2875 réponses à ce sujet

[Tirigon]

Perfect-Kenshin wrote...
From what I've understood, the "no gays" option we're talking about is choosing your character's orientation in the CC menu. The discussion (at least from what I've seen) isn't about whether there should be an option to exclude homosexual characters from the game.

That would surely be possible.
But, unless choosing straight means gay companions will be changed or removed - thus excluding them - what would it change compared to know, when you choose your orientation by telling Anders (for example) that you don´t swing that way?

[Perfect-Kenshin]

centauri2002 wrote...

Perfect-Kenshin wrote...

]I'm not certain You skillfully caught on to me not answering your question directly earlier. I'm guessing you're pretty good at cross examination. An indication of one who favors the Socratic method. 

The suspense is killing me. Which one?

Ahaha, you would be correct. I've studied classical Studies intensively so Greek philosophy was one of the topics I delved into rather deeply. Socrates' logic appealed to me. I wouldn't say I stick to his princples solely but I think it's fairly accurate to say his methods have influenced me. :3

Ah, that makes sense. Always nice to run into someone else who shares equal interest in this stuff.

Anyways, I must bid you ado. I had fun debating, but now I've gotta hit the books. Later.

[Incantrix]

Perfect-Kenshin wrote...

Shawn Ogg wrote...

Perfect-Kenshin wrote...

Incantrix wrote...
I am a homosexual, and I'm entirely offended by people who say it's a choice. If I could restart life again and make this "choice" on sexual preference, do you really believe I would choose to be gay? I'm comfortable with my sexuality, but don't you think I also want to live in a world where I can get married and have a nice house and live happily ever after with my spouse...and then have divorce and a fight to gain custody of my children?

I mean no offense, but it doesn't seem like you're happy with your sexuality when you say things like "If I could restart my life, I'd choose to be heterosexual."  I sense a lot of anger and self-loathing here. Unfortunately, I don't have the means to help you while on a message board. I think you should consider a psychologist as no good will come from keeping these feelings repressed and only presenting them on a online forum.

Ok now you went too far.

You have no idea what people have to suffer because of just being gay. not the slightest one. If you had you wounldnt answer like this. No once chooses his cards when born but since there is only one chance to live you just do the best you can with those cards.

Its not anger or self-loathing is just logic.  A poor man would prefer to have born in a wealthy family just because everything would have been easier. The same applies here.

Im happy now.: yes. but also im aware of that happiness would have been a lot easier to achieve if being born straight.

Sorry if it seems I went too far. I'm just calling it as  I see it. When people say things like "If they could choose, they wouldn't choose to be gay", that tells me that they aren't happy with themselves. As an african American, if I said "If I could choose, I'd be white", that'd suggest that I wasn't happy with my ethnicity.

As for me having no idea, quite the contrary. You try growing up in a backwards town where everyone hates you because of what you look like, where you get ostrasized at school everyday by both the students and the teachers, where some of your family members go to jail because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, where you get  accussed of stealing and cheating when your'e completely innocent. And that's not even the tip of the iceberg. Don't talk to me about having no idea what it's like to suffer. At least for those profess themselves as homosexual, they can simply keep quiet about it. What was I supposed to do? It's sad, but in many parts of this country, racism is no different than it was 40 years ago.

I know what it's like to be an outcast and I also know what it's like to rise above it and to be proud of what I am.


And your poor/rich man scenario doesn't apply as both of those states can be temporary. Based on what you've been saying in this thread, I'm assuming you think the same when it comes to orientation.

Oh don't play that card, as I am african-american too...[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/angry.png[/smilie]

First
of all, I said very well that I was comfortable with my sexuality but
you must realise that along with being black  not only do I encounter
random racism but I also encounter homophobia. No, I'm not the most
flamboyant feminine as my other gay brethren but I don't think you are
aware of the hardships one must encounter for just holdingyour
boyfriends hand in public.

Try this, hold your girlfriend/wifes hand in public. Not one person shall react, yet  that would be opposite for homosexuals.

Oh
and yes, I Iove who I am (after all if you can not love your self, who
will love you) but I have contemplated what life would be like if I was
straight. Chances are I would be as close minded as you.

In the end you are like some of the caucasions who say "racism doesn't exist" only because they have never experienced it and that certainly appalls me.

