back to article Nintendo says sorry, but there will be NO gay marriage in Tomodachi Life ... EVER

Gaming heavyweight Nintendo says it's sorry to disappointed customers for not including same-sex relationships in its Tomodachi Life simulation game, but that it's too late to do anything about it. The Mario Bros. maker posted a public note of apology to its website on Friday saying it was "committed to advancing our longtime …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Steve Knox Silver badge
    FAIL

    "such a significant development change"?

    If it's not a simple boolean check, their programmers suck.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "such a significant development change"?

      I see you have never worked on any complex applications.

      Your "simple boolean check" sounds like something the PHB would say when demanding some feature change in a product about to ship.

      1. Steve Knox Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: "such a significant development change"?

        Actually, I have worked on some very complex applications. They're hard to avoid when developing for over 32 years.

        Much of my work on complex applications has been reducing complexity by removing duplicate code and simplifying overly complicated structures that hack programmers put in there because they didn't know how to properly optimize their code.

        If they have a complex structure for gender, or they have duplicated the test for gender [in]equality multiple times within the marriage-related routines, then they're crappy programmers.

        1. bigtimehustler

          Re: "such a significant development change"?

          Sorry, but gender is a complex structure...do you really think what makes a person male or female is just a boolean flag IRL? I didn't think so, I am pretty sure Nintendo haven't even scratched the surface of gender differences in their application's gameplay but even if they have included some it could be complex to change the coupling logic, much the same as the differences between how a male and a female couple in real life is infinitely complex.

          1. Fibbles

            Re: "such a significant development change"?

            Games are pretty much always object orientated. I'd be very surprised if gender wasn't just a boolean inside the player class.

            It's not gender we're talking about though, it's marriage. I haven't played the game so I'm just wildly speculating but perhaps changing the marriage code to allow same sex partners would have repercussions elsewhere (assumptions that were no longer true, etc).

          2. RAMChYLD

            Re: "such a significant development change"?

            Actually, I'd think that the thing that makes a person male or female is a simple field in the record. Surely the game has to determine if you're female or male by asking, and then surely it has to store that somewhere. A simple if (x.gender==y.gender) check with the success condition being that the marriage would not proceed and an error thrown instead would have prevented this.

        2. the spectacularly refined chap

          Re: "such a significant development change"?

          Actually I can see exactly how this can be hard-coded in, and no it isn't a ridiculous way to look at the problem. It has nothing to do with the representation of gender - this isn't about individuals but relationships, in other words it is a set problem. Consider two possible C-style representations of a marriage:

          struct marriage {

          struct person *partners[2];

          }

          struct marriage {

          struct person *husband,

          struct person *wife,

          };

          The first form treats each partner as being equivalent so wouldn't have this issue but places additional complexity into the code. The second is more constrained and would not allow for gay marraige, but the more specific nature allows code to operate more from context and with fewer corner cases.

          For example, say you want to add the two parties separately to the marriage - that would generally be a bad idea but may be appropriate for some code bases. It's simple in the second case - if the person is a male then it refers to the husband. If female it refers to the wife. In the first case you have to identify which partner is to be updated which in turn throws up a corner case - what if there are already two people in the marriage?

          Another case would be where you want to unambiguously refer to the wife in a marriage, e.g. to change their name. No problem in the second case, it's additional decisions in the first even in the non-problem case where a marriage contains exactly one woman.

          Those are common-sense optimisations if you do not need to represent gay marriage. Changing this retrospectively to allow for gay marriage means changing function prototypes and a structure definition, and all code that depends on those, something that has a tendency to spread throughout the entire program. If the code base is arranged anything like that then that is the reality, which does not alter according to what you want to be the case.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "such a significant development change"?

            "struct person *partners[2];"

            Then you have the polygamists complaining that they can only have a single partner. Then you have rednecks.......

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "such a significant development change"?

      Good - children play these games - what people might want to do as consenting adults is up to them, but that doesn't mean that it's OK for kids games to give lessons in unusual sexual preferences. Otherwise maybe they should also have say polygamy, scat, bondage, and bestiality preferences?.

      1. Mr_Bungle

        Re: "such a significant development change"?

        "Otherwise maybe they should also have say polygamy, scat, bondage, and bestiality preferences?"

        I'd deffo play that version. And make it part of the school curriculum just to annoy sanctimonious Mary Whitehouse types like you.

        You and Nintendo can suck my cock. We'll motion capture it and release a game.

      2. Andy Gates

        Re: "such a significant development change"?

        You're confusing activities with orientation. The debate has kinda moved past that now.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "such a significant development change"?

          No - they are all 'sexual preferences' as is mentioned.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "such a significant development change"?

      "their programmers suck", suck on what.

  2. John Tserkezis

    They'll learn. They'll learn that someone's opinion, or socical convention, or political push means losing many more billions in any given market, they'll either learn to deal with it, or go bust. Their choice.

    1. Steven Roper

      That depends on what the "liberal : conservative" ratio is. LGBT couples and their supporters may well boycott Nintendo for "intolerance", but by the same token conservatives may well end up supporting it for promoting "traditional family values." If a load of conservative families buy the game for their kids on those grounds, that could pretty much undermine the liberal boycott.

      It would be interesting to set up a marketing experiment along these lines: Set up two shelf companies that have no immediately apparent connection to each other, and have each release a variant version of the same game. One that conforms to liberal values, and one that conforms to conservative values, and see which one sells more copies and which generates the bigger shitstorm.

