645 réponses à ce sujet

[ademska]

DaiyoukaiGeisha wrote...
For the record, I'm 100% behind having characters that are heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual. Yes, I want it all  because IMHO that's realistic. Regardless of whether or not you metagame (and a lot of people do), I want sexual preferences to reflect the individual. It made sense that I couldn't romance Alistair as a male in Origins. He barely knows anything about romancing a woman, romancing another man would have been completely "out there" for him. Not to say he wouldn't have come around to it, but the Dragon Age universe albiet fictional didn't seem that far removed from our own in some ways. On the other hand, it made perfect sense that Zevran was bisexual because his upbringing was completely different. I did find it a bit odd that Morrigan was heterosexual though, heh. I figured she would be someone who wouldn't give a damn one way or the other.

i'll tone down my 'crabbiness' here because this gets into another issue that i find best resolved by open-choice romance options (i even hesitate to use the word bisexual, because to me that's not the crux of the argument)

thedas draws some parallels. in thedas, marriage is a financial arrangement more than a romantic one, much as we see in our own history, and that is a parellel to which we cannot immediately relate. more importantly, and you can talk about sociological retconning between da2 and dao all you want, one thing that is not a parallel is the treatment of same-sex relationships in culture.

i could go heavily into cultural oppression in our own world, labels of sexuality and how they are very new to society, fluidity of both sexuality and sexual identity throughout history, but those are subject to varying interpretation and i just really don't feel like it.

regardless, my point is this: in a fantasy world like thedas, where so much of humanity physiologically and psychologically differs from our own world, assigning sexualities and identities to characters is going to be problematic. you just interpreted (innocently enough) justifications for characters' sexualities based on their personalities and upbringings, but the fact of the matter is personality and sexuality are not actually related in any way.

taking perceived sexuality out of the equation, like with merrill and fenris, offers greatest player choice without providing opportunity for people to justify labels with traits that don't factor in.

and, really, isn't the lack of choice and consequence in da2 what so many people here ****** on about anyway?

Modifié par ademska, 24 juin 2011 - 06:49 .

[ademska]

KOP, i understand your point, and that'd be cool, but it's not going to happen. ever. no matter how big the budget, it still won't be big enough to allow for that kind of immersion and depth.

since it's not possible, the next best alternative is all-available love interests. anything in-between and you get what dao and mass effect are struggling with.

[ipgd]

I'm not sure why "character integrity" is apparently diminished when too many bisexual people come into confluence. Is it really not possible for them to simply write characters that bisexual? What is being damaged in a way exclusively writing straight characters does not? It is not breaking any laws of physics to have four bisexual people in the same place.

[KnightofPhoenix]

ipgd wrote...
But that cannot happen because of economic concerns. It is not monetarily feasible to direct resources into a character's romance, and then arbitrarily shut it out based on things like race and, when it comes to the gays getting gay-only romance options, sex.

All bi is the best and only compromise anyone will get on this issue.

I know, which is why I don't really care atm.

But ideally, that's what I would want. To have Bioware rethink its entire philosophy and start making companions feel more like real people with preferences, rather then options lining up for the glory of the PC. How feasible that is, I don't know. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...
This is an argument for more restrictions in general, then?

I find it odd that Fenris will elect to stay with a blood mage or someone who takes Orana as a slave. Or both. As far as I'm aware, the only person who'll cut you off for any reason is Anders if you sell Feynriel's soul.

Yes, not just sexual orientation.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Zjarcal wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

And I would add  all sorts of limitations and companion preferences, like race, beliefs, actions....etc (ideally even looks if the tech can do so). Anything that would stop making the companions look like an open buffet.

Pfft, I want an open buffet, a take out menu, and all sorts of dessert options too. 

The romantic idealist in me cringes at this tbh

[ipgd]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I know, which is why I don't really care atm.

But ideally, that's what I would want. To have Bioware rethink its entire philosophy and start making companions feel more like real people with preferences, rather then options lining up for the glory of the PC. How feasible that is, I don't know. 

I don't think shutting things out is the answer, but more reactivity to potential sources of conflict would be nice. The way Fenris kinda does not care when Hawke is a mage, for example, is pretty jarring.

[jlb524]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

And that's the kind of thing I want.

Yes, wanting to romance  someone and not being able to, adds to the experience imo.

And I would add  all sorts of limitations and companion preferences, like race, beliefs, actions....etc (ideally even looks if the tech can do so). Anything that would stop making the companions look like an open buffet.

