17 réponses à ce sujet

[phantomrachie]

Not sure if anyone has read this article on AusGamers.

 

Link

 

It looks like not everyone will be bi. I know we've been speculating on this quite a bit but this confirms it.

 

I'm hoping this means they'll go with the 2/2/2 model and have 6 romanceable characters. 

 

Fingers crossed that Cass is not a male only romance 

 

Edit: updated the link

 

 

 

MODEDIT:  This is in relation to a similar, recently locked (due to hostility) thread here: http://forum.bioware...al-orientation/

 

Please go over that thread.  I will have much less patience for people attacking others for liking different things about games.  Discuss, disagree, but be respectful to each other or this one will be closed too.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 23 avril 2014 - 09:25 .

[Allan Schumacher]

This is a restart of a locked thread.

It may also be locked.

I hope they tell us if Cullen and Cassandra will be available for same-gender romance. It gets a bit annoying when people who want to romance them with the opposite gender know immediately while I have to wait for someone to hack a demo or leak a guidebook.

 

MODALLAN
It may be locked indeed.  I *strongly* urge people to see the discussions that happened in that thread, because while I'm okay for people to discuss or vent, I have much less tolerance to people trolling or derailing the topic.  Best to see if something has already been discussed before regurgitating the same posts, because it's just going to cause ire in me.

 

 

EDIT: In fact: I am adding this to the OP

[Allan Schumacher]

.... That is exactly what I said in my original post. I'm going to miss out. Again. Because every straight male LI is always far more appealing to me than the same sex ones bioware releases. 

 

Then it's up to us to prove that wrong.  More information will come between now and release.  Speaking personally, it can just as easily be "challenge accepted."

 

I won't dispute that in the past there's been aspects that are suboptimal.

[Allan Schumacher]

Well at least you are getting an equal amount of options as everyone else.

 

NOte that this doesn't mitigate concerns if there's a belief that "the options I typically get tend to be the crap ones."

So that's on BioWare.

[Allan Schumacher]

While a part of me wants to know which DA:I characters will have which orientations, one of the most pleasant surprises for me during my first playthrough of DA:O was finding that Alistair was romanceable, which only really dawned on me when he said something totally swoonworthy to my Warden on arrival at Redcliffe.  (I bought DA:O a while after release, not having particularly followed development of it, because I had little interest in gaming outside of playing and modding NWN at the time.)  There's something really pleasant about being surprised in this way.  As such, the time for me to step back a bit from development news might be soon.  Maybe I can avoid too much info about companions before I get to play DA:I for the first time.

 

Just to comment, this is in large part why I try my darndest to not say too much.

 

I have my own biases, and that influences how I behave and what I think is appropriate to reveal.  I'm immensely spoiler averse.  I know not everyone is, but it's actually a conflict for me to give someone something that they are specifically asking for in terms of information, especially publicly.  I love the sense of discovery in our games, and I literally went "LALALALALALALA" with my eyes closed and ears plugged during studio meetings that contained ME2 and ME3 information.  I didn't want to be spoiled at all.

 

So, for myself, I actually would have preferred that the specific romances not be shared.  I think that there is value in the discovery.  Just food for thought in case you see me skirting the issues as to who is romanceable and what their preferences are.

[Allan Schumacher]

My point is that I don't think making a character gay automatically adds any kind of merit. A well written bi or playersexual character can have a lot of potential too.

 

I don't remember tooooo much about ME3's finer details on each conversation, but there's one thing that I loved about Steve.

 

 

My reaction when Steve shared he had a husband: "Oh!  Oh hey.  He's gay!"

Shepard's reaction when Steve shard he had a husband: <carry on conversation without blinking an eye>

 

What I loved so much, was how much of a non issue it was for Shepard.  It was something that I learned about myself, and I feel I actually became a better person, if slightly, because of that scene.

