561 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

I feel Mass Effect'd again.

 

 

So reading the rest of the posts, I can definitely understand the concerns regarding Mass Effect 3.  We have more romance reveals undoubtedly happening at some point.  Right now there are two confirmed romance for a heterosexual woman (Iron Bull and Cullen).  Two confirmed romances for a lesbian woman (Sera and Josephine).

 

I can understand if Iron Bull and Cullen are not interesting for you.  Though at the same time, for any particular game, there's going to be some people that do not find any of the romances interesting, unfortunately.  So I'll need help unveiling what is bad luck, and what is a greater reflection of systemic issues perpetuating themselves.  It seems better than ME3 to me, but it doesn't to you.

[Grieving Natashina]

Iron Bull is confirmed as an ungated bisexual LI.  Straight women have now had a second romance option announced.

[Fast Jimmy]

 

I don't follow the bolded sentence. I just don't understand what you mean.At any rate, I think it's the same kind of power fantasy - your character is such an incredible person ,that despite the fact that they completely lack any political standing, connection with the society, wealth, or stake in the conflict they are unilaterally allowed to decide its resolution and their desire will end up being unequivocally followed by anyone. It's the same kind of "powerful person who is powerful is intoxicating to everyone around them" fantasy - the only difference is that it's politicians getting intoxicated with your glamour instead of sexually available (and attractive) adults being attracted to your glamour.They're worshiping you, the hero, and throwing themselves at you. You're objection seems to be that you want them throwing themselves at you so that you can decide how to live their life, instead of going on some virtual date. 

 

You said you didn't understand it, but then you went on to explain it exactly. Bravo.

 

I wasn't defending my preferred form of power fantasy - just clarifying that's what my preferred fantasy was. Although not because I enjoy being that politically powerful, but because I like seeing how the choices made make ripples and effects throughout the world.

 

 

Except those are never the story told.

 

You're right. Bioware has gotten in the general ballpark. No one has gotten it where I'd want it. Which is unfortunate for me, but such is my cross to bear and all that.

 

 

The story told is about how incredible you are for overcoming the threat and earning the right to tell people how to live their lives. That's how DA:O does it, how TW2 does it, how FO:NV does it, KOTOR does it, BG2, etc. etc. etc.   A story about how the world copes with change is a post-conflict story.

 

 

Or a story told in the epilogue slides. 

 

I'm someone who IMMENSELY enjoys an ending that is thorough and takes us beyond the immediate results of the end game. Stabbing the dragon, play the music and roll the credits is boring to me. Stabbing the dragon, play the music and then treating me to a recap of the actions and choices I made along the way and how that resulted in change in the world... I really enjoy that. Having it in game as well is good, but often I find the timescale and omniscience an epilogue slide outcome can provide is what works best for me.

 

I know that these are considered "bad" because now I'm knowing things beyond what my character could know, but I disagree. It is it the end of the game. I am no longer intrinsically tied to that character - their time as my narrative companion is over. All I have left is the world and, before you roll credits, you are free to show as much of that world to me as the player as you see fit. I just happen to enjoy seeing  A LOT before that cord is cut.

[Enigmatick]

Phone formatting strikes again, ya blew it Jimmy.

[DaySeeker]

I think the romances and friendships in game humanize the experience.  The giant story is great, moral choices, intriguing conflicts, immersive world, but to make the world important one needs to connect to the people in it.  I also think players connect to their avatar and want to give them something besides a body count.  I don't think romances are "nerd porn" I think it is adding emotional cohesion to player, character and world.

[Fast Jimmy]

Phone formatting strikes again, ya blew it Jimmy.

 

This is why I lose.

[CareBear1023]

I'm certainly biased, but what do you mean by "hullaballoo" because there was no shortage of controversy on the forums with respect to Sera being a lesbian. I assume you're referring to the lack of general media buzz that came as a result (which I, admittedly, have less visibility into especially with respect to our own game).

