1820 réponses à ce sujet

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I don't want to speak for BioWare or anyone else, but it seems to me to be a simple matter of fairness. To include romantic content in a way that's skewed in favour of a single demographic is to send a very powerful message about what is and what isn't tolerable. But yes, even if the distribution of romantic arcs should remain balanced for the most part, the specific grumbles of those who would demand a certain kind of romantic arc should be roundly ignored.

I think you mean it is a matter of equality. If we are looking for a matter of fairness, then most romances would be straight because the majority of the population is straight thus it is fair.

[daveliam]

23 is old? 

 

 

 

 

 

Well, I meant old as in "longevity on the BSN old" not in chronological age old. 

 

I think you mean it is a matter of equality. If we are looking for a matter of fairness, then most romances would be straight because the majority of the population is straight thus it is fair.

 

I think you actually mean equity.  This is my favorite picture on it.

 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

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".)

Offtopic, but your description of the straight guy made me think of the Deus Ex franchise since Square Enix is making them. I want the sequel so bad. 

 

On topic, Square Enix and several other Japanese companies itself has been very progressive on this front. I've been playing JRPGs or watching anime that has had PoC, women, and/or non-heterosexual people in it as major characters long before this current movement for it. I didn't even realize it was an issue until I went on the Internet because of this. 

 

 

I think you actually mean equity.  This is my favorite picture on it.

 

I was referring to the number of options as the matter of equality. So for example the LI layout being 2/2/2. Though even that isn't truly equal since asexuals and demisexuals still have less than verisexuals. 

[Melca36]

I wouldn't want to speak for BioWare or anyone else, but it seems to me to be a simple matter of fairness. To include romantic content in a way that's skewed in favour of (or indeed against) a single demographic is to send a very powerful message about what is and what isn't tolerable. But yes, even if the distribution of romantic arcs should remain balanced for the most part, the specific grumbles of those who would demand a certain kind of romance should be roundly ignored.

 

I played a human male romancing Dorian. I have a Qunari for Cassandra. I made a female dwarf for Sera and a male elf for Bull. I have a human female for Cullen.

I'm all for representation but lets face facts...there are people hiding behind the banner of representation just so they can romance who they want.  

Its not truly about representation for them its about romancing who they want and they are selfish for demanding the writers to alter the characters they envisioned just to suit their needs.  The game developers DO NOT owe us anything and I mean that for EVERYBODY.

[SnakeCode]

@Dave- I know I was just messing  . It certainly would be interesting though, I honestly can't even remember what it was we used to bicker about.

[I present Chuck Bass]

 

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?

 Yes, but I don't see how that implies to what I said? However there is a good chance I'm just missing your point... I will admit that.

My general complaint is as a writer myself... is I know the pressures can really alter the creative process. All I would ask for example would be, no matter how many homosexual,heterosexual,etc options there are for say a romance.. that fans not feel entitled enough to storm the forums and complain that as a heterosexual male playing as a straight male.. that they should have more than two options for a romance. Likewise I saw a thread awhile back complaining about the Homosexual community being vastly misrepresented in Dragon age games. It's these type of complaints that bother me... as they are solely personal complaints and should not discourage future creative content of a writer.

[SnakeCode]

I played a human male romancing Dorian. I have a Qunari for Cassandra. I made a female dwarf for Sera and a male elf for Bull. I have a human female for Cullen.

I'm all for representation but lets face facts...there are people hiding behind the banner of representation just so they can romance who they want.  

Its not truly about representation for them its about romancing who they want and they are selfish for demanding the writers to alter the characters they envisioned just to suit their needs.  The game developers DO NOT owe us anything and I mean that for EVERYBODY.

There's some truth in this. God knows I used to get exasperated by posters saying stuff like "Bioware made a huge mistake making Cassandra straight/Sera gay."  Those threads/posts were very prevalent for a while after the LIs were released.

[Fandango]

There's some truth in this. God knows I used to get exasperated by posters saying stuff like "Bioware made a huge mistake makingCassandra straight/Sera gay."  Those threads/posts were very prevalent for a while after the LIs were released.

Ah yes the smorgasbord brigade. What a sad bunch they are!

[Panda]

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".)

