370°

Atari on Making LGBTQ-Focused Games, Pridefest Criticism

J Station X: In a new interview, Atari discusses the importance of making games for the LGBTQ community and its plans for mobile game Pridefest.

Read Full Story >>
jstationx.com
staticall2451d ago

Why you have to focus on a certain group? Just make good games, that's all that matter.
I'm more than sure, that Metal Gear Solid, Half-Life, Diablo, Resident Evil and a whole bunch of other good games were enjoyed by all spectrum of games, no matter your skin color, sexual preferences or religious beliefs.

FunAndGun2451d ago ShowReplies(9)
BlindGuyMcSqueazy2451d ago

There just weren't enough same sex interactions for me in Diablo. I bought it with the expectation of getting some boy on boy action.

Eonjay2451d ago

People conflate political correctness mind-washing with advertising. The various groups that exist all have money to spend and anyone serious is gonna make money on them all. There are people who, while being disgusted by bigotry, will placate to them too for their money. Fox News pioneered a business off of that. If you don't want to see boy on boy action stay home and stay away from the internet lol. Either way, I think that that there are better ways for Atari to go after that market that are a lot more interesting and classy. I do believe that real advertisers know how to balance their personal views with their ultimate goals, which is to maximize money. Its not for everyone though.

sigrid2451d ago (Edited 2451d ago )

Why can't you just accept that it's their time and money and they can make whatever game they want? What happened to freedom of speech and freedom of expression? Isn't that what the right has been holding their rallies about? I guess it's not about wanting freedom of speech it's about wanting freedom of discrimination.

CaptainObvious8782451d ago

Are you being deliberately stupid, sigrid?

Please point out in staticall's comment where he called for censorship?

It's alarming how many agrees you got with your arrogant, ignorant statement.

Gh05t2451d ago

Wouldn't he be expressing himself? He didn't say they "couldn't" do whatever they wanted he suggested they "shouldn't".

Who's threatening violence and shutting down speeches again? Saying that people CANT speak if it goes against what they believe?

That's the difference. It's one thing to have a differing opinion and voice opposition. It's another thing to say that someone else CANT express thier opinion or aren't allowed to speak because of that opinion.

Although after writing this I realize you probably don't care about what liberty and freedom really means.

Ogygian2450d ago (Edited 2450d ago )

I never understand this type of comment, because it doesn't actually address the point raised. If someone says something is bad, to try and rebut them by saying that someone has a "right to do it" is a bizarre thing to say, because it does not conflict with the original point.

For example, if I say "Coca Cola is bad for you", and you say "people have a right to drink Coca Cola", we see how ridiculous this becomes, because I never said that Coca Cola should be banned, but that people perhaps ought to voluntary choose not to drink it. If you choose to engage with my argument, you would have to say that Coca Cola is a healthy drink.

Now, I'm really struggling to see where the argument you rebutted expressed a desire to ban LGBT video games. So the only conclusions to be drawn are that you either misunderstood what was said, or chose to try and deceive for the sake of argument.

jonh682451d ago

"Just make good games"

Well, what if it is a good game? I don't see why having a gay character means it can't be good.

staticall2451d ago

Hey, if this will be a good game, i will definitely try it out!
But when developer firstly says that their game is for certain group, for me it's a big red flag, because that means they're have nothing to say about gameplay, plot, graphics and so on, which is much more important aspects of the game, IMO.

Testfire2451d ago

What is it to you what games they make? I imagine you didn't read the article right? If you did you would know that it's about Atari refreshing support for an already existing game, "Pridefest". They said that's a priority right now as far as LGBTQ games are concerned.

It's not like all the games in production are suddenly going to be LGBTQ focused so calm down.

senorfartcushion2451d ago

Every game focuses on a certain group

Fullmetalevolust2451d ago (Edited 2451d ago )

you know what? How about just making a game with a gay lead without making an announcement about it?
he/she kicks ass, can do anything and everything a heterosexual or bisexual character can do and loves to be with the same gender romantically.
Like if Nathan Drake didn't have Helena as a love interest but a dude but it'd be the same story line, then would it have the same appeal? Heck I'd play it either way. But in our hetero normative society, other gamers wouldn't play it either way? They'd say dude is gay and they wouldn't touch it, even though it is naughty dog and a sure fire game of the year (hypothetically).
So my question is, to the general population does a gay lead appeals the same way a hetero lead does? And why can't we have gay characters that appeal to those who seek variety in their gaming experience?

Princess_Pilfer2450d ago

Literally every game has target demographics. Typically, it's 18-35 year old men, because (for what I'm sure is a large variety of factors) they're the ones who buy the most.

