533 réponses à ce sujet

[Cantina]

OK, the other thread got locked due to out of control behavior. PLEASE keep this civil and on topic. I did not start the first topic to start killing each other over who is right and who is wrong.

Lets stick to what you want to see improved on romances in Dragon Age 3 and anything you did not like in Dragon Age 2.

[mousestalker]

I' d like to see a romance declined by the companion. In DA2 you can get that with Aveline, but I'd dearly love to see the PC get kicked to the curb after going most of the way with a companion. I'd also love to see two companions romancing each other. Again, that almost happened with Aveline.

As for problems with DA2, my main problem with it was the gap in years between chapters. If there isn't any appreciable gap for all the companions in any future DA games, then problem solved.

For the future, I'd prefer some of the romances to move slowly and to evolve at a natural pace. Snarky or supportive comments from the other companions are always welcome.

[upsettingshorts]

 

brushyourteeth wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...

I would like to see the writers writing gay, straight, and bisexual characters and dialogue that celebrates the differences and similarities in each.

What are some of the differences?

Is that an honest inquiry, or are you just trying to trap you a bigot? Because I'd hate to disappoint you.

The inquiry is honest in the sense I genuinely do not know what you mean.  I do not feel as though there are differences to be celebrated that I could appreciate.  I'm just happy when someone I like likes me back.  That's the core principle of the all-bi approach, is it not? 

The only tangible difference in the other approach is the only reason why a character wouldn't like the protagonist is the gender they chose in creation.

Mmw04014 wrote...

A flavor change is basically the difference between "You love mages. I will romance you" compared with "You hate mages. I will romance you." Both sides show differences but you still are able to do what you want to do which is to romance that character. There is no real choice here because it doesn't matter what you choose, you can still do what you want. There is no consequence for the same reason.

But that distinction seems completely arbitrary to me.  The consequence is the romance plays out differently.  To you, that's not a real consequence.  To me it very much is.  When a consequence is lost content as opposed to changed content, I feel like an opportunity has been lost.  This is basically the reason I can't stand how Renegade options are treated in Mass Effect.

We may be forced to agree to disagree on this point.  

[Cantina]

mousestalker wrote...

I' d like to see a romance declined by the companion. In DA2 you can get that with Aveline, but I'd dearly love to see the PC get kicked to the curb after going most of the way with a companion. I'd also love to see two companions romancing each other. Again, that almost happened with Aveline.

As for problems with DA2, my main problem with it was the gap in years between chapters. If there isn't any appreciable gap for all the companions in any future DA games, then problem solved.

For the future, I'd prefer some of the romances to move slowly and to evolve at a natural pace. Snarky or supportive comments from the other companions are always welcome.

Hmm that brings up a interesting idea I was surprised that did not happen. For starters no romance with Aveline, does make sense. But it would have been interesting if she does become involved with Donnic, he can become a companion if you so chose.

Yes, that's one thing I missed dearly from Origins, the general comments or the smart ass comments your companions made about your romance. Granted a couple were made, but I felt my romance was over shadowed by Aveline's as if hers was more important. There could have been a sense of balance to this effect.

Edit: To this day, if I chose to load up Origins, the comments Ogren makes to Alistair are still funny as if  there the first time I heard them.

Modifié par Cantina, 02 mai 2012 - 06:31 .

[brushyourteeth]

Sorry, I'm staying well away from this topic until things have cooled down, and I won't be bringing my original suggestions back in, as I think I explained myself as well as I could. And I'm pretty sure I'm the only one who feels the way I do, in which case I definitely don't want to bash anyone over the head with my suggestions.

I was very intentional about being courteous in the last thread, but I'm afraid I still had some part to play in its lockdown. I'm sincerely, sincerely sorry for that, Cantina!

Modifié par brushyourteeth, 02 mai 2012 - 06:37 .

[Cantina]

brushyourteeth wrote...

Sorry, I'm staying well away from this topic until things have cooled down, and I won't be bringing my original suggestions back in, as I think I explained myself as well as I could. And I'm pretty sure I'm the only one who feels the way I do, in which case I definitely don't want to bash anyone over the head with my suggestions.

I was very intentional about being curtious in the last thread, but I'm afraid I still had some part to play in its lockdown. I'm sincerely, sincerely sorry for that, Cantina!