Some stuff that trips me up though is that I don't feel like we're not discussing women. For example:
Dozens of retweets for the "CupcakeQuisition" (including me encouraging users of this thread to let media outlets know there was some good news regarding women representation in gaming rather than just the bad out of E3). Which The Escapist actually did report on. Link. It's certainly been something I have been invested in, and have tried to provide a space free as well as leverage my influence as "BioWare developer" when tweeting about it and retweeting about it. The initiative started because we made a trailer featuring the woman Inquisitor, as well as other things such as playing as a female in some of our E3 videos, gender neutral box art, and so forth. Aaryn tweeted that we did a female trailer because it matters too.

Though it was exceptionally disheartening that only The Escapist responded. I think one of the posters got a response from one place that was simply "Yeah we saw that at E3. Pretty cool." So I can definitely agree that there's huge issues with male default in society, especially accented because happy news often isn't reported.

We've done a brief video interview with Alix Wilton Regan (one of the two voices used for the Female Inquisitor) which can be found here. None of the other voice actors for the Inquisitor have been interviewed yet.

Is it more that you'd still like to see more? Because your first posts seemed to be more directed towards the specific romance choices available to you, but it seems you have moved towards a different picture now? (Which is fine, I'm just trying to frame the discussion in my mind to better understand it).

 

I agree that the press proliferated Dorian like crazy, and I'm not sure why Sera wasn't also proliferated to the same extent. I suppose David could have not made a comment towards Dorian being gay. Perhaps we should have mentioned that Sera was a lesbian in her interview rather than confirmed via twitter to give it more visibility. What solutions would you suggest for remedying this, because I'll admit I struggle to see the distinction between where BioWare's responsibility is and where the news outlets reporting on news is? I think, as a society, male homosexuality as seen as more "outrageous" than female homosexuality, but that may be my privilege speaking.

I think there's a degree of intersectionality here that I'll admit, I don't fully understand and lack the experience to recognize. So if you can help out, please do.

 

First, I appreciate the thoughtful replies.  I also posted on vicodin the other day while laid up with a broken foot replaying Dragon Age: Origins and Awakenings so it was kind of a rambling first post.

 

My apologies.

 

I supposed I expect a lot from Bioware because Bioware made me feel valued.  Both you and Bethesda softworks saw that women also wanted to be heroes and for that I'll always be grateful.  I also, to an extent, feel that we did get left out in Mass Effect.  Being cheated on and left, I'm sure, is real life, but see...I'm trying to escape real life when I start playing.  I felt like our characters lacked complexity of the males and that our LIs were also the least interesting characters that you've created--and if it were any other company I'd chalk it up to bad writing.

 

But you're not a bad company.  You have great writing, so I felt it was more of a slight in the excitement to do something good and new.  I loved it when DG told the whining straight gamers to shut up.  Guys have been heroes for years in games.  Link gets Zelda.  Sonic runs from Amy.  The Witcher, Splinter Cell, Hitman...these are all for guys.  They don't get how fortunate they are to see themselves in these roles.  I always had to play a guy and when you guys gave me the opportunity to be "me" I never forgot it, and I wanted the GLBT community to likewise have that feeling.  Inclusiveness and growing a customer base, especially of women and GLBT people who have been left out of these things is to me a wonderful thing.  I think being sensitive to their needs is important, but...what about "us"?  Women have not only supported Bioware, but largely have been for the last decade the ones harassing our boyfriends about being nicer to gay guys, arguing with them to have gay friends, making the GLBT equality movement a priority, and were with you all the way.  Where is our reward as customers for being loyal and loving you for the last 6-7 years?  Dorian was written as a labor of love, I know it and I'm proud of it, but where it the female writer saying the same?

 

We have 1 straight male to romance so far that I know of.  That person is not a companion.  That means we miss out on that whole experience that we had with our "friends" (and they feel like friends by the end of the game) with this person.  This feels like another Mass Effect all over.  We have one option left to romance a companion and we know now that he's not human (not that I care) or that we choose the Bull (I would have anyway) for just a romp.

 

So, in closing it does feel like we're the afterthought of those groups who have supported you because, let's face it, you DO know that the difference between Dragon Age and Skyrim is the romance, commeraderie and interpersonal stuff.  Giving us that same level of enjoyment that the males will get would be nice.

 

Or not.

