Sign in to follow this  
KestrelPi

Massive Chalice and same sex couples

Recommended Posts

Hmmm, I think we'll have to respectfully agree to disagree on the straight standard thing. I see your point and I see why you'd want everyone to see everyone as a question mark, but humans are opinion forming, group forming, categorizing, reactionary machines. I don't see a problem with putting people in groups or categories, people are people, we are a subset of the things that make us up. Those things are categorizable, and as a species, we will categorize and identify. It's just what we do... we are monkeys after all. Pretty monkeys, but monkeys none the less. We are a poorly evolved species with a vast array of flaws. This may be one of many flaws... though it has ensured our survival up to this point so it's hard to say it's all bad, though the bad of it is surely clearly visible should we divine it. I worry this will be a load of non sense to you... I hope I've at least put forth a cogent concept.

As for your second paragraph... You SHOULD have been able to choose options for your Shepard. It should have been your choice as to whether or not you wanted to make a choice of romance or not... not just a gay Shepard who didn't make a choice because there were no options.

Steve Cortez in Mass Effect 3 is a perfect example to me of a great character who is also gay. He is well defined, you know what to expect from him in both battle(tremendous pilot) and in non battle life. I can connect with the character because I can understand him better, I feel for him when he loses his husband, one of the most heart wrenching scenes in the series for me. When he tries to divine whether I'm gay or not at the bar, it makes sense, he's gay, and would like to have a relationship with someone, my Shepard perhaps suits his fancy, it's a very understandable, cogent well structured character and personal story development I think is what I'm trying to say I guess... hope I didn't lose you in this crazy tangent.

Hopefully in the future when you're on the tube and you see a picture of two people on a couch it'll become what you'd best appreciate in that situation, with technology, should it be straight, two men, two women, or anything in between.

Since you posted I expanded a little on a few points, particularly the last paragraph. All I want to say is that I think it would be a very bad world in which I could just ignore everything that was different to me at the flick of a switch, as if that's some kind of solution to discrimination. It would drive people further apart, rather than teaching them to respect differences as part of life. While I still don't think you're homophobic or bad, I must admit that I do find it rather shocking that you think that that would be an appropriate kind of solution to these problems. I don't think I'll find myself alone there.

And I still don't think you're getting the 'straight standard' thing. Yes, people categorise. But why should that determine who has more claim to an indeterminate result? There is no default, there is only what's more or less probable. As soon as we start making judgements about the way things are by default, that's just a hair's breath away from judging that something SHOULD be a certain way, and that's where discrimination starts. You might think it's not a big deal, but it really is, it's the seed from which all forms of discrimination grow.

Why? I don't like unabated gang violence so I don't go to South Central Los Angeles. I don't like bell peppers so I don't let the vile insidious weeds infect my salads, I don't appreciate gay sex so I don't go to gay bars seeking it. We discriminate all the time, discriminating is how we stay alive a lot of the time, and discriminating isn't wrong or bad, all that matters is how you treat people, Me not liking gay sex/romance is fine, me not liking gay people, working with them, partying with them, etc. isn't fine.

Being able to view a situation to your liking doesn't offend any of this it just allows the person viewing it to experience it to their liking. Like should I eat well done steak because it exists and I've discriminated against it because I don't like it, or just keep eating medium rare steak because it suits me? Or(as a less tasteful example) Should I watch gay p0rn just as well as straight p0rn(should I watch p0rn at all) just because it exists? Or should I discriminate against it as it doesn't suit my tastes and vie for a more appealing option? Just like with the sign in the tube, if you could have one more visually appealing to you, without it affecting anyone else, as it would appear straight to them, I don't think anyone is the lesser for having seen/experienced something more in tune with their desires/liking's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I think we'll have to respectfully agree to disagree on the straight standard thing. I see your point and I see why you'd want everyone to see everyone as a question mark, but humans are opinion forming, group forming, categorizing, reactionary machines. I don't see a problem with putting people in groups or categories, people are people, we are a subset of the things that make us up. Those things are categorizable, and as a species, we will categorize and identify. It's just what we do... we are monkeys after all. Pretty monkeys, but monkeys none the less. We are a poorly evolved species with a vast array of flaws. This may be one of many flaws... though it has ensured our survival up to this point so it's hard to say it's all bad, though the bad of it is surely clearly visible should we divine it. I worry this will be a load of non sense to you... I hope I've at least put forth a cogent concept.

As for your second paragraph... You SHOULD have been able to choose options for your Shepard. It should have been your choice as to whether or not you wanted to make a choice of romance or not... not just a gay Shepard who didn't make a choice because there were no options.

Steve Cortez in Mass Effect 3 is a perfect example to me of a great character who is also gay. He is well defined, you know what to expect from him in both battle(tremendous pilot) and in non battle life. I can connect with the character because I can understand him better, I feel for him when he loses his husband, one of the most heart wrenching scenes in the series for me. When he tries to divine whether I'm gay or not at the bar, it makes sense, he's gay, and would like to have a relationship with someone, my Shepard perhaps suits his fancy, it's a very understandable, cogent well structured character and personal story development I think is what I'm trying to say I guess... hope I didn't lose you in this crazy tangent.

Hopefully in the future when you're on the tube and you see a picture of two people on a couch it'll become what you'd best appreciate in that situation, with technology, should it be straight, two men, two women, or anything in between.

