Mass Effect

[2Bad]

I mean I don't think that either drawing hard "this character is gay/straight/whatever" lines is inherently invalid as opposed to just making a giant fuck puddle, but it kinda depends on what you're angling for. Going to the SV example, the relationship stuff IS a major part of the point in Harvest Moon and character depth kind of isn't a thing. An RPG, to my mind anyway, should be more about the characters themselves and less about you fucking them (whether you do or not), so having that determined by the characters rather than the player makes more sense.

IN EITHER CASE, Andromeda having a trans character who deadnames herself in the very first conversation with her is waaaaay more inept than anything else they've done with LGBT+ stuff which is saying a lot

- - - Updated - - -

I want Bioware to make a game where no matter what gender you play as all the potential love interests always reject you and accumulating relationship points only affects how politely they let you down.

Save The Date is SORT of like this

[SeiKeo]

And yet Inquisition had Krem, who people loved, so maybe company not monolith and all that jazz

[2Bad]

And yet Inquisition had Krem, who people loved, so maybe company not monolith and all that jazz

I didn't say it was.

[Seika]

The characters have no agency to "determine" anything about themselves. There is nothing inherently straight or gay about them until the writers decide that how it'll be. It's a nonsense to suggest that rigid sexuality grants greater character depth in any case but one where that sexuality actually meaningfully impinges on the NPC's character development. Which it never does. And it certainly never will for an entire party cast, especially in the BioWare paradigm where we are either progressive space people or free-love fantasy land people.

I also object to the persistent notion from various quarters (yes, Rodyle in this instance, but it's also a typical part of the FANGIRLS conversation I've mentioned before) that the relationships are just about the sex. Yeah, some people want that, and it's unfortunate that places like the official boards have tended to attract them. But for lots of other people it's about the story they want to tell with their PC, or it's about just getting more out of a particular NPC than the non-romance track will get you. Dismissing those people is far from productive.

[Ace]

There's Dorian but other than that yeah I agree

[Seika]

Oops, you're quite right.

[Five_X]

Technically Sebastian, too, more by his lack of being an option for both genders in DA2. And his rather unique chastity as a romance option, I suppose.

[Seika]

Seb's sexuality is meaningful to his character mostly insofar as he used to like it a lot and now doesn't. Whether he preferred women or men or both is of tertiary relevance at best.

[2Bad]

The characters have no agency to "determine" anything about themselves. There is nothing inherently straight or gay about them until the writers decide that how it'll be. It's a nonsense to suggest that rigid sexuality grants greater character depth in any case but one where that sexuality actually meaningfully impinges on the NPC's character development. Which it never does. And it certainly never will for an entire party cast, especially in the BioWare paradigm where we are either progressive space people or free-love fantasy land people.

I should rephrase, ignore the "Depth" bit. It is strange, to me, if one is attempting to write a character as opposed to say, checking a box for marketing (and considering the utter brain drawn Bioware has gone through it is a struggle to give them credit for creative juices), to place something so core a person's identity in the hands of the PC when the character isn't the PC themselves. Does that make sense? Writing it in that fashion makes it harder for me to read your character as a distinct result of your creative process rather than something you've created for, yes, pandering to focus groups and whatnot.

Obviously this reading comes in part from the fact I have no faith in Bioware, but frankly why WOULD I?

[Mcjon01]

A game where every character is a focus tested pandering bundle of amorphous sexuality but at the end you were trapped in a Matrix the entire time designed to keep you content and unquestioning of your reality

[2Bad]

A game where every character is a focus tested pandering bundle of amorphous sexuality but at the end you were trapped in a Matrix the entire time designed to keep you content and unquestioning of your reality

Omikron: The Nomad Soul was pretty bad yeah

[Mattias]

Omikron: The Nomad Soul was pretty bad yeah

Calling it pretty bad is really overestimating it.

[SeiKeo]

It is strange, to me, if one is attempting to write a character as opposed to say, checking a box for marketing (and considering the utter brain drawn Bioware has gone through it is a struggle to give them credit for creative juices), to place something so core a person's identity in the hands of the PC when the character isn't the PC themselves.

I mean, I would have thought the answer to this is obvious - because the primary ideology for Bioware School Game Design is that roleplaying is the sum of choices, not 'writing the character.' They themselves are tools to the higher goal of allowing player actualization by letting the player choose how to interact with them.

[2Bad]

And that thought pattern is a problem, because it reduces the character by turning them into a mere accessory of the PC. Which is not to say that all Bioware characters fall into that trap, they don't, but many of them have little more to them than "we needed someone here for X group to fuck." The gay dude in ME3 is maybe the worst example as far as that series goes.

[Five_X]

And that thought pattern is a problem, because it reduces the character by turning them into a mere accessory of the PC. Which is not to say that all Bioware characters fall into that trap, they don't, but many of them have little more to them than "we needed someone here for X group to fuck." The gay dude in ME3 is maybe the worst example as far as that series goes.

But... STEVE!!

[Ace]

I should rephrase, ignore the "Depth" bit. It is strange, to me, if one is attempting to write a character as opposed to say, checking a box for marketing (and considering the utter brain drawn Bioware has gone through it is a struggle to give them credit for creative juices), to place something so core a person's identity in the hands of the PC when the character isn't the PC themselves. Does that make sense? Writing it in that fashion makes it harder for me to read your character as a distinct result of your creative process rather than something you've created for, yes, pandering to focus groups and whatnot.

Obviously this reading comes in part from the fact I have no faith in Bioware, but frankly why WOULD I?

Is being able to romance them as either gender really putting their sexuality in the player's hand? They'd just be bi/pan regardless of whether the player romances them or not

[I3uster]

the real problem is western gamers not being able to come out as liking waifu game

dont be ashamed friends

its nice here

[SeiKeo]

You see, I need my waifus to be deep and complex characters, their own people.

[I3uster]

I don't even want to be the JRPG guy because I don't play those but the difference in conversational tone is quite staggering when talking about pandering conducted by a WRPG dev and their non-W cousins and it's always fun to point out, for friends.

[Mcjon01]

I hope in the future video games become cute AIs that scan my brain and tell me whatever I want to hear.