Lack of Gay Character Options in RPGs "A Shame," Says BioWare Producer

[Ramzal]

I generally would prefer well written characters period. Gay or straight? I don't tend to care until their sexuality either way becomes the main basis of their character. At that point, I get very bored. I don't care who you want in your bed, but if you are boring, you are boring.

 

[Karadalis]

You know, I absolutely LOVE being reminded of my estrangement from half of my family while playing video games that acknowledge the existence of my sexual orientation! When will developers realize that one of my favorite pastimes is reminiscing over the 14 years of rotting relations with my dad's side that started with the first time I took a girlfriend over to their house to meet them? I really wish that straight gamers could share in the fun and laughter that only a decade of emotional and physical abuse from family members can bring.

You know what else is a blast? Making special arrangements with funeral homes when an extended relative dies so that you can say goodbye without the risk of bodily harm! That's one of the funnest parts of being an outcast lesbian. It's like skinny dipping - everyone should do it at least once so that, when they're old and grey, they don't look back on their lives and wonder why they didn't take more chances.

Still, at the very least, if a game drudges up enough pain from the deepest parts my soul, I can take comfort in the fact that, as the game's hero, I can overcome my sorrows in a digital world that has no bearing whatsoever on real life.

Oh!!! As a bonus, maybe game devs can arrange for someone to break into my house while I'm playing and hold a knife to my throat, like what happened to me last year after an incident at a club that had everything to do with my sexual orientation. I've been DYING to relive that day!

Ha ha! Dying? Knife to throat? Get it?

I can't wait to buy a game with that level of realism!

Wow... really? Seriously?

Racism? Psh.. who cares, put it in the game.

Religious fanatism? Psh.. who cares, put it in the game.

Classism? Psh... who cares, put it in the game.

Sexism, rape? Psh.. who cares, put it in the game.

Prejudice against gay people?! HOW DARE YOU PUT THAT INTO YOUR GAME! THIS REMINDS ME ABOUT MY OWN ISSUES!

Screw everyone else but yourselfe right? Talk about double standards...

I mean its not like we could give gay characters the ability in the game to overcome these odds or use the game to teach straight people how wrong prejudice against gay people is by portraying gay people in a positive light despite the biggotry they have to face in the game....

Naaaaah... lets simply pretend that a world like dragon age where theres all these above mentioned issues exist... simply doesnt have prejudice against homosexuals...

Also your personal sob stories? tragic, but please refrain from using them as a tool in arguments.. cause frankly no one gives a fuck about anyone elses hardships.. and dont anyone pretend it aint so. Everyone has their own personal luggage to carry around.

Im pretty sure that theres alot of people who dont want to be reminded of all the bad things that happen in real life... like violence against innocents.. rape... child abuse.. racism and all the other horrible things that people do to each other... yet it is completly fine to have them in games nowadays.

Heck if we applied your standards to all games guess GTA would never have happened...

And you know what? Its good that games use these real life issues in them... cause problems dont go away by pretending they dont exist. They only go away if they are brought to the attention of people. And games are one of the best ways to hold a mirror infront of people and make them think for a bit.

So if you cant stand a game treating this topic then thats to bad for you. But if we follow your logic then no issue should ever be a topic in a game or work of fiction and all fictional world should be paradise... but im sure you will find someone whos also offended by that.. so better have no games at all.

 

[JimB]

Wow...really? Seriously?

Racism? Psh...who cares, put it in the game.

Religious fanaticism? Psh...who cares, put it in the game.

Classism? Psh...who cares, put it in the game.

Sexism, rape? Psh...who cares, put it in the game.

Ten Foot Bunny did not say any of the things you just attributed to her. Nor did she imply them. Please stop putting words into another person's mouth if you cannot correctly parse their statements. Further, nothing obligates Ten Foot Bunny to fight on behalf of any issues other than the ones she chooses to, so please do not act like you have any right to determine what her priorities ought to be.

Also, your personal sob stories? Tragic, but please refrain from using them as a tool in arguments, because frankly, no one gives a fuck about anyone else's hardships.

Many people care about another person's hardships. That you think no one else does says much more about you than it does about the rest of the world.

