25715 réponses à ce sujet

[Quething]

Actually, I'm pretty goddamned wary of the "lol unrealistic, cuz dwarves and space magic are so realistic" dismissal. It's the exact same argument people make about Miranda in high heels - "so what if she'd break her ankle in the real world, this isn't the real world, we threw 'realism' out the door before we even started."

It's a fallacy when it's used to defend sexist bullspit, and it's a fallacy when it's used to defend queer inclusion. I can't just decide it's a good argument when it's suddenly on my side.

Any plot, any setting, any story requires a set of internally consistent rules in order to be comprehensible. Characters, conflicts, they can't make sense or be relatable if anything could happen at any time for no reason whatsoever. Every fantasy story starts from one basic premise: "Everything here works exactly the way everything in your world does, except for this one important thing, which works this way instead." It has to be that way or the reader has no way to engage in the plot.

Mass Effect works that way too. They gave us the first game and they said, "ok, these are the things that are different: aliens. Biotics. FTL travel." And they went one step further, which is why ME1 was so goddamn amazing: they also said "aliens work exactly like this. Biotics work exactly like this. FTL travel works exactly like this." And they thought about that, and they stuck to that - they said "wait, if FTL travel works like this, that means guns can work like that, and spaceships can work like the other thing." And that is why the world of Mass Effect is so compelling - because it's so well-thought out and so internally consistent and therefore it rings so true.

You can't just toss random breaks from reality into a story whenever you feel like it for whatever reason you feel like it, because it ruins that internal consistency, and breaks the contract you have with the audience. This is why Shepard's "death" in ME2 went over so poorly with the fanbase, and why the ending of ME3 is such a clusterfrack. Both break from reality, but in a way inconsistent with the setting, in a way that doesn't fit the rules we were given at the outset.

Now, that doesn't make the "four bi people is unrealistic!" thing any less the ass-stupid dumbfrackery it is. Because a) "the LI has no standards when it comes to the PC" is already on the "breaks from reality" list, and has been since roughly KotOR, so while it is a valid potential complaint in the abstract, it's definitely not a valid complaint if you claim to like any other BioWare romance since then, and more importantly four bisexual people in the same social group is ACTUALLY NOT UNCOMMON IN THE REAL WORLD, PEOPLE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD GET OUT OF THE HOUSE NOW AND THEN.

But let's just make sure we're dismissing it for the actual reasons that it's stupid, and not with weak arguments that can just as easily defend excluding queer people entirely (hey, it's not realistic for no one to be gay ever, either, right?).

[Abispa]

*Orders Quething a beer and a valium. Puts on a "My Little Pony" DVD on the TV.*

Here you go, young lady. You just relax. We'll stay here and obsess over our convoluted conspiracy theories.

[Ryzaki]

Internally consistent?

Did we play the same ME series?

[Quething]

Based on your posting history, Ry, I have always sort of suspected not.

And Abispa, I'm not falling for that. You swore revenge, man, right there where everyone can see it. I ain't touchin' nothin' you give me without a food taster screening that sucker first.

Modifié par Quething, 12 juin 2012 - 09:49 .

[Terrorize69]

Lol none of us played the same ME series

[AmyMac]

ElitePinecone wrote...

I think some employees at Bioware feel genuinely strongly about lgbt rights (the writers especially) and I don't want to sound totally cynical by saying that they only introduced s/s romances because it made business sense and there was an audience for it, but there *is* clearly a reason why it wasn't in the first two games and it is in ME3. That change had to have a purpose, and (although we have no idea) it could be a combination of having the time, seeing the fan response and an expectation that it wouldn't have caused the same controversy as five years ago.

A games company can't be entirely a vehicle for social change (especially when it needs to sell a product to a mainstream audience), and I think it's always a delicate balance between being risk-averse and trying to include wider perspectives.

Good point. Mass Effect was released in 2007, and I'd say that the public view towards/acceptance of "teh gayz" has changed quite a bit since then ... well at least in my experience. Truthfully, I don't actually blame them for not including (or cutting, whatever the case may be) s/s content in Mass Effect.
As far as including s/s content in ME3/video games in general -- by BioWare or anyone else -- I think it really depends on the extent to which the player character's romance arc plays a role in the story of the game (or games, in ME's case). I know you can get married to a same-sex NPC in Skyrim, but I don't necessarily see it as relevant, as PC/NPC interaction isn't what drives that game. It has nothing to do with who [my character] is as the dragonborn, the hero of the Imperial Legion, the leader of the Dark Brotherhood, etc, etc. However, in Mass Effect, Shepard's character is/can be deeply affected by his/her love interest (as well as interactions with other characters), because that's how the game is set up. Same with DA:O -- player-character interactions with NPC's are a huge part of the game's content and drive the story forward. I suppose you could make it through a playthrough without ever talking to them in camp, but you'd be missing out on a huge amount of content/lore/story. That would be my argument for inclusion of s/s romances in games where the player character's romance adds significantly to the story (like many BioWare games).

