9243 réponses à ce sujet

[Tirigon]

CShep25 wrote...

Purely for the sake of argument, Hitler would like to have a word with you.
He did have at least one ball...

But not two. Probably that´s why he lost in spite of having the best army in the world at his command.


Anyways, I haven´t seen Hitler coming here and argueing against same-sex content so far, so that proves my point:innocent:

Modifié par Tirigon, 26 août 2010 - 02:48 .

[M8DMAN]

Tirigon wrote...

MisterDyslexo wrote...

I mean, how many people are not going to get the game because of a male s/s romance?

Noone.
Homophobes are like fascists in that aspect: Big mouth, but in the end they do what they´re told and if they´re told the game is good they´ll get it. They won´t do anything against it simply because they don´t have the balls to do it.

Tirigon you need to stop throwing around the homophobe hate. Calling someone a homophobe just because they dont agree with your views is down right childish.

People dont allways agree, I know it sucks but we have to deal with it.

Modifié par M8DMAN, 26 août 2010 - 02:51 .

[Tirigon]

M8DMAN wrote...

Tirigon you need to stop throwing around the homophobe hate. Calling someone a homophobe just because they dont agree with your views is down right childish.

People dont allways agree, I know it sucks but we have to deal with it.

I didn´t call anyone homophobe in this post. I was just saying that those who are - whoever they might be - are not going to boycott the game if it has S/S content.

Many claim such content would cause a loss in sales. I disagree.

[M8DMAN]

Tirigon wrote...

M8DMAN wrote...

Tirigon you need to stop throwing around the homophobe hate. Calling someone a homophobe just because they dont agree with your views is down right childish.

People dont allways agree, I know it sucks but we have to deal with it.

I didn´t call anyone homophobe in this post. I was just saying that those who are - whoever they might be - are not going to boycott the game if it has S/S content.

Many claim such content would cause a loss in sales. I disagree.

People are ignorant, theres allways someone somewhere who will boycott a game just because they dont agree with its content.

[Nordic Einar]

SS Romance didn't hurt Dragon Age's sales, it didn't hurt Jade Empire's sales, and it didn't hurt KoToR's sales. Why, exactly, is it going to hurt ME's sales?



Honestly, drop this line of reasoning. It's spurious, has no basis in history, and is wild speculation at best.

[Boombox]

I really don't see how same-sex content would hurt sales in anyway. I've never known anyone to make sure games don't have anything same-sex related before they buy it. I really doubt anyone wouldn't play ME3 and finish the trilogy because theres a new same-sex romance option.

People need to understand that it's just another option, it doesn't take anything away and like any of the other romances it would be in no way forced on anyone.

[Siansonea]

Am I the only one who feels like I'm in a Star Trek episode in which the Enterprise is stuck in a temporal loop?

I feel like we keep covering the same ground over and over in this thread, and even still, we don't actually make any breakthroughs. We keep debating the same topics, and all of them are based on speculation about what would happen, what did happen, and what could happen. Why don't we focus on what we want to happen? Basically BioWare needs to come into the 21st Century, and put aside whatever 'reasons' led to them omitting s/s content from the first two games, and start including it going forward. Dissecting phantom clues and reading between the lines in deliberately obfuscatory Marketing rhetoric is a ticket to nowhere. Discussing sales issues is similarly a red herring, because we don't even know for certain whether sales was the issue that put the kibosh on s/s in the first two games.

Modifié par Siansonea II, 26 août 2010 - 05:49 .

[Wittand25]

Siansonea II wrote...

Am I the only one who feels like I'm in a Star Trek episode in which the Enterprise is stuck in a temporal loop?

I feel like we keep covering the same ground over and over in this thread, and even still, we don't actually make any breakthroughs. We keep debating the same topics, and all of them are based on speculation about what would happen, what did happen, and what could happen. Why don't we focus on what we want to happen? Basically BioWare needs to come into the 21st Century, and put aside whatever 'reasons' led to them omitting s/s content from the first two games, and start including it going forward. Dissecting phantom clues and reading between the lines in deliberately obfuscatory Marketing rhetoric is a ticket to nowhere. Discussing sales issues is similarly a red herring, because we don't even know for certain whether sales was the issue that put the kibosh on s/s in the first two games.

Every thread that is more than thirty pages long, is basically nothing more than repeating itself. With everything written on this topic it is very hard to come up with something new and considering that we dont have and never will have knowledge about why ME1 and 2 lacked s/s content all we can do is to speculate. Even though it is kind of pointless.
The main purpose of this thread for me is not discussing the topic,because frnkly I have nothing to say about it that I did not already write several times, but to show latecomers to the forum and the devs that there is a significant group wanting this kind of content.

[Tirigon]

Wittand25 wrote...

