546 réponses à ce sujet

[karushna5]

To be fair, aren't the REASONS potential backlash from the gay community who'd see it as lazy, negative stereotyping and example how they're treated like some sort of second rate part of the playerbase? So it's pretty easy to understand why BW would be reluctant about such approach.tbh I'm hoping Cassandra "romance" will boil down to her using renegade interrupt after first option is chosen and stopping that lovey-dovey **** right there. For every player character. :s

Problem is when people do Butch they make them female Oghrens. That IS negative stereotyping. What they dont do is Aveline with hair cut short, without the issues about "not being feminine enough", and trading the men in her life for women. The fact that every masculine woman character in video games is worried about her femininity is depressing.

But that aside, I am almost positive that Cassandra wont be a lesbian, but sure hope she will be bisexual. Honestly unless they make the lesbian and bisexual characters NPCS (shudders) every woman is romanceable if they give equal sexualities.

[Sequin]

Hence I mentioned that I don't necessarily agree with the decision on a pure game design level. But I'm very willing to dig in and see what I'm going to get even so. Sometimes a sacrifice is worth it, and sometimes what is perceived to be a sacrifice doesn't really end up being a sacrifice at all. Only one way to know, and I'll know by the 10th of October or so.

That's the best way to look at it, I feel. As an LGBT gamer, myself, I was excited by this news when it broke but I know I'm in the minority. Still, even I maintain "cautious optimism." And like you said, October is when we see the results and know for sure.

[daveliam]

To be fair, aren't the REASONS potential backlash from the gay community who'd see it as lazy, negative stereotyping and example how they're treated like some sort of second rate part of the playerbase? So it's pretty easy to understand why BW would be reluctant about such approach.

 

It's all about how they implement it.  If they make a butch character a walking stereotype, then yes, it would be offensive.  If they made a realistic, complex character who was also butch, then no, that's not offensive.  Also, if they made every lesbian butch, then that would be offensive, but if they show a variety of women who are lesbian, some butch, some not, etc., then no, that's not offensive.  The same thing goes with effeminate gay men. 

 

Being as the only lesbian LIs/companions ever in Bioware games are Juhani and Samantha and neither are stereotypical, I don't think that this is a major concern right now.  The only gay man is Steve, also not stereotypical.

 

Where I do feel that Bioware is flirting with stereotypes is around the "promiscuous bisexual" trope:  Zevran and Isabela were pretty close to this, so I'd be happy to not see this show up in DA: I.

[ElitePinecone]

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)"

 

It's a tricky issue, because to criticise Steve and Samantha almost feels like being ungrateful (or entitled!). I certainly don't want to question the effort or sincerity of the ME team in implementing them, but there was a certain perception that the same-sex content was relegated to side characters in ME3. Not just relegated, but then written so carefully and deliberately that there were about four layers of dialogue options between first expressing an interest in the character and having the romance actually lock in - as if the writers were terrified of people accidentally romancing them (especially Steve) and freaking out. Steve's husband reference (and Shep's response) might have been nonchalant, but it seemed like it was there precisely because everyone needed to put this character in a category from that first conversation, just to make everything absolutely clear.

 

I have to admit that I actually felt a little bit peeved with the way Bioware was congratulated (and self-congratulatory) for Steve and Samantha, when they amounted to two non-companion romances in three games - and after two of those games had zero options for substantial female-female or male-male romances, period, and after Casey Hudson and Ray Muzyka fudged their responses to questions about the lack of same-sex content. So, yeah, Bioware are definitely improving in their representation of LGBT characters, and DA is consistently better than ME in this regard, but honestly it was starting from an extremely low base.

 

(And I feel horrible for saying that, but if nobody had said anything in 2010 or 2011 nothing would've changed in the first place, in ME's case.)

[twincast]

Andraste's knickers, way to make a mountain out of a molehill, people.

 

Yeah, he phrased it awkwardly (and unless he was thinking about further depth to it, he forgot at the very least ME3 when saying that BioWare's never done that before), but it was perfectly clear to me what he meant.

