443 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

I don't know. I tend to notice that the racist and/or sexist characters tend to be white males. Isn't that setting a stereotype?

That's more of statistics at play -- when 9 out of 10 characters are white males, there's naturally higher odds over the course of the game you'll encounter one or more white characters who will appear racist and/or sexist.

However, as mentioned in one of recent GDC talks ( http://www.gdcvault....omophobia-Where ) actual research done on that matter apparently showed that, on average, it is much more common for white characters to display positive traits, while characters of other races way more often demonstrate negative traits.

[efd731]

Well, this has been an interesting and enlightening conversation, thanks all for sharing.

[ElitePinecone]

But we draw the line at approving or disapproving of inclusiveness. That's a double standard.

 

 

If there is a legitimate purpose to giving players the option to disagree with homosexuality, then I'd love to hear it. As it is, you want the option... why, exactly? Is it important to you that you're able to define your player character like that? Or to put it another way: is making a judgement call about the private behaviour of other people an attribute that you want to be able to express in the game? 

 

That's not even considering - as I've pointed out at least twice in this thread - that Thedas has no concept of prejudice against same-sex attracted people. It simply does not exist in the same way as those views persist in our world. It would not occur to people in that setting to take a view against it, unless other factors like nobility intervened. Your "rawr I disagree with inclusivity" character would, in fact, be extraordinarily unusual if they publicly expressed that disagreement - to the point where it would seem out of place in the setting. 

 

This is entirely Bioware's prerogative, of course. The player character is a product of the setting (and not a blank canvas that the player can completely mould), and it makes no more sense for them to disagree with homosexuality than it does for them to suddenly invent particle physics or be a rampaging atheist. At some level the norms of the setting are going to determine the personality of the character, or at least the boundaries within which the player is allowed to express themselves. 

[daveliam]

There is every bit as much of a purpose as there is of being able to murder knife a wounded soldier or a defenseless prisoner. Options.

 

I would not actually play such a character. I prefer to be as neutral as possible (on that note, ME3's Joker/EDI thing bugged me because you can't tell Joker, "Hey, what you do is your business. No comment.").

 

However, what that whole point was about was Bioware's unambiguous stance of support, and yet how for some people it isn't enough.

 

I agree that there are some people on BSN who don't approach inclusiveness the way that I would.  They seem to demand content instead of presenting a logical argument for it.  But I'm not going to hold that against them because people have different processing approaches.  I don't see an issue with it "not being enough", though.  Because, even though Bioware is by far the most inclusive developer that I know of, there are still some issues with LGBT representation, even within their content.  Plus, there is a very vocal opposition on BSN who continues to advocate against inclusion (usually under the guise of "realism").  So, yeah, it's not enough because it's still a work in progress.  Bioware has proven that they are interested in hearing what we think, so people give their opinions and some of those people want more, for which I can't blame them. 

 

I still don't understand the logical reasoning for wanting to include an "anti-inclusiveness" stance for the PC, however, since the lore dictates that there really isn't any homophobia in Thedas.  Yeah, it adds an option, but is it a value-add?  Just putting  more things into the game doesn't mean it's an improvement.  This is a clear case to me.  It would go against the lore and possibly alienate a portion of the player base, so I'm not really seeing any true benefit for including it.

[efd731]

I agree that there are some people on BSN who don't approach inclusiveness the way that I would. They seem to demand content instead of presenting a logical argument for it. But I'm not going to hold that against them because people have different processing approaches. I don't see an issue with it "not being enough", though. Because, even though Bioware is by far the most inclusive developer that I know of, there are still some issues with LGBT representation, even within their content. Plus, there is a very vocal opposition on BSN who continues to advocate against inclusion (usually under the guise of "realism"). So, yeah, it's not enough because it's still a work in progress. Bioware has proven that they are interested in hearing what we think, so people give their opinions and some of those people want more, for which I can't blame them.

