912 réponses à ce sujet

[Isaidlunch]

I'm not expecting any of the current male LI's to turn bisexual. It would mean more effort to write another romance for the LI specific to manShep rather than making a bisexual LI from scratch and the complaints about how everyone's beloved bro character turned gay would be endless. James Sanders or whoever we get as a new male squadmate (if there is one) is my only hope for ME3.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

I support the Big Ben Sniper for BI LI in ME3.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 24 avril 2011 - 11:48 .

[Centauri2002]

Lots of talk of fan service. Who says fan service is a bad thing? It's only bad if it has a negative impact on the game. Some may say the romances detracted from the main plot, others will say they only added to it. I remain firmly in the latter group. It's also a hugely popular part of the game.

Fan service? Perhaps. Negative part of the game? Hell no.

[catabuca]

ElitePinecone wrote...

There are presumably still unannounced characters lurking out there.

I also back Kaidan as a possible option; he was intended to be bisexual for the original Mass Effect and I can see him being that way for ME3, just in terms of character development.

Edit: Pressed enter too early ;__; 

That's another reason I'd love to see it come to completion in ME3. Character progression. I think this would work for f!Shep or m!Shep wanting to initiate a relationship with Kaidan even though they hadn't previously. The strain of events over 2 games, the people they've both known and lost, the way they became close (as friends, with or without underlying feelings in the mix), and the way they lost each other when the Normandy went down ... that's powerful stuff. To see that lead to romance in ME3 would be an exceptional opportunity to develop both characters to have more depth, to give them a richness, and to tie together the trilogy through the medium of personal relationship and the strength of human contact. It would be so powerful, a beautiful thing to behold.

That said ... a new guy would be good too. Be a pity to miss the chance at that development though.

[Eromenos]

HealthyGiraffe wrote...

Vormaerin wrote...

No, I simply disagree with you that they are more likely to be liberals, except as an accident of the current political culture. Its NOT true of the historical record. Nor is it true that its legal for gays to serve in the US Armed services in the recent past. If i walked up and said "Hi, I'm a gay man and I want to enlist", I'd be told NO." I would only be allowed to serve if I didn't admit to being gay.

Gay men have a long history of military service in the historical record. Just not in the recent history of the US.

You are being a typical American here. I'm not talking about America. America is not the centre of the universe. And if you wait a few months, you would be able to say "hi I'm a gay man and I want to enlist" in the USA anyway. 

Anyway, there is no point explaining this and I honestly don't care what you believe about it. You've never experienced it. Next time you meet someone who has been in combat, ask them how many gay men they meet out there. Because I fought with hundreds of French, British, German, Spanish and Australian men and women (who were all incredibly accepting and open about their sexuality) and I didn't meet any gay people in combat. Not one. Maybe it's just a coincidence. A coincidence that went on for five years. In two seperate wars. With people from several varying cultures. Yeah. Probably. There is no under-lying reason why this happened. 

Of course it is because of our political/social environment. I'd argue that EVERYTHING has something to do with that, and I have conceeded that maybe in the Mass Effect universe - this doens't exist. It still doesn't change the fact that gay men are 10% of the population and it still doesn't change the fact that TODAY, gay men are relatively unheard of in combat roles. 

Meeting just as many gay men in your travels as straight men, in any universe involving humans, would be a complete rarity and would break immersion for me. Gay people are rare. If I had 5 gay squad mates in ME3 and 5 straight squad mates, I'd think it was pandering, "EQUALITY FOR THE SAKE OF EQUALITY!"  nonsense because that would never happen and my immersion would be ruined. I'd get the impression that Bioware were trying to be p-c and trying to pander to the fan base instead of actually creating their artistic vision of the universe - especially considering the fact that ME1 and ME2 had no gay members. Plain and simple. And I am entitled to express this on forum. 