Them announcing their game is targeting LGBT people is no different than say, Obsidian or BioWare announcing they're targeting Baldurs Gate fans (which has actually happened with Dragon Age Orgins, billed as a spiritual sequel to Baldurs gate, and Pillars of Eternity, billed as a revival of the long dormant CRPG.)

The only difference, is that certian people make anything involving LGBT people "a political statement" or "putting pandering over gameplay" or whatever, while ignoring or being unaware that the vast majority of the AAA gaming industry has been specifically pandering to their tastes for 15+ years now. I'm sure all the muslims and arabs all over the world were *thrilled* to play as a bunch of white americans who slaughter them by the thousands in CoD. Oh wait. The game was targeting Young/middle aged white men who were afraid of muslims in the post 9/11 US and western Europe. I'm not saying CoD is racist or shoulnd't exsist, I'm saying it's target audience is quite clear and while other people *can* enjoy it, just like straight people *can* enjoy Dream Daddy, that doesn't change what the target demographic was or how the informed the game.

These things aren't mutually exclusive. You can have a target audience of or including LGBT people and also be focused on making a good game. I don't expect Atari to manage that, because they're Atari, but that doesn't negate the point. Examples? Well the previously mentioned Dream Daddy. Whatever you think of ME:A, and DA:2/Inquisition, the widly acclaimed Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2, as well as Dragon Age Origins made a point of including LGBT people. GTA: The Ballad of Gay Tony. Fallout New Vegas.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 2450d ago
InKnight7s2451d ago (Edited 2451d ago )

Yeah, that so annoying as example hollywood is forcing and suddenly its full ofLGBT characters.

Typo

BlindGuyMcSqueazy2451d ago

The representation of LGBTs in the media is way off from what you see in real life. And many times having a gay charachter just seems out of place. It rarely adds anything to a story line instead it often times is just obvious that the character is gay for the sake of it.

We don't have to pretend that queer is normal. So many times an LGBT character will just be used a shock/wow factor.

bennissimo2451d ago (Edited 2451d ago )

That's because a lot of idiots are still bigoted toward the LGBT community.

4% of Americans identify as LGBT. So, if 1 in 25 characters you see in games or movies/TV is gay, then the demographics would be correct. I'd wager that the number of LGBT characters is less than that, so the gripe isn't that there are too many.

It's that there are any at all.

2451d ago
FullmetalRoyale2451d ago

Though there are times when being gay adds something. Titus Andromedan(The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt) wouldn't be as great a character if he wasn't so flamboyant.

2451d ago
bennissimo2451d ago

beepbeep thinks that the only games that can have LGBT characters are gay games. lol

2451d ago
+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2451d ago
VideoGamesAreDumb2451d ago

Wow. It's like an entire segment of the population was edited out of since the dawn of popular media.

Shadow_Fall_X2451d ago ShowReplies(3)
Pancit_Canton2451d ago

Atari is just trying to become relevant in a gaming scene once again by stirring a controversy topic.

bennissimo2451d ago

Only controversial due to bigots.

2451d ago
2451d ago
bennissimo2451d ago

The Christian right's main objection to LGBT rights is centered on acronym size, Marxism, and feminism? That would be news to them. lol

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2451d ago
Paytaa2451d ago

How is it controversial? Them saying what their intended target demographic is would be the same if Activision declared CoD is being made to cater to the teenage boys who love mountain dew and junk food. Everyone knows it is they just haven't said it. Now would that be controversial?

Only ones making it controversial are people who have an issue regarding people who are a part of the LGBT community.

Someone above said it affects gameplay somehow. That's actually the dumbest bullshit I've ever heard.

Injusticewarrior2451d ago ShowReplies(3)
Show all comments (98)
200°

Former Activision studio Toys for Bob partners with Xbox to publish its first game as an indie

Former Activision studio Toys for Bob partners with Xbox to publish its first game as an indie. This is something of a homecoming, as Microsoft owns Activision.

Read Full Story >>
engadget.com
Obscure_Observer14h ago

Very very early in development. Still, fantastic news!

Let´s GO!!!

Lightning7712h ago

I guess.

How come they didnt either let them go or sell Tango and others to another publisher? Not saying Ubisoft, EA would be any better. (Capcome would of treated them right )

At least it wouldn't be MS of all ppl destroying them.

MS really should let go Tango go like they did TFB here.

darthv7211h ago(Edited 11h ago)

one was under Bethesda (Tango) the other under Activision (TFB). Clearly each one handled the separations of their subordinates differently.

