129 réponses à ce sujet

[Killdren88]

Yeah, like a Spirit of Honor or something. 

 

Valor is the spirit your looking for if I recall the Mage Origin correctly.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Valor is the spirit your looking for if I recall the Mage Origin correctly.

I almost put him, but then thought that people would think I meant him so chose another positive attribute that worked with suits of armor.

[omnitremere]

Cool I had never read the Maevaris Tilani comic before.  I'll have to check out more of DA's comics.  I don't know about a companion but I think Bioware really does need a prominent transgender character in DA:I.  The way the transgender prostitute was handed in DA2 was hilarious but pretty disrespectful at the same time.  A more sensitive and serious portrayal would be nice.  Until Bioware shows that they can handle that from a writing standpoint I'm not going to join any call for a transgendered companion.  As for a soul bound to armor I'm definitely all for it.

[Killdren88]

Perhaps even more interesting possibly a demon bound to a suit of Armor that fights with you due to being bound by the armor and such. Plus you get the dark twisted humor of demons as well.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Perhaps even more interesting possibly a demon bound to a suit of Armor that fights with you due to being bound by the armor and such. Plus you get the dark twisted humor of demons as well.

That would be really cool, actually. Just have the demon be some sort of negative attribute that wouldn't have it betray you.

[Cainhurst Crow]

1. The trans* community was fairly upset to see Jared Leto recieve so much acclaim for his role playing a trans* character when there are real trans* actors and actresses who could have played the part. I believe it is called trans* face, similar to black face.  Laverne Cox (I think is her name), is an amazing trans* actress on Orange is the New Black. There are talented actors and actresses within that community. Also, if you case Jared Leto who identifies as a man to play a character who identifies as a woman, its certainly understandable to question for some about how valid those creating the content view the trans* identity as.

 

I should clarify all of this by saying that I'm not a part of the trans* community, I do have friends who are, and while I'm going to do my best to represent the opinions they have expressed to me, if anyone who Id's as trans* and is comfortable discussing it wants to jump in and/or correct me please do!

 

2. I don't think we shouldn't be able to disagree or be mean to the trans* character, just that we should not be able to mock or be cruel to them for being trans*. This would be the first trans* character/companion we had which is a big deal. Being trans* still isn't widely accepted or understood, and I don't feel that 'dudebro' gamers or anyone who is homophobic or transphobic should be indulged or supported in their ability to perpetuate real world hatred. Now, if you disagree with the trans* character b/c they support the templars and you support the mages, then please, have heated arguments with them about that.

 

Additionally, some companions in Origins you can murder. I really would disagree with that being allowed as well. Now, dismissing them or not recruiting them (if you can do that with multiple companions) sure. But the murder of trans* folks is all too common and again, I don't feel like that is something the game should condone. Now yes, people get murdered, but specifically allowing a real world hate crime to happen in the game is really crossing a line imo.

 

3. I didn't so much mean they need to be the head of an organization so much as they should have other things going on for them then beign trans*. They should not be our 'trans* companion', they should be our window into the world of the Crows, or something else. That was just my example. Does that make sense?

 

 

@daveliam-thats a very good point thank you! ah-yeah, I was definitely read/interpreted that as outside the gender binary, or even agender/third gender, which does fall under the trans* identity, but probably isn't trans* in the sense most people know it as.

 

1. I can understand the reasoning presented by the community, sure. But at the same time I can't say I agree because it sounds way, way, too close to discrimination for me to get behind. Saying a person isn't allowed to portray a certain character and do a highly respectful and dignified portrayal simply because of the arbitrary differences of their circumstance harkens way too much back to the time where certain characters wouldn't be allowed to appear on the screen with other characters due to such arbitrary differences. If a trans-actor or trans-actress gives the better performance of the character, then by all means they should portray that character. But if there is an actor who captures the character more, their spirit more so then their physical attributes, then that person should probably get the role. It's like if white people were denouncing the marvel movies nick fury because the nick fury in the comics was white and in the movies hes black.

 

Even more so if its a voice actor position, where the differences matter even less. I think everyone should have an opportunity and no one should get special treatment over anyone else. Even if I can see what they mean, emphasize with what they're saying, and even agree with some of their points.

