BioWare Launches "Gay Planet" For the Old Republic 333
DavidGilbert99 writes "Labelled as an 'oddly regressive move,' developers of Star Wars: the Old Republic have decided that all gay characters will be stuck on a single planet called Makeb. The move comes with the release of the Rise of the Hutt Cartel pack and the Makeb planet will be the only place in the game where players can select 'flirtatious' dialogue options with characters of the same gender. From the article: 'BioWare executive producer Jeff Hickman apologised for same sex relationships taking so long to be added to the game, referring to the company's most famous title Mass Effect, where homosexual relationships are available by default:
"First of all, I want to apologize that this is taking so long to get in the game," wrote Hickman in a blog post. "I realise that we promised SGR (same gender relationships) to you guys and that many of you believed that this would be with a companion character. Unfortunately, this will take a lot more work than we realised at the time and it (like some other pieces of content we talked about earlier in the year) has been delayed as we focused on the changes required to take the game Free-to-Play. '"
Srsly? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Srsly? (Score:5, Interesting)
You have the desert planet, the ice planet, the forest moon, the city planet...
Every planet has one damn definable feature. What's so absurd about it when Star Wars is nothing BUT a Planet of Hats [tvtropes.org] type setting?
Re:Srsly? (Score:5, Funny)
You have the desert planet, the ice planet, the forest moon, the city planet...
And now, finally, the FABULOUS planet.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Acceptable (Score:5, Funny)
Well that takes care of 10% of their players. Now what about the robot female planet so the remaining 90% can feel accepted by their "I was born that way" mate preferences, too?
Re:Acceptable (Score:5, Funny)
So, you're saying you want a new area on planet Eroticon 6 called Valley of the RealDolls?
Re:Acceptable (Score:5, Funny)
There's already plenty of female robots and characters you can bang.
Or Clang, as the case may be.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
There's already plenty of female robots and characters you can bang.
Or Clang, as the case may be.
Clang? The compiler?
Ah, I get it, to program the sex bot. I guess the geek sex bots have a built-in terminal, and the conversation begins with: "How do you want it, Emacs or vi?"
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Since only 1-3% of the population is homosexual, I presume you are suggesting that players of Bioware titles are faggier than the general population.
At least post-Dragon Age that does seem to be the case. Maybe as high as 30-40%. They are the official LGBT developer. Half the devs themselves are gay.
Re: (Score:3)
Which in turn depends on how they define their terms.
Re:Acceptable (Score:4, Interesting)
5 - 12%, depending on which survey you read
Although the AC troll brings up an interesting point. I theorize that the rate of homosexuality among the geeks n' gamers crowd is probably higher than in the general population, if only because of the outsider appeal of the subculture. In my experience, us nerds are generally less judgmental about inconsequential things like sexual orientation and focus on things that really matter, like Who Shot First, or whether SSDs have finally solved the cost/performance ratio problem. Additionally, gamers skew younger (even with us Gen Xers bumping up the numbers), and young people tend to be more tolerant of gay folk too, in their way.
In any case, I'm growing a few throat oysters for Bioware the next time I see them walking down the street. They totally caved on their commitment to GLBT, which was a major reason I bought the game to begin with. At first it was "we'll definitely have gay stuff", and then around release they said "we'll have it in a content patch", and later they shoved queers back into the closet with "it will be a companion relationship only, so other people don't have to be grossed out by your gayness". Now they're backing away from that too? Just goes to show, a few Jesus nuts can really fuck it up for the rest of us when corporate interests are involved.
Support indie devs! Invest in crowdsource projects! Freedom is cheaper and better made.
Re:Acceptable (Score:5, Insightful)
Every group thinks theyre more insightful, wiser, and generally more intellectually mature than everyone else. I have no reason to believe-- especially after about 5 years on slashdot-- that this would be particularly true of the nerd subculture. If anything, it seems more clannish, because as people get progressively better in a niche area, they seem to progressively become closeminded and intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them.
Dont agree? Look for any article discussing Apple vs PC, or MS vs Google, or religion, or politics. As a conservative I tend to regularly get called interesting things here... "less judgemental" indeed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Called interesting things" means seeing posts indicating I (as a conservative) deserve to drown in a hurricane (post was clarified to indicate it was serious), that Im racist, bigoted, and quite possibly the greatest threat to world peace out there.
