443 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Since the universe in which one Hawke exists is clearly different from the univerise in which another Hawke exists, I see no reason to assume a host of similiarites where those similarities are not evident.

I also see no reason to assume that the universe in which one Hawke exists is the same universe as one on which any particular Warden exists. The Anders I meet in Awakening might bear only a slight resemblance to the Anders I meet in DA2.

Each game stands alone. Each playthrough stands alone.

[nightscrawl]

--- Minor SPOILER for Asunder novel ---

iakus wrote...

This "Schrodinger's sexuality" thing, among others, is only going to make creative a cohesive universe harder as more games and literature come out.

Meh, it really depends on what a writer chooses to say. For example, if in Asunder when talking about mages hooking up in dark corners and so forth that Rhys had dallied with another boy/man, or it was mentioned that since the hookups were frowned on by the templars in general, gender wasn't such a big deal, or something along those lines it could be done. Even though it's revealed that he and his female friend Adrian once had a thing, and he later ends up with a woman, having those previous lines, or even just a single same-sex pronoun could imply that same-sex relationships are either common, or not a big deal. There only has to be one or two throw away lines to remind us as readers and gamers to not view sexuality through the same lens we do in the real world.

I don't see how it hurts cohesion. You have a LI and you get together. That's it. It doesn't matter what gender either of you are. If you have an NPC, say Fenris who you don't romance in DA2 but he appears in DA3. The cohesion for him would only be broken if he got out of character and directly mentioned a specific gender in any given conversation. However, this is not typical for Fenris, Merrill, or even DA2 Anders (in general conversation), so having said NPC do that would be a break from character anyway, having nothing to do with switching their preference, even if it's only from your perceived one.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The Anders I meet in Awakening might bear only a slight resemblance to the Anders I meet in DA2.

Might? Does he ever? Aside from not liking templars very much.

At any rate, if you do an import save, aren't you specifically and purposefully planning that the two games take place in the same universe?

Modifié par nightscrawl, 30 mai 2012 - 11:06 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

nightscrawl wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The Anders I meet in Awakening might bear only a slight resemblance to the Anders I meet in DA2.

Might? Does he ever? Aside from not liking templars very much.

I haven't actually played Awakening.  I've resisted installing patch 1.03 for a very long time (because it make lieutenants unshatterable), and Awakening requires it.

At any rate, if you do an import save, aren't you specifically and purposefully planning that the two games take place in the same universe?

You're certainly choosing to have the same events occur in both.  Believing any symmetry beyond that seems unnecessary.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 30 mai 2012 - 11:33 .

[AkiKishi]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Since the universe in which one Hawke exists is clearly different from the univerise in which another Hawke exists, I see no reason to assume a host of similiarites where those similarities are not evident.

I also see no reason to assume that the universe in which one Hawke exists is the same universe as one on which any particular Warden exists. The Anders I meet in Awakening might bear only a slight resemblance to the Anders I meet in DA2.

Each game stands alone. Each playthrough stands alone.

No it does not. Bioware purposely engages the player, not the character. Cameos for people a character has never met. Who's benifit do you think those are there for ? 
Saving states between games, when the protagonist according to you exists in a different universe ? Bioware seems to disagree.

They have set this up. If they are being conisistent between games, then they should be consistent within the same game. Otherwise, why even bother carrying characters over when a new one will do since the current PC has never met them.

[AkiKishi]

iakus wrote...
Call me crazy, but I prefer game worlds where the PCs and thier actions are the only "point of divergence" within the game's continuity.  This "Schrodinger's sexuality" thing, among others, is only going to make creative a cohesive universe harder as more games and literature come out.

They should put that term in the wiki.

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Since the universe in which one Hawke exists is clearly different from the univerise in which another Hawke exists, I see no reason to assume a host of similiarites where those similarities are not evident.

I also see no reason to assume that the universe in which one Hawke exists is the same universe as one on which any particular Warden exists. The Anders I meet in Awakening might bear only a slight resemblance to the Anders I meet in DA2.

Each game stands alone. Each playthrough stands alone.

No it does not. Bioware purposely engages the player, not the character. Cameos for people a character has never met. Who's benifit do you think those are there for ? 
Saving states between games, when the protagonist according to you exists in a different universe ? Bioware seems to disagree.

They have set this up. If they are being conisistent between games, then they should be consistent within the same game. Otherwise, why even bother carrying characters over when a new one will do since the current PC has never met them.