Heck, if we applied your standards to all games, I guess Grand Theft Auto would never have happened.

And? What's the great loss there? A few thousand people don't get to spend a few hours of their lives playing one, specific video game out of trillions. I doubt the march of history would come to a stop over that temporal anomaly.

It's good that games use these real life issues in them, because problems don't go away by pretending they don't exist. They only go away if they are brought to the attention of people.

Please provide proof of your assertion that video games have improved any given social injustice in the real world.

 

[Longing]

Naaaaah... lets simply pretend that a world like dragon age where theres all these above mentioned issues exist... simply doesnt have prejudice against homosexuals...

well, a lot of homophobia actually comes from various religious factions to my understanding so it would actually make sense in a world like DA, which has completely different sets of Gods and beliefs, to actually not have a problem with homosexuality. It's just super exhausting even in a game for people to have issues with your sexuality, so I actually find this a super refreshing change.

Bioware isn't looking to change bigots' minds, just trying to please other kind of gamers than the ones who usually get their way.

 

[Ten Foot Bunny]

Racism? Psh.. who cares, put it in the game.

Religious fanatism? Psh.. who cares, put it in the game.

Classism? Psh... who cares, put it in the game.

Sexism, rape? Psh.. who cares, put it in the game.

Prejudice against gay people?! HOW DARE YOU PUT THAT INTO YOUR GAME! THIS REMINDS ME ABOUT MY OWN ISSUES!

Screw everyone else but yourselfe right? Talk about double standards...

Yeah, because that's EXACTLY what I said! Fuck everyone who isn't me. I'm SO glad you found the hidden meaning in my post, and were able to expose my racist, sexist, classist, and pro-theocratic agendas.

It's a huge weight off my mind that I no longer have to hide the blackness in my heart. Now everyone knows the real me.

Phew! That was really close.

(Seriously, though, this is a thread about gay characters and so I focused on gay characters. Anything else would have been irrelevant and nobody was bringing up other social issues that video games could potentially question. Of course I care about more issues than gay representation, but there's a time and a place for those discussions - this thread, at this moment, is neither.)

Also your personal sob stories? tragic, but please refrain from using them as a tool in arguments.. cause frankly no one gives a fuck about anyone elses hardships.. and dont anyone pretend it aint so.

No-one cares? Please speak for yourself. Your post may display a lack empathy, but I ALWAYS take into consideration how my responses will make people feel. I also listen to the stories they tell because I like to know where they come from and what may have influenced their thinking. It also gives me a guide for how to respond in a way that won't hurt or offend them (if I disagree) or, more often, how to make them laugh (which is what I prefer to do).

Everyone has their own personal luggage to carry around.

This is very true. And this is also why I strive to comport myself in a manner that doesn't ADD to the weight of their luggage. We can never know how much is going on inside of another person's head or how close they may be to their breaking point. That's WHY it's important to listen to others' stories and care about the things they say. Why risk being the person who pushes another's soul over the edge?

Im pretty sure that theres alot of people who dont want to be reminded of all the bad things that happen in real life... like violence against innocents.. rape... child abuse.. racism and all the other horrible things that people do to each other... yet it is completly fine to have them in games nowadays.

In games based in real life, yes! Fine! Include things in those games that we face IN REALITY. If people want to get offended by the gritty depiction of a topic in a game that advertises itself as a mirror version of the world in which we exist, then I agree that it's THEIR problem.

Heck if we applied your standards to all games guess GTA would never have happened...

Please see what I just wrote above. Re-read it if you must. You completely misstated my "standards" and the entire meaning of my earlier post, then based your GTA comment on that misinterpretation. If GTA hadn't happened because of what you THOUGHT I said, then we'd have a case of societal censorship.

I'm going to make this perfectly clear and unmistakable:

I do not, in ANY way, advocate for censorship

And you know what? Its good that games use these real life issues in them... cause problems dont go away by pretending they dont exist. They only go away if they are brought to the attention of people. And games are one of the best ways to hold a mirror infront of people and make them think for a bit.