 

2. For the same reason stated above, in that I don't believe a character should be treated differently then any other because of the plot, I don't think we shouldn't be restrained in interacting with a companion because of who or what they are. It leads to problems, like with liara from mass effect and how you couldn't be mean to her in character, no matter how hard you tried, because the writing wouldn't let you. Not allowing players to roleplay their jerk characters being total jerks breeds resentment that spills into the forums, and quickly can end up becoming rampant with even tolerant and level headed players as they get sick of the game throwing massive "DO NOT DO THIS" flags in their faces. Should this choice be glamorized? No. Should this choice be seen as a good choice? No. None of the other jerk choices were glamorized nor shown as good, so I don't believe this option should get special treatment in that regard.

 

There comes a point where trying to be protective of a character ends up treating them with kid gloves, to the point of almost being insulting to that character by insinuating they can't stand up to the same stuff every other character goes through. Not targeting them because of their sexuality is a compromise I could see, and while some would grumble about the game auto-playing their character interaction, it wouldn't be too bad. Killing is trickier because it requires there to be opportunity to do the deed, which in theory could not present itself. I don't think however we should have a plot in whcih this character has no opportunityI to die/be killed just because the plot said so while every other character can be killed. But if only a select few characters can be killed, then fine, you can scratch them off the list.

 

3. I would very much like to see something like that, I just misunderstood cause you listed only leadership positions. There should be more depth to them then just their sexuality. This should apply to all the characters, in my opinion, and as I've said before, I don't like anyone getting special treatment, good or bad.

 

EDIT: So basically I believe in giving transgender characters and people irl the same opportunities as everyone else and that no one should get a better chance over them just because of what they are, and vice versa. Its important to show them the respect they deserve and treat them no worse or better, to show that they are no different for you or me.

[oceanicsurvivor]

^ Though I disagree with some of what you've said, I definitely feel like these are conversations worth having, but as dave pointed out, I jumped the gun a bit in my initial post; and while many trans* people exist outside the gender binary, that isn't really what your OP was about (my bad, sorry). I'd rather not derail the thread with this convo Feel free to pm me or something though!

[Cainhurst Crow]

The levels of cruel you can be to your companions already is pretty damn large. If you're playing an "All-in" evil character, then being evil to everyone seems like the natural course to go, don't you think? I mean, if this person is acting like this big a jerk to people they keep close, what're they going to do to people they don't even need to be around for long?

 

The option to play a good person already exists in all these bioware games, the option to be pragmatic and grey also exist to an extent. All I'm saying is to extend that to being an overly evil character as well, so you can play the three extremes of overly nice, overly mean, and overly neutral, and have leeway in between.

 

Gender doesn't have anything to do with it, as I pointed up above. Its another target like religion, social status, and morality are, all of which can already be viciously mocked by the PC in previous bioware titles, dragon age 2 included. You can be pretty hardline as well, so it only follows that same line of people wanting to play hardline characters.

 

But I digress, I don't see what this has to od with the original topic.

[Allan Schumacher]

1. I can understand the reasoning presented by the community, sure. But at the same time I can't say I agree because it sounds way, way, too close to discrimination for me to get behind. Saying a person isn't allowed to portray a certain character and do a highly respectful and dignified portrayal simply because of the arbitrary differences of their circumstance harkens way too much back to the time where certain characters wouldn't be allowed to appear on the screen with other characters due to such arbitrary differences. If a trans-actor or trans-actress gives the better performance of the character, then by all means they should portray that character. But if there is an actor who captures the character more, their spirit more so then their physical attributes, then that person should probably get the role. It's like if white people were denouncing the marvel movies nick fury because the nick fury in the comics was white and in the movies hes black.

 

I don't actually agree nor disagree with whether or not someone like Jared Leto should be a trans* character, mostly because until 37 seconds ago I was completely oblivious to it as a topic.

 

I can see ocean's perspective, however.  As an analogue, however, it wasn't *too* long ago that white people commonly used to portray other races.  Things like black face or Mickey Rooney's Mr. Yunioshi.  Taking an extreme example just to sort of illustrate: I think Daniel Day Lewis is an excellent actor... would he be the best candidate for portraying Martin Luther King Jr.?  Going waaaaaaaaay back, women couldn't even be actors... but I don't think we'd want Patrick Stewart replacing Cate Blanchett as Elizabeth!

