1677 réponses à ce sujet

[Ramirez Wolfen]

Siansonea II wrote...

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...


I'm not a troll, your assumptions are wrong. I am not trying to get a rise out of people. The only reason I told you to gtfo earlier was because YOU were insulting ME. if anything, YOU are a troll.

But enough about that. back to being on topic.

Then why is this thread's title still "LIs should NOT be bisexual in ME3!" instead of something more neutral-sounding? This topic title makes it sound like you don't think there should be bisexual love interest characters in ME3 at all, not that you object solely to the addition of same-sex options to existing characters. Deliberately misleading title, not that the actual intended sentiment is all that much better. I can think of several alternate titles that would cause much less controversy.

"Should ME1 or ME2 LIs be bisexual in ME3?"
"Bisexual LIs in ME3: A Discussion"
"LI sexuality in ME3"

Part of the problem is you don't really seem to have a real grasp of what bisexual and homosexual persons are actually like, and you've based all your opinions on stereotypes that you pepper into your responses as if you don't realize how offensive they are. But of course, we all know that you are fully aware of it when you do it. I know you're only 19, but give me a break, no one is THAT clueless in this day and age.

Exactly how many offensive stereotypes have I actually said? NONE. Also, I stated in the OP and MANY times in this thread, that I'm not against bi LIs. I do not mean for it to be deliberately misleading. Anybody who can't see that is just stupid.

[MisterDyslexo]

Siansonea II wrote...

"Should ME1 or ME2 LIs be bisexual in ME3?"
"Bisexual LIs in ME3: A Discussion"
"LI sexuality in ME3"

Part of the problem is you don't really seem to have a real grasp of what bisexual and homosexual persons are actually like, and you've based all your opinions on stereotypes that you pepper into your responses as if you don't realize how offensive they are. But of course, we all know that you are fully aware of it when you do it. I know you're only 19, but give me a break, no one is THAT clueless in this day and age.

Three points to add:

1. How about "Retconning sexual orientation?" or "Retconning sexuality?", depending on people's interpretation of sexuality.
2.
 
Seriously, you're better than this Siansonea. I've seen your posts, and you're a lot smarter than me. Don't stoop the his level.

3. Do you actually think (s)he's 19? Because then I might have to take back that comment a few seconds ago about you being smart 

Modifié par MisterDyslexo, 23 mars 2011 - 10:40 .

[Inquisitor Recon]

Siansonea II wrote...
Then why is this thread's title still "LIs should NOT be bisexual in ME3!" instead of something more neutral-sounding? This topic title makes it sound like you don't think there should be bisexual love interest characters in ME3 at all, not that you object solely to the addition of same-sex options to existing characters. Deliberately misleading title, not that the actual intended sentiment is all that much better. I can think of several alternate titles that would cause much less controversy.

"Should ME1 or ME2 LIs be bisexual in ME3?"
"Bisexual LIs in ME3: A Discussion"
"LI sexuality in ME3"

Part of the problem is you don't really seem to have a real grasp of what bisexual and homosexual persons are actually like, and you've based all your opinions on stereotypes that you pepper into your responses as if you don't realize how offensive they are.

You're complaining that the title is too "provocative"? Are you one of those people who IRL have the job of forcing people to sit through "diversity appreciation day" seminars at the office rather than getting work done? This is lunacy.

Trolling would be saying "lol gays and bisexuals suck" or that idiot with his "mangiraffedog" stuff, not a topic title that apparently doesn't meet bureaucratic standards of political correctness for voicing an opinion.

Modifié par ReconTeam, 23 mars 2011 - 10:41 .

[Centauri2002]

MisterDyslexo wrote...

centauri2002 wrote...
Oh I think I may have given you the wrong impression. I absolutely don't agree with anyone giving into homophobia or any equality issues. That would effect me directly, after all. I was just saying what I thought happened. I haven't gone over all the media for the release of ME1, as I tend to stay away from it these days, but that was the impression I got from what I did see.

For teh Fox News piece:


And for some more extra "teh lulz":

Thanks for the second link, it illeviated my annoyance at the first one, even though that one's as much of a joke as well. >.>

Seriously, why don't they look at regulating purchases than trying to spoil adult gamers' fun. D:

[Siansonea]

MisterDyslexo wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

"Should ME1 or ME2 LIs be bisexual in ME3?"
"Bisexual LIs in ME3: A Discussion"
"LI sexuality in ME3"

Part of the problem is you don't really seem to have a real grasp of what bisexual and homosexual persons are actually like, and you've based all your opinions on stereotypes that you pepper into your responses as if you don't realize how offensive they are. But of course, we all know that you are fully aware of it when you do it. I know you're only 19, but give me a break, no one is THAT clueless in this day and age.