Since you posted I expanded a little on a few points, particularly the last paragraph. All I want to say is that I think it would be a very bad world in which I could just ignore everything that was different to me at the flick of a switch, as if that's some kind of solution to discrimination. It would drive people further apart, rather than teaching them to respect differences as part of life. While I still don't think you're homophobic or bad, I must admit that I do find it rather shocking that you think that that would be an appropriate kind of solution to these problems. I don't think I'll find myself alone there.

And I still don't think you're getting the 'straight standard' thing. Yes, people categorise. But why should that determine who has more claim to an indeterminate result? There is no default, there is only what's more or less probable. As soon as we start making judgements about the way things are by default, that's just a hair's breath away from judging that something SHOULD be a certain way, and that's where discrimination starts. You might think it's not a big deal, but it really is, it's the seed from which all forms of discrimination grow.

Why? I don't like unabated gang violence so I don't go to South Central Los Angeles. I don't like bell peppers so I don't let the vile insidious weeds infect my salads, I don't appreciate gay sex so I don't go to gay bars seeking it. We discriminate all the time, discriminating is how we stay alive a lot of the time, and discriminating isn't wrong or bad, all that matters is how you treat people, Me not liking gay sex/romance is fine, me not liking gay people, working with them, partying with them, etc. isn't fine.

Being able to view a situation to your liking doesn't offend any of this it just allows the person viewing it to experience it to their liking. Like should I eat well done steak because it exists and I've discriminated against it because I don't like it, or just keep eating medium rare steak because it suits me? Or(as a less tasteful example) Should I watch gay p0rn just as well as straight p0rn(should I watch p0rn at all) just because it exists? Or should I discriminate against it as it doesn't suit my tastes and vie for a more appealing option? Just like with the sign in the tube, if you could have one more visually appealing to you, without it affecting anyone else, as it would appear straight to them, I don't think anyone is the lesser for having seen/experienced something more in tune with their desires/liking's.

But you're not just talking about not engaging with something. You're talking about building technology to enable us to basically pretend something doesn't even exist. Which is an exactly backwards solution to tackling bigotry and homophobia.

You're right. I don't watch straight porn. I don't eat well done steak. But you know what? I do eat with people who eat well done steak, and I don't ask that they change their behaviour while I'm around. And I do have friends who are straight couples, and I don't ask them not to kiss each other or act like a couple when I'm around, or turn their family photographs because it's not my thing. And I think if I did ask that, they'd be quite within their rights to tell me to go to hell. When I get on the tube I do see depictions of straight couples in adverts. I notice it, because my relationship is different to that, but I'm not offended. I don't feel like my life would be enriched by never having to see that again - in fact, quite the opposite.

If you were in a straight couple, and your gay friend came around and started telling you that they didn't want to see you kiss or show affection because they found it 'icky' and you weren't offended by that? Well, I wouldn't believe you.

I can make my own choices about what I personally do. But it doesn't help me ANY to just press a button that lets me pretend as if the rest of the world is just like me too, and not have to encounter the 'unpleasantness' that someone other people might actually feel different. Encountering difference is GOOD for us. It makes us better people, and you're proposing a world that completely undermines that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in real life there were gay princes/kings that had to go through the business of creating heirs and even with the straight kings/princes the marriages and heirs were more of a business transaction than loving relationships, maybe the sexuality of the heroes could be a trait they have, i don't know if that would have any effect on the game but it could be there and it wouldn't need to be a big issue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Final point directed at Mugen, which I hope will explain why my reaction to his last posts has been so negative. Please read and consider it:

I'm not disgusted by seeing straight people kiss, or hold hands, or do relationshipy things. I'm not even uncomfortable. Why do you think that is? When you think about it, the answer is clear: it's because I grew up in a society that showed me hetereosexual relationships ALL THE TIME. I'm used to it. I saw it on TV, in movies, in the playground, in books, stories, in the conversations I would have with my peers, in my family and their friends.

The twisted thing about just how ingrained it is in society, is that even as a gay person I had to grow 'used' to seeing gay stuff. It made me feel weirdly uncomfortable at first, because it was such a rare thing for me to encounter. I knew I was attracted to it, but it 'felt' wrong, for perhaps a couple of years until I could get used to it.

Some people NEVER get over that stage. Some people are so disgusted by their own feelings that they can't live with themselves or repress it for their whole lives. Meanwhile, some straight people are so disgusted by other people's feelings that they decide they will make laws to oppress them and encourage or commit violence against them. So that's why I find it incredibly distasteful to suggest that that the solution is to try and create more ways for people never to have to encounter something they're not comfortable with. It's not the solution, it's the EXACT PROBLEM.

Finally, finally. How would this technology work with kids. Would their parents make sure they only saw straight stuff, on the assumption they'll grow up straight? How would that solve anything? Would a gay couple adopting a kid only expose their kid to gay stuff? The only answer which isn't absurd is that 'gah, throw this technology away immediately, it's vile!'

I'm done on this tangent, back to the awesome discussion about how Massive Chalice could handle different sorts of relationships!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you're not just talking about not engaging with something. You're talking about building technology to enable us to basically pretend something doesn't even exist. Which is an exactly backwards solution to tackling bigotry and homophobia.

