438 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut wrote...

Chun Hei wrote...

Russalka wrote...

I still cannot understand the problem. All the romance subplots worked and were quite full of depth, regardless of what sex my Hawke was.

That is pretty much my gripe with s/s critics as well. The DA2 romances may not be "realistic" but they actually improved over many of the LI troupes of recent year. Apparently the only way romances can strengthen immersion is if there is only one MALE s/s LI and he is either incredibly well hidden or is unconscious and killable when he's introduced to your party. Call me cynical but I do not think there would be so much whining and gnashing of teeth if the s/s LI were HAWT lesbians.

You remember how FOX News responded to Mass Effect, right?

Does anyone on these forums actually take FOX seriously anymore? I mean they're a joke.

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

Ryzaki wrote...

Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut wrote...

Chun Hei wrote...

Russalka wrote...

I still cannot understand the problem. All the romance subplots worked and were quite full of depth, regardless of what sex my Hawke was.

That is pretty much my gripe with s/s critics as well. The DA2 romances may not be "realistic" but they actually improved over many of the LI troupes of recent year. Apparently the only way romances can strengthen immersion is if there is only one MALE s/s LI and he is either incredibly well hidden or is unconscious and killable when he's introduced to your party. Call me cynical but I do not think there would be so much whining and gnashing of teeth if the s/s LI were HAWT lesbians.

You remember how FOX News responded to Mass Effect, right?

Does anyone on these forums actually take FOX seriously anymore? I mean they're a joke.

They were a joke loooong before "sexbox," IMO.

[Huntress]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Its funny...but considering the whole "everyones bisexual" thing is inaccurate because only two out of the five romances actually attempts initiation with you regardless of gender. The other 3 (Sebastian, who is female only, Fenris, and Merrill) you as the player need to initiate the romance with the right dialogue choice, both elves never showcase any sexuality or sexual desire whatsoever to you.

So really, not all of them are bisexual, in the end its the player characters percepton of sexuality that is more important over the characters sexuality, which is ironic considering this is a more character-driven game.

No, they are not that straight forward with their sexual appeals.. but you see, the people who do not like this type of relations sees them as a threat and have to make a deal out of it, people need to remember not to use the<3 if you dont want the character to be lesbian or gay. Oh i dont mean the companions, i mean you're character. the companions will bend to the hero's will.

I don't mind if all of them are Bi in fact i like the idea, I think in a world of magic where anyone can pull a demon out of their b.. at any given time is what keeps people bussy and not checking who x or Y slept with.
I very much doubt anyone will ask why leliana a lesbian  works for the chantry and is so close to the divine?.. 
lol chew on that for a while. And no i have nothing agaisnt leliana she is one of my Fwarden li.
I like romances choices, DA2 offers many of them more importantly it doesn't force me to play a male character to get any of them! thats why i like it so much!

[LinksOcarina]

Huntress wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Its funny...but considering the whole "everyones bisexual" thing is inaccurate because only two out of the five romances actually attempts initiation with you regardless of gender. The other 3 (Sebastian, who is female only, Fenris, and Merrill) you as the player need to initiate the romance with the right dialogue choice, both elves never showcase any sexuality or sexual desire whatsoever to you.

So really, not all of them are bisexual, in the end its the player characters percepton of sexuality that is more important over the characters sexuality, which is ironic considering this is a more character-driven game.

No, they are not that straight forward with their sexual appeals.. but you see, the people who do not like this type of relations sees them as a threat and have to make a deal out of it, people need to remember not to use the<3 if you dont want the character to be lesbian or gay. Oh i dont mean the companions, i mean you're character. the companions will bend to the hero's will.

I don't mind if all of them are Bi in fact i like the idea, I think in a world of magic where anyone can pull a demon out of their b.. at any given time is what keeps people bussy and not checking who x or Y slept with.
I very much doubt anyone will ask why leliana a lesbian  works for the chantry and is so close to the divine?.. 
lol chew on that for a while. And no i have nothing agaisnt leliana she is one of my Fwarden li.
I like romances choices, DA2 offers many of them more importantly it doesn't force me to play a male character to get any of them! thats why i like it so much!

Ok...how do Fenris and Merrill initiate the romance with Hawke?

