269 réponses à ce sujet

[Raiil]

 

 

But we can have a Qunari  saying women don't fight.

 

And since you are not, and have never played, someone who lives under the Qun, a woman fighting would not be an alien concept to you. It is to him. What of it? He's making a remark based on his confusion due to a culture where a nominal female does not fight.

 

 

 

We can slay humans as elves in cold blood (DA;O, Dalish origin, deciding the fate of three humans who stumble in the forest).

 

 

And a mage can rat Jowan out about his blood magic to templars, or choose to take his side, depending on his/her view of the tower. Each origin allows you to make all sorts of choices that are unique- but established- to that background.

 

 

 

We can manipulate monsters to slaughter an entire tribe (DA:O, werewolves kill the Dalish.)

 

And we ourselves can decide the fate of hundreds in a variety of circumstances, just as Loghain manipulated Uldred, Howe manipulated Loghain, and Celene allowed in her story. Again, not something unique to any given person in the series.

 

 

 

We can force a former drug addict to become addicted once more (DA:I, Cullen's lyrium addiction)

 

 

And the Chantry has forcibly manipulated probably thousands of people to start the addiction in the first place. How's that make the Inquisitor unique?

 

 

 

We can handle dangerous amount of poison to an irresponsible smuggler (DA2, Isabela's friend, Martin's quest.)

Smugglers appear all over the series. 'I am able to partake in illegal activities' isn't particularly new to the Warden or Hawke. Even the Inquisitor can make questionable choices.

 

 

 

We can betray and condemn a friend to exile or death (male cousland marry Anora and get rid of Alistair.)

 

 

Betrayal in politics? Sacre bleu!  That never happens, before or after the existence of our many PCs! We are positively unique in this matter!

 

 

 

As such, if one were careful to avoid subjective "awful excess" and the "public eye"...then this justifies incest, bigamy, polygamy, pedophilia and any other behavior that one could think of in the realm of "sexuality". Besides, how could something be in awful excess if the public is unaware of it in the first place?

 

 

Sex is natural. Pedophilia has a consent issue (and since rape is a thing in Thedas, the concept of consent does exist), bigamy is a cultural more and not just a religious one (and also legal, because inheritance rights), polygamy is covered under the concept of 'mistresses' and you can play Hawke as being with Isabela and others- meaning it exists, and is probably scandalous-, pedophilia is again covered with consent.

 

Awful excess flush against sex does not mean 'either straightfoward or we never have standards again'. The codices merely state that what happens between two consenting adults is not something that bothers people. Theosodians do not give a flying nug about who is boffing who so long as it's not smushed in everyone's faces and, reasonably, both parties are considered old enough and have said 'aye, I want to'. I daresay they don't care if you walk around naked in your room, either, so long as they don't have to look at you either.

[Monica21]

 

I kind of hope we're done with people trying to argue that the OP's request is about "role playing options," as opposed to his desire to play a self-insert homophobe. Either way, I think I should probably take my leave of the thread.

 

I wish it were about legit role-playing options. Would be more interesting that way. Although I can easily see a dialogue option of, "Hey, why can't you produce an heir and then be on your way?" as problematic for a lot of reasons, even if it is lore-friendly.

[Raiil]

I wish it were about legit role-playing options. Would be more interesting that way. Although I can easily see a dialogue option of, "Hey, why can't you produce an heir and then be on your way?" as problematic for a lot of reasons, even if it is lore-friendly.

 

 

Honestly? I actually wondered the same thing on my human mage, but I'll bet you cookies people would still be mad if you didn't squawk about 'omg gay cooties' if the Inquisitor didn't shudder their delicate shoulders at the fact that Dorian fancies dudes.

[AshenEndymion]

Honestly? I actually wondered the same thing on my human mage, but I'll bet you cookies people would still be mad if you didn't squawk about 'omg gay cooties' if the Inquisitor didn't shudder their delicate shoulders at the fact that Dorian fancies dudes.

 

If we're being honest, some people probably would, because people(in general) will complain about anything if given the opportunity...

