125 réponses à ce sujet

[maxernst]

Liable****sman wrote...

Most Definitely Sane wrote...
I know that, but what I'm trying to say is that in my opinion, you sound unintentionally sexist.
I admit I probably should've been more straightforward about my problem with your post, but I still think it seems absolutely wrong and that it doesn't say what you're trying to say.

But that's because it is/was a part of a discussion with another user. One who I had already told what I just told you. I.e she knew what I was "trying to say", as I'd already made it clear previously.

I know it may sound a little sexist, but I'm not trying to hide the fact that I'm generalizing either. It's not unintentional at all, but it's merely to tell a point.

What is your opinion then? Will you agree that more women than men love sappy, unrealistic romantic movies?
To me the answer is so obvious that is seems trivial. I think it is for you, too.

But that's totally irrelevant to this discussion because Bioware has never made a romantic game.  They've made games with optional romantic subplots that some players not only don't use but aren't even aware of.  That makes the romance content small compared with the vast majority of films because even action films (which you would characterize as "guy films") usually have romantic subplots...and often quite bad ones, which suggests that men aren't that intolerant of badly made romantic story lines if the overall film is about something else.

[Most Definitely Sane]

Liable****sman wrote...

Most Definitely Sane wrote...
I know that, but what I'm trying to say is that in my opinion, you sound unintentionally sexist.
I admit I probably should've been more straightforward about my problem with your post, but I still think it seems absolutely wrong and that it doesn't say what you're trying to say.

But that's because it is/was a part of a discussion with another user. One who I had already told what I just told you. I.e she knew what I was "trying to say", as I'd already made it clear previously.

I know it may sound a little sexist, but I'm not trying to hide the fact that I'm generalizing either. It's not unintentional at all, but it's merely to tell a point.

What is your opinion then? Will you agree that more women than men love sappy, unrealistic romantic movies?
To me the answer is so obvious that is seems trivial. I think it is for you, too.

Every woman I know would rather see something like The Expendables over The Proposal.
Edit: Pretty much the same as my last post but shorter.

Modifié par Most Definitely Sane, 12 janvier 2011 - 10:17 .

[Lord_Caledore]

Most Definitely Sane wrote..

95% of the females I know would much rather see a movie with explosions, death, chaos, destruction, and gore than...let's say The Notebook, Leap Year, anything with Jennifer Lopez, and While You Were Sleeping.
And every female I know like to see romance movies to make fun of them.
And besides, sappy and unrealistic movies, like Twilight, are hated by everyone, including women.

And while I don't doubt that's true for the women you know (it'd be true for many of the women I know, too), romantic movies like that are geared for a primarily female audience.

And much as I hate Twilight too, it's hardly universally hated. It's quite popular, and it's primary audience is female.

Saying that is not the same as saying all women like that certain type of genre. But it does point that women are more likely to enjoy that kind of movie than men, statistically.

I believe that is all he's trying to say. He's not saying "all women love x and all men love y", just that "more women enjoy x then men enjoy x".

Modifié par Lord_Caledore, 12 janvier 2011 - 10:19 .

[Liablecocksman]

maxernst wrote...

But that's totally irrelevant to this discussion because Bioware has never made a romantic game.  They've made games with optional romantic subplots that some players not only don't use but aren't even aware of.  That makes the romance content small compared with the vast majority of films because even action films (which you would characterize as "guy films") usually have romantic subplots...and often quite bad ones, which suggests that men aren't that intolerant of badly made romantic story lines if the overall film is about something else.

It may not be relevant to the discussion as a whole, but it was relevant to the point I was making in a specific discussion. Please understand that.

That being said, I don't think the eyecatchers who swoon over the muscly main characters in "guy flicks" are "romances" - they are just an excuse to show a hot chick. I happen to like that in those movies, and simultaneously hate poorly-done romances that actually try to establish themselves as believeable and emotional.

This is going entirely off-topic, as you are arguing a very specific point that made sense to argue until it was taken out of context. Please, let's just stop it right here. Thank you.

Most Definitely Sane wrote...
Every woman I know would rather see something like The Expendables over The Proposal.

You do not have to answer the question twice. Once is fine ;--)

I appreciate that your circle of friends may feel different, but I would argue that you did not know all the women in the world, and even if your circle of friends differed from the percentage of which I was speaking, you could still see the inherent logic in my statement.
You are now, essentially, arguing that chick-flicks aren't mainly watched by women by saying "Every woman I know don't watch them".

Again, this is going off-topic. Let's stop it here.

(Lord_Caledore has it right.)

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 12 janvier 2011 - 10:22 .

[Most Definitely Sane]

Liable****sman wrote...

Most Definitely Sane wrote...
Every woman I know would rather see something like The Expendables over The Proposal.

You do not have to answer the question twice. Once is fine ;--)

I appreciate that your circle of friends may feel different, but I would argue that you did not know all the women in the world, and even if your circle of friends differed from the percentage of which I was speaking, you could still see the inherent logic in my statement.
You are now, essentially, arguing that chick-flicks aren't mainly watched by women by saying "Every woman I know don't watch them".

Again, this is going off-topic. Let's stop it here.

I'm not talking about just my friends.
I had accidently in a way double posted.
I still stand by my thought that you were making it sound like all women watched "chick flicks."
I talked about every woman I know as an example that not all women watch that sort of stuff.
And yes, let's end now.

[Thiefy]

Liable****sman wrote...

I'm "Negative and flamey" - or have been at least, about Isabellas appearance. Is that what you're talking about? I'm concerned/annoyed that she is being portrayed as overlly aesthetically appealing, while her outfit may be hindering to the job she has to do on the battlefield. Please do not discuss this, as I am only making an example of what could be "flamey"(?)
Is that the kind of negativity you're talking about, or rather something to the like of "I think x looks ugly and that sucks!"?

I haven't being paying that much attetention to indivduals or their preferences so that wasn't what I was talking about. So no, that wasn't about you, in specific. There have been a lot of mean spirited comments about Aveline and Merrill as well, for instance. Then there's also the fact that there are several individuals who find something wrong with every female companion thus far and it always boils down to, essentially, flame bait.

