Orion
Orion
About
- Username
- Orion
- Joined
- Visits
- 124
- Last Active
Comments
-
@EverflowingRiver said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1985146#Comment_1985146
We want the creative team to flow, but they better flow in the direction of a gay character or we will make a ridiculously long thread about the lack of said character. Revisit my post discussing sally on a previous page please, it is worded better then my one regarding frank
Nope, the creative team flowed in the direction of an explicitly LGBT character all on their own. Why do you want them to exclude explicitly LGBT characters if that's where their ideas went?
-
@Sandwich_Jesus said:
As long as its woven into their lore, rather than their entire personality just about them being gay, trans etc ,it should be used to enhance and improve their lore and the character itself.
Basically as long as the devs don't make the character revolve around being gay or trans, and as long as they wove it into the character and the lore whilst making the character interesting I don't think many would mind.
Represention is good, as long as its not forced, make the character whatever as long as they have an actual personality besides being gay or trans, I like interesting lore.
Representation is Good however I worry if there character is a gay or trans character I can almost guarantee morons will single the person using that survivor and its a pity.
Representation is Good however I worry if there character is a gay or trans character I can almost guarantee morons will single the person using that survivor and its a pity.
People like that will always out themselves, so you can report them and help make the game better for everyone.
-
@EverflowingRiver said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984975#Comment_1984975
and what if I chose to believe frank is a ze/zem. Your argument falls apart then.
You can choose to believe falsehoods, that's up to you. However, we want the creative team to let their ideas flow.
-
@Zaytex said:
There's actual meaningful representation and just ''throw it in to meet the criteria of diversity''
You all want the latter and will not admit it.
If you assume we're all lying, then this conversation will go nowhere because you will not even consider what we're saying. If that's your starting assumption, that we're liars, then I wish you a nice day.
-
@Zaytex said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984754#Comment_1984754
Because people aren't happy until every corner of life has a token gay character in it.
Who asked for a token gay character? Please, show me a single person who asked for that.
-
@Hyp3R said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984762#Comment_1984762
Idk, I'm just curious. I really want to know why people need to be "represented" by something in-game. Why being gay and playing gay character is so important for you. As a straight white male I don't give ######### if I'm playing a black woman or asian trans dude.
As a bi white male I don't care either, but some of my LGBT brothers, sisters, and others do. It doesn't harm anyone to have representation and benefits those who want it. Therefore, I support this.
-
@Zaytex said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984732#Comment_1984732
All I'm going to say as a somewhat final, because I can see this dragging on without any ending is, if you really need LGBTQ representation in this game, then you're either:
A) In a country where LGBTQ isn't accepted and I apologise for that.
B) In a country that has plenty of representation in casual media, etc, but you just want to force a gay character in every fabric of reality, even though that isn't realism.
C) You want to sexualise the characters for sex.
If I had to generalise the people asking for LGBTQ representation, I'd say ''C'' because there's countless comments about whether Dwight is a top or bottom, or whether David has a massive crotch, but there's none about actual meaningful love or positivity when it comes to sexuality or gender, which is the representation that is needed, but you can't get it in this game.
That's not an answer the question. Again, why is it OK to have heterosexual lore, but not non-heterosexual lore?
-
@Hyp3R said:
Why do you all even care. This game is broken on all possible levels, and the biggest thread on this forum is about LGBT characters? Just why? I'm just so curious, why is that so important for you to have a trans survivor or killer in a game about murdering people?
If it doesn't matter, then why do you care why people want it?
-
@Zaytex said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984708#Comment_1984708
Let me ask you this, how do you introduce representation that is purely positive in a game about pain and murder?
This isn't a love show, and if it was, I would be down for it, but adding sexuality to a game about perpetual suffering isn't the representation the LGBTQ+ community needs.
Let me ask you something more basic: why is it OK to have heterosexual representation, but not non-heterosexual representation? Give me an argument for excluding the latter (which is forced exclusion), but keeping the former.
-
@Zaytex said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984681#Comment_1984681
Because you basically implied they were morally correct in their decision when they JUST had a scandal over doing something that was immoral.
Sure, they can decide what they want to do, but at the end of the day, they need to consider the communities feelings and if only 10% of the player base actually cares for representation, then forcing it in is ridiculous.
Like seriously, who thinks whilst playing a game about murder and suffering, ''hey I need gay and trans representation''. Unless you're living in a specific part of the world, you can literally turn the TV on and see plenty of LGBTQ representation, why do you need it in a horror game?
Because you basically implied they were morally correct in their decision when they JUST had a scandal over doing something that was immoral.
I didn't imply anything, that's something you imagined I had said. I said that it was up to them to decide whether something belonged in DbD or not, and they decided you were wrong. The closest to a moral argument I've made on the subject of representation was showing the double standard in saying that explicit mentions of heterosexuality in lore are OK, but explicit mentions of non-heterosexuality are not.
Sure, they can decide what they want to do, but at the end of the day, they need to consider the communities feelings and if only 10% of the player base actually cares for representation, then forcing it in is ridiculous.
Well, from the forums, it seems most people are for it. However, they have never taken polls before adding any other lore and I don't see why they should start now.
-
@cacao1 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984627#Comment_1984627
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984650#Comment_1984650
that are two opposite answers! Maybe a mod or a dev could give us some insight?
@GoodBoyKaru is right. The way I said it is the way it originally worked, but it was changed years ago.
