649 réponses à ce sujet

[Firewolf99]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

renjility wrote...
They made it to the bed! Why doesn't Fenris make it to the bed? 

Uh....

Did you listen to Fenris at all?  The whole experience made him uncomfortable and he wanted to get out of there.

The reason the scenes are different is because the characters are different.  Comparing them and asking why one has more content and the other has less is to miss the point completely.

You can have a long scene with Isabela, sure, especially if your character is interested romantically.  If you were just having fun, the scene is much, much shorter.

Yeah, but we don't get a feeling for Fenris's discomfort with just the kiss, and then the after scene. In fact, the discomfort only really gets shown with the after scene, and so feels a bit sudden.

And the Isabela scene was good. We're talking about going forward: developing MORE of an emotional tie to a character. Because with all the romances I did in DA so far, it felt like hitting a list of acheivments or requirements, and very little after love. I'd like more of a continuation of romances.

The "Lockdown" aspect of romances bothers me a bit too, if I'm honest. It feels like once you get a character to a certain point, you don't have to care about them any more. They become an acquired resource, like a War Asst in ME3. I'd like to see romances be a bit more difficult: and, if possible, less predictable. Random events that could end romances, perhaps?

EDIT: to clarify, Random events that, if not handled properly, could end your romance.

Modifié par Firewolf99, 25 avril 2012 - 03:00 .

[mesmerizedish]

Firewolf99 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

renjility wrote...
They made it to the bed! Why doesn't Fenris make it to the bed? 

Uh....

Did you listen to Fenris at all?  The whole experience made him uncomfortable and he wanted to get out of there.

The reason the scenes are different is because the characters are different.  Comparing them and asking why one has more content and the other has less is to miss the point completely.

You can have a long scene with Isabela, sure, especially if your character is interested romantically.  If you were just having fun, the scene is much, much shorter.

Yeah, but we don't get a feeling for Fenris's discomfort with just the kiss, and then the after scene. In fact, the discomfort only really gets shown with the after scene, and so feels a bit sudden.

That's the point? 

[Rinji the Bearded]

Firewolf99 wrote...

Yeah, but we don't get a feeling for Fenris's discomfort with just the kiss, and then the after scene. In fact, the discomfort only really gets shown with the after scene, and so feels a bit sudden.

But that was the point.  Hawke seemed all too pleased with himself/herself, then suddenly sees as Fenris gets a case of the heebie-jeebies.  It causes confusion.  What you were feeling about the scene at the time was intended.

[upsettingshorts]

Firewolf99 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

renjility wrote...
They made it to the bed! Why doesn't Fenris make it to the bed? 

Uh....

Did you listen to Fenris at all?  The whole experience made him uncomfortable and he wanted to get out of there.

The reason the scenes are different is because the characters are different.  Comparing them and asking why one has more content and the other has less is to miss the point completely.

You can have a long scene with Isabela, sure, especially if your character is interested romantically.  If you were just having fun, the scene is much, much shorter.

Yeah, but we don't get a feeling for Fenris's discomfort with just the kiss, and then the after scene. In fact, the discomfort only really gets shown with the after scene, and so feels a bit sudden.

That's the point.  

Firewolf99 wrote... 

And the Isabela scene was good. We're talking about going forward: developing MORE of an emotional tie to a character. 

That would break Fenris' character.  He desires emotional distance after what happened.  Characters are not the same.

[the_one_54321]

David Gaider wrote...
This doesn't mean they won't be there, as my opinion isn't the only one that matters, but my preference would be to have the "culmination" scene of a romance vary according to the character. Sexual depictions are fine for sexual characters (like, say, Isabela)... but even then if that leads to people going on about how they needed to see Isabela's ****** or Anders' ass in order for it to be a "real" or "adult" romance... then I'd just rather not contribute to it. And I think that's all I'll say about that.

Not asking to see anything. Just pointing out that, what is apparently the model skin itself, really throws off the whole scene. It makes it largely unbelievable, and feels similar to uncanny valley. So, if you can't change that (which is fine) then just don't show an actual scene of the act. Include the immediate lead up, and the "afterglow," as you put it. Much more of the character development will take place there than during the actual deed.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 25 avril 2012 - 03:09 .