      I'd put money on this being the outcome: the conservative version would attract the loudest howls of indignation from the mass media, calls for boycotts and demands for censorship from the liberals, even though the liberal version would actually sell marginally more copies.

    2. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      They have learned actually

      Err...

      Do you like it or not the overall number of social concervatives worldwide is bigger than the number of people supporting the mandatory manifestation of LGBT rights in any and every aspect of a product. Note - there is a significant difference between LGBT rights and "mandatory manifestation of them in every product".

      The fact that some LGBT groups are extremely loud does not suddenly make them a majority. So from a business perspective Nintendo has learned and learned well and they have made their choice - stick with the majority of the audience (something Nintendo has been doing all the time).

      As far as losing billions in a market, that is exactly what they have assessed here. They do not want to have half of the world closed to them because of including the LGBT option - off the top of my head that makes the game unsellable by law or social convention in most of the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, Russia, etc.

      Is their choice morally right? That is a different story. Is it the right choice from a business perspective? Sure it is.

      1. Old Handle

        Re: They have learned actually

        Removing the option for same-sex relationships from certain localized versions would be trivial, though. It's not uncommon to have content changes in those, especially cutting out things deemed offensive in one culture or another.

        1. h3

          Re: They have learned actually

          Yeah Nintendo of America totally butchered loads of games removing religious and alcohol references from them. (Without doing anything about filling in the gaps. Just stopping the games making any sense).

      2. DAN*tastik

        Re: They have learned actually

        Just an observation to your comment: I would have thought that the liberal countries are those targeted by game makers. Europe and the US - I believe - are a bigger market than Iraq, Russia and Uganda.

        However, when it comes to the spirit of the article, I don't really see it as a problem worth worrying about. Millions of people, me included, can't be grateful enough to the creators of gaydar, scruff, grindr and the likes. Do they have a straight section for straight people? They don't. If that's a bug or an intentional choice, who cares? It doesn't exactly discriminate in a way that makes some people's lives more difficult. It is not somebody's human right to be able to recreate themselves in that game. Reviews can be found online and purchases are often informed ones, there is little excuse for being outraged by such trivial issues. If somebody doesn't like something it is often enough to vote with their wallets rather than organising campaigns against everybody and everything.

        I'm also vegetarian ( I know, I know ... ) but I have never thought of writing to the prime minister asking for steak houses to publicly apologise and have at least 50% of their menu suitable for vegetarians. I'll leave that to those irritating vegans :-)

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: They have learned actually

        Whether gay people are in a majority is irrelevant. The issue is whether they should be included or excluded by the game makers.

        In most progressive societies, the consensus is that it's wrong to discriminate on sex, race, sexual orientation etc.

        You're either pro-equality, or anti-equality.

        1. You Are Not Free

          Re: They have learned actually

          "You're either pro-equality, or anti-equality."

          ...and you're a cultural marxist.

          1. Sean Timarco Baggaley

            Re: They have learned actually

            What about non-equality?

            We really *are* all different. Women can conceive and give birth; men (currently) cannot. Some of us are left-handed. Some of us have different skin pigmentation. Some of us grew up multi-lingual, while others might never, ever understand what it means to be able to see the world from multiple points of view. Some of us are born into poverty, or into great wealth, or into dysfunctional families, or into loving families. And so on and endlessly on.

            True equality isn't possible, short of a global, massive – and very intrusive – government-mandated genetic programme, coupled with family and childcare standardisation, all on a level that would make the 2-metre-high docs for ITIL look like a short story.

            I'm much more interested in the French philosophy: Vive la différence! Stop trying to homogenise humanity and just grow the f*ck up. Everyone is different, but that's a good thing. Because being different can be a strength.

            What we need far more of are policies that level the playing field. We cannot do anything to change our own differences, but we can change our environment to ensure those differences can become advantages rather than obstacles.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: They have learned actually

              @Sean Timarco Baggaley "I'm much more interested in the French philosophy: Vive la différence! "

              Great, but where's the tolerance if you want to speak your own minority language in France? One country, one language.

          2. Tapeador
            FAIL

            Re: They have learned actually

            "...and you're a cultural marxist."

            Wow, I never realised the Torygraph/Stormfront demographic pitched up here.

        2. Charles Manning

          AC said "You're either pro-equality, or anti-equality."

          ... or you're an AC who in't prepared to stand up and say anything.

          Look, these are GAMES. You don't have to have progressive attitudes in games. Let's just strive for equality in real life.

          I want to play Halo, but I want to be a pacifist. I want the wepons layout to include peace symbols and flowers because war is bad. The pro-violence people are stomping on my rights!

          And Pink Pony doesn't allow you to send the pony to be made into glue and pet food when you get bored with it.

          Bollocks. If you don't like the game play in a game, then don't buy it.

        3. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: AC Re: They have learned actually

          "Whether gay people are in a majority is irrelevant. The issue is whether they should be included or excluded by the game makers.

          In most progressive societies, the consensus is that it's wrong to discriminate on sex, race, sexual orientation etc.

          You're either pro-equality, or anti-equality."