Gee, I don't know, maybe for the benefit of the story?  Even then, there's a big plot hole in Act III where the PC doesn't know somebody, and realistically, it's more likely that they should, unless the PC never set foot in the Chantry, or the tavern, before the game opens up in the prologue.

It's not broken just because you think it is.  Reading the forums, a mistake on my part, was the reason I didn't buy this game when it came out, one that I now regret, having played it a couple of times through with saves at various stages on various characters to try other things.  I denied myself some fun believing that it was broken based on what other people said, even after playing MMO's and reading on their forums how broken the games where.  I should have realized that for every dissatisfied person, there were hundreds that weren't.  Give or take a few, since, on MMO forums, only about 10% of the player base actually use the forums, and most of them are unhappy about aspects of the game, and therefore it's bad.  This has been your position since I started noticing your posts.  Certain aspects of metagaming are bad, therefore the game is bad.  It's your opinion, and you have every right to have it, but it doesn't mean it's fact.

To use your pie analogy, just because you get smaller pieces at a time, it doesn't mean you don't get the whole thing.  You just get it longer.  This means that you may indeed get different dialog in one game than you did in another, even following similar paths.  If you're going to say that that means DA2 is bad, then Origins is also, because if you attempt to follow the romance path with Alistair, or Morrigan on a same sex Warden, you're going to get different dialog, and you're not going to get a romance.  I find it inconsistent that you believe that makes Origins good, but DA2 bad.  Of note is the fact that you will also get different dialog with Leliana on a male Warden as opposed to the female Warden, even though you will still get the romance.  Zevran was a one off for the achievement, so I don't know if he has different dialog for the male Warden, since I chose to do the romance on a female.

[AkiKishi]

robertthebard wrote...
Gee, I don't know, maybe for the benefit of the story?  Even then, there's a big plot hole in Act III where the PC doesn't know somebody, and realistically, it's more likely that they should, unless the PC never set foot in the Chantry, or the tavern, before the game opens up in the prologue.

It's not broken just because you think it is.  Reading the forums, a mistake on my part, was the reason I didn't buy this game when it came out, one that I now regret, having played it a couple of times through with saves at various stages on various characters to try other things.  I denied myself some fun believing that it was broken based on what other people said, even after playing MMO's and reading on their forums how broken the games where.  I should have realized that for every dissatisfied person, there were hundreds that weren't.  Give or take a few, since, on MMO forums, only about 10% of the player base actually use the forums, and most of them are unhappy about aspects of the game, and therefore it's bad.  This has been your position since I started noticing your posts.  Certain aspects of metagaming are bad, therefore the game is bad.  It's your opinion, and you have every right to have it, but it doesn't mean it's fact.

To use your pie analogy, just because you get smaller pieces at a time, it doesn't mean you don't get the whole thing.  You just get it longer.  This means that you may indeed get different dialog in one game than you did in another, even following similar paths.  If you're going to say that that means DA2 is bad, then Origins is also, because if you attempt to follow the romance path with Alistair, or Morrigan on a same sex Warden, you're going to get different dialog, and you're not going to get a romance.  I find it inconsistent that you believe that makes Origins good, but DA2 bad.  Of note is the fact that you will also get different dialog with Leliana on a male Warden as opposed to the female Warden, even though you will still get the romance.  Zevran was a one off for the achievement, so I don't know if he has different dialog for the male Warden, since I chose to do the romance on a female.

What does the Alistair cameo add to the story of Hawke ?

There are numerous points in DA2 where Hawke does not know someone the player might and vice versa. DA2 is bad on any number of levels take your pick. Just because you think it's good does not mean it is.

Origins is consistent DA2 is not. Maybe you prefer versitility and generic over depth, but that's what it comes down to.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 31 mai 2012 - 11:24 .

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
Gee, I don't know, maybe for the benefit of the story?  Even then, there's a big plot hole in Act III where the PC doesn't know somebody, and realistically, it's more likely that they should, unless the PC never set foot in the Chantry, or the tavern, before the game opens up in the prologue.

