2503 réponses à ce sujet

[alienatedflea]

Just a question, lets just say its playersexual is the path of least resistance.  Would that really be a bad thing? I mean really? If romance is ignored, would that break the game for the LGBT gamers? 

[(Disgusted noise.)]

"explicitly about more than just representation for gay players", should it be? its 2015 who are we trying to teach here? homosexuality is accepted in the community.

Lol tell that to some of the people who've posted in this thread.

[LPPrince]

"Toggle away the gay" is never going to go well.

 

Good thing "toggle away the gay" is never gonna happen then.

[alienatedflea]

Sometimes I wish this forum had a homophobic bigot toggle. That would do wonders for my blood pressure.

lol well only a matter of time that the H word would make an appearance here...instead of debate, name-calling/classifying people is a typical response these days.

[Redbelle]

If you're a gay mShep or straight fShep, romance wasn't all too fair. The games really seemed to cater to straight mShep and lesbian fShep. (Or bisexual Shep of either gender.)

 

To avoid what happened with DA:I - which caused massive upset regarding the sudden shift of romance options - maybe romance can just be equally divvied up? Seems like, at the end of the day, that's what everyone would agree on. Well, almost everyone. I know there are people out there who would rather romances just play out in whatever capacity for the sake of the story. I respect that.

 

But in the end, more will agree that it kinda sucks when options are limited for certain heroes of certain orientations/genders.

At this point in the 'how we want our LI's to develop', I feel that what's being asked for is.....

 

To have a LI of a certain sexual persuasion, that if it does not align with our character's orientation, we have the power to 'turn them'.

 

Oh jeez...... I mean, convincing an NPC LI that your the obvioius choice and they should experiment sounds good in theory? But already I can see the problem. If all character's can be turned then their own identity as a person is malleable. And if all character identities are malleable then we ru back into the problem of DA2's LI's not having established character that conforms them to values they believe in.

 

Mechanically though it's always going to come down to three orientations. Or four if Asari are counted as a gender of their own. As for how those orientations manifest? That's flavor. For example you can have a bisexual NPC whose aggressive in his pursuit of who he wants a relationship with. Or the same NPC re-flavored so he likes woman but is nervous but curious in his hidden desire to experiment with a member of the same sex. Or another NPC whose recently lost his husband...... Oh, done that one.

 

Anyway. In ME Love isn't a buffet table where it's all you can eat. In Mass Effect love is a menu and your only allowed one course.... Or a sample before moving on to another sample before the meal is laid out before you. But if you go the same restaurant three times in a row and don't choose the same dish......

 

You know what? I'm done with this metaphor.

[SardaukarElite]

David Gaider's blog was shut down, but here's another link talking about it:

 

http://www.gameranx....mantic-options/

 

 

Also, whenever someone requests a toggle a developer punts a kitten through a plate glass window.

 

Rules are rules, you've all been warned.

 

How about they focus on making a good story first and not another train wreck like ME2/3 story?

 

Clearly they just need to make the main story a romance.

 

Casablanca, in space.

[In Exile]

Good thing "toggle away the gay" is never gonna happen then.

Oh I didn't mean it was going to happen. I mean talking about it would end badly.

[Rannik]

But I want to toggle away the straight.

 

Check your privileges.

[LPPrince]

Oh I didn't mean it was going to happen. I mean talking about it would end badly.

 

I know. That toggle talk never goes well.

[LPPrince]

But I want to toggle away the straight.

 

Check your privileges.

 

I see your toggle away the straight and raise you a toggle away the toggle.

[daveliam]

Just a question, lets just say its playersexual is the path of least resistance.  Would that really be a bad thing? I mean really? If romance is ignored, would that break the game for the LGBT gamers? 

 

Here's my thoughts on it:

Depends on what you mean by "playersexual".

 

If you mean, every LI is bisexual (like the DA2 vanilla romances), then I'm totally fine with it.  It wouldn't be my preferred route, but I'd be fine.  I'll even go so far as to say that I'd be fine with either one man/one woman or two man/two women.  As long as it's not something like three bisexual ladies and one bisexual man (think BG2, but bisexual), then I'm all good.

