Ridiculous, he brings his own pen, of course.
Will he write with the usual blue, red or black ink or should he go exotic and go for something that the minority likes? Like orange with left-hand swirls of green. Now that, is something to get worried about especially if 10% of the men on this world is concerned.
Neon Pink or go home.
My biggest fear for this game is that it will have the same writer who's responsible for the ending of ME3... shivers...
it's like a 10 year old wrote that, seriously...
Despite that, I consider myself a big fan of the ME games and universe, so I really hope Andromeda will be a good game with a good story. A big open world is not necessarily a bad thing for the story, as the developers of the Witcher 3 have aptly demonstrated (huge world and awesome characters and story line).
Anyway, please bring back Garrus, that's the only thing I ask! 
*sigh*
Another SJW that needs to be educated.
Yeah, whenever someone uses that term now it really sounds like "I don't agree with your non-conservative ideas so I'm going to label you as something I don't like."
1)"the majority" is not threatened by diversity or minorities. No individual who belongs to "the majority" due to an accident of birth feels threatened by diversity. Similarly, no such "member of the majority" individual feels threatened on behalf of "the majority".
This is a silly bigoted concept dreamed up by SJW's to justify their hatred of people who are not them.
I don't know what nationality you are, but you must not be following American news if you think that the majority is not threatened by minorities. What do you think Trump's "Make America Great Again" means? And why the people voting for him are vastly white people? And he talks about deporting Muslims and building a wall across the Mexican border?
Points for trying to claim me saying the poster doesn't want diversity is actually me being bigoted.
2)"the majority" has no particular problem with diversity in games or other media. To suggest "the majority" does, is idiotic (and bigoted).
Yet when people complain about tokenism, their argument is that if diversity in games is not done exactly to their tastes, there should be no diversity at all. Agree or not with his opinion on diversity, if game developers just don't include diversity because they're worried some consumers will think it's forced, how will we ever get authentic, well written diverse characters? And why should his opinion about diversity be held as more relevant than someone else? Maybe other players didn't find the inclusion of diversity as forced.
Also remember that this guy is explaining why he is not buying a game that has not come out yet, that we have barely any information about. He is leaping to enormous conclusions and has no basis in facts to his complaints. If his argument is that he doesn't like the opinions of one employee of the company making this game, not even a writer for the game, that is stupid.
Also note that I did not say that all people in the majority feel a certain way. I said he seems like the type of person from the majority who feels and acts this way.
While writers should indeed be careful to make their minority characters three dimensional, that's just the same as saying they should strive to make all characters three-dimensional. The annoying part comes when people proclaim that poorly written minority characters would have been better served not being represented, while the same is not said of the straight/white/male majority. In such a case, it feels like tokenism is being used an excuse to exclude minorities while keeping representation largely to their tastes.
While writers should indeed be careful to make their minority characters three dimensional, that's just the same as saying they should strive to make all characters three-dimensional. The annoying part comes when people proclaim that poorly written minority characters would have been better served not being represented, while the same is not said of the straight/white/male majority. In such a case, it feels like tokenism is being used an excuse to exclude minorities while keeping representation largely to their tastes.
I think this happens because straight white male characters are so prevalent in gaming so when one is bad we shrug it off. We'll complain about it but things will go on as usual because who cares, just another bad character in a list of many bad characters.
However the thinking is that if say a gay character is poorly received because he was badly written, it's going to turn off other publishers because all they're going to see is "Game with gay character got a lot of hate over the character". In that sense, not having the character be gay would have been the better scenario because a badly written gay character is seen as damaging for future characters being included.
It's not a completely illogical stance to have, as publishers aren't exactly universally known for being intelligent and rational in their response to negative criticism of things.
Of course some people will say anything because they legitimately do just want to remove minority or female characters from the spotlight in games. Those people generally aren't worth the time or effort it would take to acknowledge.
Yeah, whenever someone uses that term now it really sounds like "I don't agree with your non-conservative ideas so I'm going to label you as something I don't like."
I don't know what nationality you are, but you must not be following American news if you think that the majority is not threatened by minorities. What do you think Trump's "Make America Great Again" means? And why the people voting for him are vastly white people? And he talks about deporting Muslims and building a wall across the Mexican border?
Points for trying to claim me saying the poster doesn't want diversity is actually me being bigoted.
Yet when people complain about tokenism, their argument is that if diversity in games is not done exactly to their tastes, there should be no diversity at all. Agree or not with his opinion on diversity, if game developers just don't include diversity because they're worried some consumers will think it's forced, how will we ever get authentic, well written diverse characters? And why should his opinion about diversity be held as more relevant than someone else? Maybe other players didn't find the inclusion of diversity as forced.