Three points to add:

1. How about "Retconning sexual orientation?" or "Retconning sexuality?", depending on people's interpretation of sexuality.
2.
 
Seriously, you're better than this Siansonea. I've seen your posts, and you're a lot smarter than me. Don't stoop the his level.

3. Do you actually think (s)he's 19? Because then I might have to take back that comment a few seconds ago about you being smart 

[MisterDyslexo]

centauri2002 wrote...

MisterDyslexo wrote...

centauri2002 wrote...
Oh I think I may have given you the wrong impression. I absolutely don't agree with anyone giving into homophobia or any equality issues. That would effect me directly, after all. I was just saying what I thought happened. I haven't gone over all the media for the release of ME1, as I tend to stay away from it these days, but that was the impression I got from what I did see.

For teh Fox News piece:


And for some more extra "teh lulz":

Thanks for the second link, it illeviated my annoyance at the first one, even though that one's as much of a joke as well. >.>

Seriously, why don't they look at regulating purchases than trying to spoil adult gamers' fun. D:

Because Fox News is always trying to tell us what to do, and wants the government to do the same?

You know, I was in Gamestop the other day, and I saw a child making a fuss over his parent not getting him Call of Duty since he's only like eight. Then I showed it to a few people, and one person seriously said "Well the game makers should've expected that reaction. The parents only have so much will-power after all."

Just like I only have enough will-power to not slap those people.

[Siansonea]

ReconTeam wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
Then why is this thread's title still "LIs should NOT be bisexual in ME3!" instead of something more neutral-sounding? This topic title makes it sound like you don't think there should be bisexual love interest characters in ME3 at all, not that you object solely to the addition of same-sex options to existing characters. Deliberately misleading title, not that the actual intended sentiment is all that much better. I can think of several alternate titles that would cause much less controversy.

"Should ME1 or ME2 LIs be bisexual in ME3?"
"Bisexual LIs in ME3: A Discussion"
"LI sexuality in ME3"

Part of the problem is you don't really seem to have a real grasp of what bisexual and homosexual persons are actually like, and you've based all your opinions on stereotypes that you pepper into your responses as if you don't realize how offensive they are.

You're complaining that the title is too "provocative"? Are you one of those people who IRL have the job of forcing people to sit through "diversity appreciation day" seminars at the office rather than getting work done? This is lunacy.

Trolling would be saying "lol gays and bisexuals suck" or that idiot with his "mangiraffedog" stuff, not a topic title that apparently doesn't meet bureaucratic standards of political correctness for voicing an opinion.

Really, well let me tell you—oh, look who it is. Never mind.

[Volus Warlord]

I will look at this thread and laugh when they turn Garrus gay.

[OrlesianWardenCommander]

I say keep it how me2 was straight you know why I say this? Because just like DA2 radical anti gays will rant and rave on how much of a gay festival me3 would be ive already seen forums and rude posts about it.

[MisterDyslexo]

Oh ReconTeam, I was waiting until you showed up. This Ramirez Wolfen guy is no challenge.

[Ramirez Wolfen]

centauri2002 wrote...

MisterDyslexo wrote...

centauri2002 wrote...
Oh I think I may have given you the wrong impression. I absolutely don't agree with anyone giving into homophobia or any equality issues. That would effect me directly, after all. I was just saying what I thought happened. I haven't gone over all the media for the release of ME1, as I tend to stay away from it these days, but that was the impression I got from what I did see.

For teh Fox News piece:


And for some more extra "teh lulz":

Thanks for the second link, it illeviated my annoyance at the first one, even though that one's as much of a joke as well. >.>

Seriously, why don't they look at regulating purchases than trying to spoil adult gamers' fun. D:

Unfortunately, regulating purchases is hard, though I do see your point.

[MisterDyslexo]

OrlesianWardenCommander wrote...

I say keep it how me2 was straight you know why I say this? Because just like DA2 radical anti gays will rant and rave on how much of a gay festival me3 would be ive already seen forums and rude posts about it.

And how many of those people do you think were going to buy the game to begin with?

Most are people who are fairly religious, I don't want to offend, but some might call them bible-thumpers. Last I checked, things like murder which is oh I don't know, only 90% of the gameplay (the other 10% is being hit on by aliens) were far worse than gay sex. Hell, to be honest I'm surprised they're not as up-in-arms about having sex with aliens, but that loophole in logic is for another thread. But back to the point, knowing that, how many do you think are not going to find another reason to not buy the game? I just listed two big reasons.

