947 réponses à ce sujet

[Blackrising]

EJ107 wrote...

Blackrising wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

Blackrising wrote...

I will never get how a certain sexuality can not 'fit' a character.
Like, there are arguments against every LI being available for both genders that I can understand to some extent, even though I may not agree.
But this? This I absolutely don't understand. There are no special personality traits that make someone 'fit' into a certain sexuality bracket or not.

Are you responding to their comment about Ashley? If so I agree completely. Kaidan in no way seemed "more bisexual" than she did. 

Yep yep, sure was.
That statement really irks me. Like they were saying that because Kaidan is a rather sensitive, gentle man, he's more bisexual than Ashley? Like...what?

I have to say, for a company that are generally very good with this kind of thing some of these statements are very... questonable. Apparently if you don't have a certain personality you don't "fit the bill" for being a bisexual. As if personaility has anything to with orientation. 

Hell, if we wanna go with the stereotypes, Ashley would have made a wonderful lesbian.

[OLDIRTYBARON]

EJ107 wrote...

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

Blackrising wrote...

I will never get how a certain sexuality can not 'fit' a character.
Like, there are arguments against every LI being available for both genders that I can understand to some extent, even though I may not agree.
But this? This I absolutely don't understand. There are no special personality traits that make someone 'fit' into a certain sexuality bracket or not.

Are you responding to their comment about Ashley? If so I agree completely. Kaidan in no way semmed "more bisexual" than she did. 

I thought Kaidan only caught The Gay because people ****ed for two games about not having a Gaidan (oh ho ho ho) romance?

"Kaidan and Ashley 
The writers considered how Kaidan and Ashley were approached as love interests. With Kaidan’s character, he seemed more appropriate as a bisexual. It fit with his personality and his demeanor. However, Ashley did not fit the bill of being bisexual. It didn’t fit her character, so the writers opted out."

If he was bisexual from the beginning, why wasn't he a gay Shepard option? That doesn't make sense to me. 

As far as Ashley is concerned, I can see what they meant. She's a space soldier Christian with a heavy faith in the Man Jesus and she resents the fact that she's so butch. She even complains about some men not seeing her as a woman because she's a marine. With the kind of story they wanted to tell with Ashley, I can see why they opted not to make her available for lesbomancy.

Kaidan is just weird though. I can't understand why he wasn't available to dudes from the start.

To make a serious point: when people create characters, they don't pick a list of traits and say "this is that person." The person just kind of... pops into existence. The more the writer writes the character, the clearer the understanding of that person becomes. Some characters are gay, some are straight. Some are bisexual, and some are eunichs. There's no rational explanation for it, because writing in and of itself is irrational. Writers will go with what feels right in the gut. Those that don't are hacks and don't make a living writing fiction.

[Ianamus]

Chari wrote...

Maybe... Ashley just doesn't find other girls arousing?.. And Kaidan likes other boys?.. Just, you know, taste. Some like chocolate, some like caramel, some like Mozart, some like Bach...

Saying that she is straight because it is just her orientation or because of her religious beliefs or whatever is fine. Saying she did not "fit the bill" because of her personality is not. 

[Chari]

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

Blackrising wrote...

I will never get how a certain sexuality can not 'fit' a character.
Like, there are arguments against every LI being available for both genders that I can understand to some extent, even though I may not agree.
But this? This I absolutely don't understand. There are no special personality traits that make someone 'fit' into a certain sexuality bracket or not.

Are you responding to their comment about Ashley? If so I agree completely. Kaidan in no way semmed "more bisexual" than she did. 

I thought Kaidan only caught The Gay because people ****ed for two games about not having a Gaidan (oh ho ho ho) romance?

"Kaidan and Ashley 
The writers considered how Kaidan and Ashley were approached as love interests. With Kaidan’s character, he seemed more appropriate as a bisexual. It fit with his personality and his demeanor. However, Ashley did not fit the bill of being bisexual. It didn’t fit her character, so the writers opted out."

If he was bisexual from the beginning, why wasn't he a gay Shepard option? That doesn't make sense to me. 

As far as Ashley is concerned, I can see what they meant. She's a space soldier Christian with a heavy faith in the Man Jesus and she resents the fact that she's so butch. She even complains about some men not seeing her as a woman because she's a marine. With the kind of story they wanted to tell with Ashley, I can see why they opted not to make her available for lesbomancy.

