922 réponses à ce sujet

[Frek]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

@Frek.

Then you are plonker who wasnt paying attention.

Fenris NEVER hits on Hawke. Never, not without Hawke having done something to warrant it. So if he hit on ur male Hawke then its your idiot fault not Bioware's or the fault of the romances.

As for the Anders being flirty thing, thats in keeping with his character because he is an outrageous flirt. The male version of Isabela.

I dont see you complaining about Bela hitting on your Hawke unsolicited which leads me to think that you have a problem either with Gay/Bisexual people or are exceptionally insecure about your own sexuality that anyone remotely "gay" (which they arent they are both bisexual males) threatens and disturbs you.

As near as I can tell.

And the bit where you have to hit the love icons or break heart icon with Anders to knock him back, that only comes up in one specific situation that is COMPLETELY avoidable if you pay attention to more than just the dialogue icons; and I am pretty sure its actually an example of a bug not something thats WAD.

In "real life" you are going to encounter situations where you "being nice" is misconstrued as interest by someone you arent interested in and that ur going to have to gently let down. It happens "in real life" so why cant it happen in the DA universe? Why is suddenly "unrealistic" and a big problem?

I dont get it. And I dont agree with you at all. You arguement is invalid as far as I am concerned.

Respones like this are exactly why a lot of people don't bother giving their opinions around here. I'm not going to bother reiterating my opinion, it is found in my previous post and it hasn't changed.

Guess you have to see things a certain way to be able to participate in this thread. Good day.

[Kmead15]

I'm a bit torn on this one, actually. On one hand, I'm definitely in the group that wants to see the companions be more choosy about who they'll take as a partner. DA:O didn't do this all that well since all four LIs were willing to prostitute themselves for trinkets the warden found on the ground, but I didn't care too much. It was the first game in the series, and it set the baseline for what I expected from then on out. However, when DA2 came out and the companions failed to care about the one thing they'd been allowed to care about in the first game, it felt like the system was headed in the exact opposite direction from what I wanted. Thus, I'd probably have been happier if DA2 had never had the all-bi system to begin with.

However, I'm not sure what to do now that it's in place. It doesn't sit right with me to say to a group "Hey, we're going to give you the same amount of choice as everyone else, NOT!" However making the LIs more choosy on other traits but ignoring sex doesn't feel right either. I suppose my ideal system would be one where a least of couple of the LIs were not available to straight PCs, but from what jlc's saying it seems like they nipped that idea in the bud. I'm going to have to think about this some more.

tmp7704 wrote...

On the other hand, having some sort of quick/long romance paths depending on whether the PC matches the companion's tastes closely or not, it feels interesting. Would definitely prefer if the criteria for that extended to more than gender -- the approval/disapproval mechanics does something in that regard, but it's not quite the thing.

Maybe something like Character X is willing to romance you at low approval if you're their absolute ideal, middling approval if none of your traits really clicks with them, high approval if you have some traits they are hesitant about, and never if you have some traits they absolutely won't tolerate?

tmp7704 wrote...

The main problem for me with that particular situation was there was no actual way to turn Anders down gently. That option was associated with a red icon, and delivered in the aggressive/forceful tone normally used for the red icons, making Hawke sound like a homophobic douche if you went for it. There was no blue tone equivalent -- the blue route was instead along the lines of "oh? do go on..."

Oh god, yes. I didn't mind that he flirted with Hawke since it fit with his personality, but our options in that conversation came across as "Initiate Romance", "Lead Him On!", and "How DARE a homosexual hit on me!?"

[jlb524]

Valaun wrote...
I too think that the romances in general could be handled better - the LI´s shouldn´t ignore morality, decisions and gender of the PC, but I do think making romances open to both sexes is the right thing to do.
In short - I want more reactivity.

Like others wrote before, the PC always has free pick, regardless if s/he´s an ***hole or a goody two shoes, no matter what the beliefs and moral compass of the LI´s entail.
I´d like to see romances beeing affected (or cut off) depending on the PC´s actions and dialogue choices, maybe even race.
In that regard I think the Friend/Rival system is a step in the right direction.