[MaximusPhoenix]

[/quote]

Oh don't play that card, as I am african-american too...[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/angry.png[/smilie]

First
of all, I said very well that I was comfortable with my sexuality but
you must realise that along with being black  not only do I encounter
random racism but I also encounter homophobia. No, I'm not the most
flamboyant feminine as my other gay brethren but I don't think you are
aware of the hardships one must encounter for just holdingyour
boyfriends hand in public.

Try this, hold your girlfriend/wifes hand in public. Not one person shall react, yet  that would be opposite for homosexuals.

Oh
and yes, I Iove who I am (after all if you can not love your self, who
will love you) but I have contemplated what life would be like if I was
straight. Chances are I would be as close minded as you.

In the end you are like some of the caucasions who say "racism doesn't exist" only because they have never experienced it and that certainly appalls me.

[/quote]

I know what you mean in a way as well, because I have a gay friend who is black, and I always think to myself "Damn, he has it even twice as bad as the rest of us"

Also, I will apologize to you if you possibly read pages back when someone started the homophobial/racism comparison when I mentioned they were both and still are present in today's society. Now that I think about it, without going back to read, I think I may have come off as soundling like that only homophobia exists. I'm well aware there is still racism. I meant to say that it is less likely someone would judge someone else on their race rather than sexuality.
It would be nice if homosexuality could catch up to the other minority movements and even better if neither of the issues even existed in socitety.

[DarkAstartes]

Wow, massive thread, so I'll throw in my 2 pence.

I really did not like all the characters being romancable by either sex, it didn't bother me in a massive way, I was far too busy being hugely dissapointed by other aspects of the game, but it I did notice it. Firstly, i really do not like this idea of your character determining the sexuality of the other party members, part of the fun of character interactions is discovering things about them, not creating them. If we're going down the line of ''oh Anders is gay now because the PC wants to bang him'', then Anders ceases to feel like a coherent, external character and might as well be a figmant of Hawke's imagination. I really didnt mind having the gay Zevran in Da:O, yes it creeped me out when he referred to me as a ''handsome brute'', that is because i am a normal heterosexual male and therefore experience a sensation of mild disgust at the thought of sex between two males, as the majority of heterosexual males do. I'm not saying i hate gay people, but I did have that reaction, it was mildly unpleasant and then I moved on i didn't thin about it again. That said, if Bioware want to put a gay character in their game I'm not going to complain, as others have said they exist in real life why not in a game.

This is totally different to the approach in Da2 though, it is stretching the bounds of probability to have every character be bisexual. If you have the player go around with a party of 6 and all of them are bisexual you are making some assumptions about the gameworld, and the fact is, it is obvious these assumptions are not being made with a view to making the gameworld more believeable or richer, but just to pander to a certain demographic. For those of you comparing it to race it just is not the same, they could set the next game in a different nation where everyone is black and this would in no way change the believeability of coherence of the world or story. What would be farcical would be if everyone in the gameworld changed skin colour to match your character. Do you suggest this would detract nothing from the feeling of coherence or completeness? Now that the populations of Fereldan or the Free Marches do not have defined ethnic appearances? Most of the people you meet in Dragon Age Origins are white, because it seems Fereldans are white, Antivans seem to be brown skinned, just like in the real world different ethnic groups have different skin tones. How is wanting characters to have defined sexualities the same as wanting no black people in the game world? In the real world black people exist, in fact I've heard tell that there are actually entire countries where almost everyone is black (imagine that), in the real world everyone is not bisexual

Modifié par DarkAstartes, 29 mars 2011 - 12:57 .

[Dark83]

DarkAstartes wrote...

This is totally different to the approach in Da2 though, it is stretching the bounds of probability to have every character be bisexual.

They're not.

Isabela is always bisexual.
In Man-Hawke's universe, Anders is gay, and Fenris is straight. In Bi-Man-Hawke's universe, you can "turn" Fenris.
In Fem-Hawke's universe, Anders is straight, and Merrill isn't mentioned. In Bi-Fem-Hawke's universe, Merrill is gay.

In every narrative, Isabela is the bisexual, and only in Bi/******-Man-Hawke's narrative is Fenris not straight. Heck, I doubt the slave even thought about romance while he was killing/escaping.

