283 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

Lithuasil wrote...

Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut wrote...


If you play a game where the protagonist is a professional monster hunter, you would expect professional monster hunting to be in the game, no?

But I'm more interested in the sexism argument. I don't recall anything particularly sexist in Twitcher 2 beyond your standard-issue male-gaze video game bollocks.

And making said monster hunter the protagonist was the single worst design choice. Again, how is any of this an excuse.

But the sexism thing - I'm not even talking gratuitus, completely out of place nudity. Just for the tip of the Ice-berg, let's play a fun game.
Think of a female character, any character that isn't
a) A hooker
evil as satan
c) completely inept and in constant need of saving, despite any powers or strength she supposedly posesses.

Not asking for sympathetic characters, or well written ones, or realistic ones - just characters that are neither damsels in distress, nor monsters...

The entire Sorceress Lodge (inc. deceased and former members) and Saskia. So in other words every character with actual power who isn't Letho, one of the rapidly dwindling list of Temerian kings, or the (offscreen) Emperor of Nilfgaard.

Although if I'm guessing what categories you put various characters into correctly, you seem to be operating under the assumption that any female character who is trying to gain power is evil, which is an... interesting viewpoint.

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

LinksOcarina wrote...

That is one of the problems with George R.R Martins work too; and the show. It gets to the point of being distracting and distasteful.

As for Dragon Age II, the sex or the relationship is really not a reward in this game. Rather, it is an option. If it was a reward, it would give benefits to the characters versus changes in appearance and dialogue. At best all you get is a few friendship/rivalry points but even then that tailors more to the non-romance options during dialogue scenes.

Plus it can happen while being good or bad, the friendship/rivalry system in-game is what makes it more dynamic.Fenris for example is more passionate and lustful as a rival versus intimate and reluctant as a friend, so the difference in their treatment is important here. 

So the relationships are less about a reward, and more about relationship dynamics. Witcher 2 I will give you the fact they acknowledge boundaries of relationships, but so does Dragon Age II, sometimes to the extreme. Isabela (and because I liked it so much Zevran from Origins) are  the most gratutious characters in-game, but are also the most complex in terms of relationships and intimacy. It is honestly fascinating to watch the layers peel back on them, questioning their own beliefs and feelings on relationships versus casual sex.

And yeah, I don't mind breast shots, but when the first game of your series has trophies that are nude sex cards...thats not exactly a precedent you want to set, and while the cards aren't in Witcher 2, the problem is the pandering which is fairly absent in Dragon Age, and that for me is a good thing at least.

I'm not necessarily talking about the character explicitly giving sex as a reward, although that definitely happens in Bioware games - it's more about mechanically, you as the player do XYZ things and if you do them correctly you get a sex scene and get to advance the romance subplot. This is something I find problematic, because it strikes me as the video game verison of how women are generally not treated as having sexual agency in fiction. The fact that Bioware's an equal-opportunity-offender with this re: gender doesn't really help this problem, IMO.

And while you will get no argument from me that both Witcher games pander, you are not going to convince me that recent Bioware games don't pander just as hard (or arguably harder.) I mean seriously, the DA2 love interests come off as designed by a focus group to maximize appeal to target demographics.

[Il Divo]

Honestly, the inclusion of love interests period involves pandering. I wouldn't mind if Bioware moved away from including love interests in their games, or at least trying a few different approaches to spice things up.

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

Il Divo wrote...

Honestly, the inclusion of love interests period involves pandering. I wouldn't mind if Bioware moved away from including love interests in their games, or at least trying a few different approaches to spice things up.

I think it depends on how it's done. Is the love subplot written to tell a story, or to present love interests to appeal to the player? I wouldn't mind if Bioware moved towards the storytelling approach to romance subplots, but telling other kinds of stories than ones relating to love and/or sex would be nice as well.

Modifié par Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut, 16 décembre 2011 - 07:08 .

[jds1bio]

Anyhoo...back to the original topic, yes?

One thing this article implies is that today's successful RPGs are coming out from under D&D-system roots, or JRPG roots, and going their own way using their own mechanics. And games like Zelda and Fallout, going back 25 years and 14 years respectively, were always on their own.

I think DAO split the difference on this one, and managed to be successful by leveraging its specializations against the attribute spread. I think DA2 split the difference even more widely than DAO and ended up penalizing players who distributed points more evenly amongst the attributes. It would be interesting to see the next DA installment with an even more in-bloom talent tree than DA2, and a return to specializations that leverage a healthy mix of the base attributes.

