Well, another thread has temporarily popped up in General. Anyone else want to go try and keep it alive and less bile-strewn before the inevitable merge/deletion?

Oh that thread.

I was going to play a little drinking game...take a drink every time someone uses a strawman in that thread.

Luckily, I didn't b/c I would have had alcohol poisoning by the 5th page.

I will admit to a certain fondness to the disingenuous "no really it's that I don't like any romance even though you know I tried and enjoyed a bit of the straight ones but only I should be allowed to do that not you gay gaymos" argument, though. It has a certain subtlety to it that can pull the unwary in, like a reverse form of concern trolling.

I do find that funny, yes.

"Oh, romances are so dumb but I make sure to do them on each toon and click every [Flirt] option available...but they're dumb and you don't need them lolz"

The funny thing is, they are probably helping our cause by doing them. I'm sure BW collects data on such things and by doing romances/using flirts, they are sending a message to BW that these kind of things are used/desired in game.

The trolls are sick of hearing about it?

Aw, their poor delicate sensibilities

Yeah, you'd think they'd stop reading/posting in the threads if that were the case.

As a long-term tabletop gamer, I'd say it would depend on the character I'm playing. Some of them might go for that, others wouldn't.

And I'm done putting my foot in my mouth in that thread in General. Contrary to how it looks in there, I do *not* have a foot fetish lol

Body Type 4, old massively scarred face, well written dialogue. Do you think people would still take the option or do you think people would skip it, as it doesn't gell with the majority of people's mental fantasies of their romances?

Are you attempting to lure people in to say that yes, they do indeed have physical preferences that can affect their choices, then attack them for being shallow and "not following the cause"?

Scarred, Body Type 3/4 female, with an aggressive history of military pursuit and conquest is exactly the kind of woman my Juggernaut would find interesting (but then, I also believe her to be pansexual/polyamorous), however, my Sorcerer would likely not be attracted to a male type 4 and my Agent is more likely to be attracted to 2/3 than 1/4. Scars are irrelevant to me Sorcerer (a previous slave, would you imagine, she is Twi'lek) or my Agent, in spite of his own personal self-loathing and vanity regarding his own scars.

Are you attempting to lure people in to say that yes, they do indeed have physical preferences that can affect their choices, then attack them for being shallow and "not following the cause"?

 

Scarred, Body Type 3/4 female, with an aggressive history of military pursuit and conquest is exactly the kind of woman my Juggernaut would find interesting (but then, I also believe her to be pansexual/polyamorous), however, my Sorcerer would likely not be attracted to a male type 4 and my Agent is more likely to be attracted to 2/3 than 1/4. Scars are irrelevant to me Sorcerer (a previous slave, would you imagine, she is Twi'lek) or my Agent, in spite of his own personal self-loathing and vanity regarding his own scars.

Not at all.

I just hear comments of discrimination, when a lot of it seems to be people wanting the sexy yuri/yaoi fantasy in their head, and using words such as discrimation to try to fight for what they want.

Mind you, I'm not saying this is everyone, just thats how a /majority/ of the posts are coming off to me. But then, they'd deny it even if it was true, since it would look bad.

So the question I'm really curious about, is if it's about having a SGR option and a lack of discrimation or is it about a sexy fantasy? Could be both of course. However, if they went the body type 4 route ugly character, the OMG NO SGR *** DISCRIMINATION crowd would at least have their voices heard, and it would be interresting to see how often the option would be taken.

I'm willing to bet it wouldn't be taken by a majority asking for SGR. I admit this to myself as well, as my SI went for Andy over the oldish IA agent because I was all "Andy is way more sexy" of course, the personality of Andy is a bit suckie I was all "Why can't Andy be less kill everyone and be more like Mako/Vette personality wise" buuuut, I figure the game writers have their favorite companions as well.

Hmn, what was I just saying a few posts back about concern trolling....

Like I said, given the popularity of the Garrus romance, I'm pretty sure an "ugly" character would have no trouble whatsoever picking up flirts from players if the writing and acting were of sufficient quality.

Not at all.

 

I just hear comments of discrimination, when a lot of it seems to be people wanting the sexy yuri/yaoi fantasy in their head, and using words such as discrimation to try to fight for what they want.

 

Mind you, I'm not saying this is everyone, just thats how a /majority/ of the posts are coming off to me. But then, they'd deny it even if it was true, since it would look bad.

