Xbox Game Pass's Boyfriend Dungeon Is Proving To Be Controversial For Some Players

I hope they just stop at the new warning, to be honest. Should people be warned of any potentially upsetting or controversial themes included within literature, films, games, etc? Absolutely, and at that point it's up to the consumer if they want to subject themselves to that.

When idiots don't heed warnings and get upset by content, that's on them. The vision of the creator shouldn't be censored because people aren't smart enough to not look at, read or play things that they were warned might upset or offend them.

Put a disclaimer at the beginning and call it a day. Don't apologize.

While I say "don't alter the content", I am sure the developer will do something to calm the mob if the backlash is enough.

A warning should suffice - you don't have to play everything, ye, entitled gamers.

The further one tastefully "crosses the line", the more I applaud the medium for pushing boundaries.

I don’t know what anyone would buy this sort of trash ‘game’ anyway. Have never understood the need for them and when poorly executed and without moral they are just more pointless and lacking in taste.

Sooo, what exactly is the issue? I just hear something about stalkers in the game? What's the most egregious example?

Snowflakes...that is all

I hope they don’t change the game. A new content warning should be all in needs. I mean the art style might have some younger audiences thinking it’s not as dark like Doki Doki; but I really don’t want them to change the game.

@jarvismp well I like the game. It’s been one of my most anticipated releases and it hasn’t let me down. But you are entitled to your opinion.

Actually enjoyed this game and completed it. Unfortunately it is really short. At one point the game mentions something and I assumed it would continue after that point, sadly it doesn't.

Ppl are so ***** soft today. Real issues should always be discussed.

@Trotterwatch How long was it? I'm tempted to give it a go!

Not that long, I'd say under 10 hours in total.

@jrt87 I half agree with you. Yes, people do seem to be more susceptible to being offended or upset by things these days. You could close your eyes, pick a forum at random and find somebody bitching about being offended by something.

However, this is why content warnings beyond age ratings should be implemented. For example, two films could be rated 18 in the UK. One could be fairly harmless and only hold an 18 rating for language, the other could deal with things that of course many people would find unsettling or disturbing, such as rape, or child abuse. I think that in cases such as these, people have a right to know what's covered before they watch/read/play.

Implementing more in-depth warnings gives people protesting unsettling or controversial themes and/or content in media less of a leg to stand on. If a film studio or game publisher warned them beforehand, they shouldn't have interacted with it.

This is where we’re at. Really sad. I don’t know what the issue is even after reading the article and don’t really care, I may not even agree with the content of the game but the developer has the right to tackle whatever themes they like, no matter how dark.

Too many babies on Twitter and sites like Polygon and Kotaku getting outraged over anything and trying to dictate what content games should or should not contain.

It's only a game, it should be allowed to stay as it is just with a big warning first. We have endless war games at the end of the day, and other graphic games so I'm sure this one can remain too.

I'm excited to try this game out. Tried out Hades which was okay but rogue lite isn't my favorite genre. Some aspect really has to hook me. I thought this looked cute and fun and I'm intrigued by the themes that they approached because it makes sense. You are handling your love and it's also your weapon. Conflict of Interest and other weapons get jealous. Seems like the right tone to take the conversation. But I'll see for myself.

@jarvismp The first sentence tells you that not everyone is buying it. Game Pass is there for people to play these "trash" 'games' without any monetary loss if they don't enjoy it.
Seems that some people are enjoying the game so as long as it isn't making you lose sleep at night then let them carry on.
They just need to put a comprehensive warning on the game and not change their vision for it. It's like they are selling out if they change the game to appeal to a wider audience.
This is the sort of advertising money can't buy though so the cynic in me thinks maybe it was intentional.

This world is getting worse. Can you imagine the reaction to a new GTA?

@VenomousAlbino agree, wouldn't rewrite the game or story to make people feel more comfortable. Tons of content out there exists, so after the content warning is updated people can move on to other games or dive into this one.

I think Stephen Fry said it best: 'It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that", as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so f***ing what?'

How much you want to bet no one was legitimately hurt by it? Welcome to 2021 pitchfork nation...

As a developer or content creator, I would so not care. Maybe the delicate flowers want me to lay out the whole plot with annotations, that in this or that section, there might be something controversal to be found, before they cosume my work?

HELL NO!

Grow up and fix YOUR OWN attitude towards fiction/art, damnit! The audacity of some people ...

