6 réponses à ce sujet

[Capone666]

Part 1 of our interview is here!

 

We talked to David Gaider, lead writer on the Dragon Age franchise...he dropped some big bombs

 

But lets start......with how the writer treats sexual diversity in his games

 

 

 

We're speaking with David Gaider - one of the senior writers at Bioware, mind behind Dragon Age, he was lead writer there for many, many years - talking a little bit about the romance options in the entire series and of course a very exciting character in Dragon Age Inquisition.

 

At what point did you make a decision, because you alluded to it earlier, to have different sorts of romances and different sorts of relationships in Origins that weren't available – they were available – but that weren't, as you said, widely accepted in the gaming world? Do you remember that instance and did you feel like it might have been a risky move?

 

It wasn't new to Dragon Age. We've been doing romances for a long time.

 

Yeah, of course.

 

I think they were kind of expected. And we weren't even the first ones to do gay romances. Jade Empire was probably our first. I think Jade Empire was – and I wasn't involved on that project – but I remember hearing about when they made that decision to put it in and I was floored. I mean, I'm gay myself, so I felt it kind of odd when I heard about it, how shocked I was because I just never thought that part of my life had a role to play in work. Like I said, it just wasn't done. I didn't even really consider the idea, so when they made that decision it was like, oh, really?

 

And I think there was a lot of apprehension about what the reaction in the gaming community would be. Because I think a lot of decisions on development teams get made, not based on the developer's personal feelings but their assumptions about the audience. I think that's a lot where the conservatism streak sort of comes from.

 

It's nervousness from the people who have all the money, and they're worried about the risk. And I think it's from the people who make the games that are probably, I would say, lean liberal and [unclear] educated and sort of what they assume their audience will or won't accept. So, when the decision was made for Jade Empire I think there was some apprehension, but I think also an idea that this was something that needed to happen. And I think when Jade Empire went out we were kind of surprised at how it really didn't cause the kind of explosion that we had thought. And I think that made us a lot bolder.

 

But yeah. After that, it was the original Mass Effect. I think that came out before Origins, and there's been a sort of a cultural development in the years since. There's a certain amount of backlash but I think also a certain amount of support as well. And I think what each time we've done that, what has become pretty clear is that from a bottom line standpoint, you could make the argument, I suppose, that if we didn't include that maybe the game would sell more. You could also make an argument that if we didn't include that the game would sell less.

 

We're putting out something that appeals to players who don't traditionally get represented in games, so maybe more of them come to play the games. Maybe it's just enough to make up for the ones that are turned off by that. But, ultimately, it hasn't really affected our sales insofar as we can tell. So, the idea of how commercial a consideration it is kind of goes out the window and we can focus on just doing the right thing.

 

We're doing a bit of a jump here, but since we are on the topic: Explain the character of Krem in Dragon Age Inquisition and how that goes into the natural progression of creating realistic characters that you were just mentioning.

 

We had never really done a transgender character prior to that. I mean, we had a character in Dragon Age Origins – or was it Dragon Age 2? Serendipity. I think that was Dragon Age 2.

 

Yeah. Dragon Age 2.

 

That we had originally intended to be a drag queen from the design perspective. And then I remember we just couldn't really get the appearance for that. So she appeared as a woman, and so I think the interpretation was that she was intended to be transgender. Which wasn't what we had intended but, I mean, authorial intention kind of goes out the window. It's what we put out there.

 

And the thing is, I think, someone, I remember, came to our forums at one point – the BioWare online forums – and complained and said: you know, you do these characters. In Dragon Age Origins you had prostitutes that you said this one's 'male' - and it was in quotes – and then you have Serendipity in DA2, which I read as transgender and also a prostitute and generally used for laughs, right? And it just feels really cheap, don't you think, that that's the only way these characters can appear?

 

And I got to ask Mary Kirby, she's the one that wrote Serendipity. She loved her dearly. And yes, we had used her for laughs. And I think when Mary read that she was like, you know, that is fair. And so that's what she responded on the forums. She said, you know, that is completely fair. That's something we should think about.

 

Because it's not that we couldn't have a Serendipity. I think the thing is that that was our only presentation of that type of character. That was all we had. And when we're talking about representation, if we have, say, a gay character, it's not that the gay character has to be a particular way. It's that if you look at the breath of your presentation, if there's only a very select amount of those characters, or one, then what they are sort of does become a statement.

 

It's like a female character. If the only females you have in your game are all second fiddles, damsels in distress, or very weak characters, then you don't have any breath. It's like, in Dragon Age 2, we have Isabella, who is a very sexualized character. But, she exists in the context of a game that also has Aveline or Meredith. So, if you have some breath in the portrayal, then there is some context.

 

I think that was the thing that resignated with us, is that okay, that is a completely fair statement. We fucked up with – oh, pardon me.