(This of course ignores pre-DA2 Anders, though some people claim he's bisexual there, and some people claim he's straight. Whatever.)

[DarkAstartes]

Dark83 wrote...

DarkAstartes wrote...

This is totally different to the approach in Da2 though, it is stretching the bounds of probability to have every character be bisexual.

They're not.

Isabela is always bisexual.
In Man-Hawke's universe, Anders is gay, and Fenris is straight. In Bi-Man-Hawke's universe, you can "turn" Fenris.
In Fem-Hawke's universe, Anders is straight, and Merrill isn't mentioned. In Bi-Fem-Hawke's universe, Merrill is gay.

In every narrative, Isabela is the bisexual, and only in Bi/******-Man-Hawke's narrative is Fenris not straight. Heck, I doubt the slave even thought about romance while he was killing/escaping.

(This of course ignores pre-DA2 Anders, though some people claim he's bisexual there, and some people claim he's straight. Whatever.)

Yes, i had no problem with Isabella being bisexual (apart from the fact that the only passably attractive female LI was a raging **** and therefore of little interest) because it was an established part of her character, and also believeable when taken along with her other features. However, like I said, changing the racial attributes of nations to match the PCs appearance would definately detract from the feeling of coherence and completeness in the world, since it no longer resembles our world (in a non fantasy aspect, ie do not say ''what about magic and elves and bla bla bla'').

Plus it is not the case that Fenris is bisexual/gay only if Hawke is. He is always gay/bisexual if Hawke is male. When I saw the romance dialogue options I of course came to the conclusion that Fenris was gay, of course that leads to a romance. This is probably due to the way the romances are implemented in that obviously if there is an option to begin romancing a character that character is romanceable. It would be interesting if Hawke could make advances to any character but would be accepted/rebuffed depending on that character's sexuality (and how much they liked Hawke), this would establish each character's sexual orientation as being something independent of Hawke's, an actual aspect of an actual character, not a roleplaying prop for the fantasies of the player. Again though, this would require that some characters be straight, something a surprising number of people (if this thread is anything to go by) have a problem with.

[MSparkyPants]

DarkAstartes wrote...
Firstly, i really do not like this idea of your character determining the sexuality of the other party members, part of the fun of character interactions is discovering things about them, not creating them. If we're going down the line of ''oh Anders is gay now because the PC wants to bang him''

The thing is, the player doesn't actually determine the sexuality of the characters. If I'm playing as Man Hawke, then Anders will be gay, regardless of whether or not I choose to pursue him. That's just how he'll roll in that particular playthrough. If I play as Lady Hawke, then he'll be straight. He is the way he is every time a new game is started. The player doesn't determine his sexuality just by choosing the correct dialogue options. The only choice the player has is deciding whether or not to initiate the romance.

(...Completely unrelated side-note: BioWare, plz let next DLC allow me to give him a tabby as a gift instead of some silly illegal amulet thing /shot)

This is totally different to the approach in Da2 though, it is stretching the bounds of probability to have every character be bisexual.

I'm not sure bisexual is the correct term for Isabela. Pansexual? That's probably not right either though. I mean, she's into a crossbow.
No mention is made of Merrill's past relationship endeavors (if there are any to begin with...?), so she is either straight or gay depending on Hawke gender.
Fenris... That's a tough one. It seems he falls under the 'Hawke-sexual' category, like an 'only because it's you sort of thing'.
The only characters that could truely be referred to as bisexual would be Anders and Isabela. So there's two characters. Not six. It's not unreasonable to assume one could be friends with two bisexuals irl.

Like I mentioned earlier, why should these characters be stuck with static orientations? Just because they were straight or gay in one playthrough shouldn't mean they should be stuck that way for all other playthroughs. Each game is different, meaning each Hawke will be different, each a unique story.

If you have the player go around with a party of 6 and all of them are bisexual you are making some assumptions about the gameworld

Just for the sake of my argument to this point, bisexual =/= gay. As I stated before, there seem to be two bisexual characters in your party. If I remember correctly, there are a few bisexual, gay, and even transexual individuals in the game outside of the party. Perhaps a generous estimate of, say, ten or fifteen (not included Hawke). I'm not even going to begin to estimate how many straight characters there are in Kirkwall; I'd loose count. What assumptions are made? There are obviously straight NPC's in the game world. It's not like Thedas has so many bisexuals that they pour out of the ramparts.

