7455 réponses à ce sujet

[Collider]

Ninja Mage wrote...
You're being obtuse Collider.

and you're constantly putting words into my mouth. Which one is worse?

This isn't a debate thread, it's not a first amendment freedom of speech thread, it's a same sex romance thread. This is about including a same-sex romance into mass effect, not just saying you're cool with gay characters but don't want them put into the game because you don't think there's a large enough audience.

I NEVER said that. Reread my posts if you have to. My God.
All I said was that I doubt there was enough people who would not buy the game if the game did not have homosexual content to matter. I NEVER said that in any way I did not want gay characters in the game, for any reasons. READ.

[Lightice_av]

All I said was that I doubt there was enough people who would not buy the game if the game did not have homosexual content to matter.

As I said, I'm entirely sure that the number of people who would refuse to buy the game if there wasn't a Garrus romance in the game can't have been large enough to cause any financial considerations to Bioware. They did it because they wanted to please the fans.

[Collider]

Lightice_av wrote...
I don't think that anyone would have refused to buy the game if Garrus romance wasn't in it, or at least they most certainly would have made no financial impact on Bioware's sales. Still they got what they wanted because Bioware likes to please the fanbase. They want to please paying customers, to be specific; people who haven't bought the game are secondary on their list of people to please.

I agree.

You're eager to say what you aren't saying, but you're far less clear in what you do want to say.

I am constantly telling people what I am not saying because they seem eager to put words into my mouth.That's not my fault.

It's no wonder that people draw wrong conclusions from the few things you manage to spit out. Tell in clear and concise manner where you stand, and you don't have to worry about misunderstandings or minterpretations of your intentions.

a) I have no problem with new characters that are gay or bisexual. I have no problem with Bioware putting new gay and bisexual characters in the game for whatever reason.
I have a problem with patches and DLC that retcon characters into another sexuality.
c) I have no problem with existing characters from ME1 and ME2 becoming open to another gender in their romance in ME3, although I believe it's likely to be a waste of time to do it.
d) I am doubtful that there are enough people who wouldn't buy the game if it did not have gay male romance in it, to warrant Bioware including gay male content on the basis of money. That is not me saying that Bioware should not have homosexual content, whatsoever.

[Collider]

Lightice_av wrote...

As I said, I'm entirely sure that the number of people who would refuse to buy the game if there wasn't a Garrus romance in the game can't have been large enough to cause any financial considerations to Bioware. They did it because they wanted to please the fans.

I agree.

[Ninja Mage]

Collider wrote...

Ninja Mage wrote...
You're being obtuse Collider.

and you're constantly putting words into my mouth. Which one is worse?

This isn't a debate thread, it's not a first amendment freedom of speech thread, it's a same sex romance thread. This is about including a same-sex romance into mass effect, not just saying you're cool with gay characters but don't want them put into the game because you don't think there's a large enough audience.

I NEVER said that. Reread my posts if you have to. My God.
All I said was that I doubt there was enough people who would not buy the game if the game did not have homosexual content to matter. I NEVER said that in any way I did not want gay characters in the game, for any reasons. READ.

Please keep this debate civil. Everything I have quoted you on you HAVE said. Now whether you want to admit it or not is on you

[Collider]

Ninja Mage wrote...
Please keep this debate civil. Everything I have quoted you on you HAVE said. Now whether you want to admit it or not is on
you

No, I know what I said. If you don't want to continue looking like you are eager to put words in my mouth, start posting actual quotes from me instead. Good luck.

[superimposed]

lawl.

That people even feel the need to start a whole thread is a little depressing. I wonder how long it's going to be before people stop giving **** about it all and it'll finally be considered the normal, unexciting and uncontroversial thing it really is.

[Temper_Graniteskul]

Collider wrote...

Somehow it's important that marketed MShep not be tainted by the hint of gay, but there's nothing to suggest that the variable Shep PC affects this image, or that sales would be adversely affected even if they did.

Never said this.

I'll retract this and edit the original post - that was Mordigan. Your icons are the same, and I misattributed.

The rest, though, I stand by. I've read your comments over three threads on this issue, and your overall gist seems to be that while you're not opposed to the idea of new characters (only, no 'retcons') to be s/s LIs, you're not especially supportive of inclusion either, because you're just not convinced there's sufficient relevant impetus. No argument is adequate.

And no argument can be. You're asking for numbers no one has, and implying through dismissal that if they aren't there the requests shouldn't be taken seriously. The idea that inclusion would make the game more fun/'better' for a large number of people, and that the numbers of those who are neutral or supportive far outweigh those that would have a problem with it, just doesn't seem to matter.

