Good thing the developers have already stated that they don't care about mimicking real world statistics when makin their world. So that argument is irrelevant.
That sounds to me like it pretty much invalidates any claims that minority characters are put in their game because they're necessary to 'represent' certain people.
That sounds to me like it pretty much invalidates any claims that minority characters are put in their game because they're necessary to 'represent' certain people.
Being represented doesn't always mean to be represented as minority.
Although I don't really see more gay characters in the game than straight (then again nobody wears the darn stickers)
Is that right?
Funny, you would think a concept so supposedly 'fragile' would have vanished by this point considering how dedicated a significant chunk of people in the western world are to wiping it out along with the concept of gender in general.
Instead these concepts are very much alive and kicking. Hmm. It's almost as if the idea of them being 'fragile' in the first place is a petty delusion born of powerlessness?
If you'd read the rest, you'd realise that femininity is equally as fragile a concept. And yes, they are still existing, but they have both changed so much throughout time and space that to try to use them in any kind of objective sense strikes me as an exercise in futility. One need look no further than the oft-cited change of pink as a 'strong', masculine color (being derived from red) and blue as a 'soft', feminine color to the paradigm we have today, wherein pink unequivocally signifies feminine, in Western society anyway; or the myriad forms of cultural dress for men which incorporate what we in Western culture think of as 'a skirt', which is designated a garment for women only.
Edit: I will make no bones about the fact that I think gender roles are something of a nonsense which limit everyone, be they man, woman or someone who doesn't feel they fit in the gender binary. Physical sex in terms of gametes obviously exists, and is likely to continue to exist for the foreseeable future, since humans reproduce sexually. Gender, as far as designating various traits, behaviors, personality types, modes of dress, etc. are concerned, seems largely pointless to me, since there is as much variation within genders as between them. Basically, absent strong societal influences to shape people designated as men into certain roles and people designated as women into others (and often despite them), people are just people, and gender doesn't particularly tell you anything about someone as an individual person.
But I am primarily an individualist, I guess - seems to me it is better to evaluate anyone you meet on their own merits based on who and how they are, rather than to just assume things on them based on their demographic designations as though they were nothing more than a walking collection of stereotypes.
If you'd read the rest, you'd realise that femininity is equally as fragile a concept. And yes, they are still existing, but they have both changed so much throughout time and space that to try to use them in any kind of objective sense strikes me as an exercise in futility. One need look no further than the oft-cited change of pink as a 'strong', masculine color (being derived from red) and blue as a 'soft', feminine color to the paradigm we have today, wherein pink unequivocally signifies feminine, in Western society anyway; or the myriad forms of cultural dress for men which incorporate what we in Western culture think of as 'a skirt', which is designated a garment for women only.
If you read the rest of the text, you'll note that I made sure to say that this concerns not just masculinity, but gender in general. I assumed you would deduce that includes femininity.
Two problems:
One, you cannot claim that part of gender is subjective. You're going to have to claim that all of it is. Because as long as any part of it remains objectively true, it's still intact. It still marginalizes people, which I'm sure is what you want you put a stop to. All ideals and standards exclude people, and therefore the only way to not exclude anybody is to purge all ideals and standards. People vary in their honesty of recognizing that simple fact, but I digress. The point is that bringing up a few examples of gender fluidity is therefore irrelevant. Nobody but a fool would think gender isn't at least somewhat subject to culture and whatnot. So a handful of examples don't prove anything.
Two, it wouldn't make any difference even if you could claim and prove gender is entirely subjective. The vast majority of things in life are. There are very few things in life that are 'objectively' hammered into the fabric of the universe. And yet many of those things, although 'objectively' unprovable, are nonetheless considered sacred truths. Such as the value of human life, for example. If you demand that people can't value or think about something meaningfully under the guise of 'everything is subjective,' you'd be eliminating >95% of all communication, and more importantly, >95% thought.
This is only part of the story though. Romances in Bioware games used to be something that was nothing more than a miscellaneous quest. I liked romances when they were like that.
Now, they are full blown quests and taking up resources which could have been used for something like the main questline perhaps ?
Its not just the fans. Its Bioware making romances in their games bigger and more prevalent. If they had kept it simple and basic like it used to be, this obsession over character sexualities would not be a big thing.
I'm one of the romance fans. It's a big part of my pick BioWare before other games list. I enjoy them in the story, same as I enjoy them in a book like the Count of Monte Cristo; a movie like Charade or True LIes 
. They add something to the games that other developers don't bother with. I'll pick up Borderlands or Skyrim after I pick up DA.
Which ones did you consider basic? BG I didn't do the BG romance. Anomen self-absorbed, rude ...nope not my style.
I LOVE the romances and dialogue in KOTOR, and JE. That is a big part of the romance draw for me. The teasing, the choices in how you replied. KOTOR I would spend time just reloading to hear the different comments between Carth and Raven or Raven and Bastilla. They were GREAT!! "Man Feelings; Kinrath pup; hairless wookiee" I miss this.