[Huntress]

I mean that No, fenris and merril never said that they are gay.. but people will complain about it if they go gay.. . nothing more. And I like them all gay, i would hate to make a male character just to kiss fenris..  I feel disconected when playing a male characters.. rofl.. oh thats good!

Modifié par Huntress, 24 janvier 2012 - 03:12 .

[LinksOcarina]

Ahh, my apologizes. Fair enough then.

[SkittlesKat96]

My only criticism of s/s romances is that I just don't want them for all characters...just seems like a waste of the developers time and budget.

Maybe if I knew that they weren't going to make the game like DA 2 then I wouldn't mind it but for now I'm a little concerned about the quality of the Dragon Age games lol.

[Xewaka]

SkittlesKat96 wrote...
My only criticism of s/s romances is that I just don't want them for all characters...just seems like a waste of the developers time and budget.

Budget is the reason all LI can be romanced by a Hawke of either sex. It maximizes the amount of romance subplots available to the player with the minimum investment. It's cheaper to write four romances and then pronoun swap than to write three different romances for each gender (As they would allot to six different romances in this case).

[ladyofpayne]

All I want from BI mance is diferent lines for male or female pC.

[Xewaka]

ladyofpayne wrote...
All I want from BI mance is diferent lines for male or female pC.

That beats the purpose of BImances in the first place (maximum amount of romances available to either gender with minimum investment).

Modifié par Xewaka, 24 janvier 2012 - 01:30 .

[culletron1]

The problem for me isn't that people are bi or not... Its pretty cool for some characters to be gay, some to be bi and to be able to turn certain others.

However what I found immersion breaking was that so many characters were bi !!! And they really didn't need much convincing to jump into bed with Hawke at all!! Just point the convo wheel towards the heart and hey presto !!

We had 4 romancable characters... and they were ALL bi, without any cajoling!! What are the chances???

[Centauri2002]

culletron1 wrote...

The problem for me isn't that people are bi or not... Its pretty cool for some characters to be gay, some to be bi and to be able to turn certain others.

However what I found immersion breaking was that so many characters were bi !!! And they really didn't need much convincing to jump into bed with Hawke at all!! Just point the convo wheel towards the heart and hey presto !!

We had 4 romancable characters... and they were ALL bi, without any cajoling!! What are the chances???

They weren't all bisexual, though. They were simply romanceable for Hawke, no matter the gender. That's slightly different. If you're a male Hawke and want to romance Merrill, then she can be straight or bisexual for you. If you play a female Hawke, then Merrill can be bisexual or a lesbian. It's entirely dependent on how you view it.

If you don't choose to romance a character, then their sexuality doesn't come into play at all. It's simply because you're aware, as a player, that all these characters are romanceable that you conclude they're bisexual. That isn't the case within the scope of the game. Sure, some of them might be bisexual, like Anders. But only those who have shown an interest in both genders in the past. Otherwise, you're free to draw whatever conclusion you wish.

As RPers say... player information is not character information.

That said, why is it even important? All of these options were implemented to give us, as players, more options. How is more choice bad? There's just no pleasing some people, is there? >.>

[jlb524]

SkittlesKat96 wrote...
My only criticism of s/s romances is that I just don't want them for all characters...just seems like a waste of the developers time and budget.

You could say the same for any romance considering only a minority of total gamers completes one.

Also, all the characters didn't have an s/s romance in DA2...only 4 out of 5 LIs.

Sylvianus wrote...
Do we decide what one loves or not ? Isabella, Aveline, what motivates them, what identificates them ? Even though it's a RPG ? No, because this is an area that belongs to the idendity, writing.

Well, you can decide to sabotage Aveline's Donnic romance....

Any time you choose to romance an LI (regardless of gender/sexuality) you are deciding who they should love (your PC).

ladyofpayne wrote...

All I want from BI mance is diferent lines for male or female pC.

I want different lines based on the PC's class/morality/etc. but that probably won't happen b/c BW romances are quite generic in regards to the PC.

Actually, in DA2 there more gender specific differences vs. class specific.

Modifié par jlb524, 24 janvier 2012 - 03:35 .

