Ce sujet est fermé
There are also bad reactions from the npcs when you choose the red option lol. So it seems fair to me if some people associate rivalry or the red option with " bad ".Dave of Canada wrote...
Allan Schumacher wrote...
First rivalry is not a punishment. it is just a reaction.
It's a shame people associate red with bad, I'd wonder how it would change if it were green or something instead.
Modifié par Sylvianus, 30 octobre 2012 - 01:54 .
Modifié par Josielyn, 30 octobre 2012 - 01:52 .
I've never had a negative response from turning someone down, straight or gay. If you're rude about it, sure, then I could understand anyone getting angry. I've been turned down by women before, one was a lesbian. She wasn't rude about it. She just said she wasn't interested in men, and that was it.Realmzmaster wrote...
EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
Why does the character have to react in a negative way at all? If you tell someone who is gay IRL that you "just want to be friends" or that you're straight, they don't react in a negative way. It shouldn't be any different in a video game.
If I tell a character I'm not interested, I gain rivalry points. The "I'm not interested" response usually has a picture of a broken heart in the center. Why should it be a broken heart, and why does that option earn a negative response? I'm not being aggressive, I'm simply letting the other character know that I'm not interested in any kind of romantic pursuit.
Actually some do react in a negative way IRL and let it be known what they think about the response that was received.
Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 30 octobre 2012 - 01:54 .
Xilizhra wrote...
Red has been associated with negativity for... a very, very long time. Probably due to its association with blood.Dave of Canada wrote...
Allan Schumacher wrote...
First rivalry is not a punishment. it is just a reaction.
It's a shame people associate red with bad, I'd wonder how it would change if it were green or something instead.
General User wrote...
It just seemed a bit jarring to me that characters who were otherwise whole, with their own appearances, histories, personalities, etc. have their sexual preferences essentially left blank until the player fills them in.
What makes a character's sexual orientation so important that it, and it alone, must wait for the player's say so before taking shape?
Origins did romances right.
EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
I've never had a negative response from turning someone down, straight or gay. If you're rude about it, sure, then I could understand anyone getting angry. I've been turned down by women before, one was a lesbian. She wasn't rude about it. She just said she wasn't interested in men, and that was it.Realmzmaster wrote...
EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
Why does the character have to react in a negative way at all? If you tell someone who is gay IRL that you "just want to be friends" or that you're straight, they don't react in a negative way. It shouldn't be any different in a video game.
If I tell a character I'm not interested, I gain rivalry points. The "I'm not interested" response usually has a picture of a broken heart in the center. Why should it be a broken heart, and why does that option earn a negative response? I'm not being aggressive, I'm simply letting the other character know that I'm not interested in any kind of romantic pursuit.
Actually some do react in a negative way IRL and let it be known what they think about the response that was received.
It shouldn't be any different in video games. And simply telling someone you aren't interested should not earn you rivalry points with that character. The dialogue wheel fails to inform you that Hawke is going to be a ****ing **** about it. Just like with Mass Effect. SImply say "No" to smeone and Shepard responds with something like "the council can kiss my ass!".
It's bad game design that's the problem here.
Allan Schumacher wrote...
First rivalry is not a punishment. it is just a reaction. Second it required a particular type of playthrough to even achieve the rivalry response.
The "bit jarring" isn't nearly as much of a negative impact on you as expanded romance possibilities is a positive one on us. The arithmetic, in this case, favors us over you. Believe me, I make my own concessions to you people.It just seemed a bit jarring to me that characters who were otherwise whole, with their own appearances, histories, personalities, etc. have their sexual preferences essentially left blank until the player fills them in.
What makes a character's sexual orientation so important that it, and it alone, must wait for the player's say so before taking shape?
Origins did romances right.
Modifié par Sylvianus, 30 octobre 2012 - 02:01 .
Xilizhra wrote...
This is possible, but I'm not sure if it'd be a wise area to spend more resources in.
Xilizhra wrote...
And I wasn't pursuing romances for a sense of accomplishment, but because I just wanted my PC and my LI to be happy together.
