930 réponses à ce sujet

[AkiKishi]

Emzamination wrote...
Thanks for admitting you believe in sexual bias.That character being written has no thought pattern until the writer gives them one and that pattern should not be hardcoded with your personal ideals, it must be able to take in and reject or accept one based on actions like a 'realistic' mind.

The human mind is not pre written or hard coded to feel certain emotions,ideals,religion and sexualities.These things are subject to change based on enviorment,situation and feelings so a pre programed LI rejecting all advances based on sexuality would be 'unrealistic', no?

Nature vs Nurture.

Actually people are predisposed to certain behaviours because of how they are "wired".

[wsandista]

Emzamination wrote...


Thanks for admitting you believe in sexual bias.That character being written has no thought pattern until the writer gives them one and that pattern should not be hardcoded with your personal ideals, it must be able to take in and reject or accept one based on actions like a 'realistic' mind.

By that standard you also have a sexual bias. You beleve that everyone should be bisexual, and that homosexuals and heterosexuals should not be included. By your own standard, you desire exclusion.

The human mind is not pre written or hard coded to feel certain emotions,ideals,religion and sexualities.These things are subject to change based on enviorment,situation and feelings so a pre programed LI rejecting all advances based on sexuality would be 'unrealistic', no?

So you believe that homosexuality isn't real? Judging from what you say, people have no solid core personality so any belief, sexuality, or quirk is liquid and can change quite easily.

Modifié par wsandista, 09 juin 2012 - 05:10 .

[Ryzaki]

syllogi wrote...

Why don't *I* want homosexual LIs?

I want as much choice as possible, and it is far more likely that homosexual only romance would be restricted to one companion at most, or even a non squadmate "light" romance. They could do one romance per straight/bi/same sex, but it's restricting choice in the name of arbitrary fairness. I want to choose to partake in video game romance based on the personality of the LI, not simply because they are there.

If your male PC prefers the demure, kind human who happens to be f/f only, and my female PC prefers the feisty, selfish elf who is only a m/f LI, then to me, the romances are far less enjoyable, and I am far less likely to romance that npc that has been chosen for me, based only on the gender of my character. So the "fair" solution doesn't make many people happy, and it could in fact, make some people choose to not play out romances at all.

I'll keep advocating for all bi LIs.

Also this. All of this.

Also...why not have non-romanceable homosexual companions? We seem to get plenty of non-romanceable heterosexual companions. That way homosexuality isn't being ignored outside of the LIs.

Have them turn down some flirtation with an o/s companion or side character with a simple "not interested in x or y." , have them in a relationship with someone of the same gender (a dead spouse? It's at least not Carth Syndrome since they won't hit on the player). There you get all sexualities and you can still have all bi LIs. Companions aren't being forced to conform to the player's whims. Those who want realism get diverging sexualities and being rejected on the basis of being the wrong gender (even if the right gender gets rejected for other reasons), and gay PCs can have a choice other than the designated bi LI. (or designated side gay LI).

Modifié par Ryzaki, 09 juin 2012 - 05:18 .

[Allan Schumacher]

This conversation is starting to flirt the lines of remaining open.


Feeling that the characters should have set types of sexuality because they feel that strengthens the character when seen from different playthroughs is a valid and fair opinion.

Feeling that characters should be "player-centric" in their sexuality because they feel it allows for deeper romances as it prevents splitting of romances is also a fair and valid opinion.

Discussions like the above are fine.  Making this personal and digging into how posters perceive sexuality and then making conclusions about the validity of their point based on those interpretations is only going to lead to bad places.


Thank you.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 09 juin 2012 - 05:21 .

[wsandista]

Ryzaki wrote...

snip

I seperate between what the PC does and what I want. This will probably leaad to a "what is role-plaing discussion" so I'm just going to stop here.

To get back to the original point. The game world and NPCs should be staic and not conform to the PC at creation. The PC should only impact the world and NPCs through actions, and should not have NPCs change for the PC.

I do not want all-bi LIs beacsue I would like to see actual homosexual LIs. I offered a solution where every party member could be an LI and they would have 2 female exclusive, 2male exclusive, and 2 bisexual.

[Emzamination]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Emzamination wrote...
Thanks for admitting you believe in sexual bias.That character being written has no thought pattern until the writer gives them one and that pattern should not be hardcoded with your personal ideals, it must be able to take in and reject or accept one based on actions like a 'realistic' mind.

The human mind is not pre written or hard coded to feel certain emotions,ideals,religion and sexualities.These things are subject to change based on enviorment,situation and feelings so a pre programed LI rejecting all advances based on sexuality would be 'unrealistic', no?

Nature vs Nurture.

Actually people are predisposed to certain behaviours because of how they are "wired".

