77 réponses à ce sujet

[EpicBoot2daFace]

It seems these days romance is taking center stage in BioWare games. It's become a requirement to get the most out of their characters. If you don't pursue romance, too bad. Be prepared for a very short dialogue tree. This leaves many characters with only a few lines in a 30-40 hour game.

But what about friendship? Shouldn't you at least get to know the characters before you become involved in a intimate relationship? This has always puzzled me with BioWare games. Whenever BioWare actually says "no, you can't romance this character" the players get upset and we have 500 ****ing threads about it on here a day later. So, naturally, they say "**** it, let's just make 'em happy so they'll shut up".

But what we end up with as a result is VERY shallow characters that are more like cardboard cut outs than people. One-dimensional characters that have a 'problem' that only the player can solve, and after the player solves it, (and a few short conversations later) they want to ****. It's AFTER that you get to see just how shallow and unrewarding the experience is.

But friendship involves actually caring about someone. How many people on here can truly say they care about their love interest in the games? Enough to just be their friends? Or does it HAVE to be a romantic involvement for you to care?

So, I hope future BioWare games take a more mature approach to how PEOPLE are presented in their games. Because as it is right now, I swear I think the people who make these games are all incredibly immature. Especially the writers. Building believable friendships is more compelling than "progress through five conversations to have sex".

[o Ventus]

"Leaves many characters with only a few lines"?

What the hell? Have you ever friended Anders? Merrill?

Modifié par o Ventus, 22 septembre 2012 - 09:48 .

[NovaBlastMarketing]

I fail to see the whole point of your post it makes no sense to me. ... Yes i have personally cared for all my LI  and In all cases you spend the game as friends Leliana , Ashley and Miranda are all cases where a friendship is there before the romance ..

I have alway thought  you spend the majority of the game in friendship mode and  the actual "romance  part was too short  and under developed

As for  friends  Sten  alistaire  wynn varric,,,etc etc also  have devoped characters

 "Or does it HAVE to be a romantic involvement for you to care?"

This has also been delt with in another thread  if there was no romance  I proebly would not even  by the game .. a popular example is skyrim after  looking into its so shoddly done   i have  no intrested in wasting my time or money with  it .

Modifié par NovaBlastMarketing, 22 septembre 2012 - 10:06 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

o Ventus wrote...

"Leaves many characters with only a few lines"?

What the hell?

You only get to to talk to the characters a few times throughout the games. The exchanges are generally short and don't amount to much.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 22 septembre 2012 - 09:49 .

[o Ventus]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

"Leaves many characters with only a few lines"?

What the hell?

You only get to to talk to the characters a few times throughout the games. The exchanges are generally short and don't amount to much of anything.

Even without romancing Anders, you talk to him at the clinic, what, at least 9 or 10 times over the course of DA2? Same goes for Merrill at her house, but her content isn't as spread out as Anders'. I think Fenris is the only DA2 character to not have a substantial amount of non-romance content.

For DAO you might have a point, but that's only for a handful of characters, not all of them. Leliana certainly isn't short for non-romance dialogue, neither is Alistair, Oghren, Zevran, or Morrigan. In regards to Mass Effect, the only characters off the top of my head without a decent amount of non-romance dialogue are Thane and Jacob (by extension, all of the ME2 cast sans Legon and Mordin), and that's only in ME3.

[The Hierophant]

o Ventus wrote...

"Leaves many characters with only a few lines"?

What the hell?

I think what Epic means is that  not romancing a character leaves out key dialogue which is the meat, and potatoes to a character's psyche. The unromanced character is less developed as a whole, and feels generic.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

The Hierophant wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

"Leaves many characters with only a few lines"?

What the hell?

I think what Epic means is that  not romancing a character leaves out key dialogue which is the meat, and potatoes to a character's psyche. The unromanced character is less developed as a whole, and feels generic.

That and I think friendship should come before romance. It's hard to do that when the characters often act in such a unrealistic fashion. As I said before, every character has a problem only the player can solve. The reward for solving this is (if the player chooses) a sex scene. It's incredibly shallow and unrealistic.

Why must a every character have something wrong with them? Why can't they just act like people? Malik from Deus Ex:HR is a perfect example of a person portrayed as a person in a video game. She acts in a realistic fashion. She isn't 'damaged goods' from the start of the game asking the player to solve her daddy issues.

BioWare: every character has to be damaged goods. They call this depth. lol.

[The Hierophant]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

"Leaves many characters with only a few lines"?