 

At the same time though, I can agree that I'm not sure if it's absolutely necessary either.  Is it bad that Leondardo DiCaprio plays a person with a handicap in What's Eating Gilbert Grape?  Can a straight/gay man not play a gay/straight man in a role?

 

Another thing to keep in mind, too, is that discrimination may be internalized and implemented institutionally, even with no overt fault of those that perpetrate it.  There was a study done where professors, both men and women, rated a potential research applicant.  In the experiment, the application was identical for all people, except some people received one that had a woman's name, while others had one that had a man's name.

 

(NOte: Statistical significance, since I use the term, denotes "The difference is significant enough that luck/random chance most likely is not a factor."  Not "this is important).

 

There was no stastitical significance in how the professors rated the applicants, regardless of being a man or a woman.  That is, the deviation in scores between men and women professors was small.  The scores on the applicants however, were different and statistically significant.  Regardless of the assessor being a man or a woman, the applicant scored better when the name was a man's name, across the board.  The applicant, with a man's name, was considered more hireable, more mentorable, and more comptent.  Both male and female assessors also offered the man a higher wage.

 

Now we can't say WHY this may be the case, and more research is almost always useful.  But it does give an interesting "Huh!"  It also lends the idea that perhaps even women internalize some of the expectation discrepancies.  This tells me that there may be a a more systemic bias that affects people subconsciously, causing them to rate an applicant different based on their expectations on gender.  So I do hesitate to say that it's discrimination outright if a trans* person were preferred to depict a trans* person in a show.  There may be systemic biases that cause us to THINK that a person is better qualified than someone else, when perhaps that technically isn't true.  I do believe that objectivity is not an easy thing to have as a human being.

[Cainhurst Crow]

You made a lot of rationalizations but didn't really answer. I take it cisgender is "just another target" too.

 

Leaving aside that for the most part, "targets" in Dragon Age are relatively safe proxies. Fictitious races stand in for actual races, fictitious religions for actual ones. The appropriate analogue to that would be a fictitious third gender, not an actual transgender person.

 

But that doesn't really sound feasible to be quite frank. And to me I answered your question, no debate or rationalization involved.

[oceanicsurvivor]

http://www.policymic...ls-trans-actors

 

http://blogs.indiewi...s-club-20140220

 

For anyone who is interested in this topic. There are more perspectives then this, but its a decent place to start I think?

 

It should be noted however that the role specifically mentioned is not a 'gender neutral' role and that I am again taking the OP to simply mean outside the gender binary in some form/identity or not cisgender.

[Allan Schumacher]

As for the OP, more specifically, this came up at PAX Prime during the LGBTQ panel.  Including looking at species (in fantasy or scifi) that don't have the concept of gender, but also recognizing that even in our world there are cultures that have more that two genders.

 

I think it'd be interesting.  I admit my own failings as I'm not too clear on the topic so I can't contribute much more than that, but I know it has come up.  It's also interesting, because there's a suit of armor character in Planescape: Torment, but I always referred to them as a "he."  I'm curious if that's actually the case or not.  I do believe the character has a history, if I remember correctly, so it may not be just an assumption on my part but actually be because the spirit lingering in the armor was a man's.

[Cainhurst Crow]

I feel this thread is starting to drift off into its own direction.

 

Like a bird, leaving its mothers nest to set out into the world. Brings a tear to my eye,.

[Killdren88]

As for the OP, more specifically, this came up at PAX Prime during the LGBTQ panel.  Including looking at species (in fantasy or scifi) that don't have the concept of gender, but also recognizing that even in our world there are cultures that have more that two genders.

 

I think it'd be interesting.  I admit my own failings as I'm not too clear on the topic so I can't contribute much more than that, but I know it has come up.  It's also interesting, because there's a suit of armor character in Planescape: Torment, but I always referred to them as a "he."  I'm curious if that's actually the case or not.  I do believe the character has a history, if I remember correctly, so it may not be just an assumption on my part but actually be because the spirit lingering in the armor was a man's.

