|
|
Post by gaycaravaggio on May 23, 2017 7:48:26 GMT
Lol, if we get choices, then I'll just keep sending the straight characters to their deaths until there aren't any. LMAO. I will eat my hat if that happens.  |
|
|
|
Post by phantomrachie on May 23, 2017 10:49:39 GMT
What BW needs is a good reminder that they are no the only company delivering LGBT content. I hope other companies wake up to the scent of gay gold and start delivering some LGBT content, in order for BW to get off their little pedestal of so called inclusivity and realize they aren't the head honcho anymore, and they cannot deliver the bare minimum and expect people to eat it up. FE Echoes just released and there's a wonderful gay male character in it, who is, from the looks of it, not an annoying trope and is very straight-forward with his homosexuality, and it isn't played for laughs. And that is pretty big coming from a Japanese game. Maybe Bethesda's upcoming games will put up some pressure on BWs LGBT content. Or any other AAA company, really. Does Bethesda have actual LGBT content without mods or do they just not give a damn who you marry like in Skyrim? I've only played Oblivion and Skyrim so was wondering. I might be in the minority with this but I don't consider Bethesda attempts at romance, LGBT content. Even in Fallout 4, which has their most heavily fleshed out romances to date, followers are either down to fuck or they are not. They don't' have any sexual preferences and the game lets you romance as many people as you like with no repercussions. Bethesda wants players to have choice and options but doesn't want those choices to have any meaningful impact on the game or run the risk of denying a player the option to do something they want to do. (or in this case, person they want to do) I say this as a person who is contently lusting after the straight girl in BioWare games, but I think in order for queerness to be properly represented, characters need to have their own sexual orientation and players need to be given indications as to what that is, even if everyone is bisexual like in DA2. And for polyamory to be included in a game, players must have to have an open conversation with their LIs about it, not just have their cheating ignored. |
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 23, 2017 10:59:56 GMT
I would rather romances be as accessible as possible, if a game is going to have them.
LGBT representation should not only be occurring in the context of romances anyway. We should be able to point to notable, undeniably LGBT NPCs outside of the available romanceable characters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2017 11:14:40 GMT
Does Bethesda have actual LGBT content without mods or do they just not give a damn who you marry like in Skyrim? I've only played Oblivion and Skyrim so was wondering. I might be in the minority with this but I don't consider Bethesda attempts at romance, LGBT content. Even in Fallout 4, which has their most heavily fleshed out romances to date, followers are either down to fuck or they are not. They don't' have any sexual preferences and the game lets you romance as many people as you like with no repercussions. Bethesda wants players to have choice and options but doesn't want those choices to have any meaningful impact on the game or run the risk of denying a player the option to do something they want to do. (or in this case, person they want to do) I say this as a person who is contently lusting after the straight girl in BioWare games, but I think in order for queerness to be properly represented, characters need to have their own sexual orientation and players need to be given indications as to what that is, even if everyone is bisexual like in DA2. And for polyamory to be included in a game, players must have to have an open conversation with their LIs about it, not just have their cheating ignored. After the MEA debacle, I saw some players who went off to play FO4, or DA2, because they didn't have to deal with any of that. Sexuality and orientation wasn't an issue at all. I got the feeling from those players that it was a relief to have those games to turn to in the wake of being so hurt by Bioware over MEA. I like having the fixed orientations as well, but only if it's going to be done right and fair. And even then, you still run into the issue of certain tropes, like the gay/bi rogue, either someone who is an actual rogue (class), or has a roguish personality (Bull and Dorian both fall under this, while not being rogue class), while the KISA is saved for the straight characters as both Cullen and Cassandra were. Ever since Avaline f/f players have been asking for a fem KISA, only to be turned down again. The same is true for m/m players and a KISA like Alistair, only to be disappointed in Cullen. So, while the 2/2/2 method is fair in numbers, it is also not full representation if they keep sticking to tropes that gay/bi characters are allowed to be. For some reason, Bioware seems really resistant to the idea of having a warrior-type woman liking other women, like they will be falling into some stereotype, even when women tell them they want one. It's ridiculous, especially since they are willing to use other stereotypes. DAI is Bioware's most fair and liberal game to date as far as romances are concerned. But there is the entire history of the MET and now MEA, as well as DAO to fall back on. Right now, we have to wait to see what is on offer for DA4, but that is a long way away. The only games we have where there was equality of content, regardless of character or orientation, are the games with the "all bi" style of DA2, FO4, and to a much lesser extent Skyrim. |