It's not broken just because you think it is.  Reading the forums, a mistake on my part, was the reason I didn't buy this game when it came out, one that I now regret, having played it a couple of times through with saves at various stages on various characters to try other things.  I denied myself some fun believing that it was broken based on what other people said, even after playing MMO's and reading on their forums how broken the games where.  I should have realized that for every dissatisfied person, there were hundreds that weren't.  Give or take a few, since, on MMO forums, only about 10% of the player base actually use the forums, and most of them are unhappy about aspects of the game, and therefore it's bad.  This has been your position since I started noticing your posts.  Certain aspects of metagaming are bad, therefore the game is bad.  It's your opinion, and you have every right to have it, but it doesn't mean it's fact.

To use your pie analogy, just because you get smaller pieces at a time, it doesn't mean you don't get the whole thing.  You just get it longer.  This means that you may indeed get different dialog in one game than you did in another, even following similar paths.  If you're going to say that that means DA2 is bad, then Origins is also, because if you attempt to follow the romance path with Alistair, or Morrigan on a same sex Warden, you're going to get different dialog, and you're not going to get a romance.  I find it inconsistent that you believe that makes Origins good, but DA2 bad.  Of note is the fact that you will also get different dialog with Leliana on a male Warden as opposed to the female Warden, even though you will still get the romance.  Zevran was a one off for the achievement, so I don't know if he has different dialog for the male Warden, since I chose to do the romance on a female.

What does the Alistair cameo add to the story of Hawke ?

There are numerous points in DA2 where Hawke does not know someone the player might and vice versa. DA2 is bad on any number of levels take your pick. Just because you think it's good does not mean it is.

Origins is consistent DA2 is not. Maybe you prefer versitility and generic over depth, but that's what it comes down to.

When two people are living in a town the size of Lothering, it's not very likely they didn't meet.  I know Wynne, as a Warden, but if she showed up in Kirkwall at all, there's no way I'd know who she was on Hawke.  This is not inconsistent, this is how it works.  It's extremely possible that I would know who Zevran is, depending on whether or not I'm romancing Isabela.  This is not inconsistent, in fact, it's the definition of consistency, since they knew each other prior to the events in Origins.  If I still had many of my DAO saves, Alistair would be dead, hard to make a cameo then.  Again, you are stuck on your metagaming perspective, and that's fine.  Feel free to ruin it for yourself by obssessing on things one Hawke would have no way to know.  As I said, it's a valid play style, but it does not equate to a bad game.

In Origins, I spent hours just chatting up companions.  This, to me, is the one thing I missed about companion relations.  That one Hawke may get a line of dialog another won't doesn't bother me as much as all the potential lines I could have had compared to Origins.  I didn't like that aspect much, but I don't feel it made the game bad.

ETA:  Depending on the cameo, it can add a clue to how to proceed if you want to reach a certain goal.

Modifié par robertthebard, 31 mai 2012 - 11:40 .

[AkiKishi]

robertthebard wrote...
When two people are living in a town the size of Lothering, it's not very likely they didn't meet.  I know Wynne, as a Warden, but if she showed up in Kirkwall at all, there's no way I'd know who she was on Hawke.  This is not inconsistent, this is how it works.  It's extremely possible that I would know who Zevran is, depending on whether or not I'm romancing Isabela.  This is not inconsistent, in fact, it's the definition of consistency, since they knew each other prior to the events in Origins.  If I still had many of my DAO saves, Alistair would be dead, hard to make a cameo then.  Again, you are stuck on your metagaming perspective, and that's fine.  Feel free to ruin it for yourself by obssessing on things one Hawke would have no way to know.  As I said, it's a valid play style, but it does not equate to a bad game.

In Origins, I spent hours just chatting up companions.  This, to me, is the one thing I missed about companion relations.  That one Hawke may get a line of dialog another won't doesn't bother me as much as all the potential lines I could have had compared to Origins.  I didn't like that aspect much, but I don't feel it made the game bad.

ETA:  Depending on the cameo, it can add a clue to how to proceed if you want to reach a certain goal.

Ok specific example. In DA2 Hawke greets some people in chapter 2. You have no idea who they are. That's disconnect between player and character.
Cameo's are there for the player not the character. While I don't take part in threads calling for XXX to be in DA whatever, many people do. It's got nothing to do with Metagaming, that is why the characters are put there by Bioware.

Because as I've being saying from the start , those lines are like a pie, sliced up into different portions for different aspects. You get less dialogue as a result. It's like you see the problem , but you don't see why it it happened between DAO and DA2.