          So you want realistic depiction of gay relationships in ALL games, just to avoid the inevitable bitching and labeling as 'homophobic' by deliberately-looking-for-offence groups like GLAAD? OK, that means a lot of game patching. In WW2 games like 'Medal of Honor', they'd have to add a bit at character creation to ask if you want to play as a gay soldier (or lesbian nurse, I suppose, for 'inclusiveness'). Of course, right after creation the game would deviate and, instead of fighting, your gay soldier gets arrested for sodomy, court martialled and ejected from the military with a permanent medical record note of being 'mentally defective'. The new thread in the games is how, whilst the straight soldiers play the original game, your gay character has to return to civvie street and 'fight' to find a job in the historically-accurate 1940s anti-gay US. You could even add in a bit on how the FBI spies on you as a possible subversive. Sounds like a winner to me! Of course, in games where you play on the Nazi side you'd just get a new level where you get sent to a concentration camp. Oh, sorry, was that level of realistic depiction not what you wanted?

          1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

            Re: AC They have learned actually

            Quote: " Of course, right after creation the game would deviate and, instead of fighting, your gay soldier gets arrested for sodomy, "

            That is if he was lucky enough to be a US soldier. If he was a UK soldier or a USSR soldier that would have been a jail sentence, criminal record and a lifetime ban from working for the government or any of its contractors. In USSR that would have been GULAG too - under the same section as the enemies of the state (one of the subsections of article 58).

          2. Charles Manning

            Re: AC They have learned actually

            That's even ignoring the issue that "realistic" games are not realistic at all.

            Most soldiers don't get one kill in a 6-12 month stint, let alone in 5 minutes. Real war is 99% boredom and 1% living hell. Real war is so damn boring nobody would want to play a real war game.

      4. P. Lee Silver badge

        Re: They have learned actually

        Not to mention that most of these games are aimed at children.

        Not something which comes naturally to the LGT's and there are plenty of people for whom unusual relationships would place the game out of contention.

        Did I mention games are aimed at children? Sexual relationships before puberty are irrelevant - why would you want to sexualise something aimed at kids? The natural environment for children is to have a male and female parent. It doesn't matter what laws you pass, children aren't really found under gooseberry bushes and that doesn't change.

        1. sabroni Silver badge

          Re: The natural environment for children is to have a male and female parent.

          The natural environment for children is outside. Don't hear you railing against houses.

          It's much more important for children to have a loving home environment, one loving mother or two loving dads is better than a male and female parent who hate each other and fight all the time.

    3. ecofeco Silver badge

      It's just a damn game and all this has done is re-enforce the stereotype that gamers have no lives and the gay agenda has no sense of finesse, discretion or boundaries.

      That's what's been learned here.

      In fact, this is such a major blunder for gay rights, I wonder if it's a false flag op?

      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
        Happy

        Re: ecofeco

        "..... I wonder if it's a false flag op?" Nope, GLAAD are notorious for exactly such vocal protestations. They're not even gamers, they are a media group that see themselves as the 'amplifier' of the voice of the gay, lez, bi and trannie 'community', whether that community asks them to or not. It's always fun when dealing with such fashionable protest groups, especially when they are insisting on the inclusion of gays in every activity, to ask them if they have any straight, black males on their board? Always good for a laugh to watch them trying to defend their own lack of 'inclusiveness'.

  3. Don Jefe

    Who?

    I really wonder at people's thought processes sometimes. The only rights a customer has are to get what they paid for, and, the right to not buy a specific thing. Customers sure as hell don't have the right to demand anything from a company.

    If customers want a gay marriage simulator but that feature isn't included in the product of a particular company then tough shit.

    1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

      Re: Who?

      How about if it didn't allow interracial marriages?

      1. Big John Silver badge

        Re: Who?

        "How about if it didn't allow interracial marriages?"

        Oh oh, I can play that game too!!!

        How about if it DID allow bestiality? Plural Marriages? B&D?

        In other words, please stay on topic and avoid conflating homosexual behavior with race (whatever that is), okay? It has yet to be proved that there is any "gay gene," and I for one am tired of seeing it assumed that there is one. The day such a gene is shown to exist unequivocally, I will be happy to change my tune.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Who?

          Whilst I don't particularly care about the game and am not commenting about that, your comment makes me sick.

          I'm sure there isn't a gay gene, but I am sure that your genetics do make the way your brain is wired to make you attracted to the same sex.

          Ergo, the comparison to interracial marriages is valid as it is two people, who have no choice about their situation not being able to be married. In that way both are the same. The same would be true of aristocracy and peasants in the past.

          Beastiality is an entirely different thing and always totted out against gay people by sick people whose mind always seems to drift to either that or necrophilia. It says more about the person making the comment than about gay people.

          1. Big John Silver badge

            Re: Who?

            Says Anonymous Coward:

            "I'm sure there isn't a gay gene, but I am sure that your genetics do make the way your brain is wired to make you attracted to the same sex. Ergo, the comparison to interracial marriages is valid as it is two people, who have no choice about their situation not being able to be married. In that way both are the same."

            You seem to be a bit confused about genes 'n stuff. See, "genetics" is a term that refers to genes. Your statement agrees there is no gay gene, then goes on to assert that very thing, and you then assume your weird assertion equals proof and thus justifies your earlier comment.

            I would advise you to stay anonymous.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Who?

              I said no gene. Singular. One. Working by itself.

              Genetics is the interaction of all of the genes. Multiple, plural, working together.