Kaidan is just weird though. I can't understand why he wasn't available to dudes from the start.

To make a serious point: when people create characters, they don't pick a list of traits and say "this is that person." The person just kind of... pops into existence. The more the writer writes the character, the clearer the understanding of that person becomes. Some characters are gay, some are straight. Some are bisexual, and some are eunichs. There's no rational explanation for it, because writing in and of itself is irrational. Writers will go with what feels right in the gut. Those that don't are hacks and don't make a living writing fiction.

I believe the reason was that it would be a scandal if one of the human LIs turned out to be bi or gay. Remember how the society reacted ro Liara's love scene? They didn't want to risk too much

[Chari]

EJ107 wrote...

Chari wrote...

Maybe... Ashley just doesn't find other girls arousing?.. And Kaidan likes other boys?.. Just, you know, taste. Some like chocolate, some like caramel, some like Mozart, some like Bach...

Saying that she is straight because it is just her orientation or because of her religious beliefs or whatever is fine. Saying she did not "fit the bill" because of her personality is not. 

It... is. It's not some douchebag comment on how being gay or bi is unnatural and terrible. It's just that some characters fit a certain role, some don't. Like being a sofite doesn't fit Arishok. Does it mean that being a qunari forbids them from liking cute stuff? No. It's just Arishok is not that kind of a character

[Blackrising]

Maybe I remember incorrectly, but weren't Ashley and Kaidan meant to be s/s romances at the beginning? Cause I remember people saying that the appropriate dialouge had already been recorded, but they axed it at the last minute.

Might have been just a rumour, though.

[Ianamus]

Blackrising wrote...

Hell, if we wanna go with the stereotypes, Ashley would have made a wonderful lesbian.

Getting this back on topic with Dragon Age, I'm surprised nobody seems to be discussing these statements. They were a pretty big blow to me, because I was sure they had said that the Dragon Age 2 model was the way forward. 

I suppose it does give the hope of s/s only LI's, which would be nice. But I have an awful feeling it may be like Mass Effect where the straight LI's are the ones you can adventure with and fight beside and the s/s only Li's are NPC's who you can only speak to at base. 

Chari wrote...

It... is. It's not some douchebag comment on how being gay or bi is unnatural and terrible. It's just that some characters fit a certain role, some don't. Like being a sofite doesn't fit Arishok. Does it mean that being a qunari forbids them from liking cute stuff? No. It's just Arishok is not that kind of a character

Implying that you can only  be bisexual if you have a specific personality is downright homophobic. Or biphobic... well, whatever the word is. 

Modifié par EJ107, 31 août 2013 - 07:32 .

[sandalisthemaker]

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...


Kaidan is just weird though. I can't understand why he wasn't available to dudes from the start.

.

In my opinion, they were too concerned about how it would be received by the target audience.
Female/Female option was there from the start, again, due to target audience.

[daveliam]

Blackrising wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

Blackrising wrote...

I will never get how a certain sexuality can not 'fit' a character.
Like, there are arguments against every LI being available for both genders that I can understand to some extent, even though I may not agree.
But this? This I absolutely don't understand. There are no special personality traits that make someone 'fit' into a certain sexuality bracket or not.

Are you responding to their comment about Ashley? If so I agree completely. Kaidan in no way seemed "more bisexual" than she did. 

Yep yep, sure was.
That statement really irks me. Like they were saying that because Kaidan is a rather sensitive, gentle man, he's more bisexual than Ashley? Like...what?

Well to be fair, I did always think Kaidan seemed like he was
interested in Male Shep.  Remember that short cinematic where he walks
up to Kaidan to engage in conversation and Kaidan turns and wipes the
sweat from his brow?  There was defiintely tension between them back in ME1!  [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie]

Can't speak to Ashley because I never romanced her and she never lived past Virmire in any of my 6 playthroughs......

Modifié par daveliam, 31 août 2013 - 07:34 .

[Chari]

EJ107 wrote...

Blackrising wrote...

Hell, if we wanna go with the stereotypes, Ashley would have made a wonderful lesbian.

