435 réponses à ce sujet

[Zered]

Let's face it. Whatever Bioware does in the romance/companion/gender department there will be someone who will moan and complain.

[littlebrightpanda]

Am I the only one who thinks that if we get a Qunari romance, it might actually be a human/dwarf/elf converting to the Qun? Just like Tallis?

 

I actually do not really care how many companions are female and how many are male and how many are spirits. As long as they have a good story to tell, I am in and I would welcome even a nug into my party if it would offer a good nug perspective. With so many big players and supporting characters being female, I think that the gender power distribution is pretty even. 

[Lucky Thirteen]

As with other game series, I would feel more wary about the ratio, but I think the team for Dragon Age has established that they are good with their female characters.

 

It will really depend on the women's roles as a whole, inside and outside of the team. If the women inside of the crew are just there to fill the quota of love interests for male players, then I'll be more peeved. Since there appears to be only three women, I suspect all three will be auto romance based on the fact they are the only women. I get the feeling there won't be any Samara or Aveline this time around, but plenty of unattainable men per usual. All sexualities included.

 

However, so far these few  women appear to be in very powerful, influential roles, seemingly more than previous female companion characters have had with the Dragon Age series. Powerful enough to compare to the Inquisitor his/herself as leaders and potentially even eclipse the lead in importance. Casandra is leading armies and Vivienne is first enchanter and advisory to the Empress. I mean hell, there are two women getting paraded around in advertising, just flaunting their power to show off what the game is capable of. How often do  you see that? Usually advertisers fear that kind of thing will scare male gamers away.

 

If their stories play out like Liara in ME3, being the most powerful "woman" in the galaxy who does very minimal things with that power, then I'll be peeved.

 

I also wonder if not all the characters will team up with the Inquisitor.  There are twelve characters in the trailer, but only nine are suppose to be companions. It could very well be possible that making certain choices will lock you out of picking up certain companions because they strongly oppose that choice and form a negative opinion about the Inquisitor. An extension of what has been seen in the past with characters replacing characters or flat out leaving. If this is true, it's logical to have some extra characters around just in case and you could very well end up with more women than men in your team.

[Dutchess]

A lot of the remarks that dismiss the 6:3 male:female ratio as irrelevant remind me of the inevitable comments on news articles about the low number of women in high-ranking and leadership positions in businesses and that the set quota of 60/40 (or whatever the specific goal is for that country) is still far from being reached: "ugh, still with that forced ratio? Why not simply take the best person for the job?". Well, hello, of course that would be the ideal! No gender, sexuality or skin color to be taken into consideration. Just the most qualified, most suitable individual to fill that role. But when the vast majority of functions (in this case, the function of companion) is still filled by men, it should be clear it is currently still not a matter of simply getting  the best person for the part, or one should assume that there just are very few women suitable for the positions in which they are being underrepresented. When the majority is always male by default, it is more likely bias is playing a part. Probably mostly unconscious and unintentional, but that doesn't mean it should not be addressed.

 

Of course we all want the most interesting and entertaining companions, but again, why would the majority of those interesting companions be male by default? Others have already remarked that various roles could probably work with a female just as well. Why would something as gender mean the noose for artistic integrity and creativity? 

 

Bioware has shown to be aware of issues in representation. Employees have talked about gender (or sexuality) representation on several conventions. They argued that things could be done differently, that the standard of the industry did not have to remain the same. But when it's up to Bioware to show their next project, they revert back to the default male protagonist in their trailer and a team largely consisting of men. So they are aware of the issue and claim they are willing to contribute to change, and when they have the chance to, they do quite the opposite. I have a hard time believing this is still unintentional, and I think that is what annoys me the most. Stick with guys as the standard if you must, but don't go about announcing all those brave, idealistic intentions. Practice what you preach. 

 

Are the so-called RL issues with gender equality more important than representation in a video game? Of course. Does that mean the video game does not matter at all? I don't think so. In fact, I believe the video game is an easier place to start for change. Obviously things as employment are a lot more complex and have a lot more factors contributing to the issue. I think that if media such as video games will be more inclusive in their representation of different groups, it can contribute to an overall shift in perception. Perhaps not dramatically, obviously not world-shattering, but I'm convinced it can do something.

