922 réponses à ce sujet

[Uccio]

^ edited it, should cause more changes into the storyline too.

[DahliaLynn]

I would think the only way to satisfy both the realism aspect and the desires of the player, is to design characters that are inherently bi, gay or straight, giving them a more defined personality. If the PC persists, give them the possibility of convincing the NPC into a romance, eventually. This way, if those players who are dissatisfied with a particular character's sexual preference, they have the option of eventually getting their way without the desire to mod the npc.

[deatharmonic]

DahliaLynn wrote...

I would think the only way to satisfy both the realism aspect and the desires of the player, is to design characters that are inherently bi, gay or straight, giving them a more defined personality. If the PC persists, give them the possibility of convincing the NPC into a romance, eventually. This way, if those players who are dissatisfied with a particular character's sexual preference, they have the option of eventually getting their way without the desire to mod the npc.

How do you persuade someone to change their sexuality? that seems even more unrealistic. No matter how persistent my gay friend Mike is, he is never going to influence my sexuality, doesn't matter what he does (just a random example).

[DahliaLynn]

deatharmonic wrote...

DahliaLynn wrote...

I would think the only way to satisfy both the realism aspect and the desires of the player, is to design characters that are inherently bi, gay or straight, giving them a more defined personality. If the PC persists, give them the possibility of convincing the NPC into a romance, eventually. This way, if those players who are dissatisfied with a particular character's sexual preference, they have the option of eventually getting their way without the desire to mod the npc.

How do you persuade someone to change their sexuality? that seems even more unrealistic. No matter how persistent my gay friend Mike is, he is never going to influence my sexuality, doesn't matter what he does (just a random example).

Correct. In real life, chances are slim if at all that this can happen, but it will give a more realistic feel to the game as far as NPC definition is concerned, while providing a choice for those who persist. This way, not everyone is unrealistically hitting on you. If the player *really* wants someone, it can eventually happen in his own game. People got very angry that Alistair was not a gay option. Though he had a defined preference, he was eventually modded.   

Modifié par DahliaLynn, 01 janvier 2012 - 02:09 .

[deatharmonic]

DahliaLynn wrote...

deatharmonic wrote...

DahliaLynn wrote...

I would think the only way to satisfy both the realism aspect and the desires of the player, is to design characters that are inherently bi, gay or straight, giving them a more defined personality. If the PC persists, give them the possibility of convincing the NPC into a romance, eventually. This way, if those players who are dissatisfied with a particular character's sexual preference, they have the option of eventually getting their way without the desire to mod the npc.

How do you persuade someone to change their sexuality? that seems even more unrealistic. No matter how persistent my gay friend Mike is, he is never going to influence my sexuality, doesn't matter what he does (just a random example).

Correct. In real life, chances are slim if at all that this can happen, but it will give a more realistic feel to the game as far as NPC definition is concerned, while providing a choice for those who persist. This way, not everyone is unrealistically hitting on you. If the player *really* wants someone, it can eventually happen in his own game. People got very angry that Alistair was not a gay option. Though he had a defined preference, he was eventually modded.   

how would that work? would there be romance dialogue options? if i were to click on them the first few times they are presented would i be knocked back? (showing the companions inherent sexuality). Then further persistence would work? i suppose it could be argued if i wanted to RP a straight character and not have the straight companion hitting on me i need not persist with the romance dialogue, therefore keeping the integrity of the companion. Having said that, i wonder how those who want to RP a homosexual character would feel? would the change from straight to gay companion feel kinda cheap? and would that change in itself compromise the companions integrity for them?

Modifié par deatharmonic, 01 janvier 2012 - 02:10 .

[DahliaLynn]

deatharmonic wrote...

how would that work? would there be romance dialogue options? if i were to click on them the first few times they are presented would i be knocked back? (showing the companions inherent sexuality). Then further persistence would work? i suppose it could be argued if i wanted to RP a straight character and not have the straight companion hitting on me i need not persist with the romance dialogue, therefore keeping the integrity of the companion.