Most of the people you meet in Dragon Age Origins are white, because it seems Fereldans are white, Antivans seem to be brown skinned, just like in the real world different ethnic groups have different skin tones.

I'mma edit this quote.

Most of the people you meet in Dragon Age Origins are ---straight---, because ---let's face it, most people are---, ---some of them, a small number, are bisexual (or gay/trans/etc)---just like
in the real world different ---people--- have different ---sexual orientations---.

in the real world everyone is not bisexual

And in the real world, not everyone is black?

(Please don't mistake my thoughts as trying to start an argument, I'm really just trying to avoid a paper and attempt debate LOL)

Modifié par MSparkyPants, 29 mars 2011 - 02:30 .

[AngelicMachinery]

Tran sexuality isn't really a sexual orientation, just to put that out there. It does fall into the LGBT though, but it a gender orientation not sexual orientation. Just had to put that out there.

[MSparkyPants]

AngelicMachinery wrote...

Tran sexuality isn't really a sexual orientation, just to put that out there. It does fall into the LGBT though, but it a gender orientation not sexual orientation. Just had to put that out there.

No, I understand that. I mentioned it mainly because of the elf in the Blooming Rose.

[Dark83]

DarkAstartes wrote...

Plus it is not the case that Fenris is bisexual/gay only if Hawke is. He is always gay/bisexual if Hawke is male. When I saw the romance dialogue options I of course came to the conclusion that Fenris was gay, of course that leads to a romance.

My man-Hawke saw absolutely no indication that Fenris was gay. The only
"gay" bit was if I tried to hit on him, which I did not. He goes on to regularly sleep with Isabela. He made no mention of interest at all, beyond being happy to finally have a battle bro. It's only if, within the narration, Hawke is gay and hits on him that Fenris ever exhibits homosexuality.

Besides, the issue is not if they are straight, or gay, or bisexual. The issue is that, once implemented, people want to take it away. It isn't a matter of "should this content be added", but "this content should be removed from my presence" - which I suspect is why many of us are offended.

Asa straight male who feels icky about homosexual male romance, that offends me. I have no opinion on if homosexual content is added, as it doesn't affect me. Kind of like how in real life, homosexuals don't affect me. I don't get infected by teh gay, I am secure in my heterosexuality. It only makes me squimish to imagine it done to me. Thus so long as I am free to say "no", I don't care they exist.

I don't demand they be removed from my sphere of awareness any more than I demand the Kansas board of education be removed from my awareness so I don't have to be aware of ignorance.

Edit: I think I know why I have spacing problems, but it bugs the heck out of me.

Modifié par Dark83, 29 mars 2011 - 03:13 .

[Blood-Lord Thanatos]

I drink in the Tears of the despairing forumites!

[DoneWithThisCompany]

The fact of the matter is... there shouldn't be male characters hitting on you if you're playing a male character. That's disgusting.

Gay people have their own game, it's called dying of AIDS.

[MaximusPhoenix]

DoneWithThisCompany wrote...

The fact of the matter is... there shouldn't be male characters hitting on you if you're playing a male character. That's disgusting.

Gay people have their own game, it's called dying of AIDS.

obvious troll is obvious

[wikkedjoker]

“I will point out that expecting us to change how we make our games because certain optional aspects of them make people uncomfortable is likely destined for disappointment.”

“Once again, I feel it necessary to address the fact that I don't see the way we handle romances changing dramatically because of some people being uncomfortable with them. They are optional content, and it is rather easy to avoid them. “

JohnEpler With all due respect, I’ve got to call bull ****, are you going to honestly tell me that the reason the characters in DA2 are Bi, isn’t because the popular demand of the Gay Alistair, and Lesbian Morrigan threads. From a writing and design stand point, Bioware just took the easy way out.

Now before the flaming starts I loved both Zevran and Leliana. There sexuality was apart of who they are. Both of them grew up that way, Zevran in a **** house than as an Assassin, Leliana as a bard spy having a more open sexuality would have added them in there professions. From a logical stand point it made since, form a writing stand point it was good writing, there characters were deep and likeable, and you felt something for them, and there sexuality didn’t seem misplaced, or forced. From a design stand point it allows people who wanted that kind of interaction to have it.

