Jump to content
BastienSoul

FE16 Same-Sex Relationship Discussion

Recommended Posts

Sure, only having one MLM romantic interest is absolutely analogous to apartheid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Parrhesia said:

Are people seriously happier with 1M/1F than 1M/3F. Honest to God question, because that seems to be the implication some people are making.

I think some are unfortunately taking their frustration over the lack of m/m supports out on the higher number of f/f supports. Understandable to a degree, but misguided. Hopefully no one actually believes making the f/f options more limited would improve the m/m options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean I'd like to believe that too, homie, but multiple people have chimed in to confirm that, yes, Equal Numbers are all that matters. Which is why Awakening was great with its 0:0, I guess?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are upset about the unequal numbers because there is no reason to make them unequal. 

Awakening had 0:0

Fates had 1:1 

Regardless of the quality of the two options (this is debatable because Niles is popular enough to make it to Warriors), people see it as ‘fair’. Furthermore, the same sex relationships were not expected which is why people see Fates as an improvement (relative to past games).

Three Houses is tricky because it is an improvement but the mlm option makes people suspect whether the increase of wlw options is genuine inclusion or pandering. The logic is that if they truly wanted to be inclusive, mlm options shouldn’t be shafted so badly. And if they were being inclusive, then they’re sending a pretty weird and slightly insulting message with how S ranks of mlm options are being presented.

The line between pandering and representation is so blurred that it will be hard to draw a conclusion. Anyways, the quantity isn’t THE problem but it reflects on a potentially bigger issue. I think the whole thing is simultaneously an improvement but also not an improvement.

 

 

Edited by evoyvoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a tough call. I don't think it's right to harp on the 5 w/w relationships themselves but no matter how you look at it the ratio is kinda screwed up. If it was 3 to 5 like most people originally thought I doubt this would be as large a controversy despite 2 of the alleged options being rather... unorthodox.

To be rather blunt m/m options most likely got screwed out of fear of backlash from the more conservative gamer crowd. Edlegard being bi is just gonna get less crap then having Dimitri and Claude being bi for society based reasons. 

It's still a dumb move considering how much gay shipping stuff is in the FE fandom though. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is not boiling down discrimination to simple arithmetic overly reductionist? Does the measure of how heinous an act of discrimination is scale linearly with the number of people being discriminated against?

From the top-down view, sure, you can argue things are better from a purely statistical viewpoint. But consider the bottom-up view because that's the perspective of the people actually being affected. To the disenfranchised minority, can you simply point at another separate group of disenfranchised people and tell them to be happy because some other group got some concessions? Their own personal situations have not improved even one bit.

Note my intentionally vague wording in my previous post(s). The poster above calling it simultaneously an improvement but not is accurate. Things might not have gotten strictly worse, but I can also see how people can feel patronised by the incessant messaging that they should be satisfied that some progress has made even though that progress doesn't affect them. For that minority, there has yet to be even any indication that things will be getting better, let alone any immediate improvement. Sexuality is a deeply personal topic and thus this issue should be viewed from the prism of the disaffected individual, not from the point of view of some mathematician in the census office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Parrhesia said:

Are people seriously happier with 1M/1F than 1M/3F. Honest to God question, because that seems to be the implication some people are making.

I'm thinking of it as Fates starting everything. Yes it's only 1 to 1 which is problematic in itself but coming from Awakening's 0 it's a big deal. It had equal representation to which I think was fantastic. No favourites and no gay dudes are gross to be found in that game. Now since Three Houses is after Fates it really should be improving upon Fates' ground work. But it's really not doing that. It makes me think that next game is gonna have like 10 female options and 0 for dudes. I'm just really tired of the whole, "it's okay to be gay as long as you like chicks" thing I've been hearing from "allies"

Oh also only 3F in three houses? Did I miss some new info? What the hell happened?

1 hour ago, Florete said:

I think some are unfortunately taking their frustration over the lack of m/m supports out on the higher number of f/f supports. Understandable to a degree, but misguided. Hopefully no one actually believes making the f/f options more limited would improve the m/m options.

For me, I feel like I've been doing an alright job making it clear that I'm not hating on the female pairings. I'm very clearly jealous of course but that doesn't mean I want less of those. That would be terrible. And also super counter productive like seriously could you imagine how stupid it would be if someone complained about the lack of male pairings and demanded less female ones. Like that's rude dude. For me at least I would just like to have the same treatment.

