? Its relevant because she is human and its normal for humans to behave as such. The Last Of Us is a series about humans vs monsters and yes....humans vs humans trying to get to a "normal" and that involves relationships too. It would be like trying to question why Glenn marries Maggie in the Walking Dead, be like "I'd be left equally bewildered as to how it was relevant in ANY sense" ....
I disagree. You've not played the game to argue what is or isn't out of place. Thats like looking at a trailer for Breaking Bad before it releases and seeing a opening cryptic scene is "out of place".....as if you actually saw the entire show to KNOW what is or isn't relevant to the actual story. So that shows openings do that often where they take something that looks irrelevant and later in the episode or another episode you find out why its actually relevant.
If you have eyes that work, that is clearly a very easy thing to understand with that trailer.
Nah bud, they are free to make the trailer how they feel just. If this person is significant to the character, they are 100% allowed to make that the focal point of a trailer. So because you are confused that humans kiss we need to not have it in the trailer? smh.
Nah bud, a lot of us don't judge so damn harshly on such things. People kiss....thats it. They are establishing a relationship exist, they are free to show that point any way they feel like it either sudden, subtile, in your face etc. The issue you have is you fail to realize people are different, there is not this rule book on how every acts or should act and anything against must mean secret agenda and should raise "brow" or something.
Look at people yourself and you'll see.
Some hold hands, some don't.
Some kiss in public like a peck on the cheek, some MAKE OUT LOUDLY.
Some hug, SOME DAMN NEAR TURN INTO XXX FILM.
Some quietly talk about their relationship, some are loud and proud and want the WORLD TO KNOW THEY ARE IN LOVE.
So my friend....does that fucking sound like 1 way to do something and any other way must raise your brow? Have you not considered for the character they made, such a scene makes sense to them no different then any of the above listed actions might make sense for someone else character in another game, film etc?
You know what my rule of thumb is regarding this? Does it happen in real life? Oh it does...
Fair game. Thats it.
For a narrative regarding revenge, it seems odd to then question WHY show footage of the great times they had of a person that literally might be the focal point of said revenge...
My god, thats like trying to say you um " it would certainly raise my brow. I don't know why it doesn't yours." with a Punisher Trailer to a show or film where Frank is with his family and hugging, kissing and enjoy life. Yup, this is out of place showing him actually enjoy what will be taken from him in a fucking NARRATIVE ABOUT REVENGE, must be dat pesky family agenda with Hallmark trying to sell more of dem cards doe lol
Doom85
10000% Agreed. I didn't go into Days Gone like "hmmmm must be a alt right agenda to me to join biker gain and marry womenz as its clear that trailer was out of place and forced, who actually marries people?" lol
Rhazer Fusion
"This is honestly one of my largest concerns with next generation. The pandering, agendas and politics is already bad enough now" ???? I mean...did you think such a thing was not able to happen before? Next generation? Sir....the same people making games now, are some of the same people that made games before and are clearly going to be some of the same people making games in the future. (Take Fear Effect, many used that as an example to show Anita that diversity existed in gaming, yet for FUCK SAKES, many of you TODAY RIGHT NOW would attack the shit out of that game if was made today and say its "WOKE" and "AGENDA" and "POLITICALZ") So those same people that existed before, exist NOW. You are not talking about something they couldn't do before bud. Thats like crying about a book being made about religious and then ignore many books have been made about it for hundreds of years or something. Be like "it seems like things will get even worst next BOOK generation". As in what? Folks will get to continue to create what they feel like it? What are you going to do? Did they break a law? What is your solution? Only have games made that you approve or something?
It would be like saying that about a fucking book as if the ability for someone to actually write a book based on such a topic was some new thing....
"Pushing your agenda or politics seems to be more important than making an imaginative or enjoyable experience. " How do you 100% factually know though? I hear this stated many times, yet you don't really know what the writer, producer, team is all thinking to really make that argument. No one does.
Do you really think when a writer makes a game and the character is gay, or religious or some crap that the programmers are like "ok I see what you wrote, I better not come up with great ideas for gameplay as it sounds like I can not do my job because character gay" I mean, it doesn't make sense.
A. The majority of the team isn't actually fucking writing the game.
B. The part of the team that is in charge of many gameplay elements don't just get limited by what they can make fun based on GAY or straight or right or left, it makes no sense. ie Lets not make any cool stealth segments cause the character is gay, that is good enough. /s
C. A game can be bad in gameplay because its just BAD IN GAMEPLAY, not everything is a fucking conspiracy. The Order 1886 is a mixed bag, a very questionable game that lacks many gameplay ideas that could have helped it. ......lts say the main character is gay...you telling me that um "Pushing your agenda or politics seems to be more important than making an imaginative or enjoyable experience" is why such a thing would make it suck? Not simply because it just sucked? lol Could you imagine a fucking SJW saying "The Order 1886 fails because of course the Alt Right have to keep pushing your agenda or politics seems to be more important than making an imaginative or enjoyable experience. Him being STRAIGHT was their only focus as to why The Order 1886 failed"
"If you want to insert your political views or ideologies into a game, then that’s your prerogative, but I don’t like it when they tamper with beloved or well known franchises" Tamper? Nah bud, that makes even less sense as they are the authority on the matter as its THEIR GAME. So I don't know how they can "tamper" when they are the default authority. They decide what is or isn't in their games. Not you or me.
My opinion next gen, stop getting so caught up in what other folks do with their games, it makes little sense to out right assume "agenda or politics seems to be more important than making an imaginative or enjoyable experience" , its doesn't make sense to assume a game with a gay character was SOLELY made for that no different then it doesn't make sense to seriously assume a game with a STRAIGHT character was solely made for that.