Aller au contenu

Photo

Who wants to bet male romance options will be heterosexual only?


776 réponses à ce sujet

#326
Jimmy Fury

Jimmy Fury
  • Members
  • 1 486 messages

Saibh wrote...
Ah, but that's the very thing: the dialogue is explicitly changed from a female's version. He's much more suggestive and all about making you blush and flirting if you're a girl; as a guy, the only thing he's trying to do is deflect you asking him if he's a virgin or not. Just listen to him put the emphasis on licked and lamppost as a girl, and then the difference as a guy.

mmmm i dunno there is some difference between the dialogue but it's only a bit of wording. For a female he says "make fun of you dear lady?" and for a guy it's "make fun of my comrade in arms?"
He still puts emphasis on "licked" and "lamppost" when talking to a guy. There's a slight difference in the tone of each but I always just attributed that to the fact that it was two recordings of the same line and it's very hard to get the tone exactly the same twice.
He definitely still extends those L's out for emphasis though ;)


(and emphasis or not it's still the most homoerotic euphamism for sex since "fight like a spartan" :lol:)

#327
Gaxhung

Gaxhung
  • Members
  • 431 messages

Jimmy Fury wrote...
(and emphasis or not it's still the most
homoerotic euphamism for sex since "fight like a spartan" [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie])


Whats homoerotic about, figting lke a spartan? :huh:

Modifié par Gaxhung, 17 juillet 2010 - 12:55 .


#328
Saibh

Saibh
  • Members
  • 8 071 messages

Jimmy Fury wrote...

Saibh wrote...
Ah, but that's the very thing: the dialogue is explicitly changed from a female's version. He's much more suggestive and all about making you blush and flirting if you're a girl; as a guy, the only thing he's trying to do is deflect you asking him if he's a virgin or not. Just listen to him put the emphasis on licked and lamppost as a girl, and then the difference as a guy.

mmmm i dunno there is some difference between the dialogue but it's only a bit of wording. For a female he says "make fun of you dear lady?" and for a guy it's "make fun of my comrade in arms?"
He still puts emphasis on "licked" and "lamppost" when talking to a guy. There's a slight difference in the tone of each but I always just attributed that to the fact that it was two recordings of the same line and it's very hard to get the tone exactly the same twice.
He definitely still extends those L's out for emphasis though ;)


(and emphasis or not it's still the most homoerotic euphamism for sex since "fight like a spartan" :lol:)


...I honestly don't think you're really listening then...sorry! Posted Image

To me, I'm hearing worlds of difference. One is being flirty and suggestive, the other is simply implying suggestion--as opposed to the flat, literal type of licking lampposts.

#329
Gegenlicht

Gegenlicht
  • Members
  • 317 messages

Monstruo696 wrote...

MiSsSmOkEy20 wrote...

I agree being a virgin doesnt mean you dont know exactly what you like. Ive never been with a girl but I know I prefer men, and Im sure there is a gay man who has never been with a women but knows he prefers men.



"I've never had an apple, but I know I prefer oranges instead."

Sorry, doesn't work that way.  Whether a specific gender turns you on or not does not require you to have lost your virginity.

Come back and discuss this when you have a basic understanding of the human psyche.


Well, as the originator of the throwaway comment that sparked this, I have to say...

I personally fully believe that sexual orientation is a matter of taste, and tastes can vary over time. Some tastes are or can be acquired. I know I used to prefer girls with curves, superficially, but I've since developed a taste for a certain type of willowy girl as well while my taste in men hasn't really changed over the years. I know I've just compared looks to gender, but that IS again very much my view.

And I know it's one not shared by a lot of people in either the hetero- and homosexual camps.

But at the end of the day, if we're talking romance and/or true love... gender is just another binary check. Relevant if you seek social acceptance or naturally produced offspring with your chosen partner, but otherwise I'd like to hope we're moving beyond that, slowly but steadily.


