922 réponses à ce sujet

[The dead fish]

jlb524 wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
What's wrong, with gays, bi and straight ? 

They won't do gay only LIs.

Everyone arguing for this assumes that's an option on the plate but it's not.

So what you are really arguing for (even if you don't realize it) is straight and bisexual LIs which privileges those that play heterosexual characters b/c they will always have more options.   I don't think that's fair.

It's no different than BG2 privileging heterosexual males over heterosexual females by giving them 3 options vs. 1 option.

Facts : DA2 everyone is BI. M3, we'll see for the first time some characters totally gays, M/M ( and according to many people, the romance aren't cheap. ) ( yes there aren't gays companions in Mass effect, but that's since the beginning in 2007, but also some old characters will be bi ). Times change.

It seems obvious to me that bioware has totally changed its mind and that for their next game, they couldn't fear to create this time real gay people in my opinion. That's why I think useless this system when finally, we are in the new situation , that isn't the same that in the past.

[SinnSly]

Laamaa wrote...

liesandpropaganda wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


In the DA world dragons and stone giants excists. its in the lore, ergo in that setting its realistic. But having Darth Vader show up in Kirkwall would be unrealistic.

here's the moment when we find out Vader was bisexual

Now that would be most  interesting for sure 

And the moment we find out he is in love with Palpatine..?

[jlb524]

Sylvianus wrote...

Facts : DA2 everyone is BI. M3, we'll see for the first time some characters totally gays, M/M ( and according to many people, the romance aren't cheap. ) ( yes there aren't gays companions in Mass effect, but that's since the beginning in 2007, but also some old characters will be bi ). Times change.

It seems obvious to me that bioware has totally changed its mind and that for their next game, they couldn't fear to create this time real gay people in my opinion. That's why I think useless this system when finally, we are in the new situation , that isn't the same that in the past.

DA and ME aren't the same team.  

Gaider (who is on the DA team) said they won't do them and gave reasons why.  He said this earlier this year.

I don't know if the DA team will change their minds but that's all we know atm.

[Laamaa]

SinnSly wrote...

Laamaa wrote...

liesandpropaganda wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


In the DA world dragons and stone giants excists. its in the lore, ergo in that setting its realistic. But having Darth Vader show up in Kirkwall would be unrealistic.

here's the moment when we find out Vader was bisexual

Now that would be most  interesting for sure 

And the moment we find out he is in love with Palpatine..?

Disturbing..Kind of.. 

[SinnSly]

Laamaa wrote...

SinnSly wrote...

Laamaa wrote...

liesandpropaganda wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


In the DA world dragons and stone giants excists. its in the lore, ergo in that setting its realistic. But having Darth Vader show up in Kirkwall would be unrealistic.

here's the moment when we find out Vader was bisexual

Now that would be most  interesting for sure 

And the moment we find out he is in love with Palpatine..?

Disturbing..Kind of.. 

I couldn't help it o.o <3

[yusuf060297]

jlb524 wrote...

yusuf060297 wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
Was it okay the way DA:O did it?  I mean, there were options listed that were obvious m/m flirts with Zevran or f/f flirts with Leliana...is that really different?

i liked it more how da:o did it and how me3 will do it, i dont really like it that in da2 the characters dont recognize your gender when its coming to the romance part

They do...the romances in DA2 differ a bit based on gender.

i know the one were anders tells that he had a relationship with karl, but i dont think it was enough as i told before when flirting with someone of the same gender they should react to it, i would be for example confused when a straight friend of mine would come to me and start to flirt, in da2 they are like making no comments to it, jack in me2 did it for example, and i would like other people to react to it, like hawkes mother, sister, brother, etc,.. 

[FedericoV]

Atakuma wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...
No it doesn`t. It makes each playthrough different, depending on what kind of character you play.
Having Adolf Hitler being able to romance Anne Frank isn`t enhancing roleplaying in any way. its game breaking. This being a possebility just to add a possibility, is just dumb.

I am not talking about anything other than character sexuality. Having all romances be bisexual doesn't take anything away from you, but adds something for others, that is all I'm saying.

Not true. If every charachter is bisexual I loose the ability to face NPCs with proper charactherization. A charachter whose sexuality is estabilished by the mood of the protagonist is simply a literary joke with no depth. Sexuality is a defining feature of a charachter and while I do not care a lot about romances and think that Bioware's storytelling is relying too much on them, I still like good and proper writing for NPCs (especially in a party based game).

