443 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

I prefer to discuss things for the sake of enjoying the discussion, rather than with any expectation of having an effect.

[nightscrawl]

robertthebard wrote...

Allow me to copy/paste the response I wrote out to your post, which you snipped to type this reply

...

If Anders is not a coward, why did he not, since he was looking to be a martyr anyway, kill the Grand Cleric face to face?  Fear of failure?  We know he escaped from the circle a lot of times, I don't remember how many off the top of my head, but how do we know that?  Because he's always been recaptured.  So either he's a failure at getting away, or a great success at getting caught.  Either way, instead of going after his target directly, he chooses to lie and manipulate the protaganist into helping him do his dirty work.  Although he does get somebody else to help him if you don't, for story purposes.  How do his missed lines adversely affect the culmination of his story?  They don't.  They don't enrich him, or degrade him any more than he does himself.  Add to this that fHawke should have no way to know she's missing anything, barring metagaming, and at that point, what's it matter anyway?

ETA:  Since you can skip the one quest where the deed is set up, and it still gets set up, I don't see how a varied dialog can have any affect on the game, since you will miss out on all that dialog if you opt to not do that quest.

That is still your own perception and conjecture. All of what you typed.

If you want to look at your game that way, that's perfectly fine. I actually don't like Anders much myself. I find him to be the most caustic person in the entire group, and when I do a romance with him I force myself to ignore the greater part of his party banter, most of which I find tactless or just plain rude -- by contrast, while Fenris and Anders snipe at each other, Fenris is down right vicious with Merrill, however she is the only person he is that way with. Rival Anders is my preferred way to play since I think it flows most naturally with the story and with the things that Anders says and does throughout the entire game.

I've never once stated it does anything in any way to the game's plot or story line. It doesn't matter for the game's story or even for Anders's own character development. And since, as you say, female Hawke doesn't know about it so it has no bearing on her or her actions regarding Anders. What matters, and what I maintain as my point, is why the devs decided to do this with his character, and his character only.

It matters to me because I want to know if they are being hypocritical when they spout all of those lines about preference and so forth. With him is the truth that belies their argument of "a LI doesn't have to tell you anything, it's none of your business" with the fact that Anders does tell the male Hawke. So, it's none of my female Hawke's business, but it is my male Hawke's business? Are they seriously saying that?

The dialogue for each gender is dramatically different, revealing an important (to him and his own development as a person) aspect of his life for one, and showing what is frankly, an inflated ego and flare for melodrama with the other. The former is important to Anders as a person, the latter is not. If it were a simple matter of saying some different lines designed to appeal to a male or female player (let's face it, those gag-inducing "I'll break your heart" lines were so written to appeal to women) I could live with that, but that's not the case.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 29 mai 2012 - 07:08 .

[robertthebard]

nightscrawl wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Allow me to copy/paste the response I wrote out to your post, which you snipped to type this reply

...

If Anders is not a coward, why did he not, since he was looking to be a martyr anyway, kill the Grand Cleric face to face?  Fear of failure?  We know he escaped from the circle a lot of times, I don't remember how many off the top of my head, but how do we know that?  Because he's always been recaptured.  So either he's a failure at getting away, or a great success at getting caught.  Either way, instead of going after his target directly, he chooses to lie and manipulate the protaganist into helping him do his dirty work.  Although he does get somebody else to help him if you don't, for story purposes.  How do his missed lines adversely affect the culmination of his story?  They don't.  They don't enrich him, or degrade him any more than he does himself.  Add to this that fHawke should have no way to know she's missing anything, barring metagaming, and at that point, what's it matter anyway?

ETA:  Since you can skip the one quest where the deed is set up, and it still gets set up, I don't see how a varied dialog can have any affect on the game, since you will miss out on all that dialog if you opt to not do that quest.

That is still your own perception and conjecture. All of what you typed.

If you want to look at your game that way, that's perfectly fine. I actually don't like Anders much myself. I find him to be the most caustic person in the entire group, and when I do a romance with him I force myself to ignore the greater part of his party banter, most of which I find tactless or just plain rude -- by contrast, while Fenris and Anders snipe at each other, Fenris is down right vicious with Merrill, however she is the only person he is that way with. Rival Anders is my preferred way to play since I think it flows most naturally with the story and with the things that Anders says and does throughout the entire game.

