Same Sex Relations in SW:TOR Post-Release

By Adam Smith on September 14th, 2011 at 10:39 am.

He can't quit you

Last month, John wrote about same sex relationships in Skyrim and SW:TOR. Specifically the fact that the Elder Scrolls will allow them while Star Wars will not. Now, in what I’m going to refer to as an extraordinary volte-face, BioWare have confirmed that “same gender romances with companion characters” will be in the game. As a “post-launch feature”. The full official quote, which I extracted from The Old Republic’s forum, is below.

In a game of this scope, which allows players to create an avatar and includes romance options, it only seems right that players can retain their real-life sexuality, or experiment a little. BioWare have recognised that in the past so when the absence of same sex relationships was admitted, it felt like this was more a Star Wars thing than a BioWare thing. Matters weren’t helped when a BioWare employee stated that the terms “gay” and “lesbian” “are terms that do not exist in Star Wars”.

Well, at an unspecified point in the future, and perhaps for the price of an expansion pack, there will be homosexual love far far away and a long time ago. It’s not clear whether the plans were always in place or whether the size of the demand has made a difference. And we still don’t know much. Here’s the official line.

“Due to the design constraints of a fully voiced MMO of this scale and size, many choices had to be made as to the launch and post-launch feature set. Same gender romances with companion characters in Star Wars: The Old Republic will be a post-launch feature. Because The Old Republic is an MMO, the game will live on through content expansions which allow us to include content and features that could not be included at launch, including the addition of more companion characters who will have additional romance options.”

What does that tell us? There will be new companions added after launch, whether through free updates, priced content expansions or microtransactions isn’t clear. At least some of these characters will be open to the idea of same gender romances. Since a lot of people are going to be waiting for that content, I wonder whether they’ll explicitly state what it contains: “DISCOVER a new planet to explore, a host of upgradeable equipment, high level instances and a gay Jedi.”

Even if the handling hasn’t been perfect, this does look like a case of listening and reacting to the community. After all, if the content was always going to be there later, why not just say that in the first place? Of course, people are still grumbling loudly and for every reason that you can imagine and some that you can’t.

If you don’t believe me, take a look at the official forums. Warning though. This thread lasted for less than 24 hours, became 329 pages long and was then closed “for maintenance”. Presumably that means they’re deleting all the denials of Darwinism (really).

__________________

« | »

, , , .

125 Comments »

  1. Alexander Norris says:

    Well, that’s a better answer than “the word ‘gay’ doesn’t exist in Star Wars, I am closing this thread” which was their previous reaction to people asking for same-sex romances in TOR.

    • Hoaxfish says:

      but there is all that “light-sabre on light-sabre” action

      Now for some hot wookie on droid.

    • stahlwerk says:

      The farce is strong in this [discussion].

    • max pain says:

      This is silly, they’re obviously just including this feature because people nagging for it on the forums.

      What’s next, a checklist of stuff all games must include not to be discriminating?

      -Same sex relationships [check]
      -A black person (not located anywhere near the street) [check]
      -etc

      Hey, what about religion? Why can’t I worship my favourite god in the game!?!? Developers surely do enrage me when they claim that “Jesus doesn’t exist in Star Wars” !

    • Lars Westergren says:

      @max pain

      >”This is silly, they’re obviously just including this feature because people nagging for it on the forums.”

      Are things you want in a game essential, but things other want in a game just silly? When you are in the majority who is being catered to all the time it is easy to handwave away the wants of others as unimportant.

      Thought experiment: What if in the next Bioware game, you could ONLY have gay relations, no heterosexual ones. Because that is what the writers thought made sense for their character. Do you think there possibly might be some mild “nagging” in the forums then?

    • neoghoul says:

      @max pain: Well, there is religion in the game. I believe it just advanced a little. Religion gets mixed with other influences alot…eastern, etc. What’s now called catholicism , is known in the star wars universe as “sith”. To prove my point, here is irrevocable proof: http://5z8.info/myspace-of-sex_g9s8jd_racist-raps
      ps: for the suspicous people…yes it’ been altered through shadyurl

    • noodlecake says:

      @Lars That would be fucking ace! I would love to see the reaction that caused. I would totally buy that game even though I am not gay just in sheer admiration of the developers. Obviously it would have to be a good game too. If sales were low despite it being a fantastic game then it would say a LOT about where the world is in terms of acceptance of the gay community… Although I do hate the term “gay community” like gay people all know each other and only hang out with other gay people and live in gay houses and go to gay cafes and eat gay toast with gay jam.