Also remember that this guy is explaining why he is not buying a game that has not come out yet, that we have barely any information about. He is leaping to enormous conclusions and has no basis in facts to his complaints. If his argument is that he doesn't like the opinions of one employee of the company making this game, not even a writer for the game, that is stupid.
Also note that I did not say that all people in the majority feel a certain way. I said he seems like the type of person from the majority who feels and acts this way.
I think this happens because straight white male characters are so prevalent in gaming so when one is bad we shrug it off. We'll complain about it but things will go on as usual because who cares, just another bad character in a list of many bad characters.
However the thinking is that if say a gay character is poorly received because he was badly written, it's going to turn off other publishers because all they're going to see is "Game with gay character got a lot of hate over the character". In that sense, not having the character be gay would have been the better scenario because a badly written gay character is seen as damaging for future characters being included.
It's not a completely illogical stance to have, as publishers aren't exactly universally known for being intelligent and rational in their response to negative criticism of things.
Of course some people will say anything because they legitimately do just want to remove minority or female characters from the spotlight in games. Those people generally aren't worth the time or effort it would take to acknowledge.
While that line of thinking is certainly coming from a better place than the argument usually does, it's still very counterproductive, and is far more likely to lead to no representation at all than well-written representation. Writers often don't really know whether their writing's any good until it's actually out there, after all (Neil Druckmann has talked about how Naughty Dog was convinced people would hate The Last of Us). If a writer decides not to write a minority character because it might cause a backlash (in an age where internet backlash is nearly unavoidable) then diversity has already lost.
While that line of thinking is certainly coming from a better place than the argument usually does, it's still very counterproductive, and is far more likely to lead to no representation at all than well-written representation. Writers often don't really know whether their writing's any good until it's actually out there, after all (Neil Druckmann has talked about how Naughty Dog was convinced people would hate The Last of Us). If a writer decides not to write a minority character because it might cause a backlash (in an age where internet backlash is nearly unavoidable) then diversity has already lost.
I'd say it probably depends. I think at this point most of us have gotten used to the idea of female characters being in the game as actual strong characters in their own right.
However I can't think of a single major AAA title that has a gay protagonist. If somebody were to do that, I could see a lot of pressure on making it a good character because I could very well see publishers being turned off future games with a gay protagonist due to that one being poorly received.
Of course with ME:A we all know that there's going to be gay and lesbian side characters in the game for the PC to romance if desired. If they're not well written we'll probably cause a fuss over it on the forums and nothing big will happen, because it's BioWare and we're pretty used to those character types being in the game.
What I don't understand is why you feel the need to resort to personal attacks against: Religious people, right wing people, and straight men on top of claiming that those who don't agree with you are simply bigots or immature straight guys.
but I guess we'll never know, because you clearly aren't interested in an actual discussion as much as you are bashing everybody who doesn't agree with your point of view. My guess is that if I point out that I do think Cortez is just a token gay person who is boring, I'll be called a bigot for thinking that.
READ MY POST.
I said they only people i can see complaining about sexuality in bioware games are right wing religious people. So just stating a observation is an attack? Really? stop The pity party.
I think Cortez is a boring character but how is he a token? His sexuality isn't a defining factor in his story his being a widower is. He responds and acts in the way a widower would and he says things exactly how a straight widower would with the exception of using husband in place of wife. The fact that people go on and on about his sexuality is telling why go on and on about it when it isn't even something the character brings up at all? What if a character is gay period that is them going on and on about it? pffft.
I did not make a blanket statement about straight white males because I am one of them, i went after the ones QQ over inclusion and the ones having a hissy fit about Cortez broadcasting his sexuality WHICH HE NEVER DOES. So if people are making sh!t up to justify their reason to not include Cortez I have to assume it is bigotry because they thing they are upset about is his token sexuality. And you people who complain about tokenism really are full of it because if they made the game where 1/2 of all characters were gay so it couldn't be tokenism you'd be the first to complain that it is unrealistic because 1/2 the population isn't gay. So get over your false persecution and faux integrity, SJW are an excuse to blame others for games no longer catering to us exclusively.
Now you want to talk about how boring Cortez is I am all for it he is boring because he is a one dimensional character and that one defining characteristic ISN'T that he likes dangly bits its that his favourite set of dangly bits is no more and that is all he ever talks about.
Will he write with the usual blue, red or black ink or should he go exotic and go for something that the minority likes? Like orange with left-hand swirls of green. Now that, is something to get worried about especially if 10% of the men on this world is concerned.