[AkiKishi]

RinjiRenee wrote...
Not all depictions of sex are meant to be titilating.

Which is why DA2 did it so much better than DA:O.  There was intimacy without the hilarity or uncanny valley going on.  And really, I want it to stay that way.

If your dipicting sex and it's not titilating to at least some degree , then you have failed. Sex and romance is not the same thing obviously.

This one is not a sex scene but it does appear to tick all the romance boxes before fading to black.

The Witcher2 lake scene (not going to link it) leaves nothing to the imagination on the other hand. Both accomplish what they set out to do.

Traynor shower scene on the hand should be like Witcher2 , that's how it's clearly directed. But being clothed makes it a cop out and looking rather silly.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 25 avril 2012 - 03:07 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Firewolf99 wrote...

EDIT: to clarify, Random events that, if not handled properly, could end your romance.

What do you mean by a 'random event'? Do you mean like how if you don't complete Fenris' quest in act 2, he'll abandon the party for good?

[the_one_54321]

RinjiRenee wrote...
Not all depictions of sex are meant to be titilating.

Exactly how much character development occurs while they are going at it? I mean, not the before, not the after, but the cloths are "off" and the act is in session.

[Rinji the Bearded]

BobSmith101 wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...
Not all depictions of sex are meant to be titilating.

Which is why DA2 did it so much better than DA:O.  There was intimacy without the hilarity or uncanny valley going on.  And really, I want it to stay that way.

If your dipicting sex and it's not titilating to at least some degree , then you have failed. Sex and romance is not the same thing obviously.

This one is not a sex scene but it does appear to tick all the romance boxes before fading to black.

The Witcher2 lake scene (not going to link it) leaves nothing to the imagination on the other hand. Both accomplish what they set out to do.

Traynor shower scene on the hand should be like Witcher2 , that's how it's clearly directed. But being clothed makes it a cop out and looking rather silly.

The Witcher 2 lake scene was awful.  The sex scene was unneeded to pull the joke off. 

And, no, not all sex scenes are meant to be titilating or arousing.  Ever seen Game of Thrones? You might be shocked to learn that some sex scenes have actual purpose beyond getting the viewer's rocks off.

Are you suggesting that we should see gratuitous, irrelevant and random sex scenes in future DA?  That this would somehow make the game better and more adult?

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 25 avril 2012 - 03:12 .

[Rann]

IMHO, romances were one area where DA2 did better than DA:O. I found myself clicking through the "culmination" scenes in DA:O because it felt a bit too much like voyeurism. (And worse: the one time I had Logain go through with The Ritual insteead of my character, it took me about 3 milliseconds and one "Yechh!" to terminate the cutscene.) I really don't like it treated as the end-all, be-all of relationships in games, and I certainly felt a bit creepy getting an achievement for a successful romance when success was apparently defined as "SCORE!" The BG2 trick of fade to black worked for me when relevant -- plus the relationships didn't end there, and often took unexpected turns through the rest of BG2 and into BG: ToB, just like real relationaships that constantly evolve and change.

[mesmerizedish]

BobSmith101 wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...
Not all depictions of sex are meant to be titilating.

Which is why DA2 did it so much better than DA:O.  There was intimacy without the hilarity or uncanny valley going on.  And really, I want it to stay that way.

If your dipicting sex and it's not titilating to at least some degree , then you have failed. Sex and romance is not the same thing obviously.

What about a rape scene? Did you get off while Noomi screamed in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo?

[upsettingshorts]

BobSmith101 wrote...

If your dipicting sex and it's not titilating to at least some degree , then you have failed. Sex and romance is not the same thing obviously.

Completely and utterly wrong.  Easy example:  Schindler's List.  Another easy example:  Shame.  Another easy example:  Irreversible.  Another easy example:  The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.

All these films have sex scenes.  All these films have sex scenes not meant to titlate at all.  All these films have sex scenes that inform on character.

I mean, if you're going to get off to Amon Goeth taking advantage of a concentration camp prisoner, that's your business I guess.  But your argument is based on nothing but your own expectations and desires, ones which not everyone shares. 

