2875 réponses à ce sujet

[v_ware]

moilami wrote...

v_ware wrote...

moilami wrote...

v_ware wrote...

moilami wrote...

Edit: And were you there to see everything first hand - or from where you got the authority to act like you were?

Same question to you.

I got the authority from acknowledged history. Whatever it is worth.

You?

So you to weren't there first hand too. Your entire argument is as valid as Trigons. Truth will probably be in the middle.

And again. Don't generalize when you discuss, that's just stupid.

You can say that if you say all work what historians has done is as valid as Trigons.

GL doing doctorate with that statement.

And again. I can play that card right back at you. Neither you nor Trigon provided adaquate valid information. Neither of you were there to witness the practices. Both are probably right AND wrong.

[Deadmac]

Wow! If you start at the top of page 61 and read down, the replies people are giving remind me of "Plato's Symposium". Lol...

[Valmarn]

Hatchetman77 wrote...

I think some insight into sexuality and culture in this world is necessary. My issue isn't homophobia, it's just having every romancable character being bisexual is just lazy, especially when we see 99% of the NPCs in male/female relationships and we don't see homosexuality in everyday life in this world.  Is homosexuality accepted in this culture, tolerated but frowned upon, and how does this relate across cultures?  Do dwarves have the same views on sexuality as humans or elves?  What is the chantry views on sexuality?  Does a religious person have a different view of homosexuality in this world?

Throughout history views towards sexuality has changed.  In Ancient Greece for example, it was ok for two men to have sex, but it was frowned upon if one male was seen as submissive in the relationship (they both had to be aggressive manly men for the relationship to be ok).  If BioWare is going to keep putting homosexuality in this world we need some kind of reference of what it means to be homosexual in this world.  You don't just put it in the game to get points for being "progressive", you should put it in to say something about your world.  

QFT...especially the last sentence.

[Valmarn]

Ms. Lovey Dovey wrote...

When it comes down to it......anyone who wants a "No homosexual" option is straight up homophobic. End of question.

It's homophobic for a straight male to not want to be hit on by other males?

[synnerman]

Valmarn wrote...

Ms. Lovey Dovey wrote...

When it comes down to it......anyone who wants a "No homosexual" option is straight up homophobic. End of question.

It's homophobic for a straight male to not want to be hit on by other males?

Do not click the heart response. Simple. 

[catabuca]

Monsteroids wrote...

My god people. It's JUST a character's SEXUAL behavior of all things. Let the people enjoy the character they prefer. I doubt video game sex is that special or sacred and why should it be?

Quoted for ABSOLUTE truth.

<3

[catabuca]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

I don't get this (massive) debate, I really don't. I'm a heterosexual male gamer and I wasn't even sure who swung which way in the game, I was busy playing the game the way I wanted to play it and let others who want to play it a different way play it that way. Not only do I support the move BioWare made with DA2 but I would champion it in any way I could.

It adds options for replayability depending on what you are comfortable with, and doesn't take any options away. It adds (or should) to the discussions you can have on these boards with people different to yourself who could have experienced the game or a character within it in a completely different way. That is all great stuff. I don't see any drawbacks, it doesn't even mean they are all bi as I understand, Merrill for example isn't bi if you are a male Hawke I believe? Regardless you don't get their full sexual history and are pretty much free to imagine where their preferences lie should such a thing be of concern to you.

Or in other words: Hear hear, Mr Gaider.

Absolutely, well said! It boggles the mind that it matters to anyone really that more players have more choices. This is a good thing. It's a game, it's there to be enjoyed by as many people as possible.

[moilami]

catabuca wrote...

Monsteroids wrote...

My god people. It's JUST a character's SEXUAL behavior of all things. Let the people enjoy the character they prefer. I doubt video game sex is that special or sacred and why should it be?

Quoted for ABSOLUTE truth.

<3

Then, why there can't be no "no homosexual advances for me" button? 

