Thanks. When heard that there will be gay romance option I was certain that in second decade of XXI century it can't be that they leave either gender behind, so I was very happy for the thought of playing the game once more, this time the way I always wanted to. But unfortunately they continue BG tradition of discriminating women on the romance area. At least I don't have to bother anymore about it, because certainly I won't support with my money people who treat women like me as second class players.
Well, that's really your decision, but I think its unfair that you equate the lack of a female same sex romance to "treating women like you as second class players". More so when they intend to add that option in the future (not sure in BGEE).
Its not possible to cater to every single group of players out there, and I really disagree with something like that being mandatory.
Well, that's really your decision, but I think its unfair that you equate the lack of a female same sex romance to "treating women like you as second class players". More so when they intend to add that option in the future (not sure in BGEE).
Its not possible to cater to every single group of players out there, and I really disagree with something like that being mandatory.
I'll just repeat my words from other thread:
They had time for straight romances. They even had time for gay male romance. That gay male romance contains probably only some small changes to straight one (as the character is bi), and they didn't even bother to do just that for lesbian players. All that was needed is some small changes in the dialogue. It tells all about their priorities - on the romance area, it was possible for them to cater to every single group of players - except for lesbian players.
Whatever the reason is, I am in far worse position than straight of both genders or gay male players - I'm left with absolutely nothing, the game won't acknowledge my existence, so please don't take away from me the right to call it as treating the women like me as second class players.
Didn´t they already hint at a female character that will be a full girl on girl romance in BG2:EE and might even turn up sooner in a DLC for BG:EE ? I think that some time ago I saw a tweet or a post here stating that, but I am not completly sure about it.
Anyway as far as we know BG:EE does not feature a full romance, only small flirtations that might bloom into full romances in the second game.
Well, you do have the right to call it "treating women like you as second class players" but in the same measure I also have the right to point out how unfair it is that if a developer doesn't cater to every single minority that they get slandered and accused of unfair treatment.
@ami don't fool yourself, lesbian romance is something that people want, straight males want them a lot as bissexual and lesbian womans also, there's a huge group of people who want lesbian romances (i'm included, i want A LOT it) so isn't a question of prejudice but an tactic to avoid people make comparison of a lesbian romance to sexism.
If the first homossexual romance was presented as an lesbian romance, the most probally course of action would be A LOT of people saying that the romance wasn't made to benefit a minority but to fulfill a fetish of all the straight mans that play the game.
What are you talking about? The Baldur's Gate novels are official Forgotten Realms novels that are considered canon.
I ask you the same question. What are you talking about? BG novels are fan made contents, they're not produced by the Wizard of the Coast in any way. If i'm wrong please point a link for the BG novel supported by WotC, an wiki link by the way can speak about the novel but do not legit it in anyway. I'm not saying that the novel is right or wrong but that's just the view of a fan of the game.
@Tanthalas are his novels supported by Wizard of the Coast? I saw that he's an employee of WotC but i don't saw any WotC logo on the book or any company logo at all (unlike in the game boxes).
You guys may disagree, but those books were terrible. I refuse to recognize them as cannon. (Though apparently they are.)
I'm not saying that to have any reflection on the topic at hand, I just had to throw that off-topic in there because, as I said, I was not a fan. More to the point, as a software developer myself, yeah I do hate it when a user says I HAVE to put something in, but to an extent you get used to requests if they're polite. You're usually creating software for more than just yourself, so you try and keep control of your vision and it invariably will be modified for profit margin. Which in cases like this, isn't always bad, if there's time and its done right. With everyone requesting this kind of thing, I'm sure the devs have heard and are considering how to put it in, post release, if only to broaden interest in the game. (One would hope or more reason than that, but at the end of the day, if all else fails, money talks and horse-pockey walks.)
EDIT: I say post release, only because they seem to feel somewhat strapped with all the testing they're doing, so I doubt they'll throw in something in half done or something. That'd probably offend more people than not putting it in till its done would.
Rheios, about the novels, I think we agree that they are horrible but sadly that does not change the fact that they are regarded canon by WotC and thus they are offical realmslore *shudders*. (I do not regard them either canon though, no matter what WotC says)
I only regard the one vague paragraph in Grand History of the Realms as cannon, all the other details I choose to ignore as they will never be referenced in other realms novels.
@ami Don't worry, the lead writer has confirmed that a lesbian romance will be arriving soon after the game is released. I know, I felt just as horribly disappointed when I learned what you just learned, but the devs haven't completely forgotten about us.
@Tanthalas If you cater to one group of players and not another, the second group is gettiing second-class treatment. You can give various justifications for why this is okay, desirable, or even unavoidable in some cases, but it doesn't change the fact that you're prioritizing some groups over others. And the others are going to feel like they're getting second-class treatment, because they are.
