649 réponses à ce sujet

[brushyourteeth]

jlb524 wrote...

DA:O had 4 LIs....DA2 had 4 LIs (not counting DLC).  4 = 4.

DA2 provided more options for bisexual/homosexual PCs though...that's the difference.  My lesbian DA2 PC had possibly 2 options instead of being stuck with just Leliana.

That's only if you're a gamer that will romance same-sex LI's only. Some of us are straight or gay IRL but will romance LI's outside our usual preference just for the fun/heck of it.

[Cantina]

I found this and could not stop laughing. I think it suits this thread.

[upsettingshorts]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Yeah, I let the first one go but you've just been reported for accusing people of being homophobe's. Congrats.

Good luck with that.

[AkiKishi]

jlb524 wrote...

Like, all the content?  Even the ending?  

Newsflash, there's lots of gamers out there (even straight ones) that just don't care.

1.Is that a refernce to some recent event ?

2.Same is true of all the other toggles too.That's not really a reason.

[upsettingshorts]

Fandango9641 wrote...

I just think it could be done a little better.

How, specifically?

Use examples.  Explain what your approach can do better and in what way.  All your posts seem to be saying is:

6 LIs:  2 straight, 2 bisexual, 2 gay > 4 LIs: 4 bisexual

If that is not what you are saying, then be clearer.

Fandango9641 wrote...

Smug c u n t.

See, that's a personal attack and circumventing the swear filter.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 mai 2012 - 03:59 .

[jlb524]

brushyourteeth wrote...
That's only if you're a gamer that will romance same-sex LI's only. Some of us are straight or gay IRL but will romance LI's outside our usual preference just for the fun/heck of it.

Huh?

There are lots of people who only do heterosexual or homosexual romances (I only do homosexual ones myself).

Those who only do heterosexual ones have always had multiple options (and every LI of the opposite sex is open to them, i.e., Morrigan and Leliana for hetero males in DA:O).

The same couldn't be said for homosexual PCs in DA:O.

DA2 changed that b/c now those that like the ladies (straight dudes or gay/bi ladies) had equal opportunity to romance the two female LIs in the game.

That's my point...not sure what you are trying to say.

BobSmith101 wrote...

1.Is that a refernce to some recent event ?

 

No.   It was a serious question.

Fandango9641 wrote...
As for the point about romancing everybody (and this for the second time) I mean LI's ok?

Yeah, how dare those folks suggest given the ability to choose which LI they want to romance considering the whole point of having an LI system is to...romance them!

Modifié par jlb524, 02 mai 2012 - 04:03 .

[Rinji the Bearded]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

Yeah, I let the first one go but you've just been reported for accusing people of being homophobe's. Congrats.

Good luck with that.

Smug [expletive deleted].

Reported.  For obvious reasons, rather than made up ones.

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 02 mai 2012 - 04:02 .

[brushyourteeth]

Cantina wrote...

I found this and could not stop laughing. I think it suits this thread.

LOL - I love this!
I don't know about anyone else, but when I played a female mage in DA:O I just loved giving Alistair a hard time about being a Templar. I mean, I gave him a real ballbusting - especially at our first meeting. It made for some seriously interesting RP, and Steve Valentine's voice acting fit perfectly with the way he always sounded mildly suspicious when you first began to initiate flirts with him.

[mesmerizedish]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

Yeah, I let the first one go but you've just been reported for accusing people of being homophobe's. Congrats.

Good luck with that.

Smug ****.

Using gendered slurs like that supports rape culture. Congrats on upholding the kyriarchy, dude!

[upsettingshorts]

brushyourteeth wrote...

LOL - I love this!
I don't know about anyone else, but when I played a female mage in DA:O I just loved giving Alistair a hard time about being a Templar. I mean, I gave him a real ballbusting - especially at our first meeting. It made for some seriously interesting RP, and Steve Valentine's voice acting fit perfectly with the way he always sounded mildly suspicious when you first began to initiate flirts with him.

I'd love for them to be able to do more of that, especially with specializations, but I seem to recall reading at some point on the forum that there's a reason it's not terribly common.

For example in DA2 much of the writing (and perhaps voice acting) was complete before the specializations were finalized (like Blood Mage or Templar) so it wouldn't have been possible to link dialogue options to react to builds that might not be in the final game.

However, as I don't have a link to the post discussing this I wouldn't be offended if people took this as rumor/hearsay.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Fandango9641 wrote..

Look, I think we want the same thing; personnel, inclusive romantic options for everybody yes? I just think it could be done a little better. As for the point about romancing everybody (and this for the second time) I mean LI's ok?

Making 2 options for each sexuality (heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual) is not being inclusive.

[Curlain]

Upsettingshorts wrote...



