1820 réponses à ce sujet

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

The best thing I ever learned was to relax my throat muscles and breathe through my nose.......from agendas.....yeah, that's totally what I meant.......

Obviously

[Farangbaa]

The best thing I ever learned was to relax my throat muscles and breathe through my nose.......from agendas.....yeah, that's totally what I meant.......

 

'OMG, quit being so offensive!!' 

 

While everybody talks about their straight sex all the time.

[Liveshiptrader]

I bet that you and I could brainstorm about 500-1000 examples of straight relationships that have been written for video games.  I bet that you and I could brainstorm about 20-40 gay relationships that have been written for video games.  I'm not just talking about romances that you can participate in through RPing.  I'm talking about romantic content (i.e. relationships) between two people of the same sex.  If we are just talking about RPing romance content, then Bioware is certainly the only one doing scripted romances (as opposed to the Sims, Fable, Skyrim approach) and even then they've only included m/m content in 5 games out of 12 that have romances (6 if you want to add the newly added DLC only NPC in the newest SWTOR expansion -- three years later). 

 

It's very easy to dismiss and/or minimize other people's concerns when it doesn't effect you.  If people are telling you that there is a lack of representation in a medium and that lack of representation contributes to larger social issues that continue to marginalize that group, it's worth exploring it and not dismissing it outright.  Is it the only contributing factor?  No.  Is it the most prevalent contributing factor?  No.  Is it one contributing factor that can be addressed?  Yes, so why is it wrong to ask for it to be addressed? 

 

 

 

Sure if you if you consider examples such as Mario and Peach a written relationship but that's not what we where talking about.We where talking about whether it was a social injustice and it isn't, you just don't like the idea that your specific taste isn't as currently prevalent.

 

You can complain about it but you are a true SJW if you equate not getting enough of what you want in the media with actual problems. To me this is no different than there being vastly more shooters than genre's I prefer, I don't like it but I understand why that is and it would look bitter to complain, these people are just lucky enough to get what they want and it's because more people buy it.

[daveliam]

Sure if you if you consider examples such as Mario and Peach a written relationship but that's not what we where talking about.We where talking about whether it was a social injustice and it isn't, you just don't like the idea that your specific taste isn't as currently prevalent.

 

You can complain about it but you are a true SJW if you equate not getting enough of what you want in the media with actual problems. To me this is no different than there being vastly more shooters than genre's I prefer, I don't like it but I understand why that is and it would look bitter to complain, these people are just lucky enough to get what they want and it's because more people buy it.

 

I hope that you seriously don't consider representation of minorities in video games as the same thing as preference for genre type.  Right?

[SnakeCode]

Wait a second?  Didn't you get initiated into our ranks last week.....?
 
Your point is a good one, though.  There will always be extremes in any charged issue.  The Sarkeesian's are one extreme; just like the extremely conservative "Gamergaters" represent the other extreme.  The problem is that SJW is now being used as an insult to anyone who supports increased LGBT issues, representation of women, etc.  Basically, if you support "liberal" concepts, you are branded an SJW (exactly what happened to you last week) and openly mocked on the forums.  It's exactly the same thing as when people on the 'left' of this argument paint anyone who shows 'conservative' views as a Gamergater, a term that has also lost it's original meaning. 
 
It's ultimately why I don't find offense with that label; because it doesn't actually mean "Sarkeesian level of extreme" anymore.  It simply means someone who supports LGBT and female representation in games.  It's like 'feminist' in that respect.  "Feminist" has now become a four letter word (because it's associated with radical feminists).  But the reality is that I am a feminist because I support equal treatment and opportunities for women. 
 
If SJW only was used against the radical "Sarkessian's" (who, to be honest, makes some solid points - and some not so solid points - but does so in a very ham-fisted, alienating way), then I wouldn't identify as one.  But the everyday use of the term?  Yep, that's me.  And I'm fine with it.