We're in complete agreement here: how are we, as a society, supposed to triumph over bigotry when it's relegated to a permanent place under the rug? Bigotry absolutely should be a subject that video games tackle because it's an ideal medium to do just that. Where I disagree with you is that I don't think we need to bring real-life stigmas and attitudes into EVERY game that includes a concept that, in real life, bears stigma and the weight of prejudiced attitudes.

For example, when you say:

Naaaaah... lets simply pretend that a world like dragon age where theres all these above mentioned issues exist... simply doesnt have prejudice against homosexuals...

I wonder, WHY?! Why does the world of Dragon Age need to have prejudice against homosexuals? Simply because the game allows for homosexual relationships? Or because it's a fantasized version of what appears to be an earlier time in the history of western civilization, set in a world that's reminiscent of a geographic region in which, during the alluded-to time period, homosexuality was a capital offense?

Dragon Age and other games of its sort exist purely for entertainment. It doesn't try to dissect modern issues or shed light on them. However, GTA does (though, in my opinion, it hasn't done a good job of it since Vice City). If people are upset that you face no stigma for being in a homosexual relationship in Dragon Age, they should be rioting in the streets over how you can conduct your relationships in Fable.

(Okay, maybe "rioting" isn't the most tactful term to use this week, but c'est la vie!)

Let some games strive for public awareness of inequality and give players the thrill of rising above it, but please, let's not belittle games that allow players to experience life as a minority without consequence. Many of us who aren't straight, myself included, are as effortlessly happy with our identities as the straight people who get to take their almost-universal acceptance for granted. Despite prejudice (which is shrinking according to many national polls) we don't sit around wallowing in misery. Let games also teach THAT lesson without distracting players with depictions of the bigotry we sometimes endure.

 

[nondescript]

2) One might as well argue "it's a shame there aren't more chances for you to RP a disabled character, or a tech support guy at work, or a Mormon." These are also large demographics that we don't let others pretend to be, or let those who are be in game. Is it a shame I can't play a paraplegic LDS techie? Or a blind Muslim chef? There are many things we are in RL and can't be in game. Excluding homosexuality is unfair, yes, but so is including it but not any number of other ignored demographics.

It's a big deal because not only is sexuality a major part of a person's identity, but non-straights have been persecuted and, hand in hand with that, depictions of them have been censored and villainized for generations.

Also your analogy is broken in that, while again sexuality is a major part of a person's identity, it is not something that is tied to a particular place or time. It is a broad trait more akin to left-handedness than a particular job or belief system. Though you are right roleplaying as a disabled character is something that would be interesting to explore, but I think it would need a lot more work to be done properly because it affects so many more basic actions a character could take. In addition to how others would react to said character, and the fact that usually non-horror games try to make the player feel empowered rather than handicapped.

So you are saying that being gay is more a part of who you are than the color of your skin? Where and how you grew up? What you, metaphysically, believe in? It seems to me they are all important factors of defining the way you see the world. As for persecution, both Muslims and Mormons have been slandered, villainized, and misrepresented in media for as long as there has been an "us" to point at "them."

That argument sounds dangerously close to 'well, if we start including the gays, then everyone will want a go.'

My argument is more streamlined: We have started including gays, and everyone deserves a go. I'm not saying they can't have what they earned, but I am standing up and saying, "The LGTB is being represented finally! So who else is the court of public opinion keeping silent? Lets get them up here too."

Why is a call for MORE equality for other groups being taken as an attack on a minority? Particularly since I never said they should show up less?

 

[JimB]

Why is a call for more equality for other groups being taken as an attack on a minority? Particularly since I never said they should show up less?

If I had to guess, I'd say it's your use of the phrase "You might as well argue for." I've only ever heard that in dismissive terms, describing the futility or uselessness of a thing, so it has a certain connotation to me.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

I honestly get tired of this whole thing. Here are two scenarios...

First scenario: Have a world full of characters that you play and interact with... as well as your choice of the type of character you play. You can choose to pursue characters as you choose, and have a relationship with them of your choosing. Characters may or may not have the same orientation as your choice, which via dialog with said character, you can find out. Explore and get to know your characters, see where it goes!