 

And it came as a pleasant surprise to me. I first said on BSN sometime before the release of DA2 that at least one hetero- bi-, and homosexual LI of each sex would be ideal, but if bisexual-only was the budgetarily sound way to get me some options, then so be it (the only thing that would upset me being a return to having hetero- but no homosexual romance options). I mean, yay for bisexual characters, but I fail to feel represented by them. Plus, DA2's companions' player-sexuality felt way more awkward to me than Zevran's and Leliana's bisexuality. Anyway, sometime after its release, I per chance saw David make basically the same statement (albeit sounding less disappointed, of course) about what would be ideal and what is financially feasible on some thread and that for that very reason anything but bi-/player-sexuality would be unlikely in DA's foreseeable future.

 

But then again, back then they said the same about race choice coming back and more than one available voice per sex for the player character, so obviously quite a lot has happened since they got their schedule extension. EA must be pumping quite a lot of money into saving the franchise after all. Maker's breath, show me some convincing (zoomed out) footage of the tactical camera combat and companion customisation, and I'll ignore the Scorpion Memorial Harpoon and actually be wholly excited for the game! Who would've thought that after DA2?

 

(By the way, since I have trouble seeing Cullen as anything but straight, my guess is that him and the political advisor scribe lady are hetero-only romance options, but I may well be wrong.)

 

That said, more representation outside the PC's LIs would of course be appreciated, and well, we'll surely meet Celene and Briala at the very least.

[PSUHammer]

I rather like the decision to keep sexuality specific to the characters (i.e. not make everyone arbitrarily bi).  I consider the sexuality/romance part minor to the game story, anyway, and I found DA2 to be a little unrealistic.  I prefer something closer to life to keep immersion in the story.  A group of people randomly gets together to do something, some may be gay, some may be straight, some may be bi.  But, there is a chance all of them are one orientation or another.  The randomness of life.  I wouldn't feel like I was misrepresented if that were the case, but that is just me.

[daveliam]

Yes, in a realistic game set in the real world realism should be important.....

[AlanC9]

Plus, DA2's companions' player-sexuality felt way more awkward to me than Zevran's and Leliana's bisexuality.

Is it really correct to call the DA2 characters player-sexual? I always read Isabela and Anders as straight-up bisexual, myself.

[Rawgrim]

Yes, in a realistic game set in the real world realism should be important.....

 

Realism within an unrealistic setting, is something too. If that isn`t in place, the codex, the rules for magic, and plenty other things would be worthless.

[tmp7704]

It's all about how they implement it.  If they make a butch character a walking stereotype, then yes, it would be offensive.  If they made a realistic, complex character who was also butch, then no, that's not offensive.

But what if for some people having short haired butch woman be a lesbian already is a 'walking, offensive stereotype'? There's then no amount of complexity or realism you can add to the character that will appease these who would get upset at the appearance.

[Will-o'-wisp]

Yes, in a realistic game set in the real world realism should be important.....

I prefer realistic games set in Fantasy Settings and I consider DA to be one of them. But probably you are using a different definition of realistic and unrealistic than I am...?

[Vandicus]

I prefer realistic games set in Fantasy Settings and I consider DA to be one of them. But probably you are using a different definition of realistic and unrealistic than I am...?

They are using realistic to mean internally consistent is how I read it.

[twincast]

Is it really correct to call the DA2 characters player-sexual? I always read Isabela and Anders as straight-up bisexual, myself.

Isabela's pretty much the sole exception and Anders the worst offender to me.

[Will-o'-wisp]

They are using realistic to mean internally consistent is how I read it.

 

That's how I meant it as well.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Maximising is not always better, sometimes less means better development and options.

I would prefer one that is good to many that are irrelevant.

So would I, bit in this case we're talking about choosing between 2 or 6 of exactly the same thing. The romances are getting written regardless. The content was identical for both genders before, so it could be again, which means there's no extra work.

There's literally no cost to the herosexual design compared to this more restrictive design. So why would we favour the more restrictive design?

[LPPrince]

So would I, bit in this case we're talking about choosing between 2 or 6 of exactly the same thing. The romances are getting written regardless. The content was identical for both genders before, so it could be again, which means there's no extra work.

There's literally no cost to the herosexual design compared to this more restrictive design. So why would we favour the more restrictive design?

 

Because freedom doesn't always equate to a positive.

 

Actually I'll take that back in this context since playersexuality has its perks, but set sexualities have other benefits, benefits that many of us(but not all) would prefer over the former.