I would say, if they continue with the current "heart" setup, then yes, why not? Personally I think relationships should grow slowly, but that's another topic. 
Yes, if you RP a straight char and not desire a romance, then of course...why choose romance dialogue? 

 Having said that, i wonder how those who want to RP a homosexual character would feel? would the change from straight to gay companion feel kinda cheap? and would that change in itself compromise the companions integrity for them?

I don't think anything would feel cheap, if the conversion was hard enough to accomplish.  

Modifié par DahliaLynn, 01 janvier 2012 - 02:20 .

[ScotGaymer]

DahliaLynn.

The thing is not "everyone" is bi in DA2 - in fact Dragon Age 2 has less openly gay and bisexual characters in it than DAO. The only characters outside the companions that are "bisexual" that leap to my mind are Seneschal Bran and the ****s in the Pearl.
DAO had quite a few more but less in the form of companions.

And even companions not everyone is bisexual. Sebastian, Varric, Aveline, Carver, and Bethany are all heterosexual. So 5 of a possible 9 Companions are straight not bi.

So your arguement that "everyone" being bi is invalid. And as I said in my earlier post the whole realism arguement is invalid too because the universe of DA is more concerned with theology and ideology than race or sexuality and they are more relaxed about the latter things than in real life, so it isnt that huge of a stretch to come across several sexually flexible persons during the course of your adventure.

In a game real life realism doesnt matter, because in games (and all sorts of media) we suspend our disbelief for many many things that arent "realistic" in real life. All that matters is, is it realistic in the context of the universe. And having 4 of 9 bisexual or heteroflexible companions is realistic.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 01 janvier 2012 - 02:57 .

[rak72]

Convincing someone to "change teams" - just no. That would be 10000x more unrealistic & immersion breaking than everyone being bi. I don't mind if there is a mod that can make it happen because in that players world that is how it is. I don't want that to be in my world, because that would just be beyond nutty for me.

[DahliaLynn]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

DahliaLynn.

The thing is not "everyone" is bi in DA2 - in fact Dragon Age 2 has less openly gay and bisexual characters in it than DAO. The only characters outside the companions that are "bisexual" that leap to my mind are Seneschal Bran and the ****s in the Pearl.
DAO had quite a few more but less in the form of companions.

And even companions not everyone is bisexual. Sebastian, Varric, Aveline, Carver, and Bethany are all heterosexual. So 5 of a possible 9 Companions are straight not bi.

So your arguement that "everyone" being bi is invalid. And as I said in my earlier post the whole realism arguement is invalid too because the universe of DA is more concerned with theology and ideology than race or sexuality and they are more relaxed about the latter things than in real life, so it isnt that huge of a stretch to come across several sexually flexible persons during the course of your adventure.

In a game real life realism doesnt matter, because in games (and all sorts of media) we suspend our disbelief for many many things that arent "realistic" in real life. All that matters is, is it realistic in the context of the universe. And having 4 of 9 bisexual or heteroflexible companions is realistic.

I never made any argument stating that *everyone* is bi. All I did, was propose the suggestion that in order to satisfy a particular player's desires, while maintaining realism, is to imprint a particular preference in each NPCs unique personality, while still giving the option of conversion if and only if the PC is persistent enough. 

Modifié par DahliaLynn, 01 janvier 2012 - 05:31 .

[DahliaLynn]

rak72 wrote...

Convincing someone to "change teams" - just no. That would be 10000x more unrealistic & immersion breaking than everyone being bi. I don't mind if there is a mod that can make it happen because in that players world that is how it is. I don't want that to be in my world, because that would just be beyond nutty for me.

The thing is, if you are not interested, then it wont happen. If you feel like messing with the game's mechanics to cause such a thing to happen then claim dissatisfaction, that's your choice.  

Modifié par DahliaLynn, 01 janvier 2012 - 05:27 .

[tmp7704]

jlb524 wrote...

Yes....'tis not fair!  But come on, it's never about species...you aren't that naive about how the world works, are you?

If you have some actual point, please spell it out. Whether i'm naive or not is not relevant, and my experience definitely doesn't extend into telepathy that'd allow me to tell what you may for sure have on mind.

