473 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

Staarbux wrote...

I'm not uncomfortable with it. Of course I'm not. But when people start saying things like 'it's probably homophobia' when they have no idea what a person's personal beliefs are it just reeks of 'I don't agree/understand their point of view so its probably X'. Which doesn't make sense to me...

I'm going by precedent and what I've seen from a lot of the posters opposing it. I have no doubt that some are sincere, but it's relatively easy to believe this sort of thing while denying to yourself that you do.

[The Uncanny]

Staarbux wrote...

I guess it's just hard for me to 'not assume' these things now I know all of the game, IYKWIM? I think it depends whether you think of the game as a collection of individual playthroughs, or if you think the whole universe is what it is over the course of ALL your playthroughs. Does that make any sense?

It doesn't alter my perception of Aveline no. But I guess that's because she's not necessarily expressing an interest in Hawke. I always assumed that she suddenly became conscious of Hawke flirting with her and it was her way of asking if Hawke was interested? But that could just be me.

But that is my point. It could mean more than once thing and you can't define her entire character on that basis.

I hear what you're trying to say but I think it's a little counterintuitive to what I would consider roleplaying. The world, for me, is what I immediately experience.

For example: if I don't romance Isabela she will take up with Fenris. I know this because I've read it. But it does not alter my reading of Isabela because I always romance her. Therefore, for me, it NEVER DOES happen.

[Dwarva]

I understand what you're saying The Uncanny. Perhaps I'm being a little closed minded when judging certain characters. It's just very difficult to break out of the whole 'I know it, I can't unknow it' situation sometimes.

[Sylvanpyxie]

Nyoka: I'm not sure why you're explaining that in a thread about subjective sexuality (that's the term the writers of the game use).

My initial post was regarding my support of Bi-Sexual characters, in a thread that was on topic about the sexuality of DA2 Characters.

The post happened to include my opinion on how poorly handled attractions between the Player and Companions was handled, which then got side tracked into a fully blown off-topic discussion. Which is why i believe i said in my final post:

Sylvanpyxie: My opinion, really, is entirely off-topic for this thread, so i'll just end my rant with - CHOICE IS GOOD.

Modifié par Sylvanpyxie, 31 juillet 2012 - 01:37 .

[The Uncanny]

Staarbux wrote...

I understand what you're saying The Uncanny. Perhaps I'm being a little closed minded when judging certain characters. It's just very difficult to break out of the whole 'I know it, I can't unknow it' situation sometimes.

No, no. I don't think it's closed minded at all. As you say, once you know something it is hard to 'unknow' it.

I just think the situation is slightly different to, say, a popular TV show you're finally getting around to watching. You've avoided finding anything out about it... except that someone let slip how a popular character betrays another character during season 3. You sit down to watch it and you can't help the fact that your reaction to character A is changed by knowing what is to come.

But in an interactive situation I just think it's a little different. The rules change because of interactivity. Events can be altered by your actions. I liken it to creating 'alternate universes'.

I'd just like, for example, Miranda Lawson to be bisexual in my alternate universe. 

[Sylvanpyxie]

Nyoka:
My apologies then '

Apologies not necessary. My concerns seem to be very similar to those of the Original Poster.

The key differences between our opinions seems to be that he believes the "subjective sexuality" is to blame for the cheapening of characters and their romance arcs.

I personally believe it's the lack of quality and care put into the writing of the characters and the romance arcs. It's very Bioware to handle the attractions between Player and Companion poorly.

So there you go. I was more on-topic than i thought, i simply believe it isn't the "subjective sexuality" that's to blame.

Modifié par Sylvanpyxie, 31 juillet 2012 - 01:56 .

[CuriousArtemis]

Xilizhra wrote...

I consider the "culture" argument irrelevant. Ultimately, it's entirely about player choice to me, and I don't see why it needs to be restricted in this way.

Yeah lol They always scream about choice until the gays show up.  Then suddenly it's all about culture. :innocent:

[draken-heart]

The best way i see how they can fix it IF they make an Dragon Age 3  is to have one romance for each sexuality, Gender and class. So like a straight male warrior but his female counterpart is a lesbian or something like that.

Modifié par draken-heart, 31 juillet 2012 - 08:32 .

