2090 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

Nicely put, but I'd wonder if the reaction to "a game without romance" would be the same as "no game with romance".
 
Personally, I would be fine if BioWare would mix it up (at least when supplemented with other compelling relationship material), but I still think the romance content has value—it's a perfectly reasonable way to expand character relationships, even if it's not necessary.
 
Going back to one of my earlier snarks, I'd be fine if a BioWare game had some other killer gameplay mechanic but light or no combat, but no BioWare game ever again having combat? No, thanks.

 
I don't think the content is valueless.  I'm just curious if its existence at this point is almost considered "mandatory" for a BioWare game to have.  It is a particularly unique way to explore a relationship, I agree.  I'm certainly not suggesting that this scenario means "BioWare never puts a romance in their game ever again!"
 
 

This more applies to same sex romances, but they can also allow the player to learn about themselves. Over at the Dragon Age Confessions tumblr there are plenty of confessions about how romancing specific characters caused the confessor to question or realize their own sexuality. The availibilty of romances in the games provides a safe space to explore same sex attraction. Personally, I'm asexual, but romancing Leliana helped me discover that I do have some romantic attraction to other women. That is something that can't be replaced if the word budget for romance went to more platonic interaction.

 
Very interesting point.  Anecdotally, one of my favourite parts of ME3 was when Steve made a reference to his husband.  To Allan, the guy living in 2012, it was "Whoa!  Wasn't expecting that!"  But to Shepard it didn't even register.  It rang home the idea of "You know, it'd be cool if I reacted like that."  Although I don't know if self discovery about sexuality need require specifically romance content.  I wonder if there are other ways (and other things) that players can learn about themselves.
 
 

Yes, I would say so.
 
But considering that most games (even games that don't have a custom character or interactive narrative) still feature some kind of heterosexual romance plot, the lack of romance for a homosexual protagonist or major character would definitely stick out and be eyeroll-worthy.
 
There's already a lot of media where characters are ostensibly homosexual, but they either don't act affectionate with their partners, or their partners are mysteriously absent.

 
Fair enough.  I think it's interesting because I get the impression that you feel the game itself would still feature romance, and based on precedent there's a greater chance it'd be heterosexual, when it wasn't something I was thinking would be the case.  It'd also be an interesting stand point where the only romance of significance came between two characters that happened to be gay.  Or perhaps no significant romance story arcs exist at all, which still doesn't preclude the gamer from learning about other characters and that they are in relationships of all kinds.
 

Personally, I feel like that  ends up running a dangerous line aka 'the dumbledore  problem'. Dude's totally gay, but without 'proof' everyone sees him as straight. I'll admit that I'm one of those ignorant few who didn't realize Master Wade and Herran were a couple. I figured Wade was gay because he fits a certain stereotype but ...thats it. And, I'm not complaining about that character per se, but without relying on stereotypes or romance how do you actively convey that a Npc is gay or bi in a way that is definitive enough to not start a zillion 'is such and such gay' threads throughout the forums?

I agree that's an issue.  But lets say that Steve wasn't romanceable in ME3, but he still makes the remark about losing his husband.  That scene sticks out for me for the reasons I detailed above.  I didn't romance Steve, nor even seek to romance him, but it certainly made me go "Oh hey, here's a guy who is gay and was in what sounds like it was a positive relationship."  Would anything more really need to be done?  Samantha's was more cryptic I think, and I don't think it would work quite as well without some altering as without anyone propositioning her I don't know if it ever comes up.  Veronica in FONV is also someone that is a lesbian, and upon getting to know her she makes a reference to a lover, and not much later points out it's a she.  I remember going "Oh hey, Veronica is a lesbian!" in a similar way that I did with Steve.  For a heterosexual male, it comes across as interesting and provides visibility for me.  I wonder if the effects are different for other people.