That's an interesting theory, but I'm thinking it's not true - you should note that this thread isn't(to use the thread itself as an example) about me not getting what I want, but instead getting something I do not want.
Using myself as an example, I can say that I could complain about just every game I've ever played, just that I do not do so. I often find myself at a loss understanding choices that developers make, but just accept them (Like you're theorizing women only do more than men) - and it's very out of character for me to outloud complain about a game, because frankly I do not often care enough to do so.

Not saying it was necessarily fact, either. You asked for a possible reason "why is this like so" and I gave you as close as an answer as I could while also saying "I really don't know, so here is a random theory". But as others have pointed out, if you do not like the feature, don't play it? It is, after all, an "extra" and there's nothing saying you can't just ignore it. The reason why it's there is because, as you can see, a lot of people do want them and it is a hook in which developers can get more business.

I don't think the romantic parts with spartans wife added to the story, it added depth to his character. If that was the case with ingame romances, I wouldn't be bothered so much either - as it is, though, I find most poorly done, unrealistic and contrived. I don't think they add to plot, other than cheaply(because they aren't well-done) giving the player more of a reason to involve him- or herself in the story.

Exactly. 300 hundred was a story about spartans, but more importantly, it centered around the spartan king. While DAO is a story about the blight or fereldan, it centers around the warden, and the romance serves to deepen the character. Maybe it didn't work for you but it worked for a lot of people. As far as it being poorly written, that's a mtter of personal taste really.

Now I'm absolutely certain that this point carries some weight, although I'm hard-pressed to accept your interpretation of my post as asking whether or not romances where the only reason women play games!

There are most certainly some gender-reasons why women talk about romances here, more than men - but I would argue still, that women care more for, and about, them than men do. In a broad, generalizing sense.

Alright I'm getting a little confused here then or something is getting lost in translation. Do women like romance? Yes. Do women like romance more than guys? My answer would be the part you quoted. Do women only play games for the romance aspect? No. Will women look into a game they know nothing about simply because it has romance (or the ability TO romance more specifically)? Yes/No/Maybe. I mean, would a man look into a game simply on the merit that it is a shooter game? Guys are supposed to like killing things/hunting more than women, after all. Or a racing/sports game, if that is your fancy. Romance is just one novelty in a game and I do't really think you can assign it to a gender. To start speculating what a person may or may not like based solely on their would be wandering into a long-winded mine field.

Well I'm quite the opposite. I often preorder games, having read a lot about them beforehand. Likewise, I hardly ever buy a game without any prior knowledge of it. The few times that I do, I am often very disappointed.
While I know you're misstyped ("simulator" instead of "creator") I think that is much of what my questions/points are about. Sometimes Dragon Age(And, for instance, Mass Effect) feel like some sort of friendship/dating simulators - and the extraordinare focus on companions and romances add to this. In Mass Effect 2 there was hardly any story at all, there was only companion-recruiting. In Dragon Age: Origins the Warden are going from place to place to do quests, but at the same time a lot of the game is spent recruiting companions, and the game itself revolves a lot around these companions. I have nothing against the companion-focus, and I feel it adds a lot to the roleplaying experience, my problem is just the (for me) large focus on romances.

I normally do research the games I like as well, but for the longest time, as far as RPGs were concerned I was in the jRPG scene, the quality of which, I feel, has declined drastically lately. Bioware had escaped my view for the longest time simply because the company did not make a broad enough game that could appeal to me. Before hand I think the biggest pull they had was KOTOR (dislike Star Wars), Neverwinter Nights (dislike DnD) and Mass Effect (dislike most shooters). But I digress, it seems like your main fear is there is not enough story or action or game in relation to companions and romance. Tell me, have you ever actually played a dating sim? If you have what were they? Because an actual dating simulator versus a game with dating sim elements are two different things. Taking away the romance in a dating sim and you have nothing, take away the romance in DAO and you still have an epic journey, and one with a customizeable main character.

You see, this is where the sexes are different.
I never, ever feel like watching or reading a nice romance. Much less a bad one. I do not, either, have an affinity for all things cute.
Sure, there are men who like romance-novels and chick-flicks, but I would think they are few and far-between. Likewise, there are surely men who have an affinity for all things cute, but I would also think those were few and far-between.

Or there actually could be plenty of men who do like cute things and are hesitant to say so, as I pointed out. 
I know of several, all of which are straight. However, I think it should be noted that you asked for my preference and experience so you should not take my example and label it as something to be applicable to all women.

Basically, I think the whole romance-aspect appeals more to women than to men, and I don't think women feel a poorly-written romance (given that some, like you, like poorly acted/directed/written feel-good chick-flicks) would detract as much from the immersion, realism and value of the game as men would.

I'll try not to take that as a personal attack. <_< You do realize that this specific part comes off as sexist and is based solely on your own opinion of what is good/bad writing? There are actually plenty of men here that would disagree with you and say that the romances and overall plot of DAO were great. Attributing a difference of opinion solely to women and then saying we all have bad taste makes you seem very very jaded, and well, kind of ignorant.

For the record, I do not like chick flicks, at all. I don't watch chick flicks, and if I'm going to the theaters, I am more likely to watch something based of a comic book like Spider man or Iron man, or something centered around a fantasy setting, like the Pirates of the Carribean or The Lord of the Rings.

If the romances are so terrible that they take away from your play value, by all means, ignore it, but for several people, regardless of gender, they add a great deal. Telling someone they are wrong or that they have poor taste because they got something out of the game that you didn't is pretty arrogant. I actually liked this topic but to be honest, I don't like the way it's turning right now, so I would appreciate it if we could keep the girls vs. boys discussion a little more general. Of course I'll try to do the same as well.

[Most Definitely Sane]

Thief-of-Hearts wrote...

Liable****sman wrote...

Basically, I think the whole romance-aspect appeals more to women than to men, and I don't think women feel a poorly-written romance (given that some, like you, like poorly acted/directed/written feel-good chick-flicks) would detract as much from the immersion, realism and value of the game as men would.

I'll try not to take that as a personal attack. <_< You do realize that this specific part comes off as sexist and is based solely on your own opinion of what is good/bad writing? There are actually plenty of men here that would disagree with you and say that the romances and overall plot of DAO were great. Attributing a difference of opinion solely to women and then saying we all have bad taste makes you seem very very jaded, and well, kind of ignorant.

