Jump to content

Same gender romance discussion


CommunitySupport

Recommended Posts

No, sorry. I don't know a single person who's pro-SGRA who's ever said they ONLY want to play SGR content. Everyone I've spoken to on the matter wants to play SGR romance content (many, like myself, also want to play OGRA content) and also, you know, the rest of the game. It's not the same attitude at all. And in any case that's not even the point I was making. I'll repeat myself.

 

What I was saying was that it's selfish to threaten to leave the game because someone else is getting content updates in a form of content you don't play. Here, I'll even give you an example.

 

I don't play PvP at all. I accidentally ran into an enemy territory today and backpedalled well before the game could PvP flag me. I have no interest in it at all. I find no fun in it, I don't bother doing it, I avoid it whenever I can. I absolutely refuse to play games that enforce PvP because I won't be pushed into it; I don't even play competitive RTS games like Starcraft 2, I'll only play cooperative games or the single-player campaign. I truly can't express the depth of my disinterest in PvP. Heck, I don't even like competing for crafting resources and quest mobs.

 

But I don't go into PvP threads demanding that no time or resources be spent on developing it. I don't call it insignificant; I don't even consider it insignificant because lots of people do indeed enjoy it. I don't insult people who do it. I don't think less of PvPers. I certainly wouldn't block the development of PvP in the game with the single exception that I would indeed leave in a heartbeat if they enforced PvP. But even then I wouldn't try and take anyone with me when I left; I'd do so quietly and without fuss.

 

Why? Because I'm not so small-minded and petty that I think the whole game needs to be catered to my tastes alone. Do I want SGRAs in the game? Yes I do. Do I think that they should retool the original content? Yes I do. Does that mean I ONLY want to play SGRA content? No, it does not. Honestly I'd be happy if they did more work on PvP because it'd make the PvPers happier (presumably). I have no problem with them getting what they want. That's totally cool with me. It's content I'll never ever see and still I'm in favour of them working on and improving it.

 

So no, sorry, we'll have to disagree. There's a massive difference between saying 'I want this in because that's where my interests lie' and 'If those people get what they want then I'm leaving.' The latter is tremendously selfish and to boil all MMO players down to the same motivations is a gross oversimplification.

 

Not what I meant. More like "If you don't add this content, I'm leaving" which, yes, people have made that comment on every bit of content, whether it be PvE, PvP, storylines, SGR, ect ect.

 

It's probably also one of the reasons SGR is low on the to do list. I'd say most people can play the romance storylines as they're offered and not go "Well I'm /this/ in real life, so if my gaming experience doesn't reflect that in my character's life, I'm totally offended and have to quit, because I just can't imagine that my character is different than me."

 

While the rest of players realize, there's so many things the character does that they the player wouldn't do, even with the option system, as it's a limited option system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That's actually something that happened to me. I was playing and I'm not into the romance, but I realized "I wouldn't get into this relationship, but under these circumstances this character totally would."

 

And then there it all went. It was like watching a movie, an enjoyable movie, and I could keep playing, because that character wasn't me.

Edited by Bytemite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Not really that fair to put people through 1-50 content with them hoping for some outcome, then implement the stuff they want then say lol nope gotta reroll to see it.

 

The boards would turn into an inferno.

 

Why it's best to put new companion dialogue as 50+ content. Then some of us won't have to reroll. No reason they can't increase the amount of affection needed on companions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not what I meant. More like "If you don't add this content, I'm leaving" which, yes, people have made that comment on every bit of content, whether it be PvE, PvP, storylines, SGR, ect ect.

 

Again, that's not the point because you're using a different sentiment than the one I've now repeatedly stated. 'If you don't add this content I'm leaving' is a statement of self-interest. It doesn't involve the deprivation of a form of content from a different group of people on the basis that you don't want it. 'If you make that content I don't want to play then I'm leaving' is both a statement of self-interest and selfish.

 

It's probably also one of the reasons SGR is low on the to do list. I'd say most people can play the romance storylines as they're offered and not go "Well I'm /this/ in real life, so if my gaming experience doesn't reflect that in my character's life, I'm totally offended and have to quit, because I just can't imagine that my character is different than me."

 

While the rest of players realize, there's so many things the character does that they the player wouldn't do, even with the option system, as it's a limited option system.

