That is an insane argument. You are equating playing an entirely different videogame with playing the same videogame with a different character (something you already have to do for every single romance). As should be needless to say, those are not equivalent.
Yet it is an example that easily illustrates the issue. Of course, you are correct to say that playing a different character isn't equivalent to playing a different genre of games. But given how important story and character interaction is in these sorts of games, is it that insane to think that people won't enjoy the same sorts of stories and interactions?
Is it that insane the bulk of men aren't able to enjoy harlequin romance novels the same way women do?
If you can't play a fantasy RPG where your protagonist is a female character, then you don't get to romance Anomen, Hexxat or Rasaad. That wasn't discrimination against you when it was just Anomen, and it isn't discrimination now.
The discrimination, I think, has to do with the *amount* of new content available, and not with whether content is accessible to all. What I find problematic is not whether developers are fair to all tastes - because ultimately, no game is capable of satisfying everybody - but when arguments of past discrimination are used to justify future discrimination, which is what a lot of posters were/are doing.
HELLO THERE, I'm a gay male player who thinks "everyone is bi" completely sucks and I look forward to play the Hexxat romance with my female charname because I roleplay.
For those new to roleplaying, I shall explain this concept to you, so you too can enjoy it!
ELI5: Roleplaying
"Roleplaying" is kind of like acting. It comes from "role" (a fictional character) and "playing" (pretending to be this fictional character). I know, it's confusing at first, so I give you an example. In "Silence of Lambs", Anthony Hopkins (he is an "actor", that's like the "player", only in a movie) plays Hannibal Lector (the "role", meaning this person isn't real). Hannibal Lector is a cannibal (someone who eats other humans). Anthony Hopkins, of course, is not a cannibal (it's not legal in most countries, so if he did, he would be a "criminal", not an "actor") and he eats no humans. He just pretends to do that when he roleplays Hannibal Lector. When he is not roleplaying Hannibal Lector, he doesn't do that. Then he normal things like fries, just like everyone else.
In real life, I'm not a woman and I also don't want to date women. When I roleplay my female character, I pretend that she is into women, just like Anthony Hopkins pretends to be a cannibal. That doesn't mean I become a woman when I'm not roleplaying, just like Anthony Hopkins doesn't become a cannibal. (Would be worse for him, he'd get arrested!!!!) It also doesn't mean I ditch my boyfriend for a woman in real life, just like Anthony Hopkins doesn't throw his fries away and eats humans. (Again, would be way worse for him, haha!)
The cool thing about "roleplaying" is that you can pretend to be many things that you can't be in real life (or wouldn't want to be, like cannibal) with no consequences! If you would try to pretend you can fly in real life, you would probably fall on your face and that would hurt you. OUCH! Who would want that? No-one! In roleplay, you can pretend to be a bird or just that you have wings - and not fall on your face! Totally cool! You can also pretend to have superpowers or be something that doesn't even exist in reality, like roleplaying an elf or a WIZARD.
I hope this short introduction sparked the interest of some of you to give it a try; it's a fun thing to do! Next week, I will explain the difference between apples and oranges - see you then!
Am gonna teach you something too...
First lesson : people are different that's why equality works That said that some people actually play differently... some people pretend to be the player.. some like you.. roleplays like reading a book... both are fine
Being condescending wont calm anything, being insulting will make it worse
I belive you are being both
Thank you for your interest in "roleplaying"! To answer your question, yes, you can roleplay many different things and characters. Actors actually do the same thing; they play different roles in different movies. Would be a boring job to play the same role all the time, right?
You are also correct in your observation that acting and roleplaying is not for everyone. Actors who can only be themselves won't get hired very often, so they usually find a better suited job, like fire fighter or accountant. It's the similar with games. If you don't like roleplaying, you can just find a better suited game, like a strategy game or a first person shooter. Not all games are roleplaying games, just like not all movies are horror movies. ("Genres" is a keyword if you want to learn more about this!)
sersafir, you cannot take a forum poll as representative of the entirety of the playerbase. Even if you could, and let's just say you're correct and 10% is the number of non-heterosexual-males playing, so what?
Heterosexual male romances are still the majority of what is available, and lots of heterosexual males don't have a problem roleplaying as other genders or orientations in a game. If you can't get over that hump yourself, that's unfortunate, but you still get access to five out of the eight romances.
sersafir, you cannot take a forum poll as representative of the entirety of the playerbase. Even if you could, and let's just say you're correct and 10% is the number of non-heterosexual-males playing, so what?
Heterosexual male romances are still the majority of what is available, and lots of heterosexual males don't have a problem roleplaying as other genders or orientations in a game. If you can't get over that hump yourself, that's unfortunate, but you still get access to five out of the eight romances.