Also I'd like to feel like the world doesn't hate me when I play a video game. Video games are happy time and I'm too busy with student loans to get horribly depressed by something that should be causing me joy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, PersonWithTime said:

Oh also only 3F in three houses? Did I miss some new info? What the hell happened?

The nature of the two non-student F/F supports is up to interpretation, apparently. How much interpretation I'm not sure as I haven't read them myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Parrhesia said:

I mean I'd like to believe that too, homie, but multiple people have chimed in to confirm that, yes, Equal Numbers are all that matters. Which is why Awakening was great with its 0:0, I guess?

I've also seen multiple state that they're not against the number of f/f supports, they just wish the m/m supports had been given the same treatment.

20 minutes ago, PersonWithTime said:

For me, I feel like I've been doing an alright job making it clear that I'm not hating on the female pairings. I'm very clearly jealous of course but that doesn't mean I want less of those. That would be terrible. And also super counter productive like seriously could you imagine how stupid it would be if someone complained about the lack of male pairings and demanded less female ones. Like that's rude dude. For me at least I would just like to have the same treatment.

Also I'd like to feel like the world doesn't hate me when I play a video game. Video games are happy time and I'm too busy with student loans to get horribly depressed by something that should be causing me joy.

Yeah, you've been doing a fine job. Most people who post about it have been plenty fair. It's just a few people who are directing their anger in the wrong direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Parrhesia said:

Sure, only having one MLM romantic interest is absolutely analogous to apartheid.

askhahhsakhfh what does people being upset over the one M/M choice have to do with apartheid?????????

Look, based on other comments you've made here, it's seems obvious you are fine with the 5 w/w choices and don't seem to care too much about mlm folks getting shafted with only having one m/m choice, which OK, fine, that's your opinion, but I don't think it's fair to be painting folks who are upset about this issue in such a negative way with all these assumptions you're making

Edited by xchickengirlx
correction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, xchickengirlx said:

askhahhsakhfh what does people being upset over the one M/M choice have to do with apartheid?????????

Look, based on other comments you've made here, it's seems obvious you are fine with the 5 w/w choices and don't seem to care too much about mlm folks getting shafted with only having one m/m choice, which OK, fine, that's your opinion, but I don't think it's fair to be painting folks who are upset about this issue in such a negative way with all these assumptions you're making

Please read more carefully. The post above made the absurd comparison. I agreed, sarcastically.

People seem to be painting themselves negatively pretty well on their own.

At no time have I said it's unreasonable to be disappointed with just the single MLM option, or with the disparity, or to just personally not want to fuck Linhardt. There's nothing wrong with sending feedback to IS that the time is right for more. But the performative outrage and claims that FE14 was somehow better is both absurd and toxic, and I'll say as much directly.

Edited by Parrhesia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Parrhesia said:

Please read more carefully. The post above made the absurd comparison. I agreed, sarcastically.

To be fair, it was on the previous page and you didn't quote it. It's not a completely unreasonable mistake to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*sigh* That can be spun either way though can't it? Depends how you view it: if it's discrimination based on race versus discrimination based on sexuality. I don't see the problem with comparing those. But yes, I can see the more absurdist argument of real life versus portrayal in a video game. I could make a trivial comparison with say, a parent giving their kids money. But then would be be insulting to compare homophobia to something as trivial as that?

What the hell, let's do it. If you're a parent, imagine just arbitrarily gifting one of your kids a thousand bucks, not at all based on anything they've done to potentially deserve it. Then double down and tell them that things are overall better now, because the average wealth of the kids has now increased. I suspect that'd go down like a lead balloon.

See, the fundamental problem of dismissing things with "it's better now" is that it completely ignores both perspective and basic human psychology. We can pretend that we and everyone else is all noble and altruistic, but I daresay everyone understands envy. Telling someone that as a result things are better now may be technically accurate, but also tone-deaf. I'm not accusing the people dismissing the concerns as being wilfully insulting, but please try to understand how it can be seen as patronising to those who have gained absolutely nothing.

P.S. And actually because representation is a videogame is less fungible than than cash money, the situation is even worse because the beneficiary can't share their boon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I learned there was a keyboard shortcut to post. Also wtf they're on the same page for me and I can't find the option to edit how many posts per page like there used to be; maybe it's a mobile thing, if I had to guess.

