25715 réponses à ce sujet

[jlb524]

Twizz089 wrote...

It doesnt matter why I couldnt romance her, all that matter was that it was part of her character as to way I couldnt, that makes the character stronger and adds to its depth.  Making characters sexually blank slates to be molded by the player takes away from this depth and waters down all romance options.  Is it too much to ask for characters who function in the world independent of the player?

They still do if ya know, don't romance them.  Hell, they even do if you do romance them.  LIs are written as characters first and then a romance is thrown on (and it's a small portion of the content for the LI).

I think this idea that romance devalues a character is silly.  The character isn't molding them either.  It's not like I have to force my PC on them in any way.

[Clonedzero]

Zjarcal wrote...

Twizz089 wrote...

Arik7 wrote...

[psssst.... gay men and lesbians can not be attracted to the same characters.  

With 6 options you could have 1 for each and 2 that overlap, so there would be 2 options for everybody.

And that would still be limiting my options and limiting choice is just not going to increase my enjoyment of the game at all.

unspecific romances limits my enjoyment of the game.
how is your enjoyment more important than mine?

i want a few options, high quality with specific writing.
you want lots of options, low quality with unspecific writing.

it is realistically impossible to do both.

[Zjarcal]

jlb524 wrote...

I think this idea that romance devalues a character is silly.  

Indeed.

The idea that a character having a specific sexual orientation defines who they are is another silly notion.

[Sunnie]

Twizz089 wrote...

Sunnie22 wrote...

Theres a difference, Aveline and Samara were not LI options, at all. Connecting with them would not have made a difference whether you were male or female.

It doesnt matter why I couldnt romance her, all that matter was that it was part of her character as to way I couldnt, that makes the character stronger and adds to its depth.  Making characters sexually blank slates to be molded by the player takes away from this depth and waters down all romance options.  Is it too much to ask for characters who function in the world independent of the player?

You have gone way out of the context of the discussion. The context was splitting LIs up into groups of 1/3s. Now you are bringing in characters that were never LIs. Thats a completely different discussion.

[Zjarcal]

Clonedzero wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

Twizz089 wrote...

Arik7 wrote...

[psssst.... gay men and lesbians can not be attracted to the same characters.  

With 6 options you could have 1 for each and 2 that overlap, so there would be 2 options for everybody.

And that would still be limiting my options and limiting choice is just not going to increase my enjoyment of the game at all.

unspecific romances limits my enjoyment of the game.
how is your enjoyment more important than mine?

i want a few options, high quality with specific writing.
you want lots of options, low quality with unspecific writing.

it is realistically impossible to do both.

*facepalm*

Yes, becasue making the romances bi is such a HUGE change that it dictates that the quality of the romances will decrease drastically. Because making Morrigan and Alistair BI in DAO would've completely destroyed their romance arcs and it would be sh!tty writing. I mean, you have noticed how the bi romances from Leliana and Zevran are nearly identical right? Making a LI bi changes nothing about the romance arc in terms of the quality of the writing.

And yes, I specifically said that I want "low quality writing"... my god, you're not worth wasting my time with. I don't want to keep on facepalming reading your stuff.

[Sepewrath]

DudesterMcGillicutty wrote...

I feel like it would be a bit of a cop-out if all the characters were made so that they could be ****** or hetero. It weakens the characters. It leaves them undefined until we, the player, chooses to define them.

I've got to agree with Twizz here, a person's sexuality is a huge part of their personality. Though, I think he didn't phrase it the best way. The physical property (the gene or nucleotide base or whatever) that determines your sexuality does not affect your personality. However, the fact that you are straight or gay plays a huge role in how both you react to people and how people react to you. People create their outward personas based on how people react to them.

So, it just seems like just plain bad writing to have a character that can be chosen to be either straight or gay. The character would be completely different in each of those circumstances.

I would agree, if they made say Jack a lesbian in ME2 and I wanted her for my male Shep, well when I found out she likes the ladies, that would be that. That's her character, that's what she should be, not a simple sponge for Shepard's desires. Those are not characters anymore, their just tools for peoples role playing desires.

