Probably because it's easier to argue specific things like semantics than try to address and understand less measurable factors like human feelings and experiences.

I support the cause, but realistically, unless this game ends up selling gangbusters (highly doubtful), I bet all this complaining does is make Nintendo think twice about releasing the next one in North America. Too much hassle for such a niche product.

Oh man, the Polygon opinion piece is terrible. The comments are the most civil thing going on there.

I stated this on Twitter just now, but as the day closes out, here are my final thoughts on the matter:

The press has put too much emphasis into blasting a fraction of the press release and the condemnation is overblown. This is symptomatic of a larger problem I see in the games press, in that far too often, there's a rush to condemn without stopping for any sort of consideration first. Mind you, I'm not saying that Nintendo is above criticism in this, but there's measured discourse, and then there's getting the torches and pitchforks out.

And the games press loves their torches and pitchforks.

While I do like many of the comments there, I also don't think the Polygon opinion is terrible. Just because I may not be as mad about it doesn't mean it's wrong or bad for someone to feel more strongly about it. I interpreted their statement in one way, and she took it to be a bit harsher. Frankly, neither of us are Nintendo; so, we can only interpret as best we can. Regardless of any tone or particularly strong statements about hatred, I agree with her general points about what is wrong with their statement, and I hope they may listen and potentially find a better way to address people's concerns.

I do feel bad that NoA is in a tough spot with the weight of NoJ, but they also could have not said anything or explained that there just isn't time or resources instead of speaking any further on it. Though, as commenters have pointed out, they've already changed a decent bit for the game's move overseas; so, blaming resources would have been a bit disingenuous. They're mainly saying that this just hasn't been a priority to them, and that's unfortunate. Hopefully they'll be given a strong enough message that they'll at least consider the idea of same-sex options in future games. If they do, their games should be even better for it.

I can understand having some concerns over the press, but frankly, this should be more about Nintendo than any press. No matter what random opinion pieces may seem to "go too far" or coverage seem too harsh, ultimately the biggest fault here is on Nintendo. I may not agree with everything out there, but Nintendo are the ones who deserve the greatest criticism in this instance. Things were decent with people plainly pointing out this oversight in one of their upcoming games and encouraging them in a way to improve it, and their response only made things worse.

It's an unfortunate instance of Nintendo dropping the ball, and I hope they'll learn from this. NoA is in a tough spot, but they can handle this better. Hopefully they'll show that they're actually listening. Because, if they listen to the many different gamers out there, I think Nintendo should be able to make their games even more fun and enjoyable for everyone.

Again, I'm not saying that Nintendo isn't at fault. But the press's reaction to this might as well have been a pack of wolves smelling blood. Criticism of this should run both ways.

The thing that strikes me about the Polygon article is that the conclusions the writer draws, while perhaps unreasonably harsh, are also totally foreseeable. There's a lot of coded language in the first paragraph of NoA's statement that I'm surprised passed their PR filters. Someone in that chain is not very good at their job.

Care to elaborate? I'm just not really sure what you're talking about.

I see her saying that Nintendo are bigots who hate gay people. I think that opinion is terrible. It's not a matter of being more mad than anyone else. It's pretty much attributing an unfounded belief to the company. This really isn't, "well, we're not Nintendo, maybe they do hate gay people." I don't think she makes any good points with regards to Nintendo or this game, just vitriol. This is basically libel.

About the only thing Nintendo could have done better is explain that the release outside of Japan is too close to include what is being asked for, and they don't have the resources to implement it. The social commentary line is being blown way out of proportion. They didn't make the game as a social commentary like several indie games have done, that much is obvious. The patch, that also got blown out of proportion, wasn't applied as a social commentary either.

At the end of the Nintendo's statement, they do in fact say that they will continue to listen to people's feedback. That could lead to changes in possible future titles. She and others like her taking things too far makes me think the next time Nintendo has a chance to bring out a quirky title outside of Japan, they'll have second thoughts.

I'm actually surprised with the number of mature posts in this thread, good work people!

Game journalists tend to only have one reaction when one of them goes too far: circle the wagons, because the next time, it may be them who blows shit out of proportion and they'll need the others on their side too.

I mean that some of the phrases that NoA uses - for instance, their claim that they aren't trying to make any social commentary, or that the game takes place in an alternate and fanciful world - are clumsy and leave them wide open to a variety of uncharitable interpretations, most of which you'll find in Polygon's op-ed.