 

Now there's problematic aspects of Steve and Veronica, since it's a tragic relationship.  I know, speaking for myself, there's that degree of impetus that "If I'm going to add that content in, in order to make it not just seem like 'oh look gay people' I feel a need to dress it up in some sort of conflict/drama."  Which is maybe what we need to not do.  I'm not a writer or designer, so it's also something I don't have as much experience with.  The settings (post apocalyptic and galactic war) are possibly situations that make this type of narrative seem more obvious (again, issues with experience maybe?).
 

and crap I totally wasn't gonna go here buuut....also, by removing romances, especially for LGB gamers, you're removing a uniquely safe place where they can see themselves represented and through these romances be allowed to explore things that they may not be able to safely do in real life. Its certainly not a games job to provide this, no, but the ability to create this environment is unique to gaming and quite powerful. And so, removing this content to instead have LGB content that maybe is more stagnant or non reactive (content not utilizing the uniqueness of the gaming format, I guess), would be disappointing. Personally.

 

Admittedly, this is something that I can only ever get a partial understanding of, since it's not something that I have ever experienced, nor a feeling that I'll probably have to experience.  I have wondered how the demographic breaks down for LGBTQ gamers in terms of their expressed approval of "the ability to romance characters is important for me, please keep it in," and the challenge for me is to step out of my world view and experiences and try to understand how others see things.  I think there's still part of me that digests the challenge that comes from my orientation being seen as default.  So it's not uncommon for me to trip up and wonder "How explicit does it need to be? It doesn't need to be explicit for me."  Which isn't really accurate.  Maybe it's the ideal (a future world where LGBTQ distinction isn't as necessary because it's just people loving other people and everyone being okay with that?), but that's not the case now.

 

That said, does the LGBTQ content require an actual romance in order to be respectfully done and reacted to in game?  It definitely has the advantage of being pretty slam dunk in terms of its unambiguity: you're romantically involved with someone and identify with a particular orientation to incorporate that.

 

I mean, there are lots of games that simply do not have romance in them.  Does this mean that these games are innately discriminating against LGBTQ gamers, or are there ways to allow LGBTQ gamers to create characters that allow them a safe environment to express their views?  My lack of experience, and until recently even the overall awareness of the topic, means I need a bit more perspective.  Part of me is curious, because until BG2 came along the idea of a romance existing at all in a game wasn't something I really considered either.

 

 

And don't worry about your post length

[Darth Krytie]

 

 

Admittedly, this is something that I can only ever get a partial understanding of, since it's not something that I have ever experienced, nor a feeling that I'll probably have to experience.  I have wondered how the demographic breaks down for LGBTQ gamers in terms of their expressed approval of "the ability to romance characters is important for me, please keep it in," and the challenge for me is to step out of my world view and experiences and try to understand how others see things.  I think there's still part of me that digests the challenge that comes from my orientation being seen as default.  So it's not uncommon for me to trip up and wonder "How explicit does it need to be? It doesn't need to be explicit for me."  Which isn't really accurate.  Maybe it's the ideal (a future world where LGBTQ distinction isn't as necessary because it's just people loving other people and everyone being okay with that?), but that's not the case now.

 

That said, does the LGBTQ content require an actual romance in order to be respectfully done and reacted to in game?  It definitely has the advantage of being pretty slam dunk in terms of its unambiguity: you're romantically involved with someone and identify with a particular orientation to incorporate that.

 

I mean, there are lots of games that simply do not have romance in them.  Does this mean that these games are innately discriminating against LGBTQ gamers, or are there ways to allow LGBTQ gamers to create characters that allow them a safe environment to express their views?  My lack of experience, and until recently even the overall awareness of the topic, means I need a bit more perspective.  Part of me is curious, because until BG2 came along the idea of a romance existing at all in a game wasn't something I really considered either.

 

 

And don't worry about your post length

 

There are lot of coded micro-transactions in a game that veer toward heterosexuality, even in games with no romance subplot. Sometimes, it's the background of the character--a dead wife/girlfriend. Sometimes it's the way the game will focus on a body of someone. (*cough Miranda cough*) Sometimes it's little flirts and blushing or what not with an opposite gendered character stuff like that.

 

Actually, as an aside, you might find it interesting to note that in the Steve situation, there's no way to turn him down until you're on the dancefloor with him without indicating you only want a lady. "Waiting for the right man" progresses the romance and the only other option is "waiting for the right woman". So, if you're a gay character, and intend to romance Kaidan, or no one, you have to make the romance progress to dancing with Steve before you can let him down gently. (Or wait til you lock in your romance with someone else.). 

 

It's stuff like that, actually. Little things like that which can be frustrating. The presumption, even in a game that offered the content.