[CareBear1023]

So reading the rest of the posts, I can definitely understand the concerns regarding Mass Effect 3.  We have more romance reveals undoubtedly happening at some point.  Right now there are two confirmed romance for a heterosexual woman (Iron Bull and Cullen).  Two confirmed romances for a lesbian woman (Sera and Josephine).

 

I can understand if Iron Bull and Cullen are not interesting for you.  Though at the same time, for any particular game, there's going to be some people that do not find any of the romances interesting, unfortunately.  So I'll need help unveiling what is bad luck, and what is a greater reflection of systemic issues perpetuating themselves.  It seems better than ME3 to me, but it doesn't to you.

 

Cullen is interesting but he's not a companion.  Iron Bull is interesting.  As I've said I would have made a million babies with the Arishok.  I hope I'm wrong.  I want to be wrong.  I posted in the concern page for a reason.

 

I'd like us to have companions that we can romance and I don't think that's too much to ask. 

 

I don't mean to pick at you, but you guys do such a great job making us feel lost in that game.  I was tearing up over leaving Varic in DA:2.  Like even though that game had the same "sets" it didn't matter because I had the best dwarf in the world with me!

[Allan Schumacher]

I'll point out that I said "responses that say X." Because that's exactly (word for word, in many cases) what the responses read. Many (I'd wager a majority, especially starting out) of the statements were exactly "I wouldn't buy it."

 

Yes well, if I took responses always to what they say word for word, I don't think I'd be doing a good job.  Otherwise when someone says BioWare is lazy, they literally mean we don't work hard as opposed to they mean the thing they are critiquing doesn't look as well as they'd prefer.  Or that when we don't listen, they actually mean that we're oblivious to what they say (despite the fact they're talking directly to me or someone else) when they really mean to say that they feel the direction we're moving in is not in alignment , or that they actually feel our writers are incompetent because they often have to have characters cut.

 

As for the quotes, lets look at the first posts (bold emphasises are mine):

 

"I might not buy the game to be honest"

"I'd be really unhappy. I actually don't know if I'd still buy it."

"Wouldn't bother me at all"

"Romances are what makes Bio games excellent.... Without romances Bio games would be much poorer." (I can't discern how it affects their willingness to purchase, but I'll take it as a negative)

"It wouldn't bother me either."

"I'd be put out, but it wouldn't stop me from buying the game."

"Personally, I don't care either way. I can play with or without romances."

"Well, romance, specifically same-sex romance, is what makes me favour Bioware games... If the romance element was taken out of a Bioware game, then I would be disappointed, and I probably wouldn't buy it, unless that title offered something else that piqued my interest"

"So long Bioware warn people before the release that there won't be romance, I'll be fine."

"Personally I would be completely fine without it."

"I would still buy it, but I would spend much less time playing it."

"Romance ain't the reason I buy the game."

"don't even play like thattttt"  (I'll take this one as a negative)

"But for DA4 and beyond, I don't care if romances are available."

"I would be extremely disappointed if they weren't there."

 

That is the first 15 responses (excluding posters that posted multiple times). Of that, 9 of them state they wouldn't care or would still buy even if disappointed.

 

 

So no, the statements were not exactly "wouldn't buy it."  You can probably find some other sort of cutoff that would make it a majority, but I picked 15 because it was the closest multiple of 5 that went to the end of my page.  It doesn't seem like your recollection is accurate, but rather that your perception (and the inherent biases within it) have skewed your impression into overstating a particular viewpoint representation.  Note that this isn't that uncommon, PBS Myth 6 details an experiment where teachers forced themselves to give 50/50 attention between boys and girls, and the boys felt the girls received upwards of 90% of the attention.

 

 

Yes. Except I've usually just been told "deal with it." But that's an entirely different discussion.

 

I'm not sure it is a different discussion.  Plenty of romance people get told to deal with it.  Further, any chance that people perceive your comments to be equivalent to you telling them to just deal with it?  Additionally, is there jadedness that you're told to deal with it while you feel that romance people are exempt from such responses?

 

 

It still didn't surprise me in the least. Nor does it make any less of a huge mountain for Bioware to climb if you ever decided to not include it, for whatever reasons. That's the thrust of my post, I suppose. Not that I find it incredulous that people like the romances or that there is value in them that I do not share, but that people behave to the suggestion of taking them out in exactly the way I'd expect and that it makes it nearly impossible to separate Bioware from its romance content going forward in future titles.