Is this supposed to be an indicator of tolerance and non-judgementalism? Am I being "reactionary" here for not thinking that this is the bastion of objectivity and rationalism that you seem to think it is?
Im not trying to warp facts here, Im saying what anyone
Re: (Score:3)
Where are these crazy entitlement posts even coming from? You may not realize it, but this game was marketed towards the gay community before release - but they never put the work into the design. That's why it's so technically difficult to hack it in now. Get it? It was just a bunch of bull. That makes people mad. If this was about feature X instead of feature Gay, you wouldn't hear about entitlements or special interests.
This is like the black thing with Obama all over again. People are afraid to face the
Re:Acceptable (Score:5, Insightful)
Or it could be because sexuality is a pretty complicated thing. While you have the majority of people who are "straight", and a minority of people who are just "gay", within both groups you have a ton of variation. How many "straight" people have had at least one homosexual encounter? Impure thoughts? How many of either group are actually "bisexual"? Where do gay people who are "closeted" and only have sex with the opposite sex fall? Where do people who can't figure it out yet fall (in high school in the early-mid 90's being gay was the big thing for some crowds, and now most of these people are happily married and straight). Pretty much every girl I know has had sexual encounters with another girl, but identify as straight. In my male acquaintances this is less common, but still it isn't terribly uncommon.
Also where do various nontraditional gender identifications fall? You identify as a woman, but are biologically male, and still only have sex with females? Or in the case of my dad's neighbor, you were born male, had operations and hormones to become female, but still only sleep with your wife of 20 years?
Sexuality is a thorny and hugely complicated subject. Any study will differ based on definitions, and sampling.
most honest researchers avoid the subject since the radical gay activists savagely attack anyone who publishes studies which run counter to gay dogma.
Who actually gives a shit how many gay people there are in the world? Why does it matter to anyone? I suppose I'm the wrong person to ponder this, since I don't actually care one bit, what people do in their bedrooms, consensually, is no business of mine. As long as people are happy, I don't care.
I am happy that there is a "gay dogma" but not a "intolerance" dogma. Which is odd, since last I checked the intolerant crowd was much louder than the other bunch.
Go be gay over there... (Score:5, Funny)
sounds like the digital version of don't ask, don't tell.
Re:Go be gay over there... (Score:5, Funny)
They should have called the planet "Hell" or "Purgatory."
Might have attracted christian players.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Seems more like "if this offends you, don't go there", since you neither have to ask nor be told to know what's going on there.
If there is no need to rub the GLBT issue in people's faces, why do it? If you ask me this is the reason places like California still do not have gay marriage. You can't make people change their minds, you arrange it so that they don't have to until it's too late.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Would have been much easier to allow everywhere and let the individual players block incomming "flirtatious" dialogue for their own character(s). That way you could block or allow all such dialogue if you wanted, or just for your specific "female protocol droid" preference.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Go be gay over there... (Score:5, Insightful)
Problem is some people are offended merely by seeing same sex couples together, allowing them to stay in the same hotel room together or just thinking about it. Bioware took the cowards way out, instead of calling out the bigots for what they are.
Re: (Score:3)
"If you dont approve of my behavior youre a bigot", is that how it is?
Would I be a bigot for example if I disapproved of seeing someone else commit adultery?
Re:Go be gay over there... (Score:5, Interesting)
"If you dont approve of my behavior youre a bigot", is that how it is?
No, disapproving of people because they are gay makes you a bigot. Being gay is not a choice someone made, just like being black or a woman isn't.
Would I be a bigot for example if I disapproved of seeing someone else commit adultery?
Depends. You can disapprove of adulterous behaviour because when it is a choice and it is harming that person's partner. On the other hand there are situations where it is usually deemed acceptable by society and the law at large, such as when a couple is separated but not yet finally divorced or when both parties agree to have other sexual partners.
The main point is that adultery is a chosen behaviour, where as homosexuality is not. Additionally, there mere fact that two people of the same sex are married does not harm anyone else.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I believe my post was specifically about disapproval, so perhaps simmer down a bit.
Re:Go be gay over there... (Score:5, Insightful)
You do realize that this isn't about interactions with other players, right?
TOR is a very story-driven game, and thus this is all about NPCs having dialogue options which include romance options. Many such NPCs already have romance options, but up to now only heterosexual ones. What's been decided there is that apparently homosexual romance can only happen on this one planet, which is part of a paid-for expansion pack.