[Sunnie]

Clonedzero wrote...

Sunnie22 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

first off, im not really sure what exactly o/s means lol. i assume it means straight?
but the reverse could happen you know.
a male player could find a connection with a female character and have her turn out to be strictly a lesbian.
im ok with that scenario as well.

and no, its still no discrimination, unless people having their own personal sexual preference is discriminating against anyone they dont want to have sex with? lol

im a straight male, would you call the fact i dont want to have sex with other men discriminating against them? thats absurd.

Yes, that is correct, I just didn't detail out all of the different variations of how it's wrong to save time and space.

And the term discriminate is accurate when you limit something to a particular group. That is a huge fail because the product will ultimately upset more players than if you gave everyone fair access to all of the content. At this point the only ones who are still whining about this are the anti-gay group who troll all of the s/s threads ad-nauseam

so not agreeing with you is whining and makes me anti-gay and a troll?
what? are you serious?

im not anti-gay at all. im just saying in future games characters should be fully written, including their sexual orientations. and everyone does have fair access to the content. just create a character compatable with that romancable character. theres nothing discrmininating about that at all. its not like the game asks you your real sexual orientation when it first starts up and locks everything out lol

So I see you are self-inserting yourself again? I don't recall saying (looks just up above at the quote) YOU were a whiner or a troll, or anti-gay. Is your self-insertion a sign that what you are saying really might not be the case?

[jlb524]

Sepewrath wrote...

I would agree, if they made say Jack a
lesbian in ME2 and I wanted her for my male Shep, well when I found out
she likes the ladies, that would be that. That's her character, that's
what she should be, not a simple sponge for Shepard's desires. Those are
not characters anymore, their just tools for peoples role playing
desires.

Then they should have clearly defined paths for every character independent of anything the PC does.  Like in a book.

Clonedzero wrote...

samara/aveline turning you down is interesting and good for their characters.

Why?  That added absolutely nothing to my appreciation of their characters...it adds no 'depth'...people turn down other's advances all the time...big whoop.  You act like that's one of the defining traits of the character.

They must be really really boring if that's what makes their character 'good'.

Modifié par jlb524, 11 août 2011 - 01:23 .

[Clonedzero]

Sunnie22 wrote...

Twizz089 wrote...

Sunnie22 wrote...

Theres a difference, Aveline and Samara were not LI options, at all. Connecting with them would not have made a difference whether you were male or female.

It doesnt matter why I couldnt romance her, all that matter was that it was part of her character as to way I couldnt, that makes the character stronger and adds to its depth.  Making characters sexually blank slates to be molded by the player takes away from this depth and waters down all romance options.  Is it too much to ask for characters who function in the world independent of the player?

You have gone way out of the context of the discussion. The context was splitting LIs up into groups of 1/3s. Now you are bringing in characters that were never LIs. Thats a completely different discussion.

it still applies.

samara/aveline turning you down is interesting and good for their characters. LI's turning you down because you're amale character and she's a lesbian is interesting and defining. why are you discriminating against lesbians? can't they exist in the game? can't straight people? why only bi?

why can't a male character be strictly openly gay? what would be wrong with that? because female characters couldnt romance him? well he's gay....why should they be able to?
same with the straight male character, or the lesbian female, ect.

they are not LI's to your character. so its no different then a character not being a LI to any character.
you're not being discriminated against because if you want to see that content you can make another character, no one is stopping you.

[Clonedzero]

jlb524 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...
i want a few options, high quality with specific writing.
you want lots of options, low quality with unspecific writing.

What do you mean by 'specific writing'?  How specific?

referencing the relationship. acknowledging it. talking about backrounds. not tiptoeing around gender identifying words and phrases lol. other characters commenting on it and acknowledging it. ect.

[Twizz089]

Sunnie22 wrote...