 

What I get out of the discussion is that people would, for the most part, be open to it as long as the game still delivered on emotional engagement, LGBTQ representation, and a focus on the companions/party members, because that's why they play our games.  Why do our interpretations vary so much, especially since I'm on the record in that thread (numerous times) as saying that romance content is not a requirement for me.

[Allan Schumacher]

Have you ever done studies on what else people find uniquely attributable to your games?

 

I'm not aware of any.  When I use that term it was simply a phrase used in the discussion thread quoted.

 

I'm sure there are other things that other people value in our games that they consider uniquely attributable.

[Enigmatick]

I'm not aware of any.  When I use that term it was simply a phrase used in the discussion thread quoted.

 

I'm sure there are other things that other people value in our games that they consider uniquely attributable.

I can't name many AAA Rtwp RPGs.

[Allan Schumacher]

We have 1 straight male to romance so far that I know of.  That person is not a companion.  That means we miss out on that whole experience that we had with our "friends" (and they feel like friends by the end of the game) with this person.  This feels like another Mass Effect all over.  We have one option left to romance a companion and we know now that he's not human (not that I care) or that we choose the Bull (I would have anyway) for just a romp.

 

So, in closing it does feel like we're the afterthought of those groups who have supported you because, let's face it, you DO know that the difference between Dragon Age and Skyrim is the romance, commeraderie and interpersonal stuff.  Giving us that same level of enjoyment that the males will get would be nice.

 

Or not.

 

There may be more news to come regarding romances.  I know that, because of ME3, non-companion romances seem innately inferior as well.  If you're still on the fence and that's the only romance option for you, maybe wait a bit and check to see how people like how the romance content is done.  I'd rather you wait and make the best choice for yourself than jump on the game only to feel disappointed and/or disregarded.

[Allan Schumacher]

Cullen is interesting but he's not a companion.  Iron Bull is interesting.  As I've said I would have made a million babies with the Arishok.  I hope I'm wrong.  I want to be wrong.  I posted in the concern page for a reason.

 

I'd like us to have companions that we can romance and I don't think that's too much to ask. 

 

I don't mean to pick at you, but you guys do such a great job making us feel lost in that game.  I was tearing up over leaving Varic in DA:2.  Like even though that game had the same "sets" it didn't matter because I had the best dwarf in the world with me!

 

There's nothing wrong with posting your concerns.  There's still several months worth of information coming so I hope that the news to come puts you in a more comfortable place with respect to what you think you'll get out of the game.

[Allan Schumacher]

I can't name many AAA Rtwp RPGs.

 

Fair enough.  Depending on who you ask, arguably there are none?

 

Though I do want to point out that this isn't an indication of "we put this in because people find it uniquely attributable to our game."  The discussion spawned out of the idea of why people feel romance content is important to our game.  For those people, it's possible that they consider it a feature on par with RtwP combat mechanics.  I'm sure some have decided to not buy our game because we deviated too much from RtwP combat mechanics.

 

It's neither good nor bad to prefer one over the other, in my opinion.

[Fast Jimmy]

Yes well, if I took responses always to what they say word for word, I don't think I'd be doing a good job.  Otherwise when someone says BioWare is lazy, they literally mean we don't work hard as opposed to they mean the thing they are critiquing doesn't look as well as they'd prefer.  Or that when we don't listen, they actually mean that we're oblivious to what they say (despite the fact they're talking directly to me or someone else) when they really mean to say that they feel the direction we're moving in is not in alignment , or that they actually feel our writers are incompetent because they often have to have characters cut.

 

As for the quotes, lets look at the first posts (bold emphasises are mine):

 

"I might not buy the game to be honest"

"I'd be really unhappy. I actually don't know if I'd still buy it."

"Wouldn't bother me at all"

"Romances are what makes Bio games excellent.... Without romances Bio games would be much poorer." (I can't discern how it affects their willingness to purchase, but I'll take it as a negative)

"It wouldn't bother me either."

"I'd be put out, but it wouldn't stop me from buying the game."

"Personally, I don't care either way. I can play with or without romances."