[Emzamination]

BobSmith101 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
When two people are living in a town the size of Lothering, it's not very likely they didn't meet.  I know Wynne, as a Warden, but if she showed up in Kirkwall at all, there's no way I'd know who she was on Hawke.  This is not inconsistent, this is how it works.  It's extremely possible that I would know who Zevran is, depending on whether or not I'm romancing Isabela.  This is not inconsistent, in fact, it's the definition of consistency, since they knew each other prior to the events in Origins.  If I still had many of my DAO saves, Alistair would be dead, hard to make a cameo then.  Again, you are stuck on your metagaming perspective, and that's fine.  Feel free to ruin it for yourself by obssessing on things one Hawke would have no way to know.  As I said, it's a valid play style, but it does not equate to a bad game.

In Origins, I spent hours just chatting up companions.  This, to me, is the one thing I missed about companion relations.  That one Hawke may get a line of dialog another won't doesn't bother me as much as all the potential lines I could have had compared to Origins.  I didn't like that aspect much, but I don't feel it made the game bad.

ETA:  Depending on the cameo, it can add a clue to how to proceed if you want to reach a certain goal.

Ok specific example. In DA2 Hawke greets some people in chapter 2. You have no idea who they are. That's disconnect between player and character.
Cameo's are there for the player not the character. While I don't take part in threads calling for XXX to be in DA whatever, many people do. It's got nothing to do with Metagaming, that is why the characters are put there by Bioware.

Because as I've being saying from the start , those lines are like a pie, sliced up into different portions for different aspects. You get less dialogue as a result. It's like you see the problem , but you don't see why it it happened between DAO and DA2.

You're using shop keepers as an example? Duuuuuuude...

[Kidd]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Congrats for proving my other point. I see they went for the generic approach if that is indeed true.

How is romance dialogue "generic" because it can be said to people of both genders? The LI is much more importantly a "romantic partner" than they are a "man" or "woman."

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

No it does not. Bioware purposely engages the player, not the character.

A mistake, I think.

They have set this up. If they are being conisistent between games, then they should be consistent within the same game. Otherwise, why even bother carrying characters over when a new one will do since the current PC has never met them.

Your desire to see this consistency across playthroughs is a problem of your own making.  I've explained in some detail in this thread how to make the problem go away, and I've also explained that you don't have to do that if you think the cure is worse than the disease.

Pick your poison.  Either you accept that everyone is bi, or you accept that the universes are separate.  Whichever circumstance you prefer can be true for you.

But if you insist that neither be the case, then get used to disappointment.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Because as I've being saying from the start , those lines are like a pie, sliced up into different portions for different aspects. You get less dialogue as a result. It's like you see the problem , but you don't see why it it happened between DAO and DA2.

Except you don't get less.  You get exactly the same content regardless of Hawke's gender.

[AkiKishi]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Because as I've being saying from the start , those lines are like a pie, sliced up into different portions for different aspects. You get less dialogue as a result. It's like you see the problem , but you don't see why it it happened between DAO and DA2.

Except you don't get less.  You get exactly the same content regardless of Hawke's gender.

Let's get this straight. They use the same lines for both male and female no changes? They don't record seperate lines for each ? 

Because if it's the latter, then you get less.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Let's get this straight. They use the same lines for both male and female no changes? They don't record seperate lines for each ? 

Because if it's the latter, then you get less.

It's the former.  You don't get less.  That's what David was saying earlier in the thread.

There might be a handful of differences throughout the game.  Anders mentioning his past with Karl is the only example I know.  They're very rare.

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
When two people are living in a town the size of Lothering, it's not very likely they didn't meet.  I know Wynne, as a Warden, but if she showed up in Kirkwall at all, there's no way I'd know who she was on Hawke.  This is not inconsistent, this is how it works.  It's extremely possible that I would know who Zevran is, depending on whether or not I'm romancing Isabela.  This is not inconsistent, in fact, it's the definition of consistency, since they knew each other prior to the events in Origins.  If I still had many of my DAO saves, Alistair would be dead, hard to make a cameo then.  Again, you are stuck on your metagaming perspective, and that's fine.  Feel free to ruin it for yourself by obssessing on things one Hawke would have no way to know.  As I said, it's a valid play style, but it does not equate to a bad game.

In Origins, I spent hours just chatting up companions.  This, to me, is the one thing I missed about companion relations.  That one Hawke may get a line of dialog another won't doesn't bother me as much as all the potential lines I could have had compared to Origins.  I didn't like that aspect much, but I don't feel it made the game bad.