Fast forward a year and some, and look at the romances in DA2. Vapid and Shallow. Even when you romance Isabella she’s still a ****, Anders who seemed quite strait in Awakening and if you play as femHawk is quite strait. ( Meaning he’s not really Bi like Zevran was, because it not brought up if you’re a female. He’s gay romance is purely fan service. Seems a bit shallow to me, just sayin.) Merrill and Fenris, are just kinda there. And the Romances have no weight on the game at all. At least in Origins if you were romancing someone it was brought up, and had some baring on things you could do. Become Queen, Argue with Morrigan at the dark ritual, get scolded by Wynne. If you romance Morrigan it HAD an effect on the story, Witch hunt you could leave with her. Dragon age 2 there just there.

There’s no point to them other than bad fan service. The romance is handled with kid gloves. And you say well there optional. Well this is true, however there was an allure to dark romance with Morrigan, a sweet naiveté to Leliana, and Alistair, and just the right amount of depravity to Zevran. Romance in story telling can make or break and epic story. Romancing Isabella, I felt no hint of regret when she left with the book, and there were no hints of Dueling the Arishok because your Hawk loved Isabella and wasn’t just doing it because the only other option was to lose a teammate.

What I’m saying is there is no depth to the characters other than what you find out at first glance, for 10 years they **** about the same things, never changing, never evolving. For 10 years the romances don’t evolve, don’t go any ware.

Now only are the characters shallow but the plot is shallow and full of bad writing. And given the plot strands in the DLC, and the Rise to Power trailer it could have been so much more.

The prime example is the climax, had it been Flemeth pulling the strings all along. From the shadows, from the amulet, or as an Advisor to the new ruler of Kirkwall, Hawk, planting dark seeds to use him to find Morrigan, or to start a war, to aid in her own means to aid the climax of the story. Not only would it have been BETTER than Marten Luther Mage and Crazy Lady on Red Dust. It would have worked A LOT better and made for an epic build up to Dragon Age 3.

I’m just saying that, the homosexuality isn’t bad, the Characters are bad, as an off shoot to the story being bad.

Modifié par wikkedjoker, 29 mars 2011 - 06:30 .

[Altima Darkspells]

Dark83 wrote...

]They're not.

Isabela is always bisexual.
In Man-Hawke's universe, Anders is gay, and Fenris is straight. In Bi-Man-Hawke's universe, you can "turn" Fenris.
In Fem-Hawke's universe, Anders is straight, and Merrill isn't mentioned. In Bi-Fem-Hawke's universe, Merrill is gay.

In every narrative, Isabela is the bisexual, and only in Bi/******-Man-Hawke's narrative is Fenris not straight. Heck, I doubt the slave even thought about romance while he was killing/escaping.

(This of course ignores pre-DA2 Anders, though some people claim he's bisexual there, and some people claim he's straight. Whatever.)

Well, Fenris and Merrill are elves.  It's not gay if it's with an elf.

So, really, there are only two bisexual characters in DA2.

The reality warping was rather weak, though.

[sleepyowlet]

DoneWithThisCompany wrote...

The fact of the matter is... there shouldn't be male characters hitting on you if you're playing a male character. That's disgusting.

Gay people have their own game, it's called dying of AIDS.

Please hie thyself away from here. Reported.

[Centauri2002]

DoneWithThisCompany wrote...

The fact of the matter is... there shouldn't be male characters hitting on you if you're playing a male character. That's disgusting.

Gay people have their own game, it's called dying of AIDS.

Too obvious. That's so ridiculous, I don't think anyone's even going to bother getting angry over it. 

[-leadintea-]

wikkedjoker wrote...

“I will point out that expecting us to change how we make our games because certain optional aspects of them make people uncomfortable is likely destined for disappointment.”

“Once again, I feel it necessary to address the fact that I don't see the way we handle romances changing dramatically because of some people being uncomfortable with them. They are optional content, and it is rather easy to avoid them. “

JohnEpler With all due respect, I’ve got to call bull ****, are you going to honestly tell me that the reason the characters in DA2 are Bi, isn’t because the popular demand of the Gay Alistair, and Lesbian Morrigan threads. From a writing and design stand point, Bioware just took the easy way out.