I still don't understand the logical reasoning for wanting to include an "anti-inclusiveness" stance for the PC, however, since the lore dictates that there really isn't any homophobia in Thedas. Yeah, it adds an option, but is it a value-add? Just putting more things into the game doesn't mean it's an improvement. This is a clear case to me. It would go against the lore and possibly alienate a portion of the player base, so I'm not really seeing any true benefit for including it.

Actually it does exist in thedas, it is just nowhere close to being the kind of issue that exists on earth. And honestly, I don't care about realism on inclusion in thedas, bioware can do what they want with the world(as long as they avoid The Cave). Near as I can tell, people just don't see why that's a taboo subject to discuss(or express opinions on in game) when first degree murder(as opposed to generic mob slaughter via gameplay) and condoning/partaking in slavery is not only in game, but has people defending those choices

[efd731]

I mean really, slavery is just sort of accepted as okay in th setting, with massive amounts of indentured labourers/slaves worldwide, but gays in thedas is too touchy a subject? Really? Unless you're disagreeing with me from Uganda or Russia, please tell me how that's more severe.

Edit: I'm escalating the conversation, but my point is, how can that be such a touchy subject while slavery is glossed over? Because it's not something that affects 99.99% of us. Just like other issues. Literally what I'm trying to point out is that everyone sucks. Either because we don't care, or are hypocrites.

[AlanC9]

Does this really matter for DA? IIRC it's pretty settled in the lore that while being an elf might be problematic, being gay is not. When Bio launches another IP this might be relevant, but not now.

[efd731]

Does this really matter for DA? IIRC it's pretty settled in the lore that while being an elf might be problematic, being gay is not. When Bio launches another IP this might be relevant, but not now.

IIRC means what exactly?

[daveliam]

IIRC = "If I recall correctly"

 

Also @efd731, I'm not sure if you are understanding my point properly.  I wasn't advocating against LGBT content in the game.  In fact, I was advocating for the opposite.  My point was that I don't see the value add of being able to be homophobic in the game.  Yes, I agree that slavery is a terrible thing.  However, the slavery that happens in the game is less socially loaded because it's not directly correlated with the slavery in the real world.  For example, if the slavery in Thedas was only against dark-skinned Rivaini people, then I would suspect (and understand) that black people in the real world would find that upsetting.  Particularly because the lore doesn't dictate that it should be that way.  The argument that I was responding to stated that homophobia (and I'm using that as a blanket proxy for 'enacting distaste or disapproval of LGBT people in the game') not only doesn't have a reason to be included because of the lore, which is pretty clear that it doesn't exist in the way that was being suggested, but there is also a direct correlation to homophobia in the real world which many gay and lesbian players would find to be very offputting.  My argument is that, while it would add "choice" for some players, it would also take away from the experienced for others, so it's not a value add, in my opinion.  I hope that clarifies what I was trying to say earlier.

[efd731]

IIRC = "If I recall correctly"

Also @efd731, I'm not sure if you are understanding my point properly. I wasn't advocating against LGBT content in the game. In fact, I was advocating for the opposite. My point was that I don't see the value add of being able to be homophobic in the game. Yes, I agree that slavery is a terrible thing. However, the slavery that happens in the game is less socially loaded because it's not directly correlated with the slavery in the real world. For example, if the slavery in Thedas was only against dark-skinned Rivaini people, then I would suspect (and understand) that black people in the real world would find that upsetting. Particularly because the lore doesn't dictate that it should be that way. The argument that I was responding to stated that homophobia (and I'm using that as a blanket proxy for 'enacting distaste or disapproval of LGBT people in the game') not only doesn't have a reason to be included because of the lore, which is pretty clear that it doesn't exist in the way that was being suggested, but there is also a direct correlation to homophobia in the real world which many gay and lesbian players would find to be very offputting. My argument is that, while it would add "choice" for some players, it would also take away from the experienced for others, so it's not a value add, in my opinion. I hope that clarifies what I was trying to say earlier.

