2875 réponses à ce sujet

[Iamnotahater]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

shumworld wrote...

It confuses me how in ME discussion boards there's a demand for some characters to be bysexual yet in the DA boards there's a demand for heterosexuality.

The internet is weird.

I'm not arguing for heterosexuality, I just think it makes more sense to base a characters sexual preferences on the way they are characterised. For example in Mass Effect Ashley is straight, is it homophobic that she is characterised as a straight woman? I personally don't think so. 

Of course it is. If you are a straight guy who likes commited relationships with straight women you are a homophobe.

Why not throw in all firms of Paraphilla? After all we wouldn't want to leave anyone out.

Why can't the Shepard romance legion?

How about EDI?

Or what about Grunt? Why doesn't he swing both ways?

[City6]

Xerin wrote...

Hatchetman77 wrote...
In Ancient Greece for example, it was ok for two men to have sex, but it was frowned upon if one male was seen as submissive in the relationship (they both had to me aggressive manly men for the relationship to be ok).   

Minor point, but this is actually incorrect. While it's true that sex between two men was popular in Sparta, the more common model was pederasty (pairing an older Greek man with a pubescent boy as part of the social ordering system).

The focus on pederasty is more to do with most surviving documents being the teachings of horny old gay men.

Generally, if we go by the survivng art and stories of Alexander's army, it was pretty much what we'd call conventional homosexuality (although they wouldn't, as the concept of who you love defining you as a certain "type" of person is pretty modern).

[Inquisitor Recon]

The Angry One wrote...
Because You. Already. Have. The. Option.
You want realism? Guess what, in real life you don't have the right to not be exposed to every single thing that offends you.

You already had a gay option in DA1. See how this work?
Guess what. In real life if I meet ten random people they are probably going to be straight. Yet if everybody was straight in Hawke's party in DA2 you would throw a tantrum.

So tell me again why is a "no homosexual" option at the start of a game a bad idea?

[demodar]

"Of course it is. If you are a straight guy who likes commited relationships with straight women you are a homophobe." Who said that?

[v_ware]

ReconTeam wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
YOU HAVE THE OPTION. YOU CAN REJECT THEM. THERE WILL BE NO ROMANCE.

According to yourself more options = improvement. So wouldn't allowing more options for players who don't want to deal with this stuff be an improvement?

Oh! We can't deal with ******/bisexuality, can we? So that's the problem then.
Wel let me just say this game is rated M for mature. For adults. And most sane and well-balanced adults are capable of dealing with sexual content, of any kind.

Especially flirting. Jeesj. He said he liked you, he didn't rape you and your entire family. Get over yourself.

[yuncas]

ReconTeam wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Because You. Already. Have. The. Option.
You want realism? Guess what, in real life you don't have the right to not be exposed to every single thing that offends you.

You already had a gay option in DA1. See how this work?
Guess what. In real life if I meet ten random people they are probably going to be straight. Yet if everybody was straight in Hawke's party in DA2 you would throw a tantrum.

So tell me again why is a "no homosexual" option at the start of a game a bad idea?

And hear I thought one out of every ten people was gay? Huh.

[AkiKishi]

The Angry One wrote...
Because You. Already. Have. The. Option.
You want realism? Guess what, in real life you don't have the right to not be exposed to every single thing that offends you.

You also have the right not to hang out with people you don't like. The problem with Anders is they made him a key part of the game by giving him the best healing powers.

If he really was optional, then it would not be so much of a problem I'm guessing.

Part of the problem with DA2 is they have made the companions too specialised. Zevren was very much optional, Anders is not.

I don't see any problem with flagging the characters sexuality as part of CC. Especially if the everyone is bi, is the new norm.

While I don't share their feelings I see no need to creep people out with gay advances if they don't want to see that.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 24 mars 2011 - 08:55 .

[Galad22]

ReconTeam wrote...

According to yourself more options = improvement. So wouldn't allowing more options for players who don't want to deal with this stuff be an improvement?

So, how are you going to get over these weird issues of yours with gay or bi people if you can't even deal with their existence in videogames?

[Artoz96]

[quote]Artoz96 wrote...
There are no 2 equal items in this world. Love=Love=FALSE. Love can bevery different and while for some it is good for others it can be dreadfull.[/quote]
Love is a very broadly used term. Love between a man and a man might be different from the love between a man and a woman but it's still love. Love between a man and a woman might be different from the love between another man and a woman but it's still love.

[quote]Artoz96 wrote...
And also Homosexuality = bisexuality = heterosexuality=FALSE. All things are different. For example you and I humans but it doesnt mean that there is no difference between us.[/quote]
Sexuality is sexuality. Acts that have the goal, or lead up to sex.