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 23, 2017 11:17:30 GMT
DA2 wasn't equal either, but Sebastian is so forgettable that people think it was, lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2017 11:21:49 GMT
DA2 wasn't equal either, but Sebastian is so forgettable that people think it was, lol. I tend to discount DLC characters, and would even if he were a full-er romance. You can't even have him as a follower until Act 2. Those two things alone, regardless of his content, make him count less. In comparison to Shale, who is also DLC, but you could acquire after Lothering, just as other followers, and have with you for the entire game. At least DAI didn't have a DLC follower. |
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 23, 2017 11:23:54 GMT
DA2 wasn't equal either, but Sebastian is so forgettable that people think it was, lol. I tend to discount DLC characters, and would even if he were a full-er romance. You can't even have him as a follower until Act 2. Those two things alone, regardless of his content, make him count less. In comparison to Shale, who is also DLC, but you could acquire after Lothering, just as other followers, and have with you for the entire game. At least DAI didn't have a DLC follower. I don't discount them, because it's still extra content that they produced specifically for heterosexuals while locking out LGBT. If anything, the fact that it's DLC makes it more egregious, because they went out of their way to do it. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2017 11:25:35 GMT
I tend to discount DLC characters, and would even if he were a full-er romance. You can't even have him as a follower until Act 2. Those two things alone, regardless of his content, make him count less. In comparison to Shale, who is also DLC, but you could acquire after Lothering, just as other followers, and have with you for the entire game. At least DAI didn't have a DLC follower. I don't discount them, because it's still extra content that they produced specifically for heterosexuals while locking out LGBT. If anything, the fact that it's DLC makes it more egregious, because they went out of their way to do it. That's fair, I understand that. |
|
|
|
Post by phantomrachie on May 23, 2017 12:09:07 GMT
<snip> LGBT representation should not only be occurring in the context of romances anyway. We should be able to point to notable, undeniably LGBT NPCs outside of the available romanceable characters. I agree. LGBT representation shouldn't be just about romances. The likes of Prey & Horizon: Zero Dawn have characters outside of the main protagonists and their friends. BioWare has done some of this but mostly relies on romances to add LGBT characters, with DA:I being the best game they have made for this. this shows that some devs are trying to be more inclusive. But I don't think Bethesda even thinks in these terms, they just want more choice for players and so might coincidently have some kind of representation but it's rarely on purpose. The only LBGT character, outside of a romance, I can think of in an Elder Scrolls or Fallout game is Carol from Fallout 3. This means that we get characters who don't discuss their sexuality or have any preference at all, they are just down to fuck the player. Depending on how a player, plays these games they could not see any LGBT representation at all and that is not representation. I might be in the minority with this but I don't consider Bethesda attempts at romance, LGBT content. Even in Fallout 4, which has their most heavily fleshed out romances to date, followers are either down to fuck or they are not. They don't' have any sexual preferences and the game lets you romance as many people as you like with no repercussions. Bethesda wants players to have choice and options but doesn't want those choices to have any meaningful impact on the game or run the risk of denying a player the option to do something they want to do. (or in this case, person they want to do) I say this as a person who is contently lusting after the straight girl in BioWare games, but I think in order for queerness to be properly represented, characters need to have their own sexual orientation and players need to be given indications as to what that is, even if everyone is bisexual like in DA2. And for polyamory to be included in a game, players must have to have an open conversation with their LIs about it, not just have their cheating ignored. After the MEA debacle, I saw some players who went off to play FO4, or DA2, because they didn't have to deal with any of that. Sexuality and orientation wasn't an issue at all. I got the feeling from those players that it was a relief to have those games to turn to in the wake of