"Well, romance, specifically same-sex romance, is what makes me favour Bioware games... If the romance element was taken out of a Bioware game, then I would be disappointed, and I probably wouldn't buy it, unless that title offered something else that piqued my interest"

"So long Bioware warn people before the release that there won't be romance, I'll be fine."

"Personally I would be completely fine without it."

"I would still buy it, but I would spend much less time playing it."

"Romance ain't the reason I buy the game."

"don't even play like thattttt"  (I'll take this one as a negative)

"But for DA4 and beyond, I don't care if romances are available."

"I would be extremely disappointed if they weren't there."

 

That is the first 15 responses (excluding posters that posted multiple times). Of that, 9 of them state they wouldn't care or would still buy even if disappointed.

 

 

So no, the statements were not exactly "wouldn't buy it."  You can probably find some other sort of cutoff that would make it a majority, but I picked 15 because it was the closest multiple of 5 that went to the end of my page.  It doesn't seem like your recollection is accurate, but rather that your perception (and the inherent biases within it) have skewed your impression into overstating a particular viewpoint representation.  Note that this isn't that uncommon, PBS Myth 6 details an experiment where teachers forced themselves to give 50/50 attention between boys and girls, and the boys felt the girls received upwards of 90% of the attention.

 

What I get out of the discussion is that people would, for the most part, be open to it as long as the game still delivered on emotional engagement, LGBTQ representation, and a focus on the companions/party members, because that's why they play our games.  Why do our interpretations vary so much, especially since I'm on the record in that thread (numerous times) as saying that romance content is not a requirement for me.

 

It is entirely possible that the differences exist because you view a "I'm not sure I would buy the game" as not that bad of a thing? Maybe that's bias as a Bioware employee, convinced you could win these potentials over with an excellent product. 

 

I'm more of the mind that anyone who even considers their purchasing decision off of a small sample of optional content that serves very little to support the larger story or experience mind blowingly indicting. That they seem to care little (or at all) for all the extra content and work that goes into the rest of the game and the overall experience if Bioware decided to not give them the ability to have a romance - even if that meant they could spend more time and interaction with the very companions they seem to want to be with - makes me scratch my head about why they'd play the game in the first place, given that they have to slog through 20-50 hours of an experience they might not be doing if there wasn't 5-15 minutes worth of romance dialogue. 

 

[quote]I'm not sure it is a different discussion.  Plenty of romance people get told to deal with it.  Further, any chance that people perceive your comments to be equivalent to you telling them to just deal with it?  Additionally, is there jadedness that you're told to deal with it while you feel that romance people are exempt from such responses?[/quote]

 

No. I put my big boy pants on one leg at a time, just like everyone else. The source of about 99% of dialogue and complaints from me in the past about said features being scrapped isn't that they were, but that Bioware didn't even seem to be aware that they were being scrapped. Or, more accurately,the belief that what was being lost could easily be replaced by features which didn't address the problem at hand. If you were to cut out romance content, there would be discussions, forums, explanations, justifications... you wouldn't just not include it in a next game and say "wait, people were actually using our game for that?" 

 

In essence, being told "deal with it" when those who got rid of a feature didn't even realize their game couldn't work for you anymore isn't a case of jadedness... its a feeling that valuable design features and lessons are being lost. Not just for Bioware, but for the community at large.

 

But this is an entirely different discussion - if you really feel that I'm being butthurt on romances because of X feature was removed, feel free to PM me.

[devSin]

I saw about 10 pages that explained that people like it for the emotional connection it provides, as well as how it's a form of expression that they really enjoy, especially in terms of LGBTQ expression.

High five for using "expression" and not "representation".

I think romance in particular is an avenue of expression (allowing you to express a particular orientation) more than solely being tied to representation (this is a gay romance, so this character should epitomize being gay).

Which is a big reason I was a fan of bisexual romances (representation can come from anywhere—romances are fertile gardens for expression and inclusion, which can be harder to cultivate in other places in the game since protagonist sexuality relates so little to most of what's going on). But in a game with finite characters (and word count), I certainly understand the efficacy of combining the two (representing LGBT individuals within the game, and allowing players to express LGBT personalities); time will tell if it leads to more satisfaction in the romance content overall.