-
@Zaytex said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984651#Comment_1984651
Right, because they're clearly the gospel of morality from their track record, yes?
I can't wait for a trans survivor to be brought into a game of murder, pain and suffering, some fine representation there.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984656#Comment_1984656
How does, sexuality and gender fit in line with a game about murder and suffering?
Because I literally do not see how sexuality, which is often represented by love and positivity, can be FAIRLY represented in a game about literal misery on a silver platter.
Right, because they're clearly the gospel of morality from their track record, yes?
Why are you bringing up morality? I'm just saying, it's their game, so it's up to them to decide whether something should be included or not. They have artistic freedom.
How does, sexuality and gender fit in line with a game about murder and suffering?
Sexuality has been a part of the slasher genre from its inception.
-
@Zaytex said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984616#Comment_1984616
This isn't the game for it. There's PLENTY of representation in the general media (depending on where you live) about all the different sexualities, genders and everything that that is non-conforming. Why do we need those characteristics in a game about murder and brutality?
You can say you're represented, but how do you know? None of the characters sexualities or genders have been officially confirmed, so just like everyone else, you're making an assumption there (unless I missed something).
This isn't the game for it.
That's for the devs to decide, is it not? And the devs decided you're wrong.
-
IIRC it selects a realm first, to ensure all realms have the same probability.
-
@Zaytex said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1984618#Comment_1984618
Please tell me which character in this game is confirmed to be heterosexual, because you're making assumptions.
Let's not pretend anyone actually believes they might be bisexual, alright? Let's argue in good faith.
-
@druggedpug69 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1983914#Comment_1983914
The times have changed. Our "society" has changed. People view things differently and people accuse people of baseless accusations all the time nowadays. Deny it all you want but someone's gonna do it. And if I'm wrong I'll take full responsibility for my stupidity.
I'm not denying that someone will do it, I'm just saying that their intentions will be to stir ######### up. They're going to be dishonest, like the guy who was caught pretending to be a gay black man on Twitter.
-
@druggedpug69 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1983856#Comment_1983856
I have a feeling this will be different.
Why? The same claim was made about black characters, and it was proven wrong.
-
@druggedpug69 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1983842#Comment_1983842
I'm getting the impression that you think I don't a LGBT person because of this. That isn't the case, I'm just saying that people are gonna be stupid and do this stuff. You say it won't happen, but it's gonna happen. May not happen immediately but it'll happen and when it does I'll be here to tell you that I told you so.
Well, so far I've only seen people who are intentionally trying to stir ######### up saying they'd do this on purpose.
-
@Snap_Tobiyume said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1983434#Comment_1983434
Looping is the literal ONLY skillful thing a survivor can do.
Yes, I know that's what people believe and that they blame stealth players for losing. Fact is, looping is not the only skillful thing you can do as a survivor, it's just the easiest to learn.
-
- Any solution will feel that way because the only way to make it worthwhile for the killer to leave the hook is if they have a chance of catching someone else.
- That's why you keep a mental note of where lockers are. If you make a mistake or get bad RNG, that's just part of the game.
- See above.
- The strategy works sometimes, yes. No strategy is fool-proof, and that's the way it should be.
- I'm a stealth player. I don't outrun the killer, I just avoid being spotted in the first place.
- Yes, perks can combo well with each other. This is by design and is the basis of builds.
- It happens. That's why I prefer to "dip my toe" into the killer's TR, then back away a little bit, if I have to hide in that "blind spot". Better safe than sorry.
-
Since most survivors only know how to loop, then yes, they get carried by the maps.
-
@El_Gingero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1982798#Comment_1982798
The irony is that you’re really missing the point(s) I’m making..pretty hard..yet I’m crystal clear on what you’re saying and where you’re coming from lol. I’m done with you now. Move on bud.
I only asked because it's clear to me you're confused about what I was actually saying and some people have difficulty with speech that isn't 100% straightforward/literal. I wanted to know so I could explain my point in a way you'd understand. If you don't want to understand what I'm saying, that's fine by me. Have a nice day.
-
It's not you, no. I rarely see anything new on the forum.
-
@El_Gingero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1982566#Comment_1982566
The discussion is about an LGBT character in DBD, not how many white straight people are on TV. Personally, I don’t judge people by the colour of their skin nor their sexuality, and I apply the same curtesy to media. I find the whole “representation” thing very faulty and highly ironic.
My whole post was saying that I’m perfectly content with an LGBT character so long as they’re not forced for the sake of politics, but you took issue with the way I said it. That’s why I was making a point about policing people’s speech and behaviour. People who look at everything through the lens of perceived identity instead of reality are obsessed with trying to force everyone to behave a certain way, and this all ties into why some of the DBD community have expressed concerns about an LGBT character in the first place. Politics, politics, politics.
You’re perfectly entitled to disagree and naturally I can handle your opinion hence why I responded to it in the way I did, humouring your arguments despite the fact that I wasn’t in the mood to debate politics. You were sidetracking the discussion unnecessarily though, instead of simply accepting that someone is in favour of an LGBT character so long as it’s not forced, you wanted to debate my reasoning.
I do get what you’re saying. But I also disagree. I don’t think there should be an LGBT character just because there are so many straight characters already. I don’t look at things that way and I think it’s a strange perspective to take. I do understand it on a certain level, but it gets taken too far and that’s what some people are annoyed with. I’m not one for keeping score, tallying up the statistics of how many this, how many that. Everything should just be taken for what it is imho
I think there should be an LGBT character because that character just so happens to be LGBT, and it’s merely a small part of their makeup as opposed to their entire identity. That’s the correct way to do representation. Make it organic. Make it fit.
