2001 réponses à ce sujet

[Arrtis]

Gaider....you....killed this thread....eh nevermind it seemed to slow down before you arrived.
Also Now that you know I am for equality is making the romances into a patch a bad thing?

Modifié par Arrtis, 31 août 2010 - 03:39 .

[zahra]

Chris Readman wrote...

Arrtis wrote...

As a person that has gone through tragedy that sounds hardly like a slap in the face.
Sounds more like over sensitivity.Come on...teasing?I seriously think some people need to experience real suffering in order to get a better perspective.

So constant psychological torture isn't considered "real" suffering? Granted, I may be a tad dramatic in my phrasing, but it doesn't discount the fact that we have to go through life being told that our existence itself is wrong. Of course this plight may not be comparable to war victims, or people going through starvation, but it's definitely much more than a "normal" person has to go through.

The point I'm trying to make is that if so many aspects of your life are already so frustrating, how would you feel if you have to go through even more hurdles in order to enjoy something that "normal" people can readily do?

Ugh. Its so frustrating to have to watch this. @Artiss, please stop whatever you're doing. Its bordering on trolling. You know exactly what kind of responses your remarks will get, and whatever your personal belief may be it isn't a discussion when you just add one inflammatory remark over the other.

On topic - I liked it when the LI made the initiative to start the romance and I hope that DA2 doesn't make it necessary for us to initiate it all the time. It feels a bit more human, rather than just being in the position of puppet master.

[Quercus]

David Gaider wrote...

I'm almost tempted to find my last post on this topic and simply cut-and-paste it into here... but maybe not. I'll just say the following:

Romance options are just that-- optional. They're an extra part of the game and not really central to its purpose. Perhaps you think they should be, but that's beside the point. They're not. Being an option means that they're essentially a luxury, and while people may argue as to exactly who's luxury they get to be they don't go beyond that. They're not a right, and treating them like one is taking it a step too far. We put in content as we can afford it, based on the size of the audience that content is likely to be used by-- not according to what's "fair".

This comes with a few caveats, however:

1) We'll always put in content for smaller portions of the audience, whenever we can. In essence, anything that's available as an optional choice only applies to a smaller portion of the audience and really it's just a matter of degrees. If we only put in content that 100% of the audience would see then you would have no choices at all. That's not really what we're about, even if we do have to be realistic.

2) You don't get to argue that an option you don't like and don't intend to use shouldn't exist at all, for anyone. Sorry, but our only concern here is that there are people who will like it. If you don't, then opt not to use it. That's why it's a choice.

3) Persuant to the above, beware of majority privilege. It's very easy for people who don't have an issue that the minority feel (and this applies to race and gender-- in gaming, particularly-- as well as to sexual orientation) to believe that something is "not a problem". "I don't see why you're so uptight about it!" Realize when you make these sorts of comments that you have no idea what you're talking about, for all our sakes. You don't know what it feels like to be marginalized, and it behooves those in the majority to use at least a modicum of sensitivity when it comes to addressing such issues. No, games aren't a platform for social change, but that doesn't mean we are also absent of responsibility when we include content in our games where such issues can arise. If we were to claim "majority privilege" as our only guide, we do nothing but add to the problem. That said, we do face other limitations-- not least of which, as I said, is that this isn't the point of the game and thus is only ever going to get limited resources.

Insofar as the male-male romance content goes specifically, there's no evidence to suggest it affected sales in the slightest. In fact, our own telemetry shows that the content was used by more players than most people would assume (you can draw your own conclusions from that). If the only objection someone can muster is "it makes me uncomfortable" then there's not too much to say-- there's lots of things in a Mature-rated game that could potentially make someone uncomfortable, some of them not even optional. That's the risk you take, I guess, when you play something that is not, by design, intended to be inoffensive to all. Trying to object from an economic standpoint, however, really doesn't wash.

What does this mean for DA2? Well, we haven't talked about any romances yet. So you'll have to see-- we're not making any promises, in particular because of the limitations I keep bringing up. If we don't include same-sex content, however, it's not because we assume too many people will think it's "icky" or because we fear a backlash, economic or otherwise.

Please return to your regularly scheduled debate.

I guess I could read in this that the reason why Bethany isn't a romance option, is because you're planning something big with her that makes it impossible, and don't believe that incest is the work of Satan?
The reason why I would have liked Bethany as a romance option is because I always thought that incest in romans can really turn up the drama level.
George R. R. Martin's ' A Song of Ice and Fire' did this really well for example.

Modifié par Shiroukai, 31 août 2010 - 03:47 .

