The Pro-Toggle Thread for same gender content.

[Lokiliesmith]

Wait... did someone get redacted while I was in the middle of replying to them?

[Master-Nala]

Out of curiosity what is -- in your opinion -- wrong with selecting a toons sexuality as part of character creation?

 

Nothing. That's not what's being asked for.

[Master-Nala]

The world just wouldn't know how to spin around according to some people if phobias aren't the fuel. Ah, the long lasting ills of grade school social studies...

 

Your attempts to hide your bigotry behind flowery language is laughable.

Edited February 21, 2012 by Master-Nala

[DoomStride]

I wouldn't mind a toggle.

 

I have no problem with same gender romances, I just want to be able to be best buds with a guy and not go through that awkward 'No, we are just friends' part... This is just because of the irritating moment when Anders started hating me because I said I didn't love him.

 

That being said, If I am still able to be best buds without another Anders moment I won't need the toggle as I won't have to worry about losing affection.

Edited February 21, 2012 by DoomStride

[Xaearth]

Wow... 24 pages of wall'o'texts... No way I'm reading all of that.

 

But, regardless of whether or not this has been brought up previously, I just want to chime in the way I see it from a game-mechanics point of view.

 

I have lotsa alts. Some are male. Some are female. I also double up on several classes for the benefit of their other AC and/or the perspective of their storyline from a character of a different gender.

 

I love the experience. The storyline is very engaging and those little details that you get to choose how your story unfolds makes it a new experience every time (so long as you aren't answering conversations to grind ls/ds points or affection).

 

My only problem with the current functionality, yes, I'm talking even the hetero only romances here:

Far too often for my liking (especially as an Imperial/Sith) am I presented with the only non-violent or non-passive aggressive response as being a [Flirt] with an NPC that I don't see my character being remotely interested in.

 

Now, because I play through the story multiple times, I know that [Flirt] option is covering up a neutral or friendly response.

 

I would much rather the option, even if it involves the hassle of canceling the convo and going into options and switching a "toggle", to get rid of [Flirt] options with NPCs my character isn't interested in without figuratively kicking them in the nuts first.

 

I mean, seriously, why do my Sith have to either threaten to cut off someone's appendages or swoon all over them?

 

That said, I think it would be ideal to "mirror" all the [Flirt] options to that left side of the convo wheel that's kinda blue'd out, so that the neutral options can stay where they are and those of us looking for the [Flirt]s, whether of the same or different gender, can find and use them when we so choose.

[CommanderPaco]

I have no problem with same gender romances, I just want to be able to be best buds with a guy and not go through that awkward 'No, we are just friends' part... This is just because of the irritating moment when Anders started hating me because I said I didn't love him.

 

That being said, If I am still able to be best buds without another Anders moment I won't need the toggle as I won't have to worry about losing affection.

 

^^This.

 

All these pages about the toggle discussion are completely moot because of the way the game works currently when it comes to the various romance options. There are so many issues from a programming and content design aspect that come up if a toggle switch was implemented that it would likely require a whole reworking of how the romance dialog options work. Just thinking about all the changes in game design makes my head hurt.

 

That being said, I understand the reasoning behind having toggle in the game somewhere to focus the character's sexual orientation to however the player wants to. What people seem to be getting all wound up about is that neither side is looking at the other side's perspective and coming to a consensus. From my understanding of what I read through (which was about half of this thread TBH), the toggle would seemingly work this way:

 

• User creates smuggler character; chooses to go heterosexual, completely blocking out any homosexual romantic options
  
• User creates bounty hunter character; chooses to go homosexual, completely blocking out any heterosexual romantic options
  

 

Now, from my understanding about those "anti-toggle" claim that the "toggles" are already there in the various flirt choices that the game already gives us and whatever/however BioWare will do for the LGBT romance addition.

 

Now if my interpretation of the arguments is incorrect, somebody please correct me. I understand both perspectives; however, they are both with plenty of flaws from a game design standpoint.

