Ya, because the movies came out in the 80's. Well there's also Juhani and Belaya, and Goran Beviin and Medrit Vasur.

 

Honestly, that's a pretty weak and mean spirited defense. You're in the wrong place, man. At least the people saying it takes too much development time have half a leg to stand on.

 

Sorry you feel it's mean spirited, but adding SGR ruins my Star wars experience and takes out any immersion that might of been there.

 

And because it's from the 80's does not mean you can now add your agenda into the game because you think it was not in the story due to a time frame. Many novels and movies had SGR stuff before the eighties and makes your point null.

Has nothing to do with hate, I don't think any kind of romance relationships need to be in game when half the people playing are 12 years old. And since it's a online game there are adults playing with these children and helping introduce sexual themes is a bad idea all around.

 

Introducing sexual themes is a bad idea? Again, are you 15 or something?

The taboo that people have on sex is ridiculous! Sexual relationships are to be valued and the game clearly demonstrates that any relationship you want requires work and most of all you need to be a kind person, it doesnt teach kids about sex either since the biggest thing theyll see is a kiss and then fade to black. This fade to black is easy for us to fill in but kids who have had no experience with sex have no idea, nor does the innuendo mean anything to them (watch some cartoons from when you were a kid, you'll see/hear what you missed)

 

If an adult doesnt want their kid to see a romance then the adult is more than welcome to ruin it by picking the wrong option by choice.

 

You sound like all you care about is stabbing your lightsaber into some poor schmuck, how is portraying violence any better than romance? Which is better, love or hate?

Sorry you feel it's mean spirited, but adding SGR ruins my Star wars experience and takes out any immersion that might of been there.

 

And because it's from the 80's does not mean you can now add your agenda into the game because you think it was not in the story due to a time frame. Many novels and movies had SGR stuff before the eighties and makes your point null.

 

You dont have to follow the SGR's so I dont see what your problem is.

 

It wasnt in the movies because being gay was very controversial during the 80's but these days its accepted and even applauded to be included in mainstream media like games.

Also Lucas was/is a bit of a prude.

 

Yes many novels and movies did and how many of them were popular back then?

Oh Im sorry, you wanted SGR examples? Revan and Juhani (if you make Revan female), Goran and Medrit are a few examples

Whilst there havent been many canon SGR's in the Star Wars universe (not even in the EU) that doesnt set a precedent for the future. It has been done before and people liked it enough that Goran and Medrit were included in several books and that Juhani was one of the more interesting companions in KOTOR

 

Anyway your argument was that romance didnt matter, I proved you wrong in that. Nice try on the deflection though

 

I would like examples of SGR in George Lucas's Star Wars, I don't believe the one's you qoute are getting royalties? or at least were.

I would like examples of SGR in George Lucas's Star Wars, I don't believe the one's you qoute are getting royalties? or at least were.

 

So, SGRA's are not ok because they weren't shown in any of the Movies, WHICH by the way showed only a small fraction of the overall Galaxy. And since there weren't any shown they aren't allowed to be added, but wait, Luke and Leia kissed...

 

Oh, and Mandalorians weren't specifically mentioned, by name, in any of the movies. Neither were the Chiss, Miraluka, Mirialan, Ratataki, and roughly 75 - 90% of what is in this Game.

Edited January 11, 2013 by Altyrell

You dont have to follow the SGR's so I dont see what your problem is.

 

It wasnt in the movies because being gay was very controversial during the 80's but these days its accepted and even applauded to be included in mainstream media like games.

Also Lucas was/is a bit of a prude.

 

Yes many novels and movies did and how many of them were popular back then?

 

But the option comes up and is offered so no I don't need to follow it but even bring it up for decision ruins the immersion.

 

So because his beliefs don't coincide with yours he's a prude? see the double standard?

 

Sure they were popular to you back then? why does everyone need to like what you do?

So, SGRA's are not ok because they weren't shown in any of the Movies, WHICH by the way showed only a small fraction of the overall Galaxy. And since there weren't any shown they aren't allowed to be added, but wait, Luke and Leia kissed...

 

Oh, and Mandalorians weren't specifically mentioned, by name, in any of the movies. Neither were the Chiss, Miraluka, Mirialan, Ratataki, and roughly 75 - 90% of what is in this Game.

 

Yes they did kiss, whats your point?

and the other stuff added was in no way foreign to Lucas's world.

Yes they did kiss, whats your point?

and the other stuff added was in no way foreign to Lucas's world.

 

"Was in no way foreign to Lucas's world"... Yeah well, then SGR's are not foreign to Lucas's World either. There isn't any example of the majority of what is in this Game that was shown in Lucas's Movies, yet we have them because of what? That's right, the Expanded Universe, which is where the SGR's come in.