 

But I'm willing to wager that, if a line like "why don't you just produce an heir so you can do what you want?" was included in that quest, more would decry it(probably likening taking such an option as akin to taking Vaughan's "bribe" in Origins) than would decry a lack of further "omg gay cooties" lines...  

[Fredward]

I don't really see why the option isn't there either. At the least a noble should have the option to disapprove of Dorian not at the least being willing to make an heir. Then you get people who have always detested or feared or reviled something simply because it is outside the norm and they do not understand it. Calling the OP a homophobe (regardless of whether he is or not, the request itself is not) is reactionary, OTT and in it's own way really close-minded.

[Vicious]

lol amazes me how much people care about video games these days. 

[Steppenwolf]

Saying that BioWare wasn't fair in not allowing you to be homophobic or anti-LGBT is a flawed statement because it implies such a viewpoint has merit. It doesn't. Not just in Thedas, where sexuality isn't such a taboo. It also has no merit in the real world. And no video game grants players complete agency in every situation and on every topic. 

[Vit246]

I think I can see OP's point, but here is why what you ask for will never happen: The PR backlash. Everyone will construe it as endorsing homophobia just like A LOT of people in this thread.

[Gothfather]

 

I understand it's Bioware's game. I understand that they want to play the "We need to represent the LGBT community" more in their games, but the mere fact of not including the real controversial aspects of this entire situation to the player gives the impression that Bioware isn't really at all interested in being fair about the entire thing.

 

Shouldn't everything be inclusive for all viewpoints or is Dragon Age becoming the sounding board only for those of the LGBT community?

 

 

They gave a Thedas centric options for viewpoints not an Earth base centric list of options. They were very fair in their options. What they did not do was allow for an earth centric view that being gay was a problem. As the lore in Thedas is such that sexuality is not tied to virtue of any religion or moral code. At best the only "concern" people would have about sexuality is in relationship to heirs and that's how Dorian's story appears to be presented. His family wanted heirs and Dorian being Dorian was contrary to the traditions of Trevinter and his class. I always got teh impression that Dorians father would have been happy if Dorian had an heir and a spare but was openly gay. I always got the impression the scandal to the family wasn't that Dorian like "dangly" bits over "inny" bits but that he refused to produce an heir. If Dorian was from peasant family then I can't see this being an issue but power in thedas is hereditary ergo there is a common feeling that each generation is responsible to both create and leave a legacy to the future. 

 

By tying Dorians sexuality to the issue of reproduction Bioware could make an allegory of being gay for us on earth. I hardly think most people who play DA:I have to worry about heir production but we can easily extrapolate Dorian's story of a disproving father about a son's sexuality. Its an allegory so it doesn't need to be the same it just has to be similar enough to resonate.

 

Why would any person in Thedas attach morality to sexuality when sexuality and sexual conduct isn't a moral issue on that world? They don't give the player options to have an opinion of the Ebola virus because its an not factor in thedas, the same holds true for not giving the player an option to be anti-gay, its not an issue for the world.

 

DA:I is not journalism there is no expectation of impartiality or inclusion of all sides to an issue. This is a game, so it can have any position on ANY issue with no requirement of impartiality or inclusion. Why you think it should is beyond me. DA:O took the position the bestiality is humorous they are not required nor is it a reasonable expectation that they include people for or against the practise of animal love. It is perfectly legitimate for them to take the position that bestiality is funny and ONLY present this side of the issue.

[TammieAZ]

(Bioware's portrayel of the "Gay struggle" with Dorian wasnt entirely fair or accurate.)

 

Read the title but not the post. 

 

He is  kind-of right. Not to be so harsh .But it does seem like BioWare has been kissing a little LGBT community ass . Which started in DA2 .

[Gothfather]

Canada is not generally regarded as a evil empire.  

 

I don't know.. We did export Celine Dion and Justine Bieber to the world. Doesn't this get us at least honourable mention for the axis of evil?

[Sylvius the Mad]

The player is forced, at best, to be neutral and I believe this presents a one-sided agenda of Bioware to the player.