 

No, I don't think that there needs to be active romance in a game to avoid discriminating against LBGT players. However, if they want to allow for a person to roleplay or have a character that's not defined at all (and allow someone to perceive whatever sexuality they choose) they need to be REALLY careful not to put those presumptions in for the character to act upon without input. There are times when you flirt or eye someone without any input from the player, and often times it's opposite gendered characters.

[Innsmouth Dweller]

i don't think ppl would be disappointed if there were no romances in the game. much. unless you decide to create a linear story (written in an hour or two) and turn every possible NPC into a drooling minion ("yes, master. i'll do as you ask, master").

the immersion doesn't come from swinging a weapon, changing a haircut or getting card with naked woman, but rather from the epic story and complex character developement. a true roleplay, not swordsmanship simulator (don't get me wrong, i'd love to have more challenging fights and more sophisticated mechanics but all in due time, i suppose).

 

there would be no pixel crushes if you didn't create such amazing characters, methinks. and if a character is somewhat crush-worthy, why not allow PC to actually court her/him?

[Nocte ad Mortem]

 Admittedly, this is something that I can only ever get a partial understanding of, since it's not something that I have ever experienced, nor a feeling that I'll probably have to experience.  I have wondered how the demographic breaks down for LGBTQ gamers in terms of their expressed approval of "the ability to romance characters is important for me, please keep it in," and the challenge for me is to step out of my world view and experiences and try to understand how others see things.  I think there's still part of me that digests the challenge that comes from my orientation being seen as default.  So it's not uncommon for me to trip up and wonder "How explicit does it need to be? It doesn't need to be explicit for me."  Which isn't really accurate.  Maybe it's the ideal (a future world where LGBTQ distinction isn't as necessary because it's just people loving other people and everyone being okay with that?), but that's not the case now.

 

That said, does the LGBTQ content require an actual romance in order to be respectfully done and reacted to in game?  It definitely has the advantage of being pretty slam dunk in terms of its unambiguity: you're romantically involved with someone and identify with a particular orientation to incorporate that.

 

I mean, there are lots of games that simply do not have romance in them.  Does this mean that these games are innately discriminating against LGBTQ gamers, or are there ways to allow LGBTQ gamers to create characters that allow them a safe environment to express their views?  My lack of experience, and until recently even the overall awareness of the topic, means I need a bit more perspective.  Part of me is curious, because until BG2 came along the idea of a romance existing at all in a game wasn't something I really considered either.

An available LGBT romance isn't necessary in order for a game to be considered respectful and representative. If a decent amount of well developed gay/bi characters are presented and the issue is upfront and undeniable, then it would be absurd to me to claim that game was bigoted. 

 

That doesn't necessarily mean it still offers everything that the DA romances do now. For some people that are very afraid of exploring those facets of their personality, just being able to express support for homosexuality, or even say they are gay offhandedly in conversation options, isn't on the same level as basically being able to simulate a relationship and explore it in a safe place before making the step into reality. Bioware is really the only place I know of that offers this kind of experience, which makes it very important to some people. Whether that's enough reason to keep it around or not is up for debate, but I don't really think there are alternatives that would wholly replace it for people in this situation. 

 

Basically, there are ways to make the game respectful to LGBT players without the romances, but the romances are an extra little step that offer a unique experience that is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to get elsewhere. 

[Allan Schumacher]

Basically, there are ways to make the game respectful to LGBT players without the romances, but the romances are an extra little step that offer a unique experience that is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to get elsewhere.

 

I am concerned about sampling bias since I'm in this thread, and on the BSN, but is there the notion that LGBTQ players are more likely supportive of the romances for this reason, and as such also find themselves having the most to lose if BioWare were to make a game that had no romances?

[Dutchess]

I'm not saying some of the things you're saying about Isabela/Fenris are wrong, mostly about her drowning the slaves, but how would the problems be any different if they were both characters you couldn't romance? That you can also romance them doesn't seem applicable to the actual issues with their relationship. 

 

It's mostly Fenris' romance that is affected, I think. The whole casual sex thing just doesn't seem to mesh well with how his relationship with Hawke develops. It's odd that he would have no flashbacks with Isabela, and with Fenris' past and what Danarius so charmingly hints at I find it difficult to imagine him going for a meaningless fling. Admittedly, the issues I have with combining Fenris' character with a friends with benefits relationship with Isabela remain even if Fenris could not be romanced. But the contrast becomes even greater when you compare it to Hawke's uphill battle to make this thing between them work and get Fenris to open up.