This isn't about other players doing unsolicited homosexual romancing. It's about the player having the ability to, if he/she so chooses, romance other characters of the same sex.
Re: (Score:3)
I wonder if it's not incompetence, laziness, or a lack of manpower, rather than cowardice. We're talking entirely new dialogue trees here, and adding the content to back it up, not just throwing one option onto each NPC.
Imagine the blowback if they did do it that way.
[Aggressive] Give me the databank codes or I'll nail your tongue to a wookie!
[Diplomatic] Surely we can come to some mutually beneficial arrangement...
[Flirtatious] Forget the databank codes. Let's talk about us...[0]
Player selects the new thir
More like go BEKAM gay over there... (Score:3)
Named Makeb, the planet will be launched as part of the new Rise of the Hutt Cartel pack and will be the only place in the game where players can select "flirtatious" dialogue options with characters of the same gender.
Go to Makeb, bekaM gay.*
*There's a campaign slogan for Makeb tourist board in there somewhere.
Maybe a transparent postcard with Makeb printed on one side, read as bekaM from the other...
Re:Go be gay over there... (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, Old Republic is still around?
Please... (Score:3, Interesting)
...don't make RTFA, but where's Disney in all of this?
bigotedly delicious! (Score:4, Funny)
Why is there flirtatious behavior? (Score:2, Funny)
I thought attachment was forbidden for a Jedi. It leads to jealousy, and last I heard the shadow of greed, that is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Jedi classes make up 2 out of 16, or 1/8th of the possible class options.
Re: (Score:3)
Actully, 2 out of 8 base classes, 4 out of 16 advanced classes. There were already standard Heterosexual relationships available for those who don't care so much about what the Order thinks.
Re: (Score:2)
It's possible that at that point in history the Jedi
Re:Why is there flirtatious behavior? (Score:4, Interesting)
So.. Still was against the code in SWTOR's time frame.
Re: (Score:2)
KOTOR takes place in the world where rules are not really enforced all that strictly, even though they are in place. So if new kids in the order bang each other and they get found, they face about the same punishment as the kid in military school getting caught. Stop or be kicked out.
But lore on the Old Republic suggests a lot less obedience to the rulebook then at the time frame of the movies. Jedi order (and by extension sith) are not all that powerful, and there are quite a few force users that openly ch
Re: (Score:2)
Just because a straight relationship is in there does not mean that has to be changed.
There is already hidden gay content in KOTOR. Click here [youtube.com] at 2:25, then tell me a regular woman would describe just a friend that way? "... she was a dear companion for many years. We would spend nights alone and gaze at the stars ..." if that does not spell out lesbian RT I do not know what else does?
Ah, virtual segregation... (Score:5, Funny)
... a heavily pixellated Geroge Wallace must be smiling in his recycle bin...
Just NPCs? (Score:2)
This is just about dialog options to NPCs, right?
Or is SW:TOR like one of those children's MMOs where you can only choose from a preset number of dialog options when engaging other players?
It was surprisingly hard to ascertain from the wikipedia page.
Re:Just NPCs? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, just flirting with other NPCs out in the world. They apparently wanted to get it working for companions but it has apparently been harder than they expected.
Just one thing to say (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"Regressive"? (Score:5, Interesting)
This.
Going back and changing scripting and bringing back all the original voice actors to voice new dialog for same-gender/same-sex dialogue is costly and a pain in the ass. So for new content moving forward, they're planning for it.
Bioware is trying to be inclusive by adding the content in the first place. They aren't trying to segregate players.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Is it more complicated than removing some "if(player1->gender != player2->gender) { do_sexy_time(); }" conditionals?
Are you imagining that they have to re-do voiceovers to make them camper?
Really, what's the big deal, technically?
I expect it's not technical at all, it's more they fear the Christian Moms Against Faggotry lobby turning it into an Issue. I mean, you start with a bit of harmless man-on-man flirting, then it's wookie-on-trandoshan civil partnerships, and before you know it, everyone
Re:"Regressive"? (Score:5, Informative)
Bioware has included same-sex options in every game since Dragon Age. They're not afraid of any agenda. They don't just take heterosexual romance options and remove gender filters. Their same-sex romances in their games are written to be meaningful and different.