And if they're just anti-gay for no reason, **** 'em. I believe David Gaider just made that stance not too long ago. He doesn't want to be associated with those kind of people, and I don't blame him. More power to him, my respect for him just grew because he didn't cave into the demands of a vocal few who he disagrees with over a pretty important issue of morality.

Modifié par MisterDyslexo, 23 mars 2011 - 10:55 .

[Inquisitor Recon]

MisterDyslexo wrote...
Oh ReconTeam, I was waiting until you showed up. This Ramirez Wolfen guy is no challenge.

Siansonea II wrote...
Really, well let me tell you—oh, look who it is. Never mind.

Honestly I'm not too bothered by my reputation of being some sort of mega-troll among your circle. I'm fine with whatever labels when your sense of trolling is so backwards to the point where picture spamming isn't trolling.

Modifié par ReconTeam, 23 mars 2011 - 10:57 .

[MisterDyslexo]

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...
Unfortunately, regulating purchases is hard, though I do see your point.

Ask any Gamestop clerk, its not. What is hard is convincing the parent to not buy it, when its

1) Illegal to advise against buying that particular product

2) The parent couldn't hear them anyways because the child is drowning out the clerk's words in a temper-tantrum

[MisterDyslexo]

[quote]ReconTeam wrote...

[quote]MisterDyslexo wrote...
Oh ReconTeam, I was waiting until you showed up. This Ramirez Wolfen guy is no challenge.[/quote]

[/quote]

Honestly I'm not too bothered by my reputation of being some sort of mega-troll among your circle. I'm fine with it when you consider my opinion to be trolling yet are totally fine with picture spamming.[/quote][/quote]


You don't like http://t1.gstatic.co...9Gai3Y9vwOt&t=1 ???

Modifié par MisterDyslexo, 23 mars 2011 - 10:58 .

[Centauri2002]

MisterDyslexo wrote...

centauri2002 wrote...

MisterDyslexo wrote...

centauri2002 wrote...
Oh I think I may have given you the wrong impression. I absolutely don't agree with anyone giving into homophobia or any equality issues. That would effect me directly, after all. I was just saying what I thought happened. I haven't gone over all the media for the release of ME1, as I tend to stay away from it these days, but that was the impression I got from what I did see.

For teh Fox News piece:


And for some more extra "teh lulz":

Thanks for the second link, it illeviated my annoyance at the first one, even though that one's as much of a joke as well. >.>

Seriously, why don't they look at regulating purchases than trying to spoil adult gamers' fun. D:

Because Fox News is always trying to tell us what to do, and wants the government to do the same?

You know, I was in Gamestop the other day, and I saw a child making a fuss over his parent not getting him Call of Duty since he's only like eight. Then I showed it to a few people, and one person seriously said "Well the game makers should've expected that reaction. The parents only have so much will-power after all."

Just like I only have enough will-power to not slap those people.

Oh that reminds me... a woman was with her 12 year old son buying GTAIV. The cashier, who was being a complete fop, was trying to point out that it might not be suitable for him. He started listing off the content: 

Cashier: It has violence.
Mum: Uh huh.
C: You can commit crimes.
M: *impatient* ... uh huh.
C: *concerned* You can kill people?
M: Yeah.
C: It has sex.
M: Sex!? Oh my god, that's disgusting. *storms out*

...says a lot, doesn't it? >.>

[Almostfaceman]

centauri2002 wrote...


Oh that reminds me... a woman was with her 12 year old son buying GTAIV. The cashier, who was being a complete fop, was trying to point out that it might not be suitable for him. He started listing off the content: 

Cashier: It has violence.
Mum: Uh huh.
C: You can commit crimes.
M: *impatient* ... uh huh.
C: *concerned* You can kill people?
M: Yeah.
C: It has sex.
M: Sex!? Oh my god, that's disgusting. *storms out*

...says a lot, doesn't it? >.>

Yes it does.  About that one particular woman. 

[Centauri2002]

Almostfaceman wrote...

centauri2002 wrote...


Oh that reminds me... a woman was with her 12 year old son buying GTAIV. The cashier, who was being a complete fop, was trying to point out that it might not be suitable for him. He started listing off the content: 

Cashier: It has violence.
Mum: Uh huh.
C: You can commit crimes.
M: *impatient* ... uh huh.
C: *concerned* You can kill people?
M: Yeah.
C: It has sex.
M: Sex!? Oh my god, that's disgusting. *storms out*

...says a lot, doesn't it? >.>

Yes it does.  About that one particular woman. 