 

So the question I'm really curious about, is if it's about having a SGR option and a lack of discrimation or is it about a sexy fantasy? Could be both of course. However, if they went the body type 4 route ugly character, the OMG NO SGR *** DISCRIMINATION crowd would at least have their voices heard, and it would be interresting to see how often the option would be taken.

 

I'm willing to bet it wouldn't be taken by a majority asking for SGR. I admit this to myself as well, as my SI went for Andy over the oldish IA agent because I was all "Andy is way more sexy" of course, the personality of Andy is a bit suckie I was all "Why can't Andy be less kill everyone and be more like Mako/Vette personality wise" buuuut, I figure the game writers have their favorite companions as well.

What makes you think that the people who want the fantasy (rightly or wrongly) adhere to conventional perceptions of beauty?

I'm a straight woman and I want SGRA's in the game so that I and others can enjoy them. Attack me for "wanting the sexy yuri/yaoi fantasy in [my] head" all you like - I know that's incorrect. You are going to likely ask me for my personal reasons for wanting this content, however, so I must as well outline them:

Yes, I do believe that the decision not to include same-sex/gender content for the this game was discriminatory, knowingly or otherwise. The further stubborn silence on the matter is merely insulting.

Intellectually I enjoy the nuances of gender identity, sexual preferences and sexuality (I consider myself to be a person who enjoys knowledge in and of itself, as an ends rather than a means), so seeing examples of it and the surrounding culture is always interesting.

And why does it matter so much to you what other people find attractive? You might as well change all companions into gnarled versions of themselves*, if you're so fascinated with the results. It seems to me you only want to have a companion who does not fit the conventional idea of beauty so that you can attack other people's preferences.

*Slipped there, but by god that was funny when I noticed it.

I just hear comments of discrimination, when a lot of it seems to be people wanting the sexy yuri/yaoi fantasy in their head, and using words such as discrimation to try to fight for what they want.

So...what?...what do you say about those that want OGRAs to fullfill a "sexy fantasy"?

I don't see why this particular motivation is just a SGRA thing.

The various reasons people may want SGRAs is a separate concern from the fact that the option has been excluded while OGRAs are in abundance in game.

So...what?...what do you say about those that want OGRAs to fullfill a "sexy fantasy"?

 

I don't see why this particular motivation is just a SGRA thing.

I can see why some people might deem it "a bad thing", but I don't believe the number of people who want it for such a reason is terribly high, nor do I personally believe that that is a legitimate reason for not having the content.

Oh noes, someone might want tight trousers because they like their character to look sexy, better get rid of tight trousers!

...Time to break this out.

My favorite facepalm.

Yep, I'm done dealing with some of the...unsavory types in there. General forums isn't good for my blood pressure nor Doup's.

Maybe I should get my Derailment Bingo going again. I finally got the, "I was on your side until you got angry," marker. It only took me a month.

I think I'm just going to focus on writing the press.

Funny...other people ask for an answer for their preferred content and it's okay. It's even a-okay to ask for an answer two weeks after the Livestream. Suddenly, we stop being content in our special corner and start getting louder. Prior to this point, we acted the way any other customer would. Posting the forums, posting in the Suggestion Box (before the mods stopped recommending it.) Asking moderators, asking developers, asking any current employee via PM.

We tried starting polls and other threads in more visible places, to get dialogue going between players. Don't give me that "no multiple threads" nonsense. Go count the number of threads regarding the same issues with the Cartel Market. Go on ahead, I'll wait.

Then we stepped it up to Facebook, Twitter and even freaking snail mail. Not a peep one way or the other. The morale was dying in the thread, people were leaving in disgust and despair (still are, but the point remains,) and I was sick of it. They need to treat the pro-SGRA community with at least a small amount of respect.

So now we aren't acting like the usual customer. We aren't just going to go, "Oh, you wacky EA." We're writing to the press to find out what's going on. We're writing to anyone that could assist us into getting a response from BW. Any response, even if it's a "Leave us alone! It's not coming, so shut up."

So...what?...what do you say about those that want OGRAs to fullfill a "sexy fantasy"?

 

I don't see why this particular motivation is just a SGRA thing.

 

The various reasons people may want SGRAs is a separate concern from the fact that the option has been excluded while OGRAs are in abundance in game.