You're right. I don't watch straight porn. I don't eat well done steak. But you know what? I do eat with people who eat well done steak, and I don't ask that they change their behaviour while I'm around. And I do have friends who are straight couples, and I don't ask them not to kiss each other or act like a couple when I'm around, or turn their family photographs because it's not my thing. And I think if I did ask that, they'd be quite within their rights to tell me to go to hell. When I get on the tube I do see depictions of straight couples in adverts. I notice it, because my relationship is different to that, but I'm not offended. I don't feel like my life would be enriched by never having to see that again - in fact, quite the opposite.

If you were in a straight couple, and your gay friend came around and started telling you that they didn't want to see you kiss or show affection because they found it 'icky' and you weren't offended by that? Well, I wouldn't believe you.

I can make my own choices about what I personally do. But it doesn't help me ANY to just press a button that lets me pretend as if the rest of the world is just like me too, and not have to encounter the 'unpleasantness' that someone other people might actually feel different. Encountering difference is GOOD for us. It makes us better people, and you're proposing a world that completely undermines that.

We're not talking about asking real gay people and real straight people to change their behaviors at all, we're just talking about using technology to make life more appealing should we chose it, if you wanted it to be a straight couple it would be, if you wanted it to be a gay couple it would be, if you wanted it to be a polygamous or polyamourous group on a picture or in a game it could be.

At no point was I ever saying we need to chastise rl gays for public displays or vica versa, but games are a world you can make into anything you want. If you want it all you can have it all, if you just want some you can have some. Real life is the way it is, games don't have to emulate it at all. If I want huge titties and a grade 5 education on my in game wife(who is of age) because i spend my real life with intellectually stimulating women and let's face it, often irritating to no end women who remember every fing thing all the fing time and ask the most mundane infuriatingly loaded questions only to chide you... that's fine, obviously you couldn't stand being with that in game woman for more than the duration of the game, but she's fun to play with a bit. Sometimes simple and easy is nice, relaxing. Not everything has to be a figurative sermon on the mount. Not every aspect of everything has to include everything. Not everything has to be scrutinized under a microscope. Things can be just for fun.

I was never talking about any of the things you brought up, and I've been nothing but supportive of rl gays and have never supported any legislation that would seek to inhibit gay rights. We're talking about preferred personal preferences, not undermining other peoples abilities or capacities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everything has to be a figurative sermon on the mount. Not every aspect of everything has to include everything. Not everything has to be scrutinized under a microscope. Things can be just for fun.

And so finally we get to your real argument, which is rather disappointing and boils down to the tedious canard that I'm just taking it too seriously. As JP LeBreton put it the other day on Twitter: "When you're against something someone else thinks is fine, the first thing they try to subtract from their image of you is a sense of humor."

I was never talking about any of the things you brought up
The thing is, yes you were. You might not realise it, but everything you were talking about is VERY much to do with the things I brought up. I tried to explain why this was.

I'm disappointed, because I think you're better than that. Anyway, I left another post a little way above, which I hope you'll read and take in. I really am done on this tangent, now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Final point directed at Mugen, which I hope will explain why my reaction to his last posts has been so negative. Please read and consider it:

I'm not disgusted by seeing straight people kiss, or hold hands, or do relationshipy things. I'm not even uncomfortable. Why do you think that is? When you think about it, the answer is clear: it's because I grew up in a society that showed me hetereosexual relationships ALL THE TIME. I'm used to it. I saw it on TV, in movies, in the playground, in books, stories, in the conversations I would have with my peers, in my family and their friends.

The twisted thing about just how ingrained it is in society, is that even as a gay person I had to grow 'used' to seeing gay stuff. It made me feel weirdly uncomfortable at first, because it was such a rare thing for me to encounter. I knew I was attracted to it, but it 'felt' wrong, for perhaps a couple of years until I could get used to it.

Some people NEVER get over that stage. Some people are so disgusted by their own feelings that they can't live with themselves or repress it for their whole lives. Meanwhile, some straight people are so disgusted by other people's feelings that they decide they will make laws to oppress them and encourage or commit violence against them. So that's why I find it incredibly distasteful to suggest that that the solution is to try and create more ways for people never to have to encounter something they're not comfortable with. It's not the solution, it's the EXACT PROBLEM.

Finally, finally. How would this technology work with kids. Would their parents make sure they only saw straight stuff, on the assumption they'll grow up straight? How would that solve anything? Would a gay couple adopting a kid only expose their kid to gay stuff? The only answer which isn't absurd is that 'gah, throw this technology away immediately, it's vile!'

I'm done on this tangent, back to the awesome discussion about how Massive Chalice could handle different sorts of relationships!

I was and have been clearly in support of gay characters in media and games as per my statements about Steve Cortez. And I agree with you, actually I never contested that gay people could and should play active rolls in games, ALL I ever said was when given the choices of MY characters sexual or romantic involvements. Which I think Identifies with and supports the desire for gay normalcy in media.

As for the legislation against gays and all that I've always been against it, never supported it, it's stupid, always has been and is inexcusable, and not something I ever argued for in any of my posts I don't think. My solution was not to eliminate gay imagery from media, I thought I said quite clearly several times gay characters SHOULD be in games. Just that their sexual/romantic options should be completely avoidable for straight players and vica versa, should the player be so inclined. This wouldn't remove ANY of the gay characters from the game, it would just be more in line with ones desirable preferences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not everything has to be a figurative sermon on the mount. Not every aspect of everything has to include everything. Not everything has to be scrutinized under a microscope. Things can be just for fun.