If Nintendo doesn't feel the need for it in the game it doesn't have to be in. I'm so tired of this bullshit. Stop making video games serious business.

@hailinel: Why do people seem to overblow people's reaction to these things? I don't really see how the reaction from the press could be described as them "getting out their pitchforks". The only comments I read came right after Nintendo's press release. Haven't seen anyone talk about it for the rest of the day. I think I saw one opinion article on polygon but that was about it. The press's reaction has seemed pretty mild so far to me but maybe I'm missing something.

@encephalon: Ah so. Yeah, I agree. A simple, "We at Nintendo of America fully support people of all orientations and we apologize that this game may lack options to be fully inclusive.", or something similar could have potentially avoided criticism.

Companies should know by now that even if you had the best intentions, don't try to explain yourself in a press release. It just makes everything worse. Especially if you have to invoke some kind of fantasy land.

Acknowledge the problem, apologize, and move on. (And, you know, maybe listen to fans and improve stuff next time!)

I think you may be misunderstanding her opinion article a bit. I was glad that many commenters in their comments section seemed to "get" it despite perhaps not sharing a similar level of anger.

I didn't get the impression she was suggesting that Nintendo, the entire company, are bigots who hate gay people. That's silly. She does note that there appear to be signs of engrained hatred, but while that may sound inflammatory, that's almost always referring to the systemic way in which historical hate has hurt people and established damaging norms. The point is rarely that such signs mean someone is actively out to get anyone. That's why she focuses so much on the issue of heteronormativity.

Hatred and bigotry throughout history have marginalized same-sex relationships to be considered unwelcome and unnecessary. While they should simply be a part of life, as some people just happen to have same-sex relationships, that isn't the world we live in. Such hatred pushed homosexuality into the darkness and made it attached to perversion in the minds of many, and unfortunately, that means that something that should just be obvious now may take effort to realize. Thus, ignorance is an unfortunate side-effect of historical hatred. Nintendo of Japan is clearly not out to eat little gay children, but they have shown ignorance regarding same-sex relationships.

Frankly, Nintendo of America should have known better, and maybe someone could have said, "Perhaps we can fix this oversight for the overseas release." But instead, they focused on just about anything else. Many parts of the game have been changed, but now we're at a point where it's a little too late to do anything about it. At least, without them spending extra time and money to make a patch. Considering that's their best excuse here, I can understand some LGBT gamers and those who care about LGBT gamers feeling like they don't matter enough for them to spend that extra bit to improve the game. I think she is understandably angry when looking at this.

I may not feel exactly the same way or even interpret it exactly as she does, but I can appreciate her feelings on it and understand where she may be coming from. I don't think her opinion article or Polygon allowing her to share it is terrible, and I am glad that many commenters on their site seemed to be empathetic with her perspective.

I hope people will continue to talk about it and Nintendo may genuinely listen.

That, plus perhaps something like "While the current game is already finished, we hear and appreciate the serious feedback and hope to address this better in future titles."

I can appreciate NoA trying to explain, but haphazardly doing so is just a recipe for making things worse. They should have given an initial acknowledgement with a well thought out response later. This statement seemed rushed, and they fell into some clear mistakes because of it.

Despite this error, I hope NoA will talk with NoJ a bit more in the coming days and eventually give a better Nintendo response which shows that they are indeed listening.

But this is precisely where all of these discussions stumble and never really get back on their feet. When you tell someone, "No you're not actively a bigot, you just behave in a bigoted way because of historical societal structures.", you've put them on the defense. You've separated what once was everyone who just wants good games into two groups, created an us vs. them situation, which inherently starts arguments rather than progress.

In the video that began this stuff, the duder makes great convincing points without resorting to a single accusation. It makes his message easy to hear, because we feel like we're included in the idea that he's proposing. When someone says, "This needs to change because you're oppressing me even if you don't know you are.", it's clearly much harder to join together and get behind something.

Yeah, I praised the guy behind this movement from day one. HE is going about things the right way, and it's very hard to disagree with any part of his argument, which is fair, polite, and understanding. Leave it to polygon to shit all over that good start.

@joshwent: The op-ed definitely read to me like a cathartic exercise for the author, rather than a piece genuinely meant to affect change in the industry at large. Whatever my criticisms of NoA's public statement, that op-ed is no sterling example of persuasive writing, either.