It’s called boyfriend dungeon…. I assumed what the content would be…. And it seems im not far off…

I don’t see the issue here at all. If it’s a sensitive subject more people need to deal with it and be exposed to it so real life occurrences become less and less. Too many people still don’t realise it’s not ok to stalk and harass people

Also everyone seems to be suggesting this is young lefty liberals complaining…. I’m fairly certain it’ll be the opposite that find the topic here challenging

I booted this up the other day and it already had a warning at the beginning of the game.

@Stocksy what I noticed is there is a lot of people making commentary towards the game that have not actually played the game.

And that’s the issue. People constantly have opinions without actually knowing first hand the content. I don’t care which side of the politically spectrum you fall under that’s a disservice to the source material. And seeing Twitter post “we’ll I haven’t played the game but …”

Not buts. You are taking someone else’s opinion as factual to the game and not actually forming your own.

sighs sorry you mentioned the posters so I had to go and actually read the comments …

A game called Boyfriend Dungeon has dark themes? What a remarkable twist.

Anyway I can't imagine what the day to day life must be like for the eternally offended. It must be exhausting.

Hell yes! It is one of my favourite ever series of games, probably because of its middle finger up to the world style. I just wonder that in these current times and the fact that people are almost hoping for something to complain and protest about, is that going ruin the games we love.

@lokozar that's a fairly narrow minded viewpoint. Let's say for example that you created a work of fiction that contained scenes of and/or allusions to child abuse. Should somebody who was abused as a child not be entitled to be warned about said content?

I don't care about this game, but I feel that the people making these complaints don't either. Probably just trying ruin something to increase their grift points. Don't like it don't play it. You like it cool keep enjoying

If you don't want to, don't play it. Don't change stuff because of the special snowflakes that get offended virtually by anything these days.

@VenomousAlbino "Should somebody who was abused as a child not be entitled to be warned about said content?"

But why?

Reminds me how a pop singer recently got upset about sweets in a frozen yogurt shop because she claimed it triggered her eating disorder. Like, why is the onus on everyone else to cater to whatever your particular baggage is?

I'm a lefty but I'll never understand this mentality. Also if hearing about the thing is so triggering then doesn't a trigger warning itself serve as a trigger?

@VenomousAlbino
No. Same way, as they are not warned when going to a museum and see naked statues of men, women and little fat angle children ...

I'm sorry that I have to play the Machiavelli here, but as hard as it sounds ... it's THEIR problem. If they are offended by art, fiction, a discussion or whatever, it clearly shows they have things to come to terms with. The very first thing being able to distinguish between reality and imaginary things. If they are not ready, and cannot bear it, the only reasonable course of action is to withdraw from the situation, and continue working on their problems - without blaming others for their own sorrow. I would argue, the latter is actually psychologically unhealthy, because it's a form of evading to work on the problem. It's transfering the responsibility over to a person who just creates something, and doesn't have to do anything with the actual abuse.

That's not to say it's their fault for being the victim of a crime, but it's most certainly also not the duty of a content creator to intercept every eventuality. That would be the same kind of absurdity that breeds manuals, which warn you to not dry a hamster in a microwave. I mean, WTF?

@lokozar @zupertramp I can see that I'm not going to see eye to eye with either of you on this. I'll just say that the onus isn't on you as a creator to prepare for or intercept every eventuality, but rather be mindful of specific things that may be upsetting. Of course nobody's asking you to censor or warn people about everything; that's an utterly ridiculous argument. Yes, ideally, people should be dealing with their issues, but is you thrusting their issue on them without warning a good way for them to do that?

@VenomousAlbino
Why is that an rediculous argument? Do you honestly believe, you can think of everything somebody is offended by? You cannot, and exactly that's the point. So, where do I start to warn, and where can I end it? You would have to resort to general warnings that most likely don't cover every flavour of offendedness - which in turn would lead to people complaining AGAIN.

It's simply not reasonable to shift this responsibility to a content creator. It's reasonable for an easily offended person, however, to work on him- or herself. Because otherwise literally any occasion can be misused to suffocate creativity or discussions.

@lokozar I mean, people are saying there should be some broad strokes warnings, but go off on saying "every eventuality". Stalking and emotional manipulation aren't some niche things.

Websites all over exist to help people with such decisions, so what is wrong with making it more easily discoverable and from the creator themselves. They responded and are dealing with it. For someone who claims to not care about offending people boy howdy are you big mad and offended about people who do. Maybe ask yourself why.