    • max pain says:

      It’s not the point what I want and what I don’t want, it’s what fits in the universe. I’m ok with gay-only relationships in a game, if the game is set in a universe where there’s no hetero (or it’s made after Noah’s Arc).

      Similarly as what the gay people are doing now, if I was religious, I could go nag about why there’s no jesus in starwars (and I’m not satisfied with the evolved and mixed version of game’s current religion, as my holy bible clearly states that mine is the only true religion).
      And of course I would be wrong, because “sith” makes so much sense in the Star Wars universe.

      When the man says ‘gay’ doesn’t exist in the Star Wars, I think he has a point.

    • Lars Westergren says:

      @noodlecake

      Yeah, it would be fun if some developers dared to go there.
      *+1 influence gained with Lars*

      @max paine

      If people nagged Bioware to include a Christian character and his/her struggles with faith and morality in the Star Wars universe, I would be totally ok with them including that, as long as the character was written well.

      Just as I really liked Mary Doria Russel’s The Sparrow, even though I’m an atheist. It didn’t make a believer out of me, but it gave me a glimpse of what it might feel like to have faith.

    • JackShandy says:

      New thread idea, let’s all link games with only same-sex relationships. I’ll start.

      http://ifdb.tads.org/viewgame?id=xwedbibfksczn7eq

    • Lars Westergren says:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gears_of_War

      Oh wait, you were serious. Cool, didn’t know there existed a game already. Any more?

    • Wulf says:

      @max pain

      Entertainingly, Jesus isn’t Star Wars canon, whilst according to a couple of sources (one of which has been cited a few times around these parts, I think), same-sex relationships are canon. I could therefore completely invalidate you by pointing out that people wanted the game to be more true to the official lore, as the official lore supports same-sex relationships.

      :P

      (In case that zooms over your head. I’ll put it simply: There are gay people in Star Wars. Read a book!)

    • RandomGameR says:

      Even if gay characters weren’t included in Star Wars (which as it has been pointed out, they are) what’s the point of making a role-playing-game where you can choose to have a relationship with a number of different characters and then eliminating same-gender as a choice?

      Either don’t include choice-based relationships or be realistic about it. It’s not a “this is a list of features that must be included in order to be PC” thing at all. It’s a “you chose to add this feature and half-ass it so we’re complaining” thing.

      Not that I’m on the forums complaining, really, as the game looks terrible, but the addition of relationships into an MMO is interesting.

    • Corporate Dog says:

      Wait.

      You’re telling me that R2D2 and C3PO aren’t a couple?

    • Thants says:

      I think two men or two women having sex makes a lot more sense in this universe than Christians in a distant universe, possibly before Christ even existed.

  2. Jimbo says:

    Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell probably doesn’t work with Jedi.

  3. Shadram says:

    As a gay man myself, I can safely say that I still have no interest in this game. Nice of BioWare to remember that we exist, though.

    • abigbat says:

      only because they’ll take flak if they don’t, doesn’t sound like a thoughtful decision to enrich the playing experience.

    • Hoaxfish says:

      As a non-gay man, I can’t say it was that interesting for us either.

    • hotcod says:

      Ya ‘cus it’s not like in a lot of past bioware games they have had these kind of options in since launch. This is clearly only pandering and not at all in keeping with the history of the company.

      Oh…

      Wait…

    • abigbat says:

      I literally don’t understand the point you’re trying to make here.

    • Wulf says:

      I’m just amused by their initial reaction.

      “Gay doesn’t exist in the Star Wars Universe!”

      Uh. Yes it does. Is this indicative of your familiarity with the lore, then? See, that doesn’t fill me with a lot of confidence.