 

Square Enix has been always quite good with introducing different kind of protagonists and breaking traditions. Final Fantasy IV already had female character as protagonist and that was released -94 so this is nothing suprising for me that they would take on another game with female protagonist I guess their newest shock I have heard is male protagonist in ridiculous sexy armor XD

 

Spoiler

 

 

[daveliam]

Square Enix has been always quite good with introducing different kind of protagonists and breaking traditions. Final Fantasy IV already had female character as protagonist and that was released -94 so this is nothing suprising for me that they would take on another game with female protagonist I guess their newest shock I have heard is male protagonist in ridiculous sexy armor XD

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

Ha.  And that 'armor' looks equally ridiculous on him as it would a lady warrior.  But, kudos to Square Enix for mixing things up a bit. 

[In Exile]

Ha. And that 'armor' looks equally ridiculous on him as it would a lady warrior. But, kudos to Square Enix for mixing things up a bit.

It looks like great fetish wear. The sort of battles I'd want someone to wear that in are decidedly different from what we see in most games.

[SnakeCode]

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".)

Agreed, there shouldn't be any reason why a protagonist of any race, gender or sexuality should be a big deal. Unfortunately there are still some major roadblocks that need moving before diversity becomes commonplace. And i'm not just talking about 'straight white males' being opposed to it either.

 

One of the main reasons we still see SWM characters as the default protagonist in gaming is because they are the safe option if you will. Devs can essentially do whatever they please with such a character. They can make him lecherous, cowardly, vulnerable, mentally derainged,  a SWM character can be made to look bad where other characters can't.

 

Look at Guybrush Threepwood, he's a coward, he's comically inept, socially awkward and a nerd. He gets regularly abused, mostly verbally but sometimes physically throughout the duration of the games he stars in. Now ask yourself what the reaction would be where Guybrush to be a woman. It would carry wider social connotations that would make such a character offensive. There's this weird thing that happens where people consider the portrayal of a female character to reflect women everywhere. Add the obsession western society has with making all women in games 'strong female characters' that aren't allowed to be sexualised in any way, and you can see why many devs decide to revert back to the safe option as it were, to not risk offending people. Most would assume that 'Girlbrush' has all of those negative qualities and gets abused precisely BECAUSE she's a woman.

 

Unfortunately we are still fairly far off from seeing female counterparts of characters like Guybrush, Trevor Philips, Luigi, or even Nathan Drake (lovable idiot.)

 

As long as straight white guys are the only characters that can be ridiculed, be scumbags, be either super good looking or super ugly, be mentally derainged or inept, they will continue to be the safe option when new protagonists are being made. Diversity amongst protagonists will continue to be a pleasant surprise instead of being commonplace (as it should be.) We, as a society really should stop thinking that a single woman/black/LGBT character represents women/black/LGBT people everywhere.

[TevinterSupremacist]

It looks like great fetish wear. The sort of battles I'd want someone to wear that in are decidedly different from what we see in most games.

There's nothing wrong with design focusing on what the creator finds appealing or considers the audience will find appealing as opposed to realistic aesthetics.

Looks cool to me.

[Liveshiptrader]

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.

 

Sure I do, I just realize I'm lucky and get it in some of things I like. You contradict your own point in the second paragraph by saying you didn't enjoy a game despite it having a gay character, perhaps it would make more sense that these people just happened to enjoy DA as well.

 

This is just an example of purchasing decisions and what motivated them, I fail to see how any of this goes against what I have said

 

No circular logic, you just made some things up.

 

1.Straight males are the primary audience -correct

2.Vdeo games are marketed towards the primary audience- correct but just in the same way that FPS are the biggest market does not mean that there is not an audience for games marketed at women.

3.Everyone buys things marketed at them, you just admitted you buy games with gay protags

4. Well, yes, they are, if you are a straight male gamer you just happen to get more because you exist in larger numbers, call it unfair if you will but that's just silly.

 

The actual reality is that only some things can be inclusive, Dragon Age can cater to more than say Final Fantasy because a precedence does not need to be made on the protags sexuality. Your point of inclusiveness makes little sense when what's more likely to happen is that you may get games similar to those in Japan that have a gay protag that caters towards women and gay men or a protag that is in a straight romance, not every game will have a non-static protag. The fact of the matter is that a game like DA can exist if it appeals to just male gamers, it can exist if it appeals to male, female and gay gamers, but currently there's little chance that it can exist without appealing to straight male gamers.