being so hurt by Bioware over MEA. I like having the fixed orientations as well, but only if it's going to be done right and fair. And even then, you still run into the issue of certain tropes, like the gay/bi rogue, either someone who is an actual rogue (class), or has a roguish personality (Bull and Dorian both fall under this, while not being rogue class), while the KISA is saved for the straight characters as both Cullen and Cassandra were. Ever since Avaline f/f players have been asking for a fem KISA, only to be turned down again. The same is true for m/m players and a KISA like Alistair, only to be disappointed in Cullen. So, while the 2/2/2 method is fair in numbers, it is also not full representation if they keep sticking to tropes that gay/bi characters are allowed to be. For some reason, Bioware seems really resistant to the idea of having a warrior-type woman liking other women, like they will be falling into some stereotype, even when women tell them they want one. It's ridiculous, especially since they are willing to use other stereotypes. DAI is Bioware's most fair and liberal game to date as far as romances are concerned. But there is the entire history of the MET and now MEA, as well as DAO to fall back on. Right now, we have to wait to see what is on offer for DA4, but that is a long way away. The only games we have where there was equality of content, regardless of character or orientation, are the games with the "all bi" style of DA2, FO4, and to a much lesser extent Skyrim. I agree that BioWare does seem resistant to having certain types characters who are gay. (If DA4 doesn't give me my warrior woman to romance than I might have to rethink my policy on not using mods to change a character's sexual preference). However, I think there is a HUGE difference between DA2 & FO4 in terms of romance and LGBT content. In DA2 some characters talk about their sexuality, Isabela tells you she is bisexual regardless of which gender Hawke. Anders tells you of an ex-boyfriend if you romance him as male. Even if you are playing as a straight male Hawke, Anders will still come on to you. Merril seems to attracted to Isabela in some of her banter or scenes with her. It's not perfect but the information is there for some characters. Regardless of the gender of Hawke, you will know the sexuality of at least some of your companions. In FO4 Piper is straight if you are a male, gay if you are a female, it is the same for the rest of them. You could play the entire game without seeing any LGBT content like it's a secret. I don't think that because the content is "equal" that it makes it better because it still gives an out to any bigots out there and allows them to think that there is no queerness in the game. BioWare is not perfect when it comes to this, they still do things that are problematic but I also think there is aa lot to be said of not making the perfect the enemey of the good. Mass Effect has always been a step behind Dragon Ages in these matters and really only got decent at it in ME3 (even if it did still have some big problems) MEA fell behind the expectation set from DA:I, and to a lesser extent ME3 (from what I've seen from Vids, the Reyes and Gill romances seem to have a similar amount of content to Cortez & Kaidan but without the sex scenes.) but it had far more representation than Fallout 4. Regardless of which Ryder I play MEA as I know that gay people exist in the Mass Effect Universe, I can't say the same for the world of Fallout 4. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2017 12:29:08 GMT
phantomrachie I do agree with all that. I just think some players want to settle down with their LI of choice and not worry about it. If we take pessimistpanda's point about representation outside of romance content, they could do a combined effort: have more NPCs as real representation (in a non fucked-up way, unlike Celene/Briala), while allowing all bi romances. For stronger representation not tied to romance, you could have followers who are gay/bi who are not romance options. For example, if Tessa (from the Magekiller comics) is a follower in DA4, she might be shown to be in her relationship with Charter, and also not be a romance option. (They always have some followers who are non-LI.) So that would bring the rep into the game, with a significant character (instead of some random NPC), while not interfering with the romances.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2017 12:29:29 GMT
