Jump to content

Same gender romance discussion


CommunitySupport

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Fixed that for you.

?

 

Nothing has been said about the romance content on Makeb only being "some flirts", or that the NPCs have been chosen at random. We could very well get a few characters integral to the Rise of the Hutt Cartel storyline that will be available for romance.

 

These are the last 2 yellow posts on the previous incarnation of this tread

 

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=5738268#post5738268

 

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=5757675#post5757675

 

The 2nd one is a response to a very eloquent post by Kioma. Joveth made a very clear distinction between SGR (flirting and romance options in general) and SGRA (romance arcs, something deeper than flirting).

 

Makeb will feature SGRs. That's how they wrote it, how they announced it. And they wrote it like that wich such distinction in mind. That's what Joveth was telling us, that they didn't write SGR by mistake or chance, because SGR and SGRA mean the same (they don't)

 

I wouldn't call this "nothing".

 

Furthermore, after Makeb, (who knows when because it's really really really really hard to make this content ) they promised more SGRs. They didn't promise SGRAs

 

Of course the NPCs chosen for flirts won't be actually random, sheesh. BW's writers will have very specific reasons to choose them, reasons most likely we will never know.

I said random because from my perspective it will look like that, given how unconsequential those flirts may be. It won't matter if you get "[Flirt]Hello !" to NPC A, NPC B, NPC C, etc.

Edited by wainot-keel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have they specifically said "No current Companions will not be SGR available." At any point? (Because there is a difference between that and "NPCs on Makeb will be SGR available")

 

 

 

....That is a very ambiguous answer.

 

 

Back at the Guild Summit, they... well, hinted, I guess is the word, that Companions could be. "We've always known who" "for who it makes sense".

 

As far as a straight answer goes.... I don't know. Reid dodged the topic, Joveth was akin to a Magic 8-Ball's "Reply hazy, try again" type answers, and I don't think Eric's said anything yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back at the Guild Summit, they... well, hinted, I guess is the word, that Companions could be. "We've always known who" "for who it makes sense".

 

As far as a straight answer goes.... I don't know. Reid dodged the topic, Joveth was akin to a Magic 8-Ball's "Reply hazy, try again" type answers, and I don't think Eric's said anything yet.

 

Mr. Musco has said he's reading our topic (but then, everyone said that) and has no information for us (just like before.) So situation normal and just as discouraging as before.

 

Mr. Hickman did say he knows we want companion romances, but that they're really hard, so Cthulhu knows what's happening there. I don't suspect Mr. Hood is available to give details (or aware that none have been given.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Musco has said he's reading our topic (but then, everyone said that) and has no information for us (just like before.) So situation normal and just as discouraging as before.

 

Mr. Hickman did say he knows we want companion romances, but that they're really hard, so Cthulhu knows what's happening there. I don't suspect Mr. Hood is available to give details (or aware that none have been given.)

 

In Hall's case, they'd just make him delete it again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I

I also find that a lot of people with strong opinions on who is or who is not gay, also seem to be blinded to the possibility of a character being bisexual. We like to put things into simple categories, but the fact of the matter is sexuality is a spectrum, and a person can sit anywhere along that spectrum between straight and gay. So it is short sighted to be so absolute about these characters.

)

 

Or blinded to the fact that despite having some personality traits that might suggest homosexuality does not in fact mean a person is actually homosexual or even bisexual. I say this based on that most of my life people tend to think I'm gay, but I'm not., nor am I bisexual. The fact that I strongly support LGBT rights despite being straight myself also confuses a lot of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stand firmly behind the idea that Corso Riggs is Bi. His chemistry with the Smuggler, Male or Female, is heavy.

 

I'm hoping that if he is the Smuggler's Gay Option that his romance will involve a brief sexuality crises :p

 

Damn, I really need to level my Smuggler before I can start commenting on Corso. I don't want to deal with his chauvinism, but mSmug's voice acting comes across a bland ._.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never understood accusations of Corso being chauvinistic. Mostly he just seems...well kind of old fashioned, but not in a disrespectful way.

 

It helps that Fem Smugglers can call him out on it all the time :3

Edited by Halinmonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think there's a difference between "chauvinistic" and old fashioned gentlemanly, but I haven't seen any evidence of him looking down on them or calling them weak. My smuggler was male though so I only saw how he reacted to female NPCs and companions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think there's a difference between "chauvinistic" and old fashioned gentlemanly, but I haven't seen any evidence of him looking down on them or calling them weak. My smuggler was male though so I only saw how he reacted to female NPCs and companions.

