645 réponses à ce sujet

[mesmerizedish]

woundedheart wrote...

According to your logic, every single one of the LIs being a Templar doesn't detract from their individuality at all as long as they all have different reasons for being one.

I'd agree with that. According your logic, every single companion, you know, being a companion does detract from their individuality.

[Pasquale1234]

woundedheart wrote...

How soon we forget what? You tried to tell me that bisexuality doesn't even come into play unless Hawke pursues a romance with that particular person, I said that I wasn't talking about what Hawke perceives, and you responded with "except your entire argument is about perception."

lol what are you even talking about?

My argument about the characters being less diverse is based off personal perception. My argument about the characters being bisexual is NOT.

Try to spend a little time trying to understand the difference between the two so this conversation can start going somewhere.

And I've explained before how all the characters having identical sexual preferences makes them less diverse. Would you like me to bold and underline that too for your convenience?

Since you continue to sidestep the question and instead devolve into condescension and snark, I can only surmise that you have no intention of providing any sort of thoughtful response to it.

I'm really trying to understand your point of view.  You're not making it any easier.

Modifié par Pasquale1234, 17 juin 2011 - 03:08 .

[hoorayforicecream]

woundedheart wrote...

According to your logic, every single one of the LIs being a Templar doesn't detract from their individuality at all as long as they all have different reasons for being one.

There's nothing wrong with sharing an occupation. One of the greatest action movies of all time (Aliens, naturally) had almost every single one of the supporting characters all be of the same occupation, but I didn't find them at all carbon copies of each other. What is important is the writing and the characterization.

If in terms of gameplay they all played the same, then there would certainly be something missing. But I hardly consider sexual orientation of companions gameplay. There's no QTE sequence where Hawke has to press the buttons to have sex with a man, or some intricate puzzle to figure out where Hawke has sex with a woman.

Finally... using a realism argument is silly. Realism extremely rarely equates to fun, especially in a video game. I never want to play "Tax Effect" where the goal is to complete your taxes by April 15th, or "Station Wagon Age" where I drive kids to soccer practice, band practice, tae kwon do practice, and if I'm lucky, ballet practice. Claiming something in a fantasy game isn't realistic when people are shooting fire out of their fingers and lightning out of their rear ends is pretty laughable.

What I ask for is that the game define rules for itself, and then be consistent in following those rules. Am I an assassin that's part of an ancient order who fights injustice by killing bad people? Cool, just keep it consistent by not making my character assassinate children. Am I a nihilistic, brutal former warlord who wishes nothing more than to destroy the gods that I believe caused all of my misery? Cool, just keep it consistent by not having too many happy, compassionate scenes. One of the rules they established in Thedas is that it's perfectly cool to like people of the same sex. They were consistent with it in DA2 - Sebastian and Aveline are as straight as they come, but there are also bisexuals. There just happens to be more bisexuals in DA2 than DAO. As long as they continue to be consistent in their presentation, I'm fine with it.

[Icinix]

Bisexuality in Dragon Age 2.
- Yep. Its in the game. Does it bother me? Nope. Was it handled ok? Yeah, with the exception of one particularly un-nerving reaction to one character when a simple " No thanks, I don't lean that way" would have been fine - rather than the "ZOMG, NO, EEWW, Don't think about me that way!!" - but then again there was NOTHING good about that recurring character, including the fact it was nothing like the character that they had recurred from previously. But I'm somewhere off on a radius.....

Thoughts?
- Currently I'm a little sleepy, and I think ate too much (hollowed out a quarter of a tiger loaf and stuffed it with chicken, cheese, onion, baby spinach and perinaise - delicious. Wasn't intending to eat all of it). But thanks for asking.

[Cutlass Jack]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

There's nothing wrong with sharing an occupation. One of the greatest action movies of all time (Aliens, naturally) had almost every single one of the supporting characters all be of the same occupation, but I didn't find them at all carbon copies of each other. What is important is the writing and the characterization. 

Heh Great minds. I nearly made that exact film reference in my previous post but edited it out.

[Sister Helen]

Hasn't this thread already been done a few times?

The sexual orientation of the companions your Hawke doesn't pursue is irrelevant.

Ex. IN real life, I work with about a dozen people every day, eight hours or more per day. I couldn't tell you what their sexual orientation is and frankly, it doesn't matter since I have no desire to date any of them.

[Teh Blasta]

whykikyouwhy wrote...
snip

Finally a post that not only made a compelling argument but also kept out personal bias. Delusions of persecution and anti-progressive degeneration are both out of control on this thread. I've seen people already say the main point that having the option is a good thing rather than being limited two an A or B when it comes to romances. (Ex. Mass Effect) As a straight white male I do not believe that BioWare is catering to LGBT gamers in DA2 but is in fact adding actual content that previously wasn't in any other BioWare games. This whole thing shouldn't be a debate on how oppressed specific minorities are or how political correctness is wrong, hell this shouldn't even be a debate.

