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

theUndead's Avatar


theUndead
01.13.2013 , 12:06 AM | #461
Quote: Originally Posted by Pvtcarnage View Post
I'm not advocating for something a small majority wants added to a game, so I'm not pushing a agenda.
First of all I am not flaming and to a degree perhaps you have a point However,I asked this of the OP now I am going to ask this of you. Could you kindly provide proof that the player base that wants SGR's are a minority? Also I do not think it is completely fair to label those who are in favor of SGR's to be having a agenda. The reason in my opinion for the hostility is that this feature was always going to be put in the game but was always pushed back because of other more important game priories and this we understand. But now that it is finally getting implemented some people are calling for it's removal without solid reasons and thus we feel sometimes we are being pushed into a corner. Again I am not saying you do not have a point but I think it is a bit more complicated than simply saying it is a agenda.
The Hellion Legacy (Harbinger) The Duma Legacy (Shadowlands)
Referal Link
Quote: Originally Posted by EricMusco View Post
As theUndead mentioned, I can't exactly spell out all of our policies in depth, but that should hopefully cover your concerns.

markcymru's Avatar


markcymru
01.13.2013 , 10:32 AM | #462
Quote: Originally Posted by Pvtcarnage
I'm not advocating for something a small majority wants added to a game, so I'm not pushing a agenda.
Throughout this debate we keep seeing the same weasel words used by the anti-SGR crowd: for example. “agenda”, “vocal minority”, “pandering”, “vast majority”, “core features”. All of which are designed to win the debate by putting down the pro-SGR position by using words that beg the question or appeal to the prejudices of the reader.

The pro-SGR posters never discuss anything else but their reasons for wanting SGRs in SWTOR (at least I’ve never seen it on this forum). So to say “agenda” about the wish to see SGRs in SWTOR is not only slimy arguing but it’s also false AND is against the rules of this forum: it’s bringing into the debate the terminology and reasoning of the extreme real-life anti-LGBT groups and should therefore be a bannable offense.
“The comments on any article about feminism justify feminism.” — Lewis's Law

Lent_San's Avatar


Lent_San
01.13.2013 , 10:45 AM | #463
Quote: Originally Posted by markcymru View Post
Throughout this debate we keep seeing the same weasel words used by the anti-SGR crowd: for example. “agenda”, “vocal minority”, “pandering”, “vast majority”, “core features”. All of which are designed to win the debate by putting down the pro-SGR position by using words that beg the question or appeal to the prejudices of the reader.
The pro-SGR posters never discuss anything else but their reasons for wanting SGRs in SWTOR (at least I’ve never seen it on this forum). So to say “agenda” about the wish to see SGRs in SWTOR is not only slimy arguing but it’s also false AND is against the rules of this forum: it’s bringing into the debate the terminology and reasoning of the extreme real-life anti-LGBT groups and should therefore be a bannable offense.
I fully agree.

TheBBP's Avatar


TheBBP
01.13.2013 , 04:05 PM | #464
Quote: Originally Posted by theUndead View Post
First of all I am not flaming and to a degree perhaps you have a point However,I asked this of the OP now I am going to ask this of you. Could you kindly provide proof that the player base that wants SGR's are a minority? Also I do not think it is completely fair to label those who are in favor of SGR's to be having a agenda. The reason in my opinion for the hostility is that this feature was always going to be put in the game but was always pushed back because of other more important game priories and this we understand. But now that it is finally getting implemented some people are calling for it's removal without solid reasons and thus we feel sometimes we are being pushed into a corner. Again I am not saying you do not have a point but I think it is a bit more complicated than simply saying it is a agenda.
I am not sure what thread you are reading. This thread does not call for the removal of anything. It merely states my opinion that putting SGRs in ahead of other much needed fixes and additions that a much smaller portion of the player base is being catered to. It is of my opinion that there are other things that they could have done that would positively affect this game for most everybody.

Nowhere have I said that SGRs do not belong or that they should be removed.
Crosswire - Republic Commando
Commander - The Way of the Maker Christian/Family-rated Guild
Ebon Hawk

Xedis's Avatar


Xedis
01.13.2013 , 05:35 PM | #465
I agree completely. The money and labor really could have been spent elsewhere in the game.

jumay's Avatar


jumay
01.13.2013 , 06:12 PM | #466
The romance options in this game are lacking in my opinion as it is. Once you complete the story arc, there is no change in the way you interact with your companions at all. My trooper hasn't said anything of consequence to Elara since last January.

To waste design time on such a flawed concept is a bad use of resources. There are many more things on the "wall of crazy" that demand design time to make this game progress.

DarthBandeth's Avatar


DarthBandeth
01.13.2013 , 09:33 PM | #467
Because previous Bioware games have had SGR, I will say that it should have been included at the beginning since there was romance options for heterosexual characters.

But, at this point in time there's so many issues in this game that I felt that the resources used could have been spent more wisely. That does not mean that I think SGR should be taken away, just that I think people could have waited until we got a real expansion instead of the 10 dollar one planet no personal class story patch.
"No amount of action or explosions is as interesting as a good story." ~ Christian bale

Stole this CE key off of a dead fan.

Kahotep's Avatar


Kahotep
01.14.2013 , 12:23 PM | #468
A few days ago I said that this thread was simply mean spirited. I stand by that statement. All moral and political arguments aside, the thrust of the argument is "Why should those people get what they wanted, when I haven't got everything I wanted yet?"

What I wonder about the OP (and the people like him) is, does he have no sense of enjoyment in seeing other people being made happy?

darklordpotter's Avatar


darklordpotter
01.14.2013 , 02:27 PM | #469
Quote: Originally Posted by Pvtcarnage View Post
This is not a romantic themed game it's a star wars themed game. And do I hate romantic scenes in a action flic? Yes.......
Guessing you hate a lot of action films then as vast amounts of them have romance scenes of varying degrees of cringeworthyness.

/OT I don't believe the addition of SGR flirts for NPCs on Makeb consumes meaningful amounts of resources as they will almost certainly just make those NPCs PCsexual (Hawkesexual if you prefer DA2) and if they were going to add the flirts for one gender it costs tiny amounts to have both genders VAs' read them.

Besides if you want to look at things draining resources look at the Cartel Market and it's "new" armour every week.

darklordpotter's Avatar


darklordpotter
01.14.2013 , 02:34 PM | #470
Quote: Originally Posted by Pvtcarnage View Post
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.
Why does adding a button labelled [flirt} ruin your experience?

Really? Name 10 heck make it five mainstream 80s movies with SGRs in where the people participating where not either:
a) dead or mortally ill by the end of the film or
b) villains

or c) both