FE16 Same-Sex Relationship Discussion

[NegativeExponents-]

I was thinking of the NoA Twitter to voice our concerns but I guess if you're confident in your Japanese then NoJ might be better since they probably value Japanese feedback more.

They definitely do listen to feedback on social media though since Mario Maker 2 had that whole fuss about the online and they decided to fix it.

Edited July 18, 2019 by NegativeExponents-

[Owain Dark]

I can understand why Linhardt and Alois. But i think people would complain way less, if theyd switch Gilbert with a Student, doesnt matter if itd be Claude, Raphael, Fernand, Ashe or Iggy, as examples. 

[Etrurian emperor]

22 minutes ago, Owain Dark said:

I can understand why Linhardt and Alois. But i think people would complain way less, if theyd switch Gilbert with a Student, doesnt matter if itd be Claude, Raphael, Fernand, Ashe or Iggy, as examples. 

I think it would have been best if Gilbert was replaced by someone like Sylvain or Dedue.

That way you get a more broad range of guys. You then get the skinny girly kind of guy in Linhard, the though muscled young guy in Dedue or Sylvain and then the mature guy with facial guy in Alois. That way fans of every stripe get someone that caters to their tastes. 

[Owain Dark]

7 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I think it would have been best if Gilbert was replaced by someone like Sylvain or Dedue.

That way you get a more broad range of guys. You then get the skinny girly kind of guy in Linhard, the though muscled young guy in Dedue or Sylvain and then the mature guy with facial guy in Alois. That way fans of every stripe get someone that caters to their tastes. 

Yeah,  tbh i only see complaints because Gilbert. Lets all hope for a support patch on the m!m house

[Lord of Riva]

1 hour ago, Owain Dark said:

I can understand why Linhardt and Alois. But i think people would complain way less, if theyd switch Gilbert with a Student, doesnt matter if itd be Claude, Raphael, Fernand, Ashe or Iggy, as examples. 

But here is the thing, I really Like Gilbert as a choice. Linhardt is a complete no-no and Alois is a mixed bag (that mustache is just a bit too ridiculous, and he has such a Round face...) for me. (EDIT: in fact Dedue would most likely be the only other option i would be interested in...)

Regardless of what is said, this is simply a matter of perception. I do not like, in the least, feminine men (Claude is someone I would not touch with a ten foot pole for example) when it comes to attraction. It's fine if you think differently but you (as in the people who are outraged about this) know people with different taste exist, right?

A really wierd kind of "diversity" people are advocating for here.

Edited July 18, 2019 by Lord of Riva

[zuibangde]

26 minutes ago, Lord of Riva said:

But here is the thing, I really Like Gilbert as a choice. Linhardt is a complete no-no and Alois is a mixed bag (that mustache is just a bit too ridiculous, and he has such a Round face...) for me. (EDIT: in fact Dedue would most likely be the only other option i would be interested in...)

Regardless of what is said, this is simply a matter of perception. I do not like, in the least, feminine men (Claude is someone I would not touch with a ten foot pole for example) when it comes to attraction. It's fine if you think differently but you (as in the people who are outraged about this) know people with different taste exist, right?

 A really wierd kind of "diversity" people are advocating for here.

I think people have said that Alois and Gilbert have very similar backgrounds and fulfils the same archetype. Their age is high enough to be Byleth's dad, both have a child, both occupy the same 'body' type. I'm glad that you prefer Gilbert the most out of the three but the truth is that Alois and Gilbert are fulfilling very similar archetypes. 

The 'diversity' people are advocating for is to include an option that is more young and masculine. There are already fewer mlm options (for no apparent reason), it's not unreasonable to have the 3 options represent 3 different archetypes. Like I've said, most of the male characters in the game fall under 'young and masculine' yet none of them is an option. It's almost like IS made a conscious effort to not choose them when deciding which characters to make bi. 

[Lord of Riva]

1 minute ago, zuibangde said:

There are already fewer mlm options (for no apparent reason), it's not unreasonable to have the 3 options represent 3 different archetypes. 

