930 réponses à ce sujet

[cindercatz]

.. You know, there's another way they could do it.

You could have an oppurtunity to establish your character's orientation early on and then the other characters of the game change in distinct ways based on that, meaning that if you play a s/s or bi character, other characters' sexual history is then established, and they can then talk about their history and explore biases based on that, but be open to the player as an option. If you play a straight character and establish that, you get examples or personal history of certain characters that identify or challenge you, but basically, sexuality is allowed to come into play and explore restrictions and biases, without actually restricting the player's options.

You'd have a default history x for player characters of one persuasion, and default history y of for other player characters' playthroughs. Characters you choose to be unromanceable by your initial orientation response or situational choice can then challenge you or display their own default sexual orientation and various scenarioes that can play off of that in relation to you. Players that are romanceable would either be strictly oriented to the player's gender or curious, etc.

You still lose consistency across all player worlds, but you don't have to have ambiguous characters or give up all the story potential and dialogue that can go along with set sexual orientation. I think that might be the best option.

Modifié par cindercatz, 13 juin 2012 - 03:30 .

[Nomen Mendax]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Appearence has always been a trivial thing in DA2. It's never really tracked. LIs do comment on if you are a dwarf/elf so it is a factor. I'd like to see more restrictions, NPCs should have their own preferences too. Like maybe choosing someone else in the party over you.

But it's another example of the world changing itself to conform to the player.  It may never be tracked in DA but it is still bizarre that a LI can fall blithely in love with a hideously ugly PC with terrible complexion.  I'm just pointing out that it's another example of how LIs are essentially hero-centric, even if their sexuality is pre-determined.

Incidentally I don't disagree with your ideas, but I also think that having hero-centric romances is a reasonable compromise.  If the romances were more central to the game (which I would be happy with) then I would expect them to be more complex. 

[ElitePinecone]

wsandista wrote...

Also, it doesn't leave room for homosexual LIs. I don't see how you can argue for inclusiveness then demand only bisexuals as LIs.

I find this a strange argument. 

How is a male protagonist's romance with bisexual [character a] any different to a romance with gay [character b]? Both A and B are men, attracted to men. 

I'd *gladly* have no exclusively gay/lesbian characters in the game, because it means that not only can I play an m/m romance but some other person sitting in another country a thousand kilometres away can load up a female protagonist and have an m/f romance. Not to mention that it's (by all developer accounts) much cheaper - and cheaper LIs mean more dialogue, more depth, more characterisation. 

Bisexual characters are, by definition, homosexual - just not exclusively. And it certainly doesn't devalue an m/m arc if that character can potentially be romanced by a female protagonist in a different universe, nor are they any *less* a valid same-sex option if their character history says they've been interested in both genders at some point in their lives. 

The most 'inclusive' thing is all-bisexual LIs, if we're talking about giving the most options to the largest number of players.

If the argument is about 'inclusivity' as 'relatability', then I'd argue the point is moot - a player wanting to relate to a 'gay' character has the supremely immersive opportunity to actually play a definable gay character, unlike practically every other game currently in existence and the majority of other media, including films or novels. I'm sure you'll agree that given how many lines the protagonist gets and their centrality to the story, playing a lesbian/gay/bisexual hero with the opportunity for same-sex romance is practically as inclusive and relatable as it gets. 

[Fallstar]

In an ideal world we would have characters who were exclusively ******/hetero sexual as well as bisexual characters. A character's sexuality is an important part of their personality. Now, having all four or however many LIs being bisexual is fine. I don't have a problem with that. What is a bit shoddy in my opinion is having all the LIs be 'herosexual'. Having Merril be heterosexual except for you just because you're the player character seems to me like a way of cutting corners. I'm not saying this was how Merril's romance was done in DA2, and I actually felt Merril's romance was one that 'fitted' being bisexual. Just using it as an example.