[LinksOcarina]

Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut wrote...

I'm not necessarily talking about the character explicitly giving sex as a reward, although that definitely happens in Bioware games - it's more about mechanically, you as the player do XYZ things and if you do them correctly you get a sex scene and get to advance the romance subplot. This is something I find problematic, because it strikes me as the video game verison of how women are generally not treated as having sexual agency in fiction. The fact that Bioware's an equal-opportunity-offender with this re: gender doesn't really help this problem, IMO.

And while you will get no argument from me that both Witcher games pander, you are not going to convince me that recent Bioware games don't pander just as hard (or arguably harder.) I mean seriously, the DA2 love interests come off as designed by a focus group to maximize appeal to target demographics.

It does happen in Bioware games, I give you that one, but whole "maximixed appeal" thing is a false argument in this case. For Mass Effect 3, as an example, I would agree with you, giving Shepard the ability to have a male/male relationship is pointless after 3 games in. But since Dragon Age started with bisexual relationships (and does them well) it gets a pass from me in that regard.

If it honestly bothered people, they could just say no, and no more romantic dialogue opens up. So it's less about pandering (because if they did they would have made it more pronounced and pushed it harder then just one line you can brush off easily), and more about the perception of pansexuality being off-putting, at least in terms of gender relations.

But I need to ask, what is the alternative mechanically? The Witcher 2 is the same thing, saying the right things to initiate a sex scene anyway. The most famous example is Geralt and Triss and the Elven well they find or whatever it is. You say the right things, you and Triss **** in the water. Why though? The pretense is because you have no way out right of the pools, so you might as well. That to me is a bit gob-smacking when compared to most alternatives.

ETA:
And just to bring this back to topic, once again the IGN writer failed to bring any of this up when talking about Witcher 2, and Dragon Age II, something that SHOULD be important because of the growth of RPG's as a more story-driven medium and as games showing intimate and sexual relationships that more complex than saving the damsel in distress. Once again, it was a missed oppertunity on Charles' part.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 16 décembre 2011 - 07:17 .

[Sylvianus]

jds1bio wrote...

Anyhoo...back to the original topic, yes?
.

Thanks, really.

 mass effect forum : Bioware is sexist
Dragon age forum : Bioware is sexist;
Tw2 : sexist, and worse apparently
Skyrim because of some revealing armor, = sexist

Merril, apparently, is also the sexist stereostype and her writer should feel bad.

I feel that soon people will move on BOOBS, bewbies, nudity = porn Miranda, isabela, and so on. Catsuits, etc.

Please, give me a break.

[Mr Fixit]

I must admit I don't really get this puritan line of thinking where everything is considered sexist, pornographic and/or distasteful. As for Song of Ice and Fire, I can't find anything gratutious there - Martin went for extreme historical realism and, guess what, that's what war and depravity looked (and probably still looks) like.

[DreamwareStudio]

Sylvianus wrote...

jds1bio wrote...

Anyhoo...back to the original topic, yes?
.

Thanks, really.

 mass effect forum : Bioware is sexist
Dragon age forum : Bioware is sexist;
Tw2 : sexist, and worse apparently
Skyrim because of some revealing armor, = sexist

Merril, apparently, is also the sexist stereostype and her writer should feel bad.

I feel that soon people will move on BOOBS, bewbies, nudity = porn Miranda, isabela, and so on. Catsuits, etc.

Please, give me a break.

I'm male and welcome the day when this happens.  Not every female character has to possess perfect boobs or cleavage that reaches from here to California.  Give me female warrirors, yes, but give them armor that makes sense rather than something which displays their asses and upper body "armor" that leaves nothing to the imagination.

I can understand sexism in some games that rely or borrow heavily from the medieval and other historical time periods but ME and the like...uh, no.

That said,  I do like romancable characters and I have no problems with unadulterated sex, but put them in context.  Nudity during moments of intimacy rather than flashes of skin on a battlefield.

Bioware and a lot of other companies seem to miss out on the fact their target audience is no longer in the teens but have all grown up, and that while flashes of ****** doesn't hurt if it is done in the proper setting, maybe it takes more than a flash of ****** to make us feel the game is "awesome".

Modifié par google_calasade, 16 décembre 2011 - 07:34 .

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut wrote...