ETA:  Depending on the cameo, it can add a clue to how to proceed if you want to reach a certain goal.

Ok specific example. In DA2 Hawke greets some people in chapter 2. You have no idea who they are. That's disconnect between player and character.
Cameo's are there for the player not the character. While I don't take part in threads calling for XXX to be in DA whatever, many people do. It's got nothing to do with Metagaming, that is why the characters are put there by Bioware.

Because as I've being saying from the start , those lines are like a pie, sliced up into different portions for different aspects. You get less dialogue as a result. It's like you see the problem , but you don't see why it it happened between DAO and DA2.

Here's the thing, the pie is the same size, no matter how many times you slice it.  Three years elapse between Chapter 1 and Chapter 2.  For you, it's been the duration of the cutscene.  It's relatively safe to assume that, since Chapter 1 didn't end in the Keep, it's safe to assume you didn't spend three years in there waiting for the cutscene to run.  You can greet merchants in Chapter 1 that you never met, because they were people that Hawke met doing his year to pay his way into the city.  I'm just wrapping up Chapt 2 for the third and fourth time, on two different Hawkes, and I don't recall any merchants, or any other people that I greeted that I hadn't met, barring some male enhancement and "you have won 60 million sovereigns" spam in the mail.  So I'm not sure where you're coming up with that, but I am old and forgetful, so maybe it's just me.

You see, this is the problem.  I'm playing DA2, and know I'm playing DA2, and you're playing DA2, and wishing it was Origins.  In spite of this, I have yet to come across any dialog options on one Hawke that I don't get on another Hawke, since I won't romance Anders on a mHawke, personal preference.  Well, with the exception of how badly I butchered the first attempt at Isabela's romance.  This was, of course, my fault, not the game's, so there's no one to blame for that but me.  Also, once I get the romance concluded, I don't see any point in redoing it, right away, so I may never notice any differences.  I didn't come in expecting to play Origins, some of the changes are more than I would have liked, but they aren't necessarily bad, they are just different.  I can deal with it, some can't.

[Dakota Strider]

I don't mind if they slice up the pie, to give more people a piece. But, gosh darnit, make the pie much bigger. I like pie!!

[Kidd]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Let's get this straight. They use the same lines for both male and female no changes? They don't record seperate lines for each ? 

Because if it's the latter, then you get less.

I fail to see how we get less. If they had different lines, out of 100 lines, we'd have 50 lines for MaleHawke and 50 lines for LadyHawke. With most being the same, we get 95 lines for MaleHawke and 95 lines for LadyHawke. How is 95 less than 50?

My pulling numbers isn't a strawman btw, it's merely an abstraction since I'm not planning on buying the game for PC just to count the liens =D

[robertthebard]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Let's get this straight. They use the same lines for both male and female no changes? They don't record seperate lines for each ? 

Because if it's the latter, then you get less.

I fail to see how we get less. If they had different lines, out of 100 lines, we'd have 50 lines for MaleHawke and 50 lines for LadyHawke. With most being the same, we get 95 lines for MaleHawke and 95 lines for LadyHawke. How is 95 less than 50?

My pulling numbers isn't a strawman btw, it's merely an abstraction since I'm not planning on buying the game for PC just to count the liens =D

I guess it's like female armor in fantasy games, less is more.

[nightscrawl]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Let's get this straight. They use the same lines for both male and female no changes? They don't record seperate lines for each ? 

Because if it's the latter, then you get less.

I don't think you get less.

Let's just say -- numbers made up, yes I know you did some of this already -- that for the first scene you have 25 lines for each gender. They are 25 lines regardless. If 5 of those lines are gender specific, it does not mean that you would get 10 lines if Anders was written solely for a one-sex romance. The other 5 lines might never have existed at all in the writers' minds, leaving you still with just the 25 total for Anders as the writers planned, or as their pre-defined (read: across all companions) dialogue quotas dictate.

Here is a really extreme example based off your pie analogy -- note I did say really extreme... You have 4 people who are starving to death. You would prefer to give 1 person an entire pie to ensure their survival, rather than give them each 1/4 pie to temporarily stave off starvation?