[Enigmatick]

Fair enough.  Depending on who you ask, arguably there are none?

 

Though I do want to point out that this isn't an indication of "we put this in because people find it uniquely attributable to our game."  The discussion spawned out of the idea of why people feel romance content is important to our game.  For those people, it's possible that they consider it a feature on par with RtwP combat mechanics.  I'm sure some have decided to not buy our game because we deviated too much from RtwP combat mechanics.

 

It's neither good nor bad to prefer one over the other, in my opinion.

Which one do you value more as a player?

[CareBear1023]

There's nothing wrong with posting your concerns.  There's still several months worth of information coming so I hope that the news to come puts you in a more comfortable place with respect to what you think you'll get out of the game.

 

I wouldn't have been so "blarg" if Cullen was a companion.  I think that's where a lot of us straight females feel left out when you read the posts.  While I'm happy for gay gamers to get Dorian (I am) I feel like, ...well, what about us?  This will sound strange, but females (straight and lesbian) and gay men have always been in the same boat when it comes to being the afterthoughts in the gaming, comics, and RPG world.  If women were represented they were standard male fantasy (straight or lesbian).  How many women can relate to Wonder Woman?  So when you see gay men get on the bus with the straight guys and you're still on the cornera it's like...dang it!

 

So like I'm happy they're getting a cool character companion, I'm a little bitter that we get Cullen but you have to go to another place to visit him.  It just feels like, once again, it's all about men, men men men getting the cool stuff.

 

 

Yes, I acknowledge I'm whining, but I have a professional career and it's soul-sucking.  Bioware and Bethesda let me escape from that soul sucking career for a little while.

[Grieving Natashina]

There may be more news to come regarding romances.  I know that, because of ME3, non-companion romances seem innately inferior as well.  If you're still on the fence and that's the only romance option for you, maybe wait a bit and check to see how people like how the romance content is done.  I'd rather you wait and make the best choice for yourself than jump on the game only to feel disappointed and/or disregarded.

I wanted jump in here Allan.  My initial reservations about NPC romances didn't have anything to do with Mass Effect.  I hadn't even played the games when the NPC romance announcement was made.  It more stemmed from Neverwinter Nights and the way Genn and Aribeth were handled.  

 

Genn was so easy to overlook for me as a romance that I didn't know about it until last year watching David Gaider's panel at GDC that he was even a LI.  I've played the game at least a dozen times and just missed his LI status, somehow.  He also seemed to have little real connection to the overarching plot, when I would go to him for quests.   While Aribeth was easier to spot (and a major player in the plot,) I felt her romance dialogue and interactions weren't handled very well.  It became pretty bad in HotU, where I felt much of her warmth and sincerity of the romance was lost.  I know there is some very good (and rather literal) reasons as to why this was, but I thought the execution felt ultimately rushed.  

 

I haven't tried the ME NPC romances yet, but considering that I've played through the series once and ME2-3 for the second time in about 6 weeks, I'm giving it a rest for a bit.  I'll give my feedback after a long break.  

 

After hearing some folks talk about the good experiences they've personally had with NPCs romances in Mass Effect (which there are some,) and also the news about the word budget, I'm much more open minded.  I'm willing to give it a shot, though truthfully this would be by my 5th or 6th playthrough, which isn't all that much considering how often I replay my games over the course of the years.   I'll check it out after I've romanced the companions I'm more interested in.

 

This is all in my opinion of course.     

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I think something to keep in mind is that it's basically default confirmed that there will be one more male LI. There are 8 LIs with two left unconfirmed. Vivienne is the only option left to be a female LI, while there's Solas, Varric and Blackwall for males. For all we know, straight women may get a whole extra option out of those, but it's almost certainly going to be at least another bisexual male option. The chances of it being another gay option are particularly non-existent, because despite what's being said, we've never really been on the same bus. 

[CareBear1023]

I think something to keep in mind is that it's basically default confirmed that there will be one more male LI. There are 8 LIs with two left unconfirmed. Vivienne is the only option left to be a female LI, while there's Solas, Varric and Blackwall for males. For all we know, straight women may get a whole extra option out of those, but it's almost certainly going to be at least another bisexual male option. The chances of it being another gay option are particularly non-existent, because despite what's being said, we've never really been on the same bus. 