Right...I agree if they are going to do it, do it right and not just 'band-aid' in gender-restrictions but still have the 'LI buffet' going on for straight PCs.

Valaun wrote... 
Gender should be more acknowledged, it would be nice if the romances would play out differenty depending if you´re playing a man or a woman - this way it wouldn´t fell like gender doesn´t matter.
But I don´t see the point in simply reducing the romances to the PC´s sex - I don´t understand why people would want that.

Choice in RPG´s is a good thing, as long as it´s fleshed out enough to have impact.
There are a lot of ways to improve and better implement the romances, so why  focusing solely on restricting the gender, which would cut many people off the romances completely?

That is what I'd like to know.

whykikyouwhy wrote...
The existence of a heart icon does not dictate the sexuality or proclivities of a companion. You'll see heart icons for Aveline during her main quest, but she will never be romancable. I don't recall there being a broken heart icon for her,

Nope...you are the one getting the broken heart icon XD

She's picking it.

Kmead15 wrote...
I'm a bit torn on this one, actually. On one hand, I'm definitely in the group that wants to see the companions be more choosy about who they'll take as a partner. DA:O didn't do this all that well since all four LIs were willing to prostitute themselves for trinkets the warden found on the ground, but I didn't care too much. It was the first game in the series, and it set the baseline for what I expected from then on out. However, when DA2 came out and the companions failed to care about the one thing they'd been allowed to care about in the first game, it felt like the system was headed in the exact opposite direction from what I wanted. Thus, I'd probably have been happier if DA2 had never had the all-bi system to begin with.

However, I'm not sure what to do now that it's in place. It doesn't sit right with me to say to a group "Hey, we're going to give you the same amount of choice as everyone else, NOT!" However making the LIs more choosy on other traits but ignoring sex doesn't feel right either. I suppose my ideal system would be one where a least of couple of the LIs were not available to straight PCs, but from what jlc's saying it seems like they nipped that idea in the bud. I'm going to have to think about this some more.

Thank you...I think you are the first person that actually understands the issue. 

Modifié par jlb524, 02 janvier 2012 - 05:12 .

[piloteyre]

Most everything I could say has already been said (and then repeated ad nauseam) - I'm pro open romance options, in the interest of fairness to all players.

Anyway, it seems like a lot of this comes down to some players wanting to RP with the PC as an avatar, and others wanting to RP with the PC as an independent character. At the end of the day, neither side is going to convince the other that their version of RP is better. "My immersion is better than your immersion" is not really an argument anyone can win, which is, of course, how these threads end up at 21 pages long.

[ScotGaymer]

@Frex

Sorry dont mean to be rude but honestly what I said is true.

If you got Fenris flirting with you then its your fault for not paying attention to the dialogue or icons properly because Fenris DOES NOT initiate flirting.

Isabela (who you notably did not complain about) and Anders are the ones who do. And even then part of Ander's dialogue is in actuality a bug not something thats WAD.

So you are quite wrong about Fenris at the least, so I ask why you avoid him and Anders? Writing them both of as "gay" and it makes you uncomfortable?
They arent gay, they are bisexual (which is a different thing), and why does it matter that they are exactly?

Like I said the only reasons I can see for your "opinion" is that either you are insecure or you are homophobic. Either is not the problem of Bioware, of this site, or of the romances themselves.

If I am wrong please do enlighten me.

Like I said, Anders I could give you maybe. Some people might not like his pushy aggressive personality which is fine (if you had similar gripes about Isabela which you notably dont, then i would totally agree with you). But I really cant give you Fenris. You are just wrong on that one.

Sorry.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 02 janvier 2012 - 06:26 .

[Abispa]

I've actually seen quite a few complaints about the heart icons alone being enough to ruin people's "immersion." Fenris doesn't hit on Hawke unless the player takes advantage of the heart icon, but apparently the knowledge that some other player out there can have some male/male loving with him is enough to ruin the s/s critic's game.