Orange and Green? Way to appropriate Irish culture. Like St Patrick's day isn't bad enough already.
Orange and Green? Way to appropriate Irish culture. Like St Patrick's day isn't bad enough already.
I think this happens because straight white male characters are so prevalent in gaming so when one is bad we shrug it off. We'll complain about it but things will go on as usual because who cares, just another bad character in a list of many bad characters.
However the thinking is that if say a gay character is poorly received because he was badly written, it's going to turn off other publishers because all they're going to see is "Game with gay character got a lot of hate over the character". In that sense, not having the character be gay would have been the better scenario because a badly written gay character is seen as damaging for future characters being included.
It's not a completely illogical stance to have, as publishers aren't exactly universally known for being intelligent and rational in their response to negative criticism of things.
Of course some people will say anything because they legitimately do just want to remove minority or female characters from the spotlight in games. Those people generally aren't worth the time or effort it would take to acknowledge.
The problem though is this leads to any character (that isn't a straight white male) having to be perfect. Only straight white men can be (or shown to be) flawed. Limiting all other characters because they have to set an example on behalf of the demographic they're portraying. Which itself is something we need to get away from, thinking that characters are a representative of us because they share our gender, or sexuality, or ethnicity etc. We need to start seeing characters as individuals again, like we do with white male characters.
I said they only people i can see complaining about sexuality in bioware games are right wing religious people. So just stating a observation is an attack? Really? stop The pity party.
Your "observation" is illogical and has no bearing on an actual discussion about those who have issues with sexuality in games. This was the case with most of your previous post, which is why I ignored the bulk of it.
I think Cortez is a boring character but how is he a token? His sexuality isn't a defining factor in his story his being a widower is. He responds and acts in the way a widower would and he says things exactly how a straight widower would with the exception of using husband in place of wife. The fact that people go on and on about his sexuality is telling why go on and on about it when it isn't even something the character brings up at all? What if a character is gay period that is them going on and on about it? pffft.
He's a token character because he's just there so that BioWare has a gay character in the game. A token character doesn't actually require that they make everything about how they're the token character. Given that the only thing Cortez talks about is how he lost his husband he seems to be there to do little else beyond existing so that BioWare could have a gay character in the cast. Thus, he's the token gay guy. If he were an interesting character that just happened to be gay he wouldn't be, but he's not.
Yes, this means that the exact same character talking about their wife would not be a token character but simply just a badly written one because they aren't a minority anymore. That's generally how it works. No, it's probably not fair.
I did not make a blanket statement about straight white males because I am one of them, i went after the ones QQ over inclusion and the ones having a hissy fit about Cortez broadcasting his sexuality WHICH HE NEVER DOES. So if people are making sh!t up to justify their reason to not include Cortez I have to assume it is bigotry because they thing they are upset about is his token sexuality. And you people who complain about tokenism really are full of it because if they made the game where 1/2 of all characters were gay so it couldn't be tokenism you'd be the first to complain that it is unrealistic because 1/2 the population isn't gay. So get over your false persecution and faux integrity, SJW are an excuse to blame others for games no longer catering to us exclusively.
Because calling people who disagree with you a bigot is a wonderful idea that is sure to convince people you're in the right. I'm also apparently now going to be the first person to complain if they make a game with half the characters being gay, so we're straight up into personal attacks against me now.
This is why I said you don't seem interested in an actual discussion. You managed to make half your post about random assumptions of other people that have nothing to do with the actual subject at hand in what I only figure is an attempt to discredit people who don't subscribe to your point of view.
That the MEA:MP side of things is done the way that DAI:MP was handled, left to rot for the first 4-6 months, then patched to have game breaking bugs. That's only I've got, other than no Quarians then I'll be sad if that was the case.
1)Yeah, whenever someone uses that term now it really sounds like "I don't agree with your non-conservative ideas so I'm going to label you as something I don't like."
2)I don't know what nationality you are, but you must not be following American news if you think that the majority is not threatened by minorities. What do you think Trump's "Make America Great Again" means? And why the people voting for him are vastly white people? And he talks about deporting Muslims and building a wall across the Mexican border?
3)Points for trying to claim me saying the poster doesn't want diversity is actually me being bigoted.
4)Yet when people complain about tokenism, their argument is that if diversity in games is not done exactly to their tastes, there should be no diversity at all. Agree or not with his opinion on diversity, if game developers just don't include diversity because they're worried some consumers will think it's forced, how will we ever get authentic, well written diverse characters? And why should his opinion about diversity be held as more relevant than someone else? Maybe other players didn't find the inclusion of diversity as forced.
