411 réponses à ce sujet

[Ravensword]

Heather Cline wrote...

No I would not. I am not into polygamy or polyamory or whatever you wanna call it. So no I do not support it.

But seriously, you should've probably read up on polyamory before posting your opinion and revealing your ignorance to the world.

[warriorN7]

attention mass effect fans

ORGY

that is all

[grimkillah]

I am against polygamous relationship for male Shepard, since "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other."
However I feel FemShep should be able to have this option, since man are usually hopeless in satisfying the needs of a woman, and Liara is too inexperienced, so more lover the better.

Modifié par grimkillah, 19 décembre 2011 - 12:10 .

[Random citizen]

grimkillah wrote...

I am against polygamous relationship for male Shepard, since "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other."
However I feel FemShep should be able to have this option, since man are usually hopeless in satisfying the needs of a woman, and Liara is too inexperienced, so more lover the better.

:lol:

[NGC1300]

I don't support polyamory but I do want to see Kaidan and Vega fighting over my MShep. Period.

Edited in accordance to
VVVVVVVV

Modifié par NGC1300, 21 décembre 2011 - 11:45 .

[jeweledleah]

Polygamy= a relationship with one husband and multiple wives. love is not necessary
Polyandry= a relationship with one wife and multiple husbands. love is also not necessary
Polyamory = a loving relationship with more then 2 partners, the types of partners can vary greatly and they may or may not be married.

[Tonymac]

Sounds morally bankrupt.

[weedyfun]

yeah why the hell not. i don't engage in such relations in real life, because i don't like to share my person with others. it grosses me out.

but this is a video game and pixels can't really get STD's (unless it's like Fable XD), so why the f_ck not?

[CptData]

jeweledleah wrote...

Polygamy= a relationship with one husband and multiple wives. love is not necessary
Polyandry= a relationship with one wife and multiple husbands. love is also not necessary
Polyamory = a loving relationship with more then 2 partners, the types of partners can vary greatly and they may or may not be married.

Thank you.

Out of those three I support the last one since it's based on love.
And since when is love considered as -wrong-?

Not that I want something like that in my case. I'm a tad too jealous for that. And I would be a hypocrite if supporting a relationship with more than one girlfriend for me without allowing a second boyfriend at the same time.
So not my cup of tea, but I support it as much as I support homosexual relationships. It's about love, after all.

[Skullheart]

No.

My Shepard prefers a full relation with his lover instead two incomplete relations.

[Random citizen]

Skullheart wrote...

No.

My Shepard prefers a full relation with his lover instead two incomplete relations.

Understandable, but what about two complete relations?

[Random citizen]

jeweledleah wrote...

Polygamy= a relationship with one husband and multiple wives. love is not necessary
Polyandry= a relationship with one wife and multiple husbands. love is also not necessary
Polyamory = a loving relationship with more then 2 partners, the types of partners can vary greatly and they may or may not be married.

Good post, but if I am allowed to nitpick: polygyny is the marriage between one man and multiple wives.

[Tasha vas Nar Rayya]

I have a Shepard who would very much be into it. She loves Thane and Samara, but Samara rejection meant she went for Thane.

Personally, loving one person is hard enough, never mind another one xD

[Random citizen]

Tasha vas Nar Rayya wrote...

I have a Shepard who would very much be into it. She loves Thane and Samara, but Samara rejection meant she went for Thane.

Personally, loving one person is hard enough, never mind another one xD

Loving is easy if it comes to you. But no one said maintenence was easy.

[AgitatedLemon]

I wouldn't support it myself, but I wouldn't reject it to people who want that sort of thing. I'm just not that kind of person, I guess, but I won't think any less of anyone else for it.

[Random citizen]

I guess my English is not good enough, so correct me if I am wrong, but "Would you support polyamorous relationships in ME3?" does not mean "Would you want to pursue polyamorous relationships in ME3?" As far as I know, supporting Gay marriage does not mean you are gay and marry someone, it means you support it being an option for those who are into that. Not supporting it means that you are either against it or not caring about people having that option or not.

[AgitatedLemon]

Random citizen wrote...

I guess my English is not good enough, so correct me if I am wrong, but "Would you support polyamorous relationships in ME3?" does not mean "Would you want to pursue polyamorous relationships in ME3?" As far as I know, supporting Gay marriage does not mean you are gay and marry someone, it means you support it being an option for those who are into that. Not supporting it means that you are either against it or not caring about people having that option or not.

If you're replying to me, then you should take a 2nd look at my post. I said "I don't support it, but I won't reject it from someone who would want that sort of thing".

I guess if you needed a TL;DR, it would be "No, I don't support it, but it's cool if you do". 

So... My post is perfectly valid. 

The question being asked is "Would you support polyamorous relationships in ME3?" My answer is no, but I wouldn't care if anyone else wants it.

[Random citizen]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

Random citizen wrote...

I guess my English is not good enough, so correct me if I am wrong, but "Would you support polyamorous relationships in ME3?" does not mean "Would you want to pursue polyamorous relationships in ME3?" As far as I know, supporting Gay marriage does not mean you are gay and marry someone, it means you support it being an option for those who are into that. Not supporting it means that you are either against it or not caring about people having that option or not.

