9243 réponses à ce sujet

[Cootie]

Again to turn this into a proper discussion that is spam-less, I appear to save the day!

Which one of our listed suggestions do you think is the worst idea? Why?
Discuss.

Modifié par Cootie, 05 juillet 2010 - 11:40 .

[Dryball]

I'd say colored text. It just would be a bit much.

[Dryball]

Best idea is a simple DLC setup so those who don't want any part, can opt out by not buying.

[jlb524]

In theory, I don't like any of them...we shouldn't need to have special indicators for same-sex romances...people should be able to deal with this.



I have no problems avoiding all the heterosexual romances that have been thrown my way in the Mass Effect series...it doesn't bother me that my FemShep could romance a dude...I easily avoid them...simple enough.

[Ziggy]

rynluna wrote...

Cootie wrote..
Which one of our listed suggestions do you think is the worst idea? Why?
Discuss.

I'm not crazy about choosing your orientation at the beginning of the game.  Choosing who you decide to romance should come naturally like all romances do in the games.

You could always keep all your options open and choose bisexual though.
Dlc would be great but will never happen.

[Cootie]

Mmyes, choosing your orientation at the beginning of the game sounds ridiculous to me. Although I like the idea of the coloured fonts, because it is, as someone previously stated, idiot-proof.
Had I known, I would never have "just felt like talking for a bit" with Jacob.

Edit: If I was awesome, I would've said this:

jlb524 wrote...

In theory, I don't like any of them...we
shouldn't need to have special indicators for same-sex
romances...people should be able to deal with this.

I have no
problems avoiding all the heterosexual romances that have been thrown
my way in the Mass Effect series...it doesn't bother me that my FemShep
could romance a dude...I easily avoid them...simple enough.

But alas, I am only human.

Modifié par Cootie, 05 juillet 2010 - 11:54 .

[Ziggy]

jlb524 wrote...
In theory, I don't like any of them...we shouldn't need to have special indicators for same-sex romances...people should be able to deal with this.

Should being the key word there.

[Dryball]

Should is only applicable to those who are truely mature.



Fact is, I'm sure there is alot of immature people playing who think it should all be one way or another. And if this is ever to be implemented, It's more likely to come in a DLC than any other form anyway. Of course, some entitlement wussy is gonna whine about how it's unfair they have to BUY content based on sexuality, but it's an honest buck based on supply and demand. If it's demanded, and Bioware supplies it, they have every right to expect compensation for it.



DLC, and natural flow is the only right way to implement it.

[Eddo36]

Em23 wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
In theory, I don't like any of them...we shouldn't need to have special indicators for same-sex romances...people should be able to deal with this.

Should being the key word there.

Keep in mind that the word "should" is very relative.

Like some would say that a person should belong in a union that encourages reproduction of the human species.

Just pointing that out.

[Onyx Jaguar]

You make so much sense Mr. Man, excuse me while I go jump off a bridge because my neihbor said scuba diving is a quality pastime.

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 06 juillet 2010 - 12:10 .

[SorenTrigg]

The whole 'choosing an orientation at the start' thing bothers me a lot. Mostly because it has never been done in their games that have had same sex content before. Including Mass Effect 1.

To me, it just feels like them feeling the need to include an off switch for gay content so as to not offend anyone, when Dragon Age and ME1 did not need it.

[Ziggy]

 

Eddo36 wrote...

Em23 wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
In theory, I don't like any of them...we shouldn't need to have special indicators for same-sex romances...people should be able to deal with this.

Should being the key word there.

Keep in mind that the word "should" is very relative. 
Like some would say that a person should belong in a union that encourages reproduction of the human species. 
Just pointing that out. 

Very true. The word 'should' has no real weight when you use it in place of 'I believe'.
For a stance, like that example you gave, to have credibility it needs to be backed up by reasoned arguments.

Modifié par Em23, 06 juillet 2010 - 12:32 .

[elearon1]

>>To me, it just feels like them feeling the need to include an off switch for gay content so as to not offend anyone, when Dragon Age and ME1 did not need it.<<



That's exactly what it is - but if there is a concern about people railing against the inclusion of Same Sex content they can't avoid, then the on/off switch would allow them to never deal with it. (though, as in real life, I think people should be forced to at least acknowledge material they themselves might not be into ... it teaches them coping skills.)



