-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Kotaku: Assassin's Creed Odyssey Director Says 'We Missed The Mark' With Controversial DLC
- Thread starter sabrina
- Start date
According to Kotaku, they aren't going to:
I guess the third part of the DLC is too far along in development to course correct...
I planned on playing all the DLC together when finished, and this all honestly has me second guessing on that. I'm gay, I chose to play a mostly gay Kass, in no way is it acceptable to construct a narrative that destroys the foundation I built my character from, the very foundation Ubisoft gave me. I'm not one to play the blame game and I won't, future episodes will need to rectify this in order for me to feel comfortable purchasing again.
Contrary to some posts, romances might not be well executed at all, but I appreciate the options more than anything. They didn't fetishize us, they treated us like our straight counterparts, I sincerely got the feeling they cared about showcasing the entire spectrum of sexuality. Perhaps they still do.
Contrary to some posts, romances might not be well executed at all, but I appreciate the options more than anything. They didn't fetishize us, they treated us like our straight counterparts, I sincerely got the feeling they cared about showcasing the entire spectrum of sexuality. Perhaps they still do.
Fuck Ubisoft. They should be ashamed of themselves. Considering the sheer number of Ubisoft employees who worked on this game, I don't doubt that someone noticed the issue with the forced relationships, but they choose to ignore it. Either that or the higher ups choose to do it.
Wow they really dropped the ball with this.
Pre-release they specifically went out of their way to note that there were now romance options and roleplaying (limited sure, but they wanted people to know they could be gay if they wanted to be).
You can't court the many gay players with gay options, suddenly take these options away, then expect everybody to be fine with it. What the hell.
Was the creative director still the lead of the DLC as well?
Pre-release they specifically went out of their way to note that there were now romance options and roleplaying (limited sure, but they wanted people to know they could be gay if they wanted to be).
You can't court the many gay players with gay options, suddenly take these options away, then expect everybody to be fine with it. What the hell.
Was the creative director still the lead of the DLC as well?
Good.
It's unrealistic to expect 2/3 of a DLC to be patched or altered but they should offer complete, no questions asked refunds to those that would want it.
It's the gaming equivalent of millions of parents trying to convince their kids that it's "just a phase."
But that's what they're doing?
They're going to let you drop the family. They can't go back and undo it, but they're going to allow you to have an opinion on what it actually means to your character.
It's not great, but there's no real way out of "the character is having a kid". It was a bad story that they shouldn't have tried to tell, but they're stuck with it now (I do think they should adjust the cutscenes to make it look less like you're settling down as a family if you never expressed interest). What they can do is let you interpret the event in your own way by providing choice (and appropriate reaction to those choices).
I'd argue the difference is that CDPR made the decision to set certain aspects of Geralt's character in stone. One of which is his sexuality. You can't have a version of Geralt that's gay or bi. He's a straight character. UBI made the decision to let people choose their characters sexuality. Then with the DLC they decide that they're just going to ignore that aspect because of whatever preset story reason they had. Basically they want to have their cake and eat it too. If they want to give people a choice that big, then they need to honor it through the story.
Ubi needs to patch the problematic content but they need to have writers with common sense to produce something better that does not ignore player choice.
Not addressing the issue as such is not going to solve it.
Not addressing the issue as such is not going to solve it.
Ubi had a free homerun with this and STILL fucking whiffed. This whole situation is complete and utterly self-inflicted. Stupid and insulting.
I'm gonna be honest, this kills my desire of eventually getting around to playing this game. I know that seems a bit hyperbolic and extreme, but this is such a supremely gross thing that they've done, and I want no part of it. It feels so insulting.
User Banned (1 Week): Dismissing concerns of LGBT issues as outrage.
There needs to be a continuation of the lineage that you all like it or not, that is such a gamer's outrage for the fuck of it.. The name of the trophy is the only thing to get the tiniest bit worked up about if there's anything. And even then, how can anyone not see pass the point of view of the ones who decided on this. It's such a tiny thing when compared to the choices of which relationships you could pursue during the entire length of the game.
If the point of the choices were to keep a open mind about relationships you'd choose, why not have a open mind over the actual narrative of the game that surrounds the lineage of assassins through times.
If the point of the choices were to keep a open mind about relationships you'd choose, why not have a open mind over the actual narrative of the game that surrounds the lineage of assassins through times.
It lets you choose who you have sex with throughout the course of the game, not what your sexuality is. Any sexuality is roleplaying/headcanon on your part, but the game never lets you overtly decide that and it makes plenty of other decisions for you and the character that may be counter to how you thought you were playing the game.
Well it's clear Ubisoft was queer baiting. It backfired now because they were dumb af with this DLC shit.
That's false. There are gay couples in the game as NPCs part of quests, both male or both female, and they're explicitly couples.
First of all, just because this is an issue you don't care about doesn't mean that other people are having "outrage" just for the sake of it. I ask you to try to put yourself in another's shoes and imagine how it actually feels to long for good representations in popular media, be denied time and time again for various reasons, then cling to the rare ones that appear, and somehow still be denied for reasons. Secondly, sexual identity - and the denial of it - is not a tiny thing, and I find the outright dismissal of it callous.
Lastly, if they truly prioritize their lineage narrative over everything else and created a story where the main character really really has to end up having a heterosexual relationship and build a family, then maybe they shouldn't have said this:
Jonathan Dumont said:
Oh look, another member who has no idea what they're talking about while also telling us that this is no big deal and that we need to get over ourselves.