And so finally we get to your real argument, which is rather disappointing and boils down to the tedious canard that I'm just taking it too seriously. As JP LeBreton put it the other day on Twitter: "When you're against something someone else thinks is fine, the first thing they try to subtract from their image of you is a sense of humor."

I was never talking about any of the things you brought up
The thing is, yes you were. You might not realise it, but everything you were talking about is VERY much to do with the things I brought up. I tried to explain why this was.

I'm disappointed, because I think you're better than that. Anyway, I left another post a little way above, which I hope you'll read and take in. I really am done on this tangent, now.

I don't see how I was trying to subtract your sense of humor from you... and I apologize for coming off as such, clearly I've made and error. Your ending a discussion on an 'I gotchya' caveat, even though it's clearly a misunderstanding, then following it up with self righteous crap like "The thing is, yes you were. You might not realise it, but everything you were talking about is VERY much to do with the things I brought up. I tried to explain why this was." is to completely ignore everything I said about how gay characters should be in games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Real life is the way it is, games don't have to emulate it at all. If I want huge titties and a grade 5 education on my in game wife(who is of age) because i spend my real life with intellectually stimulating women and let's face it, often irritating to no end women who remember every fing thing all the fing time and ask the most mundane infuriatingly loaded questions only to chide you... that's fine, obviously you couldn't stand being with that in game woman for more than the duration of the game, but she's fun to play with a bit. Sometimes simple and easy is nice, relaxing.

guys i'll be honest and say that i haven't really read your big long posts in this thread. this quote did catch my eye though and i totally have to say where is my simple-minded wife with huge titties game? i'd definitely go for the t-shirt and poster tier on that kickstarter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Final point directed at Mugen, which I hope will explain why my reaction to his last posts has been so negative. Please read and consider it:

I'm not disgusted by seeing straight people kiss, or hold hands, or do relationshipy things. I'm not even uncomfortable. Why do you think that is? When you think about it, the answer is clear: it's because I grew up in a society that showed me hetereosexual relationships ALL THE TIME. I'm used to it. I saw it on TV, in movies, in the playground, in books, stories, in the conversations I would have with my peers, in my family and their friends.

The twisted thing about just how ingrained it is in society, is that even as a gay person I had to grow 'used' to seeing gay stuff. It made me feel weirdly uncomfortable at first, because it was such a rare thing for me to encounter. I knew I was attracted to it, but it 'felt' wrong, for perhaps a couple of years until I could get used to it.

Some people NEVER get over that stage. Some people are so disgusted by their own feelings that they can't live with themselves or repress it for their whole lives. Meanwhile, some straight people are so disgusted by other people's feelings that they decide they will make laws to oppress them and encourage or commit violence against them. So that's why I find it incredibly distasteful to suggest that that the solution is to try and create more ways for people never to have to encounter something they're not comfortable with. It's not the solution, it's the EXACT PROBLEM.

Finally, finally. How would this technology work with kids. Would their parents make sure they only saw straight stuff, on the assumption they'll grow up straight? How would that solve anything? Would a gay couple adopting a kid only expose their kid to gay stuff? The only answer which isn't absurd is that 'gah, throw this technology away immediately, it's vile!'

I'm done on this tangent, back to the awesome discussion about how Massive Chalice could handle different sorts of relationships!

I was and have been clearly in support of gay characters in media and games as per my statements about Steve Cortez. And I agree with you, actually I never contested that gay people could and should play active rolls in games, ALL I ever said was when given the choices of MY characters sexual or romantic involvements. Which I think Identifies with and supports the desire for gay normalcy in media.

As for the legislation against gays and all that I've always been against it, never supported it, it's stupid, always has been and is inexcusable, and not something I ever argued for in any of my posts I don't think. My solution was not to eliminate gay imagery from media, I thought I said quite clearly several times gay characters SHOULD be in games. Just that their sexual/romantic options should be completely avoidable for straight players and vica versa, should the player be so inclined. This wouldn't remove ANY of the gay characters from the game, it would just be more in line with ones desirable preferences.

Okay, I don't want to leave this on a sour note. So let me say that I totally understand that you have no personal desire to discriminate, and I'm not calling you a homophobe or ANYthing like that. However, I was trying to get two specific points across:

1) Even when you're not a homophobe, it's super easy to not notice when there's a problem, because of how society is.

2) Making it easier for things you're uncomfortable with to be invisible is not a solution, in fact it's the very thing that causes the problem in the first place.

If you understand anything from this conversation it's 2). If you agree with the main points I made in the above post there, then you HAVE to agree that building a world where it's super easy to just put everything we're uncomfortable with behind a wall would be just about the worst possible thing for society to actually grow up over these issues. You can't claim that has nothing to do with what you were saying: it directly goes back to your very first point about wanting an 'off' button for gay in games (and, indeed an 'off' button for straight). If you don't understand that then I'm baffled, I don't even know what to say.

BUT.... I do think you mean well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a pretty interesting idea, actually. Imagine, maybe your characters have some level of autonomy and decide against a strategic marriage and go off to live with their same-sex lover as a couple. At that point retiring them wouldn't really be an option to you, but because of their extended time on the battlefield they gain really super awesome abilities, but with no one to inherit them

So then perhaps the pressure would be to find some other hero to procreate and raise their kid to learn from those guys within their lifetime. That might mean retiring a very valuable hero on the battlefield for nothing if those gay heroes die in service, and then the kid's potential is diminished somewhat.