    • RandomGameR says:

      Wulf, maybe they meant gay as in happy. Everyone’s sad in the Star Wars universe. Probably because they can’t have a relationship with the person they want. :(

    • WombatDeath says:

      It was always a stupid thing to say. This is a MMORPG: it doesn’t matter whether or not homosexuality exists in the Star Wars universe because some of the players will bring it with them. Unless those involved want to attempt to ban gay roleplaying, which they won’t because they’re not stupid, homosexuality will be present in the universe.

    • gwathdring says:

      @RandomGameR:

      Gay never *really* meant happy. At least … for the past several hundred years, the word “gay” has had a sexual context. The connection to homosexuality is fairly recent–modern usage is only as old as the 50s and homosexual subtext dates back to the early 20th century.

      However as a word referring to someone who was sexually promiscuous (especially a man), gay goes back quite a long time. In other words, it has been a euphemism for far too long for Batman comics to play dumb. ;)

  4. abigbat says:

    We’ll be adding the gays later.

    Nice job.

    • Urthman says:

      I assume this will be some sort of Gay Smooching DLC? Isn’t that how GTA IV did it?

  5. Lars Westergren says:

    Bioware games don’t do much for me, but hats off to them for daring to be one of the most inclusive companies in the business.

  6. Lazaruso says:

    The Origin of Species was a filthy collection of the devil’s lies!!!

    Oh, and how dare they put homos in my star wars, I have gay friends, I’m not racist but I can’t stand having black gays in my games, etc etc.

    Where’s TJ McCormak(Parent), when you need him??

    • ix says:

      Seriously though, I’d hate to be the mod having to comb through that thread. What a soul-crushing experience that must be.

    • Hoaxfish says:

      by fags we mean cigarettes and by gay we mean happy

    • IDtenT says:

      Hoaxfish, Queen’s English.

  7. mjig says:

    I’m pretty turned off that relationships exist in an MMO.

    I don’t understand why games keep trying to do this. 99.9% of movies and television shows do an awful job of romance plots, I don’t know why the writers at Bioware (who fall somewhere between mediocre and awful) think they can do it any better.

    • Lars Westergren says:

      >I don’t understand why games keep trying to do this.

      a) Fans request it.
      b) The interactive nature of games allows for greater emotional attachment, since it feels like you are interacting with personalitles instead of just observing them.

      >99.9% of movies and television shows do an awful job of romance plots

      Sounds like plenty of opportunity exists to do it better then. :) One of the few things DA2 did better than its predecessor IMO was that it left the “consummation of the romance” to the imagination. Like horror, eroticism works better if you leave things implied and let the viewer fill things in. So perhaps Bioware are getting better at this.

    • Hoaxfish says:

      and when they tried to make the thunderbirds laugh, they looked like they were screaming in agony

    • neems says:

      I don’t think it was the consummation, or lack thereof, that was the problem with DA and its sequel. More the fact that the ‘romance’ consisted of picking a target, and then constantly giving them presents and / or agreeing with them incessantly. Hey presto!

    • MiniMatt says:

      Oh god this :o) It’s cringe-worthy in every game.

      Writers are constrained by three things – firstly the fantasy perfect universe (whereas romance is generally awkward, fumbling, giggly, and tipsy); the “we are serious writers so we’ll approach this like some philsophical debate” (again, refer back to awkward fumbling and giggly inebriation); and the “has to get a teen suitable rating” – and in the US at that (which kind of always results in romance and sex as imagined by a 12 year old).

    • mondomau says:

      Neems: “I don’t think it was the consummation, or lack thereof, that was the problem with DA and its sequel. More the fact that the ‘romance’ consisted of picking a target, and then constantly giving them presents and / or agreeing with them incessantly. Hey presto!”

      Sadly, probably not entirely an inaccurate portrayal for a depressing number of relationships.

    • Lars Westergren says:

      @neems

      Obsidian does it better. In Knights of the Old Republic 2, if you are constantly agreeing with Kreia (one of the best NPCs ever), she will tell you with icy contempt – “Your attempts to manipulate me are pathetically transparent. Stop it.”