[Captain Jazz]

moilami wrote...

Rasanaa wrote...

I don't submit much to forums .....because of obvious reasons.

It still amazes me to this day that forums like these contain people, who will for 59 pages and counting, argue amongst themselves and never resolve anything. It will be a group of maybe 6 to 10 people, who are hard headed, opinionated, and self-centered, who will argue for the sake of argument and never come to any common ground because they all believe they are the ones in the right and the world should revolve around themselves.

Hmmm.....I think I just summed up the US House and Senate.

The world would be a better place if people would.....listen.

The thing is that this is not mathematics. So there is plenty of room for different opinions.

The only thing where some people are wrong is that "discrinimation" clause. If in a game, or book, or movie there is no gay romances or gay people it is not discrinimation. Even a child could understand that, maybe. What is discrinimation would be if the some book, movie, or game would not be sold to gays.

Other things like requesting NPCs to be variables depending on your gender is an opinion like requesting them to be characters by themselves and not romance puppets is an opinion.

I would say that requesting NPCs to be variable puppet romance feeders goes in-line with requesting "no gays" button.

True, I've read lots of books that didn't include homosexual romances, as well as lots that did. Neither is discrimination. But if the readers of books which did include homosexual romances demanded a version without it... well, that's starting to look 'phobic. The funny thing in this situation is that the option to play the story without a homosexual romance is already there, so demanding the omg no ghey option not only makes you sound like a ridiculous homophobe, it's also totally unnecessary.
It's like demanding an option to disable the sword and shield skills for your warrior because you want to use a greatsword - just don't put points into the weapon and shield skills and you don't have to deal with it.

If you really were forced into bed with Anders, then I could understand the argument, but you are not.

Anders: Just say no.

[Valmarn]

Filament wrote...

CRISIS1717 wrote...

Filament wrote...

We don't really need two threads discussing the same topic, do we?

edit: orrrr the other one could just get locked.

I just posted in this one because OP was sensationalist and wrong, there is nothing homophobic about this at all.

Well, it is the title of the article verbatim. (though it seems a bit strange that they would dedicate a whole article to an exchange on a forum.)

So if anyone were to be sensationalist and wrong it would be the Escapist.

QFE

Maybe I need to surf the web a bit more, but it does, indeed, seem a bit out-of-place for an internet publication to have an article dedicated to a forum post made by an average, everyday forum member, regardless of the fact that the lead writer responded to said post.


For an internet publication to jump on a forum post like a pitbull on a chihuahua, it only speaks of their desperation for something halfway interesting; either that, or they're sensationalists, as you mentioned.

ehh...probably both.


Either way, I'd take anything they say with grain of salt.

[moilami]

Captain Jazz wrote...

moilami wrote...

Rasanaa wrote...

I don't submit much to forums .....because of obvious reasons.

It still amazes me to this day that forums like these contain people, who will for 59 pages and counting, argue amongst themselves and never resolve anything. It will be a group of maybe 6 to 10 people, who are hard headed, opinionated, and self-centered, who will argue for the sake of argument and never come to any common ground because they all believe they are the ones in the right and the world should revolve around themselves.

Hmmm.....I think I just summed up the US House and Senate.

The world would be a better place if people would.....listen.

The thing is that this is not mathematics. So there is plenty of room for different opinions.

The only thing where some people are wrong is that "discrinimation" clause. If in a game, or book, or movie there is no gay romances or gay people it is not discrinimation. Even a child could understand that, maybe. What is discrinimation would be if the some book, movie, or game would not be sold to gays.

Other things like requesting NPCs to be variables depending on your gender is an opinion like requesting them to be characters by themselves and not romance puppets is an opinion.

I would say that requesting NPCs to be variable puppet romance feeders goes in-line with requesting "no gays" button.