@VenomousAlbino Admittedly well said but I'm still a little more torn on where the creator's responsibility ends and the consumer's begins. But at the end of the day adding a content warning never hurt anyone. It's just hard not to get frustrated at the constant furor over this or that because it didn't handle the audience with kid gloves. One gets compassion fatigue after a while.

@lokozar No, I can't honestly think of everything that someone may be offended or upset by, but I'm also pretty sure I could come up with a comprehensive list of subjects that could be highly upsetting for people who have witnessed and/or been victims of, because I'm not a f*cking monster. AGAIN, I'm not saying you should be trying to warn everybody of every little thing:

Just. The. Obviously. Sensitive. Topics.

Like I said before, we're obviously not going to see eye to eye on this because I'm obviously not artistically minded like yourself. But I will ask this: have I once said that you should censor your art? Have I once said that it's not your right to create fiction or anything else centered around and/or containing themes that some people may find upsetting? No, because you have the right to do so. Putting a warning before your art doesn't diminish your right to create it.

@Darthroseman
I'm not mad or offended by people who defend offended people. That's an attempt to distract. I'm voicing my - granted - very strong opinion on the matter. Am I not allowed to?

As for your question: "What's wrong with it?"
Nothing, as long as it's not mandatory, but a voluntary thing. Meaning: Everything is wrong with it, when someone is being pilloried, when this person doesn't warn.

@VenomousAlbino
Right. As said, I'm convinced it's their issue, and I'm not willing to play in the hands of people who would abuse their perceived right to be handled with extra care.

It's as if I was saying, I'm offended by your red T-Shirt, because I was in the war and saw way too much blood. You shouldn't have worn it in the first place. Or you shouldn't have used this in your drawing. I mean, so much red, you couldn't have thought about blood? You couldn't have warned persons like me, really?

As for your question: Have I claimed once, you're talking about censorship? I am and was writing about said warning. You can warn if you want, but it goes much farther than that. Read your own words again, and realize that I am already a f*cking monster in your eyes, for deciding against a warning.

THAT right there is the actual problem. There is already the attempt to pressure me into doing a certain thing, otherwise I'm a bad person. So, basically I am being blamed for a person's inability to step back and work on their own problem. You do not see the potential of abuse in the long run?

@lokozar Yes, ideally people could/should work on their issues, but it's not always as easy as that. And surely, SURELY, you can see the harm that could be done to someone who's not strong enough or had the help or opportunities to face their fears or their pain or their past trauma? You shouldn't need to be pressured. It's just looking out for your common man and showing empathy, in the same way that I assume you're not racist, sexist, ageist, homophobic, transphobic.

@VenomousAlbino
Nudging ... -.-

I see it this way. I can do a lot of harm, by entering a vehicle and driving down the road, even though I drive cautiously. Right? Speed was within the limit, lights were on, breaks, horn, everything - but a person just jumped in front of my car. I was using my car as intended ...

Once again, as hard as it sounds, these things happen. Doesn't mean, that I henceforth have to quit driving cars, or announce I will be driving down the road at day X and time Y - meaning, there is the destinct possibility someone could get hurt by my hood. I could do it, but I would decide against it, because I'd find that behaviour pretty strange. Same goes for warnings regarding fiction.

The mere act of stepping outside your home involves taking risks and dealing with them. That's a hard lesson everyone has to learn. It cannot be the solution, to be constantly reminded by others, who have something to do with things you're doing, over the course of the day. And if someone really absolutely CANNOT deal with such things, and instead lash out, then I'm sad to say, they are collateral damage, and might need a completely different kind of help.

@lokozar
That's a great analogy considering society teaches us to cross roads safely, not throw us out there unprepared.

You know, teaching, as in warning there is danger.

@Otis_Z_Firefly
Not sure I got this right, but I think at some point society also warns us that in fiction too sh*t can happen.

@VenomousAlbino
Mhm ... You do you ...

@lokozar and being specific on these warnings we are informed on if we are prepared to take the risk both physically and mentally.

@Otis_Z_Firefly
Only the warnings are not specific. You‘re victim of a traffic accident, then you‘re subject to multiple possible injuries and could land in a hospital.

You‘re consuming fiction, you subject yourself to any possible topic, including upsetting ones.

So? When and by whom was it decided necessary, to go into detail up front? If you’re especially concerned about certain things, for example stalking or child abuse, you could just as well go ahead and ask if something like this happens in the piece of fiction you‘re about to consume. Because you know yourself best and hopefully can decide what you can handle and what not.