As mentioned a couple times here, adoption could also be an option. That might imply the existence of orphans, or couples who are willing to give up their children to come out of retirement. That could add another dynamic of the children inheriting certain abilities, and gaining new ones under the care of their foster parents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Final point directed at Mugen, which I hope will explain why my reaction to his last posts has been so negative. Please read and consider it:

I'm not disgusted by seeing straight people kiss, or hold hands, or do relationshipy things. I'm not even uncomfortable. Why do you think that is? When you think about it, the answer is clear: it's because I grew up in a society that showed me hetereosexual relationships ALL THE TIME. I'm used to it. I saw it on TV, in movies, in the playground, in books, stories, in the conversations I would have with my peers, in my family and their friends.

The twisted thing about just how ingrained it is in society, is that even as a gay person I had to grow 'used' to seeing gay stuff. It made me feel weirdly uncomfortable at first, because it was such a rare thing for me to encounter. I knew I was attracted to it, but it 'felt' wrong, for perhaps a couple of years until I could get used to it.

Some people NEVER get over that stage. Some people are so disgusted by their own feelings that they can't live with themselves or repress it for their whole lives. Meanwhile, some straight people are so disgusted by other people's feelings that they decide they will make laws to oppress them and encourage or commit violence against them. So that's why I find it incredibly distasteful to suggest that that the solution is to try and create more ways for people never to have to encounter something they're not comfortable with. It's not the solution, it's the EXACT PROBLEM.

Finally, finally. How would this technology work with kids. Would their parents make sure they only saw straight stuff, on the assumption they'll grow up straight? How would that solve anything? Would a gay couple adopting a kid only expose their kid to gay stuff? The only answer which isn't absurd is that 'gah, throw this technology away immediately, it's vile!'

I'm done on this tangent, back to the awesome discussion about how Massive Chalice could handle different sorts of relationships!

I was and have been clearly in support of gay characters in media and games as per my statements about Steve Cortez. And I agree with you, actually I never contested that gay people could and should play active rolls in games, ALL I ever said was when given the choices of MY characters sexual or romantic involvements. Which I think Identifies with and supports the desire for gay normalcy in media.

As for the legislation against gays and all that I've always been against it, never supported it, it's stupid, always has been and is inexcusable, and not something I ever argued for in any of my posts I don't think. My solution was not to eliminate gay imagery from media, I thought I said quite clearly several times gay characters SHOULD be in games. Just that their sexual/romantic options should be completely avoidable for straight players and vica versa, should the player be so inclined. This wouldn't remove ANY of the gay characters from the game, it would just be more in line with ones desirable preferences.

Okay, I don't want to leave this on a sour note. So let me say that I totally understand that you have no personal desire to discriminate, and I'm not calling you a homophobe or ANYthing like that. However, I was trying to get two specific points across:

1) Even when you're not a homophobe, it's super easy to not notice when there's a problem, because of how society is.

2) Making it easier for things you're uncomfortable with to be invisible is not a solution, in fact it's the very thing that causes the problem in the first place.

If you understand anything from this conversation it's 2). If you agree with the main points I made in the above post there, then you HAVE to agree that building a world where it's super easy to just put everything we're uncomfortable with behind a wall would be just about the worst possible thing for society to actually grow up over these issues. If you don't understand that then I'm baffled, I don't even know what to say.

BUT.... I do think you mean well.

Generally I agree with #1 though it's kind of a blanket statement and an over simplification, but for all intents and purposes I agree

and for #2 I AGREE!!! I said again and again there should be gay characters in games that have real gay feelings for other characters and even the main character should one desire that option, but removing that SINGLE option, WITHOUT REMOVING THE OTHER GAY CHARACTERS, doesn't at all diminish the gay presence and gay influence on the game that SHOULD be there. There's no reason for gay choices to be there for non gay players. We'd never use them and even if we did it would be an accident which would be immersion breaking to some extent. It's a tiny simple solution which DOESN'T diminish the gay presence of influence in the grand scheme of story telling one iota... UNLESS the design of the main character is SUPPOSED to be gay from the out set in which case it makes sense in terms of the narrative and I CHOSE to play a game with a gay lead(which I would) and it wasn't imposed on me either intentionally or accidentally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Brad, if I could just chip in my two cents, I love these ideas, I'd just ask that you consider having the option to research OR raising children available to the male / female couples too. I say this as a gay man, I find the idea of a same-sex couple in the game being 'the best at research' whilst the others are there 'just' for making babies makes me cringe a bit. I don't think the same-sex couples should be unique in their ability to aid research.

I love having the option for them all to do something, though. Perhaps a good balance could be to have all couples able to aid in some way (whether its research or a variety of other functions possibly assignable to couples), with 'making babies' being one that only the male/female couples can select from.

Love the idea behind the game, can't wait to see what you do with it =)

Oh I'm sorry if it came out that way! The concept was that you wouldn't be forced into anything. I don't think we should give advantages to same-sex couples, but at the same time I don't think we should disallow them.

Male/Female couples would also be able to research if you wanted to!