You could also not pursue the romance and roleplay it as if the person doesn't want your PC.

It's okay to want restrictions, but it seems that BW is moving in the other direction and I think it's a double-standard that some are fine with no restrictions on heterosexual pairigs but push to keep gender checks.

Honestly, if they are going to start throwing in race/class/morality checks, I'd rather they do it during the main quest of the game than in romances, which are only a small and optional part of the game.

I think some of the DA:Origins races played poorly because of this lack  of recognition around the entire game (Dalish Elf especially).  Then there's the whole 'Hawke as mage' issue in DA2.

I think the DA2 devs time would be better spent adding in more class specific checks for mage Hawke as opposed to adding in gender checks to prevent some of the LIs from s/s romance.

[KnightofPhoenix]

ipgd wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I know, which is why I don't really care atm.

But ideally, that's what I would want. To have Bioware rethink its entire philosophy and start making companions feel more like real people with preferences, rather then options lining up for the glory of the PC. How feasible that is, I don't know. 

I don't think shutting things out is the answer, but more reactivity to potential sources of conflict would be nice. The way Fenris kinda does not care when Hawke is a mage, for example, is pretty jarring.

I think shutting a few things out is good, while keeping others to become a source of conflict.
For instance, I can't see Fenris with a boodmage. I can see him with a mage, but not a maleficar. I can't see Alistair with a maleficar either. I can't see Anders with a Chantry / Templar fanatic / loyalist.

I know that I have several red lines I will not cross and options that I shut out.

[DaiyoukaiGeisha]

ipgd wrote...

Having a straight, bi or gay orientation doesn't really have much to do with your upbringing or personality. I'm not sure why a character needs to confirm to an acceptable stereotype in order to "make sense" as a gay or bisexual.

Let's just agree to disagree on this one. I can see this going doing a very bad path. As far as stereotypes, ugh, let's not go there either because I said nothing about stereotyping in my comment.

Sorry, I agree with "KnightofPhoenix" I don't want an open buffet either. I want some characters to be honest up front about what they like or don't like, just like in Origins (Leliana: "My fruit!?") and I want the option to get "shot down" if I flirt with someone and that's just not how they roll. However, this isn't a deal breaker for me either way. Gay/Bi/Straight I'd still play the game.

[KnightofPhoenix]

jlb524 wrote...
You could also not pursue the romance and roleplay it as if the person doesn't want your PC.

It's okay to want restrictions, but it seems that BW is moving in the other direction and I think it's a double-standard that some are fine with no restrictions on heterosexual pairigs but push to keep gender checks.

I am not one of them.

Like I said, it's me saying what I think is ideal. Whether that's feasible or not, I don't know. And yea, they should have that for main and sidequests quests.

[jlb524]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

But ideally, that's what I would want. To have Bioware rethink its entire philosophy and start making companions feel more like real people with preferences, rather then options lining up for the glory of the PC. How feasible that is, I don't know. 

They seem like real people with preferences to me, as much as a video game character can seem like a real person with preferences.

But you mean 'romantic' preferences, right?

Then you have to ask, how far should they go?  Should they start coding in preferences for eye-color?  You have a better chance with Leliana b/c you have blue eyes?

[KnightofPhoenix]

jlb524 wrote...
But you mean 'romantic' preferences, right?

Then you have to ask, how far should they go?  Should they start coding in preferences for eye-color?  You have a better chance with Leliana b/c you have blue eyes?

If it's possible, yes.
I doubt however it's possible, so I'd prefer prioritizing on things that the PC decides in the game, like choices, actions, what they say, specialization...etc.

[Addai]

ipgd wrote...

I'm not sure why "character integrity" is apparently diminished when too many bisexual people come into confluence. Is it really not possible for them to simply write characters that bisexual? What is being damaged in a way exclusively writing straight characters does not? It is not breaking any laws of physics to have four bisexual people in the same place.

No, but I don't find a bisexual as attractive a romantic lead in a story.  If they're good characters, it won't matter to the adventure part of the story, but it makes the romance story line less appealing. 

I know that by stating this I get lumped in together with the more obnoxious sorts of "straight male gamers" who demand their market dominance be acknowledged, but it's just the truth.  I certainly can appreciate that people of other orientations want to have romantic leads who are inspiring to them, who sweep them off their mental and emotional feet etc.  In an ideal world, we all get what we want.  In a not-ideal world, hopefully we can at least express our preferences and these are respected.