 

Bottom-line of this wall of text is that, yes, in an ideal world the ratio of male:female does not matter in the slightest. Then it just happens to be the way the way it is, sometimes in favor of the guys, sometimes in favor of the girls. But as long as the divide is always in favor of the guys, it does matter.

[Han Shot First]

I might as well post before this thread goes any further.  I'm also frustrated at the apparent 6:3 gender split among the companions.  I really thought they had come farther than this after DA2.  Apparently, they decided that all the companion and romance systems from DA2 needed to get removed.  In favor for more men and NPC romances.   Way to toss the baby out with the bathwater.  <sigh> 

 

Anyhow, good luck OP.  Ignore and report the trolls, don't feed them.  

 

In another thread where this topic popped up someone speculated that maybe the companions are split the way they are because female NPCs (who aren't companions) play a large role in the story. Of course not knowing much about the game yet I can't say whether or not that theory is true, but it does seem plausible at least.

 

Consider that most of the characters thought to be heavily involved in the main plot are female: Empress Celene, Morrigan, Flemeth, Divine Justinia, Leliana, ect. 

[clicketykeys]

Still, sucky ratio.

 

*sigh* I was thinking 'typical' actually. ;p

[AresKeith]

I'm guessing fanmade, considering that it's Samara with horns.

 

still looks really good 

[Texhnolyze101]

 

That kinda looks like Samara from ME just with horns attached.

[Cainhurst Crow]

A lot of the remarks that dismiss the 6:3 male:female ratio as irrelevant remind me of the inevitable comments on news articles about the low number of women in high-ranking and leadership positions in businesses and that the set quota of 60/40 (or whatever the specific goal is for that country) is still far from being reached: "ugh, still with that forced ratio? Why not simply take the best person for the job?". Well, hello, of course that would be the ideal! No gender, sexuality or skin color to be taken into consideration. Just the most qualified, most suitable individual to fill that role. But when the vast majority of functions (in this case, the function of companion) is still filled by men, it should be clear it is currently still not a matter of simply getting  the best person for the part, or one should assume that there just are very few women suitable for the positions in which they are being underrepresented. When the majority is always male by default, it is more likely bias is playing a part. Probably mostly unconscious and unintentional, but that doesn't mean it should not be addressed.

The only way to achieve this goal of yours is to either lower the goal to more practical levels so that it can better conform with reality, or to create another massive imbalance to offset the first one, IE you bar men from being allowed to participate for a while so women can flood the roles. Which in it of itself would see your ratio completely filled, and however open the possibility that the women in position will like their advantage and keep the barring of their male counterparts in place for a good, long, while. Power corrupts all, as they say, and nothing says power like exclusivity.

So, which will you choose? Because doing things the "right" way, leads us to this so called correction of imbalance requiring at least a century and a half of progress to fix, at best.

[Grieving Natashina]

A lot of the remarks that dismiss the 6:3 male:female ratio as irrelevant remind me of the inevitable comments on news articles about the low number of women in high-ranking and leadership positions in businesses and that the set quota of 60/40 (or whatever the specific goal is for that country) is still far from being reached: "ugh, still with that forced ratio? Why not simply take the best person for the job?". Well, hello, of course that would be the ideal! No gender, sexuality or skin color to be taken into consideration. Just the most qualified, most suitable individual to fill that role. But when the vast majority of functions (in this case, the function of companion) is still filled by men, it should be clear it is currently still not a matter of simply getting  the best person for the part, or one should assume that there just are very few women suitable for the positions in which they are being underrepresented. When the majority is always male by default, it is more likely bias is playing a part. Probably mostly unconscious and unintentional, but that doesn't mean it should not be addressed.

 

Of course we all want the most interesting and entertaining companions, but again, why would the majority of those interesting companions be male by default? Others have already remarked that various roles could probably work with a female just as well. Why would something as gender mean the noose for artistic integrity and creativity? 