 

First off, having a toggle, while giving a user choice from the begining of the the game, essentially forces the game's design to be inefficient. Sure it's the ultimate user choice, but programmers need design code, audio needs to be recorded, game design needs to occur in two or more ways, etc. Sure, BioWare already does this depending on all the choices one makes; however, this is a very extreme design method. It's either the content gets used, or gets completely thrown out. Think about the user who wants only same sex romance options and never wants heterosexual romance options? Or even vice versa? All the game data that isn't used by this person likely needs to be installed anyhow. This leads into the second point: this decision cannot be made at install for the reason of user choice. Hypothetically you could by having one install both sets of data, but then why have the toggle in the first place when then in that case, you can integrate all these choices into the game.

 

Now that plays into the argument of those against a toggle. Which is fine and dandy until you realize why I quoted the person above. While the choices are already in the dialogue options, they are very "black & white;" very conditional in that either this happens or that happens. There's no gray area (and there's no gray area for those who play semi-dark jedi or light-side sith) when it comes to romance options it seems. One dialogue option a user picks can potentially adversely affect affection or mess up future/potential dialogue options.

 

I hope I'm still making sense (lack of caffeine at 4:30 PM EST after an all-nighter for a class will do that)...

 

Both ideas have their merits, but for the sake of game and general software design, a simple hard toggle doesn't work as easily as the OP would like it to, and simply "pooh-poohing" the toggle idea doesn't look at the inherent flaws in the system the same group of people like already. Take the best of both worlds and combine them...straddle the line if you will. Think about it from a roleplaying standpoint, as that's what this game is in many core aspects. Keep the romance choices available, but make them more broad in that one can go back and forth in sexual orientation in how to approach certain topics of conversation and simply flirting with an NPC does not mean that the end goal is simply sleeping with him/her (but the option is always there). This way, the choice is there for users who may want to pursue a particular sexual orientation with his/her character. Of course, how the NPC reacts is up to game design of the NPC.

 

I hope all that made sense...my argument is that it's all about game design and not forgetting about that.

[NermalDetonator]

The world just wouldn't know how to spin around according to some people if phobias aren't the fuel.

 

Except in this case its true, no matter how you try and spin it.

[Comfterbilly]

Except in this case its true, no matter how you try and spin it.

 

In every case its always true for people who despite all evidence refuse to believe that any action can be ever motivated by anything other than prejudice.

 

Its the simplest, most naive conspiracy theory in the world, and if they can't find any evidence of it they simply climb out on a limb and pluck a low hanging fruit, branch snaps, they fall, blame someone else for their bizarre conduct.

[Darth_Gao_Gao]

did dragon age origins need a toggle? nope. you controlled the content based on your conversation selection. a toggle would be corny, reminiscent of those shady fallout 3 mods of which i won't mention.

 

also a toggle implies that it's okay to receive heterosexual flirt options by default, but not those of the other spectrum. it's hypocritical and unnecessary. this is 2012, the now, so get used to it.

[Jarvus]

I would also like to see a toggle off option for same gender content. I have to say that when I was trying to explore my companions' quest and story lines I was a bit taken aback to find that my male inquisitor had a conversation choice wherein he asked Andronikos for a neck massage or something like that. Really should be an option to toggle off that stuff.

[Comfterbilly]

did dragon age origins need a toggle? nope. you controlled the content based on your conversation selection. a toggle would be corny, reminiscent of those shady fallout 3 mods of which i won't mention.

 

also a toggle implies that it's okay to receive heterosexual flirt options by default, but not those of the other spectrum. it's hypocritical and unnecessary. this is 2012, the now, so get used to it.

 

Think about what you're saying Darth: its 2012, the now, where everybody is so "open minded", therefore in 2012 the now everyone should get used to having the same opinion as you do, because they are so open minded, they should all have the same opinion, because its 2012............?

 

Care to re-state? Dragon Age isn't Star Wars; Star Wars brings in a whole new wide player base made up of people who don't like seeing Star Wars "moralized" into something they don't recognize. Your argument is venturing out into a place where you're clearly rationalizing about your desire to dictate what it is "right" for people to think or want. Once you realize this you'll discover that your complaint about the ability to customize your character has nothing to do with the game.

