150 réponses à ce sujet

[Rinji the Bearded]

Rawgrim wrote...

Yeah...play the homophibia card, please. As soon as someone finds that everyone being bisexual is bad for the immersion, the homophibia card is played. Same type of argument would be used when playing the racist card. Don`t want Jim Carey to play shaft? Must be a racist then.

If you look at some earlier posts in this thread I clearly stated that I would rather have characters that are gay, than everyone being bisexual.

Your immersion is broken because a scant four people in the entirety of Thedas might possibly swing both ways?  I can assure you that more than four bisexuals exist in reality. 

[Solmanian]

Where does it stop? do you make the mabari hound romanceble?

[Volus Warlord]

sharkboy421 wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

NO

No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No

Writing- Wrecks character integrity. Some characters (Jack, Izzy, Kelly Chambers) are very plausible and believable as bi, mainly because they are all classless tramps that will literally **** anything. (Not saying all bi people are classless tramps). However, MOST CHARACTERS ARE NOT PLAUSIBLE AS BI. It just doesn't make sense, doesn't fit in with their picture. "Lolbi" weakens the strongest point of Bioware games.

Gameplay- Immersion breaking gay dude hitting on you out of nowhere. Cmon. That's just stupid.

Except they aren't bi.  Using Merrill and Fenris as examples, their orientation is completely unknown and is never touched upon.  The only way you find out is if you romance them.  If Lady Hawke decides she likes Merrill and tries to flirt with her and Merrill reciprocates, Merrill is gay in that play through.  While in the next one if male Hawke does the same thing, Merrill is straight.  Different play throughs are "parallel universes" if you will.  They have zero influence on each other.  Merrill might be gay in one and Fenris is straight.  In another its the opposite.  Or any combination you want.  They orientation is left up to the player to define but I don't LI like this as being "bi".

And that is exactly how it wrecks character integrity.

The characters go from

"I am what I am, find a way to deal with it"

to 

"I am whatever you want me to be"

They become inconsistant sexual pushovers with a superimposed cardboard cutout, rather than anything that could be confused with consistant and genuine.

No.

[Battlebloodmage]

motomotogirl wrote...

Yes all bi ... because it's really annoying having to mod your game so that you can romance Alistair, and even then, he still refers to your Warden as a woman lol So annoying.

Doesn't get any funnier when he asks the male warden to bear his children. 

[challenger18]

Rawgrim wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


The love icon is still there. that tells me that if I pick that option, the characters sexuality will be catered to me. Its like a spotlight. If you want decide this characters sexuality, press this button.

So? Just because it breaks immersion for you doesn't mean that it breaks immersion for everyone else. It's a subplot that completely optional. The game is still the same regardless. Unless you care about romance, it shouldn't even be that important. The option is not catered to you but cater to those who want that option. Yes, it breaks immersion for you, so what? The game is made for everyone to enjoy, not to cater to individual needs. 

Then they should call the game a dating sim, and not an rpg. Rpgs are about immersion and making choices as a character. Not making choices about the sexuality of everyone you meet in the game.

No, you don't choose the sexuality of everyone in the game, that's already been proven to be false, something you chose to shove away with the excuse of "plot armor." All of that is just using metagaming as an excuse, and metagaming is not choosing to let yourself be immersed in the first place. You are making choices and decisions based on what you already know as a player not the character you are playing as. 

[Rinji the Bearded]

Volus Warlord wrote...

And that is exactly how it wrecks character integrity.

The characters go from

"I am what I am, find a way to deal with it"

to 

"I am whatever you want me to be"

They become inconsistant sexual pushovers with a superimposed cardboard cutout, rather than anything that could be confused with consistant and genuine.

No.

What if they were all confident bisexuals and/or pansexuals?  Are bisexuals/pansexuals somehow not genuine enough for you?

[Rawgrim]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Yeah...play the homophibia card, please. As soon as someone finds that everyone being bisexual is bad for the immersion, the homophibia card is played. Same type of argument would be used when playing the racist card. Don`t want Jim Carey to play shaft? Must be a racist then.

If you look at some earlier posts in this thread I clearly stated that I would rather have characters that are gay, than everyone being bisexual.

Your immersion is broken because a scant four people in the entirety of Thedas might possibly swing both ways?  I can assure you that more than four bisexuals exist in reality. 

Aparantly they arn`t bi (according to Plaintiff), they are gay if I am male, Lesbians if I am female, and straight based on my gender. that was what I was getting at.

as a side note: If 100 percent of your possible love interests are bisexuall, then yes. Thats not very belivable. Rather high odds on that happening in real life. I got no problems with there being 4 bisexual people in Kirkwall, though.