Now before the flaming starts I loved both Zevran and Leliana. There sexuality was apart of who they are. Both of them grew up that way, Zevran in a **** house than as an Assassin, Leliana as a bard spy having a more open sexuality would have added them in there professions. From a logical stand point it made since, form a writing stand point it was good writing, there characters were deep and likeable, and you felt something for them, and there sexuality didn’t seem misplaced, or forced. From a design stand point it allows people who wanted that kind of interaction to have it.

Fast forward a year and some, and look at the romances in DA2. Vapid and Shallow. Even when you romance Isabella she’s still a ****, Anders who seemed quite strait in Awakening and if you play as femHawk is quite strait. ( Meaning he’s not really Bi like Zevran was, because it not brought up if you’re a female. He’s gay romance is purely fan service. Seems a bit shallow to me, just sayin.) Merrill and Fenris, are just kinda there. And the Romances have no weight on the game at all. At least in Origins if you were romancing someone it was brought up, and had some baring on things you could do. Become Queen, Argue with Morrigan at the dark ritual, get scolded by Wynne. If you romance Morrigan it HAD an effect on the story, Witch hunt you could leave with her. Dragon age 2 there just there.

There’s no point to them other than bad fan service. The romance is handled with kid gloves. And you say well there optional. Well this is true, however there was an allure to dark romance with Morrigan, a sweet naiveté to Leliana, and Alistair, and just the right amount of depravity to Zevran. Romance in story telling can make or break and epic story. Romancing Isabella, I felt no hint of regret when she left with the book, and there were no hints of Dueling the Arishok because your Hawk loved Isabella and wasn’t just doing it because the only other option was to lose a teammate.

What I’m saying is there is no depth to the characters other than what you find out at first glance, for 10 years they **** about the same things, never changing, never evolving. For 10 years the romances don’t evolve, don’t go any ware.

Now only are the characters shallow but the plot is shallow and full of bad writing. And given the plot strands in the DLC, and the Rise to Power trailer it could have been so much more.

The prime example is the climax, had it been Flemeth pulling the strings all along. From the shadows, from the amulet, or as an Advisor to the new ruler of Kirkwall, Hawk, planting dark seeds to use him to find Morrigan, or to start a war, to aid in her own means to aid the climax of the story. Not only would it have been BETTER than Marten Luther Mage and Crazy Lady on Red Dust. It would have worked A LOT better and made for an epic build up to Dragon Age 3.

I’m just saying that, the homosexuality isn’t bad, the Characters are bad, as an off shoot to the story being bad.

I mostly agree with this. While the way the characters' sexuality worked in this game was extremely poor and in bad taste, I don't think their personal history was that bad. But then again, like I said before, this is a matter of breadth vs. depth. Some people like the number of options even if it is fanservice and couldn't care less about a character's believability or development, whereas some of us are the complete opposite and like depth to our characters and their development.

[moilami]

Thunderbringer wrote...

wikkedjoker wrote...

“I will point out that expecting us to change how we make our games because certain optional aspects of them make people uncomfortable is likely destined for disappointment.”

“Once again, I feel it necessary to address the fact that I don't see the way we handle romances changing dramatically because of some people being uncomfortable with them. They are optional content, and it is rather easy to avoid them. “

JohnEpler With all due respect, I’ve got to call bull ****, are you going to honestly tell me that the reason the characters in DA2 are Bi, isn’t because the popular demand of the Gay Alistair, and Lesbian Morrigan threads. From a writing and design stand point, Bioware just took the easy way out.

Now before the flaming starts I loved both Zevran and Leliana. There sexuality was apart of who they are. Both of them grew up that way, Zevran in a **** house than as an Assassin, Leliana as a bard spy having a more open sexuality would have added them in there professions. From a logical stand point it made since, form a writing stand point it was good writing, there characters were deep and likeable, and you felt something for them, and there sexuality didn’t seem misplaced, or forced. From a design stand point it allows people who wanted that kind of interaction to have it.