[zahra]

David Gaider wrote...




3) Persuant to the above, beware of majority privilege. It's very easy for people who don't have an issue that the minority feel (and this applies to race and gender-- in gaming, particularly-- as well as to sexual orientation) to believe that something is "not a problem". "I don't see why you're so uptight about it!" Realize when you make these sorts of comments that you have no idea what you're talking about, for all our sakes. You don't know what it feels like to be marginalized, and it behooves those in the majority to use at least a modicum of sensitivity when it comes to addressing such issues. No, games aren't a platform for social change, but that doesn't mean we are also absent of responsibility when we include content in our games where such issues can arise. If we were to claim "majority privilege" as our only guide, we do nothing but add to the problem. That said, we do face other limitations-- not least of which, as I said, is that this isn't the point of the game and thus is only ever going to get limited resources.

Gaider = 

[David Gaider]

Arrtis wrote...
Gaider....you....killed this thread....eh nevermind it seemed to slow down before you arrived.
Also Now that you know I am for equality is making the romances into a patch a bad thing?

I'm assuming you're referring to the idea that we would incude same-sex romances in some kind of patch or DLC content? I think the idea for DLC is that it applies to as many players as possible-- the audience for DLC is already only a portion of the whole as it is-- so that seems unlikely. Not to mention that, if we intend to include this kind of content, there's no reason at all not to include it with the main game. Why we would purposefully segregate content or make it appear punitive in its nature is beyond me.

[Arrtis]

David Gaider wrote...

Arrtis wrote...
Gaider....you....killed this thread....eh nevermind it seemed to slow down before you arrived.
Also Now that you know I am for equality is making the romances into a patch a bad thing?

I'm assuming you're referring to the idea that we would incude same-sex romances in some kind of patch or DLC content? I think the idea for DLC is that it applies to as many players as possible-- the audience for DLC is already only a portion of the whole as it is-- so that seems unlikely. Not to mention that, if we intend to include this kind of content, there's no reason at all not to include it with the main game. Why we would purposefully segregate content or make it appear punitive in its nature is beyond me.

What was the reason for shale again?
I am thinking so much more than just ROmance.
I am thinking a number of other things allowing players to customize their playing experience.

[David Gaider]

Arrtis wrote...
What was the reason for shale again?
I am thinking so much more than just ROmance.
I am thinking a number of other things allowing players to customize their playing experience.

Err... Shale was a follower available to all, and not a romance. It was also a salvage of content that was originally cut, and designed to be an incentive for players that bought the game at retail rather than used. What's your point, exactly?

[Quercus]

David Gaider wrote...

Arrtis wrote...
What was the reason for shale again?
I am thinking so much more than just ROmance.
I am thinking a number of other things allowing players to customize their playing experience.

Err... Shale was a follower available to all, and not a romance. It was also a salvage of content that was originally cut, and designed to be an incentive for players that bought the game at retail rather than used. What's your point, exactly?

Forget it Gaider, it's not important. My question however is, go comment on that instead .

[nightcobra]

question to david gaider:



will DA2 have funny random encounters like in origins? like the monty pithon and superman references.



since mass effect 2 i've been imaniging a group of darkspawn or bandits killed by a piece of metal falling from the sky, and inscribed in it you can barely make out the name "sir isaac newton"

[Arrtis]

David Gaider wrote...

Arrtis wrote...
What was the reason for shale again?
I am thinking so much more than just ROmance.
I am thinking a number of other things allowing players to customize their playing experience.

Err... Shale was a follower available to all, and not a romance. It was also a salvage of content that was originally cut, and designed to be an incentive for players that bought the game at retail rather than used. What's your point, exactly?

I like the idea of having a choice of cutting somethings out of my game.
I believe it can have a different experience to it and add replay.*at least for me*
Patching can be done on consoles and such So it would be adding more options there.
No I do not know the specifics that would be required to ahve such a thing happen.
If someone did find something that amde them uncomftable they can always take it out....
I want more choice.
Of course I realise this will likely never happen though.

[Kyenne]

zahra wrote...

David Gaider wrote...




3) Persuant to the above, beware of majority privilege. It's very easy for people who don't have an issue that the minority feel (and this applies to race and gender-- in gaming, particularly-- as well as to sexual orientation) to believe that something is "not a problem". "I don't see why you're so uptight about it!" Realize when you make these sorts of comments that you have no idea what you're talking about, for all our sakes. You don't know what it feels like to be marginalized, and it behooves those in the majority to use at least a modicum of sensitivity when it comes to addressing such issues. No, games aren't a platform for social change, but that doesn't mean we are also absent of responsibility when we include content in our games where such issues can arise. If we were to claim "majority privilege" as our only guide, we do nothing but add to the problem. That said, we do face other limitations-- not least of which, as I said, is that this isn't the point of the game and thus is only ever going to get limited resources.