 

He doesn't look down at females at all. He's the farm boy gentleman type. That of course will come off as chauvinistic to many, which is funny, seeing as some who say that also say "He's bi! Make him SGR so I can romance him!" when he'd likely act the same way and say the same things. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I just want to see Corso have a brief Gay Freak-out where he realizes he's starting to develop feelings for the Captain and is all "I'VE NEVER FELT THIS WAY ABOUT A MAN BEFORE WHAT'S HAPPENING" And the Captain can be all "Relax, this is a completely normally reaction to my awesome :cool:"

 

Or something like that. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or blinded to the fact that despite having some personality traits that might suggest homosexuality does not in fact mean a person is actually homosexual or even bisexual. I say this based on that most of my life people tend to think I'm gay, but I'm not., nor am I bisexual. The fact that I strongly support LGBT rights despite being straight myself also confuses a lot of people.

 

Well, obviously that is the case. There's a reason why TV Tropes has entries for Straight Gay and Camp Straight, these things clearly exist as tropes in the media, so therefore they exist in reality too. It is yet another layer to the complicated spectrum that is human sexuality. (And remember this is without even mentioning asexuality, or separating out sexuality from romance).

 

As I said, you really can't tell a character's sexuality just by a limited view of their behaviour.

 

Also, the gay rights movement would get nowhere without our straight allies. So, thank you.

 

He doesn't look down at females at all. He's the farm boy gentleman type. That of course will come off as chauvinistic to many, which is funny, seeing as some who say that also say "He's bi! Make him SGR so I can romance him!" when he'd likely act the same way and say the same things. :p

 

Actually, we don't know that. It is likely he's going to be more "bromantic" towards a possible male PC love interest. He has been taught to treat women one way, and men another - that wouldn't change if he was bisexual.

Edited by Zandilar
Adding and addressing SithKoriandr's quote
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, obviously that is the case. There's a reason why TV Tropes has entries for Straight Gay and Camp Straight, these things clearly exist as tropes in the media, so therefore they exist in reality too. It is yet another layer to the complicated spectrum that is human sexuality. (And remember this is without even mentioning asexuality, or separating out sexuality from romance).

 

As I said, you really can't tell a character's sexuality just by a limited view of their behaviour.

 

Also, the gay rights movement would get nowhere without our straight allies. So, thank you.

 

 

 

Actually, we don't know that. It is likely he's going to be more "bromantic" towards a possible male PC love interest. He has been taught to treat women one way, and men another - that wouldn't change if he was bisexual.

 

You're right, we don't know that, my post was going more along with the idea of some posters saying "Just switch the female/male tags"

 

Inwhich case, he would treat the PC the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, we don't know that. It is likely he's going to be more "bromantic" towards a possible male PC love interest. He has been taught to treat women one way, and men another - that wouldn't change if he was bisexual.

 

You know, for some reason I'm reminded of a quote I saw that was attributed to the Milk movie.

 

mSmug: ...and Corso, one of these days you'll have my babies.

Corso: Not sure it works that way, Captain.

mSmug: You don't know until you try.

 

I don't know ._. it could be funny, but I'm not funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn, I really need to level my Smuggler before I can start commenting on Corso. I don't want to deal with his chauvinism, but mSmug's voice acting comes across a bland ._.

 

Give him a shot! I thought so too at first, but the voice has grown on me. It suits him, IMO. (Speaking as someone who normally chooses the snarky or diplomatic dialogue options).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just wanna give my 2 cents on the SGR subject. I made a fem sith warrior before I even knew that romance was possible in this game. Then I acquired vette and I looked up the companions. In vette's profile it says Romance = yes. In Quinn's profile it said Romance = yes (light side female) so I immediately assumed I could romance vette as a fem sith. I was actually very disappointed to learn that my only romance option was a dude. I'm glad that they're eventually putting it in. And BW is getting a lot of flack for it only with working on 1 planet at first, but honestly, there has to be A LOT of work involved. Writing new dialogue, recording voices, programming it all in, testing. For a game so massive as SW:TOR, that would take at least a year. Glad they're finally, slowly but surely, adding it to the game. I just hope it happens before I reach lvl 55 with every class.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My only hope is that this isn't a "Well, we'll give them Makeb and maybe they'll just go away". *sighs* With so many changes going on at EAware, my hope continues to dwindle. I so want to make a FemShep Trooper. But I just can't bring myself to do it without a Liara at my side. I would love for Azshara Zavaros to be romancable for my Fem Sith Inquisitor and many others. But my hope continues to fade. I still try to remain upbeat. But I don't know how much longer I can do that. I don't know how much of what Gonzoles said was lip service or how much was truth. They aren't giving anything for us to go on.