Fast forward a year and some, and look at the romances in DA2. Vapid and Shallow. Even when you romance Isabella she’s still a ****, Anders who seemed quite strait in Awakening and if you play as femHawk is quite strait. ( Meaning he’s not really Bi like Zevran was, because it not brought up if you’re a female. He’s gay romance is purely fan service. Seems a bit shallow to me, just sayin.) Merrill and Fenris, are just kinda there. And the Romances have no weight on the game at all. At least in Origins if you were romancing someone it was brought up, and had some baring on things you could do. Become Queen, Argue with Morrigan at the dark ritual, get scolded by Wynne. If you romance Morrigan it HAD an effect on the story, Witch hunt you could leave with her. Dragon age 2 there just there.

There’s no point to them other than bad fan service. The romance is handled with kid gloves. And you say well there optional. Well this is true, however there was an allure to dark romance with Morrigan, a sweet naiveté to Leliana, and Alistair, and just the right amount of depravity to Zevran. Romance in story telling can make or break and epic story. Romancing Isabella, I felt no hint of regret when she left with the book, and there were no hints of Dueling the Arishok because your Hawk loved Isabella and wasn’t just doing it because the only other option was to lose a teammate.

What I’m saying is there is no depth to the characters other than what you find out at first glance, for 10 years they **** about the same things, never changing, never evolving. For 10 years the romances don’t evolve, don’t go any ware.

Now only are the characters shallow but the plot is shallow and full of bad writing. And given the plot strands in the DLC, and the Rise to Power trailer it could have been so much more.

The prime example is the climax, had it been Flemeth pulling the strings all along. From the shadows, from the amulet, or as an Advisor to the new ruler of Kirkwall, Hawk, planting dark seeds to use him to find Morrigan, or to start a war, to aid in her own means to aid the climax of the story. Not only would it have been BETTER than Marten Luther Mage and Crazy Lady on Red Dust. It would have worked A LOT better and made for an epic build up to Dragon Age 3.

I’m just saying that, the homosexuality isn’t bad, the Characters are bad, as an off shoot to the story being bad.

I mostly agree with this. While the way the characters' sexuality worked in this game was extremely poor and in bad taste, I don't think their personal history was that bad. But then again, like I said before, this is a matter of breadth vs. depth. Some people like the number of options even if it is fanservice and couldn't care less about a character's believability or development, whereas some of us are the complete opposite and like depth to our characters and their development.

Indeed. And guess which dev method will prevail? Dumbed down shallow pixel humpables clones or complexity and individuality?


Edit: Should begin to call those NPCs Politically Correct contingency gays.

Modifié par moilami, 29 mars 2011 - 08:37 .

[Chriagon]

moilami wrote...

Indeed. And guess which dev method will prevail? Dumbed down shallow pixel humpables clones or complexity and individuality?


Edit: Should begin to call those NPCs Politically Correct contingency gays.

So "dumbed down shallow pixel humpables" == "politically correct contingency gays"?

If Bioware would have removed the option for a male/female Hawke to romance a male/female NPC that wouldn't have changed neither the complexity nor the individuality of the NPCs imo.

[catabuca]

I don't know where all this 'turning Fenris' bull comes from. mHawke didn't have one conversation with Fenris where Fenris said 'I've usually only ever been all about the girls, but I'll swing that way for you Hawke'.

I'll post what Gaider wrote on the subject, again, seeing as though no one seems to care what the person who had creative control over the creation of these characters has to say:

David Gaider wrote...

I'm sorry, but just to chime in again-- how are we coming to the conclusion that the characters are either straight or gay, exactly? Considering that they don't generally discuss their sexuality with the player, the idea that their sexuality changes seems a bit bizarre when their actions don't. You can decide for yourself what they are-- that is indeed part of the point in leaving it to your interpretation-- but deciding that they are one thing or the other and calling this "not realistic" seems to me to be a little self-serving.

And, yes, they don't discuss their sexuality. Perhaps you'd prefer if they would. It strikes me that the only way some people will be happy is if we had an entire array of characters to romance-- some completely straight, some completely gay with maybe a few canonically bisexual characters for good measure. Enough to be "fair", and all of them covering the complete range of attractions for players of that persuasion.

I don't know about you, but that seems unlikely.

So as I said, we went with simply giving players the option of deciding for themselves, as well as interpreting for themselves. If some people are unhappy that they still didn't get the particular flavor they were looking for-- well, that's just too damned bad. As always, we're never going to be able to provide enough to suit everyone. At least in this case the people that don't like it can be equally unhappy, and I can live with that.

and ...

