443 réponses à ce sujet

[AkiKishi]

robertthebard wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

You would if your real life was in Thedas. But unless you used blood magic people in Thedas still have free will so you would not just be able to pick your partner.

Your character is your avatar not a playmate. You don't play with your character, you play through your character.

Can't stop laughing.  If my real life was in Thedas, I would never know that Anders says something different to mHawke than fHawke.  Isn't it funny that you claim metagame knowledge should carry over, but defend that by saying that your real life is in Thedas, a totally role play perspective.  You sir, are argueing to argue.  However, regarding romancing, you can flirt with non LI's in game.  It was fun to flirt with Aveline, on a fHawke, while doing The Long Road.  The option is there for mHawke, but I didn't see the point of pursuing it once I'd already done it once.  She doesn't even shoot you down, it just kind of goes over her head.  You can also flirt with Varric, regardless of gender.  You can flirt, sort of, with Meredith.  You may even get some additional dialog that other Hawkes don't get, regardless of gender, so I guess she is shallow too, since she has dialog that I have never seen.  After all, according to your position, I should get the dialog regardless of taking the necessary steps to get it.  To get Anders' "bonus material", you have to meet certain conditions, one of which is being male.  You also have to choose to attempt to romance him
 
I have never gotten those dialog options, and didn't even know you could until I read it here.  But even with that, I still picked up on there was something going on I didn't know about.  Since it's not plot specific, it doesn't matter.  Not knowing doesn't make or break the game in any way.  Knowing doesn't change the outcome of Act III, so it's irrelevent to the game.  It really doesn't add anything either, other than a fishing attempt by Anders.

And you completely missed the point so maybe less laughing when your reading.

[AkiKishi]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

I just don’t support the idea of diluting each and every one for the sake of those unwilling to role-play different characters.

This is a baseless statement. While for those who want to run the same character every time, the all-bi approach would indeed be preferable, that mindset is by no means a prerequisite to appreciate said design choice.

And honestly, I don't see why either me or you should consider our way of playing the "better" way.

Our way since you call it that gives us better characters.
Your way gives a better chance of your fantasy playmate being in the game.

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

And you completely missed the point so maybe less laughing when your reading.

No, your point was, this time, that you can't romance just anyone in real life.  This is, of course, to use your term, a straw man, since I can indeed romance anyone I want to.  I may well be rejected, but that doesn't mean I can't.  However, again, real life has very little to do with gaming.  You choose to allow player knowledge of events to color your perspective.  You choose to allow metagaming to interfere with story telling, and then you choose to say "if your real life was in Thedas".  I think I addressed that pretty well:  If your real life was in Thedas, you would have no knowledge of other Hawkes, let alone other dialog options for them.  You want to have your pie, but you want to call it cake, and you are frustrated that others don't see it the same way.  So yes, I find your viewpoint funny.  It's inconsistent, and yet you call the game down for being just that.  Metagaming and role play don't mix.  Oil and water.  Either you're going to role play, or you're going to metagame.  However, your choice to metagame should not affect everyone else's game play.  If you want to get "missed" dialog, then do what you have to do to meet the criteria to get it, this is, after all, the ultimate in metagaming.  You know that a convo flag has to be set, so set it.

[brushyourteeth]

BobSmith101 wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

I just don’t support the idea of diluting each and every one for the sake of those unwilling to role-play different characters.

This is a baseless statement. While for those who want to run the same character every time, the all-bi approach would indeed be preferable, that mindset is by no means a prerequisite to appreciate said design choice.

And honestly, I don't see why either me or you should consider our way of playing the "better" way.

Our way since you call it that gives us better characters.
Your way gives a better chance of your fantasy playmate being in the game.

There's absolutely nothing about having straight or gay characters that makes them fundamentally better than ones that are bi or open to bisexuality. So I'd just be real careful about how you say that.

But I do agree that some explanation of the character's romantic past and preferences may make for better storytelling. We don't live in Thedas - we live in the real world. And as any sociologist will tell you, here in the real world we like to classify people. It makes our little worlds make sense. Most people won't be able to get past that in a day, even if it's something good to strive for.