Yes, and I do.I like this, i prefer that. Deal with it BUT here, with my sexual preference, it is according to the mind of each who are not me. Could we really say that it doesn't change who they are ?
Conserving resources and providing fun.Probably not, though if they were really interested in conserving resources they'd go the KotOR route and give you one romance option if any. And I don't expect Bioware to follow my idea I'm just saying that, for me, it'd make the romances more interesting.
I'm shamelessly loving of fluff in that area.Accomplishment isn't the right word, I can't think of what it would be, but there was no sense of "Alright I got the girl/boy." I guess I'm just a bit more calculating in how I do things, I don't do much unless I see some benefit to myself in it.
Masha Potato wrote...
For example my decision to get into those idiotic "lol sexuality is a supercomplex part of personality so bisexuals are unrealistic" debates over and over again. I could be eating mint-n-chip ice cream instead of wasting time on this!
ok now the the creepiness is done i'm going back to lurking in my corner:blush:
That's convenient, I guess.Xilizhra wrote...
Yes, and I do.I like this, i prefer that. Deal with it BUT here, with my sexual preference, it is according to the mind of each who are not me. Could we really say that it doesn't change who they are ?
Yeah, imagine a realistic response in a Bioware game. In their black & white world of extremes, there's no room for a neutral option. They just put it there to make the dialogue wheel look more "complete".Quicksilver26 wrote...
Allan Schumacher wrote...
First rivalry is not a punishment. it is just a reaction. Second it required a particular type of playthrough to even achieve the rivalry response.
I think want most people really want is just a neutral way to respond IE "Anders i think you are a very nice person but i'm just not into you" would have been 100% better then "I don't want you thinking that way" which made me want to slap my Hawke. Maybe give the PC a chance to say there they are not it to the person of the same or opposite gender might cut down some of the hate. even though fundamentally rivalry is not a punishment it can and is viewed as the opposite of friendship and therefore is a negative thing. what most of the convos in DA2 need was just one more option, I wanted to tell Anders that even though i don't want to get in your pants I still value you as a person and I hope we can have a meaningful friendship. when give izzy the amulet thingy I wanted to say even though you may not love me I'll always love you so could you wear it in honor of my love or something along those lines.
Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 30 octobre 2012 - 02:08 .
His entire character changed. I thought he was cool in Awakening, but I hated him in Dragon Age 2.Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...
I do find it jarring how Anders went from being straight in Awakening to having a male lover in 2. Maybe he was just in the closet?
Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 30 octobre 2012 - 02:12 .
This and I find that hillarious cause after my male Hawke said that he started putting the moves on Merril as soon as he saw her.EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
Yeah, imagine a realistic response in a Bioware game. In their black & white world of extremes, there's no room for a neutral option. They just put it there to make the dialogue wheel look more "complete".Quicksilver26 wrote...
Allan Schumacher wrote...
First rivalry is not a punishment. it is just a reaction. Second it required a particular type of playthrough to even achieve the rivalry response.
I think want most people really want is just a neutral way to respond IE "Anders i think you are a very nice person but i'm just not into you" would have been 100% better then "I don't want you thinking that way" which made me want to slap my Hawke. Maybe give the PC a chance to say there they are not it to the person of the same or opposite gender might cut down some of the hate. even though fundamentally rivalry is not a punishment it can and is viewed as the opposite of friendship and therefore is a negative thing. what most of the convos in DA2 need was just one more option, I wanted to tell Anders that even though i don't want to get in your pants I still value you as a person and I hope we can have a meaningful friendship. when give izzy the amulet thingy I wanted to say even though you may not love me I'll always love you so could you wear it in honor of my love or something along those lines.
Arithmetic notwithstanding, I am legitimately interested to see if you have answer to my (semi)rhetorical question: (rephrased) if the player can't determine any given character's race, or religion, or personal history, or their pre-existing personality, etc., etc., why should the player be able to determine who any given character is attracted to? What makes a character's sexual orientation worthy of special status and treatment?Xilizhra wrote...