And this Archetype is construed on the few informations we have about the characters? Alois and Gilbert could be worlds apart from each other, how alois looks way older than byleth is another headscratcher for me.

As far as i can tell those demands would only be fullfilled if every character in the list would be same sex eligible and that would absolutely detract from their character.

I would rather understand annoyance about all of them bisexual instead of solely same-sex viable, because that is actually pretty rare in comparison and also potentially detracts from the character.

Well I guess we should be happy, the game looks seemingly so good that people complain about things that are better than ever.

[Owain Dark]

Yeah, Alois and Gilbert are the same "daddy archetype", but Alois is still okay for his are (45), whereas Gilbert is probably around 55. And to me personally, Alois is a better option than Gilbert, cuz of his personality. The thing with Gilbert is, you can marry him AND his daughter, Annette. That would causes some serious family war imo lol 

[zuibangde]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

 Advanced issues found

▲

 

 

8

4 minutes ago, Lord of Riva said:

And this Archetype is construed on the few informations we have about the characters? Alois and Gilbert could be worlds apart from each other, how alois looks way older than byleth is another headscratcher for me.

 As far as i can tell those demands would only be fullfilled if every character in the list would be same sex eligible and that would absolutely detract from their character.

I would rather understand annoyance about all of them bisexual instead of solely same-sex viable, because that is actually pretty rare in comparison and also potentially detracts from the character.

Well I guess we should be happy, the game looks seemingly so good that people complain about things that are better than ever.

I think archetypes are used to generalize characters and put them into broad 'typical' groups and the information used to put these people into the archetypes is often pretty basic/shallow. Characters can fall under multiple archetypes and characters within the same archetypes can have different personalities. I'd argue that Alois and Gilbert would be falling under overlapping archetypes. Most notably, the 'oyaji' archetype because they're literal dads, have a similar body type and are similar in age (old). One can argue that Alois also borders on bara but there's a much better representation of what bara is in Raphael. Alois may not look that old but by the time you can romance him (post skip), he will be 51 years old.

Regardless, the point of why people are upset isn't really what archetypes Gilbert/Alois fulfils but what's missing (which is pretty obvious by now so I won't keep repeating it).

I think people should be happy about the game as it is heading towards a positive direction. However, I don't think it's that hard to understand why people are upset about the mlm options and people can be happy about a game and be critical of specifics at the same time.

[Lord of Riva]

16 minutes ago, Owain Dark said:

The thing with Gilbert is, you can marry him AND his daughter, Annette. That would causes some serious family war imo lol 

Well not at the same time XD

I would think that this could be a very interesting story, not that I imagine it being explored.

I do understand why people want different people as options, i really do. I can imagine that a quite a few people hated the scarlet situation in revelations as well but at the same time (not that this specific situation is a good example story wise... ) it can be something that is Part of a Story.

And that is fine, even voicing that they would rather have X or Y is. The line imho should however be drawn when people claim there is "problematic representation" it being "hamfisted" , the "choices being stereotyped" etc.

At some point there needs to be freedom to actually be creative and that means that creators need to be able to design things they want to design and even potentially being offended because one does not like the depiciton. And really whoever thinks it would be okay to just change option A to option B just because they think option A is shit argues pretty selfish.

I guess I'm out of argument here for now, we will see how it actually turns out, just remember that quantity does not mean quality (look at the fates support in general, not the same sex options)

Edited July 18, 2019 by Lord of Riva

[lambiprim]

2 hours ago, Lord of Riva said:

I do understand why people want different people as options, i really do. I can imagine that a quite a few people hated the scarlet situation in revelations as well but at the same time (not that this specific situation is a good example story wise... ) it can be something that is Part of a Story.

read up above what zuibangde said, that should be reason enough. Byleth will still be in their mid 20's after the timeskip while BOTH Alois and Gilbert will be 50+ years old. For someone in the same age group as Blythe and the students, this is NOT something I'd be interested in. Which, the games target audience are TEENS anyways. What teenager wants to marry someone in their 50's? It is great that you don't see a problem with it, but guess what, you ARE NOT the target audience.