 

 

Representation was a common talking point at two panels for PAX Prime: the LGBT panel and the Romance panel.  I was there for the LGBT panel, in the audience, and it was pretty eye opening to me.  The line to ask a question was huge, and the questions and perspectives were varied all along.

 

One person felt that Alistair was possibly conflicted about his own sexuality,and ended up asking if BioWare would ever explore having companions that were conflicted/struggling with their own sexuality.  He opened the question by stating that BioWare's games helped him deal with his own sexuality.

 

Someone actually did say "This is why we needed Steve and Traynor in the game, because at least we were represented in the game, even if we couldn't necessarily romance them."  To reinforce the idea that a person can have all sorts of traits, and that person can be gay, or bisexual, or heterosexual.  IIRC, not as many hands went up for "should we have made them bisexual instead."

 

I think it was Patrick shared at one point that he felt the idea of having the player openly experience the same things they feel in their real life (whether it be picking up dog poo, or dealing with homophobia), and it was in response to someone that said that they felt that clearly omitting some of those challenges has a tendency to make things look overly "happy happy" (to use their words) cheapened the depiction.  There are some that feel that "all bisexual" is as problematic as "all straight" so I do think, for some people, it's an issue of representation for some.  They like seeing some of that stuff, and they consider it positive.

[Allan Schumacher]

I've said before that more queer representation outside of the romances would be better. You could get exactly this same reaction by having queer characters who are not LIs. The thing about this reveal is that from what I've seen both on these forums and tumblr the queer gamers are the ones who feel the most upset and to some degree betrayed by Bioware. The perception is that Bioware is backing away from supporting queer gamers.

 

That IS entirely fair that the impression can still be made with an NPC.  Though I'm not sure if having a situation like Steve still being a love interest would be an indicator that BioWare would be backing away from supporting queer gamers.  In general, whether it be with ME3 or DA2, the queer gaming community was pretty outspokenly positive at the LGBTQ panel at PAX Prime.  Do you think that this is different now?  Could you elaborate further?

 

 

I know that there are wording issues, as detailed in the previous thread, that are particularly sore spots for some LGBTQ people.  For example, some feel that Cameron's statement comes across as suggesting that bisexuality isn't a set sexuality (and the problematic aspects that comes with that).  I feel I can understand those concerns.  But in terms of feeling betrayed, is it beyond just the messaging?  For example, if you feel that Dragon Age 2 is excellent because there are bisexual persons that you can romance, is there a concern that with this direction there will be less bisexual representation?  And since you had 4 in the previous game, having less than 4 bisexual love interests would represent a loss?  (This is a valid perception, by the way, if it's the way you feel).

 

I just want to understand the specifics about why you feel this is a betrayal.  I apologize if I come across as overly obtuse, but my inquiry is genuine.

[David Gaider]

The perception is that Bioware is backing away from supporting queer gamers.

 

Categorically not true.

 

I understand there are some people who prefer the idea of being able to romance any character who is able to be romanced, with any PC. That may have been a happy by-product of the system in DA2, for them, but that was not its purpose. Its purpose was to allow more than one option for every type of player, no matter who they were. That remains our goal.

 

As Mark Darrah tweeted earlier today, we have characters that are gay as well as bisexual and straight. I'm not going to discuss numbers or any further details at this point, so you can make of that what you will, but that allows us to tell more types of character stories without having to resort to ambiguity. Those stories exist for players who don't romance the characters as well, and that's also important. The rest will come as we discuss this aspect of the game in detail, but I'd hope the Dragon Age's team's expressed interest in inclusivity would provide us some benefit of the doubt until that happens.

[David Gaider]

Why is gender the only limiting factor when trying to make 'realistic' romances?

 

Who says it's the only limiting factor? We've not said how the romances will work at all, so that's quite the assumption.

 

I understand the concern about possibly ending up with the "short end of the stick", but I'm not sure where the DA team has yet given the impression that will be so. I'm not going to tell you that your concerns don't have validity—I'm actually quite familiar with how it feels to have my interests treated as a secondary concern when it comes to popular entertainment—but I'm hoping that concern need not equate with panic at this point. We've got a lot of time yet to discuss this.