 

<sighs>

 

SK, look. The majority of people who are pro-SGRA know quite well it's a limited-option system. The majority of people who are pro-SGRA are also entirely capable of separating their in-game experiences from their real-world sexuality. You're boiling everything down to oversimplicity again and the quote in your signature says all you need to say on your opinion of what you're boiling this down to.

 

The vast majority of us aren't here because we're 'totally offended and have to quit' because we just can't imagine that our characters are different than us. We're here because we want to see a feature implemented and have every right to ask for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem I have is not that you want time and resources invested into this same gender romance thing. The problem is that you want to "retool" the old content. That's waste of time. We all know how slow they are with developing new story content. Lets not make it even slower by coming back again and again to change old content.

 

Ahem:

Updating old content on something as insignificant as same gender romances would be great waste of time and resources. I say include it in the new content if you must, but focus on new content, not on recycling old one.

 

Bold added by me for emphasis. Retooling old content may be a problem for you but it's certainly not the only problem you appear to have with the idea. People don't call things 'insignificant' lightly, nor do they toss about terms like 'if you must' if their position on a matter is neutral.

 

Besides, retooling old content - heaps of old content, not just adding in SGRAs (which would be easily one of the smaller changes if they went the herosexual route) - would certainly not be a waste. There's no denying the fact that the game was rushed and there are heaps of things that could stand improving. There could be more open PvP areas, companion quests, there could be free-control space missions, group space missions, more missions thrown in here and there to make levelling more enjoyable, there could be additional Advanced Class missions so levelling is a more varied experience between, say, Sith Assassin and Sith Sorcerer. They could put in chairs people can sit down on. They could include more in the way of galactic lore so people feel more immersed into the story.

 

Not everyone has already played the game so it certainly wouldn't be a waste for the new folk. These options and plenty more would potentially drag in more players - subscribers and no - and get SWTOR more money. And, as has been pointed out, they aren't changes that would need to all happen at once. Would new content be good? Yes. I'd have loved it if Makeb were considerably larger and more involved. But that doesn't mean the old stuff couldn't do with a work-over.

 

Besides, it's not taking them all that long; certainly not as long as you're implying. World of Warcraft is taking consistently longer. Burning Crusade came out three years after vanilla WoW. Wrath of the Lich King was almost two years after that, Cataclysm slightly over two years later, Mists of Pandaria almost two years later again. So if we use WoW as a model the SWTOR team is actually well ahead releasing new material (and that's not including the mini-events like the Grand Acquisitions Race and so forth). They could be doing nothing but patches and the occasional themed event until 2015, instead we've had several themed events and a digital expansion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SK, look. The majority of people who are pro-SGRA know quite well it's a limited-option system. The majority of people who are pro-SGRA are also entirely capable of separating their in-game experiences from their real-world sexuality. You're boiling everything down to oversimplicity again and the quote in your signature says all you need to say on your opinion of what you're boiling this down to.

 

The vast majority of us aren't here because we're 'totally offended and have to quit' because we just can't imagine that our characters are different than us. We're here because we want to see a feature implemented and have every right to ask for it.

 

I understand people want to see the feature. But you're forgetting there have been posts of "I'm gay in real life, and can't play this game without that option" and posts of "I'm quitting unless it gets put in" [EDIT: So while it may not be a majority, there are/were still players who said such things]

 

So yes, there are people who fall into that category, as there are for all the other categories of the TOR experience (PvE, PvP, what have you).

 

And my quote is a good one :p It's a very true statement. So was my last quote, but the dforum devs said no quoting any real life political figures...that or they hate Martin Luther King.

Edited by SithKoriandr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not everyone has already played the game so it certainly wouldn't be a waste for the new folk. These options and plenty more would potentially drag in more players - subscribers and no - and get SWTOR more money. And, as has been pointed out, they aren't changes that would need to all happen at once. Would new content be good? Yes. I'd have loved it if Makeb were considerably larger and more involved. But that doesn't mean the old stuff couldn't do with a work-over.

 

I'm not against the retooling of older content. Not at all. I can just see why BW/EA might not be for it. Why? Because of that bolded part in the quote. Potentially.

 

Things, in my experience, that help get new players in, is things like new expansions that catch their eye and going f2p (which BW/EA did). What retooling old content might do, is get old players to return, but even then, without other changes, I don't find that to be the case either.