              So, no single gene, but genes working together to make the hard connections in the brain is something that must occur (unless it's something that develops in the womb through the various hormonal washes etc)

              I'm sure there isn't a gene that makes my little finger the shape it is either, and yet it is genetics that determine the basic.shape it turns out to be.

              So, no, nothing wrong in my assertion, just your ability to understand the difference between a single thing working in solo and groups of things working in tandem.

              1. Big John Silver badge

                Re: Who?

                Says Anonymous Coward:

                "So, no, nothing wrong in my assertion, just your ability to understand the difference between a single thing working in solo and groups of things working in tandem."

                You must be aware that "gay gene" has always has been a catchall term for whatever might cause (or not cause) sexual orientation, so your attempt to cast me as ignorant of this fact I find laughable, not to mention pathetic.

                But if you really did think that "gay gene" meant just one gene specifically, then I apologize for my earlier remark. Given such ignorance, your original remarks make perfect sense and I should not have taken the tone I did.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Who?

            "your genetics do make the way your brain is wired to make you attracted to the same sex."

            I find it more likely it's at least partly a choice - in my experience a significant proportion of gays look obviously weird e.g. - are effeminate / manly as inappropriate and hence would find it more difficult to attract the opposite sex in life.

            1. TheOtherHobbes

              Re: Who?

              >in my experience a significant proportion of gays look obviously weird

              Especially the family-values preacher types, eh?

        2. Robert Carnegie Silver badge

          Re: allowing bestiality?

          Isn't there already a game called "Animal Crossing"?

          In the current case (and also in Animal Crossing), I do not see why there is any particular programming difficulty in just letting any two players marry. It's just deliberately excluded.

          Polyamory might be a bit more difficult to implement. I gather that this is also the case in real life. It's a lot harder for three or more people to get along in a relationship, than for two. But I've never been there myself, so don't take my word for it.

        3. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

          Re: Big John

          There's no conflation of sexual orientation with race in my words. Nintendo can do what it likes with its game, but do you believe there wouldn't be a huge outcry if interracial marriage wasn't allowed in the game? The point, evidently sailing right over your head, is that it's not okay to discriminate on basis of sexual orientation any more than it is on basis of race.

          Since you're so fond of playing games with other people's words, did you just compare same sex marriage to bestiality? Is it you, Cory Bernardi?

          And what's this nonsense about a gay gene? The development of living organisms is a function of more than just their genetic code. Your demand for some arbitrary and unreasonable level of proof that may well not even exist (and which seems to be based on ignorance) makes a mockery of your position.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Big John

            If I was nintendo I'd just remove the functionality from the next game all together and when asked why go

            "Well we had a choice between blow hard LGBT groups crawling up our arses or blow hard conservative groups crawling up our arses - and in the end we thought 'ah fuck this for a game of soldiers' and ripped the whole lot out for when we sold it to you barbarians outside of Japan"

            As so many other Japanese games suffer from - le sigh~~~~

      2. Sandtitz Silver badge
        Coffee/keyboard

        Re: Who?

        I'll boycott the game if I can't get married in it in Jim Jones' Peoples Temple!

        I see lots of Kool-Aid drinkers here...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Who?

          I never said I would boycott the game, in fact I was quite explicit in saying that it didn't bother me, even though I am in a same sex marriage. It is a game and if you want to play it, play it, if you don't then don't.

          The comment is what bothered me...

      3. Bob Hoskins

        Re: Who?

        That’s not the case is it?

      4. Dave Stevens

        Re: How about if it didn't allow interracial marriages?

        That's not a real thing.

        Consider. Why would there be races in this game? Can't I just create a Mii with dark skin, slanted eyes and long straight blond hair?

    2. Steve Knox Silver badge

      Re: Who?

      The only rights a customer has are to get what they paid for...

      And there's the rub. What did the customer pay for? If the ad states that marriage [unqualified] is an included feature, how should that be interpreted?

      We have societal structures to define marriage, but they're in flux, and besides that, simulation games are not restricted by societal structures. That is, in fact the attraction of most of them: they allow people to explore possibilities they are unable to explore in real life.

      If marriage is coded into a simulation game, code would have to be specifically written to check the genders of the two characters getting married. That means that gay marriage would be enabled by default in any such simulation, until someone deliberately considered the possibility and specifically chose to disallow the functionality of gay marriage. They would have to do additional work to turn off the possibility, as nicely illustrated by the "bug" allowing male-male marriage in the original release.

      So it is not an unreasonable argument for a customer to claim that they believed "marriage" would not be restricted in the game, and it is an unreasonable argument to claim that additional development work is necessary to "enable" a feature which had to have been intentionally disabled to begin with.

      1. Dan 55 Silver badge
        Boffin

        Re: Who?

        If they wanted to do it properly they would have to have a smaller proportion of each gender who are attracted to their own gender and who have to somehow find each other in the first place, otherwise it would just be a free-for-all. That's probably quite a change to the game's mechanics and not like a simple bug in a check that could be fixed with a patch.

        Then when they've solved that problem, they'd have to simulate bis too...

      2. Pretendiname

        Re: Who?

        I don't mean to comment on the topic at large here, but your post makes the kind of assumptions that non-programmer bosses and customers tend to make.

        The fact the "bug" existed in the previous release might have had far-ranging implications on the game's quality. It may be that it was a "Bug" (it would seem weird that women couldn't marry), and that by not fixing it - the game would stop being able to progress, not be able to load a savegame later, miss out parts of any plot, Not be able to draw animations and bug out. There are endless possibilities on why that might be a "bug" and not a moral thing.

