Gay Characters

[Drostan]

*snip* No, the reason gamers want gay characters in games is that because there are quite a few gays in real life, *snip*

Real life =/= post apocalypse

A world populated by raiders, religious nuts, mutants and soldiers doesn't really lend much support towards our modern level of acceptence of homosexuality.

Wasteland 2 is set in our world, basic fundamental truths in our world would be true in the Wasteland world as well. Homosexuality has been accepted and not accepted during different parts of our history. This is not a new phenomena and as far as I know (don't have any links to prove it) about the same percentage of people has been homosexual all through history. Gay people have both thrived and been prosecuted during bad conditions before.

I for one don't understand why you believe that no raiders would be gay, why there wouldn't be a religious church of homosexual nuts wanting to eradicate all straight people, why mutants would kill homosexuals in any other degree than straight people (are they thinking beings they might well understand how it is not to be part of the norm, if they are unthinking creatures they would kill gay and straight all the same right?), or why there wouldn't be any gay soldiers (between 1994 and 2010, 13,650 servicemen in the USA was discharged as part of don't-ask-don't-tell, and that is just the ones that got discharged). And I still can't understand why gays would take being killed by all these miraculously straight people with guns.

So to get back to the question of gays being in the Wasteland 2 universe. It is our world. The percentage of the population that is gay hasn't in any way been proven to depend on how many of the previous generation that was gay. That means that there will always be gay people, even if all gay people of a generation is killed. So, HOW many, percentage wise, persons are openly gay in the Wasteland world is dependent on how other people view gays there. Either they are accepted everywhere and are a part of the world as open and respected members. Or they are not, which means that some will hide their sexuality and some will flock to perceived safe havens. Or pretty much everyone is out to kill them, which I see as very unrealistic as they will all have mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and friends who can see them being ordinary human beings and wouldn't stand for it.

Why would the entire world flock against killing gays after a nuclear event? If it's about survival of the fittest (not in the Darwinian sense...) I see no reason why gay people wouldn't be able to make it, since they are by no means weaker than anyone else, on the contrary stronger after having to live through crap like this thread throws them daily.

And if, in the Wasteland world everyone just wanted to kill gays, and that that is the reason for having no gays in the game, this in itself is a sort of inclusion since the game then has lore (albeit a bit unrealistic) that says why there are no gays in the game. That's inclusion enough for me, and enough to raise a few serious questions about the state of mankind. Are we really just a catastrophe away from killing all the people that aren't like us? That's a hell of a sad truth if it is true, and something well worth exploring in a game that is about people after the catastrophe.

[pomor]

The focus should be to make a good game, not to make some communities to feel "included".

Having said that, as long there is no requirement to have at least one, mandatory, gay, to be included into your party, I don't really care.

[Gearhead]

The focus should be to make a good game, not to make some communities to feel "included".

Amen to that. The thing is that people assume that, just because a given character/NPC's sexuality isn't made obvious, they obviously are straight. Unless it has some reason for being mentioned or depicted, a character's sexuality is a complete non-issue. There are really 4 options:

1) Don't bring it up. Most folks don't parade around announcing their orientation, so why should they in a game?

2) Make them obvious in their appearance and mannerisms (eg, stereotyping.)

3) Make a reference somehow (the ME3 example someone gave earlier is a very good one,) which is pretty meaningless and is just "Oh, look, this person's gay, so now we have a gay character and aren't we diverse!" Political correctness at its finest.

4) Have it come up simply as part of a character's development or storyline, without fanfare, dramatic musical stings, fireworks, etc. I don't know any LGBT-whatever (I never know how many letters are in the acronym anymore, they're always adding more) folks that march in the parades or make fools of themselves for the sake of showing off or making their orientation known: they just live their lives and don't make a big screaming deal about it.

[Elerond]

3) Make a reference somehow (the ME3 example someone gave earlier is a very good one,) which is pretty meaningless and is just "Oh, look, this person's gay, so now we have a gay character and aren't we diverse!" Political correctness at its finest.

