1981 réponses à ce sujet

[Plaintiff]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Then I guess you don't understand the definition of the word.

That's what the majority of these "anti-gay character"/"anti-romance"/"anti all-bi" arguments are rooted in, whether their proponents realize it or not.

No it isn't. While some people do use these threads as an excuse to be homophobic asses. There are plenty of legit criticisms (that i also share) about the subject of the thread. So be an adult and stop using strawmans.

That a homosexual might support some of these criticisms does not mean the arguments are not homophobic. Being a homosexual does not automatically make one aware of the subtextual cultural assumptions that underpin these arguments.

If I claim to have no problem with black people, only to then complain about a fantasy video-game with an all-black cast because it's "not realisitic" or "it's boring" or "it's tokenism" or "it's pathetic appeasement", while giving games with an all-white or majority-white cast a free pass, then the only logical conclusion to draw is that I in fact do have a problem with black people that I'm not self-aware enough to recognize.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 28 juin 2013 - 11:15 .

[Xilizhra]

fchopin wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

No, that was warranted.

May i ask why it was warranted?

Because none of your complaints have anything to do with them being bisexual, but you're using it as a platform to attack that anyway.

[Dirgegun]

Cheylus wrote...

Just my experience with DA2, take it as you please:
I didn't romance anyone in my first playthrough, because I was still waiting for characters to be interesting, multidimensionnal and actually lovable. To me, characters in this game were made to be romances by being stereotypes (Anders excepted, maybe)...
I was more attracted by Morrigan and Alistair to be honest, because I liked the characters before I "loved" them.

I don't feel any of the characters were made to be romances, but I do think that the characters were caught up in their 'issues' more than with DA:O, which made sense to a certain degree but also made them difficult to get to know beyond that. I think the time constraints the writers were under is more to blame for that than the actual romance content, though...

[Plaintiff]

Cheylus wrote...

Just my experience with DA2, take it as you please:
I didn't romance anyone in my first playthrough, because I was still waiting for characters to be interesting, multidimensionnal and actually lovable. To me, characters in this game were made to be romances by being stereotypes (Anders excepted, maybe)...
I was more attracted by Morrigan and Alistair to be honest, because I liked the characters before I "loved" them.

It's interesting that the only two romance options you deem to be definitely likeable, and more than mere stereotypes, are also the two romance options that can only be romanced by a character of the opposite gender.

Excepting Sebastian, I suppose, but nobody ever remembers him.

[fchopin]

Xilizhra wrote...

fchopin wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

No, that was warranted.

May i ask why it was warranted?

Because none of your complaints have anything to do with them being bisexual, but you're using it as a platform to attack that anyway.

I have no problem with characters being bisexual, both Leliana and zevran were bisexual in DAO and i have no problem with them so don’t understand what complain you have.

[Cheylus]

Plaintiff wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

I don't really understand why you accuse everyone that disagrees with you a homophobe.

Then I guess you don't understand the definition of the word.

That's what the majority of these "anti-gay character"/"anti-romance"/"anti all-bi" arguments are rooted in, whether their proponents realize it or not.

Well, you told me I was looking forward "to see sexual minorities being beaten in the streets" with another one of your rhetorical shortcut you love to take. 
Without knowing who I am, who are my family and my friends, where I came from, what are my ideas and values. 

You keep making assumptions about people. Yes, I don't like most romances in Dragon Age. Going there to making assumptions about who I am and what I think is beyond your intelligence. 

[Plaintiff]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Terrible analogy

Then refute it.

[Cheylus]

Plaintiff wrote...

Cheylus wrote...
...

It's interesting that the only two romance options you deem to be definitely likeable, and more than mere stereotypes, are also the two romance options that can only be romanced by a character of the opposite gender.

Excepting Sebastian, I suppose, but nobody ever remembers him.

What does it mean, doctor?

And no, characters in Dragon Age: Origins are less stereotypical than DA2 to me. I wrote that 2 hours ago on the french BSN. Zevran, Leliana, Sten are not stereotypical at all to me, but there were not as interesting and as well written than Morrigan and Alistair in my opinion
That's opinion, not mental illness.

Modifié par Cheylus, 28 juin 2013 - 11:24 .

[Xilizhra]

I have no problem with characters being bisexual, both Leliana and zevran were bisexual in DAO and i have no problem with them so don’t understand what complain you have.

So you've no problems with everyone in DA2 being one?

What does it mean, doctor?

To be fair, it might be because Bioware put less work into the bisexual options.

[Sutekh]

fchopin wrote...

If Bioware continues making all companions available to the PC Irrespective what gender is picked then i will not do any of the romances and just play for the story.
You play the game how you like and i will play how i like but don’t try to say that all companions should be open for all is the best way because that is how you like it.

I've yet to understand how a companion's sexual orientation and whether or not their relationship with the PC is s/s or o/s is related in any way to their storyline being great, the relationship being meaningful to the plot and the quality of their characterization.

Alistair, for instance. How would his storyline and characterization have changed if he'd been gay, bi or even wardensexual? What about Fenris? Morrigan? Anders?

