Are there going to be surnames ( I assume so).
Are pairing, marriages going to be allowed, ie. where two characters have the same surname. (I know this existed in EQ1 and Vanguard)
Genders, how about gender-neutral? Or just male, female still? Is VR going try and be more LGBT friendly than every other MMO in existence? :)
And how about Race based PVP servers? I know EQ1 had those in the past. I think it was humans, halflings, erudites vs. ogre, orc, DE, vs. gnomes, dwarves, etc.
There will be surnames.
Don't try to make it more than a game. There is no reason to bring up sensitive issues such as religion, politics, gender equality etc. Its a game.
I imagine that VR may avoid putting in mechanical effects of in game marriage as it currently has no real effect on game play and might distract from launching a good game. That being said in-game marriage is something that has been a part of other games and the concept of progeny is at least nominally in that direction of thought. When and if VR puts in something like marriage they will consider the choice carefully based on what is best for the game and the community, (and may possibly consider local/state/national laws).
I personally think it would be fun to marry my wife in game as well, especially if it meant we gained anything like shared inventory or housing controls, but as she has stated she will only make male avatars I’m in a kinda funny situation.
zewtastic said:Thats enough from you Philo.
I am sure there are some people that play games that would like some more inclusion. Apparently you are defining your games a bit more pruriently.
One of the reasons I ask is I have noticed a trans player streaming a lot of EQ1 on twitch.
We should all just want the game to be as good as possible and minimize conflicts and speedbumps.
I am all for inclusion but this isn't really the place for this type of discussion. Gender equality and LGBTQ conversations pretty much fall under the following forum rules imho:
Off-Limit Topics/Replies - Do not post any topics/replies containing the following:
3) Religious, political, and other “prone to huge arguments” threads
You definitely know how to stir the pot Zew. It was just a week or 2 back that you had posts deleted...and that is super rare on these forums. Kils is usually good about letting us speak our mind and only doing that when absolutely necessary.
Let's take it easy and discuss game mechanics instead of subjects that might ruffle someone's feathers.
philo said:zewtastic said:Thats enough from you Philo.
I am sure there are some people that play games that would like some more inclusion. Apparently you are defining your games a bit more pruriently.
One of the reasons I ask is I have noticed a trans player streaming a lot of EQ1 on twitch.
We should all just want the game to be as good as possible and minimize conflicts and speedbumps.
I am all for inclusion but this isn't really the place for this type of discussion. Gender equality and LGBTQ conversations pretty much fall under the following forum rules imho:
Off-Limit Topics/Replies - Do not post any topics/replies containing the following:
3) Religious, political, and other “prone to huge arguments” threads
You definitely know how to stir the pot Zew. It was just a week or 2 back that you had posts deleted...and that is super rare on these forums. Kils is usually good about letting us speak our mind and only doing that when absolutely necessary. Let's take it easy and discuss game mechanics instead of subjects that might ruffle someones feathers.
Y'know, while I DO agree with the general sentiment of your post, Philo - I also have to question one point. If this isn't the time to, as you say, "ruffle feathers", then when is?
I mean, look, we all care about game mechanics and functionality. But many, many, many people also care about the exact thing(s) that Zewtastic has brought up. Surely it would be a good idea to have a place for them to let their concerns also be known. And if that place isn't here ...then where is it? And when is it? If they put something like that on the FAQ, and leave it open ended without further information, I think it's reasonable to expect people to question it. And maybe not to question the topics, but to question when and where those topics CAN be brought up. Or to question if those topics are simply being tabled and swept under the rug indefinitely, as if the company in question is just covering their eyes and hoping it goes away.
Maybe it would be a good idea for VR to leave an e-mail address or something nearby, on the FAQ. A place where those who DO have concerns that might ruffle feathers could go.
My thought is that a video game forum is not the appropriate place for that discussion ever. I think that is somewhat backed up by the forum guidelines, but it is Kils call.
Maybe private feedback for sensitive subjects could be an option? I highly doubt that VR wants to take a stance on sensitive subjects such as politics, religion or LGBTQ equality.
Like Iksar mentioned, that seems like more of a personal or roleplay choice.
I just don't see how including things like that in character creation is important. You are picking the biological sex of a character, either A or B, everything else is psychological and has no visual or stat based representation in character creation. I think Philo is right here in that it's an arguement of gender/identity politics and a hot button issue for some in the real world.