Those 'wired' behaviours are implemented by their parents,family,friend's beliefs and actions, a child come into this world with no preference or bias of their own, only imitating what they see around their "environment".

[Ryzaki]

wsandista wrote...
I seperate between what the PC does and what I want. This will probably leaad to a "what is role-plaing discussion" so I'm just going to stop here.

To get back to the original point. The game world and NPCs should be staic and not conform to the PC at creation. The PC should only impact the world and NPCs through actions, and should not have NPCs change for the PC.

I do not want all-bi LIs beacsue I would like to see actual homosexual LIs. I offered a solution where every party member could be an LI and they would have 2 female exclusive, 2male exclusive, and 2 bisexual.

Others don't. So your way of playing isn't the only way. And clearly that allows others to twist NPCs to conform to their desires. So not having all bi LIs doesn't avert that.

And how do you know all the NPCs sexuality? Again? How do you know they're straight? You keep assuming.

And the devs flat out said that was resource heavy and thus...unfeasible. Give me a realistic solution.

My solution is for homosexual companions that aren't romanceable, same with heterosexual ones. The bi companions can be the romances that way no one has to feel they're locked out from an already written romance just because the gender they played. Different rejections with the companions that aren't romanceable and that's enough for me. There's differences, it's acknowledged, but not in a cost prohibitive way.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 09 juin 2012 - 05:24 .

[Emzamination]

wsandista wrote...

Emzamination wrote...


Thanks for admitting you believe in sexual bias.That character being written has no thought pattern until the writer gives them one and that pattern should not be hardcoded with your personal ideals, it must be able to take in and reject or accept one based on actions like a 'realistic' mind.

By that standard you also have a sexual bias. You beleve that everyone should be bisexual, and that homosexuals and heterosexuals should not be included. By your own standard, you desire exclusion.

The human mind is not pre written or hard coded to feel certain emotions,ideals,religion and sexualities.These things are subject to change based on enviorment,situation and feelings so a pre programed LI rejecting all advances based on sexuality would be 'unrealistic', no?

So you believe that homosexuality isn't real? Judging from what you say, people have no solid core personality so any belief, sexuality, or quirk is liquid and can change quite easily.

I said a page or two back that characters should have personal preferences but they should be subject to change based on one's actions.To humour  you, every one can partake of a bi character so it's not exclusive.

Yes, everything about the human personality is subject to change.homosexuality is just a title, what matters is the love.

[wsandista]

Ryzaki wrote...

Others don't. So your way of playing isn't the only way. And clearly that allows others to twist NPCs to conform to their desires. So no all bi LIs doesn't avert that.

I don't claim that my way is the only way.

And how do you know all the NPCs sexuality? Again? How do you know they're straight? You keep assuming.

As do you. I think we should drop this and agree to disagree before the thread gets shut down.

And the devs flat out said that was resource heavy and thus...unfeasible. Give me a realistic solution.

My solution is for homosexual companions that aren't romanceable, same with heterosexual ones. The bi companions can be the romances that way no one has to feel they're locked out from an already written romance just because the gender they played.

At least 6 party members are romance-able, with 2 exlusive LIs per gender is not feasible how?

It looks similar to your solution IMO.

[wsandista]

Emzamination wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Emzamination wrote...


Thanks for admitting you believe in sexual bias.That character being written has no thought pattern until the writer gives them one and that pattern should not be hardcoded with your personal ideals, it must be able to take in and reject or accept one based on actions like a 'realistic' mind.

By that standard you also have a sexual bias. You beleve that everyone should be bisexual, and that homosexuals and heterosexuals should not be included. By your own standard, you desire exclusion.

The human mind is not pre written or hard coded to feel certain emotions,ideals,religion and sexualities.These things are subject to change based on enviorment,situation and feelings so a pre programed LI rejecting all advances based on sexuality would be 'unrealistic', no?

So you believe that homosexuality isn't real? Judging from what you say, people have no solid core personality so any belief, sexuality, or quirk is liquid and can change quite easily.

I said a page or two back that characters should have personal preferences but they should be subject to change based on one's actions.To humour  you, every one can partake of a bi character so it's not exclusive.

Yes, everything about the human personality is subject to change.homosexuality is just a title, what matters is the love.

So homosexuality isn't real? Everyone can be attracted to anyone, regardless of anything? 

[Ryzaki]

wsandista wrote...
I don't claim that my way is the only way.

Which again means the NPCs are easily able to be molded by the players. All bi Lis doesn't really affect this.

As do you. I think we should drop this and agree to disagree before the thread gets shut down.

*whispers* I never said they weren't straight. I simply said I assumed X but I could be wrong. You know like you could be.

But agree to disagree.