      Agressive dom Sie in Alpha Protocol will dismiss you as a wimp if you try to talk suavely or professionally to her, only by taking an aggressive stance with her will she respect you (and start flirting via email, saying “she likes it when the prey gives a good chase” or something like that)

      @MiniMatt

      Not to mention graphics engine limitations where characters are supposed to caress each other but they either don’t touch or clip through each other. Yeah, that’s why I thought it was better that DA2 skipped those scenes (it did, right? Never finished the game) and left it to the imagination.

      One thing I imagine could work in a game though is a scene with some post coital pillow talk. It could could give writers an opportunity to advance characters, provide an emotion (tenderness) that we rarely see in games, as well as some playful banter or emotional reveals. Players would retain control rather than sit passively watching a cut scene. It would reward players that seek it with a deeper insight into NPC characters, and give the players some semi-nude eye candy without triggering censorship laws or having the developers or players feel like they are involved in a japanese dating/sex game.

      Has any game done this?

    • IDtenT says:

      Clearly we need some BDSM action with cat people in our games.

    • Simon Hawthorne says:

      @mondomau, I agree. Have this flower.

  8. faelnor says:

    look at me I am concerned by romance in video games, I am too a real person

  9. Hoaxfish says:

    In addition to everyone being “the one true hero”, everyone gets to romance the exact same companions.

    also: some sort of joke about star-gayzing

  10. henben says:

    That discussion thread is amazing if you imagine all the avatars are accurate representations of the people posting.

    A blue elephant thing like you get in the cantina scene said “Do not want”.

    A yellow bounty hunter said “I don’t think my preorder can withstand the knowledge of funding gay and lesbian romance. If same sex romancing is something TOR wants to pursue as a design philosophy, there will be a change of gaming audience.”

    A tough looking Jedi said “Were going to have to deal with it, for some reason lifestyle has to be thrust into everything.”

    etc.

    • TheApologist says:

      I take great pleasure in thrusting my lifestyle into things

  11. Teddy Leach says:

    I would rather kill things. If I want to sleep with something, I’ll go outside.

  12. Dawngreeter says:

    The possibilities for gay-for-pay jokes will be nigh-infinite if they include this in an expansion that costs money.

    TOR Expansion 1 – you can now be a true Mandalorian butt mercenary.

  13. sneetch says:

    Is this the same Star Wars where Jedis (at least) weren’t supposed to form relationships at all? No attachments. Has that not happened yet or is every Jedi going to be a rebel, hiding their secret romance?

    “Hey Bob, how’s the secret romance?”
    “Not too bad, how’s your hidden family on Icecoldia IV?”

    Can’t imagine your average Sith going home to the spouse and kids after a hard days torture and killing either.

    • hotcod says:

      Yes ‘cus you can ONLY play Jedi or Sith and those things you talk about can not form the base of compelling stories that are either interesting and moving and add depth to a character.

      I don’t know why my ever response to people in this thread has been to use out right sarcasm but it seems fitting.

    • DarkeSword says:

      No, it isn’t actually. The “Jedi shall have no attachments thing” came about much closer to the Prequel era of Star Wars, where the Jedi had gradually turned into a pack of fools. TOR takes place around 3700 years before A New Hope, and a lot of stories in the Tales of the Jedi/Knights of the Old Republic era (~4000 years before) feature Jedi who love, marry, and have children (Nomi Sunrider!).

      There’s a great bit in the excellent KotOR comic book where someone says “Aren’t Jedi not supposed to have attachments?” and another Jedi replies with the nice-guy-Jedi equivalent of “No those guys who say that are just a bunch of weirdos.”

    • sneetch says:

      @DarkeSword
      Thanks, that clears up that. Always thought that whole no attachments thing felt a bit contrived myself.

    • Mad Hamish says:

      Yeah it was just nonsense that Lucas added in to fit his awful story in the prequels. It doesn’t make any sense really. If Jedi are not aloud relationships and being force sensitive is hereditary, shouldn’t they have died out ages ago? Even if you factor in force sensitive people who never became Jedi, the numbers still probably wouldn’t add up. Fuckin Lucas, you really are a damn tool.