For the record, I do not like chick flicks, at all. I don't watch chick flicks, and if I'm going to the theaters, I am more likely to watch something based of a comic book like Spider man or Iron man, or something centered around a fantasy setting, like the Pirates of the Carribean or The Lord of the Rings.

If the romances are so terrible that they take away from your play value, by all means, ignore it, but for several people, regardless of gender, they add a great deal. Telling someone they are wrong or that they have poor taste because they got something out of the game that you didn't is pretty arrogant. I actually liked this topic but to be honest, I don't like the way it's turning right now, so I would appreciate it if we could keep the girls vs. boys discussion a little more general. Of course I'll try to do the same as well.

Hey dude, I know I said I'll stop talking about it, but I had to say this:
I know you can't see me, but I have an "I told you so" face on.

Modifié par Most Definitely Sane, 12 janvier 2011 - 10:35 .

[WingsandRings]

I mainly like romances because I like character-driven stories. I like that when you romance someone, you learn something about them that you might not have if you just play a friend, and get a deeper insight into the character even for playthroughs when your PC DOESN'T know those things. Zevran is a good example of someone who shows a lot more interesting pieces of himself during a romance than without. So talking with Zevran even on non-Zev-romance playthroughs is made that much more interesting.



So to me, that's the most important part of a romance subplot. It's not the sex or the emotional bonding, but the discovery of new aspects of a character. Kind of like any other quest, if you do follow the quest all the way through rather than aborting it early, you get a reward of sorts in information.



What can I say, I love romances in BW games, but I'm ultimately an unromantic shrew.

[Liablecocksman]

Thief-of-Hearts wrote...
I haven't being paying that much attetention to indivduals or their preferences so that wasn't what I was talking about. So no, that wasn't about you, in specific. There have been a lot of mean spirited comments about Aveline and Merrill as well, for instance. Then there's also the fact that there are several individuals who find something wrong with every female companion thus far and it always boils down to, essentially, flame bait.

Oh, I phrased myself poorly there. I meant to ask "Is that the kind of negativity you're talking about? Being critical of appearance due to lack of realism?" not asking whether or not your were refering to me specifically. Oh well.
I see what you mean, then - but some people will always complain, and my guess is that most of these just ****** and moan just for pissing and moaning.

Not saying it was necessarily fact, either. You asked for a possible reason "why is this like so" and I gave you as close as an answer as I could while also saying "I really don't know, so here is a random theory". But as others have pointed out, if you do not like the feature, don't play it? It is, after all, an "extra" and there's nothing saying you can't just ignore it. The reason why it's there is because, as you can see, a lot of people do want them and it is a hook in which developers can get more business.

I see.
You could easily say that, but I just feel it detracts from the realism of my game when I attempt to romance a character, as I do not feel it is done right. Thus it makes my game less enjoyable, unless I intentionally skip out on a rather large amount of content, and that would cause me more pain, as since I've paid for the product I will certainly experience all it has to offer.

Exactly. 300 hundred was a story about spartans, but more importantly, it centered around the spartan king. While DAO is a story about the blight or fereldan, it centers around the warden, and the romance serves to deepen the character. Maybe it didn't work for you but it worked for a lot of people. As far as it being poorly written, that's a mtter of personal taste really.

You see, I wouldn't say it was a matter of personal taste. Either something is done well, or it isn't done well. It's not a matter of personal taste that "The Usual Suspects" was, no doubt, filled to the brink with plot-holes. It may be an intriguing and suspense-filled movie... But it had some odd plot-holes, and the whole premise doesn't make much sense if it's true, and even less if it isn't true, what that he says is true and what isn't... It's a brain-twister in an awesome way, but it still doesn't make sense. Just like the fact that Jennifer Lopez is a horrible actress isn't up for debate. Her romantic-comedies are poor movies, as well as their scripts are poor.

Of course there will be personal taste in the sense that some people accept lower quality products, and do not think much about it, in certain cases. I think Deathrace (a mindless movie) is a funny, stress-relieving watch. It's high-octane, testorone-filled and it's dumb. I'm not saying it's a good movie, I'm saying it's a very bad movie. But I still enjoy it. Just like my assumption is, that women will (more than men) enjoy a bad romance simply for the fact that they are more inclined to simply enjoy a romance.

Alright I'm getting a little confused here then or something is getting lost in translation. Do women like romance? Yes. Do women like romance more than guys? My answer would be the part you quoted. Do women only play games for the romance aspect? No. Will women look into a game they know nothing about simply because it has romance (or the ability TO romance more specifically)? Yes/No/Maybe. I mean, would a man look into a game simply on the merit that it is a shooter game? Guys are supposed to like killing things/hunting more than women, after all. Or a racing/sports game, if that is your fancy. Romance is just one novelty in a game and I do't really think you can assign it to a gender. To start speculating what a person may or may not like based solely on their would be wandering into a long-winded mine field.

I would argue that Call of Duty has more male players than female players too, but I do not have any data on it, so you will have to accept it as speculation, or disagree with it.

And any speculation based solely on gender is extremely focused on stereotypes and prejudice, I've already conceded that - make no mistake about it, but I'm just saying "Maybe some of these stereotypes exist for a reason". To me, the question "Do romances appeal more to women than to men?" is just silly. The answer, to me, is obvious to the point of the question itself being redundant.

I normally do research the games I like as well, but for the longest time, as far as RPGs were concerned I was in the jRPG scene, the quality of which, I feel, has declined drastically lately. Bioware had escaped my view for the longest time simply because the company did not make a broad enough game that could appeal to me. Before hand I think the biggest pull they had was KOTOR (dislike Star Wars), Neverwinter Nights (dislike DnD) and Mass Effect (dislike most shooters). But I digress, it seems like your main fear is there is not enough story or action or game in relation to companions and romance. Tell me, have you ever actually played a dating sim? If you have what were they? Because an actual dating simulator versus a game with dating sim elements are two different things. Taking away the romance in a dating sim and you have nothing, take away the romance in DAO and you still have an epic journey, and one with a customizeable main character.