Why is it about gender then? I have no issue with species...I merely used that as a counter example.

Because gender is important factor for many that determines whether they'll consider someone a potential partner or not.

Additionally, it's a special, "safe" restriction in the sense having it doesn't say anything potentially negative about the character -- if you have character X who will never engage in romance with a dwarf "because it's a dwarf" then odds are at least some people will view that as the character being a narrow-minded racist. On the other hand if that character only engages in romance with males or females because of sexual orientation then that doesn't create such backlash because sexual orientation isn't a result of choice and something they can change, unlike racist attitude.

Hahah, apparently the BW writers thought the 'all bi LIs' in DA2 made for a good story.

Well, for DA2 specifically they've said it'd be a result of resource conservation so, no.

Ah yes, it's totes okay that both Morrigan and Leliana would want to make it with this guy:

What is the point of quoting that picture over and over? We already discussed the game can't tell whether your character is attractive or not. But it can tell whether they're male or female.

And if you really insist on dragging it there -- yes, it is "totes okay" that a heterosexual woman would rather pair with ugly man than your "attractive and charming female PC". It's like you haven't ever seen a guy going out with ugly girl even though there's plenty handsome guys he'd date instead if only his sexual orientation wasn't preventing him from perceiving them as potential partners?

(same for a homosexual person and potential partners of opposite gender, obv)

You've done nothing but argue against my style of argument and you have yet to actually...ya'know...address the actual argument that I've made

No, i have done plenty to argue your points. If you either can't or refuse to see any of this, i don't think there's point in bothering further.

(if it was all exercise in trolling just for fun, it was pretty good as it wasn't too obvious and you kept me second-guessing myself. If it wasn't, i'm inclined to feel pity)

[tmp7704]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

And even companions not everyone is bisexual. Sebastian, Varric, Aveline, Carver, and Bethany are all heterosexual. So 5 of a possible 9 Companions are straight not bi.

There's no evidence than any of these characters you listed isn't bisexual.

"But Carver only flirts with girls!"

Yeah, so was Anders in Awakening.

[nightscrawl]

jlb524 wrote...

What, Zevran can't be your bro or Leliana can't be your BFF b/c they are open to both genders?

Well here is the problem I had with Leliana: playing a femWarden, I responded to a lot of her conversations like I would to a BFF girl friend. Unfortunately, that made her end up thinking I was interested in her, even though I was in a romance with Alistair, and I had to let her down. It wasn't a pleasant experience. This is certainly one argument for the DA2 dialogue system of heart icons and so forth, you know exactly what you're getting into when you hit the icon, or you can stop any romance from starting with the broken heart icon. On the other hand, I never ran into this problem with Zev because I turned him down shortly after he joined the group, so we just became good friends, and he never hit on me again after that.

Leliana aside, I prefer the all Hawke-sexual method -- companion's sexual preference changes depending on Hawke's gender (excluding Isabela, who was previously known to be bi from DAO). I think for this one aspect of the game, it's nice for players to be able to pick their gender based on RP aspects, but still romance the person of their choice. I will not make a male PC in DAO, even though I've considered it. Alistair is my preferred romance, so I have no choice but to stick with my femWarden. On the other hand, although I've mostly played femHawke, I've made a couple manHawkes, and the change is quite fun, and I still get Fenris!

tmp7704 wrote...

Additionally, it's a special, "safe" restriction in the sense having it doesn't say anything potentially negative about the character -- if you have character X who will never engage in romance with a dwarf "because it's a dwarf" then odds are at least some people will view that as the character being a narrow-minded racist. On the other hand if that character only engages in romance with males or females because of sexual orientation then that doesn't create such backlash because sexual orientation isn't a result of choice and something they can change, unlike racist attitude.

Well, first of all, I don't think it's necessarily fair to say that anyone who might not want a romance with a dwarf or an elf is racist. They might just not find persons from that race sexually appealing. That is certainly not the same as feeling that a person of another race is inferior and does not deserve the same privileges as your own race because of said inferiority.