Does Bethesda have actual LGBT content without mods or do they just not give a damn who you marry like in Skyrim? I've only played Oblivion and Skyrim so was wondering. I might be in the minority with this but I don't consider Bethesda attempts at romance, LGBT content. Even in Fallout 4, which has their most heavily fleshed out romances to date, followers are either down to fuck or they are not. They don't' have any sexual preferences and the game lets you romance as many people as you like with no repercussions. Bethesda wants players to have choice and options but doesn't want those choices to have any meaningful impact on the game or run the risk of denying a player the option to do something they want to do. (or in this case, person they want to do) I say this as a person who is contently lusting after the straight girl in BioWare games, but I think in order for queerness to be properly represented, characters need to have their own sexual orientation and players need to be given indications as to what that is, even if everyone is bisexual like in DA2. And for polyamory to be included in a game, players must have to have an open conversation with their LIs about it, not just have their cheating ignored. From what I know of Bethesda, this seems to fit their MO. Since they make their games modable and apparently rely on fans to patch bugs (which is shitty business practice IMO so good job on Bioware for not doing this), I see why they also just created NPCs available to romance and let the players take their relationship with the NPCs into their own hands. I agree that I would prefer the characters to be more explicit in their sexuality like Isabela and Anders and that there should also be non-romanceable NPCs who are queer. But I am at least glad that Bethesda said "let's allow the NPCs to not have gender locks" instead of "we'll default them all as straight since we know our fans will mod the gender locks anyway." It at least acknowledges that players want the option to romance both genders freely. It's not as good as Bioware, of course. I tend to discount DLC characters, and would even if he were a full-er romance. You can't even have him as a follower until Act 2. Those two things alone, regardless of his content, make him count less. In comparison to Shale, who is also DLC, but you could acquire after Lothering, just as other followers, and have with you for the entire game. At least DAI didn't have a DLC follower. I don't discount them, because it's still extra content that they produced specifically for heterosexuals while locking out LGBT. If anything, the fact that it's DLC makes it more egregious, because they went out of their way to do it. But it's better that the exclusively straight option was the extra DLC and not one of the gay options. I don't see day one DLC as extra content, it was cut content which was able to be patched back in at the last minute; Bioware decided that of all of the romances in DA2 Sebastian was the most expendable and put him on back burner. I would much rather this than if MEA has a gay male quarian in the potential DLC, as that means gay guys have to pay more to get their improved m/m content. |
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 23, 2017 12:58:00 GMT
I don't discount them, because it's still extra content that they produced specifically for heterosexuals while locking out LGBT. If anything, the fact that it's DLC makes it more egregious, because they went out of their way to do it. But it's better that the exclusively straight option was the extra DLC and not one of the gay options. I don't see day one DLC as extra content, it was cut content which was able to be patched back in at the last minute; Bioware decided that of all of the romances in DA2 Sebastian was the most expendable and put him on back burner. I would much rather this than if MEA has a gay male quarian in the potential DLC, as that means gay guys have to pay more to get their improved m/m content. Assuming you're correct about the specifics of how Sebastian ended up as DLC, that just means they had plans to give straight women a bonus hetero-only dude, and it's sheer luck that he turned out to be less plot-relevant than Anders or Fenris, and could be safely cut from the main game with minimal rewrites. Also, there are probably whole entire characters that BioWare writers conceived and discarded while Sebastian got included. Some of them might even have been gay, though I doubt it. According to the Dragon Age writers, Cullen and Solas were not originally intended as romance options, but were added in because they were given more money and time. That's not very much different. Under other circumstances, their romances might have been sold as DLC instead. Sure, it would be supremely offensive if we had to pay extra money just to get another gay male character in ME:A, but the situations in DA2 and ME:A are extremely different from each other. Straight women in DA2 have the option of paying to get an extra romance option when they already have equality. In your hypothetical scenario, gay men would have to pay, just to get an equal amount of content compared to some other gamers, and even then, would still not be equal to the options available for straight men. |
|
|
|
Post by phantomrachie on May 23, 2017 13:06:46 GMT