They'd all have had the exact same plot line and characterization. And apart from a couple of lines for some, which are there to specifically address their sexual orientation and are unrelated to all the rest, the exact same dialogs.

The only two exceptions I can think of are Isabela, whose sexual behavior is an important part of her characterization (and by extension, her bisexuality), and the very straight and slightly homophobic Oghren, who's not an LI anyway.

---

daaaav wrote...

If Ohgren and Branko had been business partners rather than lovers, then yes. The story would have less impact for me. 

I'm sorry but I don't understand the reasoning. Why do Oghren and Branko need to be business partner in this example? Why can't they be a couple? 

Hypothetically, of course, because as I said above, Oghren is very straight and that is part of his characterization (and so you're right in saying that it does count. Sometimes, for some characters), but not in relation to what happened with Branka. If he'd been bi or gay and Branka had been Branko, his background story would have unfolded the exact same way.

Seriously, and generally, when it comes to characterization and plot meaningfulness, other traits such as beliefs, morality and principles seem to me much more important than sexual orientation.

[nightscrawl]

The thing I really don't understand is why this meta-game knowledge has had such a strong effect on people.

Let's go back to the very first time you played DA2. If you played as a (straight) guy, well you might have been surprised when Anders flirted with you. Perhaps you went on to romance Isabela or Merrill. We'll toss Isabela out since most people coming from DAO had prior knowledge that she was bi, leaving us with Merrill. In this scenario, you might think that Merrill is straight as there is no other indication that she isn't; she doesn't show interest in other female characters, and since you are romancing her, she doesn't even show interest in other male characters. You finish the game.

At this point, you will have certain thoughts, opinions, feelings about DA2. For some reason, for some people, these thoughts were changed around once they played a second time as a different gender, or read the forums, or read the DAwiki and discovered that the companions could be romanced by either gender.

The NPCs have no idea that last week you talked to them as a person of another gender. They only know the gender you currently are. I really don't understand how their slightly modified behavior between genders -- and let's face it, with some of them it's very minimal -- reduces their character, especially when you wouldn't even know about it had you not had this meta-game knowledge. If you were one of the majority of players who only finished the game once you would have no idea about this aspect of the game at all. So why does it matter?

[fchopin]

Xilizhra wrote...

I have no problem with characters being bisexual, both Leliana and zevran were bisexual in DAO and i have no problem with them so don’t understand what complain you have.

So you've no problems with everyone in DA2 being one?

They are not bisexual in DA2 apart for Isabella; they change depending on what gender you select for your character.

[LadyMalstroem]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Then I guess you don't understand the definition of the word.

That's what the majority of these "anti-gay character"/"anti-romance"/"anti all-bi" arguments are rooted in, whether their proponents realize it or not.

No it isn't. While some people do use these threads as an excuse to be homophobic asses. There are plenty of legit criticisms (that i also share) about the subject of the thread. So be an adult and stop using loaded terms.

Ehh, I'm questioning the "legitimacy" of the arguments I've seen here so far.

As an actual bi person, this whole conversation is beginning to sound completely ridiculous to me. Being bi may have informed my opinion on certain issues, but then again, I don't live in a fantasy world where there is practically no homophobia or discrimination based on sexuality. In real life, I have to react to things like that, and then my sexuality becomes relevant to who I am and what I think. DA characters don't have to deal with those things, so them being bi isn't actually such a huge part of their character aside from who they fall in love with. 

I'd say that there are other aspects of sexuality that are more important and more relevant to characterization than just which gender you like, at least in this case. Things like promiscuity, trust, experience. Just taking away content from LGBT gamers isn't going to add anything of value, at least not anything that is worth it.

[Welsh Inferno]

Plaintiff wrote...

Then I guess you don't understand the definition of the word.

That's what the majority of these "anti-gay character"/"anti-romance"/"anti all-bi" arguments are rooted in, whether their proponents realize it or not.

You really need to get of that highhorse & stop treating anyone who just happens to disagree with you with scorn. 

[Plaintiff]

Cheylus wrote...
Well, you told me I was looking forward "to see sexual minorities being beaten in the streets" with another one of your rhetorical shortcut you love to take.

I don't remember that at all, but it sounds like me.

I'm sure I had a good reason.

Without knowing who I am, who are my family and my friends, where I came from, what are my ideas and values.

You keep making assumptions about people. Yes, I don't like most romances in Dragon Age. Going there to making assumptions about who I am and what I think is beyond your intelligence.

I don't take anything from your posts that you don't put in there, whether you're aware of it or not.

There is no background information you can give me about yourself that would change the content of your posts.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 28 juin 2013 - 11:31 .

[Cheylus]

Plaintiff wrote...

Without knowing who I am, who are my family and my friends, where I came from, what are my ideas and values.

You keep making assumptions about people. Yes, I don't like most romances in Dragon Age. Going there to making assumptions about who I am and what I think is beyond your intelligence.

I don't take anything from your posts that you don't put in there, whether you're aware of it or not.

There is no background information you can give me about yourself that would change the content of your posts.

Then please tell me why finding Alistair and Morrigan more interesting in their respective romance - but not Leliana or Zevran - is "interesting"?
What does it mean?