And bringing back all the original voice actors to record new dialogue is costly for a game that is reporting losing tons of money.
So instead of spreading FUD based upon assumptions, you should actually play SWTOR and look into Bioware's track record.
Re: (Score:3)
Grr. Shouldn't multi-task while typing. I meant Baldur's Gate, not Dragon Age. They've done same-sex for quite some time.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:"Regressive"? (Score:4, Informative)
Nah, you're missing the point:
In previous Bioware games they allowed people to have same-sex relationships by default. In this latest Bioware game, they did not allow people to have same-sex relationships by default, and are only bolting it on in a clumsy fashion after the fact.
It's literally regressive in that this newest game by Bioware handles same-sex relationships less well than previous Bioware games. It's a step backwards for Bioware, even if it's a step forward compared to some other game makers.
Imagine the complaints if you took any $franchise and removed $feature that said $franchise was known for. People would rightly call it a step back.
As I said elsewhere, I find relationships in RPGs to be almost always poorly executed and pointless because they're not handled well, but as a gamer I can certainly see how people who come to a publisher expecting that publisher to deliver on something they usually deliver would be bothered when they don't get what they expected.
Re:"Regressive"? (Score:5, Interesting)
In Dragon Age and Mass Effect, Bioware owned the properties. They could do what they wanted without asking permission.
Adding homosexual content to Star Wars requires the permission of Lucas and LucasArts. Karen Traviss added a gay character/couple in one novel I believe, and it turned into a huge controversy even though it was a minor background character. The debate as to whether or not homosexuality even exists in the Star Wars universe had never been determined. George Lucas is a self-described "hippie" living in Marin County, so it is quite possible he had no problem with it personally, but the Lucas-empire had to decide how it would financially affect the brand.
Amazingly enough, they eventually signed off on it, and homosexuality does apparently exist in Star Wars.
Re:"Regressive"? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not saying the gay community shouldn't be upset over how they're treated by the media, or the lack of romance options in video games.
But this article and summary attack Bioware, which is absurd. Bioware has gone out of their way for years to cater to all players. The fact that Bioware needed permission from LucasArts isn't Bioware's fault. Calling this regressive behavior on Bioware's behalf isn't fair.
And you're also mistaken. Gay players don't have their own planet. The article is misrepresenting the facts and spreading bullshit that is getting people outraged over lies.
All players are being directed to the new planet for new content. All future planets and all future content will include same-sex romances.
Re: (Score:3)
Gay characters aren't being segregated. The article is mistaken.
The new planet holds new content for all players and is the center of the expansion pack. Same-sex romance options are only being added to new content, including this new planet.
Re:"Regressive"? (Score:5, Funny)
but you can't just snap your fingers and make that happen.
Perhaps if you snapped your fingers in a Z formation.
Re: (Score:2)
The "regressive" statement pretty clearly refers to the difference between Mass Effect, where gay relationships were included right away and this later game by the same company where gay relationships were not included right away and are only being bolted on afterwards. It is literally regression in that it is a step (or multiple steps) backward in how Bioware handles diversity of relationships in their games. It's a perfectly valid term to use in a valid complaint from the segment of people who care about
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You shouldn't rage about things you don't understand.
No one is being put into a walled garden. The new planet added in the expansion is not "gay-only".
A new expansion is being released. It contains same-gender flirt options. That is all. The article is biased and the title is worse. Your reaction just puts you in the same room as Fox News. Research before you insult.
Remove suggestive dialog options (Score:3)
Now, if this is because they don't want people harassing others with same-sex comments without actually being gay and are trying to limit that to a single planet then they should remove all suggestive comments entirely. If you're worried that a gay male character is going to offend a straight male character by telling him he looks sexy then don't have the comment available. The same can be said for a straight male making suggestive comments to a straight female; it can still be inappropriate and they don't have to be gay. If that's their issue; remove it entirely. (Well, I'd rather them ban players who can't behave like adults but that's another discussion I think.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Remove suggestive dialog options (Score:5, Informative)
SW:TOR is a fully voiced MMO. Every line of dialogue has a voice actor. And most NPCs have a unique voice actor. Adding same-sex romance into the game meant going back and changing the scripting for each NPC, as well as bringing back the previous voice actors to record new dialogue.
That is why they're only doing it for new content.