However, if Bioware went their traditional route of having the hero be "nice" plus the correct gender to activate a LI... well, see how well that went with Anders and read the BSN to find hundreds of players who want to shove Liara/Tali/Leliana out an airlock because you have to beat them off with a stick.

My God, can you imagine the BSN if Tali were a MALE Quarian acting they same way toward male Shepard?

If s/s critics see a heart icon it ruins immersion, and if there isn't an overt option to initiate the romance they express fears that they may be s/s ninjamanced. Hell, there were even players saying that Zevran tricked them into gay sex (I can't remember if it was Sean Hannity or Bill O'Rielly that interviewed an outraged player on FOX News).

[ScotGaymer]

Abispa.

You have to admit tho that Bioware are notorious for the Ninjamancing.

My first playthru of DAO I was fully intending on having a GayMaleMage for my first playthru and suddenly Alistair is like "sooo about this thing you have going with Morrigan..."
And im like "what thing? ive been nice to the acerbic bint! thats it!"

So my mage ended up straight and with Morrigan.

Was most annoying. its worse with Leliana, her ninjamance is really really scary lol.

[jlb524]

Abispa wrote...
If s/s critics see a heart icon it ruins immersion, and if there isn't an overt option to initiate the romance they express fears that they may be s/s ninjamanced. Hell, there were even players saying that Zevran tricked them into gay sex (I can't remember if it was Sean Hannity or Bill O'Rielly that interviewed an outraged player on FOX News).

Really?  I need to look for this on youtube now.

FitScotGaymer wrote...

Abispa.

You have to admit tho that Bioware are notorious for the Ninjamancing.

My first playthru of DAO I was fully intending on having a GayMaleMage for my first playthru and suddenly Alistair is like "sooo about this thing you have going with Morrigan..."
And im like "what thing? ive been nice to the acerbic bint! thats it!"

So my mage ended up straight and with Morrigan.

Was most annoying. its worse with Leliana, her ninjamance is really really scary lol.

I've been ninjamanced by Alistair and Leliana.

DA2 completely prevents that with the heart thing.

The Alistair one was especially funny because I was romancing Leliana at the time.

Alistair:  So...I like you and all *offers rose*
Warden:  Um...sorry I don't like you in that way.
Alistair:  'kay, that's cool.
Leliana:  OMG YOU'RE IN LOVE WITH ALISTAIR HOW DARE YOU!!!
Warden:  ...

Modifié par jlb524, 02 janvier 2012 - 07:15 .

[Ryzaki]

Oh god. The "I didn't know Zev meant that kind of massage even though he mentioned learning it in a wh*re house and if the opportunity to move past the massage presented itself..." I'm sorry there's ninjamancing and then there's the player being a moron.

[Abispa]

@ jlb524 -- I do not believe the game was ever mentioned by name, most of it was about GTA, but there was a player who mentioned a gay elf thief in a D&D style game. I assume it was Zevran.

[Abispa]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

Abispa.

You have to admit tho that Bioware are notorious for the Ninjamancing.

My first playthru of DAO I was fully intending on having a GayMaleMage for my first playthru and suddenly Alistair is like "sooo about this thing you have going with Morrigan..."
And im like "what thing? ive been nice to the acerbic bint! thats it!"

So my mage ended up straight and with Morrigan.

Was most annoying. its worse with Leliana, her ninjamance is really really scary lol.

Oh yeah, I'll admit that in a heart beat. Though I support s/s in RPGs, I rarely do them. Still, AS ANNOYING AS TALI/LIARA/LELIANA are, I don't spend thousand of keystrokes bemoaning how they make moves on my hero, how they ruin my immersion, or how the characters lack "realism" or "integrity." And the WORST was BG2, where all three of the Elf chicks AUTOMATICALLY start cat fighting over my male human/elf/hybrid hero until I eventually start role playing a character who goes far beyond their alignment or shoot them down. You may have had to earn the consumation of the relationship, but it was no effort at all to start one. I just want to add that Jahera and Aerie sound just as hurt being turned down as Anders did.