I, on the other, have never really liked JRPGs. None from the last 10 years or so, anyway - with maybe a few exceptions.
I haven't ever really played a specific "dating sim", but I've played the Sims (A "life-sim"?) and that's all I can go by. That may be why I'm seeming ignorant.
Can you divulge information on dating sims then? I take it you have played some, given your wording here.

I appreciate your ending statement here, and can agree with it.

Or there actually could be plenty of men who do like cute things and are hesitant to say so, as I pointed out. 
I know of several, all of which are straight. However, I think it should be noted that you asked for my preference and experience so you should not take my example and label it as something to be applicable to all women.

Haha, that's true. Don't worry, I'm not taking your as a representative of your entire sex - that wouldn't be fair, much less make sense.

I'll try not to take that as a personal attack. <_< You do realize that this specific part comes off as sexist and is based solely on your own opinion of what is good/bad writing? There are actually plenty of men here that would disagree with you and say that the romances and overall plot of DAO were great. Attributing a difference of opinion solely to women and then saying we all have bad taste makes you seem very very jaded, and well, kind of ignorant.

I apologise, I wrote what I did in reference to you, only because of your wording in your previous post. I quote: "Sometimes, I just want to see or read a nice romance. Or a bad one."

With fear of sounding elitist and snobbish, I'm sure you're right about plenty of men here would think it was well-done. These people just don't know any better, and cannot really be blamed for their own lacking.
Now, you could say "But if it satisfies the majority, isn't it well done?" I would be a loss here, since that is basically the argument that is being thrown in the face of everyone saying the quality of something is lacking, when the quality of such a product is successfull.
It is "well done" in the sense that most people like it.
Then again, there is a market for Twilight, and that isn't well done at all. Hell, even the directing and editing in the movie is sub-par - it's not just the acting and script. It's one the most successfull movies (not to mention series) of latest years.

I would use that example, specifically, to back my claim that some women will buy the sappy love story, regardless of how poorly done it is - given that Twilight is primarily prefered by women and not men.

For the record, I do not like chick flicks, at all. I don't watch chick flicks, and if I'm going to the theaters, I am more likely to watch something based of a comic book like Spider man or Iron man, or something centered around a fantasy setting, like the Pirates of the Carribean or The Lord of the Rings.

That's good - but my point is just that romantic-movies are aimed mostly at women, and that is because mostly women watch them. That's it. No more, no less.
My point is that women care more about romance than men. Why? Because they watch romantic comedies.
You, personally, may not do so - but my point isn't about you specifically, but romance and women in general.

If the romances are so terrible that they take away from your play value, by all means, ignore it, but for several people, regardless of gender, they add a great deal. Telling someone they are wrong or that they have poor taste because they got something out of the game that you didn't is pretty arrogant. I actually liked this topic but to be honest, I don't like the way it's turning right now, so I would appreciate it if we could keep the girls vs. boys discussion a little more general. Of course I'll try to do the same as well.

I know it may seem arrogant, and while I did say some people have poor taste above (and I'm sorry, everyone) I will have you know that I'm not holding it against them. Fair play. Someone liked something I didn't, and that's fine, but don't tell me that automatically means that that thing has inherent quality, given that low-quality works of fiction, art and everything else are being bought by the masses worldwide, every day. Hell, those guys who made Epic Movie still haven't been run out of the industry of films. That should tell you all you need to know.

I apologise if I made it too personal, it's just that we wouldn't really get anywhere if I only asked general questions, and it wouldn't really satiate my curiousity either. I'm asking a bunch of questions, I know, and if they are too personal and/or make you feel uncomfortable - please tell me to shut my mouth, and not answer them

WingsandRings wrote...

I mainly like romances because I like character-driven stories. I like that when you romance someone, you learn something about them that you might not have if you just play a friend, and get a deeper insight into the character even for playthroughs when your PC DOESN'T know those things. Zevran is a good example of someone who shows a lot more interesting pieces of himself during a romance than without. So talking with Zevran even on non-Zev-romance playthroughs is made that much more interesting.

So to me, that's the most important part of a romance subplot. It's not the sex or the emotional bonding, but the discovery of new aspects of a character. Kind of like any other quest, if you do follow the quest all the way through rather than aborting it early, you get a reward of sorts in information.

What can I say, I love romances in BW games, but I'm ultimately an unromantic shrew.

That is sound reasoning, and I might look to adopt a similar mindset in the future. I still haven't romanced Zevran or Alistair, and probably never will - but in the case of Morrigan and Leliana (Who I have romanced) you are right, although mostly about Leliana. Morrigan really isn't that much more than meets the eye.

As stated, I might look to adopt such a mindset for future games.

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 12 janvier 2011 - 11:09 .

[wildannie]

I also love the romances in BW games but it only works within the larger story, romance without the plot and gameplay would be rubbish.



Romance/love/sex is ultimately central to our existence and IRL it's... fun, it's natural!



If my characters have no friends and no love in their life it makes their story seem a bit sad. A group of adults travelling for a year, trying to save the world without any romance happening?... nah....

[Snoteye]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Snoteye wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

Most of these romances do indeed take place over long periods of time, you just don't see it in game.

Is simply knowing this enough for you? It isn't for me. My Blight lasted for years and I still cringed everytime I spoke to Morrigan.

Yes. Do you find any fictional romances realistic? I've never read a book or seen a movie that lasted as long in real time as playing DA:O.

Video games engage you (or, me) very differently from books and movies -- as well they should. In books and movies, time invariably always matters to some degree, so pacing can be controlled. This is very rarely the case in video games (and when it is it's typically a mistake). It would then be natural to assume that much character interaction should also be abstracted away, as per Beerfish's argument, but I believe this should not apply to emotional exchanges. Precisely because time is an abstraction it is possible for relationships to progress "naturally," i.e. without skipping a lot of "background" interactions, despite how doing so would in actuality stretch relationships far beyond what may be considered normal or realistic.

BGII (sort of) and PS:T both worked like that -- the pacing disregarded the continuity of game time (the progression followed a different timeline from the rest of the story)* but the mechanics to a much lesser degree (you couldn't really exhaust conversations).

