2138 réponses à ce sujet

[Puppy Love]

An analogy is never the real deal, so there are basically two parts; the part that is similar in concept to what you are comparing it to and the part that differs and is irrelevant. What you always seem to do is notice the irrelevant part and ignore what is said about the similar part. Fundamentally, my post had nothing to do with getting a job. Maybe I'll try again later on .

...


Both gay and straight males getting the same number of options has nothing to do with 'fair' or 'unfair' nor with 'equal treatment'. In this situation there are several ways you can define what is 'fair' and neither definition is right or wrong. You totally neglect the fact that the large majority of the players is straight. That's perfectly fine because everyone does this that way; you consider only a few aspects and dismiss the rest. People who don't dismiss the things you dismiss, arrive at a different concept of what is fair. You, neither them, can say that something IS fair. If you want to use that word it should be accompanied by 'I think' or 'In my opinion' or 'they way I see it' or ... . You can't pretend that in this situation 'fair' is something objective and that you can use it to make absolute statements, because it is nothing more than a curtain that hides your subjectivity. If you say that gay and straight males should have the same amount of options because it is fair, then you have given no argument at all. The same goes for people who say that all LIs should be straight because that is fair.

 

Suppose there are 1000001 gamers and that there is a trait that a LI requires to have in order to be desirable for 1000000 players. The lack of that trait is necessary for the remaining 1 player. There are 2LIs so by your definition of fair 1 LI should have the trait and the other shouldn't have it. Of course there are also other traits that result in a player not romancing a character. Suppose that 75 percent does not mind the other traits of the LI and hence there are, assuming that the 1 player is happy with his LI, 0.75*1000000 + 1 = 750001 happy players. If however both LIs have the trait, then the amount of happy players equals 0.75*1000000 + 0.75*0.25*1000000 = 937500, which includes 0.75*0.75*1000000 = 562500 extremely happy people because they have two options (notice this is more than half of all the players). The question is simple : can you understand that there are people who think it is fair that all LIs have that trait?

This argument breaks down quite simply into "I believe numbers are all that matters, and unless there are a certain number of you, you do not matter."

 

Good to know where you stand.  Because by that logic I should just be on the street starving because by that logic, as a trans woman I shouldn't have any rights, because there's too few of us to make a blip when compared to the majority.

[drummerchick]

Re: Traynor

I totally thought the, "I have no problems getting cozy," line was flirting. Maybe that's due to how interested I was in Traynor from the start.  

Also, fun fact: If Garrus died in ME2, during the scene on board Normandy directly after The Shroud event occurs, Traynor will be the one to insist Shepard get some rest. And in the case of FemShep, Traynor stares at her booty.

But I agree, I wish the romance was more fleshed out. I really liked her character and wanted to know more about her.  

[tirnoney]

An analogy is never the real deal, so there are basically two parts; the part that is similar in concept to what you are comparing it to and the part that differs and is irrelevant. What you always seem to do is notice the irrelevant part and ignore what is said about the similar part. Fundamentally, my post had nothing to do with getting a job. Maybe I'll try again later on .

...


Both gay and straight males getting the same number of options has nothing to do with 'fair' or 'unfair' nor with 'equal treatment'. In this situation there are several ways you can define what is 'fair' and neither definition is right or wrong. You totally neglect the fact that the large majority of the players is straight. That's perfectly fine because everyone does this that way; you consider only a few aspects and dismiss the rest. People who don't dismiss the things you dismiss, arrive at a different concept of what is fair. You, neither them, can say that something IS fair. If you want to use that word it should be accompanied by 'I think' or 'In my opinion' or 'they way I see it' or ... . You can't pretend that in this situation 'fair' is something objective and that you can use it to make absolute statements, because it is nothing more than a curtain that hides your subjectivity. If you say that gay and straight males should have the same amount of options because it is fair, then you have given no argument at all. The same goes for people who say that all LIs should be straight because that is fair.

Suppose there are 1000001 gamers and that there is a trait that a LI requires to have in order to be desirable for 1000000 players. The lack of that trait is necessary for the remaining 1 player. There are 2LIs so by your definition of fair 1 LI should have the trait and the other shouldn't have it. Of course there are also other traits that result in a player not romancing a character. Suppose that 75 percent does not mind the other traits of the LI and hence there are, assuming that the 1 player is happy with his LI, 0.75*1000000 + 1 = 750001 happy players. If however both LIs have the trait, then the amount of happy players equals 0.75*1000000 + 0.75*0.25*1000000 = 937500, which includes 0.75*0.75*1000000 = 562500 extremely happy people because they have two options (notice this is more than half of all the players). The question is simple : can you understand that there are people who think it is fair that all LIs have that trait?

