there's a radical difference between equality in the real world and equality in literature, in so far as adding more information to characters outside of what is needed tends to change the narrative.
You love it when culture is dominated by straight whites?
A progressive approach to sexual orientation isn't mutually exclusive to race and sex. I certainly wouldn't refer to homosexuality as uncommon, either. Its prominence varies greatly depending on region, but that's largely a social acceptance issue.
I don't know, I'd have to say 3-5% is uncommon. It's definitely uncommon enough to be a major point of any game that features it. I'm not saying that it shouldn't be done, and I'm sure it will be. I just expect it to not be done in a "good" way.
This sounds suspiciously exactly the point I made way earlier in this thread where I was talking about how there's a radical difference between equality in the real world and equality in literature, in so far as adding more information to characters outside of what is needed tends to change the narrative.
In your earlier post you say that the low occurrence rate of homosexuality would cause a gay character to stand out. I'd lay the blame with the fact that it's been a taboo subject in most places for thousands of years. If homosexuality weren't something people found exotic (and I think it's gradually becoming less so) it wouldn't stand out as someone's defining characteristic. I understand what you're saying about the differences in real life and artistic narrative, but I bet you'd be hard pressed to find a queer person who didn't worry about how coming out would change people's perception of him/her.
Telemachus on
0
Options
OtakuD00DCan I hit the exploding rocks?San DiegoRegistered Userregular
edited July 2007
Sure, as long as it isn't emphasized/forced/made very, very conspicuous as to avoid drama. If the story calls for it and it doesn't stick out like a nail or a sore thumb, then more power to you.
The fact that a character would be as such isn't the issue here. It's how that's portrayed that's important.
Sure, as long as it isn't emphasized/forced/made very, very conspicuous as to avoid drama. If the story calls for it and it doesn't stick out like a nail or a sore thumb, then more power to you.
The fact that a character would be as such isn't the issue here. It's how that's portrayed that's important.
Exactly, but in the context of games this is absurd. If a character is to be gay in any way then they actually have to be a main character for it to show up. That's going to make it conspicuous and may or may not influence the theme of narrative.
What message does a gay corrupt mayor of a town send compared to just a corrupt mayor etc. It says something that the extra information has been included, and I think it would be considered an insult to depict all homosexuals as completely flambuoyant.
electricitylikesme on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
If a character is to be gay in any way then they actually have to be a main character for it to show up. That's going to make it conspicuous and may or may not influence the theme of narrative.
It's not the case that only main characters can be visibly gay. What about two NPC guys walking down the street hand in hand? A line of NPC women standing outside a lesbian bar? The idea that gay people will blend perfectly with straight people unless the subject of sexuality is explicitly breached is a little too don't-ask-don't-tell for me.
Furthermore, of course whether a character is hardcoded to be gay will affect the narrative. Just like if they were a big sports fan, or if they were a recovering alcoholic, or if they lived with their parents, or any other form of character development. The characters you write about will shape the stories you're telling. That's pretty basic.
But taking that into account, what it sounds like you're saying is that the characters we write about should all be lily-white straight boys displaying some idealized normal behavior. Instead of diverse, real people.
If a character is to be gay in any way then they actually have to be a main character for it to show up. That's going to make it conspicuous and may or may not influence the theme of narrative.
It's not the case that only main characters can be visibly gay. What about two NPC guys walking down the street hand in hand? A line of NPC women standing outside a lesbian bar? The idea that gay people will blend perfectly with straight people unless the subject of sexuality is explicitly breached is a little too don't-ask-don't-tell for me.
Furthermore, of course whether a character is hardcoded to be gay will affect the narrative. Just like if they were a big sports fan, or if they were a recovering alcoholic, or if they lived with their parents, or any other form of character development. The characters you write about will shape the stories you're telling. That's pretty basic.
But taking that into account, what it sounds like you're saying is that the characters we write about should all be lily-white straight boys displaying some idealized normal behavior. Instead of diverse, real people.
We have two different types of game in mind. You're imagining GTA, and I'm imagining Half-Life. While it wouldn't really effect the narrative badly in either, I think positively demanding a particular quota of gay characters is demanding of a medium something which is not a consciously made decision (keep the damn gays out of my game etc.) but usually a question of resources.
Every game where characters can interact in generic ways to my memory usually does allow homosexuality because it takes essentially no resources to implement.
I'm going to retract my previous statements and say no, games should not feature characters that are bisexual or homosexual.
They should also not feature characters that are heterosexual. Or asexual.
In other words, drop the dumb love shit altogether, especially in RPGs where an otherwise good story can be tarnished by dumb love/protective/unreal altruistic plot crap. I want my characters to fight, not fuck.
And if you're also including Western-style RPGs there, I couldn't disagree more. If the game lets the player create a character and play out that character's personality, arbitrarily excluding one fundamental facet of human relationships is a ripoff. Unless you're talking about Diablo-style hack-and-slash games, but there really shouldn't be any plot in those at all outside of brief, skippable cutscenes.
Not for nothing, but the "development" of your relationship in KOTOR was asinine and cheesy.
Maybe, but not as obnoxious as the (non-romantic) relationship with Carth. The fact that BioWare has difficulty writing subtlety into relationships (not just romantic ones) doesn't make romance in video games inherently shitty.
I also agree with this.
Incidentally, the romance with Carth wasn't that badly written. And he was a good male romance option.
Exactly, but in the context of games this is absurd. If a character is to be gay in any way then they actually have to be a main character for it to show up. That's going to make it conspicuous and may or may not influence the theme of narrative.
The gay guy in Invisible War was neither a main character nor a flaming queen, but he still had a tangible effect on the game. Although he was a bit of a token minority, his inclusion was still a pleasant surprise, especially since his sexuality was implied rather than explicitly stated. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if most people didn't even know he was gay. I didn't until I played through again as a girl.
Exactly, but in the context of games this is absurd. If a character is to be gay in any way then they actually have to be a main character for it to show up. That's going to make it conspicuous and may or may not influence the theme of narrative.
The gay guy in Invisible War was neither a main character nor a flaming queen, but he still had a tangible effect on the game. Although he was a bit of a token minority, his inclusion was still a pleasant surprise, especially since his sexuality was implied rather than explicitly stated. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if most people didn't even know he was gay. I didn't until I played through again as a girl.
I have no idea who you're talking about. Was it Jankowski?
What was the last game that you've seen with a female character that didn't have huge boobs or legs that went up to her neck or something of the sort? When was the last game that you saw a black character who wasn't the expert at demolitions, had the biggest gun in human history, or was less muscular/badass than the white counterpart?
Jade from Beyond GOod and Evil and... er... yeah you're right about black characters in video games. The only ones I can really remember offhand are Cole from Gears and Barrett from Final Fantasy. Dude even had a big-ass gun in place of his hand.
I could say Indigo Prophecy, but the black guy in that game was bleeding stereotypes as well as being a fairly normal, but 3D character.
things I always hate about any videogame/tv/movie romantic relationships is that everyone never says shit about their feelings.