 

Bioware has shown to be aware of issues in representation. Employees have talked about gender (or sexuality) representation on several conventions. They argued that things could be done differently, that the standard of the industry did not have to remain the same. But when it's up to Bioware to show their next project, they revert back to the default male protagonist in their trailer and a team largely consisting of men. So they are aware of the issue and claim they are willing to contribute to change, and when they have the chance to, they do quite the opposite. I have a hard time believing this is still unintentional, and I think that is what annoys me the most. Stick with guys as the standard if you must, but don't go about announcing all those brave, idealistic intentions. Practice what you preach. 

 

Are the so-called RL issues with gender equality more important than representation in a video game? Of course. Does that mean the video game does not matter at all? I don't think so. In fact, I believe the video game is an easier place to start for change. Obviously things as employment are a lot more complex and have a lot more factors contributing to the issue. I think that if media such as video games will be more inclusive in their representation of different groups, it can contribute to an overall shift in perception. Perhaps not dramatically, obviously not world-shattering, but I'm convinced it can do something.

 

Bottom-line of this wall of text is that, yes, in an ideal world the ratio of male:female does not matter in the slightest. Then it just happens to be the way the way it is, sometimes in favor of the guys, sometimes in favor of the girls. But as long as the divide is always in favor of the guys, it does matter.

I cannot like this enough.  This is a brilliant post and humorously enough, I was saying much of the same thing when I was on the phone chatting with one of my friends from the forums.

[Dutchess]

The only way to achieve this goal of yours is to either lower the goal to more practical levels so that it can better conform with reality, or to create another massive imbalance to offset the first one, IE you bar men from being allowed to participate for a while so women can flood the roles. Which in it of itself would see your ratio completely filled, and however open the possibility that the women in position will like their advantage and keep the barring of their male counterparts in place for a good, long, while. Power corrupts all, as they say, and nothing says power like exclusivity.

So, which will you choose? Because doing things the "right" way, leads us to this so called correction of imbalance requiring at least a century and a half of progress to fix, at best.

 

I think it's better to avoid turning this topic into a debate about employment ratios. It was meant as an example to illustrate my point. I stated in a later paragraph that these RL issues are a lot more complex and are not so easily solved. In DAI, on the other hand, there is no need to block male companions and male NPCs from positions of power, and I don't think Leliana and Morrigan will abuse their position and keep all future men away.

[KaiserShep]

They've said there will be no DLC companions.

Thank the Maker.

[Grieving Natashina]

Thank the Maker.

Seconded.  I love Shale, but Sebastian?  Yeah, I'd rather have no DLC companion at all.  Besides, I thought Legacy was a much better DLC, and it was nicely free of temporary or new companions.

[Cainhurst Crow]

I think it's better to avoid turning this topic into a debate about employment ratios. It was meant as an example to illustrate my point. I stated in a later paragraph that these RL issues are a lot more complex and are not so easily solved. In DAI, on the other hand, there is no need to block male companions and male NPCs from positions of power, and I don't think Leliana and Morrigan will abuse their position and keep all future men away.

I'm starting to suspect an all female cast will be the only way this gets any sort of satisfaction for some folks here.

 

EDIT: If you know this doesn't apply to you, don't assume this statement is meant to apply to you. I can't believe I have to say this, but as evidenced below, apparently I do.

 

This doesn't have to do with you either, Renjility, I mostly see your point and can see how id be easier when doing a video game, so don't go gettin any ideas either. For the people who this does apply you, you know who you are.

[Grieving Natashina]

I need to ask: In what world does "I'd like 4 of the 9 companions to be women" translate into "some of these people just want an all female cast?"  That's ludicrous and a sentiment that has not been expressed.  Well, in this thread at least.  I can't speak for the rest of the BW forums.  

 

We're not coming in to take away your male characters or force you into playing a game with an all female cast.  Try to get a hold of the sense of hyperbole, please. 

 

Plus, you might be underestimating roleplayers here.  Not just straight men, or women, or LGBTQ folks, or minorities, but the varied groups that make up those that love RP and RPGs.  There are roleplayers that I could see enjoying a game that has an all female cast of party members.  