But also it's good to keep in mind that these are all just ideas at this point! Nothing's been set in stone... YET! :D!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it all comes down to the presentation, how much is inferred vs how much is shown.

You could show the mechanic Will Wright style where you click on a hero and are presented with a menu to evolve

it.

lets look at 2 examples:

1) Point system- at level 10 you can recycle your hero. You have 10 points. it costs 2 points to make a new hero. you can make one with 8 points pre-set or you can make 2 with 3 points pre-set all the way up to make 10 with no points.

2) Skill Tree Mix- lets say each hero has 3 skill trees with up to 3 tiers each. Each faction has it's own base skill trees. When you make a new hero you choose which skill trees or the first two tiers from each tree from any of the factions, mixing and matching as you desire. the final tiers are composed from only the factions you have direct control over/alliances with.

Neither of these ever specifically state how you managed to mix bloodlines. The player is free to make up their own story Sid Meier style.

Or it could be an elaborate series of actions like in Fable.

Take a specific hero from one faction and pair them with another faction. Tie in the current opinion of each faction for each other. This produces an amount of offspring based on a number of in game variables. You choose what attributes carry on or they are selected at random. All with elaborate actions, quests, mini games, cut scenes, ect.

It all comes down to what wold make it interesting enough to be enjoyable, efficient to produce, and robust enough to cater to everyone's play style.

These are cool ideas! But I'm trying to avoid "gamey" terms when talking about the heroes. Like when you say "recycle" I tense up a bit! :D!

I want players to be emotionally invested in their heroes and get attached to them. But more to the point mechanically, we don't want to destroy heroes that have children. If we end up going all the way with the nature/nurture system I can see some really awesome scenarios where you retire a hero, he or she has children, raises them to maturity, then they all return to the battlefield to fight side-by-side! Or if you really need the original parents on the battlefield ASAP, you could return them to service as soon as their child is born and then foster the child with another couple. Awesome possibilities! :D!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... I can see some really awesome scenarios where you retire a hero, he or she has children, raises them to maturity, then they all return to the battlefield to fight side-by-side! Or if you really need the original parents on the battlefield ASAP, you could return them to service as soon as their child is born and then foster the child with another couple. Awesome possibilities! :D!

All of these. In this type of game, the amount of options immensely adds to enjoyment and replayability I think!

Another mechanic I liked from Crusader Kings 1 / 2, was the ability to send some of my children off to study with other strong 'characters,' in game---as a means to either improve a relationship ("Here, take my child...I trust you.") or to cement a relationship (We'll be great friends on the battlefield for life! I got your back, bro!")

I am not sure if that sort of mechanic will be in MC, but in general I like lots of options when it comes to these sorts of games.

Look forward to it all.

Smiles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no reason for gay choices to be there for non gay players. We'd never use them and even if we did it would be an accident which would be immersion breaking to some extent.

Uh... why not?? I'm confused, this is the weirdest thing you've said!

I'd use the straight options. Even if I didn't have to, I'd want to. If I thought a Male Wizard and a Female Warrior would make an awesome battlemage son, I'd do that! Are you saying that if you had, say, two awesome warriors who both happened to be female and knew that together with their combined skills they'd be able to research an amazing weapon, you'd not consider making them a couple for that purpose?

Are you saying that straight people would be so distracted by the idea that there could be same sex couples in the game, that the best way to handle that is to remove the option? Genuinely? Gettoutatown...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Brad, if I could just chip in my two cents, I love these ideas, I'd just ask that you consider having the option to research OR raising children available to the male / female couples too. I say this as a gay man, I find the idea of a same-sex couple in the game being 'the best at research' whilst the others are there 'just' for making babies makes me cringe a bit. I don't think the same-sex couples should be unique in their ability to aid research.

I love having the option for them all to do something, though. Perhaps a good balance could be to have all couples able to aid in some way (whether its research or a variety of other functions possibly assignable to couples), with 'making babies' being one that only the male/female couples can select from.

Love the idea behind the game, can't wait to see what you do with it =)

Oh I'm sorry if it came out that way! The concept was that you wouldn't be forced into anything. I don't think we should give advantages to same-sex couples, but at the same time I don't think we should disallow them.

Male/Female couples would also be able to research if you wanted to!

But also it's good to keep in mind that these are all just ideas at this point! Nothing's been set in stone... YET! :D!

Thanks for clarifying Brad, all sounds awesome to me. I upped my pledge from 20 to 100 because it's clear to me you're all really listening to everyone's questions and concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no reason for gay choices to be there for non gay players. We'd never use them and even if we did it would be an accident which would be immersion breaking to some extent.

Uh... why not?? I'm confused, this is the weirdest thing you've said!

I'd use the straight options. Even if I didn't have to, I'd want to. If I thought a Male Wizard and a Female Warrior would make an awesome battlemage son, I'd do that! Are you saying that if you had, say, two awesome warriors who both happened to be female and knew that together with their combined skills they'd be able to research an amazing weapon, you'd not consider making them a couple for that purpose?

Are you saying that straight people would be so distracted by the idea that there could be same sex couples in the game, that the best way to handle that is to remove the option? Genuinely? Gerrof.

Nit picking again, and ignoring my more important points, but I'll bite. First of all, you're talking about some random male and female mages or warriors, not MY character, which I've said again and again would be fine. Now if the only option for my character was to have a homosexual relationship to produce an incredible mage/warrior/whatever, then yes that would be immersion breaking/problematic.