The polar opposite of teen shows, where kids talk about their feelings like they were fucking trained psychologists. Either that or my sister just watches absolutely all shows where the guy will spend 5 minutes detailing his feelings, as if anyone really talks like that.
I want a healthy middle.
That would require male heroes who aren't shy and emotionally stunted fourteen year olds and love interests who actually have a good reason for being interested. (I do not know of any female hero-based love stories in games, sadly).
It would be kind of nice if, during one of the major boss battles, the hero says "Hey, Miranda! When we're done saving the world, you wanna go out for dinner and a movie?"
I think part of the problem there is that "love" as it were is not going to work the same way in a life and death struggle to save the country/world/universe as it is in real life, or even just a normal situation in a creative work.
You see this a lot in movies as well, and honestly, I think it's somewhat realistic for people to develop intense feelings, and even some semblance of a relationship without ever really getting to know each other, when they are tossed into such a situation.
So yeah, it'd be interesting to see an actual, realistic love story done in a videogame, but as they so often also involve saving the world, or even saving the potential love interest, it's much harder to paint a realistic picture of the relationship, because it's not going to be realistic. Although I'd kill for some prologue, or even sequels where the hero and his love interest have completely seperated, having realized they had nothing in common and couldn't make it work without the constant danger and fear of death.
Here's my opinion, based on what I know of writing and literary criticism: details should have a point. And specifically showing that someone is gay as opposed to straight (or not showing their sexuality at all) has a larger impact - unless you're, say, showing that someone who acts like a stereotypical gay person is straight - because there are many, many more straight people than gay people, and because of the social stigma surrounding homosexuality in most cultures.
Even if you have a gay couple show up - say, as brought up as a possibility before, having two men kiss when there's an explosion - and don't focus on it and treat it as completely normal, it still changes what you're trying to do. I mean, not making a huge deal out of it might be more tasteful, but if a social criticism of the stigma surrounding homosexuality isn't already one of your themes, it's going to seem out of place no matter how your game and the characters in it treat it as normal. Some people will appreciate it being treated as normal, and some (bigoted) people will be offended, but the fact is that it will stand out to almost everyone. It won't just stand out to people who view homosexuality as special or different, I mean; it'll stand out to anyone who is aware that our culture views homosexuality as different. The fact that people are saying "it was done well (or poorly) in [X]" just shows that it's something that stood out to them.
But just saying "all games [or games where the issue of sexuality or romance pops up at all] should throw in some gay characters and not call any special attention to it in the game so it won't really change anything beyond more accurately reflecting reality" doesn't work. It does change how people will react to it, even if it's just one scene. And again, if one of your themes concerns homosexuality, that's good. If your themes or design have nothing to do with it, including it will do nothing but call attention to it and take the focus off your other themes.
And this has nothing to do with homosexuality in and of itself, but rather the cultural perception of and reaction to it. If, say, the majority of the population thought that wearing green shirts was immoral, even though it's completely stupid and irrational too, you don't just say "okay we'll have people wearing green shirts in the game and not call any attention to it and that'll be fine" won't work unless calling attention to the green shirt thing being dumb was part of your goal in the first place.
There are more or less four situations where someone would deal with homosexuality in games:
1) Their story's theme or themes deal with it (best case).
2) Their game world (or its population) is actually designed to reflect the real world's population in some way, but most games really aren't designed with this in mind).
3) They care enough to call attention away from their more important themes for a bit by bringing it up because they feel it is an important issue (admirable, but really not the best decision from a thematic or game design perspective).
4) They don't understand the thematic impact it might have and/or are using it for nothing but humor (worst case).
I'm fairly sure that the reason most people aren't advocating #1 is because really, expecting a game developer to treat the issue with respect and without it feeling overly preachy is a bit much. Unfortunately, I'm inclined to agree for the time being.
There are probably writers in the game industry who could do it, but I don't think there are many who would do it (or at least, who have publishers who would have them do it).
I'm fairly sure that the reason most people aren't advocating #1 is because really, expecting a game developer to treat the issue with respect and without it feeling overly preachy is a bit much. Unfortunately, I'm inclined to agree for the time being.
Read: all games should be about whitebread straight boys.
I'm fairly sure that the reason most people aren't advocating #1 is because really, expecting a game developer to treat the issue with respect and without it feeling overly preachy is a bit much. Unfortunately, I'm inclined to agree for the time being.
Read: all games should be about whitebread straight boys.
Read: I'm illiterate.
No, really, can you read? I mean, I know that to get from Point A to Point B here you had to have understood what at least some of the words in my post meant, but I'm not seeing anything that indicates you understood what they mean when arranged into something longer, like a phrase, or a sentence.
I guess your response to this will let us know whether this is a matter of ridiculously poor reading comprehension, or a deliberate and idiotic misinterpretation of what I wrote. The ball's in your court!
Agem on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
edited July 2007
Why is it that we can't expect a game developer to handle homosexual characters? I mean:
Of course whether a character is hardcoded to be gay will affect the narrative. Just like if they were a big sports fan, or if they were a recovering alcoholic, or if they lived with their parents, or any other form of character development. The characters you write about will shape the stories you're telling. That's pretty basic.
Yes, a character being gay affects the piece. So what? So we shouldn't have gay characters? How does that follow?
Also, there was that DS9 episode with Jadzia and that other Trill chick, although they qualify that with the premise that they were husband and wife in previous hosts.
You've just hit one of my pet peeves about Star Trek. The creators/writers pat themselves on the back endlessly for their fearless examination of hot-button issues and their progressive vision of a galaxy united in diversity and blah blah blah - but when it comes time to discuss any sort of alternative sexuality, they torturously hammer out the most strained, wilfully opaque sci-fi metaphor possible - a story wherein it is learned that one of our characters has actually hosted a benevolent parasite in his anus for twenty years but now has come the time of the hatching...
I hate that flavor of weaksauce, dishwater liberalism. One offhand mention of a male character's ex-boyfriends - or god forbid, some actual gay kissing - would be worth about fifteen Very Special Episodes.
You know what else I hate? Threads like this one, where the mention of Teh Gay inspires everyone to don their fucking conscientious critic berets: "well, I could deal with gayness in games - but only if it weren't crammed down my throat, or even better, implied but never mentioned. Ever." "I'd hate to see gay sexuality wilfully exploited for money by crass videogame designers. Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to marry some girl in Fallout to use as an autocannon shield."
I'm sorry, but after thirty years of gaming and eight million busty tavern wenches and bubble-assed archaeologist supermodels, if a company somewhere decided just for the fuck of it to let a cutscene linger on a dude's oiled ass, I'd better not hear a single goddamn human being complaining.
I'm quoting this again, because it how I feel about this.
Elki on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
Of course whether a character is hardcoded to be gay will affect the narrative. Just like if they were a big sports fan, or if they were a recovering alcoholic, or if they lived with their parents, or any other form of character development. The characters you write about will shape the stories you're telling. That's pretty basic.
Yes, a character being gay affects the piece. So what? So we shouldn't have gay characters? How does that follow?