[Rawgrim]

Solmanian wrote...

Where does it stop? do you make the mabari hound romanceble?

Just make sure the mabari is bisexual, though.

[cephasjames]

Rawgrim wrote...

seeing the love icon in your first playthrough is not metagaming.

Correct. And if you are a male PC receiving the love icon from Anders that means he's gay. If you are a male PC receiving the love icon from Merrill that means she's straight. How the PC reacts has nothing to do with either's sexuality in that playthrough.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Rawgrim wrote...

Aparantly they arn`t bi (according to Plaintiff), they are gay if I am male, Lesbians if I am female, and straight based on my gender. that was what I was getting at.

as a side note: If 100 percent of your possible love interests are bisexuall, then yes. Thats not very belivable. Rather high odds on that happening in real life. I got no problems with there being 4 bisexual people in Kirkwall, though.

This is where I point out where people get sensitive about reality in a video game that contains magic and dragons.  Those things are okay, but four people in my party who might swing both ways?  God forbid.  IMMERSIONS ARE RUINED.

[Battlebloodmage]

Solmanian wrote...

Where does it stop? do you make the mabari hound romanceble?

Have to go straight to bestiality, haven't you? <_<

I like for just one conversation about homosexuality to not result in bestiality or pedophilia.

[gonzalez.melissa53]

nightscrawl wrote...

I prefer it, simply because I can play the character I want to play while still experiencing the various options. While I like my male Hawkes, I have no desire whatsoever to make a male Warden. If that means I never get to experience the Morrigan romance, then so be it. But I am pleased that it's not something I have to be concerned with in DA2.

I don't really see the necessity for a new thread though. There are several of them in both forums, all containing lots of opinions, suggestions, teeth gnashing, garment rending, hair pulling, etc, etc.

This ^ . I veiw the romance or LI's alot like I do any other facet of the story in the game. I like playing as a female, modded pretty hair and all XD. It's nice to be able to play through eace LI option just to see what it brings to the new DA story. So Bisexuality for all? Yah, I'm for that. Plus wouldn't this simplify things as far as development and goes? Maybe not.

[Pheonix57]

Cool it off, guys.

[sharkboy421]

Volus Warlord wrote...

And that is exactly how it wrecks character integrity.

The characters go from

"I am what I am, find a way to deal with it"

to 

"I am whatever you want me to be"

They become inconsistant sexual pushovers with a superimposed cardboard cutout, rather than anything that could be confused with consistant and genuine.

No.

I guess I disagree that it wrecks character integrity.  Merrill, Fenris and Anders are the same characters regardless if they are gay, straight or just Hawke's friend.  There extra development if they are romanced, but that to me is expected as it is another part of the character development.  But agian they are same character regardless of orientation. 

[Volus Warlord]

Battlebloodmage wrote...

Solmanian wrote...

Where does it stop? do you make the mabari hound romanceble?

Have to go straight to bestiality, haven't you? <_<

I like for just one conversation about homosexuality to not result in bestiality or pedophilia.

You did jump to homophobia accusations right away. Seems like the same argument style to me.

[Rawgrim]

challenger18 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...


The love icon is still there. that tells me that if I pick that option, the characters sexuality will be catered to me. Its like a spotlight. If you want decide this characters sexuality, press this button.

So? Just because it breaks immersion for you doesn't mean that it breaks immersion for everyone else. It's a subplot that completely optional. The game is still the same regardless. Unless you care about romance, it shouldn't even be that important. The option is not catered to you but cater to those who want that option. Yes, it breaks immersion for you, so what? The game is made for everyone to enjoy, not to cater to individual needs. 

Then they should call the game a dating sim, and not an rpg. Rpgs are about immersion and making choices as a character. Not making choices about the sexuality of everyone you meet in the game.

No, you don't choose the sexuality of everyone in the game, that's already been proven to be false, something you chose to shove away with the excuse of "plot armor." All of that is just using metagaming as an excuse, and metagaming is not choosing to let yourself be immersed in the first place. You are making choices and decisions based on what you already know as a player not the character you are playing as. 

as I said earlier (since you missed that bit) : Metagaming doesn`t happen in the first playthrough. But seeing the love icons isn`t metagaming. And yes, the Aveline romance has plot armour. No matter what happens, that romance will go through. Even if she screws up her dating. Nothing in-game will ever change that from happening.

