2001 réponses à ce sujet

[dgcatanisiri]

dgcatanisiri wrote...

All right, did anyone else come here not to discuss philosophy and social issues and all that other stuff and just want to discuss what we want in a guy for our Hawke?

Please? Guys, we've gone over this repeatedly by this point, can we PLEASE return to discussing Hawke's male love interest, as opposed to debating ME's romance options in a round of 'he said she said'?

[Jimmy Fury]

AlexXIV wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
But who is limiting you?

Reality.

Who is, all thing's considered, a total ****.

Well but in essence it is gaming companies themselves. I mean, how are we as fans or customers supposed to change ressources for you? We can buy the games, that's all we can do. If more people need to buy the game so you have more ressources then you need to appeal to more people, right?

Resources aren't just cash. Time, labor, physical space on a disc, the abilities of the game engine, and the technology available are all resources that limit what the devs can and can't do.

[Stanley Woo]

JrayM16 wrote...

I am personally in favor of determining a character's sexuality based on the character, and not as a pre-defined choice by devs.
What I mean is that David or someone(forgive me if you already determine things like this) should write up a cast of characters that they think would be interesting characters with a bunch of backstory and personality. Then, they should look at said characters and determine their sexuality based on that. It should not be a "Well, we want to have a bisexual character, so let's write that character." Writing characters around traits to shoehorn something in is bad writing, pure and simple.

I'm not sure how you create characters, but wouldn't it make more sense to have a sense of who the character is before you start writing him? Otherwise, how would you know how to write him? And this is excluding any "shoehorning," just plain old, basic character conception. i woudln't be able to write even myself as a character without certain traits being developed first: Asian, short, theatre guy, sarcastic. And my role is usually "plucky sidekick" or "vocal objector."

And if a creator does have to "shoehorn" a characterin, what's to say that he doesn't take just as much care in creating that "suddenly-required bisexual character" as he would as if that character was conceived of as necessary right from the get-go? Characters can fill a role all on their own, serve only to highlight the PC's character, or anything from Campbellian epic figure to Mary Sue.

THere should not be a policy to not have homosexual or bisezual characters, nor should there be a homosexual/bisexual quota that must be filled, both would be equally threatening to creativity and quality, which is really the most important consideration in videogames.

There isn't such a quota and never has been, no matter what some people seem to think every time the phrase "gay romance" is mentioned. We've had this same discussion since Neverwinter Nights, I think.

It is also worth noting that setting should be reflected when determing how characters express their sexuality. For instance, in a setting where homosexuality is frowned upon, then it would be logical to have homosexual characters who feel nervous about revealing their homosexuality.
When things pan out, there probably should be some ******/bisexual characters in these games because there are ******/bisexual people in real life. However, they should be in the game because they are strong characters whose sexuality fits that character and not to fill some arbitrary obligation set by the fans or anybody.

Again, despite a lot of people thinking otherwise, we already write characters as characters first and foremost. Their personality traits, preferences, and biases are pretty well-defined, and audiences seem to really like (or really hate) them, which indicates they're working. Our forums are filled with character-specific threads, character-specific romance threads, and inter-character threads, and I'm sure thre is much fanfic (elsewhere online) involving such characters.

If all that is true, why do some people still feel like we're doing something wrong?

[Bryy_Miller]

AlexXIV wrote...
how are we as fans or customers supposed to change ressources for you?

We can't. There is no way for us to magically give them more time, money (since every project's budget is different), or disc space. All we can do is buy or not buy.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 03 janvier 2011 - 10:29 .

[JrayM16]

@David

Well, I never really said that you guys didn't do that, just expressing my opinion as to how things should be done to my fellow forumites.

@Chris

You somewhat misunderstood me. I didn't mean writing the characters full out, just creating them. I should have clarified. Also, as I partially pointed out to Gaider, the post was not levelled as an accusation at you guys, I was just trying to tear down the opposite ends of the spectrum for the purposes of argument.

[RosaAquafire]

For clarification, the reason why I'm fairly sure the F/F content is there to festishize lesbians is because it's not actually there for homosexual/bisexual women to play. That's obvious enough. We're told again and again that males are the biggest market share and while we women get our stuff, it's never as forefront -- and most of us are bummed by that, but we get it. So there's now way that, with men being the main audience, there would be a romance for gay women, and not one for gay men, as gay women is a way smaller audience. That means that the f/f content was for men. Which is ... yeah.

I won't back down that that's a messy double standard to have. I'm a bisexual woman, and ... I'm really, really tired of feeling like fantasy material for straight men :/ It sucks when a game I really like seems to support this attitude that I get in life all the time and bums me out. Is that not fair?