        The issue I experience is: I get given spec, and deliver that spec - then people want to change it AFTER the product is delivered, and assume it is trivial to do these things.

        I am not having a dig at you Steve, but I am not looking to going back to my desk on Monday, and your post fired a million resentful neurons.

  4. tkioz

    Damn. Talk about entitlement. Honestly, what's next? Complaining because there are no transgender options for the characters?

    1. Phil W

      The fact the people making the complaints about the lack of same sex marriage options haven't complained about the lack of transgender character creation options, while claiming to represent LGBT interests demonstrates the hypocrisy and ridiculousness of their complaint. Unless they are now actually claiming to only represent the interests on binary gender persons.

      1. Anthony Hulse

        Aren't we talking about Miis?

        As they used to say on vBulletin....:confused:

        Surely a transgendered Mii would just have a different sex to the birth gender of the player who created it, right? In this way the game already includes transgendered options.

      2. Grikath Silver badge
        Facepalm

        @ Phil W

        Nooo... That would be the next Complaint.... Got to keep those funds rolling and publicity up!

        Meanwhile in the Real World™ most of the "Community" these ....Activists... claim to represent do a /facepalm and start damage control protocols. If they can give a toss about a couple of loudmouth US-ians throwing a tantrum.

    2. JasonB

      "Damn. Talk about entitlement. Honestly, what's next? Complaining because there are no transgender options for the characters?"

      Please God no!. I've just finished my E&D training and the rights of transgeder people are frightening. Getting a criminal conviction for telling one person that another has transitioned! I'll stay away from any game that has transgender rights built in thank you.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

  5. SVV Silver badge

    And this from the company.......

    that made its' money from countless video games feaaturing a couple of extravagantly moustachioed village people style plumbers who led somewhat unconventional lifestyles to say the least........

    1. Old Handle
      Trollface

      Re: And this from the company.......

      I thought they were brothers... oh dear.

      1. Mage Silver badge

        Re: And this from the company.......

        If brothers that's worse?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Rule 34...

      Sorry.

      1. ElReg!comments!Pierre Silver badge

        Re: Rule 34...

        What you're looking for is located in the legendofkrystal forum...

  6. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    1. bigtimehustler

      A little bit of me agrees with this, who said they should support any minority group? To include every minority persuasion would be prohibitively costly and prevent the game ever being released. Who says what gets included too? Do we include racists? People who beat up the transgender people? I mean just how real life do they want the game? There are good sides and bad sides to adding extra features, if you want to present the real world as it really is, you need all the unsavoury bits too.

  7. Vociferous

    Gays had a lucky escape.

    As a straight person I find it offensive that my sexuality is referenced by such a shitty game.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    >"It also isn't clear that Nintendo is being honest"

    Libel-sensitive, eh? I don't believe them for a second.

  9. Bladeforce

    Well...

    All I can say is well done Nintendo....goes off to buy 3 3DS's for the kids after reading this

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    BREAKING NEWS! NAMBLA to sue Nintendo for not including their chosen lifestyle in-game.

    google it

    1. Stacy

      Re: BREAKING NEWS! NAMBLA to sue Nintendo for not including their chosen lifestyle in-game.

      It's not a "chosen lifestyle". If you really think that you can pick and choose your sexuality then I suggest you try it. If you can't then I have to ask why not, after all it's simply a choice to you.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: BREAKING NEWS! NAMBLA to sue Nintendo for not including their chosen lifestyle in-game.

        Not an active choice but probably a learned behaviour. Either that or ancient Greece had an extremely high proportion of people with the elusive 'gay gene'.

        Given enough time and conditioning a person could probably have their sexuality changed. Of course, I'm not saying that should ever happen; there's nothing wrong with being gay.

      2. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    2. sena.akada

      Re: BREAKING NEWS! NAMBLA to sue Nintendo for not including their chosen lifestyle in-game.

      Can't believe I googled that sh*t.

    3. Diamandi Lucas

      Re: BREAKING NEWS! NAMBLA to sue Nintendo for not including their chosen lifestyle in-game.

      Marlon Brando look-alikes need love too! Especially if they look like him towards the end of his life.

  11. This post has been deleted by its author

  12. bigtimehustler

    To be honest without knowing the application I side with Nintendo on this one now, they should have thought about it pre launch but after launch it could be a huge change. It would change the whole social interaction logic of the entire game, there could be many variables not expecting all sexes to be able to couple together, its not a case of just allowing it to happen, its looking at how that affects game play after its happened/happening.

  13. This post has been deleted by a moderator

  14. sena.akada

    More QQing from the gay lobby.

  15. Dave Stevens
    FAIL

    Missing the boat.

    If I was Nintendo, I'd roll that up as paying DLC. (Does Nintendo even support that?)

    It would be interesting to see how many people would pay the $2 or whatever to get this.

    1. Don Jefe

      Re: Missing the boat.

      That's a great idea! But why stop a $2? See how bad they really want it and make it a $99 expansion pack. In truth, a high price would more accurately reflect reality. I'm not being biased, but part of not being in the 'mainstream' are the higher costs and the PITA (Pain In The Ass) Modifier that is an unavoidable part of not jiving 100% with the herd.

