7455 réponses à ce sujet

[Siansonea]

Collider wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
Perhaps you are right. We should just be grateful that Bioware allows us to give them our money. Thank you, Bioware, for taking my money and giving me a set of disks. Content of disks not important.

That's not what I am referring to. I am saying that Bioware has had same sex content in the first place, yet people are criticizing them for being "insulting" or "homphobic." It had nothing to do with money.

Really? Biting the hand that feeds? This is your argument now? We shouldn't tell Bioware that they're being unfair because it isn't nice? My, how the conversation has deteriorated.

You are misinterpreting me.

Then enlighten me. If I am misinterpreting you, there is a chance others are as well. Please explain your stance in simpler terms, that I may understand your intent. I truly wish to understand the core of your argument, I feel that there is a lot of confusion in the thread at the moment. Unfortunately, words are not perfect vehicles for comprehension, but we must continue to try to understand the opposing viewpoints.

It sounds like your main issue isn't the inclusion of same-sex content, indeed you seem to be either in favor of it or indifferent to it. So there isn't a major disagreement at hand. The main issue you appear to have is 'retconning' existing characters to make them bisexual. The main rebuttal to this argument appears to be that simply because no reference to a characters bisexuality has occurred up to this point, this does not preclude the possibility that this could come to light in conversation. To my knowledge, no character has made a statement akin to "I am exclusively heterosexual, Shepard".

The other main argument appears to be our taking Bioware to task for their handling of Mass Effect, in light of their progressive approach to same-sex romance in Dragon Age. I would agree that Bioware deserves praise for their work on Dragon Age based on what little I know of it, but they also need to take their lumps with regard to Mass Effect. Dragon Age does not give them a 'get out of jail free card' for Mass Effect. If anything, it shows that they are capable of rising to a higher standard, and illustrates how far they fell short in Mass Effect.

Modifié par Siansonea II, 14 avril 2010 - 08:12 .

[Collider]

Just be glad I'm in favor of same sex romances. Not altering existing characters, mind you, but new ones. This is a particularly touchy issue so misinterpretations and intentions can easily be missed.

[Siansonea]

Collider wrote...

Just be glad I'm in favor of same sex romances. Not altering existing characters, mind you, but new ones. This is a particularly touchy issue so misinterpretations and intentions can easily be missed.

For the record, I think I'm close to agreeing with you on this point. I felt the Tali and Garrus romances were handled well enough, but I couldn't escape the feeling that they didn't flow naturally from past events (especially in the case of Garrus). I felt like the two characters had been compromised somewhat in order to satisfy the desires of a subset of the game's fanbase.

I think I would have a problem with it if Jacob or Miranda suddenly said 'sorry Shepard, but now I only like the boys/girls' even though they were previously open to opposite-sex romances. On the contrary, if Kaidan or Ashley were to approach same-sex Shepard in ME3 and say "It took me awhile to come to terms with this Shepard, but I can't deny anymore that I have feelings for you. I understand if you don't feel the same way, but I just needed to say that." Shepard could then respond with a "Come here, sweetie" or "But you're male/female?" dialogue tree. It doesn't take away from either of those characters. If suddenly EVERY character was open to same-sex romance, I would find that just as improbable as the Garrus/Tali romances, and it would also smell of fanservice to me. Don't get me wrong, fanservice isn't one of the great ills that plague mankind, but it does interfere with my 'suspension of disbelief' at times.

Modifié par Siansonea II, 14 avril 2010 - 08:10 .

[Nordic Einar]

Many in this thread agree with that sentiment. If all they did is re-add the same-sex romances that were originally planned, I would be quite content. A new character would work fine too, but I worry about character bloat.

[Servo to the bitter end]

Nordic Einar wrote...

Many in this thread agree with that sentiment. If all they did is re-add the same-sex romances that were originally planned, I would be quite content. A new character would work fine too, but I worry about character bloat.

Or even re-implement just one of them.  Have (for the sake of argument), Thane or Garrus available to both sexes, alongside Liara.  That would resolve the issue pretty neatly.

[Collider]

Siansonea II wrote...
Then enlighten me. If I am misinterpreting you, there is a chance others are as well. Please explain your stance in simpler terms, that I may understand your intent. I truly wish to understand the core of your argument, I feel that there is a lot of confusion in the thread at the moment. Unfortunately, words are not perfect vehicles for comprehension, but we must continue to try to understand the opposing viewpoints.

