​

The developer behind Yooka-Laylee, a Kickstarter-funded spiritual successor to the beloved Banjo-Kazooie series plans to remove the Youtuber Jontron (Jon Jafari) from the game's cast of voice actors via a Day 1 update after his recent series controversial tweets regarding ethnic minorities in America. Jontron was always a big, vocal fan of the series and was invited to collaborate on the project back in February 2015. Many might say that he was pivotal in reviving the interest in Banjo-Kazooie through his content, both on Game Grumps and his own Youtube channel. Playtonic explained their position in an interview with Gameindustry.biz:

"We recently became aware of comments made by voice artist JonTron after development on Yooka-Laylee had been completed (...) JonTron is a talented video presenter who we were initially, two years ago, happy to include as a voice contributor in our game. However, in light of his recent personal viewpoints we have made the decision to remove JonTron's inclusion in the game via a forthcoming content update. We would like to make absolutely clear that we do not endorse or support JonTron's personal viewpoints and that, as an external fan contributor, he does not represent Playtonic in any capacity. Playtonic is a studio that celebrates diversity in all forms and strives to make games that everyone can enjoy. As such, we deeply regret any implied association that could make players feel anything but 100% comfortable in our game worlds, or distract from the incredible goodwill and love shown by our fans and Kickstarter backers."

This recent development in the Jontron controversy raises an important question regarding Free Speech. I can fully understand Playtonic's position - they're distancing themselves from Jontron in order to prevent any damage to their brand. On the other hand, one could argue that Jontron is free to voice his views on his own platform and shouldn't be penalised for them elsewhere.

Naturally this is a very controversial issue, so I'm eager to hear your thoughts on the matter. What's your opinion? Tell us in comments below!

Update: Jontron acknowledged the decision via his Twitter and although he finds it unfortunate, he understands it and wishes the developers a successful launch.

"Unfortunate to see Playtonic remove me from Yooka Laylee, but I understand their decision. I wish them the best with their launch!"

~https://www.twitter.com/JonTronShow/status/845038284967493638

Source (Gameindustry.biz)

 

[Skelletonike]

First of all there's on such thing as a SJW, just people who use the term to distract from their reactionary politics

-----

"In order to please a minority (yes, because SJW's are the minority), they just lost a lot of future costumers" Like I said SJWs dont exist and are just used by people like you in order to spout your reactionary politics, and even if they were real you don't have to be a SJW to be against racism and white supremacy, dude ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If people act in a certain way, they will get a sort of title associated to them: nerd, jerk, emo (and I mean the insulting form, rather than the style or music genre), mamma's boy, etc... Social Justice Warrior is just another one of those, it's an easy way to call that certain group with loud extreme views, which mainly includes 'modern feminists', BLM supporters, among several others.

I am not racist, nor am I a reactionary as you say. While my political vies are irrelevant here, I identify with centre-right politics. I do not agree with extremism be it right, or left.


As for what Jon said, I don't agree with all he said, nor do I disagree with everything. All I am saying (or rather, typing), is that this company, Playtonic, did not act in a very decent way.
Do you seriously believe that they are in the right by banning people, and insulting them, for asking for a refund?

 

[Greymane]

So atheists creating laws that rule over religious people is fine, but religious people creating laws that rule over atheists is not. Okay, I see your point.

Where did i say that atheists should create law? I simply said that i would be satisfied if religion(thus belief) would not create law.

 

[eworm]

atheists will create laws based on real things..

religious people will create based on their own personal gain.

Oh, that is rich. Atheists are now all selfless and righteous human beings. Must be due to their lack of belief in powers greater than themselves.

EDIT: Not to imply religious people can't be assholes. We can be. Point is neither atheism nor religion will create laws by themselves. People will. And denying either religious people or atheists the chance to influence laws is denying all kinds of real values these people may believe in due to their atheism/religion.

 

[StarTrekVoyager]

As for what Jon said, I don't agree with all he said, nor do I disagree with everything. All I am saying (or rather, typing), is that this company, Playtonic, did not act in a very decent way.
Do you seriously believe that they are in the right by banning people, and insulting them, for asking for a refund?

I didn't know employees did that, and that's a shame. These should be fired, and Playtronic should just publicly apologize.

 

[Flame]

Oh, that is rich. Atheists are now all selfless and righteous human beings. Must be due to their lack of belief in powers greater than themselves.

can you give proof of this greater thing in maths?

if you say i have faith in god and there's your proof its checkmate to me.


so go on prove to me god is real and i will beleive.

 

[grossaffe]

So atheists creating laws that rule over religious people is fine, but religious people creating laws that rule over atheists is not. Okay, I see your point.

This is a red herring. It matters not whether the law maker is Christian, Muslim, Scientologist, Satanist, or Atheist. What matters is whether the law itself is foisting religious ideals on the rest of society.

 

[Depravo]

Oh, not this topic again.

Aren't we supposed to be talking about that youtube dickhead and his latest attention-seeking scheme?

