25715 réponses à ce sujet

[CyberDirectorFreedom]

AngelicMachinery wrote...

CyberDirectorFreedom wrote...

I don't see any problems with s/s relationships in a video game. If you don't like it, don't have a s/s relationship with your character. I'm not going to, because I'm a "homophobe," or so I'm told. But I'm not opposed to having it in the game, I'm just not going to use it, but a lot of people obviously will, so let them have it.

You don't seem particularly homophobic,  you just don't want to indulge in homosexual relationships which seems a-okay to me.

[ArawnNox]

CyberDirectorFreedom wrote...

I don't see any problems with s/s relationships in a video game. If you don't like it, don't have a s/s relationship with your character. I'm not going to, because I'm a "homophobe," or so I'm told. But I'm not opposed to having it in the game, I'm just not going to use it, but a lot of people obviously will, so let them have it.

if you were you'd be making slurs, demanding it be removed from the game or saying things like, "NO ****** BRO!."

Nope, you come off as a perfectly reasonable person.

[CyberDirectorFreedom]

ArawnNox wrote...

CyberDirectorFreedom wrote...

I don't see any problems with s/s relationships in a video game. If you don't like it, don't have a s/s relationship with your character. I'm not going to, because I'm a "homophobe," or so I'm told. But I'm not opposed to having it in the game, I'm just not going to use it, but a lot of people obviously will, so let them have it.

if you were you'd be making slurs, demanding it be removed from the game or saying things like, "NO ****** BRO!."

Nope, you come off as a perfectly reasonable person.

First off, I'd never say anything resembling "NO ****** BRO!."  
Secondly, thank you.

[ElitePinecone]

I've just caught up on the last ten pages or so, some interesting discussion.

Jademoon121 wrote...

I really feel the urge a thread to just outright ask Bioware to list us the LI's when they develop them, after reading some very entertaining threads. Eight months of mudslinging ins't worth it.

This. Can we seriously think about making one? I PM'd Chris Priestly about it a month ago and he basically said Bioware weren't going to reveal anything for ages because it would spoil parts of the story, but at the very least we can ask that they hurry it up a little.

devSin wrote...

It was all I could do to play a terrorist all the way to the end. The only thing I wanted to do when the SR2 was turned over was to fly straight to Alliance space, give them the keys, and have all the terrorists on board detained.

Also this. A little off-topic, but if people are getting worked up about things being forced on them, top of that list for me would be the entire plot of the second game involving Shepard being recruited into a terrorist organisation via clumsy and absurd story decisions.

Kudos to everyone for being so civil, the conversation has been really informative. I thought some of the responses to the toggle were very compelling arguments.

[CyberDirectorFreedom]

ElitePinecone wrote...

I've just caught up on the last ten pages or so, some interesting discussion.

Jademoon121 wrote...

I really feel the urge a thread to just outright ask Bioware to list us the LI's when they develop them, after reading some very entertaining threads. Eight months of mudslinging ins't worth it.

This. Can we seriously think about making one? I PM'd Chris Priestly about it a month ago and he basically said Bioware weren't going to reveal anything for ages because it would spoil parts of the story, but at the very least we can ask that they hurry it up a little.

devSin wrote...

It was all I could do to play a terrorist all the way to the end. The only thing I wanted to do when the SR2 was turned over was to fly straight to Alliance space, give them the keys, and have all the terrorists on board detained.

Also this. A little off-topic, but if people are getting worked up about things being forced on them, top of that list for me would be the entire plot of the second game involving Shepard being recruited into a terrorist organisation via clumsy and absurd story decisions.

Kudos to everyone for being so civil, the conversation has been really informative. I thought some of the responses to the toggle were very compelling arguments.