phantomrachie I do agree with all that. I just think some players want to settle down with their LI of choice and not worry about it. If we take pessimistpanda 's point about representation outside of romance content, they could do a combined effort: have more NPCs as real representation (in a non fucked-up way, unlike Celene/Briala), while allowing all bi romances. For stronger representation not tied to romance, you could have followers who are gay/bi who are not romance options. For example, if Tessa (from the Magekiller comics) is a follower in DA4, she might be shown to be in her relationship with Charter, and also not be a romance option. (They always have some followers who are non-LI.) So that would bring the rep into the game, with a significant character (instead of some random NPC), while not interfering with the romances. I think there is a balance to be struck in allowing players to settle down with whoever they fancy and making sure there is LGBT representation in a game. If there was already tons of LGBT characters in games, then all LIs could be bi or even player sexual and it wouldn't matter, but as it stands devs and players tend to rely on LIs to provide the LGBT content. I agree it would be a really nice idea to have non-romanceable LGBT companions and more LGBT NPCs which would move alot of the pressure from the romance options to be the only representation. I would still say that it would be important to make it clear that those romance options were bisexual instead of player sexual and it should still be possible to have LIs with a specific sexual orientation if the writers wanted (Dorian's questline wouldn't have been as compelling if he weren't gay). |
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 23, 2017 13:22:05 GMT
That's saying something, considering Dorian's questline totally sucks.  |
|
|
|
Post by nocte on May 23, 2017 14:19:12 GMT
Until literally any game can prove they can give as good a range of options as FO4 with "set sexualitites", I favor the all bi, or player-sexual, or whatever you want to call it approach. I like FO4's romances a lot. ME:A especially made me appreciate a game where we have a large amount of options to pick from out of the core cast. I don't really think the romances are even that light. Bioware has more cinematics, but I don't think the dialogue and involvement actually dwarfs the FO4 romances by some massive scale. Sure, there are some little nuances, like acknowledgement from other characters and stuff that they could expand on. They're good arcs with lots of emotional dialogue, though. I have a hard time seeing ME:A's two woefully under-developed NPC romances as being as good as MacCready's with his multi-stage quest and companion status.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantomrachie on May 23, 2017 14:51:06 GMT
That's saying something, considering Dorian's questline totally sucks. Bad Panda Until literally any game can prove they can give as good a range of options as FO4 with "set sexualitites", I favor the all bi, or player-sexual, or whatever you want to call it approach. I like FO4's romances a lot. ME:A especially made me appreciate a game where we have a large amount of options to pick from out of the core cast. I don't really think the romances are even that light. Bioware has more cinematics, but I don't think the dialogue and involvement actually dwarfs the FO4 romances by some massive scale. Sure, there are some little nuances, like acknowledgement from other characters and stuff that they could expand on. They're good arcs with lots of emotional dialogue, though. I have a hard time seeing ME:A's two woefully under-developed NPC romances as being as good as MacCready's with his multi-stage quest and companion status. I disagree here because there is no difference in the content with FO4 followers if you romance them or not. You go through the same arch, have most of the same conversations, but after their loyalty quest you can sleep with them. I can do MacCready's multi-stage quest whether I romance him or not, but I can't have dinner with Vetra if I don't romance her. |
|
|
|
Post by nocte on May 23, 2017 14:56:55 GMT
I disagree here because there is no difference in the content with FO4 followers if you romance them or not. You go through the same arch, have all most of the same conversations, but after their loyalty quest you can sleep with them. I can do MacCready's multi-stage quest whether I romance him or not, but I can't have dinner with Vetra if I don't romance her. But that's barely different than ME:A. You get an extra scene, but you don't really unlock much more dialogue at all. I imagine if you extracted the "extra" romance dialgue from MacCready/Danse/the more popular FO4 romances and from Reyes/Gil, they wouldn't really be substantially different in size. For me, that it unlocks with the romance isn't really important, though. I really do care more about how much overall content and impact they have on the narrative than how much romance specific content is there. So, I guess it's just a matter of priority there. But, then again, Reyes/Gil aren't comparable romances to Vetra, either. So, it you're comparing them to the companion romances, then yeah, it's a different situation. |
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 23, 2017 15:14:02 GMT
Yeah, maybe some of Mass Effect's characters have substantial extra content if you romance them, but I'm not gonna do that, so I don't give a shit, lol.
I'm never gonna play as anything other than a gay man, and that means I can have Gil or Reyes. Reyes doesn't get substantially more content if you romance him, just a few alterations to scenes that happen anyway. I'll staple my dick to my forehead before I have anything to do with Gil, whose writer was so lazy that they made his best friend's name rhyme.
