Guild Wars 2

Then again, every dragon corrupts differently.

Dare I get my hope up?

Thank Captain Smash

Not yet, but Skritt are hard to kill. I’d bet that he is just fine.

tmakinen.1048:

bullyrook.2165:

I take it to mean that what you meant to ask is “would we even be talking about this if Rox and Taimi were originally cast as males”. The answer: they wouldn’t be the same people

You have identified the correct question. You are still failing to answer it. In that hypothetical scenario the current Rox and Taimi wouldn’t exist. Hence, any answer that compares these two scenarios the way you do above is nonsensical.

Oooor perhaps you are wondering if that in the event that I felt there was a gender imbalance where males outnumber females in the main cast, would I be on board for adding more females? If that is what you meant, then the answer is: Absolutely. Makes sense for an MMO to appeal to all crowds Just try to remain civil, we can do that, right?

Keep it civil guys. Anet is adding faces all the time. I’m sure they will correct any deficiency you feel may be present.

NO LOOT FOR YOU! ~ the Loot kitten :P

Wait, do we know if he is dead or not?

I still have my Captain’s Commendations haha

reading half of these comments my current thought pattern is less “Uh-huh” and more “uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuugh”.

RoseofGilead.8907:

Diving platform guy, krait oil guy, lighthouse keeper guy, and a couple of the karma merchants are definitely dead. One of the bartenders, too.

Why must the good characters go? tear

Green Peace gone worse?

great job with the armor. What I meant about the face was that he looks like a manly woman currently. Link looks more boyish I would say. But that is just my perception

I like what they are doing here, creating a new conflict for the Sylvari and deepening their history. I just hope Anet doesn’t overplay it.

Well, I wish they had hidden some info in LA, just so we had something to do. But maybe this “calm after the storm” effect isn’t all bad. It is very eerie and tranquil, I’ll give it that. It is also interesting to see players pop in every now and then asking what happened to their city while they were gone.

side-note: kinda been avoiding the epilogue like a clingy girlfriend, I’m afraid of the drama I’ll find.

I heard that the guy at the diving platform snuffed it. Of all characters, why him?

I doubt Anet will ever unveil him/her. All in an attempt to keep us in “suspense”.

tmakinen.1048:

bullyrook.2165:

Rox and Taimi are fine as is.

This is peculiar. I specifically didn’t ask the question “Should ANet turn Rox or Taimi into a male?” but you still answer to that one, and not the question that I asked. Did I not express myself properly, was the question I did ask too difficult to conceptualize, or is there a reason to avoid answering it?

My goodness. What a horribly rude person you are. I take it to mean that what you meant to ask is “would we even be talking about this if Rox and Taimi were originally cast as males”. The answer: they wouldn’t be the same people if they were male, so they would likely lack heart because their persona’s would change somewhat. You keep acting as if changing gender is the same thing as changing clothes. I assure you, it is not the same. Aside from that, if Rox and Taimi were males then that would make the gender ratio 3 to 2 and we would still be a female short.

What I don’t understand is why the writers are trying to pitch it like Keil was the only one trying to do anything on the council. We know that she and Magnus – who is also on the council if I am not mistaken – are joined at the hip. Did Magnus have a sudden change of heart about his support of Keil?

lil too fem in the face, but I love the idea.

Yeah…. And who did the Charr take it from before it was theirs? Some say the grawl. It doesn’t matter anymore. It is in the past and Ascalonians have bigger fish to fry in the south.

huh,maybe it was just a rumor.

sounds neat, hope to save up enough gold

I am inclined to believe that the entire Captains Council enjoys the knowledge that they reduced unemployment rates in Lion’s Arch by 100%. (Sorry, had to be said)

tmakinen.1048:

Thobek.1730:

Why can’t they just add in another Male character to the group

Because all the necessary roles are already accounted for. Also, you didn’t answer the question. Would you be content if Rox or Taimi were male?

Of course not. Rox and Taimi are fine as is. And please define “necessary”.