What the hell?

I think what Epic means is that  not romancing a character leaves out key dialogue which is the meat, and potatoes to a character's psyche. The unromanced character is less developed as a whole, and feels generic.

That and I think friendship should come before romance. It's hard to do that when the characters often act in such a unrealistic fashion. As I said before, every character has a problem only the player can solve. The reward for solving this is (if the player chooses) a sex scene. It's incredibly shallow and unrealistic.

Why must a every character have something wrong with them? Why can't they just act like people? Malik from Deus Ex:HR is a perfect example of a person portrayed as a person in a video game. She acts in a realistic fashion. She isn't 'damaged goods' from the start of the game asking the player to solve her daddy issues.

BioWare: every character has to be damaged goods. They call this depth. lol.

Agreed. 

[DarkKnightHolmes]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

"Leaves many characters with only a few lines"?

What the hell?

I think what Epic means is that  not romancing a character leaves out key dialogue which is the meat, and potatoes to a character's psyche. The unromanced character is less developed as a whole, and feels generic.

That and I think friendship should come before romance. It's hard to do that when the characters often act in such a unrealistic fashion. As I said before, every character has a problem only the player can solve. The reward for solving this is (if the player chooses) a sex scene. It's incredibly shallow and unrealistic.

Why must a every character have something wrong with them? Why can't they just act like people? Malik from Deus Ex:HR is a perfect example of a person portrayed as a person in a video game. She acts in a realistic fashion. She isn't 'damaged goods' from the start of the game asking the player to solve her daddy issues.

BioWare: every character has to be damaged goods. They call this depth. lol.

Don't mess with daddy issue's! That's one of the most overused Bioware cliches anyway.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

"Leaves many characters with only a few lines"?

What the hell?

I think what Epic means is that  not romancing a character leaves out key dialogue which is the meat, and potatoes to a character's psyche. The unromanced character is less developed as a whole, and feels generic.

That and I think friendship should come before romance. It's hard to do that when the characters often act in such a unrealistic fashion. As I said before, every character has a problem only the player can solve. The reward for solving this is (if the player chooses) a sex scene. It's incredibly shallow and unrealistic.

Why must a every character have something wrong with them? Why can't they just act like people? Malik from Deus Ex:HR is a perfect example of a person portrayed as a person in a video game. She acts in a realistic fashion. She isn't 'damaged goods' from the start of the game asking the player to solve her daddy issues.

BioWare: every character has to be damaged goods. They call this depth. lol.

Don't mess with daddy issue's! That's one of the most overused Bioware cliches anyway.

It's not the only one.

Cardboard cut out cliches. All of them.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 22 septembre 2012 - 10:26 .

[Blackrising]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

It seems these days romance is taking center stage in BioWare games. It's become a requirement to get the most out of their characters. If you don't pursue romance, too bad. Be prepared for a very short dialogue tree. This leaves many characters with only a few lines in a 30-40 hour game.

But what about friendship? Shouldn't you at least get to know the characters before you become involved in a intimate relationship? This has always puzzled me with BioWare games. Whenever BioWare actually says "no, you can't romance this character" the players get upset and we have 500 ****ing threads about it on here a day later. So, naturally, they say "**** it, let's just make 'em happy so they'll shut up".

But what we end up with as a result is VERY shallow characters that are more like cardboard cut outs than people. One-dimensional characters that have a 'problem' that only the player can solve, and after the player solves it, (and a few short conversations later) they want to ****. It's AFTER that you get to see just how shallow and unrewarding the experience is.

But friendship involves actually caring about someone. How many people on here can truly say they care about their love interest in the games? Enough to just be their friends? Or does it HAVE to be a romantic involvement for you to care?

So, I hope future BioWare games take a more mature approach to how PEOPLE are presented in their games. Because as it is right now, I swear I think the people who make these games are all incredibly immature. Especially the writers. Building believable friendships is more compelling than "progress through five conversations to have sex".

I can tell you honestly that I care a lot about my Lis in the games. Sometimes a bit too much.
An example: Morrigan.
I love her to death and she was my favourite character in DA:O. I romanced her in my male Warden playthrough and I LOVED it.
The thing is: In every (male) playthrough that followed, my Warden did not romance her and married Anora instead. Why? Because I strongly feel that Morrigan needs a friend more than a lover. Because I care enough to offer her unconditional friendship without any desire for sex. She rarely views men as persons, because most - if not all - of her interactions with men are about power and sex. This is why I can't bring myself to romance her again. Morrigan doesn't need another guy lusting after her, even if he falls in love with her. She needs support that isn't 'bought' with sex.