You have gone way out of the context of the discussion. The context was splitting LIs up into groups of 1/3s. Now you are bringing in characters that were never LIs. Thats a completely different discussion.

This entire discussion is about characters who were never s/s LIs.  You say that making every character fall head over heels for shep doesnt water down the character, I am arguing that it does.  Rejection, is rejection, whether its because the character doesnt want to get involved or because the character is straight or because they are gay, that is irrelevent.  The fact that THEY have an opinion on their own sexuallity and whether or not they want to be involved with YOU is what matters.

Modifié par Twizz089, 11 août 2011 - 01:23 .

[Abispa]

EDIT: Someone out did my rant with only seven words. Respect.

Modifié par Abispa, 11 août 2011 - 01:49 .

[Sunnie]

Alright, so with that I will drop out of the discussion. Its your way or no way, you can change the context of discussion to suit your never ending backward arguments, and ther4e's no sense in further adding to a circular discussion.
I am so happy that a couple of you aren't making any decisions for any content in the next game.

[jlb524]

Clonedzero wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...
i want a few options, high quality with specific writing.
you want lots of options, low quality with unspecific writing.

What do you mean by 'specific writing'?  How specific?

referencing the relationship. acknowledging it. talking about backrounds. not tiptoeing around gender identifying words and phrases lol. other characters commenting on it and acknowledging it. ect.

DA2 had all of that.

ME2 didn't.

[Clonedzero]

jlb524 wrote...

Sepewrath wrote...

I would agree, if they made say Jack a
lesbian in ME2 and I wanted her for my male Shep, well when I found out
she likes the ladies, that would be that. That's her character, that's
what she should be, not a simple sponge for Shepard's desires. Those are
not characters anymore, their just tools for peoples role playing
desires.

Then they should have clearly defined paths for every character independent of anything the PC does.  Like in a book.

Clonedzero wrote...

samara/aveline turning you down is interesting and good for their characters.

Why?  That added absolutely nothing to my appreciation of their characters...it adds no 'depth'...people turn down other's advances all the time...big whoop.  You act like that's one of the defining traits of the character.

They must be really really boring if that's what makes their character 'good'.

what do you mean clearly defined paths for every character independent of anything the PC does? are you saying limited intereaction? why? because they have a fully developed persona? that makes no sense. you can have a fully developed character interact with the PC in better ways than a character who warps and twists at the players desire.


the samra/aveline turn does make me apperciate their chracters more. every other character was begging to be with mine, they turned down my character adding a sense of realism to the game. you can't have anyone you want and they prove that. having characters not be interested in yours shows that they arent some irresistable sex god that anyone and everyone wants to be with.

[Arik7]

Clonedzero wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...
i want a few options, high quality with specific writing.
you want lots of options, low quality with unspecific writing.

What do you mean by 'specific writing'?  How specific?

referencing the relationship. acknowledging it. talking about backrounds. not tiptoeing around gender identifying words and phrases lol. other characters commenting on it and acknowledging it. ect.

In DAO, Alistair`s romance was written specifically for straight females, yet when you apply the gay Alistair mod, 95% of the dialog sounds convincingly gay.....  so why let resourses go to waste?

Modifié par Arik7, 11 août 2011 - 01:30 .

[Clonedzero]

Sunnie22 wrote...

Alright, so with that I will drop out of the discussion. Its your way or no way, you can change the context of discussion to suit your never ending backward arguments, and ther4e's no sense in further adding to a circular discussion.
I am so happy that a couple of you aren't making any decisions for any content in the next game.

what? how am i being any more stubborn than you are?

you want everyone to be bi and nothing else. its your way or no way.

pot. kettle. black.

[Clonedzero]

jlb524 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...
i want a few options, high quality with specific writing.
you want lots of options, low quality with unspecific writing.

What do you mean by 'specific writing'?  How specific?

referencing the relationship. acknowledging it. talking about backrounds. not tiptoeing around gender identifying words and phrases lol. other characters commenting on it and acknowledging it. ect.

DA2 had all of that.