Also remember that this guy is explaining why he is not buying a game that has not come out yet, that we have barely any information about. He is leaping to enormous conclusions and has no basis in facts to his complaints. If his argument is that he doesn't like the opinions of one employee of the company making this game, not even a writer for the game, that is stupid.
5)Also note that I did not say that all people in the majority feel a certain way. I said he seems like the type of person from the majority who feels and acts this way.
1)OK, I wish I knew how to break up long posts in a quote on this site, but I don't so apologies on that.
Kind of like what you just did? Thanks for the example. 
Lets get real for a moment. You are doing what everyone, including myself at times, does when involved in internet discussions:
"What? Someone disagrees with me on the internet?? Well, I can't possibly be wrong so instead of examining my own opinions for flaws I'll just assume the other person is up to no good, or is just plain wrong"
I'm not conservative. I'm not particularly interested in politics but if anything I'm middle of the road, which, in Canada is Liberal. I certainly feel no appeal towards conservative ideology, but I'm not crazy about the extremes of either side.
It's probably pointless explaining it to you, as I already did so previously and you ignored all of it, but hey lets try again. The reason SJW's are not liked by people who are not SJW's is that despite claiming to be about equality and fairness, they are not about that at all. The SJW's that I, at least, refer to are people who have identified "the majority" (read straight white men) as 'the enemy'. They post stuff on twitter accusing 'white men' of all sorts of inhumanities while using twitter hashtage like "#killallmen" or "#killallwhitemen". They are nasty bigoted people who are only out for themselves or whatever their group is, while attempting to demonize another group.
And Hey I have a shocker for you. It's not hard to find people on the internet who are women, LGBT or trans or non white, who also are against the 'sjw religion'. I think that's what the twitter hashtag #notyourshield was about.
2) I have no idea why you are suddenly talking about the American circus, err , I mean election. I thought we were talking about diversity in video games.
I'm Canadian so don't know much about American politics, but lets go there for a minute. Trump is a whackadoodle candidate that is most likely popular because of being a whackadoodle candidate. I'm going to make a w.a.g. at the numbers here, but from my understanding these primaries Trump is winning so handily are being voted on by Republican party faithful, card holders, not the American public at large. And even so, how many votes has he really received? A few thousand? A few tens of thousands? Out of 300 million people?
His own party, the republican party brass, want to get rid of him. Now, there are two possibilities
here. Either they agree with him or not. That said, either way they don't think having him as the leader will win an election. This means, they don't believe the majority of Americans, the voting public, conservative or not, will agree with him enough to vote him in.
What was that about the 'straight white male majority' again? Since when is less than one percent a majority?
Tarring straight white males again too. Wonderful. Which brings us to
3) and 5) You apparently misread my post (yeah right).. ok now, as you know, what I really said was it is bigoted to assign negative qualities on someone based on their race, sex or sexual orientation, as you did, repeatedly.
Lets try this another way. I don't know what minority you identify with but lets assume for sake of example that you are a gay man.
So lets say we have a poster named 'Joe'. Joe reads your post and says Looks like a gay man who exhibits 'insert negative quality here'.
Now, what conclusion would you reach about Joe? I would think that Joe:
a) Believes most if not all gay men exhibit the negative quality and
is saying that Vbibbi is a gay man and therefore it's not surprising he exhibits said negative quality.
c) and finally, you'd come to the conclusion that Joe is a bigot.
Close? So it shouldn't come as any surprise that someone reads what you write, which is exactly as Joe's statement above, comes to the same conclusion, now is it?
If you don't want people to think you are a bigot, avoid saying bigoted things.
4) Yes I agree with you in this part. Some people may do this, I see no reason to tar the video maker with that brush though. Or me, as you've attempted to do. I've actually stated no negative opinions of token characters. Token characters are actually the only character representing a minority, and their main purpose is to represent that minority. According to the definition I understand anyway.
As I actually said, I think most of Biowares characters are tokens of one sort or another.
Dorian is a token gay man,. Also a token tevinter. Neither of these is a bad thing. His character development revolves around both these things, and not much else. Although now that I think of it, he did also kinda help you save the world from time magic..
Krem is a token trans man. He is also tevinter but this doesn't rule out Dorian's tevinter tokenism because you can't talk to Krem about how life is as a non magister tevinter. It isn't part of his character development.
Cortez is the only gay man in the game. According to my definition though he isn't a token because his character development doesn't center around being gay. It's not mentioned at all, except as the perfectly reasonable mention of his husband.
There are no token elves in DAI, like there are in DAO and DA2 (Zevran and Merril) A token implies they are the only one.