And...how exactly did you confirm that all of these men on the frontlines were non-gay? You rifled through their belongings? Interrogated them about their personal lives? Arched your back before every single new shock-trooper you didn't recognize and then weighed their reactions against teh gheyz you knew from "back home?"

Do please explain the depths of your litmus tests.

To be frank, your lofty proprietary attitudes are the reason why so few queer soldiers would want to be forthcoming around you in a homophobic environment. Chances are your buddies may have known some, or were queer themselves, yet probably thought less of you than you were aware of. Even in the civilian sector where corporations have anti-homophobia policies, the queer employees are guarded about expressing their own lives via pictures on office walls or small-talk with co-workers. Straight employees are never challenged for flaunting themselves, hmmm.

Have a look at Marine Staff Sergeant Eric Alva. www.hrcbackstory.org/2010/06/vet-eric-alva-responds-to-az-mayor-who-says-limp-wristed-cant-serve-country/ I have no idea whether his rank made him a front-line soldier in combat. What I do know is that by the time this country was embroiled in Iraq (and still...so much for "Mission Accomplished") Alva had been rated more than enough for combat and become the first Marine, if not the first American, to suffer a major injury via getting his leg blown off by a landmine. He's also 5'1". Do please try and reiterate your stance that queer guys can't hack it as fighters.

Your statements that queer men are nonexistent in combat has nothing to do with "our shortcomings." It has everything to do with homophobic establishments continually finding excuses to pursue witch-hunts. You're so adamant about never entertaining the thought of "allowing" queers to be out there usurping some holy right reserved for str8 men. You actually have your work cut out.

Modifié par Eromenos, 24 avril 2011 - 12:30 .

[Eromenos]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Eromenos wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Eromenos wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Eromenos wrote...

Wizz wrote...

*sigh*
Pacifien usually closes such topics. For a reason.

Yeah, and that reason would be to funnel overt gayness into the segregated free-speech zone just to placate the homophobes in this place.

Um, no.  It's because these threads turn into, well, this.

www.ign.com/blogs/next-gen-gamer/2010/02/04/mass-effect-2-bad-romance

Any thread over a topic that people fight over and call each other names over and flame one another - is a nightmare to moderate on public boards with site rules similiar to this one's.  They get locked.  As a mod on other boards, I've locked threads that devolve into this for a wide variety of topics, not just homosexuality.  Examples of topics that usually turn into flame wars are: homosexuality, abortion, the death penalty, racism - you get the point.  

"Content that is insulting to anyone based on gender, lifestyle,
religion, ethic group, race etc. is unacceptable and will be deleted
without warning. A person or persons found to repeatedly slander others
may be banned from these forums at the discretion of the staff."

BioWare does not even follow its own rules. They permit homophobic trolls to attack all threads that contest BioWare's cowardice towards queer visibility in their own products. They're basically letting flames act as their excuse to reinforce their own commitment to silence on this topic.

You can lay of the victim card, mate.

I'm seeing more straigthophobes in this thread than I am seeing homophobes.

I'm sure you would. Your victim card grows from entitlement provoked by even the tiniest of challenges against unworthy heterosexual exclusivity.

Modifié par Eromenos, 24 avril 2011 - 12:39 .

[SalsaDMA]

Eromenos wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Eromenos wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Eromenos wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Eromenos wrote...

Wizz wrote...

*sigh*
Pacifien usually closes such topics. For a reason.

Yeah, and that reason would be to funnel overt gayness into the segregated free-speech zone just to placate the homophobes in this place.

Um, no.  It's because these threads turn into, well, this.

www.ign.com/blogs/next-gen-gamer/2010/02/04/mass-effect-2-bad-romance

Any thread over a topic that people fight over and call each other names over and flame one another - is a nightmare to moderate on public boards with site rules similiar to this one's.  They get locked.  As a mod on other boards, I've locked threads that devolve into this for a wide variety of topics, not just homosexuality.  Examples of topics that usually turn into flame wars are: homosexuality, abortion, the death penalty, racism - you get the point.  