Add an interesting character. Make them gay for all I care. Just make them genuine. I don’t want to see an overtly flamboyant drag queen whose tank top says “Sissies love Kpop” because it will obviously be more tired old political pandering and I’m simply not interested in that.
Serious question: do you have trouble with metaphors, comparisons, examples, parallels, and other stuff like that?
-
@El_Gingero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1982386#Comment_1982386
You see. The TDLR of my post is “by all means add a character who just so happens to be LGBT but don’t make it a hollow token character,” yet you still take issue with it. You’ve even managed to try and make it about race. This is the problem with intersectional ideologues. They want to police everyone’s speech and behaviour, and if anything is off by their imaginary standard it’s offensive and something to make a big fuss about.
I can, on an intellectual level. I judge people by their character and actions, not their sexual preference or the colour of their skin. The same goes for media - I judge it by the content and value provided, not by whether the lead character is gay, or black, etc etc. It’s perfectly reasonable to find forced identity politics tedious and boring, and no amount of policing will change that.
Yes. Shoehorned. It’s very obvious when I mention shoehorning that I’m referring to shoehorning, and not to characters or personalities who just so happen to be LGBT, hence the point of my post in the first place.
There are many such cases of token characters and personalities being shoehorned into various media to appease particular groups of people and to profit from them in the process. This is obviously what I’m referring to and I suspect you’re aware of that.
The establishment and the majority of society is indeed fully behind the LGBT community and this is highly demonstrable. I could give many examples, but frankly this is going way off topic and I’ve really no desire for a big debate, so we’ll agree to disagree. I will say though, the fact that the extremely niche “gay conversion therapy” exists doesn’t magically mean that there’s systemic discrimination against the LGBT community, or that the establishment/society is against the LGBT community.
Anyway, what exactly does gay conversion therapy have to do with an LGBT character in DBD?
You’re missing the point. Someone can be understanding and accepting whilst also finding something boring and tedious - this is true - however, extremist identity politics is absolutely going to alienate and irk some of those people, turning them away from the “cause.” No amount of policing, criticising, banning, doxxing or bullying will ever change this. Some people will simply become fed up, turn around and say “I don’t want to hear it.”
Lets try and keep this on topic. The only people who can police my speech or opinions on these boards are the mods. The sad thing is my comment was supportive of an LGBT character, but you still had to take issue with it instead of simply accepting that we share different views on the overarching topic.
I'm not policing anyone, nor did I "try to make it about race", so you can drop it.
I disagree with you on certain things you said and expressed my disagreement, that's the point of a discussion forum. I find it quite funny that you claim I take issue with different opinions when you clearly can't handle my disagreement.
As for the race thing, I mentioned it to point out that, intellectually, I don't see why people are against LGBT representation in media on the basis that "there's too much of it" when another group already dominates media representation. It's plainly written, I don't see why you're putting words in my mouth.
-
@Claudette_Baguette said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1979132#Comment_1979132
The games story is very short. Entity bad, takes people into its realm, endless cycle of trying to escape or killing and its feeding off the hope of survivors.
That's it.
Some character stories are nice yeah but most people don't really care. As long as you know a bit of a background (for example adam is a teacher) most people will leave it there and be satisfied. I am sure there is less than 1% of players that actually read the archive entries. I completed all challenges so far and never read any entry because I couldn't care less and I haven't found a single person who enjoys reading those entries. The cutscenes are nice hto.
It's good that most people don't care, just means they have no reason to oppose stuff that will be in the lore.
-
@AshleyWB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1982441#Comment_1982441
I was referring to his attitude suggesting that straight white people run everything and everyone else deserves immediate better treatment to make up for it therefore a LGBT addition would be good.
I find it quite ignorant and condescending and I hope I've misread how he's acting.
I didn't suggest anything, that's all you. I pointed out that the majority of media is disproportionately heterosexual cis white people, and thus, on an intellectual level, I don't understand why people make such a big deal out of characters who happen to be outside that group.
-
@AshleyWB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1982427#Comment_1982427
Completely different story here in the UK. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm not a fan of labels at all maybe I vented a little.
Completely different story here in the UK.
That's not what I heard from my friend in the UK, just FYI.
To be clear, I was referring to the number of characters in each movie, ad, whatever, not the total number of movies, ads, whatever, that feature characters with certain attributes.
I'm not a fan of labels at all
Labels can be useful, it all depends on usage and context. For example, I'm a bisexual cis male. In a dating context, these are useful labels because some people might not be into (or might be exclusively into) trans men, or might be prejudiced against (or in favor of) bisexuals. In an online forum, they're only useful as an example. An example of a bad label would be basically anything political, because it highly depends on the country and is extremely reductive even within the same country.
-
@AshleyWB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1982386#Comment_1982386
"Gay torture camps" are a little off topic. Plus they're not the only kinda torture camps but that's besides the point.
Stop making this a "straight white men run everything" rant because that's exactly the type of attitude which I'm trying to discourage. In many places straight white men have been run out in place of minorities. Poor white working class males are the least likely to pass at university and they are too often taken advantage of because they somehow have to pay reparations for their ancestors slavery crimes and whatever. Many white working class families used to be slaves and it was common for them to work in workhouses back in the day. You don't have the full picture so I'd appreciate it if you didn't put "cis white men" in a bubble and talk smack about them.