    • Wulf says:

      @Mad Hamish

      +1

      I find that Lucas’ take on Star Wars is by far the most alternately annoying and boring. There are people out there who’ve done genuinely interesting things with Star Wars that are worth paying attention to (I mean, good grief, one writer even threw in Jedi werewolves, which amused me no end), but Lucas’ works are not amongst those.

      What Lucas has there is a very sanitised version of Star Wars for the lowest common denominator, and then even then it doesn’t please the vast majority, perhaps only even a tiny minority with the newer Star Wars films. So I share your feelings about this.

      If Bioware had just ignored WoW and Lucas when creating TOR, and had gone the risky route (a la GW2) with their setting and gameplay mechanics, doing Star Wars things that perhaps many gamers may not even be familiar with, then I’d have much more respect for the overall game than what I have now.

      And Lucas did so, so many stupid, internally contradictory things. I don’t even want to get into that right now because I’ll be here all day. :|

  14. Alikchi says:

    Hello, I’m a heterosexual, and I don’t see what the big deal is because my orientation is perceived as normal, so I never have to think about it! LOL QUEERS.

    • mejoff says:

      Great! Now I feel like I read the whole forum thread!

    • Vanderdecken says:

      Very much this.

    • ResonanceCascade says:

      Ha, exactly. It’s right up there with “I’m a white middle class teenager and I don’t get why everyone is whining about this overtly racist character, geez stop being so hypersensitive.”

    • DaFishes says:

      Yeah, man. You guys are CHOOSING TO BE OFFENDED and trampling my FREEDOM OF BIGOTRY in the process. I am the oppressed one here! Won’t someone please think of ME?

    • Wulf says:

      I don’t really want to break the stream of satire here, but I had to say that I’m amused by this, it was well done. And from the perspective of a gay person, this satire is a truth. It is an all too true truth. And it’s a truth that, being gay already mentioned, any disabled person, or any person of an ethnic minority is going to come face to face with at some point of their lives.

      I get it from multiple angles since I fall into the categories of gay and visibly disabled, so… yeah.

  15. Very Real Talker says:

    it was an oversight not to include gay romances in star wars: the old graphics from the beginning. They must seriously be out of touch with their audience (which doesn’t include me) to not put gay content into it

    To Sneetch
    “Is this the same Star Wars where Jedis (at least) weren’t supposed to form relationships at all?”

    No that’s just bs from the prequel trilogy… stuff we should ignore.
    What I loved about that piece of idiotical nonsense from lucas is that according to him relationships and attachment lead to the dark side, while detachment- of enemy limbs through the violent use of a light saber- and fighting wars is no problem at all. Loving another person leads to the dark side, while mutilating your best friend and letting him die an horrible, burning death was no problem at all.

    • Ghost of Grey Cap says:

      Although, to be honest, I find I’ve been drowning far more kittens since I got married. Not to mention the red and black facial tattoo…

    • Dawngreeter says:

      Jedi are basically magical Catholic ninjas. Marriage is indeed banned. There was a guy in KOTOR2 who was in-between dark and light side. Not a bad guy, but got banned from the Jedi because of the missus. So, no marriage.

      And that makes sense. The basis of Star Wars cosmology, as applied to the Force, is that serenity is good. The Jedi will not have strong emotions, they will not seek to indulge, they shall remain pure and thus Good(tm). The Sith reject this, they believe emotions will give them power. This makes them Evil(tm). So in Star Wars, every emotion leads to hate and not porking people makes you good.

    • IDtenT says:

      You are completely missing the point. Jedi are non-emotional honestly rational beings. So no, love in this case is indeed a step towards the other side.

      Edit: What Dawngreeter said.

    • _Nocturnal says:

      Alright, explain Luke and Mara, then.

    • Very Real Talker says:

      sorry guys I don’t buy it.

      “And that makes sense. The basis of Star Wars cosmology, as applied to the Force, is that serenity is good. ”

      So having a wife leads to non-serenity (even for a jedi who should be a master of self control and thus able to ignore severe nagging), while taking part to WARS doesn’t? Having a wife leads to STRONG EMOTION; partaking in lightsabers duel than ends in mutilation or death doesn’t.

      Also if this crap made sense, as a consequence they shouldn’t even be allowed to have deep interpersonal bonds like the one that forms between a master and a pupil… or between best friends.