I think your undestanding about political correctness is bit off from usual use of term (this is politicaly correct sentence which tries not to be offensive)

Examples of language commonly referred to as "politically correct"
"Intellectually disabled" in place of "Retarded" and other terms
"African American" in place of "Black," "Negro" and other terms. (However, "Black" is used in English-speaking countries other than the U.S.)
"Native American" (or "First Nations" in Canada) in place of "Indian"
"Caucasian" in place of "White", and other terms
"Gender-neutral" terms such as "firefighter" in place of "fireman," police officer in place of policeman.
Terms relating to disability, such as "visually impaired" or "hearing impaired" in place of "blind" or "deaf"
"Holiday", "winter" or "festive" in place of "Christmas"

[TΛPETRVE]

What amuses me most is how people shudder in dusgust at the mere thought of something as "abnormal" and "unnatural" as homosexual love, but then proceed to fuck their girlfriend up the arse.

[ffordesoon]

She isn't "whining about her wife", she's trying to cut through some serious red tape in order to get her daughter placed with relatives who aren't xenophobes. The gender of her spouse is beside the point, and I'm frankly astounded that "gay crap" is all you managed to take away from it.

She was strategically placed so you could not avoid her gay ramblings, and her volume was louder and carried further than all but one other conversation I came across in the game. This seemed rather intentional, and quite in your face. The other was the Asari whining in the Citadel hospital on the right side when you enter, but her ramblings took long enough to get to a point that I could run past. I didn't have to hear if she talked about her wife or girlfriend, though I assume she eventually did.

I would have thought in the future we would have found a cure for homosexuality, or at least some effective form of treatment.

Oh. So you're just a bigot, then.

I mean, aside from your post just being factually incorrect (there are plenty of triggered conversations that carry further than the one to which you're referring; I know, because I triggered every single "overheard" conversation and followed it to its conclusion, then ran past all of them to see if I could trigger any new ones later in the game), the conversation is there purely for color. She has absolutely no quest for you whatsoever.

Then, of course, there's the fact that the Asari you're talking about has PTSD, and if she talked about any sort of girlfriend or wife, it was completely incidental to her story of having to murder a teenage girl to stay out of sight. Which, you know, is kind of worth "whining" about to your psychiatrist, with whom she was forced to meet so she didn't kill herself from the guilt. Wow, that sure is dependent on her sexuality! I mean, it's not like heterosexual mothers and fathers have ever been forced to smother their baby children to stop them from crying out during a raid by an oppressive regime.

Oh, wait, they have, in hundreds - if not thousands - of documented cases, leading to PTSD and years of extensive therapy if they're lucky. Yeah, what whiners!

And finally we have the disgusting implication that homosexuality can be "cured". Gee, I wonder why so few games (or books, or movies, or TV shows) paint a positive or complex picture of religion! Which, to be clear, I actually agree with you about. But attitudes like yours, so often believed to come part and parcel with religion, maybe aren't helping things.

Of course, the Dragon Age games - whatever you think of them otherwise - are a pretty damn major exception to this rule. In point of fact, the most positively portrayed characters in both games are deeply religious. Granted, it's a fantasy religion, but it's pretty damn close to a lot of real-world ones. And, golly, they're in a game by those homophiles at Bioware! Gee, what a shock! Oh, and there's Ashley Williams in Mass Effect, who's Christian and proud of it. And Thane Krios, widely considered the best character in Mass Effect 2, who's a devout believer in his religion. And there's the fact that the entire plot of Jade Empire revolves around the loss of faith in the gods of the land and its universally negative effects. And there are the many, many other characters in Bioware games who patiently explain the tenets of their faith to anyone who'll listen. In fact, I'd say there are more people of faith per capita in Bioware's games than there are homosexuals!

By your logic, as an agnostic leaning towards atheism, I should be annoyed at all this faith getting "shoved in my face", shouldn't I? You know, 'cause there's obviously a pro-religion agenda at work, right? Clearly, those dastardly Canadians are trying to "convert" me into a believer. I mean, that's just how these things work, isn't it? And yet, it's never bothered me in the slightest, because I don't require the exclusion of things that might make me uncomfortable from the fiction I consume. In point of fact, I welcome their inclusion, because I want my beliefs and assumptions to be tested. If your beliefs are so flimsy that a few lines of incidental dialogue feel threatening to you, then I feel pretty damn sorry for you.

