533 réponses à ce sujet

[Dakota Strider]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Red_Sonja wrote...

Having party members reinvent themselves depending on the gender I choose to play is exactly what I don’t want to see. It cheapens characterisation and panders to the player in a way that I find objectionable. I would like to see my party members have a clearly defined sense of self, inclusive of things like sexuality. I mean, having LI’s amend their behaviour to facilitate the player is a rotten idea for those of us who want to see strong, consistent characterisation. Say Bioware took things a step further and had all potential LI’s amend their views regarding things like magic to accommodate the views of the player, so we could romance them? Urgh!

Exactly how does a video game character's sexual orientation cheapen their characterization?

If you ever think back about favorite games you have played, and remember favorite characters / npcs you interacted with, which are the ones you are most likely to remember? :  The ones who were always had the same beliefs, likes and dislikes, and tastes each time you played the game....or do you have a stronger memory about those that had inconsistancies, that were not exactly the same depending upon the type of character you played. 

I also agree, that any inconsistancy in a companion/npc cheapens or dilutes that character.  I also do not accept the responses that say that adding more companions, and more possible LI's will take more resources (or zots) than are acceptable.  More companions and thus more LI's mean more choices for the players.  More choices means that more players will find something in the game that they like.  And more players liking the game, will mean more sales.  And more sales means that Bioware/EA will see a return on their investment, for adding more companions and LI's.

[Tirigon]

What comes to my mind as an improvement that is direly needed:

STOP having romance and friendship dialogues labeled as quests. Such things should be available by constant talking after a while, not by seeing a new quest in your Journal:

"Questioning beliefs: I think Anders might want to talk about his teenage angst and give me a chance to compliment his backside to initiate a ******-erotic relationship. I should totally go hang out with him".

Kinda kills the fun, imo.

[Dakota Strider]

(removed because I quoted and replied to the wrong response...oops)

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 03 mai 2012 - 04:00 .

[Reznore57]

I don't think the gender that attracts you define you.
You can be a casanova , a romantic ,a jerk , co dependant etc ...whether you're gay ,straight or bi.
I don't think the all "bi "cheapens the characters and it haven't kept the writers from having Fenris slept with Isabella ,Carver having a crush on Merril,Isabella sleeping with half of Kirkwall or Aveline getting married.

What i'd like is having a light romance with the boys, Fenris and Anders were nice but kind of an headache.
I romance Isabella and it was so great .
And i was playing ME3 , romancing Garrus , great romance , except for my Fshep.
She was all "i love you garrus" and i don't like that ,I'm not big on love declaration , and there was no other options , sadly...

I like to flirt on a subtle or humurous way ,so sometimes during a game i kinda facepalm.
Another thing from mass effect , there were a number of time when your Li show some affection during the game , it helps feeling like there's an actual relationship going on.
Because during DA2 i felt "wait am i still with him/her?", the fact that in legacy and MOTA romances were aknowledge in banters was nice but a little more of content wouldn't hurt.

[Dakota Strider]

Wulfram wrote...

It's hard to roleplay when you're constantly wondering, "Hey, did that thing I selected just arbitrarily end this romance".  BG2 romances were intensely frustrating like that.

What I want from a romance is not challenge but characterisation, of both the LI and the PC.  Potentially exploding the romance if you deviate from the one viable path works against that.

I prefer the uncertainty.  It is much like life.  And the great thing is, if things do not turn out exactly the way I like in a game, unlike life, I can replay it.  But I would rather make mistakes in the game, then to have everything given to me on a silver platter.  Something you get for free, or too cheaply, is never appreciated, or seems as good as something you had to work hard for, or "pay the full price" for.

[whykikyouwhy]

Dakota Strider wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Red_Sonja wrote...

Having party members reinvent themselves depending on the gender I choose to play is exactly what I don’t want to see. It cheapens characterisation and panders to the player in a way that I find objectionable. I would like to see my party members have a clearly defined sense of self, inclusive of things like sexuality. I mean, having LI’s amend their behaviour to facilitate the player is a rotten idea for those of us who want to see strong, consistent characterisation. Say Bioware took things a step further and had all potential LI’s amend their views regarding things like magic to accommodate the views of the player, so we could romance them? Urgh!

Exactly how does a video game character's sexual orientation cheapen their characterization?