[AkiKishi]

robertthebard wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

And you completely missed the point so maybe less laughing when your reading.

No, your point was, this time, that you can't romance just anyone in real life.  This is, of course, to use your term, a straw man, since I can indeed romance anyone I want to.  I may well be rejected, but that doesn't mean I can't.  However, again, real life has very little to do with gaming.  You choose to allow player knowledge of events to color your perspective.  You choose to allow metagaming to interfere with story telling, and then you choose to say "if your real life was in Thedas".  I think I addressed that pretty well:  If your real life was in Thedas, you would have no knowledge of other Hawkes, let alone other dialog options for them.  You want to have your pie, but you want to call it cake, and you are frustrated that others don't see it the same way.  So yes, I find your viewpoint funny.  It's inconsistent, and yet you call the game down for being just that.  Metagaming and role play don't mix.  Oil and water.  Either you're going to role play, or you're going to metagame.  However, your choice to metagame should not affect everyone else's game play.  If you want to get "missed" dialog, then do what you have to do to meet the criteria to get it, this is, after all, the ultimate in metagaming.  You know that a convo flag has to be set, so set it.

Your very fixated on this meta gaming game stuff. 

Had nothing to do with that. Someone brought up how dragons and magic existing should somehow mean that reality in general does not apply.
If Anders were real he would not have limited lines so your argument is nonsensical. On the other hand mine that you can't just date anyone you like is solid in both reality and in Thedas.

Sure you can break those rules in a game and give the PLAYER what they want. But at least call it what is.

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

I just don’t support the idea of diluting each and every one for the sake of those unwilling to role-play different characters.

This is a baseless statement. While for those who want to run the same character every time, the all-bi approach would indeed be preferable, that mindset is by no means a prerequisite to appreciate said design choice.

And honestly, I don't see why either me or you should consider our way of playing the "better" way.

Our way since you call it that gives us better characters.
Your way gives a better chance of your fantasy playmate being in the game.

Uh oh, he's resorting to troll posts now.  Or maybe it's just getting back to "because I said so"?

[AkiKishi]

brushyourteeth wrote...
There's absolutely nothing about having straight or gay characters that makes them fundamentally better than ones that are bi or open to bisexuality. So I'd just be real careful about how you say that.

But I do agree that some explanation of the character's romantic past and preferences may make for better storytelling. We don't live in Thedas - we live in the real world. And as any sociologist will tell you, here in the real world we like to classify people. It makes our little worlds make sense. Most people won't be able to get past that in a day, even if it's something good to strive for.

You can write them straight gay or bi. But Hero sexual that's something else. There is no such thing as a hero sexual person so I don't think I can offend anyone

Modifié par BobSmith101, 01 juin 2012 - 03:09 .

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

And you completely missed the point so maybe less laughing when your reading.

No, your point was, this time, that you can't romance just anyone in real life.  This is, of course, to use your term, a straw man, since I can indeed romance anyone I want to.  I may well be rejected, but that doesn't mean I can't.  However, again, real life has very little to do with gaming.  You choose to allow player knowledge of events to color your perspective.  You choose to allow metagaming to interfere with story telling, and then you choose to say "if your real life was in Thedas".  I think I addressed that pretty well:  If your real life was in Thedas, you would have no knowledge of other Hawkes, let alone other dialog options for them.  You want to have your pie, but you want to call it cake, and you are frustrated that others don't see it the same way.  So yes, I find your viewpoint funny.  It's inconsistent, and yet you call the game down for being just that.  Metagaming and role play don't mix.  Oil and water.  Either you're going to role play, or you're going to metagame.  However, your choice to metagame should not affect everyone else's game play.  If you want to get "missed" dialog, then do what you have to do to meet the criteria to get it, this is, after all, the ultimate in metagaming.  You know that a convo flag has to be set, so set it.

Your very fixated on this meta gaming game stuff. 

Had nothing to do with that. Someone brought up how dragons and magic existing should somehow mean that reality in general does not apply.
If Anders were real he would not have limited lines so your argument is nonsensical. On the other hand mine that you can't just date anyone you like is solid in both reality and in Thedas.