ME2 didn't.

4 romances and 6 total characters.

10 romances and over a dozen total characters.

big difference. hence again, showing that less is more

[Ryzaki]

jlb524 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...
i want a few options, high quality with specific writing.
you want lots of options, low quality with unspecific writing.

What do you mean by 'specific writing'?  How specific?

referencing the relationship. acknowledging it. talking about backrounds. not tiptoeing around gender identifying words and phrases lol. other characters commenting on it and acknowledging it. ect.

DA2 had all of that.

ME2 didn't.

This. 

Do I want to learn about Jack's past with Murdock and try to encourage her to be a better person? 

Is my character female? - Sorry no dice!
Is my character male? - Okay move on
Is my character not romancing her - Sorry no dice!

FFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!

I'll take turning Anders down with my male Hawkes and still getting dialogue with him than ME's idiocy "Omg you're not sleeping with me I'm not gonna talk to you no moar!" nonsense anyday. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 11 août 2011 - 01:36 .

[Abispa]

jlb524 wrote...

DA2 had all of that.

ME2 didn't.

Brilliant. You managed to blow apart the DA2 "bi" LIs critics with seven words. Something I couldn't do with a dozen or so pages.

[jlb524]

Clonedzero wrote...
4 romances and 6 total characters.

10 romances and over a dozen total characters.

big difference. hence again, showing that less is more

Yes...

But weren't you arguing for this:

Clonedzero wrote...

1/3rd straight, 1/3rd bi, and 1/3rd gay/lesbian.

And saying those that would prefer the DA2 system (4 bi LIs open to everyone) want lower quality and non-specific romances?

[Abispa]

Clonedzero wrote...

4 romances and 6 total characters.

10 romances and over a dozen total characters.

big difference. hence again, showing that less is more

So you agree that the "all Bi" DA2 had better written relationships than the ME series.

That hurts me to admit since I really am an Ashley fan.

[Arik7]

Clonedzero wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...
i want a few options, high quality with specific writing.
you want lots of options, low quality with unspecific writing.

What do you mean by 'specific writing'?  How specific?

referencing the relationship. acknowledging it. talking about backrounds. not tiptoeing around gender identifying words and phrases lol. other characters commenting on it and acknowledging it. ect.

DA2 had all of that.

ME2 didn't.

4 romances and 6 total characters.

10 romances and over a dozen total characters.

big difference. hence again, showing that less is more

Now you're getting it.  ME2 had 10+ companion with 3 conversations each....  Why waste resourses on 3 different sexualities when you can concetrate on the characters' personality and dialog instead?   

Modifié par Arik7, 11 août 2011 - 01:40 .

[Clonedzero]

jlb524 wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...
4 romances and 6 total characters.

10 romances and over a dozen total characters.

big difference. hence again, showing that less is more

Yes...

But weren't you arguing for this:

Clonedzero wrote...

1/3rd straight, 1/3rd bi, and 1/3rd gay/lesbian.

And saying those that would prefer the DA2 system (4 bi LIs open to everyone) want lower quality and non-specific romances?

how is my suggestion all that different? 6 LI's with more specific and realistic backrounds. i mean the whole EVERYONE HTIS ON HAWKE thing was really annoying.

what is wrong with characters not all being bi? why cant one be straight and one be gay? its more realistic. adds more depth to their characters and doesnt give off that "this is obvious lazy writing" vibe. them all being bi sorta takes away from the uniqueness of each character and adds a bad impression that your character is some sort of irresistable superhuman.

if you want every character to be romancable and everything tobe decided by you, thenw hy not just write your own fanfiction? since obviously you dont want to give the writers the freedom to write the characters the way they see them and instead want them to be made acceptable to be romanced by everyone. it feels forced.

its like giving kids participation trophies for showing up to the game and losing.

[Ryzaki]

Everyone didn't hit on Hawke (Neither Fenris no Merrill did. Fenris could be seen as a flirt...it could also be seen as a geniune compliment).