At least 6 party members are romance-able, with 2 exlusive LIs per gender is not feasible how?

It looks similar to your solution IMO.

This is how:

John Epler wrote...

iakus wrote...

John Epler wrote...

We're not cutting either. In an ideal world, without resource considerations, we'd have more options and have those options would be more varied. I'm not commenting on what approach we might take in the future - I really
don't know, as I'm not a writer. But, you know, if allowing an underserved segment of the population more choice is on the table, that's going to be my choice wherever possible.

Choices are always good.  But I also think we can still have an abundance of choices fro everyone without doing a 100% overlap.  It might be cost-effective, but it seems...cheap.

In this case, unfortunately, it's either 'more choice' or 'more 'realistic' characters for some'. Were we to have unlimited resources, we'd likely do more on the sexuality spectrum, but a companion is a not-insignificant expenditure of resources. This has been true since at least DA:O for cinematic design, and I imagine true for writing for even longer before that.

In the end, not everyone agrees that having all the love interests be able to be romanced by either gender is hugely immersion breaking, and given the choice between 'more LI choices' and 'less immersion breaking for some', we're likely to fall on the side of the former. That's not to say that, as we find time-saving techniques, we might not start experimenting with companion rosters that have a greater variety on the human sexuality spectrum, but for the time being this is the decision we've come to as the best possible use of resources.

 
6 romanceable companions are a significantly higher resource investement than just 4. That's how.

My solution is to have homosexual companions. They're not romances. They would've already used up companion resources. Your solution is to have them use up romance resources in addition to that. That's more resource consuming. It's also if this quote is anything to go by unfeasible and unlikely.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 09 juin 2012 - 05:35 .

[Abispa]

Supporting or opposing s/s romances by using real-world data is pointless in this debate, since video games aren't, and have NEVER been, "realistic." In fact, they'd be pretty boring if they were. Imagine the ultra-exciting months of physical rehabilitation Hawke and party would have to go through after every battle if one of them fell.

Hero-sexual LIs aren't "realistic," it's a fan service. LIs are nothing more than another way for us, the players, to accessorize our heroes. I am fine with the hero-sexual solution since, while it allows other players to pursue their s/s romance, it doesn't affect me in the least. My enjoyment of the series is not diminished by the lack of exclusive content based solely on the gender of my hero, no matter how sad I was that Aveline wasn't an option.

I do like the fact that Hawke was able to flirt with people who aren't interested and get turned down. A refreshing change from the "if he can flirt with it, he can f--- it" approach of DA:O.

[jlb524]

Nyoka wrote...
It's odd that people say the world shouldn't be tailored to the player... and then they design a group of companions specifically tailored to give the same number of love interests to all possible sexual orientations. To me, that solution feels far more artificial, if only because you actually see that in-game. I imagine the protagonist thinking "Oh look, this random group of people I have been encountering in my epic journey just happen to suit a perfect model of sexual quotas, so it wouldn't matter if I were gay or not, I would have the same amount of potential romances... what a coincidence!"

The LIs are always young and hot too.

Hmmm...might be some tailoring there.

[wsandista]

Ryzaki wrote...

At least 6 party members are romance-able, with 2 exlusive LIs per gender is not feasible how?

It looks similar to your solution IMO.

This is how:

John Epler wrote...

iakus wrote...

John Epler wrote...

We're not cutting either. In an ideal world, without resource considerations, we'd have more options and have those options would be more varied. I'm not commenting on what approach we might take in the future - I really
don't know, as I'm not a writer. But, you know, if allowing an underserved segment of the population more choice is on the table, that's going to be my choice wherever possible.

Choices are always good.  But I also think we can still have an abundance of choices fro everyone without doing a 100% overlap.  It might be cost-effective, but it seems...cheap.

In this case, unfortunately, it's either 'more choice' or 'more 'realistic' characters for some'. Were we to have unlimited resources, we'd likely do more on the sexuality spectrum, but a companion is a not-insignificant expenditure of resources. This has been true since at least DA:O for cinematic design, and I imagine true for writing for even
longer before that.

In the end, not everyone agrees that having all the love interests be able to be romanced by either gender is hugely immersion breaking, and given the choice between 'more LI choices' and 'less immersion breaking for some', we're likely to fall on the side of the former. That's not to say that, as we find time-saving techniques, we might not start experimenting with companion rosters that have a greater variety on the human sexuality spectrum, but for the time being this is the decision we've come to as the best possible use of resources.

 
6 romanceable companions are a significantly higher resource investement than just 4. That's how.

My solution is to have homosexual companions. They're not romances. They would've already used up companion resources. Your solution is to have them use up romance resources in addition to that. That's more resource consuming. It's also if this quote is anything to go by unfeasible and unlikely.