[Lord of Riva]

26 minutes ago, lambiprim said:

It is great that you don't see a problem with it, but guess what, you ARE NOT the target audience.

That font size is a bit much don't you think.

From what i can gather it is actually you who is not the target audience, otherwise these things would not have been done this way, not that it matters you do complain anyways (and whatever, i am not trying to stop you).

EDIT: also FE is a old Franchise, assuming that most players are teens is kind of ridiculous, I am admittedly not.

Edited July 18, 2019 by Lord of Riva

[lambiprim]

11 minutes ago, Lord of Riva said:

That font size is a bit much don't you think.

font size means nothing. if you have a problem with it, deal with it or don't read my responses.

17 minutes ago, Lord of Riva said:

From what i can gather it is actually you who is not the target audience, otherwise these things would not have been done this way, not that it matters you do complain anyways (and whatever, i am not trying to stop you).

I'm aware I'm not, but it seems you might believe you are? neither of us are, which is why I'm looking at what a younger me would've liked, and guess what? It's not 50 year old men.

The only time I see younger men liking older men is when the older men proposition them for money. And i see that quite a lot.

The reason these things were done with way is most likely because someone on the staff wanted to portray the average gay man as a homewrecker. it wouldn't be the first time a developer had had a grudge against a people group and wanted to share their beliefs in their game. Especially in such a small way that most wouldn't notice. their countries culture doesn't agree with homosexuality anyways. unless it's used as a fetish for members of the opposite gender. 

13 minutes ago, Lord of Riva said:

EDIT: also FE is a old Franchise, assuming that most players are teens is kind of ridiculous, I am admittedly not.

When did i say most players are teens? i know how old the game is, you're "putting words in my mouth". Teens don't have to be the primary demographic playing a game to be it's target audience. They just have to be the primary demographic the company is targeting.

[Stage7_4]

At this point Riva I have no idea what point you're trying to make, other than being contrarian and argumentative just because and defending the fact that you like Gilbert as a romance option (which is not under fire).

Whether or not you personally are okay with a 20+ year age gap, as evident of this board and many others is that a large majority of people have a problem with it. And it's not something you can really challenge nor argue, we all have a right to be upset about this and criticize IS for it.

The fact that this Fire Emblem game's primary target audience is teenagers isn't even a point of contention, that's just business facts. Sure they want the money of older fans too but the eye is always on the prize (the 13 to 19 age demographic). So a teenage queer male playing this game and realizing that their only true mlm option is playing into a feminine boy stereotype while wlw gets at least three good options including a main protagonist (eliminating Sothis and Rhea just to be fair about age gaps) and that heterosexuals can romance the entire male or female student body can't help but feel IS and Nintendo has excluded them.

[Lord of Riva]

20 minutes ago, Stage7_4 said:

At this point Riva I have no idea what point you're trying to make

But I said it multiple times by now.

Quote

Whether or not you personally are okay with a 20+ year age gap

It is as "personally" relevant as what you guys here say, there is absolutely no reason why any argumentation here is any less "personal" than what I am saying.

However what is said is something different, arguing about representation, stereotypes, afterthoughts has absolutely no merit when the actual arguments are "I just want specific supports", worse even is calling developers homophobic because you do not like certain supports , that is just horrible.

There is no Objective problem here, regardless of the framing. Having an opinion is naturally fine though, but if that is what we are talking about i do not see what is wrong with voicing mine?

I also argue for creative Freedom, a freedom that can only be explored if we do not demand that everything is catered to out own preferences. It is one thing to ignore your audience completely, another if this audience forces content that may not be supported by the actual design (for whatever reasons, not only "muh, homophobia")

I fail to see how my postings are hard to understand, you may disagree, fine, but arguing to not see the point i make?