I'll take the Fallout 4 romances over at least 50% of my options in ME:A. Even without extra romance content, their characters and plotlines are just more appealing to begin with. Maybe they don't have a sexuality, but BioWare is awful at writing about sexuality and they should stop, lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantomrachie on May 23, 2017 15:30:40 GMT
I disagree here because there is no difference in the content with FO4 followers if you romance them or not. You go through the same arch, have all most of the same conversations, but after their loyalty quest you can sleep with them. I can do MacCready's multi-stage quest whether I romance him or not, but I can't have dinner with Vetra if I don't romance her. But that's barely different than ME:A. You get an extra scene, but you don't really unlock much more dialogue at all. I imagine if you extracted the "extra" romance dialgue from MacCready/Danse/the more popular FO4 romances and from Reyes/Gil, they wouldn't really be substantially different in size. For me, that it unlocks with the romance isn't really important, though. I really do care more about how much overall content and impact they have on the narrative than how much romance specific content is there. So, I guess it's just a matter of priority there. But, then again, Reyes/Gil aren't comparable romances to Vetra, either. So, it you're comparing them to the companion romances, then yeah, it's a different situation. I'm trying to compare like with like. All FO4 options are followers so I'm comparing with BioWare followers. Personally, I don't like if there is basically no difference between a friendship path and a romance path with a character, even if the extra bit is just one additional scene. Otherwise, I just feel like I'm sleeping with my friend for a stat bonus rather than actually be in a relationship. Yeah, maybe some of Mass Effect's characters have substantial extra content if you romance them, but I'm not gonna do that, so I don't give a shit, lol. I'm never gonna play as anything other than a gay man, and that means I can have Gil or Reyes. Reyes doesn't get substantially more content if you romance him, just a few alterations to scenes that happen anyway. I'll staple my dick to my forehead before I have anything to do with Gil, whose writer was so lazy that they made his best friend's name rhyme. I'll take the Fallout 4 romances over at least 50% of my options in ME:A. Even without extra romance content, their characters and plotlines are just more appealing to begin with. Maybe they don't have a sexuality, but BioWare is awful at writing about sexuality and they should stop, lol. This is completely understandable. I think BioWare can do sexuality well, they have definitely made some missteps but generally, I think the Dragon Age team in particular have done a decent job. |
|
|
|
Post by nocte on May 23, 2017 15:43:19 GMT
But that's barely different than ME:A. You get an extra scene, but you don't really unlock much more dialogue at all. I imagine if you extracted the "extra" romance dialgue from MacCready/Danse/the more popular FO4 romances and from Reyes/Gil, they wouldn't really be substantially different in size. For me, that it unlocks with the romance isn't really important, though. I really do care more about how much overall content and impact they have on the narrative than how much romance specific content is there. So, I guess it's just a matter of priority there. But, then again, Reyes/Gil aren't comparable romances to Vetra, either. So, it you're comparing them to the companion romances, then yeah, it's a different situation. I'm trying to compare like with like. All FO4 options are followers so I'm comparing with BioWare followers. Personally, I don't like if there is basically no difference between a friendship path and a romance path with a character, even if the extra bit is just one additional scene. Otherwise, I just feel like I'm sleeping with my friend for a stat bonus rather than actually be in a relationship. Well, you get extra lines, like MacCready will say "hey handsome" to you and all the flirt conversations. There are lines when you part for another companion that are unique sometimes, lines when you sleep together. It isn't literally the same lines but you can sleep together after one check. It's multiple flirts with extra dialogue, the culmination flirt and then some extra lines from there here and there. Plus the fact that they'll break up with you if you piss them off and get back together if you improve things before they get pissed off enough to leave, which is an interesting point Bioware doesn't even really do. Bioware has an extra cinematic, but sometimes that's pretty much the only difference. It's not really like they have huge amounts of extra romance dialogue or quests specific to it, usually. I think it only seems more weighty because they do cinematics and Bethesda doesn't, but that doesn't matter as much to me. But the point for me was basically always that Bioware's method isn't as good for me because I'm not assured to get good quality, companion romances. I said I prefer the all bi method because it offers a wider variety of well developed romances for me than Bioware's set sexualities tend to. It doesn't really do me any good to only compare to companions in a game where I don't have access to any companion romances that match my sexuality. That's the actual reason why I don't prefer that system to begin with. |
|
Much love right back at ya!