Every thread that is more than thirty pages long, is basically nothing more than repeating itself.

More than 2 are, usually, enough.

That is so because every attempt by nice people like me to derail it are avoided by the serious posters in the thread.

Anyways, I still think BioWare needs more possible romance options. Same Sex of course, but others too. Like Legion or Grunt. Seriously, these two are the most interesting and most attractive characters in ME2.

[ScotGaymer]

Im sorry but the whole "omg homosexuality will damage sales!" arguement is not true.



Case and point. Dragon Age.



I rest my case.

[jedishephard]

Wittand25 wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Wasn't the reason because Vanderloo didn't want his likeness associated with homosexuality or something? I could have sworn that came out at some point.

 I don't think that this Internet rumor is true for several reasons.
1.) Mr. Vanderloo is not famous enough to make such demands, even a male supermodel is someone totally unknown to the general gamer. So if he made demands regarding game content, Bioware would simply have used another face for standard Shepard.
2.) He is a professional model, so he should be used that his image is used in ways that might not suit his views ( and we don't even know that views anyway)
3.) If you search the web or just the Fight for the Love treads you will find photos of him in what can be considered homoerotic situations, so opposing that a video game character based on his face is seen in similar situations seem ridiculous.

just curious if you have a link to your info..thanks

[jedishephard]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

Im sorry but the whole "omg homosexuality will damage sales!" arguement is not true.

Case and point. Dragon Age.

I rest my case.

explain please

[PsyrenY]

jedishephard wrote...

explain please

It sold. As in, people exchanged money for it and took it home. A good number of those people were straight.

It also sold well enough to encourage DLC, and expansion pack, and a sequel.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 27 août 2010 - 03:05 .

[jedishephard]

Optimystic_X wrote...

jedishephard wrote...

explain please

It sold. As in, people exchanged money for it and took it home. A good number of those people were straight.

It also sold well enough to encourage DLC, and expansion pack, and a sequel.

Sir, isn't that a moot point? the game was not advertised as having s/s romances right? same with Mass Effect, right? I have a question for you..Why does Bioware have to include the option of S/S in every single game they create? All I am saying that it SEEMS that the exclusion of s/s didn't hurt/help the game

[Siansonea]

jedishephard wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

jedishephard wrote...

explain please

It sold. As in, people exchanged money for it and took it home. A good number of those people were straight.

It also sold well enough to encourage DLC, and expansion pack, and a sequel.

Sir, isn't that a moot point? the game was not advertised as having s/s romances right? same with Mass Effect, right? I have a question for you..Why does Bioware have to include the option of S/S in every single game they create? All I am saying that it SEEMS that the exclusion of s/s didn't hurt/help the game

Why include it? Because they can, and there are people who want it. Including it takes nothing away from people who don't want it, since it is simply an option that can be ignored if the player chooses. If it has no effect on sales, there's no reason NOT to include it.

[kalle90]

Siansonea II wrote...

Sir, isn't that a moot point? the game was not advertised as having s/s romances right? same with Mass Effect, right? I have a question for you..Why does Bioware have to include the option of S/S in every single game they create? All I am saying that it SEEMS that the exclusion of s/s didn't hurt/help the game

Why include it? Because they can, and there are people who want it. Including it takes nothing away from people who don't want it, since it is simply an option that can be ignored if the player chooses. If it has no effect on sales, there's no reason NOT to include it.

It does drain resources from other stuff, like having some more straight LI dialogue. And if it has no effect on sales there's also NO reason to DO it.

I have nothing against s/s relationships though and I doubt it would have major impact on the quality of the game atleast for me in general. Bioware showed they're ready to use multiple discs so it's really just about working to make it happen and not being afraid of some possible reactions. 

Personally I just hope that Bioware won't mess up the game by adding so many variables for everyone that all the playthroughs end up very shallow. When you give something to everyone chances are everyone will be getting very little

Modifié par kalle90, 27 août 2010 - 05:49 .

[Siansonea]

kalle90 wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Sir, isn't that a moot point? the game was not advertised as having s/s romances right? same with Mass Effect, right? I have a question for you..Why does Bioware have to include the option of S/S in every single game they create? All I am saying that it SEEMS that the exclusion of s/s didn't hurt/help the game

Why include it? Because they can, and there are people who want it. Including it takes nothing away from people who don't want it, since it is simply an option that can be ignored if the player chooses. If it has no effect on sales, there's no reason NOT to include it.

It does drain resources from other stuff, like having some more straight LI dialogue. And if it has no effect on sales there's also NO reason to DO it.

I have nothing against s/s relationships though and I doubt it would have major impact on the quality of the game atleast for me in general. Bioware showed they're ready to use multiple discs so it's really just about working to make it happen and not being afraid of some possible reactions. 