4. And I'm really not that upset. I can't fathom why I'm getting so much hate for a personal veiw, but I find it strange straight males only saw 1 improvement in enhanced edition romances.
Condescending tone? Please. Your ability to read me over the internet is quite frankly bad, much like your self centered points.
Statistics? Who actually gives a rat's... About statistics for who and who doesn't play this game? No, really? I hadn't noticed... Do you really feel the need to point out that most of the gamers are men? Bit hypocritical. However, that really has nothing to do with anything. If Men were Beamdog's biggest concern, again, they wouldn't have given Hexxat and Dorn a single thought. So, their existence, in itself, provides more than enough evidence; Does it not? Well, given the fact you just pointed out that there's supposedly only "10%" of females who play this game, why else would I believe you think they don't exist - Or rather, are unimportant in your pointers? Oh, because you're hideously self-centered - That's why. Yes, however, your top most concern, apparently, is you. Which is beyond ridiculous. If you want a Game tailored to your every need, go and make one, instead of debating about why the game isn't made to suit your every needs, okay?
Also, I prefer it if you just ignored me, at least I won't have to feel the obligation to reply to another message in such a long length. I feel not replying would be ruder than my current blunt tone.
Well, as a female that roleplays a man sometimes. I think its fun exploring the other sex, at least in a mental capacity. I mean, I remember a few years ago where I would only play female characters, and then I thought to myself 'I wonder what this would be like if I played it as a dude.'
Research, eg Chivers et. al, has shown that women are, on average, sexually bi-curious to a greater degree than men. This fact helps explain why women are, again to a greater degree, capable of getting into homosexual romances, even when they themselves are straight, while the opposite is not necessarily the case for men. Hence, it is from men that we normally see the sort of vehement opposition to LGBT options that appear on these and Bioware's boards. Of course, that doesn't make it correct.
It is also the case that the appeal of BGEE, in a lot of ways, is the new content. Thus, bringing up the imbalance in BG 2 is not going to sway minds, because that's not what the bulk of people are paying for.
To this end, I think the argument comes down to this: does past imbalance justify future imbalance in the other direction? For this logic, I think, is at the heart of the problem. Given that discrimination against female gamers is wrong, is discrimination against male gamers therefore the proper way to redress the issue?
I think a great many of the enchancements have approached it from the perspective of fixing "holes" in the original games. Clubs and spears were underrepresented in BG1, so Overhaul added some useful ones. There was no Wild Mage companion, so Neera was conjured up. There was no Monk companion, so Rasaad weighs in. We had no half-orc companions, so Dorn was provided. There are not enough evil characters in BG2 and there is no pure-class Thief, so in comes Hexxat.
There were no queer options, so now we have Dorn and Hexxat.
Maybe you should ask yourself why you're so comfy roleplaying as a female? Tell me what you get since I have been so kind as to tell you what I think.
Sure. I play females about 2/3 of the time (current BG games: male LG human cavalier romancing Neera, female CE elven RDD romance not certain).
I do so for a bunch of reasons - I like my characters to challenge the status quo (and in most games, males-doing-almost-everything is the status quo), in a lot of games you can make more interesting-looking characters if they're female (male hairstyles tend to be boring in a lot of games, for instance), and a lot of my favourite characters in fiction since childhood have been female and they inspire a lot of the characters I create.
I'm still hetero. Still male. Play guys sometimes too. It doesn't bother me, because it is not more of a stretch playing as a girl than it is playing as a century-old elf. In fact, it's a lot less of a stretch, because a human girl is more mentally like you than a century-old elf ever could be.
Yet it is an example that easily illustrates the issue. Of course, you are correct to say that playing a different character isn't equivalent to playing a different genre of games. But given how important story and character interaction is in these sorts of games, is it that insane to think that people won't enjoy the same sorts of stories and interactions?
That's why there are a variety of stories and interactions available, for the variety of tastes of those who play it.
Is it that insane the bulk of men aren't able to enjoy harlequin romance novels the same way women do?
What is insane is that you use harlequin romance novels as an example of something you apparently think the bulk of women enjoy. You might as well say that the bulk of women don't enjoy professional wrestling the way men do.
(Incidentally, I and my spouse watch wrestling, so that example isn't pejorative.)
The discrimination, I think, has to do with the *amount* of new content available, and not with whether content is accessible to all. What I find problematic is not whether developers are fair to all tastes - because ultimately, no game is capable of satisfying everybody - but when arguments of past discrimination are used to justify future discrimination, which is what a lot of posters were/are doing.