Now, in this case, I actually think the biggest problem is communication. When the devs announced that all three NPCs were romanceable, it gave people like me hope. It's extremely rare to see a game in the first place where 1) you can play as a (non-sexualized!) female, 2) you can choose your love interest, and 3) it's known that love interests of both genders will be included. And with the announcement, it was clear that the devs were rectifying the lack of romances for female characters! No gender restrictions were mentioned! It's 2012! Can you blame us for getting excited?
Unfortunately, this hope became torture when Trent tweeted that only one NPC would be open to a same-sex romance. It was casually dashed to pieces in the AMAA. The lack of good communication, of even briefly looking at it from our perspective and thinking "Hm, I wonder how they would feel if I said it like this?" strongly gave the impression that they did not care. Not that they just ran out of time. Once Dave responded to me, I felt much better.
Which brings me to my final point: I think the negative feelings from this revelation would be greatly lessened had Overhaul clearly announced the restrictions from the start instead of leaving them, perhaps unintentionally, as a nasty surprise. This goes for more than just gay or lesbian romances—a lot of people want to know if shorties can have a romance, and Overhaul still hasn't advertised Dorn and Rasaad's romance potential on their character pages like they did with Neera. New forum members never stop asking...
@Jalily BGEE won't have a Portuguese PT translation, only a Portuguese BR translation, does that mean that gamers from Portugal are getting second-class treatment? I don't view it as second-class treament because I know that game developers can't realistically cater to everyone.
Unfortunately, yes. English-speakers like me usually get first-class status as the majority or plurality and can practically take support for granted. The possibility that my language could be dropped before another is something I've never had to worry about. I wouldn't presume to tell someone who primarily speaks a different language that they're treated equally in this regard.
That's what I mean by second-class treatment. Not that the devs are neglecting people out of some weird desire to specifically exclude them—far from it, I've already said that leaving people out could be justified as unavoidable. I'm talking about the feeling of constantly having to wait in the back of the line because you're not as important as the players the devs are prioritizing for whatever reason.
In this case, three heterosexual romances were judged to be more important than even a single option for lesbians. It's not just BGEE; the same thing happens over and over again in other games and industries, with either gay men or lesbians or both getting no acknowledgement that we even exist (I'm not talking full-on romances, just incidental characters who, let's say, happen to have a husband instead of a wife or vice versa). I really appreciate the fact that Overhaul hasn't completely forgotten us, but let's face it, we're second-class gamers who only get content after most other people have gotten theirs in spades.
As @Tanthalas said, it's impossible to cover all the holes, and the more you try, the worst will be with the people that didn't get their interests covered.
Seriously though, I'm not that upset anymore because I know we're getting something. I just wish Overhaul had told us sooner! I hope @ami reconsiders the game once the DLC is out.
Many groups will be neglected with the pass of time, we can't support everyone, but believe when i say that Lesbians have nothing to worry, as you have the full backup of the whole straight naugthy male support. Maybe one too religious here, or another with a too closed mind there will not support, but serious, lesbian romances probally has the same level of interest or even a greater level of interest than any straight romances.
I think @Shandyr nailed it. I'm using second-class to mean whenever members of a group are consistently treated worse for whatever reason and, as a result, effectively end up in a "second class" when it comes to content if not consideration. BG2 romances, anyone? :P
Regarding unavoidability, I think the way communications went, at least initially, was completely avoidable. Non-straight players clearly weren't given much thought there.
@Tanthalas If we're using different definitions, let's chalk this one up to a misunderstanding and move on. The last thing anyone needs is another semantics argument.
I don't know that it's coming from a refusal to acknowledge lesbians, @Jalily. I think a lot of developers are afraid to pursue same-sex female relationships specifically because the "typical gamer" is young males who would probably get the wrong impression, or choose to view it in the worst light imaginable, as @kamuizin mentioned.
I agree that it's a mindset that needs changing, but on a subconscious level I think that's probably the reason for it. I notice it occasionally in my own writing; I'm more likely to write a same-sex male couple than a same-sex female one, because I don't want my audience to be thinking about lesbians kissing when they're supposed to be thinking about how important these two characters are to each other. On the occasions where I have written a same-sex female couple, it ended up being cautious and disjointed for that very reason.
Part of it is because I myself am a straight male, and as much as I fancy myself an advocate of human rights and equality, there's always going to be that sliver of my limbic center that "wants to see two girls doing it", and not because he believes that love transcends gender.
The difference is in the fetish @Shandyr, you're using logic in something that reject logic in all it's forms.