This is entirely correct.

Good for BioWare.

[Fandango]

I've zero desire to role-play a homophobe, racist or misogynist in Inquisition (or any other game for that matter) and for obvious reasons. As such, BioWare have my full support on this one.

[9TailsFox]

Agree whit OP. I think DA:I done correctly on religion side . But on other issues we have no RP options. Expedition conquistador done great job.

Example.

Spoiler

You find out one of your companions is half indian. We have 3 options 1)She is my friend I don't care.....  2) You lie to me....... get out of my side 3)Kill her. I see no reason to use 3 option, but the fact what it exist it improves RP options.

[9TailsFox]

No, they're not being fair to both sides about it. And I'm absolutely happy about that. 

Bioware where RP options come to die.

[Abyss108]

If we need an option to be a homophone, then we also need the option to discriminate against straight people, because they make an equal amount of sense in the world. What possible reason could anyone even have to be either of those.

 

Thedas doesn't care whether you are straight or gay, this has been established numerous times. Dorian's father takes issue with the fact that Dorian won't marry and produce a hair, not because he's gay.

[Fredward]

Bioware where RP options come to die.

 

~snip~

 

Even though I consider myself a SJW I laughed. Where did you get that if I may ask?

 

 

Also, to all ya'll saying Thedas doesn't care about your orientation... that's not really accurate. There's not a MORAL component to your orientation. In some areas where breeding is important such as with the 'dying' races (elves and dwarves) I imagine you'd at least get a slight side eye if you didn't even attempt to procreate. With the nobility there's the onus of duty towards your family/house.

 

And this is ignoring the fact that it is a fundamental aspect of human (and presumably elven, dwarven and qunari) nature to 'other' those who are not like 'us.' Thedas lacks institutionalized homophobia but doesn't mean it lacks petty kinds of homophobia, pretty sure Gamlen displays such at least once, where people display ignorance or a misunderstanding or attribute motives that don't exist to your orientation.

 

Just cuz Thedas lacks some very specific real world attitudes doesn't mean it's a biasless wonderland.

[Neleothesze]

I don't even know why so many people focus on the gay part. As much as I like Dorian as a character (not as a gay character, or a gay male character but as a character), his quest felt awkward. It doesn't matter WHY his father tried to change him, especially if no one gives a **** who he takes his pleasure from (his father could have tried to use blood magic to simply force him to have a kid with some socially and genetically desirable Tevinter girl) it's the very act of trying to control/mentally manipulate another that's repulsive.

 

Asking for homophobic choices isn't really asking for diversity... you're still just focusing on the one aspect (that they admittedly emphasized) that Dorian is gay. Who gives a ****?

 

The fact is that the Inquisitor should be able to agree or disagree with Magister Pavus' actions or motivations if you really want more diverse choices. (and douchebaggy ones)

 

1) Yes, I agree that you should wed to preserve your social status BUT your father is a major douche for using blood magic on you. Mind control? WTH, Magister Pavus?

 

example: "We - royal we if Quizzie is a noble - should not stoop to such uncouth methods."

 

2) Yes, I agree that you should wed to preserve your social status AND SO WHAT that your father used blood magic? Suck it up.

 

example: "It is the burden and privilege of nobility to continue our lines and provide an example for the lesser classes. I hadn't thought you a coward, Dorian. And the Inquisition does not harbor cowards."

 

3) No, I don't agree that you should be forced to marry AND your father was a major douche for using blood magic. Want me to beat the **** out of him?

4) No, I don't agree that you should be forced to marry BUT I don't really give a **** that your daddy used blood magic to try and control you. Suck it up.

 

5) I don't give a ****. This is why we came all the way to Redcliffe? Kiss and make up. I'm done here.

6) I don't give a ****. Sort it out by yourselves.

 

1) & 2) would get a massive disapproval from Dorian. He might even leave if you try to force him to go back to a parent who is willing to take away his free will.

 

TL;DR: Freedom of action/free will should be the focus of the quest, not his sexuality, because being unable to freely express his sexuality was only one of the problems Dorian faced in Tevinter. I think it would have made for a more compelling quest, to have the control part emphasized instead of the sex... but that's just me.