OR

Second scenario: characters run around announcing to the world, "I'm gay, I'm gay!!!" with big neon signs, or characters you interact with from previous games suddenly become aggressively homosexual, pursuing you with screwed up dialog options that have you either accept the advances or even if you try to find the best dialog available to let them down as nicely as possible, they hate you and you take a major hit with the relationship between your character and theirs.. (IE Anders)

Its ridiculous in the way they are handling it in Dragon Age. Honestly, the best attempt I have seen thus far would have to be Mass Effect 3. It was handled in a way that it is what it is, and the character didnt run around with speaking in ways that come off as pandering. It was what it was, and if you so CHOSE to pursue it, you could. If not, all was cool with the character and I felt like he was an awesome addition to the Mass Effect cast.

In other words, there is absolutely nothing wrong with having gay, straight, or bi characters in any gaming universe or RPG. Just dont make it blatant and forced, for petes sake! I feel like that is just as disrespectful, honestly. Obviously, Bioware is capable of doing it all right, as seen in the relationships in ME3, so they should have their DA crowd use that as a foundation to build upon, DEFINITELY not the way it was handled in Dragon Age 2.

 

[Ratty]

2) One might as well argue "it's a shame there aren't more chances for you to RP a disabled character, or a tech support guy at work, or a Mormon." These are also large demographics that we don't let others pretend to be, or let those who are be in game. Is it a shame I can't play a paraplegic LDS techie? Or a blind Muslim chef? There are many things we are in RL and can't be in game. Excluding homosexuality is unfair, yes, but so is including it but not any number of other ignored demographics.

It's a big deal because not only is sexuality a major part of a person's identity, but non-straights have been persecuted and, hand in hand with that, depictions of them have been censored and villainized for generations.

Also your analogy is broken in that, while again sexuality is a major part of a person's identity, it is not something that is tied to a particular place or time. It is a broad trait more akin to left-handedness than a particular job or belief system. Though you are right roleplaying as a disabled character is something that would be interesting to explore, but I think it would need a lot more work to be done properly because it affects so many more basic actions a character could take. In addition to how others would react to said character, and the fact that usually non-horror games try to make the player feel empowered rather than handicapped.

So you are saying that being gay is more a part of who you are than the color of your skin? Where and how you grew up? What you, metaphysically, believe in? It seems to me they are all important factors of defining the way you see the world. As for persecution, both Muslims and Mormons have been slandered, villainized, and misrepresented in media for as long as there has been an "us" to point at "them."

That's not how I would put it, but in a sense yes. Because there are gay Mormons, and gay Muslims. And gay theists, gay polytheists, gay agnostics and gay atheists. LGBTs come in every color across the racial spectrum. And in every period of human history and prehistory in just about every place. So the "us vs. them" divide between LGBT and straight people is particularly thin, because no matter who "us" are there are almost certainly some LGBTs among "us" in open or in the closet from fear and/or irrational shame.

That argument sounds dangerously close to 'well, if we start including the gays, then everyone will want a go.'

My argument is more streamlined: We have started including gays, and everyone deserves a go. I'm not saying they can't have what they earned, but I am standing up and saying, "The LGTB is being represented finally! So who else is the court of public opinion keeping silent? Lets get them up here too."

Why is a call for MORE equality for other groups being taken as an attack on a minority? Particularly since I never said they should show up less?

Because that's how it sounded from the way you phrased it.

 

[Phasmal]

It's kind of funny how whether or not a game developer `wanted` to make a story about a character is only important if the character isn't a straight white dude.
Suspicious concern is suspicious.

But anyway, this guy has it right. It is a shame. I'd like to have more options, and I'd love for other people who want to be represented to have those options. Options don't hurt you.

And I'd enjoy a game with a set gay character, though I think the publishers would be too afraid of upsetting the average dudebros. And that sucks.

 

[thenoblitt]

Consider this, people don't make gay characters, because they are straight, and do not want to poorly shoe one in, like bioware does because that is what is truly disrespectful. Bioware is literally saying look at him hes gay, everyone hes gay, we have a gay guy. That is horrible. He is a person, he is not defined by his sexuality, this needs to stop.

 

[JimB]

He is a person; he is not defined by his sexuality; this needs to stop.