      Everybody who doesn't match the mythical 'statistical average', in any aspect of their life, is going to have to pay. It's not my fault I'm ridiculously tall, but I have to pay 5x over the price of the same suit for normal height people. Same with neckties, 5x+ for an extra 3/4". Suck it up and pay.

  16. You Are Not Free

    This is a game for kids. I wouldn't let my kids go near it if the "rainbow flag brigade" had had any influence on it's development what so ever.

    Nintendo know this.

    1. Bob Hoskins

      Exactly - I can’t believe we live in a world where a computer games manufacturer has to apologise for not including man on man action. Bizarre.

    2. Don Jefe

      Nintendo is an organization, therefore Nintendo 'knows'. I'm not entirely certain what it is they know, but I'm sure they does...

      Grammar aside, are you saying that knowing a homosexual worked on the game is your primary purchase factor? If you don't know a homosexual has worked on the game then it's OK? What about a situation where an entirely heterosexual group worked on a game and made it just fabulously gay? Would that be OK?

      I'm not sure you have given enough thought to your logic. Put some development time in then reassess your bias. Half assing bias gives a bad name to people with proper, fully developed biases.

      1. Don Jefe

        Oh, oh! I've got another question.

        What if a homosexual worked on the development of, let's say, breakfast cereal. Would that mean you had gotten 'the gay' inside you? What about your kids?!?! Think of the children!!!!!! they will have gotten the gay inside them too!

        Hey! Maybe that's it! Homosexuality isn't a naturally occurring variance that just seems to be everywhere because of the incredibly fucking huge number of Humans all connected (probably with wires that have the gay on them). No! Homosexuality is a vast conspiracy by the breakfast cereal people to turn your kids into fruit loops (Ha!).

        Holy shit! Fruit Loops are made from (gay) people!!!!!! Why did you leave us Charlton Heston?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          I think you are confusing non impacting homosexual involvement with homosexuality promoting content.

          So if for instance your box of cereal had an obviously gay family on the cover then that would certainly put me off buying it as offensive, whereas the possibility that some of the cereal company staff were gay would not.

          1. TopOnePercent Silver badge

            So if for instance your box of cereal had an obviously gay family on the cover then that would certainly put me off buying it as offensive, whereas the possibility that some of the cereal company staff were gay would not.

            Really??!!

            Anyone that knows me in real life would tell you I'm more at the caveman end of the range than the sensitive metrosexual side.

            I'm genuinely suprised that 2 blokes on the packaging would prevent someone buying a cereal. For me it comes down to nutrition and taste (I'm fat, so the taste part of that equation usually wins).

            What annoys me far more is all the shouting about gener/age/race/sexuality issues. Caveman that I am, I don't much care about those things - you're either an asshat or you're not, and I'll judge that for myself based on your words and deeds, not some specially designated grouping.

            One of my best mates is gay. It makes not a jot of difference to any of his friends. He was nervous when he finally told us, having gathered everyone in a pub and waited until we all had a drink. He was a little bit taken aback by the response "Thanks for telling us, we've all known for many years, same (drink) again?"

            Most advocacy groups generate more hostility than they prevent, by making a fuss over a total non-issue. Its a game kids, play it and have fun, or don't. Its not like I boycotted Tomb Raider because I could only play as the pneumatic Lara Croft, while demanding they add a male character called Johnny Bigballs, endowed on a Croftian scale, so I could play as my own gender.

        2. You Are Not Free

          "Oh, oh! I've got another question.

          What if a homosexual worked on the development of, let's say, breakfast cereal. Would that mean you had gotten 'the gay' inside you? What about your kids?!?! Think of the children!!!!!! they will have gotten the gay inside them too!

          Hey! Maybe that's it! Homosexuality isn't a naturally occurring variance that just seems to be everywhere because of the incredibly fucking huge number of Humans all connected (probably with wires that have the gay on them). No! Homosexuality is a vast conspiracy by the breakfast cereal people to turn your kids into fruit loops (Ha!).

          Holy shit! Fruit Loops are made from (gay) people!!!!!! Why did you leave us Charlton Heston?"

          So.... because of that moronic, nonsensical rant, I should allow someone to push their homosexuality into my kids lives? No, thanks.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            I should allow someone to push their homosexuality into my kids lives?

            What's the alternative? Carry on pretending that gay people don't exist? They'll have to learn some time. What if one or more of your kids is gay? How difficult are you making their lives by telling them they're not acceptable?

            My daughter is a relationship with another woman. She's the happiest I've ever seen her in a relationship, reminds me of when I was first in love (with someone of the opposite gender, not that it makes any difference, didn't want you thinking I'd pushed her into it). She's had multiple crappy "straight" relationships and this is the first time I've seen her this happy with a partner. It makes me seethe when reactionaries like you try to use their kids as an excuse for bigotry. My kids are just as important as yours and their lifestyle choices are theirs alone. Deal with it and stop trying to push your heterosexuality into my kid's lives.

          2. Don Jefe

            So because of your moronic fears and nonsensical bias you're going to raise your kids to be scared of gay people too? Well, thanks for that I guess. It's good to instill baseless fears in children. If you don't do that they might grow up to be productive and likable people. We really don't need anymore productive, or likable, people. We're full up.

            1. You Are Not Free

              "you're going to raise your kids to be scared of gay people too?"