Off topic, I know, but the plot of Mass Effect 2 is fine. If someone handed you the technology and resources you need to stop an advanced alien race from stealing whole colonies of Humans, you're not going to turn it all down and say "I'll find another way to stop them." Nobody believes in them apart from these terrorists, so nobody else is going to help you. If Shepard didn't work with Cerberus, the Collectors would have successfully kidnapped pretty much every Human colony out there. Working with Cerberus was necessary, and made complete sense.

[ElitePinecone]

CyberDirectorFreedom wrote...
Nobody believes in them apart from these terrorists

Not trying to start an argument, or go off-topic, but what about the video footage from Freedom's Progress? It conclusively showed that the colonists were abducted by an enigmatic alien species. At the *very least* the Alliance would've stepped up patrols, and we can be fairly sure that any other Alliance ship bigger than a frigate would've eaten the Collector cruiser for breakfast. The Normandy, even the SR-2, is relatively lightly armed compared to other Alliance ships. 

1. Steal the footage of the Collectors abducting humans from Freedom's Progress. 
2. Fly to Alliance space, hand over keys to the Normandy, or ask the Council to be reinstated and go after them yourself
3. ???
4. Profit. 

All I'm saying is that the motive for working with Cerberus after the initial revival and handing over of the Normandy was very contrived. I felt no obligation at all to stick around with them once I had evidence of the Collectors' involvement, and it felt very forced (to the point that whole plots revolved around characters being angry with Shepard for 'joining' Cerberus). 
________________________________________

To make this post somewhat tangentally related to S/S:

I read an article the other day about how David Silverman (marketing director for ME3) is making a femShep trailer and putting femShep on the box for the third game, and about how he was quite surprised at how strong the fan response was to her being granted a larger marketing role. 

Do people think that a mistaken perception that Shepard is male is one reason why people are so against m/m, or throw around words like 'retcon', or phrases like "OMG NO HE IS A BADASS HERO!!1"? 

In other words, is the ceaseless promotion of Shepard in marketing as a default male soldier badass hero a bad thing for people arguing that there's no canon or 'correct' interpretation of the character?

Edit: Clarifying that Silverman was surprised, not me. 

Modifié par ElitePinecone, 20 juillet 2011 - 07:54 .

[Ashira Shepard]

I wouldn't be surprised if that's indeed the case. I've noticed plenty of people saying that they thought Sheploo was all you could play as, some didn't even realize until they read it in the guide after playing the game already. How you manage that is beyond me but...

Yeah, probably has something to do with it.

[CyberDirectorFreedom]

ElitePinecone wrote...

CyberDirectorFreedom wrote...
Nobody believes in them apart from these terrorists

Not trying to start an argument, or go off-topic, but what about the video footage from Freedom's Progress? It conclusively showed that the colonists were abducted by an enigmatic alien species. At the *very least* the Alliance would've stepped up patrols, and we can be fairly sure that any other Alliance ship bigger than a frigate would've eaten the Collector cruiser for breakfast. The Normandy, even the SR-2, is relatively lightly armed compared to other Alliance ships. 

1. Steal the footage of the Collectors abducting humans from Freedom's Progress. 
2. Fly to Alliance space, hand over keys to the Normandy, or ask the Council to be reinstated and go after them yourself
3. ???
4. Profit. 

All I'm saying is that the motive for working with Cerberus after the initial revival and handing over of the Normandy was very contrived. I felt no obligation at all to stick around with them once I had evidence of the Collectors' involvement, and it felt very forced (to the point that whole plots revolved around characters being angry with Shepard for 'joining' Cerberus). 
________________________________________

To make this post somewhat tangentally related to S/S:

I read an article the other day about how David Silverman (marketing director for ME3) is making a femShep trailer and putting femShep on the box for the third game, and about how he was quite surprised at how strong the fan response was to her being granted a larger marketing role. 

Do people think that a mistaken perception that Shepard is male is one reason why people are so against m/m, or throw around words like 'retcon', or phrases like "OMG NO HE IS A BADASS HERO!!1"? 