@lokozar The warning is specific.
Being hit by a motor vehicle can be fatal. Good, I know to take care crossing the road.
Movie X deals with these subjects, good, I know if I can handle that.

What's the problem?

@Otis_Z_Firefly I wouldn't bother.

People should stop complaining about things.. they add the warnings so people can decide they don’t want to play the game. Take that as a sign and leave it for what it is..

The thing is.. Now there are elements in the game that may be uncomfortable to some. When they remove it a new group will arrive saying the gameplay or story will be too bland or too generic.

Developers nowadays can never do anything right and thus I think they should be allowed to do what they think is best and everyone just needs to accept it. Is it not for you? A shame… move on to the next..

It’s not like there aren’t 20+ new games a month that release and everyone is not complaining about their major backlog of games unplayed..

Offended doesn't mean entitled. It means YOUR feelings were, somehow, hurt. That's it. No one asked they take the "no Russians" level out. They give a warning and an option to skip. No one asked to take out the unskippable torture sequence in gta v. There are more important things, in the world, to get upset about.

RDR2 offends me. They need a warning screen. "Warning, this game contains graphic depiction of equine testes under a variety of seasonal climatological conditions. Sensitive individuals who have uncomfortable thoughts about Seabiscuit are unadvised to play this game."

@PhhhCough no one asked that the No Russian mission be taken out or complained? Were you in a coma circa 2009?

@Otis_Z_Firefly
Any piece of fiction can touch every possible topic and can be considered offending by any party. It’s your personal responsibility to learn to cope with topics you find problematic. Because, again, it’s your personal problem.

You wouldn’t expect from me to warn you about specifics, when I e.g. start to brainstorm with you about a new novel I could write. You wouldn’t expect to find these kind of warnings in the finalized novel, potentially even spoiling plot twists. The notion of intercepting these things stays absurd.

@lokozar
Are you against age ratings? Because this is just an extension of those. Your argument is becoming weaker.
My Grandfather certainly welcomed these warnings, he didn't enjoy watching graphic violence and would avoid those, he saw enough of that for several lifetimes during WWII.
Now are you telling me my War hero Grandfather is a snowflake?
You need to use a bit of common sense.

@Otis_Z_Firefly
Where I'm coming from "war hero" is no argument at all. Which means, yes, your grandfather has a personal problem he needs to take care of, or needs to be helped with.

Age ratings are not specific, but cover a broad collection of criteria. Not all of them necessarily apply to fictional work at the same time. For example, a game can contain nudity but no blood and still gets the same rating. So, what exactly did the age rating prepare you for beforehand? Blood or nudity ... or any other of the points mentioned in the packet?

You're trying to push your point through by using dazzling tactics - appealing to patriotism, misrepresenting the term "specific", ad hominem ... What was it you were saying about weak arguments?

@lokozar
Your second paragraph supports the use of these warnings, as I said, it's an extension of those guidelines.
Your argument seems to revolve around "anything can offend so there is no point in trying to warn as there is to many things that can trigger", it sounds like"it's too hard so why bother" I'm coming from the point that, if there is chance to inform, you take it, leaving no one in denial about what they are about to experience.
Regarding my grandfather, yes he had problems, having participated in the Dresden bombings. So a warning on graphic violence was very welcomed by him.

My second paragraph shows that there are warnings, but that these warnings are never specific. Much the same as: "Don't walk in front of a moving car, else you get hurt." Seemingly these broad warnings were enough in the past, so why shouldn't they be enough now? What happened? Has humanity suddenly become stupid and unable to deduce the easiest things? Having said that, I'd wager, your grandpa wasn't warned about the depiction of the bombing of Dresden, but rather something along the lines of: "Hey, this is a WWII movie, about planes, depicting violence. So, you know what you're getting into.", by means of an intro, trailer, or an article somewhere. I'm very sure, your grandpa, from there on knew how to feel and what to do.

In contrast to you, I'm coming from the point that humans are able to think, and inticing them to not think is a bad thing. As is preventing people from dealing with their own problems, by making it as easy as possible to evade topics. As is shifting responsibility. As is stigmatizing people who don't spcifically warn, because of whatever artistic or socio-economic reason they have.

The fact remains, that people wanted to be informed about a specific - stalking, emotional manipulation - and then proceeded to give the developer flak.