Sure you can break those rules in a game and give the PLAYER what they want. But at least call it what is.

Hey, I can use formatting to make my points seem important too!!!!  I hate to break this to you, but none of these characters are real.  None of them here, none of them in Origins, no matter how you slice it, they all had limited dialog!!!!

We need that roll around laughing smiley, because I am about now.

[jlb524]

BobSmith101 wrote...
Our way since you call it that gives us better characters.

Is this a factual claim?

Then prove it.

[AkiKishi]

jlb524 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Our way since you call it that gives us better characters.

Is this a factual claim?

Then prove it.

Which game had the better character Origins or DA2?

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...
There's absolutely nothing about having straight or gay characters that makes them fundamentally better than ones that are bi or open to bisexuality. So I'd just be real careful about how you say that.

But I do agree that some explanation of the character's romantic past and preferences may make for better storytelling. We don't live in Thedas - we live in the real world. And as any sociologist will tell you, here in the real world we like to classify people. It makes our little worlds make sense. Most people won't be able to get past that in a day, even if it's something good to strive for.

You can write them straight gay or bi. But Hero sexual that's something else. There is no such thing as a hero sexual person so I don't think I can offend anyone

There is no such thing as a LI in a video game that is not herosexual.  No matter that they won't go for it, with out mods, if you're one gender of hero or another, Alistair will not romance Morrigan if you're female and romancing Leliana, or Zevran.  So he's pretty set on romancing either the Warden, or nobody.  Isn't that the very definition of herosexual?

[jlb524]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Which game had the better character Origins or DA2?

DA2, in my opinion.

Some will say DA:O...in their opinion.

But those aren't facts.

BobSmith101 wrote...
There is no such thing as a hero sexual person so I don't think I can offend anyone 

There's also no such thing as people who date others and disregard things such as appearance, morality, faction alignment, etc. but these type of things happen in games.

Modifié par jlb524, 01 juin 2012 - 03:12 .

[AkiKishi]

jlb524 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Which game had the better character Origins or DA2?

DA2, in my opinion.

Some will say DA:O...in their opinion.

But those aren't facts.

BobSmith101 wrote...
There is no such thing as a hero sexual person so I don't think I can offend anyone 

There's also no such thing as people who date others and disregard things such as appearance, morality, faction alignment, etc. but these type of things happen in games.

Seriously ? Can I ask why?

Maybe not the whole list. But there a plenty of real life examples of people ignoring one of those things and dating.

[syllogi]

BobSmith101 wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Our way since you call it that gives us better characters.

Is this a factual claim?

Then prove it.

Which game had the better character Origins or DA2?

While I prefer DA:O in many ways, I thought the character development in DA2 was the best part of the game, and even with non romanceable characters like Varric and Aveline, I thought I got to know them better and had a deeper relationship with them.

Compare how you interacted with Wynne in her quest in DA:O (going to a certain area at a certain point and talking to the apostate ex apprentice) with your relationship with Aveline in DA2, and her personal story.  While I like both characters, the way DA2 handled non player character relationships was more personal and intimate.

But, going back to the romanceable characters, can you provide any examples of how they are diluted or more shallow, based on their being available for romance by either gender?

[whykikyouwhy]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Had nothing to do with that. Someone brought up how dragons and magic existing should somehow mean that reality in general does not apply.
If Anders were real he would not have limited lines so your argument is nonsensical. On the other hand mine that you can't just date anyone you like is solid in both reality and in Thedas.

Sure you can break those rules in a game and give the PLAYER what they want. But at least call it what is.

Since that someone was me, I'll go ahead and respond here.

This is what you wrote:

BobSmith101 wrote...Options are nice, but not when it means less depth. Fewer LI's mean more depth for those remaining. In real life you don't have the option to romance who you want. It should be no different in an RPG. Hence the term fantasy playmate.