Getting this back on topic with Dragon Age, I'm surprised nobody seems to be discussing these statements. They were a pretty big blow to me, because I was sure they had said that the Dragon Age 2 model was the way forward. 

I suppose it does give the hope of s/s only LI's, which would be nice. But I have an awful feeling it may be like Mass Effect where the straight LI's are the ones you can adventure with and fight beside and the s/s only Li's are NPC's who you can only speak to at base. 

This is mostly a restriction due to lack of resources. Creating characters purely as LI is not the way they make them. They choose LIs from already created characters. Meaning that our of 9 confirmed companion they'd have to choose 6 LIs. That's a lot o_o And not all companions are LI-material I doubt you'd want to romance Iron Bull XD

[Ianamus]

Chari wrote...

This is mostly a restriction due to lack of resources. Creating characters purely as LI is not the way they make them. They choose LIs from already created characters. Meaning that our of 9 confirmed companion they'd have to choose 6 LIs. That's a lot o_o And not all companions are LI-material I doubt you'd want to romance Iron Bull XD

But it would be nice to see the s/s only LI's be the companions and the heterosexual-only LI's be the NPC's as a change, if that's the route they are going. Or, preferably, a mixture. 

[OLDIRTYBARON]

sandalisthemaker wrote...

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...


Kaidan is just weird though. I can't understand why he wasn't available to dudes from the start.

.

In my opinion, they were too concerned about how it would be received by the target audience.
Female/Female option was there from the start, again, due to target audience.

But if men are their target audience (well, we are), why would female/female still be an option? The statistics don't lie, and a fraction (something like 15%) of players played a female Shepard, and of that, probably an even smaller percentage were actually men playing as women. So who would the female/female relationship be for?

I don't think BioWare has ever given a clear reason for it. I wonder why (not sarcasm).

[The Elder King]

@EJ107: Gaider said once that the way he preferred was making equal but different LI (almost surely the 6 LI already mentioned by someone) but that they'll most likely follow the DA2 approach due of time/budget restraints and that the number of LI would increase the romance content in the game. Maybe the time extension changed their plans.

[Chari]

EJ107 wrote..

Chari wrote...

It... is. It's not some douchebag comment on how being gay or bi is unnatural and terrible. It's just that some characters fit a certain role, some don't. Like being a sofite doesn't fit Arishok. Does it mean that being a qunari forbids them from liking cute stuff? No. It's just Arishok is not that kind of a character

Implying that you can only  be bisexual if you have a specific personality is downright homophobic. Or biphobic... well, whatever the word is. 

No, no it's not. They technically they meant every sexuality: straight, bi and gay. Some people just don't find the opposite or the same sex appealing. Some characters don't fit to be LIs. Some don't git to be antagonists or protagonists. 
It's one of thing only a writer/artist can understand. Sometimes you create a character and feel that yeah, they would be a great protagonist. But an antagonist or a romance interest? No

[Blackrising]

Chari wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

Chari wrote...

Maybe... Ashley just doesn't find other girls arousing?.. And Kaidan likes other boys?.. Just, you know, taste. Some like chocolate, some like caramel, some like Mozart, some like Bach...

Saying that she is straight because it is just her orientation or because of her religious beliefs or whatever is fine. Saying she did not "fit the bill" because of her personality is not. 

It... is. It's not some douchebag comment on how being gay or bi is unnatural and terrible. It's just that some characters fit a certain role, some don't. Like being a sofite doesn't fit Arishok. Does it mean that being a qunari forbids them from liking cute stuff? No. It's just Arishok is not that kind of a character

That theory is flawed because it assumes that sexuality is a 'role' you only fit if you have certain character traits. That's like someone seeing me in a bar, noticing that I am nursing an extremely girly drink and concluding that 'nope, that one can't be into girls, she obviously doesn't fit the role'. Like, excuse me that I hate the taste of beer and would rather sip at a sweet pink monstrosity.
Excuse me that I can't fix a sink to save my life.
Excuse me that I talk to my stuffed animals and give them names.
Excuse me that I cry when I watch a sad movie.
Excuse me that I giggle like the girliest girl ever when I'm excited.

Does that mean my sexuality doesn't 'fit' me?

[Eragon-]

I don't think the DA team would be that cruel. The whole problem with this approach is it perpetuates stereotypes irrespective of the writer's intention. They are humans, they have their own bias and world view which is inevitably gonna drip into the characters they write.


