Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

I do not agree with the inclusion of SGRs.

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion > Suggestion Box
I do not agree with the inclusion of SGRs.
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

TheBBP's Avatar


TheBBP
01.11.2013 , 10:33 AM | #391
Back on topic folks. There is already a giant thread debating whether or not SGRs belong in the game. This thread is not about that.
Jano Aras'im - Knight of the Republic
Commander - The Way of the Maker Christian/Family-rated Guild
Ebon Hawk

DarthZak's Avatar


DarthZak
01.11.2013 , 10:34 AM | #392
Quote: Originally Posted by Pvtcarnage View Post
It is about agenda's, and it's being pushed into everything possible. My problem is when it's pushed at Kid themed media. Put a adult rating in and I'm fine.

lol homophobe, you guys need new material. I have gay friends and they can handle conversations without trying that one.
The problem is that people still consider it an agenda, why is it an agenda? Because people want equality regardless of their choice? In that case, welcome to the world my friend where EVERYTHING has an agenda.

Im not saying you are, Im saying you sound like one.

Quote: Originally Posted by -IceHawk- View Post
The last time I checked the SCOTUS had not incorporated the Bill of Rights into the virtual world of pixilated interactions between graphical blobs, so discussions of the inclusion of SGRA as fundamentally about Constitutional Rights or Equality are quite frankly invalid. (Not to mention apparently against the Forum TOS and a bannable offense as they constitute political arguments.)

If you want to strive for an individualized sense of equality and a broad based alteration to the concepts of socially normative sexual politics by all means contact your Congressman and start or join a movement.

That has nothing to do with Star Wars: The Old Republic.

Personally, I would prefer it if Bioware stopped introducing politically charged issues into the canon and actually dedicated its Story Content Funding into the extension of individual class stories.
I was giving an example of how the real world works since this game is being made in the real world and people from the real world pay real world money to play it. I think thats fair enough. Also I said countries, not the US. Kinda arrogant to immediately assume that the US is the vote that matters.

Its not a politically charged subject unless you make it one. Its matter of whether you want to give everyone a choice or just a small part of everyone a choice. As said earlier, your individual class stories can change to your liking with the inclusion of SGR's, especially if you RP
The Peacecraft Legacy
Elycia , Mariemaia , Minagoroshi

Altyrell's Avatar


Altyrell
01.11.2013 , 10:35 AM | #393
Quote: Originally Posted by Pvtcarnage View Post
It is about agenda's, and it's being pushed into everything possible. My problem is when it's pushed at Kid themed media. Put a adult rating in and I'm fine.
Uh, this Game is Rated T for TEEN using the ESRB Game Rating, not EC (Early Childhood), E (Everyone) or E10 (Everyone 10+). T for Teen is 13+ so stop with TOR being aimed at "kids" cause this day & age, 13+ already know about sex & stuff. Also, SGRA's WILL NOT INCREASE the Game Rating NOR does it mean it should be. SGRA's can be added without making it "Adult Oriented" any more so then the Romance Arcs that we currently have do.

Also, you talk about others supposedly pushing their Agendas, um isn't that exactly what you, yourself, is trying to do?

Kahotep's Avatar


Kahotep
01.11.2013 , 10:41 AM | #394
Quote: Originally Posted by Jiminison View Post
Mean is your opinion , I see alot of people shooting straight from the hip saying it's fine too bring it just not at the infantcy of the game no one here will experience your story arc which kills your arguement why do you feel we are just trying to ruin things for another segment of population all you have to do is read every other post that doesn't mention this topic and they STILL say we want more important things in this game than x,y and z you are implementing. SGR's are coming so I don't even know why it's worth argueing either way about it. I am however bracing for the "it was not good enough" crowd we all know that is coming.
I'll tell you exactly why I called this thread mean spirited. There are two reasons.