 

You say you post for adding more females and non-whites, that's just lip service.  in your second paragraph you mention how your purchasing decision was based on gay content rather than any of these factors. That's the only factor that matters, purchasing, it's not a social justice issue, it's a marketing issue and you pretty much admitted you realize that yourself. You can go out and buy games you don't like with non-white female protags if you really want but that still doesn't make this a social justice issue, it's still just a marketing issue.

[daveliam]

Sure I do, I just realize I'm lucky and get it in some of things I like. You contradict your own point in the second paragraph by saying you didn't enjoy a game despite it having a gay character, perhaps it would make more sense that these people just happened to enjoy DA as well.

This is just an example of purchasing decisions and what motivated them, I fail to see how any of this goes against what I have said

No circular logic, you just made some things up.

1.Straight males are the primary audience -correct
2.Vdeo games are marketed towards the primary audience- correct but just in the same way that FPS are the biggest market does not mean that there is not an audience for games marketed at women.
3.Everyone buys things marketed at them, you just admitted you buy games with gay protags
4. Well, yes, they are, if you are a straight male gamer you just happen to get more because you exist in larger numbers, call it unfair if you will but that's just silly.

The actual reality is that only some things can be inclusive, Dragon Age can cater to more than say Final Fantasy because a precedence does not need to be made on the protags sexuality. Your point of inclusiveness makes little sense when what's more likely to happen is that you may get games similar to those in Japan that have a gay protag that caters towards women and gay men or a protag that is in a straight romance, not every game will have a non-static protag. The fact of the matter is that a game like DA can exist if it appeals to just male gamers, it can exist if it appeals to male, female and gay gamers, but currently there's little chance that it can exist without appealing to straight male gamers.

You say you post for adding more females and non-whites, that's just lip service. in your second paragraph you mention how your purchasing decision was based on gay content rather than any of these factors. That's the only factor that matters, purchasing, it's not a social justice issue, it's a marketing issue and you pretty much admitted you realize that yourself. You can go out and buy games you don't like with non-white female protags if you really want but that still doesn't make this a social justice issue, it's still just a marketing issue.

Yeah. We're done. You are so set on trying to catch me in contradictions (Spoiler: I didn't contradict myself if you actually read the post with the intention to understand the points) that you miss the entire point of many of the things that I said. You don't care. Good for you. Other people do. Good for us. We all win. Now move on (like I will) because this conversation is going nowhere.

[Liveshiptrader]

Yeah. We're done. You are so set on trying to catch me in contradictions (Spoiler: I didn't contradict myself if you actually read the post with the intention to understand the points) that you miss the entire point of many of the things that I said. You don't care. Good for you. Other people do. Good for us. We all win. Now move on (like I will) because this conversation is going nowhere.

 

Of course you did, you went on about the main motivator being representation yet in very next paragraph say you couldn't bring yourself to play a game because you didn't enjoy the genre

 

We will win? who is we, the entitled? because that's what you sound like

 

What this boils down to, say there is another DA game, the writers are replaced again and it's story and content are more in line with Origins to try and bolster sales, if you criticize that for not being the same as Inquisition and you won't support it that's fine, Bioware didn't didn't give you want you wanted so you don't support the 4th game and you let them know that.

 

Your problem there be similar to mine in this instance and this isn't going nowhere because on top of that you've convinced yourself that you getting what you want is morally right, you are so entitled you think people should make you what you want out of guilt or some act of charity rather than because they want to make it and/or because you will give them money for it. First world problems.

[daveliam]

Of course you did, you went on about the main motivator being representation yet in very next paragraph say you couldn't bring yourself to play a game because you didn't enjoy the genre

We will win? who is we, the entitled? because that's what you sound like

What this boils down to, say there is another DA game, the writers are replaced again and it's story and content are more in line with Origins to try and bolster sales, if you criticize that for not being the same as Inquisition and you won't support it that's fine, Bioware didn't didn't give you want you wanted so you don't support the 4th game and you let them know that.