If you ever think back about favorite games you have played, and remember favorite characters / npcs you interacted with, which are the ones you are most likely to remember? :  The ones who were always had the same beliefs, likes and dislikes, and tastes each time you played the game....or do you have a stronger memory about those that had inconsistancies, that were not exactly the same depending upon the type of character you played. 

I also agree, that any inconsistancy in a companion/npc cheapens or dilutes that character.  I also do not accept the responses that say that adding more companions, and more possible LI's will take more resources (or zots) than are acceptable.  More companions and thus more LI's mean more choices for the players.  More choices means that more players will find something in the game that they like.  And more players liking the game, will mean more sales.  And more sales means that Bioware/EA will see a return on their investment, for adding more companions and LI's.

Let's see...favorite characters and what I remember about them. Here's a random sampling from the DA-verse:

Leliana - Devoted and driven by her beliefs. A weaver of words. A lover of shoes and cute nugs. Someone I would term as a dreamer, someone willing to try to see the best in people.

Morrigan - Acerbic, full of dry wit. Mysterious and secretive. Someone with a lot of barriers in place in front of her true self, and yet, someone who seemed genuinely loyal by the end of the game.

Aveline - Headstrong, given over to matters of order vs chaos (though sometimes bending the law to her own vision). A loyal friend. Someone dealing with her own securities under that stoic mask.

Isabela - Free-spirited, confident, witty and deadly. Someone who makes no excuses for who she is, someone who can care deeply for people but is unwilling to let her guard down right away to show that side of herself. 

Not one of those aspects is something that is purely driven by their sexual identity, or whether or not they might be bisexual. Those are character traits - the loyalty, the humor - all pieces that make up the whole. That's what resonates about them, that's what makes them memorable. For me, it's not about who they choose to sleep with. Rather, it's about how they act and conduct their lives, how they treat the other companions, or what they say in conversation that truly represents who they are.

Modifié par whykikyouwhy, 03 mai 2012 - 04:17 .

[Maria Caliban]

Dakota Strider wrote...


If you ever think back about favorite games you have played, and remember favorite characters / npcs you interacted with, which are the ones you are most likely to remember? :  The ones who were always had the same beliefs, likes and dislikes, and tastes each time you played the game....or do you have a stronger memory about those that had inconsistancies, that were not exactly the same depending upon the type of character you played. 

That's like asking whether I'm more likely to enjoy characters with light hair or dark hair. It's totally unrelated to whether I like the character or not.

Reznore57 wrote...

I don't think the gender that attracts you define you.

I think it does.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 03 mai 2012 - 04:34 .

[Cantina]

Tirigon wrote...

What comes to my mind as an improvement that is direly needed:

STOP having romance and friendship dialogues labeled as quests. Such things should be available by constant talking after a while, not by seeing a new quest in your Journal:

"Questioning beliefs: I think Anders might want to talk about his teenage angst and give me a chance to compliment his backside to initiate a ******-erotic relationship. I should totally go hang out with him".

Kinda kills the fun, imo.

While I don't agree with your comments on many things, I will say having to be TOLD to go speak to a companion sucks. I prefer choosing to speak to the companion when I choose to not when they have certain points in the game of when you can speak to them.

Having to accidentally click on someone (in Origins) while you were trying to do something else, did get annoying. They could implement a system to were you can speak to your companion whenever you so chose, but the dialogue system is locked if its outside their home or yours.

From a coding perspective that would take six months at minimum if you include all the dialogue options for it to be in the game. Then you have to add in resources and most importantly if the developers would consider such an option.

[jlb524]

Dakota Strider wrote...
If you ever think back about favorite games you have played, and remember favorite characters / npcs you interacted with, which are the ones you are most likely to remember? :  The ones who were always had the same beliefs, likes and dislikes, and tastes each time you played the game....or do you have a stronger memory about those that had inconsistancies, that were not exactly the same depending upon the type of character you played. 

Like how Bastila could end up either Light or Dark side at the end of KOTOR via two different playthroughs?

Yeah, she was a terrible character...don't remember much about her.

Modifié par jlb524, 03 mai 2012 - 04:45 .

[Dakota Strider]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Dakota Strider wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Red_Sonja wrote...