[Amirit]

The perfect (sadly, imposable) solution would be the ability to lock characters sexuality in game settings. So, when you run it with another gender you simply do not get those annoying (for some of us) choices.

[berelinde]

You know, the one thing I still don't understand is how inclusiveness could possibly be bad. It isn't as if bi options take away from anybody's fun. If you want to roll a straight female PC, it's pretty easy to avoid flirting with Merrill. If you want to have an exclusively straight male PC, avoid flirting with the guys. It's impossible to avoid flirting with Isabela, but that's just the way she is.

Why does this all have to be so difficult? Letting somebody else's characters have a chance at the LI they like doesn't take away from your gaming experience in the slightest. Why are we making a federal case of this? Is "Live and let live" truly dead?

[esper]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I agree about the archetype, Staarbux. I see a big problem with companions being attracted to Hawke if he does things that they find to be repellant. Why would Anders be attracted to Hawke if he supports the Chantry controlled Circles, and wants to stop a mage rebellion from emancipating Anders' people? Why would Fenris be in love with Hawke if he supported slavery and had a slave himself? I can see the problem with companions being attracted to Hawke no matter what he does, or who he (or she) is.

Because he has  no self-esteem on rivalry path and Hawke convinces him that he is a dangerous person, and everything Justice agree with Anders with is wrong, (which basically mean everything Anders is are wrong) but Hawke still love him. It is not a healthy relentionship in any way, but it is sadly not that unrealistic.

I would like to have more torpor situations in da3, though. In fact I think that every Li should have one decision to clearly demostrate hear goes there line and no further.

[brushyourteeth]

berelinde wrote...

You know, the one thing I still don't understand is how inclusiveness could possibly be bad. It isn't as if bi options take away from anybody's fun. If you want to roll a straight female PC, it's pretty easy to avoid flirting with Merrill. If you want to have an exclusively straight male PC, avoid flirting with the guys. It's impossible to avoid flirting with Isabela, but that's just the way she is.

Why does this all have to be so difficult? Letting somebody else's characters have a chance at the LI they like doesn't take away from your gaming experience in the slightest. Why are we making a federal case of this? Is "Live and let live" truly dead?

I think for some people (well okay, for me), the argument against all-bi romances is actually about inclusiveness. It's not about shutting other players out of fun content - I think very few people actually want that. It's just that maybe we straight or gay people would like to see our lifestyle validated in the game too.

Is that a requirement? Nah, definitely not. It's a videogame - it's for fun, not to be a moral soapbox or a political platform. It would just be nice, is all. The devs have said that our LI's are only bi if we want them to be, and that assuming they're bi every time is metagaming on our part. But that doesn't make any sense - the world never changes, only our decisions about it. It's like saying that if you miss that dialogue where Ruxton Harriman gets feathered by his elven servant, then it never actually happened on our playthrough. So I think that explanation needs some work.

I'm at a place where I'm seeing the value of having bi-or-pc-sexual LI's, but I'd love to have other companions and NPC's who are definitely gay, straight, or bi standing side by side in the coming battles.

[Dwarva]

draken-heart wrote...

The best way i see how they can fix it IF they make an Dragon Age 3  is to have one romance for each sexuality, Gender and class. So like a straight male warrior but his female counterpart is a lesbian or something like that.

I'm sorry because this looks like I'm singling you out (and I'm not) but I wanted to respond to your post and others along the same lines.

I think one of the issues that supporters of an all bi companion team have is the use of phrases like 'fix it'. It implies there's something wrong with the way it's done now in DA2 and, certainly in my opinion, there's nothing wrong with it. It might not be how I'd necessarily choose to have it but it's not wrong and doesn't really need 'fixed'. I think this is a large part of why people are struggling to voice an opinion against an all bi party because it implies we think it's wrong to have it like that. Which, in turn, makes them think we think the lifestyle is wrong.

Maybe I'm way off base but I think I speak for quite a large portion of the 'against an all bi party' people when I say I don't have an issue with how it is now. My ideal situation may be slightly different but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy it and take full advantage of how it is now. I've romanced Fenris and Anders as both genders so it would be incredibly hypocritcal of me to say I'm against it. I think we just need to consider how we put our point across.