There are nearly 500 people in Fight for the Love. That's not a bad number for forums, and there are more that aren't in the group that have expressed support for the idea, or who have stated that they don't care one way or the other - inclusion wouldn't bother them. Quibbles over what implementation might be preferable notwithstanding, there is both demand and support. If that's not enough for acknowledgement that we might deserve to be taken seriously, then nothing will be.

Modifié par Temper_Graniteskul, 05 mars 2010 - 11:48 .

[Ninja Mage]

Collider wrote...

Ninja Mage wrote...
Please keep this debate civil. Everything I have quoted you on you HAVE said. Now whether you want to admit it or not is on
you

No, I know what I said. If you don't want to continue looking like you are eager to put words in my mouth, start posting actual quotes from me instead. Good luck.

Look, I know what you said. We can do this all day. But you implied that no double standard existed AND you said it. There was a double-standard. There was secretary Kelly but no gay romance equivalent. AND you said that no mass effect romance needed to be persued anyway.

[Venusyl]

I completely agree with this post. I read whole topic nearly 2 hours. And like lots of people. I support same-sex realtions. If someone have a problem with this -like kids -or brains are kid ones-, racists, homophobics, not mature people, closed minded people etc...- read carefully dialogues and then select. BioWare make Dragon Age and lots of players support this that game too. I'll hope BioWare cannot change mind and put same-sex LIs to Mass Effect 3 too. -Yes Mass Effect 2 little-lack of this, but this is not right-

P.s: Hmm don't forget asari "pureblood"s. Asaris are only femael and purebloods are comprised with same-sex relations You must see that -If you read whole story, if you not read story, well not play this kind game please. Lots of non-story games around-

Modifié par Venusyl, 05 mars 2010 - 11:41 .

[Collider]

Ninja Mage wrote...
Look, I know what you said.

Then prove it with quotes from me. Like I said, good lucking finding what isn't there.

We can do this all day.

Your choice. I'll continue to call out your bull**** as long as you continue saying bull****.

But you implied that no double standard existed AND you said it.

Yep. That's opinion.

There was a double-standard.

That's your opinion. I am arguing that there is no standard to begin with. Bioware is not the government.

AND you said that no mass effect romance needed to be persued anyway.

That was in response to someone saying that male shepard being able to be gay would ruin his image.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Ryzaki wrote...

Never said I wouldn't like it if there were. But lets be honest something like Halo, Modern Warfare, Rockband, A wii game, will mostly outsell it and corporations go were the money is. Sad but true. If those kind of games made a chuckload of money like those games do you can beat your sweet a*** there would be a lot of them.

Heck I'm a Suikoden Tatics girl. You think I'm not sad there's not many games like that? 

That's just because there are barely any made. There's next to nothing for us to buy. We don't have the option. Heavy Rain is certainly turning a profit. The more developers make games like Heavy Rain, the more story-driven game fans will fork over their money. It's that simple. Could you imagine if as of March 5th, 2010, the only movies that would continue to be produced are actions flicks? Would the movie industry die? No, there are many fans of action films, but fans of other genres would rightfully feel as if they've been ignored.

[Zjabine]

Lightice_av wrote...

All I said was that I doubt there was enough people who would not buy the game if the game did not have homosexual content to matter.

As I said, I'm entirely sure that the number of people who would refuse to buy the game if there wasn't a Garrus romance in the game can't have been large enough to cause any financial considerations to Bioware. They did it because they are so gay.

Fixed.

[Ninja Mage]

Collider wrote...

Temper_Graniteskul wrote...
lack of inclusion of corresponding fanservice that allows for m/m action was very much a double standard, as far as I was concerned.

This not a double standard. There IS no standard to begin with. Bioware is not being discriminatory, insulting, or insensitive. Bioware does not owe the player anything except for a game.

You said it. This is not a double standard. And it's not my opinion, it's fact. When you blatantly include one thing, but exclude the other, it's called a Double standard, maybe you need a dictionary for your sour attitude.

[Collider]

[quote]Temper_Graniteskul wrote...
you're not especially supportive of inclusion either, because you're just not convinced there's sufficient relevant impetus. No argument is adequate.[/quote]
No, you're mistaken. While my experience of the game will not be enhanced or decreased from the inclusion of male gay romances (or lesbian romances for that matter), I don't have a problem with it being in the game for any reason whatsoever. What you seem to be talking about is my opinion that there both does not seem to be enough players who would not buy the game to make it a logical business decision for Bioware to make same sex romances simply for the money. I am not saying that they should not do it because some of the fans want it, or for it to come as a result of the writer's wills.