Re: (Score:3)
Okay, I'll buy that, but why would they have to do that at all? If all the female NPCs have flirty options for males and all the male NPCs have flirty options for women, just use those existing options.
i.e., change this:
if( ( player.gender() == male && NPC.gender() == female ) || ( player.gender() == female && NPC.gender() == male ) )
{
dialogChoice.flirty == true;
}
to
dialogChoice.flirty == true;
Re: (Score:3)
Because Bioware has never done it that way. For example, there is a character in Dragon Age 2 that is bisexual and can be romanced by a male or female character.
They don't just ignore gender in the equation. The romance is actually different if it is started by a male or female, even though both can romance the same NPC.
And as I stated, they still need new voice recordings. Voice actors aren't cheap. They have to line-up all the original voice actors to add new dialogue, and the game is reportedly losing a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
New planet, new NPCs, new voice acting lines. To retrofit it to the old planets, they'll need to bring back in voice actors and add dialog branches to already created NPCs.
Re: (Score:2)
Because it would be quite a lot of effort to retro-fit to the existing game? It would require a fair amount of scripting, as well as (possibly) new cinematics, and definitely some extra voice-acting. There's an expansion coming, that expansion has a new planet and new NPCs, and they've taken the time and effort to add gay stuff there. Move along, people, there's no bigotry to be seen here, only time and budget constraints.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
And yet they seriously have no problem at all with C-3P0? That robot would have been kicked out of a 70's era San Fransisco YMCA.
WBC (Score:5, Funny)
And in response, the Westboro Baptist Church has announced that all 12 of their members will take to the streets of Makeb to protest.
Re:WBC (Score:5, Funny)
They'll be edited into the background of Darth Vader's funeral pyre, harassing Luke with anti-gay vitriol, in the next release of ROTJ.
Re:WBC (Score:5, Funny)
And on the other side of their signs, WBC will write "But marrying your sister would be OK"
Inflammatory headline (Score:5, Insightful)
What actually happened:
New content will include will include same-sex options. It just happens that the new content only includes one planet. Future new content will also include same-sex options.
I don't understand why the submitter is taking such an offensive stance with their post. There is no conspiracy against gays, especially when it comes to Bioware who are one of the pioneers of same-sex relationships in their games (dating back to Baldur's Gate).
What would you prefer, that this content wasn't added at all? No let me guess, you'd prefer they revamp the whole game. Nevermind that their team has been cut down to a fraction of their original size due to the commercial unsuccessfulness of the game. Instead lets invent a big issue out of their good-faith attempt to add same-sex content even with their dwindling resources that would arguably better be spent on content like warzones, flashpoints, and operations.
Re: (Score:2)
Bioware hasn't been "Bioware" in quite awhile, sadly.
Re: (Score:2)
Bioware that makes SWTOR was known as "Mythic" before they were brought in by EA and fused into Bioware to take advantage of the brand.
So you're very much correct. Bioware's brand has been diluted harshly by EA that chose to use the well-known brand as a rubber stamp on games that had little to do with the original studio that made the name what is was.
Re: (Score:2)
FWIW when the trial en
finally... (Score:3)
all those guys playing female Jedi can chase Kira and have her talk dirty to them....
Jar Jar Binks (Score:3, Funny)
So, hold up... (Score:2)
Rishrathra planet next? (Score:2)
So when are they going to add a planet for rishrathra?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So when are they going to add a planet for rishrathra?
I believe they called that "second life". Something like a decade ago /. had a story on SL like every other day. I distinctly remember it was the "first" "major" game that required more than W98 it required W2000 or better which was highly unusual at that time. Then they banned everything everyone could remotely be offended by (cybersex, pr0n, gambling, basically everything that makes life worth living) leaving no one with any reason to go there anymore. Not sure if its even still up. Might check into
Misleading much... (Score:3)
Same gender relationships are new content to TOR. New content goes in new places. Trying to back add it into existing content would be a nightmare. It's not that Markab is the 'gay'planet, it's that it's the first planet going forward that supports what they are calling SGR. And all future planets likely will as well.
There are two basic problems with trying to add SGR into existing content
First: Cost. TOR has been an epic financial failure. Trying to rehire a bunch of voice actors, add in appropriate points for them to have SGR dialogue etc. is a lot of work, and importantly:
Second: What do you do for characters that have already done the content you're changing? For good or ill, your character has made a series of choices throughout the game that set the state of that characters relationships (notably with companions). Building huge content branches where you can either change after the fact, or only effect new characters is certainly possible, but it's a lot of work for content a lot of players aren't going to see.