[KylieDog]

I would prefer not all LIs are bisexual, as someone who is straight I look to someone else who is straight as a LI, and no, being BI is not as good as being straight. If Alistair was Bi I would never have romanced him with so many characters.

I would like to see straight, BI and gay LIs in DA3 to please all, if Bioware will not do a fully gay LI as some people claim then tough, complain to Bioware, but do not ruin it for straight interests too by making everyone BI.

At the very least no matter what, I want romances to be VERY VERY hard to start and require going out your way to make a point and tell the game hich one you're interested in...give them flowers or an engraved sword or something and if I don't then NEVER give me any romance text, ever. I could perhaps ignore everyone being Bi if I didn't keep getting hit on and being forced to turn people down just because I was trying to play as a 'nice' personality character and showing interest in their stories and such.

[Plaintiff]

KylieDog wrote...
if Bioware will not do a fully gay LI as some people claim then tough, complain to Bioware, but do not ruin it for straight interests too by making everyone BI.

Well if Bioware won't make a straight LI just for you, then I guess that's just tough. Why is it okay to cater exclusively to you but not to others?

How does making an LI bisexual "ruin" them? What is the logic that powers this train of thought? I'd really like to know. Do you consider real-life acquaintances to be similarly "ruined" if they express a romantic or sexual interest in both genders?

[nightscrawl]

KylieDog wrote...

If Alistair was Bi I would never have romanced him with so many characters.

I really don't understand how this makes a difference though. No matter his preference, Alistair did not go around throwing himself at people, or making flirtatious remarks to both genders. If you romanced him, he only cared about YOU and only ever expressed an interest in YOU.

So, it only makes it seem like the knowledge that players of the same gender can initiate a romance with Alistair (if it were possible) in their own game, which has nothing at all to do with you and does not affect your own game in any way whatsoever, is the main issue.

Plaintiff wrote...

KylieDog wrote...
if Bioware
will not do a fully gay LI as some people claim then tough, complain to Bioware, but do not ruin it for straight interests too by making everyone BI.

Well if Bioware won't make a straight LI just for you, then I guess that's just tough. Why is it okay to cater exclusively to you but not to others?

@ Kylie: making everyone bi makes it all inclusive, don't you see? You (the player) can romance someone based on your own real life preference, or based on your PC's role-play preference, and no matter your choice you can follow through with it because you like the companion, find that aspect of the story interesting, or whatever reason you wish to have.

Sometimes it really does seem as if people are bemoaning their exclusivity being taken away from them.

-----

I do wish to touch on a comment I found interesting: making the LIs more choosey. Disregarding gender (since I like the way DA2 does things), I think it would be interesting if there were more character (story) based aspects for a LI to either mention specifically as a reason they are reluctant to persue a relationship with the PC, or even as a basis for outright refusal: a deal breaker as it were.

I'll just continue to use Anders and Fenris as examples, since we know their strong opinions on many things. As you all know, a mage can take the Blood Mage talent tree and a warrior can take the Templar talent tree. You can use these abilities in front of your companions and other NPCs. I really would like to see stronger reaction to choices like this. Currently in DA2 there is only one instance of a specific talent tree mention where Merrill can ask you to heal Pol if you have Spirit Healer (if Anders is not present). There are a few references made to class, but that is only in a mage vs non-mage sense.

Even if it were done in a lame way where you still got your LI despite these differences, on a rivalry path it would have been fantastic to see what Fenris would say to a Blood Mage, or what Anders would say to a Templar.

The friendship/rivalry system was an interesting development and helped add to the replayability of the game, giving you the option of a different experience with these companions if you chose to go that route. However, I do think that more could be added onto it that would help the LI seem more real/alive and in control of their own lives, rather than just existing at the whim of the PC.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 03 janvier 2012 - 08:27 .

[esper]

@Nightscrawl that problem is not LI exclusive. Generally speaking I would have liked at specialization regonation, even if it was just one extra dialog which would net automatically rivalry which you could reduce to 5 like Fenris initial dialog if you are a mage.