I suppose you can see her angry response as less helpful, but regardless of your opinion on its helpfulness to the cause of equality, I still wouldn't characterize it as terrible. And things have changed a little bit since that original video. I think we can all agree Nintendo's statement made things worse, not better. It may have had a slightly different tone if remade now.

As for whether or not she should have brought up institutional bigotry in her opinion piece, well, I don't see why she needs to deny that it exists just to make you or anyone else feel better. Pointing out the inequalities in the world might make some people feel like it's an "us vs them" situation, but that's a misunderstanding of how hatred and institutional inequality has poisoned so many things in our lives. Historical racism doesn't just pop up now in crazy racists. It still exists within the very foundations of many inequalities of our world today. The African Americans disproportionately represented in poorer neighborhoods and in US prisons did not just get there by random chance. Historical bigotry helped push generations into impoverished positions, and only recent advances have given hope for escaping that status quo.

If you hear someone angry about the historical marginalization of homosexuals and how hatred has helped push them into being a near non-entity in some areas of the world and your first response is that bringing that fact up makes you feel uncomfortable, then you may be bothered by the wrong thing in this situation. It -should- make us all feel uncomfortable that the fruits of such hate still impact our world today, often even impacting ourselves, and it should reasonably encourage us to want to do more about it.

I don't think there's anything wrong with acknowledging the truth. Even if it isn't "PC" enough for those who want progress on their own terms. I may be a rather mild-mannered individual who prefers to focus more on outreach than my anger and displeasure with a situation, but I do not begrudge those who respond differently than I do. While I may not always share their same feelings or words, I understand that others will speak against inequality in their own way.

In general, it sucks that any of us have to feel compelled to say anything at all, because frankly, these issues shouldn't exist. Everything should be sunshine and rainbows, but they're not. Everything in gaming should just be "fun", but it's not. So, reluctantly, we have to spend far too much of our breath on things like this, hoping against hope that some good may come of it and gaming in the future may be better for all kinds of gamers.

I don't personally think there is anything to inherently apologize for which would explain why their statement is more explanatory rather than apologetic.

Updated OP with Nintendo's response and added Tye's latest tweet regarding the Club Nintendo survey to the bottom.

Here are some other places that have been talking about this thang:

• BBC - Nintendo says 'No' to gay game characters
• Swedish Public Service Television - Nintendo stoppar gay-bröllop
• Kotaku - Fighting For Gay Marriage In A Nintendo Game
• Polygon - Tomodachi Life fan campaigns for Nintendo to add same-sex relationships (update)
• A.V. Club - Nintendo says there’s no place for gay marriage in its “playful alternate world”
• Eurogamer - Nintendo refuses to allow same-sex relationships in Tomodachi Life

Whatever happened to the freedom to create what you want. If this is what Nintendo created and they are fine with it then so be it. Don't buy it and go create your own game.

So people are screaming at Nintendo to add a feature to a game they're already taking a huge financial risk in localizing, and then they want that feature released as free DLC?

Look, I'm not saying that there isn't a legitimate beef here, especially considering the type of game this is, but asking Nintendo to do that when the game is a month away from release is a bit asinine, and doesn't sound like the right way to pick a fight.

What, then, should they do?

Vote with your wallet. Don't buy the game. Then tell them why, afterwards. I don't think Nintendo will truly understand based on online petitions, scattered articles, and a lightly supported social media movement: I think they'll understand when they see financial losses come in on the game, and THEN you tell them why.

And considering Japan holds a very conservative stance on homosexuality as it is, we can't expect them to include the feature in an initially Japanese-only title - the backlash there would be comparable to what they're getting here, except Japan is the prime market for Tomodachi, and the rest of the world might buy a few copies too. It's all business, and while it's shitty, it makes sense.

That freedom is there--it's happening. There is also a process of criticsm and in this modern world, forum discussions are a part of that--even before the final product exists. If this is what people want to post about, then so be it. Don't read it and go create your own thread........... too bitchy?

People generally still want to support the game. We know it's a risk for them to bring it over at all. A lot of gamers just want to use this as an opportunity to send a message to Nintendo that may hopefully impact future releases. If it changed this one, that would be great, but the plan from the beginning was more to convey that this was an oversight with the current release and hopefully a feature for future ones.