Your problem there be similar to mine in this instance and this isn't going nowhere because on top of that you've convinced yourself that you getting what you want is morally right, you are so entitled you think people should make you what you want out of guilt or some act of charity rather than because they want to make it and/or because you will give them money for it. First world problems.

Look, I'm not sure what your deal is. Are you purposefully missing the point? Did you fail to actually read what I wrote? Did you read it and just not understand it? Regardless, if you think that my main point is that I think people owe me anything, then we are having two different conversations. And, frankly, it's not worth my effort to try to clarify my points again to someone who isn't actually interested in listening to my points. You want to talk about first world problems? You are so locked into your own very narrow world view that you can't/won't understand someone else's perspective and feel the need to resort to name calling and veiled insults to strengthen your 'case'. So this is the last time that I'm replying to you unless you actually read and comprehend my points.

I'm also still waiting (days later) for you to explain what specific content was removed in order to add in LGBT content.

[dragonflight288]

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.

 

There is nothing wrong with it, it's called free enterprise. They make what they want, and we buy what we want. 

 

I would disagree with only one thing. Recent polls show that male and female gamers are now roughly equal in numbers now. 

[Panda]

Of course you did, you went on about the main motivator being representation yet in very next paragraph say you couldn't bring yourself to play a game because you didn't enjoy the genre

 

We will win? who is we, the entitled? because that's what you sound like

 

What this boils down to, say there is another DA game, the writers are replaced again and it's story and content are more in line with Origins to try and bolster sales, if you criticize that for not being the same as Inquisition and you won't support it that's fine, Bioware didn't didn't give you want you wanted so you don't support the 4th game and you let them know that.

 

Your problem there be similar to mine in this instance and this isn't going nowhere because on top of that you've convinced yourself that you getting what you want is morally right, you are so entitled you think people should make you what you want out of guilt or some act of charity rather than because they want to make it and/or because you will give them money for it. First world problems.

 

Well I think there is some flaws in your argument.

 

It appears that you are going to argue that genre of the game = sexuality or gender of the player. But genre is preference, something that can change unlike sexuality or gender of player.

 

Genre doesn't bring social issues with it either since it's not something person can't change with themselves. I mean I like action and scifi films but I don't think that defines me much as person nor I want every game regardless of genre to have action or scifi elements.

 

Also making game that markets towards all genders and sexualities is possible, I mean BW pretty much does it all the time, but it's very hard to include many genres in the game in way that the game would still be coherent and have good gameplay. I mean I haven't at least seen any platform FPS RPG Strategy Visual novel games, around. Including female gamers and gamers that are non-heterosexual in other hand doesn't require much, if there is romances then romance options for them, if there aren't then just some well-written characters they can relate to.

[I present Chuck Bass]

There is nothing wrong with it, it's called free enterprise. They make what they want, and we buy what we want. 
 
I would disagree with only one thing. Recent polls show that male and female gamers are now roughly equal in numbers now.

Yeah but the number of girl gamers increased largely because of mobile gaming. My girlfriend is now considered a gaming girl...yet she is far from it hahah. The numbers are often tricky and misleading.Unless you of course count mobile gaming as true gaming, then my point is trivial.

[daveliam]

Yeah but the number of girl gamers increased largely because of mobile gaming. My girlfriend is now considered a gaming girl...yet she is far from it hahah. The numbers are often tricky and misleading.Unless you of course count mobile gaming as true gaming, then my point is trivial.

 

Yeah, this is in an interesting thing.  There seems to be a difference between "gamers" and "game players".  "Gamers" are self-identified members of the subculture that take game regularly and view it as part of their regular past time and hobbies.  "Game players" encompass all people who play video games, including 'gamers' and 'casual' (and everyone in between).  Unfortunately, the data that people refer to speaks to "game players", not "gamers".  People take that to mean "gamer", though.  You are absolutely right that someone who just plays casual mobile games regularly would be considered a "gamer" by the standards of those studies. 