Obscure_Observer11h ago(Edited 11h ago)

"How come they didnt either let them go or sell Tango and others to another publisher? Not saying Ubisoft, EA would be any better. (Capcome would of treated them right )"

Perhaps because Zenimax and ABK handles such matters differently based on their own internal policies as "independent" publishers.

Whoever, chances are it´s simply because MS didn´t wanted Tango or Austin to be acquired by competitors and develop new bangers for them, giving MS a bad rep in a possible future. Which could also be the reason why they ensured an exclusive partnership with TFB and its new game, before anyone else.

Sad and disgusting. But it is what it is.

Lightning777h ago(Edited 7h ago)

"Whoever, chances are it´s simply because MS didn´t wanted Tango or Austin to be acquired by competitors and develop new bangers for them, giving MS a bad rep in a possible future."

MS has a bad rep now because those studios are no more. I rather them sell the studio continue to make multiplatform releases, while MS continues to focus on whatever they're doing. If they didn't want Tango around they should separated from them or sell them to, like they did TFB.

It's inexcusable, they have options on how to handle studios they don't want anymore with killing jobs. Not just MS but the rest of the industry also.

Sad and disgusting sure how many will get shut down next year or this year even?

I don't trust MS decisions and motivations at this point. You have to admit they make one dumb move after another.

Obscure_Observer18m ago(Edited 18m ago)

"MS has a bad rep now because those studios are no more. I rather them sell the studio continue to make multiplatform releases, while MS continues to focus on whatever they're doing. If they didn't want Tango around they should separated from them or sell them to, like they did TFB."

Imo, MS separated from TFB because they didn´t had a game associated with Xbox yet, unlike Tango.

"I don't trust MS decisions and motivations at this point. You have to admit they make one dumb move after another."

Fair enough. It was indeed an epic dumb move from them to close Tango.

Still, all to be forgotten, like always have. This is not the first time a big publisher shuts down a beloved and/or successful studio out of nowhere and certainly won´t be the last. Do you remember Lionhead? Do you remember Evolution Studios? Yeah... both were beloved studios and yet, those companies kill those studios in q blink of an eye and got away with it.

-Foxtrot13h ago

Manages to buy their freedom especially after all the shit Microsoft has been doing with its studios lately

...

Goes right back to them as partners.

Okaaaaaay...

darthv7211h ago

Id venture a guess that TFB working directly with MS was a better outcome than working through Activision to get to MS.

VersusDMC9h ago

From the article...

"Toys for Bob spun out as an indie back in February after Microsoft instituted sweeping layoffs that impacted 86 employees, which was more than half of the staff"

I doubt those 86 employees enjoyed the Microsoft experience over Activisions.

Inverno9h ago

MS shuts down studios because of lack of resources and then helps these guys by giving em resources. Also MS is what forced them to buy their freedom in the first place? What kind of logic 😂

Chevalier6h ago

The best thing is that the company that is worth $3 trillion and owns the company instead of Xbox lacks resources. How the hell does a company worth $3 trillion making a measly $70 billion purchase they 'can't' support. Lol

Sciurus_vulgaris11h ago(Edited 11h ago)

Xbox’s gaming division seems to still function as 3 semi-autonomous sub-divisions, Xbox Studios, Bethesda and ABK. The three main sub-divisions can seemingly shut down or build studios and set up partnerships independently. This would explain why Bethesda can recently shutdown studios, while ABK spins off one studio, while building a new one. Plus, Toys for Bob could be spun off by ABK, only to immediately re-partner with Microsoft.

Chevalier6h ago

That's absolutely 💯 BS. Any sane 'autonomous' company would NOT put their games on Gamepass day 1 like COD will lose probably billions.

Also they're all under Xbox game studios so any autonomy is an illusion.

Elda6h ago

Either a kiddie game or something uninteresting.

Obscure_Observer10m ago

Don´t worry. You won´t be playing it anyway since their next game will possible be a next gen Xbox console game.

Show all comments (17)
190°

Sony shares big new PS Plus stat, but not the one we want to see

PlayStation Plus has improved the split of PS4 and PS5 players on its priciest tiers, but Sony continues to hide total subscriber numbers.

Read Full Story >>
theloadout.com
mandf17h ago

lol acting like it’s equivalent to ms numbers

Mr Logic17h ago

Uh...They're definitely not equivalent.

"Microsoft’s Xbox Game Pass service now has 34 million subscribers."

"the total number of PS Plus subscribers across all tiers was 47.4 million"

darthv7216h ago(Edited 16h ago)

That PSN number seems like it should be much higher... especially when you consider that PS4 alone has a sell through of over 117m. To not even be at least half that is rather interesting.