I haven’t checked out the epilogue yet, but I heard something about Jory showing a dark side when it comes to Sylvari. Any truth to the rumor?

If so, I really don’t hope they go with yet another tragic homosexual romance. I mean, I don’t like the subject being portrayed as romantic in the first place, but it is just weak to not go through with a gesture once it has already begun. And all that aside,that has been done to death.

Wow, did they really give Marjory a dark side? I’ll have to see that before I believe it. Here I thought the devs were going to turn her into another pet project.

I think slow poke’s ideas would have been better. At least I would have stopped taking the storyline so seriously.

Again, the results vary widely. And it wasn’t a tid-bit used to prove anything, merely some info I stumbled upon.

CharrGirl.7896:

bullyrook.2165:

One thing I do feel needs to be cleared up. When I said “advocate heterosexuality”, I really did mean it as a choice. A stance of acceptance with non-hostile disagreement has yet to be studied in its effects.

Don’t think I quite understand what you’re saying here, maybe my english sucks but…

It’s most definitely not a choice. I never “chose” to be heterosexual, or just decided at one point that I was, it just comes to you naturally. Just as with homosexuality.

Actually, all we’ve concluded is that we may not be able help what our bodies find physically attractive (environment and society play large factors). But that is about it. There are a few cases of homosexuals falling for their opposite gender for who the are as a person. But again, the “hows” and “whys” of these relationships have not been thoroughly investigated. Did they only choose them because they were oppressed? Possibly. The love life of Freddie Mercury (one of my favorite singers) is an example of this. He left the vast majority of his fortune and song rights to his ex-girlfriend. And a significant, but lesser, sum of money to his then male partner. Trouble is, some say that he was in the closet, some say that he wasn’t. There is just so much data to sort through and I think that the “no free will” argument of homosexuality is assuming too much.

An interesting fact here: some studies suggest that the mind of the homosexual male works very much like the mind of a heterosexual female. However, the mind of the homosexual female does not work like the mind of a heterosexual male. I find this to be a very compelling piece of data.

And to Malafide, I’ll keep this discussion going with you. Give me a bit, I have to do some more research before I respond.

Yumiko, you still lack conclusive data to back up your claims. I can argue this with you, but based on that point alone it would be a waste of both our time.

Why are we arguing about this? The majority likely should have darker skin though. At least the kept the ruler’s lineage the same. Although, a lot can change over the course of 200 years.

I thought I heard something about “E” having a deep voice. That suggest’s it may be male.

Thank you to those of you who decided it was best to agree to disagree. Emotion is really the tripping stone for both sides in this equation.

To you, Malafide, I would like to thank you for remaining cool about the topic. I just have a little to say before we continue: are you certain you don’t want to agree to disagree? I have given a logical argument, which was what you asked for. I can’t help that you disagree. If you need me to continue I think we both know that this could go on for awhile with each of us making fair points.

One thing I do feel needs to be cleared up. When I said “advocate heterosexuality”, I really did mean it as a choice. A stance of acceptance with non-hostile disagreement has yet to be studied in its effects.

Yumiko Ishida.3769:

The only reason the animosity against same sexes exists in real life because the laws are based on religions of the nation writing those laws. The gw 1 and 2 lore of humanity has no such religious basis for such laws to begin with! The gods never cared about that and never said same sex is wrong.

Same sexes stuff exists because of our genetics and biology of animals, not because a god said it is to be or not to be so.

Anet did it right and stayed true to real world in that a religion makes it so whether something is allowed or not and laws being written to reflect the will of a religion.

And your scientific data on this is… where? What many people label as homophobia dates back to ancient Greece. The truth is that pinning it all on religion is a common misconception by individuals (possibly biased or who have a phobia of religion) who type before they do the proper research. Some researchers are actually attempting to classify individuals who fall within the current hyperbolic definition of homophobic as having a type of personality disorder. It is 100 percent possible for an Atheist to exhibit behavior that is considered “homophobic” without a belief system of any kind.

Saying that no such person could possibly exist in Tyria and remain civil is as logical as saying there are no homosexuals in Tyria.