 

Trying to make decisions for other people is out of bounds - its impolite, improper, and beyond our rights as human beings. I'm not qualified to make decisions about what you ought to think of this, you're not qualified to make decisions about what anyone else ought to think. I can see your good intentions, but that desire in its base form is monsterous. The solution is for free thinking individuals to reach a consensus of their own volition.

Edited February 22, 2012 by Comfterbilly

[Racheakt]

Nothing. That's not what's being asked for.

 

Actually I think I think the OP was looking for a dialog on how to accommodate people of different beliefs without offending anyone (tough to do with this topic)

 

The entire idea of a toggle is redundant and pretty dumb.

 

Can't be redundant if there is no toggle now.

 

I have yet to hear one articulated that is not based upon real world politics and prejudices.

 

I have not seen an valid argument against the idea that is not grounded in emotion.

 

 

 

Here is how I came to the belief that having the orientation as a core trait like race or gender is the best solution:

 

A. Orientation is not a malleable trait like Light & Dark Side.

1. To argue orientation is a malleable trait I think is absurd, one cannot be turned homosexual nor straight.

2. If it is a fixed attribute then having unwanted "flirts" is immersion breaking and annoying (See Anders DA2)

B. A UI toggle is insulting to some, it implies their lifestyle is something that needs to be filtered.

C. Like it or not there are those who will be offended by constant Same Gender prompts.

D. All of the flirt option I have seen are in class/companion stories (i.e. Private) or solo content.

 

Ask yourselves why does it matter if someone somewhere wants to only flirt with one gender only? Do you want the choice to be "in their face"? If it is, this is not the venue (IMHO).

 

Ask yourselves why do you want a "toggle"? if it is "to keep the gay out", again this is wrong reason. In many areas of the world they are accepted members of society.

 

How do you as a game developer merge the two into a reasonable compromise of the two camps? By having the orientation as a core trait like race or gender.

 

A. It does not make sexual orientation "objectionable" it makes it a part of the character.

B. Allows for all sides to see only "flirt" options they want.

 

 

Now what is a rational objection that is not grounded in emotion or prejudice (one way or the other)?

Edited February 22, 2012 by Racheakt

[Senatsu]

I really don't see why people are being so up-tight about same-sex flirt options. It would be the same as if the government killed off everyone who was gay. Just stupid to not have it in. The only people I can really see hating on it would be religious people, to which I respond: "Suck it up". It would also be a +1 to the gay community.

[Comfterbilly]

I really don't see why people are being so up-tight about same-sex flirt options. It would be the same as if the government killed off everyone who was gay. Just stupid to not have it in. The only people I can really see hating on it would be religious people, to which I respond: "Suck it up". It would also be a +1 to the gay community.

 

I'm not religious at all, all I care about is the game, so take it from an atheist: you don't have to "hate" SGRA to not want it in your game, you don't have to be religious not to like "moralizing" Star Wars beyond the point of recognition, and you don't get to spend other peoples' money (subscriptions) degrading their gaming experience with political messaging.

[CommanderPaco]

Not to toot my own horn, but somebody else had to have mentioned the game design issues a "toggle switch" of sorts would entail, right?

 

Cause I don't think it's as anywhere as easy as people make it out to be to do this or do this seamlessly without a toggle switch.

[Comfterbilly]

Not to toot my own horn, but somebody else had to have mentioned the game design issues a "toggle switch" of sorts would entail, right?

 

Cause I don't think it's as anywhere as easy as people make it out to be to do this or do this seamlessly without a toggle switch.

 

Great posts! So well thought out, its hard to reply not being able to set aside an equal measure of time, and furthermore better to consider it first.

 

Still, the only thing hard about designating the content is the walking over eggshells to accomplish something very simple. Ideally I'd like the choice to be in the character creation screen, however out of consideration for the numerous people who say they may want to change their minds, it is that fickle notion that demands a fickle accompiant in the options panel. So I figure an option to select it on character creation in addition to an options panel is the way to go simply because so many people have said they want to be able to switch it on or off for reasons that have nothing to do with sexuality, but instead how they think conversations will benefit their toon.