So yes, I care enough about her to be just friends.

But in most cases...romance is simply more satisfying. Like with Merrill. I just wanted to hug and support and care for her and never ever leave her side.

[DarkKnightHolmes]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

"Leaves many characters with only a few lines"?

What the hell?

I think what Epic means is that  not romancing a character leaves out key dialogue which is the meat, and potatoes to a character's psyche. The unromanced character is less developed as a whole, and feels generic.

That and I think friendship should come before romance. It's hard to do that when the characters often act in such a unrealistic fashion. As I said before, every character has a problem only the player can solve. The reward for solving this is (if the player chooses) a sex scene. It's incredibly shallow and unrealistic.

Why must a every character have something wrong with them? Why can't they just act like people? Malik from Deus Ex:HR is a perfect example of a person portrayed as a person in a video game. She acts in a realistic fashion. She isn't 'damaged goods' from the start of the game asking the player to solve her daddy issues.

BioWare: every character has to be damaged goods. They call this depth. lol.

Don't mess with daddy issue's! That's one of the most overused Bioware cliches anyway.

It's not the only one.

Well it's more family issue than daddy issue's. I mean almost every companion/squadmate in DA/ME has some problem with a family.

[The Night Haunter]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

It's not the only one.

Cardboard cut out cliches. All of them.

Read the article, and while i might agree with some

Akward Hottie and the Psychotics (for ME, not for DA tho). Sten doesnt fit into the category besides being honorable.

But the rest your lumping characters together who really have nothing in common.
Useless Mentor? Jolee isnt a mentor, you get him 2/3 of the way throuh the game (depending on when you go to Kashyk)

Recalcitrant Shrew? Silk Fox and Morrigan are nothing alike, and putting Jack in there just shows how desperate they are to get 3 characters in the category. This slot is completely false.

Kickass Robot? Sure HK, Legion and Shale are awesome, but their characters are vastly different. Sure some Shale dialogue and some HK dialogue is similar on the surface, but deeper down HK wants to kill everything and Shale is just sarcastic. Legion's character is completely different to the others, pure logic, no individual motivation.

Pile of Gray Sludge? Crappy name, Generic Nice Guy would be better to describe Kaidan, Alistair and Carth (Im ignoring Carver cause he is barely a party member and Jacob because ME2 is a horrible example of Biowares characters).

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Blackrising wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

It seems these days romance is taking center stage in BioWare games. It's become a requirement to get the most out of their characters. If you don't pursue romance, too bad. Be prepared for a very short dialogue tree. This leaves many characters with only a few lines in a 30-40 hour game.

But what about friendship? Shouldn't you at least get to know the characters before you become involved in a intimate relationship? This has always puzzled me with BioWare games. Whenever BioWare actually says "no, you can't romance this character" the players get upset and we have 500 ****ing threads about it on here a day later. So, naturally, they say "**** it, let's just make 'em happy so they'll shut up".

But what we end up with as a result is VERY shallow characters that are more like cardboard cut outs than people. One-dimensional characters that have a 'problem' that only the player can solve, and after the player solves it, (and a few short conversations later) they want to ****. It's AFTER that you get to see just how shallow and unrewarding the experience is.

But friendship involves actually caring about someone. How many people on here can truly say they care about their love interest in the games? Enough to just be their friends? Or does it HAVE to be a romantic involvement for you to care?

So, I hope future BioWare games take a more mature approach to how PEOPLE are presented in their games. Because as it is right now, I swear I think the people who make these games are all incredibly immature. Especially the writers. Building believable friendships is more compelling than "progress through five conversations to have sex".

I can tell you honestly that I care a lot about my Lis in the games. Sometimes a bit too much.
An example: Morrigan.
I love her to death and she was my favourite character in DA:O. I romanced her in my male Warden playthrough and I LOVED it.
The thing is: In every (male) playthrough that followed, my Warden did not romance her and married Anora instead. Why? Because I strongly feel that Morrigan needs a friend more than a lover. Because I care enough to offer her unconditional friendship without any desire for sex. She rarely views men as persons, because most - if not all - of her interactions with men are about power and sex. This is why I can't bring myself to romance her again. Morrigan doesn't need another guy lusting after her, even if he falls in love with her. She needs support that isn't 'bought' with sex.

So yes, I care enough about her to be just friends.