I use that because I believe it is better to give more people more variety, even if, as you believe, they don't get a complete character, than to have less variety for fewer people. I will not make a male character in DAO simply to experience the Morrigan romance. Happily, I don't have to worry about that with DA2.

Fandango9641 wrote...

Because introducing a one size fits all approach to romance has its drawbacks. I asked David in an earlier post whether he wrote Alistair’s romance arc with a female protagonist in mind, when I should have asked him whether making Alistair hero-sexual in the manner of Anders would have held him back in any way. I wasn’t sure at the time of asking whether David wrote his favourite arc with a certain demographic in mind. It appears he did:

David Gaider wrote...
Origins' romances came about from a number of experiences. In the last romance I'd written, I wanted to draw out if I could make a male romantic character that female players would actually love. I wanted to know what was wrong with former female-oriented romances, what was lacking there, and how they differed from actual romance. It's difficult, because you can't really go to prose for the answer, because this is an interactive romance. I went to this site called "Ladies of Neverwinter Nights," and I asked the female players there, How do you guys feel? What do you want to see in romance? What kinds of elements and moments were you missing? And they told me. They were very frank about it, and having gotten that excellent feedback, I tried to incorporate that feedback into Alistair.

Link:

http://killscreendai...w-david-gaider/

Wonderful stuff! Why wouldn’t the same approach work equally well for a gay protagonist? Why does making each and every romance path available to all represent a better direction for the franchise over and above the more focused approach of Origins?

Awww, makes me all DG fangirly (especially since I loved NWN and it was my first game of this type).

That said, there is no reason that same effort couldn't be put into doing a romance for both genders for the same character. If he is straight, he would still ask female players what they want in the romance because that is who he is designing the male NPC/female PC romance for, not as a straight man who knows what he wants from such a relationship. If he's gay he would still ask other men what they want out of a male NPC/male PC romance because relying solely on his own experiences as a man is not enough to write for a large swath of players who may want different things from DG himself.

In terms of Anders, we know that he was written by a woman. As a woman, she will never ever have any experiences in a male/male romantic relationship. That doesn't mean that the male/female (or a female/female) relationship is the only valid one she can write, or that the male/female relationship for Anders is somehow more valid simply because she can relate to it -- by the by, how does anyone relate to being in love with a guy who has a spirit inside of him?

With the differences between the Anders and Fenris romances -- I primarily single out these two because they are the only ones I have experience with as both male and female Hawke, and friend/rival -- It seems to me that the Anders romance revolves around Hawke and how he/she deals with Anders, goes against/with his motivations and goals, and in making the final decision regarding him; in a way having more gender specific dialogue (although I've made my feelings clear on that before) makes sense, since it's so Hawke-centric. On the other hand, the Fenris romance is about Fenris's own development as a character (that we interact with) and as a person (in the story), and how Fenris himself handles the changes that happen in his life; Hawke is simply there along with Fenris, contributing in his/her own way, so it's not entirely necessary for there to be the gender specific dialogue.

I don't hold with the theory that if the effort is doubled for both genders, the end result is an incomplete product for each gender than if there had only been one for the writers to concern themselves with. You have a goal, set aside the requirements needed to achieve that goal, and then work toward it using the requirements you set aside. If you want to bring in budget and time constraints, then I believe that is a different matter and not really related to the mere fact of them deciding to let the NPCs have dual-gender romances.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 01 juin 2012 - 01:23 .

[Kidd]

nightscrawl wrote...

Let's just say -- numbers made up, yes I know you did some of this already -- that for the first scene you have 25 lines for each gender. They are 25 lines regardless. If 5 of those lines are gender specific, it does not mean that you would get 10 lines if Anders was written solely for a one-sex romance. The other 5 lines might never have existed at all in the writers' minds, leaving you still with just the 25 total for Anders as the writers planned, or as their pre-defined (read: across all companions) dialogue quotas dictate.

Even if those lines -would- still be put into that specific NPC, we're still not "gaining" very many of them for a hetero/****** LI. The amount of gender-unique dialogue is hardly anywhere close to the ratio of 5/25 (1/5) like in your example, for instance. It's very rare that companions mention a gender in any way.

That is, -if- they were put into the same NPC. Much of the line economy would likely be shuffled over to other places where it can be used to flesh out plot lines that are currently on the weaker side. At least that's what I believe.

Modifié par KiddDaBeauty, 01 juin 2012 - 07:37 .