[Veriond]

 Very interesting point.  Anecdotally, one of my favourite parts of ME3 was when Steve made a reference to his husband.  To Allan, the guy living in 2012, it was "Whoa!  Wasn't expecting that!"  But to Shepard it didn't even register.  It rang home the idea of "You know, it'd be cool if I reacted like that."  Although I don't know if self discovery about sexuality need require specifically romance content.  I wonder if there are other ways (and other things) that players can learn about themselves.

 

At least for me the active nature of romancing a character was important. I was emotionally engaging in the romance with Leliana in a way I didn't emotionally engage when I played straight or gay male characters for the other romances in DA:O. That I chose the relationship and actively participated in it was the key figuring out that maybe I'd like some kind of romantic relationship with women in real life.

[Darth Krytie]

I am concerned about sampling bias since I'm in this thread, and on the BSN, but is there the notion that LGBTQ players are more likely supportive of the romances for this reason, and as such also find themselves having the most to lose if BioWare were to make a game that had no romances?

 

Possibly true! I know that almost all my lbgt friends play  BioWare games (and some don't play other games nearly as much). And I know that I met a lot of lbgt friends through BSN/BW related tumblr blogs/LJ and they primarily play these games. And a common comment I see is that they wish there was more content out there at large or least not SWM-dudebro games. A lot of people saying it was the first time they ever felt acknowledged by a game. The excitement and all that being able to finally roleplay yourself....

 

Even my daughter, who is 15 and a lesbian, finds herself watching me as I play and was so happy to see the content because none of her games allow it and she wishes that it did.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I am concerned about sampling bias since I'm in this thread, and on the BSN, but is there the notion that LGBTQ players are more likely supportive of the romances for this reason, and as such also find themselves having the most to lose if BioWare were to make a game that had no romances?

Well, this is just my opinion, since I can't speak for LGBT people, generally, but I would say they do feel like they have the most to lose if Bioware should remove romances from their games. Romance is obviously going to be a more raw issue for LGBT people. Video games are basically the only place we can go to see a gay protagonist in a fantasy or sci-fi setting. You're not going to get that hero from a summer blockbuster. Most other video games (Skyrim, Fable, etc) don't invest much in the relationships. They have same sex relationships, but there's little content to them and the characters usually have very little personality. Bioware offers a level of content for LGBT people that is just unheard of. So, yeah, I think there is a sense of loss that other people just don't get, because it's not something they've ever been missing. 

[devSin]

That said, does the LGBTQ content require an actual romance in order to be respectfully done and reacted to in game?  It definitely has the advantage of being pretty slam dunk in terms of its unambiguity: you're romantically involved with someone and identify with a particular orientation to incorporate that.
 
I mean, there are lots of games that simply do not have romance in them.  Does this mean that these games are innately discriminating against LGBTQ gamers, or are there ways to allow LGBTQ gamers to create characters that allow them a safe environment to express their views?  My lack of experience, and until recently even the overall awareness of the topic, means I need a bit more perspective.  Part of me is curious, because until BG2 came along the idea of a romance existing at all in a game wasn't something I really considered either.

It's not discriminating. Nor is it acknowledging or including.
 
I imagine the privilege of being the default that you allude to is why you don't see the romance. The princess you saved in your games was always the right gender for your orientation (what else is there?). You didn't have to think about it, and of course you never considered it. Why would you? (Now you can argue that gender roles aren't tied to romance, and I would agree, but the message can have the same effect. You are affirmed, while others are denied.)
 
But I think that issue (inclusion) is also separate from representation. Inclusion doesn't require romance (it only requires the absence of prescription), but I think representation more often does—orientation is often a function of love, and if there's no romance, how exactly do you expect to represent that? How can you be gay in a game if there's no way to express it? Wear pink?

If you're asking if it needs to be player romance, I'd say that's the realm of personal expression more than representation, but it probably doesn't hurt, especially when representation has to take a back seat to the reality of not being applicable to the vast majority of players (and I think that's closer to the idea that representation can't just be relegated to tokenism—it has to be shown to matter and done respectfully, and one of the easier ways to do this may just be allowing the player to "play gay").
 

