Furthermore, the RPG genre really does not need any more outlets for sex-starved, lesbian-loving men.
Seriously? Did you ever consider that maybe some ACTUAL lesbians love this game and would like the possibility of having a romance just like everyone else? Like me and a few others on this very board who will once again be left out completely?
It's very hurtful when people automatically dismiss lesbian or bisexual characters as only "outlets for sex-starved, lesbian-loving men". I hear it all the time. It may not have been your intention, but it gives the strong impression that we are not considered actual gamers. Much like how some people subconsciously dismiss female gamers when they say why would you choose female except to stare at your character's butt?
Well, let me tell you something. I guarantee you that the people who most wanted a same-sex female option are NOT straight men. Straight men already have an option, as they have in every single game where you can choose your gender and have a relationship with someone. But no one seriously suggests that THEIR option shouldn't exist.
Well, let me tell you something. I guarantee you that the people who most wanted a same-sex female option are NOT straight men.
This is where you are wrong. Trust me on this one...
Oh, I don't doubt there are greater numbers of straight men who would go "yeah, if there's a gay option I'd prefer female", but like I said, they're guaranteed their own love interests. A lesbian romance is still just a bonus for them, not the only choice that matches their sexuality.
i'm really, REALLY happy to see one of the male characters is bisexual. i hope for rasaad (i play good parties and do not feel like nurturing a chaotic evil blackguard in my party), but let's wait and see who it really is. precisely because rasaad seems more appropriate could mean he is not bi. you know just for surprises sake.
and @Jalily , i feel your pain, really do. i would be equally disappointed in reversed situation. it is too bad that just some of us get represented, but i hope that will be rectified in bg2:EE. besides, i'll believe it, when i see it. i'm always somewhat skeptical of indirect statements from developers...
@trinit Thanks, just knowing that someone understands makes me feel a little better.
Weirdly enough, when I play as a dude I also prefer to be gay or bi since non-straight protagonists are so rare. Here's to hoping the mystery man has some interesting conflicts with Neera!
@Roller12 you can but it is not the same, obviously. try romance anomen as a dude and watch him address you "my lady". or viconia complementing your manly charms and calling you "male" in a lesbian romance.
since this is ROLE playing game, editing those variables destroys immersion and credibility of the game, because NPC's dialogue denies it. on the other hand- in a game that promotes choice and options, suggesting editing with shadowkeeper is not a solution to a problem, it's more of an inadequate patch. and at far as i noticed, i don't believe @Jalily s complaint was revolving around her inability to use shadowkeeper.
lastly, if neera and "the other male" prove to be dialogue manageable enough, i hope community will bring patches to make the viable alternative for same sex.
just to be clear- a big thanks to developers to present us with a m/m option.
@trinit Exactly! I did that for BG2 and almost every romance dialogue destroyed immersion. Especially Aerie's...you know. O_o
I'm not hopeful about the community modding it - has something like that even come out for the BG2 romances? I know there's a Viconia relationship mod that's been dead for years and that's it.
just to be clear- a big thanks to developers to present us with a m/m option.
I agree, I'm glad the developers included at least this. Now, since Trent Oster did say "one of the three", my only hope is if there is a secret fourth character that has been unannounced for spoiler purposes and...
I agree, I'm glad the developers included at least this. Now, since Trent Oster did say "one of the three", my only hope is if there is a secret fourth character that has been unannounced for spoiler purposes and...
A gal can dream.
According to the devs, we're supposed to get new characters for BG2, so keep your fingers crossed!
@Fake_Sketch i agree. that's why i was talking about mods-an optional install that may modify a game to be more to your liking, because you are not bothered by the inconsistencies with canon.
no option in cannon itself is a different matter. and no option to modify canon (aka. mod it) is even worse.
@Fake_Sketch It's cool. I don't think most people are malicious when they say these things.
About realism and characters staying out of reach, keep in mind that the vast majority of joinable NPCs, let alone regular NPCs, are out of reach for everybody. I don't think it's unreasonable for this tiny group of people in the whole world to be attracted to the main character, especially when it's not unusual for LGBT people to be drawn to each other in real life. Also, the reality of game development means that for gay people, it's usually either date a bisexual person or have no one because few developers will spend the resources to create a romance just for us.