      “The Jedi will not have strong emotions, they will not seek to indulge, they shall remain pure and thus Good(tm). The Sith reject this, they believe emotions will give them power. This makes them Evil(tm). So in Star Wars, every emotion leads to hate and not porking people makes you good.”

      Yup, and a lick of sense doesn’t it make. Also it’s just bullshit from the prequel, they don’t count let’s be honest here!

    • Wulf says:

      I’d like to point out that not all of Lucas’ silly, poorly considered, and often internally inconsistent and contradictory choices are supported by most of those whom even write the lore. In fact, there are a number of sources that have outright spurned Lucas’ choices. So there you go. And yes, the whole ‘no relationships’ thing was a Lucas choice.

    • Dawngreeter says:

      “Yup, and a lick of sense doesn’t it make.”

      Oh, I agree. It’s just Lucas imagining his magical Catholic ninjas. But it makes sense within the Star Wars universe. The cosmology clearly states that all emotions lead to hate, as applied to the Force. It also clearly states, again as applied to the Force, that you can avoid committing genocide by not porking people. Because if you get your peepee or lala contaminates with cooties, you start shooting lightning out of your fingers and murdering kindergartens. You can think this cosmology is stupid, and you’d be right, but you can’t argue that a world someone else imagined is wrong. It is as it is.

  16. stahlwerk says:

    That thread.

    That thread.

    Incredible, how many of those posters assume that this will turn SWTOR in Priscilla, queen of Tatooine, while taking up ALL of Bioware’s staff FOREVER to work on it.
    Internet, you never fail to limbo my already low expectations.

    • Interstella says:

      I would buy “Priscilla, Queen of Tatooine” in a flash – sounds genius!

      I agree that it is quite amazing how many people on there seem to think Bioware consists of ONE PERSON, who will be forced by the “vocal minority” to spend all the precious post-release time working on how to get members of the same sex to experience the emotion we humans know as “wuv”.

      Truly, this world in which we live is a special place.

    • ResonanceCascade says:

      I too would play that game. Drive around Tatooine in an oversized pink Sand Skiff, find Krayt dragons, get chased off by the backward and intolerant sand people…

      Getting in adventures on Tatooine in full drag would be a blast.

    • Wulf says:

      I’d also buy that. It’d just need a good writer. With a good writer, a scenario like that could be the most incredible thing to ever have graced the Star Wars Universe.

      It should be done.

  17. Choca says:

    Aren’t Jedi supposed to be celibate anyway ?

  18. Tusque D'Ivoire says:

    Now that’s some gay DLC.

    I wonder if, now that they’re actually generating content, they’re gonna try and make money off of it.

  19. Jazz42 says:

    I can’t say i really understand this.
    It’s a game, not real life. Perhaps everyone should be asexual.

    • Teddy Leach says:

      “Who cares if there’s a galaxy to save, let’s fuck!”

    • Lars Westergren says:

      >I can’t say i really understand this.
      >It’s a game, not real life.

      Yes? Some people find it rewarding to pretend to shoot people in a game. Others find it rewarding to role play a character, including having non-violence based relationships with characters in the game. I don’t see why one form of make believe is worse than another.

      @Teddy Leach

      People seeking each other for mutual comfort during a crisis is not unusual in the real world… “Hey, tomorrow morning is the big battle, we could all be dead soon. How about we have some sex to take our minds off it?”

    • Jazz42 says:

      I find both confusing when they cause this much ire.

      edit: That’s all well and good but…it’s a video game. It’s not necessary and i should think it over complicates the writing process.

    • Lars Westergren says:

      >It’s not necessary and i should think it over complicates the writing process.

      Not to be confrontational, but who are you to decide what is necessary?
      :)

      As mentioned above, lots of players want this. For them, it is an essential part of good writing in games.

    • Jazz42 says:

      Obviously the vocal minority? Not the people who actually write the story?
      I see your point, and you’re not being confrontational..It just irks me.
      I..I can’t be the only one who finds people throwing their toys out of the pram because they can’t role play as a homosexual character in a video game, or can’t shoot random terrorist 95 as the case may be, worrying.

      edit: People want to have relationships with AI characters? So much so that if you can’t romance another guy there are complaints?
      *mind boggled*

      Yeah, thats beyond me.
      More power to them for changing it i guess…

  20. TheApologist says:

    I don’t think I’ll read that thread. My soul can’t take seeing the naked heart of the internet today.

