126 réponses à ce sujet

[daaaav]

The other thread was derailed by muppets...

Anyway, I think a point needs to be made.

Sexuality and sexual objectification are two very different things. I hope that Dragon Age 3 avoids objectification without characterisation but heartily embraces sexuality.

The game is set in Orlais, a land where courtesans, brothels and intrigue are a part of their culture. It would feel strange and inauthentic if sexuality where not an integral part of the setting and story. Whether this is accomplished by characterisation or evocative imagery (yes nudity) is up to the developers.

But, it really irks me when people say things like "female characters should dress practically"... Why? What if they don't want to dress practically? If it makes sense for the character then they can dress as impractically as they like...
 
So how important should this be to both the setting and story?

Modifié par daaaav, 19 septembre 2012 - 01:27 .

[HiroVoid]

The game is set in Orlais?  I figured we'd be going to multiple settings based on rumors.

[Emzamination]

I agree, a character should be able to dress how they please without being sexually classified.

[Nixter Shepard]

Well obviously it should all correspond to who the character is. What's their origin, what part of Orlais do they live in, social status, wealth. These factors should really play an integral role in how certain characters and citizens act, speak, and of-course dress.

[Volus Warlord]

Isn't using sexuality as an identifying trait kind of objectifying in and of itself?

[Biotic_Warlock]

Agreed, characters should not be designed to objectify for the sakes of it; i wouldn't object to Isabela being as she was in DA2, but would prefer more coverage.

About sexuality, i hope Bioware designs some romances like they did in Mass Effect 3; they payed more attention to sexuality and both Steve Cortez and Samantha Traynor were both very well written.

Volus Warlord wrote...

Isn't using sexuality as an identifying trait kind of objectifying in and of itself?

Not really...
If a character is open about being gay, how are they being objectified? Being gay or straight shouldn't be something that needs to be hidden, nor should it be emphasised innapropriately. If any gay characters were innapropriately stereotypical, then it would partly objectify sexuality and it would be innapropriate.

Modifié par Biotic_Warlock, 19 septembre 2012 - 01:15 .

[daaaav]

Volus Warlord wrote...

Isn't using sexuality as an identifying trait kind of objectifying in and of itself?

On it's own? Yes.

Sexuality is only part of good characterisation and setting.

[The Hierophant]

daaaav wrote...

But, it really irks me when people say things like "female characters should dress practically"... Why? What if they don't want to dress practically? If it makes sense for the character then they can dress as impractically as they like...
 

Not really because a character whose only clothing is a piece of dental floss, a leaf, a cape, and armed only with a dagger, would look stupid when fighting armored knights or dragons who can tear steel with their claws.

[HiroVoid]

daaaav wrote...
But, it really irks me when people say things like "female characters should dress practically"... Why? What if they don't want to dress practically? If it makes sense for the character then they can dress as impractically as they like...
 

As long as they put their snow gear on for winter and don't blame me when there's no chainmail between flesh and a dagger.

[CitizenThom]

We all physically exist as objects, we will be objectified. The hope is that we aren't only seen as objects. Sexuality is usually at least part objectification... even if it is an extension of romantic love. Unless your sexuality is wrapped entirely around metaphysical things, words and ideas, rather than physical things.

[syllogi]

HiroVoid wrote...

The game is set in Orlais?  I figured we'd be going to multiple settings based on rumors.

Based on what Mike Laidlaw said at conventions last year, the game will take place all over Thedas.  I think that the leaked marketing survey makes it sound like the game will at least begin in Orlais, but we don't know how long we'll stay there.  I mean, technically, part of DA2 took place in Ferelden.

daaaav wrote...

But, it really irks me when people say things like "female characters should dress practically"... Why? What if they don't want to dress practically? If it makes sense for the character then they can dress as impractically as they like...
 
So how important should this be to both the setting and story?

 

Despite what was being said in the last few pages of the last thread, I never said that choice is a bad thing.  Yes, characters should dress as they would like.  But the player should also be able to find gear for themselves and their party members that isn't ridiculous and impractical.  And if, for instance, the Inquisitor's outfit fully covers a male character, and looks functional and imposing, I would hope to have the same sort of effect when my female character wears that armor.  It would be disappointing if armor were lore breaking *just* to be "sexy."  

Plenty of people find Cassandra attractive, for instance, even with her full armor.  It makes sense for her.  And while I adore Isabela, it did not make sense for her to wear the same outfit for seven years.  A choice of gear would have been great.

[MidKnight-Fury]

It would be cool if your character would cross dress lol

[Dhiro]

I think that a character's clothes should always say something about the character. Isabela's clothes fits her and her personality. I don't mind more, let's say, revealing clothes if that's something a character would wear. If the clothes say nothing about the character, or even go against what this character believes, I think it's a waste.

So... more sexuality? Sure, if it fits. Otherwise? Nah.

[HiroVoid]

MidKnight-Fury wrote...

It would be cool if your character would cross dress lol

Just make an in-game gender bender item.  Then, people can switch between their LI's back and forth.

Modifié par HiroVoid, 19 septembre 2012 - 01:24 .

[The Hierophant]

MidKnight-Fury wrote...

It would be cool if your character would cross dress lol

Modifié par The Hierophant, 19 septembre 2012 - 01:34 .

[cindercatz]

Glad we've got the new thread..

Well, the game in general is supposed to be "more .. Orlesian.." going by the Q&A session. So Orlais I would think would be the hub nation, and then it wheels out from there.