The most obvious thing here is that I never said we shouldn't have gay characters, and in fact outlined different reasons it might be done (marking only throwing gay characters in haphazardly without realizing it would change anything and using them for nothing more than the butt of jokes as "bad").
#1, the part you were talking about when you quoted me, has nothing to do with a game developer being able to handle homosexual characters. It has to do with game developers (actually, game publishers) being able to handle homosexuality being dealt with in a theme. A homosexual character being in the game changes things, but having one in doesn't generate a new theme just by virtue of him being there. A theme also isn't a moral. I'm using "theme" in the strict literary sense, which may not be the same as the one you're using, and which deals with the underlying meaning behind the piece as a whole or in part. Most writers for game either aren't mature enough or simply don't write about things with maturity in mind to handle homosexuality well thematically. Of those that could handle it well, fewer would, either for preferring to write about something else or fearing criticism. Of those that could handle it well and want to do so, virtually no major publisher would let it happen - maybe as a very minor theme that the player won't even come across unless they do something very specific.
On the publisher and fear of criticism side, it has to do with the stigma attached to homosexuality in our culture. On the maturity side, it has to deal with most videogame writers not being very mature, or not writing about mature things. That'll change as the medium develops, just like it did with every other one.
Agem on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
edited July 2007
I'm willing to expect quality in games. That includes the storytelling angle.
Of course whether a character is hardcoded to be gay will affect the narrative. Just like if they were a big sports fan, or if they were a recovering alcoholic, or if they lived with their parents, or any other form of character development. The characters you write about will shape the stories you're telling. That's pretty basic.
Yes, a character being gay affects the piece. So what? So we shouldn't have gay characters? How does that follow?
We should. It'd be awesome. And eventually, we'll hit a point where a couple of gay guys walking down the street in a game will be a non-event.* However.
Right now, any gay people in a game are going to be conspicuous, just as once upon a time any black guy in a movie or TV show was conspicuous. If you had a black guy in your movie, it was probably going to be to fulfill a role that demanded blackness, because otherwise the blackness itself was going to be distracting. If you wanted to make a movie about a certain theme, it didn't matter, because yours was going to be That Movie With the Black Dude.
Things progressed to the point where black characters we're distractingly conspicuous so much as blatantly tokenized. Your movie had Black Guy in it, and Black Guy's purpose was to be Black. But nobody thought much of it, because every movie and TV show had Black Guy. This was progress. And now, most people don't even really notice if there's a black or hispanic or asian guy in a movie, because it's been accepted.
But for a while, you had to rely on people who wanted to make a statement with their inclusion of black folks in their movies. You had to rely on people who didn't much care if their movie's theme or point was overshadowed by OMG BLACK DUDE! or else on people who specifically needed a character to be black.
Games are going to be the same way with gay folks. If a game has a gay person, that is going to draw attention from the other elements of the game. It doesn't matter how it's handled, it's going to draw attention. Me, I have a hard time faulting people who just want to make a fun game and who don't want to worry about making a statement. There'll be people who go out of their way to stick gay people in there, and every one of those will push homosexuality further into acceptance. That's great of those people. But the corollary is not that everyone who doesn't have a gay dude in his game is an asshole.
Recognizing this reality does not mean that one is saying that "all game characters should whitebread straight guys". I'm not even sure where "whitebread" came from, except maybe you thought a subtle accusation of racism would help bolster your point, or something.
*It's worth point out that very, very few games are sophisticated enough to where they portray any two people walking hand in hand, or interacting in meaningful ways. The best crowd AI you generally get is in something like Oblivion, where two people are standing there conversing randomly. So in order to communicate such background gayitude using current technology, you'd pretty much have to have two guys standing there and running through dialogue from a fairly extensive list of lines custom written for those two characters that were all about how much these people were in love, or something.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Here's my opinion, based on what I know of writing and literary criticism: details should have a point. And specifically showing that someone is gay as opposed to straight (or not showing their sexuality at all) has a larger impact - unless you're, say, showing that someone who acts like a stereotypical gay person is straight - because there are many, many more straight people than gay people, and because of the social stigma surrounding homosexuality in most cultures.
Homosexuality is massive in literature at least since the Greeks. "Queer Theory" is at least as big as "Marxist Theory" these days.
It's every-goddamn-where.
The symbols behind it are numerous, but can range anywhere from "In this setting, people are not stupid enough to be homophobes" to representing TRUE love unfettered by reproductive concerns, the love of friends, etc. And, sometimes, it can just be a random aspect to show that the setting is authentic, and not forced; the world does not revolve around the characters, theirs is simply one of many stories of equal merit. And sometimes it's just to show the different dynamics of love that differ simply from the physical nature of individuals based on the gender ideals of that setting.
Beyond that, if you simply consider the nature of combat, you're going to get a lot of relationships forming; the Spartans based their military on it. It would be the most natural thing in the world for two characters in any random RPG to fall in to a relationship, regardless of gender, provided their societal training or individual sexual orientation wasn't strong enough to prevent it. Even straight people can end up loving someone of their own gender in the right situations; Mormons on long mission trips are famous for it (at least among Mormons) simply due to their closeness and coping with mutual stress.
And, ultimately, there's just no reason NOT to have non-hetero characters.
--
Blah blah blah, if their sexuality doesn't alter the narrative they can be into fucking goats for all it matters because it never comes up so stop bringing it up.
Here's my opinion, based on what I know of writing and literary criticism: details should have a point. And specifically showing that someone is gay as opposed to straight (or not showing their sexuality at all) has a larger impact - unless you're, say, showing that someone who acts like a stereotypical gay person is straight - because there are many, many more straight people than gay people, and because of the social stigma surrounding homosexuality in most cultures.
Homosexuality is massive in literature at least since the Greeks. "Queer Theory" is at least as big as "Marxist Theory" these days.
It's every-goddamn-where.
The symbols behind it are numerous, but can range anywhere from "In this setting, people are not stupid enough to be homophobes" to representing TRUE love unfettered by reproductive concerns, the love of friends, etc. And, sometimes, it can just be a random aspect to show that the setting is authentic, and not forced; the world does not revolve around the characters, theirs is simply one of many stories of equal merit. And sometimes it's just to show the different dynamics of love that differ simply from the physical nature of individuals based on the gender ideals of that setting.
Beyond that, if you simply consider the nature of combat, you're going to get a lot of relationships forming; the Spartans based their military on it. It would be the most natural thing in the world for two characters in any random RPG to fall in to a relationship, regardless of gender, provided their societal training or individual sexual orientation wasn't strong enough to prevent it. Even straight people can end up loving someone of their own gender in the right situations; Mormons on long mission trips are famous for it (at least among Mormons) simply due to their closeness and coping with mutual stress.
What's your point? This doesn't change or contradict anything in my post. Only parts of it even address anything I wrote. Read the whole thing, if you didn't.
And, ultimately, there's just no reason NOT to have non-hetero characters.
--
Blah blah blah, if their sexuality doesn't alter the narrative they can be into fucking goats for all it matters because it never comes up so stop bringing it up.
And this makes it seem like my and ElJeffe's posts don't even exist.