 

However, considering that this doesn't happen outside of a few JRPGs, I think you're safe.   

[Stelae]

I can understand David Gaider's point that the story, and how interesting a character is and how well they serve the action, must be the primary concern.  I don't want a 5:4 ratio if it's going to mean 3 great female companions and one average one to make up the numbers, especially if it costs me a Varric or a Garrus or a Mordin.  But isn't it funny how "oh, we just want the best person in the role" has once again come down with a male-skewed gender imbalance?

 

Would it be so hard to follow the recent advice of Geena Davis on scriptwriting? Look at your character list, and change half the names to female?  Is a companion's maleness really so crucial to their role in the story that you couldn't, at the beginning stages, go "hey, any reason why this elf Fade expert (or whatever) couldn't be female?"  I'm not suggesting that genders be assigned at random, but if there's not a compelling reason for a character to be male, why not at least consider making them female? 

 

Yes, there are powerful women in Thedas, and there are women in positions of high responsibility.  We see what they do, but we have no agency over them.  The characters we are actually going to be using to move through the game matter more to me in game terms than the people who make up the background, even when they are interesting and powerful. 

[Tayah]

In another thread where this topic popped up someone speculated that maybe the companions are split the way they are because female NPCs (who aren't companions) play a large role in the story. Of course not knowing much about the game yet I can't say whether or not that theory is true, but it does seem plausible at least.

 

Consider that most of the characters thought to be heavily involved in the main plot are female: Empress Celene, Morrigan, Flemeth, Divine Justinia, Leliana, ect. 

In the article where Cameron Lee revealed set sexualities he also revealed that the head of the chantry and the leader of the mage's rebellion are killed in the incident at the start of the game. As I understand it (since I haven't read the books) that means Divine Justina and Fiona are eliminated then and while the new head of the chantry would be female the new head of the mages may not be. He called it a peace conference where several factions had gathered to seek peace so potentially any other women in power could be killed there along with Lambert? and Gaspard? unless the rest haven't arrived when the incident happens whoever is there dies according to Cass in the trailer the inquisitor is the last person standing. 

 

I think my disappointment comes from the fact that it is such a large imbalance in the party, I never expected it to be 5:4 female to male (although a world where that might actually be the case and no one would bat an eyelid would be nice) but I had high hopes for a party of 5:4 male to female rather than only half females... I get that there are plenty of strong female npcs in various degrees of minor roles but it's the companions you spend most time with and who have the banters and biggest amount of character development which is why they're such a focus point for me.

 

@ Jensaarai I don't think most of the posters are asking for an all female party (though that could be fun ) we're just asking for the ratio to be a little closer because frankly that's progress for women in any kind of media.   Or what Natashina said, that sums it up too.

 

Note: Also what Vian said so brilliantly. Thread keeps moving so fast on me. 

[Cainhurst Crow]

I need to ask: In what world does "I'd like 4 of the 9 companions to be women" translate into "some of these people just want an all female cast?"  That's ludicrous and a sentiment that has not been expressed.  Well, in this thread at least.  I can't speak for the rest of the BW forums.  
 
We're not coming in to take away your male characters or force you into playing a game with an all female cast.  Try to get a hold of the sense of hyperbole, please. 
 
Plus, you might be underestimating roleplayers here.  Not just straight men, or women, or LGBTQ folks, or minorities, but the varied groups that make up those that love RP and RPGs.  There are roleplayers that I could see enjoying a game that has an all female cast of party members.  
 
However, considering that this doesn't happen outside of a few JRPGs, I think you're safe.

I wasn't talking about you.

 

Geez, some people can be so nosey and full of assumptions. Maybe if you stopped type casting, you'd be able to realize this doesn't involve you or whatever cliche your in.

[Giant ambush beetle]

Where's that from?

[Volus Warlord]

Why is this even a big deal? (No, really, why?)

[Grieving Natashina]

I wasn't talking about you.