43 minutes ago, Humanoid said:

*sigh* That can be spun either way though can't it? Depends how you view it: if it's discrimination based on race versus discrimination based on sexuality.

The subject isn't the issue. Comparing it to, say, marriage equality IRL also falls flat.

43 minutes ago, Humanoid said:

What the hell, let's do it. If you're a parent, imagine just arbitrarily gifting one of your kids a thousand bucks, not at all based on anything they've done to potentially deserve it. Then double down and tell them that things are overall better now, because the average wealth of the kids has now increased. I suspect that'd go down like a lead balloon.

I kept trying to doctor this analogy to not suck and couldn't do it. Suffice to say, this falls flat for a number of reasons.

a) Both kids deserve the thousand bucks. There Should Be Same-Sex Options. Multiple per. Nobody active in this thread disputes this.
b) The kids have been through some shit together. There is common ground here.
c) The boy gets $400; the girl $1000.
d) This time last year, at the last time both might have been expected to pocket a grand, both got (relatively) stiffed with $200, and were also told to go fuck themselves.

Yeah, the analogy still sucks, but hopefully you take my point. It's not a binary 0 vs. 1. It's inadequate MLM options, and they aren't adversarial to WLW options.

(This also assumes that the 1:3 are the only LGBT characters in the cast. I heard someone say there were more, that Linhardt himself, at least, had other male romance options. But that might have been wrong. Still, if it's true, that's another step forward.)

43 minutes ago, Humanoid said:

See, the fundamental problem of dismissing things with "it's better now" is that it completely ignores both perspective and basic human psychology. We can pretend that we and everyone else is all noble and altruistic, but I daresay everyone understands envy. Telling someone that as a result things are better now may be technically accurate, but also tone-deaf. I'm not accusing the people dismissing the concerns as being wilfully insulting, but please try to understand how it can be seen as patronising to those who have gained absolutely nothing.

I've been conscious, I hope successfully, at trying to avoid a 'be content with your gruel, peasant' tone. But this thread has turned outright toxic at multiple points, and a lot of people have lost all perspective. Yes, in an absolute vacuum, a single MLM option is below-par for a 2019 game of this cast size. The frustration is easy to understand, so is the temptation to lash out, but not all temptations have to be acted on. And most people have been reasonable in their reactions - more would've been great, maybe they tweet IS' feedback department to say as much. But, honestly, we live in an era in which Neil Gaiman is getting death threats because the Good Omens protagonists never fuck on-stage, in which there is an established pattern where authors are too afraid of backlash to attempt to write minority characters, for fear of making a fatal misstep that could see them #cancelled forever and their finances tank. Obviously these are extreme examples, and I'm not trying to 'fine people on both sides' this debate - even the most overzealous desire for more much-needed queer representation comes from a far better place than reactionary hatred - but it's worth being conscious of. And of course, on a more local level, I'm trying to avoid this thread boiling over to the point where I just have to lock everything and ban everyone.

Edited by Parrhesia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone let me know, without spoiling who and what happens, the number of paired endings between male characters (excluding Byleth) that can be interpreted as being romantic? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Parrhesia That's fair. I haven't seen anything too bad in this thread but I haven't gone too far back in it, and I don't know what people are doing outside it's confines since this is the only FE community I actively participate in. Maybe the worst of it has already been moderated away before I could see it. At any rate, I'm completely understanding of people being angry (and I know this is your stated position too), and I wouldn't blame if they took offense to some of the outright dismissal of their concerns. Fortunately while there have been a fair few of those dismissive comments sprinkled throughout, I don't specifically remember ones coming from a position of malice rather than perhaps a bit a thoughtlessness.

The point of difference I have here though is that I don't accept that the people upset with IS should feel obligated to credit IS just because they've thrown a bone to someone else. You asked the "honest to God" question on the previous page and I can definitely expect some to answer in the affirmative, again because of basic human psychology. I am not personally invested because I do not intend to pursue the option in-game, and understand that viewing things from that dispassionate perspective that things have gotten better. But I try to put myself in the shoes of the minority and from that perspective, I can also wholly understand how they can easily disagree with your proposition. Even if it's coming from an emotion of pure envy, it's still a valid and very human reaction.