There are plenty of reasons. Ranging from financial (why publishers don't usually want to delve into it) and wanting to avoid controversy, to not wanting it if it's irrelevant to whatever you're trying to say.
You know what? There's no reason to not have non-hetero characters in the same way there's no reason to not have a character who really likes collecting stamps, or hates loud music, or is a diabetic, or is composed entirely of freon. Now while I'm pretty sure there's a terrible old game somewhere where you play as a diabetic superhero, most games don't have these things. Are diabetics somehow lessened because they don't show up? Are stamp collectors disenfranchised because we don't see them walking hand-in-hand as they collect every stamp they find? I bet gays show up more often than diabetics or stamp collectors, and certainly more than diabetic stamp collectors composed entirely of freon, right?
I want gays to have mainstream acceptance. I really, really do. But when Toni Morrison was writing Beloved, do you think this ever happened?
"ARE YOU INCLUDING HOMOSEXUAL CHARACTERS?"
"No, it's not really relevant to--"
"YOU KNOW THERE'S NO GOOD REASON NOT TO."
The very good reason and that's that it isn't relevant and changes what you're trying to say.Beloved - an extremely good book, by the way - wasn't about that. And there wasn't any goat-fucking I caught, but there was cow-fucking in that book.
So what if a writer don't want their narrative to be changed because Incenjuar told them 'there's no good reason to not have non-hetero characters'? Because seriously, Incenj, there are plenty of reasons to not have non-hetero characters if it's not relevant in some way to what you're trying to say, even before you get into what the publishers or certain "family" organizations might think of it. Beloved wasn't about homosexuality. It had nothing to do with it. So there were no prominent gay characters - in fact, I'm almost positive there weren't any at all, not even a character that was in for just a page or a paragraph, but it's been a while since I read it and I don't want to say that definitively.
So no, I absolutely do not think game developers to just start inserting gay characters unless it's important somehow, they're trying to reflect the real-world population in some way, or they're trying to make it more acceptable for them to show up. And honestly, while number three there is admirable, it's not going to help make the actual theme stronger, and may in fact weaken it by taking the audience's attention off of it. Personally, I likely wouldn't think of it beyond a split-second "Hey, there are gay people in this game!" reaction, but I'm not the primary audience they're aiming for.
Sure, some games have serious storylines and thematic components, but there are tons of them that are more . . . lowbrow? If you've got a first person shooter, will it really "change the narrative" to have a character growling, in a cut scene, that he has to break out of the space station to rejoin his boyfriend, rather than his girlfriend? What difference will you experience in gameplay when the aliens burst out of the ducts and try to eat your homosexual character, rather than a heterosexual character?
Sure, some games have serious storylines and thematic components, but there are tons of them that are more . . . lowbrow? If you've got a first person shooter, will it really "change the narrative" to have a character growling, in a cut scene, that he has to break out of the space station to rejoin his boyfriend, rather than his girlfriend? What difference will you experience in gameplay when the aliens burst out of the ducts and try to eat your homosexual character, rather than a heterosexual character?
It will be slightly different from every other game you play?
I mean, why should a certain character have black hair? Isn't blonde okay for all of them? It doesn't really matter to the gameplay— I mean, it's not like you're going to be sewing their scalps into your clothing in a little pattern-matching minigame, or anything.
Mr^2 has really failed to convince me that anything Agem has said is in fact wrong - it's just a statement of how a narrative is going to read/be received/played when you do certain things to it. You're making a point or potentially making a point every time you do something likely to deviate from any sort of contextual societal norm, and my concern when writing anything is always to make sure the message I want is well received.
To argue that gay characters aren't going to poorly effect a narrative when included without much prior thought but just because "oh hey, we need some more gays. Barry! MORE GAYS!" gets you Sex in the City and the portrayal of gay men as handbags for "self-assertive women". Of course the show did try and succeeded in telling interesting stories about those men, but far too often they were there because the writers needed a neutral character for a main character to talk to.
Conversely I also think it's a bit ignorant to argue that there wasn't a point to the gay chancellor in DX:IW (who sadly disappears if you play as a female character) because he did add to the diversity of the area and the overall theme of the WTO Enclaves - they were supposed to be socially progressive but economically regulated environments. It made sense, and it was used decently and his sexuality was shown in a context where it fitted.
This doesn't however mean, that it usually makes sense in games to set out and try and include characters who are specifically gay - because normally dealing with their sexuality just doesn't make sense in the context.
It's all contextual, because it all is about how the narrative is going to be received. There is a large case that if you are building a world as you are in games more and more these days rather then telling a story that gay characters should be included because it is simply relevant to any human-like society that they will exist, but until the day that homosexuality is neutrally received in our own societal context I wouldn't expect to see more gay characters in narratives - and even then, I wouldn't especially expect it until it is openly visible enough in our own society that a (likely to be heterosexual) writer/composter/artist feels they can incorporate it naturally. We draw on our own experiences and all that.
Sure, some games have serious storylines and thematic components, but there are tons of them that are more . . . lowbrow? If you've got a first person shooter, will it really "change the narrative" to have a character growling, in a cut scene, that he has to break out of the space station to rejoin his boyfriend, rather than his girlfriend? What difference will you experience in gameplay when the aliens burst out of the ducts and try to eat your homosexual character, rather than a heterosexual character?
It will be slightly different from every other game you play?
I mean, why should a certain character have black hair? Isn't blonde okay for all of them? It doesn't really matter to the gameplay— I mean, it's not like you're going to be sewing their scalps into your clothing in a little pattern-matching minigame, or anything.
It's going to drastically effect how I, the heterosexual and likely majority of the target audience, identify with the main character?
Hell, to an extent that's why I think Valve's philosophy of never having Gordan speak was actually the best idea ever. You pretty much decide for yourself how Gordan reacts to the various characters.
I want gays to have mainstream acceptance. I really, really do. But when Toni Morrison was writing Beloved, do you think this ever happened?
"ARE YOU INCLUDING HOMOSEXUAL CHARACTERS?"
"No, it's not really relevant to--"
"YOU KNOW THERE'S NO GOOD REASON NOT TO."
The very good reason and that's that it isn't relevant and changes what you're trying to say.
There a difference between "it changes what you're trying to say" and "it changes how your audience receives what you're trying to say". What your hypothetical exchange brings to mind is this quote from Harlan Ellison:
One nonsensical charge often leveled at writers is that we don't write enough black or gay or female characters. The proper response is that unless black or gay or female is a character facet that functions in the story, it ain't necessary.
Ellison and several posters in this thread seem to be saying that a minority character's role in the story must be centralized around their minority status. A character should only be black if his role in the story is, in some way, the role of The Black Guy; a black guy cannot simply have a role in the narrative in which his race is incidental or immaterial. Likewise if the character is gay, or a woman. According to this line of thinking, the Straight White Man is the default for any character, unless that character's role in the story revolves around race, gender, or sexuality. Unsurprisingly, this line of thinking is most common among straight white men, although non-white people will often make an exception for race and women will often make an exception for gender.
It's going to drastically effect how I, the heterosexual and likely majority of the target audience, identify with the main character?