"Content that is insulting to anyone based on gender, lifestyle,
religion, ethic group, race etc. is unacceptable and will be deleted
without warning. A person or persons found to repeatedly slander others
may be banned from these forums at the discretion of the staff."

BioWare does not even follow its own rules. They permit homophobic trolls to attack all threads that contest BioWare's cowardice towards queer visibility in their own products. They're basically letting flames act as their excuse to reinforce their own commitment to silence on this topic.

You can lay of the victim card, mate.

I'm seeing more straigthophobes in this thread than I am seeing homophobes.

I'm sure you would. Your victim card grows from entitlement provoked by even the tiniest of challenges against unworthy heterosexual exclusivity.

No, I'm just tired of people claiming the victim card when all they really want is exclusivity for themselves.

A certain individual isn't interested in you? tough. That's how life goes. I don't **** about meeting a gorgous girl and then finding out she isn't interested in guys. Most of the gay-proponents in this thread, however, are doing exactly this about characters they find attractive.

It's like the gays that tells straigths in gaybars: "No straigths allowed". It's ironic and sad at the same time how the claims of being openminded only counts as far as people are agreeing with them. If you don't agree, you are called a homophobe. It's a similar attitude/behaviour used by ethnic minorities all the time, and equally distatefull. Ie. disagree with a guy from an ethnic minority, and there's a fair chance he'll pull the "You're just a racist" card. It happens every day, regardless of what people say or do.

As long as you are in disagreement with the self-entitled 'victims' they will happily claim the "you are just <insert random degatory phrase>" card.

Read through the thread. You'll quickly notice that even people that openly suggest new companions that are targeted at the vocal gay-segment in this thread get slammed together in the 'homophobic' group just because they disagree with turning specific established characters into Bi's.

[Saeran]

Just going to pop in here and say quote pyramids are generally frowned upon.

And another point, most of us don't care what character whether it be old or new, some of us just want that option. I currently don't have any option, I'm not gonna play a victim card over it but that's where we are. Straight men get plenty, straight women get plenty, and gay/bisexual women get 1. Gay males get none. Just 1 person who swings that way is seriously gonna harm the game that much for people?

[SalsaDMA]

Saeran wrote...

Just going to pop in here and say quote pyramids are generally frowned upon.

And another point, most of us don't care what character whether it be old or new, some of us just want that option. I currently don't have any option, I'm not gonna play a victim card over it but that's where we are. Straight men get plenty, straight women get plenty, and gay/bisexual women get 1. Gay males get none. Just 1 person who swings that way is seriously gonna harm the game that much for people?

Introduce a new male character that is purely interested in males, and I couldn't really give a crap. I'd find it shoddy writing based on the established sexuality of Shepard in the previous games, but that is as far as my displeasure would go. <_<

Rewriting already established NPC characters, however, can easily put me into a furor

Modifié par SalsaDMA, 24 avril 2011 - 01:45 .

[Eromenos]

[quote]SalsaDMA wrote...

It would have helped you if you had done your research. Both voiceactors were just given the full scripts to record. Or do you think it is 'intentional' when Maleshepard refers to himself as a woman?

You're looking for implications that aren't there, and trying to pull the homophobic card at the same time just shows you as a frothing troll.

So yes, in your specific case you are actually feeling entitled to a speciel privelege. Namely by claiming one that never existed in the first place should have been there.

[/quote]

Shyeah. We also have Kaidan responding to MShepard as "ma'am"/"woman" while MShepard flirts with Kaidan by name, using Mark Meer's voice as MShepard. I'm sure you'd want proof that Kaidan and Ashley address same-sex Shepards romantically; because only then would your precious human str8 Marines fit my argument? No--all of them were entertained as being potentially bisexual. MShepard/Kaidan, FShepard/Ashley. From the ground-up they were not conceived that way, but when all the elements made it possible once the Shepard actors' lines were reviewed, the content was excluded for fear of homophobia.