Actually, as an aside, you might find it interesting to note that in the Steve situation, there's no way to turn him down until you're on the dancefloor with him without indicating you only want a lady. "Waiting for the right man" progresses the romance and the only other option is "waiting for the right woman". So, if you're a gay character, and intend to romance Kaidan, or no one, you have to make the romance progress to dancing with Steve before you can let him down gently. (Or wait til you lock in your romance with someone else.). 
 
It's stuff like that, actually. Little things like that which can be frustrating. The presumption, even in a game that offered the content.

Presumption? Are you referring to the Gay Shield™ aspect, or something else?
 
I do agree that the conversation is a little wonky, but the ME3 romance plots are structured oddly. They all have that switch conversation, and it's not really influenced by orientation that I felt, nor is it ever really natural. (I'm not sure how Dusty could have worked out that scene better.)
 

I am concerned about sampling bias since I'm in this thread, and on the BSN, but is there the notion that LGBTQ players are more likely supportive of the romances for this reason, and as such also find themselves having the most to lose if BioWare were to make a game that had no romances?

More to lose than what? How do you measure any person's investment and reliance on the form of escapism offered, or decide the importance of it?

I certainly wouldn't want to be the person to claim I have more to lose than any other person, and I'd hope others would tend toward the same.

As to being more likely to be supportive, I would suspect so, given the relative lack of representation or even bare inclusion in most forms of media. But there are LGBTQ posters here who scoff at the romances and find them offensive, so I'm not sure the consensus you're searching for even exists.

[Darth Krytie]

Presumption? Are you referring to the ******-guard aspect, or something else?
 
I do agree that the conversation is a little wonky, but the ME3 romance plots are structured oddly. They all have that switch conversation, and it's not really influenced by orientation that I felt, nor is it ever really natural. (I'm not sure how Dusty could have worked out that scene better.)
 

 

By presumption, I meant that if you choose not to romance Steve as a dude, your only initial way of turning him down requires you to claim you want a woman. If you want to turn him down, but roleplay a gay man, you need to progress the romance to the dance floor before saying it's just as friends. Or lock your chosen romance before you see him.

[Allan Schumacher]

Possibly true! I know that almost all my lbgt friends play  BioWare games (and some don't play other games nearly as much). And I know that I met a lot of lbgt friends through BSN/BW related tumblr blogs/LJ and they primarily play these games. And a common comment I see is that they wish there was more content out there at large or least not SWM-dudebro games. A lot of people saying it was the first time they ever felt acknowledged by a game. The excitement and all that being able to finally roleplay yourself....

 

Even my daughter, who is 15 and a lesbian, finds herself watching me as I play and was so happy to see the content because none of her games allow it and she wishes that it did.

 

Romance is definitely explicit and not ambiguous, which is a strength for representation.  I'm about to crash as I stayed up too late talking about this... (<.<) but I do have two questions!

 

1) Do you think it'd be an additional challenge to try to depict a game world that would allow LGBTQ people to find this level of acknowledgement and ability to roleplay yourself, without the existence of romantic fulfillment?

 

2) What other ways can you think of (if any) that could come across as positive way for LGBTQ.  (Even if we return to reality where romances exist, I'm still interested to hear your response because if we can add more to this than simply the romanceable characters, it's probably not a bad thing).

[devSin]

By presumption, I meant that if you choose not to romance Steve as a dude, your only initial way of turning him down requires you to claim you want a woman. If you want to turn him down, but roleplay a gay man, you need to progress the romance to the dance floor before saying it's just as friends. Or lock your chosen romance before you see him.

Yeah, that's the Gay Shield™ (actually, the H-guard, but the H word is apparently censored now, even when used for great justice). To keep the innocent straight people from blindly straying on to the path of the gay.

I agree that sucks, but I doubt there was ever an option for it to not be there. Coming from the ME team, it was virtually guaranteed.

[oceanicsurvivor]

 

Now there's problematic aspects of Steve and Veronica, since it's a tragic relationship.  I know, speaking for myself, there's that degree of impetus that "If I'm going to add that content in, in order to make it not just seem like 'oh look gay people' I feel a need to dress it up in some sort of conflict/drama."  Which is maybe what we need to not do.  I'm not a writer or designer, so it's also something I don't have as much experience with.  The settings (post apocalyptic and galactic war) are possibly situations that make this type of narrative seem more obvious (again, issues with experience maybe?).
 

