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
staticall2453d 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.

FunAndGun2453d ago ShowReplies(9)
BlindGuyMcSqueazy2453d 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.

Eonjay2453d 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.

sigrid2453d ago (Edited 2453d 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.

CaptainObvious8782453d 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.

Gh05t2453d 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.

Ogygian2453d ago (Edited 2453d 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.

jonh682453d 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.

staticall2453d 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.

Testfire2453d 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.

senorfartcushion2453d ago

Every game focuses on a certain group

Fullmetalevolust2453d ago (Edited 2453d 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_Pilfer2453d 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 2453d ago
InKnight7s2453d ago (Edited 2453d ago )

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

Typo

BlindGuyMcSqueazy2453d 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.

bennissimo2453d ago (Edited 2453d 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.

2453d ago
FullmetalRoyale2453d 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.

2453d ago
bennissimo2453d ago

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

2453d ago
+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2453d ago
VideoGamesAreDumb2453d ago

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

Shadow_Fall_X2453d ago ShowReplies(3)
Pancit_Canton2453d ago

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

bennissimo2453d ago

Only controversial due to bigots.

2453d ago
2453d ago
bennissimo2453d 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 2453d ago
Paytaa2453d 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.

Injusticewarrior2453d ago ShowReplies(3)
Show all comments (98)
240°

Take-Two CEO Doesn’t Think AI Will Reduce Employment or Dev Costs; “Stupidest Thing” He’s Heard

Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick doesn't think AI will reduce employment or lower development costs, and calls it "stupidest thing" he's ever heard.

lodossrage23h ago(Edited 23h ago)

They already have AI trained to do coding.......

How he thinks it's stupid is beyond me, Especially since we see it happening in real time.

CS721h ago

Company A has 300 employees and lays of 200 to replace them with AI to release the same quality game.

Company B has 300 employees and keeps all 300 but instead uses AI to release a game with dramatically larger scale, scope, complexity, short dev cycle etc.

Company B would release a dramatically better product by using humans + AI and consumers would buy the better game.

I actually agree with this concept.

Huey_My_D_Long21h ago(Edited 21h ago)

This is key facet. Its how the AI is used. It's actually is impressive as is and really would make an amazing addition to alot of people in their jobs, not just tech. It also has the potential for businesses to use to lay off large amounts of people, as much as they could to save money on labor. I hope too many companies don't go with the latter. But since usually companies are worried about bottom line over people...we will see some try and hopefully fail. But yeah, if its to help workers like in your company B scenario I'm totally down...Just scared Company A may be too enticing to some ceos and businesses.

Darkegg20h ago

Value of AI and value of humans will both be increased with human-AI complex. Each, by themselves, will not be independently better than the other. Whether AI will ever be independent from humans is the fear question of humans, ironically because of our doing. At this stage, most of the doing is because of humans, not because of AI. AI is doing exactly that by our design, until we have failed ourselves with an AI development that went awry. The biggest take is that humans have only ourselves to blame when things become wrong, and we have to decide what is the ultimate goal with AI we want to accomplish. It would take a person with high morals and high ethics to make right of AI. I would not want businessman to decide what AI should do or what capabilities it can have. AI should be in the hands of people with high moral fiber, or those operating on love, kindness, and compassion.

BlackOni20h ago

AI is SUPPOSED to be used as a tool, not a replacement. It's designed to do two important things artists can take advantage of immediately.

- Make the ideation/reference imaging process much quicker and easier (basically using it as a google search)
- Make mundane and time consuming tasks faster and easier so more time is spent on creation.

Unfortunately, what many have done is used it as a way to replace rather than supplement.

Einhander197217h ago(Edited 17h ago)

CS7

In the ideal world yes.

In the real world where companies have shown little desire to innovate and spent every effort to maximize profits the end result will be the same quality games (if were lucky) made by less people and more AI.

Company Real World: Fires 200 people and makes the same game cheaper using AI and the executives get record bonuses.

Edit:

Lets look at history, specifically auto manufacturing.

In the 70's and 80's the auto unions tried to oppose automation of jobs (robots) stating that they would take peoples jobs. And the people in charge who wanted to make more money said the exact same types of things that are being said about AI. But we can look at history and see that countless types of jobs were in fact replaced by automation, that was of course even compounded upon by computers.