I'm not necessarily talking about the character explicitly giving sex as a reward, although that definitely happens in Bioware games - it's more about mechanically, you as the player do XYZ things and if you do them correctly you get a sex scene and get to advance the romance subplot. This is something I find problematic, because it strikes me as the video game verison of how women are generally not treated as having sexual agency in fiction. The fact that Bioware's an equal-opportunity-offender with this re: gender doesn't really help this problem, IMO.

And while you will get no argument from me that both Witcher games pander, you are not going to convince me that recent Bioware games don't pander just as hard (or arguably harder.) I mean seriously, the DA2 love interests come off as designed by a focus group to maximize appeal to target demographics.

It does happen in Bioware games, I give you that one, but whole "maximixed appeal" thing is a false argument in this case. For Mass Effect 3, as an example, I would agree with you, giving Shepard the ability to have a male/male relationship is pointless after 3 games in. But since Dragon Age started with bisexual relationships (and does them well) it gets a pass from me in that regard.

If it honestly bothered people, they could just say no, and no more romantic dialogue opens up. So it's less about pandering (because if they did they would have made it more pronounced and pushed it harder then just one line you can brush off easily), and more about the perception of pansexuality being off-putting, at least in terms of gender relations.

But I need to ask, what is the alternative mechanically? The Witcher 2 is the same thing, saying the right things to initiate a sex scene anyway. The most famous example is Geralt and Triss and the Elven well they find or whatever it is. You say the right things, you and Triss **** in the water. Why though? The pretense is because you have no way out right of the pools, so you might as well. That to me is a bit gob-smacking when compared to most alternatives.

Well, I think the bisexuality thing is a different topic - don't want to derail our derail, now do we?  Long story short, I applaud the inclusion of non-hetero characters in vidya games but don't think that inclusion was Bioware's intention when writing DA2 characters.

Well, the thing I liked in Witcher 2 was that G of R and TM were in an existing relationship, and the relationship subplot was more about where that relationship went than the struggle to gain a relationship in the first place. I also liked that the romance was not the entire point of TM's character, and primarily played as an offshoot of the continuing question of whether or not G of R trusts TM or thinks she's using him in a larger power game.

Re: the "elven bath" scene, I liked how for once the female, non-player character had some agency there. TM is basically all "hey, how about you and me go to this hilariously romantic location and talk about our relationship*" and G of R either brushes her off or goes along with it.** I like that a lot more than "hey, you saved me twice and stood up for me at a trial, let the sexytimes ensue." In other words, there's a key difference between "character A wants to shag character B, character B says yes" and "character A wants to shag character B because of something B did for A, character B says yes."

*(and get a flower that I claim cures amnesia but that you later discover also is useful for mind control.)

**(It's pretty obvious that the characters are supposed to be joking with the "no way out of here" line, considering the tone and context of the line and the fact that TM can freaking teleport.)

Modifié par Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut, 16 décembre 2011 - 07:35 .

[LinksOcarina]

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but isn't Aveline the anti-sexism argument here?

She is a strong-willed female that pretty much beats the tar out of people, takes her work seriously, and remarries after the death of her husband in a really nice side-quest that shows that yes, people can be vulnerable in some relationships, but it was done in a way that didn't demean her or make her look to be a "stereotype."

How is she, in any way, sexist?

ETA: I think I will make a topic on this since this entire question of sexism is coming up a lot and keeps derailing the IGN article...

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 16 décembre 2011 - 07:39 .

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

Mr Fixit wrote...

I must admit I don't really get this puritan line of thinking where everything is considered sexist, pornographic and/or distasteful. As for Song of Ice and Fire, I can't find anything gratutious there - Martin went for extreme historical realism and, guess what, that's what war and depravity looked (and probably still looks) like.

Sometimes that's true - GRRM does occasionally use sex to tell us about the story and the characters. Not always the case, though. The book lost me on this issue somewhere around the Nth Shae scene, and the show lost me when Littlefinger basically spent 5 minutes explaining the plot and his motivations while two hookers had sex in the background.

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

LinksOcarina wrote...

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but isn't Aveline the anti-sexism argument here?

She is a strong-willed female that pretty much beats the tar out of people, takes her work seriously, and remarries after the death of her husband in a really nice side-quest that shows that yes, people can be vulnerable in some relationships, but it was done in a way that didn't demean her or make her look to be a "stereotype."

How is she, in any way, sexist?

Aveline I really like, and yeah, very much non-sexist. I'm not saying "all Bioware games are always sexist" or "Witcher games are never sexist" (especially the second one - I'm looking at you, card-collecting mechanic.) I'm mostly talking about things I find sexist or refreshingly not sexist, respectively, about each game. For the record, I actually think that Bioware is much better than average re: sexism, but that they tend to derp up when it comes to visual design or romance subplots.