 

Either way you select it, all that's entailed is indexing which genders the NPC's are and whatever ones have flirts, those flirts are activated or deactivated by your choice; all it is is a story tree with some smalllll bits of recorded dialogue, which is pretty much no different from the tweaks they used to do in the text-based Eamon games of old.

 

Other than the voice-overs these flirts are all text based dialogue trees that could have been offered to toons by NPC's in just about any adventure dialogue game to come out since the early 90's, if not earlier.

 

Nothing they could tweak in the dialogue trees is near so complicated as the PR song and dance that goes along with this content.

[Lokiliesmith]

Here is how I came to the belief that having the orientation as a core trait like race or gender is the best solution:

 

A. Orientation is not a malleable trait like Light & Dark Side.

1. To argue orientation is a malleable trait I think is absurd, one cannot be turned homosexual nor straight.

2. If it is a fixed attribute then having unwanted "flirts" is immersion breaking and annoying (See Anders DA2)

B. A UI toggle is insulting to some, it implies their lifestyle is something that needs to be filtered.

C. Like it or not there are those who will be offended by constant Same Gender prompts.

D. All of the flirt option I have seen are in class/companion stories (i.e. Private) or solo content.

 

Ask yourselves why does it matter if someone somewhere wants to only flirt with one gender only? Do you want the choice to be "in their face"? If it is, this is not the venue (IMHO).

 

Ask yourselves why do you want a "toggle"? if it is "to keep the gay out", again this is wrong reason. In many areas of the world they are accepted members of society.

 

How do you as a game developer merge the two into a reasonable compromise of the two camps? By having the orientation as a core trait like race or gender.

 

A. It does not make sexual orientation "objectionable" it makes it a part of the character.

B. Allows for all sides to see only "flirt" options they want.

 

 

Now what is a rational objection that is not grounded in emotion or prejudice (one way or the other)?

 

Ok, I'll reiterate my counter points to you since you have presented the only voice that wasn't just "I don't want to have to look at the gay":

 

A) I agree it is not malleable and I agree with A-1, but A-2 I think is a point of contention. You can add flirt options without making them the only way to interact with a character. DA2 sucked for this. ME2 was much better.

 

B) Agreed

 

C) Yes, but just because they are offended does not mean they need to be catered to. Like it or not there are those offended by the racism of the empire. It should be no more subject to removal than this.

 

D) I group up for planetary quests. Darth Lachis is a good example of someone you can end up flirting with during group play.

 

I am not saying that I am insulted by the fact that some people only want to play hetero characters. However you can easily do this by just NOT flirting with the same gender. It takes no more effort than NOT picking the flirt option. Ideally Bioware has enough sense to not make flirt the only amicable option in a conversation.

 

 

The problem I have is that by playing a character I discover their sexuality in the same what that I discover their personality. I thought I was going to play a dark side bounty hunter but I found that Mako's opinion really mattered to me. Hello light side points. I thought I would play a balanced Sorc but people just constantly were begging to get shocked. Hello dark side points. I also thought the Sorc was a lesbian, but damn it Andronikus and her just had so much chemistry. Maybe I'm a little too into the game in that way. But for me picking the sexuality of the character breaks the immersion, and I imagine it is the same for other people.

 

I'm also worried about the implementation. These kinds of changes are inevitably fraught with bugs. Instead of just turning it all on you are adding numerous checks elsewhere in the code for the gay/notgay track. Also, you'll eventually need a 3rd track for the undecided/bi folks. It just becomes increasingly complex as you try to please more people when the most simple solution is the most obvious. Give people the option to flirt. Let them skip it if they want.

[VelnikSP]

Nothing they could tweak in the dialogue trees is near so complicated as the PR song and dance that goes along with this content.

 

hehehe. Best point of all.

[Comfterbilly]

C) Yes, but just because they are offended does not mean they need to be catered to. Like it or not there are those offended by the racism of the empire. It should be no more subject to removal than this.....

 

 

This entire conversation about same gender flirt prompts is about catering to people who are offended. The toggle is for people who are tired of being bothered by people who are offended at all times about all things.

