443 respuestas en este tema

[thedancingdruid]

@Teddie Sage thanks for the link. The derailed rant aside, as it doesn't add to actually discussing the content of the interview, I'm glad to have gotten a chance to see it nonetheless.

It is always welcome to see DG's passion for his creations, you can see it in his eyes when he talks about his characters.

Mr. Gaider, if you're still peeking in on the thread, please don't totally rule out a fourth novel at some point. I, like many, have thoroughly enjoyed Stolen Throne, The Calling and Asunder. They provide such rich threads to add to the universe, and the universe, in my opinion, is so much better for it.

Editado por dafangirl, 30 mayo 2012 - 12:33 .

[Wulfram]

BobSmith101 wrote...

The way I see it you can make it either shallow or off limits. I'd rather fully realised set characters than watered down flip-floppers even if that means less to choose from overall.

I think you're creating a false dichotomy.

Were Leliana and Zevran shallow?

[AkiKishi]

Wulfram wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

The way I see it you can make it either shallow or off limits. I'd rather fully realised set characters than watered down flip-floppers even if that means less to choose from overall.

I think you're creating a false dichotomy.

Were Leliana and Zevran shallow?

They were written specifically as bisexual characters not flip-floppers. I have no problem with bisexual character who are bisexual irrespective of the PC. Just like characters should be straight or gay irrespective of the PC.100% of their lines , or 100% of the pie was devoted to it.

Editado por BobSmith101, 30 mayo 2012 - 12:42 .

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

If you've got 50 lines for a gay and a straight romance, you can spend them as:

(numbers equally made up)

1 character with 40 lines that apply to both and 5 each for lines specific to gender, or 2 characters each with 25 lines - or more likely, 35 lines for the straight romance and 15 for the gay one.

The second seems to leave you with a shallower romance than the first.

The way I see it you can make it either shallow or off limits. I'd rather fully realised set characters than watered down flip-floppers even if that means less to choose from overall.

Or, since all the romances are aimed at "Hawke", you can have 50 lines, with an easter egg type scenario for one or the other gender, if you wanted.  I see a lot of the claim that it cheapens the character, but I have yet to see an explanation other than "I said so".  Let's look at the "everyone you meet is bi" claim, shall we?

Varric:  Hmm, seems like he can like the hero, no matter the gender, but since he's also not a romance option, how can anyone claim he's bi?

Aveline:  She's married to Wesley when we meet her, and the only person she shows sincere interest in is Donnic, who is also a guy.  Where do we get bi from that?

Isabela:  She's not bi, she's trysexual, if it's sex, she wants to try it.  However, she'll go either way, and is open about it, so we can label her as bi, since she would, if she knew what that meant.

Fenris:  A former slave, to a Tevinter mage, who implies that he's had sexual relations with Fenris.  It's not hard to believe that his sexuality would stem from that, so we can say bi.

Bethany/Carver:  Our sibling, so paying any kind of attention to their sexual preference is kind of creepy, but either way, at least with Bethany to end game, and Carver through Act I, I have seen nothing that indicates what they prefer.  So we can't say one way or the other.

Anders:  While my fHawke was given no lines of dialog to confirm it, she always suspected there was more to Karl than just a friendship.  However, as I indicated in my last post, he's still not inconsistent, but merely a man trying to get laid.  Since he can go either way for the hero, we could slap that label on, if you wanted to.

Merrill:  It's not inconceivable that she's a lesbian.  After all, the only person that she was close to prior to joining your little group was the Keeper, who is female.  There is nothing in game to suggest they had a sexual relationship, but, there is also nothing to suggest she didn't.  She can fall for mHawke because he's powerful, and showing interest, or leading by strong example, and gaining Rivalry.  But it still comes down to being powerful.  So maybe it's more she's in awe of, instead of in love with, but she doesn't know how to express it?

Sebastian:  Cannot be romanced by mHawke, so bi doesn't fit.  I also saved him for last because it's possible that not everyone has the DLC.

So, "Everyone is bi" is an invalid arguement.  Since it's invalid, how can any points derived from that position be valid?

[AkiKishi]

robertthebard wrote...
Or, since all the romances are aimed at "Hawke", you can have 50 lines, with an easter egg type scenario for one or the other gender, if you wanted.  I see a lot of the claim that it cheapens the character, but I have yet to see an explanation other than "I said so".  Let's look at the "everyone you meet is bi" claim, shall we?