DA:O differs in that game time is disregarded mechanically (you can exhaust conversations) but not continuity wise (NPCs will respond to the Warden as having travelled with it for months or years, regardless of how much time has passed). Logically this abstraction is perfectly reasonable, but it doesn't work well for me.

*BGII is a little special because it bases passage of time on game cycles, hence you can leave the game running without doing anything and eventually a "timed" dialogue will trigger on its own. Exploiting this would make for a rather unusual and inefficient style of play, though.

I don't know if that made any sense whatsoever, nor do I really expect you to see this response.

[Edit]
But, while I have not played neither BGII nor PS:T in years, I remember the romances as far less in-your-face and... sappy? than DA:O's. Both are personal detractors.

Modifié par Snoteye, 12 janvier 2011 - 11:15 .

[Thiefy]

[quote]Liable****sman wrote...
Oh, I phrased myself poorly there. I meant to ask "Is that the kind of negativity you're talking about? Being critical of appearance due to lack of realism?" not asking whether or not your were refering to me specifically. Oh well.
I see what you mean, then - but some people will always complain, and my guess is that most of these just ****** and moan just for pissing and moaning. [/quote]
No problem. Isebella is the eye candy, questioning the virtue of her exsistance or her wardrobe is a little moot, I think. The other two possible female LI companions are opposite ends of the spectrums. There's also those that hate Aveline because she looks too manly. Merrill is "virginal" and looks like child. I think at one point we have to take a step back and say how realistic do we want to get in a fantasy? Isebella's lack of pants is a little weird, but then again so is Fenris' lack of shoes. I'm not going to hold it against them, but if other people choose to do so good on them. I think it would limit your playthrough if you choose to pigeon hole characters without the benefit of getting to know them but we also have the benefit of a large pool to choose companions from.

[quote]
I see.
You could easily say that, but I just feel it detracts from the realism of my game when I attempt to romance a character, as I do not feel it is done right. Thus it makes my game less enjoyable, unless I intentionally skip out on a rather large amount of content, and that would cause me more pain, as since I've paid for the product I will certainly experience all it has to offer.[/quote]
It just wasn't to your liking this time, and I'm sorry for that. That is a completely valid point. Hopefully next time that won't be the case with you.

[quote]
You see, I wouldn't say it was a matter of personal taste. Either something is done well, or it isn't done well. It's not a matter of personal taste that "The Usual Suspects" was, no doubt, an intriguing and suspense-filled movie... Even though it had some odd plot-holes, and the whole premise doesn't make much sense if it's true, and even less if it isn't true, what that he says is true and what isn't... It's a brain-twister in an awesome way, but it still doesn't make sense. Just like the fact that Jennifer Lopez is a horrible actress isn't up for debate. Her romantic-comedies are poor movies, as well as their scripts are poor.[/quote]
I'll have to disagree with you and leave it at that. Maybe your romance with Morrigan, Zevran or Leli wasn't fulfilling for you, but the romance between my Warden and Alistair was so fulfilling, I went back and bought old bioware + obsidian games hoping to get a little bit of that squee that I got when I romanced him.

[quote]Of course there will be personal taste in the sense that some people accept lower quality products, and do not think much about it, in certain cases. I think Deathrace (a mindless movie) is a funny, stress-relieving watch. It's high-octane, testorone-filled and it's dumb. I'm not saying it's a good movie, I'm saying it's a very bad movie. But I still enjoy it. Just like my assumption is, that women will (more than men) enjoy a bad romance simply for the fact that they are more inclined to simply enjoy a romance.[/quote]
<_<
Ignoring the crossed out section that has nothing to do with the topic at hand, this is more or less saying that you are the be-all, end-all judge of what is good or well made, and what is not. That is a dangerous card to play sir, and one that is better left in your pocket.

You might think the romances in DAO were subpar and part of a low quality product, but many, many of us (men and women) respectfully disagree. Please do not tell us otherwise or that we have "inferior" taste. That is were you are wrong.

[quote]
I would argue that Call of Duty has more male players than female players too, but I do not have any data on it, so you will have to accept it as speculation, or disagree with it.

And any speculation based solely on gender is extremely focused on stereotypes and prejudice, I've already conceded that - make no mistake about it, but I'm just saying "Maybe some of these stereotypes exist for a reason". To me, the question "Do romances appeal more to women than to men?" is just silly. The answer, to me, is obvious to the point of the question itself being redundant.[/quote]
But I'm not asking you about a specific, well known title. You asked about one feature (romance) being enough to sell a game on that merit alone. I replied with asking if another feature (FPS) was enough to sell the game based on that merit alone. Is it? If you nothing about a game other than the fact it wa a first person shooter, would you invest money in it? Because essentially, that is what it seemed like you asked me, only with romance subsituted for shooting.

[quote]
I, on the other, have never really liked JRPGs. None from the last 10 years or so, anyway - with maybe a few exceptions.
I haven't ever really played a specific "dating sim", but I've played the Sims (A "life-sim"?) and that's all I can go by. That may be why I'm seeming ignorant.
Can you divulge information on dating sims then? I take it you have played some, given your wording here.

I appreciate your ending statement here, and can agree with it.[/quote]
I have.
The Sims and an actual dating sim are still two different things. The difference between a dating sim and a game with dating elements is that the purpose of the dating is to "get the guy/girl". the game ends once you are dating, married, or a certain event happens/a set amount of in game time has passed. A popular example would be a school setting where you are a new transfer student to a high school and have to find "the one" (usually a childhood friend you made a promise to but moved away, only to move back years laters and try to rekindle young love based on a nearly forgotten promise) before you graduate.

An RPG or adventure game with dating elements usually gives the options of bonuses or rewards for the player taking the time to explore them. Most of the time it is a unique ending but it can also result in extra side quests, extra skills, combined skills between the main character and the npc in question, extra in game items, or a combination of the previously mentioned. They are nonessential to the plot - meaning as a player you can choose to avoid the entirely (and in most cases, forfeit any benefits that come from exploring them).