The net effect was that the rich got richer less jobs were needed so wages were forced down by competition for the jobs that were left.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 16h ago
Number1TailzFan21h ago

You can already make your own SFX with text prompts now as well, of course it will lower development cost and time

1Victor20h ago(Edited 20h ago)

WARNING WARNING ‼️ SARCASM AHEAD
Sure Strauss and robots didn’t take jobs from car factories.
Edit:Sad thing is he believes it and unfortunately he won’t be replaced for a long time by AI

senorfartcushion19h ago(Edited 19h ago)

He doesn't, he's just lying. These people lay people off so they can get bonuses. If AI takes jobs, their bonus goes bigger and the workforce goes smaller.

porkChop17h ago

Because he sees AI as a tool to aid development. He wants to use AI to help make bigger and better games in the same timeframe. Other CEOs want to replace devs with AI to cut costs and make lifeless games faster for a quick buck. Strauss has the right idea, this is how AI should be used. To extend and expand the capabilities of devs.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 15h ago
jambola23h ago

Ceo says stupid thing
Part 5837384

Zeref21h ago(Edited 21h ago)

I think maybe sometimes we give people in these positions too much credit when it comes to intelligence.

DarXyde1h ago

I think you mean candor, not intelligence.

If you take him to mean what he's saying at face value, sure.

I don't. And I think he's clearly lying.

romulus2321h ago

As long as it doesn't effect his inflated executive salary or his ridiculous bonuses I'm sure he's fine with it.

RNTody21h ago

Hahaha yeah trust the CEO suit over the actual developers making the games. Good one.

Show all comments (29)
100°

Every PlayStation Studios game available now on Windows PC

Windows Central writes: "Many PlayStation Studios games that are ported to PC get dedicated PS5 DualSense support, which allows users to experience haptic feedback and adaptive trigger support without actually having to own a PS5.

According to Hermen Hulst, head of PlayStation Studios, it's still the company's intent to launch the bigger single-player games on PS5 first, before later bringing the games to PC. This might not be the case for multiplayer games however, which are considered okay to launch simultaneously on console and PC."

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
ocelot072d ago

My guess is after god of war. Probably last of us 2 that's a almost 4 year old game now and by the time it's released on pc it will be more than 4 years old or close to 5.

Elda1d 23h ago

Every old Playstation game that is now on PC.

shinoff21831d 14h ago

Right. I definitely see what a headlined from a website named windows central was trying to do though. It's cute little wordplay to help out the green box

Flewid6381d 13h ago

Are PlayStation games no longer good or worth playing once they are old?

Elda1d 12h ago

I'm guessing my comment went over your head.

XiNatsuDragnel1d 22h ago

Good at least they can sell hardware

220°

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_Observer2d ago

Very very early in development. Still, fantastic news!

Let´s GO!!!

Lightning772d 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.

darthv722d ago (Edited 2d ago )

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

Obscure_Observer2d ago (Edited 2d 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.

Lightning772d ago (Edited 2d 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_Observer2d ago (Edited 2d 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.

anast1d 23h ago (Edited 1d 23h ago )

The studio boss made some money from this transaction. Once the game releases, the studio will get chopped up.

-Foxtrot2d 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...

darthv722d ago

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

VersusDMC2d 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.

Inverno2d 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 😂

Chevalier2d 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

romulus231d 19h ago

Stockholm syndrome, maybe?

BlindMango1d 14h ago

The reason they would need to "partner with Microsoft" is simply to make a game that's part of a franchise that Microsoft owns. Meaning they're probably going to make a new Spyro game - they're still an independent studio, but are making a game in a franchise that Microsoft owns. It's kind of like Remedy partnering with Rockstar to be able to make the Max Payne remakes.

shinoff21831d 14h ago

It was probably the deal to get released from Ms

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1d 14h ago
Sciurus_vulgaris2d ago (Edited 2d 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.

Chevalier2d 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.

PhillyDonJawn1d 20h ago

No, I'm sure MS can and does step in when they want something done specifically but I'm also sure they let them also work independently

shinoff21831d 14h ago

I highly highly doubt this. Ms controls all. The guys aren't gonna be allowed to just shut something down like that without approval. No way

Elda2d ago

Either a kiddie game or something uninteresting.

Obscure_Observer2d ago

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

Elda2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Don't worry about my comments.

PhillyDonJawn1d 20h ago

Right probably something like astrobot

romulus231d 19h ago

Nah he said "uninteresting", lots of people are interested in Astro Bot.

Elda1d 17h ago

Never Astro Bot. Astro Bot looks better than any exclusive released on XB this entire generation & believe there hasn't been much.

Asplundh1d 17h ago

Crash 4 was good, so I'm hopeful.

PhillyDonJawn1d 15h ago

Hey you said that about SOT and looks like many ppl on PS is playing it. You also found bugsnax interesting ffs your opinion hold no weight lol.

Elda1d 15h ago (Edited 1d 15h ago )

Bugsnax is BS, tried it & quickly deleted it. It's a game that fits right on Gamepass. PS5 owners that are probably playing the boring SOT you could count on one hand. LMAO!!...don't try to come for me.

PhillyDonJawn1d 13h ago

So you admit bugsnax interested you enough to try? 😂 someone gotta call you out on the foolishness.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1d 13h ago
Show all comments (35)