And, really, consider your every day life - most people have made hard line decisions about their sexuality; heterosexuals leave the house every day with no interest in flirting with other guys (in general); homosexuals leave the house with no intention of picking up on the opposite sex, and so forth. While I *do* feel there are circumstances were we may all be given reason to question our sexuality, or where one might meet a person who defies their expectations and they find themselves attracted to despite their usual nature - if one is open to that possibility for their character, they can always choose the "bi" option. (and if, while playing a heterosexual, they pause to wonder if they might not want to try a relationship with same sex crewmate Z, then that gives them a reason to do another playthrough ... or, the switch could be toggled during gameplay - like a "gore on/off" switch in most games)

[elearon1]

Remember, most of the advocates here are not suggesting the "on/off switch" or "colored dialog" because that is what they want, but as a compromise with the fervent "not interested" crowd.

[Dryball]

Cartims wrote...

[*]Go to the gay pride parade and count the people.......all over the world!.......nice market I'd say!

Of the highside conservative estimate(meaning overestimated) 60,000,000 non-heterosexual(includes bisexual, lesbian, gay, and transgendered) individuals in the US approximately 42,000,000 play video games(based on 70% of total Americans play video games estimated in 2008 also higher than average estimates). Of those,  approximately 37,800,000 play online PC games and the rest play consoles. And of those approximately 34,020,000 only play casual online games such as puzzle games. That leaves approximately 3,780,000 that play other games, of which approximately  604,800 list online RPG and FPS type games. 

To put that in perspective:

Based on the above estimates on non-heterosexual population counts for America.
Approximately 168,000,000 heterosexual people play video games, 151,200,000 play online PC games, the rest consoles, 136,080,000 play only casual games leaving 15,120,000 that play other games with 2,419,200 admiting to playing online RPG and FPS typs games.  

That means approximately 25% of online RPG/FPS gamers are of a sexuality other than heterosexual. 

This is all based on conservative estimates about 10% higher than average estimates for the ratio of hetero to non-hetero people in the US and a very broad low estimate of 300,000,000 people living in the US today.

Keep in mind this includes WOW gamers who are notorious for being stuck on WOW and unwilling to branch out to other RPG/FPS online games. It also includes FPS games which are a diffent type of animal themselves from RPG games. 

This game truely falls under niether category, but illustrates the percentages very well. 

They aren't as big as they are made out to be(number of homosexual gamers). So while there is a market, it would be imprudent to dedicate a game solely to this one class of people. That's why you don't see them this way. It would also be imprudent to include it in every single game on the market. Niether leaves any option in regards to getting anyone other than a select few of the gaming population into buying a game. 

This doesn't mean they should be ultimately ignored, and I think it's been quiet the opposite in fact. As pointed out in the OP, content in two of BW's last two games were geared to this group of players, and some consider some of the content in this game geared in this direction as well, although I patently disagree.
[*]
[*]                                                                                                                                                                                                             This game could use some fun spicy stuff in it. For me it's the GG stuff. If everyone here is honest, they all aren't interested in "relationships" and "deep character developement." They all want to see some freak nasty in thier particular flavor. LOL!                                                                      

Modifié par Dryball, 06 juillet 2010 - 01:13 .

[ElitePinecone]

elearon1 wrote...

Remember, most of the advocates here are not suggesting the "on/off switch" or "colored dialog" because that is what they want, but as a compromise with the fervent "not interested" crowd.

Compromise is generally better than hateful conflict, for sure. 

I'm more inclined to prefer coloured dialogue instead of an 'on/off switch" because the latter option (as far as I see it) locks players into certain choices unrealistically. A more open approach where players could choose to ignore or pursue relationships (with the help of coloured text) would be more in the spirit of a 'role-playing' game. 

[Dryball]

elearon1 wrote...

Remember, most of the advocates here are not suggesting the "on/off switch" or "colored dialog" because that is what they want, but as a compromise with the fervent "not interested" crowd.

Unneccessary. The on/off and colored text completely defeat the purposes of this in this thread. The request is for gamances that mirror the flowing ones already in the game. This precludes on/off switches and colored dialog to be counter productive. It seriously just needs to be a simple DLC that put in the appropriate conversational parts and video parts to allow g/g m/m interaction equal to whats already in the game. It'd be the easiest and most realistic way to go anyway.

