25715 réponses à ce sujet

[ElitePinecone]

More to the point: Bioware aren't even conceding that there have been f/f romances, given that they flatly deny that Liara is female.

It's a ridiculous position, but it reinforces the point that there hasn't yet been an officially-sanctioned f/f romance that gives a Paramour achievement (however nice the Kelly one may be). It's a murky and contested area, which will be resolved in ME3 with (presumably) some full romance options for m/m and f/f that even Bioware count as legitimately s/s options.

Also: I'm not even a particular fan of Vega but that picture is adorable.

[Chun Hei]

wolf99000 wrote...

funny that no one was that upset that bioware retconned tali to be in love with shepard in mass effect 2

I am sure that SOMEONE must have complained but I REALLY noticed people complaining about Tali and Garrus once they realized that their new romance options in ME2 may help set the precident for possible new s/s romance options with previously established characters.

[wolf99000]

ncknck wrote...

wolf99000 wrote...

if this thread was called male gay romances it would be on fire with flames till bioware closed it because that is the problem most anti ss romance people have its the idea of 2 men

Exactly. By including f/f, you are entering foreign territory. People could visit this for f/f, but see m/m.
 Keep it to m/m and noone will care. There are a lot of separate discussion groups, and they all are perfectly fine. Including "Gay Warden". And i assure you its not because of some hidden agenda or imaginary "hate". 

last time I checked f/f and m/m are both same sex romaces so why would be talking about just one side of it as for if it was just about m/m you say no one would care what forum are you reading 90% of the people on here against this only really mention it in respect to male shepard you guys have always had the whole woman together great I love that but 2 men is not the same

[ElitePinecone]

Edit: oops, wrong browser tab. 

Modifié par ElitePinecone, 22 septembre 2011 - 01:22 .

[FoxHound109]

Seriously guys, don't. Just don't. This is the same poster that called gay men "filth" in another thread. Obvious troll is obvious and you are all getting steamTROLLed right now.

[Quething]

@misi-chan: Adorable! :happy:

Chun Hei wrote...

wolf99000 wrote...

funny that no one was that upset that bioware retconned tali to be in love with shepard in mass effect 2

I am sure that SOMEONE must have complained but I REALLY noticed people complaining about Tali and Garrus once they realized that their new romance options in ME2 may help set the precident for possible new s/s romance options with previously established characters.

I was rather upset about the Tali romance, actually.

Of course, what I was upset about was the execution, which I felt diminished her character and both Flanderized and infantilized her from the ME1 character I had liked, and also made it really difficult to enjoy that character when playing a dudeShep who wasn't interested (and since I have one dudeShep and he isn't interested...). None of those things are necessary byproducts of the mere fact of her romance option; I have no issues at all with the addition of Garrus as a love interest, because it neither killed his broability with my nonromancing Sheps nor portrayed a personality that seemed absent of the things I'd liked about him in ME1 or full of new things I didn't care for. (I could say the same of Anders as well, were this a DA thread).

And of course the person in the series who thus far has undergone the most radical personality shift between games was Liara, who not only was not newly romancable in ME2, but in fact was removed as a romance option for that game and cannot be pursued by new-for-ME2 Shepards.

I'm going to go out on a wild, unstable, creaky limb here and say that maybe, just maybe, that means there's no correlation between "crazy personality shifts" and "new romance path."

[Chun Hei]

@ Quething -- I have problems with some of the romances themselves but I was talking about fan reaction to the Tali romance as a concept not as it was executed.

[BioticDeviantx7]

misi-chan wrote...

There you go, Vega and Sheploo  I wanted both to wear the same clothes x3

This is all sorts of Win great work! 

[Cootie]

I'm just gonna' point out that Vega's facial expression looks as though he just, like, peed his pants in that picture.





Not that I'd know anything about that, or anything.
Just an observation.



Because I don't pee my pants on a regular basis.


Like he does.

[George89]

Hi guys!
After three weeks, I read the "first" 205 pages of this topic.
In my game I fell in love with Garrus, so I hope he will be a LI for man Shepard. Kaidan and James, however, are welcome too XD
I'd like to share with you this video:
From 04:29 you can hear the italian voice of Kaidan. Hope you like it as do I

[The Uncanny]

I would love to see ME3 do 'Silk Fox in space'.

She'd have a haughtiness and commanding authority about her. She'd deal with rivals crisply and dismissively. She'd have supreme confidence in her skills and her body. She'd wear a revealing, body hugging catsuit. There would be a complicated relationship with her father and...

Wait. Why does that sound so hauntingly familiar?

[jlb524]

wolf99000 wrote...

funny that no one was that upset that bioware retconned tali to be in love with shepard in mass effect 2

Some people complained, but not as many as those who complain about her possibly being a 'retconned' s/s LI in ME3.  Most of the complaining also focused around BW giving into the demands of Tali fans and not that she was retconned.

Tali's and Garrus' ME2 romances weren't really retcons, either.

[TMA LIVE]

jlb524 wrote...

wolf99000 wrote...

funny that no one was that upset that bioware retconned tali to be in love with shepard in mass effect 2

Some people complained, but not as many as those who complain about her possibly being a 'retconned' s/s LI in ME3.  Most of the complaining also focused around BW giving into the demands of Tali fans and not that she was retconned.

Tali's and Garrus' ME2 romances weren't really retcons, either.