You're not clever enough to make assumptions about people by overreading their comments about video games, and nobody is. 

Modifié par Cheylus, 28 juin 2013 - 11:39 .

[Dirgegun]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Very well

If I claim to have no problem with black people, only to then complain about a fantasy video-game with an all-black cast because it's "not realisitic" or "it's boring" or "it's tokenism" or "it's pathetic appeasement", while giving games with an all-white or majority-white cast a free pass, then the only logical conclusion to draw is that I in fact do have a problem with black people that I'm not self-aware enough to recognize.

For one, you are using a touchy subject like race to once again make yourself look better and discourage people to argue with you. Second. A lot of people are not making that point and have even said they have no trouble with homosexual or bisexual romances. They just do not like the concept of "pc-sexual" which is something I also share because it is a cheap cop out to avoid writing an actual well-written gay character (Steve, Arcade Gannon, Veronica, some Persona characters) or bi character and just re-using resources and calling it a day.

Your analogy is just another strawman to discourage people from arguing with you so you can lord over them with your sexual orientation and call them a bigot a lot.

They might not be PC-sexual, though, but simply something else? There's more sexualities than just bi, straight, and homosexual. None of these other sexualities are less valid or make a lesser story. If you want characters to talk about their sexualities, I suppose I can understand your distaste with the idea that they are all available to the player. I think it would make for a rather boring story, however, if the romance subplots were all based around their sexualities rather than different issues. Alistair, for example, was about finding love on the battlefield as it were, with a mention that he's inexperienced. Morrigan was about finding someone she actually connected with. Zevran's romance arc was very much about falling in love after he's lived his life as a guy that just took pleasure where he could. Admittedly I'm not sure about Leliana as I still haven't finished her romance arc. Either way, none of them were really about the gender they found attractive. Did it get mentioned? It did, but it wasn't a subject they lingered on for over long.

Steve's romance arc, however, is, somewhat, more about his sexuality. As it is about him finding love again after the loss of his husband, though he also learns to move on and cherish what he has in a friendship path. (I, personally, prefer his friendship path. I just feel uncomfortable romancing him so soon after he lost his husband. It feels, to me, that he needs a friend before he needs a lover. )

Modifié par Dirgegun, 28 juin 2013 - 11:43 .

[nightscrawl]

fchopin wrote...

They are not bisexual in DA2 apart for Isabella; they change depending on what gender you select for your character.

This isn't entirely accurate either. The devs seem to refute the "player-sexual" term. The other three aren't really "bi" as Isabela is because they don't openly express interest in either gender. However, what I've seen mentioned, particularly in threads about Anders where Karl is brought up, is that just because he never tells your fem Hawke about it doesn't mean it didn't happen. The same can be assumed for the others as well.

Just because Aveline was married to a man, and marries another man later on, does not mean that she is straight and has no interest at all in women. All it means is that (1) she has had romantic involvement with two specific men, and (2) rejects the advances of a specific woman who flirts with her [Hawke].

To put it another way, all of these labels we toss around are based on our assumptions viewed through the lens of the real world. However, none of these things apply in Thedas.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 28 juin 2013 - 11:45 .

[Ravensword]

Before this thread gets locked, I'd liike to post this.

[Plaintiff]

Morocco Mole wrote...
For one, you are using a touchy subject like race to once again make yourself look better and discourage people to argue with you.

As opposed to the subject of sexual politics, which isn't touchy at all. Right.

It couldn't possibly be that different forms of bigotry make naturally good analogies for each other. If anything, race is a less touchy subject than sexual orientation in modern Western society.

Second. A lot of people are not making that point and have even said they have no trouble with homosexual or bisexual romances.

I've already addressed that these claims are incongruous with the arguments they put forth in opposition of sexual freedom in roleplaying games.

They just do not like the concept of "pc-sexual" which is something I also share because it is a cheap cop out to avoid writing an actual well-written gay character (Steve, Arcade Gannon, Veronica, some Persona characters) or bi character and just re-using resources and calling it a day.

How is a "well written gay character" different from a well-written character generally? Why is a set sexuality a prerequisite of being "well-written"?

Why shouldn't they re-use resources? Why should the gender of the PC make any difference at all? Why would a character significantly change their approach to relationships based on their partner's gender?

Your analogy is just another strawman to discourage people from arguing with you so you can lord over them with your sexual orientation and call them a bigot a lot.

Why would I discourage people from being idiots? It's an endless source of amusement for me.

[Plaintiff]

Welsh Inferno wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Then I guess you don't understand the definition of the word.

That's what the majority of these "anti-gay character"/"anti-romance"/"anti all-bi" arguments are rooted in, whether their proponents realize it or not.

You really need to get of that highhorse & stop treating anyone who just happens to disagree with you with scorn. 

If I didn't think the people who disagree with me are idiots, I wouldn't disagree with them.

[jillabender]

Ravensword wrote...

Before this thread gets locked, I'd liike to post this.

I approve of the linked blog post.

[Dirgegun]

jillabender wrote...

Ravensword wrote...

Before this thread gets locked, I'd liike to post this.

I approve of the linked blog post.

Oh, yes! This!