I've never once stated it does anything in any way to the game's plot or story line. It doesn't matter for the game's story or even for Anders's own character development. And since, as you say, female Hawke doesn't know about it so it has no bearing on her or her actions regarding Anders. What matters, and what I maintain as my point, is why the devs decided to do this with his character, and his character only.

It matters to me because I want to know if they are being hypocritical when they spout all of those lines about preference and so forth. With him is the truth that belies their argument of "a LI doesn't have to tell you anything, it's none of your business" with the fact that Anders does tell the male Hawke. So, it's none of my female Hawke's business, but it is my male Hawke's business? Are they seriously saying that?

The dialogue for each gender is dramatically different, revealing an important (to him and his own development as a person) aspect of his life for one, and showing what is frankly, an inflated ego and flare for melodrama with the other. The former is important to Anders as a person, the latter is not. If it were a simple matter of saying some different lines designed to appeal to a male or female player (let's face it, those gag-inducing "I'll break your heart" lines were so written to appeal to women) I could live with that, but that's not the case.

...and this is all your own perception.  No matter what, we're going to see this from our own perspectives, and we can chat back and forth all month, and it's not going to change it.  You stated what you felt the problem is, and how it breaks him as a character, and I stated how, as a character, he's already broken, and the dialog that's missing from fHawke doesn't alter that.  Just because he chose to share something with one protagonist, perhaps in an attempt to get him in the sack, because we all know men never ever do that, doesn't mean he feels it's necessary to share it with fHawke.  It doesn't mean he's written inconsistently, in fact, quite the opposite, he's written to be just like any other man that's trying to get into a woman's pants.  He shares something with mHawke that he believes will make it easier to get into his pants, and leaves it out with fHawke because he doesn't figure he needs to lay it on that thick, or that laying it on that thick would hurt his chances.  Take your pick, both are perfect examples of men in heat, written from the perspective of a man that's been in heat more than a few times in my life.

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

"Selfish nonsense"?

The difference here is that one side requires metagaming knowledge-- you need to have played through the game multiple times, or spent time on the forums reading about these characters, to even know that they could have romances with more than one gender PC. Thus it's the sort of opinion you'll find common here on the forums where such knowledge is considered de rigeur, but nowhere else.

EXACTLY.  *applause*

The developers should not care whether some players use metagame knowledge to ruin their own gameplay experience.  Metagaming is a problem of the player's own making.

I hope this position is adopted universally throughout BioWare's various design departments.

[nightscrawl]

robertthebard wrote...

...and this is all your own perception.

Only partially. It's a fact that the actually does say different things to each gender of Hawke. That is not a perception issue.

robertthebard wrote...

It doesn't mean he's written inconsistently, in fact, quite the opposite, he's written to be just like any other man that's trying to get into a woman's pants.  He shares something with mHawke that he believes will make it easier to get into his pants, and leaves it out with fHawke because he doesn't figure he needs to lay it on that thick, or that laying it on that thick would hurt his chances.  Take your pick, both are perfect examples of men in heat, written from the perspective of a man that's been in heat more than a few times in my life.

Ahaha... that's the best explanation in this entire thread. Thanks!

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

"Selfish nonsense"?

The difference here is that one side requires metagaming knowledge-- you need to have played through the game multiple times, or spent time on the forums reading about these characters, to even know that they could have romances with more than one gender PC. Thus it's the sort of opinion you'll find common here on the forums where such knowledge is considered de rigeur, but nowhere else.

EXACTLY.  *applause*

The developers should not care whether some players use metagame knowledge to ruin their own gameplay experience.  Metagaming is a problem of the player's own making.

I hope this position is adopted universally throughout BioWare's various design departments.

I think there is a distinction to be made between a person who has prior knowledge simply because they played the game before and liked it so much that they play it again and a person who actively uses guides and such to control the game's story. If there is no distinction, then only the first run through would be considered pure or authentic, even if, through the player's own lack of knowledge about the game they miss out on what may be several interesting story aspects.

A person cannot change their knowledge of events once they have played the game once. So do you consider any subsequent play "metagaming" simply because they know what can happen? Does Bioware not want their players to like the game so much that they play it again? I highly doubt it. Indeed the very structure of DAO encouraged replayability, even if only to experience all of the origin stories. If on my first play I played as a female Hawke then on my very next play I played as the male for kicks, to look at something fresh, hear a knew voice, possibly romance another character, or whatever reason, is that by default "metagaming" if I romanced Fenris as female Hawke and then learn he can be romanced by both genders simply by playing the male?