 

This is what I wrote:

In real life, I would not be flinging fireballs from my fingers. In real life, I would not be hefting a greatsword around. In real life, I would not be facing off with a dragon. In real life, I would not be scrounging to fund an expedition into dwarven ruins.
With regard to romance, in real life, I wouldn't know that there are a game mechanic set number of individuals available for me to attempt to get to know and flirt with. In real life, I would take my chances chatting someone up and either receive a (hopefully polite) rejection or be pleasantly surprised by interest given in return. In real life, I have a whole broad world to seek romance in, should I choose to do so.

nightscrawl summed it up quite nicely:

nightscrawl wrote...

In the game you are limited to the set amount of LI the developers decide on, you do NOT have the entirety of Thedas to choose from, as you would if Thedas were our real lives. Hawke should be able to go shag that horny guy at the Hanged Man, but she can't because the game doesn't allow it.

As a woman, if I were rejected by Morrigan and didn't like Leliana, real Thedas certainly has more women out there that I can go talk to, who may or may not like me in return. The game limits me from doing that, so I can either only hope I get lucky with the small selection offered (in this case one for Leliana), or hope for a larger variety, which is what I choose to do.

 
So...if real life were Thedas and Thedas were our reality, there would be no game mechanics. There would be no restrictions on where we could go, provided that we had the means of travel and the coin required. So, if this were Thedas, and I was seeking love, I would probably have a much broader array of prospects than 5 people in Kirkwall. And that doesn't imply that I would be able to bed each and every person within the entire known world. No...it merely means that my options would not be restricted by game mechanics, because there would be no game. There would be no parameters set on flags or code. Real life would allow me to explore different cities and lands. To maybe seek out a romance with a merchant, a templar, a dwarf, a Kossith, etc. 

So, if real life were Thedas, who's to say who I may or may not be able to date/woo? Who's to say who would or would not be open to a romance, should I choose to pursue one? Thedas is a pretty big chunk of land and people.

[AkiKishi]

syllogi wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Our way since you call it that gives us better characters.

Is this a factual claim?

Then prove it.

Which game had the better character Origins or DA2?

While I prefer DA:O in many ways, I thought the character development in DA2 was the best part of the game, and even with non romanceable characters like Varric and Aveline, I thought I got to know them better and had a deeper relationship with them.

Compare how you interacted with Wynne in her quest in DA:O (going to a certain area at a certain point and talking to the apostate ex apprentice) with your relationship with Aveline in DA2, and her personal story.  While I like both characters, the way DA2 handled non player character relationships was more personal and intimate.

But, going back to the romanceable characters, can you provide any examples of how they are diluted or more shallow, based on their being available for romance by either gender?

I thought the non romancable characters,Avelive/Varric were head and shoulders above the LI's.

I've been providing theoretical examples for the last 5 pages.

[AkiKishi]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Had nothing to do with that. Someone brought up how dragons and magic existing should somehow mean that reality in general does not apply.
If Anders were real he would not have limited lines so your argument is nonsensical. On the other hand mine that you can't just date anyone you like is solid in both reality and in Thedas.

Sure you can break those rules in a game and give the PLAYER what they want. But at least call it what is.

Since that someone was me, I'll go ahead and respond here.

This is what you wrote:

BobSmith101 wrote...Options are nice, but not when it means less depth. Fewer LI's mean more depth for those remaining. In real life you don't have the option to romance who you want. It should be no different in an RPG. Hence the term fantasy playmate.

 

This is what I wrote:

In real life, I would not be flinging fireballs from my fingers. In real life, I would not be hefting a greatsword around. In real life, I would not be facing off with a dragon. In real life, I would not be scrounging to fund an expedition into dwarven ruins.
With regard to romance, in real life, I wouldn't know that there are a game mechanic set number of individuals available for me to attempt to get to know and flirt with. In real life, I would take my chances chatting someone up and either receive a (hopefully polite) rejection or be pleasantly surprised by interest given in return. In real life, I have a whole broad world to seek romance in, should I choose to do so.

nightscrawl summed it up quite nicely:

nightscrawl wrote...