Again, this isn't meant as an attack on yourself - it was just the post that highlighted this to me about how we should be careful how we phrase things when it comes to such an emotive subject.

[whykikyouwhy]

If I could make a few comments with regard to this -

brushyourteeth wrote...

Is that a requirement? Nah, definitely not. It's a videogame - it's for fun, not to be a moral soapbox or a political platform. It would just be nice, is all. The devs have said that our LI's are only bi if we want them to be, and that assuming they're bi every time is metagaming on our part. But that doesn't make any sense - the world never changes, only our decisions about it. It's like saying that if you miss that dialogue where Ruxton Harriman gets feathered by his elven servant, then it never actually happened on our playthrough. So I think that explanation needs some work.

I'm at a place where I'm seeing the value of having bi-or-pc-sexual LI's, but I'd love to have other companions and NPC's who are definitely gay, straight, or bi standing side by side in the coming battles.

I think the explanation has some weight and validity. In any playthrough, your Hawke may be different from the last one you played. (S)he may be diplomatic, sarcastic, aggressive, or a mix of all. (S)he may be friends with some companions, and never cozy up to others. (S)he may align with the templars, the mages, or wherever the coin may fall. There are numerous variables that come down to static decisions, yes, to options selected, to a yea or nay for quests, but all of that also influences how that particular Hawke sees the world - what sort of focus (s)he has or what sort of tint and hue (s)he is viewing things from.

IRL, we may make assumptions about people based on impressions and a whole lot of what we don't know, but guess at from observations. Every person that we encounter isn't going to run through a checklist with us of what they like or don't like, how they feel about any numbers of things like religion, politics, ethics and love. We may never get to know the deeper dreams and/or desires of folks, even those that we may consider ourselves close to. Does that change who they are? No, but we are only privy to so much, so in that regard, we don't really fully know who they are. Does that change what happens in their lives? No. But again, those are things held separate from us.

That's where what happens in any playthrough and metagaming intersect. The feather incident can happen in your game, but in a playthrough where you didn't visit the estate, or walk into that room (I missed that room during my first playthrough), it isn't part of our experience or scope. It doesn't happen within the realm of what we know. Companions are richly crafted individuals, but Hawke only knows part of who they are based on the interactions that can happen in any one playthrough, based on how we may run it. If one Hawke flirts up Isabela and has some sexytimes but never has the post-coital conversation about love (and thus, backstory), then that Hawke doesn't know that Isabela was in a loveless marriage. As the player, I know it, because I troll the forums, and have done my reading and had discussions with other players. But Hawke? Hawke would only be aware of that facet of Isabela from the pirate herself, or from other dialogue. Thus, that Hawke's perspective of Isabela is shaped not just by what (s)he knows, but by what (s)he doesn't know.

While sexuality and sexual identity are vital parts of any individual, how an individual expresses that aspect of his/herself varies. Some people don't talk about matters of the heart or the bedroom, some people are quite open about that. Some people actively think or act from the perspective of who they are/identify as sexually, whereas others may think or act more from other parts of themselves, if not just the sum total. 

The "all-bi" or rather, the availability of LIs to be romanced by a Hawke of either gender, allows for our perspective, as Hawke, to align itself as closely as possible (in some regard) with how we function IRL. We get to know someone through word and deed, and we form opinions based on what we see and don't see from them - points of view and angles that can shift from playthrough to playthrough, though not necessarily altering the truth of something, rather, it alters how we see and interpret it.

Modifié par whykikyouwhy, 01 août 2012 - 10:05 .

[brushyourteeth]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

If I could make a few comments with regard to this -

brushyourteeth wrote...

Is that a requirement? Nah, definitely not. It's a videogame - it's for fun, not to be a moral soapbox or a political platform. It would just be nice, is all. The devs have said that our LI's are only bi if we want them to be, and that assuming they're bi every time is metagaming on our part. But that doesn't make any sense - the world never changes, only our decisions about it. It's like saying that if you miss that dialogue where Ruxton Harriman gets feathered by his elven servant, then it never actually happened on our playthrough. So I think that explanation needs some work.

I'm at a place where I'm seeing the value of having bi-or-pc-sexual LI's, but I'd love to have other companions and NPC's who are definitely gay, straight, or bi standing side by side in the coming battles.