I'm also not sure how reasonable expecting people to tone down their anger because of the threat of possible backlash and IS potentially "punishing" them out of spite is. I appreciate it's not your intention but it could easily be perceived as victim-blaming. That said, I don't expect that to be a remotely realistic outcome, because as tone-deaf as IS is, I don't imagine they'd put spite ahead of profits.

Ultimately, I think having an opportunity to vent within reason is cathartic and I don't think is harmful to the discussion here or elsewhere, including official channels. Sure, maybe a more eloquent message might be more constructive overall but I don't necessarily agree that a simple expression of anger (within limits) is non-constructive, and it's better than just compliant silence which I suspect would be the alternative that many would end up going to. The ability to judge the mood is a valuable tool so simply being able to gauge the level of community anger I think is useful. Where the line is crossed into personal insults or downright illegal activities like death threats, then yeah, shut that stuff down.

Edited by Humanoid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbf most of the people I've been talking with or read discussions of the issue are simply disappointed at how the ratio is skewed to 5(3? Maybe):1 in romatic same-sex supports. There's less anger, more of a confused and overlaying disappointment on the lack of options for those who would want Byleth to end up with another male character but they still love the game anyway.

On the other hand, I have also talked to people who are accepting of how things were handled with the supports… but there were also people who are frankly indifferent to the issue because it doesn't personally affect them; for me, the indifference is the more frustrating aspect since it feels like they're telling me I should just smile and accept we have anything at all. Coming from that end, I can understand why some people are angry and why they would react rather er, harshly, I suppose.

I think sharing an opinion politely and in a level-headed manner goes a long way, forums or otherwise. Hopefully anyone who is planning in contacting Nintendo, IS, etc. with their opinions can share it civilly.

Edited by Senpoi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Parrhesia said:

Are people seriously happier with 1M/1F than 1M/3F. Honest to God question, because that seems to be the implication some people are making.

I think it's actually 1M/4F or 1M/5F. Sothis' S support seems overtly romantic to me, and Rhea's seems pretty darn romantic too from what I've read. It gets even worse when you consider romantic pairings between other characters, as there are several explicitly romantic WLW endings, but no explicitly romantic MLM endings outside of Byleth.

Obviously the options in Three houses aren't objectively worse than those in Fates. Even ignoring the number difference, the characters are just better written. But the WLW situation is so much better that it makes the MLM look even worse by comparison. It's that inequality that's made people angry.

As is understandable. Take this analogy: you and your friend both buy a bag of sweets, you get 5 inside and they get 5. It's not much, but you both get the same for what you paid. Now imagine that you both buy a bag for the same price and you get 6, but they get 100. Objectively you have a better deal than last time, because you have more, but you feel worse than in the first case because now it also feels unfair. 

Edited by EJ107

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is usually not a topic I voice my opinion about (since it can easily get heated, and people tend to stick to very strong personal beliefs), but I do feel like they took one step forward and several steps back in Three Houses. I've written to Nintendo UK's customer support (since it was the only email to Nintendo I could find), but I'm not sure if it will really reach the right place for the feedback to be heard. Perhaps if enough people write to them, the poor customer support employee who doesn't really have a say in this matter could forward it higher up.

 

My personal opinion (even if it isn't necessarily what people are debating right now) is that I don't see the problem with letting both Byleths S rank all characters if there are no child units, and the supports seem to be the exact same with changed pronouns anyways? I guess some people just have to get offended by the idea that some characters of the same sex can romance you? It's still the player's choice. I just don't buy the whole "but realism" argument. It isn't realistic for everyone to be able to fall in love with you either. And really, realism doesn't equal good game design, especially not if the realism is only there to hinder player freedom. For those who want pure realism, then the calendar system should play out in real time à la Animal Crossing too. 

 

I feel like most things that I agree with regarding the choices in this game have already been said, so I won't dwell too much about it. I really do think they missed the mark this time. When the first leaks came out, a lot of people were already prepared for an unequal ratio of female/male same-sex options. When the previews came out, the actual choices for Male Byleth were fairly questionable, and increased the disappointment. And finally, when the game came out it turns out that the real situation was actually worse, since the two more questionable choices weren't even romantic choices to begin with, making the ratio (which people were starting to accept) even more skewed. If it is bad enough to get me to write a lengthy post about it, and even attempt to contact Nintendo, then you know it is bad. I don't buy the whole "gays are entitled" thing either. You don't have to be LGBT to think that the situation in this game is baaaaaad for many reasons. 