[Plaintiff]

nightscrawl wrote...
I do wish to touch on a comment I found interesting: making the LIs more choosey. Disregarding gender (since I like the way DA2 does things), I think it would be interesting if there were more character (story) based aspects for a LI to either mention specifically as a reason they are reluctant to persue a relationship with the PC, or even as a basis for outright refusal: a deal breaker as it were.

There is an instance of this in DA2, actually. If you romance Anders prior to Night Terrors, and then take the deal with Torpor in front of him (you have to kill Feynriel in the Fade order to remove the  "It was a bluff" safeguard), Anders will end the romance next time you talk to him and suggest that Hakwe look to Merrill "since you both like demons so much".

I can't think of many similar situations in Origins, since hitting a companion's beserk button there mostly results in them leaving the party or attacking you outright.

I don't know if specializations make sense. Blood Mage might for Fenris, but using templar abilities is not the same as actually joining the templar order. I think Anders would be willing to grant some leeway in that regard, because, well, you do fight a lot of mages and being able to block their spells would be useful.

But if you had to join the templars to learn those abilities, it would make sense for Anders and/or Merrill to leave you on that basis. 

Modifié par Plaintiff, 03 janvier 2012 - 08:46 .

[Tryynity]

I like the option to be open - sex, race, class.

Perhaps though it could be more difficult for say a Dalish to be romanced by a shem, dwarf to romance and elf - and vice versas.

Different genders could be harder to convince to, jump borders LOL

Fenris detested mages but can be romanced by one, with difficulty.

Zevran was a manho LOL that was easy to bed, that had difficulty loving.

Alistair was the opposite to Zev - but gets there in the end.

It makes the characters real, and deep - you discover/unwrap them layer by layer to discover them - just like RL.

Modifié par Tryynity, 03 janvier 2012 - 09:10 .

[rak72]

PresidentCowboy wrote...

All bi is bad. And this is coming from a gay man. I'd do a mixture of straight, bi, gay, one per gender, that way straight men have two options, gay men have two options, bi men have two options, same for women.

This is realy the best solution and the developers should give it another look.  It would be fair to everyone, and give people who normally would not play a gay character, incentive to do so.  Plus, wether people want to admit it or not, gay or straight, sometimes you don't want your dude/dudette to be into other dudes/dudetts. 

[ArtsyCookie]

Kmead15 wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

The main problem for me with that particular situation was there was no actual way to turn Anders down gently. That option was associated with a red icon, and delivered in the aggressive/forceful tone normally used for the red icons, making Hawke sound like a homophobic douche if you went for it. There was no blue tone equivalent -- the blue route was instead along the lines of "oh? do go on..."

Oh god, yes. I didn't mind that he flirted with Hawke since it fit with his personality, but our options in that conversation came across as "Initiate Romance", "Lead Him On!", and "How DARE a homosexual hit on me!?"

If your referring to when they only give you one option in which its either red, purple or blue, it only comes red if thats the most popular choice you have taken during the course of your game. At least thats how I saw it with my multiple playthroughs. 

For example,If In Playthrough 1 the player chooses the red option most of the time, when a time comes when he has one choice of colour and a few other choices, it will come out red.
 
If in Playthrough 2 the player clicks the blue option for most of his dialogue, he will get more blue options.

I also noticed that depending on which colour you pick the most the personality behind the colour will actually be Hawkes personality as in situations where Hawke tlks defaultly with no Player interaction Hawke will say whatever he has to say in the tone of what colour you chose the most. 
Did that make any sense... :S

[Youknow]

PresidentCowboy wrote...

All bi is bad. And this is coming from a gay man. I'd do a mixture of straight, bi, gay, one per gender, that way straight men have two options, gay men have two options, bi men have two options, same for women.

I'd be okay with this I guess. But be careful, opinions like this will have people jumping on you saying that they shouldn't have to deal with the fact that no all romances are open for both genders. 

[esper]

Youknow wrote...

PresidentCowboy wrote...

All bi is bad. And this is coming from a gay man. I'd do a mixture of straight, bi, gay, one per gender, that way straight men have two options, gay men have two options, bi men have two options, same for women.