 

 

To the other person:

Quote

I'm aware I'm not, but it seems you might believe you are? neither of us are

I guess i should heed your advice and just do not read your posts, after the writing style and the content of this post im neither sure if you aren't going to explode on me or if there is any merit here.

I never did argue about the target audience in any way, before you brought it up therefore, no i do not think this is overly relevant your argument was still not conclusive though.

Edited July 18, 2019 by Lord of Riva

[Stage7_4]

If your point is that you don't fundamentally see a problem in the mlm options, on a forum thread predominately about people fundamentally finding a problem with the mlm options (all of which have posted valid and supported arguments at to why this is problematic), then it seems you're against the point of the thread itself and I have to wonder why you're here?

[Lord of Riva]

14 minutes ago, Stage7_4 said:

If your point is that you don't fundamentally see a problem in the mlm options, on a forum thread predominately about people fundamentally finding a problem with the mlm options (all of which have posted valid and supported arguments at to why this is problematic), then it seems you're against the point of the thread itself and I have to wonder why you're here?

That is not what i said.

Not only don't I have a problem with the existing supports I certainly do have a problem with demands to change existing options.

I also have yet to see valid and supported "arguments", what I have seen are valid opinions, which is certainly fine.

There is also the thing with the very harsh criticism of developers, just because one does not like the things they made, calling someone homophobe is not something I take lightly and neither should anyone else.

And why I am here is also easy, this is a Forum, I am interested in the Topic and I want to discuss, i do not see how it can be seen as problematic that i disagree with statements in a discussions, isn't that par for the course? That said, the topic is certainly not "why does Riva say things i do not like" but "Same-Sex Relationships Confirmed: 3 Male and 5 Female" so I will go back to that topic if you don't mind.

Edited July 18, 2019 by Lord of Riva

[Vanil]

It just baffles me at how people legit think the people who are upset and in the minority here. It's been one of the most discussed topics since the info dropped everywhere. While SF is more limiting in who posts, places like Twitter are a good example. These people are the audience the game is being sold to. There is far more people upset than those who are not. And again since I feel like this point is ignored. We don't have to get rid of Alois or Gilbert, but you can't say how this isn't pandering when the f/f options are as it is and the m/m are as it is. You just can't argue the m/m feels more like an afterthought when the f/f has great picks and front line plot related characters as picks. Whether or not the supports turn out good isn't really the issue. If the supports and characters turn out great then that's great. It does come across as them preferring to pander to the men who play as the female MC anyways, while going "Oh yeah we need some M/M supports to shut up those who like it" then following it up with "Dimitri/Claude are the main Lords and what person would let a queer lead them. They might try something on the MC" or whatever excuse straight people tend to invent. Honestly again they should have done something more fair such as: Lord/1 Male/1 Female per house and 3 non-student girls and 2 guys so it would be more even. But ofc being even is too much to ask so let's make it horribly unbalanced and make BE have more options, BL have one option, and GD have none.

[Stage7_4]

But we all have a right to have harsh criticism of the developers and demand better, as myself and many others believe these options (and the lack of options) do display homophobia. Probably not explicitly but an internal prejudice portrayed through stereotypes and lack of representation in comparison to others.

If you don't believe that and refuse to acknowledge the arguments, then frankly you're just plain wrong.

[Lord of Riva]

15 minutes ago, Vanil said:

It just baffles me at how people legit think the people who are upset and in the minority here.

I would assume it's is the minority as the people wanting same sex relationships will be the minority... as this would reflect the actual world.

but nvm that does not really matter, there is a lot of people complaining and thats okay, maybe you will even change things like it happened with Fates. (if that is desirable though is on another page, THEN it will definitely be "hamfisted")

Quote

There is far more people upset than those who are not

Most people are really not invested in any of this, most people simply do not care much about any pre-release stuff at all or FE in general, most people do not use twitter in that capacity either. The active FE community is NOT the majority of purchasers. I am not saying that to devalue your position (or others) but your perception there is simply not correct.