That's just general nonsensical behaviour. You don't go into a shop and complain they have Nestle stuff in their, which offends you, because it's an inhumane company. You know, when you're going into a shop, that they very well could have wares in there you don't agree with. It's a bad habbit nowadays, to complain about such things. It borders on obsession - which also is a bad thing.

@Otis_Z_Firefly As we've both repeated countless times, the issue isn't that there should be warnings for everything. The issue is that it would be nice to be warned about media containing obviously sensitive topics. lokozar's arguement remains the same:

"You can't warn against everything, etc, plus why should I have to do anything?"

lokozar seems steadfast in the belief that everyone could be deemed offensive or upsetting to someone, but fails to grasp that it's only issues that are obviously and widely recognised as taboo/offensive/upsetting should have warnings.

My advice would be to leave it; let the artist "win" the argument and come away in the knowledge that you're not the a-hole in this situation.

@VenomousAlbino
Who decides if something is recognised as taboo/offensive/upsetting? The society? Who is the society? What society are we even talking about? US? Canada? Russia? Sweden? Saudi-Arabia? Through which procedure?

It doesn't work the way you think it works. Any consolidating attempt in this direction would lead to misuse, by a minority. Why do you think warnings are formulated broader in the first place?

@VenomousAlbino
You're probably correct but I'll give it one more go.

@lokozar
The local broadcasting or publishing authority for those individual countries will apply their own moral judgements on what will be considered offensive or sensitive material. We already have such a system, only now there is more detailed way of giving forewarning, it only helps.
Of the countries you listed, I can only see The Saudis there that would go as far as censorship.

@FraserG @lokozar I've said everything I'm going to say, plus you've brought up "society", which means you're probably only a couple of posts away from comparing warnings to a police state or Nazism or some other bull; disagreeing with whatever society deems necessary or appropriate just because it maintains the illusion you have of yourself that you're a "free thinker".

Honestly, between your bullsh*t, the constant vitriol from people like phoenix1 and stuff like the transphobic sh*t that came out of so many people on here a few months back, I'm done with this community and this website. Post whatever you like from now on because I won't see it. You'll literally be talking to yourself.

@lokozar
Just seen your longer response. You need to stop comparing real life with entertainment. Entertainment is a contained and controlled business, all the info is there so it hurts no one in giving that info to the consumer so they can decide if they feel they want to watch, with an informed decision. Entertainment is usually used for escapism, we all deal with the real world, we have no choice, we want a choice with our entertainment, an informed choice.

@Otis_Z_Firefly
So, no reason to warn in detail then, if it is for escapism. Should be clear to everyone that it's not real. Meaning, they don't have to obsess about it.

We're back, full circle, at: "It's actually their personal problem."

@lokozar
Even fake images traumatise or worse trigger real memories of horrific violence (PTSD is a thing). I'm done arguing with you. There is is no reasoning with Libertarians, everything is interference from the state to them.

@Otis_Z_Firefly
True, but once again, no creator should be pilloried or pressured because of THEIR personal problems. I get it, they have PTSD, psychological issues, and the like. That sucks, yes! But it's neither their nor is it my fault ... I'm just trying to create stuff. Fair warning is given by mandatory labels, like youth protection. For the rest, they have to learn to cope.

I'm not libertarian. I'm not on the political radar of your culture. State was not the topic at all, since the complains came from private persons - consumers.

@lokozar
I agree no one should self sensor.
More nuanced content information system is useful in judging what is to be consumed, that's what I'm arguing for.
I'm taking about certificates for publishing, I'm not suggesting the creators are responsible for the content warning. It really isn't any more complicated than that.

Personally I don't particularly care to read any kind of content warning before digesting any kind of art/media, like in the example of this game it would have been a surprise to me (knowing very little about the game upon release) to find that it dealt with deeper subjects than I'd expected going in, this may have made the affect of that content more engaging to me. However I do appreciate that perhaps there are people who have underlying issues that could be triggered by certain types of content. My solution would be to start putting some kind of start menu option labelled 'content warning' or whatever in place for games featuring potentially contentious material whereby you select it and it gives you a run down of the kind of content to expect in game. This way folk like myself can avoid any kind of content warnings whilst those who feel differently have the option there should they require it.

If y'all want to see offensive, you should check the reviews on the Xbox store. What in the actual hell happened there... it's like two trains full of "political" morons crashed into each other in the review section of a random game (altho maybe not as random as it appears at first).

This story just gets worse

https://kotaku.com/boyfriend-dungeon-voice-actor-responds-to-harassment-ov-1847501108

Now people are harassing the voice actor.