I mostly agree, though you do seem to be incredibly misinformed about the gamergate movement. Most of them consider themselves to be liberal, and lean left on political matters. They just aren't on the extreme left like the "SJWs" they are fighting against. Looking in at the whole thing from the outside, the whole thing has become a fight for free speech (and freedom of creativity,) something that has become a prominant talking point on many fronts as of late. The anti GGers like Mackintosh are notably blaming the victims of the the whole Charlie Hebdo shootings in Paris. Essentialy saying 'that's what you get when you pick on minorities.' Which shocked me. The GGers are fighting for freedom of speech/expression whilst the 'SJWs' are fighting for the right to censor anything they deem to be problematic.

[daveliam]

I mostly agree, though you do seem to be incredibly misinformed about the gamergate movement. Most of them consider themselves to be liberal, and lean left on political matters. They just aren't on the extreme left like the "SJWs" they are fighting against. Looking in at the whole thing from the outside, the whole thing has become a fight for free speech (and freedom of creativity,) something that has become a prominant talking point on many fronts as of late. The anti GGers like Mackintosh are notably blaming the victims of the the whole Charlie Hebdo shootings in Paris. Essentialy saying 'that's what you get when you pick on minorities.' Which shocked me. The GGers are fighting for freedom of speech/expression whilst the 'SJWs' are fighting for the right to censor anything they deem to be problematic.

 

No, I'm aware of Gamergate and the stances of the various sides.  I'm saying that there are conservative people within that movement who hold very conservative views (about women, in particular) and those people are the far extreme.  And, just like it would be unfair to paint all people within the "gamergate movement" with that same brush, it would be just as inaccurate to paint all people who voice "social justice" views with the extreme "Sarkeesian" brush. 

[SnakeCode]

No, I'm aware of Gamergate and the stances of the various sides.  I'm saying that there are conservative people within that movement who hold very conservative views (about women, in particular) and those people are the far extreme.  And, just like it would be unfair to paint all people within the "gamergate movement" with that same brush, it would be just as inaccurate to paint all people who voice "social justice" views with the extreme "Sarkeesian" brush.

Again I agree with you. I just took issue with you saying "paint anyone who shows conservative views as a gamergater." As though Gamergate is a conservative movement. It's not. It isnt a left vs right issue, it's a left vs extreme left issue for the most part. (I don't doubt that there are indeed those who hold conservative views within the GG consumer revolt, but the most that I have seen (through blogs, twitter, youtube etc) have identified as liberal.)

[daveliam]

Again I agree with you. I just took issue with you saying "paint anyone who shows conservative views as a gamergater." As though Gamergate is a conservative movement. It's not. It isnt a left vs right issue, it's a left vs extreme left issue for the most part. (I don't doubt that there are indeed those who hold conservative views within the GG consumer revolt, but the most that I have seen (through blogs, twitter, youtube etc) have identified as liberal.)

 

Yeah, I agree that it's not a conservative moment.  But there are people who see it that way because it gets that reputation because of the very vocal extremists.  And the people who use it as a slur or insult are probably not accurate.  And that's remarkably similar to those who throw SJW around as an insult against anyone who espouses liberal views.  That's my point.  It's not a perfect analog, but I think it makes the point.

[SnakeCode]

Yeah, I agree that it's not a conservative moment.  But there are people who see it that way because it gets that reputation because of the very vocal extremists.  And the people who use it as a slur or insult are probably not accurate.  And that's remarkably similar to those who throw SJW around as an insult against anyone who espouses liberal views.  That's my point.  It's not a perfect analog, but I think it makes the point.

Yeah I think we're actually on the same side. I have been anointed an honorary SJW after all.

[Liveshiptrader]

I hope that you seriously don't consider representation of minorities in video games as the same thing as preference for genre type.  Right?

 

I would say you where being dishonest with me if you said you cared anywhere near as much about equal representation across the board rather than representation in what you like.

 

Preference of genre is more important to the individual, do you think most people would give a sh*t that the character in that romance novel they will never read or action movie they will never watch has the same race or sexual preference as them.

