2875 réponses à ce sujet

[moilami]

Shawn Ogg wrote...

Hi. First of all:

Hi there. It is funny to see people popping here after everything has been discussed to tell their opinion. Good you came anyway.

I am practising to get away of the pyramid quoting.

Can I now haz first grammar troll plz??? 

[Seifz]

Viper371 wrote...

snfonseka wrote...

What I think what BW has done is totally dumb. They should have introduced some characters as straight, some as bi and some as gay. It is more realistic than turning all the romance-companions into bi characters.  They should have approached this sexuality issue in more creative manner, where the sexuality is part of the characters' personality. For example, Merrill is straight and Isabela is bi.  Well..., BW you have done the character development in your past games in great manner, so don't try to dumb down the character development now.

this is the problem with the romances.

On DAO, there were bi-sexual characters. Lelianna was more on the straight side of the fence, Zevran was totally bi.

I'm sure a few people didn't like that.  There are people like that.  But as many people as are currently disliking the romance options in DA2?  No way.

The problem is not that a character or another is gay/bi instead of straight, it's that every single one of them is bisexual, wich is unrealistic, and dumb from a gameplay point of view.

Currently, there's no difference playing a male or female character.  Oversimplification, again.

I'll repeat it again: oversimplification.  That's the problem of this game, and that's the problem with romance, just as with almost all aspect of the game.

You know, I don't care if character X is totally, openly gay.  It's a in-game choice to pursue a romance, and that's fine.  But I do mind when everyone is bi, and there's really no difference between playing a male and a female.  In DAO, it felt different, in DA2, it doesn't.

I entirely agree with this.  That said, I think the BioWare approach to romance is pretty flawed anyway and I doubt that I'll ever be satisfied with any similar implementation.  I mean, they've literally gotten to the point where you pursue romances for achievements.  "Have sex with Companion X to unlock this achivement!"  It's terrible.

Until they figure out how to make romances actually matter to the story in a meaningful way, I don't really care how many of my companions are bisexual.  Might as well give everyone the option to pick their favorite sex toy.

[the_one_54321]

Viper371 wrote...

snfonseka wrote...
What I think what BW has done is totally dumb. They should have introduced some characters as straight, some as bi and some as gay. It is more realistic than turning all the romance-companions into bi characters.  They should have approached this sexuality issue in more creative manner, where the sexuality is part of the characters' personality. For example, Merrill is straight and Isabela is bi.  Well..., BW you have done the character development in your past games in great manner, so don't try to dumb down the character development now.

this is the problem with the romances.

On DAO, there were bi-sexual characters. Lelianna was more on the straight side of the fence, Zevran was totally bi.

I'm sure a few people didn't like that.  There are people like that.  But as many people as are currently disliking the romance options in DA2?  No way.

The problem is not that a character or another is gay/bi instead of straight, it's that every single one of them is bisexual, wich is unrealistic, and dumb from a gameplay point of view.

Currently, there's no difference playing a male or female character.  Oversimplification, again.

I'll repeat it again: oversimplification.  That's the problem of this game, and that's the problem with romance, just as with almost all aspect of the game.

You know, I don't care if character X is totally, openly gay.  It's a in-game choice to pursue a romance, and that's fine.  But I do mind when everyone is bi, and there's really no difference between playing a male and a female.  In DAO, it felt different, in DA2, it doesn't.

Absolutely. The whole systems and the whole issue has nothing to do with wither or not there are gay or bi characters or even if they hit on you.

The issue is that the whole system is another example of cutting corners in the game.

[Tirigon]

solstickan wrote...

I'm sorry, I should have been more specific. The straight person having a same sex relationship is more of a one time thing. S/he is drawn to a specific person, but not attracted in general to people of the same sex (bi). If you have watched Torchwood I would describe it as Jack and Ianto's relationship. Though of course this can vary greatly -- see the Kinsey scale. 

What I meant was, that sexuality isn't set in stone. At least, that is not how I see it. I see myself as heterosexual, but I imagine that if I met the right person, I could have a gay relationship. Though, maybe that is because I am very open-minded?

Thanks for the explanation.

I didn´t think you´d mean it like that because, for me, being attracted to a certain person regardless of gender is the only I have ever experienced.