Besides that, as was said, BioWare didn't really understand just what it was getting itself into with an MMO, and discovering after the fact that this is going to take a lot longer than they thought necessarily means making some compromises. And the longer it goes on without SGR the harder it becomes to fix because there will be more players who've gone through the existing content because they've given up waiting on the developers.
Re: (Score:3)
As a semi-casual player, I think I can answer the question on replaying content. Replaying content is the core of SWTOR. They even made a legacy system which specifically requires you to play through the game time and time again to get rewards. Vast majority of their content and essentially most if not all of the interesting content is in the personal stories, which require you to keep replaying the game time and time again to see.
It's simply the way the game is made. It's also why so many of us were confus
Re: (Score:2)
That's on a new character.
You don't replay the same (story) content on the same character.
And most players don't want to keep making new characters. Also, the leveling curve is short enough a lot of people already full leveled one of each.
Re: (Score:2)
You just listed the reasons why SWTOR failed. Because it needed you to want to do these things. That's where games strengths are.
And as you point out, most people do not want to do these things. That's likely the single biggest factor in SWTOR's failure.
Re: (Score:2)
It is only a failure because EA is giving up on it too soon.
No, it's a failure because the producers of the game thought that the first 100 hours of play experience mattered more than the next 900.
Yes at launch it had issues compared to WOW. It is not fair it was not as mature as WOW as it is 7 years old.
SWTOR sold about 2 million copies in its first 2 months, it's down around a 10th of that in players. People wanted the game to be good. It definitely made improvements, but they made enough basically bad choices that it wasn't worth putting up with for 75 or 80% of their playerbase. That wasn't EA's money pile, that was bad design, and when those people left their non-c
This summary is stupid. (Score:3)
That said, this summary is absolutely ridiculous. How is adding content that people requested (if only in a small chunk at first) "anti-gay?" The summary makes it sound like anyone who ever wanted same-sex options are forced to stay on one planet, which isn't the case at all; the content just hasn't been added to the other places yet. I don't know who wrote this summary, but they ought to be ashamed, too. There are plenty of bad things to say about SWTOR, EA, and Bioware that are actually true that nobody should need to make shit up.
Planet Name (Score:4, Funny)
Uranus
Okay... I'm sorry. Don't be mad. I cringed too when it crossed my mind.
No safe answer here (Score:2)
They were in a bind on this with no safe way to do this at all. Make something that is politically correct in some parts of the world and you'll deeply offend other people in other parts of the world with different values. Different cultures simply don't share the same set of values and when we try to impose are values on other cultures it creates a lot of resentment.
It's a balancing act and Bioware is well aware of this. They tried to strike a balance and they were going to be damned no matter what they di
Re: (Score:2)
Considering how dialogue trees in games like SWTOR are formed, it would have been far easier to make an "enable homosexual content" toggle, and have designers flag all starting points of dialogue trees for homosexual content with specific flag.
And when the homosexual content is disabled, all dialogue trees that are flagged as being homosexual content simply do not get displayed. Reality is that romance, like most things that is decided in the SWTOR dialogue has no real impact on the surrounding world beyond
Re: (Score:2)
Make something that is politically correct in some parts of the world and you'll deeply offend other people in other parts of the world with different values.
We need MMOs with more of this stuff, not less. I'd much rather see the fighting online than in the real streets.
Nothing to see, move along (Score:2)
Adding in extra story choices/dialog/voiceovers/animations to support new "flirts" is a big job. It has NOTHING to do with whether the "flirt" is homosexual or heterosexual (or robosexual!), the extra work is there with every "flirt" they add. Going back and making the old encounters support more "flirts" is a big job, one that they don't have the resources to do right now, especially as the original voice actors would have to be recalled.
Whoever labelled their commitment to adding homosexual flirtations to
Well MMO players are gay (Score:2, Funny)
At least half the general chat messages I saw in WoW were people calling each other fags, so it stands to reason half of all MMO players are gay. Bioware is just trying to capture this market.