Quote

the m/m feels more like an afterthough

Quote

f/f has great picks

Quote

It does come across as them preferring

Quote

whatever excuse straight people tend to invent

Listen to yourself my friend, this is the bread and butter of the argument here, you feel and you think others are better and you think they prefer and explanations are excuses from straight people.

This is incredibly subjective and I am not faulting you. It can be frustrating if you expect something and get something else but coming to this:

Quote

"Oh yeah we need some M/M supports to shut up those who like it" then following it up with "Dimitri/Claude are the main Lords and what person would let a queer lead them

Ends in full on dismissive and harsh conjecture that has basically nothing to do what has been said, is being said or even what has been thought. Bringing this negativity, baseless, into the discussion is rather harmful and hateful even.

EDIT:

Quote

 

But we all have a right to have harsh criticism of the developers and demand better, as myself and many others believe these options (and the lack of options) do display homophobia. Probably not explicitly but an internal prejudice portrayed through stereotypes and lack of representation in comparison to others.

If you don't believe that and refuse to acknowledge the arguments, then frankly you're just plain wrong.

 

Criticism is fine, if harsh criticism is really warranted and helpful to achieve your goals we may disagree upon. Saying something is homophobic has nothing to do with criticism, telling someone is endorsing or doing a criminal offense is far from "criticism"

At what point are you willing to draw a line there?

Edited July 18, 2019 by Lord of Riva

[Stage7_4]

Homophobia is a spectrum of behavior and can leak down into the tiniest of actions, that's why the term micro-aggression and internalized prejudice exist. Someone (or in this case some developer) might not be (as you put it) "criminally" homophobic but through their actions can support a prejudice against the queer community is still homophobia.

Personally I don't think IS nor Nintendo did this intentionally, I honestly think they thought these three options were a boon to the gay community. But you can not intend to do harm and still display homophobia, and the fact that the mlm options play into stereotypes and are very much lacking in comparison to others is homophobic.

But at this point if you're going to dismiss every argument on this board is not valid enough for you, then we are just going to spin in circles.

So let me respond in kind: you're wrong.

[Vanil]

5 minutes ago, Lord of Riva said:

I would assume it's is the minority as the people wanting same sex relationships will be the minority... as this would reflect the actual world.

but nvm that does not really matter, there is a lot of people complaining and thats okay, maybe you will even change things like it happened with Fates. (if that is desirable though is on another page, THEN it will definitely be "hamfisted")

Most people are really not invested in any of this, most people simply do not care much about any pre-release stuff at all or FE in general, most people do not use twitter in that capacity either. The active FE community is NOT the majority of purchasers. I am not saying that to devalue your position (or others) but your perception there is simply not correct.

Listen to yourself my friend, this is the bread and butter of the argument here, you feel and you think others are better and you think they prefer and explanations are excuses from straight people.

This is incredibly subjective and I am not faulting you. It can be frustrating if you expect something and get something else but coming to this:

Ends in full on dismissive and harsh conjecture that has basically nothing to do what has been said, is being said or even what has been thought. Bringing this negativity, baseless, into the discussion is rather harmful and hateful even.

Okay let me clarify, the majority of people actively talking about the game currently. Yes overall it's probably an overall minority but that doesn't change the that a lot of people clearly aren't happy.

My point IS NOT "Wah I hate old men where's my studs" though. It's more that it feels like it's a conscious choice to pick and choose the options as they did. Yeah I don't have video proof of the devs saying that exactly but you can't honestly act like these points are silly.

What exactly do you mean by "never been thought"? There's certainly people on other sites saying stuff like that. It's not dismissive in the slightest. Sure I'll get you the devs probably didn't say that out loud all casually, but the fans against same sex supports existing in the first place are certainly saying that. There has been both people saying they'd cancel their pre order if Claude is an option it isn't.

