Slashdot Mirror
On Gay Characters In Videogames
Thanks to Armchair Arcade for its feature discussing the portrayal of gay characters in videogames past and present. The article starts by pointing out: "In Troika Games' computer role playing game The Temple of Elemental Evil (2003)... the player is asked to rescue, and given the option to marry, an openly gay character", and ends by arguing: "Gay avatars are an inevitable development in the evolution of the videogame that will take place with or without this article. If we already see such possibilities opening up in even mainstream titles like The Temple of Elemental Evil, I doubt it will be long before even the idea of a fantasy role-playing game featuring only one white male avatar will seem a strange, misguided aspect of our distant past."
Given the option to marry?
I never thought I'd see the day that first person shooters would be more tolerant of social differences the the general U.S. population.
Gamers are some of the most homophobic people out there. Using "gay" to mean "stupid" or "cheap" is clear homophobia, I don't care what kind of way people try to construe it.
"That's so GAY!" is heard almost every round of Counterstrike. "God, why does that fag have to keep cheating?" If you're a real gamer, you know what I'm talking about.
The worst part is that most of them think it's okay, because either a) They don't *really* mean Gay people, it's just a word, or b) they think gay people deserve it.
Its really a problem that needs to go away. It makes online gaming less fun, and it makes otherwise intelligent people act like assholes.
Considering gamers still use the words 'fag', 'gay' and 'homo' in order to insult each other online, it'll be a while until homosexual characters are implemented more into games. Don't forget, video games mirror reality so until the public accepts homosexuality, gamers won't accept homosexuality.
On top of that, don't forget that video games have barely scratched the surface of heterosexual relationships anywhere near as far as the article's example goes. While most people point to BMX XXX, GTA3, GTA:VC, and DOA : Xtreme Volleyball as video games protraying or promoting heterosexuality, theres no hinting of any type of "relationship" between the characters. The most I've ever seenen any type of friendship between "just friends" is in linear RPGs (which isn't saying much since it is linear).
This works in Fallout (or was it Fallout 2). Girls could sleep with the girls, guys with the guys... I think you could even have same sex marriages.
Those debates equal massive amounts of money, and gays will buy the game just to show support over the issue.
Well you're right about the free publicity, but the number of gays buying the game out of support would be dwarfed by the number of religious types who wouldn't let their kids play such a game.
Let's face it, the main reason there aren't many games that target gay consumers is because gays are a tiny portion of the game market. There aren't even a hell of a lot of games for girls, and females are more than half the population! Why risk rocking the boat for a couple percent of your demographic, max?
I think one important change is that there are now a lot of people out there who were raised by openly gay couples. An article I read last Sunday estimates the numbers are something like 15 million. A small minority, but likely to have influence disproportinate to their numbers. Once you have to as careful about fag jobs as you are about polack jokes, you know there's a fundamental change in attitude.
Same-sex relationships existed in the first Sims game, though I can't recall what the situation was regarding marriage. You could certainly fall in love and share a bed with members of either sex, the engine didn't care.
Gamers are some of the most homophobic people out there. Using "gay" to mean "stupid" or "cheap" is clear homophobia
Ignorance, maybe. Insensitivity, sure. But homophobia? Most people who use that word use it without thinking about it's meaning in relation to the current context. But if they were homophobic, they would be thinking about it's meaning, and purposely using it with the intention of intimidating gay people.
By branding ignorant or insensitive behavior as homophobic, you're guilty of making the same generalizations that truly homophobic make.
You could sleep with a farmboy in Fallout 2, then his father would walk in on you as you were getting dressed and insist on you getting married. You'd be stuck with him as a useless tagalong in you party that did nothing but nag.
Why is it that people insist upon focusing upon a single facet of their being rather than the entirety?
In the specific case of homosexuality, too many people focus upon the fact that they are gay to the exclusion of all else. Should the person be famous and be on a talkshow, that's the whole of their discussion - their homosexuality.
Now, consider somebody like Elton John. Queer as a three dollar bill, and has made no bones about it for years. Yet, that is only a small part of the man - yes, if he is on a talk show and the subject comes up he may discuss (briefly) his S.O., but then he moves on. He treats his relationship like any polite person should - it is his private life, and he trys to keep it such. I don't want to hear about Elton's bedroom, but then again, I really don't want to hear about Ahnold's bedroom, either.
Which brings me to the subject of "Gay characters in (games|movies|TV)" - in most such cases that is ALL the character is - gay. No other character development, just "Look at Fred. He's gay."
How about having a character who is, among other things, gay? Buffy the Vampire Slayer did pretty well with Willow - the fact she was gay was only a small facet of her character.
So why must the fact that some character in this video game is gay be the main facet of the game, or the character? Why not just have the fact come out (pun intended) during the normal course of the game, and make it just another part of the character?
www.eFax.com are spammers
I can't wait for the pureitan side of america to find that out or govener scwarzenegger
Saying Apple is better than MS is like saying Botulism is better than rabies.
Not giving a rat's ass is easy when you are not among the oppressed.
People who don't use computers for anything more than Word and AOL generally don't give a rat's ass about the DMCA, RIAA, MPAA, and SCO, but that doesn't make them right.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
so, since we will have gay characters in-game, can I have a sexy donkey in my game?
Way to throw that red herring in there. Consensual relationships between consenting adults of the same species are in a very different category than bestiality. If you can't see that then you are blind.
why is homosexuality being 'rammed' down everyones throat over the past few years?
Why did those uppity black people ram their race down everyone's throats in the 60's?
Why are some members of our secular (separation of church and state?) society being denied their rights based on moral definitions that are purely religious?
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
What about insect?
That is the next step.
Two consenting adults of the same specifies.
Insects can't consent - they're not a sentient species. I don't even know what "specifies" they are.
If you meant incest, then that's different. The argument you're trying to make is a logical bait-and-switch. We're not arguing that issue, but if it does come up as a significant issue, we can deal with it on its own. I haven't seen any incest-rights marches lately, so i'm not inclined to think of this as a pressing concern.
Black people wanted equal treatment to the whites in the 60's.
Homosexuals have equal treatment already. They can already marry some one of the opposite sex. What they want is SPECIAL TREATMENT.
Not precisely. You can look at it as an increase in rights for everyone (straight people can marry other same-sex straight people too) or you can look at it more realistically, as if your head were not encased in your rectum. Straights have the right to have their romantic relationships sanctioned by law, same-sex couples don't. There are thousands of rights associated with marriage - property rights, inheritance, guardianship, adoption - that are currently denied to same-sex couples. That's unequal treatment.
Comparing the homosexual quest for marriage to civilrights is horrible in logic and in sensitivy.
Maybe when the butt fucking fags get out and start getting bit by police dogs, killed with buckshot, hit by water cannons, and arrested then you can compare the two. Until then stfu.
Bullshit. Look up the arguments that were used to defend anti-miscegenation laws. They are the same ones that are used against gay marriage.
And as to violence, maybe you never heard about a little phenomenon called gay-bashing? Not so different from lynching. Police have been raiding gay clubs, beating up, locking up, and generally persecuting homosexuals for years. I think that qualifies as "until then." Until you get past your uninformed bigotry, stfu.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.