[ademska]

DaiyoukaiGeisha wrote...

ipgd wrote...

Having a straight, bi or gay orientation doesn't really have much to do with your upbringing or personality. I'm not sure why a character needs to confirm to an acceptable stereotype in order to "make sense" as a gay or bisexual.

Let's just agree to disagree on this one. I can see this going doing a very bad path. As far as stereotypes, ugh, let's not go there either because I said nothing about stereotyping in my comment.

Sorry, I agree with "KnightofPhoenix" I don't want an open buffet either. I want some characters to be honest up front about what they like or don't like, just like in Origins (Leliana: "My fruit!?") and I want the option to get "shot down" if I flirt with someone and that's just not how they roll. However, this isn't a deal breaker for me either way. Gay/Bi/Straight I'd still play the game.

i'm going to expand on this in a... polite way.

sexual identity (ie, how someone views his orientation), not inherent sexuality, is what is potentially tied to upbringing. in thedas, the kind of cultural oppression/repression that keeps one from fully exploring ideas of sexuality do not exist. with freedom to explore sexuality, you are effectively severing the connection between sexual identity and upbringing.

in your statement itself you deduced who "made sense" as a bisexual character by comparing them subconsciously to accepted bisexual stereotypes.

once again, no one has any problem with KOP's suggestion because it draws more attention to personal choices limiting love interests and expands immersion. however, it's not feasible.

if that kind of system was implemented without fully expounding on non-sexuality issues like blood magic, class, personality, political alignment, etc, it would still be predicated on a flawed gender check system. and that **** ain't cool.

[Zjarcal]

Addai67 wrote...

No, but I don't find a bisexual as attractive a romantic lead in a story.  If they're good characters, it won't matter to the adventure part of the story, but it makes the romance story line less appealing. 

Even if that character will show zero interest in a same sex relationship during your game (since you'd playing as the opposite gender)?

I guess it's a good thing Alistair wasn't bi (even if he probably wouldn't have even hinted at it during your game).

Modifié par Zjarcal, 24 juin 2011 - 07:06 .

[ademska]

Addai67 wrote...
No, but I don't find a bisexual as attractive a romantic lead in a story.  If they're good characters, it won't matter to the adventure part of the story, but it makes the romance story line less appealing. 

I know that by stating this I get lumped in together with the more obnoxious sorts of "straight male gamers" who demand their market dominance be acknowledged, but it's just the truth.  I certainly can appreciate that people of other orientations want to have romantic leads who are inspiring to them, who sweep them off their mental and emotional feet etc.  In an ideal world, we all get what we want.  In a not-ideal world, hopefully we can at least express our preferences and these are respected.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

YES THAT WOULD BE NICE WOULDNT IT

[Master Shiori]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Like I said, it's me saying what I think is ideal. Whether that's feasible or not, I don't know. And yea, they should have that for main and sidequests quests.

It would be ideal, but it's also not cost effective. Romances are already a minority content and adding further restrictions that prevent people from accessing said content would be pointless. I like your idea of npcs reacting to PC's specialization but stuff like that is also aimed at minorities, since many players only go through the game once, may not choose to play the class that has that specific specialization or may not pick the specialization in question.
So the question is how many players would end up experiencing that specialization  or class specific content and would that justifiy the resources spent on it?

That's probably the main reason for making every LI bisexual. Bisexual LI's are open to all players regardless of PC's gender and thus ensure that more resource can be spent on other things.

[ipgd]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I think shutting a few things out is good, while keeping others to become a source of conflict.
For instance, I can't see Fenris with a boodmage. I can see him with a mage, but not a maleficar. I can't see Alistair with a maleficar either. I can't see Anders with a Chantry / Templar fanatic / loyalist.

I know that I have several red lines I will not cross and options that I shut out.

If anything has to be shut out I'd prefer it to be choices rather than incidental character creation options. Like Fenris should dump Hawke if he/she takes Orana as a slave.

Anders is ridiculously desperate and would probably **** Ser Pounce-a-Lot if he asked nicely, so I dunno about that in his case. You need, like, self-respect for that.

[jlb524]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

If it's possible, yes.
I doubt however it's possible, so I'd prefer prioritizing on things that the PC decides in the game, like choices, actions, what they say, specialization...etc.

It would be possible.  I'm sure a 'blue_eyed' variable could be flagged if the player selected that specific eye color on the slider during character creation.