I don't like the framing you have of "straight white people are entitled so let's give everyone else something to make up for it". I think that is an outdated way of seeing things.
Stop making this a "straight white men run everything" rant because that's exactly the type of attitude which I'm trying to discourage.
Your words, not mine. I didn't rant, insult, or denigrate cis white men. I pointed out that the vast majority of media features heterosexual cis white people (didn't even use the word "men"), which is just a statistical fact.
Why are you always trying to put words in my mouth?
-
@El_Gingero said:
I don’t have any issues with adding a character who just so happens to be LGBT, however if they’re a token character who’s entire identity is LGBT sexuality, then while it obviously won’t make me stop playing the game, I’ll find it highly cringe-worthy and tedious.
LGBT sexuality is shoehorned into just about everything these days and I can see why some people are getting bored with it. We get it. Some people are LGBT. I’m bi. One of my friends is a transvestite. There’s no need to keep shouting it from the rooftops - the entire establishment has your back already, as does the majority of society. There’s nothing you can do about the fact that some people don’t like it.
In summary, by all means add a character who just so happens to be LGBT, but don’t make it a blatant pandering to tired old identity politics as this actually has a negative effect on the LGBT community because it makes what would normally be an understanding and accepting person into someone who just don’t want to hear it anymore.
LGBT sexuality is shoehorned into just about everything these days and I can see why some people are getting bored with it.
Really? Because I can't, at least on an intellectual level.
On an emotional level, sure, having something you're not used to appear multiple times can be annoying.
On an intellectual level, the fact remains that the vast majority of media is about heterosexual cis white people (disproportionately so).
And "shoehorned"? Why is the inclusion of anything other than the default seen as "shoehorned"? Artistic freedom, and all that.
There’s no need to keep shouting it from the rooftops - the entire establishment has your back already, as does the majority of society.
Yes, "the establishment" (whatever that means) and the "majority of society" that keeps gay torture camps (commonly called "conversion therapy" to hide the fact that it's quite literally torture) up and running.
In summary, by all means add a character who just so happens to be LGBT, but don’t make it a blatant pandering to tired old identity politics as this actually has a negative effect on the LGBT community because it makes what would normally be an understanding and accepting person into someone who just don’t want to hear it anymore.
You can be understanding and accepting while also not wanting to hear about something. However, if all it takes for you to go from "understanding and accepting" to "hateful and opposing" is the presence of the thing you (supposedly) understand and accept, then you were never very understanding and accepting to begin with.
An example: I understand and accept that people like to eat popcorn in movie theaters. Personally, I can't even stand the smell, makes me nauseous. The fact that I see popcorn associated with movies doesn't make me hate movies, nor theaters, nor popcorn eaters.
-
@AshleyWB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1982214#Comment_1982214
I'm mainly talking about people who identify themselves as LGBT on social media a lot of them especially low profile content creators keep bashing "cis white straight men" and harassing anyone who calls them out.
If these people are indirectly encouraged to do so, it's just gonna spiral badly.
I've literally seen threads where full grown adults are attacking young teens for saying the most innocent of questions.
It's just frustrating seeing outright bullies using their identity as LGBT to attack strangers.
It goes both ways of course, it's just that when you mentioned trolls I feel like you only meant the ones who just disagree with you and don't let up.
I'm mainly talking about people who identify themselves as LGBT on social media a lot of them especially low profile content creators keep bashing "cis white straight men" and harassing anyone who calls them out.
Outrage gets clicks/views. If people were to stop feeding them clicks/views, they wouldn't exploit the outrage. Report them if they're harassing other people and the platform has rules against that.
Also, just because someone identifies as something doesn't mean they are that thing. I've seen too many bad faith actors to count. The most prominent in recent times who comes to mind is that guy who was caught trying to pretend to be a gay black man on Twitter.
If these people are indirectly encouraged to do so, it's just gonna spiral badly.
And then they get banned. The end.
I've literally seen threads where full grown adults are attacking young teens for saying the most innocent of questions.
Same. I've seen physical attacks as well for such innocuous things as holding up signs or having a lemonade stand.
It's just frustrating seeing outright bullies using their identity as LGBT to attack strangers.
Agreed, but there are ######### everywhere who use arbitrary characteristics to attack strangers. The best way to get rid of them is to report them, get them banned, and give them no quarter. Eventually, they either start having normal conversations like adults or disappear.
It goes both ways of course, it's just that when you mentioned trolls I feel like you only meant the ones who just disagree with you and don't let up.
Well, since you didn't say you were referring to social media (which I don't use) or content creators (whom I don't watch), I was referring to the people I'd seen. I can't judge what I haven't seen.
-
This just proves memes are not informational and should not be relied upon to gain knowledge. A lot of players (primarily survivor mains) asked for a Ruin nerf before it finally came.
-
@AshleyWB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1982135#Comment_1982135
Saying that the game has different departments focussing on different areas to me is not a valid excuse for certain things to be neglected and some things to be ahead of schedule.
It's like playing Dark Souls for the first time but the department in charge of making the weapons is 2 months behind schedule so they're not in the game get. The product, the game itself needs to function in a healthy way as a priority.
There are people who are already fanning the flames and to me it seems like as long as you agree with a person's opinion you'd turn a blind eye to the harassment, intimidation and outright hate they direct at random people for simply questioning their opinion.
As you said, we won't get the full picture until this is released. Watch the chapter not have a LGBT person at all now.