 

Personally, I'd rather the conversation didn't start with a discussion of what is "realistic". That's not a bar the DA team uses to judge any of our content—not in a fantasy game. There's an argument that can be made about internal plausibility within the setting, but the realism that Cam was trying to talk about in that interview was with regards to character depictions and the variety of viewpoints that can be touched on depending on the approach. I hope that's clear. If not, it's something we'll certainly be discussing more in the months to come.

[Allan Schumacher]

RE: Allan

 

Part of it is messaging issues that have already been brought up. Part of it is lack of clear information, which with further details will likely either lay to rest or confirm quite a few of worries. I would say in general what I have seen of the queer community is that yes we are very supportive of what queer content has been given. That said, and not to take away for my love of the queer characters we have, there has been a trend to them either being sidelined with straight LI's being plot essentual or fitting in with some hurtful stereotypes. The all bi LIs of DA2 by their nature of all being bi avoided that. Part of the worry is that the return of straight LI's to Dragon Age means that the queer content will be shuffled off to the metaphoical corner where it can be safely ignored by the "dudebro" gamers who so loudly objected to DA2's LIs all being bi as "unrealistic".

 

That is the place where the betrayal feelings are coming from. A perception that, rather that increasing queer inclusivity Bioware is caving to complaints that DA2 was too queer. Now I personally am hopeful that that is not, in fact, the rational behind this LI decision. But the general vagueness about LI sexuallity, number, and follower vs non follower status is definitely causing a great deal of worry among many queer gamers.

 

Thanks!  I think it's important that stuff like this still gets communicated, because it clarifies the feelings of betrayal as a sense of "when it was exclusive in the past, it kinda sucked for us."  I find this a very important message, because it serves as a reminder: "If we're going to do something like this, remember that in the past it sucked for some people.  Don't make it suck for people."  This was a large takeaway that I had from the discussions at PAX.  It's perfectly reasonable to remind us that you think past games could have been done better.

 

 

For what it's worth, I do not really find "I find queer romances icky" to be a compelling reason for us to change the way we do romances.  I know I'm just saying words and you have a history of experiences where queer content IS shuffled into the corner, but I hope that we are able to show you that it doesn't need to be that way at all, and that we can still give interesting and balanced content across all the romance options we have available.

[Allan Schumacher]

I had a similar reaction as you to Steve. I think someone like Steve could have had even more of an impact if he were more of a "main" character, like Garrus or Kaidan.

 

 

I agree.  I think characters like Steve and Samantha are extra compromised because they are the new characters to a franchise of established characters.  It's easy for me to step right into Garrus or Tali.  I also think people like Vega are hurt, and he's still a companion, simply because I have to go through all the "Hello, I am Vega" with him, whereas Garrus it's "<HIGH FIVE> Let's do this B)"

 

 

Personally I think it'd be AWESOME to incorporate sexuality struggles into a character. I don't know if it'd make sense for it to happen in a DA game, because thus far it doesn't seem like anyone in that universe has ever had a problem with people's orientations to begin with.... but I'd love love love to see it.

 

Can I ask what specifically that person was saying about Alistair's sexuality?

 

It's a 90 minute podcast, but you can find it here: http://biowarebase.n...ppropriate.com/  It's the LGBT one from PAX Prime.

 

But the Alistair comment was just that the speaker and his friends felt that Alistair fit the image of someone that may not be openly gay, and it made him wonder if that was a part of who Alistair was, and by extension if we'd see a character like that in BioWare games going forward.

[Allan Schumacher]

I just removed a chain of posts.

 

Note that coming in with a remark that comes across as snide because people are now "okay with this" as though they're being hypocrites or something similar is something that makes me give the stink eye.