[AkiKishi]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Let's get this straight. They use the same lines for both male and female no changes? They don't record seperate lines for each ? 

Because if it's the latter, then you get less.

I fail to see how we get less. If they had different lines, out of 100 lines, we'd have 50 lines for MaleHawke and 50 lines for LadyHawke. With most being the same, we get 95 lines for MaleHawke and 95 lines for LadyHawke. How is 95 less than 50?

My pulling numbers isn't a strawman btw, it's merely an abstraction since I'm not planning on buying the game for PC just to count the liens =D

It depends if the lines are being recorded or just reused. If they are being recorded then you are paying for them. You could just as easily be paying for twice as many unique lines.

Once you get into cinematics it's even more of an issue.

Let me give you an example. Runefactory Frontier has around 15 prospective partners. Each of those has their own unique dating sequence. If you are happy with just having the ability to date anyone, that's going to take priority over quality and difference anyway.

Because those lines are not free they come out of the VA budget. Take all of femhawkes lines and give them to mhawke you get twice as many lines and hence a deeper character with more interaction. Of course there is a price which is what we are talking about here. The price here is less choice, because characters will be fixed.

[AkiKishi]

nightscrawl wrote...

I don't think you get less.

Let's just say -- numbers made up, yes I know you did some of this already -- that for the first scene you have 25 lines for each gender. They are 25 lines regardless. If 5 of those lines are gender specific, it does not mean that you would get 10 lines if Anders was written solely for a one-sex romance. The other 5 lines might never have existed at all in the writers' minds, leaving you still with just the 25 total for Anders as the writers planned, or as their pre-defined (read: across all companions) dialogue quotas dictate.

Here is a really extreme example based off your pie analogy -- note I did say really extreme... You have 4 people who are starving to death. You would prefer to give 1 person an entire pie to ensure their survival, rather than give them each 1/4 pie to temporarily stave off starvation?

I use that because I believe it is better to give more people more variety, even if, as you believe, they don't get a complete character, than to have less variety for fewer people. I will not make a male character in DAO simply to experience the Morrigan romance. Happily, I don't have to worry about that with DA2.

That could be the case if they are just looking to slash the VA budget otherwise, you have more lines to use somewhere else.  If you pay the guy who voices Anders for 100 lines how you split them is down to you.

Well the rational thing to do is to save 1 person rather than prolong the agony of 4. In game terms though, if you are a player who must have a gay character in order to relate and you must have your choice of LI's then DA2 will be preferable, even if it is objectively worse.No matter how much banana cream is on offer if you don't like banana cream it's not going to matter.

I believe the characters are there to serve the story not be a fantasy playmate for the player. As such they need to be as complelte and detailed as budget allows. Splitting that budget makes for worse characters.

[Alessa]

BobSmith101 wrote...

nightscrawl wrote...

I don't think you get less.

Let's just say -- numbers made up, yes I know you did some of this already -- that for the first scene you have 25 lines for each gender. They are 25 lines regardless. If 5 of those lines are gender specific, it does not mean that you would get 10 lines if Anders was written solely for a one-sex romance. The other 5 lines might never have existed at all in the writers' minds, leaving you still with just the 25 total for Anders as the writers planned, or as their pre-defined (read: across all companions) dialogue quotas dictate.

Here is a really extreme example based off your pie analogy -- note I did say really extreme... You have 4 people who are starving to death. You would prefer to give 1 person an entire pie to ensure their survival, rather than give them each 1/4 pie to temporarily stave off starvation?

I use that because I believe it is better to give more people more variety, even if, as you believe, they don't get a complete character, than to have less variety for fewer people. I will not make a male character in DAO simply to experience the Morrigan romance. Happily, I don't have to worry about that with DA2.

That could be the case if they are just looking to slash the VA budget otherwise, you have more lines to use somewhere else.  If you pay the guy who voices Anders for 100 lines how you split them is down to you.

Well the rational thing to do is to save 1 person rather than prolong the agony of 4. In game terms though, if you are a player who must have a gay character in order to relate and you must have your choice of LI's then DA2 will be preferable, even if it is objectively worse.No matter how much banana cream is on offer if you don't like banana cream it's not going to matter.

I believe the characters are there to serve the story not be a fantasy playmate for the player. As such they need to be as complelte and detailed as budget allows. Splitting that budget makes for worse characters.

Perfectly said! There's nothing to add. I totally agree with you!