I suppose that the issue is complicated in that Tolkien never stated that same sex marriages did not happen in M-e, so players who wanted such things could argue that for all any of us know same sex unions were commonplace - so commonplace in fact that they didn't even merit a mention - any more than Tolkien needed to mention that water in M-e is wet.
Another argument would be that, if M-e is really our world in the ancient past, then humans would have been much the same then as they are now, & so same sex relationships would naturally have occurred - unless they were specifically banned by society.
Hence, this aspect of thee 'problem' opens up a much wider question, of how tolerant, or how judgemental, societies in M-e were.
The other issue - Dwarf-Hobbit marriages (or Dwarf -Elf, Elf-Goblin, or even Goblin-Ent
) relationships. Is it actually impossible for a Dwarf guy & a Hobbit gal to meet & fall in love & live happily ever after, producing lots of little Dwobbits, or is it just something that 'didn't happen'?
But isn't that the point of a game like this - to explore, to invent, to come up with new things - if you only want 'what happened' then stick to the books.
After all, how many Eowyn's are we going to see in M-e on-line? Yet Eowyn is the exception that proves the rule that in M-e women were not warriors. In this M-e women warriors are, I assume, going to become so commonplace that an Eowyn figure will not be a shock to anyone - rather than anyone expressing surprise that a woman should come to fight with the Rohirrim it'll more likely be the case that they'll be surprised not to find a whole female cavalry regiment - & who's betting there won't be?
And how long before the demand by players to be 'Elven Wizards', or for their characters to be able to fly or teleport, leads to changes in the game? As Noggy implies, probably not too long - this is a commercial enterprise.
CT's statements about the movies come to mind - that LotR is unsuitable for such treatment. I'd say this is doubly the case with a multi=player game like this one. This comment from the article:
Quote:
But sex-in-games expert and author Brenda Brathwaite argued that videogames inherently branch away from their source content and should allow gamers to make their own decisions about relationships.
|
(leaving aside one's natural inclination to want to hunt down & throw big sharp rocks at anyone who presents themselves to the world as a 'sex-in-games expert' ) One can see the issue laid out here - the 'game' is not M-e - or not for very long anyway. It will 'inherently' (sic) branch away from its source.
So, its being sold as your chance to enter into M-e. Yet, it actually isn't, & never could be. Can't help thinking of our recent discussion on whether CoH should be made into a movie, & of how the more 'difficult' parts of the story would be dealt with - would we really ever see a big budget Hollywood flick with such a proud, flawed & often extremely unpleasant 'hero', ending in a double suicide of the central characters? And the conclusion we came to was 'probably not'. Because the average movie goer don't want that kind of thing - its too depressing. This 'game' will be dominated by players who, while they may love M-e (the movie version in most cases), don't see why they should not be allowed to do as they want, if they're paying for the privilege.
I wonder if this issue could destroy the whole project? There are players - who want to wander in M-e & have the freedom to do prety much what they want, & there are fans, who want an authentic M-e experience. Whether a clash can be avoided, & who will win if there is one, is the question...