Enforced Companion Sexual Preference.

[ryanshowseason2]

Just had this thought today after playing through a companion mod. Won't say which but I discovered most of the way through the content that I wouldn't be able to marry this companion.

 

Not because it wasn't set to be marriageable. But because the author had explicitly programmed it to be so based on gender.

 

This irked me on a few different levels, Programmer, Gamer, content creator and person. It seemed like a good discussion topic. Just a discussion though I'm not here to wave a pitchfork! just to see how others see the topic.

 

Here were my thoughts.

 

Programmer: It is just more code to write, making the creation more difficult for the author. You have to think about what the player is when programming certain scenes and dialogs. Its cumbersome, you could just treat the player as a person instead and not care about gender unless it were truly necessary like commenting on certain physical attributes.

 

Programmer. Since it is more code it is another failure point to cause a bug sometime somewhere. Inevitably something will probably fail in testing or release because you forgot to put the male/female version of a line or logic section in. Once again a burden.

 

Gamer: It hides content from users and forces the author to create two sets of content sometimes. I want to play through your character but honestly unless it is really good I probly won't do it twice.

 

Person: Why do you care that I'm having the collection of bits you wrote marry another set of bits that looks female as well? It's a game grow up. However you like to swing or play is great, but why enforce it on anyone else? Hopefully not because of moral reasoning, its all different for the next guy.

 

Content creator: Ok I concede on this one to enforcing sexual preference. After thinking about it I can definitely see making a character and having their sexuality be a vital part of enforcing who they are. It can definitely be a purposeful detail about them... However in the absence of it being a purposeful detail I find it distasteful to force this personal preference. I have my own preference that I don't like M/M but I wouldn't ever think of creating content that disallowed it just because I don't enjoy it. I won't write for it, but that's not the same as banning it explicitly.

 

Sidenotes:

In this mod I really didn't see a case for the enforced sexuality preference.

 

I like how the vanilla marriage system works, although it kind of reeks of laziness rather than open-mindedness. There's almost nothing to it nothing is gender specific at all. In its simple lazy nature though it creates something good: A gender neutral approach to romance. No one cares who or what you are, just that you like each other and want to spend what little time you have in this mortal coil together. No one questions it... But mostly because Bethesda was lazy.

[Georgiegril]

Ultimately, I am in support of mod authors making mods to their liking. Which may not be to my liking, and often isn't.

I think a culture of creative openness requires acceptance that someone else may not have the same values or tastes.

It seems to me that in the long view, allowing this sort of individuality leads to a pool of more mods with greater range of choice, even though a specific mod may be quite limited.

 

That being said, I also think there is some onus on a mod author to accurately represent their mod, so that someone considering it has sufficient information to decide if the mod meets their needs.

So the only real issue I see if that if the mod author did not state clearly the limitations of the companion (E.g. marriagable but only to men, or whatever). It may have been an oversight not to add that info, and they may appreciate your bringing that politely to their attention. Definitely doing so may help other users avoid the disappointment you suffered.

 

Many mod authors are open to others making patches--you might approach the mod author about making a patch for the companion that allows more choice in spouses.

 

Edited to add my gratitude for the vision and vigilance of Dark0ne to create and maintain a creative forum that is open, supportive, and also protective and fair.

[ryanshowseason2]

Well said exactly the kind of discussion I'd hoped for. Essentially: free speech means even those with dissenting viewpoints and even regressive backwards ones get to speak. I suppose its the price you pay to keep it open for all.

[Lisnpuppy]

Just remember that we have rules here and this isn't a democracy with free speech in the same way that you standing on a street corner of NYC is.

 

As long as the discussion remains civil and does not violate the Terms of Service it can continue. No mod bashing, no author bashing...no personal insults to each other or a group of people (all this is in the ToS BTW it just sounds more official there.)~Lisnpuppy

 

Now that the official part is out of the way:

Remember this...mod authors make mods THEY like and then they share them with us...out of the niceness and graciousness of their hearts. They don't have to do that. They don't have to tag their files or make a good description (though we like them to and its to their advantage.) They don't have to adhere to a "best practices" or worry about their brand.