I do not disagree with you on most of that. However, due to the fact that I'm sure it'll never happen, I feel fairly confident in stating that having the option there shouldn't off out anyone. It's not like "I hate queers" is going to be an unskippable auto dialogue. If anything any opportunity to say anything at all like that would be very opportunity specific, and it's use would depend on choice. Also, Rivaini people having dark skin wasn't my point. There's more Asian people in slavery than blacks at this point apparently. Also, despite the prominent American example, slavery had never been black exclusive. Barbary states, industrial revolution Britain(what America did to black people they did to their own children). I'm just pointing out that it's an immensely more important topic that everyone skips over because of course slaves don't have time to play video games, so they can't get mad at being content fodder.
Also Slavic nations in general, apparently being the root of the word slave

[Jorji Costava]

I do not disagree with you on most of that. However, due to the fact that I'm sure it'll never happen, I feel fairly confident in stating that having the option there shouldn't off out anyone. It's not like "I hate queers" is going to be an unskippable auto dialogue. If anything any opportunity to say anything at all like that would be very opportunity specific, and it's use would depend on choice. Also, Rivaini people having dark skin wasn't my point. There's more Asian people in slavery than blacks at this point apparently. Also, despite the prominent American example, slavery had never been black exclusive. Barbary states, industrial revolution Britain(what America did to black people they did to their own children). I'm just pointing out that it's an immensely more important topic that everyone skips over because of course slaves don't have time to play video games, so they can't get mad at being content fodder.
Also Slavic nations in general, apparently being the root of the word slave

 

I don't think the fact that people are actually subject to the evils of either slavery or homophobia makes either one too taboo to mine for content, but that isn't the issue. The issue is whether or not it's appropriate to enable the character to express homophobic attitudes in a game where homophobia isn't plot relevant. I don't really think it is appropriate. Imagine a game which actually does center around the issues of homophobia and tolerance, and where slavery doesn't come up at all. Would it be appropriate to enable the PC of this game to say, "I think people who are sold into slavery are subhumans who deserve all the suffering they get. Slavery is a great institution; keep up the good work everyone!" Probably not. Yet I'm not seeing any difference between that and enabling the PC of Dragon Age to express homophobic attitudes.

[efd731]

^^^thats fair, and I see your point. All I was trying to say is that slavery is a gam issue, and irl an issue of much greater importance than homophobia. Yet there's all this clamor for improvement of lgbt characters in bioware games(who do a wonderful job) and none for slavery. Both are issues that need addressing, but I was just stating that I find it slightly/significantly hypocritical. And then I equated some people's lack of interest to lgbt issues in gaming(because it doesn't affect them) to everyone's lack of interest in slavery in gaming(because if you have time for dragon age, you've probably never had any experience with slavery)

[daveliam]

I'm really not following your argument.  Are you indicating that slavery shouldn't be in Dragon Age games?  Or that slavery should be better addressed in Dragon Age games?  Or that since slavery is in Dragon Age then so should homophobia?  I am genuinely not understanding your point. 

 

And I am aware that I was using an American-centric example because I was trying not to derail the thread into a discussion of which type of slavery is worse or more prevalent or whatnot.  I needed an example to breach the "real world" and "game world" comparison since there aren't elves in the real world and used that one for simplicity's sake.

[efd731]

I'm really not following your argument. Are you indicating that slavery shouldn't be in Dragon Age games? Or that slavery should be better addressed in Dragon Age games? Or that since slavery is in Dragon Age then so should homophobia? I am genuinely not understanding your point.

And I am aware that I was using an American-centric example because I was trying not to derail the thread into a discussion of which type of slavery is worse or more prevalent or whatnot. I needed an example to breach the "real world" and "game world" comparison since there aren't elves in the real world and used that one for simplicity's sake.

Oh no, I'd rather not see either. I only got involved in this argument because initially I and another forumite had an arguement over the treatment of lgbt characters. Which devolved into me playing devils advocate and stating that anyone who's super concerned about such characters in dragon age is a hypocrite, if they ignore other in game issues that have real life equivalents.
Basically non lgbt people not caring about lgbt characters is not worse than lgbt people/supporters giving 0 f**ks about slavery.

[efd731]

Because let's be honest, with a few very small exceptions the DA fan base is pretty open to anything...but you'll never get the moral outrage and attention over a slavery thread that you will in a lgbt rights/characters/treatment thread. Or the devs so emphatically reinforcing one side. So I say hypocrisy.