Firstly it is partly appealing to the idea that the majority should always get what the majority wants. This is mean spirited (yes, in my opinion - do we really need to say that as intelligent people?) because the flip side of this is that the minority will always have to wait as long as the majority is asking for more or new things. When do the minority get their turn? Is it ever their turn under such a system?

Secondly, it is based on a fallacy that the development team work on one thing at a time, finish it, then move onto the next thing. If they are working on this, then they are not working on that. In reality, there are lots of small teams all working on different content and the team which works on one type of content do not necessarily work on another type.

If you split your developers to work on different areas, then you can allocate man hours to projects based on the need and the popularity of the content. This is what BW have done. This is why in the last year we have had new warzones (the game launched with 3 remember), new flashpoints and operations, new PvE areas, a new companion and its associated quest line and only now, over a year after launch, something is being said about SGRs.

And its a little thing. An npc storyline. A tiny part of an expansion which is promised to to contain a large amount of all kinds of content. One tiny part of the development time and budget.

Yet there are people in this thread who begrudge even that small amount of time being spent on SGR, despite everything else that has been released in the last 12 months, despite everything else that will be in the expansion.

And that folks, is why I call this thread mean spirited and I think that the people who have spoken against SGR are basically mean and petty.

-IceHawk-'s Avatar


-IceHawk-
01.11.2013 , 10:45 AM | #395
Quote: Originally Posted by DarthZak View Post
I was giving an example of how the real world works since this game is being made in the real world and people from the real world pay real world money to play it. I think thats fair enough. Also I said countries, not the US. Kinda arrogant to immediately assume that the US is the vote that matters.

Its not a politically charged subject unless you make it one. Its matter of whether you want to give everyone a choice or just a small part of everyone a choice. As said earlier, your individual class stories can change to your liking with the inclusion of SGR's, especially if you RP
Considering that Bioware and Electronic Arts are American companies and are thereby subject to American Laws you would be incorrect. It is arrogant to assume the socio-cultural impetus of other countries should have a direct bearing on the content of an American company that is bound by American legal precedent.

What was that? An attempt at labeling me as some kind of cultural chauvinist? It failed.

Karen Traviss' inclusion of the homosexual Mandalorians was designed to grind a specific political agenda, as was her machinations about degrading the Jedi Order and demonizing those characters she considered "the elites." In discussions of Star Wars canon I would not appeal to the authority of a woman who characterized fans who disliked her work as suicide bombers and now is no longer employed by LFL.

That being said, the Gun Control Strawman is rather interesting.
If your argument is that Bioware has crafted a game that is fundamentally political in nature and therefore has opened itself to political discussions you logically validate political opposition to the inclusion of SGRA (meaning validating any and all socio-cultural, religious, or personal motivations).

I doubt Bioware would agree on that point.

Then again, it seems to me once again I am being drawn into a political discussion, by you.

Shall we shift this conversation back under the TOS of the Forums?

Altyrell's Avatar


Altyrell
01.11.2013 , 10:49 AM | #396
And the thing is, whether you agree with Karen or not, is besides the point. The fact remains, what was added to the Lore via her series of books, was added to the Lore and are considered Canon. Same level of Canon as this Game is on. So until Leland Chee or a higher power [or if he is replaced, his replacement] says otherwise in regards to Karen's Star Wars Books, they are still Canon. So, whether your or anyone likes or doesn't like it, those 2 Gay Mandalorians are still Canon & part of the Star Wars Lore. And her intent, political or otherwise, ultimately doesn't matter cause the fact remains, her stuff is still part of the Star Wars Lore & Canon.

-IceHawk-'s Avatar


-IceHawk-
01.11.2013 , 10:50 AM | #397
People seem to fail to understand one basic thing about development.

Money is a Finite Resource.

It does not matter if there are different teams in charge of divergent facets of development.

Any $ allocated to one department for a specific project is $ not allocated to another.

The argument that SGRA does not detract from other development cycles is fundamentally wrong.

We can debate as to the significance of that allocation and what specifically it detracts from, but you people hiding behind this particular strawman need to give it up.