There are attractive people of both gender, and among both genders there´s plenty of people who are ugly, assh*les or both......

[Shawn Ogg]

solstickan wrote...

moilami wrote...

The first quoting police I see here. I wonder is this evolution and will I see the first grammar police soon.

I am not the first in this thread. But the other was here long ago and his/her messago is long lost...

Tirigon wrote...
[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/andy.png[/smilie]
Don´t get me wrong.... but what exactly is "bi" even, if you can be atttracted to someone of your own gender and still remain straight?

I'm sorry, I should have been more specific. The straight person having a same sex relationship is more of a one time thing. S/he is drawn to a specific person, but not attracted in general to people of the same sex (bi). If you have watched Torchwood I would describe it as Jack and Ianto's relationship. Though of course this can vary greatly -- see the Kinsey scale. 

What I meant was, that sexuality isn't set in stone. At least, that is not how I see it. I see myself as heterosexual, but I imagine that if I met the right person, I could have a gay relationship. Though, maybe that is because I am very open-minded?

I have to disagree, not totally but still a little. Its true that one encounter wont make you homosexual. Sex is sex and some people would even put theit tools into a electric socket for that purpose. What makes you homosexual is the physical attraction and thats something you cant force or deny. You cant control your body chemistry.

You could try to have a gay ralationship even if you are not gay but does is something that wont end well. No matter what romantics feelings you can have, a relationship needs its physical part too.

[Tirigon]

moilami wrote...

Can I now haz first grammar troll plz??? 

Gladly:

[Centauri2002]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Absolutely. The whole systems and the whole issue has nothing to do with wither or not there are gay or bi characters or even if they hit on you.

The issue is that the whole system is another example of cutting corners in the game.

While it is true that is one valid issue, it wasn't the original point of this thread. That was completely unrelated to the quality of work on the game, actually. Still, cutting corners is never a good thing but, unfortunately, when the end result is all about money it's going to happen to some degree. I'm hoping BioWare will learn from their mistakes and make up for it in the third Dragon Age. If, indeed, there is another. 

[AngelicMachinery]

Viper371 wrote...


On DAO, there were bi-sexual characters. Lelianna was more on the straight side of the fence, Zevran was totally bi

Maybe it was just because I was playing as a woman, but Leliana seemed lean more towards the company of women than men.  Zevran also preffered women over men, and says so directly...  he was still bi but he had a definite prefence. 

Modifié par AngelicMachinery, 27 mars 2011 - 08:46 .

[Lord Sullivan]

Seifz wrote...

No, I am not a nihilist.  That said, your claim that homosexuality is unnatural has no scientific evidence to support it.  Thus, we have no reason to believe that homosexuality is abnormal.

If you continue to call gay people unnatural, etc. then don't complain when someone calls you homophobic.

Nor is there scientific evidence that homosexuality is natural. Observation that it exist are not scientific proof of it being natural. Logic however, dictates that it isn't. Logic dictates that it is different, a different path, not of the norm.

Homosexuality/bi-sexuality doesn't scare me, but I won't ignore the truth nor will I fear expressing my thoughts.

Calling realist "Homophobic" is nothing but Hyperbole which as been used quite a bit here in the forums and in that article.

[the_one_54321]

centauri2002 wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
Absolutely. The whole systems and the whole issue has nothing to do with wither or not there are gay or bi characters or even if they hit on you.

The issue is that the whole system is another example of cutting corners in the game.

While it is true that is one valid issue, it wasn't the original point of this thread. That was completely unrelated to the quality of work on the game, actually. Still, cutting corners is never a good thing but, unfortunately, when the end result is all about money it's going to happen to some degree. I'm hoping BioWare will learn from their mistakes and make up for it in the third Dragon Age. If, indeed, there is another.

I take exception because the devs have been using the "fair options" and "social statement" argument to justify that they cut corners.

[Centauri2002]

AngelicMachinery wrote...

Viper371 wrote...


On DAO, there were bi-sexual characters. Lelianna was more on the straight side of the fence, Zevran was totally bi

Maybe it was just because I was playing as a woman, but Leliana seemed lean more towards the company of women than men.  Zevran also preffered women over men, and says so directly...  he was still bi but he had a definite prefence. 

