685 réponses à ce sujet

[Dhiro]

Saibh wrote...

adembroski11 wrote...

I'm surprised nobody's asked for surprise TS's yet.

This whole issue is becoming absurd. If they'd never included homosexual relationships in the first place, nobody ever would have said a word. Now that they've set that expectations, people feel the need to take the proverbial mile.

The old line is, "it's not a dating sim"... you wouldn't know it by glancing at the forums, would you?

...Er, I definitely think people would have asked for gay options. Gay people don't disappear when they're not mentioned, and they don't spring into existence when they are mentioned, or if you hear a bell ring, or clap, or something.

We're aways here. Like ninjas, only more awesome.

[Razaroh]

adembroski11 wrote...

I'm surprised nobody's asked for surprise TS's yet.

This whole issue is becoming absurd. If they'd never included homosexual relationships in the first place, nobody ever would have said a word. Now that they've set that expectations, people feel the need to take the proverbial mile.

The old line is, "it's not a dating sim"... you wouldn't know it by glancing at the forums, would you?

You know them minorities, give 'em an inch and then they want the whole football field.

And no, Bioware games aren't dating sims but the romance aspects are perhaps the most relatable part to a large majority of the people. I don't know what it's like to be framed for murder, to lose my family in a massacre, or have the tremendous and abstract burden of saving the world shoved upon my shoulders. But falling for a cute girl with a pretty accent? Now that I can see.

Modifié par Razaroh, 15 janvier 2011 - 04:06 .

[Liablecocksman]

Razaroh wrote...
You know them minorities, give 'em an inch and then they want the whole football field.

And no, Bioware games aren't dating sims but the romance aspects are perhaps the most relatable part to a large majority of the people. I don't know what it's like to be framed for murder, to lose my family in a massacre, or have the tremendous and abstract burden of saving the world shoved upon my shoulders. But falling for a cute girl with a pretty accent? Now that I can see.

So games should aim to make the player character as relateable (in terms of actions the player can relate to) as possible?
Is that what you're saying?

Please...

[Razaroh]

Liable****sman wrote...

So games should aim to make the player character as relateable (in terms of actions the player can relate to) as possible?
Is that what you're saying?

Please...

Isn't Gaider often going on about having 'hooks' in the games? People can relate to romance therefore Love Interests serve as another hook for the player.

But it is a servant for Bioware games, mind you, not the master.

Modifié par Razaroh, 15 janvier 2011 - 04:57 .

[Liablecocksman]

Razaroh wrote...
Isn't
Gaider often going on about having 'hooks' in the games? People can
relate to romance therefore Love Interests serve as another hook for
the player.

But it is a servant for Bioware games, mind you, not the master.

But you should, in terms of RPGs, aim for (which is what Bioware is doing) relateability with the characters, and not their actions.

The romances are themselves entirely optional, meaning that whatever "hook" you're speaking off isn't required at all. Describing it as "the most relatable part to a large majority of the people" is faulty for that reason. If it was so crucial to the game, a romance wouldn't be optional, but instead an integral part of gameplay.

Instead, you are meant to relate to characters, their desires, their feelings and whatever else about them, while simultaneously being entertained by(not relating to) the story, the plot and the game.

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 15 janvier 2011 - 05:05 .

[Ziggeh]

Liable****sman wrote...
The romances are themselves entirely optional, meaning that whatever "hook" you're speaking off isn't required at all.

But is clearly desirable. So the point you're making is that people shouldn't ask for what they want.

[Liablecocksman]

Ziggeh wrote...
But is clearly desirable. So the point you're making is that people shouldn't ask for what they want.

I'm not asking for anything, I am responding to a post about romances being the most "relateable" thing in a RPG, and that a player could not relate to the "actions" of the PC, further necessitating romances.

[FaeQueenCory]

David Gaider wrote...

Mistress9Nine wrote...
I don't mind straight only romances as long as there isn't a double standard. What bothered me in DA is that you had 2 str8 and 2 bi options. No strictly gay options. It's easy to say "We didn't do all bi romances because the characters would've needed to be written differently" but I can't really accept it as an excuse until this works both ways.