I still don't see it. Companions already generally get more resources than almost any other character(s). Why not simply write them as LIs if the trouble to give them more character development is already happening? Would it have taken that much more resources to make Varric, or Sten LIs?

I don't know because they don't throw out a pie chart showing what gets how many zots.

[Ryzaki]

wsandista wrote..
I still don't see it. Companions already generally get more resources than almost any other character(s). Why not simply write them as LIs if the trouble to give them more character development is already happening? Would it have taken that much more resources to make Varric, or Sten LIs?

I don't know because they don't throw out a pie chart showing what gets how many zots.

You don't see how the devs telling you additional cutscenes and dialogues needed would be more resource intensive? 

As for Varric and Sten...it might've. They don't have infinite resources. Even ME3 with the homosexual LIs had some LIs cut out of the picture or given mere scraps to accomdate for the sheer amount there were.

Well I'm going to take their word for it. Though I wouldn't mind a bit more through explantion from a wandering dev.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 09 juin 2012 - 05:45 .

[Emzamination]

wsandista wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Emzamination wrote...


Thanks for admitting you believe in sexual bias.That character being written has no thought pattern until the writer gives them one and that pattern should not be hardcoded with your personal ideals, it must be able to take in and reject or accept one based on actions like a 'realistic' mind.

By that standard you also have a sexual bias. You beleve that everyone should be bisexual, and that homosexuals and heterosexuals should not be included. By your own standard, you desire exclusion.

The human mind is not pre written or hard coded to feel certain emotions,ideals,religion and sexualities.These things are subject to change based on enviorment,situation and feelings so a pre programed LI rejecting all advances based on sexuality would be 'unrealistic', no?

So you believe that homosexuality isn't real? Judging from what you say, people have no solid core personality so any belief, sexuality, or quirk is liquid and can change quite easily.

I said a page or two back that characters should have personal preferences but they should be subject to change based on one's actions.To humour  you, every one can partake of a bi character so it's not exclusive.

Yes, everything about the human personality is subject to change.homosexuality is just a title, what matters is the love.

So homosexuality isn't real? Everyone can be attracted to anyone, regardless of anything? 

homosexuality is just a title given to people of the same gender who love each other, it's nothing more than a title put on love.

Yes any person can be attracted to anyone for a multitude of reasons.

[Abispa]

jlb524 wrote...

Nyoka wrote...
It's odd that people say the world shouldn't be tailored to the player... and then they design a group of companions specifically tailored to give the same number of love interests to all possible sexual orientations. To me, that solution feels far more artificial, if only because you actually see that in-game. I imagine the protagonist thinking "Oh look, this random group of people I have been encountering in my epic journey just happen to suit a perfect model of sexual quotas, so it wouldn't matter if I were gay or not, I would have the same amount of potential romances... what a coincidence!"

The LIs are always young and hot too.

Hmmm...might be some tailoring there.

What are you talking about, woman? My romance with The Keeper literally brought the house down.

Oh, wait. That was a MOD. My bad.

[jlb524]

Abispa wrote...

What are you talking about, woman? My romance with The Keeper literally brought the house aravel down.

Fixed.

[Ryzaki]

...why must you insist on putting those disturbing images in my head Abispa. WHY?!?

[Abispa]

jlb524 wrote...

Abispa wrote...

What are you talking about, woman? My romance with The Keeper literally brought the house aravel down.

Fixed.

No, no, no. That option only occurs during s/s romances. Mine was straight, thus we were at Uncle Gamlen's place.

[Abispa]

Ryzaki wrote...

...why must you insist on putting those disturbing images in my head Abispa. WHY?!?

Have you ever concidered just how easily these images find a home in your head?

[Ryzaki]

Abispa wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

...why must you insist on putting those disturbing images in my head Abispa. WHY?!?

Have you ever concidered just how easily these images find a home in your head?

It's because of your damnable influence! That and that stupid abomination of Legion pic. Curse you! CURRSEE YOUUUUUU!

On topic: Seriously though a homosexual companion would be nice. On average how many companions do we get in the DA games anyway? 

[AkiKishi]

Nyoka wrote...

It's odd that people say the world shouldn't be tailored to the player... and then they design a group of companions specifically tailored to give the same number of love interests to all possible sexual orientations. To me, that solution feels far more artificial, if only because you actually see that in-game. I imagine the protagonist thinking "Oh look, this random group of people I have been encountering in my epic journey just happen to suit a perfect model of sexual quotas, so it wouldn't matter if I were gay or not, I would have the same amount of potential romances... what a coincidence!"

This is what happens when you start politiking game design. The characters should be representative of what you find in Thedas and that should be the end of it.