I feel sorry for the boy. He doesn't stand a chance. >.>

[Ramirez Wolfen]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Are we trotting out the tired old scapegoat of Fox News again?  You know It doesn't hold up under scrutiny, don't you? 

Last I checked, ME1 didn't have gay content before the Fox News report.  Of course both DA games, released after the Fox News report, have gay content.

It doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

So what do you think it is, then?

[Siansonea]

ReconTeam wrote...

MisterDyslexo wrote...
Oh ReconTeam, I was waiting until you showed up. This Ramirez Wolfen guy is no challenge.

Siansonea II wrote...
Really, well let me tell you—oh, look who it is. Never mind.

Honestly I'm not too bothered by my reputation of being some sort of mega-troll among your circle. I'm fine with whatever labels when your sense of trolling is so backwards to the point where picture spamming isn't trolling.

Of that I have no doubt. You obviously cultivate a very specific persona here, a belligerent iconoclast, and are generally just unpleasant. You try to cloak your diatribes in shades of freedom and whatnot, but what it boils down to is that you do not Work And Play Well With Others, and you clearly resent the fact that not everyone gives a fig what you think or what you say. You pop into threads, say obnoxious things, and pop right on out again. You're not going to be winning any congeniality awards, that's for sure. But to you, being cooperative and courteous is anathema, you think that you are somehow entitled to insult everyone around you as some sort of God-given right or something. Well, I don't think that's freedom, that's just bullying.

[Ramirez Wolfen]

Siansonea II wrote...

ReconTeam wrote...

MisterDyslexo wrote...
Oh ReconTeam, I was waiting until you showed up. This Ramirez Wolfen guy is no challenge.

Siansonea II wrote...
Really, well let me tell you—oh, look who it is. Never mind.

Honestly I'm not too bothered by my reputation of being some sort of mega-troll among your circle. I'm fine with whatever labels when your sense of trolling is so backwards to the point where picture spamming isn't trolling.

Of that I have no doubt. You obviously cultivate a very specific persona here, a belligerent iconoclast, and are generally just unpleasant. You try to cloak your diatribes in shades of freedom and whatnot, but what it boils down to is that you do not Work And Play Well With Others, and you clearly resent the fact that not everyone gives a fig what you think or what you say. You pop into threads, say obnoxious things, and pop right on out again. You're not going to be winning any congeniality awards, that's for sure. But to you, being cooperative and courteous is anathema, you think that you are somehow entitled to insult everyone around you as some sort of God-given right or something. Well, I don't think that's freedom, that's just bullying.

Isn't that what you've been doing?

[LiquidGrape]

As usual it comes down to whether established characters have established sexualities.
Seeing as that issue is ambiguous at best, I think we have our answer. Whether some people feel comfortable with the idea or not.
That said, I doubt ME3 will turn out even a single bisexual love interest. The ME series has a very different sensibility as compared to Dragon Age (which is ironic, seeing as sci-fi is often proclaimed to be the foremost progressive genre in fiction), and seeing as both previous games have sorely lacked in their implementation of what romances there are, I can't say I would expect anything as finely crafted as the relationships in either Origins or Dragon Age 2.

Sorry Mass Effect, but I have a new darling. Get back to me if you're feeling more adventurous in the future, kk?

Modifié par LiquidGrape, 23 mars 2011 - 11:21 .

[Siansonea]

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

ReconTeam wrote...

MisterDyslexo wrote...
Oh ReconTeam, I was waiting until you showed up. This Ramirez Wolfen guy is no challenge.

Siansonea II wrote...
Really, well let me tell you—oh, look who it is. Never mind.

Honestly I'm not too bothered by my reputation of being some sort of mega-troll among your circle. I'm fine with whatever labels when your sense of trolling is so backwards to the point where picture spamming isn't trolling.

Of that I have no doubt. You obviously cultivate a very specific persona here, a belligerent iconoclast, and are generally just unpleasant. You try to cloak your diatribes in shades of freedom and whatnot, but what it boils down to is that you do not Work And Play Well With Others, and you clearly resent the fact that not everyone gives a fig what you think or what you say. You pop into threads, say obnoxious things, and pop right on out again. You're not going to be winning any congeniality awards, that's for sure. But to you, being cooperative and courteous is anathema, you think that you are somehow entitled to insult everyone around you as some sort of God-given right or something. Well, I don't think that's freedom, that's just bullying.

Isn't that what you've been doing?

Nope.