We didn't (and won't) do strictly gay romances because a romance is very expensive content-- both from a writing, cinematic and testing perspective. It's one thing to add the extra costs to piggy-back on top of an existing romance plotline (and by this I don't necessarily mean "add gay option to straight romance"... it could just as easily be the reverse) and quite something else to have a romance created from whole cloth.

All content has a cost. Sometimes people forget that we as developers create content -- not romance options. It's not solely about whether you have the choice and how fair that is, but whether or not we can afford to make it and whether it fits into the rest of the project we're making.

Very true, Mr. Gaider.
Besides, if you really want someone as a LI... someone's gonna have made an "equal love mod".
On the pc, everyone's a possible LI... With some minor mods anyways...

[Jimmy Fury]

FaeQueenCory wrote...
Very true, Mr. Gaider.
Besides, if you really want someone as a LI... someone's gonna have made an "equal love mod".
On the pc, everyone's a possible LI... With some minor mods anyways...

If mods are possible that is. Has there been word on whether a toolset update is actually happening? Last I heard it was still up in the air.

As for the topic... everyone being bi creates way too much ninjamance potential. No thank you.

[Blacklash93]

I'm assuming people want this because they're afraid they're going to get the LI they don't like.



Like how a lot of people wanted Alistair instead of Zevran.

[catabuca]

Liable****sman wrote...

But you should, in terms of RPGs, aim for (which is what Bioware is doing) relateability with the characters, and not their actions.

The romances are themselves entirely optional, meaning that whatever "hook" you're speaking off isn't required at all. Describing it as "the most relatable part to a large majority of the people" is faulty for that reason. If it was so crucial to the game, a romance wouldn't be optional, but instead an integral part of gameplay.

Instead, you are meant to relate to characters, their desires, their feelings and whatever else about them, while simultaneously being entertained by(not relating to) the story, the plot and the game.

You can't tell someone else what they are or are not meant to relate to in a game. We are all not the same person, each of us brings different things to the table when we play one of these games.

I, for example, love my various play throughs of DAO where my PC romanced Alistair, because it makes the choices my PC makes later on in the game all the more important and poignant. I wouldn't begin to suggest that when you play the game you must take a romance with Alistair (had you pursued one) into account when deciding whether to have him marry Anora, whether to have him executed, whether to have him leave the party, etc. These decisions are yours, and your motivation and that of your PCs is your own. I, however, do take these things into account, and the feelings of my PC toward Alistair in this situation often have a deep effect on which path they will take.

The fact remains, however, that some players do indeed use romance storylines as a 'hook' into the world, as an extra layer that helps them build up motivation for their characters' actions. That they are optional means nothing. There are lots of things in these games that are optional, but that does not mean that during play throughs when you choose to include them they are not important. Otherwise they would not be there at all to choose from, no?

[Sophiatje]

I think that would be fun although a little weird. I liked both Alistair and Zevran and I had characters of both genders, but it is kinda sad that only the ladies can have both of them.

But in seriousness I would like it if they could be bi-romantic, you don't need to have sex to be in love. Or maybe only bi-romantic for Hawke(tte) if you have super high approval.

I would like the option to be heterosexual life partners with the straight LI of the same gender.

[AngelicMachinery]

Blacklash93 wrote...

I'm assuming people want this because they're afraid they're going to get the LI they don't like.

Like how a lot of people wanted Alistair instead of Zevran.

I thought Alistair was going to be a M/M romance when I first played... their was just something about him that made me think he enjoyed the company of men.

[Razaroh]

Liable****sman wrote...

I'm not asking for anything, I am responding to a post about romances being the most "relateable" thing in a RPG, and that a player could not relate to the "actions" of the PC, further necessitating romances.

I never said the player was incapable of relating to the actions of the PC, there's a reason punching the reporter is so popular over at ME2. Rereading my post I should have chosen my words more carefully.

Liable****sman wrote...