 

It's all right. No worries. This is peer credit. No worries.

 

Okay. We fucked up with Serendipity, so it's like, you know, if the opportunity presents itself, maybe we can think about what we're saying with a transgender character. And there are people out there who would look at that moment as a, oh, now you've limited yourself creatively. I don't look on that as a limitation. It's not a prison.

 

Just because our first idea was let's make this transgender character that's a prostitute and is there for laughs – having a moment to talk about that and thinking about maybe there's some other things we could do is not limitation. It is: just acknowledge that maybe that's a bad idea, or maybe it's just a bad idea to do that all the time. Or maybe we should consider not only what that says to us but what it is saying to our audience. Just the moment of having that conversation is not a limitation. It allows for more creativity.

 

So, Krem is an excellent example because I think originally the character of Krem was supposed to be somebody else. Maybe actually a cameo, I can't remember which, but that didn't work out. So, Patrick Weeks was writing and he became sort of Iron Bull's second in command. And he was just a male mercenary character and it seemed kind of dull.

 

And I think it started with Patrick. I had already made a character called Maevaris Tilani in one of the comics, and he said it would be neat if we could take that on step further and have something in the game. And would it be cool if I made this character transgender?

 

And the team started to discuss it, and we were like, oh! That's not a limitation because the moment he said that it was just like, oh! Well, let's stop and think about that for a moment. And that sort of opened up all new ideas of what that would mean. Well, okay, how would Iron Bull as a member of the Qunari feel about transgender? It led into a conversation about the way the Qunari view gender, which is different from us. And there's a way, we figured, when we wrapped our heads around it, I don't think the Qunari would look on gender the same way we do, not the way that when we've discussed them.

 

And the idea of the Chargers, Iron Bull's mercenary group, they sort of consisted of the other. And not the other as in a threatening or a derogatory sense, but people who had different experiences and who they were said something about Iron Bull. You know what I mean? It became as much about him. So, when Patrick talked about that, it was like, yeah. I was like, go for it. Explore that and see where you can put it. And maybe see if you can find somebody in the transgender community that you can run it by just to make sure you're not doing anything untoward because he was- I think that was as much his idea because he was very concerned about doing something inadvertent.

 

And that's very easy. And you can never do it perfectly. I mean, there's always going to be a way that somebody can sort of turn it in their heads and they're going to interpret it a way that's not going to be what you intended. But that's okay. The purpose of making characters is not make them inoffensive to everyone. I think that's almost impossible. But you want to be careful to not inadvertently says things you don't intend, like with Serendipity.

 

So, he put together a treatment of the character that seemed interesting. It got some interest. We talked to our VO department if they'd be willing to work with that. Because it's like, can we find a transgender voice actor? Possibly – now certainly more than before. But, whether a voice actor, one that is signed up with a voice agent that we can deal with. Is that an option?

 

A lot of hurdles.

 

Yeah, what are the hurdles for doing this? Is it possible that an actor might object to that kind of role? When we started with the gay romances, that was also a concern. We have actor in the booth, say, okay, your character can romance somebody of the same gender, go. And you think, wow, who's going to have a problem with that? More than you'd think.

 

Really?

 

I mean, not even a problem, but that somebody might be uncomfortable with it, and that that would then come across in their acting - especially if they weren't aware that this was a possibility or something. So, it's something you just got to keep in mind. Our VO department, Caroline Livingstone, our VO director, was absolutely enthusiastic about the challenge involved. And, who played Krem? Jennifer-

 

Jennifer Hale.

 

Jennifer Hale, right. She jumped on the idea. She did research. I think her voice performance was fantastic. When I first heard it, knowing Jennifer Hale's voice as well as I do, I could hear it, but I think she did a solid job.

 

I think if we do something like that again, we need – actually, not need. That's a bad word. I think the next step would be to see if we could actually find a transgender performer. I think that should be our first stop, at least to see if that's an option. I don't actually know what the hurdles are. I'm not in VO. I don't do the casting. I just know that wasn't as easy as it might first appear.

 

But the fact that the rest of the team just sort of jumped on it – I think we ultimately made a character that might not be perfect in very sense, but that was indicative of more thought going into the process than we'd used previously. Because I think when mistakes get made it's hardly ever intentional but more often than not is just born of ignorance.  

[David Gaider]

If someone doesn't like Dorian's quest because they don't think it was well-written, so be it. I'm not about to argue with them.

 

If one's objection, however, is that having a single follower quest -- out of the four followers who are gay or bisexual -- which makes their sexuality at all relevant somehow makes that the entire point of the quest or, indeed, Dorian's arc as a character...then I'm afraid I'll simply have to shrug and say their comment says more about them than anything else.

