Which is a form of media. Which influences the way we think and construct what is 'normal' and acceptable. Especially important with forming the inchoate conceptualizations of children and youngins.

Poor writing by what metric? Compared to which devs? How is pandering related to a lower quality of writing? In fact, define pandering.

It is, doesn't change that it's the most hamfisted and clichéd writing I've seen outside of fanfiction.

More like if "SJWs" had power over what kind of story and characters were in games, it would be great for creativity since we could have almost any story or character possible. Instead of the same or almost the same over and over again. That, if anything, limits creativity.

Of course "SJWs" might want a protagonist who is gay, who is trans, disabled, something other than white, a skinny guy, a fat girl, an old person etcetera and that might seem "limiting" because it excludes the straight white muscular 30-something guy with brown hair and the girl with thin waist and big boobs who looks like she's signed up for "weirdest swimsuit competition", but that's just because you find those everywhere already. Same as you might not see Guy Whose Wife Is Killed or Guy Saves The Girl plots for a while, but don't worry, "diverse" means there's room for them too.

DA: I has LGBT problems in your face throughout the whole game, they'll make it in the main quest next time at this rate. Medieval fantasy having 2015 model sixuality think-pieces seem rather odd at times. David Gaider apparently lets his sixuality govern the way he creates games, which is at best self-inserting and at worst pursuing an agenda throughout a game, which hampers its overall quality.

I don't mind LGBT characters and even choose to play such characters myself often but I wouldn't say how Bioware handles those issues should be the norm. They do it in a rather black & white sort of way, poor LGBT characters chased off by the evil people who also conspire to end the world. Uh..

Again you have no clue what SJW means......

Not really, they don't just want diversity but also want that diversity to be portrayed in a Mary Sue way. They don't want any portrayal of sixual violence, sixual prejudice, 'diverse' villains, (they can only be infallible heroes!) diversity being the motivator of anything bad even if misguided. They want positive discrimination. And yes, that would kill creativity.

They wouldn't want a transgender villain abducting people to include in his/her own harem or a non-white racist trying to round up people for genocide for example, they'd be outraged and shout out "check your privilege!" That role would only be suitable for a 'non-diverse' villain, because 'patriarchy' and 'white hegemony'.

The day we have 'diversity' being portrayed in all kinds of ways would be the day creativity really is free. We currently have positive discrimination and SJWs want that to be forcefully amplified.

You're right about modern ideals concerning homosixuality would be amiss in the medieval era... if it was our medieval era. But it's not. Do you think there's something inherent in a medieval setting that forces homophobia?

Gonna assume that last bit is a shot at Dorian which I think is more indicative of the level of attention you paid then it is about Bioware's supposedly poor story telling. He didn't run away from the evil people trying to destroy the world, he ran away from his stagnating society and a father who wouldn't accept him. The evil people came in later. Plus, there's a lot of other LGBT characters in the game who don't fit that mold even vaguely but yeah. This fits your narrative I guess.

Is there a gay hivemind somewhere? WHY WAS I NOT INVITED?! I would like to see all those things, as long as they aren't the only portrayal of LGBT characters.

It's not homophobia but it's about how widespread and one-note the issues are handled. Then it comes off as pursuing agendas. Even in 2015, there isn't a monolith consensus about the issues worldwide. Yet somehow that medieval fantasy is no longer gray but all black & white and taking a stance.

Not just Dorian but also Krem. One would think the country was made of homophobes who also happen to be bad people. But I guess that also fits my narrative?

I wouldn't be so presuming to call all LGBT people as SJWs, I was addressing SJWs. Like certain 'journalists' who flipped a table and accused Atlus with homophobia when Kanji in Persona 4 turned out to be just a confused teenager rather than a homosixual.

Yes, SJWs want creativity to be curbed, they want something like that movie Equilibrium, to neuter any expression if it runs counter to their view of the world.

There's no reason to take a stance against it. Not in lore. It just is. Except! Among the noblility. You get some flack for not breeding amongst the nobility, as you'd expect, this plays a role in Dorian's story as well as the civil war that sparked in Orlais.