But you should, in terms of RPGs, aim for (which is what Bioware is doing) relateability with the characters, and not their actions.

The romances are themselves entirely optional, meaning that whatever "hook" you're speaking off isn't required at all. Describing it as "the most relatable part to a large majority of the people" is faulty for that reason. If it was so crucial to the game, a romance wouldn't be optional, but instead an integral part of gameplay.

Instead, you are meant to relate to characters, their desires, their feelings and whatever else about them, while simultaneously being entertained by(not relating to) the story, the plot and the game.

Couldn't it be argued that people are defined by their actions, which are influenced by their desires and feelings? Ideally, I see the two as dependent on eachother.

Aren't RPGs, at least Bioware RPGs, defined by the choices given to the players? Admittedly, had Bioware made so the PC would end up with Alistair or Morrigan through narrative means I would be a little less interested in the game. Others may have had loved it even more. People are different like that.

While my words were poorly chosen I maintain that romances are important, if to no one other than the player. Judging by the shear number of LI threads we get and peoples reaction to them I'd say that the romances are a pretty big hook. The biggest and most effective? No. But they certainly don't make the games worse for having them. You can even argue that those who romanced Alistair or Morrigan felt a greater impact from the story for having chosen so.

[Annarl]

I think its a strange idea. Everyone bisexual...it's silly. Bioware does the love interest very well.

[AngelicMachinery]

omearaee wrote...

I think its a strange idea. Everyone bisexual...it's silly. Bioware does the love interest very well.

Don't worry,  once we get cloning technology down pat and we stop seeing sex as a means of reproduction...  chances are more and more people will eventually ride the line of bisexuality.  It'll be great.

[catabuca]

AngelicMachinery wrote...

omearaee wrote...

I think its a strange idea. Everyone bisexual...it's silly. Bioware does the love interest very well.

Don't worry,  once we get cloning technology down pat and we stop seeing sex as a means of reproduction...  chances are more and more people will eventually ride the line of bisexuality.  It'll be great.

I can't wait

[Liablecocksman]

catabuca wrote...
You can't tell someone else what they are or are not meant to
relate to in a game. We are all not the same person, each of us brings
different things to the table when we play one of these games.

Of course I can.
In Dragon Age, you are meant to relate to the characters, and not meant to relate to killing people with axes and/or magic.

See how easy that was?

Wouldn't you know it, your whole example of being more drawn in to the game because of a romance has to do with relating to characters too.

The only fact that remains is, that the player should be hooked into the story because of more than just the romance, and that while these may provide the player with extra incentive to caring, they are certainly not the main provider of such "Hook".

Razaroh wrote...

I never said the player was incapable of relating to the actions of the PC, there's a reason punching the reporter is so popular over at ME2. Rereading my post I should have chosen my words more carefully.

I see. No harm, no foul - but that isn't what you wrote

Couldn't it be argued that people are defined by their actions, which are influenced by their desires and feelings? Ideally, I see the two as dependent on eachother.

Certainly.

Aren't RPGs, at least Bioware RPGs, defined by the choices given to the players? Admittedly, had Bioware made so the PC would end up with Alistair or Morrigan through narrative means I would be a little less interested in the game. Others may have had loved it even more. People are different like that.

RPGs defined by the choices given to the players?
What kind of choices?

While my words were poorly chosen I maintain that romances are important, if to no one other than the player. Judging by the shear number of LI threads we get and peoples reaction to them I'd say that the romances are a pretty big hook. The biggest and most effective? No. But they certainly don't make the games worse for having them. You can even argue that those who romanced Alistair or Morrigan felt a greater impact from the story for having chosen so.

Romances are not important. Not at all.

Bioware is the only developer I can think of, who are trying to (and have) included them in all of their recent releases.

Play Divinity 2: Ego Draconis.
Play Risen.
Play The Witcher (Sex does not equal romance)
Play whatever other roleplaying game you wish. "Romance" certainly isn't important.
I'm not saying it's not an added incentive for some people to buy or game, or that it is inherently bad - but claiming it "important" is simply wrong.