I have some desires toward Megan Fox for example, i had an huge attraction toward Sandra Bullock in my childhood (i have it yet by the way), and i feel some attraction for a lot of girls that i know it's almost impossible to get, be in reason of opportunity or distance and sometimes even in reason of money, yet i feel attraction.
When i see 2 lesbian girls togheter i can't help but imagine myself with them in a menage, it's pretty much like roleplay in fact, it's not what can happen or not but what is in your mind that counts.
In reason of the structure of the society, womans are much more open to bissexuality than males, prejudice is normally reduced among them (be the woman straight or lesbian), so correct if i'm wrong but lesbians normally don't see the spent of time with a guy as disgusting normally, just disinterested. The disgust concept comes from society prejudice, it don't come as an natural behavior.
All that having been said, it's still not an excuse. Just an explanation. Knowing why we do something is a big step toward making sure we don't do it again. Just as there need to be more female characters in general in video games (and entertainment as a whole), there needs to be a stronger coalition to make sure that those demographics (straight, bi, or gay) are represented in the same force as male demographics (straight, bi, or gay).
That's why almost everything I've ever written has included some form of alternative sexuality, and that's why my first BG mod will be for a believably bisexual (not merely a switch in pronoun language) female character.
So we will kill variation and diversity for the sake of filling quotas, so we can avoid the rage of the minority? I don't think so.
This solution make the focus of a well wrote plot to be lost in favor of political behavior, i don't like that and i will not support that. Intelectual creations shouldn't be bound to political behavior interests.
Comments
Thanks. When heard that there will be gay romance option I was certain that in second decade of XXI century it can't be that they leave either gender behind, so I was very happy for the thought of playing the game once more, this time the way I always wanted to. But unfortunately they continue BG tradition of discriminating women on the romance area. At least I don't have to bother anymore about it, because certainly I won't support with my money people who treat women like me as second class players.
Well, that's really your decision, but I think its unfair that you equate the lack of a female same sex romance to "treating women like you as second class players". More so when they intend to add that option in the future (not sure in BGEE).
Its not possible to cater to every single group of players out there, and I really disagree with something like that being mandatory.
They had time for straight romances. They even had time for gay male romance. That gay male romance contains probably only some small changes to straight one (as the character is bi), and they didn't even bother to do just that for lesbian players. All that was needed is some small changes in the dialogue.
It tells all about their priorities - on the romance area, it was possible for them to cater to every single group of players - except for lesbian players.
Whatever the reason is, I am in far worse position than straight of both genders or gay male players - I'm left with absolutely nothing, the game won't acknowledge my existence, so please don't take away from me the right to call it as treating the women like me as second class players.
I think that some time ago I saw a tweet or a post here stating that, but I am not completly sure about it.
Anyway as far as we know BG:EE does not feature a full romance, only small flirtations that might bloom into full romances in the second game.
Well, you do have the right to call it "treating women like you as second class players" but in the same measure I also have the right to point out how unfair it is that if a developer doesn't cater to every single minority that they get slandered and accused of unfair treatment.
If the first homossexual romance was presented as an lesbian romance, the most probally course of action would be A LOT of people saying that the romance wasn't made to benefit a minority but to fulfill a fetish of all the straight mans that play the game. I ask you the same question. What are you talking about? BG novels are fan made contents, they're not produced by the Wizard of the Coast in any way. If i'm wrong please point a link for the BG novel supported by WotC, an wiki link by the way can speak about the novel but do not legit it in anyway. I'm not saying that the novel is right or wrong but that's just the view of a fan of the game.
http://www.amazon.com/Baldurs-Gate-Novelization-Philip-Athans/dp/0786915250/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1351886730&sr=1-1&keywords=Baldur's+Gate
They exist, but people tend to hate them because they change a lot of stuff from the game.
WotC's logo doesn't usually appear on the covers of novels:
http://www.amazon.com/Elminster-Enraged-Shadowdale-Forgotten-Realms/dp/0786960299/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1351891353&sr=1-1&keywords=elminster+enraged
But it has the Forgotten Realms logo, so yeah, it is supported by WotC.
I'm not saying that to have any reflection on the topic at hand, I just had to throw that off-topic in there because, as I said, I was not a fan.
More to the point, as a software developer myself, yeah I do hate it when a user says I HAVE to put something in, but to an extent you get used to requests if they're polite. You're usually creating software for more than just yourself, so you try and keep control of your vision and it invariably will be modified for profit margin. Which in cases like this, isn't always bad, if there's time and its done right. With everyone requesting this kind of thing, I'm sure the devs have heard and are considering how to put it in, post release, if only to broaden interest in the game. (One would hope or more reason than that, but at the end of the day, if all else fails, money talks and horse-pockey walks.)