Gaider = 

Agreed! It gives me the fuzzies when developers come here and talk intelligently about privilege. So thanks, guys

[ErichHartmann]

Adriano87 wrote...

I'm serious about it ... If Bioware Put ******-Bi Sexual Content in DA2, so many of straight People [Absolute Majority of People] won't buy it at all , including me.

Do you work for Fox/Faux news?  Guess what?  The Sims is one of the best selling games of all time and they had open relationships from day 1.  I can't imagine how many books and movies you avoid because it makes you "uncomfortable". 

[exoproto]

Adriano87 wrote...

I'm serious about it ... If Bioware Put ******-Bi Sexual Content in DA2, so many of straight People [Absolute Majority of People] won't buy it at all , including me.

If that were the case, why did so many people buy DA:O?

You aren't the voice of the majority. I pertain to the majority and yet you see me participating in this discussion without any issues whatsoever.

Modifié par exoproto, 31 août 2010 - 04:14 .

[David Gaider]

Adriano87 wrote...
I'm serious about it ... If Bioware Put ******-Bi Sexual Content in DA2, so many of straight People [Absolute Majority of People] won't buy it at all , including me.

People threaten to not buy games all the time if they don't get what they want, or if we include something they don't want. Considering that this is content that some people do want, we're not worried about the possibility of including it. But you're welcome to express your opinion, so long as you do so politely-- just remember that "it's just my opinion" is not an excuse for expressing intolerance.

Modifié par David Gaider, 31 août 2010 - 04:16 .

[Rogue Unit]

Shiroukai wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I'm almost tempted to find my last post on this topic and simply cut-and-paste it into here... but maybe not. I'll just say the following:

Romance options are just that-- optional. They're an extra part of the game and not really central to its purpose. Perhaps you think they should be, but that's beside the point. They're not. Being an option means that they're essentially a luxury, and while people may argue as to exactly who's luxury they get to be they don't go beyond that. They're not a right, and treating them like one is taking it a step too far. We put in content as we can afford it, based on the size of the audience that content is likely to be used by-- not according to what's "fair".

This comes with a few caveats, however:

1) We'll always put in content for smaller portions of the audience, whenever we can. In essence, anything that's available as an optional choice only applies to a smaller portion of the audience and really it's just a matter of degrees. If we only put in content that 100% of the audience would see then you would have no choices at all. That's not really what we're about, even if we do have to be realistic.

2) You don't get to argue that an option you don't like and don't intend to use shouldn't exist at all, for anyone. Sorry, but our only concern here is that there are people who will like it. If you don't, then opt not to use it. That's why it's a choice.

3) Persuant to the above, beware of majority privilege. It's very easy for people who don't have an issue that the minority feel (and this applies to race and gender-- in gaming, particularly-- as well as to sexual orientation) to believe that something is "not a problem". "I don't see why you're so uptight about it!" Realize when you make these sorts of comments that you have no idea what you're talking about, for all our sakes. You don't know what it feels like to be marginalized, and it behooves those in the majority to use at least a modicum of sensitivity when it comes to addressing such issues. No, games aren't a platform for social change, but that doesn't mean we are also absent of responsibility when we include content in our games where such issues can arise. If we were to claim "majority privilege" as our only guide, we do nothing but add to the problem. That said, we do face other limitations-- not least of which, as I said, is that this isn't the point of the game and thus is only ever going to get limited resources.

Insofar as the male-male romance content goes specifically, there's no evidence to suggest it affected sales in the slightest. In fact, our own telemetry shows that the content was used by more players than most people would assume (you can draw your own conclusions from that). If the only objection someone can muster is "it makes me uncomfortable" then there's not too much to say-- there's lots of things in a Mature-rated game that could potentially make someone uncomfortable, some of them not even optional. That's the risk you take, I guess, when you play something that is not, by design, intended to be inoffensive to all. Trying to object from an economic standpoint, however, really doesn't wash.

What does this mean for DA2? Well, we haven't talked about any romances yet. So you'll have to see-- we're not making any promises, in particular because of the limitations I keep bringing up. If we don't include same-sex content, however, it's not because we assume too many people will think it's "icky" or because we fear a backlash, economic or otherwise.

Please return to your regularly scheduled debate.