DA2 did something new and progressive, it added options, so be sure complain as much as possible about that choice now that way when they are not available later it gives you reason to complain about their absence. After all, this is the BioWare forums and whining excessively is its international pastime.

[hoorayforicecream]

woundedheart wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

I'd agree with that. According your logic, every single companion, you know, being a companion does detract from their individuality.

We're talking about predetermined characteristics. Try to keep up...<_<

What about being a companion isn't predetermined? 

[mesmerizedish]

woundedheart wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

I'd agree with that. According your logic, every single companion, you know, being a companion does detract from their individuality.

We're talking about predetermined characteristics. Try to keep up...<_<

In what way is being a Templar more predetermined than being a companion?

[Wulfram]

If Isabela and Anders were straight, and Merrill bi and Fenris gay, would their characters really be more individual than they are currently?

Modifié par Wulfram, 17 juin 2011 - 03:38 .

[Sutekh]

woundedheart wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

In what way is being a Templar more predetermined than being a companion?

Characteristic predeterminations. Who the character is prior to meeting you. Prior to meeting you, your companions have a bisexual characteristic.

Prior to meeting you, your companions do not have a companion characteristic. That doesn't even make sense.

Edit: and by "bisexual" I mean that they will be attracted to you regardless of your gender. <_<

Upon meeting you, no matter what they were/thought/their ideals were, your companions will become companions. How is that different from upon flirting with you, your LI will be attracted to you regardless of gender? How do you know they would've been attracted to any gender before meeting you?

[mesmerizedish]

You don't know they're bisexual prior to meeting you. Also, *spoiler* doesn't become a Templar until after *spoiler*

Your argument is just really inconsistent.

[ddv.rsa]

Wulfram wrote...

If Isabela and Anders were straight, and Merrill bi and Fenris gay, would their characters really be more individual than they are currently?

Not really. On your first run you have no way of knowing that their sexual orientation is based on player gender, so what's the problem? On later runs, instead of going "but you're straight!" people should stop metagaming.

[mesmerizedish]

woundedheart wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

You don't know they're bisexual prior to meeting you.

Do you know what "predetermined" means?  

Me knowing their sexual orientation doesn't decide their sexual orientation. That's decided before they even meet you.

You're misunderstanding me. Maybe they're not bisexual until Hawke comes along. You have no idea what their sexualities are prior to that meeting.

And you still haven't addressed the issue of your own Templar example. You seem to have a habit of ignoring things that go against your points >.>

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 17 juin 2011 - 04:07 .

[Wulfram]

Team mate sexuality should be randomly generated every game, based on the decay of radioactive substances.

[hoorayforicecream]

woundedheart wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

In what way is being a Templar more predetermined than being a companion?

Characteristic predeterminations. Who the character is prior to meeting you. Prior to meeting you, your companions have a bisexual characteristic.

Prior to meeting you, your companions do not have a companion characteristic. That doesn't even make sense.

Edit: and by "bisexual" I mean that they will be attracted to you regardless of your gender. <_<

You're being awfully finicky in your definitions. If you expect people to understand what you're arguing, then you really need to lay your terms out more clearly. I'm not telepathic; I can only go with what words you choose. Right now you sound like somebody who's somehow upset that companion characters the protagonist meets may fall for the protagonist, regardless of the protagonist's gender.

But there are characters who aren't that way (see Aveline and Varric), and there's one character who gender does matter for (Sebastian). And you choose flimsy defenses (it's not predetermined because it's not THIS kind of predetermined. It's bisexual, but only THIS kind of bisexual) for your statements.

The only conclusion I can draw is that you're trying to be difficult.

Overall, I think that there are two competing issues overall - one camp doesn't feel it is immersive that all of the love interests are open to either gender, and the other camp feels that they like particular characters and appreciate the fact that their protagonist can be with those particular characters regardless of gender. Since romances are entirely optional, I am reminded of an old adage.

Man says to his doctor: "Doc, it hurts when I do this."
Doctor replies to man: "Don't do that."

[xkg]

I must say the harsh truth here.

Everyone who says that having BI-sexual companions breaks his immersion is bad at roleplaying.

You guys are unable to jump into Hawke shoes and pretend that you know nothing about your companions from the beginning. That means you don't know how to ROLE PLAY your character and you are simply metagaming.

[mesmerizedish]

Wulfram wrote...

Team mate sexuality should be randomly generated every game, based on the decay of radioactive substances.

Uranium is hella gay.

[hoorayforicecream]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Team mate sexuality should be randomly generated every game, based on the decay of radioactive substances.

Uranium is hella gay.

Plutonium, on the other hand, totally goes both ways.

[Cutlass Jack]

No no no. Its Lyrium in the water. The Talkative Man knows the truth.