EDIT: I say post release, only because they seem to feel somewhat strapped with all the testing they're doing, so I doubt they'll throw in something in half done or something. That'd probably offend more people than not putting it in till its done would.
@Tanthalas If you cater to one group of players and not another, the second group is gettiing second-class treatment. You can give various justifications for why this is okay, desirable, or even unavoidable in some cases, but it doesn't change the fact that you're prioritizing some groups over others. And the others are going to feel like they're getting second-class treatment, because they are.
Now, in this case, I actually think the biggest problem is communication. When the devs announced that all three NPCs were romanceable, it gave people like me hope. It's extremely rare to see a game in the first place where 1) you can play as a (non-sexualized!) female, 2) you can choose your love interest, and 3) it's known that love interests of both genders will be included. And with the announcement, it was clear that the devs were rectifying the lack of romances for female characters! No gender restrictions were mentioned! It's 2012! Can you blame us for getting excited?
Unfortunately, this hope became torture when Trent tweeted that only one NPC would be open to a same-sex romance. It was casually dashed to pieces in the AMAA. The lack of good communication, of even briefly looking at it from our perspective and thinking "Hm, I wonder how they would feel if I said it like this?" strongly gave the impression that they did not care. Not that they just ran out of time. Once Dave responded to me, I felt much better.
Which brings me to my final point: I think the negative feelings from this revelation would be greatly lessened had Overhaul clearly announced the restrictions from the start instead of leaving them, perhaps unintentionally, as a nasty surprise. This goes for more than just gay or lesbian romances—a lot of people want to know if shorties can have a romance, and Overhaul still hasn't advertised Dorn and Rasaad's romance potential on their character pages like they did with Neera. New forum members never stop asking...
That's what I mean by second-class treatment. Not that the devs are neglecting people out of some weird desire to specifically exclude them—far from it, I've already said that leaving people out could be justified as unavoidable. I'm talking about the feeling of constantly having to wait in the back of the line because you're not as important as the players the devs are prioritizing for whatever reason.
In this case, three heterosexual romances were judged to be more important than even a single option for lesbians. It's not just BGEE; the same thing happens over and over again in other games and industries, with either gay men or lesbians or both getting no acknowledgement that we even exist (I'm not talking full-on romances, just incidental characters who, let's say, happen to have a husband instead of a wife or vice versa). I really appreciate the fact that Overhaul hasn't completely forgotten us, but let's face it, we're second-class gamers who only get content after most other people have gotten theirs in spades.
Life in unjust, adapt.
As @Tanthalas said, it's impossible to cover all the holes, and the more you try, the worst will be with the people that didn't get their interests covered.
Seriously though, I'm not that upset anymore because I know we're getting something. I just wish Overhaul had told us sooner! I hope @ami reconsiders the game once the DLC is out.
Regarding unavoidability, I think the way communications went, at least initially, was completely avoidable. Non-straight players clearly weren't given much thought there.
@Tanthalas If we're using different definitions, let's chalk this one up to a misunderstanding and move on. The last thing anyone needs is another semantics argument.
But since the romance for them will be coming shortly too, i think it's ok in the end.
I agree that it's a mindset that needs changing, but on a subconscious level I think that's probably the reason for it. I notice it occasionally in my own writing; I'm more likely to write a same-sex male couple than a same-sex female one, because I don't want my audience to be thinking about lesbians kissing when they're supposed to be thinking about how important these two characters are to each other. On the occasions where I have written a same-sex female couple, it ended up being cautious and disjointed for that very reason.
Part of it is because I myself am a straight male, and as much as I fancy myself an advocate of human rights and equality, there's always going to be that sliver of my limbic center that "wants to see two girls doing it", and not because he believes that love transcends gender.
I have some desires toward Megan Fox for example, i had an huge attraction toward Sandra Bullock in my childhood (i have it yet by the way), and i feel some attraction for a lot of girls that i know it's almost impossible to get, be in reason of opportunity or distance and sometimes even in reason of money, yet i feel attraction.
When i see 2 lesbian girls togheter i can't help but imagine myself with them in a menage, it's pretty much like roleplay in fact, it's not what can happen or not but what is in your mind that counts.
In reason of the structure of the society, womans are much more open to bissexuality than males, prejudice is normally reduced among them (be the woman straight or lesbian), so correct if i'm wrong but lesbians normally don't see the spent of time with a guy as disgusting normally, just disinterested. The disgust concept comes from society prejudice, it don't come as an natural behavior.
That's why almost everything I've ever written has included some form of alternative sexuality, and that's why my first BG mod will be for a believably bisexual (not merely a switch in pronoun language) female character.
This solution make the focus of a well wrote plot to be lost in favor of political behavior, i don't like that and i will not support that. Intelectual creations shouldn't be bound to political behavior interests.