The fact that male shepard "can't be gay" and female shephard can is just a mess of weird things to me. There's the possibility that the explanation is entirely innocent, but ... I can't imagine what it would possibly be.
Yes, yes, market constraints and time constraints and greater share of audience, I get all of that. I've been one of the champions for "stop begging for gay-exclusive romances, bi romances are wonderful and I'm grateful for them! (Also, there's nothing offensive about rogues being bi, wtf!) But this one sits reeeeally bad with me. I don't think it's unreasonable to get a bit miffed about it

ETA: To clarify, it's REALLY just the double standard that gets me here. That FemShep CAN be gay, but MShep CAN'T. I don't mind a little titilation -- I personally enjoyed Miranda's behind up in my grill But this goes beyond that, I don't know. It's the "a hero can't be gay, but a heroine can" thing that's a little weird.
Or maybe it's just a soapbox for me. In any case, I did lose respect for the ME team for it, and I can't really help that, but if BW is upset by that, I'll keep it down. I like you guys enough for that!

Modifié par RosaAquafire, 03 janvier 2011 - 10:49 .

[Stanley Woo]

Oh, don't back down on account of l'il ol' me, RosaAquafire. Or David Gaider. We're okay with disagreements, and like I always say, when it comes to our preferences in games, "different strokes for different folks."



If the double standard bothers you, it bothers you. I don't know if we can resolve anything, since you seem pretty passionate about it and the ME team isn't here in this thread to clarify anything. but I am, as always, okay with agreeing to disagree. the world would be a boring place indeed if everything thought the same way about stuff. i do like arguing, though.

[RosaAquafire]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Oh, don't back down on account of l'il ol' me, RosaAquafire. Or David Gaider. We're okay with disagreements, and like I always say, when it comes to our preferences in games, "different strokes for different folks."

If the double standard bothers you, it bothers you. I don't know if we can resolve anything, since you seem pretty passionate about it and the ME team isn't here in this thread to clarify anything. but I am, as always, okay with agreeing to disagree. the world would be a boring place indeed if everything thought the same way about stuff. i do like arguing, though.

I do, too >_>

Okay back on topic, sorry for the derail. Who wants to buttkiss David Gaider for giving us S/S in DA2 some more??

Modifié par RosaAquafire, 03 janvier 2011 - 11:00 .

[AlexXIV]

Jimmy Fury wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
But who is limiting you?

Reality.

Who is, all thing's considered, a total ****.

Well but in essence it is gaming companies themselves. I mean, how are we as fans or customers supposed to change ressources for you? We can buy the games, that's all we can do. If more people need to buy the game so you have more ressources then you need to appeal to more people, right?

Resources aren't just cash. Time, labor, physical space on a disc, the abilities of the game engine, and the technology available are all resources that limit what the devs can and can't do.

I am not blaming the devs. I know that much. That why I say company. The only thing that boggles me is that DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O depsite DA:O's success. 

[AlexXIV]

RosaAquafire wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Oh, don't back down on account of l'il ol' me, RosaAquafire. Or David Gaider. We're okay with disagreements, and like I always say, when it comes to our preferences in games, "different strokes for different folks."

If the double standard bothers you, it bothers you. I don't know if we can resolve anything, since you seem pretty passionate about it and the ME team isn't here in this thread to clarify anything. but I am, as always, okay with agreeing to disagree. the world would be a boring place indeed if everything thought the same way about stuff. i do like arguing, though.

I do, too >_>

Okay back on topic, sorry for the derail. Who wants to buttkiss David Gaider for giving us S/S in DA2 some more??

What about a handshake? Or pat on the shoulder? I don't like butt-kissing people I don't really know well.

[David Gaider]

RosaAquafire wrote...
Who wants to buttkiss David Gaider for giving us S/S in DA2 some more??

No need. I happen to enjoy writing them, when I get the chance.

[Maugrim]

In the spirit of getting things back on track here is a picture of Jonathan Rhys Meyers. Someone as intense, sensual and moody as his portrayal of a young Henry VIII would be right up my alley for a M/M romance play through of mine.





Heck I'm a goldstar lesbian and even I would have to make an exception for this man.

[Bryy_Miller]

AlexXIV wrote...

Jimmy Fury wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
But who is limiting you?

Reality.

Who is, all thing's considered, a total ****.

Well but in essence it is gaming companies themselves. I mean, how are we as fans or customers supposed to change ressources for you? We can buy the games, that's all we can do. If more people need to buy the game so you have more ressources then you need to appeal to more people, right?

Resources aren't just cash. Time, labor, physical space on a disc, the abilities of the game engine, and the technology available are all resources that limit what the devs can and can't do.

I am not blaming the devs. I know that much. That why I say company. The only thing that boggles me is that DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O depsite DA:O's success. 

Wait, so are you bashing BioWare (or even EA) as a whole for not giving DA2 an unlimited budget? 

[AlexXIV]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Jimmy Fury wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
But who is limiting you?

Reality.

Who is, all thing's considered, a total ****.

Well but in essence it is gaming companies themselves. I mean, how are we as fans or customers supposed to change ressources for you? We can buy the games, that's all we can do. If more people need to buy the game so you have more ressources then you need to appeal to more people, right?

Resources aren't just cash. Time, labor, physical space on a disc, the abilities of the game engine, and the technology available are all resources that limit what the devs can and can't do.