The whole 'still a virgin' thing was rather flippant. The implication was that essentially, Alistair was never really allowed to *explore* his sexuality. Without empirical opinions of our own, we tend to mimic those around us. If heterosexual relationships are what he mostly is aware of, it's what he'll try to mimic. He might not even be aware of an attraction to men if he's been taught, by example as it were, that romantic relationships happen between men and women. As such, he'd obviously fall for the woman who takes over Duncan's role in his life.

#330
Querne

Querne
  • Members
  • 303 messages
I understand that the need to have a romance matching the own sexualtiy. If they were no romance options for females but there were some for males I would also be p-d off too and definitly not get the product. I simply don´t consider products witch don´t consider me.
I have also the problem, that as female I already don´t belong to the main audience and have to accept some cuts. I guess that the gay community belongs to a minority that is still more minor, hope that resourcess will suffice to make them happy and don´t have a clue why others have a problem with it.
As we can still change the appearence (I hope) the gay Hawke WOULD NOT be the straight one, but I imagine that voicing could be a problem.


Now some negatives about this thread ( not the OPs post but some following):



I really can´t hear this "is latent gay" or "can´t be sure if he/she is straight if she/he hasn´t tried it out" anymore.
Some people are straight, others are not. There are about 76 billions things we don´t have to try out to know that we don´t like it. For the crushing majority of humans some kinds of sexuality are such a thing, even if it wasn´t that clear for you yourself.
Alistair is not gay in the game. As in RL I see no need for speculation. Make your peace with it, please.

Anyway as stated before I wish you good luck for your romance options.

Modifié par Querne, 17 juillet 2010 - 01:07 .


#331
Saibh

Saibh
  • Members
  • 8 071 messages

Gegenlicht wrote...

Monstruo696 wrote...

MiSsSmOkEy20 wrote...

I agree being a virgin doesnt mean you dont know exactly what you like. Ive never been with a girl but I know I prefer men, and Im sure there is a gay man who has never been with a women but knows he prefers men.



"I've never had an apple, but I know I prefer oranges instead."

Sorry, doesn't work that way.  Whether a specific gender turns you on or not does not require you to have lost your virginity.

Come back and discuss this when you have a basic understanding of the human psyche.


Well, as the originator of the throwaway comment that sparked this, I have to say...

I personally fully believe that sexual orientation is a matter of taste, and tastes can vary over time. Some tastes are or can be acquired. I know I used to prefer girls with curves, superficially, but I've since developed a taste for a certain type of willowy girl as well while my taste in men hasn't really changed over the years. I know I've just compared looks to gender, but that IS again very much my view.

And I know it's one not shared by a lot of people in either the hetero- and homosexual camps.

But at the end of the day, if we're talking romance and/or true love... gender is just another binary check. Relevant if you seek social acceptance or naturally produced offspring with your chosen partner, but otherwise I'd like to hope we're moving beyond that, slowly but steadily.


The whole 'still a virgin' thing was rather flippant. The implication was that essentially, Alistair was never really allowed to *explore* his sexuality. Without empirical opinions of our own, we tend to mimic those around us. If heterosexual relationships are what he mostly is aware of, it's what he'll try to mimic. He might not even be aware of an attraction to men if he's been taught, by example as it were, that romantic relationships happen between men and women. As such, he'd obviously fall for the woman who takes over Duncan's role in his life.


You've gotta be kidding me. I hope I'm reading you wrong (and I keep rereading it, because part of me is sure that you're not really saying this), but are you essentially saying that people are straight because society tells them to be? Please. Just because you happen to be attracted to both genders doesn't mean that you're the future of humanity, the pinnacle of what we should be in the future. The mere thought of this offends me to the nth degee.

I can't even comment back to the Alistair thing, because the idea that you somehow intrinsically understand that Alistair may be gay/bi because he's just "never thought about it before" is silly--especially since Word of God tells you that you're wrong! Alistair was surrounded by men, all day, every day, and was never attracted to them. Querne is putting it in a more coherent, nice fashion than I, but there you go.

#332
Jimmy Fury

Jimmy Fury
  • Members
  • 1 486 messages

Gaxhung wrote...