 

[eworm]

so go on prove to me god is real and i will convert.

C.S. Lewis - "Mere Christianity".
Absolutely logic-driven thought process leading straight to theism. It has long been done. If your statement is true and you're willing to accept an existence of a god, I encourage you to read that book. But I have a sneaky suspicion you won't, because your atheism is the only possible option for an intelligent person and all religious people are ignorant and stupid, so there's no point to reading their drivel.

I could of course try to summarize the book here, but this is hardly the time and place. Like some people have already pointed out, we're already in the off-top territory.

 

[Greymane]

Oh, that is rich. Atheists are now all selfless and righteous human beings. Must be due to their lack of belief in powers greater than themselves.

EDIT: Not to imply religious people can't be assholes. We can be. Point is neither atheism nor religion will create laws by themselves. People will. And denying either religious people or atheists the chance to influence laws is denying all kinds of real values these people may believe in due to their atheism/religion.

I am not denying any person a hand in making law, i am simply denying belief(that which is based in nothing) a hand in it. Belief should simply not be used for the making of law, since it denies what is not in conform to it. In the debating however it should be allowed as to see why it the standpoint of the person and if the belief hold merit beyond the nothing belief is based on.

gone be reading C.S. Lewis - "Mere Christianity". so further replies might take a bit longer

 

[Flame]

C.S. Lewis - "Mere Christianity".
Absolutely logic-driven thought process leading straight to theism. It has long been done. If your statement is true and you're willing to accept an existence of a god, I encourage you to read that book. But I have a sneaky suspicion you won't, because your atheism is the only possible option for an intelligent person and all religious people are ignorant and stupid, so there's no point to reading their drivel.

I could of course try to summarize the book here, but this is hardly the time and place. Like some people have already pointed out, we're already in the off-top territory.

WOW THANK YOU ! you have made me see the light. Hallelujah jesus.

 

[SonicMC]

Thoughts are bouncing around in my head again... Possibly more on topic...

Wondering how far would Playtonic go to "protect" their brand:

"However, in light of his recent personal viewpoints we have made the decision to remove JonTron's inclusion in the game via a forthcoming content update."

This isn't believed to be the case; but suppose if it were: JonTron had developed code and art and voice clips compiling up to approximately 10-15% of the game. Let's pretend that it would take 3-6 months of work to replace those. Would they still remove all JonTron's inclusion??? or would we have heard nothing about JonTron... or would there be a statement of disclaimer but no removal...

This is a hypothetical and with that you can change the numbers; what if it would take them an extra year to replace his work... Would their answer/statements change? Is it moral for them to change their answer based on these types questions?

 

[eworm]

WOW THANK YOU ! you have made me see the light. Hallelujah jesus.

A: Tell me the logic behind your opinions and I may agree.
B: Here's where you can read the logic behind my opinion.
A: Ironic quip, f*ck you.

This has been productive.

 

[jimbo13]

How about we stop attempting to generalize an entire nationality to a single belief. Not every Muslim is anti-gay.

Just a voting majority in London when polled repeatedly support criminalzation & sharia law. How about you stop platituding when something has been polled and proven repeatedly.

 

[Eddypikachu]

I was pointing out how the entertainment industry and other segments of the population are trying to make homosexuality into an 'encouraged' thing instead of an 'accepted' thing. If it is encouraged, then that causes a drop in population growth, which is harmful when the modern equivalent of war is a long-term plan to overwhelm the rest of the world with population. ;

Homosexuality isn't really "encouraged" its just more accepted to our society. And that's good because sexuality isn't something we choose, we're born with it and there's nothing we can do about our current sexuslity. Accepting that gay people aren't bad for being gay is good and doesn't lead to an increase in gay people and wont lead to a decrease in population. Being gay is natural, theres nothing wrong with accepting gay people.

btw love your profile pic

 

[jimbo13]

50% of 12.4 Muslim Londoners = 6.2% Even if that was right, how on Earth would 6.2% of Londoners impose a law to the rest of England? -.-

Census projections have them as a majority within 10 years, how are you going to stop them? Suspend elections?

And that's good because sexuality isn't something we choose, we're born with it and there's nothing we can do about our current sexuslity.

Not proven by science anywhere at anytime.

 

[Depravo]

Ok, ok. My subtle hint fell on deaf ears. This thread is now irredeemably off topic.

If any of you wish to continue this fascinating theological discourse please feel free to do so via private messages. Hail Satan.

 

[Veho]

Hail Satan.

つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

 

[BORTZ]

つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

I guess I won't share my opinion on this topic...

Oh well

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つPRAISE HELIX༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

 

[Foxi4]

We can't have nice things, @BORTZ. Shrek is love, Shrek is life.

 

[Foxi4]

Quick update, apparently the developers are getting hit with refund requests over the issue. Unfortunately Kickstarter does not offer refunds directly, however many gamers pledged to return the game immediately upon receiving their copy.

https://heatst.com/gaming/yooka-laylee-getting-slammed-with-refund-requests-after-dropping-jontron/