As it happens, I had no problem with the DA2 romances all being bi, each of the LIs felt like they were actually bisexual. (Aside from Fenris who I barely even spoke to, so I don't know about him.) What I would have a problem with is if rather than having their own indepenent personalities, and by extension sexualities, the LIs are available to the PC regardless of gender just because you're the PC and its quicker to write this way. So all the LIs being bisexual isn't really a problem, what would be is if they were 'herosexual'.

[AkiKishi]

Nomen Mendax wrote...
But it's another example of the world changing itself to conform to the player.  It may never be tracked in DA but it is still bizarre that a LI can fall blithely in love with a hideously ugly PC with terrible complexion.  I'm just pointing out that it's another example of how LIs are essentially hero-centric, even if their sexuality is pre-determined.

Incidentally I don't disagree with your ideas, but I also think that having hero-centric romances is a reasonable compromise.  If the romances were more central to the game (which I would be happy with) then I would expect them to be more complex. 

I like fixed characters (Geralt/Adam/Micheal)so the problem kind of solves itself there. I'm sure there are ways to make a characters appearence trackable, but I've never seen it done in practice.

If you made them less player centric, then you could make them a bigger part of the game. Final Fantasy VI,VII,VIII,IX and X are all driven by plot romace. Of course you don't get choices, so it's not the same thing. ME3 playes out best when you romance Liara, which is great if you romance Liara, not so much if you dont. But creepy Liara who does not respect boundries and always looks like she is waiting to jump you (and may have mind raped you in London) is still good value to the story.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 13 juin 2012 - 06:29 .

[Iakus]

Alexa_ wrote...

But if all Lis were not herosexual but defined bisexual, then most of the straight players might moan, that they want at least the feeling of having a straight LI and that they can't bear the LIs all having sex with the same gender, too. With all LIs being defined bisexual like Zevran and Isabela the straight players would be excluded of having their preferred romance option. So the "all defined bi" thing would put off the greatest part of the players. To make all LIs herosexual is the best way to satisfy most of the players.

I would be very suprised if that turned out to be true at all.  At most, it would be complaints at what a strange coincidence it is.

[Vormaerin]

iakus wrote...

I would be very suprised if that turned out to be true at all.  At most, it would be complaints at what a strange coincidence it is.

The majority of folks don't make a distinction between bisexual and herosexual, though there are some slight variations in the objections.

Either way, the majority of the objections will be of the "I don't want some creepy gay guy companion hitting on my manly dude PC."

The rest of the objections to this mythical "all bi" status are of the "its not realistic" version, which is pretty nonsensical.  Its  "not realistic" for a random sampling of individuals in our culture.   Problem is, its not our culture.   There are human cultures where it wouldn't be unusual.    Also, the companion characters aren't a "random sampling" of society and they aren't normative for a lot of reasons besides sexual tendency.

If its herosexual, the objection is instead based on the idea that you are doing violence to proper characterization, which I don't believe is true for reasons I've given earlier in this thread.

[robertthebard]

iakus wrote...

Alexa_ wrote...

But if all Lis were not herosexual but defined bisexual, then most of the straight players might moan, that they want at least the feeling of having a straight LI and that they can't bear the LIs all having sex with the same gender, too. With all LIs being defined bisexual like Zevran and Isabela the straight players would be excluded of having their preferred romance option. So the "all defined bi" thing would put off the greatest part of the players. To make all LIs herosexual is the best way to satisfy most of the players.

I would be very suprised if that turned out to be true at all.  At most, it would be complaints at what a strange coincidence it is.

It's actually pretty common now, with what we do have.

[Nomen Mendax]

BobSmith101 wrote...

I like fixed characters (Geralt/Adam/Micheal)so the problem kind of solves itself there. I'm sure there are ways to make a characters appearence trackable, but I've never seen it done in practice.