While sexuality and sexual identity are vital parts of any individual, how an individual expresses that aspect of his/herself varies. Some people don't talk about matters of the heart or the bedroom, some people are quite open about that. Some people actively think or act from the perspective of who they are/identify as sexually, whereas others may think or act more from other parts of themselves, if not just the sum total. 

The "all-bi" or rather, the availability of LIs to be romanced by a Hawke of either gender, allows for our perspective, as Hawke, to align itself as closely as possible (in some regard) with how we function IRL. We get to know someone through word and deed, and we form opinions based on what we see and don't see from them - points of view and angles that can shift from playthrough to playthrough, though not necessarily altering the truth of something, rather, it alters how we see and interpret it.

I can definitely see the validity in your explanation, so very well put - and thanks for the time.

I think I can chalk my frustrations in this department over the fact that in general I've a very hard-lined, black-and-white type of person. I feel much more freedom to roleplay within a world with some strong boundaries, and I like to definitively know as much as I can about my companions. I get annoyed that we can influence them in other ways too ("I'm against everything you stand for, but sacrifice all that's important to your personal integrity and love me anyway! Furthermore, I'll make you tag along and force you to kill the people you wish you could be supporting! Hooray!!")
 
And the idea that we can change someone's sexuality is the complete opposite of inclusive to me. You don't want Anders to be gay? Just be a jerk to him and voila! - he isn't gay! Isn't that convenient for you, person-who-can't-respect-another-human-beings-differences? We make it easy for you to plug your ears and pretend homosexuality doesn't exist! And as Bioware, we will almost go there-- oh yes! And you will pat us on the back for inclusiveness. We just won't dare create a scenario that represents SGLBT people all working together in loving friendships without any problems. You can headcannon that on your own!

See what I mean? Frustrating!
I loved Steve in ME3. I loved Traynor. I adored Liara!! I loved Vega, who by all accounts seems pretty exclusively interested in the ladies. And we had something great on the Normandy in that regard. I'd just love to have some more of that.

Modifié par brushyourteeth, 01 août 2012 - 03:42 .

[Xilizhra]

And the idea that we can change someone's sexuality is the complete opposite of inclusive to me. You don't want Anders to be gay? Just be a jerk to him and voila! - he isn't gay! Isn't that convenient for you, person-who-can't-respect-another-human-beings-differences? We make it easy for you to plug your ears and pretend homosexuality doesn't exist! And as Bioware, we will almost go there-- oh yes! And you will pat us on the back for inclusiveness. We just won't dare create a scenario that represents SGLBT people all working together in loving friendships without any problems. You can headcannon that on your own!

This would be valid if it was done to all companions, and not just the ones who are potential love interests. It's totally fine to do something your way so long as it doesn't infringe on player choice by restricting LIs as well.

[syllogi]

brushyourteeth wrote...

I think I can chalk my frustrations in this department over the fact that in general I've a very hard-lined, black-and-white type of person. I feel much more freedom to roleplay within a world with some strong boundaries, and I like to definitively know as much as I can about my companions. I get annoyed that we can influence them in other ways too ("I'm against everything you stand for, but sacrifice all that's important to your personal integrity and love me anyway! Furthermore, I'll make you tag along and force you to kill the people you wish you could be supporting! Hooray!!")
 
And the idea that we can change someone's sexuality is the complete opposite of inclusive to me. You don't want Anders to be gay? Just be a jerk to him and voila! - he isn't gay! Isn't that convenient for you, person-who-can't-respect-another-human-beings-differences? We make it easy for you to plug your ears and pretend homosexuality doesn't exist! And as Bioware, we will almost go there-- oh yes! And you will pat us on the back for inclusiveness. We just won't dare create a scenario that represents SGLBT people all working together in loving friendships without any problems. You can headcannon that on your own!

See what I mean? Frustrating!
I loved Steve in ME3. I loved Traynor. I adored Liara!! I loved Vega, who by all accounts seems pretty exclusively interested in the ladies. And we had something great on the Normandy in that regard. I'd just love to have some more of that.

I never play male characters, so when I am mean/snarky to Anders, am I changing his sexuality?  He has not revealed anything about his sexual history to Hawke at that point (and that would be weird, since they just met), and even after turning him down, the only time my female Hawke hears about his past exploits, it's in a very general way (the electricity trick at the Pearl, in a banter with Isabela).