As and example, there is the Fire Emblem series. There are very, VERY, minor companion/romance subplots between team members. For the sake of our specific example, let's use Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones. In this particular FE game you can choose to play one of two predefined characters: a prince or princess. Your goal is to save the world and restore your kingdom. If you have a specific companion with you for "x amount of battles" they start to get sort of a "brothers in arms" thing going and get stat bonuses for fighting together, like a team. These are called "supports". There are three different levels of support, C, B, and A, with A being the highest. "A" support also illustrates the closeness of the bond between "war brothers". If only one of them is in battle, they will not get the same bonus as if both of them had gone into battle together. Now, assuming that one of those troops is male and one is female, it is possible for them to fall in love and have and ending together. Is it essential to the plot? No. Can you play the game without it or without evern trigger it/knowing it was there? Yes. Is it cute? This was one was, for me anyway. :3 (sorry for the poor quality in that video)

In a dating sim you MUST fall in love. If not, you get the "bad" ending, or at the worse the game ends or you die. Literally. You cannot avoid the romance aspect without penalizing the gamer directly (as opposed to just playing without "extras" when you avoid a romance in another genre).
[quote]
I apologise, I wrote what I did in reference to you, only because of your wording in your previous post. I quote: "Sometimes, I just want to see or read a nice romance. Or a bad one."[/quote]
That was just a misunderstanding then. i didn't mean bad as in poorly written, I meant bad as in one with dark tones, and not necessarily a happy ending. I still want a romance that was well written but it doesn't always need to be sunshine and butterflies, or a romantc comedy.  Some of the best writtern love stories are about bad romances - the one with the cheater boyfriend/husband that leaves his woman knocked up and addicted to coke. The quality of the story isn't what is "bad" but the situation the romance is in, is. Does that make sense?

[quote]
With fear of sounding elitist and snobbish, I'm sure you're right about plenty of men here would think it was well-done. These people just don't know any better, and cannot really be blamed for their own lacking.
Now, you could say "But if it satisfies the majority, isn't it well done?" I would be a loss here, since that is basically the argument that is being thrown in the face of everyone saying the quality of something is lacking, when the quality of such a product is successfull.
It is "well done" in the sense that most people like it.
Then again, there is a market for Twilight, and that isn't well done at all. Hell, even the directing and editing in the movie is awful - it's not just the acting and script. It's one the most successfull movies (not the mention series) of latest years.

I would use that example, specifically, to back my claim that some women will buy the sappy love story, regardless of how poorly done it is - given that Twilight is primarily prefered by women and not men. [/quote]
You are sounding a little elitest, but not because you have different opinion, but because it almost seems like you don't respect other people who disagree. It doesn't matter if you are the minority or the majority, telling someone they are wrong because "they like apples more than oranges" is not cool, double that when you take on the "poor you, you don't know any better so I'll let it slide"  attitude. The key word here is respect, everyone is entitled to thier own opinion but I think it's crossing the line when you say that your own personal opinion is more valid that others, "just because" and should be used a system of measurement for several things pertaining to other people's personal preference.

[quote]
That's good - but my point is just that romantic-movies are aimed mostly at women, and that is because mostly women watch them. That's it. No more, no less.
My point is that women care more about romance than men. Why? Because they watch romantic comedies.
You, personally, may not do so - but my point isn't about you specifically, but romance and women in general.[/quote]
I think you have it a little backwards, the arguement should be "More women watch romantic comedies than men because in general, women care about romance more than men." I'm not aruging that point for you, mind you, just rephrasing what you said to what I think you meant. The arguement is "Woman like romance more"; the proof is "women watch more romantic movies", correct? In any case, that is a very broad generalization. While generalizations have some truth behind them, I don't think we should entirely dismiss that women are are encouraged to explore their feelings while men are encouraged to repress them. I do think romance is important to guys, and not to a lesser extent than it is to women, but I also believe they are much more likely to keep it to themselves whereas a woman would not. It's the same as sex: men are encouraged to "conquer" while women are are discouraged from sexual activities. The resulting generalization is that men care more about sex than women which is not true at all, and women who are "on par" with men as far as sexual activities go are labeled a lot of nasty names and even teased or said to carry a lot of sexual disease.

I have to wonder though, why would you want to play into a generalization of any kind? When you do so you take away any intimate knowledge you would know about a person or group of people and subsequently just catagorize them into a little "this or that" folder.

[quote]
I know it may seem arrogant, and while I did say some people have poor taste above (and I'm sorry, everyone) I will have you know that I'm not holding it against them. Fair play. Someone liked something I didn't, and that's fine, but don't tell me that automatically means that that thing has inherent quality, given that low-quality works of fiction, art and everything else are being bought by the masses worldwide, every day. Hell, those guys who made Epic Movie still haven't been run out of the industry of films. That should tell you all you need to know.[/quote]

That's fine, I guess, but since you asked about me, specifically, I think it would be best that the conversation should stay geared towards my preferrences instead of saying "all women have poor taste." I think a lot of misunderstanding could have been avoided if "women" generalizations had been cutback.

On the flip side, I have to also say that just because you didn't like a product, doesn't mean the quality was subpar. Regardless if someone else liked it or not, I just don't think one person's personal opinion on a subject is a good enough base of measure for quality. A personal opinion holds bias, not matter how you skin it, so it's not fair to base something off of that.

[quote]
I apologise if I made it too personal, it's just that we wouldn't really get anywhere if I only asked general questions, and it wouldn't really satiate my curiousity either. I'm asking a bunch of questions, I know, and if they are too personal and/or make you feel uncomfortable - please tell me to shut my mouth, and not answer them
[/quote]

No, it's not like it, it was just reading that part, it seemed like you were saying I had poor taste because I was a woman, not because I liked the romances in DAO. One is highly offensive, the other is respectfully disagreeing. It wasn't that it was getting personal to me, so to speak, but I didn't like the guys vs. girls direction the thread was taking. I think it would have been more appropiate if it was kept to my own preferrences rather than grouping all female likes/dislikes/actions together, as if we have a hive mind or some such nonsense.

If you want to tell me I have poor taste because I liked the romances in DAO, by all means. I have thick skin. However, I don't appreciate being told that "I can't help that I have poor taste in romances because I'm a woman". Entirely different implecations there. I want to be recognized as an individual first and foremost, not my gender. However, I understand that you have questions for me because of my gender, and that's fine. What I dislike is someone thinking that my gender would somehow hinder my judgement or hold me back somehow. Does this make sense?