Varric:  Hmm, seems like he can like the hero, no matter the gender, but since he's also not a romance option, how can anyone claim he's bi?

Aveline:  She's married to Wesley when we meet her, and the only person she shows sincere interest in is Donnic, who is also a guy.  Where do we get bi from that?

Isabela:  She's not bi, she's trysexual, if it's sex, she wants to try it.  However, she'll go either way, and is open about it, so we can label her as bi, since she would, if she knew what that meant.

Fenris:  A former slave, to a Tevinter mage, who implies that he's had sexual relations with Fenris.  It's not hard to believe that his sexuality would stem from that, so we can say bi.

Bethany/Carver:  Our sibling, so paying any kind of attention to their sexual preference is kind of creepy, but either way, at least with Bethany to end game, and Carver through Act I, I have seen nothing that indicates what they prefer.  So we can't say one way or the other.

Anders:  While my fHawke was given no lines of dialog to confirm it, she always suspected there was more to Karl than just a friendship.  However, as I indicated in my last post, he's still not inconsistent, but merely a man trying to get laid.  Since he can go either way for the hero, we could slap that label on, if you wanted to.

Merrill:  It's not inconceivable that she's a lesbian.  After all, the only person that she was close to prior to joining your little group was the Keeper, who is female.  There is nothing in game to suggest they had a sexual relationship, but, there is also nothing to suggest she didn't.  She can fall for mHawke because he's powerful, and showing interest, or leading by strong example, and gaining Rivalry.  But it still comes down to being powerful.  So maybe it's more she's in awe of, instead of in love with, but she doesn't know how to express it?

Sebastian:  Cannot be romanced by mHawke, so bi doesn't fit.  I also saved him for last because it's possible that not everyone has the DLC.

So, "Everyone is bi" is an invalid arguement.  Since it's invalid, how can any points derived from that position be valid?

So many lines wasted on not addressing the point. Try again with half that ammount.

[Urzon]

Yet, the set amount of lines seems more of the developer's fault then anything else.

You keep saying its shallow and watered down, yet the game itself seems that way towards the end. They rushed production, so they made cuts to everything. That includes romance scenes and dialouge, i'm sure.

The character writers could easily come up with new and better dialouge for all the LIs, but they can't input that into the game since it's too late. They would have to get all the animators back to film the scenes, not to mention all the VAs to speak them.

If i had to lay blame for watered down romances, i would blame them rushing the game out to sell. Not them making all the characters "flip-floppers". The DA writers always showed us excellent written characters and romances. They could have done the same with the DA2 characters if they weren't rushed so bad.

Editado por Urzon, 30 mayo 2012 - 01:03 .

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
Or, since all the romances are aimed at "Hawke", you can have 50 lines, with an easter egg type scenario for one or the other gender, if you wanted.  I see a lot of the claim that it cheapens the character, but I have yet to see an explanation other than "I said so".  Let's look at the "everyone you meet is bi" claim, shall we?

Varric:  Hmm, seems like he can like the hero, no matter the gender, but since he's also not a romance option, how can anyone claim he's bi?

Aveline:  She's married to Wesley when we meet her, and the only person she shows sincere interest in is Donnic, who is also a guy.  Where do we get bi from that?

Isabela:  She's not bi, she's trysexual, if it's sex, she wants to try it.  However, she'll go either way, and is open about it, so we can label her as bi, since she would, if she knew what that meant.

Fenris:  A former slave, to a Tevinter mage, who implies that he's had sexual relations with Fenris.  It's not hard to believe that his sexuality would stem from that, so we can say bi.

Bethany/Carver:  Our sibling, so paying any kind of attention to their sexual preference is kind of creepy, but either way, at least with Bethany to end game, and Carver through Act I, I have seen nothing that indicates what they prefer.  So we can't say one way or the other.

Anders:  While my fHawke was given no lines of dialog to confirm it, she always suspected there was more to Karl than just a friendship.  However, as I indicated in my last post, he's still not inconsistent, but merely a man trying to get laid.  Since he can go either way for the hero, we could slap that label on, if you wanted to.

Merrill:  It's not inconceivable that she's a lesbian.  After all, the only person that she was close to prior to joining your little group was the Keeper, who is female.  There is nothing in game to suggest they had a sexual relationship, but, there is also nothing to suggest she didn't.  She can fall for mHawke because he's powerful, and showing interest, or leading by strong example, and gaining Rivalry.  But it still comes down to being powerful.  So maybe it's more she's in awe of, instead of in love with, but she doesn't know how to express it?