I guess I could read in this that the reason why Bethany isn't a romance option, is because you're planning something big with her that makes it impossible, and don't believe that incest is the work of Satan?
The reason why I would have liked Bethany as a romance option is because I always thought that incest in romans can really turn up the drama level.
George R. R. Martin's ' A Song of Ice and Fire' did this really well for example.

I think this guy is on to something...

[David Gaider]

Shiroukai wrote...
I guess I could read in this that the reason why Bethany isn't a romance option, is because you're planning something big with her that makes it impossible, and don't believe that incest is the work of Satan?
The reason why I would have liked Bethany as a romance option is because I always thought that incest in romans can really turn up the drama level.
George R. R. Martin's ' A Song of Ice and Fire' did this really well for example.

We might bring it up as a plot point, if we cared to-- just as George R.R. Martin does.

Bringing it up as something for the player to indulge in? We're not interested. Not because it's "wrong" or anything of the sort-- we're just not interested. I suggest fanfic.

[zahra]

Adriano87 wrote...

I'm serious about it ... If Bioware Put ******-Bi Sexual Content in DA2, so many of straight People [Absolute Majority of People] won't buy it at all , including me.

People like you make me want to have a gay wedding even though I'm straight. Just to mess with you. Because its so easy. Gay pplz all up in ur gamez, ruinin' ur life.

[Quercus]

David Gaider wrote...

Shiroukai wrote...
I guess I could read in this that the reason why Bethany isn't a romance option, is because you're planning something big with her that makes it impossible, and don't believe that incest is the work of Satan?
The reason why I would have liked Bethany as a romance option is because I always thought that incest in romans can really turn up the drama level.
George R. R. Martin's ' A Song of Ice and Fire' did this really well for example.

We might bring it up as a plot point, if we cared to-- just as George R.R. Martin does.

Bringing it up as something for the player to indulge in? We're not interested. Not because it's "wrong" or anything of the sort-- we're just not interested. I suggest fanfic.

This is something I can accept with ease, thanks for the respond .
Although I do hope to see something like this as a plot point or an indulgeon for players in future DA games.
I'm a sucker for drama romance, be that incest or inter racial, if it's seen as something bad in that society it really spices thinks up for me.

Modifié par Shiroukai, 31 août 2010 - 04:41 .

[Arrtis]

zahra not cool.
To try to get this jump started.
Is anyone against a shy gay male dwarf for a romance?
If so why?

Modifié par Arrtis, 31 août 2010 - 04:37 .

[eucatastrophe]

zahra wrote...

Adriano87 wrote...

I'm serious about it ... If Bioware Put ******-Bi Sexual Content in DA2, so many of straight People [Absolute Majority of People] won't buy it at all , including me.

People like you make me want to have a gay wedding even though I'm straight. Just to mess with you. Because its so easy. Gay pplz all up in ur gamez, ruinin' ur life.

That made me smile. Thanks

There are 2-3 posters here that definitely make me not smile though and I wish there was some way I didn't have to see their posts. but such is life

[NKKKK]

David Graider = Giant middle finger to anyone

[ErichHartmann]

Adriano87 wrote...

exoproto wrote...

Adriano87 wrote...

I'm serious about it ... If Bioware Put ******-Bi Sexual Content in DA2, so many of straight People [Absolute Majority of People] won't buy it at all , including me.

If that were the case, why did so many people buy DA:O?

You aren't the voice of the majority. I pertain to the majority and yet you see me participating in this discussion without any issues whatsoever.

those people didn't know about that, the High selling of Dragon Origins was because of its similar Story-Gameplay(better to say Atmosphere) to Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter nights series. and you should know that a Fantasy Game sells more than a Sci-Fi game and both have less selling than a Real-World Game. [just like that crap Modern Warfare II]

other thing is there are undecided and WE DON'T CARE people which haven't any clear decision about this matter.
There is Idealist (and what a crap Ideal it is) that want freedom and equality of everything including Sex and Relations ... the only thing that matters for them is to do the job and complete the Moral Chaos in the world [talking about there is no ethics at all or we have different kind of view or etc.] ... so I hope politicians to do more restrictions about it and do works on Society to hinter spreading abnormal sexual acts. I also hope Psychologists and Genetic Professors to find a cure for this Blight.

the Reason I hate Obama is his Party with Homosexuals, and I've become a supporter of republicans only because of Obamas direct speech and action for them.
Thats disgusting. I dislike these group in rational way, and nothing can change this fact; because I object Hedonism, Anarchism and Immorality.

End of my Argue.

Just, STFU.  People like you continue the circle of hate.