At the very least, I would think that in an alternate reality where I am a man, I would think my 'faults' would still hold me back, regardless of my gender.

[Liablecocksman]

This is just a quick post telling you that I'll reply tomorrow. I hope you're still interested in the topic then, and will check back. I'm getting some rest now, so good night!



-- I don't think being able to read that means I can get a good job in computer programming

[Thiefy]

Liable****sman wrote...

This is just a quick post telling you that I'll reply tomorrow. I hope you're still interested in the topic then, and will check back. I'm getting some rest now, so good night!

-- I don't think being able to read that means I can get a good job in computer programming

no problem, have a good rest.
sorry i take so long to reply to, i usually multitask while replying so it takes me forever to type something that i could normally write in a few minutes.

-- doesn't mean you will but you've got the capabilities to

[Selene Moonsong]

Liable****sman wrote...
...I do, or do not, take advantage of love interests in games. I don't really care much about them, and would honestly rather see the resources devoted to them, to be invested into other parts of the game. Companions I can understand, I certainly appreciate their varied personalities and immensely like their personal quests - but I think that is different from love interests. As stated, I really place little significance in the love interests, as I do not play the games for their "romance-options". Most of the time, I find them quite contrived.

Basically - what is all this "Love interest" about? Why do you care? If you do not care, why don't you care?
What about the romances themselves? Why (Or why not) would an entirely sexually-driven relationship be wrong? Why (or why not) do you care that the characters are attractive - do you transfer your own preference onto your character?

It looks like you are attempting to build arguments for not including romance, in a game where romances are sinply a very small part of developing a NPC character and can be a very natural progression for a given NPC's character development.

For example, you seem to be okay with developing friendships with companions and enjoy their different personalities, and yet in regards to romantic interests that others happen to enjoy about BioWare games you state you "...would rather see the resources devoted to them, to be invested into other parts of the game".
David Gaider already stated in another thread that the small of amount of resources used for creating romances wouldn't have an affect in the game if directed elswhere. Think about it for a moment...

Whether or not romance is included, the same amount resources saved by not creating a romantic interest are still required to develop a character's persona (personality traits, likes, dislikes, personal quests, plots and sub-plots, etc, that develops the whole NPC/Companion character). Such re-directed resources wouldn't improve a combat move, talent, Skill, or even depth to a non-romance character.

Romantic interests are included because so many players do enjoy them. And, IMHO, romance adds a little more depth and belivablity to a character's persona. The best part is that participating in the romances is purely a player option. There is nothing to be gained by not including romance interests, but it does take something away from players who do enjoy them.

A person's reasons for enjoying romances, or not depending on your point of view, can vary greatly, and has no bearing on the fact that players may or may not enjoy having possible romantic interests in the game. Some people simply don't care either way as long as they enjoy a game, they are happy.

IMHO, including romance possibilities in a game does not add realism, but it does add a little depth and believability to a given character, especially when you consider that your character is a leader of a group of adventurers that have been together over a relatively long period of time and interacting with each other. Without developing friendships and individual character traits (wherther or not romance is a possibility), the characters would amount to nothing but a package of stats for skills and talents your character may not have.

So far, I have yet to see a valid reason from anyone for not including possible romantic interests, other than that some folks are simply not interested in them. Romance is simply a relatively small feature in the game that happens to appeal to a large variety of players and is why there are so many topics revolving around it. 

Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 13 janvier 2011 - 11:16 .

[SirGladiator]

Romances are a very important addition to any game. The basic objective in any truly great video game storyline is to 'save the world and get the girl'. To only be able to do part of that (or none of it, as the case might be) is to make the game less fun. On a practical level, the romances add a truly huge, huge amount of replayability to a game. For many games, there's simply no reason to replay it, even if it was really fun and cool the first time through. But if you have romance options, you can play a bit differently each time and it makes playing through the game repeatedly so much more fun.



As to why I personally like romances, in addition to what I already mentioned, I like them simply because they're fun and cool. I love romance in my movies, TV shows, books, why wouldn't I enjoy it in my games? Its all about what you like, and for most people, myself included, the addition of romance in the games makes them a LOT more fun.

[Schneidend]

FreezaSama wrote...
Did... did you just make a Gargoyles reference? 

To quote the great Robert Evans: "You bet your ass I did."

[The Big Nothing]

Virgins! Virgins! Virgins!

[RosaAquafire]

Wow, this thread is a giant, offensive disaster.

[Lord of Creation]

Why do I like the Romance aspect of games like Dragon Age? Romance is just another option that adds another layer to what the RPG can offer players looking for some entertainment.

Better question is why do you care if the option for romance is in game or if people like to talk about the characters they might be able to romance? Does the mere thought of romance existing in life bother you to the extent that you have to make an entire thread insulting people who do not share your disgust? Or is it just that you have something against women and those who will be playing characters that pursue same sex relationships?

You seem very willing to use sexist generalizations to try to prove a point and keep using them long after several people have corrected you so I doubt my post shall make any difference but I could not read through this thread and not comment. I actually think your "parody" title would have gone over far better than the sexist crap that you claim was brought up because the virgin thing would have been locked, or ignored, is ridiculous. The other threads that you seem so opposed to have only continued to increase in posts so why would your virgin thread be locked by the mods or go without attracting similar attention?

Someone saying they find a character appealing because of how they look, their history (sexual or otherwise), morals or sexual orientation is no different from people alking about how they like their food prepared, it is simply conversation. Whereas insisting women are all about crappy love stories, seemingly attributing that to why the romance option is in Dragon Age in the first place, that have such sappy endings that they would make a tree sick but men who have their characters go through a "romance" thing with a companion just want the chick that takes her clothes off the fastest is complete sexist crap.

Modifié par Lord of Creation, 13 janvier 2011 - 08:24 .

[Kidd]

Why romance is so interesting? Because it adds one more layer to the NPCs. I don't think I need to delve deeper into that one =)

As for why so many are posting threads wishing X or Y would be romanceable, I definitely understand that. If I got to wish a feature into DA2 and future BW RPGs, it'd be that almost all characters should be romanceable. A few exceptions are fine, and actually really good to have (there's many reasons why a character might not be interested in romance, and these people will really stick out and be memorable for their feelings on the matter!). But the majority of people like relationships, hence we like to find ourselves in them irl.