[zuibangde]

 

 

3

 Advanced issues found

▲

 

 

 

12 minutes ago, Lord of Riva said:

Not only don't I have a problem with the existing supports I certainly do have a problem with demands to change existing options.

I also have yet to see valid and supported "arguments", what I have seen are valid opinions, which is certainly fine.

I'm not sure why you need to create a distinction between 'arguments' and 'opinions'. You literally need an opinion to have an argument. The issue with LGBT representation isn't a natural science or maths where things can be argued through statistics and data. It falls under a variety of fields in social sciences (Sociology, Psychology, History etc) which all have a lot of emotional attachment (which is clearly shown in this thread). Concerning this issue, it is unreasonable to invalidate people's arguments as 'opinions'. 

However, here are some 'facts' about the current state of mlm options we currently know (given the amount of information we have):

There is an unequal amount of wlw and mlm options (for no apparent reason so far). 

Two of the three options are above 50 years old and have established families. 

Claude flirts with both Byleths (pretty aggressively from the screenshots and videos we've seen) and is not available as an mlm option.

There is no mlm option that clearly falls under the 'young and masculine' category (ie Caspar, Dimitri, Sylvain, Raphael, Dedue etc.)

None of the current options is known to be plot important yet (at least not on the level of Edelgard and the two other 'spoiler' options).

There is a total of 13 male students. Only Linhardt is an mlm option.

I may be missing some points, but anyways, whether these points are 'problematic' or not is down to the individual. I'll let you draw your own conclusion but it's a bit disingenuous to say that people just want to 'change existing options' and that they should be grateful for what is presented because it's better than previous games.

[Lord of Riva]

22 minutes ago, Vanil said:

It's more that it feels like it's a conscious choice to pick and choose the options as they did.

I am not saying it is Silly, I am saying it is subjective. And this is also not meant to say it is not valid.

but going from "I think you missed your target Audience here guys, your options are kinda shit" to saying they are homophobic is a stretch, it's not only a logical stretch but one about human decency. How can someone, or in this case a part of a community, go to such an extent. Saying some is homophic should be a definitive and LAST step, not the first one your take as it is a real issue don't you think?

Quote

What exactly do you mean by "never been thought"? 

I meant the devs, i do not Know what others in other places do say. I do not endorse any of those messages though and those messages do not relate in any way to what is actually the case.

 

EDIT:

Quote

I'm not sure why you need to create a distinction between 'arguments' and 'opinions'. 

I am not a native speaker, so my apologies if i use the terms in the wrong context.

What I am saying is that it is wrong to pose opinions as Facts (which has been done multiple times here) when the only reason to do so is because facts can not be argued against, opinions though, even if having the same merit on an argumentative basis can be disagreed upon.

I concur on the listed facts, but not only do these facts incorporate some things we do not know (like plot relevancy) what they actually mean has to be interpreted, which is exactly what I am arguing for. I also never said that the sole issue is that some of the existing ones should be changed but that WAS voiced in this thread and i found that not really agreeable.

I wonder about the last point though quadrupling the amount of choices does not spell homophobia to me, i find that quite disingenious.

EDIT²: ah and sorry i missed the social sciences part, if you still read this. The basis on the social sciences is inherently flawed, as it is based upon feminist circular logic of power vs. opression, which is problematic on so many levels. I am not going to open that can of worms here.

Edited July 18, 2019 by Lord of Riva

[Vanil]

2 minutes ago, Lord of Riva said:

I am not saying it is Silly, I am saying it is subjective. And this is also not meant to say it is not valid.

but going from "I think you missed your target Audience here guys, your options are kinda shit" to saying they are homophobic is a stretch, it's not only a logical stretch but one about human decency. How can someone, or in this case a part of a community, go to such an extent. Saying some is homophic should be a definitive and LAST step, not the first one your take as it is a real issue don't you think?

It comes across as not being valid when you've been completely dismissive and refuse to understand others PoV on the matter.  

I really don't see how it's a stretch to come to that conclusion based off what we know and the clear differences. But if you think it's a stretch then that's fine.