Final Fantasy XIV Interview — Stormblood’s Success, Romance, Graphics Upgrades and Mo

[Remedi]

Be careful on what you wish for

[Claire_Pendragon]

The standard of acknowledging and respecting people's existence...?

You failed to address Asexuals... and so forth.
You're no better, and yet you're trying to preach he shouldnt forget something.

[UnstablePersonality]

Tbh I doubt they'd ever implement relationships with npcs. Partners maybe in a way, I'd love more time working with Y'shtola and if they went and developed more of like a friendship with her or something...mainly since she barely got any SB screentime atm.

[DreamAngel-Ren]

When it comes to NPC's feelings towards the WoL, there's no legit answer since the dialogue is open for interpretation to the players.
So whatever you think of how that certain NPC feels towards your character (or other NPCs for that matter), it's your story, believe what you want darlin'! In my case, Aymeric and my character are lovers XD

POWER OF THE IMAGINATION!!

[Khalithar]

The interview was alright. Not terrible but not very good either.

[Snow_Princess]

Once again someone looking for offense, I see nothing in Bourne's post that implies anything offensive.

Once again someone is being rude:

No one has twisted anything. Your initial response strongly implied some sort of bias because Yoshida did not specifically mention gay or lesbian relationships. You're basically complaining about micro-aggressions, and those are not popular for a reason.

You can't call gay or lesbian relationships "not popular for a reason" I am not looking at all, that is what the person said and im reading it.

You failed to address Asexuals... and so forth.
You're no better, and yet you're trying to preach he shouldnt forget something.

10/10 good try but I take it you do not know what Asexual means? If you did, you would know it can't apply to a romance situation.

In Final Fantasy XIV the writers cannot determine the character’s age or sex,

It is a small issue that he said this sentence like this.

For example, if it so happens that the player is male, playing a male character, it could easily give that sort of idea that perhaps there is a chance.

if the player is a woman, utilizing a female character, or if he is a man playing a female character

So he purposely admits males and females playing female chrs could " easily take the dialogue as strong words of admiration towards a strong woman." while the other states " male, playing a male character" if you are going to go in detail like that, you better not leave out groups, like females playing male chrs or if the player is attracted to the same sex. Some people even make rp profiles if their chr is bi/straight/gay/lesbian/ (though I do not think I seen Asexuals or pansexual, most people don't even know what those words mean) Plus I do not even know if the Japanese language has different words for bi and pan. (there may be leaving out transgender issues but even for me i think that is reading too much into it, again that comes from the male or female player playing female, while for the male chr, nothing like this is said. It just leaves me feeling awkward and confused why it is worded that way.)

NY: Even I, when I was looking at some of the dialogue involving Lyse and even Alisae, thought “oh, this can be taken a certain way.” I think that comes from a strong admiration these characters feel towards the Warrior of Light.

You could interrupt the dialog as a strong admiration or romance

I think Ishikawa-san was able to write the lines so well that it can be interpreted in either way.

That is all that needed be said, I do feel awkward in reading that, going in details like that while leaving groups out. Does he think female playing male chrs don't exist? or people liking same sex? I do not get it. I am not looking to be offended, and I am quite neutral on the interview itself (different how I feel about some of the posts here) I just think it is a bit awkward and confused why it was worded like that.

So I can understand Naunet and others are coming from, but others basically saying "you should not interpret it like that" ... i do not think so, you can't tell someone how they should be reacting. Questioning them to see how valid it is is one thing, but outright state stuff "You're basically complaining about micro-aggressions," and "Once again someone looking for offense" is really out there in knowing how to talk to people.

https://youtu.be/kVu_yMEhUfM

[Malzian]

You can't call gay or lesbian relationships "not popular for a reason" I am not looking at all, that is what the person said and im reading it.

They were referring to the angry posts about something not being specifically stated, not the relationships.

10/10 good try but I take it you do not know what Asexual means? If you did, you would know it can't apply to a romance situation.

An asexual individual can be romantically attracted to someone, it just means they're not sexually attracted to them. Please let us not fall into the trap that sex equals romance and romance equals sex. Sex can be a part of romance but that does not implicitly mean it is required.

So he purposely admits males and females playing female chrs could " easily take the dialogue as strong words of admiration towards a strong woman." while the other states " male, playing a male character" if you are going to go in detail like that, you better not leave out groups, like females playing male chrs or if the player is attracted to the same sex. Some people even make rp profiles if their chr is bi/straight/gay/lesbian/ (though I do not think I seen Asexuals or pansexual, most people don't even know what those words mean) Plus I do not even know if the Japanese language has different words for bi and pan.