But in most cases...romance is simply more satisfying. Like with Merrill. I just wanted to hug and support and care for her and never ever leave her side.

You sort of lose all credibility when you say you're willing to marry a woman you don't even know and have barely any dialogue with. You skipped friendship altogether.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 22 septembre 2012 - 10:50 .

[Blackrising]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Blackrising wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

It seems these days romance is taking center stage in BioWare games. It's become a requirement to get the most out of their characters. If you don't pursue romance, too bad. Be prepared for a very short dialogue tree. This leaves many characters with only a few lines in a 30-40 hour game.

But what about friendship? Shouldn't you at least get to know the characters before you become involved in a intimate relationship? This has always puzzled me with BioWare games. Whenever BioWare actually says "no, you can't romance this character" the players get upset and we have 500 ****ing threads about it on here a day later. So, naturally, they say "**** it, let's just make 'em happy so they'll shut up".

But what we end up with as a result is VERY shallow characters that are more like cardboard cut outs than people. One-dimensional characters that have a 'problem' that only the player can solve, and after the player solves it, (and a few short conversations later) they want to ****. It's AFTER that you get to see just how shallow and unrewarding the experience is.

But friendship involves actually caring about someone. How many people on here can truly say they care about their love interest in the games? Enough to just be their friends? Or does it HAVE to be a romantic involvement for you to care?

So, I hope future BioWare games take a more mature approach to how PEOPLE are presented in their games. Because as it is right now, I swear I think the people who make these games are all incredibly immature. Especially the writers. Building believable friendships is more compelling than "progress through five conversations to have sex".

I can tell you honestly that I care a lot about my Lis in the games. Sometimes a bit too much.
An example: Morrigan.
I love her to death and she was my favourite character in DA:O. I romanced her in my male Warden playthrough and I LOVED it.
The thing is: In every (male) playthrough that followed, my Warden did not romance her and married Anora instead. Why? Because I strongly feel that Morrigan needs a friend more than a lover. Because I care enough to offer her unconditional friendship without any desire for sex. She rarely views men as persons, because most - if not all - of her interactions with men are about power and sex. This is why I can't bring myself to romance her again. Morrigan doesn't need another guy lusting after her, even if he falls in love with her. She needs support that isn't 'bought' with sex.

So yes, I care enough about her to be just friends.

But in most cases...romance is simply more satisfying. Like with Merrill. I just wanted to hug and support and care for her and never ever leave her side.

You sort of lose all credibility when you say you're willing to marry a woman you don't even know and have barely any dialogue with. You skipped friendship altogether.

Technically, my Warden married Anora for the good of Ferleden. Because Alistair always runs off when I spare Loghain.
(I admit that I have a headcanon romance going on here, though. I believe they'll grow to love each other over time. Because I used to read A LOT of trashy romance novels and still like that sort of setup.)

[The Elder King]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...


That and I think friendship should come before romance. It's hard to do that when the characters often act in such a unrealistic fashion. As I said before, every character has a problem only the player can solve. The reward for solving this is (if the player chooses) a sex scene. It's incredibly shallow and unrealistic.


BioWare: every character has to be damaged goods. They call this depth. lol.

My Warden and Hawke had sex with Morrigan and Isabela before solving their problems. Actually, solving their problems triggered the possibility to advance the relationship.
Though I agree with you on having more friendship-content.

[David Gaider]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
It's not the only one.

Cardboard cut out cliches. All of them.

Wow.

Sorry, but that link... sure, let's reduce the characters to broad categories, and then if we squint hard enough it'll look like they actually fit in those categories (when, let's face it, many of them don't with any but the most cursory examination). And this is supposed to be profound information to whom, I wonder?

They're called archetypes. If you try hard enough, you can make any character fit into one. Someone breaks out the word 'cliche' in this context as if they've said something meaningful, as if the lack of archetypes would be either better or even possible.

I'm not going to stand here and suggest that any character we've written at BioWare is a model of brilliant originality... but if someone's going to criticize a piece of writing it would be excellent if they could manage to summon up a critique that manages to do more than provide the shocking discovery that archetypes exist. That would be nice, and thank you.

/end diatribe

Modifié par David Gaider, 24 septembre 2012 - 11:48 .

[FINE HERE]

David Gaider wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
It's not the only one.

Cardboard cut out cliches. All of them.

Wow.

Sorry, but that link... sure, let's reduce the characters to broad categories, and then if we squint hard enough it'll look like they actually fit in those categories (when, let's face it, many of them don't with any but the most cursory examination). And this is supposed to be profound information to whom, I wonder?