It wasn't just you. Since Leliana also had history with another woman, it seemed to me she'd fit the lesbian role nicely. I didn't consider her anything else in my play through, actually.

[Lord Sullivan]

Tirigon wrote...

Lord Sullivan wrote...

Some like to refer to that as being straight with Bi-sexual tendencies.

I like to call bullsh!t on stupid word constructs and call it plain old Bi:police:

Hey I'm with you on that one

[solstickan]

Shawn Ogg wrote...

-The inclusion of gay relationships on the game
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Well I have no problem with that, will be foolish of me to oppose that since Im gay. I have to admit (DA series not being the case) that Id rather prefer not to see a gay npc than to see once more the tipical gay stereotype many series/films/games tends to force down our throats.

I cant understand why some people would have problems with that so I can only imagine the reasons. I wont convince anyone with that opinion to change it, Im not naive enough to think a post in a forum would be able to do anything against years of "education" recieved also I have no need to do so,

-How the relationships are handle/written
-----------------------------------------------------------

When I first played DA:O my only option was Zevran. Not bad at the end but I everytime I saw Alistar I just felt a little frustrated I cant romace him (he is just too cute). I ended up making a female champ on my second playthrought but still it wasnt the same. The inmerison thing. I though it was nice this "limitation" was not present on DA2.

Still I can see why some people complain about this issue. I do realize that more than half of the party flirt with you is just a little weird. The inmersion thing again.

So I though: on one hand I like being able to have many options to choose but on the other hand It feels a little strange everyone is willing to drop down their pants at the snap of my fingers.

After some thinking I do believe that the all bi thing is not the problem here. But rather how it is handle. I think it would be no problem at all if it had been done better. How? Well, the thing is it should be done in a way a straigh Hawke never get flirted by any male companion unless the companion was clearly meant to be gay/bi (Zevran) while I gay Hawke will. To achieve that there must be a way that the game recognize the player tastes before making any of the npc make a move. How? Well it would be enough to let Hawke make the first advance always.

What I disliked in DAO (and ME) was that you can't even flirt with the companions you want. Sure, let them reject me with a harsh laugh, but at least let me try! That said, I do adore the DA2-team for making them all bi/Hawkesexual. And I don't think they did it as a fan service, because it makes sense that they are all bi/don't have a "clear" sexuality (see also my view on sexuality in my other post). Plus, it's a game. Let everyone have their fun (even if a handful will whine about it on the forums). I sincerely hope BioWare consider continuing having all LIs availible for everyone.

As for why people so animatedly complain about the option being there, the answer is simple: homophobia. 

Modifié par solstickan, 27 mars 2011 - 08:54 .

[Shawn Ogg]

moilami wrote...

Shawn Ogg wrote...

Hi. First of all:

Hi there. It is funny to see people popping here after everything has been discussed to tell their opinion. Good you came anyway.

I am practising to get away of the pyramid quoting.

Can I now haz first grammar troll plz??? 

T T

I do realize it is probably too late to try to discuss anything. But you know I just read a lot of things and I wanted to give my opinion too (even if no one cares anymore ). At least Im able to let off steam with that post.

[Caralampio]

solstickan wrote...

I'm sorry, I should have been more specific. The straight person having a same sex relationship is more of a one time thing. S/he is drawn to a specific person, but not attracted in general to people of the same sex (bi). If you have watched Torchwood I would describe it as Jack and Ianto's relationship. Though of course this can vary greatly -- see the Kinsey scale. 

What I meant was, that sexuality isn't set in stone. At least, that is not how I see it. I see myself as heterosexual, but I imagine that if I met the right person, I could have a gay relationship. Though, maybe that is because I am very open-minded?

More like, you're bi, but don't want to admit it. People who prefer one gender, but are not totally closed to a relationship with the other, are still bi. Only they haven't acted on the potential. For the truly straight person, the possibility doesn't even exist. Unimaginable. Absolutely not. (Notice this has nothing to do with not respecting other people's choices. It's about one's own choices).

[moilami]

Tirigon wrote...

moilami wrote...

Can I now haz first grammar troll plz??? 

Gladly:

Big lol that gave me by far the biggest laughs this week and even wet eyes. Much appreciated.