I'll reply to this one as I think it works for replying to the others.

I have no problem with SGRs being put in. I have no problem with people wanting to full fill their sexual fantasies and wanting to get them put in.

I see a problem with people wanting that, and then trying to say it's discrimination why it's not in.

I think the reason BW/EA doesn't give an answer to the question is more to do with a vocal backlash, even if it was proven first, that it just wouldn't be cost effective, because the vocal minority is often the loudest.

If they said "Look, we planned on it, but now it's just not worth the time and effort, wouldn't be profitable, and thusly a waste of time, when before we thought it we could do it and it not be" they'd still be stuck with forum goers saying "But you said" even if they replied "We didnt, the original devs said it"

I think a lot of things were planned, when they thought the game would be a bigger success. I think the SW IP could be a big success in MMOs to rival WoW, but I think it takes more than the IP to get it there, which is where it bombed (imo).

I'm having fun in TOR, but I can step back and look and understand why players have left. Some of it is player loyalty...it just sucks and the usual player loyalty may be enough to keep a MMO running, I don't think it's enough to count on for OMG HUGE NUMBERS THAT RIVAL WOW! Not anymore...just a different playerbase than before.

I think adding SGR cutscenes won't change the numbers on the playerbase. People will return/start playing with an equal amount leaving, basically a very low amount of players base their playing the game on SGR options.

I think right now, TOR needs to focus on getting/keeping more players with actual game content.

I think getting clarification on where exactly SGRs on BW/EA's priorities would be a good thing, but I can see why saying "on the backburner due to profitability" could be a PR nightmare, as that's what media does.

TOR could fix all lag/bugs/class balance and say SGR is on the backburner due to profits, and the vocal distractors will be louder with "Saying SGR isnt profitable is discriminating"

Something I am wondering about...does the mother of all MMOs WoW have SGR options? Of all the top 10 MMOs, do any of them?

Something I am wondering about...does the mother of all MMOs WoW have SGR options? Of all the top 10 MMOs, do any of them?

I had not realised that World of Warcraft, Runescape, EvE, Guild Wars 2, Tera, Everquest, The Secret World and Star Trek Online (to name a few) had scripted and animated romances that players could partake in, like Star Wars: The Old Republic. Could you post examples?

Edit: You've also failed to address why physical preferences are so important and why people who want SGRA's should be forced to have someone who stands outside of conventional ideals of beauty - unless of course it's so that you can be sure that we aren't all secretly straight people want to live out some "fantasy".

It's my experience that people who want p-rn, simply go find p-rn (can't say that word). It's no doubt quicker than mashing 'Escape' and redoing the conversation options over and over. There's that silly logic of mine again.

Gosh, I've been playing my OGRA's all wrong. The sexy parts are blacked out, silly me! That explains everything I suppose being animated it doesn't count as "real" and therefore only qualifies for a 16+ rather than an 18+

I can see why some people might deem it "a bad thing", but I don't believe the number of people who want it for such a reason is terribly high, nor do I personally believe that that is a legitimate reason for not having the content.

 

Oh noes, someone might want tight trousers because they like their character to look sexy, better get rid of tight trousers!

It's my experience that people who want p-rn, simply go find p-rn (can't say that word). It's no doubt quicker than mashing 'Escape' and redoing the conversation options over and over. There's that silly logic of mine again.

...Time to break this out.

 

My favorite facepalm.

 

I'll see your Mustaine, and raise you one big cat.

I have no problem with SGRs being put in. I have no problem with people wanting to full fill their sexual fantasies and wanting to get them put in.

 

I see a problem with people wanting that, and then trying to say it's discrimination why it's not in.

But it is discriminatory.

I want SGRAs b/c I like them and yes I think a romance with two women is "sexy".

I'm curious, what is a valid reason for a person wanting SGRAs that allows them to also call lack of SGRAs (when there are an over-abundance of OGRAs in game) out for what it is (i.e., a discriminatory practice)?

As in, what motivation for wanting SGRAs would allow someone to discuss discrimination in your opinion?

I had not realised that World of Warcraft, Runescape, EvE, Guild Wars 2, Tera, Everquest, The Secret World and Star Trek Online (to name a few) had scripted and animated romances that players could partake in, like Star Wars: The Old Republic. Could you post examples?