If you're replying to me, then you should take a 2nd look at my post. I said "I don't support it, but I won't reject it from someone who would want that sort of thing".

I guess if you needed a TL;DR, it would be "No, I don't support it, but it's cool if you do". 

So... My post is perfectly valid. 

The question being asked is "Would you support polyamorous relationships in ME3?" My answer is no, but I wouldn't care if anyone else wants it.

Although it is pretty certain that it is too late for ME3, things like this tend to happen because enough people want or support it. By not supporting it, one decreases the odds for it to happen. That why most people support causes they themselves sympathise with, even if they don't share them.  I support gay relationships in real life as well as in roleplaying games, although I am not gay or overly interested in exploring such a storyline.

So the question really is: do you cast your vote in favour of the cause, allowing more options and thus making people who like such options happy,  or do you not.

Its not  "you are either with us or against us"  its you are "either with us, against us or not helping".

But both being against a cause and not helping it makes it harder for the cause to succeed.
Not caring is not as neutral as people sometimes might think.

[Random citizen]

warriorN7 wrote...

attention mass effect fans

ORGY

that is all

I feel I must comment on this. Currently in our western civilization, we have trouble in depicting sexuality in a way that does not cause moral outcry and thrives on being "immoral" or "dirty" for added effect and excitement. It is regretable, but also understandable given how religion and patriarchy has f-ed us up. Not only does the image of an orgy pop up in the minds of people when mentioning something about the possibility of  polyamorous relationships ("OMG Threesome!! or "OMG Tali-Mirand-Liara-Jack circle with Shepard in the middle!) but such reaction makes it even harder to actually depict or at least indirectly describe such an "orgy" in any serious manner.

I am through playing sexologist for know so I will think i will wrap this post up here.

[Cernex]

No. Not because of any big morality issue, but because, gameplay-wise, it would (for me at least) screw ti the little "challenge" romancing has. I know it might sound as a cold approach to the whole thing, and that I should prolly balance it out more out of morals (like any good western-RPGer does), but let's face it: if Shep went into the whole poligamy thing, nothing would stop us from grabbing EVERY. SINGLE. LI. out there, and we would do it without a problem, get all the endings, all the delicious upcoming WAFF, and call it a day.

So for those reasons, I say: nay.

[Random citizen]

Cernex wrote...

No. Not because of any big morality issue, but because, gameplay-wise, it would (for me at least) screw ti the little "challenge" romancing has. I know it might sound as a cold approach to the whole thing, and that I should prolly balance it out more out of morals (like any good western-RPGer does), but let's face it: if Shep went into the whole poligamy thing, nothing would stop us from grabbing EVERY. SINGLE. LI. out there, and we would do it without a problem, get all the endings, all the delicious upcoming WAFF, and call it a day.

So for those reasons, I say: nay.

I think you should read the thread more carefully.

[jeweledleah]

Random citizen wrote...

jeweledleah wrote...

Polygamy= a relationship with one husband and multiple wives. love is not necessary
Polyandry= a relationship with one wife and multiple husbands. love is also not necessary
Polyamory = a loving relationship with more then 2 partners, the types of partners can vary greatly and they may or may not be married.

Good post, but if I am allowed to nitpick: polygyny is the marriage between one man and multiple wives.

had to look it up, nothing personal, it seems my terminology is out of date.  you are right, nowadays, polygamy refers to both, will note for futue reference.

that said I'm still iffy on supporting your cause.  writing monogamous relationships in a game that allows for variations in responces and subsequent reactions from npc's is hard enough.  adding more people to the mix might detract from the game's actual focus. imagine having to account for being nice to one partner, nasty to the other and then figuring out how it will affect relationship between them... unless you want relationships with the depth of those in skyrim?  in which case - sky is the limit.

[Random citizen]

I think that we can all agree that anything bigger then a triangle might be a bit more then most devs can chew, unless its very casual, or involve more casual relationships on top of the more intimate triangle, or involves npcs that rarely interacts with Shep. (like for example a Liara<->shepard>-<Tali-><Kal'Reegar constellation)

[Squidbreath]

[quote]dragoneffectrepublic wrote...

Yeah I would support. I mean it should be done tastefully and not like random threesomes...but like all members involved should actually LOVE each other. It shouldn't be like "let's have random sex". That would be odd and tacky.


Like someone said it should be true to the character. I don't see someone like Kaiden or Ashley going for that. In fact if you suggest that in the first game, when you have a love triangle encounter between either Liara/Ashley or Kaidan/Liara, they decline. 
[/quote]
[quote]FoxHound109 wrote...

Short Answer: Yes.

Long Answer: Only If it fits with the personality of the characters in question.[/quote]
[/quote]

Ot3's ftw

Modifié par Squidbreath, 28 décembre 2011 - 02:32 .

[HolyAvenger]

Having recently played the confrontation in 1, I'm don't think Liara is down with the poly-relationship idea (plus the way the sleazy-Renegade-Shep says, it sounds like he/she is talking about just sex), its just Kaidan/Ash are more disgusted and react more quickly.