Jimmy Fury wrote...
(and emphasis or not it's still the most
homoerotic euphamism for sex since "fight like a spartan" [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie])


Whats homoerotic about, figting lke a spartan? :huh:

Saibh wrote...
..I honestly don't think you're really
listening then...sorry! ../../../images/forum/emoticons/whistling.png

To me, I'm hearing worlds of difference. One is being
flirty and suggestive, the other is simply implying suggestion--as
opposed to the flat, literal type of licking lampposts.


oh cheeses nevermind they were both just jokes. Must everything on the boards be turned into a debate lately. 
Fine you're both right. There's nothing even remoootely homoerotic about dudes in leather underpants or licking posts of any sort. Hurray for you.

to quote St. Kitten... all of a sudden everybody's getting serious. serious, serious, serious.:pinched:

#333
Saibh

Saibh
  • Members
  • 8 071 messages

Jimmy Fury wrote...

Gaxhung wrote...

Jimmy Fury wrote...
(and emphasis or not it's still the most
homoerotic euphamism for sex since "fight like a spartan" ../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png)


Whats homoerotic about, figting lke a spartan? :huh:

Saibh wrote...
..I honestly don't think you're really
listening then...sorry! ../../../images/forum/emoticons/whistling.png

To me, I'm hearing worlds of difference. One is being
flirty and suggestive, the other is simply implying suggestion--as
opposed to the flat, literal type of licking lampposts.


oh cheeses nevermind they were both just jokes. Must everything on the boards be turned into a debate lately. 
Fine you're both right. There's nothing even remoootely homoerotic about dudes in leather underpants or licking posts of any sort. Hurray for you.

to quote St. Kitten... all of a sudden everybody's getting serious. serious, serious, serious.:pinched:


Posted Image

Um...

Sorry...Yeah, I'm in serious-debate mode, and I'm right now incapable of reading humor.

...There needs to be a proper blush icon, dammit!

#334
Gegenlicht

Gegenlicht
  • Members
  • 317 messages

Querne wrote...

Some people are straight, others are not. There are about 76 billions things we don´t have to try out to know that we don´t like it. For the crushing majority of humans some kinds of sexuality are such a thing, even if it wasn´t that clear for you yourself.


At the risk of sounding obnoxious, that's a ****ing wide brush you're using. I can get behind not being physically attracted to gender Z as a rule, but I also constantly hear people ****ing and moaning that love isn't about superficialities. Which one is it now? Is humanity as a whole shallow or just narrow-minded? Hell, I'll let you decide.

And I can't start to tell you about things I figured I wouldn't like but found out I liked quite a bit, cause that'd likely get the thread deleted or at least locked. But saying you or anybody else can definitely and without fail foresee what they will or won't like in a vacuum is flat-out wrong. You can draw comparisons to things you have tried and didn't like, yes. Apples and oranges won't work, of course, but if you don't like having a guinea pig for a pet, there's a high chance you won't like bunnies or hamsters either. That's however already giving you credit for doing more than flat out stating you don't or won't like something for no apparent reason other than...

...and here I close the circle to my last post...

...mimicking the other people around you, or going by what they've told you. Which is not comparable to finding out for yourself. Because you don't actually make decisions in a vacuum. Free will isn't free in so far as that there's always contributing external factors that you may not even be consciously aware of but which nudge your thought processes and their results one way or another. But of course that's bleeding obvious and shouldn't need to be mentioned. I just wanted to be thorough.

#335
Saibh

Saibh
  • Members
  • 8 071 messages

Gegenlicht wrote...

Querne wrote...

Some people are straight, others are not. There are about 76 billions things we don´t have to try out to know that we don´t like it. For the crushing majority of humans some kinds of sexuality are such a thing, even if it wasn´t that clear for you yourself.


At the risk of sounding obnoxious, that's a ****ing wide brush you're using. I can get behind not being physically attracted to gender Z as a rule, but I also constantly hear people ****ing and moaning that love isn't about superficialities. Which one is it now? Is humanity as a whole shallow or just narrow-minded? Hell, I'll let you decide.