True, I've read lots of books that didn't include homosexual romances, as well as lots that did. Neither is discrimination. But if the readers of books which did include homosexual romances demanded a version without it... well, that's starting to look 'phobic. The funny thing in this situation is that the option to play the story without a homosexual romance is already there, so demanding the omg no ghey option not only makes you sound like a ridiculous homophobe, it's also totally unnecessary.
It's like demanding an option to disable the sword and shield skills for your warrior because you want to use a greatsword - just don't put points into the weapon and shield skills and you don't have to deal with it.

If you really were forced into bed with Anders, then I could understand the argument, but you are not.

Anders: Just say no.

I haven't demanded for "no ******" buttons. I have asked what's wrong with it if there is already button "disable/enable gayness on NPC" 

[Incantrix]

My theory is that most of the "straight male" demographic is too immature for romances in general.

Seriously, those who don't want s/s romances are homophobic and you know what their bs reason will be? "immersiveness" if I had a nickel for everytime I heard that...

I also find it funny when they say "I dont want to be hit on by a guy" its a bunch of pixels, if you cant handle a pixelated character making subtle passes at you, then what about real life? Would you hit the guy?

Every post I read on this topic makes me shake my head in dissappointment due to the immaturity and self entitlement of this "straight male" demographic, its as if anything that doesnt cater to them is bad and should be left out(ofc lesbian sex is okay though); even when its your choice to enter a romance with the characters.

I pity the closeminded fools who create all this crap over a video game.

[Captain Jazz]

moilami wrote...

Captain Jazz wrote...

moilami wrote...

Rasanaa wrote...

I don't submit much to forums .....because of obvious reasons.

It still amazes me to this day that forums like these contain people, who will for 59 pages and counting, argue amongst themselves and never resolve anything. It will be a group of maybe 6 to 10 people, who are hard headed, opinionated, and self-centered, who will argue for the sake of argument and never come to any common ground because they all believe they are the ones in the right and the world should revolve around themselves.

Hmmm.....I think I just summed up the US House and Senate.

The world would be a better place if people would.....listen.

The thing is that this is not mathematics. So there is plenty of room for different opinions.

The only thing where some people are wrong is that "discrinimation" clause. If in a game, or book, or movie there is no gay romances or gay people it is not discrinimation. Even a child could understand that, maybe. What is discrinimation would be if the some book, movie, or game would not be sold to gays.

Other things like requesting NPCs to be variables depending on your gender is an opinion like requesting them to be characters by themselves and not romance puppets is an opinion.

I would say that requesting NPCs to be variable puppet romance feeders goes in-line with requesting "no gays" button.

True, I've read lots of books that didn't include homosexual romances, as well as lots that did. Neither is discrimination. But if the readers of books which did include homosexual romances demanded a version without it... well, that's starting to look 'phobic. The funny thing in this situation is that the option to play the story without a homosexual romance is already there, so demanding the omg no ghey option not only makes you sound like a ridiculous homophobe, it's also totally unnecessary.
It's like demanding an option to disable the sword and shield skills for your warrior because you want to use a greatsword - just don't put points into the weapon and shield skills and you don't have to deal with it.

If you really were forced into bed with Anders, then I could understand the argument, but you are not.

Anders: Just say no.

I haven't demanded for "no ******" buttons. I have asked what's wrong with it if there is already button "disable/enable gayness on NPC" 

Fine. I apologise for suggesting you were making irrelevent demands. The demand is still irrelevant even if you're just asking what's wrong with it. The option is already there. Turn him down. If you cannot do that without upsetting him... well, I don't know about you, but when I've been rejected I get upset about it... call me overemotional.

[moilami]

Incantrix wrote...

My theory is that most of the "straight male" demographic is too immature for romances in general.

Seriously, those who don't want s/s romances are homophobic and you know what their bs reason will be? "immersiveness" if I had a nickel for everytime I heard that...

Oi, yet another saying that if you don't want to do gay sex in video games you are homophobic. I thought it would had been old card to use in bashing. But noooo. It just evolves. Now they say "if you don't want to do gay sex in video games you are immature too". 