Did you see the love interest RP thread? 33% of respondents were het males, 32% het females and the other 30+% were gay or bisexual. It wasn't scientific but i wonder if the 'majority are het males' mantra might be a bit off the mark when it comes to Bioware's rpgs. Taking the numbers approach to justify more het male romances might not work out so well for you.

[LarryDavid]

 

 

 

Obviously, as a single employer dealing with a specific group of applicants, you're going to want to hire the applicant who is best qualified for the job.

 

But the gay men in this scenario have every right to campaign for the government to protect their rights to not be discriminated against, given that in the USA, it is still legal to fire someone for being gay in 29 states.  It is also their right to draw media attention and awareness to this injustice.  That is, essentially, exactly the same as when people are asking for more representation in games.  Nobody is saying that every single game is now obligated to include LGBT content.  They are simply asking to see it more often, in games where it is appropriate (such as, for instance, games that have romance content).

 

Your scenario makes it sound like this is an either/or situation.  It is not.  Games can seamlessly include straight characters and LGBT characters.  They can be appealing for a straight audience and an LGBT audience at the same time.

 

It also makes it sound like LGBT characters can only be included if they are somehow justified.  Do you think this means that the writing would suffer if characters happened to be LGBT?  That somehow gameplay would be altered?  That the game would be changed in any way, other than that a few characters who would normally be presented as straight are now presented as not straight?

 

 

 

I don't care about the amount of LGBT characters in DAI or any other game for that matter. Bioware may put as many in their game as they want and everybody may ask for as many LGBT characters to be in their game as they want. Just don't bullshit about it. From the way Bioware acts and communicates it is rather obvious that they didn't cater to Cullen fans by making Cullen romanceable and they didn't cater to dwarf/elf/qunari fans by making these races playable. They do however differentiate between people based on their sexual orientation and as such cater to the LGBT community. They can do whatever they want, but really, don't be surprised as people point out that you cater to the LGBT community and don't get angry about it. They don't have to justify themselves for nothing, but if you do, don't say that it is because it IS 'fair'. If you want disproportional over-representation of LGBT LIs because it means very much to you due to discrimination in real life, just say so. But don't pretend it has anything to do with 'equality' or 'fairness'.

[tirnoney]

The Traynor "romance" was hardly a romance whatsoever, seemed far more like a fling thanks to how empty it was, no citadel dates, hardly any dialogue, a rushed start that went immediately to the sex & no final goodbye in london, was just sad how her romance was mostly treated as an afterthought, where most people just remember it for it's "hot lesbian" shower scene & little else.

It had its problems, but i still loved it. It was the idle flirting by the CIC i liked best of all. The shower scene was cliche at best. Or maybe i'm just so desperate for a lesbian relationship in a game that i'm far too forgiving. Who knows?

[DaySeeker]

An analogy is never the real deal, so there are basically two parts; the part that is similar in concept to what you are comparing it to and the part that differs and is irrelevant. What you always seem to do is notice the irrelevant part and ignore what is said about the similar part. Fundamentally, my post had nothing to do with getting a job. Maybe I'll try again later on .

...


Both gay and straight males getting the same number of options has nothing to do with 'fair' or 'unfair' nor with 'equal treatment'. In this situation there are several ways you can define what is 'fair' and neither definition is right or wrong. You totally neglect the fact that the large majority of the players is straight. That's perfectly fine because everyone does this that way; you consider only a few aspects and dismiss the rest. People who don't dismiss the things you dismiss, arrive at a different concept of what is fair. You, neither them, can say that something IS fair. If you want to use that word it should be accompanied by 'I think' or 'In my opinion' or 'they way I see it' or ... . You can't pretend that in this situation 'fair' is something objective and that you can use it to make absolute statements, because it is nothing more than a curtain that hides your subjectivity. If you say that gay and straight males should have the same amount of options because it is fair, then you have given no argument at all. The same goes for people who say that all LIs should be straight because that is fair.