But please, continue to explain your position. I wouldn't want to exclude you from this discussion simply because I disagree.

@everyone else:

Despite making reference to a lot of Bioware games, this response is not about Bioware, but rather about refuting BertMacklin's arguments. In fact, I pointedly avoided praising or criticizing Bioware regarding the treatment of religion and homosexuality in their games for exactly that reason. I could certainly offer plenty of praise and criticism for their treatment of both issues, but this thread is not a referendum on Bioware or their games, no matter how much some people would like it to be.

That is all.

EDIT: Oop, one other thing, actually.

@Gearhead:

LGBT is four letters. LGBTQ is five. I'm sorry it's such a struggle to keep up with four or five letters.

Funny how nobody has trouble keeping up with acronyms like "RIAA" and "ASPCA", isn't it? All those letters! Golly!

[WolfStark]

Gays make up such a small portion of the population that there is really no need to include gay themes in any game. Gays wouldn't even make up 1% of the population in a post apocalyptic world, so including even one gay character in this situation would be pushing unnecessary agenda.

Games are made to entertain us, not be mouthpieces for political movements. Please learn from ME3 and leave the gay garbage out of this game. No one will be offended that there aren't gays, but you sure will offend people by including them. Maybe give me the option to kill off gays in game if they are included so I don't have to hear their constant BS like in ME3 everytime I walk by them or am forced to talk to them.
What if Christianity was pushed hardcore on the player since a much larger percentage of Americans identify that way? Makes about as much sense as including gays because it just isn't necessary in the grand scheme of things in a fictional world. Stay strong inXile and don't give into the gay agenda.

If there just has to be gays, how about a free DLC that pro-gay people can download that adds gay themes to the game so the rest of us aren't forced to suffer through it. Everyone wins this way, well except all the other minority groups that won't get equal representation because they aren't as loud as the gay movement.

You are wrong in so many ways here Bert, I don't know where to start first. With the percentage of how many people are in some way gay? Or Mass Effect 3? Or with the feeling of being offended? Or maybe with the topic of christianity in games? Or with the medium games? The gay agenda? DLC?

Gays aren't such a minority, just fiddle with sexuality as a whole. Homosexual experiences, interests are way more to a norm as the opposite. I and others, already talked about the influence of culture for suppression of the own needs and feelings. Gays are as same as a minority as jews, punks, handicapped, liberals, blacks or women. And that means, yes of course jews, punks, handicapped, liberals, blacks and women should also be in games in every role you can imagine them, since they are humans and humans are individuals. There is no such thing as an agenda but enlightment. Realizing individuality, that sexuality isn't so easy as "there are the normals and there are the freaks" is part of seeing the world in a rational manner. Including gays is what you have to do, if you want to show authentic world. Maybe Bioware didn't do it always right but they did it and besides of all the things they do wrong, it's the right step. As same as it's the right step, that CD Projekt showed uncensored sex, love basicly relationships. Games aren't just made to entertain us, games aren't made for any reason. Music, literature, paintings, movies, comics, sculpting have no reason. There is no god or goddess who made a definition for what they are here. We gave it a meaning, the artist and the recipient. There is entertainment as same as there is the process of coming to terms with something or the wish to clarify a position. And in the end, entertainment doesn't mean you have to exclude everything which could offend someone. A great german author, Heinrich von Kleist, wrote in his "Erdbeben von Chili" how a baby is thrown to death at a wall. Or even Goethe included in "Die Leiden des jungen Werther" something absolutly offensive for the time it was released - suicide. Those titles weren't the work of eremits but published from masses at the time and they were entertainment. Entertainment isn't just Transformers, it's everything. Story telling means depicting the reality in an altered matter. Sometimes you take a snippet of it and show it as pure as possible, sometimes you deform a huge part of it. There is and was never a border but forced, artifical ones are always unjustness.