[FiveThreeTen]

Of all the things you could complain about for having more RP options, it has to be that of course

 

I'm always amazed how some people focus so heavily on "teh gayz". You would think they are fascinated or something.

 

I'm not sure this thread would exist if Dorian had been straight and refused an arranged marriage with a woman (I'm already awaiting the "But if Dorian had been straight chances are we could have told him to just suck it up!!!" argument. I will just say that I suspect not having the option wouldn't bother the OP so much)

[Hazegurl]

This leads to the question that this "lore" was with the aforementioned intention of introducing the LGBT community into its games in the first place and without any such condemnation from anyone; hence the reason I said it was unfair that it couldn't be condemned by any player throughout DA:I.

 

So...the inclusion of "gay" situations, in this specific context, without condemnation of any sort for either personal or roleplaying reasons, I argue, is a specific intention on Biowares part to present LGBT situations to the public eye and weave the thread to be specifically supportive or "neutral" in all cases.

 

 

 

You do realize that gay relationships were already included in the games before that codex was written...

If anything I would say that it was written because of people like you who can't accept the fact that not everyone in the game is screaming bloody murder at seeing a gay person.  The fact remains is that the Chantry is not whatever IRL religion you might follow so condemning gays on the behalf of the Maker is silly. It is also silly to condemn gays as your character because your character lives in Thedas and therefore does not have all of the same ideals as you. It's called role playing.

 

The only leg you have to stand on is the lack of options to agree with Halward about Dorian's refusal to produce an heir. And even then it only makes sense if you are a human noble.

 

Edit: I actually forgot about Gamlen's comment in DA2. So I guess there is an expression of homophobia in game.  It does show that it exists in their world to a degree. I suppose with that in mind it would make sense to add a disapproval dialogue beyond producing heirs, however, dragging the Chantry in it would not be lore friendly.

[Retro-bit]

Putting homophobic content in a game is aking for trouble, it would be a minefield and I can just imagine the backlash EAWare would get for it so I can understand why that is not an option.
The point of the game after all is certainly not Dorians sexually and I swear people are just looking to poke holes sometime...

[9TailsFox]

Even though I consider myself a SJW I laughed. Where did you get that if I may ask?

Find on memecenter, one of topics, don't remember exact.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Also you are playing as someone in Thedas, a world where society has rather different outlook on these matters, your character is product of that society. I could think couple more dialogue options if the character was from Tevinter, but the Inquisitor is Orlesian Marcher, it is fitting.

 

Rejecting the Andrastian faith, being tolerant of the Qun's views, and being accepting and understanding of mages isn't a normal product of thedasian society, nor is it normal for a "marcher" who were invaded by the qunari, saw the mage rebellion get its first breath, and had the chantry blown up by rogue mages.

 

Yet, only now, is this argument brought up about "you have to play with a marchers/thedasian outlook because reasons".

 

Face it, bioware removed the option to play evil characters, and with this one, removed any sort of roleplaying at all. You can be accepting, or reluctantly accepting, or fully promotive, but nothing else.

 

You can say this is good or bad, but don't lie about the reason behind it.

[9TailsFox]

Putting homophobic content in a game is aking for trouble, it would be a minefield and I can just imagine the backlash EAWare would get for it so I can understand why that is not an option.
The point of the game after all is certainly not Dorians sexually and I swear people are just looking to poke holes sometime...

Putting racist content is asking for trouble, DA setting is build on racism.

Putting religious content is asking for trouble. I think it was handled good. We have Praise the maker, I don't care, and Fu.. the maker

Putting naked body in game is asking for trouble at least according to Fox news.

Putting killing in game oh wait killing is good and appropriate.

[TammieAZ]

 

 

 

 

 

 

5) I don't give a ****. This is why we came all the way to Redcliffe? Kiss and make up. I'm done here.

6) I don't give a ****. Sort it out by yourselves.

 

 

 

 

Now those are the responses I wanted .