Wouldn't it water down the characters and the worth of romance if they were almost all romanceable, you might wonder. At least I really don't think so. In a game where you create your own character and decide how that character sees the world, how s/he acts etc, you should pretty much always be capable of being attractive to any given character that isn't inherently incapable of romance.

If an NPC could only fall in love with a racist with a silver tongue and you play a racist with a silver tongue, it's only logical the NPC would fall for you. If another NPC could only fall in love with a naive goody two shoes, logic dictates they should fall for you if you're playing such a character. Simple as that.

I believe lots of people agree with that, hence they want certain characters romanceable. This desire is of course only strengthened even more if they fancy a certain character concept and/or design. If they wish to pursue a strong, independant woman, they'll likely say they wish characters that seem to fit the idea of a strong, independant woman would be romanceable. If they have an idea of a character that would fit great in a s/s relationship with a snarky man, they'll also voice their opinion when a man that comes off as snarky is previewed for us. Same goes for other, non-personality traits as well, such as a character's looks or background (how many times have I read "dalish please?" here? =)).

This is of course not including how most people - and thus characters - certainly often find themselves falling for people who aren't exactly "their type". Maker knows I've had quite a gallery of past boys and girls in my life whom I might not have described as my 'ideal partner' =) Even my Warden had no intentions of flirting up Alistair until she had talked to him for a bit and realised that wow, that guy's just amazing! ^^

As for your desire to label whether things are good or bad as swiftly as you do, thinking you can somehow objectively tell whether something is good or not (you claim Deathrace is a bad film for instance, and while I agree with you, I doubt we think similarly at all when we say so), I find it a tad odd. I've always been of the understanding that there are only two ways to figure what is "good" and what is "bad". Either you look at what most people think, which in the gaming world involves every single person who touches a game console / plays on their computer. This would mean as an example, at least I believe so (I haven't really read any numbers =)), that Halo 3 is a better game than Mass Effect 2, while Mass Effect 2 is better than Mass Effect 1, while Dead Or Alive Xtreme 2 is a piece of trash.

I do not agree with that line of thinking, personally, which is why I opt for simply judging things by what I think, knowing it is only what I think. To me in the above example, ME2 is indeed better than ME1, while Dead Or Alive Xtreme 2 is an amazing game in another right (I swear I sound very pretentious when I start discussing how others just don't "get" the game ) and Halo 3 is trash. However, YMMV.

Another part where YMMV is how much you want to see, graphically, with romances. I and several others feel naked skin is completely redundant. A kiss is far more gratifying to watch than anything else. Others prefer different levels of nudity. And they will state and talk about how they wish the game showed as much skin - little or much - depending on their tastes. Maker knows if Origins' romances had been filled with 20 minutes porn flicks, I would've posted tons about it to complain and try to ensure DA2 would not turn out the same ^^

If you find it a curious tidbit to know about other people you speak to on an online forum - which I believe you do since you've brought it up in numerous posts though I mean not to be offensive in assuming such - I am female.

Modifié par KiddDaBeauty, 13 janvier 2011 - 02:01 .

[Khayness]

This Cracked article sums it all up pretty much (Profanity, so mayhaps NSFW).

Everywhere BioWare games gets mentioned, LIs will come up eventually and steal the show.

[Tiax Rules All]

RosaAquafire wrote...

Wow, this thread is a giant, offensive disaster.

yup

[Irkalla]

Since men hate romance and all, why not cut out a female romancable character and leave just a lesbian one. The devs can then put those resources into greater good. Everybody is happy and lives happily to the end of their days!

[Nivilant]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

RosaAquafire wrote...

Wow, this thread is a giant, offensive disaster.

yup

Which is a tad annoying given it doesn't need to be.

Anyway, as to what I personally think, romance is a nice addition but it isn't necessary.

I don't have a problem with it in-game. I do think that making the instant connection between closeness and romance is a bit off (for those people who have found themselves in surprise romances while getting approval), and the fact that at least one person in your group is guaranteed to be in love with your character is a bit... I don't know how to say it.

I think when Bioware tries to make romance more believable in-game. That is, deep and meaningful, they design the characters for the players, not for the PC. I like Alistair, not a lot, but I like him. When I decided that a certain playthrough was going to involve a romance with him I played my character in a way that would properly match up with him. To me, that's what I like, when the LIs have their preferences too. I mean, having a Morrigan-like character in a successful romance with him is kind of odd because he despises Morrigan herself. So the romance is never for me personally.

Which is sort of why the 'squee' thing baffles me. I mean, I can understand liking a character and I can even understand being jealous when another character ends up with them... but then, your PC isn't you. So what baffles me is that these people who go on about hating characters for stealing their guy/girl or being competition somehow manage to avoid being 'jealous' of their PC. Because they think of their PC as 'them'. I guess that's where I start to see this whole thing as getting a little out of hand, because it's blurring the line between the game and your self-perception.

That was kind of OT and I've gone off on a tangent, let me try and get back on-track.

What I don't like about the romance options is not the characters themselves. It's the amazingly long threads shouting about them. Because whether I read them or not, I get dosed with it. Case in point: Tali from the ME board. I liked Tali's character, and she hasn't changed enough for me to not like her anymore. But once the romance threads started they eventually spilled over to other threads and the boards were soon drowning in 'TALI FOR LI IN ME3!' 'SUPPORT TALI!' I eventually saw so much of it that it turned me off her character completely. And that's sad, because it's not the character's fault. It's like eating your favourite pudding for months and nothing else. The pudding hasn't changed, but eventually you just don't want to see it ever again.

It's already starting to happen with Varric, and then when the game comes out I can already see the crushing disappointment. It isn't the character's fault, but it's been hyped to the point where only that view will do now. For some people, I'm not saying that's true for everyone.

So in short (bit late for that, eh?) I generally ignore it in-game, it's on-board that it's gets the eyes rolling.

I somehowget the feeling I haven't explained very well. Oh well