 

Suppose there are 1000001 gamers and that there is a trait that a LI requires to have in order to be desirable for 1000000 players. The lack of that trait is necessary for the remaining 1 player. There are 2LIs so by your definition of fair 1 LI should have the trait and the other shouldn't have it. Of course there are also other traits that result in a player not romancing a character. Suppose that 75 percent does not mind the other traits of the LI and hence there are, assuming that the 1 player is happy with his LI, 0.75*1000000 + 1 = 750001 happy players. If however both LIs have the trait, then the amount of happy players equals 0.75*1000000 + 0.75*0.25*1000000 = 937500, which includes 0.75*0.75*1000000 = 562500 extremely happy people because they have two options (notice this is more than half of all the players). The question is simple : can you understand that there are people who think it is fair that all LIs have that trait?

 

First of all, math has never solved anything.  

 

If you were trying to use it to solve this you have your numbers wrong.  One, you can not assume all straight players want the same thing. or even that straight players want only one thing, or that they will play the game only one time and only one way.  Some may want a gay romance, some may not want a romance at all, some may find that this playthrough they feel like playing a completely different character.  You're also assuming that all straight people are averse to having gay characters in their game or would see no value in having that be so.  Where are you getting those numbers from?  I also don't know how one would give a numerical value to role playing diversity.  How would one determine if it makes the game better or worse from only the standpoint of it existing or not.  

 

Your arguments attempt to be somehow logical or mathematical, but make no sense in this context.  Are we able to measure how very important it is for some players to be able to explore gender or sexuality or identity in the safe gaming space, or the joy at seeing oneself represented?  What number would you give that? What number would you give a game that has a variety of characters that live outside the norms of many other AAA games?  

 

Having a game that is good is good for all players.  

[tirnoney]

I don't care about the amount of LGBT characters in DAI or any other game for that matter. Bioware may put as many in their game as they want and everybody may ask for as many LGBT characters to be in their game as they want. Just don't bullshit about it. From the way Bioware acts and communicates it is rather obvious that they didn't cater to Cullen fans by making Cullen romanceable and they didn't cater to dwarf/elf/qunari fans by making these races playable. They do however differentiate between people based on their sexual orientation and as such cater to the LGBT community. They can do whatever they want, but really, don't be surprised as people point out that you cater to the LGBT community and don't get angry about it. They don't have to justify themselves for nothing, but if you do, don't say that it is because it IS 'fair'. If you want disproportional over-representation of LGBT LIs because it means very much to you due to discrimination in real life, just say so. But don't pretend it has anything to do with 'equality' or 'fairness'.

99% of games provide no LGBT content. That counts as disproportional over-representation to you?

[Lady Nuggins]

*snip*

 

What's fair is that every single person* who picks up the game will have more than one option available to them.  Beyond that, trying to argue that you should have more options just because there are many other people like you is silly.  LIs are not some finite resource, and therefore must be allocated according to population numbers.  You can romance Cassandra and 10,000 other straight men can romance Cassandra, and that romance track does not run out because too many people have tapped into it.

 

_{*With the exception, perhaps, of asexuals and other lesser known identities.} 

[Puppy Love]

Honestly right now I'm just tired and spent...  I may come back at some point to this topic, but by then it'll be so far in the past I won't bother...  I need to break for the time being...

[Hanako Ikezawa]

First of all, math has never solved anything.  

Well, that is untrue. Even your statement comes from adding up everything math has been used for, thus is a math problem itself, and has led to an answer thus math has solved something.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

What's fair is that every single person* who picks up the game will have more than one option available to them.  Beyond that, trying to argue that you should have more options just because there are many other people like you is silly.  LIs are not some finite resource, and therefore must be allocated according to population numbers.  You can romance Cassandra and 10,000 other straight men can romance Cassandra, and that romance track does not run out because too many people have tapped into it.

 

_{*With the exception, perhaps, of asexuals and other lesser known identities.} 

[rocsage]

not exactly favoring the s:lgb ratios, but criticisms based on realism and/or statistical likelihood have overlooked the fact that the sample size is ridiculously tiny.

to date, there have been 9 romance-options in the series.

as thedas population has been consistently over 100 and by a wide margin, this sample size is deficient.

and don't get me started on potential sampling biases.

@$$♂@$$i♂in brought up in a brothel, spy, escaped male, elven slave of a male magister, someone who regularly cuts herself, a freaking pirate, and a guy who's been between in virtual prison and on the run since 12...

what's the second part of the ghost-written sequel to <<Hard in Hightown, Siege Harder>> again?

[phantomrachie]

"Don't do it again." seems harsh, even if you don't get rivalry points.  Where's the "You're sweet but I'm not interested." option?