Also, the devs have used racism against elves quite a bit in DAO and DA2. I don't see why it would be out of the realm of possibility for them to do so in regard to the romances. There are already comments in the game regarding people (Nanette and Hawke specifically) being "into"/"going for" elves, and those types of things could certainly be expanded upon.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 01 janvier 2012 - 07:15 .

[Zanallen]

Simple fix: Keep all LI as bisexual, but give them a preference. Take Alistair for example. He would be bisexual, but prefer girls. As such, a female PC would have an easier time pursuing him. A male PC would have a more difficult time, perhaps requiring more approval or undergoing a certain mission or whatever that would allow a romance to blossom. Everyone can then romance everyone, but the character's integrity is still intact. Plus there is the added bonus of the PC seeming to have a higher level of effect on their companions.

[wildannie]

Zanallen wrote...

Simple fix: Keep all LI as bisexual, but give them a preference. Take Alistair for example. He would be bisexual, but prefer girls. As such, a female PC would have an easier time pursuing him. A male PC would have a more difficult time, perhaps requiring more approval or undergoing a certain mission or whatever that would allow a romance to blossom. Everyone can then romance everyone, but the character's integrity is still intact. Plus there is the added bonus of the PC seeming to have a higher level of effect on their companions.

I don't think I'd have a character pursue a LI if it was known that they actually preferred the opposite sex.  

Although I see there are problems with having all LIs available to all PCs I do think its the compromise that offers the best solution.  Giving the majority of players the choice to experience the story and characters in a way that's fitting to them. 

[Zanallen]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

No. If characters are bisexual, they should be fully bisexual. Having a character that's "semi-bi" is just ridiculous.

They wouldn't be semi-bi. They would be technically bisexual but prefer members of one gender over the other. Which is perfectly realistic.

[Tezzajh]

if they are gonna do bisexual again, great! i dont have to be a man for the sole purpose to romance a straight female. but if they are gonna do bisexual it needs its own dialouge, as lets face it gay or lesbian romance is not comman but dragon age treats it as it is, the most realstic is ogrhen when he finds about branka

[Zanallen]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

If they're willing to go for both genders, they shouldn't need anything extra to convince them to romance someone of a certain gender. Zevran himself stated that he preferred females to males, and he was equally easily romancable by both genders.

Of course he was. He was the designated bisexual male character in DAO. Just like Leliana was the designated bisexual female. I'm not talking about that. I am talking about a compromise between the system used in DAO and that of DA2. The argument is character integrity or characters being more realistic with some form of restrictions placed on romancing them versus the player having the opportunity to romance who they want which whatever sort of PC they wanted to create.

With my compromise, the restrictions would still be there in the form of romancing out of preferrence requiring more work, but would also allow the freedom that certain players want.

[Momiji.mii]

I understand the argument that if we have straight romance options (like Sebastian), then we should have completely gay options as well. I also have a strong respect for players wishing for more representation in the games they play, for example, a lesbian player wanting to romance a completely lesbian companion. This argument personally makes more sense to me than people wanting to go back to having straight companions in the game (which, as people already pointed out, DA2 has in Sebastian). For me, asking for progress (in this case representation) instead of regression (or keeping of the normative ways) always superseds in arguments like these.

However, I felt that for me as a roleplayer, DA2 was pretty much perfect with the way it handled romances. It added a lot to my enjoyment of the game that I could build a closer relationship for my Hawkes with any of the four companions available for romance. Sometimes, a gay relationship is right for my Hawke, sometimes a straight relationship, and depending on his or her personality, that person could be any of the four available romantic intrests. If I say, didn't have Anders available for my male Hawke, I'd have to "make do" with a romance that might not fit the character of my Hawke and probably, my roleplaying experience would suffer for it.

While sad romances doomed to fail is fine if done well, I'veI already played a male Shepard that was hopelessly in love with Kaidan and while that was fine, it really didn't give me any payoff as a player. Hell, my Shep couldn't even try to flirt with him in the in-game conversations! It's like the game just assumed that my Shepard wasn't interested. That was very disappointing for me as a gamer.

