228 réponses à ce sujet

[Maria Caliban]

Xilizhra wrote...

I loved Fall-From-Grace in Planescape for example, a Succubus that couldn't even kiss you, because that would kill you.

Wait, what? Energy drain is a willingly activated effect, not something that's always on without being able to turn it off. Unless that was changed in 3E, in which case it's clearly a very good thing.

They wanted a relationship where she could never touch you, so they changed lore.

[hoorayforicecream]

Saibh wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Samara and Sebastian should both qualify for these criteria.

Neither of which are actually full romances. 

You'll have to define what a "full romance" is then, since Fall-from-Grace's relationship to the Nameless One had much more in common with Samara and Shepard than any of the other companions in any of the other games. Then again, you probably wouldn't consider Fall-from-Grace a romance either, despite her being the example the poster I replied to gave.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 15 décembre 2012 - 07:52 .

[Saibh]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

You'll have to define what a "full romance" is then, since Fall-from-Grace's relationship to the Nameless One had much more in common with Samara and Shepard than any of the other companions in any of the other games. Then again, you probably wouldn't consider Fall-from-Grace a romance either, despite her being the example the poster I replied to gave.

That's Planescape Torment, which is not BioWare. So...it's not exactly relevant and I'm not sure why you think it is.

EDIT: Besides, it is literally one conversation with Samara that does not impact anything--not your relationships with an actual LI, not your influence with her in ME3. Nada. It's just briefly said "I like you, but we can't do this, period". You do not even enter into a relationship.

Modifié par Saibh, 15 décembre 2012 - 08:02 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Saibh wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

You'll have to define what a "full romance" is then, since Fall-from-Grace's relationship to the Nameless One had much more in common with Samara and Shepard than any of the other companions in any of the other games. Then again, you probably wouldn't consider Fall-from-Grace a romance either, despite her being the example the poster I replied to gave.

That's Planescape Torment, which is not BioWare. So...it's not exactly relevant and I'm not sure why you think it is.

EDIT: Besides, it is literally one conversation with Samara that does not impact anything--not your relationships with an actual LI, not your influence with her in ME3. Nada. It's just briefly said "I like you, but we can't do this, period". You do not even enter into a relationship.

Did you even read the quote I responded to? I hope you did, because I quoted it. Then you quoted me. Here it is again, because you seem to have missed it:

Sometimes I wish that Bioware would just try to write ONE romance without any sexscenes involved, just to bring out their creativity and see what they can do with it. I loved Fall-From-Grace in Planescape for example, a Succubus that couldn't even kiss you, because that would kill you.

I was responding to this. If the poster who wrote this believes that Fall-from-Grace is an example of a romance without any sex scenes involved, then both Sebastian and Samara should qualify to this poster as romances without any sex scenes involved.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 15 décembre 2012 - 08:31 .

[Saibh]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
I was responding to this. If the poster who wrote this believes that Fall-from-Grace is an example of a romance without any sex scenes involved, then both Sebastian and Samara should qualify as romances without any sex scenes involved.

This is still not relevant. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at--the poster likes Fall-From-Grace as a romance, but Samara and Sebastian are not full romances. I already expressed why Samara and Sebastian are different. 

However, I also assumed you were trying to say "We already had a romance like that: Fall-From-Grace", which is why I was bewildered. I still understood you to be comparing that to Sebastian and Samara, and I still think the comparison doesn't follow through. You are unable to actually have a relationship with Samara as you might have with Tali or Thane, regardless of sex. Even cutting out the actual sex, they still form a relationship and a bigger bond, which Samara does not.

And, as I said, Sebastian's romance is far less detailed and complex as the other four. It's not considered a romance in the context of the game. This is why the parameters would be considered different for them. It is not because they lack sex scenes. It is because they lack detail and complexity. They are short, Samara's is pretty much non-existent.

Modifié par Saibh, 15 décembre 2012 - 08:41 .

[Maria Caliban]

Amycus89 sees Fall-From-Grace as a good example of a non-sexual romance and thinks BioWare should do the same. hooraytoicecream thinks Sebastian meets the same requirements.

I don't think it matters that you don't see Seb as a real romance because hooraywithicecream's not saying that BioWare has met your requirements for a non-sexual romance; she's saying they've met Amycus89's.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 15 décembre 2012 - 09:04 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Edit: Maria summed it up much better than I did. Brevity is the soul of wit.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 15 décembre 2012 - 09:01 .

[Saibh]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Amycus89 sees Fall-From-Grace as a good example of a non-sexual romance and thinks BioWare should do the same. hooraytoicecream thinks Sebastian meets the same requirements.