In other words, is the ceaseless promotion of Shepard in marketing as a default male soldier badass hero a bad thing for people arguing that there's no canon or 'correct' interpretation of the character?

Edit: Clarifying that Silverman was surprised, not me. 

Alright. I'll accept that it wasn't completely necessary. However, Cerberus was already in the process of helping Shepard. Going back to Citadel Space and trying to convince the Council/Alliance of this threat would take a great deal of time and effort, which could be better spent building a squad. And if you cut ties with Cerberus, you'd never know about Horizon, and who knows how many more innocents would have died, how many other colonies would have 'disappeared' while Shepard's convincing the Council of this threat. I mean, they didn't even think to try to find out what happened to the colonies before. Whole colonies disappearing and they don't even TRY to figure out what happened to them. It could take a long time to convince the Council that this threat is real. Cerberus already believes it, and has handed you a warship. If this actually happened, I think most people would go with Cerberus.

[jlb524]

CyberDirectorFreedom wrote...

I don't see any problems with s/s relationships in a video game. If you don't like it, don't have a s/s relationship with your character. I'm not going to, because I'm a "homophobe," or so I'm told. But I'm not opposed to having it in the game, I'm just not going to use it, but a lot of people obviously will, so let them have it.

As others have said...you are not a homophobe for not wanting to play though s/s romances and choosing not to.  Some prefer heterosexual romances and that's fine.  There's not a damn thing homophobic about that.

[Tonymac]

gamer_girl wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...

gamer_girl wrote...

whywhywhywhy wrote...

gamer_girl wrote...

Answer me this. whywhywhywhy, why are you so intolerant that you won't even be bothered to see a dialogue OPTION - aka something Shepard COULD say to a character that would be romantic? By that logic you should be offended by the toggle because it mentions the word gay and brings up the option of having gay characters.

whywhywhywhy wrote...

But I still have to question why it's "offensive" everyone act as if
every human being has been exposed to homosexuals.  I assure you this is
not the case.

So in your mind intolerance>tolerance?

sigh.  Exposure is important.  Understanding from both sides is important.  Expecting someone to accept your lifestyle because it is different is wrong.  I never expect/demand people to accept me because of what I am but welcome them to get them to know me and accept/reject me because of who I am.  You or anyone else who expects a mandatory acceptance are being intolerant.  People disagree.  Some completely reject. Others behave as zealots.  You have to greet them all in the same loving manner and take joy in being you.

So you're saying we should be tolerant of intolerant people? Why should
you be given the privilege of our tolerance when you obviously can't
give that same respect to certain groups of people? What makes you more
worthy of tolerance than them?

Edit:
There
is a huge difference between acceptance and tolerance. You may not be
able to accept homosexuality, but it's common social decency to tolerate
it.

If you aren't tolerant of all up to the point of physical and verbal assualt then why should other tolerate you when you don't tolerate them but simply demand that they tolerate you ?  And falling to "fall in line" illicits aggression(as I have seen).  Your asking for what you refuse to give.

Someone decode that message for me. I'm having a difficult time figuring out what is actually meant by that.

I need more coffee to translate this this....

[Squidbreath]

CyberDirectorFreedom wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...

CyberDirectorFreedom wrote...
Nobody believes in them apart from these terrorists

Not trying to start an argument, or go off-topic, but what about the video footage from Freedom's Progress? It conclusively showed that the colonists were abducted by an enigmatic alien species. At the *very least* the Alliance would've stepped up patrols, and we can be fairly sure that any other Alliance ship bigger than a frigate would've eaten the Collector cruiser for breakfast. The Normandy, even the SR-2, is relatively lightly armed compared to other Alliance ships. 

1. Steal the footage of the Collectors abducting humans from Freedom's Progress. 
2. Fly to Alliance space, hand over keys to the Normandy, or ask the Council to be reinstated and go after them yourself
3. ???
4. Profit. 