 

Geez, some people can be so nosey and full of assumptions. Maybe if you stopped type casting, you'd be able to realize this doesn't involve you or whatever cliche your in.

 

You were talking in general, making a statement that was rather exaggerated.  I was merely replying to you words that you made.  You're the one that jumped to such a silly conclusion, making statements that "some just won't be happy without an all female cast."

 

Just to let you know, women have dealt with an all male cast of companions, with ladies only have marginal roles at best or not even included at all at worst.  There are games out there that have just that, frequently.  

 

Type casting?  How?  By saying that there is probably a lot of role players that would enjoy a female cast?  Or that only a few JRPGs have a female characters? Or was it my saying that we're not taking away your male characters?  

 

I've been reading your posts, and you seem to have this really huge problem with some folks wondering why there was only 3 women in the party to travel with yet again.  How about instead of trying to convince others that they are wrong and that they should feel ashamed, why don't you go into another thread that talks about what you want?  I've been in here off and on because this matters to me and to others.  

 

If it doesn't matter to you, then I respect that, but you don't need to keep saying it over and over again.

[Grieving Natashina]

Why is this even a big deal? (No, really, why?)

Just read the thread, or any of the others on this subject.  There are many wonderful and valid points that posters have made as to why this matters.  I've made some pretty long posts myself.   I'm not trying to be lazy, but really some posters put it better than I ever could have. 

[Stelae]

Why is this even a big deal? (No, really, why?)

Because Bioware tires really hard to be progressive in its portrayal of minorities and other disenfranchised groups in video games, and spends a lot of time talking about it and advocating for change in the industry.  But they do not appear to be walking the walk, here, and are falling back on the very same cliches that the real world (and the game-making world) uses to explain the lack of women in the public sphere. 

 

We call them out on it because we expect better from the company who allowed Manveer Heir to make such a passionate and reasoned call for equality at GDC.  They talk a good game, and we expect them to play one.

[Cainhurst Crow]

You were talking in general, making a statement that was rather exaggerated.  I was merely replying to you words that you made.  You're the one that jumped to such a silly conclusion, making statements that "some just won't be happy with an all female cast."

 

Just to let you know, women have dealt with an all male cast of companions, with ladies only have marginal roles at best or not even included at all at worst.  There are games out there that have just that, frequently.  

 

Type casting?  How?  By saying that there is probably a lot of role players that would enjoy a female cast?  Or that only a few JRPGs have a female characters? Or was it my saying that we're not taking away your male characters?  

 

I've been reading your posts, and you seem to have this really huge problem with some folks wondering why there was only 3 women in the party to travel with yet again.  How about instead of trying to convince others that they are wrong and that they should feel ashamed, why don't you go into another thread that talks about what you want?  I've been in here off and on because this matters to me and to others.  

 

If it doesn't matter to you, then I respect that, but you don't need to keep saying it over and over again.

 

You typecast what my reaction might be to a game with an all female cast. Assuming I'd be as spoiled and rotten as to refuse a game because of something as stupid as what gender the companions were or characters were, or that it would even offer any sort of problem to my enjoyment of the game.

 

What I want is impossible to attain, because what I want is for people to stop bitching, whining, and moaning, every time they don't get exactly what they want from bioware. I want people to show gratitude, for once, when bioware does something good without trying to turn it into a denouncement of them for not pushing harder then they did for those peoples own agendas.

 

In fact its not even that, now that I think about it. I want people to stop shoving their complaints onto these forums to where everyone has to see them whenever they check the new content being posted here, in every thread about new content.

[Divine Justinia V]

Because Bioware tires really hard to be progressive in its portrayal of minorities and other disenfranchised groups in video games, and spends a lot of time talking about it and advocating for change in the industry.  But they do not appear to be walking the walk, here, and are falling back on the very same cliches that the real world (and the game-making world) uses to explain the lack of women in the public sphere. 

 

We call them out on it because we expect better from the company who allowed Manveer Heir to make such a passionate and reasoned call for equality at GDC.  They talk a good game, and we expect them to play one.

 

Very well put.

 

I am highly disappointed at the way DA:I is going.