Iksar said:I just don't see how including things like that in character creation is important. You are picking the biological sex of a character, either A or B, everything else is psychological and has no visual or stat based representation in character creation.
Be careful there Iks. I know you are trying to be constructive but not everyone will agree with:
the biological sex of a character, either A or B, everything else is psychological
That is exactly the type of conversation that should be avoided on a video game forum imo.
philo said:There will be surnames.
Don't try to make it more than a game. There is no reason to bring up sensitive issues such as religion, politics, gender equality etc. Its a game.
The marriage issue is sailing near to a tender subject and that should probably simply be role-played and not involve a game mechanic. Being able to pick the same surname should probably just be a 'family' thing covering people who want to be married, siblings or whatever the reason.
As for gender assignment, I've known RPGs that had gender neutral dwarves. At least, you couldn't pick a gender and the explanation was you wouldn't know if they were male or female just by looking anyway.
I'm pretty sure I've seen gender neutral races in other fantasy/sci-fi RPGs too.
Kilsin did just make a thread about people playing the opposite gender in RPGs. It's hardly a taboo subject and I doubt there would be arguments like there are caused by religeon and politics.
In my answer in Kilsin's thread I had to say I think gender should pretty much be irrelevant when it comes to an RPG. It usually is, actually. In my experience role-players are very inclusive types. When you identify with Ogres and Elves, gender is a secondary consideration most of the time.
What would be the harm in someone selecting 'neutral' or 'unspecified' instead of male/female? I could understand the devs not wanting to increase development effort by adding some kind of 'neutral' body type, but assuming picking male or female body type with some customisation of it was possible, what's the problem?
I think it would be fair to steer clear of sexual preferences, sure - that's not really relevant, but gender? *shrug* Why not?
Let's make sure we are addressing the original topic dispo. This was part of the question:
Is VR going try and be more LGBT friendly than every other MMO in existence? :)
That is the conversation that should be avoided. Let's not smooth it over by changing the subject or talking around it.
I have to disagree with the idea that these conversations have no place in a video game's forum. What makes MMO's or video games different from other forms of entertainment? Why is it acceptable to advocate inclusion in television, movies, toys, etc - but not in video games?
That's just a philosophical question. But the main thing to keep in mind is that not everyone agrees that it has no place in video games. GamerGate nonsense aside, Google equal representation in video games, or gender, or anything that could ruffle feathers in Video games, and you'll see plenty of people simply don't agree with that. I think that's enough to at least include it in the discussion.
Frankly, I don't personally care either way. What tends to rub me the wrong way, however, isn't so much the direction video games go, as it is the sometimes outright refusal to even discuss it. It's important to people - just as important as fast travel, death penalty, and phat lewts are to others - but because some of the ideas and discussions make people uncomfortable, it becomes too volatile to even discuss? That bums me out.
Sure, we can compartmentalize these kinds of discussions. Since this forum is technically a "developer forum", I think it's fair to keep ideas of a political or ethical nature out, but that doesn't mean the discussion needs to NEVER happen. It should just happen somewhere else.
Iksar said:I just don't see how including things like that in character creation is important. You are picking the biological sex of a character, either A or B, everything else is psychological and has no visual or stat based representation in character creation. I think Philo is right here in that it's an arguement of gender/identity politics and a hot button issue for some in the real world.
What makes anything in character creation important, with the exception of stats and those details that effect gameplay? Why would choosing eye color or hair style be more important? And if it's not more important, why not discuss what else could be included? I think it's unfair to arbitrarily decide what is important, and what isn't.
Edit: Fully aware I'm skirting on the edges of breaking forum rules. Feel free to delete.
Tralyan said:I have to disagree with the idea that these conversations have no place in a video game's forum. What makes MMO's or video games different from other forms of entertainment? Why is it acceptable to advocate inclusion in television, movies, toys, etc - but not in video games?
That's just a philosophical question. But the main thing to keep in mind is that not everyone agrees that it has no place in video games. GamerGate nonsense aside, Google equal representation in video games, or gender, or anything that could ruffle feathers in Video games, and you'll see plenty of people simply don't agree with that. I think that's enough to at least include it in the discussion.
Frankly, I don't personally care either way. What tends to rub me the wrong way, however, isn't so much the direction video games go, as it is the sometimes outright refusal to even discuss it. It's important to people - just as important as fast travel, death penalty, and phat lewts are to others - but because some of the ideas and discussions make people uncomfortable, it becomes too volatile to even discuss? That bums me out.