The majority of those characters' interactions and dialogue were already gender-neutral; they had been developed as functionally bisexual to be appealing to males and to females in overlapping sexual/nonsexual connotations. It's called "charisma." Everything that worked for the str8 relationships worked for the S/S relationships too. BioWare just didn't want to go the extra mile because they overvalue your lot.

[/quote]

[quote]

In all honesty, at first I wouldn't even had raised an
eyebrow if BW, to cater to frothing 'straigthophobes' (if that is even a
word, but it somehow suits the people in here that are so vehemently
against straigth people in their games), had included a new LI option
for that segment only. After all, if it didn't touch with the
establishment of the old characters what would be the issue, right?

[/quote]

So much irony in the way that homophobic trolls come to a thread like this one to "lay down the law" by calling queer visibility a sign of unworthy subversion, and that its proponents must be dangerously rabid. I love  homophobes trying to characterize my arguments as being generally anti-str8 in general. They don't get it and they feel entitled to not have to get it; their chief concern is just to put down a ghey who won't pretend to play nice by their patronizing edicts.

[quote]

Que? What on earth are you blabbering about? You are reminding me more an more of the gay people that get offended when a straight person 'dare' to have a beer a in a known gaybar.

This isn't about non-gays accepting gays. This is about gays accepting non-gays.
[/quote]

The general attitude you share with the person I was responding to happens to be one of disdain at the possibility of being confronted by dissolution of boundary-lines imposed by straight culture's limited binary gender roles. Yeah, and I don't even have to guess your typical reaction to the trigger-word "straight" being used in a critical tone. Here's what it is- straight culture retains excessive privileges with a proven habit of whitewashing all other elements of human sexuality in an effort to prop itself up on a pedestal. That should not be allowed, and I am grateful to the rare straight people who see this dynamic as a problem, as they do not wish for queer people to be treated as lessers/accessories/pets/undesirables who have to "wait their turn" at the mercy of those who wield unearned authority.

Gays(queers in general) do not ever need to "accept" those specific elements among non-gays who wish to maintain their own worldviews, which in effect whitewash all meaningful participation/inclusion of queer people.

Modifié par Eromenos, 24 avril 2011 - 01:48 .

[Saeran]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Saeran wrote...

Just going to pop in here and say quote pyramids are generally frowned upon.

And another point, most of us don't care what character whether it be old or new, some of us just want that option. I currently don't have any option, I'm not gonna play a victim card over it but that's where we are. Straight men get plenty, straight women get plenty, and gay/bisexual women get 1. Gay males get none. Just 1 person who swings that way is seriously gonna harm the game that much for people?

Introduce a new male character that is purely interested in males, and I couldn't really give a crap. I'd find it shoddy writing based on the established sexuality of Shepard in the previous games, but that is as far as my displeasure would go. <_<

Rewriting already established NPC characters, however, can easily put me into a furor

Just like Garrus and Tali's lack of sexuality was established in ME1? :/

[SalsaDMA]

Taking note of Saerans suggestion not to quote too much I'll just cut my reply to Eromenos down to the following:

You're totally off your wacker.

Not only are you wrongfully asuming a certain sexual preferences constitute having a higher moral, but you are at the same time acusing people disagreeing with it as expressing the very attitude you showing.

Not only that, but you are totally unable to respond without resorting to insults and flames. If I ever needed to show people a typical example of 'the biggoted gayproposer' you fit perfectly with your posts.

[SalsaDMA]

Nyoka wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Introduce a new male character that is purely interested in males, and I
couldn't really give a crap. I'd find it shoddy writing based on the
established sexuality of Shepard in the previous games, but that is as
far as my displeasure would go. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/angry.png[/smilie]
Rewriting already established NPC characters, however, can easily put me into a furor [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]

Right. Getting out of the closet is something that never happens in real life. It's so unrealistic. Or maybe those who do get out are shoddy, unworthy persons.