You're asking for numbers no one has,[/quote]
I never asked for numbers. Did I ever ask you to conjure up numbers for your position? No.

[quote]and implying through dismissal that if they aren't there the requests shouldn't be taken seriously.[/quote]
Yet again you're misintepreting me. I have never said anything about the requests specifically. I was referring to the people who supposedly would not buy the game if it did not have same sex content. I have never said anything about the requests on this forum made by people who want it.

[quote]The idea that inclusion would make the game more fun/'better' for a large number of people, and that the numbers of those who are neutral or supportive far outweigh those that would have a problem with it, just doesn't seem to matter.[/quote]
See, I'm not against Bioware including it to satisfy some fans. It's clear that Bioware listens to the fans and in that way I'm all for it.

I'm also not against Bioware including it for extra money, I just don't think it's logical to do it just because they think they'll make more money that way. Got it?

[quote]There are nearly 500 people in Fight for the Love. That's not a bad number for forums, and there are more that aren't in the group that have expressed support for the idea, or who have stated that they don't care one way or the other - inclusion wouldn't bother them. [/quote]
Never said anything (that I remember) whatsoever regarding the people who would be bothered by same sex content.

[Arik7]

Venusyl wrote...

I completely agree with this post. I read whole topic nearly 2 hours. And like lots of people. I support same-sex realtions. If someone have a problem with this -like kids -or brains are kid ones-, racists, homophobics, not mature people, closed minded people etc...- read carefully dialogues and then select. BioWare make Dragon Age and lots of players support this that game too. I'll hope BioWare cannot change mind and put same-sex LIs to Mass Effect 3 too. -Yes Mass Effect 2 little-lack of this, but this is not right-

P.s: Hmm don't forget asari "pureblood"s. Asaris are only femael and purebloods are comprised with same-sex relations You must see that -If you read whole story, if you not read story, well not play this kind game please. Lots of non-story games around-

Always good to hear from new supporters...

Modifié par Arik7, 05 mars 2010 - 11:51 .

[Collider]

Ninja Mage wrote...
You said it. This is not a double standard. And it's not my opinion, it's fact.

It's your opinion.

When you blatantly include one thing, but exclude the other, it's called a Double standard, maybe you need a dictionary for your sour attitude.

By your definition, there being no gay content in the movie Avatar is a double standard, which is absolutely laughable.

Here's the real definition of double standard (from wiktionary):

1. The situation of two or more groups, one of whom is tacitly excused from following a standard generally regarded as applying to all groups.

What I am saying is that there is NO standard to begin with. The U.S. government disallowing women to vote is a double standard. Not having gay male content in Mass Effect is not a double standard, IMO.

Regarding me being sour. I feel I am being very civil. I've never insulted you. However, you've been putting words into my mouth. You don't expect that to go well with most people, do you?

[Temper_Graniteskul]

Double standard: one code that has different provisions for different groups. Heck, Dictionary.com's example even talks about sexual standards for men having more freedom than those for women. In this case, I thought it was pretty obvious that Liara and Kelly both are straight male fanservice - the standard is that those interests and desires are worth including in a game. Those interested in f/f can sort of ride on the coattails of this, but ME2 is remarkably unsatisfactory for that from all accounts (unless a fling is all you're after). By contrast, nothing at all for any gamer interested in seeing m/m, because they aren't likely to belong to that straight male group - despite having those interests and belonging to the gamer group.

[Ninja Mage]

Collider wrote...

Ninja Mage wrote...
You said it. This is not a double standard. And it's not my opinion, it's fact.

It's your opinion.

When you blatantly include one thing, but exclude the other, it's called a Double standard, maybe you need a dictionary for your sour attitude.

By your definition, there being no gay content in the movie Avatar is a double standard, which is absolutely laughable.

Here's the real definition of double standard (from wiktionary):

1. The situation of two or more groups, one of whom is tacitly excused from following a standard generally regarded as applying to all groups.

What I am saying is that there is NO standard to begin with. The U.S. government disallowing women to vote is a double standard. Not having gay male content in Mass Effect is not a double standard, IMO.

Regarding me being sour. I feel I am being very civil. I've never insulted you. However, you've been putting words into my mouth. You don't expect that to go well with most people, do you?