I'd also like to think it's pretty obvious I agree with daaaav's first post here. :-)

edit: Also, I want to state again that I'm for lots of customization, full armor customization for the entire party, personal options for the player character for casual, formal, and perhaps utilitarian use. It all helps to characterize the pc and adds to immersion.

Modifié par cindercatz, 19 septembre 2012 - 01:32 .

[Gallimatia]

MidKnight-Fury wrote...

It would be cool if your character would cross dress lol

That's what the Chasind Robes are for. It's a regular dress for male dwarves and a low cut one for human males. Never tried it on an elf.

[Biotic_Warlock]

MidKnight-Fury wrote...

It would be cool if your character would cross dress lol

That's actually a disapointing part of the sims... women have suits and clothes that would "traditionally" be only for men (thankful that they have that since i do not believe people should be judged for the way they look) but male sims cannot wear dresses *at all*.

[PhillyB]

Wow, just wow. I'm not even going to touch this one.

[Emzamination]

The Hierophant wrote...

daaaav wrote...

But, it really irks me when people say things like "female characters should dress practically"... Why? What if they don't want to dress practically? If it makes sense for the character then they can dress as impractically as they like...
 

Not really because a character whose only clothing is a piece of dental floss, a leaf, a cape, and armed only with a dagger, would look stupid when fighting armored knights or dragons who can tear steel with their claws.

Dental floss?

But anyways Hierophant this guy has to disagree with you on that front.

[Sylvianus]

I get what you're saying. Personally, I have no problem with "sexy" female characters... so long as it's consistent for the character and there is diversity in the representation. One must have Avelines as well as Isabelas. And thus I think we've done pretty good on that front.

I don't think one would get much traction with the suggestion that there should be no sexualization, or defining where the line is. There definitely is a line, however, between exploitation and idealization... particularly when it comes to female characters (which are generally the former) and male characters (which are generally the latter), so it's easy to see why anyone might be sensitive to such depictions.

Written by David Gaider. Just read what is interesting on this board. ;)The key words are diversity and consistent. Don't need to worry.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 19 septembre 2012 - 01:34 .

[daaaav]

syllogi wrote...

HiroVoid wrote...

The game is set in Orlais?  I figured we'd be going to multiple settings based on rumors.

Based on what Mike Laidlaw said at conventions last year, the game will take place all over Thedas.  I think that the leaked marketing survey makes it sound like the game will at least begin in Orlais, but we don't know how long we'll stay there.  I mean, technically, part of DA2 took place in Ferelden.

daaaav wrote...

But, it really irks me when people say things like "female characters should dress practically"... Why? What if they don't want to dress practically? If it makes sense for the character then they can dress as impractically as they like...
 
So how important should this be to both the setting and story?

 

Despite what was being said in the last few pages of the last thread, I never said that choice is a bad thing.  Yes, characters should dress as they would like.  But the player should also be able to find gear for themselves and their party members that isn't ridiculous and impractical.  And if, for instance, the Inquisitor's outfit fully covers a male character, and looks functional and imposing, I would hope to have the same sort of effect when my female character wears that armor.  It would be disappointing if armor were lore breaking *just* to be "sexy."  

Plenty of people find Cassandra attractive, for instance, even with her full armor.  It makes sense for her.  And while I adore Isabela, it did not make sense for her to wear the same outfit for seven years.  A choice of gear would have been great.

Yeah I completely agree. If gear looks one way on a male model then it shouldn't look like a strippers outfit on a female one. That is the ojectification I hope the game avoids.

[syllogi]

Dhiro wrote...

I think that a character's clothes should always say something about the character. Isabela's clothes fits her and her personality. I don't mind more, let's say, revealing clothes if that's something a character would wear. If the clothes say nothing about the character, or even go against what this character believes, I think it's a waste.

So... more sexuality? Sure, if it fits. Otherwise? Nah.

In some ways I think that Isabela's outfit did a disservice to her character, only because it seems like a lot of gamers took one look at her model and refused to get to know her.  I see people claiming that she doesn't love a romanced Hawke, that she'll have sex with anyone, and nastier things, simply because they see how she looks and hear her flirtatious banter, but don't take the time to get to know her better.  If they are talking to her, then they're certainly not listening.

I do wonder if they would take her more seriously if they could change her outfit.  Morrigan, who actually has a somewhat similar view as Isabela on sex at the beginning of a romance with the Warden, AND who has a default outfit that is pretty revealing, doesn't get as much s-shaming at all.  People either don't like her for the content of her character or her actions, rather than the way she views sex or her outfit.  

Maybe Isabela would still be doomed to be hated by those people because they know her from DA:O as the chick with "loose morals," but I think it would be interesting to see how the opinions would shape up if they could switch her into different gear a few minutes after meeting her, like Morrigan.  Maybe they'd still hate her for what happens at the end of Act 2, but that would be make more sense than some of the stuff we hear now.

And for the record, I don't have a problem with Isabela or Morrigan's iconic outfits, but being able to change Morrigan's clothes was nice.  I'm sure she would have been chilly at Soldier's Peak in those rags.

Modifié par syllogi, 19 septembre 2012 - 01:38 .

[daaaav]

PhillyB wrote...

Wow, just wow. I'm not even going to touch this one.

Yeah... the only ones who should touch it are the fox news alarmists and reactionaries...

It's ok. You can talk about it.

[StElmo]

edit: never mind

Modifié par StElmo, 19 septembre 2012 - 01:40 .