The romances in DA:O were good; DA2 for me lacked a lot; ME series were all good until ME3 poor Jacob and many of them got left in the cold. DAI, not bad.
Eh, Chrome ate my post and I CBA to repost it. In any case it's gone well off-topic now. *shrug*
All I'll say is, question everything, especially anything that anyone claims is important. If we don't think about how or why things are important or valuable, then how important or valuable are they?
I've questioned masculinity and femininity, and they have my complete and total approval. Knowing fully well that many people who have done nothing wrong suffer because of them.
I'm afraid I have come to the opposite conclusion; I find them ultimately meaningless. So on that note, I am off to do something more constructive with my time. Cheerio, peeps!
Me, seeing that this thread is still going on.
Me, seeing that this thread is still going on.
...and here comes the awkward silence... 
This is actually a really good idea for a noble character or a city elf. Very interesting idea.
I totally had forgotten they did the arranged marriage thing too! Yes. Definitely.
That actually sounds like a really interesting idea, and one I don't think has been done before. I wouldn't mind something like that implemented in a future game.
Glad to see people like it. 
If you read the rest of the text, you'll note that I made sure to say that this concerns not just masculinity, but gender in general. I assumed you would deduce that includes femininity.
Masculinity and femininity are not a gender. Masculinity is the possession of traits commonly associated with men, and femininity is the possession of traits commonly associated with women. Gender is a state of being, not a stereotype.
Gender is a state of being, not a stereotype.
And what 'state of being,' is that, exactly?
Depends what you mean by "gender".
As a social role (gender role) it is a social construct and thus based on different social norms/patterns across cultures which creates gender systems, however as such it is defined both on personal level and group level. Society enforces the gender label first, however since we do not have hivemind people tend to differentiate on personal level. Social label is not a rigid concept either, it changes with time and is constantly challenged. (This is in part why people have catfights over Cullen's sexuality).
As biological role it is a state of being, ie biological sex.
If you'd read the rest, you'd realise that femininity is equally as fragile a concept. And yes, they are still existing, but they have both changed so much throughout time and space that to try to use them in any kind of objective sense strikes me as an exercise in futility. One need look no further than the oft-cited change of pink as a 'strong', masculine color (being derived from red) and blue as a 'soft', feminine color to the paradigm we have today, wherein pink unequivocally signifies feminine, in Western society anyway; or the myriad forms of cultural dress for men which incorporate what we in Western culture think of as 'a skirt', which is designated a garment for women only.
Edit: I will make no bones about the fact that I think gender roles are something of a nonsense which limit everyone, be they man, woman or someone who doesn't feel they fit in the gender binary. Physical sex in terms of gametes obviously exists, and is likely to continue to exist for the foreseeable future, since humans reproduce sexually. Gender, as far as designating various traits, behaviors, personality types, modes of dress, etc. are concerned, seems largely pointless to me, since there is as much variation within genders as between them. Basically, absent strong societal influences to shape people designated as men into certain roles and people designated as women into others (and often despite them), people are just people, and gender doesn't particularly tell you anything about someone as an individual person.
But I am primarily an individualist, I guess - seems to me it is better to evaluate anyone you meet on their own merits based on who and how they are, rather than to just assume things on them based on their demographic designations as though they were nothing more than a walking collection of stereotypes.
Me, seeing that this thread is still going on.
No offence, but I think you need a Brazilian wax (kidding).
And what 'state of being,' is that, exactly?
Do you own a dictionary? Can you google? If you're going to use words to try to make your point, then you should understand what those words mean.
Obviously to shove homosexuality down your throat.
Hmm. Wait...
Seems as if they were planning to make everyone player sexual ala DA2, but ran out of time
Note that I don't really care about Cullen's sexuality one way or another. That said, I don't feel that the posted quote answers anything. We do know that one reason (the main reason?) we got a Cullen romance -- and a Solas romance -- in the first place is because they got the extra year of development time, which is really great. But since files were discovered that indicated the developer intention to, at one time, have him be bisexual, what caused that to change?
If it were say Blackwall, who is also straight, and who was (apparently, I assume) designed that way from the beginning, THEN his response at GaymerX would be applicable. They chose to make certain characters gay, straight, or bi, and that is fine. But that doesn't appear to be the case with Cullen specifically. So the question is why did it change?
I haven't been able to find the developer tweets referencing this issue, and I'll admit that I never looked very hard because I didn't want to wade through all of the gnashing of teeth regarding this just to find it. If someone has a link handy I'd like to see it.
Regardless of the reason, I think it was a HUGE mistake to leave the files in there in the first place
Wouldn't be the first time Bioware left files like that in their games
I find it odd that game after game they go so far as to recording voice-work for these things only to scrap them. Isn't voice-work one of the last things they do?
Seems as if they were planning to make everyone player sexual ala DA2, but ran out of time
According to them, the options in DA2 were all bisexual. It's not like 4 people who know each other can't be.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