Personally I just hope that Bioware won't mess up the game by adding so many variables for everyone that all the playthroughs end up very shallow. When you give something to everyone chances are everyone will be getting very little

I see we're back at the "it drains resources" part of the endless loop. Can somebody give me a breakdown of exactly how much of a resource drain this is in actual dollars-and-cents terms, and contrast it with other game factors?

Let's pursue this logic a bit though. There were resources used to create Zaeed, a FREE DLC character. Why bother? Why not just leave him out? It used up resources! It was a DLC character, no one's going to buy the game just to get Zaeed. What was the economic incentive to allocate resources to create Zaeed? They did it because they thought people would want it, and to give people another option in the game. That's all we're asking for here.

Really, people throw around this resource argument like it means something, but the truth is we have no idea what BioWare's workflow is like, and how much content is developed that is ultimately not used. We also don't know what percentage of the man-hours spent on the games results in actual in-game content, and how much is simply research and development and creative exploration.

Don't forget also that ME3 is NOT going to undergo a dramatic gameplay overhaul, so what about all those 'resources' that are now free to be utilized elsewhere? Really, unless this "resource diversion" argument comes from somebody at BioWare who is actually working on the game, I'm not buying it.

[catabuca]

Siansonea II wrote...

I see we're back at the "it drains resources" part of the endless loop. Can somebody give me a breakdown of exactly how much of a resource drain this is in actual dollars-and-cents terms, and contrast it with other game factors?

Let's pursue this logic a bit though. There were resources used to create Zaeed, a FREE DLC character. Why bother? Why not just leave him out? It used up resources! It was a DLC character, no one's going to buy the game just to get Zaeed. What was the economic incentive to allocate resources to create Zaeed? They did it because they thought people would want it, and to give people another option in the game. That's all we're asking for here.

Really, people throw around this resource argument like it means something, but the truth is we have no idea what BioWare's workflow is like, and how much content is developed that is ultimately not used. We also don't know what percentage of the man-hours spent on the games results in actual in-game content, and how much is simply research and development and creative exploration.

Don't forget also that ME3 is NOT going to undergo a dramatic gameplay overhaul, so what about all those 'resources' that are now free to be utilized elsewhere? Really, unless this "resource diversion" argument comes from somebody at BioWare who is actually working on the game, I'm not buying it.

There be truth in that thar post.

As for the last sentence, even if that comment did eventually come from a dev I'd still be pissed, because then apparently it is okay to use those precious resources to create extra fanservice hetero romances ... but when it comes to the ****** ones, oops, sorry, the money and time ran out.

[kalle90]

Siansonea II wrote...
I see we're back at the "it drains resources" part of the endless loop. Can somebody give me a breakdown of exactly how much of a resource drain this is in actual dollars-and-cents terms, and contrast it with other game factors?

Let's pursue this logic a bit though. There were resources used to create Zaeed, a FREE DLC character. Why bother? Why not just leave him out? It used up resources! It was a DLC character, no one's going to buy the game just to get Zaeed. What was the economic incentive to allocate resources to create Zaeed? They did it because they thought people would want it, and to give people another option in the game. That's all we're asking for here.

Don't forget also that ME3 is NOT going to undergo a dramatic gameplay overhaul, so what about all those 'resources' that are now free to be utilized elsewhere? Really, unless this "resource diversion" argument comes from somebody at BioWare who is actually working on the game, I'm not buying it.

Fact is that they have limited space (unless they are willing to use multiple discs, which still has a limit) and time even if they have infinite budget and skills. When they're doing s/s dialogue they could be doing some other dialogue or something completely different like explorable planets etc.

Zaeed was a part of the plan to make people buy the game new. Honestly, they could have created a much better incentive whether by creating a different character or something else. It's still clear that Cerberus Network as a whole sold some new games and some DLC codes. You really think they created all that just for our pleasure? How come we haven't had any free dlc in ages then? Just "Pay 7 bucks for 2 hour mission please"

Now, Bioware probably has ways to cheat everything but time, will and EA. If all those click I'm all up for it, but if not there's a risk we get yet another mess of glitches, cut stuff and other traces of unfinished product that has something for everyone but no one is fully satisfied

[jedishephard]

Siansonea II wrote...

jedishephard wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

jedishephard wrote...

explain please

It sold. As in, people exchanged money for it and took it home. A good number of those people were straight.

It also sold well enough to encourage DLC, and expansion pack, and a sequel.