[J.C. Blade]

centauri2002 wrote...
They weren't all bisexual, though. They were simply romanceable for Hawke, no matter the gender. That's slightly different. If you're a male Hawke and want to romance Merrill, then she can be straight or bisexual for you. If you play a female Hawke, then Merrill can be bisexual or a lesbian. It's entirely dependent on how you view it.

If you don't choose to romance a character, then their sexuality doesn't come into play at all. It's simply because you're aware, as a player, that all these characters are romanceable that you conclude they're bisexual. That isn't the case within the scope of the game. Sure, some of them might be bisexual, like Anders. But only those who have shown an interest in both genders in the past. Otherwise, you're free to draw whatever conclusion you wish.

And that's the very thing that bothers some players. I don't want't to be the one to make the choice for NPC that decides an aspect of an NPC's personality with a single press of a button (hells, I even use "auto" for leveling up on party memeber menus); unless it's done through influencing said NPC throughout the story (hardening Leliana and Alistair for example). There is nothing worse for me in a game when it forces me to make a player based choice when I should be making a character based one. My player based choices should have ended with me choosing Hawke's gender, appearence and class, and pressing "start game" button.

As RPers say... player information is not character information.

That said, why is it even important? All of these options were implemented to give us, as players, more options. How is more choice bad? There's just no pleasing some people, is there? >.>

Because if you pulled that kind of thing in the room with an actuall DM - trying to make an option out of somehting (anything really) he had already decided is a "no go" - you'd fly out of the room. I've felt it on my own skin.

A player should never be allowed to influence anything he so damn well pleases. DA2 makes it worse in so far that it allows you to unfluence virtually nothing save your gender, class and who your partenr in bed will be.

[Centauri2002]

J.C. Blade wrote...

And that's the very thing that bothers some players. I don't want't to be the one to make the choice for NPC that decides an aspect of an NPC's personality with a single press of a button (hells, I even use "auto" for leveling up on party memeber menus); unless it's done through influencing said NPC throughout the story (hardening Leliana and Alistair for example). There is nothing worse for me in a game when it forces me to make a player based choice when I should be making a character based one. My player based choices should have ended with me choosing Hawke's gender, appearence and class, and pressing "start game" button.

Because if you pulled that kind of thing in the room with an actuall DM - trying to make an option out of somehting (anything really) he had already decided is a "no go" - you'd fly out of the room. I've felt it on my own skin.

A player should never be allowed to influence anything he so damn well pleases. DA2 makes it worse in so far that it allows you to unfluence virtually nothing save your gender, class and who your partenr in bed will be.

I wasn't implying that you could change the character's sexuality. More that it's your perception of their sexuality that changes. There's some big differences between RPing and video games as well. The DM can be reactive to any input, whereas a video game is limited to its coding. So some allowances have to be made. I guess some compromises have to be made in order to make the most amount of people happy. Or at least offer the same enjoyment to as many as possible.

It's not a perfect system but it can be improved upon. And I certainly see it as better than limiting the options or excluding them entirely.

[Wulfram]

jlb524 wrote...
I want different lines based on the PC's class/morality/etc. but that probably won't happen b/c BW romances are quite generic in regards to the PC.

Isn't that what Friendship/Rivalry is supposed to be?

[Huntress]

"How is more choice bad? There's just no pleasing some people, is there? >.>"

Having more choices is not bad at all, people want games to come close to real life with all the taboos, stupidities and believes..
Totally unfair when am trying to scape all that for a couple of hours.
I want games to be more like game and less than real life, want to explore another world where the god's walk with the people or more fantastic monsters, or gay priests.. what ever! I just want to be out of reallity for few hour. How freaking hard can that be? very!! it seems
Everyone have to settle of how this others people think a game should be, frak that, bioware games are fine, get out of my fantasy world.

[jlb524]

Wulfram wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
I want different lines based on the PC's class/morality/etc. but that probably won't happen b/c BW romances are quite generic in regards to the PC.

Isn't that what Friendship/Rivalry is supposed to be?

Well, I do think that system was a step forward from the DA:O gift-spamathon romances.  It was based on how you interacted with the character (which is good).

I guess I want to say that I prefer differences in dialog based on something like this...something that is more substantial and interesting to me vs. differences based on gender.