This isn't "regressive" (Score:5, Informative)
This is a bit long, but I don't see anyone else saying it, so I will. I power-played this game from launch to max level, and then for a few months after, until it was obvious my friends weren't going to keep at it- the TLDR version is that this isn't about shitting on gays at all, but instead money. Ok here's why:
If you play the main plot of TOR, you quickly find out that each of the four "base classes" on each "empire" or "republic" side (so eight base classes total) has their own plotline. Each plotline takes you through the same planets in the same order as the other base classes in your faction, with the exception that each faction has two starting planets- one for the Jedi/Sith, and the other for the tech heroes.
For instance: if you are a smuggler, you begin by pulling into the same planet that the Troopers start on, and your ship gets stolen. You then fall in with a kind of small time crime boss, and when he is assassinated his right-hand man becomes yours.
The smuggler can become a "scoundrel" or a "gunslinger"- the two "advanced classes". The "scoundrel" has a shotgun that has close ranged positional attacks, and a stealth belt, as well as some brawler type moves. You also gain some heals. The "gunslinger" has a belt that creates a portable force-field cover that can knock people back, and they use two weapons. The "scoundrel" is essentially a rogue with a healing spec, and the "gunslinger" is kind of a ranger or archer role. Which you pick has NO RELEVANCE on your plot, even though they play differently.
The "trooper" can become two types of thing as well (a character with a shield generator and the best armor who can tank or deal damage, or a character with a super advanced huge gun who can deal damage or use the gun to heal), as can the "Jedi Knight" (dual wield damage guy or single wield guy who can tank) and the "Jedi Consular" (force caster/healer or a stealthy two-bladed light saber guy). Both of these start on the planet with the Jedi Academy.
Meanwhile, on the Sith side, all of these choices are mirrored- the Imperial Agent can become an "Operative", who has the exact same powers as the "Scoundrel", or a "Sniper", who has the same powers as the "Gunslinger". But all the "Imperial" side plots are TOTALLY DIFFERENT than the Republic ones- there are EIGHT total paths you can follow in this game, based on all eight character types you can start the game with (Sith Inquisitor, Jedi Consular, Sith Warrior, Jedi Knight, Imperial Operative, Smuggler, Bounty Hunter, Trooper). As you play through, you get "companion characters"- you get one very early, and then others as you play through your plotline. You can have one with your character at most times, but you can't hang out with all of them at once unless you are on your ship. Each has a series of mini plotlines that you can play through.
Importantly, THESE ARE THE CHARACTERS YOU CAN BE ROMANTIC WITH. In your plotline, you meet some NPCs that are just mentioned once or twice, and that will attempt to seduce you, or you can attempt to seduce them. That's not what anyone who wanted same-sex relations in this game was hoping for, and that's what this planet seems to be offering. The companion characters are all individually voice acted by professional actors and have a ludicrous number of things they can say, ways they can respond, etc. It is seriously high production value.
As an example: My smuggler is female. The first guy you meet, Corso Riggs, is a possible "romantic companion" for a female smuggler. Your wookie companion is not, and neither are the female companions or the fish-head alien. If you accept Corso's advances, he will prove to you that he's both desired by others and totally into just you, a reasonably common romance novel thing, and you can even marry him. A male character has similar options with his two female companions- for instance, Akavi Spaar, a rough and tumble alien warrioress, can fall for your advances, as can Risha, a human woman.
So everyone was expecti
Still a BAD game you mean (Score:3)
The complete and total failure of SWTOR will continue to be ignored by an industry that is stuck on the PC, hates PC gamers but can't optimize their games to run on decade old hardware. MMORPG's of old were MASSIVE games designed to make games from the Elder Scroll series seem claustrophobic. And, if you want to be nasty, just as empty and pointless. Star Wars Galaxies had HUGE planets with some sparse content strewn around (it actually had quest chains (outside the themeparks) but most were very obscure a
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but if you had used your spellchecker, you would have known that desease is not a word.
lol there is no cure for my ignorance.
Re: (Score:2)
If they have to "rewrite the entire game" to add dialog options and some more lines of voice acting, then they're doing it very, very wrong.
Besides, hetero relationships aren't possible with all the companions, so there was no expectation that every single one would be available for same-sex relationships either.
Re: (Score:2)
Well did you ever stop and think that when you tell others what to think or do that youre just being a facist jerk?
The funniest defense against contract law I've ever seen. They don't want an opinion, they shouldn't ask for money.