Modifié par Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut, 16 décembre 2011 - 07:42 .

[nightscrawl]

From the article...

There was plenty of decision points and a handful of memorable moments, but those couldn't allay my fear that Dragon Age II was a sign that big budget role-playing was becoming too diluted and concerned with mass appeal for its own good.

This summed it up perfectly for me. While I enjoyed DA2, in a different way than I enjoyed DAO, I really felt that Bioware let some aspects of game creation get away from them a bit.

I think the two main issues I have are with map design re: open world exploration, and the repetitive nature of the three acts.

Even with Neverwinter Nights, the maps were more open, and although you only went to one for a specific quest, you could go anywhere you wanted while on the map itself. The landscape architecture of Dragon Age (both games) has felt very restrictive to me. Even with DAO's large area covering most of Ferelden, you were still limited to specific map points, and sometimes a specific pathway. All it does is end up making the world seem very small when I know that Thedas itself is very large (we have maps!). The Wounded Coast made me insane after a while. One of the reasons I appreciated Legacy and MotA so very much is because I got to say "Yay, somewhere new!"

It's been mentioned in other posts in other threads, but the non-changing aspects of Kirkwall did not contribute to any sort of variety within the game world itself. I think the largest appreciable difference involves various aspects of construction in the Docks area. Most of the NPCs are doing and saying the exact same things in year seven that they are doing in year one. If I hear that guy calling for his mistress's dog one more time...

Finally, the author of this piece calls DA2 "an intermediate step for the franchise." With the way the story ends, you can tell that this was a bridge game in terms of lore. Unfortunately, the game design also reflects that. What it does well is what Bioware always does well: character and relationship development. But that alone is not enough to sustain a game.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 16 décembre 2011 - 07:45 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Avaline was very well done all around.

What's not Avaline or Bioware's fault, but is very telling about the issue of female characters as sexual objects, is how many mods you can find to make Avaline's appearance "sexier" or "more feminine" or whatever.

[Sylvianus]

google_calasade wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

jds1bio wrote...

Anyhoo...back to the original topic, yes?
.

Thanks, really.

 mass effect forum : Bioware is sexist
Dragon age forum : Bioware is sexist;
Tw2 : sexist, and worse apparently
Skyrim because of some revealing armor, = sexist

Merril, apparently, is also the sexist stereostype and her writer should feel bad.

I feel that soon people will move on BOOBS, bewbies, nudity = porn Miranda, isabela, and so on. Catsuits, etc.

Please, give me a break.

I'm male and welcome the day when this happens.  Not every female character has to possess perfect boobs or cleavage that reaches from here to California.  Give me female warrirors, yes, but give them armor that makes sense rather than something which displays their asses and upper body "armor" that leaves nothing to the imagination.

I can understand sexism in some games that rely or borrow heavily from the medieval and other historical time periods but ME and the like...uh, no.

That said,  I do like romancable characters and I have no problems with unadulterated sex, but put them in context.  Nudity during moments of intimacy rather than flashes of skin on a battlefield.

Bioware and a lot of other companies seem to miss out on the fact their target audience is no longer in the teens but have all grown up, and that while flashes of ****** doesn't hurt if it is done in the proper setting, maybe it takes more than a flash of ****** to make us feel the game is "awesome".

Mass effect is good, only Miranda and her ass bothered me. She should have also an armor and she has now.

If there's anything I hate, it's the hype about social issues. I complained when there was no armor for some characters in M2 ( female AND male ) and I complained a lot about Isabela. But never you saw me saying some stuff like that.

To say that bioware is sexist, it's the biggest bull**** to me. People are forgetting what they have undertaken to date for the female player. Yes, I consider also that sexy characters, visually, it's also a good thing. More with armor ? yes. But it isn't incompatible.

Puritan sense that any visible portion of the skin is a horror, I don't get it. More consistency, yes.

Debates on bsn, from what I read on this subject are not what I consider as a good thing, because they are unhealthy,  and extreme.

Now, I don't want to be involved in this kind of discussion, I leave it at that.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 16 décembre 2011 - 07:54 .

[UrkOfGreyhawk]

Plaintiff wrote...

UrkOfGreyhawk wrote...

I think the role-playing genre will survive. I'm just not so sure about Bioware. They seem to have completely lost touch with what RPG players want.