Saying that the game has different departments focussing on different areas to me is not a valid excuse for certain things to be neglected and some things to be ahead of schedule.
It's not an excuse, it's an explanation.
It's like playing Dark Souls for the first time but the department in charge of making the weapons is 2 months behind schedule so they're not in the game get. The product, the game itself needs to function in a healthy way as a priority.
Yes, the game needs to work. However, it's not the people writing lore who are going to do that.
There are people who are already fanning the flames
Yes, I've seen the trolls.
and to me it seems like as long as you agree with a person's opinion you'd turn a blind eye to the harassment, intimidation and outright hate they direct at random people for simply questioning their opinion.
Please, point out those comments. I haven't read every single comment from every single user on the subject. Also, don't assume things about me. It never ends well.
As you said, we won't get the full picture until this is released. Watch the chapter not have a LGBT person at all now.
I wouldn't care either way. If the character was bisexual instead of gay, lesbian, trans, or nonbinary, and wasn't a bisexual stereotype (promiscuous, unfaithful, and so on), I might give a #########, because that's not something I usually see. However, I'd still judge the character based on the perks, because that's what matters to me in the end.
-
It's difficult (and expensive) to get good translations, so the devs probably run things through Google Translate and/or ask non-native speakers who learned the language to translate. This is an issue with many languages and is one of the reasons why I only play games in English.
-
@AshleyWB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1982014#Comment_1982014
One thing that has been a problem for years which would be way more inclusive is the struggle button feature.
People who struggle to spam the struggle button still to this day can't enjoy the game as much as others. Even without a disability it's such a tedious action to do.
The colour blind settings took way too long and if they just shove a trans survivor in for example to me that would show a double standard that they actually don't respect the very thing which they claim to do so.
It's one thing having an "inclusive" game but however you look at it the games health must come first.
By this I mean if a trans survivor is added and all their perks are busted, to add 3 new skins to the store while ignoring the broken perks would be a shame.
Pressure from the threat of outrage is something that shouldn't influence decision making but it may end up so.
Another example is that if a trans character only had 9 cosmetic pieces compared to Megs 100+, people will say "dbd is transphobic and not inclusive". It's just how people are.
I'm not going to find someone else's comment about a particular thing because I can't speak on behalf of them plus I'm not digging through the forums.
Before anyone calls me homophobic (they will somehow) I would probably enjoy a trans character if they had a certain uniqueness or an interesting power.
If it's something disappointing I will say so regardless of people thinking criticism is transphobic because that's what will happen.
The people who work on character design and lore are not the same ones who work on the coding side of things. This is actually something that has been brought up before in relation to a lot of characters - that the devs should work on bug fixing first and content later. For once, not a double standard.
Now, for the record, I agree with this idea in principle, but in practice, it's unworkable. The people in charge of skins, lore, etc., can't just drop everything and stop working while the programmers fix the game. BHVR is probably not going to pay them if they're standing around doing nothing.
Pressure from the threat of outrage is something that shouldn't influence decision making but it may end up so.
There's always a threat of outrage for every decision. This is a moot point.
Another example is that if a trans character only had 9 cosmetic pieces compared to Megs 100+, people will say "dbd is transphobic and not inclusive". It's just how people are.
Yes, and then you can explain to those people that the trans character is new, whereas Meg has been here since release. If the people are reasonable, they will listen. If not, you can ignore them. For the record, though, "people" includes you.
Before anyone calls me homophobic (they will somehow) I would probably enjoy a trans character if they had a certain uniqueness or an interesting power.
Nobody is going to call you homophobic. Nobody has called you homophobic, either. So this just seems very out of place.
If it's something disappointing I will say so regardless of people thinking criticism is transphobic because that's what will happen.
You can't see the future, so let's focus on things that have happened, shall we?
-
@AshleyWB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1981982#Comment_1981982
You pretending no-one has ever criticized the Devs is ridiculous.
To me it seems to be your excuse for not wanting to accept someone else's opinion.
Literally every suggestion I make there's 5x more people who take issue with it. Don't act like they sit and wait for the LGBT topic to crop up before disagreeing with glee.
I'm not going to force you to respect other people's opinion but everything would work so much more smoothly if people would.
You pretending no-one has ever criticized the Devs is ridiculous.
Your words, not mine. What I've said, repeatedly, is that there was never this much complaining.
To me it seems to be your excuse for not wanting to accept someone else's opinion.
No, it's my justification for showing the double standard.
Literally every suggestion I make there's 5x more people who take issue with it. Don't act like they sit and wait for the LGBT topic to crop up before disagreeing with glee.
They do, actually. The topic came up when BHVR tweeted last year saying they were no longer going to exclude LGBT relationships, then popped up a few more times over the last year.
I'm not going to force you to respect other people's opinion but everything would work so much more smoothly if people would.
I already said I had far more respect for someone who applies their standards equally than someone who doesn't. This implies I do respect the latter's opinion, to some degree.
EDIT: I'm going to ask you, for a third time, to show me someone who has a concern that doesn't apply to other things that are already in the game, so I can discuss things with that person. I'm open to having a conversation, but you gotta meet me halfway. It's not unreasonable of me to want to avoid having the same discussion for the Nth time.