What is also insane is that you continue to think that adding a single lesbian romance is "discrimination", of any sort, ever.
The game added a new heteronormative female romantic interest in Neera - is that discrimination too?
@Ayiekie I'm glad you can do that. However I can't. My identity as a male is probably something too harshly ingrained in me. In addition, I mostly roleplay as a human male. Sometimes I'll go half-elf or full elf because they're so similar to humans I can still roleplay as one.
I simply can't immerse myself as a woman, it's one less similarity than I need. For example, a human female might be more like me than a century old elf, but not so similar as a human male. If I want to roleplay an orc, a female orc is one step farther in the less immersive direction. [you can't be a century old elf in this game. I think the age is the same for all characters at the start. ]
@Ayiekie I'm glad you can do that. However I can't. My identity as a male is probably something too harshly ingrained in me. In addition, I mostly roleplay as a human male. Sometimes I'll go half-elf or full elf because they're so similar to humans I can still roleplay as one.
D&D elves aren't very similar to humans at all, really. And being a half-elf is also pretty likely to be very far from any experience you've had, unless you yourself are of mixed-race heritage and have suffered discrimination from both "sides" for this (which is of course possible). Even then you're not going to be able to empathise with the longer lifespan, magical nature, the sort of societies they're torn between and so forth.
I simply can't immerse myself as a woman, it's one less similarity than I need. For example, a human female might be more like me than a century old elf, but not so similar as a human male.
But you CAN be an elf, so why not a human female, which is, as you've acknowledged, closer to you than an elf.
The question is rhetorical, of course. I know the problem here, and I know it's a common problem for a lot of guys. When I was much younger, I had the same trouble, so believe it or not I know where you're coming from. But if you wanted to, you can get over that, and once you start thinking about female humans as being "humans, who happen to be female", you'll find it easy and immersive to roleplay as one.
If I want to roleplay an orc, a female orc is one step farther in the less immersive direction. [you can't be a century old elf in this game. I think the age is the same for all characters at the start. ]
That actually violates the rules of D&D, though. You can't really be a 20-year-old elf at the beginning of the game and do anything, because elves aren't adults until they're 120 - and even if you think being Bhaalspawn speeds aging to human norms (why? Bhaal isn't human), it's inconceivable nobody noticed how odd that was, including the PC.
Sersafir, you're wasting your breath. People like Ayiekie will never understand. I'm like you, I've tried to play female characters, but I just can't detach myself from the character enough so it begins to feel strange. I feel the same when playing evil characters as well at times, and I always choose human male as well..
People roleplay differently. Some people invest a portion of their own Self into their characters, whilst others are strictly hands off, letting the characters take on their own aspect. We are the former, and people like Ayiekie are likely the latter.
Ignorant dumbasses will attempt to label me as a homophobe, but not once in this entire thread have I said that I was against S/S romances. I only wanted Hexxat to be available for male PCs as well as female.
@ayiekie You know what I mean. Similar in appearance.
What is the problem here then? That I don't like to step out of my gender identity?
Honestly? It's that I don't think you're actually homophobic or misogynist, and that you could not only do it if you wanted to, but someday you'd feel it was awfully silly that you think right now that doing it was difficult and uncomfortable.
You don't have to, of course, and I don't really think you'll listen to me. But I actually do hope one day you'll say to yourself, "Well, if I can play an elf, I'm sure I can play a girl, and no matter who I romance in a video game, it doesn't change who I am in real life. In fact, it might be fun to see things from a different perspective".
People roleplay differently. Some people invest a portion of their own Self into their characters, whilst others are strictly hands off, letting the characters take on their own aspect. We are the former, and people like Ayiekie are likely the latter.
You're incorrect there, actually. If I'm roleplaying, I generally do put some of myself into a character. It just isn't necessarily my gender that I'm putting in, because my gender (or for that matter my sexuality) is not the entirety of who I am.
This whole thread shows how stupid it was to limit her to female romance. Those who in fact defend that OTHER SINGLEPLAYERS should not get the most fun out of their male npcs does not really care one way or the other. They wont remember that beamdog robbed them of their fun. We sadly will.
To be honest, I think this thread justifies making her purely lesbian, as I said before.
Besides which, Beamdog didn't make her purely homosexual to spite male charnames; they did it because (at least some of them) are opposed to "player-sexual" romances and prefer to write characters who have reasonably well-defined sexualities, as people in real life do. Dorn is bisexual because he's bisexual, not because he's player-sexual. The same goes for Hexxat... or for that matter, Neera and Rasaad.
While I might disagree with that viewpoint on a wide scale (primarily due to pragmatism), I'm not going to argue with their artistic vision of the character they created.