Sera's characterization revolves around downtrodden peasants, and the red Jenny, not simply being a lesbian or being an elf, although these things come up.
Solas's characterization obviously revolves around him being an elf, but obviously he is much more than this. Not a token
Blackwall is the token grey warden, until he's not.. then he isn't much of anything. Awkward.
Varric? technically a token dwarf but there is again much more to his character,
Cole? uhmmm.. no not really. Hes a character from a book they brought into the game.
Cassandra? not really a token of anything
Vivienne? Well, similar to Varric and also in real world terms, the token black character. This doesn't come into her characterization though. Totally a token circle mage though.
Iron Bull? Well yeah token Qunari. Not token bi though, as Josie exists, and this also does not really factor into either characterization.
And then there's Mass Effect. All aliens are tokens. One Asari, one Krogan, One turian, one quarian and so on. Garrus may be an exception though as he is more than simply a turian. Same with Liara in later games,
And finally, because I've had enough and likely you have too:
Jacob. Token black guy? Well, no, his race doesn't come up, at all. In real world terms though, similar to Vivienne, he is the only black character among a cast of lily white people. I'm of course referring to companions only. Anderson is also black but not really an active part of the cast.
So how does this stack up on the diversity scale? Not that well, it seems, as token characters are a half assed attempt at meeting quotas. So yes, by all means, have more than one of any given minority. make them interesting characters that are defined as something more than their minority status, or a mouthpiece for a faction.
He's a token character because he's just there so that BioWare has a gay character in the game. A token character doesn't actually require that they make everything about how they're the token character. Given that the only thing Cortez talks about is how he lost his husband he seems to be there to do little else beyond existing so that BioWare could have a gay character in the cast. Thus, he's the token gay guy. If he were an interesting character that just happened to be gay he wouldn't be, but he's not.
Yes, this means that the exact same character talking about their wife would not be a token character but simply just a badly written one because they aren't a minority anymore. That's generally how it works. No, it's probably not fair.
Should we be defending unfair standards? My first impulse is to either ignore or mock anyone who tries to apply one.
Well there's nothing that can be done about it because, by definition, a token character is a minority character designed to little else beyond adding diversity to the group.
This means that taking a token character and removing the one thing that makes them a minority will always make them not a token character.
The best way of fixing it would be to write ME:A's gay romance as an actually interesting character so that he has more to him. I wouldn't call Dorian a token gay character because he has a lot more to him, while Cortez isn't saved by being a widower because that's basically the only other thing about him.
Well there's nothing that can be done about it because, by definition, a token character is a minority character designed to little else beyond adding diversity to the group.
This means that taking a token character and removing the one thing that makes them a minority will always make them not a token character.
The best way of fixing it would be to write ME:A's gay romance as an actually interesting character so that he has more to him. I wouldn't call Dorian a token gay character because he has a lot more to him, while Cortez isn't saved by being a widower because that's basically the only other thing about him.
Then Joker is a token character as well with his disability, but I don't see the same outrage about his inclusion or portrayal as Cortez.
Then Joker is a token character as well with his disability, but I don't see the same outrage about his inclusion or portrayal as Cortez.
Arguably he's not because there is a fair bit more to him than just his disability.
As I noted, Cortez I don't believe gets saved from the label because being a widower is basically the only other thing he has.
Is this all anybody thinks about these days? Sexuality,gender, race and SJWS?
I hope Armageddon happens soon.
Well if BioWare would release information on ME:A, then we'd have actual topics to talk about around here.
Is this all anybody thinks about these days? Sexuality,gender, race and SJWS?
I hope Armageddon happens soon.
I sometimes accidentally refer to this game as "Mass Effect: Armageddon". 
Every piece of media has a bias. The fight here is what kind of bias should Bioware present? SJWs, so to speak, want their bias included so they feel a part of the world. An accepted part to the whole. Sadly we cannot just have the world that is all inclusive without having to profile special ones to keep specific demographics happy. Make the CP a bisexual girl of mixed race, I really don't care as long as the story is good. I loved Friday by Heinlein who is not male, and was genetically engineered (so faces the the patriarchal and anti non-human powers that be while questioning her own sense of who she is).
I made my Shep of both genders and ranging skin tones and ethnic appearances and role played as best as Bioware allowed. 9 complete shep stories later, I've tried pretty much everything but the male on male romances as I simply find no interest in them. Already had my own self exploration and I know what I prefer. I've played through full Paragon, Full Renegade and a mix (Didn't find Renegade as mean and self-destructive as I would have liked)
Retour en haut