Not sure if they are serious. But anything is possible.

God help us.

[Captain Jazz]

moilami wrote...

Incantrix wrote...

My theory is that most of the "straight male" demographic is too immature for romances in general.

Seriously, those who don't want s/s romances are homophobic and you know what their bs reason will be? "immersiveness" if I had a nickel for everytime I heard that...

Oi, yet another saying that if you don't want to do gay sex in video games you are homophobic. I thought it would had been old card to use in bashing. But noooo. It just evolves. Now they say "if you don't want to do gay sex in video games you are immature too". 

Not sure if they are serious. But anything is possible.

God help us.

Nonononono. Yet another saying that if you don't want gay sex to exist in video games you are homophobic. You don't have to engage in them.

[aries1001]

I find this topic very interesting and am also a little bit baffled by this -ahem- commotion. I clearly remember way back when - e.g. before the game was released. People were then saying that they thought that Bioware did not dare to make interesting romances and thought they wouldn't have the courage to do same sex romances anymore. As this thread, and the many more about the gay (or bi) romances in the game suggest, this has not happened. Bioware still writes these - and has these romances in their games.

I also get the feeling that many people might think that if they play their character like someone who pursues same sex relationships they'll become (or be?) like that in real life. And I can tell you that no such thing can or will happen. It is a game, you're playing a character in an rpg, a role, and it this character that is doing this, not you in real life. The same can be seen in acting e.g. when actors act in movies and tv-series.


One of the examples that comes to mind is this one: The actor in the tv-series, Melrose Place, that played a person who has same sex relationsships were actuallly heterosexual, irl. Of course Melrose is a tv-series, and actors act, but if your character (your role) in this game is pursuing same sex relationsship, it doesn't mean that you're suddenly such a person or aspiring to be one. It is your character in the game that acts in this, of course he or she is still being directed by you much like an actor is being directed by the director and the movie's script.

[moilami]

Captain Jazz wrote...

moilami wrote...

Captain Jazz wrote...

moilami wrote...

Rasanaa wrote...

I don't submit much to forums .....because of obvious reasons.

It still amazes me to this day that forums like these contain people, who will for 59 pages and counting, argue amongst themselves and never resolve anything. It will be a group of maybe 6 to 10 people, who are hard headed, opinionated, and self-centered, who will argue for the sake of argument and never come to any common ground because they all believe they are the ones in the right and the world should revolve around themselves.

Hmmm.....I think I just summed up the US House and Senate.

The world would be a better place if people would.....listen.

The thing is that this is not mathematics. So there is plenty of room for different opinions.

The only thing where some people are wrong is that "discrinimation" clause. If in a game, or book, or movie there is no gay romances or gay people it is not discrinimation. Even a child could understand that, maybe. What is discrinimation would be if the some book, movie, or game would not be sold to gays.

Other things like requesting NPCs to be variables depending on your gender is an opinion like requesting them to be characters by themselves and not romance puppets is an opinion.

I would say that requesting NPCs to be variable puppet romance feeders goes in-line with requesting "no gays" button.

True, I've read lots of books that didn't include homosexual romances, as well as lots that did. Neither is discrimination. But if the readers of books which did include homosexual romances demanded a version without it... well, that's starting to look 'phobic. The funny thing in this situation is that the option to play the story without a homosexual romance is already there, so demanding the omg no ghey option not only makes you sound like a ridiculous homophobe, it's also totally unnecessary.
It's like demanding an option to disable the sword and shield skills for your warrior because you want to use a greatsword - just don't put points into the weapon and shield skills and you don't have to deal with it.

If you really were forced into bed with Anders, then I could understand the argument, but you are not.

Anders: Just say no.