 

A reminder again of the fact that media get made based on what gets bought regardless of personnel race, sexuality or genre preference

[Maverick_One]

Question. Why can't we just be happy with quality over quantity? If anything the Lesbians should be outraged, and this coming from a guy. Sera while I like her is not as good as Dorian in my opinion. So the homosexual males get the better end of the stick than the females. I'd be happy 1 good quality romance for whatever I want to be vs. equal number of options and they all be shite romances. Even if the other options get 10 and I get 1 truly great  romance I'd be happy. After all I can suck it up buttercup and play the other options if I want more than what I got. Me being a straight gamer doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't play those lesbian or homosexual options. That is my take on it anyway. Feel free to disagree. 

[Panda]

Question. Why can't we just be happy with quality over quantity? If anything the Lesbians should be outraged, and this coming from a guy. Sera while I like her is not as good as Dorian in my opinion. So the homosexual males get the better end of the stick than the females. I'd be happy 1 good quality romance for whatever I want to be vs. equal number of options and they all be shite romances. Even if the other options get 10 and I get 1 truly great  romance I'd be happy. After all I can suck it up buttercup and play the other options if I want more than what I got. Me being a straight gamer doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't play those lesbian or homosexual options. That is my take on it anyway. Feel free to disagree. 

 

In tumblr side some lesbian/bisexual female players are somehow outraged actually cause many doesn't like Sera and sees her romance toxic. Some also see pattern for this in Bioware's f/f romances cause all of them don't end that nicely and have negative elements so not good representation I guess like Hespith & Branka and Celene & Briala. Hmm, in Sera's case I think she's harder to like and more dividing in opinions than Dorian who is mostly loved character ^^

[daveliam]

I would say you where being dishonest with me if you said you cared anywhere near as much about equal representation across the board rather than representation in what you like.

 

Preference of genre is more important to the individual, do you think most people would give a sh*t that the character in that romance novel they will never read or action movie they will never watch has the same race or sexual preference as them.

 

A reminder again of the fact that media get made based on what gets bought regardless of personnel race, sexuality or genre preference

 

You clearly have no idea what it's like to lack representation then.  If you did, then you'd realize that people will in fact seek out genres of games/movies/books, etc if they offer representation that is lacking elsewhere.  There are plenty of people who play Bioware games because it allows them to play as a woman, gay man, lesbian, etc. and these are people who aren't interested in RPGs in general.  In fact, I can't count the number of people who say that Bioware games were what specifically drew them into the genre in the first place because of that representation. 

 

I'll give you another example: I hate FPSs.  Can't stand them.  But then I heard that Axton in Borderlands 2 is a bisexual guy.  So I looked into it and saw this article:  http://gearboxsoftwa...-inclusivity.  Based on this, I decided to pick up the game as a digital download.  I still hated it.  In fact, I only played about three or four hours and never went back to it.  But I was happy to try something new and give my money to a developer who is interested in inclusivity.  On the other hand, I chose not to buy Bound by Flame because they offer 4 romances and all of them are straight.  I also chose not to buy Alpha Protocol and The Witcher 2 (I rented them through gamefly instead) because those games also only offers straight romances.  Had those games offered LGBT romances, I would certainly have bought them. 

 

You seem to be stuck in circular logic:

 

1.)  Straight guys are the primary audience for video games;

2.)  Video games are marketed to the primary audience;

3.)  Straight men buy things that are marketed to them;

4.)  Therefore, straight men are the primary audience for video games

 

The reality is that companies that are making an effort to be inclusive in their content are not suffering because of this decision.  Most people don't care if the content is opened up to include stories for women and/or LGBT folks.  The few that do care are not missed because those companies pick up additional customers by expanding their outreach. 

 

Do I have a personal stake in seeing more LGBT content?  Of course I do, but if you are familiar with my posting record, you'll see that I'm just as quick to support other areas of inclusivity (such as increased representation for females, even though I'm a guy, and increased representation for racial minorities, even though I'm white).  And I'm far from the only one.  There are dozens and dozens of straight men and women who post regularly about how much they support LGBT inclusive content, even though it doesn't represent them.  To try to paint anyone who supports this content as being selfish and dishonest is incorrect and, frankly, ridiculous.