Way to go using your own blog to support an unfounded argument. I especially love how you take developer statements out of context and have the arrogance to presume that you speak for everyone who enjoys RPGs, while simultaneously making offensive generalizations about anyone who enjoys other genres, with no consideration for the fact that those demographics can and frequently do crossover.

Yes plaintiff. It's called an "opinion". And so far the numbers support it. I just used my bvlog to spare myself some typing. Perhaps the name "Urk's Outpost" was too subtle for you? I do apologize if you feel misled and congratulate you on the steel trap intellect that allowed you to figure out my ruse.

I stand by my post. AAA mainstream gamers are a bucnch of knuckleheads who are too stupid to realize they are just buying reskins of the same game over and over agian. RPG's will never crossover into that market. RPG elements will be, and have been, succesfully tacked on to knucklehead favorites (FPS, racing, and sports games) but RPG's themselves just don't interest that market and never will.

Modifié par UrkOfGreyhawk, 16 décembre 2011 - 08:13 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

I would not call Bioware sexist. It's not that simple.

[LinksOcarina]

UrkOfGreyhawk wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

UrkOfGreyhawk wrote...

I think the role-playing genre will survive. I'm just not so sure about Bioware. They seem to have completely lost touch with what RPG players want.

Way to go using your own blog to support an unfounded argument. I especially love how you take developer statements out of context and have the arrogance to presume that you speak for everyone who enjoys RPGs, while simultaneously making offensive generalizations about anyone who enjoys other genres, with no consideration for the fact that those demographics can and frequently do crossover.

Yes plaintiff. It's called an "opinion". And so far the numbers support it.

I stand by my post. AAA mainstream gamers are a bucnch of knuckleheads who are too stupid to realize they are just buying reskins of the same game over and over agian. RPG's will never crossover into that market. RPG elements will be, and have been, succesfully tacked on to knucklehead favorites (FPS, racing, and sports games) but RPG's themselves just don't interest that market and never will.

Your opinion however is so assinine (after reading your blog) I can't help but comment on how wrong you really are.

So the game failed because it attempts to broaden the market. That made it bad, and in form made Bioware irrelevant as a devloper now because Electonic Arts is their parent company? 

First off,  RPG's were always a niche genre, but gaming tastes have changed since 1999; the reason is due to graphical limitations and a growth in the industry as a whole. Computer gaming, sad to say, is less of a platform for deep experiences as it was ten years ago. Most old school computer games are revered for their complexity and deep RPG elements, from Privateer to Elder Scrolls Arena.

Try going back and playing them though after playing Dragon Age: Origins on the PC though. 

Console RPG's are also a different beast, since most of them followed the light rpg model from Japan for years. Then that changed, and people cried foul, and people forgot about it afterwards. I still yearn a turn-based Final Fantasy, but the chances of it coming back are likely not going to happen. Even Hironobu Sakaguchi has moved away from this in The Last Story, and this is the guy that made most classic FF's and Lost Odyssey, the last great turn-based RPG. 

Then you say that dumbing it down makes the game bad, and that RPG players know a lot more about the tech of computers and about being creative.

Now, where is the proof of the latter? Such a statement quantifys an explaination and evidence to support it, other than a baseless claim.

Second, "dumbing it down" is an elitist line. Because the game loses a lot of the charm that hardcore players have, and that "cutting corners" and "making the game a more casual experience" is something RPG players don't like, it means the game is terrible and the company making them is guilty of coroprate pandering? 

First off, your demeaning a game that is just as complex as the UI from Ultima III; it is just complex in a different way. Sad to say, not everything needs a stat page to list every +1 you get or an obtuse, tactical interface from an isometric POV anymore. Hell, a lot of gamers and real RPG fans can live without it for now. No, the focus on story elements, different tech and character dynamics is not important, even though this is what Bioware does best, including well written adventures.

Second, you also just belittled Bioware, which pretty much gave us two of the biggest RPG franchises in the past five years, and two franchises that made RPG's more mainstream than ever before. Are Mass Effect 1 and 2 bad RPG's because they are, god forbid, popular and make it too casual? How about Origins, a game that took seven years to make, which had sales figures of 4.8 million across three platforms? Is that too popular to be considered a good RPG now?  No problem with them it seems, only Dragon Age II, which did things different and changed up the formula (in some ways vast improvements too, from the friendship/rivalry system to the customizable skill trees as a few examples.)

See the problem with your argument yet? I know I do, but I guess i'm just another knucklehead who  likes to casually play Dragon Age five different times for five different stories in-between bouts of Deus Ex.

