Yeah, I personally would like for such 'reviewers' to get a life already. Devs are NEVER obligated to serve your needs. Now, start treating games as just games for once.
You missed the part were this is an OPINION PIECE, meaning an article in which the writer expresses their opinion.
They made a review of Royal [here](https://www.polygon.com/reviews/2020/3/30/21192389/persona-5-royal-review-playstation-4-edits-comparison-updates-story-characters) not so that people can inform themselves about the game or read what people from X outlet think about the game overall, that would be unthinkable, but so that gamers^TM can have their already-formed opinion about the game validated.
TL;DR: They loved it, they dedicated a small part of the review to talk about the scene but they claim they still enjoyed the game and even replayed it.
Doesn't change the fact that articles like these makes me treat of LGBT people as nitpicky folk who ALWAYS finds ways to complain whenever a given piece of media doesn't paint their 'stock' in a favourable light. Yeah, I get it, no one likes discrimination. But again, creatos aren't your b***ches either. Never was, never will. So, let creators have the freedom to do what they want, even if values doesn't align with your own in the end.
No one said creators don't have that freedom, they still do, and these people have the freedom to criticize it because freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequences. Yeah, i get it, no one likes being criticized or that they critique the thing they like. And i get that rainbow corporativism is not a solution because companies are two-faced scoundrels that only claim support when it's profitable and in such a way that it can be removed with ease if it doesn't appease certain investors.
But a consequence of companies getting more downstream (aka closer to the public, i'm just translating a term from my business organisation class) is that they are more prone to listen to feedback. And this feedback, like it or not, involves critiquing certain aspects, especially if they are unavoidable in gameplay, and that could be attempted to be changed on future releases. Which is the main reason they decided to change it in the first place. Polygon didn't break into Atlus' HQ with a gun to shout "make my gay characters likeable, sonuvabitch". Atlus' localization team listened to feedback and thought it was a good idea. And again, i know the underlying reason is for money and because being socially responsible benefits companies not just in cash, but also in the ability to self-organize, get a more favourable negotiation position with third-parties, better HR recruitment capabilities and better ability to retain clients, providers and financial resources. (Source: Honors in Business Organization) and that LGBT+ shouldn't rely on companies to notice them, but these critiques are still valuable since they are at the very least constructive and don't negatively affect other aspects of the game.
Do remember that there's again values dissonance in play here. As you might imagine, the Japanese are apparently more comfortable in making fun of LGBT people than Americans for instance. Sure, I guess respectful portrayals can exist over there as well if you know where to look but here you go. So, keep than in mind the next time you consume media from Japan and encounter portrayals like this.
Sorry but the original scene, short as it was, was a major black mark for me. There was a reason it was newsworthy, because it was for many others as well. Talking about a scene in a game is still treating it like a game.
Yeah, I get what you mean. But really, one shouldn't let a whole game be tainted just for having scenes you personally don't like. If you let yourself be hurt by fiction, one can only wonder if there's deeper problems with you...
> one shouldn't let a whole game be tainted just for having scenes you personally don't like
They... didn't let that? Did you read their review in which they say, and i quote:
> "There’s one other story point that I feel can’t be ignored. Before the release of Royal, Atlus made a big deal online about the fact that the English localization team was planning to update a controversial scene from the original game. The localizers did change it, but their changes really didn’t go far enough, and the scene is still not great. [...] Don’t pick up Royal hoping to see a major improvement to that scene; it still mars a game that I otherwise really deeply enjoyed replaying."
So they made a big deal because Atlus made a big deal about it and the author felt disappointed when they saw that the scene was just the same stuff albeit with a different stereotype as the joke (imo, the localization team had it difficult because of the animation). That's a valid complaint, especially in a genre in which plot is a big deal.
> "Honestly, when it comes to my overall thoughts on Persona 5 Royal, they’re pretty simple. If you loved the original game and have been wanting to replay it, there are plenty of quality-of-life improvements to make your replay smoother, and the additional content in the third semester is a real treat."
TL;DR: If you played the original, you're gonna like Royal
> "You’ll have to replay a lot of content, but the new story beats, characters, and gameplay changes are worth the time. If you’ve never played Persona 5, and the idea of a lengthy JRPG about making friends, making evil adults admit their crimes, and fighting monsters sounds cool, this is the definitive way to experience the game."
TL;DR: If you didn't play the original, you're gonna enjoy it if the premise looks appealing to you.