Having party members reinvent themselves depending on the gender I choose to play is exactly what I don’t want to see. It cheapens characterisation and panders to the player in a way that I find objectionable. I would like to see my party members have a clearly defined sense of self, inclusive of things like sexuality. I mean, having LI’s amend their behaviour to facilitate the player is a rotten idea for those of us who want to see strong, consistent characterisation. Say Bioware took things a step further and had all potential LI’s amend their views regarding things like magic to accommodate the views of the player, so we could romance them? Urgh!

Exactly how does a video game character's sexual orientation cheapen their characterization?

If you ever think back about favorite games you have played, and remember favorite characters / npcs you interacted with, which are the ones you are most likely to remember? :  The ones who were always had the same beliefs, likes and dislikes, and tastes each time you played the game....or do you have a stronger memory about those that had inconsistancies, that were not exactly the same depending upon the type of character you played. 

I also agree, that any inconsistancy in a companion/npc cheapens or dilutes that character.  I also do not accept the responses that say that adding more companions, and more possible LI's will take more resources (or zots) than are acceptable.  More companions and thus more LI's mean more choices for the players.  More choices means that more players will find something in the game that they like.  And more players liking the game, will mean more sales.  And more sales means that Bioware/EA will see a return on their investment, for adding more companions and LI's.

Let's see...favorite characters and what I remember about them. Here's a random sampling from the DA-verse:

Leliana - Devoted and driven by her beliefs. A weaver of words. A lover of shoes and cute nugs. Someone I would term as a dreamer, someone willing to try to see the best in people.

Morrigan - Acerbic, full of dry wit. Mysterious and secretive. Someone with a lot of barriers in place in front of her true self, and yet, someone who seemed genuinely loyal by the end of the game.

Aveline - Headstrong, given over to matters of order vs chaos (though sometimes bending the law to her own vision). A loyal friend. Someone dealing with her own securities under that stoic mask.

Isabela - Free-spirited, confident, witty and deadly. Someone who makes no excuses for who she is, someone who can care deeply for people but is unwilling to let her guard down right away to show that side of herself. 

Not one of those aspects is something that is purely driven by their sexual identity, or whether or not they might be bisexual. Those are character traits - the loyalty, the humor - all pieces that make up the whole. That's what resonates about them, that's what makes them memorable. For me, it's not about who they choose to sleep with. Rather, it's about how they act and conduct their lives, how they treat the other companions, or what they say in conversation that truly represents who they are.

Yet those you recall, did have a consistant identity thoughout, no matter what you played as a character.  It was fairly obvious Leliana was bi.  She speaks of Marjolaine, as well as some of her "bard" experiences with male targets.   Isabella was clearly bi, and that was true from her "origin" in DAO.   So whether you played a male or female with them, their identity was always consistant. 

And it is not all about who they choose to sleep with.  But I cannot think of any other situation that the writers chose to make characters act differently, except for sex.  IF the writers chose to make the characters behave differently because of other aspects of your character, besides sex, it would be just as bad.

For Example:  If you play a warrior or rogue Hawke....Fenris hates mages.  But if you played a mage Hawke...he suddenly hates rogues, but loves mages.   Anders hates Templars and the Chantry...but if you pick up a Templar specialty, he now supports Templars, and turns into a mage hunter, to return them to the Circle.

((Cannot wait for certain somebodies to declare this is the new code or disguise for homophobia....))

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 03 mai 2012 - 04:58 .

[Pasquale1234]

Wulfram wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Exactly how does a video game character's sexual orientation cheapen their characterization?

Changing their orientation according to the player's gender cheapens their characterization.  Being actually bisexual, doesn't.

How?  What about them do you think is different?

Red_Sonja wrote...

Reading comprehension a problem for you? I’m saying the exact opposite in that a characters sexual orientation is fundamentally important to their characterisation and that flip-flopping on it as described in the post I quoted above cheapens this. I just don’t like the idea of having LI’s (on non-romancable NPC’s for that matter) modify their personality to accommodate people who play differently.

On any given playthrough, I could consider Merrill to be straight, gay, or bisexual, and it changed her characterization and personality not one iota.  The character might change due to Hawke's treatment of her, whether she was a friend or rival, romanced or not - but it has absolutely nothing to do with her sexual orientation.