You believe sex scenes in games have failed if they are not titilating.  Because you want to be titilated.  They do not have to serve this purpose by rule.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 25 avril 2012 - 03:15 .

[Brockololly]

David Gaider wrote...

Cantina wrote...
What I am saying is I used Anders romance as an example and picked it apart by showing what I viewed as bad flaws. My hope is that by bringing these issues forward will allow other players to comment on how they felt about whichever romance, they chose and if they found flaws.

When I go back in Origins and romance let us say, Alistair, I actually felt it was a romance. You did a lovely job smoothing it across the game. However, in Dragon Age 2 my romance with Anders felt disconnected and all over the place. It just did not have the same feel of being in a relationship. I think cutting out interacting with your romance whenever you so chose led to that disconnecting feeling.

Not saying I hated the Anders romance, I did like parts of it, but I just felt it could have been done better.

What this tells me, however, is that you liked the Alistair romance and disliked the Anders romance-- and yet used a single example to paint all the romances as if they were the same.

(Maybe I'm totally misconstruing one of Cantina's points,) But it seems Cantina is bringing up the disjointed aspect of the DA2 romances via the time jumps too. While Alistair and everyone's romances in Origins felt like they progressed on a continuum that felt natural as the relationships progressed and you had a mix of player initiated and NPC initiated dialogue, DA2' s romances felt awfully herky jerky due in large part to the time jumps. So you'd be in one time period then skip ahead a couple years and the relationship either felt like it was in limbo or you missed out on a bunch of stuff.

David Gaider wrote...

It's odd, too, because one of the points you brought up was how static "DA2 romances" were-- and yet Anders is actually the worst example of that, considering the character arc he has over the course of the game and how it can change based on his friendship/rivalry. Alistair is the least static of DAO romances, meanwhile, but only because he's the one most strongly tied into the main plot. You decide his fate in the end, but the amount you can actually change him is quite limited... and the other romance characters far less so. So generalizations based on these two examples don't really hold up.

Yet Anders goes Kamikaze terrorist no matter what, while Alistair can end up as 1.) King, 2.) Warden, 3.) Drunk/Exile, or 4.) Martyr and if you romanced him, the Warden's status can change accordingly too, whether thats as Queen or mistress or just staying as a fellow Warden or a widow of sorts. I think thats some reason people like it, is that its quite variable at the end. People like having choices/consequences like that. So while Anders might "change" based on friendship/rivalry, what does it matter if in the end he gets funneled down to the same plot point of terrorist no matter what? I think thats what people dislike most- having the illusion of some reactivity or choice only to have it smushed into a one size fits all ending that makes it obvious nothing you've had a hand in previously really mattered. Thats one of my major issues with DA2 overall, not just the romances.

David Gaider wrote...
An argument can be made that romances are better when they're tied to the main plot more strongly... but while that does allow a romance to be larger (Alistair was easily twice the content of the other characters in DAO), that does mean less of them.

I just think it comes down to a certain measure of reactivity. So if I choose  to romance a character thats tied to the main plot in some major way, when that NPC becomes a major plot player, I want the relationship between the PC and plot relevant NPC to be acknowledged and provide some significant reactivity and ideally unique options or content. For better or worse. Like Alistair turning down a Elven warden as queen but making her a mistress. Or a male Warden that romanced Morrigan being the only ones able to go into the Eluvian. Or a female Cousland being able to marry Alistair and become Queen. Unique content like that where the game reacts to the player character the player has created and developed throughout the game.

[the_one_54321]

RinjiRenee wrote...
And, no, not all sex scenes are meant to be titilating or arousing.  Ever seen Game of Thrones?

You have got to s****** me...

I've seen game of thrones, and there is not a single instance of nudity in that show that was not intended to be entirely gratuitous. Many of them felt like "hey, they are supposed to be having sex, but instead of using the description in the book lets have them thrusting and grunting in doggy style. Or here, where there's a conversation with Tyrion, lets just have him surround with naked hookers. I think that would be cool." 

I am not exaggerating.

[syllogi]

I can totally do without simulated sex scenes.

But shirtless kissing before or after the fade to black is nice. Especially shirtless males.