I have nothing against same options for everyone. But give me NPCs with a proper personality.

[Dave of Canada]

jlb524 wrote...

Morrigan and Alistair just had more content at the end b/c they were more plot-important.

Morrigan's romance still fits with a female...I've done it.

Did I say Morrigan's romance didn't fit? I said restricted content, not removal of it. Morrigan's romance has the interesting angle of you possibly being the father of the god child, Alistair has the interesting angle of you becoming Queen of Ferelden.

This is what I'd like to see possibly down the road with restrictions. Alistair breaking up with you because Ferelden needs a queen has a whole entire different experience if you'd be a man, for example.

[jlb524]

FedericoV wrote...
Not true. If every charachter is bisexual I loose the ability to face NPCs with proper charactherization. A charachter whose sexuality is estabilished by the mood of the protagonist is simply a literary joke with no depth. Sexuality is a defining feature of a charachter and while I do not care a lot about romances and think that Bioware's storytelling is relying too much on them, I still like good and proper writing for NPCs (especially in a party based game).

I have nothing against same options for everyone. But give me NPCs with a proper personality.

Well, is it any different from the player establishing the characters preferences and personality by romancing them with a race/class/morality that doesn't 'make sense'?

Dave of Canada wrote...
Did I say Morrigan's romance didn't fit? I said restricted content, not removal of it. Morrigan's romance has the interesting angle of you possibly being the father of the god child, Alistair has the interesting angle of you becoming Queen of Ferelden.

Ah, I see...I guess I misunderstood your point. 

Modifié par jlb524, 29 décembre 2011 - 08:44 .

[goofyomnivore]

Why not ask for more in depth romances? Where race, class, gender and orientation matter more?

What good are more options if they're all not that different anyways?

[AngryFrozenWater]

As a hetero I don't have anything to gain by supporting same sex romances. But I support them anyway, because others have sufficient reasons to want them in the game. I see it as an optional feature which I don't have to use. So I am fine with it. I can imagine that the best option would be that each character would have its specific orientation, but I would be cool if all were bi as well.

[Fidget6]

staindgrey wrote...

 If it makes sense and adds to the game, do it. I'll give some examples of how not to do it:

1) If it doesn't make sense for the character. For an example, Ashley in ME1 was very classic Christian, and it's safe to assume that 200 years from now there will still be a large number of Christians who believe homosexuality to be wrong. Ashley gives this impression throughout the game, and only flirts with BroShep, never FemShep. Suddenly making her bi for no reason in ME3 would arguably betray her character.

Considering most Christians today have no problem with homosexuality, that's a pretty weak argument, and one that's assuming a LOT about her character based on her religion. Also, was it ever stated what her religion even was? From what I can recall, she said she believes in God, so I guess from that you automatically assume she's Christian?

staindgrey wrote...

I also expect that LI to give signs that he/she is bi regardless of us romancing him/her, so that it doesn't come off as a straight guy going gay for just my PC. Once again, it feels as though it's betraying the character.

So just because someone doesn't constantly announce what they're attracted to all the time, it would come off as unrealistic that they could be attracted to their same gender? 

Modifié par Fidget6, 29 décembre 2011 - 08:52 .

[jlb524]

strive wrote...
Why not ask for more in depth romances? Where race, class, gender and orientation matter more?

What good are more options if they're all not that different anyways?

What's the point of having race options (like in DA:O) if the overall game plays the same anyway?

[goofyomnivore]

What's the point of having race options (like in DA:O) if the overall game plays the same anyway?

That is the point. You're saying some things don't matter so lets make other things not matter as a justifiable argument. Why not do what Dave said and build on interesting conflicts and aspects?

And your race and class are noticed more than your orientation in Dragon Age: Origins, so I don't really think that is a good example. Is it ideal? No it isn't, but it is more present than your orientation for sure, and that is a good thing IMO.


edit: "suck" will probably be taken the wrong way so I changed the wording a bit.

Modifié par strive, 29 décembre 2011 - 08:57 .

[Ryzaki]

If I'm reading Dave correctly (and correct me if I'm wrong) he wouldn't have had a problem with all DAO Lis being bi as long as things like Alistair only marrying a female Cousland and Morrigan and her DR were handled differently and sensibly as befitting the warden's gender.

I.E. the gender differences aren't glossed over.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 29 décembre 2011 - 08:53 .

[jlb524]

strive wrote...

What's the point of having race options (like in DA:O) if the overall game plays the same anyway?