To the XB side, having 34m to an install base of roughly 50m (XBO sell through) or even 85m (360 sell through) is a greater percentage of unit to member ratio than PSN.

bloop13h ago

That's not the "gotcha" you think it is Darth.

darthv7212h ago

^^it's not supposed to be bloop.... it's just an interesting observation.

Einhander197211h ago

darthv72

"That PSN number seems like it should be much higher... especially when you consider that PS4 alone has a sell through of over 117m. To not even be at least half that is rather interesting.

To the XB side, having 34m to an install base of roughly 50m (XBO sell through) or even 85m (360 sell through) is a greater percentage of unit to member ratio than PSN."

Have you ever heard of a PC before? I hear they are pretty popular.

fr0sty5h ago

MS started lumping gold subscribers in with those GP numbers... keep in mind.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5h ago
shinoff218315h ago(Edited 15h ago)

What. Definitely more os plus subscribers but that makes sense due to actual console sales

Darth the difference between the bases are huge your right but you gotta think. Ps players buy more games, where as the Xbox base relies on gamepass for their gaming. So it makes perfect sense

darthv7215h ago(Edited 15h ago)

What makes perfect sense though? You say PS players buy more games... so then logically there should be more PS+ subscribers given the increased number of online multiplayer games in the PS4 generation alone. The PS4 was the first time that + was required for online play much like Gold was for 360 users.

Keep in mind we are talking subscribers, not simply XB/PS users. I assume you meant to say offline single player games, which is most likely true as well. That gen also saw a significant increase in games with an online component comparted to the previous gen.

victorMaje15h ago

I for one will be going back to essential at the next renewal. When I feel a game is good & right up my alley, I’ll check trusted reviews & just buy it.

jznrpg13h ago(Edited 13h ago)

I have the top tier until 2028 as they gave me a massive discount for all the years I had left but I’ll most likely go to essential as well. I buy my games but my kids do use the service occasionally. They do prefer to own their games as well since any game can leave the rental service at some point and they don’t like that idea. They mostly use it to demo games then ask me to buy games if they really like it.

RedDevils9h ago

For me, I will cancel it all together but unfortunately I still have it till 2030 lol

meganick13h ago

I would like to see Sony add a fourth tier of PS Plus for people who just want to be able to play games online without any of the perks like monthly games, store discounts, or anything like that, and it should cost $20 annually, $30 maximum. There’s no way I’m paying $80 just to play games online. Even the original $60 fee was too much, and I would often wait for sales to re-up my subscription.

P_Bomb9h ago(Edited 9h ago)

Essential is too expensive, I agree. We’ve got one Essential and one Premium sub. Dropping the Premium when it expires.

gamerz6h ago

Just let my subscription lapse for the first time since 2010. Will sub again every now and then for a month or so to access my old ps+ games but for me it's the end of an era.

DivineHand1255h ago

Let those numbers continue to drop because it is now too expensive. $80 per year just to play online. I noticed they didn't offer any discounts on the subscription or controllers during this year's days of play for the first time in many years and they will feel it when people choose not to renew.

My subscription will lapse next month and it will stay that way until further notice.

KevtheDuff2h ago

There were savings on subs and controllers here in the UK? I bought a controller yesterday in the sale..
It would be weird if those deals were not in other territories too?

130°

What Happens to Your Steam Account When You Die?

The Outerhaven writes: While Steam has come out recently, stating that Steam accounts can't be transferred, we need to think about it since we all will eventually kick the bucket. But if Valve is denying transferring accounts, what can be done? Plenty, actually.

Read Full Story >>
theouterhaven.net
thorstein1d 15h ago

It goes to my kids because I gave them the passwords.

To Steam: Missio has a song that conveys my feelings about you stealing my purchase after I die. It's called "Middle Fingers"

shinoff218320h ago

Pretty much. My son knows my info.

Abear2120h ago

Yeah worrying about digital ownership when you’re on the other side of the grass seems a little strange, but also on brand for these millennial journalists to worry about.

qalpha5h ago

I'm sure Keith will be happy to hear he's a millennial journalist.

Goodguy0123h ago

I suppose if I have kids, I'd just give em my account details by retirement age. If I die young then...idk lol.

CrimsonWing6921h ago

Yea, I mean just give someone the password to your account. Is that difficult to do or something? Like, I’m legit asking because I don’t know.

anast19h ago(Edited 19h ago)

It's not difficult but It's against the policy. If they find out, they will lock the account permanently.

CrimsonWing6918h ago

Ah ok, I had a feeling there was something like that. It seems kind of weird that you can’t just hand your account over to a family member or friend and let them take over the account.

Show all comments (15)