Sure, we can compartmentalize these kinds of discussions. Since this forum is technically a "developer forum", I think it's fair to keep ideas of a political or ethical nature out, but that doesn't mean the discussion needs to NEVER happen. It should just happen somewhere else.
Edit: Fully aware I'm skirting on the edges of breaking forum rules. Feel free to delete.
I have to leave so I won't respond after this...
What makes MMO's or video games different from other forms of entertainment? Why is it acceptable to advocate inclusion in television, movies, toys, etc - but not in video games?
It is highly avoided in the media. Sure it is becoming more common in the last decade or 2, but if you think inclusion of Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals,Transgender and Queer people are openly discussed "in television, movies, toys, etc", I'm wondering what alternate universe you live in? That has a long way to go.
I'm going to see a movie. I'll check this thread after.
philo said:I have to leave so I won't respond after this...
What makes MMO's or video games different from other forms of entertainment? Why is it acceptable to advocate inclusion in television, movies, toys, etc - but not in video games?
It is highly avoided in the media. Sure it is becoming more common in the last decade or 2, but if you think inclusion of Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals,Transgender and Queer people are openly discussed "in television, movies, toys, etc", I'm wondering what alternate universe you live in? That has a long way to go.
I'm going to see a movie. I'll check this thread after.
I disagree. We've had sitcoms with openly gay men and women, movies that included a transgender character (though some were used as a punchline). There are news and headlines that talk about the sudden upsurge in including strong female characters in movies like the Avengers, not to mention racial discussions a la Black Panther. Sure, there is still a large group of people that disagree with what they consider unnecessary political correctness, but it's still talked about. It's still argued.
But when people even try to talk about these things on video games, it gets shut down as being "too volatile". And, y'know, I guess it is. Nerds are some angry folk. I mean, look at the death threats sent to Anita Sarkeesian (sp?) for not wanting so much cleavage showing. I can only imagine what would happen to someone who openly and loudly advocated gay/lesbian and trans representation. Disagreeing with something is fine, but shutting down or being aggressive like what happens with video games? That's not so great.
It's not that I don't agree that maybe these forums aren't the place to talk about it. What I don't agree with is what LOOKS like an attempt to just hide from the conversation completely. I mean, give an e-mail address for those who would like to express concern, at least. I wouldn't be one of them, because like I said, I can't really be fussed - but to say these things are less important just because they're less important to me or you? I think that's a dangerously arrogant stance to take on anything. Talking about it, or the addition of these features, doesn't diminish my gaming experience at all - and it could improve many others. Seems like something to talk about.
I don't think anyone would want to hide from this discussion - it's more of a "what's the point?" Everyone for the most part is going to be steadfast in their beliefs. It's much like rehashing the death penalty at this point. I'm perfectly ok with never discussing religion, politics, hot topics etc. on these forums - mainly because my opinion is always right. Haha.. just kidding.... maybe....
Anyway, back on topic - I'm sure surnames will exist, and marriages/unions, etc. And, I'd also wager if there's enough interest and subscriptions, there will be many different variations of PvP, RP, and PvE servers.
Now, for the LBGT portion. I don't think VR needs an official stance, or needs to modify the game in any significant way. I believe the built-in mechanics will suffice.
I don't forsee anyone who is LBGT having issues in game. In a game world, versus real life, the person has the ability to choose their gender at launch, versus being born as a male/female without choice. So, if a person has an issue after the fact, /reroll.
If it's because a person wants a more androgenous character - pick a dwarf female with a beard (joking), but realistically, you could have the standard male/female choice, or just have gender like every other character feature a toggleable slider where the character will look more or less androgenous. No idea if VR is implementing this, but I'm sure even with the standard sliding features you could make a character appear more androgenous.
As far as being LBGT friendly, I think that should be up to the player's roleplay status anyway. I highly doubt there's going to be any issue if two characters are role-playing a non-traditional couple in game.
And, as a final resort, if there's some major issue, you could always /petition a GM.
Raidan said:As far as being LBGT friendly, I think that should be up to the player's roleplay status anyway. I highly doubt there's going to be any issue if two characters are role-playing a non-traditional couple in game.
And, as a final resort, if there's some major issue, you could always /petition a GM.