[Fox In The Box]

Quething wrote...

Based on your posting history, Ry, I have always sort of suspected not.

And Abispa, I'm not falling for that. You swore revenge, man, right there where everyone can see it. I ain't touchin' nothin' you give me without a food taster screening that sucker first.

That's just part of his plan, don't you see? He's using reverse psychology to lull you into complacency.
Sneaky, sneaky.

[ElitePinecone]

^ I think a good analogy, and one that I've heard Bioware devs use more than once, is an action movie or some other formulaic (but linear) story with a single protagonist. There's almost always a 'significant love interest', that (among other things) helps to define the main character and provides some sort of motivation for the story. It's almost a genre cliche (riding off into the sunset with explosions, whatever).

For Bioware's games that are comparatively linear compared to, say, Skyrim, and put a *much* higher priority on character interactions and individual personalities, having LIs that aren't interchangeable NPCs fits that 'action movie' convention. Shepard's/Revan's/Hawke's arc can be significantly affected by the player's choice of LI (among a hundred other gameplay choices) and it complements the personalised nature of the way Bioware does stories. Skyrim and games like Fable do offer 'romances' (and s/s ones, to boot) but they feel hugely superficial and facile, insofar as the LIs could be made of cardboard and we wouldn't notice. There's almost no story intersection there at all.

Though I don't think that necessarily entails an obligation to provide s/s romances for players (and there's the usual caveat about resources, time, difficulty, etc), the fact that games are interactive and that the player character is malleable in so many other ways (origin, beliefs, gender, morality, etc) does make me think it's still fair(er) to provide more options where possible, especially when the romance arcs adds so much to the storytelling.

(Case-in-point: my male Noble Warden in Origins had a doomed fling with the Arlessa's son at Highever. That this was possible at all, and within the first ten minutes of the game, is really interesting in terms of storytelling. Alongside all the other facets of 'noble life in Ferelden' that we get presented with - having a dog, learning from the old scholar, tales from Nan, protecting the local peasants, going to war, being trained in combat - liasons with other nobles, or their servants, is presented as pretty mundane.)

If the Cousland had only Iona as a wooing option, it would've definitely detracted from our ability to define the character, and establish (however minor it is) that part of the Warden's history.

[Hvlukas]

Modifié par Hvlukas, 09 juillet 2012 - 06:13 .

[Ryzaki]

Quething wrote...

Based on your posting history, Ry, I have always sort of suspected not.

And Abispa, I'm not falling for that. You swore revenge, man, right there where everyone can see it. I ain't touchin' nothin' you give me without a food taster screening that sucker first.

LOL I suppose we have widely diverging views on it.

[AmyMac]

Hvlukas wrote...
I completely agree about Skyrim. They should've simply just totally cut out the marriage thing (for everybody). It's just filler really and just add shallow flavour. The guy or girl you marry is just bland pixels with a voice with a few non-specific sentences. And I also agree with your description of why romances work in Mass Effect (won't know if I think it works in Dragon Age until this weekend, where I finally get to try them). It's all about connecting, identifying, empathy and going in under the skin of the characters.

This is where games can do something no other media can - it can blur the lines between the audience, the content and the writers/creators. I wish more games would explore this unique potential more fully. Luke Skywalker is no longer "a" hero, but via Shepard "my" hero, and I feel "my" story is the right one because it "happened to me".

I think, if you have a roleplaying fantasy world like Mass Effect, with meaningful romances, a developer really should just include every orientation out there. There ain't all that many after all. It just makes sense to me. The "how to implement" is still up for debate (as this thread proves).

I'm just glad we can have the discussion with a real life game as an example at all.

I wonder if the debate as to how to implement them would have gone differently if Kaidan/Ash had been bi from the start. The fact that the audio files exist for it suggests that the idea was at least there in some phase of the planning, regardless of how early it was cut. It goes back to the fact that a game in 2007 with meaningful s/s romances would have been received with a greater degree of apprehension than a game in 2012.