I've seen the same arguments as in this thread in discussions like this over and over again, and when people state that having all their romanceable companions being bisexual breaks their immersion in the game or whatever, it strikes me as odd since this is roleplaying. While playing, I usually build my own personal inpretation of how Hawke and his companions interact outside of what the game shows me. If I don't press the heart-icons during the conversation, what does my current Hawke really know about his or her romantic inclinations?

Note that this means that I HAVE the options but chose not to utilize them, as a difference to my male Shepard mentioned previously, when I had NO options and had to put all that into my personal imagination with none of it available in the game itself. There's a big difference between the two experiences.

Going just a little outside of the original topic: If anything, what really disappoints me is that when the companions that my Hawke doesn't romance start building relationships among each other on their own, the romanticly or sexually tinged ones (reciprocated or not) are always straight. Carver and Merril, Isabella and Fenris, Bethany and Sebastian - unless I've missed something, that's all straight romances. I'd personally have loved if, say, Isabella hooked up with Bethany a lot better. It'd have made more sense to me (at least in how I interpreted the characters).

Modifié par Momiji.mii, 02 janvier 2012 - 12:11 .

[LarryDavid]

jlb524 wrote...

If,

A: romances ignore race
B: romances ignore class
C: romances ignore appearance
D: romances ignore gender
E: romances ignore morality

and A - E are bad

but people are fine with A + B + C + E.

Whoever, people are not fine with A + B + C + D + E.
...

(I will misuse the notations as defined above, but the meaning should be clear from the context)

This whole thread you are wondering why people react more strongly to {D} than to {A,B,C,E} in almost every post. I hope you do realize that you lose a lot of credibility when posting something like this :

jlb524 wrote...
But gender is sooo important.

This is why all lesbians would sleep with some chick that looks like the brood mother over Alistair. Cuz, female!

The core difference is that, regarding future partners, nobody is born with preferences about {A,B,C,E} whereas {D} is fixed. Hence, one can imagine that despite a certain LI having a very strong feelings about {A,B,C,E}, your awesomeness makes you an unimaginable exception.

Basically, everybody is born with a set of characteristics like {race, sxual preferences, physical appearance, ...}. These characteristics are a part of who you are at each moment in time. So if we have someone with personality P1 -> something (possible awesome) happens -> you end up with personality P2; where P2 is a function of P1 (which includes your sxual preferences) and the thing that happend. Hence, you can not say that someone has personality P AND that his sxual preference is X, because they are intertwined. So, in my opinion making all LIs BI is a bad move as the range of possible personalities reduces dramatically.

[tmp7704]

nightscrawl wrote...

Well, first of all, I don't think it's necessarily fair to say that anyone who might not want a romance with a dwarf or an elf is racist.

Which is why i said some people may view this behaviour racist, not that it certainly makes the character in question one.

Also, the devs have used racism against elves quite a bit in DAO and DA2. I don't see why it would be out of the realm of possibility for them to do so in regard to the romances.

When it's a trait possibly affecting companion's behaviour rather than some random NPC's (and usually one you get opportunity to kill for it to boot) i can definitely see why devs could be hesitant about using it -- it's difficult enough to create interesting companions who are widely likable, even without saddling them with extra negative baggage.

The controversy surrounding Ashley comes to mind here as example, and she wasn't even intended to be perceived as a racist in the first place.

Modifié par tmp7704, 01 janvier 2012 - 10:58 .

[ArtisticOreo]

Momiji.mii wrote...

I understand the argument that if we have straight romance options (like Sebastian), then we should have completely gay options as well. I also have a strong respect for players wishing for more representation in the games they play, for example, a lesbian player wanting to romance a completely lesbian companion. This argument personally makes more sense to me than people wanting to go back to having straight companions in the game (which, as people already pointed out, DA2 has in Sebastian). For me, asking for progress instead of regression (keeping of the ways) always superseds in arguments like these.