So, I'll try again, in a somewhat different way:

Exactly how does a videogame character's sexual orientation affect their personality and/or characterization?

Dakota Strider wrote...

If you ever think back about favorite games you have played, and remember favorite characters / npcs you interacted with, which are the ones you are most likely to remember? :  The ones who were always had the same beliefs, likes and dislikes, and tastes each time you played the game....or do you have a stronger memory about those that had inconsistancies, that were not exactly the same depending upon the type of character you played.

How exactly does a videogame character's sexual orientation affect their personality and/or characterization?

Reznore57 wrote...

I don't think the gender that attracts you define you.
You can be a casanova , a romantic ,a jerk , co dependant etc ...whether you're gay ,straight or bi.

Thank you.

[Dakota Strider]

jlb524 wrote...

Dakota Strider wrote...
If you ever think back about favorite games you have played, and remember favorite characters / npcs you interacted with, which are the ones you are most likely to remember? :  The ones who were always had the same beliefs, likes and dislikes, and tastes each time you played the game....or do you have a stronger memory about those that had inconsistancies, that were not exactly the same depending upon the type of character you played. 

Like how Bastila could end up either Light or Dark side at the end of KOTOR via two different playthroughs?

Yeah, she was a terrible character...don't remember much about her.

I never played KOTOR, so I do not know the character, or example specifically.  However, from what I know of Star Wars, and how Bioware writes rpg's (or at least, how they USED to write them), I am assuming that if your character made certain decisions during the game, it would affect the reactions of your companions.  That is not a new concept, and is totally believable.

And being able to make those type of choices, that actually affect how those around you behave, is what I want in an rpg.  Bioware did the same thing in other games.  The one example that pops to mind is Viconia in BG2.  Your decisions in how you treated her, could change her alignment from Chaotic Evil, to True Neutral, which is a drastic change for a drow.  Or your choices could have no affect on her at all.

[Wulfram]

Dakota Strider wrote...

I prefer the uncertainty.  It is much like life.  And the great thing is, if things do not turn out exactly the way I like in a game, unlike life, I can replay it.  But I would rather make mistakes in the game, then to have everything given to me on a silver platter.  Something you get for free, or too cheaply, is never appreciated, or seems as good as something you had to work hard for, or "pay the full price" for.

In real life, if a conversation goes wrong you can apologise, spend more time with them and generally fix it.  CRPGs have a limited amount of dialogue, so you can't do that.

And if things really go wrong, in real life there actually are plenty more fish in the sea.  Whereas in the game, there's just the evil witch you've probably already dumped.

What I don't appreciate is something you never get to actually enjoy because you're constantly worrying that you're going to break.

Pasquale1234 wrote...

How?  What about them do you think is different?

In one, the character is a consistent.  In the other, they're changed to suit your whims.

Modifié par Wulfram, 03 mai 2012 - 05:07 .

[Sutekh]

Wulfram wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

How?  What about them do you think is different?

In one, the character is a consistent.  In the other, they're changed to suit your whims.

How? In DA2, how were they changed? Be precise. Give examples.

[Red_Sonja]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Red_Sonja wrote...

Reading comprehension a problem for you? I’m saying the exact opposite in that a characters sexual orientation is fundamentally important to their characterisation and that flip-flopping on it as described in the post I quoted above cheapens this. I just don’t like the idea of having LI’s (on non-romancable NPC’s for that matter) modify their personality to accommodate people who play differently.

On any given playthrough, I could consider Merrill to be straight, gay, or bisexual, and it changed her characterization and personality not one iota.  The character might change due to Hawke's treatment of her, whether she was a friend or rival, romanced or not - but it has absolutely nothing to do with her sexual orientation.

So, I'll try again, in a somewhat different way:

Exactly how does a videogame character's sexual orientation affect their personality and/or characterization?

Ok, let’s take a look at Zevran, Isabela and Leliana. Each character was bisexual in a way that actually strengthened their characterisation. I found it interesting for example talking to them about past relationships etc and it really helped me understand them as characters. Now take a look at Anders, who I learnt in this thread has aspects of his backstoy kept away from those playing a female protagonist. Not cool.

It’s not that people can’t enjoy or remember characters for other reasons (I know I do), I just support the idea of having NPC’s with clearly defined sexual identities over and above the more ambiguous approach advocated by others. And to say again, it’s all about the strength, quality and consistency of characterisation for me, nothing more.