 

I think that the idea of "gamer identity" is an interesting one.  If a middle aged woman plays Candy Crush every single day for two hours a day (on her commute, on her lunch break, at home at night) and considers herself a "gamer", can someone else tell her she's not one?  If someone plays AAA FPS games regularly, but doesn't see gaming as part of their identity, can they be considered a "gamer" even if they don't consider themselves to be one?  Who gets to decide who's "in the club" and which games count as "true gaming"?  I haven't see any studies on gamer identity or demographics.  I suspect that "gamers" are still majority straight males.  I also suspect that the number of female and/or LGBT gamers have increased significantly over the past decade (although not as much as female "game players", if that makes sense). 

[Nefla]

Yeah but the number of girl gamers increased largely because of mobile gaming. My girlfriend is now considered a gaming girl...yet she is far from it hahah. The numbers are often tricky and misleading.Unless you of course count mobile gaming as true gaming, then my point is trivial.

People like to assume that because these mobile games are made pink and with cute, childish characters that it must only be women playing them and that these games are what the majority of women play. The person I met who played the most candy crush was a 50 year old man. I used to wear a necklace at work that was the symbol of the empire from TES and the female customers were the only ones who recognized it or at least commented on it. Male gamers often wonder "why don't more women play video games?" There are two answers to that which tie into each other:

 

1) There are more than you think but they keep more to themselves and their female friends, play male characters in MMO's so they don't get hit on, often buying games as digital downloads, through Amazon, or from grocery stores rather than game stores because:

 

2) Gaming culture tends to be unwelcoming and often downright hostile towards women. When I was a child, my game purchases weren't questioned but as an adult, every time I went into a gamestop or similar I'd get either hit on, treated like an idiot who must be buying whatever game for their appropriate male friend or relative, or just met with hostility along the lines of "you're not a true gamer, you're probably playing this to impress a man" or giving me the third degree and asking all sorts of questions (in a hostile tone) as if to disprove my lies. I stopped going to game stores all together some years back and couldn't be happier. Now that's just the fan culture. The industry itself does little to make women feel welcome. Women are featured as protagonists in comparatively few games and those games are generally given a smaller budget and advertising budget. Not only that, but a huge portion of those female protagonists are overtly sexualized and obviously designed for the male player's gaze than the female player to identify with. Female supporting characters are often relegated to the role of the love interest/daughter/mother/sister/background eye candy for the male hero and aren't given nearly as much skills or character development as their male counterparts.

 

I've been playing video games since I was a small child in the '80s and back then it was ok for both genders to play as long as you were a kid. I've found tons of games throughout the years that I've loved and spent hundreds of hours in, playing multiple times (a lot of those came from BioWare) but if I hadn't already been a part of this world, I doubt I would start gaming now. Even the games that have awesome female characters and protagonists (or a choice in gender) are often marketed to make you think there is a set generic scruffy white straight male hero and that the game is all meaty explosions and metal music even when the game has depth, character customization, roleplaying, choice, etc...(BioWare often markets their own games like this).

[Brockololly]

My only qualm with the heterosexual male romance options in Inquisition isn't that there aren't more or anything like that, its mostly that they just wind up playing out a bit too similar to one another. Granted, I didn't finish the Josephine romance but watched how it ends up on Youtube. It just seems like Cassandra and Josephine's romance arcs play out too similarly. Josie and Cass both are inexperienced with romance due to being all focused on their jobs at first, both are reluctant and awkward when engaging with them romantically and both are basically big romantics at heart.

 

Maybe that's oversimplifying things a bit but  in past games you've had the choice between Morrigan and Leliana or Viconia, Aerie and Jaheira. Morrigan or Leliana's romances felt quite a bit different in terms of the characters involved- with Morrigan its sex up front and then loads of drama while Leliana's plays out a bit more traditionally. With Inquisition the heterosexual male romances seem to more or less play out the same way because both of the romance options basically treat romance similarly.

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

There is nothing wrong with it, it's called free enterprise. They make what they want, and we buy what we want. 
 
I would disagree with only one thing. Recent polls show that male and female gamers are now roughly equal in numbers now.

Thats usually just ignored tho, some guys always say "girls ain't real gamers, they only wanna play phone games & only play true games to get attention from guys" whenever that stat gets mentioned

[Feranel]

Technically all romance options are limited except if you play human or elven female, Elven female has the most options, followed by human, and then everyone else has the exact same number.