All I'm saying is that the motive for working with Cerberus after the initial revival and handing over of the Normandy was very contrived. I felt no obligation at all to stick around with them once I had evidence of the Collectors' involvement, and it felt very forced (to the point that whole plots revolved around characters being angry with Shepard for 'joining' Cerberus). 
________________________________________

To make this post somewhat tangentally related to S/S:

I read an article the other day about how David Silverman (marketing director for ME3) is making a femShep trailer and putting femShep on the box for the third game, and about how he was quite surprised at how strong the fan response was to her being granted a larger marketing role. 

Do people think that a mistaken perception that Shepard is male is one reason why people are so against m/m, or throw around words like 'retcon', or phrases like "OMG NO HE IS A BADASS HERO!!1"? 

In other words, is the ceaseless promotion of Shepard in marketing as a default male soldier badass hero a bad thing for people arguing that there's no canon or 'correct' interpretation of the character?

Edit: Clarifying that Silverman was surprised, not me. 

Alright. I'll accept that it wasn't completely necessary. However, Cerberus was already in the process of helping Shepard. Going back to Citadel Space and trying to convince the Council/Alliance of this threat would take a great deal of time and effort, which could be better spent building a squad. And if you cut ties with Cerberus, you'd never know about Horizon, and who knows how many more innocents would have died, how many other colonies would have 'disappeared' while Shepard's convincing the Council of this threat. I mean, they didn't even think to try to find out what happened to the colonies before. Whole colonies disappearing and they don't even TRY to figure out what happened to them. It could take a long time to convince the Council that this threat is real. Cerberus already believes it, and has handed you a warship. If this actually happened, I think most people would go with Cerberus.

Besides the "Cerberus gives you resources and intel thing", Edi was somewhat shackled. Wouldn't want the ship's AI to potentially go haywire on you. Or maybe you wanna get a better chance to hack it for info.

Also we never get to know how loyal (or forced to be loyal because Cerberus is controlling my family) the rest of the crew members are to Cerberus i.e. everyone not Chambers, Gardner, Hacksaw, Joker, Kenny / Gabby or a squad mate etc.Wouldn't you rather spend time strip mining planets than rehiring and re-training peeps to run the ship?

[Swimming Ferret]

STEELWOLF86 wrote...

Swimming Ferret wrote...

bleetman wrote...

STEELWOLF86 wrote...

im not against gays but bioware better make an option to turn any homosexual dialog

I don't think "not" means what you think it means.

"Sometimes trolls can be a real ass. Just try to ignore them."

yeah well if having an opinion makes me an ass then then your an ass hole as well
and its a fair compromise u get what you want a gay character and i get what i want no gays in my game i  think an option to get rid of ****** dialog would be a good idea on bioware part i really dont feal like hearing about vega's feelings i just want him to kill **** thats it

ROFL, seriously? 'Get rid of ****** dialogue'? That's one of the more foolish and arrogant things I've seen around here. If you're so bee-crazy over this 'gays in game' thing they maybe you should stop buying games that include some, oh I dunno, sexual diversity?

Also, your inability to type correctly is making me completely dismiss your argument/trolling.


Back on topic; Personally, I have absolutely no quarrel if a character is gay, straight or bisexual. One of the funniest things I found in DA2 was romancing the same character with different reactions towards it (Like Varric's talk with Fenris getting swept off his feet had me giggling.)
I I admit though, I really wouldn't like Ashley or Kaiden being bisexual, simply because they were in the first game and I doubt they would simply change their sexuality in a snap. That, and my Shep doesn't like Kaiden that much. (He wouldn't mind Vega though hurr)

Modifié par Swimming Ferret, 20 juillet 2011 - 11:46 .

[easyt3hremember]

Ugh this is getting out of hand, if you don't want s/s then don't do s/s, also if the dev's think that s/s dosen't suit a character what you wanted to do s/s well thats too bad, and if you don't like that then don't buy the game, also stop comparing DA to ME there too different games.

Modifié par easyt3hremember, 20 juillet 2011 - 03:35 .