Hell, to an extent that's why I think Valve's philosophy of never having Gordan speak was actually the best idea ever. You pretty much decide for yourself how Gordan reacts to the various characters.
I'm not talking so much about the protagonist here. But since we're on that, I'm not sure it's a massive leap. I don't usually wind up agreeing with a lot of the choices my characters make.
Your misinterpreting his statement there. The key word is "necessary". He's not saying you SHOULDN'T, he's saying you don't NEED to. If there's no reason for a character to be black/female/gay/etc, then it's entirely up to the writer to determine those characteristics. So alot of characters end up straight by default.
Your misinterpreting his statement there. The key word is "necessary". He's not saying you SHOULDN'T, he's saying you don't NEED to. If there's no reason for a character to be black/female/gay/etc, then it's entirely up to the writer to determine those characteristics. So alot of characters end up straight by default.
Why should the assumed default be the straight white male?
Your misinterpreting his statement there. The key word is "necessary". He's not saying you SHOULDN'T, he's saying you don't NEED to. If there's no reason for a character to be black/female/gay/etc, then it's entirely up to the writer to determine those characteristics. So alot of characters end up straight by default.
Why should the assumed default be the straight white male?
Straight is the default in real life. The majority of people, by a hell of alot, are heterosexual.
For white and male? Well, if your a white male, your default is .... white male. And let's be honest, I think we can all agree that it's likely that white men make up a staggeringly large percentage of game designers.
Your misinterpreting his statement there. The key word is "necessary". He's not saying you SHOULDN'T, he's saying you don't NEED to. If there's no reason for a character to be black/female/gay/etc, then it's entirely up to the writer to determine those characteristics. So alot of characters end up straight by default.
Why should the assumed default be the straight white male?
Straight is the default in real life. The majority of people, by a hell of alot, are heterosexual.
For white and male? Well, if your a white male, your default is .... white male. And let's be honest, I think we can all agree that it's likely that white men make up a staggeringly large percentage of game designers.
Majority ≠ default. And it sounds a bit like you're making excuses for lazy ethnocentricism. Just because people are predisposed to their own gender, race, or sexual orientation doesn't mean we should just forget it and hope for more minority representation in game development.
I throw my chips with whomever mentioned that pioneering roles for diversity are often two-dimensional, stereotypical, and maybe even offensive. If topics are avoided through the fear that they'll be done poorly or received poorly then we'll continue to go nowhere.
Sure, some games have serious storylines and thematic components, but there are tons of them that are more . . . lowbrow? If you've got a first person shooter, will it really "change the narrative" to have a character growling, in a cut scene, that he has to break out of the space station to rejoin his boyfriend, rather than his girlfriend? What difference will you experience in gameplay when the aliens burst out of the ducts and try to eat your homosexual character, rather than a heterosexual character?
Lowbrow games are the games most likely to be made for little more than money or fun, which also makes them the least likely to have lesbians that aren't supermodels or gay men that aren't the butt of a joke.
Your misinterpreting his statement there. The key word is "necessary". He's not saying you SHOULDN'T, he's saying you don't NEED to. If there's no reason for a character to be black/female/gay/etc, then it's entirely up to the writer to determine those characteristics. So alot of characters end up straight by default.
Why should the assumed default be the straight white male?
Cultural/societal bias. Most people in the US are white = default is white. Most people in the US are straight == default is straight. Most people in the US aren't male, but we have the whole patriarchal society thing and a language with a universal "he."
Now, ideally it wouldn't work like this, but in most books, talking about someone without mentioning their race is meant to imply that they're white (unless context dictates otherwise; i.e. you shouldn't really have to say that a slave on a Virginia plantation was black), while if they're black (except where context makes it clear) they're usually called "black." Ideally, if race isn't a factor, it should never be brought up at all. If race is a factor, it should be stated for everyone. But in the US we assume everyone's white. Anyone have that link for that online game where they charged extra to make your character black because it was an additional feature?
Sexuality is much easier to tell from context if it becomes an issue. I mean, you can have a white guy living in what is considered a "black" area by the general public, like Harlem, but you can't have a gay dude who sleeps with women (in the vast majority of situations, anyway). Bisexuals are trickier, but if sexuality is important enough to be a theme, you probably shouldn't have to state it explicitly.
Gender... well, the biased default is considered male, even though there are more women than men, which means a lot of times males will take up a large majority of the prominent roles due to bias. But other than that it's generally really freaking easy to tell if someone's a man or a women because we have different pronouns for the different genders. You could avoid the gender-based pronouns and make it ambiguous by either referring to them by name alone or making up your own pronoun, but the first idea is awkward and the second is annoying (I don't like when someone makes up any word and uses it like every other damn sentence).
The difference with sexuality here, though, because we don't live in an ideal world, is that sexuality is treated differently. Make your characters whatever race you want! No one but the KKK will bat an eye. Same thing with gender, for the most part - there's still some stigma attached to extremely dominant, aggressive assertive females and extremely submissive, passive males. Sexuality though is such a hot-button political issue that it's going to be virtually impossible to bring up homosexuals without their very presence calling attention. Again, that doesn't mean gays shouldn't be in games - and in fact, the best way to get this cleared over time is to include them more often - but one should be aware that it will take attention off of something that is thematically more important (unless, again, homosexuality is dealt with thematically, which is the Best Case Scenario).
It's going to drastically effect how I, the heterosexual and likely majority of the target audience, identify with the main character?
Hell, to an extent that's why I think Valve's philosophy of never having Gordan speak was actually the best idea ever. You pretty much decide for yourself how Gordan reacts to the various characters.
I'm not talking so much about the protagonist here. But since we're on that, I'm not sure it's a massive leap. I don't usually wind up agreeing with a lot of the choices my characters make.
Like has been stated, there's something of a difference between "you play this guy" and "you play this gay guy" because the difference is almost entirely mental. People can often imagine walking around with a different skin color, appearance, physique etc. But walking around with a different mental state? It's possible, but not easy. Try as I might I just can't be needlessly malevolent - my maxiKill run idea for Deus Ex failed because I just couldn't deal with executing innocent people.
Likewise, it would definitely throw me out of a game somewhat to be told I'm supposed to imagine I'm gay. Well, ok, but that changes nothing except that I have difficulty understanding the characters motivations on an emotive level because being heterosexual I'm more or less incapable of imagining a romantic attraction to someone of the same gender.
Now, of course this is very much a 'me' centered statement, but bear in mind when you're producing something you want to push that 'me' button as many times as possible. And to do that, that audience just happens to be heterosexual.
It's going to drastically effect how I, the heterosexual and likely majority of the target audience, identify with the main character?
Hell, to an extent that's why I think Valve's philosophy of never having Gordan speak was actually the best idea ever. You pretty much decide for yourself how Gordan reacts to the various characters.
I'm not talking so much about the protagonist here. But since we're on that, I'm not sure it's a massive leap. I don't usually wind up agreeing with a lot of the choices my characters make.