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 15 janvier 2011 - 06:20 .

[AlexXIV]

AngelicMachinery wrote...

omearaee wrote...

I think its a strange idea. Everyone bisexual...it's silly. Bioware does the love interest very well.

Don't worry,  once we get cloning technology down pat and we stop seeing sex as a means of reproduction...  chances are more and more people will eventually ride the line of bisexuality.  It'll be great.

You assume that people mostly see sexuality as a means of reproduction, which is quite the opposite of reality. I don't know how people could think everyone could be or will be bisexual some day. I mean the last thing I want to see is a another nude man. No insult meant, but it is just not going to happen.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 15 janvier 2011 - 06:21 .

[DaySeeker]

omearaee wrote...

I think its a strange idea. Everyone bisexual...it's silly. Bioware does the love interest very well.

Don't think of everyone as bisexual, instead think of each character's sexuality as decided bu the character.  There's no reason the npc's can't be everything they are written to be AND any sexuality.  On'e sexuality does not preclude any talent, attitude or personality trait.

[Ziggeh]

Liable****sman wrote...

Bioware is the only developer I can think of, who are trying to (and have) included them in all of their recent releases.

They're also about the only people who approach it with the perspective of a writer, rather than the plot being something that glues all the explosions together. I suspect theres a correlation.

[Liablecocksman]

Ziggeh wrote...
They're also about the only people who approach it with the perspective of a writer, rather than the plot being something that glues all the explosions together. I suspect theres a correlation.

Shouldn't the mere fact that they are entirely optional prove that they aren't "important", though?
I'm not saying nobody find romances a nice addition to the gamplay of Dragon Age: Origins, I'm just saying it is not *important*.

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 15 janvier 2011 - 06:25 .

[catabuca]

Liable****sman wrote...

I'm not saying it's not an added incentive for some people to buy or game, or that it is inherently bad - but claiming it "important" is simply wrong.

No, claiming it is important to everyone would be wrong, claiming it is important to no one is wrong, claiming it is important to some people is not wrong.

Again, your opinion is not the same as objective fact. It is your subjective fact, but it is not mine, and vice versa.

[Ziggeh]

DaySeeker wrote...

Don't think of everyone as bisexual, instead think of each character's sexuality as decided bu the character.  There's no reason the npc's can't be everything they are written to be AND any sexuality. 

Pretty much what gaider outlined earlier, and yep, can't see the problem myself, with the following exception:

DaySeeker wrote...
On'e sexuality does not preclude any talent, attitude or personality trait.

That rather depends upon how they are written. I think if you try to impose different sexualities upon previous characters it generates problems as they do have aspects defined by their sexuality, morrigans attitude towards men, leilana's general attitude to relationships etc. But if the character is written without such traits, it doesn't automatically make them weaker and doesn't present a problem.

[AngelicMachinery]

AlexXIV wrote...

AngelicMachinery wrote...

omearaee wrote...

I think its a strange idea. Everyone bisexual...it's silly. Bioware does the love interest very well.

Don't worry,  once we get cloning technology down pat and we stop seeing sex as a means of reproduction...  chances are more and more people will eventually ride the line of bisexuality.  It'll be great.

You assume that people mostly see sexuality as a means of reproduction, which is quite the opposite of reality. I don't know how people could think everyone could be or will be bisexual some day. I mean the last thing I want to see is a another nude man. No insult meant, but it is just not going to happen.

Taking what I say seriously is sometimes confusing.  I highly doubt that sexuality is at all linked with the idea of reproduction, it sounded funny at the time (Which is why I typed it).  On the other hand,  I hope that eventually we break down sexual taboos and we reach a point where people are free to represent their sexuality without any judgement.  

Do I expect bisexuality to be the norm eventually? Yes,  though I am very biased.  I find the idea of restricting lovers based on gender to be... strange.  If someone is astetically pleasing, and posesess a pleasant deamenor why should what is between their legs matter at all?    Though this is moving towards pansexuality over bisexuality...