David Gaider wrote...

I'm not saying they could be anything-- there are a few instances (Anders and Isabela, primarily) when their past might come up. I'll point out that, with Anders, he doesn't say "I am attracted only to men" or "I am attracted to both men and women". You could decide one way or the other... perhaps if someone says a member of the opposite sex or same sex is attractive, that's enough for you? But they simply don't say where they preference lies. My point is that their actions don't change, yet some people are deciding that their inference is enough to suggest the characters alter their preferences at the player's whim.

Even if they did, I'm not sure that would be a crime. Regardless, it's not the case.

(all of Gaider's comments on that thread and subject are here)

Modifié par catabuca, 29 mars 2011 - 11:20 .

[JediMB]

Yeah, a lot of people don't seem to realize that one can be bisexual and still have a preference for one sex over the other.

It would seem that both Anders and Fenris prefer women, although in Fenris' case it could simply be a matter of availability... since Isabela is easy, and all. For Anders I'm judging from his behavior in Awakening, of course.

Modifié par JediMB, 29 mars 2011 - 11:53 .

[moilami]

chrissicross wrote...

moilami wrote...

Indeed. And guess which dev method will prevail? Dumbed down shallow pixel humpables clones or complexity and individuality?


Edit: Should begin to call those NPCs Politically Correct contingency gays.

So "dumbed down shallow pixel humpables" == "politically correct contingency gays"?

If Bioware would have removed the option for a male/female Hawke to romance a male/female NPC that wouldn't have changed neither the complexity nor the individuality of the NPCs imo.

Why it is bad to make a NPC who earns a place in your team because of other merits than being a gay? I am mostly talking about Zevran here. He was a bi though, but could had been gay and earned his place by other merits than being a gay.

In other words, why not make real gays?

[catabuca]

JediMB wrote...

Yeah, a lot of people don't seem to realize that one can be bisexual and still have a preference for one sex over the other.

It would seem that both Anders and Fenris prefer women, although in Fenris' case it could simply be a matter of availability... since Isabela is easy, and all. For Anders I'm judging from his behavior in Awakening, of course.

That's just it though - you can infer anything you like from their actions in the game, since there is never a specific declaration of preference one way or another. Which is exactly what Gaider says in his quotes above.

Some take the fact that in a fHawke game Fenris likes fHawke as some kind of 'proof' that if he falls for a mHawke in a mHawke game Hawke has somehow 'turned him'. I really do not understand that logic at all.

Others take the fact that Anders doesn't mention his sexual relationship with Karl to fHawke as meaning that he is straight in a fHawke game but gay/bi in a mHawke game. Again, the logic here is astounding. Sure, if that's how you want to view Anders, then that's fine, but to use that as some kind of hard proof of a specific sexuality that is canonical is bizarre. I could just as correctly interpret that as Anders just not thinking it was relevant to tell a fHawke about his deeper relationship with Karl, whereas he tells mHawke because it's more pertinent to their situation and a way of him trying to test the water to see if Hawke likes him in that way. Either way is perfectly fine in terms of how you interpret your own game, but neither is 'correct' and set in stone. It's all open to interpretation, and I think that is wonderful.

I don't require people irl to justify and explain their orientation to me before I can accept it is a part of who they are. If all the characters in DA2 had been written as canonically straight in every playthrough, I wouldn't need them to come forward and have a few lines of dialogue where they explain to me that they are straight before I can accept it as a deep and realistic part of their personality. Why is it so many people feel that these characters being bisexual or gay DOES require some sort of dialogue to justify it? That, my friends, is a double standard.

And again, it comes down to the notion of privilege. When you are in the majority, your orientation or behaviour or preferences need no explanation since it simply 'is'. However, you view the preferences or behaviour of others who are in a minority as needing an explanation because it falls outside of your view of what is generally expected and accepted of people. But this is just the thing: being gay needs no more explanation or justification than being straight, and when some call for the characters to be written in a way that expands on their homosexuality with dialogue options that explain it, I wonder would you expect the same from a straight character? Honestly? Would you only accept a character is 'convincingly' straight if they explain their straightness to you first? No. I doubt you would.