[whykikyouwhy]

Let's remove the labeling for a minute and not define the companions as bisexual. The 4 LIs (not counting Sebastian for this exercise) are each struggling with something in their past that continues to haunt or trouble them. Each has their own sense of right and wrong, loyalty, order, etc. They are all at a point where they have not given themselves over to love - to the idea and truth of love.

Then they meet Hawke. And Hawke possibly aids them in their quests, gifts them with tokens of affection, converses with them about an assortment of personal matters. And flirts with them. The characters are responding to the sum total of Hawke and his/her actions & words, and aren't, for themselves, allowing gender to restrict that pursuit of love.

As others have stated, the characters are not necessarily all bisexual - no one claims to be that. The word may not even exist in the same modern context in Thedas. But, the characters have the ability to love Hawke, because maybe, just maybe, Hawke is *who* they may need and want.

I could attempt to look at it from a development perspective - resources and the like (which is a valid thing to consider). But I tend to look at the whole matter from story. To me, the companions are unique individuals who are finally availing themselves to love because they see something in Hawke that they desire, and thus they respond to flirtation. And these individuals may not be inclined to let gender prevent that pursuit of love - this doesn't cheapen anything because we don't really know how these characters would feel about such matters beyond what we see on the screen or hear in dialogue. They may not be willing to divulge all of their secrets and desires and names of past lovers, and it may not even matter. The main influence of the PC is the decision to flirt. That doesn't exactly rewrite the companions because they may simply be open to the possibility of love on their own terms.

[J.C. Blade]

centauri2002 wrote...
I wasn't implying that you could change the character's sexuality. More that it's your perception of their sexuality that changes. There's some big differences between RPing and video games as well. The DM can be reactive to any input, whereas a video game is limited to its coding. So some allowances have to be made. I guess some compromises have to be made in order to make the most amount of people happy. Or at least offer the same enjoyment to as many as possible.

It's not a perfect system but it can be improved upon. And I certainly see it as better than limiting the options or excluding them entirely.

While in game my perception of their sexuality IS their sexuality. I have to click on the golden heart button to establesh it, don't I? Schrodinger's cat, almost.

As far as restrictions go...
Viconia's romance, back in Baldur's Gate 2, was in my opinion the best romance I've ever actually roleplayed through, and it was restrictive as all hell; you had to be male, couldn't be of certain alligment, couldn't be a dwarf, gnome or an elf, and if your reputation went to high up she'd leave... She was picky, confused, angry and guarded and made me work to get her to fall in love with my character. She made me create and activly roleplay a male character - something I've done once for her and never again to this day in any game - unless it's Geralt from the Witcher of course. And it was my second most loved playthrough through BG2

[culletron1]

J.C. Blade wrote...

centauri2002 wrote...
I wasn't implying that you could change the character's sexuality. More that it's your perception of their sexuality that changes. There's some big differences between RPing and video games as well. The DM can be reactive to any input, whereas a video game is limited to its coding. So some allowances have to be made. I guess some compromises have to be made in order to make the most amount of people happy. Or at least offer the same enjoyment to as many as possible.

It's not a perfect system but it can be improved upon. And I certainly see it as better than limiting the options or excluding them entirely.

While in game my perception of their sexuality IS their sexuality. I have to click on the golden heart button to establesh it, don't I? Schrodinger's cat, almost.

As far as restrictions go...
Viconia's romance, back in Baldur's Gate 2, was in my opinion the best romance I've ever actually roleplayed through, and it was restrictive as all hell; you had to be male, couldn't be of certain alligment, couldn't be a dwarf, gnome or an elf, and if your reputation went to high up she'd leave... She was picky, confused, angry and guarded and made me work to get her to fall in love with my character. She made me create and activly roleplay a male character - something I've done once for her and never again to this day in any game - unless it's Geralt from the Witcher of course. And it was my second most loved playthrough through BG2

Here Here

I really don't want the companions to just give it up to hawke so easily no matter who he is or what he does... All I, as hawke, had to do for any of the companions was basically click on the heart button...

For some of the companions it should be something you have to work for. 

It just feels so lazy that any of the companions can be a LI whether your hawke is good or bad, male or female, mage or warrior. Will the companions just take any port in a storm or do they have things they like and dislike? 