Their statement has brought up some other things though; so, it isn't as simple as it was. But the general point is still the same. Make sure it's clear to Nintendo that many gamers -do- want to see same-sex relationships as an option in their games. :)

I know how you feel, but this activist movement itself could not be a better example of how to do this sort of thing without pointing fingers or making harmful accusations. You should watch it if you haven't already.

Shots fired over at Polygon, as one might except. I have a lot of issues with Polygon, their preachiness and how infrequently it's backed up with solid content, however, I generally agree.

I was disappointed to see so many people shrug off Nintendo's answer in this thread as if it legitimately addressed the concerns put forward. Somewhere along the lines of development, these features were designed specifically to pair oppositely gendered mii's. This distinction only exists in code, unlike real life. When you're putting boundaries around functionality, it's entirely on them.

And no, I'm not that surprised at Nintendo's response, but sneering at the backlash isn't exactly productive either. Criticism is valid to any art form, and should be encouraged. Always. It's a month from release, and if you want to hand them that excuse then fine, but for those that feel strongly, it's on you to vote with your wallets. If you don't, then enjoy the game.

The movement in general is OK. It really is a great example. But the press trying to latch themselves onto it for a soapbox? No.

Polygon in a nutshell.

Also, keep it in mind that the population of Japan is very old, resulting in a very conservative and traditional society compared to the ones in the west.

You mean gay people will just marry somebody of the opposite sex when they realize same-sex marriage is off the table?

The best bet is for the indie scene to create its own version of Tomodachi Life.

I don't think screaming really fits the bill, fine it's the internet and it's a hot button social issue so some people are probably being hot headed about it, but if you watch the guys video who started the whole thing, he is calm and polite about the whole thing, it doesn't come off as a demand it comes off as request.
And personally I don't think there is anything wrong with letting a company know that you would like for them to change or include something and see how things go.
Nothing gets done by sitting on your ass after all.

@fattony12000:

Those are some loaded headlines that assume an awful lot about Nintendo's intentions. They are pretty misleading for "news" headlines.

@fifichiapet: my point being that we are now a society that gangs up on people until we change them or get our way. If this was discussing for the sake of an open talk then that's cool but it's not that. Groups of people will continually attack them for something they probably don't even care about either way. Respond to us or feel our self entitled wrath!

I'm glad I grew up around a type of "golden age" with games, I could spend my early teens on different gaming sites and it was all about the video games, no one seemed to have any real agenda outside of wanting to enjoy the damn games. I don't have a problem with gay characters in games, I think that is perfectly fine. I am just saying that even 10 years ago you could chew the fat on video games without having to account for these daunting politically correct topics. That is something kids on the internet have to deal with a whole lot more now. They go to gaming sites now and are confronted with such highly controversial topics, if I grew up around that it might have driven me away from video games.

EDIT: I am not saying that gay characters would drive me away from gaming, I already know this post is probably gonna be misinterpreted. I am saying that the blind innocence of gaming that was either unaware or unwilling to tackle these topics (that do need to be addressed) did provide for an easier fandom of gaming as a medium even though it operated as a shield from important topics such as this.

None of those people are actually going to buy the game.

I hope I'm not reposting something, but I found this write up on Gamasutra to be a fantastic take on this issue.

What I think was really unclear about the nature of the game is that it seems you have little to no control over the events that happen in the game, even the relationships. As I understand it, you aren't forced to choose heterosexual relationships, you have NO choice. Relationships and marriage just happen. Which means if the game had homosexuality, your seemingly straight miis could just randomly enter homosexual relationships, which is its own can of worms. And there would be guarantee your gay miis wouldn't enter into gay relationships either.

Now, obviously if that is not the way they would want to handle this situation, you should be able to select your sexuality, but I also kinda understand a little bit more why they would just try to avoid the issue all together, because it doesn't seem like a simple feature to allow you to enter a relationship with the same sex.

"Go create your own game" is fine advice for folks who generally want more representation of certain genders/orientations/whatever. That's not what this is about. It's a kid who wants to experience this specific game, made by Nintendo, with Wiis, just in the same way that hetero folks already get to.

That's fine, but maybe consider if the complete lack of any options in games to mimic your real life if you were a gay male, would still allow for that "easier fandom".