 

Mostly just rambling and venting - this is not targeted at anyone specifically, but is more about how I feel about all the discussion I've read during pre-launch and afterwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AntasticTunes said:

I don't see the problem with letting both Byleths S rank all characters if there are no child units, and the supports seem to be the exact same with changed pronouns anyways? I guess some people just have to get offended by the idea that some characters of the same sex can romance you? It's still the player's choice. I just don't buy the whole "but realism" argument.

The whole "but realism" argument falls also flat when considering that there are no real gay Characters, just straights and bisexuals. Might be interpreted as a reflection on the conservative Japanese narrative of Homosexuals as straight-available in denial. (I actually met a Japanese woman who couldn't get her head around the fact that as gay person I won't develop any sexual or romantic feelings for her. In the end I had to finally cut contact after trying to make her see reason multiple times.)

Skyrim is imo a good example for this freedom, NPCs there are either Dohvakiinsexual or not at all, regardless of the Dohvakiin's gender. I think they didn't even have to alternate the dialogues.

2 hours ago, Senpoi said:

for me, the indifference is the more frustrating aspect since it feels like they're telling me I should just smile and accept we have anything at all.

Yikes, I've been told the same and it is tbh utterly frustrating. To put it in the words of MLK Jr.:

Quote

I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

Of course MLK had bigger issues to fight for, but I think it's fitting regardless.

Edited by Zadok the priest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm currently thinking, while it would still suck, if Alois and Gilbert actually had a romance with M Byleth, it wouldnt be as bad as it is. 3/5 is better than 1/5 tbh, even tho I'd swap Gilbert for Raphael or even Sylvain. 

 

Sadly we, the customers, cant really reach Intelligent Systems and Nintendo doesnt seem to send IntSys our feedback too. 

 

I think the only thing we really can do at this point is, hoping that they patch back in the dummied m!m options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zadok the priest said:

Skyrim is imo a good example for this freedom, NPCs there are either Dohvakiinsexual or not at all, regardless of the Dohvakiin's gender. I think they didn't even have to alternate the dialogues.

I played a great Skyrim mod "Interesting NPC's", that adds a bunch of Marriage options with more involved dialogue. What it did was make ~80% of the new marriage options bisexual, with the remaining 20% being split evenly between gay, lesbian and straight characters. It's by far the best way of doing things IMO

The "realism" argument is stupid from the get-go, because how is it realistic that literally every playable female character in the game wants to get in M!Byleths pants?  People don't seem to care about "realism" when the unrealistic features are pandering to them. It's only when games are trying to appeal to a demographic they aren't a part of that it's suddenly a big issue. 

Edited by EJ107

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently this is starting to get some magazine articles about it. There are a couple of spoilers for certain supports in the one I found so I'll be putting the link in spoiler tags for safety.

Spoiler

I think this article hit some of the major points that people are talking about, and hopefully other articles like this will help get Nintendo's attention. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Parrhesia said:

Yeah, the analogy still sucks, but hopefully you take my point.

Don't analogies tend to turn into rabbit holes due them rarely aligning 100%, and the differences as is here being picked at leads to a drawn out discussion that is sorta tangental and fruitless conversation? 

7 hours ago, Parrhesia said:

But this thread has turned outright toxic at multiple points, and a lot of people have lost all perspective.

To look on the positive side, the toxicity here doesn't look so bad as it's been else on other matters in SF's history. And so far this is the only fault I see being vigorously discussed so of 3H. I mean this is like the only topic I really let myself read in this forum, b/c not having the game makes me want to avoid all gameplay/character/plot discussion. But I not seeing any overt topics of criticizing any of those things seems to be positive news.

Although at the same time I find it a little odd there are no other critical topics. Not due to a desire to see this game burnt to the ground, but because no game is perfect, no FE is perfect. And therefore, there must be things to put into the deficit column of 3H's quality records. Maybe just not enough time has passed for people to play the game in full and then just let everything sit, during which the good shall marinate, and that which is bad shall be revealed to be so by undergoing instead the process of putrefaction.

 

🌈😀

Edited by Interdimensional Observer
misspelled "putrefaction" as "purification", thinking the word was "purtification"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...