 

Edit: You've also failed to address why physical preferences are so important and why people who want SGRA's should be forced to have someone who stands outside of conventional ideals of beauty - unless of course it's so that you can be sure that we aren't all secretly straight people want to live out some "fantasy".

My point on the cutscenes and the top MMOs (and as a fan of TERA, is that even a top MMO? Doesnt seem it in NA anyways) is that's it's just not that cared about by the majority of players.

And I thought I did address the physical appearance. I'm curious. Is it because people (who in this thread and the other in General) think the lack of it is discriminating, or is it really just to play out some imaginative fantasy?

I have nothing against the later. I just think some are saying it's discriminating so they can obtain the fantasy. When I don't think it's a matter of discrimination, but rather a matter of cost, and people want to play the discrimination arguement, because they think that will give them what they want (which, it could in some instances).

They didn't put it in originally because of cost (as they said in the beginning), a cost they thought they'd make up at release (is my guess). And since the release, things haven't panned out to match their projected profits.

But it is discriminatory.

 

I want SGRAs b/c I like them and yes I think a romance with two women is "sexy".

 

I'm curious, what is a valid reason for a person wanting SGRAs that allows them to also call lack of SGRAs (when there are an over-abundance of OGRAs in game) out for what it is (i.e., a discriminatory practice)?

 

As in, what motivation for wanting SGRAs would allow someone to discuss discrimination in your opinion?

Discrimination would be "OMG ICK! NO WAY! NEVER! I DON'T AGREE WITH IT!"

Discrimination isn't "Sorry, but putting that in just isn't cost effective/profitable"

Hope you will either get this for free with a big patch or buy it with CC for the whole account.

And I really hope that it wont be with the hut cartel which you can only buy digitally that would be a real **** .

Discrimination would be "OMG ICK! NO WAY! NEVER! I DON'T AGREE WITH IT!"

 

Discrimination isn't "Sorry, but putting that in just isn't cost effective/profitable"

But do you believe it was discrimination not to develop same-sex romances at the same time as opposite-sex romances, as that is where the majority are getting their basis of the discrimination from?

My point on the cutscenes and the top MMOs (and as a fan of TERA, is that even a top MMO? Doesnt seem it in NA anyways) is that's it's just not that cared about by the majority of players.

 

And I thought I did address the physical appearance. I'm curious. Is it because people (who in this thread and the other in General) think the lack of it is discriminating, or is it really just to play out some imaginative fantasy?

 

I have nothing against the later. I just think some are saying it's discriminating so they can obtain the fantasy. When I don't think it's a matter of discrimination, but rather a matter of cost, and people want to play the discrimination arguement, because they think that will give them what they want (which, it could in some instances).

 

They didn't put it in originally because of cost (as they said in the beginning), a cost they thought they'd make up at release (is my guess). And since the release, things haven't panned out to match their projected profits.

matter of cost? then explain to me why OGRA made it into the game.

looks like grasping for straws to me. 'it's a matter of money' is a pretty easy answer, and yet so very very wrong. if they honestly didn't have the money - or time, as they claim - they should have made romance options a 'post launch' feature, and not same-gender romance options. (not forgetting to mention that still doesn't explain why you can't even [flirt] with a member of the same sex)

oh, and just so you know, for me it is indeed just 'living out a fantasy' when I want a gay male chiss smuggler. in reality I'm a straight female human. shockingly, I don't even have the same hair colour as my character.

none if this matters, though, because I still very much see the big issue with cutting only parts of a feature when cutting the whole feature would have prevented a lot of this 'stink'.

Discrimination would be "OMG ICK! NO WAY! NEVER! I DON'T AGREE WITH IT!"

 

Discrimination isn't "Sorry, but putting that in just isn't cost effective/profitable"

Regardless of the veiled, shady reasoning behind it, the end result consistently remains the same.

Equal representation is being denied to a group of people. The motivation, the reasoning, are of no consequence whatsoever. Equality is very infrequently easy, or cost effective, but that doesn't justify not granting it. If someone is doing a morally wrong thing, frankly, I don't give a good goddamn what the reason behind it is. The fact that what is being done here is morally wrong is reason enough for myself and many other of my colleagues to raise serious concerns.

About the positions of this company regarding fair and equal treatment of groups, about this company's stance against discrimination, and most importantly, about this company's ethical policies. Specifically on promising a feature to a group of paying customers, and then failing to deliver said feature over an entire year. And yes, their silence, their shadiness, their deletion of Tweets, and their misdirection have all indirectly supported business practices which can be considered... unethical, at best.