[quote]Artoz96 wrote...
And if I could I would vote for no homosexuality button in my game. It was really NOT pleasant to me when Anders started his dialoge... [/quote]
Yes cry because a fictitious guy hit on you. Was it terrifying? Do you need a cookie and a blankie?[/quote]

Love is still love? And what does it mean except some rise of hormons?  It is like to say life is life and to make an intelligent face like you said something very clever

And you did it, Sexuality is sexuality. Brilliant argument!

You say that it is nothing when fictitious guy hit on you, but maybe it is also nothing if there is no such choise at all? Why people do need gay romance with "fictitious guy:?

[Inquisitor Recon]

v_ware wrote...
Oh! We can't deal with ******/bisexuality, can we? So that's the problem then.
Wel let me just say this game is rated M for mature. For adults. And most sane and well-balanced adults are capable of dealing with sexual content, of any kind.

Especially flirting. Jeesj. He said he liked you, he didn't rape you and your entire family. Get over yourself.

Your personal attacks still fail to answer my question. Again why is it a bad idea? And most sane guys I know don't like being hit on by men either.

[stickydimes2006]

i don't care that there are Homosexuals in the game. It doesn't matter to me. Do they really have to hit on you constantly? For any kind of relationship in the game you should have to do something or choose a conversation option that opens it up. Anders automatically hitting on me the second i recruit him is too much. Even after i turn him down him and other male characters are always trying to hit on me. Call me what you will but it i don't want to play a gay date simulation. I thought i'd be killing dragons here not turning down homosexual advances constantly. For Dragon Age 3 take the relationships out completely or at least make it to where i have to hit on someone first before i have to always be discusted over and over. I don't want to recruit any more soldiers for fear it will just be another gay moment in an otherwise great game. Do the Call of Duty thing and ask before i'm forced to endure this. Make people check a gay box or something at the beginning of the game.

[KidnappedKevin]

Great thing lost in all of this discussion: in Gaider's post, he mentions that, if he could do it again, he probably wouldn't have Anders hit on you if you were being nice to him. Which seems to be the crux of the issue when people complain that they feel like Bioware is trying to make them be gay.

So congrats, those of you who were offended. You won. You don't have to worry about Mages challenging your sexuality in future Bioware installments. I hope this will now allow you to sleep peacefully at night.

[c3701]

You're going around in circles and missing my point.
YOU HAVE THE OPTION. YOU CAN REJECT THEM. THERE WILL BE NO ROMANCE.

I do not think he is missing the point.  He simply doesn't want the content.  It's not that hard to understand.  It goes the other way as well.  No straight content.  I think an option in the gameplay section is a good idea.  For me, I personally would just like like-able characters.  I pretty much can't stand any of the companions, except for Varric and Bethany.

Modifié par c3701, 24 mars 2011 - 08:59 .

[Inquisitor Recon]

Galad22 wrote...
So, how are you going to get over these weird issues of yours with gay or bi people if you can't even deal with their existence in videogames?

So your playing amateur psychologist now, is that it? Really?

[yuncas]

BobSmith101 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Because You. Already. Have. The. Option.
You want realism? Guess what, in real life you don't have the right to not be exposed to every single thing that offends you.

You also have the right not to hang out with people you don't like. The problem with Anders is they made him a key part of the game by giving him the best healing powers.

If he really was optional, then it would not be so much of a problem I'm guessing.

Part of the problem with DA2 is they have made the companions too specialised. Zevren was very much optional, Anders is not.

Doesn't this just boil down to you not  liking the idea of peole being gay?

[Dark83]

ReconTeam wrote...

So tell me again why is a "no homosexual" option at the start of a game a bad idea?

For the same reason why a "no black people" option in restaurants is a bad idea.

[Firky]

Don't you guys remember the thread in about November where the devs asked "What is your primary concern about DAII?" I rushed straight in with "tactical camera" and then looked around and a surprisingly large percentage of posters had written, "I am concerned there will be no s/s LI options." I didn't even know what that stood for, at the time.

Good for you, BioWare, for finding (what I think) is an appropriate way to integrate a whole bunch of s/s Li options into the game. Personally, I probably would have like to see an authentically gay character, an authentically bi and an authentically straight, amoung whoever else - but all I really wanted was a tactical camera, and the way this has been implemented does make lots of sense.

[Iamnotahater]

ReconTeam wrote...

v_ware wrote...
Oh! We can't deal with ******/bisexuality, can we? So that's the problem then.
Wel let me just say this game is rated M for mature. For adults. And most sane and well-balanced adults are capable of dealing with sexual content, of any kind.

Especially flirting. Jeesj. He said he liked you, he didn't rape you and your entire family. Get over yourself.