I agree with most of this with a caveat. In game weddings, as an example. If this isn't something handled in any way by the GM's, and was purely a function of roleplaying, then sure. No need to delve into it deeper.
If there was, however, a feature within Pantheon specifically for in-game weddings, it would be nice if LGBT was represented fairly. If Frank petitions to share a surname with Lucy, and it got approved - but George's petition to share a surname with Charles was denied - that would rightfully make some folks upset.
As far as character creation and wanting to make your character look more androgynous, I don't think anyone is arguing that there needs to be a "Androgynous" button. As long as VR has robust sliders, and characters can be manipulated to appear however you want (within reason. I don't want to see a bunch of bobble heads running around), then I don't see the problem with that. That's what inclusion is all about - not overtly pointing out differences as much as just allowing for those differences to be present, and accepting them.
Raidan said:I don't think anyone would want to hide from this discussion - it's more of a "what's the point?" Everyone for the most part is going to be steadfast in their beliefs. It's much like rehashing the death penalty at this point. I'm perfectly ok with never discussing religion, politics, hot topics etc. on these forums
As far as being LBGT friendly, I think that should be up to the player's roleplay status anyway. I highly doubt there's going to be any issue if two characters are role-playing a non-traditional couple in game.
Pretty much this. I don't see any issues with the LGBT community with having male/female options.
Terminus is a land filled with hundreds, even thousands of races and cultures. Our world is very naturally diverse and inclusive. We will have surnames as previously mentioned but as for marriage and a natural gender, that is something for the creative and design teams to decide on while taking into consideration game lore, itemization, character models, skills etc. so far we have male and female characters and classes without gender locking.
Please don't make this into something it isn't, we do not need social crusades being started on our official game forums as this is a high fantasy game being created by people who believe in equality and diversity, we are a company that is tolerant of constructive viewpoints and opinions but we have to draw the line when real-life social issues creep into our official high fantasy game forums.
There will be no race-based servers of any kind that I am aware of.
Visionary Realms is diverse and inclusive. Terminus is diverse and inclusive. It is our job to entertain and that is what we intend to do. :)
Thanks Kilsin.
I could see an issue if VR put weddings in the game and only allowed males to marry females (and vice versa). The chance of them doing that is ...remote.
Would you like them to include an asterisk on the character selection screen and a footnote. "For purposes of Pantheon male means a person that gives the superficial visual appearance traditionally associated with males in their culture. No implication is intended that the person thinks of themself as a male as of the date of creation or any other time. No implication is given that their culture is wise or enlightened when it comes to gender determination. All cultures are fictitious and do not represent the culture of anyone playing the game. No player's gender selection on this screen implies or represents anything about their personal orientation or lack of orientation."
philo said:Let's make sure we are addressing the original topic dispo. This was part of the question:
Is VR going try and be more LGBT friendly than every other MMO in existence? :)
That is the conversation that should be avoided. Let's not smooth it over by changing the subject or talking around it.
That was part of it. Let's not mis-represent by cherry picking either.
The original quote was: -
"Genders, how about gender-neutral? Or just male, female still? Is VR going try and be more LGBT friendly than every other MMO in existence? :)"
Personally I read that as being interested in a gender neutral option, as that would be more LGBT friendly, not suggesting Pantheon should support or reflect LGBT sexuality.
You may have jumped straight to LGBT as the focus, personally I simply saw it as a frivolous addendum, especially given the smiley.
Picking male or female is just part of character creation.
I went and looked for that gender neutral dwarf. It's actually LOTRO. Yeah, that obscure little game. Not an overt LGBTQ+ or otherwise mention in sight, but gender neutral all the same, which might well give LGBTQ+ players a warm glowy 'included' feeling :)
Some RPG lore says dwarves are neither male nor female and bud from rocks...
Look, yes, I agree that sexuality isn't a necessary discussion here. I made that clear in my earlier post. I guess some people are triggered more easily by certain issues.
That was the part that obviously wasn't going to receive a direct response from VR. That is why it was pointed out. It was the part that was in question that, as Kils put it, could turn this into a "social justice crusade".
I got quoted below before I could edit my typos...
philo said:That was the part the obviously wasn't going to receive a direct response from VR. That is why it was pointed out. It was the part that in question that, as Kils put it, could turn this into a "social justice crusade"
Good thing we're all grown-ups and no one over-reacted then.