As much as you might not like it, straight people think straight, we think about women and traits they have which would benefit our children and vica versa for straight women. Gay relations really don't phase us as they're genetically irrelevant and when they're forced to cross our mind it's an irritating/uncomfortable feeling.

You don't have to understand it or like it, but there's no reason for us to be made to feel uncomfortable in the things we choose to do, and if we want pure straight options, pure gay options, or both options, we should be entitled to that. Games are about having fun, and if you want to reduce that fun by imposing your views on the game and forcing us to make those decisions and have those choices irrespective of our desire to do so is surely malevolent.

You should be able to make whatever choices you want in your game as should we, including, but not limited to, gay sex/romance options. All I'm asking for are OPTIONS. To be able for EVERYONE to play the game how they want to play it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as you might not like it, straight people think straight, we think about women and traits they have which would benefit our children and vica versa for straight women. Gay relations really don't phase us as they're genetically irrelevant and when they're forced to cross our mind it's an irritating/uncomfortable feeling.

I'm struggling to keep my cool here. Read that again. THINK ABOUT HOW IT SOUNDS.

I'm sorry that despite your desire for us to be treated equal, the idea that you might occasionally be reminded that two guys sometimes love each other is such an imposition. And before you say I'm misinterpreting you again, how else am I supposed to interpret 'when they're forced to cross our mind it's an irritating/uncomfortable feeling.'? Mm?

You know, you're right in one aspect. There IS no reason for you to be made to feel uncomfortable. The solution? STOP PERPETUATING A SOCIETY WHERE THESE THINGS ARE TREATED AS ALIEN.

Did you not read the part where I talked about how uncomfortable I was with MY OWN gay feelings when I first discovered them? What do you think the cause of that was? And how do you think your attitude is helping with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mugen, please stop talking about "how straight people think". You keep saying saying things that I, as a straight male, have never thought. It might be how you think, but don't assume that everyone else automatically feels the same way because they're also straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would people need to enter a relationship to research things together? Sure there's been researching couples throughout history, but it's not a requirement, and a lot of them worked together before they were even friends.

Free love (no marriage, everybody has sex with who they want), polygyny (one husband, many wives, patriachy, harems), and polyamory (any arrangement of more than two adults in a loving relationship) should be represented as well. In the media, there's one set formula for relationships that involves two people and they're meant to get married.

People who don't want to have children but still want relationships, so those heroes that don't want to have children are just going to die alone killing demons? That's forcing societal norms on people, as if relationships are only about children.

Genders, why stop at two? Clothes, transvestites, nudists, and never-nudes should be represented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as you might not like it, straight people think straight, we think about women and traits they have which would benefit our children and vica versa for straight women. Gay relations really don't phase us as they're genetically irrelevant and when they're forced to cross our mind it's an irritating/uncomfortable feeling.

I'm struggling to keep my cool here. Read that again. THINK ABOUT HOW IT SOUNDS.

I'm sorry that despite your desire for us to be treated equal, the idea that you might occasionally be reminded that two guys sometimes love each other is such an imposition. And before you say I'm misinterpreting you again, how else am I supposed to interpret 'when they're forced to cross our mind it's an irritating/uncomfortable feeling.'? Mm?

You know, you're right in one aspect. There IS no reason for you to be made to feel uncomfortable. The solution? STOP PERPETUATING A SOCIETY WHERE THESE THINGS ARE TREATED AS ALIEN.

Did you not read the part where I talked about how uncomfortable I was with MY OWN gay feelings when I first discovered them? What do you think the cause of that was? And how do you think your attitude is helping with that?

So... having an infinite number of gay characters in a game, doing/being any number of character descriptions, having you able to play the game however you want, isn't good enough, you need me to appreciate very personally(my character) your experiences regardless of my wants because you feel yours usurp mine? My desire to have options is ridiculous and your imposition of what are really still options in the same light, just less strict ones, is somehow a better idea? This is preposterous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would people need to enter a relationship to research things together? Sure there's been researching couples throughout history, but it's not a requirement, and a lot of them worked together before they were even friends.

Free love (no marriage, everybody has sex with who they want), polygyny (one husband, many wives, patriachy, harems), and polyamory (any arrangement of more than two adults in a loving relationship) should be represented as well. In the media, there's one set formula for relationships that involves two people and they're meant to get married.

People who don't want to have children but still want relationships, so those heroes that don't want to have children are just going to die alone killing demons? That's forcing societal norms on people, as if relationships are only about children.

Genders, why stop at two? Clothes, transvestites, nudists, and never-nudes should be represented.

Yup, that's very true about research - it's just that I thought it would kinda fit and be cute in this setting because of the whole arranged marriage aspect being something they want to do. Also it keeps it simple (couples are just couples). But there's no reason it couldn't be even more subtle than that, sure.

And as for you other points, I think it'd be cool to represent as much as possible, but I get that that's an ideal, and not necessarily a top priority for making a cool game. Where they can figure out a way of doing it that makes the game cooler, I say go for it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mugen, please stop talking about "how straight people think". You keep saying saying things that I, as a straight male, have never thought. It might be how you think, but don't assume that everyone else automatically feels the same way because they're also straight.