I feel it is a rather tired issue. Basically, I disagree with the exaggerative outrage that some people seem to be expressing over the lack of M/M content in ME2. I can understand not buying the game if it does not exist, but I don't agree with it indicating that they are trying to insult LGBT players, especially in light Dragon Age which had both M/M and F/F content. I also don't agree with holding a magnifying glass to every portrayal of same sex content and deciding that if it isn't spotless, it's insulting. Last I checked, the portrayal of heterosexuality in ME wasn't always perfect either. You can have casual, uncaring sex with Jack for instance, and afterwards, she tells Shepard to "**** off." I also think that saying that lesbianism is being portrayed negatively does not do characters like Liara and Samara justice. Liara went through much trouble to save Shepard, and Samara quite literally is the archetypal Paladin. If those are not decent portrayals of two women in a relationship or interested in eachother to some people, well, what can you do.

It sounds like your main issue isn't the inclusion of same-sex content, indeed you seem to be either in favor of it or indifferent to it.

I am in favor of including it in new characters or characters that have previously not had a romance such as Joker. I am against altering existing characters who have already had romances.. To relay my point, consider this. Henry is a squad mate and he is gay. They release DLC that makes him realize he is no longer attracted to men or no longer was, and is now only open to females. The romance conversation that began the romance magically no longer has Henry interested in the same sex anymore, now only the opposite sex. This is what I am saying (Shepard is male)

First playthrough
"Hey, thanks for helping me back there on Palaven. I couldn't have survived otherwise.
Hey, you know, we get along pretty well. You're not uninterested in men, are you...?"

DLC is released.
Second playthrough
"Hey, thanks for helping me back there on Palaven. I couldn't have survived otherwise.
Anyways, I should get back to work."

He never explicitely said that he liked men, or that he didn't like women. By your logic, this would mean it's okay, right?

This is what I am saying. Suddenly, these characters are interested or uninterested in the same sex, therefore retconning their conversations. The same would go for if Henry was gay but they released DLC that made him open to females.

(Shepard is female)
First playthrough
"Hey, thanks for helping me back there on Palaven. I couldn't have survived otherwise.
Anyway, I should get back to work"

DLC is released.
Second playthrough
"Hey, thanks for helping me back there on Palaven. I couldn't have survived otherwise.
You know, you're a pretty amazing woman..."

So there isn't a major disagreement at hand. The main issue you appear to have is 'retconning' existing characters to make them bisexual. The main rebuttal to this argument appears to be that simply because to reference to a characters bisexuality has occurred up to this point, this does not preclude the possibility that this could come to light in conversation. To my knowledge, no character has made a statement akin to "I am exclusively heterosexual, Shepard".

See, I never said that any character said something like that. I DO think that the romances only being open to the opposite gender implies that they are straight in light of the fact that male and female Shepard can act exactly the same, not to mention the apparent nonexistence of discrimination or aversion to homosexuality in the ME universe. It does not prove it, but to me implies it. But it's not only exclusive to heterosexuality, if a character was only open to the same sex, I would think it implies that they are gay. The fact that they are suddenly showing interest in the same conversations where they once weren't, within the same game, leads me to think it is negative retconning.

Modifié par Collider, 14 avril 2010 - 08:17 .

[Collider]

Garrus and Tali are not altering them as I mean. They never had romances to begin with. It's not the same.

Modifié par Collider, 14 avril 2010 - 08:20 .

[Nordic Einar]

Collider wrote...

Garrus and Tali are not altering them as I mean. They never had romances to begin with. It's not the same.

I think that's a fairly tenuous argument and I'd imagine most people in the thread would disagree with you.

[SorenTrigg]

Collider, no one is asking for characters that had previous romances to turn completely gay/straight. Anyone that is asking for characters to 'change' at all are asking for them to be open for both sexes.

Don't take it to extremes to try to prove a point.

[Collider]

Nordic Einar wrote...

Collider wrote...

Garrus and Tali are not altering them as I mean. They never had romances to begin with. It's not the same.

I think that's a fairly tenuous argument and I'd imagine most people in the thread would disagree with you.