If you want most characters to be out of reach for gay people ('cause let's face it, hardly anyone brings up exclusively gay love interests as a serious possibility), there's also the issue of which. As has been demonstrated in this very thread, if you only have one non-straight NPC, you have to skirt around all sorts of unfortunate implications because you specifically chose this character to be a sexual minority and people will jump to their own conclusions why.
From the players' side, it gets worse. To give a Dragon Age example, I was totally fine with having only one love interest out of four - as long as that love interest was Morrigan. Whoops. If the straight woman had been Leliana, it wouldn't have bothered me nearly as much, which brings me to my point:
Many things that sound totally sensible from a logic and realism standpoint break down when they don't take into account obvious differences in playstyle and player preferences. For example, in Oblivion, different genders are slightly better at different things: males are generally stronger and females better at magic. When I began, I thought this was a decent way to incorporate some realism while making neither gender superior to the other...probably what the developers thought too.
Well, it shouldn't surprise you that I had been planning to be a female mage all along, so I could effectively ignore the differences; they'd never work against me, and in fact I could get a head start by picking the race I already wanted! Then I visited some Oblivion boards and finally saw the obvious: many players wanted to be male mages or female fighters and felt they were being punished for their preferred style. After all, choosing your gender is supposed to be a personal preference and not a calculated gameplay decision.
And romances are a significant part of gameplay, especially when they come with quests and storylines. I do understand wanting to make some characters specifically unavailable so you can't take their romance for granted (that also applies to straight people), but I think they should be turned off by the player's story choices, morality, or propensity to pal around with their enemies. That way, your gameplay decisions really matter but you're free to choose your own identity without worrying about missing large chunks of content.
To sum up my monstrous post, cutting down on same-sex relationships might make sense if you want to make a handful of already exceptional party members accurately represent global statistics for realism in this one regard, but you usually end up with an Anomen situation where the only choice YOU get is not the one you even remotely enjoy.
Um, no offense, but is English not your first language?
Nope I can speak average and read very well but formulation difficult sentences is sometimes hard for me. But i was think it´s understandable, does´t it ?
Also, your comparison makes no sense. Children and animals can not consent. It doesn't matter anyways, it's already in the game for people who want it, whether you like it or not.
And romances are a significant part of gameplay, especially when they come with quests and storylines. I do understand wanting to make some characters specifically unavailable so you can't take their romance for granted (that also applies to straight people), but I think they should be turned off by the player's story choices, morality, or propensity to pal around with their enemies. That way, your gameplay decisions really matter but you're free to choose your own identity without worrying about missing large chunks of content.
To an extent, I think that almost all the NPCs should have the optional full-fledged romance, and at least an option to put that forward to the character so that they can reject you if you're not their type in terms of race/stats/class/alignment or gender. By making NPCs unromancible by either the PC or other NPCs, it kinda communicates that they're not interested in that aspect of their lives, which may be understandable for specific characters, but is unrealistic for the majority of them.
In the old days, they did not make so much romance in the games. Today they make it in every game. They put more and more gay stuff in the games also. Dragon age 1 have 25% men and 33,33% women some are to both sides. Dragon age 2 have 66,67% that are to both sides. Will Dragon age 3 have 100% that are to both sides. I really dont hope that happening. I dont mind if they add 1 gay male & female to a rpg, just that the major part of the npc's are not gays. Make all npc's bi, will only broke the game to pieces...
In the old days, they did not make so much romance in the games. Today they make it in every game. They put more and more gay stuff in the games also.
Where are all these games with overflowing gay content, pray tell? You know Mario and Pokemon are just full of sinful content pushing the gay agenda all the time.
Comments
imho this game really doesn need all this glamorous stuff.
It's very hurtful when people automatically dismiss lesbian or bisexual characters as only "outlets for sex-starved, lesbian-loving men". I hear it all the time. It may not have been your intention, but it gives the strong impression that we are not considered actual gamers. Much like how some people subconsciously dismiss female gamers when they say why would you choose female except to stare at your character's butt?
Well, let me tell you something. I guarantee you that the people who most wanted a same-sex female option are NOT straight men. Straight men already have an option, as they have in every single game where you can choose your gender and have a relationship with someone. But no one seriously suggests that THEIR option shouldn't exist.
and @Jalily , i feel your pain, really do. i would be equally disappointed in reversed situation. it is too bad that just some of us get represented, but i hope that will be rectified in bg2:EE.
besides, i'll believe it, when i see it. i'm always somewhat skeptical of indirect statements from developers...
