209 réponses à ce sujet

[Last Vizard]

TexasToast712 wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

(the writter can even bring the dead back to life).--- and what the hell is up with rpg games today when i have to tell a male character (NO for the love of god NO... i'm as straight as the bloody shortest distance between two points). can i get a start menu option saying i'm straight?

I didn't know being straight made you immune to being flirted by men who found you attractive.

I'm a straight woman, I don't object to being flirted with by women. I can always, you know, tell them I'm not interested. I don't get why it's such a big deal to be flirted with by someone who isn't a member of your gender of choice. Isn't it just the same as being flirted with by someone of the 'right' gender who you just don't fancy? 

I dont like being hit on by manly men who shouldnt be homosexual in the first place. Anders and Fenris are way to manly to be homosexual and its annoying to know that. Anders made is very clear on several occassions in Awakenings that he likes the ladies and then all of a sudden he is hitting on me in DAII. At least Fenris never blatantly hit on me.

Yeah that shocked me too, Justice seemed to like the dead guys wife in DA: A too, the whole thing is out of character. AllthatJazz, my issue is with the fact that its everywhere in games today and every character has to be "romanceable" i want to play an RPG with a GREAT story.

AllthatJazz, it is a very different situation for guys, funny story: i was at a party and was hit on by a couple of gays who thought i was gay because they've never seen me try anything with their chick friends over the five years i've been in town (i played NRL football until the end of highschool and i still work out even though i'm a sci-fi and fantasy nerd) .... some local chicks i know thought i was gay too because they haven't seen me show any interest in them or other chicks at the pub or clubs (regaurdless of my average looks lol) I'm just a nice guy who doesn't want to be hit on by gay or bi NPC in a game that should be all about story.... i lol'd when trying to bloody romance Aveline and she is after Donnic, face palm.

[Last Vizard]

DrGulag wrote...

I think Sandal might have a role in the next game.

I always assumed the old woman was Flemeth and the boy is not a human. Or why else is the fella standing next to hordes of slaughtered darkspawn in Origins and defeated them again in DA2.

Could be just comic relief....could be:bandit:

I think it was Enchantment that got them, some way of applying it to living creatures in a very bad way, plus he shows you that weird rock.

[AllThatJazz]

nicethugbert wrote...

Maybe we should call him Janders?

 They have to do this for the next game.

[TobiTobsen]

There are still people who try to discuss the whole mage/templar topic with Lobsel? I'm impressed

[AllThatJazz]

Last Vizard wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

(the writter can even bring the dead back to life).--- and what the hell is up with rpg games today when i have to tell a male character (NO for the love of god NO... i'm as straight as the bloody shortest distance between two points). can i get a start menu option saying i'm straight?

I didn't know being straight made you immune to being flirted by men who found you attractive.

I'm a straight woman, I don't object to being flirted with by women. I can always, you know, tell them I'm not interested. I don't get why it's such a big deal to be flirted with by someone who isn't a member of your gender of choice. Isn't it just the same as being flirted with by someone of the 'right' gender who you just don't fancy? 

I dont like being hit on by manly men who shouldnt be homosexual in the first place. Anders and Fenris are way to manly to be homosexual and its annoying to know that. Anders made is very clear on several occassions in Awakenings that he likes the ladies and then all of a sudden he is hitting on me in DAII. At least Fenris never blatantly hit on me.

Yeah that shocked me too, Justice seemed to like the dead guys wife in DA: A too, the whole thing is out of character. AllthatJazz, my issue is with the fact that its everywhere in games today and every character has to be "romanceable" i want to play an RPG with a GREAT story.

AllthatJazz, it is a very different situation for guys, funny story: i was at a party and was hit on by a couple of gays who thought i was gay because they've never seen me try anything with their chick friends over the five years i've been in town (i played NRL football until the end of highschool and i still work out even though i'm a sci-fi and fantasy nerd) .... some local chicks i know thought i was gay too because they haven't seen me show any interest in them or other chicks at the pub or clubs (regaurdless of my average looks lol) I'm just a nice guy who doesn't want to be hit on by gay or bi NPC in a game that should be all about story.... i lol'd when trying to bloody romance Aveline and she is after Donnic, face palm.

I also like seeing definitively straight/bi/gay characters  - I thought New Vegas did this pretty well with companions, although of course there were no romances - Veronica FTW!; just because the writers can then make sexuality more a part of the characters' identity, which it can't be to the same degree if the LI sexuality is dependent on the sexuality of the protagonist. Though to be fair, both Isabela and Sebastian had independent sexual preference, didn't they? Personally it doesn't bother me in the least, and hey. At least it means I get to romance Anders and Merrill no matter who I play.  Plus defining a characters' sexual preference will always lead to fans complaining that their choices were limited, or that they didn't like the straight/gay option for whatever reason and the other 'side' has it better or whatever. So it's a decent compromise, I think. 

I too kind of lol'd at the Aveline romance lines; though I love Aveline, and actually wish she had been a fully-fledged romance option, despite enjoying her personal quest very much.