The argument for an all-bi system -- at least my argument for an all bi system -- is that the ability of the player's romance arc of choice to fit into his/her player's story has more to do with the personality of the player and NPC's than anything else. Like, a blood mage would never romance Leliana, no matter how much s/he thought she was hot, and a templar would never romance Morrigan, etc.
As far as Mass Effect romances go, I always thought Ashley to be a bit more renegade than Kaidan (especially since she usually argues for killing the rachni, letting the council die, etc), so I see her as more appropriate for/compatible with a renegade Shepard.
Furthermore, an all-bi system would probably save resources -- you could develop deep and meaningful romance arcs for 2-4 characters, have the majority of the lines essentially be the same for male/female player characters, and you wouldn't run into the problem of spreading your resources too thin (and thus having poorly-developed romance stories) ... like in ME3 where you had 11 romances (plus Allers, who doesn't count anyway).

[Hvlukas]

Modifié par Hvlukas, 09 juillet 2012 - 06:13 .

[ElitePinecone]

Looking at the posts over in the DA2 discussion about this, the two major factors involved in 'all-bi' romances (I don't like the term, because finding out they're available for both genders involves metagaming for many characters, i.e. they wouldn't self-identity as bisexual at all) seem to be resources and providing player choice - at least according to the devs.

Resource limitations would definitely point to making significant LIs open to both genders, the amount of resources invested in unique cutscenes/voice acting for "gay" or "lesbian" romance options would not be insignificant, especially if they were to be *companions* rather than - like Steve/Sam - appearing only on the Normandy or hub worlds. At the moment, Bioware simply don't have the zots (nor, I suspect, is there the audience size) to justify gay/lesbian characters as full romance options in lieu of providing more depth with characters that are open to both genders. Particularly if we were to talk about filling a companion slot with a purely gay or lesbian character.

The second argument is for player choice, which I find pretty persuasive. More options available for more people is easier to produce when characters are available to both genders, even if they 'appear' as straight or gay in different playthroughs depending on the player's gender. I don't agree that 'purely gay' or 'purely lesbian' characters are somehow more legitimate or interesting than NPCs open to both genders, and I think it's entirely possible to write a good arc with a character even if in some other meta-universe they're also open to the other gender of protagonist.

1) would an all-bi cast of characters scare off a certain audience, specifically people with anything from mild discomfort with same-sex love to all-out hate of anything non-heterosexual, 2) is it a good media strategy? And 3) does the economical layer of leaders find it worth it to spend resources?

1. I can go find the quotes from David Gaider and John Epler, but they aren't (at least officially) worried about the screaming dudebros. David flat-out said they wouldn't be cutting s/s content just because people disagreed with it. There certainly would be an audience reaction, but the amount that would actually boycott the game due to optional content would, I think, be infinitesimal.

2. It's most certainly a good media strategy. Positive articles about Bioware's recent foray into s/s stuff with ME3 far outnumbered the negative ones, anecdotally - probably because they were written by people older than twelve - and it went on to make a grand total of zero outraged mentions on conservative news networks.

3. The layer of people who deal with resources isn't too far removed from the layer who actually write the content (for example, David Gaider was tweeting about spreadsheets and budgets the other day). We obviously don't know any details about the internal discussions, but clearly both the executive team of ME and DA are fine with this sort of content, have actively encouraged it (eventually, in ME's case) and don't seem to be averse to including it even with smaller budgets (as I think we can safely say applied to DA2 vis a vis Origins).

[Hvlukas]

Modifié par Hvlukas, 09 juillet 2012 - 06:14 .

[Abispa]

Fox In The Box wrote...

Quething wrote...

Based on your posting history, Ry, I have always sort of suspected not.

And Abispa, I'm not falling for that. You swore revenge, man, right there where everyone can see it. I ain't touchin' nothin' you give me without a food taster screening that sucker first.

That's just part of his plan, don't you see? He's using reverse psychology to lull you into complacency.
Sneaky, sneaky.

I just love being accused of possibly being as cunning and I rarely considered that I may never have been.

[Quething]

So, since EC furor is all the rage at the moment, how well do we think s/s relationships will be served by the changes? Obviously Steve and Sam got hardcore screwed by the ending-as-shipped (poor Traynor doesn't even get a final conversation, and if you romanced one of them your last thoughts will naturally be of Liara), so what are the odds BioWare did anything to rectify that while they were busy polishing everything else about their prize turd?

