1769 réponses à ce sujet

[Lightice_av]

I doubt she'll be part of ME3 since Bioware needs to cover such contingencies.

By the same logic every single member of your Suicide Squad will be quietly omitted, because every single one of them can die. Why people keep assuming that Kelly will be any different from any other potential death in the game?

Besides, I always thought she was just a Cerberus spy who wouldn't hesitate stabbing my Shepy in the back if she strayed too far from cerberus interests...

Nope, that was Miranda. Until her loyalty quest, anyway.

[Fade9wayz]

Lightice_av wrote...

I doubt she'll be part of ME3 since Bioware needs to cover such contingencies.

By the same logic every single member of your Suicide Squad will be quietly omitted, because every single one of them can die. Why people keep assuming that Kelly will be any different from any other potential death in the game?

Besides, I always thought she was just a Cerberus spy who wouldn't hesitate stabbing my Shepy in the back if she strayed too far from cerberus interests...

Nope, that was Miranda. Until her loyalty quest, anyway.

I am aware of that, but in the end, she's just a very side character, as opposed to Wrex, for exemple, where it makes sense to develop real consequences for him surviving ME1 or not.. I could be very wrong of course, after all Jocker and Chakwas are still there and gaining depth. I'm just basing my current opinion on the fact that the devs were willing to let her die. Indeed, she's the first to melt, after all, as opposed to Chakwas surviving anyway.

Who's to say they aren't more than one spy? I doubt the IM wouldn't  have anything ready in the case of one of his agents became a 'liability'.

[Lightice_av]

I am aware of that, but in the end, she's just a very side character, as opposed to Wrex, for exemple, where it makes sense to develop real consequences for him surviving ME1 or not..

I considered Kelly to be the face for the ordinary crew, all those people whose names you never bother to learn, but will still follow you to hell. She's not the only named crewmember by now ofcourse, but definately the one you speak the most with. Her potential death signifies how badly you betrayed your crew by leaving them in the hands of the Collectors.



In this game "can die" is clearly not equal to "is dead in the sequel, no matter what". I liked Kelly well enough, though she could have had a bit more dialogue options; refreshing to have a noncombatant to chat with from time to time. I would be dissapointed if she couldn't be in Mass Effect 3, no matter what, and I consider her "can die" status to be a weak explanation for why she couldn't be in, seeing how the same applies to every single member of your squad.

[Fade9wayz]

Lightice_av wrote...

I am aware of that, but in the end, she's just a very side character, as opposed to Wrex, for exemple, where it makes sense to develop real consequences for him surviving ME1 or not..

I considered Kelly to be the face for the ordinary crew, all those people whose names you never bother to learn, but will still follow you to hell. She's not the only named crewmember by now ofcourse, but definately the one you speak the most with. Her potential death signifies how badly you betrayed your crew by leaving them in the hands of the Collectors.

In this game "can die" is clearly not equal to "is dead in the sequel, no matter what". I liked Kelly well enough, though she could have had a bit more dialogue options; refreshing to have a noncombatant to chat with from time to time. I would be dissapointed if she couldn't be in Mass Effect 3, no matter what, and I consider her "can die" status to be a weak explanation for why she couldn't be in, seeing how the same applies to every single member of your squad.

I do not dislike her, don't get me wrong. It is unfortunate, but in a battle, no one can ensure everyone's safety and I would think the crew knows that. Besides, at the time my Shepy was trying to ensure the rest of the crew enough safety for them to be actually able to save what was left to save. I wasn't even aware of the number of missions allowed just after the kidnapping conditionning how many crew members would or would not survive. We are always wiser afterwards, as they say.

I do not think my shepard betrayed them, failed them, certainly, but betrayed them? No. Betraying them would have been doing it on purpose, or not even trying to save them.

I have no idea if Kelly will or will not be in ME3, and to be frank, I could care less one way or the other. It was just a wild guess from my part that she might not. Now, everyone can agree or disagree on that, that's just an opinion, and not even an opinion on what should or shouldn't be in ME3. I at least think I'm entitled to have my opinion, as you're to have yours. They are just that, opinions, not the absolute and transcendal truth.

[SimonTheFrog]

BrianWilly wrote...

Collider wrote...

Bioware is not obligated to make homosexual romances,

I do agree on this point in theory, though I will point out that making a homosexual romance in the first game and then coquettishly backpeddling from that sort of content in the second game is very suspect, and any examination of that decision would be well-deserved.  No one's dogpiling on Bungie or Rockstar for skimping on gay content, after all; Bioware opened this door themselves, both with this series and with their other games.