Krem got [censored] for passing as a man in the military under a section where only men were supposed to serve. It had little to do with him being transgender. Through the war table you have positive to neutral interaction with Tevinter, with the Archon, with a noble house, with some fancy librarian and a magister. So yes, I think it fits your narrative to reduce them to 'the bad country.'

I don't know who you're talking about or care very much. What I do know is that people like sticking labels on things so that they're easier to sweep aside all at the same time. You get extremists in every sphere, in every movement. They're not representative of the whole kinda by definition. Now you can stick your fingers in your ears and just dismiss the entire concept based on your opinion of those poeple but that's silly and reductive. You listen to a general idea, not the fringe elements frothing on your new rug when you form an opinion about something.

Funny, considering if you go a few decades back that's exactly what you found. 'Cept then everyone was straight and white. Yah know. Before all these movements started that are draining creativity and diverse representation.

Hah, most of my characters have kind of carried my own sixuality just based on how I roleplay them, that being bi/pansixual. Being married to a opposite six in the 1950s dystopian future doesn't really mean that much in terms of our character being railroaded into a certain sixuality. Whose to say he isnt putting up a act to try and avoid being persecuted, like people in the crazy police state of 2077 logically would be? Pre-War America in the Falloutverse puts up a false smile of perfect suburban life while the reality of society is absolutely horrible, with the government not being much better than the China or USSR of this universe.

With the confirmed bachelor perk in New Vegas and the ability for same-six marriage in Skyrim its good that Bethesda isnt just ignoring that LGBT people would exist in both Tamriel and and The Wastes. Personally I hope we run into some truly homophobic characters, and then get to deal with them how we see fit. My New Vegas character would absolutely blow away a guy ranting about how gay people caused the Great War or some similar nutty stuff like that, and I don't think the Fallout 4 character would be any less of a vigilante. Fallout in general seems to fit a character that uses the ultimate judgement and authority in his mind: The Gun. And thats part of what makes it a lot of fun.

From the trailer

http://i.imgur.com/TFJ2qL9.jpg

The game does that, not me. Tevinter is portrayed as "the bad guys", then suddenly all those people with certain problems escaped from there. I'd say there are an awful lot of coincidences going on there at the same game.

Yeah you don't know what I'm talking about yet ignore the very real threat those individuals pose to the art of this industry as a group. When did I speak against diversity in all these messages? On the contrary, I said I roleplay as one of those 'diverse' people. I'm speaking against 'positive' (I'd say it's a negative when it comes to art) discrimination. I support the general idea but am against some of those who pursue a self-serving agenda, then 'it fits their narrative' to brand me as 'anti-diverse'.

I'm perfectly fine if Bethesda gives the option to play a LGBT character and I'm also fine if they don't. I don't see the need to cry foul either case. Fallout games always had backstories for their characters, not blank states. You work your way over that.

Your character can't be gay just like my character cant be single, get over it.

Except the character is straight, you start out married to the opposite gender.

Who said he/she was straight?

Noone, while implied, can be ignored.

That's what (rot)(fodder) said.

Married
to
the
opposite
GENDER
with
a
BIOLOGICAL
CHILD

To be fair, I always interpreted 'be whoever you want to be' to mean 'your character is a blank slate, so do whatever you please, I don't care. Here's the world, here's a plot now have some fun!!'

In the trailer, you're the husband/wife of the other spouse and the father/mother of a little boy. I can see why this is restrictive to those who want to play a gay Sole Survivor. Even if you could use imagination to explain why your gay character is apparently 'married' to a parent and has a child.

I hate to break it to you, but Bethesda has "catered" to us for years and so have the creators of the Fallout franchise. Or did you forget Skyrim same-six marriages or Fallout 2 gunshot marriage?

HMMMMMMMMMM COULD IT BE WE WANT TO FEEL LIKE WE CAN PLAY AS OURSELVES IN A GAME THAT LET'S US CREATE OUR OWN CHARACTER?! Nah, couldn't be that better be offensive as all hell and say it shouldn't be a thing in A OPEN WORLD ROLE-PLAY GAME WHERE OUR CHARACTERS CAN BE AVATARS OF OURSELVES!