[Centauri2002]

Lord Sullivan wrote...

Nor is there scientific evidence that homosexuality is natural. Observation that it exist are not scientific proof of it being natural. Logic however, dictates that it isn't. Logic dictates that it is different, a different path, not of the norm.

Homosexuality/bi-sexuality doesn't scare me, but I won't ignore the truth nor will I fear expressing my thoughts.

Calling realist "Homophobic" is nothing but Hyperbole which as been used quite a bit here in the forums and in that article.

Hate to say it, Sullivan, but your logic doesn't sound very logical to me. Why not just say it's merely your opinion and then we can agree to disagree, rather than you and others insisting that yours or their view is the correct one? We all have a different outlook on the world and we all perceive the information we obtain differently. It doesn't make opinion fact though.

[AlanC9]

Tirigon wrote...

centauri2002 wrote...

Maybe homosexuality is nature's way of controlling the population, since we are quite out of control.

Impossible. If this was true, 90% of Europeans and North Americans, and the entire rest of the world, would be homosexual.

Unless, of course, Mother Nature screwed up big time. As she always does.

You don't need 100%, or anything like it, just enough to get the birth rate under replacement. Which looks like it's pretty muchhappening in Europe. But since it ain't happening in China or India, looks like the theory's got a couple of farily big holes.

[the_one_54321]

solstickan wrote...
As for the why people so animatedly complain about the option being there, the answer is simple: homophobia.

No, it's not. Don't lump me in with the people who uncomfortable with non-heterosexuality. I don't make generalizations about non-heterosexuals. <_<

I don't care how many gay or bi characters there are. I just want the writing to make sense. Characters are not variables, they are supposed to be people. The way this was presented takes away from my ability to enjoy the game.

And I wasn't getting any of the kind of romances I would have liked even if they were all straight. That has nothing to do with it.

[Seifz]

Nor is there scientific evidence that homosexuality is natural. Observation that it exist are not scientific proof of it being natural. Logic however, dictates that it isn't. Logic dictates that it is different, a different path, not of the norm.

Except for the thousands of examples that you're conveniently ignoring.  Sure.

If you want to bring logic and math into this, then you need to understand that a homosexual minority does not make for an unsustainable population.  Logic says nothing about homosexuality being unnatural.

Homosexuality/bi-sexuality doesn't scare me, but I won't ignore the truth nor will I fear expressing my thoughts.

Calling realist "Homophobic" is nothing but Hyperbole which as been used quite a bit here in the forums and in that article.

Please don't hijack the term realist to describe your bigotry.  If you see homosexuals as unnatural or somehow lesser than heterosexuals, you're a homophobe.  That's all there is to it.

[sereture]

Even though there have been some terrible grammar and spelling throughout this thread, it's just too much of a bother to play editor on every post, when it's fully understandable for (mostly) everyone anyway. We all make mistakes...

If anyone REALLY wants their own personal grammar/spelling police, I can be that for you. ;P
I'm reading it all anyway...

Modifié par sereture, 27 mars 2011 - 08:56 .

[AlanC9]

Lord Sullivan wrote...

Nor is there scientific evidence that homosexuality is natural. Observation that it exist are not scientific proof of it being natural. Logic however, dictates that it isn't. Logic dictates that it is different, a different path, not of the norm.

"Natural" = the norm? I'm nearsighted. My eyesight is unnatural?

Seriously, if we're going to be talking about what's "natural," we need a coherent definition of "natural."

[AngelicMachinery]

I love how being bi automatically makes a character more shallow.

[Centauri2002]

sereture wrote...

Even though there have been some terrible grammar and spelling throughout this thread, it's just too much of a bother to play editor on every post, when it's fully understandable for (mostly) everyone anyway. We all make mistakes...

If anyone REALLY wants their own personal grammar/spelling police, I can be that for you. ;P
I'm reading it all anyway...

You're offering, eh? I have a 50,000 word story I need beta read. *grins*


...no? Bah, was hoping for free editing. >.>

[Centauri2002]

AngelicMachinery wrote...

I love how being bi automatically makes a character more shallow.

Didn't you know there's no such thing as 'bisexual', only 'greedy'?

/sarcasm