 

If the defense for saying such a thing is "You would have responded the same way if the situation was reversed" you end up stating to me "Yes I realize we are being jerks (despite my instruction that I'd be monitoring the thread and to not do this)... I just think we're justified in behaving this way because I believe we would have had to deal with it if the situation were reversed."  This also raises my stink eye (and motivated me to decide that the chain needed to be removed).

 

If the situation were reversed and people who prefer varied sexual orientations were being attacked, then I'd be removing the posts attacking them instead.

[Allan Schumacher]

Please be careful, as your post comes across as suggesting that a bisexual person does not have personality.

[Allan Schumacher]

First the character you create can be anything you want so why do you assume the PC will be straight?
Why do you care if there are more straight characters than gay characters?
Do you not like to interact with different people who have their own sexuality? Must they all be only what you like?

 

Full stop.

 

Emphasis mine.  I think this is a question you need to ask yourself, as opposed to them.  If you cannot think of a reason, then keep giving it some thought.  It's been discussed a lot in both of the threads about this.

 

Basically the issue is that, yet again, "the type of content I prefer is not considered as valuable as what the 'normal' people like, and I've been marginalized again."

 

A lot of people like DA2 because, simply, this feeling is NOT conveyed.  That we aren't doing it for DAI means "They aren't doing it in a way I felt comfortable with... this means that it might not be as good" and people get concerned.  This is a human reaction.

 

 

As for the last line, it's a straw man and no one suggests that the characters must "all be only what you like?"  Questions like this are easily turned around on yourself, because you clearly like it this way so why must it be the way that you like?

 

 

 

Mr. Gaider is not the first to say this so why do suddenly all your concerns alleviate?
Why were they not alleviated before when other people said similar things?

 

Because David (and myself) have infinitely more context by which to inform our answers.  When you say something, (especially when it includes statemens like your question above), it's presumptive and comes across as "Well it's the way I like it now... you should just deal with it.  Why does it have to be your way?"  Because, again, why does it have to be any way?

[Allan Schumacher]

It can also mean getting more love interests to choose from than other demographics. 

 

It might mean that.  Based on history, it's unlikely that those that feel they typically do not get it will feel this way however.

 

Even still, someone may still NOT be okay that they get more content that they would prefer because they recognize that other people may not be as happy.

[Allan Schumacher]

When people say realism they usually refer to realism in the context of an specific game universe, not the real world.

 

We are not talking about EuroTruck simulator, we are talking about DA and Thedas in particular where dragons, magic and mostly heterosexual relationships are completely realistic.

 

If this is the case then I find the usage of the word "realism" is increasingly not relevant, because we have no basis for the distribution of sexual orientations.

 

Further, that something is unlikely does not mean it's not realistic.  If people have issues about it being improbable, then I'll remind people that for DA2, if we had for example gone with 1 heterosexual character, 2 bisexual characters, and 1 homosexual character, that there is a mere 1 in 5 chance of that happening if we assume an even distribution of sexual orientations throughout the population.  Since the sexual orientations of the characters are fixed in the game, any specific version we give you of them is not likely.

 

As an analogy, it's improbable that my genetic make up is the way that it is (try replicating it in experiments!).  But it still happened.

[Allan Schumacher]

What's an example of this?

 

It means that we can have a love interest be clearly gay, for example, and have interactions with that character about that, even if that love interest is not being actively pursued during a given playthrough.

[Allan Schumacher]

Thread locked.

 

 

If Anders hitting on you makes you feel bad to be in that type of situation, please do not accuse other people of being too sensitive.

 

If you are someone that needs David to explicit state "All the characters in DA2 are bisexual" in order to change your world view on how DA2's characters are represented, I challenge you to examine why you feel your current view must be the correct way, and why it's important to you that that view is the way it is short of overall authority.

 

Referring to LGBT content as a "crusade," frankly makes me angry.

 

The "realism" argument is irrelevant when you're already artificially restricted to a specific subset of people that are purely romanceable because we have allowed them to be.