 

If you mean, every LI's sexuality changes based on the PC gender (i.e. the LI is straight if you are a woman and gay if you are a man), then I'm not in favor of that.  Plus, it seems to fly in the face of the 'focus on good storytelling' argument.  Characters have sexualities.  If a character's story involves a romance with the PC, then that sexuality is an important part of their story.  Seeing it change and flip flop based on your gender is weak and, in my opinion, terrible writing.  I'd also like to point out that Bioware has never gone this route.  There are some games (text based mobile games like the Choice of Games series) that do it.  They first ask you to identify your gender and orientation.  Then that changes the characters you encounter.  For example, a character named Chris is a straight man for some players, a lesbian for others, a gay man for others, a straight woman for others.  I think it weakens their characters a bit as it reduces them to simply LI's.  Their character is now designed around your gender/orientation.  I'm not in favor of that.

[(Disgusted noise.)]

Just a question, lets just say its playersexual is the path of least resistance.  Would that really be a bad thing? I mean really? If romance is ignored, would that break the game for the LGBT gamers? 

 

I used to be, well not a proponent, but content with having all bisexual LIs because I'm still bitter about having access to three of the four LIs in DAO with a self-insert character, but the only one I actually wanted to romance was blocked from me, however Dorian in DAI changed my tune about that. His romance subplot (not his side quest) was such a uniquely queer story that couldn't have existed if he was able to be romanced by female characters and it was something I related to so much from when I was coming to terms with my sexual orientation, and I value that experience over having to play through a game with no LIs that appealed to me. So, while not every romance subplot is going to be inseperably tied to a character's sexual orientation and I wouldn't be distraught if all bisexual LIs did make a return, I prefer having a variety of orientations present due to the storytelling possibilities.

[Master Race]

[Snorka]

Alright, alright. I'll take the time. I should, anyway.

 

WHY A SEXUALITY TOGGLE WOULD BE A TERRIBAD IDEA-

 

Sexuality is way too variable to ever be accurately handled via a simple choice or toggle made at a menu.

 

For example, me. I'm a straight guy. I've always been straight. Never wavered. I love women and only women in both a romantic and sexual way. If I were to be "toggled" into the straight option, it'd be fine.

 

But not everyone is so rigid in their preferences. Others ebb and flow and change with time and other factors. Others aren't quite sure. Some are so complicated I can't sit here and pretend I can accurately describe how it works for them.

 

Sexuality isn't always a "one or the other" sort of thing. Its not always quite that simple. Romantic/sexual interest is so widely different from person to person(even between people of the same sexuality) that a toggle would only limit what kind of character a player could control.

 

Perhaps someone wants to play a character who's set in their preferences and only sticks to one or the other. A toggle could still affect them if they come across a character of a different sort that they'd like to attempt pursuing.

 

Point is, a toggle is a terrible idea. All it does is limit, does so unnecessarily, and would be a waste of resources. Bioware recognizes this and has always stated they won't do it.

Thank you for your time, i see the toggle can be seen in a negative light. I just find with games, take this one for example it is rumored to have only 7 companions, now if 6 of them are romance options, surely friendship options are suffering, with a toggle you go "right, i want to play a gay male and want my 2 romance options and wan't to invest time with other characters to discover comrade-dry and friendship" 

[(Disgusted noise.)]

Thank you for your time, i see the toggle can be seen in a negative light. I just find with games, take this one for example it is rumored to have only 7 companions, now if 6 of them are romance options, surely friendship options are suffering, with a toggle you go "right, i want to play a gay male and want my 2 romance options and wan't to invest time with other characters to discover comrade-dry and friendship" 

 

Sorry people jumped down your throat about it, but it gets brought up regularly and not everyone has noble intentions.

[Rannik]

You should be more careful when talking about these things, in-game option menus are serious business.

 

They could destroy entire ecosystems and ruin the lives of everyone on earth.

[LPPrince]

Sorry people jumped down your throat about it, but it gets brought up regularly and not everyone has noble intentions.