[twincast]

So would I, bit in this case we're talking about choosing between 2 or 6 of exactly the same thing. The romances are getting written regardless. The content was identical for both genders before, so it could be again, which means there's no extra work.

There's literally no cost to the herosexual design compared to this more restrictive design. So why would we favour the more restrictive design?

A.) Wrong. The Inquisitor's lines would need to be recorded more often.

B.) Sexual orientation and other aspects of sexuality inform one's personality, so they can write stuff they otherwise couldn't.

[dlux]

I'd love to see 2/2/2.

 

It is by far the best option in my opinion as it gives both realism and fairness for everyone!

2/2/2 (heterosexual/homosexual/bisexual companions) really isn't that realistic though, seeing that the prevalence of heterosexuality in our society is about 90% and not 33%. So 4/1/1 or something would be closer with 66% heterosexual companions. 30/2/2 would be even more realistic with ~90% heterosexual companions (30/2/2 is obviously something we will never see, you'd have to clone Mr. Gaider and the rest of the writing team 10 times over to pull that off ). But it doesn't really matter anyway; whatever BioWare does, some people are just going to get rubbed in the wrong way, no matter which sexual orientation they might have.

 

I think we have come to a point where romance in games is just not feasible anymore, because no matter what you do somebody is going to feel discriminated and get pissed. As much as I like (heterosexual) romance in BioWare's games, I'd recommend that BioWare removes explicit romance from their new IP and instead replaces it with deep friendships, where romance and love and sex are only very slightly implied and left open for interpretation by the player. I think this is the only way to actually please everyone.

[AlanC9]

So would I, bit in this case we're talking about choosing between 2 or 6 of exactly the same thing. The romances are getting written regardless. The content was identical for both genders before, so it could be again, which means there's no extra work.

There's literally no cost to the herosexual design compared to this more restrictive design. So why would we favour the more restrictive design?

 

I get the feeling that people who want the more restrictive design actually don't want the content to be the same in the first place.

[daveliam]

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.

 

There is nothing in the lore to suggest that "mostly heterosexual relationships" are completely realistic.  Plus, bisexuals can be in heterosexual relationships, so I'm not really following.  We have nothing to suggest that having most people be straight (as opposed to a larger number of bisexual people) is "realistic" with regards to internal consistency.  In fact, the fact that we have more bisexual LI's than straight ones seems to fly directly in the face of the concept that more people in Thedas are straight.  Let's call it like it is:  when people say "realism" with regard to sexuality, they are using the real world as the comparison.

 

But what if for some people having short haired butch woman be a lesbian already is a 'walking, offensive stereotype'? There's then no amount of complexity or realism you can add to the character that will appease these who would get upset at the appearance.

 

Well, I suppose that some people will be offended regardless.  I think that most people wouldn't be offended by simply having a short haired butch lesbian woman in the game provided that it's not done in a stereotypical way.

 

Isabela's pretty much the sole exception and Anders the worst offender to me.

 

Anders was bisexual.  Gaider has confirmed that Anders was bisexual back in DA: A when he wrote him.

[daveliam]

2/2/2 (heterosexual/homosexual/bisexual companions) really isn't that realistic though, seeing that the prevalence of heterosexuality in our society is about 90% and not 33%. So 4/1/1 or something would be closer with 66% heterosexual companions. 30/2/2 would be even more realistic with ~90% heterosexual companions (30/2/2 is obviously something we will never see, you'd have to clone Mr. Gaider and the rest of the writing team 10 times over to pull that off ). But it doesn't really matter anyway; whatever BioWare does, some people are just going to get rubbed in the wrong way, no matter which sexual orientation they might have.

 

I think we have come to a point where romance in games is just not feasible anymore, because no matter what you do somebody is going to feel discriminated and get pissed. As much as I like (heterosexual) romance in BioWare's games, I'd recommend that BioWare removes explicit romance from their new IP and instead replaces it with deep friendships, where romance and love and sex are only very slightly implied and left open for interpretation by the player. I think this is the only way to actually please everyone.

 

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about.  Realism in the game world =/= realism in our world, but some people will never fail to use that argument.

[AlanC9]

Isabela's pretty much the sole exception and Anders the worst offender to me.

 

What's wrong with Anders? Looks like we saw him differently.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

B.) Sexual orientation and other aspects of sexuality inform one's personality, so they can write stuff they otherwise couldn't.

What's an example of this?