I'd be okay with this I guess. But be careful, opinions like this will have people jumping on you saying that they shouldn't have to deal with the fact that no all romances are open for both genders. 

The problem with six LI as it would be is that bioware don't intent to do 6 options, which it would narrow down to. I would like this, but as it is I prefer all-bi which at least gives all the sexualities two options instead of one.

[syllogi]

PresidentCowboy wrote...

All bi is bad. And this is coming from a gay man. I'd do a mixture of straight, bi, gay, one per gender, that way straight men have two options, gay men have two options, bi men have two options, same for women.

Although I wouldn't mind this solution terribly, why is all bi bad, compared to putting one of each gender/orientation in the game?  

My problem is that labelling characters as "the gay one," "the straight one," and "the bi one" will lead to players focusing way too much on sexuality rather than personality when judging potential LIs.  It's going to happen anyway, but it's kind of nice that Fenris and Merrill can be fully fleshed out characters without big flashing signs announcing their sexual orientations.  I also like choice, and while I don't mind having my heart broken occasionally, as with Aveline and Varric, I would prefer not to go back to lusting after a character I can't romance simply because I prefer playing as one gender over another.  It may not be "realistic," but I'm not looking for gritty and dark realism when I choose to pursue a romance in a video game.

[Sylvianus]

nightscrawl wrote...

KylieDog wrote...

If Alistair was Bi I would never have romanced him with so many characters.

I really don't understand how this makes a difference though. No matter his preference, Alistair did not go around throwing himself at people, or making flirtatious remarks to both genders. If you romanced him, he only cared about YOU and only ever expressed an interest in YOU.

So, it only makes it seem like the knowledge that players of the same gender can initiate a romance with Alistair (if it were possible) in their own game, which has nothing at all to do with you and does not affect your own game in any way whatsoever, is the main issue.

The identity of a character is known, through all he says, everything he does, all he can decide. that's how we establish the personality of the characters,  ( for those interested ) we are debating about it. So if you know he can have relations bi, you know he's bi, even if in your playthrought, you play someone straigh. If you are doing another playthought, and you want to know everything with the other gender, you'll know that he'll also interested in the other gender. I do know how is it possible to avoid that, no matter how it is difficult.

And hearts from all people, do not help thinking that the characters are free to think for themselves. As I said, it is just a share content, without consideration for the characters, I do not see the substance for the story, and that's what irritates me.

I want people who follow their thoughts, who are developed and evolve, according to what they are, and not just objects for desires, nihilating at the same time diversity.

And please, do not come talk to me, insignificant details like ugly / mage  or otherwise, sexuality is an integral part of human identity, something important enough ( otherwise you wouldn't all come to talk here to give your opinion, strong feelings  again and again, yes it is important for everyone, so when someone is saying, it isn't important, that seems so hypocritical ) is not something that can be ignored so miserably for me. Especially when the romance  are an important part in the characterization of the characters in bioware games.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 03 janvier 2012 - 03:23 .

[whykikyouwhy]

I don't think that any of the companions suffered from not being developed or fleshed out due to their inclusion as LIs or their ability to be romanced by a Hawke of either gender. In each of their individual story arcs, there was character development, there was turmoil, there was struggle - it may not have been keyed off of their genders, but it related to their own narratives.

I guess I still question the perceived issue of realism with regard to romances. There isn't anything unrealistic in having 4 bisexual individuals in your circle, and it's not unrealistic for Hawke to have 4 potential LIs in all of Kirkwall. While the romances in general do not follow RL exactly (we certainly aren't afforded a considerable amount of time to woo someone, and we may not be allowed all of the sidebar chats or dating that one might follow in our real world), I don't think that DA2 did any character a disservice by availability to Hawke. A player still has to complete certain criteria for the romance to be fully fledged - the. LI must be conversed with, quests must be fulfilled, etc. I just don't see the availability as negating or crippling "realism" especially if, from a true role-playimg sense, *Hawke* would not know how a character is going to react to his/her advances until those advances are made.