Nintendo Apologizes For Not Allowing Same-Sex Relationships In Life Sim Game

An anonymous reader writes "Nintendo has been taking heat recently for their decision not to allow same sex relationships in Tomodachi Life, an upcoming life simulation game for the 3DS. An advocacy group for LGBT issues said, 'In purposefully limiting players' relationship options, Nintendo is not only sending a hurtful message to many of its fans and consumers by excluding them, but also setting itself way behind the times.' The group also pointed out that The Sims allowed such choices over a decade ago. Nintendo originally replied that the game was not intended to be social commentary, and pointed out that the U.S. release of Tomodachi Life is just a localization of the Japanese version (gay marriage is not legal in Japan). Now Nintendo has officially apologized for 'failing to include same-sex relationships' in the game, and they promised to build a more inclusive experience if they make a sequel."

Comments

bah!

[Anonymous Coward]

Society is sure bending over for something like 1% of the population.

We should treat drug addicts and alcoholics as lovingly.

Overreacting

[duke_cheetah2003]

This is just dumb. It's a game!

I'm all for LGBT rights and such, but really to criticize a game just cuz it don't include your sexual orientation..? I dunno about that. What's next? Is the LGBT community going to demand air time in Disney cartoons next?

Besides, no one complained about Harvest Moon, another game that only permits heterosexual marriages. So what! It's a game!

Re:Overreacting

[QuasiSteve]

Now read that with s/LGBT/Black/

Not that I completely disagree, but if you're going to make a 'life simulation' game localized to a given market, then it's not all that far-fetched to make it reflect the (aggregate) society of that localization, or accept that you'll get complaints if you don't.

Ultimately Nintendo's solution is to say "we'll look at it IF we make a sequel" - it's not much of a commitment, more of a PR strategy.

Re:Overreacting

[pla]

Now read that with s/LGBT/animals/.

Now read that with s/LGBT/power tools/.

I completely support the right of gays to marry (to the extent that I support any marriage, an institution I wholly reject, as does my long-term partner). But this amounts to a purely manufactured controversy. The game contains what it contains; don't like it? Don't play it. Send a message with your wallet, rather than pissing and moaning about a game you didn't create not behaving like you want it to.

Re:Overreacting

[QuasiSteve]

Now read that with s/LGBT/animals/.

Now read that with s/LGBT/power tools/.

Yes, and that's the 'slippery slope' argument one could make.

However, "reflect the (aggregate) society of that localization". What society are you living in where you can legally marry animals and/or power tools, and are either of those characters that you [i]can[/i] play as in the first place?

Re:Overreacting

[Andtalath]

It's entertainment.
Entertainment in a large fashion dictates what is ok and normal.
Every bit of acceptance is good.

This is also the matter of people noticing that a feature is lacking in their game.
It's the same type of complaint, in a fashion, as when you can't play games in a LAN unless you are connected to the internet.
It's an unneccesary addition specifically not allowing two people to get together.

Re:Overreacting

[thesandtiger]

Kind of funny that you're using YOUR voice to suggest other people shouldn't use theirs.

You're pissing and moaning on Slashdot because other people aren't behaving how you want them to.

Speaking with your wallet and your wallet alone does nothing - how do the people you're boycotting know why you're boycotting? Speaking up with your wallet and your voice is far more powerful.

Re:Overreacting

[QuasiSteve]

What about adoption? Children without marriage? Poly-amorous relationships? Common enough in my area that no one blinks an eye, and yet they're not in the game.

Yes, but then you're actually arguing my point for me. Marriage is in the game. It's just that there's a check in the code that says "if (MiiA.gender == m && MiiB.gender == f) { okiedoke; }" which quite actively blocks two male or two female Miis from marrying each other.

Unless, of course, you view 'gay marriage' as distinctly different from 'straight marriage', because then your argument makes sense.

Re:Overreacting

[AdamHaun]

I'm all for LGBT rights and such, but really to criticize a game just cuz it don't include your sexual orientation..?

You're talking like this is a small thing, like the game didn't include their exact hair color or that one shirt they like to wear. People were upset because Nintendo was pretending that their relationship with their spouse did not and could not exist. That's not a small thing in a "life simulator", nor is it an attitude that's limited to games. And when Nintendo was called on it, they tried to dodge the issue rather than confronting it.