There are five romances available to men in BGII:EE. There are four romances available to women. One of those male romances is with a man, and one of the female romances is with a woman.
Do you know how much recognition and attention lesbian gamers get in games? Virtually none. And yet, there are quite a few of them - passionate, intelligent gamers who are just as deserving of content as anyone else. Gay men, for example, get far more content than lesbian women -- and we really don't get a lot. What little lesbian content is in games is usually targeted at white, heterosexual men.
Not everything is about money. Stating that just because "straight males" are the majority of gamers (which is quickly becoming untrue, by the way), does not mean straight males are "entitled" to an extra romance -- there are already four romances available for straight males.
I am going to let this thread stay open, but if I see any further homophobic remarks in this thread, it will be closed.
people are taking this romance thing too seriously. What do you rub one out in bed thinking of romance on this game? Calm down about this, it doesn't matter. If it's a lesbian character it's a lesbian character, probably has dialogue options that are specific to that as well. No reason to be butthurt about nothing.
There are five romances available to men in BGII:EE. There are three romances available to women. One of those male romances is with a man, and one of the female romances is with a woman.
Female->Dorn, Anomen, Rasaad, and Hexxat. If you include the fifth on men, you gotta include the fourth on women.
Do you know how much recognition and attention lesbian gamers get in games? Virtually none. And yet, there are quite a few of them - passionate, intelligent gamers who are just as deserving of content as anyone else. Gay men, for example, get far more content than lesbian women -- and we really don't get a lot. What little lesbian content is in games is usually targeted at white, heterosexual men.
That's because games have a capitalist bias. The heterosexual male is the most represented in gaming because the hetero male buys the largest volume of games. I'm not saying they don't deserve content at all. I'm simply upset at the lack of *additional* content for guys like me.
Not everything is about money. Stating that just because "straight males" are the majority of gamers (which is quickly becoming untrue, by the way), does not mean straight males are "entitled" to an extra romance -- there are already four romances available for straight males.
Quickly becoming untrue? Yes, I know women are becoming a larger audience. But to say they're quickly replacing men is a bit of a misstatement. Even assuming they were outnumbering us in small apps, dnd still maintains a dominant male audience. On the subject of romances. There were three before the Enhancement, and four after. Meaning if you didn't like one improvement, you got nothing. Women had 2 times as much enhancements geared toward them here.
Hey, maybe I am acting over-entitled. But I am the largest audience here and thus beamdog owes most of its ability to fund this game thanks to guys like me. I'm not saying any other audience was not involved. But if you somehow got all straight men to lose interest in this game, it would never profit. And I feel that there could have been more improvements for us guys on this matter. That's all I've been trying to say.
There are five romances available to men in BGII:EE. There are three romances available to women. One of those male romances is with a man, and one of the female romances is with a woman.
Female->Dorn, Anomen, Rasaad, and Hexxat.
Sorry, my mistake! It's been a long day. Edited in my post.
That's because games have a capitalist bias. The heterosexual male is the most represented in gaming because the hetero male buys the largest volume of games. I'm not saying they don't deserve content at all. I'm simply upset at the lack of content for guys like me.
But there isn't a lack of content for straight males. The game already offered three. If we were making an entirely new game, we probably would have done things differently -- but BGII:EE already has three romances for straight guys.
Quickly becoming untrue? Yes, I know women are becoming a larger audience. But to say they're quickly replacing men is a bit of a misstatement. Even assuming they were outnumbering us in small apps, dnd still maintains a dominant male audience. On the subject of romances. There were three before the Enhancement, and four after. Meaning if you didn't like one improvement, you got nothing. Women had 2 times as much enhancements geared toward them here.
Hey, maybe I am acting over-entitled. But I am the largest audience here and thus beamdog owes most of its ability to fund this game thanks to guys like me. I'm not saying any other audience was not involved. But if you somehow got all straight men to lose interest in this game, it would never profit. And I feel that there could have been more improvements for us guys on this matter. That's all I've been trying to say.
I didn't say they were going to outnumber men, just that straight men are soon no longer going to be the majority. Gay gamers are a group with quickly rising numbers as well.
We believe in diversity, and that diversity makes good games. Appealing to the straight, white male demographic is not the only way to make money. And straight, white men have plenty of content geared specifically to them, in BGII and in many other games. Hexxat's and Dorn's romances are a very small nod to the LGBT community in the scheme of things.
It's difficult to understand what this means to many gay and lesbian gamers, because most people have little to compare it to. I play many games, and none of the content even acknowleges me -- and I'm absolutely cool with that, because you know what? You are absolutely right. Straight men *are* a majority. But does it really hurt you if -- for one game -- there's a little attention paid to a minority that very rarely gets any attention at all?