If you made them less player centric, then you could make them a bigger part of the game. Final Fantasy VI,VII,VIII,IX and X are all driven by plot romace. Of course you don't get choices, so it's not the same thing. ME3 playes out best when you romance Liara, which is great if you romance Liara, not so much if you dont. But creepy Liara who does not respect boundries and always looks like she is waiting to jump you (and may have mind raped you in London) is still good value to the story.

I understand the attraction of fixed characters but personally I don't like them (so much so I've not bought the Witcher of Deus Ex).

I wouldn't mind playing a game with a romance that was more central to the plot, I'd certainly be willing to give up some choice for it as well.  Although I think there should still be straight / gay options.  I agree that Liara would have worked well in this role.

Unfortunately (as DG suggested earlier in the thread) this is such a personal issue that you are not going to ever please everyone.  Equally unfortunately trying to please as many people as possible is likely to produce something that doesn't have as much depth as there could be.

[hussey 92]

It felt like Origins had two different perspectives you could choose, one male and one female. DA2 didn't really have this and that had a lot to do with the all bi cast.


EDIT:  when I wrote male and female perspectives, i was talking about a male warden's perspective and a female warden's perspective.

Modifié par hussey 92, 13 juin 2012 - 09:41 .

[Iakus]

Nomen Mendax wrote...
I understand the attraction of fixed characters but personally I don't like them (so much so I've not bought the Witcher of Deus Ex).

I wouldn't mind playing a game with a romance that was more central to the plot, I'd certainly be willing to give up some choice for it as well.  Although I think there should still be straight / gay options.  I agree that Liara would have worked well in this role.

Unfortunately (as DG suggested earlier in the thread) this is such a personal issue that you are not going to ever please everyone.  Equally unfortunately trying to please as many people as possible is likely to produce something that doesn't have as much depth as there could be.

The Witcher and Deus ex also had fixed player characters, whom we had little control over.  I don't think anyone really wants that for Bioware games.  What's being argued is having fixed non-player charcters, who are consistent regardless of who the player chooses to be.

[Vormaerin]

hussey 92 wrote...

It felt like Origins had two different perspectives you could choose, one male and one female. DA2 didn't really have this and that had a lot to do with the all bi cast.

I'm trying to make sense of this comment.   What "female" perspective is present in DAO that isn't in DA2?  I don't call  "Alistair or Morrigan" a perspective change.  Is there something I'm missing?

[Abispa]

hussey 92 wrote...

It felt like Origins had two different perspectives you could choose, one male and one female. DA2 didn't really have this and that had a lot to do with the all bi cast.

It's already been sited several times in this thread that the LIs do treat female and male Hawke differently, and the games presents different ways for the genders to react to them. Unless you wish to imply that gay men are not really men, lesbians aren't really women, and bisexuals are really nothing. If you didn't realise the former, you haven't played through each option, so what's the difference whether they're "all-bi" or not? If you WANT to play every sexual persuasion of hero and demand a separate LI for each (like Jeweldeliah), I might sympathize. If what you believe is the latter, that's just... very sad.

[Vormaerin]

iakus wrote...

The Witcher and Deus ex also had fixed player characters, whom we had little control over.  I don't think anyone really wants that for Bioware games.  What's being argued is having fixed non-player charcters, who are consistent regardless of who the player chooses to be.

Well, I don't expect Bioware to adopt a fixed character to the point of having a single gender and look.  But Hawke and Shepard are both "fixed" characters for all narrative purposes.

Regarding NPCs, you've yet to convince me that having Merrill fall in love with mHawke is inconsistent with Merrill falling in love with fHawke.

[hussey 92]

Vormaerin wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

It felt like Origins had two different perspectives you could choose, one male and one female. DA2 didn't really have this and that had a lot to do with the all bi cast.

I'm trying to make sense of this comment.   What "female" perspective is present in DAO that isn't in DA2?  I don't call  "Alistair or Morrigan" a perspective change.  Is there something I'm missing?

It's not just the Li's.  NPC's like Bella can react differently to you depending on gender.