Edit: by open to anything I meant accepting of all creeds and denominations and orientations etc.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

The other arguments against it aside, I don't really feel like there are enough options on the dialog wheel to shoehorn in homophobic commentary. Does this mean you have to hate gays to pick the "aggressive" stance in some conversations? They can only fit in so many responses. I don't feel like homophobia is prevalent enough either in Thedas, or among DA fans, to warrant them burning the word count and the dialog slots on it. The pragmatic argument isn't really behind it. 

[AlanC9]

The other arguments against it aside, I don't really feel like there are enough options on the dialog wheel to shoehorn in homophobic commentary. Does this mean you have to hate gays to pick the "aggressive" stance in some conversations? They can only fit in so many responses. I don't feel like homophobia is prevalent enough either in Thedas, or among DA fans, to warrant them burning the word count and the dialog slots on it. The pragmatic argument isn't really behind it. 

 

Now this is a real objection. There's a lot of things they can do with the wordcount, but adding PC homophobia ought to be pretty low on the priority list.

[efd731]

All of efd731's comments are excellent, and pretty well reflect what I would say.

Though I would point out that homophobia =/= disagreeing with homosexuality, and that's a dangerous, dangerous rode to take.

One the BSN and now BF is happy to charge down--but it is a false one.

Basically, the bottom line is this: should the player character be able to murder a wounded soldier or a defenseless prisoner, or sell a person into slavery or worse own a slave, and yet not be able to disagree with homosexuality? What moral impetus is there for that?

As long as Bioware is removing these other moral options, them preventing a moral opinion on LGBT characters is acceptable.

However, all of this is a side point to the main one: that Bioware has a hard-line, unambiguously positive view of inclusiveness to the point of preventing dissention in-game, and yet certain folk such as the OP think Bioware is being negative in their portrayal. Which strikes me as absurd.

Thank you for the kind words, and that last paragraph, f**k yeah. Seriosuly, bioware writes all DA characters well, name one lgbt style character that was portrayed negatively

[Darth Krytie]

Thank you for the kind words, and that last paragraph, f**k yeah. Seriosuly, bioware writes all DA characters well, name one lgbt style character that was portrayed negatively

I know quite of few trans folk that really were bothered by Serendipity. Especially in MotA, with that really awkward scene.

[efd731]

I know quite of few trans folk that really were bothered by Serendipity. Especially in MotA, with that really awkward scene.

Correct me if I'm wrong...but wasn't that a bug? It was susposed to trigger only if hawke had had (grammatically correct but so painful) sex with serendipity previously. That wasn't a deliberate thing, merely an error. Besides, in regards to the actual dialogue wouldn't you feel awkward if a former.....hook up(?) was at the same party with another person? And the person they were with didn't know you were acquainted in that manner?

Edit: if it's because of the dialogue, then it's not a trans issue, it's a personal one

[Darth Krytie]

Correct me if I'm wrong...but wasn't that a bug? It was susposed to trigger only if hawke had had (grammatically correct but so painful) sex with serendipity previously. That wasn't a deliberate thing, merely an error. Besides, in regards to the actual dialogue wouldn't you feel awkward if a former.....hook up(?) was at the same party with another person? And the person they were with didn't know you were acquainted in that manner?

 

Not everyone knows that, especially if they're not on the forums. All they know is the game they play and that's how that played out. I never used the brothel, and when I first played (without the benefit of knowing it was a bug) I was put off by it and actually posted a complaint about in the old forum.

 

So, deliberate or not, what happened in the game is what people experienced. And it was never patched or anything to change it. And knowing later that it was a bug doesn't change my immediate, visceral reaction to the scene, nor anyone else's.

 

I manage going around my party all the time without being awkward. I usually sleep with three of the four party members. So, it just played out weird, even given that you'd slept with Serendipity before.

 

Moreover, Tallis doesn't know about Serendipty's potentially former relationship with Hawke and her response was equally cringeworthy.