 

 

That's tragic in more ways then one. Looking at media, movies specifically throughout times...I'll use an old Western, Stage Coach as an example, because it was the example used to explain this to me. In that movie, (original version), there is a banker embezzling money. In the end, he gets arrested. So, he pays for his crime. Meanwhile, a sex worker character is allowed a vaguely happy ending. You move the creation of this story ten years in either direction and the outcomes would be different for these characters. Why? The banker wouldn't be seen as evil and therefore in need of societal justice/punishment (this film was made in the 1930's so the great depression and evil bankers were a thing, where as before this time period, the character would have been viewed as an upstanding/rightous/moral member of society), and instead a character behaving 'immorally', like the sex worker would be punished with death.

 

You see this in media with LGBT representation still, even if it is getting better. There is a well known semi-joke that all tv lesbians get hit by a car at some point. In the 80s/90s every gay character got AIDS and died. Partly b/c it was seen as 'realistic', but also b/c it fit that social punishment idea. 'You can be a sympathetic character, sure, but you still get to pay for your social deviance'. Now, certainly all tv has drama, but with such a small pool to draw on when you can point at almost any character in it and have those same beats, a similar pattern or view forms. Its certainly not the same as it used to be, but the trend is still alive to a degree.

 

I think Steve was a pretty decent character. I just thought you brought up an interesting point. And its worth noting, that again, thanks to the choice within games, if you don't want your character to have a massively tragic ending, its avoidable. You get the chance to be the LGB star of a summer blockbuster instead of a depressing B level art film that will never even show up on Netflix.

 

 

Admittedly, this is something that I can only ever get a partial understanding of, since it's not something that I have ever experienced, nor a feeling that I'll probably have to experience.  I have wondered how the demographic breaks down for LGBTQ gamers in terms of their expressed approval of "the ability to romance characters is important for me, please keep it in," and the challenge for me is to step out of my world view and experiences and try to understand how others see things.  I think there's still part of me that digests the challenge that comes from my orientation being seen as default.  So it's not uncommon for me to trip up and wonder "How explicit does it need to be? It doesn't need to be explicit for me."  Which isn't really accurate.  Maybe it's the ideal (a future world where LGBTQ distinction isn't as necessary because it's just people loving other people and everyone being okay with that?), but that's not the case now.

 

That said, does the LGBTQ content require an actual romance in order to be respectfully done and reacted to in game?  It definitely has the advantage of being pretty slam dunk in terms of its unambiguity: you're romantically involved with someone and identify with a particular orientation to incorporate that.

 

I mean, there are lots of games that simply do not have romance in them.  Does this mean that these games are innately discriminating against LGBTQ gamers, or are there ways to allow LGBTQ gamers to create characters that allow them a safe environment to express their views?  My lack of experience, and until recently even the overall awareness of the topic, means I need a bit more perspective.  Part of me is curious, because until BG2 came along the idea of a romance existing at all in a game wasn't something I really considered either.

 

 

 

 

In terms of it creating the specific safe space for identity exploration that I'm referring to, I would say so? For context, I'll be ...maybe too honest haha, Dragon Age 2 probably helped me arrive at the conclusion about how incredibly gay I was a few years earlier then I would have if I hadn't been playing Bioware games for years haha.

 

I dont know if Ill explain this correctly so I'm just gonna ready another paper bag to stuff over my head buut...We all know pretty quickly who the LI's are in the game, and you can start deciding who you feel a connection to personally or who you think your character would feel a connection to. It's a safe environment just to look. Not only that, you're encouraged to! Straight people (largely) are encouraged to do so IRl, but very few LGB people I know feel they have the same luxury, especially if they are just beginning to figure themselves out. It's 'creepy' to be attracted to people who don't share it, and adding the social stigma of same sex attraction to that is a huge part of internalized homophobia for a lot of people I know (self included sure). But its just a natural part of the game and the characters/world in DA. You're not just going 'oh man, cool  LGB character' (like you are in tv/movies), you're encouraged to engage in that content and you aren't shamed for it in the game either. You're allowed to choose from male and female characters and go 'yes, ok, this is who I like, of all these available choices, this is who I feel the most attached to/strongly for' whatever. And in terms of creating an environment for people to explore their sexuality (in the midst of an amazing 30 plus hour adventure epic), that does strike me as different from passively seeing more LGBT characters in the universe. Although I would certainly welcome that as well.