  21. Metonymy says:

    Yep it’s a game, it makes no sense to even address this issue. And there’s no way to say anything honest about things like this without being whisked off to the corner with the dunce hat on.

    I’m wondering if the NPCs just turn gay when you take an interest in them. Now that’s some realism for you.

    • Alec Meer says:

      “I am not interested in this, therefore anyone who is is wrong.”

      I think grown men crying because 11 men they don’t know failed to kick a ball into a net enough times is absurd, but if that’s their thing, that’s their thing.

      There is, of course, plenty of potentially fascinating psychological and sociological discussion to be had about whether romancing options or lack thereof in games is helpful or harmful or anything in between, which is why broad dismissal is such a waste of everyone’s time.

    • Berzee says:

      You grab Meto, I’ll ready the dunce hat.

    • Jazz42 says:

      What happens if I don’t understand both of them?

  22. Hakkesshu says:

    I’m not so much for romances in general, but the idea of developing more personal and complex relationships between characters as a gameplay mechanic has always been super interesting to me. In Baldur’s Gate 2, the fact that romancing characters was basically a game in itself (a dialogue-driven one at that) was honestly a really cool way of both expanding the lore of the world and creating actual player-driven experiences between your characters. Even if it was fairly static.

    This is something that games like Suikoden has absolutely excelled at doing on a much larger scale, and it’s something I wish more role-playing games would emphasize. It seems as though they tried to do something similar with Fable 3, but it was entirely linear and plot-driven.

    Bioware’s current romances are mostly kind of boring and creepy, mainly due to the fact that all you have to do to sex up every crewmember is just to be nice to them. There’s no real strategy to it, and all the motion-captured lovemaking sequences just look horrendous and awkward.

    I’m still waiting for some large-scale RPG developer to straight up copy Suikoden’s formula of recruiting and forming relationships with an entire entourage of characters, because it’s a really underappreciated mechanic and Konami’s doing fuck all with that series as it is.

    • Unaco says:

      I agree. I despise “Romances” in most games… the appalling writing and ‘gameyness’ of them, they’re just thrown in to appease the players almost… Like they have to tick a box, it’s an RPG so there has to be Romances, and there has to be 1 of each type for everyone, so everyone is content. Which really isn’t realistic, and is a little ludicrous.

      I also agree that Baldur’s Gate 2 actually did them well. Best I’ve seen in a video game thus far.

  23. Skeletor68 says:

    I can see the problem with some of the Bioware relationships being too ‘gamey’ and just settling on picking one of many companions throwing themselves at their feet.

    I’d love to see them just just react to your character instead. Like actually try to be funny with them, disagreeing with them on some issues etc. I guess it’s pretty difficult to implement and the RPG player ‘must find all content!’ addiction problem would probably prohibit things ‘just happening’.

    • Megadyptes says:

      *Throw favourite gift at NPC a few times to raise ‘Romance Level’. NPC wants to fuck you raw, regardless of previous actions or any sexual preferences on the NPC’s part*

  24. Tony M says:

    I know homophobia is no laughing matter for gay men and women. But I find these homophobic attitudes to be so old fashioned and absurd that they seem comical. The angrier they get the more ridiculous they look.

  25. Cerzi says:

    But can my sim lose his job for being gay?

  26. bit_crusherrr says:

    I wish romance wasn’t in choice driven games in at all. It’s the thing that annoys me most about Bioware games. I proper don’t see the point in it being in SWTOR since I’m pretty sure Jedi aren’t meant to love.

    • Lars Westergren says:

      >”I proper don’t see the point in it being in SWTOR since I’m pretty sure Jedi aren’t meant to love.”

      But only two out of the eight player classes are Jedi? The sith actively draw power from strong emotions, positive or negative, and the other two republic classes (Trooper and Smuggler) don’t sound like they would be averse to having relations.

