Why? Because they destroyed that spinning top strategy in PvP? Good freaking riddance.

4 if I am getting stomped by a premade, 6-7 when I do okay... 9 when I am rolling.

I actually had it explained to me in the RPG books.

Yo dawg, I heard you like unreadable text...

Right now those classes are the ones most screwed over by armor and shielding. They have multiple weapon damage attacks, and don't get to cheat like Operatives do.

Nice snob attitude there. I don't agree that keybinding is the ONLY correct way to play, and if you don't you are not doing it "properly". I rebound A and D into strafes, so I don't keyboard turn anymore... too much of a hassle, but I don't see the problem with backpedaling. In fact, every time I see someone ask about it, the snobs just "lol" without actually saying why people like me are going to hell for back pedaling. I was told I needed to rebind S into something else, because if I backpedal I am "doing it wrong". I found it made my playing much much worse. There were so many times when it would be easier just to take two steps back, instead of completely spinning my camera 180*. As for that whole PVP argument, I've never had that problem. Maybe it is my class. I get one of you Sith Marauders that thinks he is some kind of carousel, spinning around me and circle strafing and all I have to do is hit Freezing Force and start backpedaling. Bam. You are now 100% in front of me, for the rest of the entire fight.

I keep hearing this Tin-Foil hat crap about how everything is already in place and that this is all just blocked... and/or all they would have to do is basic coding to switch it over. Exactly what hard data is being used to make this declaration of truth? And for that matter, how many people holding this "theory" have pursued any existing romances? Because what I have seen so far goes behind merely just hitting the Find/Replace command with some pronouns. My main has done everything with Doc up to the actual marriage proposal, which is waiting for me but I ESC'd out of it... and I can tell you that there are Flirts up to this point that are not exactly voiced in a "neutral" capacity. There is a lot more references to these scenes than just gender-specific pronouns. Doc in particular would need to be completely redone for a same gender romance, and he is probably not the only one. Implementation may be a lot more complicated than some of these knee-jerk conspiracies would suggest.

To be fair products like Dragon Age and Mass Effect are played in their own toybox. You can always have your own little green army men do whatever you want. It's when you start playing with other kid's toys (Ex: Star Wars license), that it starts to get tricky. As for the why we can kill people/torture/blah blah but not have gays question... it is actually really, REALLY simple. Desensitization. In 40 years, it will be so common and everyday that this entire thing will look stupid.

I still don't agree with this whole "toggles are offensive!" garbage. At this point I would think you would do cartwheels just to have it in the game PERIOD. Bioware has not even SPOKEN about it since before Early Game Access and people are already micro-complaining.

If you were married in real life you would know this is normal. Actually no... I don't get regular gifts.

Personally I think it would be easier to keep ALL of it in here.. minus the irrelevant "I never want this is game"

Did you really think they were going to cover this in some slapped together vague 10 question thing?

Founder? Please. Nothing looks dumber than "Black Bisector".

It will sound a lot like this: "What are your plans to implement <FEATURE> into SWTOR?" "Well, poster. Thank you for asking. As you know, we are constantly adding new features to the game.. and we know that is something players have been asking for. We are always listening to the community and <FEATURE> is definitely something we'd like to see in the future."

I am still curious what other option there is if we are at a toggle vs. Full implementation impasse.

Okay.. minor nitpick. How many games with SGRA are "plenty"? I only count Sims, Fable, and Dragon Age... and sort of Mass Effect?

I have received a private message from another forum user. *Scar's Voice* Oh, GOODIE. Yeah. This discussion has officially reached My Way Or The Highway. Dev silence on implementation is almost looking justified. When this goes live the backlash is going to be Biblical.

1.) Please explain how something that impartial is not fair. 2.) I am sorry, but you are flat out wrong - there ARE LGBT gamers complaining about the heterosexual romances in game. One poster even called it wrong and backwards. It sounds like you are saying that homosexual content needs to be blatantly visible in all game content wether the user wants it or not... or am I reading this wrong? Please clarify.

The problem with your analogy is that in both cases... eye color does not change the fact that eyes are fully function and see the same. They are not perceived as equal function, they ARE equal function. I'm going to once again say at this point I am for SGRA's in game. I feel the need to say that again, because I KNOW someone is going to take that as ignorant/homophobic/bigoted/etc. I can be perfectly tolerance and accepting of something without forgetting the fundamental science behind it. Therefore it isn't offensive if is in the fault in something. I mean, you can be offended if you WANT to... but that doesn't make it discrimination.

I also want to go on record as saying this idea is #$%$ing brilliant. Right now my only romance option is DOC, and I am not going to throw away my Jedi oath over him if there is a slim chance I could get someone more redeeming in a future content update.

I am not saying there should not be an alternative. I'm saying that I do not believe it stupid or offensive that heterosexuality is in something by default. Mario chases after Peach, that is not offensive or discimination. Ditto with a hundred other video games.

Can we please stop with this line of thinking? OGRA's are inherently a DEFAULT. You're complaining about a preset setting. The more I see posts like this, the more I am convinced that when Bioware finishes implementing the SGRA's, there will be another 1000 post thread about all the ways they "did it wrong".

No, not just to me. Nor is it an opinion. It is not GAMEPLAY. See how I put it in caps? Your sexual/romance options has nothing to do with running, jumping, shooting, crew skills, or flashpoints. That is GAMEPLAY, not LORE. Look at the very subforum this thread is posted in. This is not "my computer crashes at 10% and I cannot play." You don't get out much beyond this one subforum do you? Go to General Discussion, or Customer Service. Poke around for 10 minutes. Cite me one time in any thread where I said I do not want SGRA's in game. Go for it. I DARE YOU. It's not about devaluing it. It is about putting it into perspective. If my faucet leaks, that sucks for me and I think that is a big deal. But if my neighbor has a wiring short that is threatening to light his apartment on fire... that is a higher priority to the maintenance guy than my leaky faucet.

And I think that is where the silence is coming from. The problem is that SGRA content is really, really unimportant from a GAMEPLAY standpoint. Right now they have screaming fans that VASTLY outnumber you that are upset over crashes, blue screens of death, ability delay, stuttering animations, poor performance on machines, etc. These are issues that affect the GAMEPLAY of 100% of the player base. SGRA's are affecting a NON-GAMEPLAY element of the game for a minority of players. I know it is tempting every single patch to hop up and start screaming about being ignored, but we are not even 90 days out yet and Bioware has a LOT of nearly gamebreaking issues still needing resolution. Unless you are like a Certain Other Poster in this thread with his tinfoil hat on thinking the entire thing is some sort of conspiracy. In which case, I don't know what to tell you.

"Hello Kioma. I want to play a game..."