I haven't demanded for "no ******" buttons. I have asked what's wrong with it if there is already button "disable/enable gayness on NPC" 

Fine. I apologise for suggesting you were making irrelevent demands. The demand is still irrelevant even if you're just asking what's wrong with it. The option is already there. Turn him down. If you cannot do that without upsetting him... well, I don't know about you, but when I've been rejected I get upset about it... call me overemotional.

I appreciate it if NPCs are scripted to respond to IC actions with IC concequences. That is one very defining factor of RPGs.

I would appreciate it even more if Anders would take a leave after he has been turned down. I am sure you don't understand this in a way I meant - which is very funny.

[Captain Jazz]

moilami wrote...

Captain Jazz wrote...

moilami wrote...

Captain Jazz wrote...

True, I've read lots of books that didn't include homosexual romances, as well as lots that did. Neither is discrimination. But if the readers of books which did include homosexual romances demanded a version without it... well, that's starting to look 'phobic. The funny thing in this situation is that the option to play the story without a homosexual romance is already there, so demanding the omg no ghey option not only makes you sound like a ridiculous homophobe, it's also totally unnecessary.
It's like demanding an option to disable the sword and shield skills for your warrior because you want to use a greatsword - just don't put points into the weapon and shield skills and you don't have to deal with it.

If you really were forced into bed with Anders, then I could understand the argument, but you are not.

Anders: Just say no.

I haven't demanded for "no ******" buttons. I have asked what's wrong with it if there is already button "disable/enable gayness on NPC" 

Fine. I apologise for suggesting you were making irrelevent demands. The demand is still irrelevant even if you're just asking what's wrong with it. The option is already there. Turn him down. If you cannot do that without upsetting him... well, I don't know about you, but when I've been rejected I get upset about it... call me overemotional.

I appreciate it if NPCs are scripted to respond to IC actions with IC concequences. That is one very defining factor of RPGs.

I would appreciate it even more if Anders would take a leave after he has been turned down. I am sure you don't understand this in a way I meant - which is very funny.

That's lovely, thank you for appreciating that I don't understand what you mean, rather than taking the ridiculous effort of making sure to be clear in your meaning.
Anyway, since I have your permission to misunderstand you, why do you want Anders to be sent to a deathcamp for being gay? Why are you such an inhuman monster?

[Tirigon]

moilami wrote...
How much did they got paid?

Their entire education, everything they needed to live (food, clothing, a home etc....), important connections later on.

Edit: And were you there to see everything first hand - or from where you got the authority to act like you were?

No I wasn´t but I busied myself with Greece history a gereat deal.

[Tirigon]

Mrwakka wrote...

So because Alistair didn't fit your stereotype for a straight man, he must be gay.

No, because he pretty much fits the stereotype of a gay man. People were complaining about Zevran being too stereotypical. I found that retarded, Alistair acts far more in accordance with gay clichés. Except for not being gay without mods, that is.

Eudaemonium wrote...

Also, since when did not being in a relationship before equate to not having a sexual preference? (re: Morrigan).

She never states she is straight, ad her history doesn´t show it, so for all i care she is not.
I would be fine with her being straight if you could flirt with her as woman and she´d tel you she´s not interested.

However, in the game she NEVER talks about being straight, instead your Warden does not have an option to express interest in her, if she´s female.
This is f*cked up design, and it´s quite ironic that the romance works even better for women than it does for men if you use the "Equal Love" mod.

[c3701]

Captain Jazz wrote...

True, I've read lots of books that didn't include homosexual romances, as well as lots that did. Neither is discrimination. But if the readers of books which did include homosexual romances demanded a version without it... well, that's starting to look 'phobic. The funny thing in this situation is that the option to play the story without a homosexual romance is already there, so demanding the omg no ghey option not only makes you sound like a ridiculous homophobe, it's also totally unnecessary.
It's like demanding an option to disable the sword and shield skills for your warrior because you want to use a greatsword - just don't put points into the weapon and shield skills and you don't have to deal with it.

If you really were forced into bed with Anders, then I could understand the argument, but you are not.