    • bit_crusherrr says:

      I suppose you’re right. But I still wish the game had no romance options.

  27. Stupoider says:

    Nothing says “I Love You” better than taking your partner to the hub where EVERYONE is sleeping with them.

  28. Megadyptes says:

    I wish that poorly written romance plots were not in games at all, gay, straight or HAWKSEXUAL or whatever. Bioware romances are just cringe worthy and quite insulting really. They only exist as nerd-wank material. It’s pretty pathetic.

    • SavageD says:

      In the interests of healthy gaming (as a hetrosexual male), it would be a better idea NOT to give me the option of playing a slutty lesbian Mercenary. Since I refuse to police my own behaviour and am weak of will, I can only blame the game if this occurs.

  29. JackShandy says:

    Reading the forums:

    “Thank you for the statement. I am relieved they will exist in game at a later stage.”

    Oh, that’s lovely. I-

    “in the same patch that you add the lgbt bs, make sure to include the option to kill off companions permanently.!”

    Oh.

    Oh.

  30. Jibb Smart says:

    In WoW a homosexual relationship meant two guys playing girls dancing next to each other. Isn’t SW:TOR a MULTIPLAYER game? Can’t they just give players more “dancing” options and be done with it?

  31. Eddy9000 says:

    Hello,
    As a sexually naive, socially awkward adolescent, I like to play computer games compulsively because they provide a way for me to escape from the social contact that I feel so unequipped to deal with. I find the idea of relationships particularly terrifying and mysterious, and the only way I can feel comfortable experiencing them is when they are reduced to a tawdry heteronormative in game dating sim. I have to say that because I haven’t cemented my sexual identity with any kind of experience, I’m still a little unsure of my preferences, but im also under massive pressures of social normalisation from my peer group to be heterosexual. I therefore find the inclusion of homosexuality in videogames challenging and uncomfortable, and to cover for my insecurity I feel I should either denounce it emphatically, or just throw the baby out with the bathwater and say there should be no mention of romantic relationships in any game ever.

    Thank you.

  32. Squirrelfanatic says:

    Adam, you need to work on your alt-text skills! “Give me your heart! <3"

    Edit: Thanks! :)

  33. Rii says:

    What I want to know is if I’m going to be able to turn the violence off. I am sick of having this morally bankrupt lifestyle forced upon me.

    • Saldek says:

      Don’t worry, I’m sure the domestic violence will be purely optional.

  34. Zepp says:

    If there are romances (both genders or not) will there be pregnancy? I want my female jedi (impregnated by wookie) to fight evil siths while bearing a furry messiah! After bloody birth another player could take control of the toddler. That would be awesome.

    • Unaco says:

      What about ‘accidental’ pregnancy? Will they include abortion so we can ‘terminate’ any unwanted little fetuses? If they don’t have that then clearly the devs are anti-choice and anti-women.

    • Rii says:

      If they included pregnancy in the game then the availability of abortion (or lack thereof) could indeed be an issue.

      Similar to how the lack of homosexual relationships in-game wasn’t an issue until the devs decided to make it one by offering heterosexual relationships.

  35. archcorenth says:

    I want to play as a gay Ewok!

  36. Kato says:

    I always hated how the whole “gay and lesbian don’t exist in Star Wars” thing happened. Not because it’s not plausible or believable, but because the Karen Traviss Republic Commando books specifically mention a gay Clone couple.

    Meh, hooray for the SW universe finally acknowledging it (assuming the game will be at least semi-canon?).

  37. Arglebargle says:

    I don’t care much who’s bonking who in RL, much less in this game. Don’t see anything upsetting with it, really.

    What I do find very interesting is this example of oil-tanker-like ponderousnous from fully voiced games. If this was text based, the change could be done in relatively short order. Due to the ‘wonder’ of full voicing, changing aspects of a game become extremely complicated, expensive, and possibly quite difficult. Full voicing brings a whole new set of problems, ably framed by this announcement.

    I also find that I am less likely to play certain characters in fully voiced games, if I don’t like their voice. Much less their sexual orientation.

  38. WJonathan says:

    I need pictures of AT ATs mounting each other or I can’t be interested.