 

Certainly a game not having romances isn't discriminating. But as Darth Krytie mentions, there are many micro ways in which things get seen as straight, and thats not a game or media exclusive thing, thats just a societal thing right now..../always...I wouldn't say then that any one game is discriminating per se. The Uncharted Series has romance in it, and it isn't discriminating that Nate happens to be straight. Same with the fact that all of the Assassins in the Assassins Creed series who have had romantic interests have had opposite sex interests. Same with the pro tag of Far Cry 3 who has a girlfriend etc etc. On there own none of these are a problem, its the build up, over and over that creates an atmosphere of exclusion. And then you have rather upsetting LGBT inclusion, like The Witcher 2, where either path exposes you to a gay sorcerer/witch who also happens to be a bad guy...that game...really upsetting on the representation front imo...or Mars War Log, created by the people who are doing the upcoming Bound By Flame. That game starts you off with a poorly written way too long almost rape in prison bathroom scene, where the bad guy is this chortling rotund man, literally named Fatso.

 

So one nice thing about Bioware is, I could be a guy romancing Fenris who also happens to murder everyone I meet or I can be a girl and romance Isabela and be sickeningly sweet to everyone I see. Or vice versa.

[Darth Krytie]

Romance is definitely explicit and not ambiguous, which is a strength for representation.  I'm about to crash as I stayed up too late talking about this... (<.<) but I do have two questions!

 

1) Do you think it'd be an additional challenge to try to depict a game world that would allow LGBTQ people to find this level of acknowledgement and ability to roleplay yourself, without the existence of romantic fulfillment?

 

2) What other ways can you think of (if any) that could come across as positive way for LGBTQ.  (Even if we return to reality where romances exist, I'm still interested to hear your response because if we can add more to this than simply the romanceable characters, it's probably not a bad thing).

1. I think it can be done, yes. I think it would be a challenge, though, because I know a lot of people will subtly write things they don't perceive as being coded for heterosexuality, but are...like, say, Leandra telling Hawke she wants to find him/her a suitable wife/husband. Now, granted, you could say that she would as it's expected to reproduce, but if you've indicated in the game your sexuality, then perhaps she could change her dialogue to suit it.

 

2. Say, if there's no romance in a particular game, but friendship...one of your companions could ask: Do ever want to find someone special? (Don't code it for opposite genders!) And you can say: Yes, I'd like to settle down with a woman. Yes, I'd like to settle down with a man. Yes, I'd like to settle down with someone I can share my life with. (pan/bi/demisexuality) or No, I don't think so.

 

There are other ways, too. Subtle things. Being allowed to not autoflirt with opposite genders. Being able to flirt with same sex genders. Those types of things. (Even if the flirting leads no where.) If the premise of the game is avenging a lost loved one, allow the protag to pick if they lost a boy/girlfriend. Other things like being able to refer to a past relationship and allow you to choose the gender of who you were with.

 

Also, if there's no romance, allow for fully developed companions with a broad spectrum of sexuality that is explicit. (it doesn't need to be full-on sex, but hey this is my girlfriend or hey that's my husband is fine)  And make them complex. Not just the flamboyant dude who made your armour. More like Celene.

 

Seriously, one of the hardest things that throws me out of roleplaying a male gay character is the way the camera lovingly follows every square inch of Samara's breasts or Miranda's ass. And not nearly enough on James or Steve or Kaidan. Just tweaking that a bit so I don't feel like I'm perving when I ought not would be excellent.

 

I can probably think of more when I've thought on it.

[Darth Krytie]

Yeah, that's the Gay Shield™ (actually, the H-guard, but the H word is apparently censored now, even when used for great justice). To keep the innocent straight people from blindly straying on to the path of the gay.

I agree that sucks, but I doubt there was ever an option for it to not be there. Coming from the ME team, it was virtually guaranteed.

 

I don't mind that "I'm straight" was an option so much as it was the only option aside from progressing the romance in the first wave of the conversation.