[katerinafm]

Quething wrote...

So, since EC furor is all the rage at the moment, how well do we think s/s relationships will be served by the changes? Obviously Steve and Sam got hardcore screwed by the ending-as-shipped (poor Traynor doesn't even get a final conversation, and if you romanced one of them your last thoughts will naturally be of Liara), so what are the odds BioWare did anything to rectify that while they were busy polishing everything else about their prize turd?

My guess is they will make a very brief appearance, maybe an extra line or two if you romanced them. But if the LIs get nothing then Bioware has really not been listening as well as they claim.

I just really hope I get a scene with Kaidan in it. If I get a good scene with him then I can forgive them if they neglect the other characters even though it's not just Kaidan I've romanced XD.

[devSin]

Jessica's been saying that almost all of the content starts at the horde mode battle at the missiles.

That pretty much rules out any buffs to the Sam romance, or getting Kaidan and male Shepard to say "I love you".

Also, in the memorial shot where the squad and Joker are standing at the memorial wall on the wreckage of the Normandy (presumably so they can add Shepard's name to the wall before they put Steve out to stud and start breeding their way into the future), Steve and Sam don't appear to be in it. They show the traitor Joker, right in front, but not the Alliance's best loyal pilot and the galaxy's brightest expert-turned-assistant.

I'm sure they at least "fixed" the flashback, though. Victory?

Modifié par devSin, 23 juin 2012 - 05:17 .

[katerinafm]

Memorial shot? Where did you see that? o.o

Edit: Never mind, I think I see which one you mean. The white one with no textures, right? I thought it was the scene Shepard gives his speech on Earth XD.

Modifié par katerinafm, 23 juin 2012 - 06:38 .

[devSin]

We've decided Shepard's not in that shot (nor Steve or Sam). It's the squad and Joker.

It's tricky because both Ashley and Kaidan are staged (but they won't both show up in the game, of course).

So they're adding your name to the memorial wall, so they can mourn your passing before your LI has to start making babies with another crew member (even Steve and Sam have to get to work).

They're obviously not going to get rescued, because they wouldn't haul the entire wreck back to Earth (since the relays are destroyed and everything) and they wouldn't hold a memorial service on the jungle planet if they were going to go back to Earth for the official service. Which means they're still on the jungle planet, and they're going to be stuck there forever.

At least, that's pretty much where I'm at right now.

Modifié par devSin, 23 juin 2012 - 07:03 .

[katerinafm]

Lovely. Can't wait XD.

[Quething]

Dev, you're a pessimist.

No, wait, what's the one that means "probably right"? That one. You're that one.

[devSin]

I'm willing to concede that my previous predictions might be a little too extreme.

Probably Steve and Sam are going to die in the crash, so it won't be implied that they have to breed to help establish the colony. I think that will be their graceful solution.

Closure!

In all seriousness, though, I'm not really sure what to expect. I kind of get the feeling that we get a nod, but not much more than that. And with all the same-sex partners on the jungle planet, their future hinges entirely on there being a rescue, which may not be in the cards (I can't get over them holding the memorial on the wreck). I'm sure a memorial will be touching, but I will not be happy unless the crew is recovered and gets to come home where they belong (they can leave Joker behind, though), even in the ending where Shepard dies.

If Shepard lives, I will not accept some chintzy text epilogue where "Years later, the wreckage of the Normandy was located, and the heroes of the battle for Earth were recovered and reunited with Shepard at long last." Especially now that the geth and EDI always die—if you're going to needlessly punish the player and introduce nonsensical consequence into an option (seriously, the Reapers, EDI, and the geth have nothing in common, technologically), then you damn well better give something in return. I want to see Shepard and partner reunited, not read about it or have it implied with cheap cinematic gimmicks.

I'm just not expecting a whole lot at this point, at least as far as the romances are concerned. I think the nonsense on the Citadel at the end is going to be as bad as ever (and the Normandy is still going to run away, which makes my blood boil), but maybe there will be something in the epilogue sequences that leaves things on a more satisfying note (I won't dare hope for it, though).

Modifié par devSin, 24 juin 2012 - 05:01 .

[draken-heart]

i agree with ya devSin, i want Shepard and LI reunited, even if it is for only a brief second before they die...

[SerenityRebirth]

I am wondering if the new EC means at least a little more time with Cortez. IMO, he didn't get as much treatment as Kaiden.