I'm sorry, but I'm not generally fond of the idea of giving my money to companies that behave in such a way. If they're willing to lie about something like SGR's (which, as I've mentioned, they have already taken the press fallout for because of the statements made at launch) then... what else would they be willing to lie to their customers about? It is an atrocious business move on the part of a company to lie to paying customers, and frankly, whoever orchestrated this cloak-and-dagger silence and misdirection campaign should be ashamed of themselves.

And you, SithKoriandr. I've explained a couple of times what consistent negative arguments do to our cause. You're indirectly screwing us over. By repeatedly fighting us. I don't know why you do it. I don't know why you want to screw us over so badly. But whether you realize it or not, your crusade against SGR is likely doing just that. Odds are I'm betting people like you are a big part of why we haven't gotten what we want. Because some incompetent financial analyst at EA was lurking the boards one day and saw posts like yours, seemingly supportive of our cause but insisting, repeatedly, against all opposition and reason presented to you, that there is no possible way that SGR's could ever be cost effective ever, and as such, we would never get them. Said analyst takes it higher up, suits decide that you may have something there, and we're ****ed. For good.

Please, for the love of all that is holy, just shut up. I don't care what your reason is. I don't care how good your logic is. I'm tired of seemingly well-meaning people trying to stonewall us, for no apparent reason whatsoever. Because whether you know it, or believe it, you may very well be stonewalling us WAY more successfully than you think.

And the fact that our cause is being destroyed from within this very thread, is honestly, very hurtful and insulting to me. Please. Stop. Leave us alone.

Odds are they have the V/O assets already recorded, they're just waiting for some gods-unknown reason to make it happen. So please. Just leave us alone and let it happen.

Discrimination would be "OMG ICK! NO WAY! NEVER! I DON'T AGREE WITH IT!"

 

Discrimination isn't "Sorry, but putting that in just isn't cost effective/profitable"

So now you have a problem with anyone saying it's discriminatory and not just certain people?

Discrimination isn't necessarily as explicit as you make it out to be. Really, it comes down to two groups of people being treated differently (intentional or not).

I'm also not sure about the "cost effective" angle, considering there are tons of OGRA content and not all of it feels necessary. Instead of making sure most male PCs had a woman on every planet to "sex up" they could have done a few SGRA romances. But, OMG NO! male PCs need more action! Can you see why that's kind of a problem? That's what doesn't sit right with me. If there were only a few OGRA encounters then it would be a different story.

But do you believe it was discrimination not to develop same-sex romances at the same time as opposite-sex romances, as that is where the majority are getting their basis of the discrimination from?

No. I think it was a matter of profits as they stated. I think their profits havent been as good as they hoped to beable to add it in after the fact.

Cutscenes take time to make. The people who make those cutscenes are very likely also the ones who do the cutscenes that will be needed in the expansion they're planning on making.

Writers may have the time to pen it out, but they're also likely trying to pen good/passable stories for the expansion.

One could think it was Lucas Arts that said no to it, but then I'd have to wonder why they just didn't say, no there isnt, and right now it's not a priority.

With BW's track record of SGR in other games, I think it shows it wasn't a matter of discrimination...at least on BWs part....but back to profits (which they're in the business to make).

So now you have a problem with anyone saying it's discriminatory and not just certain people?

 

Discrimination isn't necessarily as explicit as you make it out to be. Really, it comes down to two groups of people being treated differently (intentional or not).

 

I'm also not sure about the "cost effective" angle, considering there are tons of OGRA content and not all of it feels necessary. Instead of making sure most male PCs had a woman on every planet to "sex up" they could have done a few SGRA romances. But, OMG NO! male PCs need more action! Can you see why that's kind of a problem? That's what doesn't sit right with me. If there were only a few OGRA encounters then it would be a different story.

Ever think that could of just been the writers and not BW as a whole? They write the story, bosses read it, think it's good to go and pass it, without ever thinking "OMG! There's no SGR! What are you a writer or an insensitive discriminatory hack!"

Do you call Matel sexist because they don't advertise Barbie for boys, when there are boys who play with Barbie?

I basically take BW's word on it being about profits, it's the one thing I can always believe a company on, they're out to make money.