[Ianamus]

Romance is definitely explicit and not ambiguous, which is a strength for representation.  I'm about to crash as I stayed up too late talking about this... (<.<) but I do have two questions!

 

1) Do you think it'd be an additional challenge to try to depict a game world that would allow LGBTQ people to find this level of acknowledgement and ability to roleplay yourself, without the existence of romantic fulfillment?

 

2) What other ways can you think of (if any) that could come across as positive way for LGBTQ.  (Even if we return to reality where romances exist, I'm still interested to hear your response because if we can add more to this than simply the romanceable characters, it's probably not a bad thing).

 

I  frequently roleplay as characters who are bisexual and occasionally homosexual in MMO's and similar games where you can create a character but there is no actual in-game situation where their sexuality is relevant or expressed in any way. In my mind the only thing you really need to play an LGBTQ character is for the game to let the player create their own character and to not ever put the player character in a situation or give them dialogue that could contradict the players view of their character.

 

Romance options obviously make it easier to roleplay a character with a certain sexuality, but even then many of my characters are bisexual in my mind yet only ever express interest in a single LI, or none at all. Even in Bioware games it's as much about how you view your character as what they actually do and you don't need to pursue romance options or flirt with people to give the character a sexuality.

 

I really think the best way to make a game come across as positive for LGBTQ people is to include romance between people of the same gender in the game world, between NPC's or in side-quests. It's a small, simple thing, but something that can really make a game stand out for me. 

[devSin]

I thought the Steve romance flag was silly only because I romanced Jack, and I just locked her romance seconds before, a few feet away from him. And then I have to tell Steve I'm straight by gawking at strippers.

Bug, or you weren't actually locked in yet.

That path shouldn't be available once you get true love (you just talk briefly and then he says he'll meet you back on the ship).
 

I don't mind that "I'm straight" was an option so much as it was the only option aside from progressing the romance in the first wave of the conversation.

I do wish that Dusty had been able to do something a bit different for that. I would have preferred the romance dialogue not occur until after you do the dance (so that Shepard would have to make the first move after the "waiting for the right guy" line). It was a good opportunity for expression (you get to tell him you're gay/bisexual and get your dance on) that probably got stuck in the weird romance structures they had over there. (Honestly, I think the bigger issue is that it presumes binary sexuality, which isn't really any more fair than just assuming everyone is straight.)

But the path for turning down the romance was still really classy (it wasn't awkward at all, even though Steve's dialogue before it is a little "heavy" to just be friends). I can guess Dusty was stuck trying to make it an obvious romance hook without trying to box you into it.

That team was pretty horrible when it came to issues like this, but I know for fact that Dusty wouldn't have intended it to come across that way.

[CannotCompute]

This seems as good of a thread as any as it's a romance themed thread, but I was talking with some friends and BioWare games came up, and we actually wondered "How would people react if there were no romances?" (But presumably replaced with some other type of writing content instead)

 

I'm not saying DAI has no romances, but I'm just curious how many people simply expect them to be there, and if they weren't there, would be more than a little disappointed.

 

For me, the option to get involved in a romance is part of the experience and I would be pretty disappointed if it would be missing from a DA or ME game. It's one of those game ingredients that sets BioWare, as a developer, apart from the competition.

[DragonRacer]

I see.  :|

 

 

Oh, God, that just broke my heart.

 

C'mere, gimme a hug!

[devSin]

It's definitely a lock. You only meet Jack two times (unfortunately). Her mission and then that appearance in the bar next to Steve. You can only lock it in there.
 
Speaking of which, ME3 is a good case in point when I say how pointless romances are. Especially the follow through for ME2 characters. If you're going to do it half-assed like this, don't do it at all. I'd rather not even know about romances if they lead nowhere like that. Ignorance is bliss. Heh.

Kaidan was pretty great, actually (Cathleen is going to be at PAX, for those who are going). And I've heard generally positive things about Garrus and Tali. I do feel for the people who got shafted, though (especially female Shepard).

As for why Steve glitched on you, I couldn't say. It definitely wasn't the intended behavior, though.

[Grieving Natashina]

The fact that there is a civilized conversation happening about LGBTQ romance representation shows how far this community has come in the last three years.  I'm really heartened by the discussion here and I feel like I'm learning a lot.