I don’t know a nice way to say this, but I’m not sure how seriously I’m going to take the criticism of someone who fumbles to the use of “relationship stating” over “redundancy.”
I’ll do my best to take this in good faith, though. Redundancy on its own does not make for bad writing. It can come off as banal, to be sure, but that is both sometimes expected of unimportant side characters and totally fine. It is actually generally bad to give an equal amount of depth to an entire supporting cast, because your reader, player, listener, etc. do not want to be held in a deadlock with these characters for extended periods of time.
Dude, it’s not about trying to get rid of LGBT representation. It’s about the fact that, simply put, most people that play this game aren’t LGBT and for some reason it’s the entire dialog right now. People are way more open to celebrating something that isn’t a part of their natural, every-day life when it’s not constantly shoved down their throats and told they HAVE to. What part of this aren’t you people getting?
Well in this particular context it is not redundancy in general because that isn’t the topic, it was specifically about stating one’s relationship.
Oh also I understand the misinterpretation now.
I was using < brackets which have obviously hidden the actual wording.
Might have to change it to square brackets because the posts understandably don’t make sense without that context, hopefully it will make more sense then.
Pardon the confusion.
More than once, right? Or is this where I’m misunderstanding you?
I’ll go back and re-read, moment.
EDIT: So, it still seems to me like redundancy is the issue? They’re repeating something that, by the time it’s repeated, you should be expected to already understand. Right?
I dont care if the characters are gay. Who cares about the realationship about the side quest characters…does that really ruin your immersion that much? Pandering? You are pathetic and very much an idiot. Theres my argument, forum hero!
Yes, absolutely.
Which as I said is poor writing, but in this specific context (relationships) can be interpreted by some to instead be intentional pandering, like they are trying to hammer that point in.
Alright, then toward the poor writing I maintain that it is sometimes expected to be this way. The characters are one-dimensional, at least as of their current development. It isn’t too different from Neville being redundantly cowardly until Rowling decided it was his time to have a glow-up. While I don’t respect Rowling much as an author, that in particular is a pretty normal thing in writing.
To the point of pandering, I’ll ignore my hatred of the word when used in regards to this topic. Everything written in the game is fabricated in some way. There is a level of subjectivity in determining how ‘lively’ the fabrication is, and at its core, that’s what gets argued most often. In debatable levels of faith.
The diversity tool was hilariously terrible and both panned and scrapped immediately. It just made sure characters hit certain virtue signal checkmarks without regards to accurately depicting cultures/sexuality/etc.