 

This.

[LPPrince]

Thank you for your time, i see the toggle can be seen in a negative light. I just find with games, take this one for example it is rumored to have only 7 companions, now if 6 of them are romance options, surely friendship options are suffering, with a toggle you go "right, i want to play a gay male and want my 2 romance options and wan't to invest time with other characters to discover comrade-dry and friendship" 

 

Remember that romantic relationships do not have to be and are likely not limited to those we take with us into combat.

[LPPrince]

You should be more careful when talking about these things, in-game option menus are serious business.

 

They could destroy entire ecosystems and ruin the lives of everyone on earth.

 

Here at least.

[Char]

lol well only a matter of time that the H word would make an appearance here...instead of debate, name-calling/classifying people is a typical response these days.

Better people than me have argued admirably and eloquently about the benefits of equality and the fact that giving LGBT players options takes nothing away from straight players. And the idea that there is somehow something so frightening about being exposed to content not aimed at one's own sexual preference that it needs to be toggled away in case someone accidentally ends up gay or some other bs is really quite worrying.

I'm never going to use multiplayer but I'm not sitting in threads about multiplayer geting in a snit about it being harder to get the ending I wanted in ME3. I've accepted that there is content I'm not going to use and isn't intended for me as a gamer, and I'm perfectly happy to let other people enjoy it. Why people can't accept romance options that aren't aimed specifically for them honestly bemuses me.

[Grieving Natashina]

Thank you for your time, i see the toggle can be seen in a negative light. I just find with games, take this one for example it is rumored to have only 7 companions, now if 6 of them are romance options, surely friendship options are suffering, with a toggle you go "right, i want to play a gay male and want my 2 romance options and wan't to invest time with other characters to discover comrade-dry and friendship" 

I apologize for the tone my own remarks.  It was borne out of frustration and you didn't deserve me getting so aggressive.  

[The Elder King]

his personality/character changed is what ruined him. Why was there a change? Because apparently your personality has to change in order to go from straight to bi. >.< because thats what happened.

1)Kaidan 'changed' already in ME2.
2) I can't be sure Since I'm straight and I didn't see much of Kaidan fanbase, but I don't think people Who wanted Kaidan as a s/s LI disliked him in ME of wanted him to change.
Writers often change something in characters when writing them in different games, because They want to add something new. Kaidan would've Been the same Even If Straight.

Just a question, lets just say its playersexual is the path of least resistance. Would that really be a bad thing? I mean really? If romance is ignored, would that break the game for the LGBT gamers?

You do know that a lot of people Who complained about DA2's model were/Are straight, right? It has nothing to do with being straight, homosexual or bisexual, It's about people's opinions on the matter.

[Snorka]

I apologize for the tone my own remarks.  It was borne out of frustration and you didn't deserve me getting so aggressive.  

I'm sorry if i came across ignorant, it's probably is because i am. I thought a toggle would halve romance development time, not add to it.

[Rannik]

I like how a simple sexuality toggle for your character turns into rambling about some "problematic" "homophobic" nonsense.
 

I'm sorry if i came across ignorant, it's probably is because i am.

 
Nah you're not, there's nothing wrong with the idea of a sexuality slider just like there's no problem with the idea of a class slider, in fact as far as gameplay goes those two are pretty similar in nature.
 
There are arguments for and against it (the most reasonable one being the fact that it could add a lot of complexity and QA time), but is something that is probably worth exploring as a tool to make games more engaging and many people might find interesting regardless of what the digital drama queens think about it.
 
Ironically, some of those people were fine with (or even argued for) playersexuality in DA2, which is pretty much what such a slider could do.

[Grieving Natashina]

I'm sorry if i came across ignorant, it's probably is because i am. I thought a toggle would halve romance development time, not add to it.

You're willing to learn.  That's not being ignorant in my opinion, that's just being inexperienced.  I should have taken it easier on you and my knee-jerk reaction wasn't a great thing to do.  Thanks for keeping an open mind.  

 

And yeah, it would be a crazy amount of work for something that I don't think is really worth the trouble.