I personally don't support romance limits of any kind, as I can impose them myself through roleplaying.  I roleplay it that Alistair is not interested in my female Warden at all in spite of him being a possible romantic opiton for her.

Plus, opening them up does allow for more roleplaying freedom with your character.  I see the romances (and friendships) as an extra means to define your PCs personal story.  If you want to believe that Alistair falls in love with your Warden in spite of being a blood mage and have a good explanation for it...that's all good to me.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Master Shiori wrote...
It would be ideal, but it's also not cost effective.

I know it's not sadly, which is why I said I don't really care atm, though Bioware's philosophy on a lot of thigns are starting to lose my interest. I am tired of companions lining up for the PC to pick and choose at his / her leisure. 

ipgd wrote...
If anything has to be shut out I'd prefer it to be choices rather than incidental character creation options. Like Fenris should dump Hawke if he/she takes Orana as a slave.

Anders is ridiculously desperate and would probably **** Ser Pounce-a-Lot if he asked nicely, so I dunno about that in his case. You need, like, self-respect for that.

Becoming a blood mage is not an incidental character creation option. Gender is, but I personally prefer it being shut out for a few LIs, but not on its own.

And....point...

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 24 juin 2011 - 07:08 .

[DaiyoukaiGeisha]

ademska wrote...

DaiyoukaiGeisha wrote...

ipgd wrote...

Having a straight, bi or gay orientation doesn't really have much to do with your upbringing or personality. I'm not sure why a character needs to confirm to an acceptable stereotype in order to "make sense" as a gay or bisexual.

Let's just agree to disagree on this one. I can see this going doing a very bad path. As far as stereotypes, ugh, let's not go there either because I said nothing about stereotyping in my comment.

Sorry, I agree with "KnightofPhoenix" I don't want an open buffet either. I want some characters to be honest up front about what they like or don't like, just like in Origins (Leliana: "My fruit!?") and I want the option to get "shot down" if I flirt with someone and that's just not how they roll. However, this isn't a deal breaker for me either way. Gay/Bi/Straight I'd still play the game.

i'm going to expand on this in a... polite way.

sexual identity (ie, how someone views his orientation), not inherent sexuality, is what is potentially tied to upbringing. in thedas, the kind of cultural oppression/repression that keeps one from fully exploring ideas of sexuality do not exist. with freedom to explore sexuality, you are effectively severing the connection between sexual identity and upbringing.

in your statement itself you deduced who "made sense" as a bisexual character by comparing them subconsciously to accepted bisexual stereotypes.

once again, no one has any problem with KOP's suggestion because it draws more attention to personal choices limiting love interests and expands immersion. however, it's not feasible.

if that kind of system was implemented without fully expounding on non-sexuality issues like blood magic, class, personality, political alignment, etc, it would still be predicated on a flawed gender check system. and that **** ain't cool.

First, thank you for keeping it polite.

Second, this comment:

"in thedas, the kind of cultural oppression/repression that keeps one from fully exploring ideas of sexuality do not exist."

You see, that's where I disagree. I don't think they don't exist. They just haven't been specifically called out in the gameplay. However, how many homosexual couples did you run into in Thedas? Gamlen's comment if your male-Hawke romance's Fenris, "So, you're into elves? Well I guess I won't ask who's the girl." I disagree that there is no oppression/repression in Thedas on terms of sexuality. Thedas seems to revel in oppression/repression on many levels (mage/templar, elf/human, black divine vs. white divine vs Qun).

Modifié par DaiyoukaiGeisha, 24 juin 2011 - 07:08 .

[Pasquale1234]

Zjarcal wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

And I thought the devs had pretty much debunked that idea- that the characters are the way they are, whether you see a given dialogue or not.

Yep, Gaider did so:

http://social.biowar...51322/5#6959410

David Gaider wrote...
I will say that one element of the reaction to this I find interesting is the idea that so many people believe a character's sexuality actually changes because their exposure to it changes.

Anders isn't any different a person in a game with a male PC or a female PC, for instance, yet some people seem to think that because he doesn't mention his relationship with Karl to a female player it must never have happened... and he is therefore 100% straight as opposed to being 100% gay if it is mentioned. While the point of that is indeed to leave it free for the player to interpret for themselves, the part I find interesting is the assumption that the characters' personalities are somehow written differently based on the circumstance. I suspect that says a lot about how some people actually think about sexuality, which is if anything an interesting behavior to observe in the community.

He also indicated that they did it purposely to leave it open to the player's interpretation.