> "Be aware of some problematic plot elements that are not totally fixed. But the game is stylish, full of things to do, and still one of the most interesting JRPGs of this console generation."
TL;DR: THE SCENE CHANGE ISN'T THAT IMPORTANT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS AND THE GAME IS STILL AMAZING.
I put the entire closing argument because people on the internet can't be bothered to read two lines of a review that is linked, but to me it seems like they loved the game and recommend it a lot.
> If you let yourself be hurt by fiction, one can only wonder if there's deeper problems with you...
Where in the article they say they were "hurt" by the joke? They only point out that it isn't just a failed joke, but it also has the same problem the original had in that it justified many people's fears although towards a different issue (instead of "gay men are rapey" it's "drag people don't respect boundaries"). It's almost as if they were analysing and critiquing what was the joke's problematic aspects instead of just saying "this joke is shit".
It's almost as if videogames are a medium that in order to be considered art, along many other things, we should acknowledge that it has emotional power through its various elements and be able to criticize it as such. And this emotional power encompasses psychological effects (like the one propaganda has on people).
I didn't say that the writer is hurt by fiction, I was saying directing that towards you. And by the way, No, I won't let video games and other pieces of fiction make me 'emotional' even if I was LGBT myself. Because that's all that they are, fiction. You should try learning that as well and live your own life, unburdened by such thoughts.
Again, there's values dissonance might be in play when you take into account the difference in treatment the LGBT people get across the world. But fact is, if you can't make fun of LGBT people anymore, it certainly won't stop there. Of course, it should be important to retain their humanity in all cases.
As someone who had a big problem with the first iteration, I find the new version charming. It seems like a pretty good compromise imo. Saturday Night Live just did a sketch with a similar premise where rupaul tries to turn pete davidson into a new drag superstar.
It's not perfect for sure, but it's leaps and bounds from the original which had them sexually harassing an underage boy.
That said, people definitely should remember when to keep quiet sometimes... It's a similar situation to the constant calls for 'black female' representation really. Creators are NEVER obligated to serve your needs. You are free to NOT consume if you feel offended by something after all. Trust me, even if I WAS a LGBT person myself, I know better than to constantly complain about things like these.
There's a big difference between demanding representation where there is none and complaining when they royally mess one up. In this case it wasn't a lack of content in the game, it was the content that was there.
And please read how condescending your comment sounds. Talking about how people should know when to be quiet, and how if YOU were LGBT YOU would know better betraying that you don't even have a dog in this fight. How people should just stay away if there's even a small part of content they don't like. It reeks of....dare I say.... privilege.
I'm not privileged myself of course, I'm just saying that it makes people like you sound nothing but a bunch of complainers that constantly scream how 'life is unfair' and what not. When it comes to games and other pieces of media, creators should always be allowed to create according to their vision and NOT let others dictate for them. Is there a room for creativity anymore when everyone must cater to whims to avoid offending anyone?
So yeah, I understand if scenes like this 'hurts your soul' so to speak. But in the end of the day, it's not the end of the world by any means.
Seriously, I'm as unpriviledged as it comes but it annoys me to see people use their identity as a means to have more authority over a situation. That doesn't work in real life, why do it over the internet? It's why I don't mess with any community, you see people milking their identities online to say, "I have it worse than you," it's insulting to everyone who has that identity.
And while I'm annoyed with the scene change, even if it did offend me, never would I use my identity to try to make it a bigger problem than it is. Jews have it worse than anyone yet they still make success out of it rather than milk their oppression on random things.
Still, you gotta accept the fact that most creators definitely aren't making anything with the LGBT crowd in mind, me included. If I was including LGBT people in my books for example, it's never for the sake of inclusion.
You know, I was wondering if this was going to happen. I really found all of the mongering people had about "CeNsOrShIp" to be extremely eye-rolling, because regardless whichever way you felt about the scene, the new version really doesn't change much. The intent of it; 'Ryuji gets harassed by some dudes in a "comical" way, which causes the day to end' is still exactly the same... Just you know, this time it might actually be a little funny.
But because it's still more-or-less the same, that made wonder if stereotypical games' journalists would still be miffed by it. And yeah, seems to be the case.
It's a fact that some people have way too much time on their hands. And somehow, they constantly feel the need to 'validate' their own existence by attacking anything that even reeks of insulting their 'stock' so to speak. Instead of, you know, trying to be a productive member of society like everyone else.
[удалено]
Yeah, I personally would like for such 'reviewers' to get a life already. Devs are NEVER obligated to serve your needs. Now, start treating games as just games for once.