It's not difficult to understand. We're talking about DLC that alters the romance of romanceable characters ME2 IN ME2. That is what I am against.. I am against altering the orientations of the romances of character that already have romances. Why? Because having the romance to begin with shows that they are interested in one or both genders. I would disagree with disallowing Kelly from being open to females, for example, because she already has a "romance" that has her open to the same gender. One can apply the "logic" "they never said they were explicitely interested in the same gender" and say that maybe Kelly realized she isn't into women. I would disagree with this.

[Atomic Space Vixen]

Collider wrote...

Just be glad I'm in favor of same sex romances. Not altering existing characters, mind you, but new ones.

What about the existing characters who were altered to remove the same-sex romance options that were not just written for them, but the voice actors already recorded? Would you be fine with what was already altered being fixed to restore their original state?

There has also been talk about the same-sex relationships in Dragon Age. DA was announced in 2004, so despite its release date, it's a much older game than ME2. That further adds to the same-sex material being removed from ME2 a step backward.

Baldur's Gate 2 had three female NPCs as romance options for a male PC as opposed to one male NPC for a female PC.
Knights of the Old Republic had one female NPC for a male PC, one male NPC for a female PC, and one female NPC for a female PC (though a bug allowed male PCs to romance her). A big step forward.
Jade Empire had one female NPC for a male PC, one female NPC for both male and female PCs, and one male NPC for for male and female PCs. The biggest step forward yet.
Dragon Age has one female NPC for a male PC, one male NPC for a female NPC, one female NPC for both male and female PCs, and one male NPC for both male and female PCs. Another step forward in balance. Equal choices for both male and female PCs.
Mass Effect 1 had one female NPC for a male PC, one male NPC for a female PC, and one female NPC for both male and female PCs. A big step backward.
Mass Effect 2 has three female NPCs for a male PC, three male NPCs for a female PC, and three female NPCs that a female PC can kinda romance, but not really and certainly not for the Paramour achievement. Their biggest step backward yet.

This is what the fuss is about. This is why this thread is important. If we don't speak up, these steps backward will be seen as not mattering to people when they do. Going from inclusion to exclusion matters.

[SorenTrigg]

Again, Collider, there is a difference between what you are saying.

Everyone here wants *more* content. Not to change content to fit what we want. All that we want is for things to be *added*.

You are making it seem like everyone here wants only gay content.

[Nordic Einar]

Collider wrote...

Nordic Einar wrote...

Collider wrote...

Garrus and Tali are not altering them as I mean. They never had romances to begin with. It's not the same.

I think that's a fairly tenuous argument and I'd imagine most people in the thread would disagree with you.

It's not difficult to understand. We're talking about DLC that alters the romance of romanceable characters ME2 IN ME2. That is what I am against.. I am against altering the orientations of the romances of character that already have romances. Why? Because having the romance to begin with shows that they are interested in one or both genders. I would disagree with disallowing Kelly from being open to females, for example, because she already has a "romance" that has her open to the same gender. One can apply the "logic" "they never said they were explicitely interested in the same gender" and say that maybe Kelly realized she isn't into women. I would disagree with this.

Who's suggesting we remove heterosexual romances? That's a claim I've never seen. We're asking that previously bisexual characters be returned to their pre-release status and open up to S/S Romances. They would not lose their heterosexual romances.

[Nordic Einar]

Double post.  I hate the way this forum is coded D:

Modifié par Nordic Einar, 14 avril 2010 - 08:33 .

[Collider]

SorenTrigg wrote...
Collider, no one is asking for characters that had previous romances to turn completely gay/straight. Anyone that is asking for characters to 'change' at all are asking for them to be open for both sexes.

The fact is that people are trying to validate the changing of practical orientations in the first place. I used changing from gay to straight as an example of how ridiculous it is. The logic I got from Simeon was that the character can decide they to tell Shepard that they are interested in x gender, because no character has ever explicitely stated their preference. By that same logic, they can decide they are not interested in x gender. And I'm sure many of you would disagree with a gay (practically speaking) character becoming straight, no?

Don't take it to extremes to try to prove a point.

I didn't just use the gay to straight example. I also used gay to bisexual.

[Siansonea]

Collider wrote...