Like has been stated, there's something of a difference between "you play this guy" and "you play this gay guy" because the difference is almost entirely mental. People can often imagine walking around with a different skin color, appearance, physique etc. But walking around with a different mental state? It's possible, but not easy. Try as I might I just can't be needlessly malevolent - my maxiKill run idea for Deus Ex failed because I just couldn't deal with executing innocent people.
Likewise, it would definitely throw me out of a game somewhat to be told I'm supposed to imagine I'm gay. Well, ok, but that changes nothing except that I have difficulty understanding the characters motivations on an emotive level because being heterosexual I'm more or less incapable of imagining a romantic attraction to someone of the same gender.
Now, of course this is very much a 'me' centered statement, but bear in mind when you're producing something you want to push that 'me' button as many times as possible. And to do that, that audience just happens to be heterosexual.
I see what you're saying, and I realize that developers do need to employ a certain amount of pragmatism in creating for a broad audience. Honest question though: is it really that hard to put yourself in the shoes of someone attracted to a member of the same sex? What if your character is a woman interested in a man? If you can play along with countless heterosexual romances involving NPC's who probably don't represent your ideal real life mate, shouldn't it be a short step to suspend disbelief that that romance involves two men or two women?
I don't expect to get aroused when my character does, much in the same way that I don't expect to get hurt when my character does. In terms of immersion... well, if I can roleplay as a psychopathic murderer, I bet I can roleplay as someone who happens to likes penis.
Most games that would lock you into playing as a homosexual character probably wouldn't be very immersive anyway. It would be like a JRPG; the choice has already been made for you. I mean, it's possible to make some really open-ended game where you're locked into being homosexual (much like in many open-ended games you're locked into be a heterosexual), but given the current market... not likely.
Posts
You love it when culture is dominated by straight whites?
What.
In your earlier post you say that the low occurrence rate of homosexuality would cause a gay character to stand out. I'd lay the blame with the fact that it's been a taboo subject in most places for thousands of years. If homosexuality weren't something people found exotic (and I think it's gradually becoming less so) it wouldn't stand out as someone's defining characteristic. I understand what you're saying about the differences in real life and artistic narrative, but I bet you'd be hard pressed to find a queer person who didn't worry about how coming out would change people's perception of him/her.
The fact that a character would be as such isn't the issue here. It's how that's portrayed that's important.
What message does a gay corrupt mayor of a town send compared to just a corrupt mayor etc. It says something that the extra information has been included, and I think it would be considered an insult to depict all homosexuals as completely flambuoyant.
It's not the case that only main characters can be visibly gay. What about two NPC guys walking down the street hand in hand? A line of NPC women standing outside a lesbian bar? The idea that gay people will blend perfectly with straight people unless the subject of sexuality is explicitly breached is a little too don't-ask-don't-tell for me.
Furthermore, of course whether a character is hardcoded to be gay will affect the narrative. Just like if they were a big sports fan, or if they were a recovering alcoholic, or if they lived with their parents, or any other form of character development. The characters you write about will shape the stories you're telling. That's pretty basic.
But taking that into account, what it sounds like you're saying is that the characters we write about should all be lily-white straight boys displaying some idealized normal behavior. Instead of diverse, real people.
We have two different types of game in mind. You're imagining GTA, and I'm imagining Half-Life. While it wouldn't really effect the narrative badly in either, I think positively demanding a particular quota of gay characters is demanding of a medium something which is not a consciously made decision (keep the damn gays out of my game etc.) but usually a question of resources.
Every game where characters can interact in generic ways to my memory usually does allow homosexuality because it takes essentially no resources to implement.
Thank you; couldn't have said it better myself.
I also agree with this.
Incidentally, the romance with Carth wasn't that badly written. And he was a good male romance option.
The gay guy in Invisible War was neither a main character nor a flaming queen, but he still had a tangible effect on the game. Although he was a bit of a token minority, his inclusion was still a pleasant surprise, especially since his sexuality was implied rather than explicitly stated. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if most people didn't even know he was gay. I didn't until I played through again as a girl.
I have no idea who you're talking about. Was it Jankowski?
I could say Indigo Prophecy, but the black guy in that game was bleeding stereotypes as well as being a fairly normal, but 3D character.
I think part of the problem there is that "love" as it were is not going to work the same way in a life and death struggle to save the country/world/universe as it is in real life, or even just a normal situation in a creative work.
You see this a lot in movies as well, and honestly, I think it's somewhat realistic for people to develop intense feelings, and even some semblance of a relationship without ever really getting to know each other, when they are tossed into such a situation.
So yeah, it'd be interesting to see an actual, realistic love story done in a videogame, but as they so often also involve saving the world, or even saving the potential love interest, it's much harder to paint a realistic picture of the relationship, because it's not going to be realistic. Although I'd kill for some prologue, or even sequels where the hero and his love interest have completely seperated, having realized they had nothing in common and couldn't make it work without the constant danger and fear of death.
Even if you have a gay couple show up - say, as brought up as a possibility before, having two men kiss when there's an explosion - and don't focus on it and treat it as completely normal, it still changes what you're trying to do. I mean, not making a huge deal out of it might be more tasteful, but if a social criticism of the stigma surrounding homosexuality isn't already one of your themes, it's going to seem out of place no matter how your game and the characters in it treat it as normal. Some people will appreciate it being treated as normal, and some (bigoted) people will be offended, but the fact is that it will stand out to almost everyone. It won't just stand out to people who view homosexuality as special or different, I mean; it'll stand out to anyone who is aware that our culture views homosexuality as different. The fact that people are saying "it was done well (or poorly) in [X]" just shows that it's something that stood out to them.
But just saying "all games [or games where the issue of sexuality or romance pops up at all] should throw in some gay characters and not call any special attention to it in the game so it won't really change anything beyond more accurately reflecting reality" doesn't work. It does change how people will react to it, even if it's just one scene. And again, if one of your themes concerns homosexuality, that's good. If your themes or design have nothing to do with it, including it will do nothing but call attention to it and take the focus off your other themes.
And this has nothing to do with homosexuality in and of itself, but rather the cultural perception of and reaction to it. If, say, the majority of the population thought that wearing green shirts was immoral, even though it's completely stupid and irrational too, you don't just say "okay we'll have people wearing green shirts in the game and not call any attention to it and that'll be fine" won't work unless calling attention to the green shirt thing being dumb was part of your goal in the first place.
There are more or less four situations where someone would deal with homosexuality in games:
1) Their story's theme or themes deal with it (best case).
2) Their game world (or its population) is actually designed to reflect the real world's population in some way, but most games really aren't designed with this in mind).
3) They care enough to call attention away from their more important themes for a bit by bringing it up because they feel it is an important issue (admirable, but really not the best decision from a thematic or game design perspective).
4) They don't understand the thematic impact it might have and/or are using it for nothing but humor (worst case).
I'm fairly sure that the reason most people aren't advocating #1 is because really, expecting a game developer to treat the issue with respect and without it feeling overly preachy is a bit much. Unfortunately, I'm inclined to agree for the time being.
There are probably writers in the game industry who could do it, but I don't think there are many who would do it (or at least, who have publishers who would have them do it).
And
End of "Double Agent" spoilers.