Irritating that after the volumes I wrote someone would niggle this one thing, but I digress, you're right, I went over the line in presupposing the disposition of all, it was irresponsible and incorrect, you were right to call me out on it. I apologize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as you might not like it, straight people think straight, we think about women and traits they have which would benefit our children and vica versa for straight women. Gay relations really don't phase us as they're genetically irrelevant and when they're forced to cross our mind it's an irritating/uncomfortable feeling.

I'm struggling to keep my cool here. Read that again. THINK ABOUT HOW IT SOUNDS.

I'm sorry that despite your desire for us to be treated equal, the idea that you might occasionally be reminded that two guys sometimes love each other is such an imposition. And before you say I'm misinterpreting you again, how else am I supposed to interpret 'when they're forced to cross our mind it's an irritating/uncomfortable feeling.'? Mm?

You know, you're right in one aspect. There IS no reason for you to be made to feel uncomfortable. The solution? STOP PERPETUATING A SOCIETY WHERE THESE THINGS ARE TREATED AS ALIEN.

Did you not read the part where I talked about how uncomfortable I was with MY OWN gay feelings when I first discovered them? What do you think the cause of that was? And how do you think your attitude is helping with that?

So... having an infinite number of gay characters in a game, doing/being any number of character descriptions, having you able to play the game however you want, isn't good enough, you need me to appreciate very personally(my character) your experiences regardless of my wants because you feel yours usurp mine? My desire to have options is ridiculous and your imposition of what are really still options in the same light, just less strict ones, is somehow a better idea? This is preposterous.

Yeah, sure, that's a reasonable interpretation of what I said. Come off it. We're done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as you might not like it, straight people think straight, we think about women and traits they have which would benefit our children and vica versa for straight women. Gay relations really don't phase us as they're genetically irrelevant and when they're forced to cross our mind it's an irritating/uncomfortable feeling.

I'm struggling to keep my cool here. Read that again. THINK ABOUT HOW IT SOUNDS.

I'm sorry that despite your desire for us to be treated equal, the idea that you might occasionally be reminded that two guys sometimes love each other is such an imposition. And before you say I'm misinterpreting you again, how else am I supposed to interpret 'when they're forced to cross our mind it's an irritating/uncomfortable feeling.'? Mm?

You know, you're right in one aspect. There IS no reason for you to be made to feel uncomfortable. The solution? STOP PERPETUATING A SOCIETY WHERE THESE THINGS ARE TREATED AS ALIEN.

Did you not read the part where I talked about how uncomfortable I was with MY OWN gay feelings when I first discovered them? What do you think the cause of that was? And how do you think your attitude is helping with that?

So... having an infinite number of gay characters in a game, doing/being any number of character descriptions, having you able to play the game however you want, isn't good enough, you need me to appreciate very personally(my character) your experiences regardless of my wants because you feel yours usurp mine? My desire to have options is ridiculous and your imposition of what are really still options in the same light, just less strict ones, is somehow a better idea? This is preposterous.

Yeah, sure, that's a reasonable interpretation of what I said. Come off it. We're done.

I'm glad you understand what I was trying to put across, I was concerned you weren't grasping my heavier point and just focusing on everyone having immediate access to homosexual behavior irrespective of the way they'd want to enjoy their game. I don't understand how having extra options for non gay and gay players turned into such a row, especially considering the added immersion it could add for everyone on all fronts given the degree of customization it would provide. Anyway, I'm glad we came to an understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fun pills and sleds for SurplusGamer and Mugen.

I trust Brad and Team will make some great choices.

Smiles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad you understand what I was trying to put across, I was concerned you weren't grasping my heavier point and just focusing on everyone having immediate access to homosexual behavior irrespective of the way they'd want to enjoy their game. I don't understand how having extra options for non gay and gay players turned into such a row, especially considering the added immersion it could add for everyone on all fronts given the degree of customization it would provide. Anyway, I'm glad we came to an understanding.

I'm going to try one more approach, if you're willing to go along with me. Put aside the other issues right now and put your discomfort aside for just a short moment to put yourself in my position. You grew up with examples of straight relationships all around you, and you naturally assumed that was your future, too. But then at maybe around 15 you finally realise for sure that you feel differently. Those people who feel differently are mocked by kids, maybe you even took part in the mockery before you knew any better. But you try to be strong and accept yourself. It takes time. These new feelings are hard, because they're different to what society expects. You wish you could just flick a switch and feel the same way as all your friends. But you can't. Eventually, if you get through that, it gets better. You accept and even come to like your feelings. But it took you years to get there to break through that discomfort.

Meanwhile, the world is getting better. It's got a way to go but you notice that it's no longer as big a deal in some societies to come out as it used to be. With more examples of same sex relationships for kids to grow up around, like your nephew who will always see it as a normal part of life because you'll be around, you have great hope for the future. You can even talk about the issues in gamer forums and get a really positive response.

Then, someone tells you that they agree with your cause, that they think all relationships should be represented... as long as straight people aren't ever forced to think about gayness because they find it kinda gross.

In light of everything that came before in your life, can you now understand how that might actually be a pretty hurtful thing to hear?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a person in a same-sex relationship and with a boyfriend who would totally love to play this kind of game too, I support this inclusion 1000 percent! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome ideas all around. I really like Brad's solutions. I will try to think of improvement while happily lurking on forums :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this