One thing I've decided I enjoyed about the Anders romance (and this does kind of relate to the topic) is that he can't be 'saved' from Vengeance. Initially I was quite pissed off that he couldn't be separated from Justice and everything ends all lovely and fluffy. But storywise it's better this way. He is who is now, and the PC has to decide whether she/he can live with that (or whether Anders can live it, anyway) - it would all have been a bit too easy if he could be turned back into old Anders and suddenly start to regret his militancy.

It should be said, however, that the most 'manly' man I know is gay. And the most effete guy I've ever met is rampantly straight. Not sayin' stereotypes don't exist anywhere, but it ain't good to generalise

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 20 mars 2011 - 10:32 .

[Roonya]

A very interesting thread, I very much enjoyed reading all of it including the Chantry-Templars arguments that some people considered a derail.

My male Hawke was friendship-romancing Anders. I come to the sad conclusion that it was Anders' fault, way back when he chose to take the spirit of Justice into his soul. That was his (totally sane at the time) choice. The playful and compassionate Anders of Awakening gradually ceased to exist, the Anders Hawke meets is already varyingly unable to control his actions, and although Justice undoubtedly has been fanning the flames of Anders' own desire for mages to be free, the original Anders would never have wanted it this way.

It also makes him a hypocrite for always criticising Merrill and all other blood-magic users for consorting with demons when we know that 'demons' and 'spirits' are essentially the same thing with a different name, due to differing motives, which people categorize as either 'good' or 'evil'. I think this highlights very clearly that the spirit inside Anders has warped and perverted him so that he is deluded as to his own nature.

It made me very sad to see whenever fragments of real Anders showed through, like when he was scared of himself and repentant for almost murdering Ella, and eventually for killing innocents and breaking my heart. I eventually knew I had to kill him, because there was no telling what other harm he would bring if left to live - he hadn't been really human for a while. In this respect I wish there had been a dialogue where before you kill him, you get to say something like 'I had hoped I could save you, but now I know there is no Anders left to save.' Rather than just y'know, not even looking him in the eyes and telling him he needs to pay. I think this line was awful for my Hawke, because it made him seem just as weak minded (well... human) as the others. The Chantry was blown up and a bloody war begun in the name of 'justice' (the concept) and my Hawke thinks to just stab the culprit quickly because he needs to pay for what he's done'... It proves that the option to kill Anders is done in anger, or vengeance, and as we have seen, this doesn't make it right.

It reminds me of a banter between Anders and Isabela where he is disgusted with her for causing the Qunari attack thus indirectly ended many innocent lives. She says 'What do you think I should do about it now, flog myself daily?' She says how there is no justice in the world, justice is an idea, and in a world of ideas it works, but otherwise not. Isabela is actually a very wise pirate girl, under that veneer of shallowness. It also pained me how I found myself agreeing more and more with Fenris' and Sebastian's views on mages and the world, although my Hawke was in love with and trying to protect Anders. I mean, he was selfish and used me and did a terrible thing in the end, and really I attribute this to his spirit possession, which of course was only possible because of his being a mage.

The player is made to make extremely difficult choices. This is always a main theme in Bioware games, which I love. They often have me take a break at crucial points and wander around the room going 'What the hell do I do?' Because, the fact is, there is no black and white good or evil in the world (Thedas or RL lol). The length of the argument in thread even proves that. So, I disagree with someone's earlier post that said DAII is too absolute in this. I think half of the problem is that the concept of 'justice' is so nebulous as pointed out earlier. It is also too dependent on your view of good and evil. Justice itself is in no way absolute from them.

(Edited for formatting)

Modifié par Roonya, 20 mars 2011 - 03:10 .

[LobselVith8]

TobiTobsen wrote...

There are still people who try to discuss the whole mage/templar topic with Lobsel? I'm impressed

I didn't realize you were still being condescending to me because I don't share your viewpoint.

[TobiTobsen]

LobselVith8 wrote...

TobiTobsen wrote...

There are still people who try to discuss the whole mage/templar topic with Lobsel? I'm impressed

I didn't realize you were still being condescending to me because I don't share your viewpoint.

Oh i'm not. I just don't see a reason to argue about something where we won't come to a consensus. You and other people say it's slavery, I don't think so and so do other people and we use the same arguments over and over again. We're beating a dead horse and not just in this thread. You're just the most vocal supporter of the Circle=Slavery argument, so i took you as an example.

[MColes]

Doing the wrong thing, for the right reasons does not absolve anyone of guilt, ever.

The chantry is wrong, but for the right reasons.

The mages are wrong, but for the right reasons.

Anders/Justice/Janders/Vengeance is wrong, but for the right reasons.

There is no inbetween, It's a dark grim world, this Thedas. It's very grey, more so than a lot of people give it credit for. But that's a discussion for another thread, involving trolls hating on DA2's story.

[LobselVith8]

TobiTobsen wrote...

Oh i'm not. I just don't see a reason to argue about something where we won't come to a consensus. You and other people say it's slavery, I don't think so and so do other people and we use the same arguments over and over again. We're beating a dead horse and not just in this thread. You're just the most vocal supporter of the Circle=Slavery argument, so i took you as an example.

Wouldn't it have been better simply to say that we should agree to disagree since we won't come to a consensus, then?