You're bisexual. Maybe you're incapable of understanding only liking one gender, but guess what? For some people, they are incapable of being attracted to men or women. It just doesn't happen. It's hardwired in there, it's a part of their being. Just because it's not a part of yours doesn't demean or diminish what they know to be true. It's not superficial. It just plain isn't.

#336
Gegenlicht

Gegenlicht
  • Members
  • 317 messages

Saibh wrote...
You've gotta be kidding me. I hope I'm reading you wrong (and I keep rereading it, because part of me is sure that you're not really saying this), but are you essentially saying that people are straight because society tells them to be? Please. Just because you happen to be attracted to both genders doesn't mean that you're the future of humanity, the pinnacle of what we should be in the future. The mere thought of this offends me to the nth degee.

I can't even comment back to the Alistair thing, because the idea that you somehow intrinsically understand that Alistair may be gay/bi because he's just "never thought about it before" is silly--especially since Word of God tells you that you're wrong! Alistair was surrounded by men, all day, every day, and was never attracted to them. Querne is putting it in a more coherent, nice fashion than I, but there you go.


The Alistair thing is Schroedinger's cat. As long as he hasn't thought about his sexuality, he's practically pansexual and asexual at the same time. At any rate, the Alistair thing wasn't terribly serious. He just struck me as very stereotypically gay in many regards. Which isn't even to say that it's anywhere near reality. I definitely know more butch gay men than I know effeminate ones. But Alistair's clearly on the effeminate side.

And I'm not trying to make any qualitative judgment on sexual orientations one way or another. I just resent the idea that sexual orientation is hardwire into our very beings as opposed to be a matter of taste and occasionally choice. If someone only ever fancies one gender and never has any interest in the other, I couldn't care less.

And yes, I'm used to that kind of reaction. I know quite a few homosexuals (usually men, but then I tend to have troubles with men of any orientation for no apparent reason) who, in a defensive reaction to the world around them, celebrate and project their different lifestyle very starkly. Those guys usually feel like I'm trying to lessen just how special they are by daring to suggest that their Maker-given sexual orientation is simply a matter of preference. Oddly, conservative people share that sentiment at that point, though they are of course coming from a different direction.

And once more, yes, in a vacuum, without comparable experiences of their own, people will take more cues from their environment than their own mind. Because there's nothing comparable there to work from. This goes for people getting married and having kids before they realize they're homosexual for example. It's more likely for your environment to push you in the straight direction by majority alone. But I've seen the opposite happen at least once, with a girl who was a hardcore lesbian when I met her, who's now engaged to a strapping lad, pregnant and not the least bit interested in women. All of this apparently based on her best friend being a lesbian.

It's not my fault we're built that way.

#337
Gegenlicht

Gegenlicht
  • Members
  • 317 messages

Saibh wrote...

Gegenlicht wrote...

Querne wrote...

Some people are straight, others are not. There are about 76 billions things we don´t have to try out to know that we don´t like it. For the crushing majority of humans some kinds of sexuality are such a thing, even if it wasn´t that clear for you yourself.


At the risk of sounding obnoxious, that's a ****ing wide brush you're using. I can get behind not being physically attracted to gender Z as a rule, but I also constantly hear people ****ing and moaning that love isn't about superficialities. Which one is it now? Is humanity as a whole shallow or just narrow-minded? Hell, I'll let you decide.


You're bisexual. Maybe you're incapable of understanding only liking one gender, but guess what? For some people, they are incapable of being attracted to men or women. It just doesn't happen. It's hardwired in there, it's a part of their being. Just because it's not a part of yours doesn't demean or diminish what they know to be true. It's not superficial. It just plain isn't.


Heh. See what I wrote in my reply to your other post. Hadn't read this at the time, just FYI.