If there's no proof that turning him down with a female character makes him homosexual, why do you assume that turning him down with a male character makes him heterosexual?  I've heard about how he mentions that Karl was his lover to a male Hawke, and I'm not sure if he says this to an unromanced Hawke, but wouldn't that conversation existing at all indicate that Anders has had at least one male lover in the past, whether Hawke shuts him down or not?

And why do these conversations always focus on Anders?  I really, really would like to see some convincing arguments as to why/how Merrill and Fenris have been "ruined" by being available for romance by both genders.

[brushyourteeth]

Xilizhra wrote...

And the idea that we can change someone's sexuality is the complete opposite of inclusive to me. You don't want Anders to be gay? Just be a jerk to him and voila! - he isn't gay! Isn't that convenient for you, person-who-can't-respect-another-human-beings-differences? We make it easy for you to plug your ears and pretend homosexuality doesn't exist! And as Bioware, we will almost go there-- oh yes! And you will pat us on the back for inclusiveness. We just won't dare create a scenario that represents SGLBT people all working together in loving friendships without any problems. You can headcannon that on your own!

This would be valid if it was done to all companions, and not just the ones who are potential love interests. It's totally fine to do something your way so long as it doesn't infringe on player choice by restricting LIs as well.

That's definitely what I'm proposing. Though when the rubber meets the road, you have a conflict between player choice and character integrity, right? - Which is very closely tied (at least the way I see it) to the idea that a real-life person has a right to love men or women exclusively, and any attempt to change them comes from a place of  extreme ignorance. I'm definitely not saying that there's anything distasteful about being bi - only that there's something fundamentally wrong with the idea that you can make that decision for someone else. I don't like where that takes us, even with fictional characters, even for the sake of fun RP.

So when it comes down to it, I don't actually know how to fix that -- I just wish we lived in a world where we can accept someone's GLBTS sexuality for what it is and aren't interested in romancing them if it means we may have to change them. The underlined is what I'm afraid the whole "everyone is bi" OR pc-sexual scenario implies.

[The Uncanny]

brushyourteeth wrote...

And the idea that we can change someone's sexuality is the complete opposite of inclusive to me.

Change? From what? I don't think I follow you.

[brushyourteeth]

syllogi wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...
[/i]And the idea that we can change someone's sexuality is the complete opposite of inclusive to me. You don't want Anders to be gay? Just be a jerk to him and voila! - he isn't gay! Isn't that convenient for you, person-who-can't-respect-another-human-beings-differences? We make it easy for you to plug your ears and pretend homosexuality doesn't exist! And as Bioware, we will almost go there-- oh yes! And you will pat us on the back for inclusiveness. We just won't dare create a scenario that represents SGLBT people all working together in loving friendships without any problems. You can headcannon that on your own!

See what I mean? Frustrating!
I loved Steve in ME3. I loved Traynor. I adored Liara!! I loved Vega, who by all accounts seems pretty exclusively interested in the ladies. And we had something great on the Normandy in that regard. I'd just love to have some more of that.

I never play male characters, so when I am mean/snarky to Anders, am I changing his sexuality?  He has not revealed anything about his sexual history to Hawke at that point (and that would be weird, since they just met), and even after turning him down, the only time my female Hawke hears about his past exploits, it's in a very general way (the electricity trick at the Pearl, in a banter with Isabela).

If there's no proof that turning him down with a female character makes him homosexual, why do you assume that turning him down with a male character makes him heterosexual?  I've heard about how he mentions that Karl was his lover to a male Hawke, and I'm not sure if he says this to an unromanced Hawke, but wouldn't that conversation existing at all indicate that Anders has had at least one male lover in the past, whether Hawke shuts him down or not?

And why do these conversations always focus on Anders?  I really, really would like to see some convincing arguments as to why/how Merrill and Fenris have been "ruined" by being available for romance by both genders.

That's funny, actually - I only use Anders as an example because I've seen Mr. Gaider in more than one of these topics explain that hey, if you don't want Anders to be gay, change up the dialogue and he won't be gay - fixes everything, right?