Collider wrote...

and the inclusion or exclusion of homosexual content is not indicative of Bioware's collective opinion regarding homosexuality.

The exclusion of homosexual content does not necessarily indicate homophobia on Bioware's part, that is very true.  But, but to blunt, it sends a very clear message.  That message might not be "We hate gays," but it can nonetheless be nearly as exclusionary.

"We're not comfortable putting gays in this product."
"Gay women are acceptable characters in our game.  Gay guys are not."
"Commander Shepard's race, gender, life history, skillset, interests, spirituality, temperment, world views, and choice of nine romantic interests between the two games are all up for you to decide...except that he can't be gay, that's totally pre-defined."

And so on and so forth.  Let's me try to be clearer on this point: no game in the world is obligated to do anything at all, much less adding an option to make the protaganist gay.  But when your company has a history of being open to this sort of content, and when your game itself seems flawlessly designed to accomodate that sort of content (with its emphasis on choice and character development and wide range of diverse romantic options) to the point where the exclusion of said content would feel more conspicuous than otherwise, and then you go ahead and specifically exclude that content...well, that sends a message all right, loud and clear.

Very well put! <3

[That Ninja]

I've come to the conclusion that gay activists are very, very irritating and should probably be ejected out of an airlock.

Basically this whole thing is about gays trying to force their lifestyle on everyone else, whether they like it or not. Nothing new there, of course.

Modifié par That Ninja, 14 février 2010 - 05:00 .

[Akrim_Drak]

That Ninja wrote...

I've come to the conclusion that gay activists are very, very irritating and should probably be ejected out of an airlock.

Basically this whole thing is about gays trying to force their lifestyle on everyone else, whether they like it or not. Nothing new there, of course.

You are aware of what an "option" is right? Optional? Something you have the CHOICE to choose? Just curious...

NOBODY is trying to FORCE anything on anyone. People are asking for the option to do something the way they'd like to IN ADDITION to what is already there.

Totally wasting my breathe here but whatever. I guess it needs reinforced.

[biddypocket]

That Ninja wrote...

I've come to the conclusion that gay activists are very, very irritating and should probably be ejected out of an airlock.

Basically this whole thing is about gays trying to force their lifestyle on everyone else, whether they like it or not. Nothing new there, of course.

*shrug* As if I haven't had your lifestyle forced upon me my entire life?

[catabuca]

Jimmy Fury wrote...



And this is where some of the difference comes in.
Some people (not myself, but others) see that there may be an indication that gay men aren't acceptable because the options were explored in development of both games and then ultimately removed while bi-female and lesbian options remained.

As I mentioned before, there are 4 females that fem.Shep can express interest in: Liara, Kelly, Samara, and Morinth. There were 2 men that were explored as romance options for male.Shep: Kaidan and Thane.
While the Ashley option was also removed from 1 along with Kaidan, 3 new f/f interests were brought in with ME2.
I agree that the inclusion of Zevran and the m/m option in Jade Empire show that BioWare, as a company, doesn't have a problem.
But I think it's also reasonable for people to perceive that the ME team is different.
Again, I don't neccesarily agree with that, but it is still a reasonable perception.

This is what it comes down to for me. I wouldn't suggest for a moment that the ME Bioware team are sat in their offices rubbing their hands with evil glee at not having any m/m romances in the franchise - that's bordering on the paranoid  

Regardless of intention, people's actions will have an effect and will be perceived in various different ways. Some people feel snubbed, let down, bummed out (fnar), etc., simply because:

a) Bioware has an awesome history of including s/s options in their work (most recently with Dragon Age - which was leaps ahead in terms of how well it was implemented)

The work was done (voice acting, some animation, story-writing etc.) for m/m options to be included in both versions and cut before release

c) Other romance options were expanded, with Tali and Garrus added (seemingly because of fans' wishes), and more options were added for f/f content (albeit not fully fleshed out like femShep/Liara in ME1)

Taken together, these points add up to a deal of disappointment, and it's something many people want to comment on, inquire about the reasoning for, and vocally state they would like reviewed in ME3. We love Bioware for its inclusive stance - we're just puzzled (and saddened) that such an inclusive company has seemed to pull back a little on this particular aspect - especially considering the 3 points above. 

It's not irrational or out of order to question it and put forth opinions on it. 

[That Ninja]

Akrim_Drak wrote...

You are aware of what an "option" is right? Optional? Something you have the CHOICE to choose? Just curious...

Yeah, I'm aware that BioWare has an option of doing whatever kind of romances they want to, or none at all. They've already done bromance in their other games and this time they just decided not to.

biddypocket wrote...

*shrug* As if I haven't had your
lifestyle forced upon me my entire life?