I agree with you about the fatigue from seeing so much news and opinions related to the social and societal aspect of gaming rather than the games themselves, but this specifically doesn't seem like one of those cases to me. The overblown reactions from sites like Polygon, sure, but this all started from a kid who just wanted this life simulator to be more like... his actual life. It's not really a controversial topic at all.

Moonmist (1986)

In 1986, Infocom released Moonmist, a text adventure mystery with several possible randomly selected plotlines. In one of these plotlines, the criminal is a female artist who is jealous because her girlfriend has got married to a man. This is the first instance of a homosexual character in a video game.

Super Mario Bros. 2 (1988)

In 1988, Nintendo released Super Mario Bros. 2 for the NES. In the first-edition manual for the North American release of the game, Birdo is referred to as a male who believes that he is a female and would rather be called "Birdetta", making her the first transgender character for Nintendo. In the game, Birdo's name was also mistakenly switched with another Super Mario Bros. 2 enemy, Ostro, both in the manual and in the end credits. While the Japanese manual for Super Mario Bros. 2 referred to Birdo as female, later games featuring the character have made conflicting statements of Birdo as female, male or of indeterminate gender.

Final Fight (1989)

In 1989, Capcom released Final Fight for the arcades. One of the characters, Poison, was born male but, depending on the region, is either a crossdresser or transgender. She has since been confirmed as a male-to-female trans woman.

Earthbound (1994)

In 1994, Nintendo released Earthbound for the Super Nintendo Entertainment System. One of the characters featured is Tony who has subtle attractions to his best friend Jeff, according to Earthbound creator, Shigesato Itoi.

Chrono Trigger (1995)

Square's 1995 SNES RPG Chrono Trigger featured a major villain who was transgender. The character Flea, a henchman of Magus, was described as looking like a girl. Flea would exclaim "Hey, I'm a guy!" and later "Male or female, what difference does it make? Power is beautiful, and I've got the power." Flea would later appear with his sidekicks in the sequel Chrono Cross, appearing as a female with a pink wig and miniskirt. However, the battle screen in Chrono Cross displays the enemies' sex with a male or female symbol, and Flea is clearly marked as a man. It is notable that Flea's transgender theme appeared in the US translation of the SNES release, during Nintendo's censorship phase.

Phantasmagoria 2: A Puzzle of Flesh (1996)

The 1996 computer game Phantasmagoria 2: A Puzzle of Flesh featured a homosexual male character named Trevor, who was a close friend and co-worker of the player's character, Curtis Craig. Despite his effeminate and flamboyant portrayal, Trevor is shown as intelligent and is very significant through the game's plot. Curtis admits to his psychiatrist that he has feelings for Trevor and might be bisexual and later the two kiss, although Curtis is also shown as having relationships with a girlfriend and a S&Mdomme. Creators of the game talked about the mature sexual themes in the game during a 1997 interview. Curtis is the first playable non-heterosexual character in a video game.

i remember when games used to be about having a good ol' time. you know, like heterosexual marriage

Not only that but they've pretty much guaranteed next time Nintendo thinks about bringing one of their "weirder" games over it probably won't happen. What is sad is the initial efforts as many have said are balanced and thought out. It is all the people jumping on after the fact dragging these efforts into the muck.

People should remember Nintendo is like the old guy down the street who isn't sure if the internet is used in fishing or not. You have to be nice to Nintendo, and don't make too loud of sounds near them or they might get spooked and run away.

The only thing about this whole thing that really bugs me is that, when relationships were considered for this game, heterosexual relationships were automatically considered but homosexual relationships weren't. Because they should be automatically considered. It's not about social commentary or making some profound statement. It's about representing the real world as it truly is.

@wolfgame: A couple weeks ago I was digging through what paltry amount of old X-Play videos exist on the shambling corpse that is the G4 website, and they had a preview of Super Princess Peach from early 2006. They both basically spend the entire time just goofing on Peach's powers, and Morgan also made fun of it for the same thing in the review. But it was never preachy or hostile. They rate the game highly, make a few jokes, and move on.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I really understand and sympathize with where you're coming from.

@jasonr86: You realize this game was made in Japan years ago by Nintendo right? Also, if we're representing "the world as it truly is" Tomodachi Life would need to be some MA+ shit and would never make it to the 3ds.

@amikron:

I can only imagine there were homosexual relationships in Japan when this game was made. And 'the world as it is' referring to what this game is trying to represent. In this case, relationships.