I feel it is a rather tired issue. Basically, I disagree with the exaggerative outrage that some people seem to be expressing over the lack of M/M content in ME2. I can understand not buying the game if it does not exist, but I don't agree with it indicating that they are trying to insult LGBT players, especially in light Dragon Age which had both M/M and F/F content. I also don't agree with holding a magnifying glass to every portrayal of same sex content and deciding that if it isn't spotless, it's insulting. Last I checked, the portrayal of heterosexuality in ME wasn't always perfect either. You can have casual, uncaring sex with Jack for instance, and afterwards, she tells Shepard to "**** off." I also think that saying that lesbianism is being portrayed negatively does not do characters like Liara and Samara justice. Liara went through much trouble to save Shepard, and Samara quite literally is the archetypal Paladin. If those are not decent portrayals of two women in a relationship or interested in eachother to some people, well, what can you do.

I am in favor of including it in new characters or characters that have previously not had a romance such as Joker. I am against altering existing characters who have already had romances.. To relay my point, consider this. Henry is a squad mate and he is gay. They release DLC that makes him realize he is no longer attracted to men or no longer was, and is now only open to females. The romance conversation that began the romance magically no longer has Henry interested in the same sex anymore, now only the opposite sex. This is what I am saying (Shepard is male)

First playthrough
"Hey, thanks for helping me back there on Palaven. I couldn't have survived otherwise.
Hey, you know, we get along pretty well. You're not uninterested in men, are you...?"

DLC is released.
Second playthrough
"Hey, thanks for helping me back there on Palaven. I couldn't have survived otherwise.
Anyways, I should get back to work."

He never explicitely said that he liked men, or that he didn't like women. By your logic, this would mean it's okay, right?

This is what I am saying. Suddenly, these characters are interested or uninterested in the same sex, therefore retconning their conversations. The same would go for if Henry was gay but they released DLC that made him open to females.

(Shepard is female)
First playthrough
"Hey, thanks for helping me back there on Palaven. I couldn't have survived otherwise.
Anyway, I should get back to work"

DLC is released.
Second playthrough
"Hey, thanks for helping me back there on Palaven. I couldn't have survived otherwise.
You know, you're a pretty amazing woman..."

See, I never said that any character said something like that. I DO think that the romances only being open to the opposite gender implies that they are straight in light of the fact that male and female Shepard can act exactly the same, not to mention the apparent nonexistence of discrimination or aversion to homosexuality in the ME universe. It does not prove it, but to me implies it. But it's not only exclusive to heterosexuality, if a character was only open to the same sex, I would think it implies that they are gay. The fact that they are suddenly showing interest in the same conversations where they once weren't, within the same game, leads me to think it is negative retconning.

It sounds like we aren't as divergent in our viewpoints as we might think. I would also dislike it if new content overrode existing content, and changed dialogue from previous games. I think any new information about a characters orientation would have to occur in new scenes, not existing ones. I am not that big a proponent of reinserting the same-sex content in ME1 as some of the others, mainly because I am largely 'done' with that game. The only reason I would play ME1 at this point is to tailor a character for ME2, I've played ME1 so many times I can recite the dialogue, so new content for that game would have to be new scenes and situations that don't contradict what happens in ME2. I think it's unlikely to see ME1 DLC anyway, though.

But again, just because Kaidan and Ashley weren't explicitly forward with same-sex Shepard in ME1, it does not negate the possibility that after Shepard's departure from their lives, they've come to realize they are attracted to Shepard. It may be that Shepard is the first individual that made them realize they were bisexual, in which case it might take them longer to acknowledge it, especially given Kaidan's need to 'process' things and Ashley's general lack of introspection. Perhaps only after Shepard was gone did they realize that their feelings went beyond friendship and camaraderie. I do not think that is retconning, it is adding a new dimension. And, in essence that is what they did with Tali and Garrus, though the onset seemed a bit more sudden, since neither character made references in ME2 that their feelings were starting to develop for Shepard in ME1. Does that make sense?

Modifié par Siansonea II, 14 avril 2010 - 08:32 .

[Nordic Einar]

Collider wrote...

SorenTrigg wrote...
Collider, no one is asking for characters that had previous romances to turn completely gay/straight. Anyone that is asking for characters to 'change' at all are asking for them to be open for both sexes.

The fact is that people are trying to validate the changing of practical orientations in the first place. I used changing from gay to straight as an example of how ridiculous it is. The logic I got from Simeon was that the character can decide they to tell Shepard that they are interested in x gender, because no character has ever explicitely stated their preference. By that same logic, they can decide they are not interested in x gender. And I'm sure many of you would disagree with a gay (practically speaking) character becoming straight, no?