@liamEsler I never wanted it to turn into a flamewar.
but BGII:EE already has three romances for straight guys.
You read the numbers wrong again. Four.
Straight men *are* a majority. But does it really hurt you if -- for one game -- there's a little attention paid to a minority that very rarely gets any attention at all?
I'm really not even very upset. I'm just a little dissapointed.
You are right here: I agree gay and lesbians deserve more representation. It's not like this is a game breaker for me. I will most likely end up buying it when the bugs get fixed, and mods are made for it too. So, don't get me wrong there. I'm just saying my feelings on the matter. I just wish there was more content, not asking them to take away any from anyone else or anything, for guys like me.
This thread is a mess. What's wrong with having a lesbian character exist? I mean, I'm a bisexual female player and I'm not complaining I can't romance Aerie or Viconia. Oh no! Only heterosexual male characters can romance them. Oh wait. I can create a male character and play through it. The content is for everyone to enjoy. I don't complain about Neera's exclusively heterosexual romance. If you cannot even try to play a female character, then perhaps Hexxat isn't for you because she wouldn't be interested in that sort of hypermasculinity.
I think having romances from all sorts of different types of sexualities in this game creates a lot of interest and contrast. It also makes a much more realistic/immersive game experience. It makes it much more just a facet of their character, instead of the dull everyone is bi meme which isn't so bad when it's done well, but when it's done poorly it's really really awful (lol DA2). Dorn isn't really so much bisexual as attracted to power. Neera, Rasaad, Anomen, Viconia, Jaheira, and Aerie are all heterosexual, but they are attracted to different things about people.
I like that Hexxat is a lesbian, because I know women who are exclusively attracted to women, and it's nice to have them both represented, and also it makes for a more interesting character. Even if she were not a romance option, I love having her in my party because she has an interesting philosophy and personality, and that makes paying for her worth it.
And everyone talking about statistics? Maybe the reason girl and especially gay girl players aren't as obvious on the forums is because of the way so many boys behave and their sense of entitlement and inability to even attempt to fathom what might go on in a woman's mind. I was really shocked by this thread because I thought for some reason that BG fans might be more open minded and inclusive.
I think character is more important than the romances in the game, and if there are romances, they must be ruled by CHARACTER, not just catering to the whims of straight boys. Sometimes, even being a heterosexual male doesn't mean every woman wants to be with you.
This is a ROLE PLAYING GAME. Think about it like this: a player's theoretical heterosexual male human fighter encounters wildly varied individuals over the course of the game. For the same player, the dialogue choices and interactions made for that heterosexual male human fighter are probably going to be completely different than if they rolled another heterosexual male human fighter after that playthrough. Why? Because they come into contact with different NPCs, go to different locations in different orders, have different backstories in the mind of the player, and maybe they use a different kind of sword. It isn't fun to play this game the same way twice, and I'm sure no one does.
So think of it like this: let's put Hexxat in the middle of a room surrounded by four player characters. One is a straight guy, one is a gay guy, another a lesbian, and the last a straight girl. Each of these PCs are going to experience Hexxat differently, and IN ALL FOUR CASES their time with Hexxat is going to shape and enrich their personal growth as a character. No one is losing anything. Hexxat doesn't magically cease to exist to the three she isn't interested in. She's still there, and she's still affecting them.
The straight woman might see her as a friend, but maybe there would be some underlying tension there, too. This is where you use your mind to play a role. Maybe Hexxat thinks she's cute. Maybe she's WORRIED Hexxat thinks she's cute. Maybe she doesn't know Hexxat is gay and is paranoid that she's going to steal Anomen away from her. Mind you, these are all merely romance-specific possibilities. The gay man might see her as a kindred spirit, and they might find strength in each other against heterosexist society. The gay woman could date her, sure. And the straight man? He could react in any way you wanted him to. Maybe he's a homophobe and doesn't want to adventure with her. Maybe he's never met a gay person before, and wants to observe and get to know one. Maybe they bond over their mutual interest in Jaheira.
The point is, you're getting something out of it whether or not you're supposedly incapable of rolling a female character. Even if you don't see the romance content, you're still getting benefit out of knowing her. I'm sure you enjoyed, say, Nalia's friendship in the vanilla game. Your character can't mash genitals with her, but that doesn't make her a non-person. She's still fleshed out. She still contributes to the experience. Open yourself to that.
Just as an aside: it's incredibly unfortunate that the discussion here has reduced Hexxat to a single character trait (her sexuality). There is so much more to her than that. And yeah, I can't romance her with my main PC (both because he's male and because he's only got eyes for Dorn), but she's still a unique, interesting and valuable member of Team Evil.