 

TOR has it's fans who will come and go, and that's likely where their player numbers will stand. WoW of course can worry less about it, since millions of players coming and going, still has them with millions of players. TOR seems to have less wiggle room, not to mention being run by stockholders, where the important part isn't "Is the game good" but rather "are we making money".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So yes, there are people who fall into that category, as there are for all the other categories of the TOR experience (PvE, PvP, what have you).

 

Sure, but there's people like that everywhere. I'm talking about the majority.

 

And my quote is a good one :p It's a very true statement.

 

I have issues with it. It's fine if it has a context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not against the retooling of older content. Not at all. I can just see why BW/EA might not be for it. Why? Because of that bolded part in the quote. Potentially.

 

Yes, but nothing is guaranteed to make them money. Everything is a potential money-maker.

 

Things, in my experience, that help get new players in, is things like new expansions that catch their eye and going f2p (which BW/EA did). What retooling old content might do, is get old players to return, but even then, without other changes, I don't find that to be the case either.

 

Without other changes, maybe, but when did I ever suggest that there should be no other changes? Not once. Indeed, I think that not having to choose between option A and option B is one of the good things about MMOs. I'd like to see that broadened, too - sabacc games, for example, or that space-chess game whose name I keep forgetting.

 

TOR has it's fans who will come and go, and that's likely where their player numbers will stand. WoW of course can worry less about it, since millions of players coming and going, still has them with millions of players. TOR seems to have less wiggle room, not to mention being run by stockholders, where the important part isn't "Is the game good" but rather "are we making money".

 

Blizzard has shareholders too. That's why Blizzard and Activision merged in the first place; the shareholders decided it'd be a good move.

 

WoW has millions of subscribers now, yes. It's worked its way up to the position it holds. No reason SWTOR can't do something similar. Although sci-fi MMOs do markedly less well than fantasy MMOs, even with the Star Wars label attached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, but there's people like that everywhere. I'm talking about the majority.

 

So, do you think the majority of players want more, end game content/class story lines or SGR romances?

 

I have issues with it. It's fine if it has a context.

 

It does have context! To those who say "I'm offended" it has context :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, do you think the majority of players want more, end game content/class story lines or SGR romances?

 

Sigh. Now you're just baiting me, but that's okay because your point here is irrelevant. What the majority of players want from the game's development isn't the 'majority' in question. As you well know. And as you consistently avoid addressing, we don't actually have to choose between them.

 

It does have context! To those who say "I'm offended" it has context :)

 

Yeah, but that's not the context in question. With the context of trying to make constructive comments, yes, 'I'm offended' has no real meaning on its own other than 'my feelings don't like that'. Such statements require clarification and further discussion which is, I believe, part of Mr Fry's main point. Vetoing things because you disagree with them and for no other reason is stupid.

 

But without that context it's just a license to be rude. "I've offended you? I don't care. Saying 'I'm offended' is meaningless, Mr Fry says so." No, saying 'I'm offended' isn't meaningless. It expresses a reaction to a subject. It's the function of stopping at 'I'm offended' and offering no other objection that's the meaningless bit.

Edited by Kioma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh. Now you're just baiting me, but that's okay because your point here is irrelevant. What the majority of players want from the game's development isn't the 'majority' in question. As you well know. And as you consistently avoid addressing, we don't actually have to choose between them.

 

No, we don't. The devs do. That's the problem with players getting what they want. :p

[EDIT: And no, not trying to bait you, I was curious as to what you think the majority of players want, not just the majority of posters in this thread]

 

 

Yeah, but that's not the context in question. With the context of trying to make constructive comments, yes, 'I'm offended' has no real meaning on its own other than 'my feelings don't like that'. Such statements require clarification and further discussion which is, I believe, part of Mr Fry's main point. Vetoing things because you disagree with them and for no other reason is stupid.

 

But without that context it's just a license to be rude. "I've offended you? I don't care. Saying 'I'm offended' is meaningless, Mr Fry says so." No, saying 'I'm offended' isn't meaningless. It expresses a reaction to a subject. It's the function of stopping at 'I'm offended' and offering no other objection that's the meaningless bit.

 

I took it to mean, in how people think things have to be changed or stopped just because they're offended, when I listened to it.