[Punky]

Wow. It sounds like this thread went south (both politically and metaphorically) pretty fast. Can't say I'm surprised though.

Homophobia, frankly, should be banned on a forum like this. Frankly, you wouldn't let people run around screaming racist epithets, and this is the homophobic version thereof.

"And the person who says that the only way to please them is to restrict options for others is, if you ask me, the one who deserves it least. And that's my opinion, expressed as politely as possible." - David Gaider (one of those oh so scary BIOWARE writers!)

[Gearhead]

@Gearhead:

LGBT is four letters. LGBTQ is five. I'm sorry it's such a struggle to keep up with four or five letters.

Yeah, only last I saw it was LGBTQ2A, so keep up with the times. The ones you mentioned don't keep adding to themselves.

[ffordesoon]

@Gearhead:

LGBT is four letters. LGBTQ is five. I'm sorry it's such a struggle to keep up with four or five letters.

Yeah, only last I saw it was LGBTQ2A, so keep up with the times. The ones you mentioned don't keep adding to themselves.

Someone mentioned that to me after I posted what I posted, and I actually agree that it's pretty ridiculous.

Still, I've never seen anyone actually use anything more complex than LGBTQ.

[Gearhead]

Someone mentioned that to me after I posted what I posted, and I actually agree that it's pretty ridiculous.

I mean heck, I still remember (in the dim past) when it was just LGB. But anyway, my feelings are that it should be treated like anything else, in that content should be story- and experience-driven, and not an end unto itself. In the case of diversity (race, gender, sexuality, etc) effort should be made to depict more diversity as part of the whole experience, not to satisfy quotas or potentially-offended parties. It should be a creative and expressive process, not a political one.

[edit]Aaaaaand, just to make it interesting, apparently there's also LGBTQI2-S, and a host of other permutations with still more letters.

[Tagaziel]

Examples of language commonly referred to as "politically correct"
"Intellectually disabled" in place of "Retarded" and other terms
"African American" in place of "Black," "Negro" and other terms. (However, "Black" is used in English-speaking countries other than the U.S.)
"Native American" (or "First Nations" in Canada) in place of "Indian"
"Caucasian" in place of "White", and other terms
"Gender-neutral" terms such as "firefighter" in place of "fireman," police officer in place of policeman.
Terms relating to disability, such as "visually impaired" or "hearing impaired" in place of "blind" or "deaf"
"Holiday", "winter" or "festive" in place of "Christmas"

Technically, this isn't being politically correct. It's simple evolution of language in a society that develops to include multiple different cultures and gradually removes stereotypes ingrained in it from ages (thankfully) long past.

There's some really good discourse in here. Glad to see this thread wasn't derailed. Continue.

[SDF121]

Including gay characters can't hurt the game. Honestly, people, remember that characters are devices : if a gay character helps to tell a good story or is a key-point in a sidequest, why not ? Just like an old character can be a good addition to the story (because, if a lady managed to survive long enough in Wasteland to become an old lady, you can be pretty sure it's not a good idea to mess up with badass granny).

What would their sexuality have to do with the merits of their actions though? In other words, why should I care about the proclivities or inclinations of an individual if they are a good human being? How does focusing on their sexuality, be it straight or gay, serve to enhance the plot or add to the merit of their actions?

I'd much rather the writers see people as individuals first, rather than as a sexuality or ethnicity or what have you.

Agreed, I have always found it strange that others would base an individuals identity solely on their proclivities. I also think that those who define themselves either by their ethnicity, gender, nationality, or sexual preferences inadvertently end up perpetuating the artificial divisions and distinctions between one another that they are seemingly opposed to.

Also, there simply would be some gay people in the wasteland. I believe the popularly accepted statistic is that one in every ten Americans is gay, yes? Surely a few of those people would survive the bombs.

The unemployment rate in the US is 1 in 12. I guess this means there should be unemployed people in Wasteland 2? And disabled people? And fat people? How many dog owners are in the US? I guess lots, so they have to be represented in Wasteland 2. I mean, why not, right?