 

We don't pay them a wage and can not dictate to them when, how and why to work. The modding tools are available to all of us, allowing us to make our game exactly how we want it to be. At one point all these mod authors also knew nothing about making mods and they learned, maybe got some help from the community..and then shared. They share their knowledge and support and their mods giving back to the community that gave to them hopefully continuing on the cycle.

 

I have no expectations that a mod author has to do anything at all. There are plenty of mods I dislike and plenty I love. There are great mods and some that with some direction will be great. There are mods on all levels of the learning curve. As long as there isn't anything malicious in them...I don't care. I don't like them or disagree with them...I don't use them. I am grateful for them all.

 

If a mod author made something a certain way then likely it is because that is how they wanted it. Sometimes it is a learning issue..or a lack of ability for the game to be modded a certain way. You can ask nicely for a mod author to take a request but don't get bent out of shape if they say no. Again they mod for themselves usually and share it. If they say no..then thank them for their hard work and move on...perhaps to learn those mod tools to make a mod like you envision it?

[djjohnjarvis]

As a mod author I can say that it is no more difficult to limit something based on gender in the CK. Literally it is one small condition check, no programming involved. The difficulty comes from the actual dialogue. When writing dialogue I have to write gender neutral because there is like 800 lines and it would be inefficient to have separate lines for each gender although there are a handful of lines where I have to write it for each gender as there is just no way around the issue. Romance dialogue would be even worse for having to rewrite lines, especially if they didn't take the gender neutral approach that I took. Although I agree it is nice to have that option the reason it is limited is more likely to do with the extra work involved than anything else and the mod author having no interest in that side of things. Of course some mod authors really like to roleplay their followers and create huge back stories to the point where their followers have to adhere to set rules which is fair enough.

[Dhegonus]

in my eyes, a mod author makes a mod, especially followers and quest mods of a story they wish to tell, if they make their characters homosexual, bi-sexual, heterosexual or even A-sexual, that is entirely the mod's makers prerogative. If you want a mod where such things are possible, then ask in the mod request section or make a mod yourself that does such a thing. Some mod makers may not be entirely comfortable with the idea of doing x,y or z and it shouldn't be thrust upon them to do something they aren't comfortable with. If you want something changed, the best thing to do, especially in skyrim, is to knuckle down, learn how to do it then ... do it.

 

Crating a character, giving them a voice and even quests aren't difficult, there's a hundred and one tutorials out there covering the subject and if you do need a hand with scripting, there are loads of other modders here who would be willing to help, granted you have to nudge them with your elbow at some points, but they'll help regardless :)

[Ellderon]

The culture of "creative openess" should then also accept that some characters are written in a certain way.

 

If I write a character as cowardly, will you complain that he could be brave? Sexual preference is part of someones personality, like it or not. And some writers/creators envision very specific characters and try to bring them to life.

ANYTHING that you add to make them more real introduces complexity and points of failure - from them taking a bath to them switching clothes, etc..

 

I doubt I'll make any such restriction on my NPCs, but that is because I'm lazy.

As for the rest - that's why the CK exists. You can load any mod and tweak it. Or use a console to add it to the "married" faction.

[AlduinWorldEater]

Sexual preference is part of someones personality, like it or not.

 

This actually goes hand-in-hand with a discussion I was having at work that personality is hard-coded into someone's genetics. That's probably not a discussion for this forum, but if anyone wants to know my theory, PM me :P

[Georgiegril]

The culture of "creative openess" should then also accept that some characters are written in a certain way.

 

As you are quoting me, I would like to emphasize that this was exactly my point.

[Dhegonus]

you'd also have to take into account as the world of elder scrolls is a quasi medieval world of sorts, homosexuality would more than likely end up with you meeting the noose or the executioners block. But that would be more for the realistic/lore friendly type of players.