-
@justtrynaplay said:
I don’t have a problem with an lgbt character what I have a problem with is if the fact that they are lgbt is either their main selling point or that it is their only character trait it’s like Claudette and her autism we didn’t know about it until some lore for the tome and that is fine because it is important that characters are actually established rather than just one note and trying to make a character for the sole purpose of being lgbt is very shallow and silly
BHVR hasn't even announced an LGBT character, this is all speculative. If the new character is indeed LGBT, then it's not the main selling point because it's not even in the teasers to begin with.
As for how the character is, we (you included) have no access to the lore, so we don't know what the character is like. However, I will say that Meg, for example, was also a very one-note character. Her whole thing was running, that's it. A lot of characters were like that, back in the old days, which is why we got the tomes to begin with, because they were very basic. This has not been an issue for some time and I doubt it'd be an issue now.
PS: Please use punctuation and paragraphs, it's difficult to read your comment.
-
@AshleyWB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1981925#Comment_1981925
The difference is that people with concerns don't know if the new character will just have a page of lore or whether the Devs will make it really extravagant.
I think people are fearful of the latter primarily because of the fact that the Devs are kinda unpredictable and are prone to making bad decisions every now and then.
When I reference the use of "homophobe" it's not because you are using this label it's because many other people have.
I don't think being bitter towards people with a different opinion achieves anything so when you say you are unwilling to apologize for alienating people based on difference of opinion. It's just needlessly divisive.
People have and will present petty arguments but there is and always will be people who are just wary of bad decision making. These people are often underappreciated and will be the difference between a full on twitter brawl or people moving onto the next thing to complain about.
The difference is that people with concerns don't know if the new character will just have a page of lore or whether the Devs will make it really extravagant.
I think people are fearful of the latter primarily because of the fact that the Devs are kinda unpredictable and are prone to making bad decisions every now and then.
Again, why don't these concerns pop up any other time? Where were these concerns when it came to other extravagant skins or virtually any new character? Because, remember, any character might be extravagant and some skins are extravagant. Why is it only an issue if it's an LGBT character who might be extravagant?
I don't think being bitter towards people with a different opinion achieves anything so when you say you are unwilling to apologize for alienating people based on difference of opinion. It's just needlessly divisive.
I'm not alienating people based on a difference of opinion. I'm not even intentionally alienating them, I'm just sick and tired of pretending they're not showing a double standard. Also, again, you say that I'm being needlessly divisive when these people don't even apply their standards fairly and equally.
People have and will present petty arguments but there is and always will be people who are just wary of bad decision making. These people are often underappreciated and will be the difference between a full on twitter brawl or people moving onto the next thing to complain about.
It's not just petty, it's a blatant double standard. Seriously, where have all these wary people been over the last 4+ years? Why didn't they speak up against bunny onesies or the Nurse? Why are they only speaking up now, when it comes to LGBT characters?
Give me someone who has a concern that doesn't also apply to something else already in the game and I assure you, I will take that person's concern very seriously. Until then, I'm sticking to what I've said: there is no reason to oppose LGBT characters that isn't a double standard.
-
@AshleyWB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1981867#Comment_1981867
Dismissing these as "not real concerns" just alienates the people who disagree though.
There's two sides of the fence and being on either side shouldn't make your view less valid. A lot of fuss can be removed if it there was some reassurance that the Devs acknowledge the issues that crop up rather than painting people with concerns as homophobes.
When you mention about legion having a very heterosexual themed bit of lore, to many it doesn't change anything. I didn't even know or care.
People who hold moral superiority over other people's opinions are not nice people. That's exactly why the tone of discussion needs to be sensible and people including content creators shouldn't talk down to people with concerns like what happens (without naming names)
It's too easy to be tribal and say "you're wrong because you're hateful and have trash opinions". People are already doing that due to the leaks.
Dismissing these as "not real concerns" just alienates the people who disagree though.
I explicitly defined "real" in the sense of "concerns that don't also apply to things that are already in the game".
I'm also not going to apologize for alienating people who only seem to have these deep concerns when LGBT characters come up and not for literally anything else. Why don't these people ever have to stop alienating LGBT people who want LGBT characters in the game? Why don't you ask them to apply their standards fairly and equally?
I have far more respect for the person who says "I don't want LGBT characters in the game because I feel they don't fit and was also against the bunny onesies" than the person who says "I don't want LGBT characters in the game because I feel they don't fit and didn't care about the bunny onesies". I disagree with both of them, but at least I know the first one applies their standards fairly and equally.
There's two sides of the fence and being on either side shouldn't make your view less valid.
No, of course not. However, I'm still waiting for someone to bring up concerns that don't apply to stuff that is already in the game and they didn't complain about.
A lot of fuss can be removed if it there was some reassurance that the Devs acknowledge the issues that crop up rather than painting people with concerns as homophobes.
- The devs did acknowledge the issues, multiple times.
- Nobody's calling anyone a homophobe, those are your words, not mine.
When you mention about legion having a very heterosexual themed bit of lore, to many it doesn't change anything. I didn't even know or care.
That's the point! So many people who don't even read the lore are now complaining about the possibility of LGBT lore that they will never read. I'm not going to pretend that the "concerns" from people like this are in any way valid, it's like me complaining about a newspaper using Comic Sans when I don't read newspapers to begin with.
It's too easy to be tribal and say "you're wrong because you're hateful and have trash opinions". People are already doing that due to the leaks.
Look at it from our perspective. Where were all these "very concerned individuals" in the last 4+ years? Why did nobody object to the Nurse's lore explicitly mentioning her husband? Why are they only showing up now, when it comes to LGBT representation? What's different?