*need type faster *

Modifié par Eragon-, 31 août 2013 - 07:37 .

[Chari]

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...

sandalisthemaker wrote...

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...


Kaidan is just weird though. I can't understand why he wasn't available to dudes from the start.

.

In my opinion, they were too concerned about how it would be received by the target audience.
Female/Female option was there from the start, again, due to target audience.

But if men are their target audience (well, we are), why would female/female still be an option? The statistics don't lie, and a fraction (something like 15%) of players played a female Shepard, and of that, probably an even smaller percentage were actually men playing as women. So who would the female/female relationship be for?

I don't think BioWare has ever given a clear reason for it. I wonder why (not sarcasm).

Because lesbianz are hot. Ask any middle-schooler 

[sandalisthemaker]

EJ107 wrote...

 But I have an awful feeling it may be like Mass Effect where the straight LI's are the ones you can adventure with and fight beside and the s/s only Li's are NPC's who you can only speak to at base. 

That would annoy me. 

On the topic of sexuality, it wouldn't surprise me if they go the equal number of set sexualities this time around.  I just can't picture them allowing Varric to be a S/S option, if he is even a LI at all.   I would like it if they did, however.

[sandalisthemaker]

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...

sandalisthemaker wrote...

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...


Kaidan is just weird though. I can't understand why he wasn't available to dudes from the start.

.

In my opinion, they were too concerned about how it would be received by the target audience.
Female/Female option was there from the start, again, due to target audience.

But if men are their target audience (well, we are), why would female/female still be an option? The statistics don't lie, and a fraction (something like 15%) of players played a female Shepard, and of that, probably an even smaller percentage were actually men playing as women. So who would the female/female relationship be for?

I don't think BioWare has ever given a clear reason for it. I wonder why (not sarcasm).

Because girl on girl is apparently hawt to straight men, while guy on guy is "icky."
Can't upset the target audience now can we....
Good thing that things have changed since then.

Modifié par sandalisthemaker, 31 août 2013 - 07:38 .

[daveliam]

Chari wrote...

EJ107 wrote..

Chari wrote...

It... is. It's not some douchebag comment on how being gay or bi is unnatural and terrible. It's just that some characters fit a certain role, some don't. Like being a sofite doesn't fit Arishok. Does it mean that being a qunari forbids them from liking cute stuff? No. It's just Arishok is not that kind of a character

Implying that you can only  be bisexual if you have a specific personality is downright homophobic. Or biphobic... well, whatever the word is. 

No, no it's not. They technically they meant every sexuality: straight, bi and gay. Some people just don't find the opposite or the same sex appealing. Some characters don't fit to be LIs. Some don't git to be antagonists or protagonists. 
It's one of thing only a writer/artist can understand. Sometimes you create a character and feel that yeah, they would be a great protagonist. But an antagonist or a romance interest? No

Please stop with this line of conversation.  It's getting into dangerous and offensive territory.  I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, just that it's not productive and shouldn't be part of the conversation because past experience has indicated that it never goes well.  I don't want this thread to get locked and it will if we continue down this road.

[WildOrchid]

Blackrising wrote...

I will never get how a certain sexuality can not 'fit' a character.
Like, there are arguments against every LI being available for both genders that I can understand to some extent, even though I may not agree.
But this? This I absolutely don't understand. There are no special personality traits that make someone 'fit' into a certain sexuality bracket or not.
This 'deciding sexuality based on personality' is, I think, difficult when you consider that most people are still stuck in a heteronormative worldview. Straight until proven gay. Not that I don't think the writers are doing their best, but they're human and they're not above heteronormativity.

Which might explain why we ended up with a gazillion LIs for a straight male Shep while FemShep was merely allowed to sniff out the remaining scraps.

Me neither. Seriously.

OLDIRTYBARON wrote...


She's a space soldier Christian with a heavy faith in the Man Jesus and she resents the fact that she's so butch.

If you think that it's because of her beliefs, then i have news for you all: there are gay people who have the same beliefs as Ashley.


What they said is a weak excuse, imo. Because they didn't know what else to say.

Modifié par WildOrchid, 31 août 2013 - 07:43 .

[Chari]

Blackrising wrote...