[Jimmy Fury]

ElitePinecone wrote...
To make this post somewhat tangentally related to S/S:

I read an article the other day about how David Silverman (marketing director for ME3) is making a femShep trailer and putting femShep on the box for the third game, and about how he was quite surprised at how strong the fan response was to her being granted a larger marketing role. 

Do people think that a mistaken perception that Shepard is male is one reason why people are so against m/m, or throw around words like 'retcon', or phrases like "OMG NO HE IS A BADASS HERO!!1"? 

In other words, is the ceaseless promotion of Shepard in marketing as a default male soldier badass hero a bad thing for people arguing that there's no canon or 'correct' interpretation of the character?

Edit: Clarifying that Silverman was surprised, not me.

Probably an unpopular opinion but I would say no. Other games have pushed a male protag in their marketing and had s/s content with very little moaning. Fable is one big example.
Anyway it's a causiation-correlation thing. I don't think Shep=Male causes Shep=Straight. I think, instead, they share a cause which is Shep=Space Marine.
Shepard is a badass space marine whether male or female. But the video game industry, and sci-fi in general to be honest, constantly push the BASM=Male idea.
Even movies/games/shows with a female BASM usually push her to the side or Vasquez her. Avatar did it to Michelle Rodriguez. BSG did it to Katie Sackoff (not until the very end but still). etc. Female BASM's have a habit of being butch and not surviving so their appeal is less than that of the BASM dude who gets the girl and saves the day.
Now combine that with the general lack of non-heterosexual males in sci-fi and you get BASM=Straight Male.  Even in the rare instance where you find a gay in space, they're almost never soldiers.

So i really don't see it as a Bioware marketing issue at all. It's a sci-fi issue in general and one that Bioware is  subverting just by including the ability to play a female BASM in previous games and a non-straight one in ME3.

[ElitePinecone]

Jimmy Fury wrote...
So i really don't see it as a Bioware marketing issue at all. It's a sci-fi issue in general and one that Bioware is  subverting just by including the ability to play a female BASM in previous games and a non-straight one in ME3.

That's an interesting perspective. 

You're right in that the 'BASM' trope isn't associated so much (well, at all) with non-heterosexuality; several of the less articulate arguments I've heard against s/s in ME3 have boiled down to "Well, Shepard is the best soldier humanity has, he's [they never use she...] a badass hero, and badass hero soldiers can't be gay." 

I doubt there's causation between maleShep dominating advertising and the 'Shep can't be gay!!1' argument, given the wider sci-fi context (and heck, even military context) you've outlined, but at the same time a not-insignificant minority of posts about this topic have assumed, wrongly, that Shepard is indeed the badass male character from the ads and boxart, and that no other interpretation of the character is valid. 

It couldn't hurt for Bioware to state through their advertising that the gender choice even exists, and that Shepard is not, indeed, always male. 

Related point: I love that femShep is a BASM without needing to be either the Vasquez uber-butch stereotype or a femme fatale seductress (well, 99% of the time...). It's a real credit to Bioware's writing team and the VO director that she sounds like a competent and efficient soldier/diplomat/commander who just happens to be female. 

[FoxHound109]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...
To make this post somewhat tangentally related to S/S:

I read an article the other day about how David Silverman (marketing director for ME3) is making a femShep trailer and putting femShep on the box for the third game, and about how he was quite surprised at how strong the fan response was to her being granted a larger marketing role. 

Do people think that a mistaken perception that Shepard is male is one reason why people are so against m/m, or throw around words like 'retcon', or phrases like "OMG NO HE IS A BADASS HERO!!1"? 

In other words, is the ceaseless promotion of Shepard in marketing as a default male soldier badass hero a bad thing for people arguing that there's no canon or 'correct' interpretation of the character?

Edit: Clarifying that Silverman was surprised, not me.