[hussey 92]

Abispa wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

It felt like Origins had two different perspectives you could choose, one male and one female. DA2 didn't really have this and that had a lot to do with the all bi cast.

It's already been sited several times in this thread that the LIs do treat female and male Hawke differently, and the games presents different ways for the genders to react to them. Unless you wish to imply that gay men are not really men, lesbians aren't really women, and bisexuals are really nothing. If you didn't realise the former, you haven't played through each option, so what's the difference whether they're "all-bi" or not? If you WANT to play every sexual persuasion of hero and demand a separate LI for each (like Jeweldeliah), I might sympathize. If what you believe is the latter, that's just... very sad.

You misunderstood me.  When I said male and female, I was talking about a male warden and a female warden.

[Vormaerin]

hussey 92 wrote...

It's not just the Li's.  NPC's like Bella can react differently to you depending on gender.

This is different from DA2 how?

[hussey 92]

Vormaerin wrote...

hussey 92 wrote...

It's not just the Li's.  NPC's like Bella can react differently to you depending on gender.

This is different from DA2 how?

I don't remember seeing a big difference in DA2

aside from emile

Modifié par hussey 92, 13 juin 2012 - 09:51 .

[Vormaerin]

hussey 92 wrote...

I don't remember seeing a big difference in DA2

aside from emile

I'm too lazy to parse the conversations in both games to get any factual evidence of this one way or the other.  So we'll just say that we don't remember it the same way.   

However,

hussey 92 wrote...

It felt like Origins had two
different perspectives you could choose, one male and one female. DA2
didn't really have this and that had a lot to do with the all bi
cast.

Whether or not characters like Emile and Belle have different dialogues or not has nothing to do with the assertion you made in this quote.  If this perspective is based on Belle not kissing girls, then the supposed "all bi" status of the LIs is not a factor.  

LIs in both games have slightly different dialogues based on gender of the PC, so how does the supposedly  "All bi" cast have a lot to do with it?

[hussey 92]

I guess the Li's do treat male and female hawkes a little differently. I just think that if the Li's are all bi, then the gender of the character has less meaning then it does in DA:O or ME3.

[robertthebard]

hussey 92 wrote...

I guess the Li's do treat male and female hawkes a little differently. I just think that if the Li's are all bi, then the gender of the character has less meaning then it does in DA:O or ME3.

Respective NPC dialogs do a lot of mentioning of him/her, he/she when they are talking about you as Hawke, and there are a lot of "woman/man", or in Gamlen's case "boy/girl" references.  Party banter is full of examples of how even nonromanced characters recognize your gender, so I don't get what you're aiming for here.  Did you expect them to fawn all over fHawke, and back away in fear from mHawke due to excessive manliness or something?  The "generic" treatment of Hawke in a lot of dialog, where it's simply "Hawke", or "Champion" is also used in DA: O, since the Warden could be either gender, and 3 different races.  A majority of the time you are simply "Warden".  So what's different?  You can romance any of the LI's on any character, and that's about it.  The same rule applies to all games with voice acting, and a choice of genders to roll with, which is why we have Shepard in ME.

[ElitePinecone]

robertthebard wrote...

Respective NPC dialogs do a lot of mentioning of him/her, he/she when they are talking about you as Hawke, and there are a lot of "woman/man", or in Gamlen's case "boy/girl" references.  Party banter is full of examples of how even nonromanced characters recognize your gender, so I don't get what you're aiming for here.  Did you expect them to fawn all over fHawke, and back away in fear from mHawke due to excessive manliness or something?  

Not to mention that over-emphasising the gender difference when there's no need for it could actually be detrimental. 

Patrick Weekes had a great blog post about femShepard in Mass Effect and how he specifically didn't want to have NPCs react to her based on gender, because feedback suggested a large portion of players wanted a powerful female protagonist that didn't get special treatment (for better or worse). He didn't "want to assume that because someone plays FemShep, their Shepard is automatically kinder, more sensitive, or interested in flirting."