Modifié par culletron1, 24 janvier 2012 - 04:41 .

[Centauri2002]

J.C. Blade wrote...
While in game my perception of their sexuality IS their sexuality. I have to click on the golden heart button to establesh it, don't I? Schrodinger's cat, almost.

As far as restrictions go...
Viconia's romance, back in Baldur's Gate 2, was in my opinion the best romance I've ever actually roleplayed through, and it was restrictive as all hell; you had to be male, couldn't be of certain alligment, couldn't be a dwarf, gnome or an elf, and if your reputation went to high up she'd leave... She was picky, confused, angry and guarded and made me work to get her to fall in love with my character. She made me create and activly roleplay a male character - something I've done once for her and never again to this day in any game - unless it's Geralt from the Witcher of course. And it was my second most loved playthrough through BG2

The way I see it with these kinds of games, every play through is a clean slate. In one save, Hawke can be female and romance Merrill who only happens to be attracted to her. She can choose to side with the mages and be a complete arse to everyone. In another play through Hawke can be male and romance a seemingly straight Merrill, side with the Templars and be a nice guy. I don't see how any of these choices would impact how you see the characters in another play through. People are saying that because there is the option of a romance there, that instantly makes them all bisexual. By this argument, Hawke would be both male and female and have split personalities. 

See, that's the wonder of fantastic storytelling. It's a pity not everything were up to such a standard. I've even created male characters on rare occasions to experience some romance storylines but I definitely enjoy them more as a female character. It's just easier for me to relate. As such, these increased options make games more enjoyable for me.

Everyone's different though so keeping everyone happy is never going to be possible.

[culletron1]

centauri2002 wrote...

The way I see it with these kinds of games, every play through is a clean slate. In one save, Hawke can be female and romance Merrill who only happens to be attracted to her. She can choose to side with the mages and be a complete arse to everyone. In another play through Hawke can be male and romance a seemingly straight Merrill, side with the Templars and be a nice guy. I don't see how any of these choices would impact how you see the characters in another play through. People are saying that because there is the option of a romance there, that instantly makes them all bisexual. By this argument, Hawke would be both male and female and have split personalities. 

But this absolutely does impact how I feel about the game world and the characters. The characters cease to be real people with wants, desires, like and dislikes and become a stepping stone to Hawke having an easy LI. 

If I play a different Hawke then I expect the outcomes to change but I expect the characters to be consistent no matter what I do.  

This is all subjective so I am not going to say you should or shouldn't feel that way but for me this really has a bad impact on immersion. The world seems less real and the characters come across as game constructs rather than people. 

[jlb524]

culletron1 wrote...

But this absolutely does impact how I feel about the game world and the characters. The characters cease to be real people with wants, desires, like and dislikes and become a stepping stone to Hawke having an easy LI. 

If I play a different Hawke then I expect the outcomes to change but I expect the characters to be consistent no matter what I do.  

This is all subjective so I am not going to say you should or shouldn't feel that way but for me this really has a bad impact on immersion. The world seems less real and the characters come across as game constructs rather than people. 

You have to admit this is an issue with the DA:O romances as well.

[Centauri2002]

culletron1 wrote...

But this absolutely does impact how I feel about the game world and the characters. The characters cease to be real people with wants, desires, like and dislikes and become a stepping stone to Hawke having an easy LI. 

If I play a different Hawke then I expect the outcomes to change but I expect the characters to be consistent no matter what I do.  

This is all subjective so I am not going to say you should or shouldn't feel that way but for me this really has a bad impact on immersion. The world seems less real and the characters come across as game constructs rather than people. 

I'd love for the characters to be more realistic. It'd be great if they could react to the decisions you make based upon their own moral compass and personality; that they would refuse any advances if you made a decision they disagreed with, etc. I'd prefer if there were specifically gay characters, straight characters and bisexual characters. From a story perspective, that would be more realistic and a lot more fun. But, I also appreciate that there are limitations to coding, finances and time at the moment. Maybe we'll see all these included in the next game BioWare make. I hope so.

However, I'm not going to let it ruin my enjoyment of the existing games either. I can put aside things like that and just enjoy the story for what it is. At the end of the day, it's my form of  escapism and I don't want to get worked up over it.