Sebastian:  Cannot be romanced by mHawke, so bi doesn't fit.  I also saved him for last because it's possible that not everyone has the DLC.

So, "Everyone is bi" is an invalid arguement.  Since it's invalid, how can any points derived from that position be valid?

So many lines wasted on not addressing the point. Try again with half that ammount.

Your point is addressed.  Your point is everyone is bi, and they are weaker characters for it.  What else needs to be addressed?  Everyone is not bi, nor can everyone wear the herosexual label, so your point is invalid.

[AkiKishi]

robertthebard wrote...
Your point is addressed.  Your point is everyone is bi, and they are weaker characters for it.  What else needs to be addressed?  Everyone is not bi, nor can everyone wear the herosexual label, so your point is invalid.

No it's not, but if you can't see that , well too bad really. That you needed to reach so far is far more telling than what you actually said.

[Dutchess]

Oh, so this thread turned into a bisexuality discussion thread as well. Has this discussion not gotten old long ago?

I still fail to see how it makes Fenris a weaker character when he kissed my female Hawke in one playthrough, and slammed my male Hawke against a wall in another.

[AkiKishi]

Urzon wrote...

Yet, the set amount of lines seems more of the developer's fault then anything else.

You keep saying its shallow and watered down, yet the game itself seems that way towards the end. They rushed production, so they made cuts to everything. That includes romance scenes and dialouge, i'm sure.

The character writers could easily come up with new and better dialouge for all the LIs, but they can't input that into the game since it's too late. They would have to get all the animators back to film the scenes, not to mention all the VAs to speak them.

If i had to lay blame for watered down romances, i would blame them rushing the game out to sell. Not them making all the characters "flip-floppers". The DA writers always showed us excellent written characters and romances. They could have done the same with the DA2 characters if they weren't rushed so bad.

While true I don't see that as excusing anything.

There are only 2 DA games. The one with the good characters had fixed characters. The one with the shallow characters had the flip-floppers.It's less about rushing and more about finate resources/costs.

For example if you have to pay a VA for 100 lines that's what you get. The VA won't do the alternate lines for free. If you want another 100 lines you have pay for another 100 lines.

[Reznore57]

In DA0 , nobody cares that Li didn't mind your pc race...
I mean does a relationship between a human and a dwarf is very common in the world of dragon Age?
As far as i can tell , not really...
You had 3 humans willing to go sexy time with your proud dwarf anyway.Because they were already a bit of warden -sexual going on.
There are characters that won't be interested in you , Aveline , Varric , sten etc...Li are here to give the player a romance , that 's what they are designed for.

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
Your point is addressed.  Your point is everyone is bi, and they are weaker characters for it.  What else needs to be addressed?  Everyone is not bi, nor can everyone wear the herosexual label, so your point is invalid.

No it's not, but if you can't see that , well too bad really. That you needed to reach so far is far more telling than what you actually said.

I understand you perfectly, it's that way because you said so.  I addressed that earlier too.  Here's the kicker, Zev and Leliana were OK, because they were written to be bi, but other characters, that you have a preconceived notion of, should not be OK, even though they are written to be herosexual.  Again, this comes back to because you said so.  Lay out some concrete shallowness here.  I went through the trouble of debunking your blanket statement of "everyone is bi", so do me a courtesy, demonstrate the shallowness that's not based entirely on "I said so".

[AkiKishi]

robertthebard wrote...
I understand you perfectly, it's that way because you said so.  I addressed that earlier too.  Here's the kicker, Zev and Leliana were OK, because they were written to be bi, but other characters, that you have a preconceived notion of, should not be OK, even though they are written to be herosexual.  Again, this comes back to because you said so.  Lay out some concrete shallowness here.  I went through the trouble of debunking your blanket statement of "everyone is bi", so do me a courtesy, demonstrate the shallowness that's not based entirely on "I said so".

Character who are written to be bi are fine because 100% of their lines go into writing them that way.

Herosexual characters flip-flop. You get variety at the expense of depth.

Unless you can conjour lines out of nothing, that's how it is. Sure some people might be so taken with the idea they can romance anyone ,that will overlook it. But the characters are still going to have less lines and less depth. I could go you tube many many examples, but it's really not worth the effort.