#338
Querne

Querne
  • Members
  • 303 messages
The brush is simply matching to about 2-7%, absolute maximum of ca. 11% of homosexuals, and it´s not even sure if everyone of them has tried out something other than sexuality with his own gender.
As I understand the hope that people will be more openminded in future imo it´s an absolutely daydream that it´s only a matter of habit or culture what gender we choose what can be easily explained by biological need for reproduction.

Please don´t distort what I write. I didn´t say that anybody knows, but that the crushing majority knows. And who told you that I didn´t try it out?

Sorry, I will opt out here, as the thread runs unfortunatly absolutely offtopic.

Modifié par Querne, 17 juillet 2010 - 01:39 .


#339
Gegenlicht

Gegenlicht
  • Members
  • 317 messages
At any rate, I've said my piece. I'm available to continue discussing this privately, but the thread's had enough of a sidetrack, and we seem to be rather firmly entrenched on each side of this. I'd rather not get this thread modded or locked.

#340
Monstruo696

Monstruo696
  • Members
  • 650 messages

Gegenlicht wrote...

At any rate, I've said my piece. I'm available to continue discussing this privately, but the thread's had enough of a sidetrack, and we seem to be rather firmly entrenched on each side of this. I'd rather not get this thread modded or locked.


I would, considering the issue has been addressed and no amount of gay bashing and straight hating will change anything the only purpose it can possibly serve  is as fuel for a flamewar.

Lock please.

#341
Saibh

Saibh
  • Members
  • 8 071 messages
I deleted it, since the others are right--off-topic, flame-war worthy...and quite frankly, I was getting sick of it.

Modifié par Saibh, 17 juillet 2010 - 01:45 .


#342
ejoslin

ejoslin
  • Members
  • 11 745 messages

Gegenlicht wrote...

The Alistair thing is Schroedinger's cat. As long as he hasn't thought about his sexuality, he's practically pansexual and asexual at the same time. At any rate, the Alistair thing wasn't terribly serious. He just struck me as very stereotypically gay in many regards. Which isn't even to say that it's anywhere near reality. I definitely know more butch gay men than I know effeminate ones. But Alistair's clearly on the effeminate side.


Except Alistair HAS thought about his sexuality -- he says as much in the lampost licking conversation.  Being a virgin has nothing to do with whom you're attracted to, anyway, especially when talking about an adult.

You're making it sound like sexual orientation is a choice.  It is NOT.  If it were, life for many people would be so much easier.  I know a few divorced women who wish they were gay because they do NOT want to deal with another man.

But anyway, Alistair is supposed to be a grown man -- somewhere between 19-24 depending on whom you ask.  His sexuality is established.  He is straight, not pansexual, not asexual.  He is an inexperienced straight man.

#343
TheMufflon

TheMufflon
  • Members
  • 2 265 messages

Gegenlicht wrote...

The Alistair thing is Schroedinger's cat. As long as he hasn't thought about his sexuality, he's practically pansexual and asexual at the same time. At any rate, the Alistair thing wasn't terribly serious. He just struck me as very stereotypically gay in many regards. Which isn't even to say that it's anywhere near reality. I definitely know more butch gay men than I know effeminate ones. But Alistair's clearly on the effeminate side.

And I'm not trying to make any qualitative judgment on sexual orientations one way or another. I just resent the idea that sexual orientation is hardwire into our very beings as opposed to be a matter of taste and occasionally choice. If someone only ever fancies one gender and never has any interest in the other, I couldn't care less.

And yes, I'm used to that kind of reaction. I know quite a few homosexuals (usually men, but then I tend to have troubles with men of any orientation for no apparent reason) who, in a defensive reaction to the world around them, celebrate and project their different lifestyle very starkly. Those guys usually feel like I'm trying to lessen just how special they are by daring to suggest that their Maker-given sexual orientation is simply a matter of preference. Oddly, conservative people share that sentiment at that point, though they are of course coming from a different direction.