 

I am going to disagree.  This is not about "romances", or not only about it.  It's about playing a game where the hero could be you.  Take the love out of it and look at the history of gaming.  Most games did not have love interests.  You just played a male character that shot people, stabbed them, hacked them, etc.  You got to be "you" no matter what.  Until Lara Croft no one even thought a game could have a female lead and have people play it, and even then she had to be this male fantasy.

 

My sexuality and your sexuality is actually a miniscule portion of who we are. We had our bodies before we knew what it could do.  Before I knew I could fall in love I knew I liked to play and pretend.  Even as a girl child I pretended to be males because there were very few female heros.  This is why Jean Gray, Buffy, and Xena were so awesome because they were anomalies.

 

Women as heros is new.  So in context of what I was saying, yes we were on the same "bus" insofar as not seeing ourselves as lead characters.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I am going to disagree.  This is not about "romances", or not only about it.  It's about playing a game where the hero could be you.  Take the love out of it and look at the history of gaming.  Most games did not have love interests.  You just played a male character that shot people, stabbed them, hacked them, etc.  You got to be "you" no matter what.  Until Lara Croft no one even thought a game could have a female lead and have people play it, and even then she had to be this male fantasy.

 

My sexuality and your sexuality is actually a miniscule portion of who we are. We had our bodies before we knew what it could do.  Before I knew I could fall in love I knew I liked to play and pretend.  Even as a girl child I pretended to be males because there were very few female heros.  This is why Jean Gray, Buffy, and Xena were so awesome because they were anomalies.

 

Women as heros is new.  So in context of what I was saying, yes we were on the same "bus" insofar as not seeing ourselves as lead characters.

You can play a woman in DA:I. Nobody is taking that away. If it's not about romances, then the argument is irrelevant to this issue. We're talking about romances.

[Fast Jimmy]

I am going to disagree.  This is not about "romances", or not only about it.  It's about playing a game where the hero could be you.  Take the love out of it and look at the history of gaming.  Most games did not have love interests.  You just played a male character that shot people, stabbed them, hacked them, etc.  You got to be "you" no matter what.  Until Lara Croft no one even thought a game could have a female lead and have people play it, and even then she had to be this male fantasy.

 

My sexuality and your sexuality is actually a miniscule portion of who we are. We had our bodies before we knew what it could do.  Before I knew I could fall in love I knew I liked to play and pretend.  Even as a girl child I pretended to be males because there were very few female heros.  This is why Jean Gray, Buffy, and Xena were so awesome because they were anomalies.

 

Women as heros is new.  So in context of what I was saying, yes we were on the same "bus" insofar as not seeing ourselves as lead characters.

 

Not to nitpick, but Samus from the Metorid games was female. As could you chose being a female in Ultima 4, back in 1985.

 

I know its not widely known, but games (particularly RPGs) have been offering the option to play as a female for a long time. Almost my entire "career" as a gamer has seen the option to play female in a lot of games. Not the majority, mind you, but at the same time, it wasn't invented in the year 2000 or anything.

[CareBear1023]

You can play a woman in DA:I. Nobody is taking that away. If it's not about romances, then the argument is irrelevant to this issue. We're talking about romances.

 

We're talking about a company that wants to market to women and men.  We're talking about how to keep happy customers.  We're talking about not just romances but the importance of losing your reality but keeping some component of "you" in that world.

 

I think that the excitment of being able to finally open up the playing field to disenfranchised groups has momentum and sometimes other players get lost in the mix.

 

For the romances, having a non-companion as your romantic interest is ****.  You wouldn't like it if Dorian, the gay character, was a non companion but the bisexuals were.

[CareBear1023]

Not to nitpick, but Samus from the Metorid games was female. As could you chose being a female in Ultima 4, back in 1985.

 

I know its not widely known, but games (particularly RPGs) have been offering the option to play as a female for a long time. Almost my entire "career" as a gamer has seen the option to play female in a lot of games. Not the majority, mind you, but at the same time, it wasn't invented in the year 2000 or anything.

 

Why is it not widely known?  Because it was rare.