 

Yes yes, I know. They can't exactly show us anything. *rubs temple* I just have a bad feeling about this. LIke this is all one massive con job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes yes, I know. They can't exactly show us anything. *rubs temple* I just have a bad feeling about this. LIke this is all one massive con job.
Really not surprising with this game. They need to start keeping their promises, even if they were made before free-to-play and all that, they still said "soon," "sooner than you expect!," "get ready for what's coming!", etc. Not all that much progress really... (speech bubbles, hood toggle, space, etc etc).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think EA is about to win "Worst company of the Year" award again. Is it pretty bad when I wish SOE would have gotten the rights to this game? I mean...I hate to say it, but Smedley is actaully trying to turn his company around. At least SOE has kept their promises. Not always good ones, but they have kept them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think there's a difference between "chauvinistic" and old fashioned gentlemanly, but I haven't seen any evidence of him looking down on them or calling them weak. My smuggler was male though so I only saw how he reacted to female NPCs and companions.

 

Actually, being and old fashioned gentleman is rooted in traditions of chauvinism. It's important to recognize that chauvinism isn't misogyny. Chauvinism doesn't require a hatred of women. Traditionally defined, chauvinism does require a belief of superiority, but you don't have to have a chauvinist mentality to engage in chauvinist actions and traditions.

 

Corso believes that women should be treated in a certain way because they are women. That's chauvinist, and nonsense. People should be treated as they desire or deserve based on who they are, what they want, and what they've done. Not their gender.

 

Opening doors, pulling out chairs, or otherwise "treating a woman like a lady" is rooted in the idea that men should treat women like porcelain dolls or delicate flowers. A man doing these things might not mean anything negative by it, but it carries a negative connotation.

 

That's not to say that no man should ever treat a woman like a lady, or act in an old fashioned gentlemanly manner. There are no shortage of women who want to be treated that way. But there are also no shortage of women who don't want to be treated that way.

 

Pulling out a chair for a woman who enjoys that treatment is polite. Insisting on treating all women a certain way because you think that's how one treats women is chauvinistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

Opening doors, pulling out chairs, or otherwise "treating a woman like a lady" is rooted in the idea that men should treat women like porcelain dolls or delicate flowers. A man doing these things might not mean anything negative by it, but it carries a negative connotation.

 

That's not to say that no man should ever treat a woman like a lady, or act in an old fashioned gentlemanly manner. There are no shortage of women who want to be treated that way. But there are also no shortage of women who don't want to be treated that way.

 

Pulling out a chair for a woman who enjoys that treatment is polite. Insisting on treating all women a certain way because you think that's how one treats women is chauvinistic.

I once received flak for something as simple as holding the door open. This was a few years ago, but I got barked at "I don't need you hold the door open for me!"

 

It was a bit of a surprise and wholly uncalled for, as I do this for both women AND men. If I'm at the door, and it's not automatic, and there's someone coming up behind me, I hold the door for them.

 

I've always thought it of it as a point of etiquette, or respect.

 

It think it's important to distinguish between a school of people who were raised into believing in inherent superiority, and people who were just taught "this is polite behavior"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once received flak for something as simple as holding the door open. This was a few years ago, but I got barked at "I don't need you hold the door open for me!"

 

It was a bit of a surprise and wholly uncalled for, as I do this for both women AND men. If I'm at the door, and it's not automatic, and there's someone coming up behind me, I hold the door for them.

 

I've always thought it of it as a point of etiquette, or respect.

 

It think it's important to distinguish between a school of people who were raised into believing in inherent superiority, and people who were just taught "this is polite behavior"

 

Ditto. I do this for anyone, male or female, young or old, rich or poor because I'm a polite person. I understand why people might think I'm being sexist but it's not the case. Lots of behavioural modes have changed meaning over the years (Samhain to Hallowe'en, Yule to Christmas, chasing invading tribes away to running after the marriage car as it leaves) and I can see a great deal of benefit to this one being the same. Rather than 'Don't hold doors open for women' there's no reason it couldn't change to 'hold doors open for anyone'.

 

Having said that y'all DO know this whole conversation is going to get purged, right?

 

On that note while I have no inherent issue with the use of the term I'd like to point out that originally 'Chauvinism' referred to Nicholas Chauvin's overwhelming belief in Napoleon's (and by extension Napoleon's forces') superiority. That's why the mistaken belief of male superiority over women is called 'male chauvinism'. Just thought you'd like to know (though you probably already do). Chauvinism doesn't have to have anything at all to do with gender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once received flak for something as simple as holding the door open. This was a few years ago, but I got barked at "I don't need you hold the door open for me!"

 

It was a bit of a surprise and wholly uncalled for, as I do this for both women AND men. If I'm at the door, and it's not automatic, and there's someone coming up behind me, I hold the door for them.

 

I've always thought it of it as a point of etiquette, or respect.

 

It think it's important to distinguish between a school of people who were raised into believing in inherent superiority, and people who were just taught "this is polite behavior"

 

While there may be a few who see it as that way, there's so many more who appreciate it :p

 

Anyone who see's that as bad, should be grouped along with those who don't want SGR and basically ignored!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...