And once more, yes, in a vacuum, without comparable experiences of their own, people will take more cues from their environment than their own mind. Because there's nothing comparable there to work from. This goes for people getting married and having kids before they realize they're homosexual for example. It's more likely for your environment to push you in the straight direction by majority alone. But I've seen the opposite happen at least once, with a girl who was a hardcore lesbian when I met her, who's now engaged to a strapping lad, pregnant and not the least bit interested in women. All of this apparently based on her best friend being a lesbian.

It's not my fault we're built that way.


1) You don't understand Schrödinger's Cat.

2) You assert a theory for which there is no evidence at all, yet you call others narrow-minded. I find that offensive.

#344
Grommash94

Grommash94
  • Members
  • 927 messages
Since when has virginity meant you don't know what gender you are attracted to? It isn't like you don't think about those sort of things, even though you have never experienced sex. Sexuality is never, ever, a choice. Ever.

Seriously, just ./facepalm.

Modifié par Grommash94, 17 juillet 2010 - 01:52 .


#345
Tirigon

Tirigon
  • Members
  • 8 573 messages

Wishpig wrote...

Lets face it... most girls just don't seem to feel the same way about two guys doin the nasty as most guys feel about two women doing the nasty.


Not true. Plenty of women like gay porn. In fact, "Gay" porn is made more for women than for gays, actually.

Considering that the porn industry is business, not a charity, this proves that it´s successful.

#346
Tirigon

Tirigon
  • Members
  • 8 573 messages

winter troll wrote...

oh come on people if you want to play porn game there are plenty of henti games on the market .


But these are not Dragon Age.


To be honest, I never played a hentai game. maybe I should do some day, I like anime drawing style:innocent:

#347
joriandrake

joriandrake
  • Members
  • 3 161 messages

Tirigon wrote...

winter troll wrote...

oh come on people if you want to play porn game there are plenty of henti games on the market .


But these are not Dragon Age.


To be honest, I never played a hentai game. maybe I should do some day, I like anime drawing style:innocent:


Tears to Tiara has a great story, and the PC version has now an english language patch too

#348
winter troll

winter troll
  • Members
  • 101 messages

Addai67 wrote...

winter troll wrote...

oh come on people if you want to play porn game there are plenty of henti games on the market .


It may shock you to learn that romances in DA are about... romance.  Not just pixel porn.


yeaaaaahhhh tale of love , hardship and reunion :wub: ........ you give them presents and then chouse dialogue options based on what you think npc is going to like . Very romantic.  Sounds exactly like love sim , minus that you cant go on dates in dragon age . 

Would be lovely if games would try exploring other plot cavites , like long term freindship , brotherhood , cibling love and so on.

If game going to have love plot , then it should be set character limmited dialogue options and various cutscenes involving you helping one another and chatting as you bond grows . Not the shallow I care about you , here a teddybear present type of thing.

#349
twincast

twincast
  • Members
  • 829 messages
My, pure popcorn entertainment this thread is, young padawans.

#350
DragonAddict

DragonAddict
  • Members
  • 441 messages
When I played DA, I didn't care that there were gay and lesbian romance options. Didn't interest me at all and had no interest in them. Whether the programmers have hetero, ****** or both in the game was their business because its their game. This is a game afterall and not reality so its no big deal to me. If you don't like the fact there might not be a gay romance in DA 2, then don't play it!!! The main reason for playing DA 2 in first place is not for the sex / romance, its the adventures and friends you meet along the way. If you want a gay game, I'm sure there are many out there to choose from. Its called variety, some are hetero, some are ****** and some are both. You can't force every game to have always the same options because it would be very boring and too generic, etc. And there was Zeferin and Leliana in DA so a no ****** sexuality option was totally covered. Some games are very male orientated and some are female orientated. Take your pick. Yes, to a large extent, bioware will program to what will make them the most money, that's just simple economics. If I programmed a game that became a hit, I would target the mass majority to make as much money as possible and to have addons and expansions and part 2, 3, etc. Stereoypes don't bother me at all either. classic gay guy, lesbian, butch hetero, etc., doesn't bother me. I'm not in the game to get my rocks off, I'm in the game to play, adventure,  loose myself from reality and just have a good time. Keep up the excellent work Bioware.