You could interrupt the dialog as a strong admiration or romance

That is all that needed be said, I do feel awkward in reading that, going in details like that while leaving groups out. Does he think female playing male chrs don't exist? or people liking same sex? I do not get it. I am not looking to be offended, and I am quite neutral on the interview itself (different how I feel about some of the posts here) I just think it is a bit awkward and confused why it was worded like that.

Remember 2 things here: 1) This is an interview and therefore he's going to give as short a statement as possible to fit into the time frame for the interview and therefore can't possibly be expected to explore every possibility. 2) Yoshida speaks Japanese while the interview was done in English, this means translations in both one direction then again in another. As such meanings will not always convey and intent can become lost. Take the statements to Google translate and run it it though back and forth a few times and see what comes out...

[Snow_Princess]

An asexual individual can be romantically attracted to someone, it just means they're not sexually attracted to them. Please let us not fall into the trap that sex equals romance and romance equals sex. Sex can be a part of romance but that does not implicitly mean it is required.


Remember 2 things here: 1) This is an interview and therefore he's going to give as short a statement as possible to fit into the time frame for the interview and therefore can't possibly be expected to explore every possibility. 2) Yoshida speaks Japanese while the interview was done in English, this means translations in both one direction then again in another. As such meanings will not always convey and intent can become lost. Take the statements to Google translate and run it it though back and forth a few times and see what comes out...

First part.. rrrrr I think those are just called platonic friendships, I do not think "romance" is used in that context.

Second part, again that is why I am left confused why it was detailed in some cases and not in others. Why say "For example, if it so happens that the player is male, playing a male character, it could easily give that sort of idea that perhaps there is a chance. " then say "if the player is a woman, utilizing a female character, or if he is a man playing a female character " ???? Why include male playing female and exclude female playing male? if you are going in that such detail, both should been said, along with same genders attraction and other things or don't say it at all?

I even explained how it SHOULD OF been said if the idea was to keep answers short:

NY: Even I, when I was looking at some of the dialogue involving Lyse and even Alisae, thought “oh, this can be taken a certain way.” I think that comes from a strong admiration these characters feel towards the Warrior of Light. You could interrupt the dialog as a strong admiration or romance . I think Ishikawa-san was able to write the lines so well that it can be interpreted in either way.

Why include what gender the player is and the character in game comparisons for???? Just leaves an awkward feeling (male playing male or female) and not talk about the reverse, female playing male.

[Claire_Pendragon]

Once again someone is being rude:
10/10 good try but I take it you do not know what Asexual means? If you did, you would know it can't apply to a romance situation.

Not applicable to what was said.
He didnt mention them. It has nothing to do with if your character is either sexually attracted to someone or romantically attracted to someone or which ever.
If he had mention them, and the possibility of how they would have felt in a romantic setting where someone may or may not be attracted to these NPCs, then its only fair to mention she didnt mention them.
Pointing something out isnt by default rude.
Its neutral, and only you can perceive it as "Glass half empty", "glass half full", or "glass is always full of something, be it air or water, unless in a vacuum."

[Snow_Princess]

Not applicable to what was said.
He didnt mention them. It has nothing to do with if your character is either sexually attracted to someone or romantically attracted to someone or which ever.
If he had mention them, and the possibility of how they would have felt in a romantic setting where someone may or may not be attracted to these NPCs, then its only fair tomention she didnt mention them.
Pointing something out isnt by default rude.
Its neutral, and only you can perceive it as "Glass half empty", "glass half full", or "glass is always full of something, be it air or water, unless in a vacuum."

Telling me or telling others what they are doing is rude to me. Since it is directed at me, I felt offended with the aggressive tone of "Once again someone looking for offense" That is not a neutral stance, it is a passive-aggressive one. I however was tying to help others show why it would be an issue to some. Telling people they should not feel in x way is a big rude don't you think?

Or are you confused what I was calling rude? I said several times my feelings on the article itself:

I am quite neutral on the interview itself (different how I feel about some of the posts here) I just think it is a bit awkward and confused why it was worded like that.

So I can understand Naunet and others are coming from, but others basically saying "you should not interpret it like that" ... i do not think so, you can't tell someone how they should be reacting. Questioning them to see how valid it is is one thing, but outright state stuff "You're basically complaining about micro-aggressions," and "Once again someone looking for offense" is really out there in knowing how to talk to people.

https://youtu.be/kVu_yMEhUfM