You know what ol’ Jack Burton says at a time like this?

I like the Sylvari. They brought a lot of balance to the game.

Well, I’ll be letting go of the previous wall of text that I have been trading with Malafide, just let it be known that I disagree with her as far as the nature of taboos go. But that is a discussion for later.

Alright, here we go. I will try to keep this as simple as possible.

Here is what I believe: I believe that most people are putting the cart before the horse when it comes to their exact position on homosexuality. Yes, it is true that homosexuality has been linked to genetics, but there is no proof that people are homosexual solely because of their genetics. We don’t even know how homosexuality factors into being human. Some say it is not “linked” to anything and “just is”, and that it is a natural and healthy way for people to interact.

A direct quote from the APA here:
“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.”

Without determining the source, we cannot claim to know beyond a doubt whether it is natural or not. The trouble is, some people do not want to find out what the source is. They believe that if we find the source, we may try to classify it and change it. That frightens some individuals.

I just want to know what I m supporting, before I say I support it. I think that is reasonable. So, what do I “know”?

I know that homosexuality exists. I know that no proof has yet been found that it is a form of mental disorder. I know it is a matter of controversy. I know that there is a question of whether it is logical or illogical. I know that the human race requires more conclusive data before it can answer this question.

Without the required data, I am forced to make an educated guess so that I may conduct my own life. I choose to believe that our genetics are geared towards heterosexuality, to seek out a mate of the opposite gender and attempt to create offspring. These offspring, if we manage to create them, will in turn attempt to continue the cycle. My logic dictates that the existence of a “homosexual gene” is unlikely (not impossible) in terms of evolution. Even if you factor in recessive genes, evolution usually does not perpetuate genetics that are counter productive. A “homosexual gene” is unlikely to be passed on and one would think that it would eventually exit the gene pool. Therefore, if the genetic material is not present (does not exist), then homosexual behavior is likely to be caused by some other factor. What factor? I couldn’t hazard a guess. More data is needed beyond this point.

This is my logic. This is how I believe humanity is intended to be. No bias. No emotion. Just reason.

Again, this is horribly over-simplified, but this is the basics. Anything additional that I tack onto this belief merely ties into acts to reinforce it – religion, culture, personal tastes, etc.

As for those of you who say that love is never wrong… Honestly, I have no answer for you. I have questions. Endless questions. Questions that I know none of you could ever hope to answer. Where do we draw the line in what is moral? Why do we have morals? What does it mean to hurt another individual? How much of our society is wrong? Why do we even exist? How is it possible for us to exist? What makes this existence worthwhile? And at the end of the day all we can do is choose and hope for the best.

I choose to draw the line at genetics. Genetics that dictate who we should be seeking out in order to propagate our species. Choosing anything else is a waste of effort. To make a family and leave the world a better place is our directive. I would rather die than enforce my will on someone else’s, but that doesn’t mean I have to agree with how you spend your life or how you let your sensory perceptions influence you.

So, what is my stance? I believe that these individuals should most definitely not be criminalized or discriminated against, whether they could choose their sexuality or not. However, we really should advocate heterosexual behavior in those who do have a choice because it is the logical relationship to pursue, at least until we know all the “whys”. There is still far too much data missing for me to feel at ease about this, and I hope you can understand my choices.

I know this is not a popular view. That is why I was worried about revealing it. It implies that something might be amiss, and that angers some people.

Feel free to throw your various fruits and vegetables.

Heraldusluminare.2946:

bullyrook.2165:

Why is everyone down on Evon? Seriously, he warned everyone what would happen, he was right, and now he is getting his wares stolen by the Liongaurd because they wouldn’t listen. I still believe Evon is the Mysterious “E”.

I initially thought that Evon might be “E” as well, but when Marjory first encounters him on the streets (https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/marjorys-story-the-last-straw-part-2/), the only remarkable thing she notes is that “E” has a ‘deep voice’.