Eh no need to apologize, people can get carried away with a converstation or an opinon they feel passionate about. Just want this converstation to be as civil as possiable, if we want the developers to take our sugggestions seriously.

Modifié par Cantina, 02 mai 2012 - 06:32 .

[Mmw04014]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

But that distinction seems completely arbitrary to me.  The consequence is the romance plays out differently.  To you, that's not a real consequence.  To me it very much is.  When a consequence is lost content as opposed to changed content, I feel like an opportunity has been lost.  This is basically the reason I can't stand how Renegade options are treated in Mass Effect.

We may be forced to agree to disagree on this point.  

Deal. Agree to disagree. I suspect more people agree with you though.

I don't really play a large variety of games. I mainly stick with that ones I already have and replay them a lot. If I'm locked out of content, it doesn't feel like a lost oppurtunity but more of a reason to replay the game with a new and different type of character.

[Cantina]

Mmw04014 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

But that distinction seems completely arbitrary to me.  The consequence is the romance plays out differently.  To you, that's not a real consequence.  To me it very much is.  When a consequence is lost content as opposed to changed content, I feel like an opportunity has been lost.  This is basically the reason I can't stand how Renegade options are treated in Mass Effect.

We may be forced to agree to disagree on this point.  

Deal. Agree to disagree. I suspect more people agree with you though.

I don't really play a large variety of games. I mainly stick with that ones I already have and replay them a lot. If I'm locked out of content, it doesn't feel like a lost oppurtunity but more of a reason to replay the game with a new and different type of character.

I have this bad habit when I play Origins, I generally chose a diffrent class to play, but once I find a romance I like I don't romance anyone else. It feels like cheating...LOL!

Of course it did not help matters when I got word you could romance Anders in Dragon Age 2. Now my playthoughs are me playing a mage and only romancing him. Sure, I could romance someone else, but again, I feel like I am cheating.

Modifié par Cantina, 02 mai 2012 - 06:36 .

[TEWR]

I had a post for the other thread in response to Upsettingshorts about why I feel the all-bi LIs approach was one that I think shouldn't be done, that didn't consist of homophobic remarks.

Now it's lost

Dammit.

[wsandista]

I like the idea of having exclusive romances(not just by sex, but by choices, race, and class BTW). It just seems strange that the PC can get whoever they want, even if they are completely incompatible(Anders and Templar-supporting Hawke comes to mind). l also would like to see the PC being rejected once in a while.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Mmw04014 wrote...

A flavor change is basically the difference between "You love mages. I will romance you" compared with "You hate mages. I will romance you." Both sides show differences but you still are able to do what you want to do which is to romance that character. There is no real choice here because it doesn't matter what you choose, you can still do what you want. There is no consequence for the same reason.

But that distinction seems completely arbitrary to me.  The consequence is the romance plays out differently.  To you, that's not a real consequence.  To me it very much is.  When a consequence is lost content as opposed to changed content, I feel like an opportunity has been lost.  This is basically the reason I can't stand how Renegade options are treated in Mass Effect.

We may be forced to agree to disagree on this point.  

I do agree that they should keep friendship/rivalry romances, however I believe that they need to be fine tuned.  There were somewhat disappointing moments I felt fell flat when comparing the different sides of the romance (ie, I really didn't get the sense of Fenris's "softer side" in the friendship romance, or I felt as if it wasn't really that big of a difference as he is always a Jerk*** woobie).  BUT, there was at least one instant in the game where a potential decision in the game could end a romance (striking a deal with Torpor in the fade will always end a romance with Anders).  I think there needs to be more "reactive" things like this, maybe some implications with class as well (blood mage trying to have a relationship with a templar for instance).  Not exclusion, but perhaps more hurdles to cross or things to consider.  Or maybe they could offer the player to make the mature decision and end the relationship before someone got hurt!  

Friendship/rivalry IMO was a step in the right direction because while it presented somewhat difficult ideas/notions that many weren't used to, it kept from characters halting in development because the PC has too much disapproval with them.  It just needs to be fine tuned and refined some more.

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 02 mai 2012 - 06:41 .

[Cantina]

wsandista wrote...

I like the idea of having exclusive romances(not just by sex, but by choices, race, and class BTW). It just seems strange that the PC can get whoever they want, even if they are completely incompatible(Anders and Templar-supporting Hawke comes to mind). l also would like to see the PC being rejected once in a while.