Does any game actually give you some sort of box to check in terms of sexuality? It's generally just handled in RPG's as characters flirting with you and you choosing whether to go along with it. But when games give you that option they don't take it back at some other point in the story. They usually pull this off by not making a characters sexuality critical to the overall story. But in this case UBI decided that no matter what player choice they may have given, they were still going to have Kassandra hook up with a male character. Which nullifies that player freedom. So either that option never should've been up to the players or UBI should've figured out how to write a story that took into account players choosing to play Kassandra as a lesbian.
This this. They definitely missed the mark. I knew nothing of this
No, it doesn't give you any sort of box to check other than choosing the sex of your character at the beginning. Outside of that, the character of your Alexios or Kassandra is basically decided outside of some very minor decisions in the grand scheme of things. Sometimes you can choose to spare people, but sometimes the game makes you kill for the story. Sometimes you can be a bad person, but more often than not the story makes you do good things. My point is that the game never lets it be "your Kassandra" or "your Alexios," since you only get to make a few choices about what they do and how they behave in the overall story.
Is there a comprehensive, updated re-cap of AC storyline on a convenient video form?
Because I've stopped caring right after Ezio, and just played the games awhile until I got bored.
Because I've stopped caring right after Ezio, and just played the games awhile until I got bored.
Now imagine playing Metro 2033 and realizing how tough that can be to get the "good" ending through natural gameplay.
The game has a hidden "moral points" system that can be gained by exploring, eavesdropping on NPC/enemy dialogue, being stealthy, and avoiding kills when possible.
As an outsider looking in, I find it strange that so many are struggling with separating sexual preferences from the duty to procreate.
This isn't even just about gay people; for thousands of years, humanity had men and women who reproduce with each other due to obligation, while feeling no love with each other. This had been the historical NORM. Everyone did this, everywhere, through out time.
If anything, many ancient cultures have openly gay people who married and have children anyway, and at no point did historians single them out for being unusual.
The cultural whiplash here, is that too many people today got used to the idea of not having children, when that was unacceptable even not that long ago. And never mind the idea of marrying someone you don't love.
The game was being ironically historically accurate, its just that the reality stings. Have as many lovers of any gender you want, but you still need a legit heir at some point. Secure the heir, and you are free to go off and love anyone you want afterwards.
This isn't even just about gay people; for thousands of years, humanity had men and women who reproduce with each other due to obligation, while feeling no love with each other. This had been the historical NORM. Everyone did this, everywhere, through out time.
If anything, many ancient cultures have openly gay people who married and have children anyway, and at no point did historians single them out for being unusual.
The cultural whiplash here, is that too many people today got used to the idea of not having children, when that was unacceptable even not that long ago. And never mind the idea of marrying someone you don't love.
The game was being ironically historically accurate, its just that the reality stings. Have as many lovers of any gender you want, but you still need a legit heir at some point. Secure the heir, and you are free to go off and love anyone you want afterwards.
No it is not. It is fiction. A good writer and a competent game designer would have figured out a way to continue the lineage, i.e. in the form of another Isu descendant, and not ignore players choices all the way. And if they are talented they could make Alexios/Kassandra actions fun and add to the gameplay.
As for "gamer's outrage for the fuck of it" you need to remember how important is the respect for the LGBT representation in every medium and how bad can anyone feel if their choices not only do not matter but it appears as the players were cheated. This time outrage is good, even Ubisoft had to agree with this.
But Ubi needs to do more and fix the mess they caused with this stupidly handled DLC.
You are free to take a look at all of the hilarious, completely unrealistic and inaccurate things in the series and realize how stupid this sounds.
If I were to say the things I want to towards this post and this almost parody level of thinking (I need to keep a fucking open mind??), I would be banned.
Last edited:
Your problem with it isn't realism, but that it is unpleasant. I didn't say you have to like it, but sexual preference had very little to do with the need for children. Love and reproduction are simply two separate things.
If you actually took a look at the content before posting you might realize how horribly it was framed and had very, very little to do with your "realistic" need for reproduction. It goes so, so far beyond that and for a game that sells itself on the sexual freedom to have your character be how you wish - including one that may align with how you are yourself - they threw that out the window by forcing a heterosexual coupling. That's not great, that's not applaudable, that's not acceptable. It's erasure.
Too bad the game doesn't make that distinction and instead forces you into a romantic relationship. If you spent five minutes looking it up instead of coming in here to give everyone your hot take you probably would have known that.
That's a really weird way to interpret the character's sexuality. Sure, in the real world who you have sex with doesn't necessarily define your sexuality. But, for a fictional character, unless you predefine it there's no way to solidify it like that. You, as the player controlling the character, don't just choose who they fuck. You choose who they WANT to fuck. Their entire pitch for the romance that Ubi presented is built around that.
Thank you, your well-researched contribution is greatly appreciated.
Just trying to get to the root of the problem. Is the problem the lack of choice? Because the game, like most RPG's really only offers the illusion of choice. Any key story decisions are made without player input and this doesn't seem any different.
I don't really get attached to my characters in games so this really wouldn't affect me at all, my Kassandra slept which everybody :) I didn't discriminate against anyone, if they wanted to get down and dirty then we got down and dirty.
I mean, technically, that would be better. If you're going to create harmful trash, it is definitely better to tell people up front that's your plan than to surprise them with it. But it'd still promote the same harmful ideas regardless of whether they give people a heads up.
This is video games, so even the most up front a game publisher would be with announcing details on content will still be far too late to meaningfully fix fundamental story problems like this.
OP
OP
That's great for you but how does that help those of us who were invested completely one way or the other?
Yeah as I said they should have left it alone. Oh well hopefully they have learned a lesson.