To be honest, I think this thread justifies making her purely lesbian, as I said before.
Besides which, Beamdog didn't make her purely homosexual to spite male charnames; they did it because (at least some of them) are opposed to "player-sexual" romances and prefer to write characters who have reasonably well-defined sexualities, as people in real life do. Dorn is bisexual because he's bisexual, not because he's player-sexual. The same goes for Hexxat... or for that matter, Neera and Rasaad.
Sorry but that is ridiculous. If the romances were well done and thoroughly implemented, then maybe you'd have a point. However, the romances in BG2 are just a minor prop and pleasant distraction, and play second fiddle to major aspects like the quest, fighting monsters, getting loot, character development etc.
Artificially limiting the romances in that light seems silly and counterproductive to the enjoyment of the game.
Contrast BG2 romances to the Witcher series where romance is a major plot arc and we get to both see, and experience Geralt having a well scripted and fleshed out romance with Triss Merigold, whilst trying to resolve his memory of Yennefer.. That's an actual romance, and the romances in BG2, DAO, DA2, Mass Effect etcetera pale in comparison.
Limiting player romances makes sense in the Witcher series, but not in a game like BG2 where the romances constitute just a few lines of script and are superficial.
I don't see why people are getting so bent out of shape over Hexxat being lesbian. I mean sure, if I was going evil, I'd want to romance her too (I play male characters) but I'm not going to cry over it. I'd do something about it.
Something like... oh I don't know, maybe pick up BG Tweaks and use the romance modifier that lets you romance anyone regardless of race/gender?
ZOMG! PROBLEM FIXED! Now you have 9 romances! WOOO!! You want more content, you just GOT more content.
And if for some reason BG2 Tweaks DOESN'T affect the new NPC's... well I say give it a week, two tops, and it will.
It really is very simple here. The game designers design the game a certain way. You take it as is. Period. If you don't like it, don't buy it, or better yet, MOD IT. That's why mods exist in the first place. Because there's something they didn't like/wanted to add and they set about changing/adding whatever it is they wanted to the game.
Most of it is fan wank, but they're still far better than the people that complain and do nothing.
Comments
Is it that insane the bulk of men aren't able to enjoy harlequin romance novels the same way women do?
The discrimination, I think, has to do with the *amount* of new content available, and not with whether content is accessible to all. What I find problematic is not whether developers are fair to all tastes - because ultimately, no game is capable of satisfying everybody - but when arguments of past discrimination are used to justify future discrimination, which is what a lot of posters were/are doing.
You are also correct in your observation that acting and roleplaying is not for everyone. Actors who can only be themselves won't get hired very often, so they usually find a better suited job, like fire fighter or accountant. It's the similar with games. If you don't like roleplaying, you can just find a better suited game, like a strategy game or a first person shooter. Not all games are roleplaying games, just like not all movies are horror movies. ("Genres" is a keyword if you want to learn more about this!)
Heterosexual male romances are still the majority of what is available, and lots of heterosexual males don't have a problem roleplaying as other genders or orientations in a game. If you can't get over that hump yourself, that's unfortunate, but you still get access to five out of the eight romances.
Statistics? Who actually gives a rat's... About statistics for who and who doesn't play this game?
No, really? I hadn't noticed... Do you really feel the need to point out that most of the gamers are men? Bit hypocritical. However, that really has nothing to do with anything. If Men were Beamdog's biggest concern, again, they wouldn't have given Hexxat and Dorn a single thought. So, their existence, in itself, provides more than enough evidence; Does it not?
Well, given the fact you just pointed out that there's supposedly only "10%" of females who play this game, why else would I believe you think they don't exist - Or rather, are unimportant in your pointers? Oh, because you're hideously self-centered - That's why. Yes, however, your top most concern, apparently, is you. Which is beyond ridiculous. If you want a Game tailored to your every need, go and make one, instead of debating about why the game isn't made to suit your every needs, okay?
Also, I prefer it if you just ignored me, at least I won't have to feel the obligation to reply to another message in such a long length. I feel not replying would be ruder than my current blunt tone.
There were no queer options, so now we have Dorn and Hexxat.
I do so for a bunch of reasons - I like my characters to challenge the status quo (and in most games, males-doing-almost-everything is the status quo), in a lot of games you can make more interesting-looking characters if they're female (male hairstyles tend to be boring in a lot of games, for instance), and a lot of my favourite characters in fiction since childhood have been female and they inspire a lot of the characters I create.