No, it's saying that I am thoroughly, consistently, and repeatedly unimpressed with their arguments.  Every single opportunity I've had to engage someone to the point where they get down to their basic objections, it is - without fail - always, "I don't like the gays in my game."  Everything else just comes off to me as dog-whistle politics.

I'm open to the possibility of someone convincing me that their objections aren't based on their personal discomfort, prejudice, or a self-serving arbitrary concepts of "character depth," but I've yet to be convinced of it by anyone.  

No one should have to to convince you that their arguments are not the result of personal discomfort, prejudice etc.  Placing a judgement about someone's character based on a general postion the hold in a debate or discussion is a form of prejudice (you've labelled them before knowing them), and are telling them they have to convince you first that is is not the case.  That is neither fair, nor is it anyone's responsibility to convince anyone else that they are or are not x (in this case they are not homophobic).  That is a default assumption for any discussion, and should always be assumed (given how easy misunderstandings and miscommunications happen on internet forums) unless a poster comes out and straight out says, 'I hate x group because they are x group,' etc.

So if you are feeling that you have to be convinced of their lack of prejudice or honest intentions in a debate or discussion, then I think that is an issue for you in these debates, not them.

Modifié par Curlain, 02 mai 2012 - 04:08 .

[Cantina]

Guys come on, I made this thread to discuss peoples opinions on romances not to start fighting like three old kids.

I don't want to see this locked and on top of it the developers decide not to take the opinions seriously.

[brushyourteeth]

jlb524 wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...
That's only if you're a gamer that will romance same-sex LI's only. Some of us are straight or gay IRL but will romance LI's outside our usual preference just for the fun/heck of it.

Huh?

There are lots of people who only do heterosexual or homosexual romances (I only do homosexual ones myself).

Those who only do heterosexual ones have always had multiple options (and every LI of the opposite sex is open to them, i.e., Morrigan and Leliana for hetero males in DA:O).

The same couldn't be said for homosexual PCs in DA:O.

DA2 changed that b/c now those that like the ladies (straight dudes or gay ladies) had equal opportunity to romance the two female LIs in the game.

That's my point...not sure what you are trying to say.

What I'm saying is that having straight or gay only LI's never limits a player's options - it simply limits their gay or straight only romance options. In an world where nobody had a problem with sexual orientation this wouldn't bother anyone. We'd simply choose another gender and/or another LI on a second playthrough.

That isn't to insinuate that you or anyone else is prejudiced because they usually romance their real-life preferred gender in a game (I do too - usually). But it does insinuate that no one should be unhappy about being unable to romance a given character based on that character's sexuality - because the option is still open to them, just not maybe in the way that they would prefer.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Curlain wrote...
No one should have to to convince you that their arguments are not the result of personal discomfort, prejudice etc.  Placing a judgement about someone's character based on a general postion the hold in a debate or discussion is a for prejudice (you've labelled them before knowing them), and are telling them they have to convince you first that is is not case.  That is neither fair, nor is it anyone's responsibility to convince anyone else that they are or are not x (in this case they are not homophobic).  That is a default assumption for any discussion, and should always be assumed (given how easy misunderstandings and miscommunications happen on internet forums) unless a poster comes out and straight out says, 'I hate x group because they are x group,' etc.

So if you are feeling that you have to be convinced of thier lack of prejudice or honest intentions in a debate or discussion, then I think that is an issue for you in these debates, not them.

Upsettingshorts would like to see a convincing argument against all bisexual LIs that doesn't come down to "I don't want to be hit on by the member of the same sex,"  which is a homophobic statement, whether one intended it or no.  You can have internalized, negative feelings about something without realizing that you are perpetuating a harmful idea.

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 02 mai 2012 - 04:13 .

[mousestalker]

Fandango9641 wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

snippage

Smug ****.

Using gendered slurs like that supports rape culture. Congrats on upholding the kyriarchy, dude!

Just responding in kind to being branded a homophobe dude. Felt good.

This is why we aren't allowed to have nice things or discuss subjects unmonitored. 

[upsettingshorts]

Curlain wrote...

No one should have to to convince you that their arguments are not the result of personal discomfort, prejudice etc.  Placing a judgement about someone's character based on a general postion the hold in a debate or discussion is a for prejudice (you've labelled them before knowing them), and are telling them they have to convince you first that is is not case.  That is neither fair, nor is it anyone's responsibility to convince anyone else that they are or are not x (in this case they are not homophobic).  That is a default assumption for any discussion, and should always be assumed (given how easy misunderstandings and miscommunications happen on internet forums) unless a poster comes out and straight out says, 'I hate x group because they are x group,' etc.

So if you are feeling that you have to be convinced of thier lack of prejudice or honest intentions in a debate or discussion, then I think that is an issue for you in these debates, not them.