Sir, isn't that a moot point? the game was not advertised as having s/s romances right? same with Mass Effect, right? I have a question for you..Why does Bioware have to include the option of S/S in every single game they create? All I am saying that it SEEMS that the exclusion of s/s didn't hurt/help the game

Why include it? Because they can, and there are people who want it. Including it takes nothing away from people who don't want it, since it is simply an option that can be ignored if the player chooses. If it has no effect on sales, there's no reason NOT to include it.

but that doesnt explain why they should though. People want a lot of things included in the game what makes this any better than those other things? just wondering 

[jedishephard]

[/quote]

I see we're back at the "it drains resources" part of the endless loop. Can somebody give me a breakdown of exactly how much of a resource drain this is in actual dollars-and-cents terms, and contrast it with other game factors?

Let's pursue this logic a bit though. There were resources used to create Zaeed, a FREE DLC character. Why bother? Why not just leave him out? It used up resources! It was a DLC character, no one's going to buy the game just to get Zaeed. What was the economic incentive to allocate resources to create Zaeed? They did it because they thought people would want it, and to give people another option in the game. That's all we're asking for here.

Really, people throw around this resource argument like it means something, but the truth is we have no idea what BioWare's workflow is like, and how much content is developed that is ultimately not used. We also don't know what percentage of the man-hours spent on the games results in actual in-game content, and how much is simply research and development and creative exploration.

Don't forget also that ME3 is NOT going to undergo a dramatic gameplay overhaul, so what about all those 'resources' that are now free to be utilized elsewhere? Really, unless this "resource diversion" argument comes from somebody at BioWare who is actually working on the game, I'm not buying it.

[/quote]
just want to say that...thats not necessarily true sir.  I bought my ME2 in used condition and i had to pay for that so no that was not a "free" dlc character for all.  They got their money out of it somehow by either bumping up the price of the new pre-order price or other DLCs.  Nothing is ever "free" everyone knows that.

[grim_reaper_13]

Well i will sound like a hater but i dont want a homosexiual romance for Shepard ( male or female )
in Mass Effect 3.For me it just doesn't feel quite right.I din't have a problem with it in Dragon Age : Origins (Zevran for Male Warden , Leliana fro Female Warden ). I mean how are they gonna explain Shepard goin from a heterosexual to a homosexual in a matter of months probably from what we have heard.
Also i would like to say that i don't see the Liara romance in Mass Effect 1 as a homosexual - lesbian relationship if you have a female Shepard.Because she isnt a woman.
Last but not least i would like to say that i am not against homosexuality in video-games (well unless its a in your face kind gayness "oh look at me im fabulous and i love lady gaga").

Modifié par grim_reaper_13, 27 août 2010 - 08:52 .

[Siansonea]

jedishephard wrote...

just want to say that...thats not necessarily true sir.  I bought my ME2 in used condition and i had to pay for that so no that was not a "free" dlc character for all.  They got their money out of it somehow by either bumping up the price of the new pre-order price or other DLCs.  Nothing is ever "free" everyone knows that.

It's ma'am, not sir. I am a woman.

Regardless, Zaeed was just an example, there's no need to go into a death spiral of 'why Zaeed isn't free' or 'why Zaeed was an appropriate use of resources'. It was just an example of content being included that wasn't 'critical' to the game. It was developed, it was provided, people downloaded it.

Honestly, by some of the logic people are putting forth, ME3 should dispense with most of the romances, and just have a very nuanced, very deep and compelling Tali romance. Why have so many options, when the majority of players are just going to romance Tali anyway? All those resources "wasted" on Jack, Miranda, Ashley, Liara, Kaidan, Garrus, Thane and Jacob could go toward more Tali content.

It's funny, people want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to have the options that appeal to them, but want to limit the options that only appeal to others. Heaven forbid some N7 mission to turn on a glorified light switch gets cut so that a sizable group of players have a romance option they want. That N7 mission was important! My Shepard needs to turn on that light switch!

[Siansonea]

grim_reaper_13 wrote...

Well i will sound like a hater but i dont want a homosexiual romance for Shepard ( male or female )
in Mass Effect 3.For me it just doesn't feel quite right.I din't have a problem with it in Dragon Age : Origins (Zevran for Male Warden , Leliana fro Female Warden ). I mean how are they gonna explain Shepard goin from a heterosexual to a homosexual in a matter of months probably from what we have heard.
Also i would like to say that i don't see the Liara romance in Mass Effect 1 as a homosexual - lesbian relationship if you have a female Shepard.Because she isnt a woman.
Last but not least i would like to say that i am not against homosexuality in video-games (well unless its a in your face kind gayness "oh look at me im fabulous and i love lady gaga").

And now we're back on the "but Shepard can't suddenly be GAY?!" portion of the endless loop. There are people out there who are bisexual. They might have a romance with a woman for awhile, then date a man, then go back to women. It's for real, y'all. Shepard wouldn't "suddenly be gay", he or she would simply be bisexual. Of course some Shepard's passed on romance altogether in the first two games because they ARE gay and didn't have any romance options that were appropriate for them. Just because YOUR Shepards aren't gay doesn't mean no one else's is.