 

It's rather like the occasional messages I get from certain parties who complain about how the game "caters to gay people" ...why? Evidently because there isn't enough content for straight people (meaning more than they got, which is actually the same as in previous DA games), because they don't like the content they did get and ascribe that to either a gay or feminist agenda which is being "rammed down their throat" (an odd metaphor to select, if you ask me), or because those characters exist at all...and the mere existence of a few characters or themes that relate in any way to the actual world we live in is somehow too jarring a notion in a mature-themed game already full of themes that cover almost everything else under the sun.

 

It's an odd thing to obsess this much over, considering there's so much else in the game to occupy one's attention, but hey -- you do you.

[David Gaider]

I called it an "after school special" because as someone who's gay, I grew up watching a number of movies and television shows where the gay child-parental redemption story has been done and I didn't expect something so cliche from a Bioware series, much less from a Bioware companion, who are famed for being interesting and well-written characters. I found Dorian's story entirely predictable and cliche, and I knew exactly how the story would go (except for the whole blood magic bit) the minute Mother Giselle gave me Halward's note for Dorian. I honestly expected a bit more from Gaider, since I assume he's familiar with gay media and the typical stories that come out from it (no pun intended and also another type of overdone gay story), being gay and all, but I guess he wrote the story mainly for straight gamers who probably haven't been exposed to such a story and would think it a novel or interesting story. For me, personally, I wasn't impressed, but I guess I was let down more so because I had high hopes for the first gay Bioware companion than the writing being bad.

 

It is fair for you to interpret the plot however you like, I won't argue with that.

 

The fact that Dorian's plot is neither about his father accepting his homosexuality (his father's issue is that Dorian allows his preferences to take precedence over his duty, not that he has those preferences to begin with) and does not end with the conflict neatly resolved belies it being an "after school special" -- at least, in my opinion. To me, that involves conflicts which are presented in a simplistic manner and with an overly-pat resolution. Perhaps you feel that's the case, but then I'd be curious if it wasn't just the plot's basic nature in that it involves parental conflict which was the source of your issue.

 

Beyond that, I'll just say that I've had many gay people (men and women) contact me to say they were deeply moved by the plot -- which either means it's not something they've seen before (not in a video game, certainly) or that they didn't interpret it as you did. Which is not to say they're right and you're wrong, but your implication that anyone gay would feel as you do is just not the case.

[David Gaider]

Except for the fact that the IB said nothing about it being a matter of personal identity as opposed to assignment by the religious caste, and more to the point when Krem dreamily talks about the Qun in that context the IB does his usual dodge when he's trying to cover up how brutal and oppressive his regime is to people. 

 

The first thing the IB introduces you is the fact that torture and re-education are completely and absolutely central to the Qunari, and that anyone who deviates from the role they're believed to embody is broken through - among other things - sleep deprivation, solitary confinement, and repeated interrogation. Not to mention your only role - if they don't just break your mind with poison - is menial labourer. The IB is a huge exception here (and likely because he turned himself in). 

 

The IB didn't say people get to choose gender. He said that the Qunari - using their usual form of insane troll logic - decide that someone fit for the role of a man is a man. 

 

This just comes back to the fact that people don't get the Qun. They didn't get it when Sten talked about it, they missed the point when the Arishok talked about it, and they really missed the point when the IB talks about how horrid it is because of the obsession over Krem. 

 

Yes -- when the idea of Krem being transgender was brought up by Patrick, what we discussed was whether that fit into how we understand the Qun...and it did. It allowed us to explore the Qun idea of gender further, not to mention said something about Iron Bull as well. That made it an opportunity.

 

We did not go "hey, let's change the Qun to be this thing". Why would we? The Qun's concept of gender is not integral to Krem's existence in the Chargers. Iron Bull could just have easily said "yeah, this would never fly under the Qun" and be done with it.

 

I find it interesting that some fans feel they had a complete understanding of the Qun after indirect exposure to it through the eyes of a single character, and that, when exposed to some new facet afterwards, they react as if this new information required "retconning" on our end rather than some thought on theirs. Indeed, that was part of Iron Bull's purpose -- by Sten's estimation, Iron Bull should not be possible, never mind Krem. Iron Bull requires you to take your understanding of the Qunari (who Sten insisted were all monolithic in their purpose) and tilt it 45 degrees. Krem only requires you to understand that the Qunari see gender as a role -- if you are a warrior, you are a male...if Krem insisted on being female and a warrior THAT would make no sense to them -- and thus show another facet of how the Qunari are quite alien to us with regards to their view of certain things.

 

But I suppose it really depends on whether a given fan wants to consider such things. Maybe they'd prefer the Qunari just be the Borg, I don't know. Either way, I'm certain new things about them will continue to be shown by Patrick and co. in the years to come, which will undoubtedly blow peoples' minds with the extent of their "revisionism".

[David Gaider]

It's very easy to deflect the issue especially when the lore is vague enough, but the thing is, we didn't make these assumptions in a vaccum.