I'm still hetero. Still male. Play guys sometimes too. It doesn't bother me, because it is not more of a stretch playing as a girl than it is playing as a century-old elf. In fact, it's a lot less of a stretch, because a human girl is more mentally like you than a century-old elf ever could be.
Oops, sorry, you got me there, thought i was in the BSN for a moment :DDD
P.S. Chill out folks, it's just a game :]
P.S. @Nic_Mercy yeah, i certainly understood how you felt all those years, but now i can empathise better ;p
(Incidentally, I and my spouse watch wrestling, so that example isn't pejorative.)
What is also insane is that you continue to think that adding a single lesbian romance is "discrimination", of any sort, ever.
The game added a new heteronormative female romantic interest in Neera - is that discrimination too?
I simply can't immerse myself as a woman, it's one less similarity than I need. For example, a human female might be more like me than a century old elf, but not so similar as a human male. If I want to roleplay an orc, a female orc is one step farther in the less immersive direction. [you can't be a century old elf in this game. I think the age is the same for all characters at the start. ]
The question is rhetorical, of course. I know the problem here, and I know it's a common problem for a lot of guys. When I was much younger, I had the same trouble, so believe it or not I know where you're coming from. But if you wanted to, you can get over that, and once you start thinking about female humans as being "humans, who happen to be female", you'll find it easy and immersive to roleplay as one. That actually violates the rules of D&D, though. You can't really be a 20-year-old elf at the beginning of the game and do anything, because elves aren't adults until they're 120 - and even if you think being Bhaalspawn speeds aging to human norms (why? Bhaal isn't human), it's inconceivable nobody noticed how odd that was, including the PC.
People roleplay differently. Some people invest a portion of their own Self into their characters, whilst others are strictly hands off, letting the characters take on their own aspect. We are the former, and people like Ayiekie are likely the latter.
Ignorant dumbasses will attempt to label me as a homophobe, but not once in this entire thread have I said that I was against S/S romances. I only wanted Hexxat to be available for male PCs as well as female.
What is the problem here then? That I don't like to step out of my gender identity?
Also, even if it breaks the rules, so do several characters, (one being Aerie and her class) and it's what happens at the beginning of the game.
You don't have to, of course, and I don't really think you'll listen to me. But I actually do hope one day you'll say to yourself, "Well, if I can play an elf, I'm sure I can play a girl, and no matter who I romance in a video game, it doesn't change who I am in real life. In fact, it might be fun to see things from a different perspective". Actually, IIRC, Avariel can be cleric/mages so she is in fact legal that way.
Besides which, Beamdog didn't make her purely homosexual to spite male charnames; they did it because (at least some of them) are opposed to "player-sexual" romances and prefer to write characters who have reasonably well-defined sexualities, as people in real life do. Dorn is bisexual because he's bisexual, not because he's player-sexual. The same goes for Hexxat... or for that matter, Neera and Rasaad.
While I might disagree with that viewpoint on a wide scale (primarily due to pragmatism), I'm not going to argue with their artistic vision of the character they created.
Do you know how much recognition and attention lesbian gamers get in games? Virtually none. And yet, there are quite a few of them - passionate, intelligent gamers who are just as deserving of content as anyone else. Gay men, for example, get far more content than lesbian women -- and we really don't get a lot. What little lesbian content is in games is usually targeted at white, heterosexual men.
Not everything is about money. Stating that just because "straight males" are the majority of gamers (which is quickly becoming untrue, by the way), does not mean straight males are "entitled" to an extra romance -- there are already four romances available for straight males.
I am going to let this thread stay open, but if I see any further homophobic remarks in this thread, it will be closed.
If you include the fifth on men, you gotta include the fourth on women. That's because games have a capitalist bias. The heterosexual male is the most represented in gaming because the hetero male buys the largest volume of games. I'm not saying they don't deserve content at all. I'm simply upset at the lack of *additional* content for guys like me. Quickly becoming untrue? Yes, I know women are becoming a larger audience. But to say they're quickly replacing men is a bit of a misstatement. Even assuming they were outnumbering us in small apps, dnd still maintains a dominant male audience. On the subject of romances. There were three before the Enhancement, and four after. Meaning if you didn't like one improvement, you got nothing. Women had 2 times as much enhancements geared toward them here.
Hey, maybe I am acting over-entitled. But I am the largest audience here and thus beamdog owes most of its ability to fund this game thanks to guys like me. I'm not saying any other audience was not involved. But if you somehow got all straight men to lose interest in this game, it would never profit. And I feel that there could have been more improvements for us guys on this matter. That's all I've been trying to say.
We believe in diversity, and that diversity makes good games. Appealing to the straight, white male demographic is not the only way to make money.