EDIT: added 'consistency'

Modifié par Red_Sonja, 03 mai 2012 - 05:33 .

[Wulfram]

Sutekh wrote...

How? In DA2, how were they changed? Be precise. Give examples.

In DA2, they were consistent.  Merrill missed having a bunch of super muscular male giants wandering around with their tops off even if you were romancing her with Lady Hawke.  This was good.

If she was changed to not apreciate muscular male giants if you were playing a female Hawke, this would be bad.  Her tastes shouldn't change to accomodate the PC.

[Kidd]

Tirigon wrote...

What comes to my mind as an improvement that is direly needed:

STOP having romance and friendship dialogues labeled as quests. Such things should be available by constant talking after a while, not by seeing a new quest in your Journal:

"Questioning beliefs: I think Anders might want to talk about his teenage angst and give me a chance to compliment his backside to initiate a ******-erotic relationship. I should totally go hang out with him".

Kinda kills the fun, imo.

Agreed, though I think keeping someone like Bodahn/Kelly/Traynor around to tell us how NPC X came by looking for us etc is still a good idea. It's more or less the same thing in theory, only it feels less gamey.

[Tirigon]

Red_Sonja wrote...

Ok, let’s take a look at Zevran, Isabela and Leliana. Each character was bisexual in a way that actually strengthened their characterisation. I found it interesting for example talking to them about past relationships etc and it really helped me understand them as characters. Now take a look at Anders, who I learnt in this thread has aspects of his backstoy kept away from those playing a female protagonist. Not cool.

It’s not that people can’t enjoy or remember characters for other reasons (I know I do), I just support the idea of having NPC’s with clearly defined sexual identities over and above the more ambiguous approach advocated by others. And to say again, it’s all about the strength, quality and consistency of characterisation for me, nothing more.

EDIT: added 'consistency'

It is no secret I detest DA2, however here I have to defend it:

Anders hid his homosexual background to female Hawkes PRECISELY BECAUSE some people on the forum didnt want to be bothered by "****** stuff", so BioWare threw that in as a kind of token towards these people.

[Tirigon]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Agreed, though I think keeping someone like Bodahn/Kelly/Traynor around to tell us how NPC X came by looking for us etc is still a good idea. It's more or less the same thing in theory, only it feels less gamey.

True, it depends on how it is done.

For example, (ME3 SPOILERS AHEAD)









After Thessia, if you have both Garrus and Tali in the team, they talk about how Liara is in her room crying, and whether they should comfort her or give her time to grief and, at least if you are in a romance with Liara, they then decide that it is best you go.
And after you did, they talk about how happy they are that Liara has you.


Yes, in a way that was basically "go talk to Squadmate X in location Y now". But due to the way it was done it didnt feel like crap, but was actually one of the most touching scenes in the entire trilogy (at least for me).

[Red_Sonja]

Tirigon wrote...

Red_Sonja wrote...

Ok, let’s take a look at Zevran, Isabela and Leliana. Each character was bisexual in a way that actually strengthened their characterisation. I found it interesting for example talking to them about past relationships etc and it really helped me understand them as characters. Now take a look at Anders, who I learnt in this thread has aspects of his backstoy kept away from those playing a female protagonist. Not cool.

It’s not that people can’t enjoy or remember characters for other reasons (I know I do), I just support the idea of having NPC’s with clearly defined sexual identities over and above the more ambiguous approach advocated by others. And to say again, it’s all about the strength, quality and consistency of characterisation for me, nothing more.

EDIT: added 'consistency'

It is no secret I detest DA2, however here I have to defend it:

Anders hid his homosexual background to female Hawkes PRECISELY BECAUSE some people on the forum didnt want to be bothered by "****** stuff", so BioWare threw that in as a kind of token towards these people.

That would be a shame if true. And what about the point I made about the added value of having party members who were explicitly bi. That still stands right? In any case, I think I’ve expressed myself as best I can.

[Dakota Strider]

Tirigon wrote...

Red_Sonja wrote...

Ok, let’s take a look at Zevran, Isabela and Leliana. Each character was bisexual in a way that actually strengthened their characterisation. I found it interesting for example talking to them about past relationships etc and it really helped me understand them as characters. Now take a look at Anders, who I learnt in this thread has aspects of his backstoy kept away from those playing a female protagonist. Not cool.