Edited by SithKoriandr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, we don't. The devs do. That's the problem with players getting what they want. :p

[EDIT: And no, not trying to bait you, I was curious as to what you think the majority of players want, not just the majority of posters in this thread]

 

The developers don't either. They can (and do) provide a wide range of content. They only need to decide which parts they'll put in, which they'll leave out and in which order. They certainly don't need to choose between, say, end-game content and SGRAs. They may choose to (which is their right as the makers of the game) but they don't need to.

 

EDIT: If you're actually wondering what I think the majority of players want, I think the player population is too split to agree on any one particular type of content and as cynical as it may be of me I definitely think most groups would claim the majority want what they do. I certainly don't think SGRAs are a priority for the majority of players but I doubt crafting is either. I can't really speak for the majority because I don't frequent most of the other boards.

 

I took it to mean, in how people think things have to be changed or stopped just because they're offended, when I listened to it.

 

That's what I mean by vetoing things on the basis of disliking them and for no other reason.

Edited by Kioma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't really speak for the majority because I don't frequent most of the other boards.

 

Probably lucky at that. Lot of arguing on some of them, not a lot of understanding or listening.

Edited by Bytemite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The developers don't either. They can (and do) provide a wide range of content. They only need to decide which parts they'll put in, which they'll leave out and in which order. They certainly don't need to choose between, say, end-game content and SGRAs. They may choose to (which is their right as the makers of the game) but they don't need to.

 

EDIT: If you're actually wondering what I think the majority of players want, I think the player population is too split to agree on any one particular type of content and as cynical as it may be of me I definitely think most groups would claim the majority want what they do. I certainly don't think SGRAs are a priority for the majority of players but I doubt crafting is either. I can't really speak for the majority because I don't frequent most of the other boards.

 

 

 

That's what I mean by vetoing things on the basis of disliking them and for no other reason.

 

Will have to disagree. I think the devs do need to figure out what the majority of players want, and out of that, what is the most cost effective for them, while, if we're lucky, implementing the things that are nice for some, but likely not cost effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahem:

 

 

Bold added by me for emphasis. Retooling old content may be a problem for you but it's certainly not the only problem you appear to have with the idea. People don't call things 'insignificant' lightly, nor do they toss about terms like 'if you must' if their position on a matter is neutral.

 

Besides, retooling old content - heaps of old content, not just adding in SGRAs (which would be easily one of the smaller changes if they went the herosexual route) - would certainly not be a waste. There's no denying the fact that the game was rushed and there are heaps of things that could stand improving. There could be more open PvP areas, companion quests, there could be free-control space missions, group space missions, more missions thrown in here and there to make levelling more enjoyable, there could be additional Advanced Class missions so levelling is a more varied experience between, say, Sith Assassin and Sith Sorcerer. They could put in chairs people can sit down on. They could include more in the way of galactic lore so people feel more immersed into the story.

 

Not everyone has already played the game so it certainly wouldn't be a waste for the new folk. These options and plenty more would potentially drag in more players - subscribers and no - and get SWTOR more money. And, as has been pointed out, they aren't changes that would need to all happen at once. Would new content be good? Yes. I'd have loved it if Makeb were considerably larger and more involved. But that doesn't mean the old stuff couldn't do with a work-over.

 

Besides, it's not taking them all that long; certainly not as long as you're implying. World of Warcraft is taking consistently longer. Burning Crusade came out three years after vanilla WoW. Wrath of the Lich King was almost two years after that, Cataclysm slightly over two years later, Mists of Pandaria almost two years later again. So if we use WoW as a model the SWTOR team is actually well ahead releasing new material (and that's not including the mini-events like the Grand Acquisitions Race and so forth). They could be doing nothing but patches and the occasional themed event until 2015, instead we've had several themed events and a digital expansion.

 

Yes, I personally consider the whole thing insignificant, but thats not important right now. My opinion that "retooling" old content is waste of time and resources isnt influenced by that at all. I would say the same thing about any kind of similar changing old content, even the new story aspects I would like. 1-50 story is good as it is. Lets think about new things to add, but add them to new content, because coming back to change old things would only make developing new story content slower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I personally consider the whole thing insignificant, but thats not important right now. My opinion that "retooling" old content is waste of time and resources isnt influenced by that at all. I would say the same thing about any kind of similar changing old content, even the new story aspects I would like. 1-50 story is good as it is. Lets think about new things to add, but add them to new content, because coming back to change old things would only make developing new story content slower.