You misunderstand.  What typically happens is:

I read an argument against bisexual romances in Dragon Age.  Some are transparently and unapologetically homophobic, we can agree that neither of us are defending those.  Some display a poorly disguised discomfort with bisexuality or homosexuality, such as "I don't like that he could be romancing another man in someone else's game," you can see how those are problematic, too, I take it.  Some are incredibly vague and assert that there are problems with the bisexual approach and claim there is some inherent superiority to another approach.  The latter group of posts is the one I'm talking about.  

When those posters get into a long discussion over precisely what they mean when they say how much better a straight/gay approach is, my impressions are without exception uniformly as I've described.  As such, I have come to expect more of the same.  It would be prejudicial to always assume this to be the case, I'll freely admit that, but given that posters have consistently failed to convince me otherwise it's not a position I'll easily abandon just because some people indignantly protest as I side-eye them.  If you want to convince me, convince me, don't try to make me feel bad because I've heard the same thing countless times and have drawn conclusions.

It's an issue for everyone.  On these boards new arguments are rare.   People pick up on what each other has been saying and repeat arguments, consciously or unconsciously, and if you hang around long enough the patterns become pretty easy to spot.  You have a few posters who come here often enough that they set the tone of discussion, the boundaries, the definitions of terms, and broad arguments.  It doesn't take very long for all the threads and posts to start feeling familiar.  

RinjiRenee wrote...

Upsettingshorts would like to see a convincing argument against all bisexual LIs that doesn't come down to "I don't want to be hit on by the member of the same sex,"  which is a homophobic statement, whether one intended it or no.  You can have internalized, negative feelings about something without realizing that you are perpetuating a harmful idea.

Yep.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 mai 2012 - 04:14 .

[brushyourteeth]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

LOL - I love this!
I don't know about anyone else, but when I played a female mage in DA:O I just loved giving Alistair a hard time about being a Templar. I mean, I gave him a real ballbusting - especially at our first meeting. It made for some seriously interesting RP, and Steve Valentine's voice acting fit perfectly with the way he always sounded mildly suspicious when you first began to initiate flirts with him.

I'd love for them to be able to do more of that, especially with specializations, but I seem to recall reading at some point on the forum that there's a reason it's not terribly common.

For example in DA2 much of the writing (and perhaps voice acting) was complete before the specializations were finalized (like Blood Mage or Templar) so it wouldn't have been possible to link dialogue options to react to builds that might not be in the final game.

However, as I don't have a link to the post discussing this I wouldn't be offended if people took this as rumor/hearsay.

I think a lot of that was lost in the whole Hawke family mage legacy that the writers built up. It made the story mesh well together, but a small downside of that was that when you threatened a Templar as a warrior, it made just as much sense as it would if you were a mage because it's still a touchy subject for everyone in the Hawke family. Nobody, as far as I've seen in the game discriminates against warriors or rogues so those options were lost in both DA's and made extra special for mages.

I'd love to see specializations make a bigger difference in DAIII, especially among your companions. Anders (and maybe Fenris) should have dumped you as soon as you became a blood mage, IMO.

[Curlain]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

Yeah, I let the first one go but you've just been reported for accusing people of being homophobe's. Congrats.

Good luck with that.

Smug c u n t.

You are not doing yourself any favours you know.  Upsettingshorts has  I believe has wrong approach to some posters postions (even if he has had a negative experience in previous debates that has lead to him assuming this postion).  But you have just outright insulted him, and that is far worse, if you were getting that angry from a discussion, just get up and leave your computer.  Have a coffee etc, go for a walk and cool off, it is just an internet forum.  But it's lashing out with such insults is not on.

Modifié par Curlain, 02 mai 2012 - 04:19 .

[jlb524]

brushyourteeth wrote...
What I'm saying is that having straight or gay only LI's never limits a player's options - it simply limits their gay or straight only romance options. In an world where nobody had a problem with sexual orientation this wouldn't bother anyone. We'd simply choose another gender and/or another LI on a second playthrough.

That isn't to insinuate that you or anyone else is prejudiced because they usually romance their real-life preferred gender in a game (I do too - usually). But it does insinuate that no one should be unhappy about being unable to romance a given character based on that character's sexuality - because the option is still open to them, just not maybe in the way that they would prefer.

I know it doesn't limit those that play both genders/all sexualities.

It does limit options for those that prefer to play one gender all the time for whatever reason or for those that prefer to play only homosexual/heterosexual romances.

There's nothing wrong with that and these people are gamers too that deserve to be considered when discussing this.

On the other hand, the 'all bi' thing does not limit those that are open to playing both genders or all sexualities.

In one situation, you are going to limit people...in the other you aren't.

Modifié par jlb524, 02 mai 2012 - 04:18 .