The "bit jarring" isn't nearly as much of a negative impact on you as expanded romance possibilities is a positive one on us. The arithmetic, in this case, favors us over you. Believe me, I make my own concessions to you people.It just seemed a bit jarring to me that characters who were otherwise whole, with their own appearances, histories, personalities, etc. have their sexual preferences essentially left blank until the player fills them in.
What makes a character's sexual orientation so important that it, and it alone, must wait for the player's say so before taking shape?
Origins did romances right.
Guest_Nizaris1_*
Truth be told, I believe that worrying about this is unnecessary and that all love interests should just be declared bisexual. However, if we must go with this paradigm... sexual orientation, in all Bioware games thus far, is wholly irrelevant except for determining who can romance them. ME is a far-future setting where most bigotry about it has evaporated, and in DA, there doesn't seem to have been much to begin with. As such, sexual orientation wouldn't have much of an impact on any given character's history in the DA universe and doesn't need to be so strictly set.General User wrote...
Arithmetic notwithstanding, I am legitimately interested to see if you have answer to my (semi)rhetorical question: (rephrased) if the player can't determine any given character's race, or religion, or personal history, or their pre-existing personality, etc., etc., why should the player be able to determine who any given character is attracted to? What makes a character's sexual orientation worthy of special status and treatment?Xilizhra wrote...
The "bit jarring" isn't nearly as much of a negative impact on you as expanded romance possibilities is a positive one on us. The arithmetic, in this case, favors us over you. Believe me, I make my own concessions to you people.It just seemed a bit jarring to me that characters who were otherwise whole, with their own appearances, histories, personalities, etc. have their sexual preferences essentially left blank until the player fills them in.
What makes a character's sexual orientation so important that it, and it alone, must wait for the player's say so before taking shape?
Origins did romances right.
Xilizhra wrote...
Red has been associated with negativity for... a very, very long time. Probably due to its association with blood.Dave of Canada wrote...
Allan Schumacher wrote...
First rivalry is not a punishment. it is just a reaction.
It's a shame people associate red with bad, I'd wonder how it would change if it were green or something instead.
But I totally wanted Velanna to be the mother of my children.Harle Cerulean wrote...
Excellent post, Maclimes. If people want to talk realism, what are the odds that all of your available LIs in Origins would have been sexually attracted to humans, elves, and dwarves? Goodness knows that as much as I love dwarves, dwarven men just are not hot to me. Not even Varric, and if any dwarf man could have convinced me, it would have been him. XD
I know, in the name of absolute realism, perhaps they should make straight LIs, who don't like humans and will only romance a dwarf or elf . . . I think that would be an excellent addition to DA3.
(Yes, before anyone says anything, I'm aware the PC will be human. That's the point.)
*
*
In certain cases, rivalry is the only way you can show that your companion's way is wrong. For example, Merrill won't smash the mirror and Anders won't join you to fight the mages no matter what until you are on a rivalry path. Red is not always bad, health potions are always red, isn't it?Nashiktal wrote...
Xilizhra wrote...
Red has been associated with negativity for... a very, very long time. Probably due to its association with blood.Dave of Canada wrote...
Allan Schumacher wrote...
First rivalry is not a punishment. it is just a reaction.
It's a shame people associate red with bad, I'd wonder how it would change if it were green or something instead.
Whether or not blood has anything to do with it, I know the culture in my nation at large has instilled within me that RED IS BAD.
Red means STOP. Red is placed upon the top of emergency vehicles, and means someone is either hurt or breaking the law. Red is associated with Satan and other evils. Red in a ledger books means debt and loss of money.
Of course people are going to respond badly to red. Very rarely is red when paired with a number a good thing. Not to mention that DA2 never explains how rivalry is different from any "bad" paths from other games.
. The color red tends to make people more aggressive, so it's a given that they tend to be associated with negative things. There are many reinforced ideas in our society about the color red being bad, so it would be okay if they change it to other colors like green. Who doesn't like green?
Retour en haut