A better question is, what about this bothers you so much? Regardless of what kind of product it is, customers (potential and actual) have every right to criticize it. This is core game functionality. What's wrong with talking about it?

What's next? Is the LGBT community going to demand air time in Disney cartoons next?

I'm not sure what you're exactly trying to say with that, but Disney might be a bit ahead of you there.

Re:Overreacting

[Idarubicin]

Now read that with s/LGBT/Black/

Now read that with s/LGBT/animals/.

Which is totally sound reasoning, if you would like to make the assertion that "LGBT people", "black people", and "animals" are all proper subsets of the group "people". Or, alternatively, that "LGBT people", "black people", and "animals" are all not subsets of the group "people". Which one of those arguments did you want to plant your flag on?

Don't play it. Send a message with your wallet, rather than pissing and moaning about a game you didn't create not behaving like you want it to.

Welcome to America, where we have now passed through the stage where money is equivalent to speech and reached the point where money is the only socially-acceptable form of speech.

Don't like what other people are saying about the game, pla? Guess you should stop pissing and moaning about it, and just not give any money to the people whose behaviour you disagree with. You know--follow your own advice.

Where's the apology for lack of Polyagmy?

[Anonymous Coward]

For a family friendly company they completely dropped the ball when it comes to living my virtual harem fantasies.

Jesus christ

[Anonymous Coward]

The game is offensive unless it allows relationships between ethereal giraffe genderqueer fursonas and tri-curious pansexual midget doctors. Right?

Is it so bad that people just want to make a game that reflects the relationships the majority of people on Earth have? Do they really have to support every sexual minority to be "fair"?

Re:First World Problems

[Sique]

Actually, the complaint arised when two people who owned already the game found out they couldn't have their Mii characters marry in the game. But let a fact not spoil your rant. Keep up the good work!

Re:Kind of understandable from Nintendo

[BrendaEM]

Is 1:10 people really an anomaly?

Re:First World Problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Fanny bandits only care about destroying society. You must either love gay sex or be sent to the gulags!!!

Re:Kind of understandable from Nintendo

[RazorSharp]

Is 1:10 people really an anomaly?

1:10 where? San Francisco, the United States, the world? I'd like to see an objective source that validates that statistic. I hear people throw it around a lot but I've never seen it verified.

Any organism that actively engages in a behavior that inhibits its ability to reproduce is an anomaly. That's just a basic understanding of how natural selection works. Humans, with our self-reflecting consciousness, have a great tendency to do anomalous things as our behavior is more than mere impulse, so I don't mean it as a disparaging remark. I personally don't want to reproduce because I don't think the human race needs to increase our numbers at this time, and this type of decision makes me an anomaly among organisms.

I can't stand the California attitude that evolution is a hardened fact yet being a homosexual is like being born to a ultra-special race that must be cherished and insulated from anything that might possibly be misconstrued as a slight against their amazing specialness. Do I believe that homosexuals should be discriminated against? No. Do I think they should be able to marry? I don't believe that marriage should be a legal status among straights or homosexuals. Call your partnership with your significant other whatever you want to call it. Do I think that every TV show and movie and video game should have token gay people? No. At a certain point the pursuit of inclusiveness makes a spectacle of those included. It used to be the token black guy who always had something snappy to say. Now it's the token gay guy. I guess next up will be the token tranny.

Re:A game and the reality

[RazorSharp]

Boo hoo. If people want to kill themselves for stupid reasons I'm not going to stop them. The world is better off without pussies who can't deal with a little hardship.

Re:Secret guidelines

[MBGMorden]

Mass Effect and Dragon Age both had same-sex relationship options, and both were available on Xbox and Playstation, so those platforms certainly don't restrict that from appearing on there. Not sure about Nintento and iOS, but I doubt they'd ban the concept on the entire platform.

Besides - the whole thing has gotten a bit silly lately anyways. Dragon Age 2 not only allowed same-sex relationships, but made it so that EVERY character capable of starting a romance could enter into a relationship with your character regardless of your gender. That effectively removes heterosexuality from the game and renders everyone bisexual, which is in no way realistic.

Re:First World Problems

[Drew_9999]

LGBT is 1% of Nintendo Buyers.

Citation?