They're called archetypes. If you try hard enough, you can make any character fit into one. Someone breaks out the word 'cliche' in this context as if they've said something meaningful, as if the lack of archetypes would be either better or even possible.

I'm not going to stand here and suggest that any character we've written at BioWare is a model of brilliant originality... but if someone's going to criticize a piece of writing it would be excellent if they could manage to summon up a critique that manages to do more than provide the shocking discovery that archetypes exist. That would be nice, and thank you.

/end diatribe

I just wanted to say you're awesome.

[upsettingshorts]

ghostmessiah202 wrote...

Read the article, and while i might agree with some

Akward Hottie and the Psychotics (for ME, not for DA tho). Sten doesnt fit into the category besides being honorable.

You left out that one of the "awkward hotties" isn't awkward at all and is a fourteen year old girl.  Since when are the streetwise thief and the antisocial archaeologist in the same category?The article reads like someone who has played none of the games.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 24 septembre 2012 - 11:57 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

Wow.

Sorry, but that link... sure, let's reduce the characters to broad categories, and then if we squint hard enough it'll look like they actually fit in those categories (when, let's face it, many of them don't with any but the most cursory examination). And this is supposed to be profound information to whom, I wonder?

They're called archetypes. If you try hard enough, you can make any character fit into one. Someone breaks out the word 'cliche' in this context as if they've said something meaningful, as if the lack of archetypes would be either better or even possible.

I'm not going to stand here and suggest that any character we've written at BioWare is a model of brilliant originality... but if someone's going to criticize a piece of writing it would be excellent if they could manage to summon up a critique that manages to do more than provide the shocking discovery that archetypes exist. That would be nice, and thank you.

/end diatribe

*applause*

[Sylvius the Mad]

Given that David actually responds to things like this, I have to wonder what it's like to work with him on a daily basis. It would either be incredible, because he's awesome, or depressing, because of the world in which he's forced to live.

[Menagra]

David Gaider wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
It's not the only one.

Cardboard cut out cliches. All of them.

Wow.

Sorry, but that link... sure, let's reduce the characters to broad categories, and then if we squint hard enough it'll look like they actually fit in those categories (when, let's face it, many of them don't with any but the most cursory examination). And this is supposed to be profound information to whom, I wonder?

They're called archetypes. If you try hard enough, you can make any character fit into one. Someone breaks out the word 'cliche' in this context as if they've said something meaningful, as if the lack of archetypes would be either better or even possible.

I'm not going to stand here and suggest that any character we've written at BioWare is a model of brilliant originality... but if someone's going to criticize a piece of writing it would be excellent if they could manage to summon up a critique that manages to do more than provide the shocking discovery that archetypes exist. That would be nice, and thank you.

/end diatribe

Yes the whole "stereotype" thing is unfair. Really I think a couple of the comparisons are off and others are offensive. Though I will admit I always though Liara and Mission were quite similar. Maybe because they are both niave and blue?

Maybe OP and David Gaider can talk about  Carl Jung oo and we can watch a pbs show about archtypes from the 80s featuring George Lucas and Joseph Campbell Yey post-modernism and the "monomyth"


Actually I hate the monomyth. Seems unfair to assume we can generalize all cultures into one story. Even if we do consider ourselves scientific.

Modifié par infraredman, 25 septembre 2012 - 12:14 .

[Dhiro]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Given that David actually responds to things like this, I have to wonder what it's like to work with him on a daily basis. It would either be incredible, because he's awesome, or depressing, because of the world in which he's forced to live.

It would be depressingly awesome and awesomely depressing, obviously.

[Dhiro]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

ghostmessiah202 wrote...

Read the article, and while i might agree with some

Akward Hottie and the Psychotics (for ME, not for DA tho). Sten doesnt fit into the category besides being honorable.

You left out that one of the "awkward hotties" isn't awkward at all and is a fourteen year old girl.  Since when are the streetwise thief and the antisocial archaeologist in the same category?The article reads like someone who has played none of the games.

Jailbaits do it best.

Also, I'm not sure how Carver is comparable to Kaidan or Jacob.

[Iakus]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

It's not the only one.

Cardboard cut out cliches. All of them.

Well that link was good for a laugh.

The only ones I thought were even remotely connected was Grunt and Black Whirlwind.  The rest might as well have been a random collection of screenshots of Bioware characters, for all the resemblence they had.