I am a serious metagamer. I look up achievements and actively try to work toward them. I consider myself a completionist, trying to see every lore codex entry, min/max my characters, use the DAwiki for the most efficient way to get followers to max F/R, look up item drops and farm for them if necessary, and generally try to see as much of the content that Bioware (or other companies) made for me as possible. Not only because I want to experience everything, but also because I want to get my money's worth. The achievements and websites are half of what is maintaining my interest in Diablo III at the moment.

That said, I don't consider that the same thing as a person having prior knowledge simply because they played the game once before.

I tend to do a pure, fresh run the first time I play any game. I enjoy the story, the characters, the setting, take my time in learning my class, get fun surprises, and so forth. Any subsequent plays are subject to metagaming from me. For a comparison, there was a thread on the BSN some time ago from a person who wanted to play DAO once, and only once, in order to craft a save for his import into DA2. He was using the DAwiki to help himself as well as coming here to ask questions and seek advice. Do I think he "ruined" the game for himself by playing such, rather than letting the story unfold naturally? Yes I do, but as he had a goal in mind, he obviously didn't see it that way.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 30 mai 2012 - 04:19 .

[HiroVoid]

Sylvius is talking about this from a roleplaying perspective. You can see what'll happen, but that doesn't mean your character has to. I still do playthroughs in DAO doing different paths in the Connor storyline even though there's one path that has absolutely no negative consequences.....that was kind of a cop out. There should have at least been casualties.

[nightscrawl]

HiroVoid wrote...

Sylvius is talking about this from a roleplaying perspective. You can see what'll happen, but that doesn't mean your character has to. I still do playthroughs in DAO doing different paths in the Connor storyline even though there's one path that has absolutely no negative consequences.....that was kind of a cop out. There should have at least been casualties.

But... but then Alistair yells at me! *CRY* Really, his reaction is the primary reason I always pick the no-loss scenario. The Behlen/Harrowmont decision is my favorite in the entire game though, simply because there is no best scenario. The game would have been darker overall if all of the major choices had been presented that way.

[brushyourteeth]

nightscrawl wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

Sylvius is talking about this from a roleplaying perspective. You can see what'll happen, but that doesn't mean your character has to. I still do playthroughs in DAO doing different paths in the Connor storyline even though there's one path that has absolutely no negative consequences.....that was kind of a cop out. There should have at least been casualties.

But... but then Alistair yells at me! *CRY* Really, his reaction is the primary reason I always pick the no-loss scenario. The Behlen/Harrowmont decision is my favorite in the entire game though, simply because there is no best scenario. The game would have been darker overall if all of the major choices had been presented that way.

I agree completely! I remember storming up to Connor's room and killing him on my first playthrough. I was literally stunned when Alistair got mad. I was like "people were dying, buddy!"

Then he actually admitted he was wrong, but still disapproved and I was never the same person in his eyes again. Harsh. I remain convinced that while I was out fetching mages the demon was inflicting some sort of new torture on the townsfolk of Redcliffe, but no one actually cared enough to get angry for them.

[HiroVoid]

brushyourteeth wrote...

nightscrawl wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

Sylvius is talking about this from a roleplaying perspective. You can see what'll happen, but that doesn't mean your character has to. I still do playthroughs in DAO doing different paths in the Connor storyline even though there's one path that has absolutely no negative consequences.....that was kind of a cop out. There should have at least been casualties.

But... but then Alistair yells at me! *CRY* Really, his reaction is the primary reason I always pick the no-loss scenario. The Behlen/Harrowmont decision is my favorite in the entire game though, simply because there is no best scenario. The game would have been darker overall if all of the major choices had been presented that way.

I agree completely! I remember storming up to Connor's room and killing him on my first playthrough. I was literally stunned when Alistair got mad. I was like "people were dying, buddy!"

Then he actually admitted he was wrong, but still disapproved and I was never the same person in his eyes again. Harsh. I remain convinced that while I was out fetching mages the demon was inflicting some sort of new torture on the townsfolk of Redcliffe, but no one actually cared enough to get angry for them.

Personally, I think it would've just been a nice touch if the knights had died(or someone else) if you went to go get the mages, or that you would have less forces at the end of the game.

[AkiKishi]

The reasons I don't like it are multiple.