However, I felt that for me as a roleplayer, DA2 was pretty much perfect with the way it handled romances. It added a lot to my enjoyment of the game that I could build a closer relationship for my Hawkes with any of the four companions available for romance. Sometimes, a gay relationship is right for my Hawke, sometimes a straight relationship, and depending on his or her personality, that person could be any of the four available romantic intrests. If I say, didn't have Anders available for my male Hawke, I'd have to "make do" with a romance that might not fit the character of my Hawke and probably, my roleplaying experience would suffer for it.

While sad romances doomed to fail is fine if done well, I'veI already played a male Shepard that was hopelessly in love with Kaidan and while that was fine, it really didn't give me any payoff as a player. Hell, my Shep couldn't even try to flirt with him in the in-game conversations! It's like the game just assumed that my Shepard wasn't interested. That was very disappointing for me as a gamer.

I've seen the same arguments as in this thread in discussions like this over and over again, and when people state that having all their romanceable companions being bisexual breaks their immersion in the game or whatever, it strikes me as odd since this is roleplaying. While playing, I usually build my own personal inpretation of how Hawke and his companions interact outside of what the game shows me. If I don't press the heart-icons during the conversation, what does my current Hawke really know about his or her romantic inclinations?

Note that this means that I HAVE the options but chose not to utilize them, as a difference to my male Shepard mentioned previously, when I had NO options and had to put all that into my personal imagination with none of it available in the game itself. There's a big difference between the two experiences.

Going just a little outside of the original topic: If anything, what really disappoints me is that when the companions that my Hawke doesn't romance start building relationships among each other on their own, the romanticly or sexually tinged ones (reciprocated or not) are always straight. Carver and Merril, Isabella and Fenris, Bethany and Sebastian - unless I've missed something, that's all straight romances. I'd personally have loved if, say, Isabella hooked up with Bethany a lot better. It'd have made more sense to me (at least in how I interpreted the characters).

This pretty much sums up my opinion. 

How will having an "all bi LI" effect your immersion if you ar RPing as a heterosexual male/female. You simply do not click the heart dialogue 

[jlb524]

tmp7704 wrote...
Because gender is important factor for many that determines whether they'll consider someone a potential partner or not.

So is race/class/morality/appearance but they don't add in checks for that.  My question has been...why just gender?

tmp7704 wrote... 
What is the point of quoting that picture over and over? We already discussed the game can't tell whether your character is attractive or not. But it can tell whether they're male or female.

The game could easily add in a system that discriminates based on looks in some way.   If you use a certain preset, the Morrigan romance is locked out...etc.

It's not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction as far as 'realism' goes...which is what people want, right?

tmp7704 wrote... 
And if you really insist on dragging it there -- yes, it is "totes okay" that a heterosexual woman would rather pair with ugly man than your "attractive and charming female PC". It's like you haven't ever seen a guy going out with ugly girl even though there's plenty handsome guys he'd date instead if only his sexual orientation wasn't preventing him from perceiving them as potential partners?

I've also seen plenty of women dating women.

Just because some women date unattractive men doesn't mean all women would.

Just because some women date women doesn't mean all women would.

The issue is what is the likelihood of that occuring and is having two women in the same game/party that would date an ugly man 'unrealistc'?  Apparently, having two women that would date other women is just immersion blowing but having two women that would date an unnattractive man or a dwarf isn't?

Especially when considering that female/female relationships seem more prevelant in DA than human/dwarf.

LarryDavid wrote...
Basically, everybody is born with a set of characteristics like {race, sxual preferences, physical appearance, ...}. These characteristics are a part of who you are at each moment in time. So if we have someone with personality P1 -> something (possible awesome) happens -> you end up with personality P2; where P2 is a function of P1 (which includes your sxual preferences) and the thing that happend. Hence, you can not say that someone has personality P AND that his sxual preference is X, because they are intertwined. So, in my opinion making all LIs BI is a bad move as the range of possible personalities reduces dramatically.

I would imagine by adulthood most would have a set personality and set preferences for mates beyond orientation.   Those don't change 'at the whim of the PC'. 

Modifié par jlb524, 01 janvier 2012 - 11:46 .