Chari wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

Chari wrote...

Maybe... Ashley just doesn't find other girls arousing?.. And Kaidan likes other boys?.. Just, you know, taste. Some like chocolate, some like caramel, some like Mozart, some like Bach...

Saying that she is straight because it is just her orientation or because of her religious beliefs or whatever is fine. Saying she did not "fit the bill" because of her personality is not. 

It... is. It's not some douchebag comment on how being gay or bi is unnatural and terrible. It's just that some characters fit a certain role, some don't. Like being a sofite doesn't fit Arishok. Does it mean that being a qunari forbids them from liking cute stuff? No. It's just Arishok is not that kind of a character

That theory is flawed because it assumes that sexuality is a 'role' you only fit if you have certain character traits. That's like someone seeing me in a bar, noticing that I am nursing an extremely girly drink and concluding that 'nope, that one can't be into girls, she obviously doesn't fit the role'. Like, excuse me that I hate the taste of beer and would rather sip at a sweet pink monstrosity.
Excuse me that I can't fix a sink to save my life.
Excuse me that I talk to my stuffed animals and give them names.
Excuse me that I cry when I watch a sad movie.
Excuse me that I giggle like the girliest girl ever when I'm excited.

Does that mean my sexuality doesn't 'fit' me?

As you said before, characters are not real people. Good creators try to make them as real-life as possible, but for the sake of story-telling lots of aspects have to either be left out or highlighted. There was one good post in Tumblr about it. A character likes bread. In normal life it's okay, they just tend to buy bread often. In games or books BREAD IS THEIR WHOLE LIFE. And no less. It's for easier understanding of them. So people an easier understand the character.
All characters have their own roles which are supposed to make an impact on the reader/player. Some characters are made to represent some nation or race, some are made to please us or disgust. 

[Chari]

daveliam wrote...

Chari wrote...

EJ107 wrote..

Chari wrote...

It... is. It's not some douchebag comment on how being gay or bi is unnatural and terrible. It's just that some characters fit a certain role, some don't. Like being a sofite doesn't fit Arishok. Does it mean that being a qunari forbids them from liking cute stuff? No. It's just Arishok is not that kind of a character

Implying that you can only  be bisexual if you have a specific personality is downright homophobic. Or biphobic... well, whatever the word is. 

No, no it's not. They technically they meant every sexuality: straight, bi and gay. Some people just don't find the opposite or the same sex appealing. Some characters don't fit to be LIs. Some don't git to be antagonists or protagonists. 
It's one of thing only a writer/artist can understand. Sometimes you create a character and feel that yeah, they would be a great protagonist. But an antagonist or a romance interest? No

Please stop with this line of conversation.  It's getting into dangerous and offensive territory.  I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, just that it's not productive and shouldn't be part of the conversation because past experience has indicated that it never goes well.  I don't want this thread to get locked and it will if we continue down this road.

Sure
Oh west, the place where you can get arrested because some people overreact to your words

[Blackrising]

Eragon- wrote...

I don't think the DA team would be that cruel. The whole problem with this approach is it perpetuates stereotypes irrespective of the writer's intention. They are humans, they have their own bias and world view which is inevitably gonna drip into the characters they write.


*need type faster *

This.

The only way to balance that out might be to have the writing staff consist of an equal number of gay men, straight men, gay women and straight women. That way, there would be a way to counteract (unintended) heteronormativity. But really, I don't think that's a very likely solution.

[Ianamus]

Chari wrote...

No, no it's not. They technically they meant every sexuality: straight, bi and gay. Some people just don't find the opposite or the same sex appealing. Some characters don't fit to be LIs. Some don't git to be antagonists or protagonists. 
It's one of thing only a writer/artist can understand. Sometimes you create a character and feel that yeah, they would be a great protagonist. But an antagonist or a romance interest? No

I don't think you understand my point. I have no problem with the fact that some people are just interested in a particular gender and some aren't, or that Kaiden may just be into guys while Ashley isn't into girls. 

The only problem I have is that, from the statement they made, it seemed like the only reason they didn't make Ashley bisexual was her personality. This doesnt make sense to me, because bisexual people have all sorts of different personality's and you can't judge someones orientation beased solely on their personality. 

Modifié par EJ107, 31 août 2013 - 07:44 .