              Sorry, but the only moronic fears and nonsensical bias around here is clearly in your own head. As evidenced by your incredible douche-bag comment with regards to what YOU THINK I think or how you might imagine I'm going to raise my kids. It's only matched by the irrelevance of your thoughts with regards to such. Idiot.

      2. You Are Not Free

        "I'm not sure you have given enough thought to your logic. Put some development time in then reassess your bias. Half assing bias gives a bad name to people with proper, fully developed biases."

        I think you should take your own advice.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      +1

      I wouldn't let my kids near the recent Mass Effect version for the same reason. Vote with your wallet.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        +1 - The Sims for the same reason.

  17. RISC OS

    You know you spend too long in front of a computer...

    ... if your looking for someone in-game to marry.

    Whatever you are into, boys, girls, ladyboys... look in the real world.

    1. sabroni Silver badge
      Facepalm

      You are so right!

      Likewise if you play COD, stop wasting time in front of the computer and get into the real world and start slaughtering! All you tetris fans, start destroying real walls! All you pacman heads, take pills and eat ghosts in real life.

  18. Tom 7 Silver badge

    Havent they heard of 1950's coding techniques

    or did they think it was called Objectional Orientation Programming?

    1. Don Jefe
      Happy

      Re: Havent they heard of 1950's coding techniques

      Objectional Orientation Programming sounds like a 'Safe Search' feature for satnav systems. You know, like if you needed an ATM but didn't want to have to go inside a titty bar to use it.

  19. mickey mouse the fith

    Nintendo`s biggest market is kids, the last thing most parents would want is little timmy asking why ryu and ken are kissing like mummy and daddy do. Also, how will they handle breeding ingame?

    These activists are barking up the wrong tree if they think the majority want poofters in kids games.

    And where do you stop?, multiple wives are common in some cultures as are child brides and forced partnerships, imagine a game that included that little lot to avoid upsetting the locals.

    Nintendo are 100% right for the decision they made, and if the gay crowd dont like it, then tough, dont buy it, go and play arseraiders 5 or whatever floats your boat.

    1. Big John Silver badge
      Pirate

      "..arseraiders 5.."

      I'm trying to imagine such a game...

      1. sabroni Silver badge
        Happy

        re: I'm trying to imagine such a game...

        I bet you are. Looks good, yeah?

      2. d3vy Silver badge

        arseraiders 5..

        Finally a reason to buybthe occulus rift!

    2. sabroni Silver badge
      WTF?

      re: the last thing most parents would want...

      ... is little timmy asking why ryu and ken are kissing like mummy and daddy do

      Well maybe most parents (citation needed) should stop being so uptight and just explain that ryu and ken love each other just like mummy and daddy do and that's why they're kissing. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

  20. Hilmi Al-kindy

    Attention seeking and desperate attempts at social acceptance

    In my opinion, all this protesting is just a desperate attempt at getting social recognition for gay marriages. I am a Muslim and my religion allows polygamy, you don't find me screeming in outrage why a game doesn't represent my life style. Why? Because I don't feel desperate to prove anything to world. I am convinced that there is nothing wrong with my moral standards, therefore I don't need to shove my morals down everybody's throat and scream about inequality. I have nothing to prove, I don't care for the acceptance of others because I know I am right.

    The day the G&L community stops screaming about such trivial things, is the day I know that they are truly convinced there is nothing wrong with what they are doing. The way I see it, a person who is confident that their actions are not wrong, does not need to prove anything to the world. If they feel discriminated against, let them campaign where it matters like discrimination in the work place or recognition of marriage or some such matter. They don't need project their moral values on me and enforce them on me and expose my children to their values.

    Just imagine the outrage in the USA if Nintendo released a game that allowed polygamy. I wonder how many of those same G&L campaigners would campaign for the rights of those of different religious beliefs.

  21. Tank boy
    Childcatcher

    This is unfortunate

    I'm so sorry I let the wife convince me into buying a Wii. Until I bought Mortal Kombat and Pirates! but I guess same sex/transgender is out of bounds for the Nintendo folks. Sure you can get a fatality or rob and pillage, but we can't have anything that racy.

  22. Zot
    Facepalm

    It's just a fecking computer game folks!

    They can design it how they want, leave politics out if it.

    Talking of politics...

    “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time” - John Lydgate.

    1. ukgnome Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: It's just a fecking computer game folks!

      NO!

      All computer games now need to be rainbow flavoured...

      Splinter Cell shall now be sphincter cell...

      Doom will be re-branded with rainbows and be called Happy

      And Microsoft Train Simulator will now have tighter tunnels....

      Yes, I am been a bit sarcastic, but that's because it's just a friggin game.....

      *I am more concerned with pokemon, but you don't see the ALF protesting!

      **An El Reg, we need a sarcasm icon please!

      1. TopOnePercent Silver badge
        Joke

        Re: It's just a fecking computer game folks!

        *I am more concerned with pokemon, but you don't see the ALF protesting!

        That's mostly because it was a typo - they meant to call it pokeman.

  23. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

    Every time something like this happens I find it difficult to say what nauseates me more - the histrionics of the activists, pretending that they care about gay rights but only wishing to score a personal point, or the wave of the homophobic reaction it inevitably provokes...

    1. Don Jefe

      I think your observation does a great job highlighting the fact that on nearly every 'controversial' issue out there we get overexposed to the loudest fringes, the minorities, and the moderate voices in the middle, the majority, get drowned out.

      It's all quite unfortunate.