Your personal attacks still fail to answer my question. Again why is it a bad idea? And most sane guys I know don't like being hit on by men either.

+1

Maybe Gayder does and he created the game to liveout his fantasy.

Just saying

Modifié par Iamnotahater, 24 mars 2011 - 08:58 .

[Sharn01]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

shumworld wrote...

It confuses me how in ME discussion boards there's a demand for some characters to be bysexual yet in the DA boards there's a demand for heterosexuality.

The internet is weird.

I'm not arguing for heterosexuality, I just think it makes more sense to base a characters sexual preferences on the way they are characterised. For example in Mass Effect Ashley is straight, is it homophobic that she is characterised as a straight woman? I personally don't think so. 

Thats the point really, there is nothing wrong with a character being straight, but all the people hating on the DA2 romances are upset because the characters are bi, they seem to feel cheated that they dont have a straight love interest to choose from that bi and gay characters are unable to romance.  Basicly they think its unfair if there isnt a romance that is straight only.

[Inquisitor Recon]

[quote]Dark83 wrote...
So tell me again why is a "no homosexual" option at the start of a game a bad idea?
[/quote]For the same reason why a "no black people" option in restaurants is a bad idea.
[/quote]

Since when is homosexuality race? It is okay for you to be able to "customize" your game by all of the LIs being bisexual yet me not wanting that content is bad? Enough of this hypocrisy.

[Galad22]

ReconTeam wrote...

So your playing amateur psychologist now, is that it? Really?

Sure why not. It is just as sensible as making such a big deal from something this small in a videogame.

[City6]

stickydimes2006 wrote...

i don't care that there are Homosexuals in the game. It doesn't matter to me. Do they really have to hit on you constantly? For any kind of relationship in the game you should have to do something or choose a conversation option that opens it up. Anders automatically hitting on me the second i recruit him is too much. Even after i turn him down him and other male characters are always trying to hit on me. Call me what you will but it i don't want to play a gay date simulation. I thought i'd be killing dragons here not turning down homosexual advances constantly. For Dragon Age 3 take the relationships out completely or at least make it to where i have to hit on someone first before i have to always be discusted over and over. I don't want to recruit any more soldiers for fear it will just be another gay moment in an otherwise great game. Do the Call of Duty thing and ask before i'm forced to endure this. Make people check a gay box or something at the beginning of the game.

Two lines is an odd definition of "constantly". Especially when indicating "Ummm, no thanks" nips it in the bud.

Isabella tries to bed you far more often and far more graphically.

You must be incredibly sensitive to brief same-sex flirtation. Funny.

[Dark83]

BobSmith101 wrote...

You also have the right not to hang out with people you don't like. The problem with Anders is they made him a key part of the game by giving him the best healing powers.

Anders actually has crappy healing compared to a Spirit Mage. Once again PCs prove their superiority to consoles - my Merrill is a Spirit Healer. Don't need to bring psycho terrorist Anders along.

[The Angry One]

ReconTeam wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Because You. Already. Have. The. Option.
You want realism? Guess what, in real life you don't have the right to not be exposed to every single thing that offends you.

You already had a gay option in DA1. See how this work?
Guess what. In real life if I meet ten random people they are probably going to be straight. Yet if everybody was straight in Hawke's party in DA2 you would throw a tantrum.

I'm not the one whining. You are. I threw no "tantrums" about this in DA:O, so your point is moot.

So tell me again why is a "no homosexual" option at the start of a game a bad idea?

Because it's an option that only appeals to bigots who can't even deal with the IDEA.
Yet again. You have the option to say no and nothing will come of it.

[Pious_Augustus]

[quote]c3701 wrote...

You're going around in circles and missing my point.
YOU HAVE THE OPTION. YOU CAN REJECT THEM. THERE WILL BE NO ROMANCE.


[/quote]

I do not think he is missing the point.  He simply doesn't want the content.  It's not that hard to understand.  It goes the other way as well.  No straight content.  I think an option in the gameplay section is a good idea.  For me, I personally would just like like-able characters.  I pretty much can't stand any of the companions, except for Varric and Bethany.

[/quote]

The main issue if you loose major points for rejecting them I have yet to lose any points for rejecting Isabela so Bioware with its comments are forcing the issue and actually making us lose points for not being homosexual. I think Fox News would have a real story this time

Headlines you lose points unless your homosexual in Dragon Age lol

[quote]The Angry One wrote...



Because it's an option that only appeals to bigots who can't even deal with the IDEA.
Yet again. You have the option to say no and nothing will come of it.

[/quote]


WRONG!

Modifié par Pious_Augustus, 24 mars 2011 - 09:01 .