So I think you're misunderstanding my sarcasm on the subject - I think the idea that we the player can alter our companions' dialogue in order to pretend they're our desired sexuality is a bad thing. In fact, like you, I just don't think the idea makes very much sense at all. Do I like the idea that the romantic content is open to everyone? I do. But in this regard I wish Bioware would take the "Yep, all four LI's are bi! What luck!" stance because it makes oh-so-much-more sense than "Isabela is what you want her to be." Excuse me? Isabela does what she wants -- it's why I love her! And I would even then be much happier if we had more excellent companions and NPC's who were gay, straight, and transgendered.

[draken-heart]

Staarbux wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

The best way i see how they can fix it IF they make an Dragon Age 3  is to have one romance for each sexuality, Gender and class. So like a straight male warrior but his female counterpart is a lesbian or something like that.

I'm sorry because this looks like I'm singling you out (and I'm not) but I wanted to respond to your post and others along the same lines.

I think one of the issues that supporters of an all bi companion team have is the use of phrases like 'fix it'. It implies there's something wrong with the way it's done now in DA2 and, certainly in my opinion, there's nothing wrong with it. It might not be how I'd necessarily choose to have it but it's not wrong and doesn't really need 'fixed'. I think this is a large part of why people are struggling to voice an opinion against an all bi party because it implies we think it's wrong to have it like that. Which, in turn, makes them think we think the lifestyle is wrong.

Maybe I'm way off base but I think I speak for quite a large portion of the 'against an all bi party' people when I say I don't have an issue with how it is now. My ideal situation may be slightly different but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy it and take full advantage of how it is now. I've romanced Fenris and Anders as both genders so it would be incredibly hypocritcal of me to say I'm against it. I think we just need to consider how we put our point across.

Again, this isn't meant as an attack on yourself - it was just the post that highlighted this to me about how we should be careful how we phrase things when it comes to such an emotive subject.

what i was saying to keep both sides happy they would have to give people more options, but limit those options to about four: 1 straight, 2 bi, and 1 S/S Love interest in the next game. But i see your point.

[jlb524]

brushyourteeth wrote...
"Yep, all four LI's are bi! What luck!" stance because it makes oh-so-much-more sense than "Isabela is what you want her to be." Excuse me? Isabela does what she wants -- it's why I love her! And I would even then be much happier if we had more excellent companions and NPC's who were gay, straight, and transgendered.

Isabela isn't what you want her to be (in regards to sexuality) since her sexuality is expclicity defined in game via conversations that take place outside of LI dialog.

However, with some LIs, they only express any form of sexuality via interaction with the PC, so in that case, sexuality is up to player interpretation.  Lots of BW LIs are like this in that they only express sexuality with the PC...even if these LIs are exclusive to one gender.

[brushyourteeth]

jlb524 wrote...

brushyourteeth wrote...
"Yep, all four LI's are bi! What luck!" stance because it makes oh-so-much-more sense than "Isabela is what you want her to be." Excuse me? Isabela does what she wants -- it's why I love her! And I would even then be much happier if we had more excellent companions and NPC's who were gay, straight, and transgendered.

Isabela isn't what you want her to be (in regards to sexuality) since her sexuality is expclicity defined in game via conversations that take place outside of LI dialog.

However, with some LIs, they only express any form of sexuality via interaction with the PC, so in that case, sexuality is up to player interpretation.  Lots of BW LIs are like this in that they only express sexuality with the PC...even if these LIs are exclusive to one gender.

Yeah, that's the part I have a problem with. Just me, though - admittedly I'm the weird one. I really should just quit bringing this up and let people enjoy their game.

[jlb524]

brushyourteeth wrote...
Yeah, that's the part I have a problem with. Just me, though - admittedly I'm the weird one. I really should just quit bringing this up and let people enjoy their game.

Is the issue with things being left up to interpretation?  Considering how much dialog is presented in game, a lot will be left up to player interpretation with these characters.

I don't know if you read fan fic, but fan fic writers make up loads of crap about characters...they add in details that the game writers didn't feel was important enough to include.  As long as nothing in game contradicts this, I don't see the problem.

There's nothing in game that contradicts my belief that Merrill is dwarf-sexual but making an exception for Hawke, so I can roll with it.