[ObserverStatus]

I guess I don't really have a problem with all bisexual LI's. The way I see it, if they do it that way they cut down on the total number of characters who can be scrogged while leaving no one feeling left out. That way, Bioware can focus less on giving players lots of choices of characters for their avatar to scrog, and more choices that are relevant to the game's overarching plot.

Modifié par bobobo878, 28 novembre 2012 - 06:53 .

[Battlebloodmage]

Volus Warlord wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

Solmanian wrote...

Where does it stop? do you make the mabari hound romanceble?

Have to go straight to bestiality, haven't you? <_<

I like for just one conversation about homosexuality to not result in bestiality or pedophilia.

You did jump to homophobia accusations right away. Seems like the same argument style to me.

If the pattern didn't exist, I wouldn't have jumped to it. Why bring it up when it has nothing to do with the discussion?

Modifié par Battlebloodmage, 28 novembre 2012 - 06:53 .

[Rinji the Bearded]

Volus Warlord wrote...

You did jump to homophobia accusations right away. Seems like the same argument style to me.

Nope.  You being sensitive about a "gay" man hitting on you is thinly veiled homophobia.  You brought up the beastiality thing all on your own.

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 28 novembre 2012 - 06:54 .

[Rawgrim]

cephasjames wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

seeing the love icon in your first playthrough is not metagaming.

Correct. And if you are a male PC receiving the love icon from Anders that means he's gay. If you are a male PC receiving the love icon from Merrill that means she's straight. How the PC reacts has nothing to do with either's sexuality in that playthrough.

Wich means the game has changed in order to cater to the PC. The player "choses" the sexuality of the character.

[Volus Warlord]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

You did jump to homophobia accusations right away. Seems like the same argument style to me.

Nope.  You being sensitive about a "gay" man hitting on you is thinly veiled homophobia.  You brought up the beastiality thing all on your own.

Hey now, beastiality wasn't me, and the Anders thing was just kinda like 'Really?' But that does not justify your accusation. Here's a nice counter-example for your bigotryaccusationitis:

Say you got a male character and a companion is this smoking hot lesbian, which could be expressed implicitly or explicitly. Then, out of nowhere, she starts hitting on you.

You'd think. "What? That makes no sense. That is inconsistant to your character. I thought you were a lesbian and I wasn't interested in you and now all the sudden the game's forcing the question." 

Cmon. No.

Modifié par Volus Warlord, 28 novembre 2012 - 07:02 .

[Rawgrim]

sharkboy421 wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

And that is exactly how it wrecks character integrity.

The characters go from

"I am what I am, find a way to deal with it"

to 

"I am whatever you want me to be"

They become inconsistant sexual pushovers with a superimposed cardboard cutout, rather than anything that could be confused with consistant and genuine.

No.

I guess I disagree that it wrecks character integrity.  Merrill, Fenris and Anders are the same characters regardless if they are gay, straight or just Hawke's friend.  There extra development if they are romanced, but that to me is expected as it is another part of the character development.  But agian they are same character regardless of orientation. 

Everything ends up exactly the same in this game, no matter what you do. Same goes for the romances. The characters are set in stone.

[Rawgrim]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

You did jump to homophobia accusations right away. Seems like the same argument style to me.

Nope.  You being sensitive about a "gay" man hitting on you is thinly veiled homophobia.  You brought up the beastiality thing all on your own.

He was sensetive about it wrecking (possibly) the character and the immersion. Not the fact that a gay character hit on him.

[Solmanian]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Yeah...play the homophibia card, please. As soon as someone finds that everyone being bisexual is bad for the immersion, the homophibia card is played. Same type of argument would be used when playing the racist card. Don`t want Jim Carey to play shaft? Must be a racist then.

If you look at some earlier posts in this thread I clearly stated that I would rather have characters that are gay, than everyone being bisexual.

Your immersion is broken because a scant four people in the entirety of Thedas might possibly swing both ways?  I can assure you that more than four bisexuals exist in reality. 

Since your party is usually a demographic slice of the people of thedas... And if everyone in your party turns out to be bisexual it means one of two possibilities:

either
1. A large part  (maybe even majority) of thedasian population are bisexual.

or
2. Your protagonist has very questionable recruiting methods

[Rinji the Bearded]

Rawgrim wrote...

He was sensetive about it wrecking (possibly) the character and the immersion. Not the fact that a gay character hit on him.

I can 100% guarantee you that if Anders was female, he wouldn't have cared.