While I agree that defining a person by his sexuality is shallow and certainly not how I'd choose to define myself, I object to the absolutes of your tone. Some people do define themselves by their sexuality, and choosing that trait out of all the other traits they possess is no less valid or more arbitrary than the choices anyone else makes about identity.

Now, that's not to say I think fictional characters should be allowed the same latitude as real people since the fictional characters are created reflections of a real person's mind rather than someone who can make a genuine choice, but I'm just saying, it can happen and does happen that people define themselves according to their sexuality.

 

[Grace_Omega]

I love how accusations of shoe-horning and tokenism fly thick and fast whenever this topic comes up. Could someone explain to me how you'd put gay characters in a game without doing this? What exactly would it look like?

Related: "Yes but their sexuality shouldn't be a big deal", which nine times out of ten comes across as a thinly veiled version of "just as long as these gay characters don't actually do anything gay".

Related related: the sudden call for "ambiguity" so we can all pretend that the gayness isn't really there. Funnily enough this never comes up with straight characters.

 

[Machine Man 1992]

I'd rather play an RPG with fun game mechanics, interesting support characters, involving lore, and a deep, exciting world.

If I want to play a dating sim, I'll buy a f-ing dating sim. Dammit Bioware, just make actual games for Odin's sake!

 

[Hieronymusgoa]

Did I mind not being able to romance "same sex" in some RPGs? Yeah, but not much. I did like it though when it was possible due to Bioware (alas, no Alistair). Still I found it irritating how it seemed like everyone in recent Bioware games wanted to romance you as long as you were kinda nice to them. But still: I immerse myself more into RPGs when I can act the way I feel. "Being into guys as a guy" is a part of that for me. Bioware has surely not told (gay) romance in the best way it can be told but they did it and it was kind of a new and big thing. At least for my fellow LGBTs and me, I think.

Do I want more of that? Yes. Do I think every f'ing game needs that? Not at all. As long as it is there as an option when you have to chose something related to it. If you don't like it, don't play the game that way.

I still totally think it is okay if main characters aren't inherently gay. If you market something to a certain group it's your thing how you do that and if you think it works best with a hetero gal/guy, I certainly don't mind.

 

[Malk_Kontent]

I don't think it would be to difficult to write LGBT relationships into RPGs, though it would probably be easier with party-based RPGs like Dragon Age, Mass Effect, etc., than open-world "Lone Hero" type games like the Elder Scrolls series. Hear me out: IF sexuality & gender identity (allowing for trans characters) were a part of character creation options, they could establish different character scripts for your party members, at least for the ones that are slated to be relationship options in-game. Say you make a straight character: Love Interest characters A, B, & C run with a complimentary script. Run a bisexual character, and the Love Interest List expends to A,B,C,D, and E, to reflect the same-gendered options who could run a bisexual or gay script. Same thing goes if you run a homosexual character. Not EVERY NPC's script would be altered to match your character's sexuality: Not EVERYONE has to have a script for any sexuality!

But the point is for the scripts of the characters to change, based on the nature of the romance plot. One problem I have with the romance plotlines in some games, for NPC's who can/will go either way, is that the script is IDENTICAL, whether your character is male or female. Liara's romance script, for example, was exactly the same, regardless of the gender of Shepard. Of course, Shepard's script was the same whether Shep was a guy or a girl: I get the "tough, military woman" thing for Shep, but the scripts REALLY shouldn't have been identical! And the same thing goes for including sexuality in RPGs: There NEEDS to be some variance in the scripts, which shouldn't be hard if you're able to choose your character's sexuality during character creation.

 

[JimB]

Of course, Shepard's script was the same whether Shep was a guy or a girl: I get the "tough, military woman" thing for Shep, but the scripts really shouldn't have been identical!

Like where? Can you give specific examples of lines that ought to have differed, and how they should have?

 

[nondescript]

That's not how I would put it, but in a sense yes. Because there are gay Mormons, and gay Muslims. And gay theists, gay polytheists, gay agnostics and gay atheists. LGBTs come in every color across the racial spectrum. And in every period of human history and prehistory in just about every place. So the "us vs. them" divide between LGBT and straight people is particularly thin, because no matter who "us" are there are almost certainly some LGBTs among "us" in open or in the closet from fear and/or irrational shame.