 

yeah, it doesn't sound harsh, at least not when said by Lady Hawke (I only played as her). Probably the poorest paraphrasing choice in DA2

[LarryDavid]

This argument breaks down quite simply into "I believe numbers are all that matters, and unless there are a certain number of you, you do not matter."

 

Good to know where you stand.  Because by that logic I should just be on the street starving because by that logic, as a trans woman I shouldn't have any rights, because there's too few of us to make a blip when compared to the majority.

 

FFS

1) Where did I say that numbers are all that matters or that I believe that numbers are all that matters?

2) You should differentiate between real life and the topic at hand. In general, an argument in a certain situation may not be an argument at all in another situation.

[LarryDavid]

Did you see the love interest RP thread? 33% of respondents were het males, 32% het females and the other 30+% were gay or bisexual. It wasn't scientific but i wonder if the 'majority are het males' mantra might be a bit off the mark when it comes to Bioware's rpgs. Taking the numbers approach to justify more het male romances might not work out so well for you.

 

Good to know that you think that gay and bisexual people are male nor female .

 

Now, where the hell did I say that there should be more female than male LIs?

[Ina]

yeah, it doesn't sound harsh, at least not when said by Lady Hawke (I only played as her). Probably the poorest paraphrasing choice in DA2

 

My male Hawke reacted harshly for sure turning down Anders even though my intention was to be gentle. I agree I don't remember it being harsh at all when fem Hawke said it. It was kinda like "I'd rather you not think of me that way" but Anders still got upset and gave me rivalry points. So in this case I think it's just the way he reacts to being turned down, harsh or not.

[LarryDavid]

First of all, math has never solved anything.  

 

If you were trying to use it to solve this you have your numbers wrong.  One, you can not assume all straight players want the same thing. or even that straight players want only one thing, or that they will play the game only one time and only one way.  Some may want a gay romance, some may not want a romance at all, some may find that this playthrough they feel like playing a completely different character.  You're also assuming that all straight people are averse to having gay characters in their game or would see no value in having that be so.  Where are you getting those numbers from?  I also don't know how one would give a numerical value to role playing diversity.  How would one determine if it makes the game better or worse from only the standpoint of it existing or not.  

 

Your arguments attempt to be somehow logical or mathematical, but make no sense in this context.  Are we able to measure how very important it is for some players to be able to explore gender or sexuality or identity in the safe gaming space, or the joy at seeing oneself represented?  What number would you give that? What number would you give a game that has a variety of characters that live outside the norms of many other AAA games?  

 

Having a game that is good is good for all players.  

 

 

The 'suppose' indicates that all these numbers are fictional. And I can do that because it is a conceptual argument. In this context, your definition of 'fair' does not take group sizes into account and you act like that's the only valid way to look at it. To indicate that other people may have a different point of view I can use any number I want. Also, where did I assume that straight people are averse to having gay characters in their game?????

 

You are of course right that it is not possible to quantize the impact of the distribution of the sexual orientation of the LIs. And that's also a reason why you can't go running around pretending that 'fair' may be used objectively. You can say "I think it's fair that LG people have access to the same number of LIs than straight people" and Bioware may same the same. Just don't presume that you can say that it IS fair.

 

Suppose that there are two people who are hungry and weigh 50kg and 100kg, respectively. If I have 150g rice to hand out, what is fair?

(i) I both give them 75g rice

(ii) I give 50g rice to the person weighing 50kg and 100g to the person weighing 100kg.

In situation (i) I have given them an equal amount of rice whereas in situation (ii) I have given them an equal amount of rice per kg. Maybe you can come up with a situation (iii). Either way, can you say that the option you pick IS fair? That people picking an other option are unreasonable?

[LarryDavid]

99% of games provide no LGBT content. That counts as disproportional over-representation to you?

 

Maybe 99% of the games that are produced are from companies that are owned by straight people . And maybe straight producers like to make games they would like to play and hence reflect their own sexual orientation . I have the feeling that straight people are disproportional over-represented in the set of game companies owners and, if this is the case, that is something you should take into account.

 

Anyways, games are independent entities. There is no reason to put something in your game just because someone else didn't.

[Ina]

they didn't cater to Cullen fans by making Cullen romanceable and they didn't cater to dwarf/elf/qunari fans by making these races playable. 

 

Just wanna point out Cullen is available for both humans and elfs. Just so people not updated with the latest news coming on to this thread don't get any misinformation.