If I tell a child that he can't have a cat because he can't take care of a pet, but I also say he can have a dog, do you think my issue is with him having a pet, or with him having a cat? Are we really supposed to believe that the issue isn't related to having LGBT characters when these issues only show up when LGBT characters are mentioned?
-
@JasmineDragon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1981871#Comment_1981871
they have always said to make your own head cannons in regards to these
They said that, yes, because they also said they weren't going to mention relationships. However, they dropped the ball (2 months and 4 days after release, which is when the Nurse was released), and since then, when they did mention characters' relationships, they were always heterosexual. Now, they're no longer holding themselves back and will mention non-heterosexual relationships if they want to.
Headcanons, though, or "fanfictions" as I like to call them, don't have to take canon into account, so you can still pretend that an LGBT character is straight. However, the fact remains that if heterosexual relationships get to be explicitly featured, then so should non-heterosexual relationships. Equality.
-
@JasmineDragon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1981701#Comment_1981701
Yea but the fact that your only idea of a "stereotypical gay trait" is a "flamboyant guy who only hangs out with LGBT people", makes me think you don't know enough about the community to know what is representation. That alone is kinda really offensive. Im not trying to take jabs at you here, thats just how this seems to me. Like what was great about the old system was when someone had a head cannon on who was gay or straight or bi in game, that was it. We have enough information to think they may be that, which is that they were human people. Anyone could be anything, you don't need some rainbow leotard and a flag to be gay. If they want to start labeling people then it should be casually a part of their lore, maybe from the stuff we learn through the archives. It should just be another fact about them, there is no person who is being represented well if their only trait is a stereotype, full stop
Like what was great about the old system was when someone had a head cannon on who was gay or straight or bi in game, that was it.
You mean the old system that lasted 2 months and 4 days after release? Because that's how long we went without any characters having sexual orientations.
-
@AshleyWB said:
To me it is one of those topical subjects people seem to want to latch onto for attention.
I don't care about the lore at all but there are people who do. The difference is that the main thing that needs to function properly is the game running smoothly everything else can be as botched as possible.
I would say the game has put itself trapped in a bit of a corner. Get it right and everyone baring those who don't understand the emphasis on a made up characters sexuality (perfectly valid) will be happy.
Get it wrong, then it could get ugly. Outrage will come like a hungry pack of wolves and deal a blow to the game whether they did a good job or not .
We shouldn't pretend the playerbase and the people in the community are perfect, in fact many are thirsty for drama and don't underestimate people's desire to cause a ruckus.
I think the main thing that needs to be addressed is that if people don't like a LGBT character then instead of harassing people who disagree with you, instead understand the person's concerns because it will become something very divisive and overblown otherwise.
I'm holding back my opinion until whatever comes out of this upcoming chapter materialises.
One standard I live by is that you should always allow someone to offer their opinion even if it's something you disagree with.
Respect is very rare nowadays and those who are willing to listen to others are the ones who prevent this turning into different groups of people and opinions fighting over something which doesn't even matter.
There's a lot going on in the world and if you're getting worked up by this then I honestly think you're wasting your time doing something with no good outcome/return.
Do something new, learn a new skill or just think about the things which make you happy instead of worrying about things which you can't single handedly change.
I think the main thing that needs to be addressed is that if people don't like a LGBT character then instead of harassing people who disagree with you, instead understand the person's concerns because it will become something very divisive and overblown otherwise.
Their concerns are a double-standard. Their concerns only seem to pop up when it comes to LGBT characters. For example (I'm paraphrasing the arguments I've seen):
I just want them to do it right.
So does everyone, for everything. This has never been an issue big enough to prevent inclusion with literally any other content in DbD, so why is it an issue with LGBT characters?
I'm worried they might get it wrong.
Again, everyone has this concern, for everything. And, again, this has never been an argument that was used to stop, say, Myers getting into the game, so why is it an issue now?
If they get it wrong, it will piss off a lot of people.
Again, this happens with virtually everything. The creation of the game alone made a lot of people upset, yet I didn't see anyone saying this to stop it from being made.
I just don't feel like it fits in DbD/horror.
Neither do bunny onesies, yet here we are. I didn't see anyone making this much of a fuss over those, or Dwelf.
Sexuality has no place in DbD/horror.
Nurse has had a husband since she was released, which was years ago. Nobody complained about sexuality back then. Also, sexuality has been a theme in slasher films since forever.
It's not important.
Some people felt Shape being added to the game wasn't important (me, for example). This is purely opinion-based and not even a real concern.
It feels forced because it's unnecessary.
Everything is "forced", if you think like this.
It's going to shove homosexuality down our throats.
Legion had an entire tome that's shoving heterosexuality down our throats. No complaints.
It's just pandering.
So is the inclusion of licensed characters. That's literally the point of new (and existing) content, to pander to more people so they buy the game.
There are too many people asking for it.
Yes, and apparently it's a bad thing that the devs give players what they want. Oddly enough, this wasn't an issue when all those licensed chapters were requested and added to the game.
There are too many gay people in media already, in proportion to the population.
This can be applied to different groups; for example, white heterosexual men, who are ubiquitous in media. Also, like everything else, this isn't an issue when it comes to other groups being added to the game, just LGBT.
Please, show me someone with a real concern (meaning one that doesn't also apply to things that are already in the game) and I will gladly debate it with that person. Until then, know that we have taken the high road over and over again, heard all the concerns, and all we've found is that these concerns only pop up when it comes to LGBT characters.