It’s not that people can’t enjoy or remember characters for other reasons (I know I do), I just support the idea of having NPC’s with clearly defined sexual identities over and above the more ambiguous approach advocated by others. And to say again, it’s all about the strength, quality and consistency of characterisation for me, nothing more.

EDIT: added 'consistency'

It is no secret I detest DA2, however here I have to defend it:

Anders hid his homosexual background to female Hawkes PRECISELY BECAUSE some people on the forum didnt want to be bothered by "****** stuff", so BioWare threw that in as a kind of token towards these people.

Umm...so those that played male characters...never noticed that Anders had a homosexual background?   Wow...they really did hide that good. 

Just for the record, I do not think the Bioware DA staff does anything to hide the homosexuality of their npcs within the game.  They actually seem to have a policy that is against that. 

[Tirigon]

Dakota Strider wrote...

Just for the record, I do not think the Bioware DA staff does anything to hide the homosexuality of their npcs within the game.  They actually seem to have a policy that is against that. 

It's the only explanation.

[Dakota Strider]

Tirigon wrote...

Dakota Strider wrote...

Just for the record, I do not think the Bioware DA staff does anything to hide the homosexuality of their npcs within the game.  They actually seem to have a policy that is against that. 

It's the only explanation.

I am not trying to be hostile or combative with you.  But I have to disagree with you again.  There is more than one possible explanation.  The explanation that I believe, is that they want Anders to be a homosexual when Hawke is a male, and when Hawke is a female, they want him to be straight. 

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 03 mai 2012 - 05:51 .

[Wulfram]

Tirigon wrote...

Yes, in a way that was basically "go talk to Squadmate X in location Y now". But due to the way it was done it didnt feel like crap, but was actually one of the most touching scenes in the entire trilogy (at least for me).

But it only really works for an important scene, it's not something you can do for every dialogue.

Of course, things get less problematic if they go back to a central camp, rather than everyone having their own house.

One clue I liked in ME3, though it might have been too subtle since I didn't catch it until later playthroughs, is that whenever the character has actual dialogue - rather than the basic comments on last mission stuff - they stand in a different place from normal.  With a central camp, that could work well as a "talk to me now" signal.

[whykikyouwhy]

Dakota Strider wrote...

Yet those you recall, did have a consistant identity thoughout, no matter what you played as a character.  It was fairly obvious Leliana was bi.  She speaks of Marjolaine, as well as some of her "bard" experiences with male targets.   Isabella was clearly bi, and that was true from her "origin" in DAO.   So whether you played a male or female with them, their identity was always consistant. 

And it is not all about who they choose to sleep with.  But I cannot think of any other situation that the writers chose to make characters act differently, except for sex.  IF the writers chose to make the characters behave differently because of other aspects of your character, besides sex, it would be just as bad.

For Example:  If you play a warrior or rogue Hawke....Fenris hates mages.  But if you played a mage Hawke...he suddenly hates rogues, but loves mages.   Anders hates Templars and the Chantry...but if you pick up a Templar specialty, he now supports Templars, and turns into a mage hunter, to return them to the Circle.

((Cannot wait for certain somebodies to declare this is the new code or disguise for homophobia....))

I guess I'm waiting for specific examples of how the DA2 characters were inconsistent. If you're basing your entire argument on who the companion chooses to sleep with, that doesn't really say anything about how their overall characteristics have changed, how they are suddenly different people, and therefore somehow cheapened. Just because someone's sexual identity is not clearly defined and declared and that person isn't wearing a sign or a label to identify him/her as "X" to you, doesn't mean that they are somehow less. The sum total of a character is much, much more than who he/she may be choosing to bed.

As far as changes in Fenris or Anders based on your PC's class or specialization, I think what is happening there is less about class changes and more about the persuasion/coercion that is somewhat wrapped into the friend/rival scale. When your companions are at a high enough level in either direction, I believe, they won't outright object to certain actions. But...a similar thing happened in DA:O. You could harden Alistair or Leliana. And in doing so, Leliana won't protest to actions taken by the Warden that would have otherwise bothered her. So, to that end, do you feel that hardening those characters cheapened them?