That is the point. You're saying something sucks so lets make it all suck as a justifiable argument. Why not do what Dave said and build on interesting conflicts and aspects?

And your race and class are noticed more than your orientation in Dragon Age: Origins, so I don't really think that is a good example. Is it ideal? No it isn't, but it is more present than your orientation for sure, and that is a good thing IMO.

Right...I'd rather them put effort into having things like this matter (because they affect the entire game and are more interesting) than adding it to romances (which is a small part of the game and most don't even do romances).

But there seem to be far less complaint threads about that than "Oh no!  All bi!  Immersion ruined!"

Ryzaki wrote...
If I'm reading Dave correctly (and correct me if I'm wrong) he wouldn't have had a problem with all DAO Lis being bi as long as things like Alistair only marrying a female Cousland and Morrigan and her DR were handled differently and sensibly as befitting the warden's gender.

I.E. the gender differences aren't glossed over. 

No, that's right...I read him wrong.

Modifié par jlb524, 29 décembre 2011 - 08:54 .

[FedericoV]

jlb524 wrote...

Well, is it any different from the player establishing the characters preferences and personality by romancing them with a race/class/morality that doesn't 'make sense'?

Apples and oranges. It's a different matter and depends more on how the devs handle writing and interactions during the game. It can work or not, but charachters will still have a defined personality and a sexuality like every literary charachter in the history of fiction. A charachter can change opinions or fall in love with an unlikely person (Romeo and Juliet anyone?). It's a formal problem.

Instead if every possible LI is bisexual as a rule, they all loose a significant part of their personality and they become a paper thin writing joke just for gamey sakes. And that's a matter of substance. It's a general problem of DA2: gamey features taking over story's context.

Modifié par FedericoV, 29 décembre 2011 - 09:05 .

[goofyomnivore]

I.E. the gender differences aren't glossed over.

That is pretty much all I want. It would make the romances more dynamic. I think it is more efficient to achieve that by making characters with a preset orientation, but if they devoted the resources to adding content to address some conflicts (heirs, taboos, children, etc) while leaving orientation up to the player that would be ideal.

[Sister Goldring]

I've always thought that since everyone is paying (discounted prices aside) roughly the same amount for the game then then the same content should be available for all no matter what sexuality they want to play.

The companions are, I imagine, a pretty zot intensive element of the game and I don't see why gender should lock some players out of romance content when obviously you are only ever going to be able to have a limited amount of companion characters to develop relationships with.

So to me bi-sexuality or PC-centric sexuality seems to be the most sensible way to give players the most options in the game.

(edit - I can't spell!)

Modifié par Sister Goldring, 29 décembre 2011 - 09:10 .

[jlb524]

FedericoV wrote...
Apples and oranges. It's a different matter and depends more on how the devs handle writing and interactions during the game. It can work or not, but charachters will still have a defined personality and a sexuality like every literary charachter in the history of fiction. A charachter can change opinions or fall in love with an unlikely person (Romeo and Juliet anyone?). It's a formal problem.

Or not...

I'm a lesbian but that doesn't mean I could possibly love any woman that would approach me if they just say the right things.

[Blacklash93]

FedericoV wrote...
Instead if every possible LI is bisexual as a rule, they all loose a significant part of their personality and they become a paper thin writing joke just for gamey sakes. And that's a matter of substance. It's a general problem of DA2: gamey features taking over story's context.

I'm not in favor of this implementation of romance, but I don't believe characters become "a paper thin writing joke" because of it. Sexuality is a core part of who we are, but it's not like it comes up at every corner during an epic quest to save the world (save for the main character's romance plot).

There's much more to a character than that. All of it much more interesting, too.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 29 décembre 2011 - 09:14 .

[Brockololly]

jlb524 wrote...
What, Zevran can't be your bro or Leliana can't be your BFF b/c they are open to both genders?

They absolutely can be and for many of my Wardens were. I'm saying that its occasionally nice to have an NPC stand up to the PC and firmly say "No." I wanted one of my Shepard's to romance Samara and she shoots him down. That was surprising and I kind of respected her for that. It made for a different experience and made her a more interesting character for it.
While Morrigan and Alistair don't explicitly shoot down same sex romances (cause I don't believe you're given the dialogue to try and initiate one), given their characters, its nice to have some characters limited to non romance roles due to who they are.

jlb524 wrote...
If you RP a heterosexual PC you will always get your own way because you can romance any LI of the opposite sex pretty easily.   But I guess it would be bad if homosexual PCs also got to do this...