 

My point is, is that almost half the time the people who state that there weren't any Gays, Lesbians, etc shown in the Movies, therefore shouldn't be added to the game, seem to not realize that the Majority of what is in this game wasn't even shown &/or mentioned in any of the Movies. Also, we have 3 new Movies coming, so for all anyone knows, they might add some Gay/Lesbian/Etc Characters into any/all of the 3 new Movies.

I would like examples of SGR in George Lucas's Star Wars, I don't believe the one's you qoute are getting royalties? or at least were.

 

Since the books are made/published by Lucasarts and same with the videogame, yes Lucas did get royalties.

 

But the option comes up and is offered so no I don't need to follow it but even bring it up for decision ruins the immersion.

 

So because his beliefs don't coincide with yours he's a prude? see the double standard?

 

Sure they were popular to you back then? why does everyone need to like what you do?

 

So your experience is ruined by lack of option? Or because you dont want the option to be in the game at all, my experience would be ruined? Thats fair!

At least youll have the option of ignoring which is more than we have

 

No he's a prude because he showed several times that he doesnt want to do too extravagant things (except Luke and Leia kissing obviously)

He's not anti-gay so his beliefs arent the problem here, he's from an older generation. A good example is my grandma, shes fine with my nephew being gay but doesnt like it if he and his boyfriend kiss in front of everyone. She doesnt like it when me and my wife do it either because shes from a generation where such a thing was only done in private.

 

Thank you, try again.

 

Name a movie that was about as popular as Star Wars from before the 80's that had explicit gay or lesbian romances in it. And it had to be popular at the time.

"Was in no way foreign to Lucas's world"... Yeah well, then SGR's are not foreign to Lucas's World either. There isn't any example of the majority of what is in this Game that was shown in Lucas's Movies, yet we have them because of what? That's right, the Expanded Universe, which is where the SGR's come in.

 

My point is, is that almost half the time the people who state that there weren't any Gays, Lesbians, etc shown in the Movies, therefore shouldn't be added to the game, seem to not realize that the Majority of what is in this game wasn't even shown &/or mentioned in any of the Movies. Also, we have 3 new Movies coming, so for all anyone knows, they might add some Gay/Lesbian/Etc Characters into any/all of the 3 new Movies.

 

Yea I'm sure Disney will be PC about the issue lol

 

Majority should rule here and it looks like it's going that way since all they are doing is some NPC flirt. Nuff said, not everyone has your view (majority) Less may speak up due to the slurs your type throw at them but none the less no one has to like agenda's push down their throat.

Yea I'm sure Disney will be PC about the issue lol

 

Majority should rule here and it looks like it's going that way since all they are doing is some NPC flirt.

 

First, Disney doesn't have a problem with it and Disney isn't just about Children as they have released things aimed at people who are Teens and older.

 

Second, you may need to re-read what was stated as far as the inclusion of SGRA's. NPC Flirt is JUST the beginning.

 

http://www.swtor.com/info/news/blog/20130102

 

"Secondly, I want to reveal today that we are adding SGR with some NPCs on Makeb and do intend on pursuing more SGR options in the future. More details to come!"

 

So, NPC Flirts is not all that they are doing, NPC Flirts are just the beginning as there will be more to come.

Edited January 11, 2013 by Altyrell

Sorry you feel it's mean spirited, but adding SGR ruins my Star wars experience and takes out any immersion that might of been there.

 

And because it's from the 80's does not mean you can now add your agenda into the game because you think it was not in the story due to a time frame. Many novels and movies had SGR stuff before the eighties and makes your point null.

 

It's not about the timeframe, it's about the cultural attitudes of that decade. Would you say the same thing about movies from the 40's "adding the agenda" of racial equality or movies from the 50's "adding the agenda" of gender equality? This is pretty much common knowledge at this point. Things change as time moves on, either get used to it or continue to fight it, but you can't fight the rising tide.

 

For the record, there wasn't many mainstream movies in the 80's that had LGBT characters.

Sorry you feel it's mean spirited, but adding SGR ruins my Star wars experience and takes out any immersion that might of been there.

 

You won't be forced to participate in it. All this really comes down to is you not wanting something in the game that you hate & you're trying to use the immersion argument as justification. Maybe it's time for people like you to join the rest of the civilised world in jumping off the gay hate train.

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.

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.

 

That goes both ways, because gun control is a politically charged issue, so should BioWare not add firearms to the game? Oh and there are 2 Gay Mandalorians in the Lore and they were NOT added by BioWare. Also, SGRA's are Story Content, and them adding SGRA's weren't the sole reason for them not including Chapter 4's to the RotHC Expansion. Plus, SGRA's doesn't mean that they won't add Chapter 4+ to the Classes.

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.

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.

 

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

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?

Edited January 11, 2013 by Altyrell

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.

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?

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. Edited January 11, 2013 by Altyrell

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.

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

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...

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