Probably an unpopular opinion but I would say no. Other games have pushed a male protag in their marketing and had s/s content with very little moaning. Fable is one big example.
Anyway it's a causiation-correlation thing. I don't think Shep=Male causes Shep=Straight. I think, instead, they share a cause which is Shep=Space Marine.
Shepard is a badass space marine whether male or female. But the video game industry, and sci-fi in general to be honest, constantly push the BASM=Male idea.
Even movies/games/shows with a female BASM usually push her to the side or Vasquez her. Avatar did it to Michelle Rodriguez. BSG did it to Katie Sackoff (not until the very end but still). etc. Female BASM's have a habit of being butch and not surviving so their appeal is less than that of the BASM dude who gets the girl and saves the day.
Now combine that with the general lack of non-heterosexual males in sci-fi and you get BASM=Straight Male.  Even in the rare instance where you find a gay in space, they're almost never soldiers.

So i really don't see it as a Bioware marketing issue at all. It's a sci-fi issue in general and one that Bioware is  subverting just by including the ability to play a female BASM in previous games and a non-straight one in ME3.

Bingo! This exact issue is why the Mass Effect team struggled with s/s romances and the Dragon Age team didn't. Science-Fiction and Fantasy tend to appeal to vastly different crowds, and in sci-fi it's very common to see the space marine/space soldier as the epitome of masculinity. This, of course, goes contrary to the stereotypical western view that homosexuality is not masculine (which I find laughable for more reasons than I care to name right now) and I probably think the ME team was afraid the first and even second game wouldn't be well received.

The third one is different: it's the final one in the trilogy, they kind of couldn't give a hoot at this point since their fanbase is largely established.

This is why I was absolutely annoyed with Bioware saying that the reason there were no s/s romances for mShep was because "technically, femShep wasn't a lesbian since Liara doesn't count." Did they REALLY think we wouldn't see through that faster than Kirstie Alley can go through a cheesecake?

Modifié par FoxHound109, 20 juillet 2011 - 03:32 .

[shepskisaac]

ElitePinecone wrote...

Jademoon121 wrote...

I really feel the urge a thread to just outright ask Bioware to list us the LI's when they develop them, after reading some very entertaining threads. Eight months of mudslinging ins't worth it.

This. Can we seriously think about making one? I PM'd Chris Priestly about it a month ago and he basically said Bioware weren't going to reveal anything for ages because it would spoil parts of the story, but at the very least we can ask that they hurry it up a little.

How exactly would just saying a name of a character available for s/s romance spoil parts of the story? It's not like we want them to release a guide how to romance them, when, and in which order. And frankly, all these constant anti s/s threads are spoiling the fun of this game for me much more than any 'character name reveal' would.

[FoxHound109]

IsaacShep wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...

Jademoon121 wrote...

I really feel the urge a thread to just outright ask Bioware to list us the LI's when they develop them, after reading some very entertaining threads. Eight months of mudslinging ins't worth it.

This. Can we seriously think about making one? I PM'd Chris Priestly about it a month ago and he basically said Bioware weren't going to reveal anything for ages because it would spoil parts of the story, but at the very least we can ask that they hurry it up a little.

How exactly would just saying a name of a character available for s/s romance spoil parts of the story? It's not like we want them to release a guide how to romance them, when, and in which order. And frankly, all these constant anti s/s threads are spoiling the fun of this game for me much more than any 'character name reveal' would.

I know, right? It's not like when they announced Anders and Fenris as romanceable for DA II anyone thought: "OH NOES! THE STORY IS SPOILED! I CAN'T PLAY THIS GAME ANYMORE!"

o_O

O_o

And yes, I too think we should make a thread. Not that we'll ever get a response of any sort, LOL. But nothing lost in trying.

[shepskisaac]

Before anyone makes a thread, let's think about it and try to create a convincing OP here. What should it include etc so the argument is good.