You debunked nothing, which is kind of the point. You set up a straw man with nothing to do characters who are LI's then knocked it down. Everyone is bi is the title of a thread from when it was first announced in DA2 it's an in joke.

[Wulfram]

BobSmith101 wrote...

They were written specifically as bisexual characters not flip-floppers. I have no problem with bisexual character who are bisexual irrespective of the PC. Just like characters should be straight or gay irrespective of the PC.100% of their lines , or 100% of the pie was devoted to it.

How would, for example, Merrill be written differently if she was "bisexual" rather than a "flip-flopper"?  And in what way would this cause less "shallowness"?

[Dutchess]

So if Anders, Merrill, and Fenris would have said: "Hi! I'm bi!" they would have been consistent and not shallow in your opinion?

[YohkoOhno]

One thing that makes me ponder the sexuality question people are bringing up again is this:

What would happen if other elements of the personality were randomized. Right now the sexual preference of the character is based on the players response. But what would people be saying if this or other items were randomized--say one of the companions turns out to be a traitor but it's randomized, or love interests are randomized. Or what if Bioware creates a custom experience based on character backgrounds or even a player-aimed startup quiz asking what kind of game experience they would like. This doesn't exist CURRENTLY in Bioware's games but it could in the future, look at the AI Director in Left for Dead or Skyrim's own randomizing system.

Would people be complaining as much if this kind of system was implemented--this seems like the start of that eventual direction.

Editado por YohkoOhno, 30 mayo 2012 - 02:24 .

[Wulfram]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

This has as a consequense that if 100 dialogue lines are available they need to be split up to adress both genders. Thus the total amount of lines that you can have with your LI gets cut in half ergo leading to a more 'shallow' romance because of that.

But the lines don't need to be split in half, because most of them will work for both sexes.  And it's misleading to compare it to one romance, when it's filling the role of two.

[whykikyouwhy]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Character who are written to be bi are fine because 100% of their lines go into writing them that way.

Herosexual characters flip-flop. You get variety at the expense of depth.

Unless you can conjour lines out of nothing, that's how it is. Sure some people might be so taken with the idea they can romance anyone ,that will overlook it. But the characters are still going to have less lines and less depth. I could go you tube many many examples, but it's really not worth the effort.

You debunked nothing, which is kind of the point. You set up a straw man with nothing to do characters who are LI's then knocked it down. Everyone is bi is the title of a thread from when it was first announced in DA2 it's an in joke.

I don't know that you can say that "100%" of the lines for Leliana or Zevran go into "writing them that way." In fact, it's only through conversation between your Warden and either character that you find out that they have had not only lovers in the past, but lovers who were the same gender. Does that make them bisexual? Perhaps in the modern context and penchant for labeling. But did either character classify or identify themselves as such? Not to my recollection. You could technically say that both characters were hero-sexual, because on a base game mechanic level, they were characters set aside to be LIs, and then set to be available to a PC of either gender. They just happen to relate a lot of backstory.

Both characters were open to discuss those details however. That is something inherent to their characters - openness about their pasts. And so it makes sense for them to share that with the Warden when conversation veers towards personal and romantic matters.

In DA2, several characters were less willing to talk about their personal lives, their backstories, their families, their pasts. Aveline doesn't open up much at all, and is often rather curt about dropping the subject when the conversation becomes personal. Fenris has difficulty reconciling his past. Merrill doesn't speak about her love life. Varric is not inclined to tip his hand about certain things in the years prior to meeting Hawke. So you have characters who are simply not as open to divulging information about themselves. Does that mean they "flip-flop?" No. Just because you do not know all of their intimate details does not mean that they do not have any, or that there were not any lovers, liaisons to speak of.

Perhaps where the difficulty lies for you is that DA2 has characters who are as revealing as those in DA:O. Not so chatty about personal things. Does that lack of information make them weak or shallow or watered down? IMO, no. Because discretion is really part of their character make-up. With the examples I listed above, you will receive more backstory, more information as the game progresses and if you continue to handle their quests and engage in conversation options.

[Dakota Strider]

One of the few things I thought that ME3 did well, was how it handled a couple of gay companions/characters. The comm officer and the shuttle pilot (forget their names offhand, and don't care enough about ME3 anymore to look them up) both were well defined. As a player who does not rp homosexual relationships, I think the way your "straight" Shepard was allowed to interact with them was very well done. Both Shepard, and the possible LI could give subtle hints if they were interested in each other, rather than the blatantly rushed come-ons/advances all the LI's made in DA2.