Especially lyrium tattooed elf males.

[AkiKishi]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...
Not all depictions of sex are meant to be titilating.

Which is why DA2 did it so much better than DA:O.  There was intimacy without the hilarity or uncanny valley going on.  And really, I want it to stay that way.

If your dipicting sex and it's not titilating to at least some degree , then you have failed. Sex and romance is not the same thing obviously.

What about a rape scene? Did you get off while Noomi screamed in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo?

Sex is between consenting parties. Not really the same thing.

[Esbatty]

I enjoyed the romances I did participate in across the Dragon Ages Morrigan/Leliana/Alistair/Isabela/Merrill/Fenris (would've liked if my Orlesian Wardens could've cozied up to Velanna and Howe in Awakening *coughcough*)

While I enjoyed seeing how the conversations and gift giving in Origins ended up initially making Leliana and Morrigan get cross with one another and my Warden, creating an unexpected dynamic to the story... I did inevitably ask other Dragon Age players/consult guides on how to navigate the dialogue for future playthroughs so as to get the "results" I wanted to vary my playthroughs.

In Dragon Age 2 with the more concise Romance dialogue options and crazy specific gifts, it helped me avoid "ninja romances" and made me ultra vigilant to paw through every nook and cranny shop/loot from every person/place/thing I came across. With the whole Friendship/Rivalry turns to the romances, now that allowed me to see not only a new side to Merrill/Isabela/Fenris but also to Hawke. (Also this time I actually bought the Collector's Ed. guide... mostly 'cause it looked f*ckin' awesome... and its closest thing I've ever come across to an Encyclopedia to Thedas).

If I do have anything to add/request regarding romances for Dragon Age 3.

Two words: Flemeth Romance.

I know-I know, I'm well aware of whats been said of her "history" and even if its just like a passing conversational thing that Flemeth can laugh off in regards to the PC advances/flirations or its kinda liek that weird relationship like the Samara/Morinth unrequited love/death-by-snoo-snoo from Mass Effect 2. I'd really enjoy something like that.

Ooh, also, since I'm lettin' my freak flag fly (as per usual).

Kossith Love Interest.

Yeah, I remember when we begged for a Qunari LI. And ya'll totally pulled a "oh a QUNARI you can get frisky with? Suuuuuuuuuuuuuure, heres some DLC." I saw what you did this so this time... while I like and fully appreciate Tallis. I'm being super specific.

KOSSITH. LOVE. INTEREST.

I mean it. I don't care if they're Tal-Vashoth (sp?) or still a part of the Qun and they're being weird to the PC. But yeah, I want that. Even if it ends up breaking my PC's little stabby-stabby/fireball-flingin' heart at some point. (sweet feast day Andraste, I already went through that with Morrigan, so you KNOW I can take it.) Thats what I wants.

*nods*

So yeah thats my 2 coppers.

[hoorayforicecream]

RinjiRenee wrote...

And, no, not all sex scenes are meant to be titilating or arousing.  Ever seen Game of Thrones?

I'm really not a fan of the game of thrones sex scenes. Several of them seem very gratuitous, and it's even coined a new term in hollywood called "sexposition", wherein a character does an infodump for the viewer while (s)he and/or other people have sex. Granted, the scenes really aren't meant to be titillating or arousing, but many of them still do feel gratuitous. My personal theory is that it's another of the producers' budget-saving endeavors. It's easier to have two people humping while explaining the history of a nation than to show it.

[TEWR]

David Gaider wrote...

Ummm... yeah.

What you're describing is not simpler, it's actually more difficult.

Never said it was simpler . In fact, I was laboring under the assumption that it'd be more complex because of what it was. It's an alternative, surely. An unfeasible one at the moment now that you've told me about the issues associated with making a scene.

I don't know the intricacies associated with scene-making and model creating, so when I propose an idea like this it's out of ignorance and optimism.

Still, it's something to keep in mind IMO, should the engine the game runs on ever permit it -- if it's upgraded to such a degree of course.

Question: You say that the dress is a part of the model. Would it be possible to make a blanket a part of the model as well in a sex scene?