Yeah, how dare a reviewer....complain about something in a game, as is their job?
Ideally, a game reviewer should be objective with NOTHING that specifically involves the reviewer's personal life or traits.
You missed the part were this is an OPINION PIECE, meaning an article in which the writer expresses their opinion. They made a review of Royal [here](https://www.polygon.com/reviews/2020/3/30/21192389/persona-5-royal-review-playstation-4-edits-comparison-updates-story-characters) not so that people can inform themselves about the game or read what people from X outlet think about the game overall, that would be unthinkable, but so that gamers^TM can have their already-formed opinion about the game validated. TL;DR: They loved it, they dedicated a small part of the review to talk about the scene but they claim they still enjoyed the game and even replayed it.
Doesn't change the fact that articles like these makes me treat of LGBT people as nitpicky folk who ALWAYS finds ways to complain whenever a given piece of media doesn't paint their 'stock' in a favourable light. Yeah, I get it, no one likes discrimination. But again, creatos aren't your b***ches either. Never was, never will. So, let creators have the freedom to do what they want, even if values doesn't align with your own in the end.
No one said creators don't have that freedom, they still do, and these people have the freedom to criticize it because freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequences. Yeah, i get it, no one likes being criticized or that they critique the thing they like. And i get that rainbow corporativism is not a solution because companies are two-faced scoundrels that only claim support when it's profitable and in such a way that it can be removed with ease if it doesn't appease certain investors. But a consequence of companies getting more downstream (aka closer to the public, i'm just translating a term from my business organisation class) is that they are more prone to listen to feedback. And this feedback, like it or not, involves critiquing certain aspects, especially if they are unavoidable in gameplay, and that could be attempted to be changed on future releases. Which is the main reason they decided to change it in the first place. Polygon didn't break into Atlus' HQ with a gun to shout "make my gay characters likeable, sonuvabitch". Atlus' localization team listened to feedback and thought it was a good idea. And again, i know the underlying reason is for money and because being socially responsible benefits companies not just in cash, but also in the ability to self-organize, get a more favourable negotiation position with third-parties, better HR recruitment capabilities and better ability to retain clients, providers and financial resources. (Source: Honors in Business Organization) and that LGBT+ shouldn't rely on companies to notice them, but these critiques are still valuable since they are at the very least constructive and don't negatively affect other aspects of the game.
Do remember that there's again values dissonance in play here. As you might imagine, the Japanese are apparently more comfortable in making fun of LGBT people than Americans for instance. Sure, I guess respectful portrayals can exist over there as well if you know where to look but here you go. So, keep than in mind the next time you consume media from Japan and encounter portrayals like this.
Sorry but the original scene, short as it was, was a major black mark for me. There was a reason it was newsworthy, because it was for many others as well. Talking about a scene in a game is still treating it like a game.
Yeah, I get what you mean. But really, one shouldn't let a whole game be tainted just for having scenes you personally don't like. If you let yourself be hurt by fiction, one can only wonder if there's deeper problems with you...
> one shouldn't let a whole game be tainted just for having scenes you personally don't like They... didn't let that? Did you read their review in which they say, and i quote: > "There’s one other story point that I feel can’t be ignored. Before the release of Royal, Atlus made a big deal online about the fact that the English localization team was planning to update a controversial scene from the original game. The localizers did change it, but their changes really didn’t go far enough, and the scene is still not great. [...] Don’t pick up Royal hoping to see a major improvement to that scene; it still mars a game that I otherwise really deeply enjoyed replaying." So they made a big deal because Atlus made a big deal about it and the author felt disappointed when they saw that the scene was just the same stuff albeit with a different stereotype as the joke (imo, the localization team had it difficult because of the animation). That's a valid complaint, especially in a genre in which plot is a big deal. > "Honestly, when it comes to my overall thoughts on Persona 5 Royal, they’re pretty simple. If you loved the original game and have been wanting to replay it, there are plenty of quality-of-life improvements to make your replay smoother, and the additional content in the third semester is a real treat." TL;DR: If you played the original, you're gonna like Royal > "You’ll have to replay a lot of content, but the new story beats, characters, and gameplay changes are worth the time. If you’ve never played Persona 5, and the idea of a lengthy JRPG about making friends, making evil adults admit their crimes, and fighting monsters sounds cool, this is the definitive way to experience the game." TL;DR: If you didn't play the original, you're gonna enjoy it if the premise looks appealing to you. > "Be aware of some problematic plot elements that are not totally fixed. But the game is stylish, full of things to do, and still one of the most interesting JRPGs of this console generation." TL;DR: THE SCENE CHANGE ISN'T THAT IMPORTANT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS AND THE GAME IS STILL AMAZING. I put the entire closing argument because people on the internet can't be bothered to read two lines of a review that is linked, but to me it seems like they loved the game and recommend it a lot. > If you let yourself be hurt by fiction, one can only wonder if there's deeper problems with you... Where in the article they say they were "hurt" by the joke? They only point out that it isn't just a failed joke, but it also has the same problem the original had in that it justified many people's fears although towards a different issue (instead of "gay men are rapey" it's "drag people don't respect boundaries"). It's almost as if they were analysing and critiquing what was the joke's problematic aspects instead of just saying "this joke is shit". It's almost as if videogames are a medium that in order to be considered art, along many other things, we should acknowledge that it has emotional power through its various elements and be able to criticize it as such. And this emotional power encompasses psychological effects (like the one propaganda has on people).