That's a strawman argument. I NEVER brought up avatar. And whether you THINK I'm putting words into your mouth is irrelevant, because you say things without clearly defining what you mean. You're being obtuse in order to hide behind your words.

[Andaius20]

I have to agree with that, your using it wrong!

[Collider]

Temper_Graniteskul wrote...

Double standard: one code that has different provisions for different groups. Heck, Dictionary.com's example even talks about sexual standards for men having more freedom than those for women.

See, there is no code to begin with. Bioware games are not required to have romances. The U.S. government (constitution) requires equality of genders, so in my example of what a double standard actually is, I presented the double standard of the U.S. government disallowing females to vote.

In this case, I thought it was pretty obvious that Liara and Kelly both are straight male fanservice - the standard is that those interests and desires are worth including in a game.

Technically all romances are fan service. Although I do agree that in my opinion the entire Asari race are "fanservice." I would have much rather had the Asari have two genders (or more) instead of being space babes whose only difference from human females are head tentancles, being blue, and having a lengthy lifespan that I would envious over. Oh, and a completely illogical mind melding thing.

As for Kelly, I don't know why you say that.

[Collider]

Ninja Mage wrote...
That's a strawman argument. I NEVER brought up avatar.

Nope, not strawman. I am using your very definiton.

Ninja Mage
When you blatantly include one thing, but exclude the other

Avatar is blatantly including a heterosexual romance, but does not have homosexual content. According to your definiton, the Avatar movie has a double standard. I suggest you revise your definition or try looking into a dictionary.

And whether you THINK I'm putting words into your mouth is irrelevant, because you say things without clearly defining what you mean. You're being obtuse in order to hide behind your words.

All you need to do is provide quotes from me, but you haven't. It's not my fault if you have to jump the gun and start assuming things about me.

[Ninja Mage]

Collider wrote...

Ninja Mage wrote...
That's a strawman argument. I NEVER brought up avatar.

Nope, not strawman. I am using your very definiton.

Ninja Mage
When you blatantly include one thing, but exclude the other

Avatar is blatantly including a heterosexual romance, but does not have homosexual content. According to your definiton, the Avatar movie has a double standard. I suggest you revise your definition or try looking into a dictionary.

And whether you THINK I'm putting words into your mouth is irrelevant, because you say things without clearly defining what you mean. You're being obtuse in order to hide behind your words.

All you need to do is provide quotes from me, but you haven't. It's not my fault if you have to jump the gun and start assuming things about me.

That's not what I said. Maybe you SHOULD read what I wrote, unless of course I purposely obscured the meaning like you, oh wait, I didn't. And does Avatar include a lesbian romance? No, so you're argument is nothing but a STRAWMAN argument. Avatar has nothing to do with mass effect

[Collider]

Ninja Mage wrote...
And does Avatar include a lesbian romance?

No, but it has a heterosexual romance.

No, so you're argument is nothing but a STRAWMAN argument.

Not a strawman. I am using your very definition. You should try revising it or looking in a dictionary.
Let's look at definitions for double standard:

a) The situation of two or more groups, one of whom is tacitly excused from following a standard generally regarded as applying to all groups.
any code or set of principles containing different provisions for one
group of people than for another, esp. an unwritten code of sexual
behavior permitting men more freedom than women.Compare single standard (def. 1).
c) a set of principles that applies
differently and usually more rigorously to one group of people or
circumstances than to another; especially : a code of morals that applies more severe standards of sexual behavior to women than to men

Avatar has nothing to do with mass effect

What, your definiton of double standard only applies to mass effect? You should have told me.

[Ninja Mage]

Collider wrote...

Ninja Mage wrote...
And does Avatar include a lesbian romance?

No, but it has a heterosexual romance.

No, so you're argument is nothing but a STRAWMAN argument.

Not a strawman. I am using your very definition. You should try revising it or looking in a dictionary.
Let's look at definitions for double standard:

a) The situation of two or more groups, one of whom is tacitly excused from following a standard generally regarded as applying to all groups.
any code or set of principles containing different provisions for one
group of people than for another, esp. an unwritten code of sexual
behavior permitting men more freedom than women.Compare single standard (def. 1).
c) a set of principles that applies
differently and usually more rigorously to one group of people or
circumstances than to another; especially : a code of morals that applies more severe standards of sexual behavior to women than to men

Avatar has nothing to do with mass effect

What, your definiton of double standard only applies to mass effect? You should have told me.

I did tell you, But you weren't listening, a bad habit you need to break