Don't take it to extremes to try to prove a point.

I didn't just use the gay to straight example. I also used gay to bisexual.

If Bioware created a game with no heterosexual romances, I absolutely would not have a problem taking a previous S/S Exclusive character and making them bisexual. Which is exactly what we're asking for here, in reverse.

[SorenTrigg]

Collider wrote...
 And I'm sure many of you would disagree with a gay (practically speaking) character becoming straight, no?

Everyone would argue against a straight character becoming completely gay as well.
Because we don't want to *remove* content. That is kind of what we are fighting *against*. We don't want things excluded. Only included.

[Collider]

Nordic Einar wrote...
Who's suggesting we remove heterosexual romances? That's a claim I've never seen.

I also brought the example of changing gay romances to bisexual romances, so I'd rather no one act as if I've claimed that anyone has suggested removing heterosexual romances. The point was made to show how ridiculous it is to change the romances' orientations. The "logic" that was given in favor of doing this was that the character has never explicitely stated their preference and can decide or change their interest. They can "realize" that their interest is changed or something.

We're asking that previously bisexual characters be returned to their pre-release status and open up to S/S Romances.

Previously bisexual? Pre-release status? Again, development does not involve two phases. It is not original ---> final. It involves many phases. I can say Jack "previously" had pink hair and should be returned to her pre-release status, but that would sound equally ridiculous.

[Nordic Einar]

Collider wrote...

Nordic Einar wrote...
Who's suggesting we remove heterosexual romances? That's a claim I've never seen.

I also brought the example of changing gay romances to bisexual romances, so I'd rather no one act as if I've claimed that anyone has suggested removing heterosexual romances. The point was made to show how ridiculous it is to change the romances' orientations. The "logic" that was given in favor of doing this was that the character has never explicitely stated their preference and can decide or change their interest. They can "realize" that their interest is changed or something.

We're asking that previously bisexual characters be returned to their pre-release status and open up to S/S Romances.

Previously bisexual? Pre-release status? Again, development does not involve two phases. It is not original ---> final. It involves many phases. I can say Jack "previously" had pink hair and should be returned to her pre-release status, but that would sound equally ridiculous.

You can keep saying that it's ridiculous, but it doesn't make it true. I disagree with the decision to cut S/S content, and would like them to reimplement previous plans for it. I'm not sure why, exactly, that sounds ridiculous. And who says their interest was changed? Why is this ridiculous? I never expressed interest in men during High School and dated exclusively women. That doesn't change the fact that I was attracted to, dated, and began a long term relationship with my boyfriend when I met him.

[Ryzaki]

Uh...fictional characters. They have no set orientation unless the writers say so. Seeing as how the writers haven't...

Haven't we had this arguement before Collider?

They're not real people. They haven't announced their orientation. As long as said orientation doesn't change the character's personality, ideals and accomplishments it can be believeable.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 14 avril 2010 - 08:43 .

[Nordic Einar]

Ryzaki wrote...

Uh...fictional characters. They have no set orientation unless the writers say so. Seeing as how the writers haven't...

Haven't we had this arguement before Collider?

I've a feeling the unstoppable force has met the unmoveable object, here.

[Collider]

Ryzaki, the writers know more than we do. The writers can easily know the orientations of their characters. It's really tacky if characters go "I don't like guys lol."

[SorenTrigg]

And again, Collider, that is *exactly* why you should not be arguing that they are straight.

[Siansonea]

Collider wrote...

Nordic Einar wrote...
Who's suggesting we remove heterosexual romances? That's a claim I've never seen.

I also brought the example of changing gay romances to bisexual romances, so I'd rather no one act as if I've claimed that anyone has suggested removing heterosexual romances. The point was made to show how ridiculous it is to change the romances' orientations. The "logic" that was given in favor of doing this was that the character has never explicitely stated their preference and can decide or change their interest. They can "realize" that their interest is changed or something.

This situation actually occurs in real life, so it is not illogical that it can occur in a video game. Placing logic in quotes may appear to cast aspersions on its legitimacy, but the concept is a valid one. And for the record, I'm not suggesting Kaidan or Ashley become exclusively homosexual. But I would find a bisexual Kaidan and Ashley no more jarring than Tali and Garrus suddenly becoming romantically interested in Shepard. Certainly it comes out of left field for many people, but it doesn't negate everything that came before.