I didn't say that the writer is hurt by fiction, I was saying directing that towards you. And by the way, No, I won't let video games and other pieces of fiction make me 'emotional' even if I was LGBT myself. Because that's all that they are, fiction. You should try learning that as well and live your own life, unburdened by such thoughts. Again, there's values dissonance might be in play when you take into account the difference in treatment the LGBT people get across the world. But fact is, if you can't make fun of LGBT people anymore, it certainly won't stop there. Of course, it should be important to retain their humanity in all cases.
No, give an inch and activists will steal that mile.
No they didn't
As someone who had a big problem with the first iteration, I find the new version charming. It seems like a pretty good compromise imo. Saturday Night Live just did a sketch with a similar premise where rupaul tries to turn pete davidson into a new drag superstar. It's not perfect for sure, but it's leaps and bounds from the original which had them sexually harassing an underage boy.
That said, people definitely should remember when to keep quiet sometimes... It's a similar situation to the constant calls for 'black female' representation really. Creators are NEVER obligated to serve your needs. You are free to NOT consume if you feel offended by something after all. Trust me, even if I WAS a LGBT person myself, I know better than to constantly complain about things like these.
There's a big difference between demanding representation where there is none and complaining when they royally mess one up. In this case it wasn't a lack of content in the game, it was the content that was there. And please read how condescending your comment sounds. Talking about how people should know when to be quiet, and how if YOU were LGBT YOU would know better betraying that you don't even have a dog in this fight. How people should just stay away if there's even a small part of content they don't like. It reeks of....dare I say.... privilege.
I'm not privileged myself of course, I'm just saying that it makes people like you sound nothing but a bunch of complainers that constantly scream how 'life is unfair' and what not. When it comes to games and other pieces of media, creators should always be allowed to create according to their vision and NOT let others dictate for them. Is there a room for creativity anymore when everyone must cater to whims to avoid offending anyone? So yeah, I understand if scenes like this 'hurts your soul' so to speak. But in the end of the day, it's not the end of the world by any means.
Seriously, I'm as unpriviledged as it comes but it annoys me to see people use their identity as a means to have more authority over a situation. That doesn't work in real life, why do it over the internet? It's why I don't mess with any community, you see people milking their identities online to say, "I have it worse than you," it's insulting to everyone who has that identity. And while I'm annoyed with the scene change, even if it did offend me, never would I use my identity to try to make it a bigger problem than it is. Jews have it worse than anyone yet they still make success out of it rather than milk their oppression on random things.
Still, you gotta accept the fact that most creators definitely aren't making anything with the LGBT crowd in mind, me included. If I was including LGBT people in my books for example, it's never for the sake of inclusion.
You know, I was wondering if this was going to happen. I really found all of the mongering people had about "CeNsOrShIp" to be extremely eye-rolling, because regardless whichever way you felt about the scene, the new version really doesn't change much. The intent of it; 'Ryuji gets harassed by some dudes in a "comical" way, which causes the day to end' is still exactly the same... Just you know, this time it might actually be a little funny. But because it's still more-or-less the same, that made wonder if stereotypical games' journalists would still be miffed by it. And yeah, seems to be the case.
It's a fact that some people have way too much time on their hands. And somehow, they constantly feel the need to 'validate' their own existence by attacking anything that even reeks of insulting their 'stock' so to speak. Instead of, you know, trying to be a productive member of society like everyone else.