Weirdly enough, when I play as a dude I also prefer to be gay or bi since non-straight protagonists are so rare. Here's to hoping the mystery man has some interesting conflicts with Neera!
For the record you can always romance any gender/race/animal, just enable the corresponding matchmaking variable in shadowkeeper.
since this is ROLE playing game, editing those variables destroys immersion and credibility of the game, because NPC's dialogue denies it. on the other hand- in a game that promotes choice and options, suggesting editing with shadowkeeper is not a solution to a problem, it's more of an inadequate patch.
and at far as i noticed, i don't believe @Jalily s complaint was revolving around her inability to use shadowkeeper.
lastly, if neera and "the other male" prove to be dialogue manageable enough, i hope community will bring patches to make the viable alternative for same sex.
just to be clear- a big thanks to developers to present us with a m/m option.
I'm not hopeful about the community modding it - has something like that even come out for the BG2 romances? I know there's a Viconia relationship mod that's been dead for years and that's it. I agree, I'm glad the developers included at least this. Now, since Trent Oster did say "one of the three", my only hope is if there is a secret fourth character that has been unannounced for spoiler purposes and...
A gal can dream.
Wow, I actually never thought of that. Although you're not addressing me, I never thought of that and I'm sorry.
@trinit
I don't really like that, if all characters become bi, the game is less realistic, you have to know some people are out of your reach.
no option in cannon itself is a different matter. and no option to modify canon (aka. mod it) is even worse.
About realism and characters staying out of reach, keep in mind that the vast majority of joinable NPCs, let alone regular NPCs, are out of reach for everybody. I don't think it's unreasonable for this tiny group of people in the whole world to be attracted to the main character, especially when it's not unusual for LGBT people to be drawn to each other in real life. Also, the reality of game development means that for gay people, it's usually either date a bisexual person or have no one because few developers will spend the resources to create a romance just for us.
If you want most characters to be out of reach for gay people ('cause let's face it, hardly anyone brings up exclusively gay love interests as a serious possibility), there's also the issue of which. As has been demonstrated in this very thread, if you only have one non-straight NPC, you have to skirt around all sorts of unfortunate implications because you specifically chose this character to be a sexual minority and people will jump to their own conclusions why.
From the players' side, it gets worse. To give a Dragon Age example, I was totally fine with having only one love interest out of four - as long as that love interest was Morrigan. Whoops. If the straight woman had been Leliana, it wouldn't have bothered me nearly as much, which brings me to my point:
Many things that sound totally sensible from a logic and realism standpoint break down when they don't take into account obvious differences in playstyle and player preferences. For example, in Oblivion, different genders are slightly better at different things: males are generally stronger and females better at magic. When I began, I thought this was a decent way to incorporate some realism while making neither gender superior to the other...probably what the developers thought too.
Well, it shouldn't surprise you that I had been planning to be a female mage all along, so I could effectively ignore the differences; they'd never work against me, and in fact I could get a head start by picking the race I already wanted! Then I visited some Oblivion boards and finally saw the obvious: many players wanted to be male mages or female fighters and felt they were being punished for their preferred style. After all, choosing your gender is supposed to be a personal preference and not a calculated gameplay decision.
And romances are a significant part of gameplay, especially when they come with quests and storylines. I do understand wanting to make some characters specifically unavailable so you can't take their romance for granted (that also applies to straight people), but I think they should be turned off by the player's story choices, morality, or propensity to pal around with their enemies. That way, your gameplay decisions really matter but you're free to choose your own identity without worrying about missing large chunks of content.
To sum up my monstrous post, cutting down on same-sex relationships might make sense if you want to make a handful of already exceptional party members accurately represent global statistics for realism in this one regard, but you usually end up with an Anomen situation where the only choice YOU get is not the one you even remotely enjoy. Fable, Temple of Elemental Evil, and Bully off the top of my head. *crosses fingers*
I can speak average and read very well but formulation difficult sentences is sometimes hard for me.
But i was think it´s understandable, does´t it ?
Also, your comparison makes no sense. Children and animals can not consent. It doesn't matter anyways, it's already in the game for people who want it, whether you like it or not.
Today quantity always defeat quality :-(
But games like Baldurs Gate, Planescape Torment, Arcanum and others legendary RPG was from golden era. In that times was quality above all.
I miss that good old days...
Mému rodnému jazyku by jsi vůbec nerozuměl, protože čeština je neuvěřitelně težká na naučení.
It is my Czech language :-)
We live in truly sad age...