  24. BongoJoe

    Pandora's Box

    Will the same activists also admit that, alas, gay bashing does go on in the Real World and thus should also take a part in this game?

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What age range is this game even aimed at?

    I see it has an E rating, meaning everyone, which usually means that the game is for children, and young ones at that, else the rating would probably be E+10.

    Why would you subject children to these confusing messages at such a young age? How many people knew they were gay when they were 5 or 6?

    Will there be a time when children think being gay is normal human behavior and force themselves into a situation which they will later regret? Or be taken advantage of by someone older?

    Keep childrens games simple, a basic life game should be just that, basic. Put in some good moral codes, promote friendship and equality. Promote curiosity and asking questions.

    If a child thinks they are gay, they shouldnt think their only way to express themselves is anonymously in a game. They should be encouraged to talk to their parents for love and support.

    Too many parents nowadays rely on others and technology to raise their kids, we are creating a very bad world and we need to get a hold of it now.

    1. Gareth Gouldstone
      Happy

      "How many people knew they were gay when they were 5 or 6?"

      I knew when I was five that I was different. I didn't have a name for it until I was thirteen, by which time I had learned that it was 'wrong' to feel like I did. 48 years later I would hope that kids can see role models for how they are rather than how their parents would like them to be.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "How many people knew they were gay when they were 5 or 6?"

        Or even better - that they find a cure.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "How many people knew they were gay when they were 5 or 6?"

        How do you know you were different? How do you know that what you felt was different from every other 5 or 6 year old out there? You don't, since you never had that feeling, you don't know if it was the same or not.

        5 or 6 year olds don't have a solid orientation, most 5 year old boys hate 5 year old girls. I certainly wasn't interested in developing relationships at that age and don't remember being attracted to girls at that age either.

        1. Gareth Gouldstone
          Happy

          Re: "How do you know you were different?"

          It was more about having a crush on men and being very happy to spend time with girls, I guess. And not being interested in ball games (although that is a stereotype, of course).

    2. Old Handle

      Do you seriously think children will be "confused" by finding out gay people exist, or do you really just mean you are confused by it? Because usually children take new information in stride pretty easily.

  26. ecofeco Silver badge

    Once again re-enforcing the stereotype...

    Once again, a small group of gamers are just re-enforcing the stereotype of people without lives.

    Why, WHY is this even an issue? It's just a damn game for Pete's sake! A GAME!!

  27. DrXym Silver badge

    Nintendo was asking for this

    They blatantly ignored cisgender females who want to establish relationships with birth male pre op transexuals but without the hetronormative hegemonic displays of "love" that phallocentric society demands. Floating love hearts in a game are practically akin to penetrative rape. How DARE they!!!

    Back in reality, this crappy game would have come and gone without anybody noticing or caring before this silly protest.

  28. Lars Silver badge
    WTF?

    I wonder

    Will they have to apologize to Mormons too for not allowing polygamy. What the hell.

  29. Hilmi Al-kindy

    What would computer games be like if they had to cater for every single minorities moral standards?

    Computer games are formative for children. They should be representing the main stream moral standards of society and should not used to campaign for the moral standards of minorities. Where should the game stop? Today it's Gay and lesbian representation, then it is the drug users who insist on allowing "medicinal" use of drugs then it's the guy who insists to force his religious principles and then it's the fringe cults etc.... etc...

    Where should a game stop in representing minorities? Everybody thinks their cause is a just one and it should be treated as an exemption, but the truth of the matter is, a game needs to be designed to cater for main stream ethical standards. The standards which every single person would agree have nothing wrong with them. All other minorities need to go to specialty entertainment providers to get entertainment geared specifically for that market. It is a free market, want a gay marriage game, start a company and make games that support gay marriage, nobody is stopping you. If I own a company and don't want to make gay marriage available in my game, that is non of your business, I have not interfered with your sexual preference nor have I stopped you from being gay in any way nor have I insulted or offended you in any way. So keep out of my hair and I will keep out of yours.

    Trying to cater for every single minority in every single scenario is just not practical nor is it morally correct to force everybody to compromise on their personal ethics so they fit in with your personal ethics.

    SO GROW UP AND LIVE WITH THE FACT THAT OTHER PEOPLE DON"T AGREE WITH YOUR PERSONAL CHOICES.

  30. Stretch

    "Unfortunately, it is not possible for us to change this game's design, and such a significant development change can't be accomplished with a post-ship patch,"

    In a word: Bullshit.

  31. Swarthy Silver badge

    What I find offensive

    Is that there was a last minute (post-release even) requirements change, and it did not go through proper change control or validation.

    If I get a sudden change of requirement after (or even shortly before) a Release to Production, my answer will be the same :"No." I don't care if it's a color change on a widget, or changing all of the calculations to base-9. The implementation is a small part. Testing, analysis and all the other gubbins of writing a decent project would have to be re-accomplished.

    I will NOT allow bugs to be shipped in my code because someone decided last-minute to throw a fit.

    If I'm feeling nice, and the request was made politely, I may agree to try to work it into an update, or if it's a fundamental change, in the next release; which is what Nintendo have said.

  32. GaryBarber

    Why all the fuss? Nintendo will change it in the next version. So just wait a while and you're can create any kind of in-game relationship you like.

    Crikey, proper same-sex marriage (not civil partnership) only became legal in the UK in March!

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Instead

    It will be Hentai with lesbian monsters.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019