[Farangbaa]

There are dozens and dozens of straight men and women who post regularly about how much they support LGBT inclusive content, even though it doesn't represent them. To try to paint anyone who supports this content as being selfish and dishonest if incorrect and, frankly, ridiculous.

Can't wait to hear someone say they are closeted gays.

Cause we all gotta have an agenda against the straight, white males' toys.

Oh darnit, I am one. Fighting myself, oh Lord.

[SnakeCode]

You clearly have no idea what it's like to lack representation then.  If you did, then you'd realize that people will in fact seek out genres of games/movies/books, etc if they offer representation that is lacking elsewhere.  There are plenty of people who play Bioware games because it allows them to play as a woman, gay man, lesbian, etc. and these are people who aren't interested in RPGs in general.  In fact, I can't count the number of people who say that Bioware games were what specifically drew them into the genre in the first place because of that representation. 

 

I'll give you another example: I hate FPSs.  Can't stand them.  But then I heard that Axton in Borderlands 2 is a bisexual guy.  So I looked into it and saw this article:  http://gearboxsoftwa...-inclusivity.  Based on this, I decided to pick up the game as a digital download.  I still hated it.  In fact, I only played about three or four hours and never went back to it.  But I was happy to try something new and give my money to a developer who is interested in inclusivity.  On the other hand, I chose not to buy Bound by Flame because they offer 4 romances and all of them are straight.  I also chose not to buy Alpha Protocol and The Witcher 2 (I rented them through gamefly instead) because those games also only offers straight romances.  Had those games offered LGBT romances, I would certainly have bought them. 

 

You seem to be stuck in circular logic:

 

1.)  Straight guys are the primary audience for video games;

2.)  Video games are marketed to the primary audience;

3.)  Straight men buy things that are marketed to them;

4.)  Therefore, straight men are the primary audience for video games

 

The reality is that companies that are making an effort to be inclusive in their content are not suffering because of this decision.  Most people don't care if the content is opened up to include stories for women and/or LGBT folks.  The few that do care are not missed because those companies pick up additional customers by expanding their outreach. 

 

Do I have a personal stake in seeing more LGBT content?  Of course I do, but if you are familiar with my posting record, you'll see that I'm just as quick to support other areas of inclusivity (such as increased representation for females, even though I'm a guy, and increased representation for racial minorities, even though I'm white).  And I'm far from the only one.  There are dozens and dozens of straight men and women who post regularly about how much they support LGBT inclusive content, even though it doesn't represent them.  To try to paint anyone who supports this content as being selfish and dishonest is incorrect and, frankly, ridiculous.

I agree. There's nothing wrong with voting with your wallet, as you did with Borderlands and TW. I think you see people getting frustrated when people try to shame devs for choosing NOT to include that type of content (and that DOES happen, regularly.)

Especially if it's a game with a set protagonist taken from other media that shouldn't be tampered with like The Witcher series or the Arkham games (yes, there actually was a thread in the Feedback section in which people complained about only being able to play a white guy in a BATMAN game.)

 

As for videogames being primarily targeted at a male (particularly straight) audience, I don't think many would argue that. Inclusivity is a relatively new thing in videogaming history. And as guys make up the majority of the consumer base, they will likely continue to have videogames targeted at them (or pandered to as many on here would say.) I think it's important to remind people  sometimes that (aaaaaand here's the point where everyone disagrees with me  ) there's NOTHING WRONG with that.

[Fandango]

There are dozens and dozens of straight men and women who post regularly about how much they support LGBT inclusive content, even though it doesn't represent them.  To try to paint anyone who supports this content as being selfish and dishonest is incorrect and, frankly, ridiculous.

Spot on Dave, though it's equally true that the degree to which some people seem invested in fighting their own little corner on this one could easily give that impression.