Anders: Just say no.

Demanding is a little harsh.  I would use "asking."  It's not like I or others are asking for something that would be difficult to implement.  It's not like it would change the game in any way for you.

[Tirigon]

moilami wrote...

You can say that if you say all work what historians has done is as valid as Trigons.

GL doing doctorate with that statement.

It is not, but what you claim to be proven by history is a blatant lie, since I based my statement on actual Greek history and contemporary sources (yes, I learned ancient Greek for a while in school)

[Tirigon]

moilami wrote...

Then, why there can't be no "no homosexual advances for me" button? 

There is one. It looks like a broken heart in the dialogue wheel.


Also, please stop retarded pyramid quotes if you only respond to the latest line, it makes your posts unnecessary long and hard to read.

[MrWakka]

Tirigon wrote...

Mrwakka wrote...

So because Alistair didn't fit your stereotype for a straight man, he must be gay.

No, because he pretty much fits the stereotype of a gay man. People were complaining about Zevran being too stereotypical. I found that retarded, Alistair acts far more in accordance with gay clichés. Except for not being gay without mods, that is.

Eudaemonium wrote...

Also, since when did not being in a relationship before equate to not having a sexual preference? (re: Morrigan).

She never states she is straight, ad her history doesn´t show it, so for all i care she is not.
I would be fine with her being straight if you could flirt with her as woman and she´d tel you she´s not interested.

However, in the game she NEVER talks about being straight, instead your Warden does not have an option to express interest in her, if she´s female.
This is f*cked up design, and it´s quite ironic that the romance works even better for women than it does for men if you use the "Equal Love" mod.

Again, thats kind of a bigoted point of view on alistair. He acts in a way you deem gay, thus even though he isn't into it, he should be? Explain please exactly what in his personality defines him as gay, I am curious to hear that. Is a gay man who doesn't fit the worst stereotype told he can't be gay because he doesn't act like it? kinda messed up.

As to Morrigan, I seem to recall she mentions having been with men before in her explorations.

[moilami]

Captain Jazz wrote...

moilami wrote...

Captain Jazz wrote...

moilami wrote...

Captain Jazz wrote...

True, I've read lots of books that didn't include homosexual romances, as well as lots that did. Neither is discrimination. But if the readers of books which did include homosexual romances demanded a version without it... well, that's starting to look 'phobic. The funny thing in this situation is that the option to play the story without a homosexual romance is already there, so demanding the omg no ghey option not only makes you sound like a ridiculous homophobe, it's also totally unnecessary.
It's like demanding an option to disable the sword and shield skills for your warrior because you want to use a greatsword - just don't put points into the weapon and shield skills and you don't have to deal with it.

If you really were forced into bed with Anders, then I could understand the argument, but you are not.

Anders: Just say no.

I haven't demanded for "no ******" buttons. I have asked what's wrong with it if there is already button "disable/enable gayness on NPC" 

Fine. I apologise for suggesting you were making irrelevent demands. The demand is still irrelevant even if you're just asking what's wrong with it. The option is already there. Turn him down. If you cannot do that without upsetting him... well, I don't know about you, but when I've been rejected I get upset about it... call me overemotional.

I appreciate it if NPCs are scripted to respond to IC actions with IC concequences. That is one very defining factor of RPGs.

I would appreciate it even more if Anders would take a leave after he has been turned down. I am sure you don't understand this in a way I meant - which is very funny.

That's lovely, thank you for appreciating that I don't understand what you mean, rather than taking the ridiculous effort of making sure to be clear in your meaning.
Anyway, since I have your permission to misunderstand you, why do you want Anders to be sent to a deathcamp for being gay? Why are you such an inhuman monster?

Lol I would never send Anders or Zevran to deathcamp because they are gay. They are good fighters and Anders fights for justice even.

You misunderstood, and I had good lols because of that. Anders should take a leave by himself because being turned down and not act as an obedient puppet for the PC.