I am not blaming the devs. I know that much. That why I say company. The only thing that boggles me is that DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O depsite DA:O's success. 

Wait, so are you bashing BioWare (or even EA) as a whole for not giving DA2 an unlimited budget? 

Yeah right, that's exactly what I was saying.

[LiquidGrape]

David Gaider wrote...

RosaAquafire wrote...
Who wants to buttkiss David Gaider for giving us S/S in DA2 some more??

No need. I happen to enjoy writing them, when I get the chance.

And there's no possible way butt-kissing would increase that chance?

I mean, we have the people. Willing and able.

Modifié par LiquidGrape, 03 janvier 2011 - 11:22 .

[pallascedar]

I'll actually make a post addressing the topic of the thread! I know the whole thread is about who we want to be the romancee, but really, I'm happy being surprised. From BG and DA:O, I liked Aerie, Jaheira, Alistair, Leliana, Zevran and Morrigan. About the only thing I really want from any romance, be they M/M, F/F, or M/F, is that they be well written, fun, and different (and I've full confident they will be)...and probably not a dwarf because I'm racist (except female dwarves, they're cute)
Though the M/M romance should be the best, because catering to me is all that matters.

Modifié par pallascedar, 03 janvier 2011 - 11:21 .

[Bryy_Miller]

AlexXIV wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I am not blaming the devs. I know that much. That why I say company. The only thing that boggles me is that DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O depsite DA:O's success. 

Wait, so are you bashing BioWare (or even EA) as a whole for not giving DA2 an unlimited budget? 

Yeah right, that's exactly what I was saying.

Well, that's kind of what it seemed like you were saying, so I responded in kind. What do you actually mean, then?

[AlexXIV]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I am not blaming the devs. I know that much. That why I say company. The only thing that boggles me is that DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O depsite DA:O's success. 

Wait, so are you bashing BioWare (or even EA) as a whole for not giving DA2 an unlimited budget? 

Yeah right, that's exactly what I was saying.

Well, that's kind of what it seemed like you were saying, so I responded in kind. What do you actually mean, then?

We derail this thread I fear. I said I am wondering why DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O. Nowhere did I say they should have unlimited ressources. Actually unlimited ressources and time being a ressource would mean it would take forever to make it, no?

Modifié par AlexXIV, 03 janvier 2011 - 11:25 .

[Ziggeh]

AlexXIV wrote...

I said I am wondering why DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O.

Looking at one element is going to be fairly misleading. We know they've doubled the cinematic department, but on that basis we can't say they have double the total resources. At a guess, they assign said resources on a project by project basis.

[David Gaider]

AlexXIV wrote...
I said I am wondering why DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O.

Because taking 5 years to make a game is a luxury few can reasonably afford.

[Cobrawar]

Ziggeh wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I said I am wondering why DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O.

Looking at one element is going to be fairly misleading. We know they've doubled the cinematic department, but on that basis we can't say they have double the total resources. At a guess, they assign said resources on a project by project basis.

 its proably the expensive voice acting, but thats just a guess on my part

Modifié par Cobrawar, 03 janvier 2011 - 11:31 .

[Bryy_Miller]

AlexXIV wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I am not blaming the devs. I know that much. That why I say company. The only thing that boggles me is that DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O depsite DA:O's success. 

Wait, so are you bashing BioWare (or even EA) as a whole for not giving DA2 an unlimited budget? 

Yeah right, that's exactly what I was saying.

Well, that's kind of what it seemed like you were saying, so I responded in kind. What do you actually mean, then?

We derail this thread I fear. I said I am wondering why DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O.

We don't know the budget for DA2. So speculating on why BioWare/EA didn't give as much budget/resources to DA2 as you would like (which you have simply implied to be "more") is futile.

[YoziMaiden]

pallascedar wrote...

I'll actually make a post addressing the topic of the thread! I know the whole thread is about who we want to be the romancee, but really, I'm happy being surprised. From BG and DA:O, I liked Aerie, Jaheira, Alistair, Leliana, Zevran and Morrigan. About the only thing I really want from any romance, be they M/M, F/F, or M/F, is that they be well written, fun, and different (and I've full confident they will be)...and probably not a dwarf because I'm racist (except female dwarves, they're cute)
Though the M/M romance should be the best, because catering to me is all that matters.

Yea,  I noticed that about Dwarven women too....  they did tend to have rather nice curves.

[magicwins]

David Gaider wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
I said I am wondering why DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O.

Because taking 5 years to make a game is a luxury few can reasonably afford.

Did DAO not do well, critically and commercially? If resources are a constraint in this context, can you not plead, 'With time comes awesomeness'?

[AlexXIV]

magicwins wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
I said I am wondering why DA2 seems to have less ressources than DA:O.

Because taking 5 years to make a game is a luxury few can reasonably afford.

Did DAO not do well, critically and commercially? If resources are a constraint in this context, can you not plead, 'With time comes awesomeness'?

Well I assume they were thinking of a franchise to begin with, so they didn't expect DA:O to pay off alone without the rest of the franchise. That makes actually sense.