In the game you are limited to the set amount of LI the developers decide on, you do NOT have the entirety of Thedas to choose from, as you would if Thedas were our real lives. Hawke should be able to go shag that horny guy at the Hanged Man, but she can't because the game doesn't allow it.

As a woman, if I were rejected by Morrigan and didn't like Leliana, real Thedas certainly has more women out there that I can go talk to, who may or may not like me in return. The game limits me from doing that, so I can either only hope I get lucky with the small selection offered (in this case one for Leliana), or hope for a larger variety, which is what I choose to do.

 
So...if real life were Thedas and Thedas were our reality, there would be no game mechanics. There would be no restrictions on where we could go, provided that we had the means of travel and the coin required. So, if this were Thedas, and I was seeking love, I would probably have a much broader array of prospects than 5 people in Kirkwall. And that doesn't imply that I would be able to bed each and every person within the entire known world. No...it merely means that my options would not be restricted by game mechanics, because there would be no game. There would be no parameters set on flags or code. Real life would allow me to explore different cities and lands. To maybe seek out a romance with a merchant, a templar, a dwarf, a Kossith, etc. 

So, if real life were Thedas, who's to say who I may or may not be able to date/woo? Who's to say who would or would not be open to a romance, should I choose to pursue one? Thedas is a pretty big chunk of land and people.

But as I said already is it so important that the character do that during the game ? If you don't find your soulmate in the party does it really matter when the character will continue beyond the game ? (Well unless they die, but then it's not going to matter either way).

If people want virtual playmates that's valid. Dave Gaider when he did his Alistair research was certainly not researching characters, rather targetting the people who would be playing those characters.

[AkiKishi]

Filament wrote...

It's not really your place to dictate how other people roleplay. Self-insert is just one way to do so.
There is no such thing as a hero sexual person so I don't think I can offend anyone

You're the one assuming they're herosexual. People who like the concept are free to do that but it doesn't mean it is that way. You said it'd be fine if they're bi, well great, then assume they're all bi, that position is perfectly consistent with what we see too. Problem solved.

It's not self insert.it's a just a fact you need a character to be in the gameworld. How you use it, well that's upto you.

They are not written as bisexual (Issabella excluded)no ammount of headcannon will make it so. Would I prefer it that way ? Maybe , I'd rather have Zevrens and Lelianas than anything from DA2. While the idea of so many bi sexual people being in the same place is stretching credibility it's of secondary import.

[Wulfram]

I think it's rather to the DA2 characters benefit that they're not defined by their sexuality.

Modifié par Wulfram, 01 juin 2012 - 05:02 .

[brushyourteeth]

I rather think after 5 pages of all this everybody should be just about ready to accept that they're not going to change anyone's mind.

I'm actually more confused than ever and I'm ok with just walking away from the topic. Some of us have asked the devs for an explanation and there's been none forthcoming, so I'm personally packing it in.

[robertthebard]

They should really add lines to the PC's dialog along these lines:

fHawke: Hey Anders, stow it, you tried to romance me as mHawke last game, and you're nothing but a ho. You want me to risk life and limb, and my sister(myself if playing as a mage) to save your boyfriend, and you don't even have the courtesy to tell me he's your boyfriend? BTW, I understand that you weren't herosexual in Awakening, did Justice make you bi? Damn Fade spirits.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Voice actors are paid by the number of lines not by the hour.

But recording studio time is paid for by the hour.  So recording those lines in a timely manner is also valuable.

[jlb524]

BobSmith101 wrote...
Seriously ? Can I ask why?

The DA2 characters felt more developed to me considering they each had their own personal mission that lasted throughout the game.  You just didn't get to hear about something that happened to them in their lives...you were their with them to see it all act out.

The DA:O companions were just kinda following the Warden around in order to stop the Blight..  Sure, some had one personal mission but it wasn't as in depth as what you see with the DA2 companions.

I still think most of the DA:O companions are kinda boring.

BobSmith101 wrote... 
Maybe not the whole list. But there a plenty of real life examples of people ignoring one of those things and dating.

There are also real life examples of heterosexual people ignoring gender and dating someone of the same gender.