That would be funny to incorporate into the game.

Hawke: Let's have sex

Anders: No not tonight, I have to finish these eight pages in my manifesto.

Hawke: ............... <goes to the brothel>

[Red_Sonja]

wsandista wrote...

I like the idea of having exclusive romances(not just by sex, but by choices, race, and class BTW). It just seems strange that the PC can get whoever they want, even if they are completely incompatible(Anders and Templar-supporting Hawke comes to mind). l also would like to see the PC being rejected once in a while.

Agreed. I’d like to see relationships in DA3 factor in things like religion, race, gender and class. I guess specialisations could play a part also (thinking specifically about blood magic). Anything that adds variety and depth to that dynamic would be of great value to me.

[jackofalltrades456]

Is it really a good idea to revive this topic? It's just going to end up like the original...

[the_one_54321]

I'm guessing I'm the only one that wants to see the neutral presentation of a love story and has no interest in playing Dragon Age: Dating Sim....

[Cantina]

Red_Sonja wrote...

wsandista wrote...

I like the idea of having exclusive romances(not just by sex, but by choices, race, and class BTW). It just seems strange that the PC can get whoever they want, even if they are completely incompatible(Anders and Templar-supporting Hawke comes to mind). l also would like to see the PC being rejected once in a while.

Agreed. I’d like to see relationships in DA3 factor in things like religion, race, gender and class. I guess specialisations could play a part also (thinking specifically about blood magic). Anything that adds variety and depth to that dynamic would be of great value to me.

Hmm, wouldn't religion be a bit of an issue to incorporate? I mean its not like Neverwinter Nights, to were there is a variety of religious options.

Unless you want to toss in the Old Gods too.

[TEWR]

wsandista wrote...

I like the idea of having exclusive romances(not just by sex, but by choices, race, and class BTW). It just seems strange that the PC can get whoever they want, even if they are completely incompatible(Anders and Templar-supporting Hawke comes to mind). l also would like to see the PC being rejected once in a while.

DAO did rejection a little bit with Morrigan, where once she hits peak approval she'll say she doesn't want to have sex.

I liked that.

I also liked how Alistair would dump the female Warden not because he's a douche, but because he was afraid of how it would affect the Female Warden if she wasn't queen. At least I think that's how it went. I've only played one Female Warden before (never liked the running animation or the voices you could pick for them).

And I do think that having romances be tied to race, class, and more importantly choices should happen. If I'm pro-mage yet anti-possession, Anders shouldn't hate me for that and lump me in as a pro-Templar ****. He needs to recognize the distinction.

[upsettingshorts]

the_one_54321 wrote...

I'm guessing I'm the only one that wants to see the neutral presentation of a love story and has no interest in playing Dragon Age: Dating Sim....

Any thread about the romances is implicitly a discussion over a small amount of ingame content.  That people have strong opinions about it is nothing new.

But what do you mean by a "neutral presentation of a love story" and in what way is that different from "Dragon Age: Dating Sim?"

[wsandista]

Cantina wrote...

Red_Sonja wrote...

wsandista wrote...

I like the idea of having exclusive romances(not just by sex, but by choices, race, and class BTW). It just seems strange that the PC can get whoever they want, even if they are completely incompatible(Anders and Templar-supporting Hawke comes to mind). l also would like to see the PC being rejected once in a while.

Agreed. I’d like to see relationships in DA3 factor in things like religion, race, gender and class. I guess specialisations could play a part also (thinking specifically about blood magic). Anything that adds variety and depth to that dynamic would be of great value to me.

Hmm, wouldn't religion be a bit of an issue to incorporate? I mean its not like Neverwinter Nights, to were there is a variety of religious options.

Unless you want to toss in the Old Gods too.

Pro-Chantry or Anti-Chantry, would be good to implement, IMO

[Cantina]

wsandista wrote...

Cantina wrote...

Red_Sonja wrote...

wsandista wrote...

I like the idea of having exclusive romances(not just by sex, but by choices, race, and class BTW). It just seems strange that the PC can get whoever they want, even if they are completely incompatible(Anders and Templar-supporting Hawke comes to mind). l also would like to see the PC being rejected once in a while.

Agreed. I’d like to see relationships in DA3 factor in things like religion, race, gender and class. I guess specialisations could play a part also (thinking specifically about blood magic). Anything that adds variety and depth to that dynamic would be of great value to me.