Heterosexuality is the norm and the default and the basis of human life and society.

Modifié par That Ninja, 14 février 2010 - 05:46 .

[SorenTrigg]

That Ninja wrote...

biddypocket wrote...

*shrug* As if I haven't had your
lifestyle forced upon me my entire life?

Heterosexuality is the norm and the default and the basis of human life and society.

Good thing Shepard is always a white christian male then, right?

Oh, wait.

[biddypocket]

That Ninja wrote...

biddypocket wrote...

*shrug* As if I haven't had your
lifestyle forced upon me my entire life?

Heterosexuality is the norm and the default and the basis of human life and society.

1) Norm? yes. Who creates norms? Society. What's your point?

2) "default" ? Are you trying to say that everyone starts off heterosexual? There's millions who would disagree

3) "basis of human life" ? Last time I checked, it was the unification of sperm and egg...which can be done in a testtube these days. *shrug* no one ever said you had to be heterosexual to make babies...and what about bisexuals?

4) "basis of....society" ? Exactly. Just as how caucasiasns were the basis of the early colonial United States, and look how well we incorporated blacks. What's your point?

Modifié par biddypocket, 14 février 2010 - 06:02 .

[Jimmy Fury]

Well said catabuca.

I have to admit that in my case there was a bit of disappointment. Buyers remorse might be more accurate actually.

The #1 reason I preordered the CE (as opposed to buying the SE on release day or renting and waiting for a used copy and a price drop-which is what i usually do because I'm cheap...) was because I had erroneously assumed that a m/m option was a given due to the complete lack of controversy over it in DAO.



And don't feed the troll guys.

[Lightice_av]

Why act like he has an argument? He assumes that only mainstream need any attention and everybody else can go to hell. Soon enough he'll tell that RPG fans need to take a hike because the shooter fans are majority.

[biddypocket]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

And don't feed the troll guys.

Sowy Jimmy . Dey is just so cuwteeEE!!!

[Jimmy Fury]

biddypocket wrote...
Sowy Jimmy . Dey is just so cuwteeEE!!!

So are stray kitties. but they'll both pee all over your furniture if you let them in.

[JamesMoriarty123]

No offense, but spamming the thread to keep it on the front page is just as bad as trolling. There isn't really anything left to discuss. It's all been argued in threads 1-3.
Everyone is aware of the gay minorities stance, and everyone is aware of the straight majorities stance.

[Lightice_av]

Why not tell that to the Tali thread in the spoiler section with about 700 pages? This thread is small fries compared to that.  

Modifié par Lightice_av, 14 février 2010 - 06:25 .

[catabuca]

Everybody is aware of the pro-healthcare reform stance; everybody is aware of the anti-healthcare reform stance. Everybody is aware of the anti-forces in Iraq stance; everybody is aware of the pro-forces in Iraq stance. Everybody is aware of the climate change arguments.



I guess everybody everywhere just better shut the heck up quick. Too many horses will be desecrated after death.

[Arik7]

JamesMoriarty123 wrote...

No offense, but spamming the thread to keep it on the front page is just as bad as trolling. There isn't really anything left to discuss. It's all been argued in threads 1-3.
Everyone is aware of the gay minorities stance, and everyone is aware of the straight majorities stance.

^ Yet you are attracted to this thread like a bee to honey.

[KumoriOokami]

Someone get that horse to Cerberus for a rez

[Zereth Deagroth]

/sign



I'd like for the Shepard I create, make decisions for, and ultimately mold one way or another (including the decisions on WHO, if anyone, to engage in the romance with) to be able to have same sex romances, either male-male or female-female. In today's culture forcing opposite gender romance options on players could possibly been seen as discrimination against the same sex pairings.



Just some food for thought.

[Arik7]

Zereth Deagroth wrote...

/sign

I'd like for the Shepard I create, make decisions for, and ultimately mold one way or another (including the decisions on WHO, if anyone, to engage in the romance with) to be able to have same sex romances, either male-male or female-female. In today's culture forcing opposite gender romance options on players could possibly been seen as discrimination against the same sex pairings.

Just some food for thought.

THIS 100%

[catabuca]

KumoriOokami wrote...

Someone get that horse to Cerberus for a rez

Miranda: Mr Ed is prepped for surgery Wilson.

Wilson: Wait, but I'm dead ...

[KumoriOokami]

catabuca wrote...

KumoriOokami wrote...

Someone get that horse to Cerberus for a rez

Miranda: Mr Ed is prepped for surgery Wilson.

Wilson: Wait, but I'm dead ...

Petition for DLC with a new unicorn teammate.