-
Did you check the controller itself? Maybe the key is busted from struggling too much.
This problem is almost impossible to fix because the devs have no way of knowing if it's a hardware or software issue, and even if it is a software issue, it seems to be impossible to reproduce.
-
@nikkim said:
I mean I don’t have a problem with this at all. But I think it would be more beneficial to make cosmetics represeting lgbt rather than make a whole new chapter
Why?
-
Report cheaters. Cheaters are no reason to change the game's features.
With that said, Bloodlust will go away, eventually. It was a temporary feature from the start.
-
@GraveHunter said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/230896/it-s-so-sad-tbh-yes-another-lgbt-post
I think it has more to do that it is "forced". Nowadays it's more of a hype to be part of a diversity it seems (not that I have anything against other people), but it's more of a "jump on the hypetrain" move I think. At least, I can imagine people feel that way.
Not that I can care less about a character, since I don't read the lore of characters in this game anyway. If they have good perks, that's all I care about in this game. I main one character and that's it. After level 40 I only play that character for a daily and nothing more.
People who say it's "forced" can't even explain why without tripping all over themselves. One guy said it felt forced because there are no LGBT horror icons, and also that you can't make LGBT horror icons because it'd feel forced because there are no LGBT horror icons. See the problem there?
There is no argument for the exclusion of LGBT lore that doesn't apply to non-LGBT lore that is already in the game. That "forced" complaint is moot, as far as I'm concerned. If someone decides to focus on the fact that a character is LGBT, to the exclusion of every other trait, that's on them. It doesn't mean the character is defined by their sexual orientation and it doesn't mean the character was "forced".
This "forced" crap is the same argument that was used against Claudette, back when the game was released. She was apparently a "forced token character" because she was an intelligent black woman, whereas Meg was the athletic one. They said that their traits had "obviously" been switched "because SJWs".
-
@CluelessWanderer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1981399#Comment_1981399
I've been quite clear as a gay person myself that of course it isn't "bad". But you're already assuming it has been purposely, consciously excluded. On what basis do you know that? Once again, most survivors have no reference to their sexual orientation in their lore.
If Behaviour wants to give it a shot, go for it. But I'm calling it right here, right now, there will be complaining. There will be articles written by woke journalists dissecting how the new character is "problematic" lol.
But you're already assuming it has been purposely, consciously excluded. On what basis do you know that?
The devs' own words.
Once again, most survivors have no reference to their sexual orientation in their lore.
And yet the ones who do are all heterosexual, even though the devs had originally said they were going to avoid sexual orientations. Curious, no?
If Behaviour wants to give it a shot, go for it. But I'm calling it right here, right now, there will be complaining.
Yes, I'm sure there will be complaints, just like there were complaints about a product changing its name and virtually everything else in the entirety of human history. There will also be bad faith actors trying to stir ######### up, which always happens with matters like this. Remember that guy who was caught on Twitter pretending to be a gay black man? Anyway, are complaints from people like that a good reason for the devs to curb their own artistic freedom?
-
@Unicorn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1981351#Comment_1981351
Like I mentioned earlier, sexual orientation does not matter especially in a game like DBD, BUT it isn’t harming anything in-game if a character does represent a huge portion of people in the world so why not? I do agree, I don’t really like the pressing for it though, it can be a bit overwhelming and can make companies force disingenuous changes into the game. That in itself is harmful.
I think not knowing everyone’s sexual orientation is what makes the game more fun and imaginative in my opinion.
I do agree, I don’t really like the pressing for it though, it can be a bit overwhelming and can make companies force disingenuous changes into the game. That in itself is harmful.
Nobody pressured or is pressuring BHVR.
-
@CluelessWanderer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1981376#Comment_1981376
So what you and others want so vehemently is a snippet of lore on a survivor that states explicitly that they're not straight b/c there are 3 characters that have mentioned hetero relationships?
If I were Behaviour I wouldn't touch this with a 10 foot pole, and I'll tell you why; the small, vocal minority on social media that demand these things usually cannot be pleased. I've seen it happen dozens of times. A company gets pressured into being "inclusive", and they think "hmm, ok, we can do that". But it is never good enough. The mob will complain that it wasn't done right. That someone looks like a "bad stereotype", or "not gay enough". I'm calling it now- game journalists will analyze every pixel of that character, break it apart and find something offensive.
And God help them if they make a Killer 'LGBT'. I'm warning you Behaviour, don't even try it LMAO.
Honestly, I have no issues ( of course) if a new survivor just happens to be gay. It's just such a loaded issue these days with things being how they are.
What people want is for LGBT lore to be treated just like heterosexual lore, instead of being purposefully excluded, which feels forced. Is that so bad?
BHVR has already decided to do it without being pressured, so your "I've seen it happen dozens of times" thing is moot.
-
@UncleStabby said:
"Why are there no (insert meaningless differentiating physical trait here) characters in our game, waaaaaah!!!"
Remember the good old days where a character's skin tone or weight had no effect on how interesting a character was. You bring up Adam Francis for his skin tone and just skim over the fact that he was a well written, altruistic, hyper intelligent character who did well for himself regardless of his physical appearance.
I love this era of acceptance and representation that's holding back creative character development.
I love that the trait is simultaneously meaningless, yet so powerful that it completely destroys character development.
No, I don't remember those "good old days". I do remember shows being cancelled for having black and/or gay people on, though, as well as any kind of LGBT content immediately forcing higher (more restrictive) ratings in most countries.