Hmm, wouldn't religion be a bit of an issue to incorporate? I mean its not like Neverwinter Nights, to were there is a variety of religious options.

Unless you want to toss in the Old Gods too.

Pro-Chantry or Anti-Chantry, would be good to implement, IMO

That's a good route to go.

But what if you don't have an opinon on the matter. Maybe you just don't care, or maybe your some strange human who worships the Creators or choses to follow the Dwarven Ancestors...LOL!

[Mmw04014]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

And I do think that having romances be tied to race, class, and more importantly choices should happen. If I'm pro-mage yet anti-possession, Anders shouldn't hate me for that and lump me in as a pro-Templar ****. He needs to recognize the distinction.

You know I was wondering this about DA2. I'm planning to play a character who is pro mage but will rival Anders. which I'd never done before, and I was wondering if he'd mention the difference in his questioning beliefs. Based on this, I'm assuming he doesn't?

[the_one_54321]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
I'm guessing I'm the only one that wants to see the neutral presentation of a love story and has no interest in playing Dragon Age: Dating Sim....

Any thread about the romances is implicitly a discussion over a small amount of ingame content.  That people have strong opinions about it is nothing new.

But what do you mean by a "neutral presentation of a love story" and in what way is that different from "Dragon Age: Dating Sim?"

I don't want a simulation of a growing romance through extended interaction/gift exchange/what-have-you. Just write a love story and let me view it. This can include dialog, and it can include multiple options for the romantic interest. I'm saying I don't want it to be a mini-game, of any kind.

It seems to me that almost everyone interested in these romantic intersts as DA mini-games.

[Curlain]

mousestalker wrote...

I' d like to see a romance declined by the companion. In DA2 you can get that with Aveline, but I'd dearly love to see the PC get kicked to the curb after going most of the way with a companion. I'd also love to see two companions romancing each other. Again, that almost happened with Aveline.

As for problems with DA2, my main problem with it was the gap in years between chapters. If there isn't any appreciable gap for all the companions in any future DA games, then problem solved.

For the future, I'd prefer some of the romances to move slowly and to evolve at a natural pace. Snarky or supportive comments from the other companions are always welcome.

I quite like the idea of misinterpreting a companions' intentions, as well as having a companion misinterpret the PC's intentions (and could either be positive or negative in that misinterpretation, ie if negative say something, 'look buddy, I'm interested ok,' and as you could have your PC awakwardly trying to assure them that wasn't what they meant, while the companions looks at them disbelievingly).  It definitely could be both interesting and amusing as while as making characters more independent.

Though I wouldn't necessarily want it to defaultly happen no matter what, only certain things should trigger it, and if possible I would want to depend on the character someone crafted as their PC as well.

[Cantina]

Mmw04014 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

And I do think that having romances be tied to race, class, and more importantly choices should happen. If I'm pro-mage yet anti-possession, Anders shouldn't hate me for that and lump me in as a pro-Templar ****. He needs to recognize the distinction.

You know I was wondering this about DA2. I'm planning to play a character who is pro mage but will rival Anders. which I'd never done before, and I was wondering if he'd mention the difference in his questioning beliefs. Based on this, I'm assuming he doesn't?

If your pro-mage and rival romance Anders, the game will not recognize this and assume your pro-templar.

So you can be pro-mage, but rival Anders just because your against his possession. I mean you could, but the dialogue will come out you being a templar supporter.

Modifié par Cantina, 02 mai 2012 - 06:54 .

[TEWR]

Mmw04014 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

And I do think that having romances be tied to race, class, and more importantly choices should happen. If I'm pro-mage yet anti-possession, Anders shouldn't hate me for that and lump me in as a pro-Templar ****. He needs to recognize the distinction.

You know I was wondering this about DA2. I'm planning to play a character who is pro mage but will rival Anders. which I'd never done before, and I was wondering if he'd mention the difference in his questioning beliefs. Based on this, I'm assuming he doesn't?

He doesn't. He thinks you're supporting the Templars, even if you took him on a few pro-mage quests you do.

Some people chalk it up to him being crazy, which works. I just chalk it up to bad implementation of the romance aspect that doesn't recognize the permutations that can exist.

It's why I couldn't Rival Anders anymore and be pro-mage.