DarthZak's Avatar


DarthZak
01.11.2013 , 10:52 AM | #398
Quote: Originally Posted by -IceHawk- View Post
Considering that Bioware and Electronic Arts are American companies and are thereby subject to American Laws you would be incorrect. It is arrogant to assume the socio-cultural impetus of other countries should have a direct bearing on the content of an American company that is bound by American legal precedent.

What was that? An attempt at labeling me as some kind of cultural chauvinist? It failed.

Karen Traviss' inclusion of the homosexual Mandalorians was designed to grind a specific political agenda, as was her machinations about degrading the Jedi Order and demonizing those characters she considered "the elites." In discussions of Star Wars canon I would not appeal to the authority of a woman who characterized fans who disliked her work as suicide bombers and now is no longer employed by LFL.

That being said, the Gun Control Strawman is rather interesting.
If your argument is that Bioware has crafted a game that is fundamentally political in nature and therefore has opened itself to political discussions you logically validate political opposition to the inclusion of SGRA (meaning validating any and all socio-cultural, religious, or personal motivations).

I doubt Bioware would agree on that point.

Then again, it seems to me once again I am being drawn into a political discussion, by you.

Shall we shift this conversation back under the TOS of the Forums?
It isnt about what laws theyre bound to, I never said that so please dont put words into my mouth.
I was aiming at what the humane/social standard was regarding SGR's in the countries that this game is played in (more specifically the "Western" countries)
So you made it into politics, not me.
I didnt attempt anything, I think I made it quite clear that you consider this as a US issue when this is a worldwide game with players from all over the world.

Even if I agreed that still leaves Juhani. And if you are arguing something like this, is there ever room for SGR's in the EU or even the new movies? Youre saying "It hasnt been done in the passed so it shouldnt happen now" then interspecies relations shouldve never happened either and theyre everywhere.\

Switching back to ToS discussions is fine with me
The Peacecraft Legacy
Elycia , Mariemaia , Minagoroshi

-IceHawk-'s Avatar


-IceHawk-
01.11.2013 , 10:52 AM | #399
Quote: Originally Posted by Altyrell View Post
And the thing is, whether you agree with Karen or not, is besides the point. The fact remains, what was added to the Lore via her series of books, was added to the Lore and are considered Canon. Same level of Canon as this Game is on. So until Leland Chee or a higher power [or if he is replaced, his replacement] says otherwise in regards to Karen's Star Wars Books, they are still Canon. So, whether your or anyone likes or doesn't like it, those 2 Gay Mandalorians are still Canon & part of the Star Wars Lore. And her intent, political or otherwise, ultimately doesn't matter cause the fact remains, her stuff is still part of the Star Wars Lore & Canon.
I am not sure anyone was arguing that Traviss' contribution were not canon.
In fact I believe the specific point being made is that all inclusion of SGRA in C-Canon has been the result of a politically motivated agenda.

First by Bioware and then later by Traviss.

Quite frankly, politics should be jettisoned from Star Wars unless we are talking about the balance of power between Borsk and Ackbar or the legitimacy of Thrawn's Shogunate...

DarthZak's Avatar


DarthZak
01.11.2013 , 10:54 AM | #400
Quote: Originally Posted by -IceHawk- View Post
People seem to fail to understand one basic thing about development.

Money is a Finite Resource.

It does not matter if there are different teams in charge of divergent facets of development.

Any $ allocated to one department for a specific project is $ not allocated to another.

The argument that SGRA does not detract from other development cycles is fundamentally wrong.

We can debate as to the significance of that allocation and what specifically it detracts from, but you people hiding behind this particular strawman need to give it up.
I agree that money is a finite resource but then again there is something called budgetting which allocates money to certain development area's. This means that yes you are correct that money that goes to SGR's doesnt go to lets say Operations but it also means that this is a calculated choice and not some horrible fate that it sounds like
The Peacecraft Legacy
Elycia , Mariemaia , Minagoroshi