Speaking of which, the blending in of RPG elements into other games is also a good thing, not a bad one. It enhances other genres and opens up RPGs out of the Fantasy realm to new territories. I said Privateer earlier and while that is a space sim, a lot of RPG elements in the game, from how you talk to people to how you upgrade ships, make it special in it's own way, so I consider it a good RPG as well. Recent titles that blend the genres like Borderlands and Dead Island have proved it can be done without being a skinner box like the multi-player of Call of Duty 3. Instead it's a simple talent tree and your characters have specific strengths and weaknesses.

Hell, Chris Avellone even praises the experimentation of the genre and the implementation of RPG elements into new territories. While I don't agree with the whole "undermining the thrill of exploration" bit, however, but when Chris Avellone disagrees with you, I think it's time to rethink what you believe in, and change with the times dude.

ETA: Just to tie this one more to the IGN article, it even discussed the refinement of the said elements that you believe are killing what makes RPGs what they are. Reward and progression are mostly what is cited, and yeah, sometimes it's clear that it's just a poor attempt at keeping people addicted for things, like in Call of Duty. But most RPGs follow that model too. Old school dunegon crawlers did this formula for years. Skyrim does it now (and lets be honest, besides how the games atmosphere is, that is why a lot of people played it.) and overall, the genre has showed that this is what a lot of gamers want, so even if it's a Skinner experiment from skyrim or CoD, it is still effective in making a good game more in-depth. So ****ing about this being a bane of RPGs is totally ridiculous, since most RPGs thrive on it to begin with.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 16 décembre 2011 - 08:50 .

[NErWOnek]

DA II is a very enjoyable CASUAL RPG. That's it. I like it 'cause it's simpler than mass effect ever was and looks great. As for this article I'd go with the Witcher 2 as goty, skyrim becomes boring after a while. For me there is something like "too much" open world and repetitive gameplay schemes. 50 hours in - skyrim feels like a mmorpg.

[Killjoy Cutter]

"Change with the times" usually means "accept this crap we're giving you or we'll call you old-fashioned".

[Monica83]

i just say that...

I'm so whaiting a game where you can kill puritans
Joking Aside...

There is difference in how the adult content is potraited.. The Elven bath scene of the witcher 2 was just perfect in a manner of Sensuality Romanticism with a bit of humor..((and for me is always better see a realistic sensual scene like that than two idiots that kiss and jumps on bed with clothes on))

The witcher 2 is sexist? Yes and NO..
Yes because the witcher world remember a true medieval setting where woman IMO are considered the weak sex...

NO because even in the witcher 2 female character have important and huge Roles...

*Saskia the dragonslayer is an heroine
*The sorceress are the ones that benhind the scene influence the politic

And since i don't find this game an offence for woman at all...

In Dragon age 2 i really hated how they potraied isabella..

I mean a woman with a huge breast that wear a corset a perizoma and long boots... Ho well but now i bet that DA2 defenders comes out and say: It's just the character.. or It have a more personal look.. Or again. It's just oversexualized...

That's truly a pity because on my opinion Isabela had the chance to be a much more interesting character if not ruined by that look..

But i agree you take less risk when you make politically correct title...

But is just my opinion..

[LinksOcarina]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

"Change with the times" usually means "accept this crap we're giving you or we'll call you old-fashioned".

To quote Morriagn for a second:

"Many fear change and will fight it with every fiber of their being. But sometimes change is what they need most. Sometimes change is what sets them free."

Changing with the times does not mean accepting crap (which Dragon Age II is not, if it was I wouldn't defend it), but it does mean evolving tastes and experimentation. That is the point I was trying to make, and a lot of people, hardcore RPG players, casual gamers, industry folk and guys like Avellone were saying.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 16 décembre 2011 - 08:56 .

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

Monica83 wrote...
In Dragon age 2 i really hated how they potraied isabella..

I mean a woman with a huge breast that wear a corset a perizoma and long boots... Ho well but now i bet that DA2 defenders comes out and say: It's just the character.. or It have a more personal look.. Or again. It's just oversexualized...

And this isn't a problem that you also have with Witcher 2... how? I mean, I like that game, but some of the character designs are kind of hilarious. Saskia's cleavage-plate comes to mind.

[Monica83]

But saskia have IMO a plate and a credible one... Others dressed sexy are the sorceress.. Even triss in travel is full covered...

Isabela just have a corset a perizoma and long boots i mean its ridicolus