I'm not sure if this is really an appropriate use of the 'slippery slope'. Aside from that, I can think of several reasons why many of these demographics would cease to exist in a post apocalyptic world. First of all, I'm not sure of how one can really consider anyone as being employed or unemployed in a post apocalyptic world. Second, with a lower standard of living and primitive health care, I would imagine that it would be very difficult for the disabled to thrive as they would be facing numerous challenges. Of course, they may do well in established towns and communities but I would imagine that they would be very few. With respect to the overweight, I can't imagine that there would be many of them either as food would be scarce and the general labor and activity required of someone surviving in such a world would work against gaining significant weight.

I don't think any of us would mind the inclusion of a few LGBT characters in Wasteland 2. However, I think the problem that some members of this forum are taking issue with is the demand for quest's or elements of the game's plot to be centered around LGBT issues. It is demands such as these that others fear will detract from the game.

I might have missed it but I haven't seen anyone demand anything. Not even inclusion of gays. I would love it for a few characters in the game that are gay, be they good, bad, in-between, obnoxious, gracious, doesn't matter. I for one would enjoy some quest in the game centering around gay themes, just as I would love part of a side quest focus around racism or other things that we as a human race have made into problems for ourselves. But I wouldn't think of telling the developers it had to be in there. This is a wish-thread just like every other thread in "What to Include" but I can't see people suggesting getting medals in the game getting "It's demands such as these that others fear will detract from the game."

There are no demands here, just a suggestion, and a discussion for those who wish to join with mature input.

I seem to remember someone requesting that an entire quest be devoted to exploring LGBT themes. Perhaps using the word 'demand' was inappropriate as it implies something more forceful. Regardless, I think the issue here is a matter of subtlety. Apparently, there was a gay character in Fallout 2. I have no recollection of there being one but perhaps I simply missed the character or was not paying close enough of attention. Regardless, I'm sure that many of the commentators of this thread would have no objection to a similar NPC. Even Fallout: New Vegas seemed to handle the implementation of an LGBT chararacter in matter that was both mature and appropriate with that ghoul who would simply exchange a few flirty remarks and nothing else. I don't think that the majority of us are opposed to LGBT characters in the game. We just want it to be handled appropriately. Again, I think that it is a matter of subtlety.

try not to derail it into a BioWare discussion either.

Too late! I have never played any of the Bioware games (never really interested me) but I have a number of friends who enjoy them (both gay and straight). From what I have been able to gather from them as well as others who complained about its portrayal of sexuality is that it was never subtle. While I am sure that Fargo and his team can include LGBT characters in a way that isn't explicitly "in your face" or out of place within the context of the games story, I can understand some of the supporters concerns.

However, if there was a bar tender who would refer you to speak to his partner (who also works in the bar) to trade items or something, that would seem perfectly fine. However, devoting an entire quest towards an LGBT NPC would seem to be less subtle as there would be more of an explicit focus on a persons sexuality. This not to say that there cannot be side quests involving LGBT NPCs, but having side quests that revolve around rescuing their partner or saving an LGBT NPC from a lynch mob (as some have suggested) seems out of place.

I think that is situations like these that some members are opposed to because it seems to be putting an emphasis on matters that are not significant to the overall themes of Wasteland. Perhaps I am mistaken in this regard but when I think about moral dilemmas in a post apocalyptic world, I generally am thinking of how limited resources and the struggle to survive may affect ones moral deliberations. In a world of disorder, does one become a brute who conforms to the state of nature or does one maintain his humanity by affirming natural law?

Well. I think a lot of people seem not to take offense at gay people being in it, they're more like "if InXile wants gay people in it, that's fine". But offense seems to be taken to the suggestion that gay people *need* to be in there. I kind of agree. If it makes no sense story/setting-wise, gay people needn't be in it. But as you point out, it makes sense for WL2, and I kind of expect some gayness to make an appearance regardless of feedback. But it shouldn't be something that "needs to be in".

Well said.