Read: all games should be about whitebread straight boys.
Read: I'm illiterate.
No, really, can you read? I mean, I know that to get from Point A to Point B here you had to have understood what at least some of the words in my post meant, but I'm not seeing anything that indicates you understood what they mean when arranged into something longer, like a phrase, or a sentence.
I guess your response to this will let us know whether this is a matter of ridiculously poor reading comprehension, or a deliberate and idiotic misinterpretation of what I wrote. The ball's in your court!
Yes, a character being gay affects the piece. So what? So we shouldn't have gay characters? How does that follow?
I'm quoting this again, because it how I feel about this.
#1, the part you were talking about when you quoted me, has nothing to do with a game developer being able to handle homosexual characters. It has to do with game developers (actually, game publishers) being able to handle homosexuality being dealt with in a theme. A homosexual character being in the game changes things, but having one in doesn't generate a new theme just by virtue of him being there. A theme also isn't a moral. I'm using "theme" in the strict literary sense, which may not be the same as the one you're using, and which deals with the underlying meaning behind the piece as a whole or in part. Most writers for game either aren't mature enough or simply don't write about things with maturity in mind to handle homosexuality well thematically. Of those that could handle it well, fewer would, either for preferring to write about something else or fearing criticism. Of those that could handle it well and want to do so, virtually no major publisher would let it happen - maybe as a very minor theme that the player won't even come across unless they do something very specific.
On the publisher and fear of criticism side, it has to do with the stigma attached to homosexuality in our culture. On the maturity side, it has to deal with most videogame writers not being very mature, or not writing about mature things. That'll change as the medium develops, just like it did with every other one.
We should. It'd be awesome. And eventually, we'll hit a point where a couple of gay guys walking down the street in a game will be a non-event.* However.
Right now, any gay people in a game are going to be conspicuous, just as once upon a time any black guy in a movie or TV show was conspicuous. If you had a black guy in your movie, it was probably going to be to fulfill a role that demanded blackness, because otherwise the blackness itself was going to be distracting. If you wanted to make a movie about a certain theme, it didn't matter, because yours was going to be That Movie With the Black Dude.
Things progressed to the point where black characters we're distractingly conspicuous so much as blatantly tokenized. Your movie had Black Guy in it, and Black Guy's purpose was to be Black. But nobody thought much of it, because every movie and TV show had Black Guy. This was progress. And now, most people don't even really notice if there's a black or hispanic or asian guy in a movie, because it's been accepted.
But for a while, you had to rely on people who wanted to make a statement with their inclusion of black folks in their movies. You had to rely on people who didn't much care if their movie's theme or point was overshadowed by OMG BLACK DUDE! or else on people who specifically needed a character to be black.
Games are going to be the same way with gay folks. If a game has a gay person, that is going to draw attention from the other elements of the game. It doesn't matter how it's handled, it's going to draw attention. Me, I have a hard time faulting people who just want to make a fun game and who don't want to worry about making a statement. There'll be people who go out of their way to stick gay people in there, and every one of those will push homosexuality further into acceptance. That's great of those people. But the corollary is not that everyone who doesn't have a gay dude in his game is an asshole.
Recognizing this reality does not mean that one is saying that "all game characters should whitebread straight guys". I'm not even sure where "whitebread" came from, except maybe you thought a subtle accusation of racism would help bolster your point, or something.
*It's worth point out that very, very few games are sophisticated enough to where they portray any two people walking hand in hand, or interacting in meaningful ways. The best crowd AI you generally get is in something like Oblivion, where two people are standing there conversing randomly. So in order to communicate such background gayitude using current technology, you'd pretty much have to have two guys standing there and running through dialogue from a fairly extensive list of lines custom written for those two characters that were all about how much these people were in love, or something.
Homosexuality is massive in literature at least since the Greeks. "Queer Theory" is at least as big as "Marxist Theory" these days.
It's every-goddamn-where.
The symbols behind it are numerous, but can range anywhere from "In this setting, people are not stupid enough to be homophobes" to representing TRUE love unfettered by reproductive concerns, the love of friends, etc. And, sometimes, it can just be a random aspect to show that the setting is authentic, and not forced; the world does not revolve around the characters, theirs is simply one of many stories of equal merit. And sometimes it's just to show the different dynamics of love that differ simply from the physical nature of individuals based on the gender ideals of that setting.
Beyond that, if you simply consider the nature of combat, you're going to get a lot of relationships forming; the Spartans based their military on it. It would be the most natural thing in the world for two characters in any random RPG to fall in to a relationship, regardless of gender, provided their societal training or individual sexual orientation wasn't strong enough to prevent it. Even straight people can end up loving someone of their own gender in the right situations; Mormons on long mission trips are famous for it (at least among Mormons) simply due to their closeness and coping with mutual stress.
And, ultimately, there's just no reason NOT to have non-hetero characters.
--
Blah blah blah, if their sexuality doesn't alter the narrative they can be into fucking goats for all it matters because it never comes up so stop bringing it up.
There are plenty of reasons. Ranging from financial (why publishers don't usually want to delve into it) and wanting to avoid controversy, to not wanting it if it's irrelevant to whatever you're trying to say.
You know what? There's no reason to not have non-hetero characters in the same way there's no reason to not have a character who really likes collecting stamps, or hates loud music, or is a diabetic, or is composed entirely of freon. Now while I'm pretty sure there's a terrible old game somewhere where you play as a diabetic superhero, most games don't have these things. Are diabetics somehow lessened because they don't show up? Are stamp collectors disenfranchised because we don't see them walking hand-in-hand as they collect every stamp they find? I bet gays show up more often than diabetics or stamp collectors, and certainly more than diabetic stamp collectors composed entirely of freon, right?
I want gays to have mainstream acceptance. I really, really do. But when Toni Morrison was writing Beloved, do you think this ever happened?
"ARE YOU INCLUDING HOMOSEXUAL CHARACTERS?"
"No, it's not really relevant to--"
"YOU KNOW THERE'S NO GOOD REASON NOT TO."
The very good reason and that's that it isn't relevant and changes what you're trying to say. Beloved - an extremely good book, by the way - wasn't about that. And there wasn't any goat-fucking I caught, but there was cow-fucking in that book.
So what if a writer don't want their narrative to be changed because Incenjuar told them 'there's no good reason to not have non-hetero characters'? Because seriously, Incenj, there are plenty of reasons to not have non-hetero characters if it's not relevant in some way to what you're trying to say, even before you get into what the publishers or certain "family" organizations might think of it. Beloved wasn't about homosexuality. It had nothing to do with it. So there were no prominent gay characters - in fact, I'm almost positive there weren't any at all, not even a character that was in for just a page or a paragraph, but it's been a while since I read it and I don't want to say that definitively.
So no, I absolutely do not think game developers to just start inserting gay characters unless it's important somehow, they're trying to reflect the real-world population in some way, or they're trying to make it more acceptable for them to show up. And honestly, while number three there is admirable, it's not going to help make the actual theme stronger, and may in fact weaken it by taking the audience's attention off of it. Personally, I likely wouldn't think of it beyond a split-second "Hey, there are gay people in this game!" reaction, but I'm not the primary audience they're aiming for.