I mean, there are certainly valid circumstances where a gender difference is obvious and affects the story (the Landsmeet, some of the Origins stories) but I don't see why it should be a big deal outside of that. Thedas has no assumed gender roles. As people have already pointed out, even the romances available to both genders treat male and female Hawkes slightly differently. 

(If the criticism is that maleHawke and femHawke don't differ substantially outside of a different voice actor and appearance then I'd say - why should they? The point of gender selection at character creation is surely more about allowing players to play the gender they want, rather than providing two completely different experiences.)

[iheartbob]

I'm jumping in on this discussion a little late, but here goes ...

I really have no issue with romanceable characters being available to both sexes.  In DAII, I had no idea which characters were romanceable by both sexes until I actually started visiting this and other similar forums.  Granted, I only ever play as female characters, so the only romances I experienced in that game were with Anders, Fenris and Isabella (again, all as fem-Hawke.)  Finding out that Anders and Fenris are romanceable by a male Hawke (and vice-versa for Merril and Isabella) did not at all effect my game play. Merril was a character I would have only pursued as a male-Hawke (which obviously never happened), and while I recognized some of the dialog set-ups she has to spark a lesbian romance, I was able to ignore them just fine. 

I do want to point out that I think the romances in DA:O were executed a little better, that is the gay/lesbian/bi relationships, and here's why:

To me, the sexualities of Leliana and Zevran were developed better. I was able to gleam from the conversations with Leliana as a female Warden in all playthroughs, that in her past, traveling Orlais as a bard and minstrel it was very believable that she might have pursued both female and male relationships.  Again, it was something I could ignore if I chose to by simply ignoring some dialog options, but it still seemed very organic to her characterization.  Zevran is the same way, and he is very explicit with a female Warden that he's been with both men and women and he asks if you're okay with it.  I thought their sexualities were handled very well, and more importantly, they were believable.

Ironically enough when I romanced Isabella during one of my fem-Hawke playthroughs, it did not feel as organic to me.  And she's a character who is certainly presented as being explicitly bisexual.  When I romanced her though I felt like I was playing a fem-Hawke stuck in a male-Hawke's romantic role.  The romance did not resonate as well with me as the Fenris and Anders romances.  I even explored options with Merril, just to see what the romance with the Fem-Hawke was like, before reloading a save and going back on it and again the issue was that it didn't feel like an organic lesbian relationship.  Those same-sex romances just felt like they were put in for convinience more than anything.

And that is mostly my issue.  I like the idea of having options, be them gay, straight, bi, or a PC going completely solo ... I would just like to see NPC characters' sexualities treated in a way that is organic to the character and not just available for the sake of making it available.  I don't know if this involves including and excluding dialog exposition and options based on a PC's sexual orientation/gender or what.  But I do think it's possible because I saw it handled very well in DA:O.

Nevertheless, I'm glad the options were still explored in DA:II.  You have to experiment to figure out what works for your game, and I'd rather see a gaming company try new things and take chances rather than not try anything new at all.  The feedback and discussion between the players and the devs is what is going to make the gaming experience better, and we have a healthy amount of that going on right now on these forums, which I think is great.

Modifié par iheartbob, 14 juin 2012 - 04:40 .

[AkiKishi]

Nomen Mendax wrote...
I understand the attraction of fixed characters but personally I don't like them (so much so I've not bought the Witcher of Deus Ex).

I wouldn't mind playing a game with a romance that was more central to the plot, I'd certainly be willing to give up some choice for it as well.  Although I think there should still be straight / gay options.  I agree that Liara would have worked well in this role.

Unfortunately (as DG suggested earlier in the thread) this is such a personal issue that you are not going to ever please everyone.  Equally unfortunately trying to please as many people as possible is likely to produce something that doesn't have as much depth as there could be.

You should pick up Deus Ex:HR since you can get it for less than a pizza now and give it a try. You will probably be suprised how little it really changes things.