[Lilaeth]

TBH, having seen the options available to me, I'm thinking this is going to be a very celibate DA for me, so I'm not bothered about the orientation of any of them!

[tirnoney]

Maybe 99% of the games that are produced are from companies that are owned by straight people . And maybe straight producers like to make games they would like to play and hence reflect their own sexual orientation . I have the feeling that straight people are disproportional over-represented in the set of game companies owners and, if this is the case, that is something you should take into account.

 

Anyways, games are independent entities. There is no reason to put something in your game just because someone else didn't.

 

You're avoiding the question.  

 

When LGBT characters are routinely found in games across the entire spectrum of the industry we can continue the discussion about what constitutes fair representation.  Until then I'm done.

[DaySeeker]

The 'suppose' indicates that all these numbers are fictional. And I can do that because it is a conceptual argument. In this context, your definition of 'fair' does not take group sizes into account and you act like that's the only valid way to look at it. To indicate that other people may have a different point of view I can use any number I want. Also, where did I assume that straight people are averse to having gay characters in their game?????

 

You are of course right that it is not possible to quantize the impact of the distribution of the sexual orientation of the LIs. And that's also a reason why you canI ha't go running around pretending that 'fair' may be used objectively. You can say "I think it's fair that LG people have access to the same number of LIs than straight people" and Bioware may same the same. Just don't presume that you can say that it IS fair.

 

Suppose that there are two people who are hungry and weigh 50kg and 100kg, respectively. If I have 150g rice to hand out, what is fair?

(i) I both give them 75g rice

(ii) I give 50g rice to the person weighing 50kg and 100g to the person weighing 100kg.

In situation (i) I have given them an equal amount of rice whereas in situation (ii) I have given them an equal amount of rice per kg. Maybe you can come up with a situation (iii). Either way, can you say that the option you pick IS fair? That people picking an other option are unreasonable?

 

I'm not arguing fair; I'm arguing value.  I don't think fair is determine by numbers as you seem to, but that is outside this discussion.  I think it is valuable top have these romances in game.  I believe it serves any audience.  You seem to be arguing they should not exist because there are more straight gamers than gay ones, therefore there should little to no gay content that supposes the gay content is of no value or interest to straight gamers, thus my previous statements.  

[LarryDavid]

I'm not arguing fair; I'm arguing value.  I don't think fair is determine by numbers as you seem to, but that is outside this discussion.  I think it is valuable top have these romances in game.  I believe it serves any audience.  You seem to be arguing they should not exist because there are more straight gamers than gay ones, therefore there should little to no gay content that supposes the gay content is of no value or interest to straight gamers, thus my previous statements.  

 

Really, please quote where I have said that

1) Fair should be determined by numbers

2) LGBT content should not exist

3) LGBT content has no value for strait gamers

[phantomrachie]

I'm not arguing fair; I'm arguing value.  I don't think fair is determine by numbers as you seem to, but that is outside this discussion.  I think it is valuable top have these romances in game.  I believe it serves any audience.  You seem to be arguing they should not exist because there are more straight gamers than gay ones, therefore there should little to no gay content that supposes the gay content is of no value or interest to straight gamers, thus my previous statements.  

 

I agree there is definitely value to adding diversity to games. Adding characters from diverse backgrounds allows players to be exposed to people form different backgrounds, something that their every day lives might not expose them too.

 

For example, Ireland didn't really have a significant population of  African's  until the 90's so it was possible for people to go their whole lives without seeing a black person, unless of course they were a Thin Lizzy fan. This means that there is a lot of ignorant racism in the older population.

 

This was an actual conversation that happened between my Grandmother and my Dad

 

Gran: There are a lot of black people working in Tesco these days

Dad : Yes Ma? *confused look*

Gran: I suppose that is because they can pay them less

Dad *shocked look on his face* eh no Ma, they don't get paid less

Gran: oh right

 

She was 85 and from Belfast, a city not exactly famous for their diversity, if she had been exposed to more black people on T.V. or in Films perhaps she never would've came out with that comment.

 

Adding diversity to media allows people to become more comfortable with people who are not like them and in turn hopefully leads them to being less, racist, homophobic sexist etc , provided of  course that these examples are positive.

 

Besides, if we only include characters that represent the average human being then I'm pretty sure that would make all characters Chinese men.

[CuriousArtemis]

There is one gay companion and one lesbian companion. That's not "over-representation." If you don't know at least one gay man and lesbian woman in your life, well... I'm afraid you don't know as much about your friends and co-workers as you think you do.