[SorenTrigg]

As far as ME2 is concerned, a DLC is all we can actually get.

Is DLC that would enable it what you would want for ME3 as well? If that is the case, I cannot really agree with that.

[Dryball]

The DLC method produces the most viable option in ME3 as well. It's the easiest way to please both parties, without going overboard and just making a game that serves no other purpose than political/social agenda propaganda.



That was the problem with Avatar the movie. It was a great movie with a semi-decent story, that was warped into propaganda, and threw out far too many cliches and obvious "between-the-lines" content. If not for that it would have seen better reviews and sales than it did.



The ultimate goal isn't a "gay" game. It's a game with options. DLC = options. That way if you want it, you buy it, if not you don't. It rewards BW for thinking of other parties through the funds it generates instead of punishing those who don't want anything to do with it who buy and play it for it's already established story and plot by having to deal with social issues straight out of the box.



I've been hit on by a guy or two, is it uncomfortable? Of course, but I'm mature enough to know how to handle it because it wasn't forced down my throat prior. Whereas a force-fed induction into it simply creates undue resentment and more than likely a hit in overall sales to boot. A game is not going to give a decent teaching experience into such dynamics. That's up to parents, and family, and experience in reality. The only way this could even approach that is if it had lots of stuff from the negative side of the issue. The occassional predjudice and snide remarks for example.



No one wants to see that. And if they do, then they aren't playing a GAME anymore.

[Thajocoth]

Choosing orientation beforehand is annoying because it puts too much emphasis on sexualization in the game, which is, really, a rather minor part of the game. Having a DLC is almost as bad for the same reasons. Not to mention that a DLC is more likely to get rated AO just on principle, and therefore denied, for being a separate piece who's content is mainly sexual.



Marked text is something I want REGARDLESS of who's available, as it prevents you from accidentally starting the subplot with someone you didn't want to start the subplot with, something I've done in both ME & DA. It is very often not obvious what line of dialogue starts the subplot.

[Poaches]

There is never compromise, not with things like these. Its always going to be controversial just by being there, in any shape or form. And taking the issue like its some kind of side dish extra is extremely offensive.



Take the DLC idea, if it were to be implemented, I can easily see how it'll turn into a marketing ****storm in excess proportions than the liara sex scene ever conceived.



First, you'll get the activist groups yelling at EA for seggregating the LGBT community as second class or being called on being PC. (i.e. Implying that gay gamers have to pay more for the same game)



Then you get your usual FOX helping of "EA is selling a gay sex add-on to lure children into homosex", or just more "homosexual agenda!" blah blah blah.



Followed by parents complaining in droves about "adult content" being exposed to their kids; as if the MS marketplace would ever allow something like this to go on sale in the first place.



Won't happen. Either have it and have it done equally for everyone, or don't at all. Because its always an "agenda" to somebody. Compromise tends to do nothing and get everyone pissed off at the same time anyway.



Marked text for everyone is reasonable. considering how many times finding out that simply being nice to a someone ment wanting to get into their pants in a game.



I heard a long time ago the writers got angry at the players who were implying their characters could also be gay and the subsequent modding them to be gay or something like that?

[SorenTrigg]

A DLC (especially a pay one) for ME3 just feels like a bad idea. Worse than having a toggle to turn off the gay content.

Even if it was free at launch it just would not be right. I mean, think of all the logistics of it. Normally the free at launch stuff is something they couldn't get done right away, like Shale or little bonuses for people who actually buy the game first hand.

This however would feel...sort of insulting. Plus, away from all of that, it would spoil all the romancable characters before anyone even played the game.

[Siansonea]

I hate that humanity is still so unevolved that we even have to have discussions like these. I understand that the vast majority of the opposing faction are young males who are not yet secure in their masculinity/sexuality, but JEEZ.

Can't we have a great, inclusive game in spite of these kids who should be playing their T for Teen games anyway? Don't "PG-13" my game just to please a bunch of people who still have a lot of maturing to do.

This applies not only to same-sex content, but all social aspects of the game. I definitely could feel the invisible hand of the Prototypical Annoying Gamer Kid in some of the dialog in this game. Let's not aim for that demographic, shall we? Adult-friendly nuance is wasted on them anyway. As long as you give those kids stuff to shoot and Krogans to act out their chest-thumping fantasy, the rest of the game can pretty much be a test pattern screen for all they’d notice anyway.