I don't get why people say they were retconned either. Retcon means they changed something to something different, that contridicts what was said in the past. Not changing or adding something in a sequal. Yet Tali and Garrus never said they weren't into humans. Nor did they say "Oh, I think you're unattractive" in ME1.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 22 septembre 2011 - 04:48 .

[wolf99000]

as you all know I am all for s/s romances but I am not sure about Garrus he said in me2 that he has not got a human fetish so it was a big jump in my head for him to romance with femshep

so while I dont have a problem if bioware do have him as a romance option for male shep I dont think it would really fit

with tali I can see it working better as the way they did the romance with her in me2 can very easliy be done with a femshep as she had that whole hero worship thing

Modifié par wolf99000, 22 septembre 2011 - 05:03 .

[adneate]

If you're going by the technical definition of retroactive continuity then the Tali and Garrus romances are considered retcons. Since the initial usage of the term was the addition of a character trait or plot element that the author didn't think of or add when creating the previous work. Tali and Garrus being willing to enter into a romantic relationship with a human is therefore an additive example of retroactive continuity.

Therefore any "change" in pre-established characters to be same sex romances would likely fall under the same definition. There is nothing to alter or remove, which is what most people think of when they throw the term retcon at something. If you watch television then you deal with additive retcons all the time and they aren't as vile as Lucas altering a film to make Greedo shoot first. If anything they probably added a lot to your enjoyment of a work of fiction and made you say "Wow I never saw that side of that character."

So let's not be so simplistic to just say that Retcon = Bad.

[jlb524]

I thought retcon meant 'changing established facts' and not adding more information about a character that didn't exist previously.

I suppose there are different types...most seem to focus on the alteration of facts when they say 'retcon is bad' and neither the Tali nor Garrus romance are that type of retcon (nor would the s/s romances be).

[adneate]

jlb524 wrote...
I thought retcon meant 'changing established facts' and not adding more information about a character that didn't exist previously.

Not entirely that's a type of retcon (probably more accurately called a revision) but the basic idea behind retroactive continuity is to draw a line from a current work to a previous one. That thread didn't exist initially but you retroactively make it part of the fiction's pre-established continuity.

[jlb524]

adneate wrote...

Not entirely that's a type of retcon (probably more accurately called a revision) but the basic idea behind retroactive continuity is to draw a line from a current work to a previous one. That thread didn't exist initially but you retroactively make it part of the fiction's pre-established continuity.

It seems a lot of things have been retconned in this broader sense of the word.  I think the story would be boring if it weren't the case.

[mesmerizedish]

adneate wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
I thought retcon meant 'changing established facts' and not adding more information about a character that didn't exist previously.

Not entirely that's a type of retcon (probably more accurately called a revision) but the basic idea behind retroactive continuity is to draw a line from a current work to a previous one. That thread didn't exist initially but you retroactively make it part of the fiction's pre-established continuity.

Wikipedia wrote...

Retroactive continuity (often shortened to retcon) is the alteration of previously established facts in a fictional work.

[wolf99000]

Some retcons do not directly contradict previously established facts, but "fill in" missing background details, usually to support current plot points.

this is the passage that fits most as s/s romances do not contradict previously established facts but by definition its a retcon but not in the way I think most anti s/s mean

[adneate]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Wikipedia wrote...

Retroactive continuity (often shortened to retcon) is the alteration of previously established facts in a fictional work.

Alteration doesn't equal contridiction, a retcon can be introduced without it contradicting what was said before. Giving a character an interest that they didn't have before and one you never showed or even intended on adding is still an alteration of a previously established fact.

[jlb524]

adneate wrote...

Alteration doesn't equal contridiction, a retcon can be introduced without it contradicting what was said before. Giving a character an interest that they didn't have before and one you never showed or even intended on adding is still an alteration of a previously established fact.

I agree except for the last bit...an additive alteration isn't changing a previously established fact as we knew nothing about, say, Ashley's favorite ice cream flavor and now we know it's strawberry.

[adneate]

jlb524 wrote...
I agree except for the last bit...an additive alteration isn't changing a previously established fact as we knew nothing about, say, Ashley's favorite ice cream flavor and now we know it's strawberry.

It's all in the usage though a good example on my mind recently was from Battlestar Galactica, Lee Adama was a fighter pilot and the CAG for 2 seasons, then in season 3 they add in that he was interested in law as a child and liked to read his grandfather's books on Caprican law. Thus allowing him to be part of the team preparing for Gaius Baltar's impending trial.

That interest never existed and the character never talked about it or mentioned it, it just appeared one episode and became a major part of the story. Not just some trival fact like ice cream preference, but a major new point that will lead the character in a new direction. Yet at the same time it never contradicted anything we knew about him before hand, he just never mentioned it to anyone as far as the audience knows.

[TheMarshal]

adneate wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Wikipedia wrote...

Retroactive continuity (often shortened to retcon) is the alteration of previously established facts in a fictional work.

Alteration doesn't equal contridiction, a retcon can be introduced without it contradicting what was said before. Giving a character an interest that they didn't have before and one you never showed or even intended on adding is still an alteration of a previously established fact.

Also, the citation for that statement is an opinion article, and doesn't actually say what that sentence is asserting.

One of the main tricks is "retconning" - that is, making retrospective
continuity alterations, more or less subtle versions of saying "he
wasn't killed in the explosion, he was just, um, buried under a pile of
rubble and lost his memory for 40 years, but now he's back".

[Destroy Raiden_]

And it was dumb Lee wanting to be a lawyer and the con lawyer with the dead cat wasn't much better.