 

 

Demons and Spirits are genderless yes? It can work if you bind say a Spirit of Valor to a suit of armor (Assuming that is even possible). As for the voice, it can be a male and female voice actor's lines meshing together.

[Allan Schumacher]

But that doesn't really sound feasible to be quite frank. And to me I answered your question, no debate or rationalization involved.

 

Why does it not sound feasible?  My assumption is that there'd be an innate resistance to accepting a situation where there isn't a gender binary establishment.  (The concept is unfamiliar to myself, as well, so I'd be concerned about my own ability to relate)

[addiction21]

 

but I don't think we'd want Patrick Stewart replacing Cate Blanchett as Elizabeth!

 

 

 

I don't have much I want to say on the topic but I just wanted to say sounds like this could be great.

[Darth Krytie]

I actually like the idea of having someone gender neutral as a companion. I just would want them to be treated as such. Or at least have them specify what pronouns to use. (And here's the obligatory reference to Mass Effect)... Legion was what you could consider gender neutral. A geth. Yet, Shepard frequently refers to Legion as 'he', presumably because the voice Legion used to speak with sounded masculine. So, I'd appreciate avoiding that by having the companion either state a preference or something to that effect.

 

Still, I'm always interested in the atypical when it comes to companions. I loved HK-47 so much. So very much. And spent a lot of time calling people meatbags for years after playing that game.

[n7stormrunner]

I don't have much I want to say on the topic but I just wanted to say sounds like this could be great.

 

I bet he could do it. it be interesting to see people react to something like that. more so, if it was done completely serious. but that probably off topic I'll go now. 

[Cainhurst Crow]

Why does it not sound feasible? My assumption is that there'd be an innate resistance to accepting a situation where there isn't a gender binary establishment. (The concept is unfamiliar to myself, as well, so I'd be concerned about my own ability to relate)

Cant see how you could invent a new gender withe anyone going "thats just an analogue of this gender", unlike invented races, religions, or cultures which have more ambiguity and room to debate. Because, as the others posted brought up, it'd be better to have evil characters only be capable of antagonizing a made up gender in their full evil play through then allow them to target actual irl genders.

I dont think anyone would be unable to understand someone without a gender we get. But at the same time, there are so many gender identities irl and gender identity is such a specific trait, that I'd be hard to make an analogue that doesn't fit any of them.

[Cainhurst Crow]

I actually like the idea of having someone gender neutral as a companion. I just would want them to be treated as such. Or at least have them specify what pronouns to use. (And here's the obligatory reference to Mass Effect)... Legion was what you could consider gender neutral. A geth. Yet, Shepard frequently refers to Legion as 'he', presumably because the voice Legion used to speak with sounded masculine. So, I'd appreciate avoiding that by having the companion either state a preference or something to that effect.
 
Still, I'm always interested in the atypical when it comes to companions. I loved HK-47 so much. So very much. And spent a lot of time calling people meatbags for years after playing that game.

What if a character doesn't care, and says for the character to refer to them however they'd like. So we could pick a male, female, or gender neutral identifier to refer to them?

[Darth Krytie]

What if a character doesn't care, and says for the character to refer to them however they'd like. So we could pick a male, female, or gender neutral identifier to refer to them?

 

As long as the options exist, I guess it's fine. I just don't want it to default to something based on the VA's presumed gender without any input from the companion or op.

[Allan Schumacher]

Cant see how you could invent a new gender withe anyone going "thats just an analogue of this gender", unlike invented races, religions, or cultures which have more ambiguity and room to debate. Because, as the others posted brought up, it'd be better to have evil characters only be capable of antagonizing a made up gender in their full evil play through then allow them to target actual irl genders.

I dont think anyone would be unable to understand someone without a gender we get. But at the same time, there are so many gender identities irl and gender identity is such a specific trait, that I'd be hard to make an analogue that doesn't fit any of them.

 

I think that that is fair and I agree that it'd probably come across as pretty alien.  I think it'd also be hard to execute because it'd be alien.  I am pretty sure I wouldn't be able to do it.

 

At the same time though, it may just be alien simply because no one has really tried (or at the very least, been successful at it)?