The almighty homophobic dollar decides things in the end.
I should have said "If the population weren't stupid piles of shit, there is no reason..."
But yes, pander away.
Really, the contents of games should be decided by majority vote. Minorities can go make their own games.
It will be slightly different from every other game you play?
I mean, why should a certain character have black hair? Isn't blonde okay for all of them? It doesn't really matter to the gameplay— I mean, it's not like you're going to be sewing their scalps into your clothing in a little pattern-matching minigame, or anything.
To argue that gay characters aren't going to poorly effect a narrative when included without much prior thought but just because "oh hey, we need some more gays. Barry! MORE GAYS!" gets you Sex in the City and the portrayal of gay men as handbags for "self-assertive women". Of course the show did try and succeeded in telling interesting stories about those men, but far too often they were there because the writers needed a neutral character for a main character to talk to.
Conversely I also think it's a bit ignorant to argue that there wasn't a point to the gay chancellor in DX:IW (who sadly disappears if you play as a female character) because he did add to the diversity of the area and the overall theme of the WTO Enclaves - they were supposed to be socially progressive but economically regulated environments. It made sense, and it was used decently and his sexuality was shown in a context where it fitted.
This doesn't however mean, that it usually makes sense in games to set out and try and include characters who are specifically gay - because normally dealing with their sexuality just doesn't make sense in the context.
It's all contextual, because it all is about how the narrative is going to be received. There is a large case that if you are building a world as you are in games more and more these days rather then telling a story that gay characters should be included because it is simply relevant to any human-like society that they will exist, but until the day that homosexuality is neutrally received in our own societal context I wouldn't expect to see more gay characters in narratives - and even then, I wouldn't especially expect it until it is openly visible enough in our own society that a (likely to be heterosexual) writer/composter/artist feels they can incorporate it naturally. We draw on our own experiences and all that.
Hell, to an extent that's why I think Valve's philosophy of never having Gordan speak was actually the best idea ever. You pretty much decide for yourself how Gordan reacts to the various characters.
Ellison and several posters in this thread seem to be saying that a minority character's role in the story must be centralized around their minority status. A character should only be black if his role in the story is, in some way, the role of The Black Guy; a black guy cannot simply have a role in the narrative in which his race is incidental or immaterial. Likewise if the character is gay, or a woman. According to this line of thinking, the Straight White Man is the default for any character, unless that character's role in the story revolves around race, gender, or sexuality. Unsurprisingly, this line of thinking is most common among straight white men, although non-white people will often make an exception for race and women will often make an exception for gender.
I'm not talking so much about the protagonist here. But since we're on that, I'm not sure it's a massive leap. I don't usually wind up agreeing with a lot of the choices my characters make.
Male, too!
Straight is the default in real life. The majority of people, by a hell of alot, are heterosexual.
For white and male? Well, if your a white male, your default is .... white male. And let's be honest, I think we can all agree that it's likely that white men make up a staggeringly large percentage of game designers.
Majority ≠ default. And it sounds a bit like you're making excuses for lazy ethnocentricism. Just because people are predisposed to their own gender, race, or sexual orientation doesn't mean we should just forget it and hope for more minority representation in game development.
I throw my chips with whomever mentioned that pioneering roles for diversity are often two-dimensional, stereotypical, and maybe even offensive. If topics are avoided through the fear that they'll be done poorly or received poorly then we'll continue to go nowhere.
Now, ideally it wouldn't work like this, but in most books, talking about someone without mentioning their race is meant to imply that they're white (unless context dictates otherwise; i.e. you shouldn't really have to say that a slave on a Virginia plantation was black), while if they're black (except where context makes it clear) they're usually called "black." Ideally, if race isn't a factor, it should never be brought up at all. If race is a factor, it should be stated for everyone. But in the US we assume everyone's white. Anyone have that link for that online game where they charged extra to make your character black because it was an additional feature?
Sexuality is much easier to tell from context if it becomes an issue. I mean, you can have a white guy living in what is considered a "black" area by the general public, like Harlem, but you can't have a gay dude who sleeps with women (in the vast majority of situations, anyway). Bisexuals are trickier, but if sexuality is important enough to be a theme, you probably shouldn't have to state it explicitly.
Gender... well, the biased default is considered male, even though there are more women than men, which means a lot of times males will take up a large majority of the prominent roles due to bias. But other than that it's generally really freaking easy to tell if someone's a man or a women because we have different pronouns for the different genders. You could avoid the gender-based pronouns and make it ambiguous by either referring to them by name alone or making up your own pronoun, but the first idea is awkward and the second is annoying (I don't like when someone makes up any word and uses it like every other damn sentence).
The difference with sexuality here, though, because we don't live in an ideal world, is that sexuality is treated differently. Make your characters whatever race you want! No one but the KKK will bat an eye. Same thing with gender, for the most part - there's still some stigma attached to extremely dominant, aggressive assertive females and extremely submissive, passive males. Sexuality though is such a hot-button political issue that it's going to be virtually impossible to bring up homosexuals without their very presence calling attention. Again, that doesn't mean gays shouldn't be in games - and in fact, the best way to get this cleared over time is to include them more often - but one should be aware that it will take attention off of something that is thematically more important (unless, again, homosexuality is dealt with thematically, which is the Best Case Scenario).
Like has been stated, there's something of a difference between "you play this guy" and "you play this gay guy" because the difference is almost entirely mental. People can often imagine walking around with a different skin color, appearance, physique etc. But walking around with a different mental state? It's possible, but not easy. Try as I might I just can't be needlessly malevolent - my maxiKill run idea for Deus Ex failed because I just couldn't deal with executing innocent people.
Likewise, it would definitely throw me out of a game somewhat to be told I'm supposed to imagine I'm gay. Well, ok, but that changes nothing except that I have difficulty understanding the characters motivations on an emotive level because being heterosexual I'm more or less incapable of imagining a romantic attraction to someone of the same gender.
Now, of course this is very much a 'me' centered statement, but bear in mind when you're producing something you want to push that 'me' button as many times as possible. And to do that, that audience just happens to be heterosexual.
I see what you're saying, and I realize that developers do need to employ a certain amount of pragmatism in creating for a broad audience. Honest question though: is it really that hard to put yourself in the shoes of someone attracted to a member of the same sex? What if your character is a woman interested in a man? If you can play along with countless heterosexual romances involving NPC's who probably don't represent your ideal real life mate, shouldn't it be a short step to suspend disbelief that that romance involves two men or two women?
I don't expect to get aroused when my character does, much in the same way that I don't expect to get hurt when my character does. In terms of immersion... well, if I can roleplay as a psychopathic murderer, I bet I can roleplay as someone who happens to likes penis.
Most games that would lock you into playing as a homosexual character probably wouldn't be very immersive anyway. It would be like a JRPG; the choice has already been made for you. I mean, it's possible to make some really open-ended game where you're locked into being homosexual (much like in many open-ended games you're locked into be a heterosexual), but given the current market... not likely.