Basically, create a model that has the romance covered by a blanket enough to not go "OMG ******" but also doesn't go "OMG DRY HUMPING".

David Gaider wrote...

This doesn't mean they won't be there, as my opinion isn't the only one that matters, but my preference would be to have the "culmination" scene of a romance vary according to the character. Sexual depictions are fine for sexual characters (like, say, Isabela)... but even then if that leads to people going on about how they needed to see Isabela's ****** or Anders' ass in order for it to be a "real" or "adult" romance... then I'd just rather not contribute to it. And I think that's all I'll say about that.

Personally speaking, it's not that I need it there to make it adult. It already is adult without it based on the nature of what transpires. 

But it certainly helps to flesh out the adultness even more IMO, and thus I would like to see it. If that makes sense.

[Firewolf99]

D'you know what? I went back and read my post, and realized, "Yeah, actually. Wasn't that the point?"

Thanks guys.

But anyway, Okay, maybe Fenris needs emotional distance: But then give us more of an indication of that. Or better yet, give us the chance to get it wrong! Just, more of a relationship or exploration of the ties between characters basically. (this can apply to none romance characters too, btw)

[upsettingshorts]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Sex is between consenting parties. Not really the same thing.

And watch as BobSmith backtracks from his unsustainable position like the wind.

Not all the of examples I listed myself are rape scenes.  They still aren't meant to be gratuitous or titilating and inform on character. 

Game of Thrones is a poor example, let's not waste a ton of time trying to tear it down for being one.  It has scenes that inform on character, and gratuitous sexposition as well.  Move on.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 25 avril 2012 - 03:19 .

[AkiKishi]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

If your dipicting sex and it's not titilating to at least some degree , then you have failed. Sex and romance is not the same thing obviously.

Completely and utterly wrong.  Easy example:  Schindler's List.  Another easy example:  Shame.  Another easy example:  Irreversible.  Another easy example:  The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.

All these films have sex scenes.  All these films have sex scenes not meant to titlate at all.  All these films have sex scenes that inform on character.

I mean, if you're going to get off to Amon Goeth taking advantage of a concentration camp prisoner, that's your business I guess.  But your argument is based on nothing but your own expectations and desires, ones which not everyone shares. 

You believe sex scenes in games have failed if they are not titilating.  Because you want to be titilated.  They do not have to serve this purpose by rule.

I thought it was obvious this was about consenting characters. Depicting anything else is an entirely different matter.

[mesmerizedish]

BobSmith101 wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...
Not all depictions of sex are meant to be titilating.

Which is why DA2 did it so much better than DA:O.  There was intimacy without the hilarity or uncanny valley going on.  And really, I want it to stay that way.

If your dipicting sex and it's not titilating to at least some degree , then you have failed. Sex and romance is not the same thing obviously.

What about a rape scene? Did you get off while Noomi screamed in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo?

Sex is between consenting parties. Not really the same thing.

Uh-huh. Get back to me when you're ready to stop fabricating fantasy defintions for words.

[Dhiro]

Many - I'm not going to say "all" or anything - of The Witcher's sex scenes are made so the player can, well, get off.

And that's ok. Not all sex scenes must be deep and say something about the character like Dragon Age II's - there's nothing wrong in just wanting some porn.

But just because some people find the sex scenes in The Witcher 2 hot, that doesn't means all romances - especially in a different company with a different way to do things - should include something like that, if at all.

[syllogi]

the_one_54321 wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...
And, no, not all sex scenes are meant to be titilating or arousing.  Ever seen Game of Thrones?

You have got to s****** me...

I've seen game of thrones, and there is not a single instance of nudity in that show that was not intended to be entirely gratuitous. Many of them felt like "hey, they are supposed to be having sex, but instead of using the description in the book lets have them thrusting and grunting in doggy style. Or here, where there's a conversation with Tyrion, lets just have him surround with naked hookers. I think that would be cool." 

I am not exaggerating.

Well, we can thank the innovative creative consultant for that.

Seriously, I would be a considered a super fan of GRRM's books, but I LOATHE how sex scenes are handled in the HBO show.  That would be a great example of how to completely disgust a portion of your audience.