Nice to see you can discuss without trying to pull the victim card. Oh wait, you can't.

See this post alone shows why communication is almost impossible. If you disagree with every whim spouted out, then you are branded as predjudiced.

As long as you behave like an 'unworthy person' by continually stigmatising yourself as such, then I will asume this is what you actually want and do that.

On the other hand, if you want to be treated like a fellow human being, you should start acting like one instead of trying to act like a victim of nonexistant predjudice.

And please, please don't tell me you think it would be anywhere near good writing to have a character after two thirds of a trilogy suddenly adopt a distinctly different personality, just to apease a certain segment of the fan base.

[Centauri2002]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Taking note of Saerans suggestion not to quote too much I'll just cut my reply to Eromenos down to the following:

You're totally off your wacker.

Not only are you wrongfully asuming a certain sexual preferences constitute having a higher moral, but you are at the same time acusing people disagreeing with it as expressing the very attitude you showing.

Not only that, but you are totally unable to respond without resorting to insults and flames. If I ever needed to show people a typical example of 'the biggoted gayproposer' you fit perfectly with your posts.

I don't think you should be labelling people like that at all. Next we'll be seeing terms like the "homosexual agenda" in this thread. >.>

People can be unreasonable without that being associated with their sexual preference. Anyway, I'm getting off-topic.

You were talking about Shepard's established sexual preference in the game before. But it's never been established. The sexual preference of Shepard is determined by the player playing Shepard.

Modifié par centauri2002, 24 avril 2011 - 02:03 .

[SalsaDMA]

Saeran wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Saeran wrote...

Just going to pop in here and say quote pyramids are generally frowned upon.

And another point, most of us don't care what character whether it be old or new, some of us just want that option. I currently don't have any option, I'm not gonna play a victim card over it but that's where we are. Straight men get plenty, straight women get plenty, and gay/bisexual women get 1. Gay males get none. Just 1 person who swings that way is seriously gonna harm the game that much for people?

Introduce a new male character that is purely interested in males, and I couldn't really give a crap. I'd find it shoddy writing based on the established sexuality of Shepard in the previous games, but that is as far as my displeasure would go. <_<

Rewriting already established NPC characters, however, can easily put me into a furor

Just like Garrus and Tali's lack of sexuality was established in ME1? :/

Bah... I need to quote people if my responses are to make meaning

Tali and Garrus I consider shoddy writing, yes, but at least Garrus was discreetly done. Ie. He never even approached my female shepard in a way I actually noticed it, so I could actually ignore that part.

Tali, however, made me cringe my toes when she suddenly 'confronted' my Shepard that was dating with Miranda. Appearantly being a friend to Tali meant I was 'with' her. Considering I hadn't acted differently towards her than in ME1 I did find it a stupid turn of events that my Shepard had to suddenly deal with a Tali that was another person than in ME1.

[catabuca]

@SalsaDMA -- why do you keep trying to paint people in here as playing a victim card? Do you feel like a victim?

[SalsaDMA]

Nyoka wrote...

There is no reason why a character getting out of the closet would put you into a furor. That happens in real life, so it's realistic and an interesting, original personal development if you liked the character from previous games.

The only reason why that would upset you is if you thought getting out is an inherently bad thing for one's character.

I'm sorry. I never heard about a switch getting thrown in people that suddenly changes who they are.

And as far as 'getting out of the closet', that happens most commonly in the young years of people. actively Expecting rare occurences to happen in a story, one that isn't even hinted at in any way prior in the story is not realistic, no. Nor is it interesting.

In fact, I find such things as interesting in a story as deux ex machinas. From out of the blue, to make a random change, we made this thing happen.

Sorry, that's not good storytelling.

[Biotic_Warlock]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Taking note of Saerans suggestion not to quote too much I'll just cut my reply to Eromenos down to the following:

You're totally off your wacker.

Not only are you wrongfully asuming a certain sexual preferences constitute having a higher moral, but you are at the same time acusing people disagreeing with it as expressing the very attitude you showing.