[ElitePinecone]

IsaacShep wrote...
How exactly would just saying a name of a character available for s/s romance spoil parts of the story? It's not like we want them to release a guide how to romance them, when, and in which order. And frankly, all these constant anti s/s threads are spoiling the fun of this game for me much more than any 'character name reveal' would.

The way it was described, I think they have more character reveals up their collective sleeve... and they don't want to announce the romances because it would spoil the procession of revealing the new ME3 squadmembers. 

You know how it is... we'll get a 'cool' gameplay movie, with 'visceral' third person action, set to a rock music soundtrack and guitar riffs. 

Although, Hudson is meant to be announcing something at ComicCon, so unless it's something gimmicky (I'm calling it now; space combat!) it could be a new character. 

So in summary: I think a thread is a good idea, once it's planned enough, but I'm definitely not optimistic about any response. The marketing and PR teams have a carefully orchestrated schedule of reveals and trailers that they want to stick to, and we don't factor into that. 

[shepskisaac]

Good points. We can try with the thread after the new female gets revealed though, since I think she will be the last s/s option we haven't seen yet.

[Wereparrot]

ElitePinecone wrote...

I've just caught up on the last ten pages or so, some interesting discussion.

Jademoon121 wrote...

I really feel the urge a thread to just outright ask Bioware to list us the LI's when they develop them, after reading some very entertaining threads. Eight months of mudslinging ins't worth it.

This. Can we seriously think about making one? I PM'd Chris Priestly about it a month ago and he basically said Bioware weren't going to reveal anything for ages because it would spoil parts of the story, but at the very least we can ask that they hurry it up a little.

 
I don't think that it would be a good idea to reveal the LIs just yet, because The Argument would continue, except it would consist of people thanking Bioware that certain characters are unchanged and people wailing about how their male Shepherd can't romance Kaidan or Garrus and rapidly degenerate. Certainly I've no wish to imminently discover that Garrus swings both ways. 

Bioware would be accused of treason by these people, put on trial at The Hague and certain key writers will be hung, drawn and quartered at dawn, and their heads will be impaled on spikes at the Tower of London. If the arrogance of certain individuals and strange interpretation of events is anything to go by. 

[shepskisaac]

Should we try to storm David Silverman's twitter and ask for GayShep and LesShep trailers? Yeah I know... Not gonna happen

[Jimmy Fury]

Wereparrot wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...

I've just caught up on the last ten pages or so, some interesting discussion.

Jademoon121 wrote...

I really feel the urge a thread to just outright ask Bioware to list us the LI's when they develop them, after reading some very entertaining threads. Eight months of mudslinging ins't worth it.

This. Can we seriously think about making one? I PM'd Chris Priestly about it a month ago and he basically said Bioware weren't going to reveal anything for ages because it would spoil parts of the story, but at the very least we can ask that they hurry it up a little.

 
I don't think that it would be a good idea to reveal the LIs just yet, because The Argument would continue, except it would consist of people thanking Bioware that certain characters are unchanged and people wailing about how their male Shepherd can't romance Kaidan or Garrus and rapidly degenerate. Certainly I've no wish to imminently discover that Garrus swings both ways. 

Bioware would be accused of treason by these people, put on trial at The Hague and certain key writers will be hung, drawn and quartered at dawn, and their heads will be impaled on spikes at the Tower of London. If the arrogance of certain individuals and strange interpretation of events is anything to go by.

I must confess that I don't want it to be revealed until very close to release, if even then. I have vivid flashbacks of the Anders reveal and the endless screams of retcon. Even from people who had previously been s/s advocates. It was an ugly affair and one I'd rather not see again.
Plus Bioware has long functioned under the assumption that any romance related information is a spoiler. Probably because they like to focus on the combat and other core elements while romances are optional.

[gamer_girl]

IsaacShep wrote...

Before anyone makes a thread, let's think about it and try to create a convincing OP here. What should it include etc so the argument is good.

I don't know that creating a topic will do much. Mine was non controversial and they still found a reason to lock it.