[ffordesoon]

@SDF121:

As someone who enjoys Bioware's output, I can say with confidence that they have all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the face. Which was the main problem with the ending of ME3, to my mind: they aimed for ambiguity and subtlety instead of playing to their strengths, and - predictably - they ended up missing the mark by a mile, the dart they flung at the board instead landing somewhere in the no man's land between "confusing" and "pretentious horseshit".

EDIT: My point being, it's not just the romances that are unsubtle.

EDIT 2: It's also worth noting that Wasteland's world is not one that lacks for resources in the way Fallout's does.

[SDF121]

@SDF121:

As someone who enjoys Bioware's output, I can say with confidence that they have all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the face. Which was the main problem with the ending of ME3, to my mind: they aimed for ambiguity and subtlety instead of playing to their strengths, and - predictably - they ended up missing the mark by a mile, the dart they flung at the board instead landing somewhere in the no man's land between "confusing" and "pretentious horseshit".

EDIT: My point being, it's not just the romances that are unsubtle.

I think that is may be more of a problem of the medium than the developers themselves. Gameplay will always trump story. Otherwise, you might as well be watching a movie or reading a novel or a treatise. Of course, there are ways to seamlessly weave a compelling narrative within the context of a video game but it can be very difficult, if not at times elusive. Even then, I still feel that serious matters are better suited to the realm of academic discourse and spirited discussion with friends where you will actually end up treating the matters themselves rather than attempt to wrap such discussions in entertainment (as video games do) without ever getting to the heart of these matters.

Anyways, my concern with trying to treat any legitimate issues within the context of a video game is that they almost always fall flat. I think this reviewer raises excellent points with respect to the themes portrayed throughout Deus Ex: Human Revolution...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X43i8NQ--_s#t=8m57s

[ffordesoon]

Well, I would argue that Obsidian has done some incredibly subtle work with plenty of moral ambiguity and a strong narrative focus, but they plan around the limitations of the medium. So I take your point.

[agvkrioni]

I don't see the problem here. If you see a gay in game, you can do to that person what you do to anyone you either like don't like. It's just another aspect of human society. I'd argue for gays in game for the same reason I would children. Because they exist.

This is me not inserting a comment about killing certain types of characters to incite a flamewar.

[ffordesoon]

I'm absolutely not opposed to the game letting you kill any character you want. Gay, straight, black, white, kid, adult - if they're in the game, the player should be able to kill them. I wouldn't kill any character I didn't have to kill, but if you want to kill every gay person in the game, go nuts. It's your sandbox, not mine.

[TΛPETRVE]

Most homosexuals in the real world don't stick out from the crowd in any way, since - well, since they are all perfectly normal people, for fuck's sake. Thus explicitly marking random NPCs in a videogame as "gay" is of course futile at best and gormless at worst, as it adds bugger all to their role in the game, as we said above. That said, and it was already said, too, it doesn't do any harm either to acknowledge the existence of openly homosexual people in WL2. After all, most people don't spend all day at home and act as if they have no social life, so actually meeting a homosexual couple somewhere in the game world is certainly not an anomaly of biblical proportions. And while they might be the only ones that are explicitly pointed out to be gay, that doesn't mean there is not more of them among the faceless crowds of generic filler NPCs.

[Charlie Quinn]

I suppose the "all of you" was probably an overstatement. I haven't read the thread end-to-end, but what parts I've seen have been redundant and/or mean. Other (kinder, still redundant) stuff has undoubtedly been said--so don't feel insulted, as your posts most likely fell into that category.

But yeah, I don't think that this thread is contributing anything anymore. All sides have been presented; the thread's only remaining function is to breed animosity.

You haven't read through the entire thread, and you don't even know what ffordesoon's posts said, but you feel qualified to decide for all of us when this thread should end? I really don't think that's how these things work. "All sides" have not been presented (nor do they need to be), and I have a problem with the way that the homophobic and hateful "side" is described in such a way that it makes it appear legitimate, and equal to the side that doesn't dig on homophobia and hatefulness.

If you were a moderator, my feelings would obviously be different. However, a moderator has already said that we are free to continue our discussion, just a few pages back. And until they, or another moderator say to clam up, this thread can and should go on as long as people have something to say.