Not only that, but you are totally unable to respond without resorting to insults and flames. If I ever needed to show people a typical example of 'the biggoted gayproposer' you fit perfectly with your posts.

I disagree with what you said...

... am i a flamer now?

Alas, I think the "biggoted gayproposer" remark is a bit rude - so i'd mind who you accuse of such things.

[Saeran]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Bah... I need to quote people if my responses are to make meaning

Tali and Garrus I consider shoddy writing, yes, but at least Garrus was discreetly done. Ie. He never even approached my female shepard in a way I actually noticed it, so I could actually ignore that part.

Tali, however, made me cringe my toes when she suddenly 'confronted' my Shepard that was dating with Miranda. Appearantly being a friend to Tali meant I was 'with' her. Considering I hadn't acted differently towards her than in ME1 I did find it a stupid turn of events that my Shepard had to suddenly deal with a Tali that was another person than in ME1.

And yet I presume you still enjoy the game and to this day it hasn't degraded anything. What would the difference be if they reverted the character back to their original design, i.e Kaidan bisexual, but he never mentions it unless you pursue it. I can't see much difference there. As I say though, I don't care if it's Kaidan or James Sanders or the Illusive Man (which would demand some extremely shoddy writing). I would just enjoy the game a whole lot more with that 1 little option.

EDIT: Oh and quoting is fine, pyramids of quotes start getting extremely long however. :3

Modifié par Saeran, 24 avril 2011 - 02:17 .

[Centauri2002]

@Salsa: What makes you think these characters are straight in the first place? They could very well be bisexual for all you know. Just because they don't go shouting about tapping both males and females doesn't mean they're automatically set to straight. That's just an assumption based on a heteronormative view.

[SalsaDMA]

catabuca wrote...

@SalsaDMA -- why do you keep trying to paint people in here as playing a victim card? Do you feel like a victim?

Yes yes. I feel like a victim. A victim of incredibly poor taste of words used by people that can't carry a debate without hurling insinuations or veiled insults.

When people start making references that disagreeing with their opinion automatically should make you feel they as a person are a lesser being, then it's hard not to feel like a victim of their incredible silly insinuations and lack of grasp of reality and the ability to accept other peoples opinions without having to try and paint anyone disagreeing with them as being biggots.

does that answer your question freud?

[Centauri2002]

SalsaDMA wrote...

catabuca wrote...

@SalsaDMA -- why do you keep trying to paint people in here as playing a victim card? Do you feel like a victim?

Yes yes. I feel like a victim. A victim of incredibly poor taste of words used by people that can't carry a debate without hurling insinuations or veiled insults.

When people start making references that disagreeing with their opinion automatically should make you feel they as a person are a lesser being, then it's hard not to feel like a victim of their incredible silly insinuations and lack of grasp of reality and the ability to accept other peoples opinions without having to try and paint anyone disagreeing with them as being biggots.

does that answer your question freud?

Which is exactly what you just did with catabuca. <_<

[SalsaDMA]

Biotic_Warlock wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Taking note of Saerans suggestion not to quote too much I'll just cut my reply to Eromenos down to the following:

You're totally off your wacker.

Not only are you wrongfully asuming a certain sexual preferences constitute having a higher moral, but you are at the same time acusing people disagreeing with it as expressing the very attitude you showing.

Not only that, but you are totally unable to respond without resorting to insults and flames. If I ever needed to show people a typical example of 'the biggoted gayproposer' you fit perfectly with your posts.

I disagree with what you said...

... am i a flamer now?

Alas, I think the "biggoted gayproposer" remark is a bit rude - so i'd mind who you accuse of such things.

no, because you did it without feeling a need to resort to the rethorics of the flamers.

If the term "biggoted gayproposer" is rude, then it stems from the part that is "biggoted". the secondary part only describes in what way he/she is biggoted in. I have nothing against gays. I have everything against biggots. of any variety.