 

This makes sense. Has anybody noticed in the Act 1 of various stories, the lightsabers still have huge hilts?

If that hasn't changed from beta, what are the chances of additional story options? Redesigning the cutscenes

would be cheaper than new voiceovers AND animations for SGRs. But it is not happening. It seems they are continuing to focus on new content. Que Sera, Sera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would be hard to have an open homosexual relationship, in the Empire perspective, as the Imperials are pretty much made after the Nazi party. Hell, idea behind the imperial agent came from the gestapo. the culture is based around how the Nazi's thought; and they killed homosexuals like dogs. I think from the Empire side, if they add SGR, they need to make it to where the relationship is not open to the public. We're talking about a fictional culture, who pretty much see aliens as the Nazis did the Jews; either killing them or putting them to work as slaves. From an Lore perspective, why would a bigoted culture, be accepting to homosexuality?

 

A fascist society like the empire, would identify specific roles for each type of individual based on race, social standing, etc. I'm sure they have their own ideas of what a proper relationship between two people is. In fact, you run into a pureblood on Korriban, that finds it despicable, that his ancestors mated with slaves, and believes, there needs to be an ethnic cleansing among the overseers. Then you have the noble class amongst the Empire, and on Kaas, you overhear a woman talking about how a relative of hers got with a person they consider a lesser, and about how this relative is now on her own because of it.

Edited by cool-dude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting.

I had always seen The Empire as being akin to Adam Sutler's UK. Still fascists.

Hatred of certain groups was used to rule by fear. Fear was a tool for control and a means to

complete domination. The henchmen were seen more than the leader. But you know the leader is to be feared.

In The Empire, the Emperor is not seen but greatly feared; even by the henchmen.

There is probably a Don't Ask Don't Tell policy in The Empire. "We know you're out there. Just keep it to yourself."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From an Lore perspective, why would a bigoted culture, be accepting to homosexuality?

 

Not all fascists are the same and not all bigotry is the same, either. You are assuming that all the values of the Empire are equal to the values of entirely Earth-based fascist governments, and that is a mistake.

 

For all we know, the Empire could up-hold artificial reproduction means to a higher standard than standard biological means, meaning that the idea of homosexuality being "wrong" or "less worthy" on the basis of reproduction is irrelevant. Simply because the Empire has a eugenics programme designed to create highly intelligent and efficient computers, does not mean that they therefore believe in a hierarchy based on race, gender or sexuality. The origins of eugenics are not necessarily as demonic as most people think, the science was largely usurped by racial purists (I don't agree with eugenics, mind, I'm just aware of a little of its history.)

 

And stop making the fascists=Nazis connection. It's wholly incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's half incorrect. The Nazis were kind of this weird merger between socialist ideas and fascist ideas - they had the health care and welfare systems and big civic programs like socialists for members of the party, but the brutal jackboot police state thing and their attitudes towards workers, businesses, and military conquest were fascist.

 

Hitler himself even expressed the idea that Nazism was a merger between both hard authoritarian left-wing and hard authoritarian right-wing ideologies with strong dose of cult-like nation and state worship, which just goes to show that if people go too extreme one way or the other, they end up going full-circle.

 

(TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC sorry)

 

As for the Empire, I might suggest that rampant sexism against women could lead to reduced homophobia and more tolerance towards homosexuality. This combination of attitude was fairly rare, but I can think of an example in Ancient Greece where this was common.

Edited by Bytemite
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah. Then yeah, basically. Nazis might have used some socialist ideas but despite the name (which was a remnant of socialists being in the party, very few of which were still around by Hitler's time) most of them didn't identify as socialists and really didn't like socialists. Hated Marx. Put socialist political dissenters in concentration camps.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought most of the prejudice in the Empire was based on people being weak. Aliens are slaves and discriminated against because however many hundred years ago their ancestors were not strong enough to prevent themselves from becoming slaves, therefore their descendants are weak as well. I haven't noticed much sexism in the Empire; there are a lot of highly ranked people who are women. I think the only reason homosexuality would be discriminated against would be if it was believed to be a sign of weakness or somehow make one less able to serve the Empire.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...