The Qun was shown more or less as an extremely utilitarian version of North Korea, everything is considered through the the question of "is this good for the Qun"? No place for sentiments, at least not according to the official line.

 

Why would this utilitarian view require them to assume that "gender is a role -- if you are a warrior, you are a male"? Can't they just use the word *warrior* instead of the word *Male*? A true Utilitarian view would simply not care about physical gender, and would assume roles according to precieved potential and ability.

 

To me, that said that someone tried to make the Qun more cuddly, and at the same time extend a rather meaningless olive branch towards transgenders, for reasons that had less to do with the story and more to do with political opinions.

 

I'm going to assume that what you're picturing, when it comes to Krem, is Krem going to the Tamassran priesthood and going, "hey, I don't think I'm comfortable with this role you've assigned me" and them going, "gosh, you're totally right". Then they all hold hands and sing songs about love and social justice.

 

This is my interpretation when you say the Qun has been painted as more "cuddly".

 

Or perhaps you simply mean more "cuddly" for the player -- as if this makes the Qunari more friendly-seeming, somehow? If so, I'd say that really depends on who you are and what your thoughts are on the idea of self-determination.

 

Either way, there's a number of assumptions at work on your part. With respect to the lore itself, I agree they don't come out of a vacuum...but with respect to this particular aspect of it, I'll simply say there are some biases of your own at work. I'll just say that the utilitarian aspect of the Qun does not disagree with a more nuanced understanding of gender...indeed, considering the importance that the Qun places on gender, I'd say it's complementary. Perhaps the process that Tamassrans use to assign roles is something that future games will go into more detail on, I can't really say. Might be interesting.

[David Gaider]

They operate on insane troll logic. Their very notion of identity is defined through liberal application of the No True Scotsman fallacy. You can't say that you understood their views on identity and take issue with their mental gymnastics when it comes to gender. They're the same thing. 

 

Let's turn right back to the Arishok talking about Tal-Vasoth. He says that he lost no "Qunari" to talk the Tal-Vasoth. This only works if you tautologically define a Qunari as "someone who would not become a Tal-Vasoth". It is the same kind of logical black hole Sten puts forward in DA:O. Applying this to gender, here is what Sten (and the Arishok) say: 

 

Sten says: IF AND ONLY IF "Warrior", THEN "Man". One implication of the biconditional being IF NOT Man, THEN NOT "Warrior". We have no idea what Sten considers to be a warrior beyond the fact that it seems to involve "war" being your calling in some important way (not just a propensity for fighting). When you talk to Sten about the GWs, he views their "role" as being to combat the blight. In some sense, that's a "Warrior" role. And then his mind breaks, because he has the fundamental Qun biconditional about gender and warriors applicable in this case ("IF Warrior, THEN Man") along with your clearly defined role ("PC = Grey Warden = Warrior") and the implication of that biconditional ("IF NOT Man, then NOT Warrior"). So now Sten has to deal with you - by his internal logic - being in the "NOT Warrior" box but at the same time having you assert you are a "Warrior". That breaks his mind. Since he accepts his precondition can't be wrong - he's a good Qunari - he assumes you're lying and attempts to get you to relent (by saying you're a "NOT Warrior"). The Ben-Hassarath solve this issue by saying you're not "NOT Man". And that's the No True Scotsman fallacy. 

 

This works the same way with the Arishok and Tal-Vasoth, since the logic there is just "IF AND ONLY IF Tal-Vasoth, THEN NOT Qunari". 

 

Understanding this in terms of formal logic is very important, because as far as we can tell the Qun is content neutral. "Man" means whatever thing they define it to mean, not whatever it corresponds to IRL. People think the words the Qun uses about roles apprehend IRL meaning instead of whatever meaning the Qunari define those words to mean, which they often pull out of the air when confronted by a circumstance that doesn't fit their predefined notion. That's the Qunari's whole stick - the No True Scotsman fallacy. 

 

10 points to House Gryffindor.

[David Gaider]

Personal views do not....or they didn't used to matter in Qunari society before DAI.

 

Here, I think, is the crux of your problem.

 

Which "personal view" do you think would matter, in this case?

 

Have you considered the possibility that they would not view Krem's gender as a "personal view"? That Krem did not say "pretty please", and then the Tamassrans went "okay, we'll put you in a male role, but only because you asked so nicely."

 

We are telling you the Qunari have a more nuanced view of gender, because it does apply absolutely to their role, insofar as they're concerned. At what point that occurs, and how it happens, we haven't really gone into...but consider that, prior to the point at which their role is irrevocably assigned, the Tamassrans would also be the ones raising a child and preparing them and also assessing them. They decide where said child fits, not the child. This does not contradict anything else we've told you. That's all I guess I can really say about it.