Yes, I get it, you're pulling the privelege card and putting words in my mouth. No, what I'm saying is that BioWare should step up and have actual homosexual and bisexual and heterosexual characters in their games, like New Vegas. With corresponding romances that actually present genuinely unique content that makes the most of having defined characters. Instead of having romances like DA2, they should be more like Morrigan and Alistair's in DAO where you had the potential for unique possibilities with them in a romance based on how they were defined characters.

And if that means restricting content, then thats fine- if my straight PC can't romance the lesbian NPC, that'll give me extra incentive to play the game again with a new PC.

Dave of Canada wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Morrigan and Alistair just had more content at the end b/c they were more plot-important.

Morrigan's romance still fits with a female...I've done it.

Did I say Morrigan's romance didn't fit? I said restricted content, not  removal of it. Morrigan's romance has the interesting angle of you  possibly being the father of the god child, Alistair has the interesting angle of you becoming Queen of Ferelden.

This is what I'd like  to see possibly down the road with restrictions. Alistair breaking up  with you because Ferelden needs a queen has a whole entire different  experience if you'd be a man, for example.

Right- more reactivity to the PC via having more defined characters and a more defined world state makes for a more interesting environment to RP your character.

Whether thats restricting some romances based on Gender or class or the fact that certain sliders made your PC's nose too big and thus unappealing to a possible LI- thats good.  In BG2, a drow like Viconia isn't going to romance anybody- that wouldn't make sense for the character.  Hell, prior to playing DAO I was thinking if I spec'd my warrior as a Templar, Morrigan wouldn't romance him because of that. I was disappointed when she didn't react to that.

It comes down to reactivity. If everybody is "bi" then I want more reactivity to the PC whether thats gender, class, prior actions and so forth. DA2 lacked that reactivity and beyond the differences in friendship/rivalry, it made the romances feel like little more than substituting pronouns and rather boring.

Modifié par Brockololly, 29 décembre 2011 - 09:15 .

[FedericoV]

Sister Goldring wrote...

I've always thought that since everyone is paying (discounted prices aside) roughly the same amount for the game then then the same content should be available for all no matter what sexuality they want to play.

The companions are, I imagine, a pretty zot intensive element of the game and I don't see why gender should lock some players out of romance content when obviously you are only ever going to be able to have a limited amount of companion characters to develop relationships with.

So to me bi-sexuality or PC-centric sexuality seems to me the most sensible way to give players the most options in the game.

That's ludicrous. If I play a warrior I have no access to magic. That's not unfair: it make sense in the context of the game. If you want to experience any romance in the game, you can: you have just to replay it many times.

Modifié par FedericoV, 29 décembre 2011 - 09:17 .

[Gunderic]

hell no. sexuality should be part of a character's unique identity, not the sex dolls dragon age 2 turned them into.

[LiquidGrape]

FedericoV wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Well, is it any different from the player establishing the characters preferences and personality by romancing them with a race/class/morality that doesn't 'make sense'?

Apples and oranges. It's a different matter and depends more on how the devs handle writing and interactions during the game. It can work or not, but charachters will still have a defined personality and a sexuality like every literary charachter in the history of fiction. A charachter can change opinions or fall in love with an unlikely person (Romeo and Juliet anyone?). It's a formal problem.

Instead if every possible LI is bisexual as a rule, they all loose a significant part of their personality and they become a paper thin writing joke just for gamey sakes. And that's a matter of substance. It's a general problem of DA2: gamey features taking over the story context.

Wait, I might be interpreting this entirely the wrong way (and if so, I apologise), but are you seriously purporting that "every literary charachter in the history of fiction" has had a defined sexuality?
Even the deliberately ambiguous ones?

Golly.

Either way, considering Sebastian was a heterosexual love interest, I don't see any kind of rule enforcing some strict policy in the case of the four bisexual romances in DA2. I simply see four characters in possession of very different attributes and qualities (in a diegetic and non-diegetic sense alike) like I see in any other piece of fiction I've encountered.
They just happen to be bisexual.
Certainly the writers were aware of what they were doing, but I honestly cannot see what its implementation impacted negatively on the integrity of the writing.

Frankly, if anyone is enforcing any kind of rule here it is you and your assertion that they are invariably reduced to "a paper thin writing joke" without motivating that perception more in-depth.

Modifié par LiquidGrape, 29 décembre 2011 - 09:21 .