1. The idea of just happening to bump into 6 bisexual individuals is incredulous, meta gaming or not.
2. The party does not reflect the wider world. it's like it's own little bubble of unreality there for the players fantasy dating needs. 
3. If there are a finite number of lines , then how those lines are spent is a concern. Either you split them, or you make them generic. Both of which are worse than characters that are 100% defined in the way they were in DA:O.
The DA2 characters were a shadow of those in DA:O and everyone being bi and the friend/rival split are prime reasons for it.

[whykikyouwhy]

BobSmith101 wrote...

The reasons I don't like it are multiple.

1. The idea of just happening to bump into 6 bisexual individuals is incredulous, meta gaming or not.
2. The party does not reflect the wider world. it's like it's own little bubble of unreality there for the players fantasy dating needs. 
3. If there are a finite number of lines , then how those lines are spent is a concern. Either you split them, or you make them generic. Both of which are worse than characters that are 100% defined in the way they were in DA:O.
The DA2 characters were a shadow of those in DA:O and everyone being bi and the friend/rival split are prime reasons for it.

Are there 6 individuals within DA2 who refer to themselves as bisexual, or who you, through conversation or some in-game conjecture, assume are bisexual?

There are only 5 romancable companions. Where are these 6 characters you are refering to? Or is it that "everyone" is bi, as you claim in your last sentence? I don't believe that either is correct, and the latter is certainly a broad generalization.

So too, perhaps bumping into several people who may or may not identify as bisexual is incredulous to you, but it can, and does, happen. But hey, folks have already mentioned that in this thread before as well as others. I suppose it continues to be a small bit of reality that a lot of people cannot fathom or accept. Which is a shame, really.

[AkiKishi]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

The reasons I don't like it are multiple.

1. The idea of just happening to bump into 6 bisexual individuals is incredulous, meta gaming or not.
2. The party does not reflect the wider world. it's like it's own little bubble of unreality there for the players fantasy dating needs. 
3. If there are a finite number of lines , then how those lines are spent is a concern. Either you split them, or you make them generic. Both of which are worse than characters that are 100% defined in the way they were in DA:O.
The DA2 characters were a shadow of those in DA:O and everyone being bi and the friend/rival split are prime reasons for it.

Are there 6 individuals within DA2 who refer to themselves as bisexual, or who you, through conversation or some in-game conjecture, assume are bisexual?

There are only 5 romancable companions. Where are these 6 characters you are refering to? Or is it that "everyone" is bi, as you claim in your last sentence? I don't believe that either is correct, and the latter is certainly a broad generalization.

So too, perhaps bumping into several people who may or may not identify as bisexual is incredulous to you, but it can, and does, happen. But hey, folks have already mentioned that in this thread before as well as others. I suppose it continues to be a small bit of reality that a lot of people cannot fathom or accept. Which is a shame, really.

Do you know what meta gaming means ? 

All the LI's are bi , that makes them weaker characters than the characters in DA because of how lines split.

Sure it does... care to work out the odds for that ?

Modifié par BobSmith101, 30 mai 2012 - 10:02 .

[Urzon]

I never understood why people slapped the "bisexual" label on all the LIs. Other than Isabela, who outwrite states she is, is it that hard to believe that Hawke is an exception for them?

[AkiKishi]

Urzon wrote...

I never understood why people slapped the "bisexual" label on all the LIs. Other than Isabela, who outwrite states she is, is it that hard to believe that Hawke is an exception for them?

Which do you find more incredulous. That you happen to meet a group of people who are all bisexual? Or you happen to meet straight people who become bisexual because of contact with you?

Since we are not in character here. We know the characters are written to flip-flop which is something that many of us see as bad for any number of different reasons.

I look at it like a pie. If you need to share the pie, then you get less pie. I'd rather have different flavours of pie rather than the same pie cut into slices.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 30 mai 2012 - 10:10 .

[Alessa]

BobSmith101 wrote...

The reasons I don't like it are multiple.

1. The idea of just happening to bump into 6 bisexual individuals is incredulous, meta gaming or not.
2. The party does not reflect the wider world. it's like it's own little bubble of unreality there for the players fantasy dating needs. 
3. If there are a finite number of lines , then how those lines are spent is a concern. Either you split them, or you make them generic. Both of which are worse than characters that are 100% defined in the way they were in DA:O.
The DA2 characters were a shadow of those in DA:O and everyone being bi and the friend/rival split are prime reasons for it.

Second this! 

[Wulfram]

If someone is attracted to people of both sexes, thinking they're bisexual seems the most natural.