Also while I'm not a fan of modern bioware games what Bioware is doing should be an example to more game companies, Bethesda included so yea, going "down the path of Bioware" would actually be cool.

It's not "catering" to let people play other sixual preference then straight.

Fo3 let you "be who you want to be" a lot more so openly than you can apparently be in F4 which is my gripe. I hate prescripted backstories like this, especially if the lifestyle is not necessary to define in this way. Its also pretty generic as well. It would have been better if you could define yourself by who you interact with, including romances, and then if you're gay - you should do a quest that lets you adopt a child or get a serrogate or something.

Except "SJW" is not a label people put on themselves (only ironically). Anyone can be labeled SJW for wanting to play a gay character for example, or for wanting others to be able to play a gay character if they wish. Which we can see very clearly in this debate. So when you talk about SJWs, you really talk about people that *you* define as SJWs, and because you define them as SJWs you also think they must have certain goals and views that you have attributed to the category. Diverse villains is in fact on the wishlist of several people I know, who are often labeled SJWs. What they don't want is the same old stereotypes repeated over and over.

(The Tevinters aren't homophobic; they think gay six is ok as long as you're also married and produce offspring. Personally I don't think Bioware's "trans 101" and "gay guy rejected by parents" is the best way to include LGBT people either, but at least they're trying. Which hopefully means it will get better in time. There's a good in-universe explanation of Dorian's situation even if we've heard that story many times before - whereas the handling of Krem is just bad.)

Perhaps we should do a small breakdown of my post. Allow me to re-iterate and expand upon the deeper meaning of my post.

"1- I can't be single in this game, 2- you can't be gay in this game. 3- Get over it."

"1- "I can't be single in this game"

This statement is used to convey a fact. The fact is that when I play Fallout 4 in it's un-modded form, my character is going to have to start out as being married, or in layman's terms, not single. When this statement is read in the context of this thread, and is used in conjunction with the rest of the sentence, the implication is one of personal disappointment, in the fact that I am unable to roleplay a character that is not (or has not been) in a relationship with someone in their own back story.

2- "you can't be gay in this game."

This statement also conveys a fact. The fact in this statement is that when you play Fallout 4 in it's unmodded form, your character will start the game in the position of being in a straight relationship, regardless of what you decide your characters personal orientation should be. In the context of this thread, this statement is used to show that I understand you are suffering a disappointment in regards to the opening scenes of the game. In the context of this sentence, this statement is used to show that I understand that we are both disappointed with the direction Bethesda has decided to take the opening scene of the game, even if we are both disappointed for different reasons.

3- "Get over it."

This final portion of the message while short, conveys a lot of meaning. In conjoining the first two parts of the sentence, the addition of these final three words imply that complaining about the situation in question will have little to no effect on the outcome. In this case, It will be the fact that when you start your game for the first time, your character will be in a hetrosixual relationship and simultaneously that when I start my game for the first time my character will be forced to be in a relationship(of any kind) as well. Finally, this last portion of the sentence requests that you do not complain fruitlessly about it, and simply accept your first Fallout 4 character's fate while waiting patiently for mods, while also implying that I should do the same.

And that wouldn't be how I describe a SJW as I'd be a SJW myself by that description. I have quite a many views that are common with even SJWs, like being against bikini armor and such. I however still am against those people who try to put their own priorities before anything else and demand change or else, dictating one-note stories and characters even if they're merely 'token diversity'. Then we end up with outrage culture we have that imposes limits and vilifies anything out of their norm. Check out how some of those received FO4, telling it catered to patriarchy with its ultra-violence.

As one character said in FO2: "Opinions are like [censored]s, everybody has one and they all stink". Nowadays all you need is a Twitter account to start up some name & shame campaign to bully your agenda and curb expression in games or anywhere else. That's what a SJW does, you don't need to identify yourself as one if you dislike such an attitude.

If the story they have written involves a straight relationship, then yeah, it is. It is catering to people who want to play other sixual preferences. I've got nothing against being able to play someone who ain't straight, but not every story structure allows for that.