That argument sounds dangerously close to 'well, if we start including the gays, then everyone will want a go.'

My argument is more streamlined: We have started including gays, and everyone deserves a go. I'm not saying they can't have what they earned, but I am standing up and saying, "The LGTB is being represented finally! So who else is the court of public opinion keeping silent? Lets get them up here too."

Why is a call for MORE equality for other groups being taken as an attack on a minority? Particularly since I never said they should show up less?

Because that's how it sounded from the way you phrased it.

Let's try it a different way then: You said the analogy was broken because "while again sexuality is a major part of a person's identity, it is not something that is tied to a particular place or time." Personally, I believe that while one's sexuality isn't linked to anything more than a preference for partners, or finding one physical form more attractive than another. However, none of these stand isolated within us. It's fairly evident that a gay man in the 90's, acted differently than now (or the 70's or 1800's.) Also, the culture around you shapes you, even if you hate that culture. Amish children can leave the society of their free will, but they will still have the ethics and values their family and neighbors taught them.

You refer to time, and history. Do you have hard evidence of past examples, or are you extrapolating from present-day scenarios? I don't know everything that has happened in the past, but I know it matters little compared to what is happening. The world is slowly realizing that judging a person by anything but their actions is wrong. History doesn't teach us how to stop this, only shows that it happened. It's our job to go the next step and figure out why it happened, and prevent it from happening to anyone.

So why stop and bicker about how little progress we're making, when we could be making more progress?

 

[Ratty]

Let's try it a different way then: You said the analogy was broken because "while again sexuality is a major part of a person's identity, it is not something that is tied to a particular place or time." Personally, I believe that while one's sexuality isn't linked to anything more than a preference for partners, or finding one physical form more attractive than another.

But the preference for partners is, I would say, crucial to much of the human experience.

A woman's face with nature's own hand painted,
Hast thou, the master mistress of my passion;
A woman's gentle heart, but not acquainted
With shifting change, as is false women's fashion:
An eye more bright than theirs, less false in rolling,
Gilding the object whereupon it gazeth;
A man in hue, all 'hues' in his controlling,
Which steals men's eyes and women's souls amazeth.
And for a woman wert thou first created;
Till Nature, as she wrought thee, fell a-doting,
And by addition me of thee defeated,
By adding one thing to my purpose nothing.
But since she prick'd thee out for women's pleasure,
Mine be thy love and thy love's use their treasure.


?William Shakespeare, Sonnet 20.[footnote]One of the group of Shakespeare's sonnets that's typically considered to be addressed to a man. Lines 9-14 say the speaker doesn't want the man being discussed physically but many people have interpreted this proverbial "no homo" as a necessary addition to the sonnet to keep Shakespear from getting arrested. Pointing out the passion evident in the rest of the piece. In addition to the (possibly) gay sonnets etc. Shakespeare lived apart from his wife and famously the only thing he left her in his will was his "second best bed", leading many to speculate that he himself was gay or bisexual.[/footnote]

The kind of person you want to spend the rest of your life with is a pretty big deal, and says a lot about you in turn.

However, none of these stand isolated within us. It's fairly evident that a gay man in the 90's, acted differently than now (or the 70's or 1800's.) Also, the culture around you shapes you, even if you hate that culture. Amish children can leave the society of their free will, but they will still have the ethics and values their family and neighbors taught them.

Yes, nature and nurture both shape the person you become. They're not mutually exclusive.

You refer to time, and history. Do you have hard evidence of past examples, or are you extrapolating from present-day scenarios?

Both. But http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_LGBT_history

I don't know everything that has happened in the past, but I know it matters little compared to what is happening. The world is slowly realizing that judging a person by anything but their actions is wrong. History doesn't teach us how to stop this, only shows that it happened. It's our job to go the next step and figure out why it happened, and prevent it from happening to anyone.

So why stop and bicker about how little progress we're making, when we could be making more progress?

Fighting for equality is a continual process. Societies can and will erode the rights of the minority over time if they're not actively protected. In some ways you always have to make sure the ground you're standing on is solid. Otherwise it could be two steps forward and three steps back.