[ArtMonster]

keep these high fuel argument issues out of gaming.... there is enough in politics.

 

my vote is no.

you can get rid of the regular romance stuff too...cheesy, and it didnt have any effect on gameplay or story....

 

(( [flirt], ohhhh, bed me, OK, done ))..... that's all there is anyway. why do we need this kind of cheese in star wars game?

 

no toggle, no stupid sexual inuendos.

 

no content that creates rifts becuase they are battle issues in real life.....and this sure qualifies.

 

.

Edited February 22, 2012 by ArtMonster

[Liavain]

Okay... I find this whole idea of being able to "filter" out content that some might find offensive is silly. It is too subjective and becomes a slippery slope. Those arguing that homosexuality is not in Star Wars are also incorrect.

Goran Beviin was a Mandalore and one of Boba Fett's most trusted lieutenants. Oh, and he was married to a man.

 

In real life, you can't realistically "filter" out things you object to. Sure, you can close your eyes and put your fingers in your ears and say "LALALALALALALALA!" and try to ignore it, but that changes nothing. It is still there. You simply cannot avoid all situations that you object to.

 

If someone in real life flirts with you and you don't approve, you can just walk away.

In SWTOR, you can just avoid the "flirt" option.

 

I don't see the need for a "toggle" in any form. Especially since the same-gender romances will be via brand new Crew Members. NOT current ones. Don't want to deal with it? Then don't talk to the new NPCs.

[ArtMonster]

or just 'not' go there.

 

it will be a crapstorm of issues and arguments that really doesn't need to be ingame.

 

keep potentially explosive ( and this 'will' explode ) themes and ideals out of gaming altogether.

 

( we have a hard enough time keeping the PvP and PvE crowd civil )

[VelnikSP]

I smoke. My character would smoke too. does that mean that smoking should be included in the game? if it were, do you think that having a 'toggle' that could take out the NPC smoking graphics and options that involve lighting up a cigarette would be inappropriate because some parents don't want their kids seeing smokers as role models?

 

Heck no. The only reason it's even an issue is because we are threatening to point out that their sacred cow is made out of paper mache.

[Fluffy_Bunny]

Quoting the mods: "As a special request to everyone, as this is a sensitive topic, please review the Rules of Conduct before posting in the other threads. Please remember that when voicing your opinions, never be rude or insulting to other community members, derogatory towards any groups, keep religion and politics out of posts and please be respectful of one another!"

 

In that case this thread should be deleted. The option to have same sex relationships censored is rude and insulting.

[Comfterbilly]

Okay... I find this whole idea of being able to "filter" out content that some might find offensive is silly. It is too subjective and becomes a slippery slope. Those arguing that homosexuality is not in Star Wars are also incorrect.

Goran Beviin was a Mandalore and one of Boba Fett's most trusted lieutenants. Oh, and he was married to a man.

 

In real life, you can't realistically "filter" out things you object to. Sure, you can close your eyes and put your fingers in your ears and say "LALALALALALALALA!" and try to ignore it, but that changes nothing. It is still there. You simply cannot avoid all situations that you object to.

 

If someone in real life flirts with you and you don't approve, you can just walk away.

In SWTOR, you can just avoid the "flirt" option.

 

I don't see the need for a "toggle" in any form. Especially since the same-gender romances will be via brand new Crew Members. NOT current ones. Don't want to deal with it? Then don't talk to the new NPCs.

 

Did Goran Beviin try to give me a back massage? Fail. It's in the story, and in my opinion the extent to which its included in the lore today is balanced and in proportion. "Boba Fett: A Practical Man" is a 2006 publication, just so everybody knows that.

 

What's so hard to understand about 'unwanted advances', on new NPC's or otherwise? We've seen tons of LGBT people saying they don't want to see hetero flirts either. Its growing increasingly clear that the only people who have a problem with being able to choose your toon's pixelated video game make believe sexuality, make clear overtly or unintentionally that their main objection to that option has nothing to do with the game, where they are overly concerned about the experience in other players' single player modes, which is nobody else's business.