[I present Chuck Bass]

 

Do I have a personal stake in seeing more LGBT content?  Of course I do, but if you are familiar with my posting record, you'll see that I'm just as quick to support other areas of inclusivity (such as increased representation for females, even though I'm a guy, and increased representation for racial minorities, even though I'm white).  And I'm far from the only one.  There are dozens and dozens of straight men and women who post regularly about how much they support LGBT inclusive content, even though it doesn't represent them.  To try to paint anyone who supports this content as being selfish and dishonest is incorrect and, frankly, ridiculous.

 

I just don't get why people don't let the Bioware writers do their thing. This is their story, their world, and it would be best if consumers didn't influence that at all. Everyone should stop complaining of lack of this or lack of that, and just let these writers create the characters they want to create, they should by no means feel any pressure to do anything but that. There shouldn't be groups  who go around preaching, for example, " increased representation for racial minorities", because since when did anyone become entitled enough to say that they feel the creative content of another should represent them more..

[SnakeCode]

 

 

I just don't get why people don't let the Bioware writers do their thing. This is their story, their world, and it would be best if consumers didn't influence that at all. Everyone should stop complaining of lack of this or lack of that, and just let these writers create the characters they want to create, they should by no means feel any pressure to do anything but that. There shouldn't be groups  who go around preaching, for example, " increased representation for racial minorities", because since when did anyone become entitled enough to say that they feel the creative content of another should represent them more..

I don't think there's anything wrong with complaining about not liking their options, or how much content is aimed at them. It's a right we all have as customers.

 

I think where it becomes a problem is when people are actively trying to censor creativity or artistic expression. As we have seen recently with the likes of Hatred, Hotline Miami 2 (good on the devs for standing up to that bs) and GTA V (Australia.) Even Ubisoft, I agreed with peoples complaints about the lack of a female character for multiplayer, but the way they went about shaming the devs was horrible.

 

Edit- Lol, dunno what happened with that quoting. 

[Laurelinde]

I just don't get why people don't let the Bioware writers do their thing. This is their story, their world, and it would be best if consumers didn't influence that at all. Everyone should stop complaining of lack of this or lack of that, and just let these writers create the characters they want to create, they should by no means feel any pressure to do anything but that. There shouldn't be groups  who go around preaching, for example, " increased representation for racial minorities", because since when did anyone become entitled enough to say that they feel the creative content of another should represent them more..

 

When there are systemic biases in place which prevent people from 'other' groups from getting their own representation out there in the first place, I guess.  Here's an example story from just this week: http://www.themarysu...ife-is-strange/.

 

Clearly it isn't just fans who are putting pressure on artists and developers to make things a certain way, and it shows (*waves in the general direction of the Academy Awards people*).

[daveliam]

I agree. There's nothing wrong with voting with your wallet, as you did with Borderlands and TW. I think you see people getting frustrated when people try to shame devs for choosing NOT to include that type of content (and that DOES happen, regularly.)

Especially if it's a game with a set protagonist taken from other media that shouldn't be tampered with like The Witcher series or the Arkham games (yes, there actually was a thread in the Feedback section in which people complained about only being able to play a white guy in a BATMAN game.)

 

As for videogames being primarily targeted at a male (particularly straight) audience, I don't think many would argue that. Inclusivity is a relatively new thing in videogaming history. And as guys make up the majority of the consumer base, they will likely continue to have videogames targeted at them (or pandered to as many on here would say.) I think it's important to remind people  sometimes that (and here's the point where everyone disagrees with me  ) there's NOTHING WRONG with that.

 

I almost didn't include the Witcher because it was a pre-established protagonist and it does make it kind of hard to implement m/m romance without fundamentally changing the character.  It also why you don't really see me complaining about that.  I get that.  (Although I do complain that Geralt has a magical ability to avoid showing any naughty bits in romance scenes, but that's a different thing altogether.....)

 

With regard to your last point.  I don't have an issue with games being marketed towards straight males.  I have an issue with all games being marketed to straight males.  I think it's important that there are games marketed towards all aspects of the consumer base.  Straight males included. 