If you reduce the potential audience for a romance, I doubt that would result in there being more lines spent on them.

[Alessa]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Urzon wrote...

I never understood why people slapped the "bisexual" label on all the LIs. Other than Isabela, who outwrite states she is, is it that hard to believe that Hawke is an exception for them?

Which do you find more incredulous. That you happen to meet a group of people who are all bisexual? Or you happen to meet straight people who become bisexual because of contact with you?

Since we are not in character here. We know the characters are written to flip-flop which is something that many of us see as bad for any number of different reasons.

I look at it like a pie. If you need to share the pie, then you get less pie. I'd rather have different flavours of pie rather than the same pie cut into slices.

Yes! Well said!

[whykikyouwhy]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Urzon wrote...

I never understood why people slapped the "bisexual" label on all the LIs. Other than Isabela, who outwrite states she is, is it that hard to believe that Hawke is an exception for them?

Which do you find more incredulous. That you happen to meet a group of people who are all bisexual? Or you happen to meet straight people who become bisexual because of contact with you?

Since we are not in character here. We know the characters are written to flip-flop which is something that many of us see as bad for any number of different reasons.

I look at it like a pie. If you need to share the pie, then you get less pie. I'd rather have different flavours of pie rather than the same pie cut into slices.

What do you see or hear within the game that makes you think that the entire group of people you meet are all bisexual? I don't recall Varric, Aveline, or Sebastian mentioning the gender of previous lovers or folks they were attracted to, if they even mentioned them at all. So where does that assumption come from? As far as the LIs go, Sebastian cannot be romanced by a male Hawke. So neither "everyone is bi" and "all of the LIs are bi" are correct statements.

In looking at sexuality/sexual identity IRL, not everyone knows or embraces who they are, who they may be attracted to, or how they feel at an early age. There are those who come to understand their feelings much later in life, or come to accept aspects of themselves due to the support of others. There are people who have always thought that they have felt one way about things, but in meeting a certain individual, have had to reassess those feelings. It's not a matter of "straight people becoming bi" - it's a matter of people discovering/embracing/accepting/reassessing something that was part of them.  

Gaider has already commented on the characters and this notion of "flip-flopping." You clearly continue to find issue with his statements. I would wager though, that he is in a much better position to comment on how the characters were written.

Modifié par whykikyouwhy, 30 mai 2012 - 10:24 .

[AkiKishi]

Wulfram wrote...

If someone is attracted to people of both sexes, thinking they're bisexual seems the most natural.

If you reduce the potential audience for a romance, I doubt that would result in there being more lines spent on them.

Not sure if that was addressed to my point or not ,but it's not what I mean.

(all these numbers are made up).

Lets say we have 50 lines. I can spend those lines making a 50 line romance for a male or female. Or I can spend 25 on each (or split them some other way). Or I can make the lines generic so they can do double duty for both sexes.

If we then do the friend/rivalmace thing, that dilutes the number of lines per character romance even more.

Which leaves you with a very shallow romance.Or to use my pie analogy a very small unsatisfying small slice of pie.
I'd rather just leave the pies I don't like to the people that do and vice versa rather than trying to share the same pie with them.

[Urzon]

In a world like Thedas that doesn't care near as much about sexual orientation as the real world? I don't think it would be hard at all to find a group of people that were bisexual. In the real world on the other hand, it might be a bit harder, but not impossible.

The problem alot of people seem to have, is that they are pushing their real world expectations onto a fantasy world. When the fantasy world doesn't meet up with what they expected, they get upset. They then proceed to blame it for not being what they think it should be. The fantasy world (Thedas) isn't governed by the same rules, laws, expectations, or cultural views as the real world. To expect otherwise, is the fault of the gamer, not the world itself.

[Reznore57]

It's LI , they sleep with you no matter what you look like , almost no matter how you act like.
There's a lot more to complain about than the sexuality issue if people want to go on why are they so convenient road....
And they do not "flip flop" , they have a past history that you can't change ,and somebody can call himself straight and have a few gay affair if she/he wants to.
Even Freud came up with the idea everyone was born bi ...
There is no consensus over sexuality preferences even on a scientist level.
So if the writer wants to keep it that way ,it's fine and not unrealistic.
I mean sexuality is not set in stone for everybody , it can change evolve etc...why is it such a hard concept to grasp?

[Wulfram]

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.

[AkiKishi]

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.