It's difficult to understand what this means to many gay and lesbian gamers, because most people have little to compare it to. I play many games, and none of the content even acknowleges me -- and I'm absolutely cool with that, because you know what? You are absolutely right. Straight men *are* a majority. But does it really hurt you if -- for one game -- there's a little attention paid to a minority that very rarely gets any attention at all?
You are right here: I agree gay and lesbians deserve more representation. It's not like this is a game breaker for me. I will most likely end up buying it when the bugs get fixed, and mods are made for it too. So, don't get me wrong there. I'm just saying my feelings on the matter. I just wish there was more content, not asking them to take away any from anyone else or anything, for guys like me.
I think having romances from all sorts of different types of sexualities in this game creates a lot of interest and contrast. It also makes a much more realistic/immersive game experience. It makes it much more just a facet of their character, instead of the dull everyone is bi meme which isn't so bad when it's done well, but when it's done poorly it's really really awful (lol DA2). Dorn isn't really so much bisexual as attracted to power. Neera, Rasaad, Anomen, Viconia, Jaheira, and Aerie are all heterosexual, but they are attracted to different things about people.
I like that Hexxat is a lesbian, because I know women who are exclusively attracted to women, and it's nice to have them both represented, and also it makes for a more interesting character. Even if she were not a romance option, I love having her in my party because she has an interesting philosophy and personality, and that makes paying for her worth it.
And everyone talking about statistics? Maybe the reason girl and especially gay girl players aren't as obvious on the forums is because of the way so many boys behave and their sense of entitlement and inability to even attempt to fathom what might go on in a woman's mind. I was really shocked by this thread because I thought for some reason that BG fans might be more open minded and inclusive.
I think character is more important than the romances in the game, and if there are romances, they must be ruled by CHARACTER, not just catering to the whims of straight boys. Sometimes, even being a heterosexual male doesn't mean every woman wants to be with you.
So think of it like this: let's put Hexxat in the middle of a room surrounded by four player characters. One is a straight guy, one is a gay guy, another a lesbian, and the last a straight girl. Each of these PCs are going to experience Hexxat differently, and IN ALL FOUR CASES their time with Hexxat is going to shape and enrich their personal growth as a character. No one is losing anything. Hexxat doesn't magically cease to exist to the three she isn't interested in. She's still there, and she's still affecting them.
The straight woman might see her as a friend, but maybe there would be some underlying tension there, too. This is where you use your mind to play a role. Maybe Hexxat thinks she's cute. Maybe she's WORRIED Hexxat thinks she's cute. Maybe she doesn't know Hexxat is gay and is paranoid that she's going to steal Anomen away from her. Mind you, these are all merely romance-specific possibilities. The gay man might see her as a kindred spirit, and they might find strength in each other against heterosexist society. The gay woman could date her, sure. And the straight man? He could react in any way you wanted him to. Maybe he's a homophobe and doesn't want to adventure with her. Maybe he's never met a gay person before, and wants to observe and get to know one. Maybe they bond over their mutual interest in Jaheira.
The point is, you're getting something out of it whether or not you're supposedly incapable of rolling a female character. Even if you don't see the romance content, you're still getting benefit out of knowing her. I'm sure you enjoyed, say, Nalia's friendship in the vanilla game. Your character can't mash genitals with her, but that doesn't make her a non-person. She's still fleshed out. She still contributes to the experience. Open yourself to that.
Artificially limiting the romances in that light seems silly and counterproductive to the enjoyment of the game.
Contrast BG2 romances to the Witcher series where romance is a major plot arc and we get to both see, and experience Geralt having a well scripted and fleshed out romance with Triss Merigold, whilst trying to resolve his memory of Yennefer.. That's an actual romance, and the romances in BG2, DAO, DA2, Mass Effect etcetera pale in comparison.
Limiting player romances makes sense in the Witcher series, but not in a game like BG2 where the romances constitute just a few lines of script and are superficial.
Something like... oh I don't know, maybe pick up BG Tweaks and use the romance modifier that lets you romance anyone regardless of race/gender?
ZOMG! PROBLEM FIXED! Now you have 9 romances! WOOO!! You want more content, you just GOT more content.
And if for some reason BG2 Tweaks DOESN'T affect the new NPC's... well I say give it a week, two tops, and it will.
It really is very simple here. The game designers design the game a certain way. You take it as is. Period. If you don't like it, don't buy it, or better yet, MOD IT. That's why mods exist in the first place. Because there's something they didn't like/wanted to add and they set about changing/adding whatever it is they wanted to the game.
Most of it is fan wank, but they're still far better than the people that complain and do nothing.