 

I get frustrated when people take exception to any games being marketed to "other" groups in the consumer base.  DA: I is a great example of that.  The LGBT content is actually fairly minimal.  There are 4 romances (the minimum number needed to offer a choice in LI), one part of a single companion quest that deals with gay themes, one NPC of note who has two (optional) conversations about being trans, two major NPCs who are lesbian, and a small number (4 or 5) very minor NPCs that you can run across.  Altogether, the LGBT content of a single playthrough amounts to about 30-40 minutes in a game that contains over 100 hours of content.  But, by listening to some of the posters here, you'd think that the game is mostly about LGBT themes.  That's the stuff that annoys me.

 

Sometimes I do take this stuff too seriously, but I'll be honest, I get lots of PMs from people thanking me for speaking up the way that I do.  So, as long as those PMs keep coming, I will continue with my Exalted SJW March! 

 

Spot on Dave, though it's equally true that the degree to which some people seem invested in fighting their own little corner on this one could easily give that impression.

 

Totally.  Obviously people will advocate for content that they want to see, whether it's about types of stories, game mechanics, or representation.  There's usually some personal interest in advocating for content.  Sure, sometimes it's altruistic.  But most of the time, people are invested in the requests that make.  I think that issues of representation get heated (and, thus, more memorable to readers/participants) because there's a personal nature to it.  If I create a thread asking for changes in the tactical cam and it's shot down by the majority of posters, it's hard to take that personally.  If I create a thread asking for more romances for straight males and it's shot down by the majority of posters, it's easy to take that personally.  I think it's mostly perception.  Internet communication is kind of fascinating in that way. 

 

I just don't get why people don't let the Bioware writers do their thing. This is their story, their world, and it would be best if consumers didn't influence that at all. Everyone should stop complaining of lack of this or lack of that, and just let these writers create the characters they want to create, they should by no means feel any pressure to do anything but that. There shouldn't be groups  who go around preaching, for example, " increased representation for racial minorities", because since when did anyone become entitled enough to say that they feel the creative content of another should represent them more..

 

This works both ways, then.  If you don't want to see any threads about "increased representation for BLANK", then I don't want to see any threads complaining about "increased representation for BLANK".  The writers for this series have made their stance clear.  They want to write these stories.  So, using your logic, then no one should be preaching about seeing less of that content, right?

[SnakeCode]

I would quote you Dave but there's no point since I agree with essentially everything you said.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

When there are systemic biases in place which prevent people from 'other' groups from getting their own representation out there in the first place, I guess.  Here's an example story from just this week: http://www.themarysu...ife-is-strange/.

 

Clearly it isn't just fans who are putting pressure on artists and developers to make things a certain way, and it shows (*waves in the general direction of the Academy Awards people*).

Good for Square Enix. 

[daveliam]

I would quote you Dave but there's no point since I agree with essentially everything you said.

 

Can I just state that I'm actually very very please that you and I (and also Fandango and I) are all getting on so well now?  I think we've all mellowed out in our old age and I kind of dig it!  (It also makes me want to go back and look at those old threads where we went at each other about these very issues and see what the hell we misinterpreted about each other's points to get us so worked up?)

[Laurelinde]

Good for Square Enix. 

 

Quite.  It shouldn't be a big deal that a protagonist of any given game is a woman/gay/lesbian/black/whatever or even, yes, a scruffy-bearded straight white guy.  With gaming rapidly becoming the primary form of entertainment in the modern world, the market should be wide enough to accommodate everyone, and over a full spectrum of genres and ideas (so not just "all FPS games for white dudes, horrible microtransaction dress-up games for everyone else".)

[SnakeCode]

Can I just state that I'm actually very very please that you and I (and also Fandango and I) are all getting on so well now?  I think we've all mellowed out in our old age and I kind of dig it!  (It also makes me want to go back and look at those old threads where we went at each other about these very issues and see what the hell we misinterpreted about each other's points to get us so worked up?)

23 is old?