Since ME3 came out after DA2, perhaps Bioware had learned its lesson, and corrected what seemed to be very bad character writing in regards to the companions. Or perhaps the ME3 team had no influence from DA2, and just instinctively wrote that part of the character interaction in a better way. Regardless, hopefully that when DA3 is written, they can use the ME3 example.

I have said it before in different ways, but I agree with most of what BobSmith is saying. If you are going to make a companion straight, gay or bi, keep them that way for every play through. Do not water them down, by making them do things differently depending upon who the protagonist's gender or preference is. That makes weaker characters, and weaker characters make weaker stories.

[AkiKishi]

renjility wrote...

So if Anders, Merrill, and Fenris would have said: "Hi! I'm bi!" they would have been consistent and not shallow in your opinion?

Well Zevren for example talks about attitudes to his sexuality by society. That's one layer right there missing from a flip-flopping character.

That's a little more than "Hi , I'm bi".

[Wulfram]

Well, as far as friendship/rivalry goes I'd say that a character who can only interact with the player in one way, which is incapable of reflecting the way the PC has treated them or what decisions they have made, could be considered shallow.

[AkiKishi]

Dakota Strider wrote...

One of the few things I thought that ME3 did well, was how it handled a couple of gay companions/characters. The comm officer and the shuttle pilot (forget their names offhand, and don't care enough about ME3 anymore to look them up) both were well defined. As a player who does not rp homosexual relationships, I think the way your "straight" Shepard was allowed to interact with them was very well done. Both Shepard, and the possible LI could give subtle hints if they were interested in each other, rather than the blatantly rushed come-ons/advances all the LI's made in DA2.

Since ME3 came out after DA2, perhaps Bioware had learned its lesson, and corrected what seemed to be very bad character writing in regards to the companions. Or perhaps the ME3 team had no influence from DA2, and just instinctively wrote that part of the character interaction in a better way. Regardless, hopefully that when DA3 is written, they can use the ME3 example.

I have said it before in different ways, but I agree with most of what BobSmith is saying. If you are going to make a companion straight, gay or bi, keep them that way for every play through. Do not water them down, by making them do things differently depending upon who the protagonist's gender or preference is. That makes weaker characters, and weaker characters make weaker stories.

Cortez and Trayner. More could have been done with them, but the same could be said of anyone not Liara when it comes to ME3.
I think Liara stole the show when it came to lines,scenes and plot moments. But that's another issue. Her role was almost JRPGesque in how she was linked to the plot.

Editado por BobSmith101, 30 mayo 2012 - 03:01 .

[David Gaider]

Dakota Strider wrote...
I have said it before in different ways, but I agree with most of what BobSmith is saying. If you are going to make a companion straight, gay or bi, keep them that way for every play through. Do not water them down, by making them do things differently depending upon who the protagonist's gender or preference is. That makes weaker characters, and weaker characters make weaker stories.

Sorry, but you guys can say this until you're blue in the face. But just saying it doesn't make it true.

All four love interests in DA2 were written exactly the same way, as a single character who responded to the situation at hand. That we left things open enough for players to interpret on their own was intentional, but to mistake that interpretation as an objective truth is myopic -- and if you can't see that, then you can't see that.

If you didn't like how the character was written, that's fine... but to ascribe it to the fact they didn't discuss their past relationships enough, or are somehow baffled that Anders would not mention his relationship with a man to a woman (in what world would someone do this?) or that bisexuality (in deed or by virtue of their natural preference) is somehow inherently inconsistent unless the person in question actively mentions past experiences, says more about you that it says about "watered-down characters".

I've always said that ideally we'd have a spread of characters that covered different sexualities, if we had the resources to do so. I can't help but roll my eyes at the thought that, should we ever do so, some of you would assume we did it to appease the people who make the "everyone is bisexual" complaint. Frankly, the more I read of this conversation, the more I'm leaning towards never doing that even if we had the resources.

Which probably means I should stop reading, as there are benefits to that kind of spread no matter how much this talk annoys me-- greater variety being one of them. I recognize there are some who will declare my participation here to be "arrogant", but I've tried my best to read and understand where this idea comes from... and I just can't do it, sorry.