I’d imagine as a human, having a charr sidle up to you feels very different (and obviously so) from a human. In particular, charr are covered in fur, have clawed paws, constantly growl when they speak and a have a substantial height difference – characteristics not typical of (most) humans.

Of course, this is my two cents worth (who is to say ANet won’t blanket it all by saying Evon was under a very, very convincing polymorph spell?), so feel free to speculate, besides, Ellen Kiel also starts with “E”. ^.^

Sooooo are you suggesting Ellen Kiel has a deeper voice than we know? :P

Flissy.4093:

bullyrook.2165:

My question is: what are they going to do with a massive structure like the breachmaker?

They are going to turn it into a coffee shop.

Crudly… Why would you give the devs an idea like that? Now Destiny’s Edge 2.0 has a base of operations. I feel like I’m stuck in an episode of Friends.

She’s a necro, not a thief.

uhh, the one I know of is kinda in jail lol

Some are from Ascalon, the population has grown in Kryta while the majority of original Krytan descendants likely shrunk due to loss of land and near constant war.

I get the feeling that there may not be any laws concerning imprisonment (there shouldn’t be). But I suspect the populous (both the good and the bad ones) would be divided on the subject.

Very possible, bub. I guess only time will tell. I think there is more to it.

Maybe, but we don’t know if she was still in control of her actions or not. “buddy”

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Chrispy.5641:

But,…Gearbox (also Bioware and a few other companies) having to feel the need to say the word ‘inclusive’ and how you ‘respect everything’ at all in a press release/blog just comes off as very pompous, and makes me wonder if you really wanted a gay character in your game at all, or if there was a focus group you wanted to appeal to?)

On having a major Gay character in Guild Wars 2? Sure! So long as its not done just for the sake of having a gay character, and it is instead done for the sake of having a great story!

I think a lot of game-writers are still struggling in this regard. It is hard to separate political correctness from simply writing a good story. No company should have to state that they are ‘inclusive’, it should be generally assumed that they are.

Writers should start off by writing their characters as sexuality-neutral. As in: The character comes first, and his/her sexuality could be anything later. I don’t know if GW2’s writers follow this principle when writing their character, but I assume they do.

I disagree :P. Sexuality and your views on sexuality are only pieces of character design, they are not separate, but composite.

Mega Messiah.1734:

PeterThomas.7243:

I actually laughed out loud when Braham interrupted Scarlet’s offer to explain her motives.

Scarlet: “Oh noes! You beat me! I bet you’re wondering why I did it. I’ll tell you all about my motives in a monologue at the end of act three as all poorly written villains do…”

Braham: “NO! WE’RE NOT EVEN GONNA GIVE YOU THE CHANCE! WE’RE GONNA KILL YOU AND NEVER LET YOU EXPLAIN ANYTHING.”

Scarlet: “Um… Okay then.”

Player: unceremoniously plants a stick in Scarlet

After all, Arenanet can’t have Scarlet explaining something that they can’t even explain themselves…

>Scarlet dies
>Cutscene plays showing drill hitting leyline resevoir
>Dragon wakes up at end of cutscene

“Well, guys, I have no idea why she did it! We needed an exposition dump to find out!”

Um, buddy, we still don’t know why she wanted to wake up the dragon. Crazy? Under orders? Wants the world to burn? Wants somewhere green? Wants to feed Audrey II? Who knows?

Derom.1205:

Just some questions i have in mind after reading this thread.
Is the story bad because there are 4 women and 1 man? Thusly, would the story be improved if a-net adds a male to the biconics?
But, does that mean that the story would not as well improve if they add an additional female to the biconics?

And as a sidenote, i think that Marjory is pretty much male, there isn’t much feminine on her. I mean she is a typical hard boiled film noir detective. Although she is female (as a guy) i can easly relate to that kind of person.
I mean, she is Humphrey Bogart from Casablanca (with breasts).

sigh seriously? We already said that there being so many females in the group is not a bad thing, some of us were just wondering if the males in Tyria actually possess spines to fight along side them or if they are actually some sub-species of invertebrate.

However, there is evidence of a handful peaceful Charr who are religious.