I don't think it matters that you don't see Seb as a real romance because hooraywithicecream's not saying that BioWare has met your requirements for a non-sexual romance; she's saying they've met Amycus89's.

We're only supposing that it is. My point is that I could have the exact same requirements and still not consider Sebastian to be meeting them, if he does not begin to be a romance at all. 

[hoorayforicecream]

Saibh wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Amycus89 sees Fall-From-Grace as a good example of a non-sexual romance and thinks BioWare should do the same. hooraytoicecream thinks Sebastian meets the same requirements.

I don't think it matters that you don't see Seb as a real romance because hooraywithicecream's not saying that BioWare has met your requirements for a non-sexual romance; she's saying they've met Amycus89's.

We're only supposing that it is. My point is that I could have the exact same requirements and still not consider Sebastian to be meeting them, if he does not begin to be a romance at all. 

I still don't think you understand, but I also don't think you care to understand. So I will take my leave here.

[Saibh]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

I still don't think you understand, but I also don't think you care to understand. So I will take my leave here.

No, we are both presuming for someone who is not here. You think that Sebastian should count as for the other poster's criteria, but she is not here to confirm that. I am pointing out that it is not necessarily true that he does, and I said why. If Sebastian does not count as a romance, he wouldn't pass her criteria. 

[snackrat]

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, many from an individual perspective I thought "damn! But she's the least crazy, most appealling, most in-character choice for this Hawke!"

The most in-character choice for your Hawke, I assume you meant?

That imples I only have one Hawke, one playthrough. Hence I say "for this Hawke".

Or perhaps you thought I said just "for Hawke" and assumed all Hawkes, regardless of their background, should want Aveline? It is a small word after all, easy to miss.

Or you were referring to the crazy line? A mage extremist Hawke (which I have played) doesn't think Anders is crazy, nor a Templar nut (also played) think Fenris is, thus specifying. Most appealling? I would except my Hawke's to choose those they find most appealling, and it seems unusual for any other to do otherwise. Perhaps I am missing something? If so, please explain.

Also Saibh, hoorayforicecream: you are no longer discussing the topic, you are discussing who said what and why... dangerous territory that may attract moderator attention. Remember the BSN motto: Be excellent to each other!

Modifié par Karsciyin, 15 décembre 2012 - 10:30 .

[Xilizhra]

That imples I only have one Hawke, one playthrough. Hence I say "for this Hawke".

Or perhaps you thought I said just "for Hawke" and assumed all Hawkes, regardless of their background, should want Aveline? It is a small word after all, easy to miss.

So it would seem.

[Amycus89]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Amycus89 wrote...

Well, one of my complaints with recent Bioware games is that the romances have been reduced to sidequests where the ultimate goal is to end up in bed with a certain companion to get another achievement. After the sexscene the romance is pretty much over. I loved for example how I could still have a unique conversation with Morrigan in DA:O even after the dark ritual, during the battle of Denerim.

This has not been the case in Dragon Age. It has in Mass Effect. None of the romances in DA2 culminated in sex - all of the sex scenes occur in act 2, not act 3. DAO is actually far more guilty of this than DA2 is, considering that it actually awards romance achievements after sex and not after completing the actual romance.

Sometimes I wish that Bioware would just try to write ONE romance without any sexscenes involved, just to bring out their creativity and see what they can do with it. I loved Fall-From-Grace in Planescape for example, a Succubus that couldn't even kiss you, because that would kill you. I thought they were going something like that with Tali in ME2, but no, thankfully enough Sheppard had the time to search around the galaxy for a way to bed her, despite the reaper threat (they even mentioned the dilemma in one of the NPC dialogues you could overhear in one of the bars in the game, "Don't let some human spoil you").

Samara and Sebastian should both qualify for these criteria.

I said "recent Bioware games", so I wasn't talking specifically about DA2. I will admit though that DA2 didn't follow this trend - although it had some other problems, like feeling a bit too linear. Largely in part due to the quest journal dictating when they had something to say to me. Also, it still had the feeling that the sexscenes were put in there "Just because", not to develop the story or their characters. It's like they just decided beforehand, before even writing the characters, that they will have X number of romance options, and each will have ONE sexscene. Now write some characters for this".

For example, I actually found it strange that Hawke only had 1 sexscene with Isabella considering her... you know. Yet she has the same number of sexscenes as Merril, or any other of the romance options. What I mean is... If you want to throw in thousands of sexscenes, I'm completely ok with that - as long as it fits with their characters.

I didn't romance Sebastian, so I can't comment on that. It's great if he did follow those criterias though.

Samara though... was she even romancable? *searches on youtube* Whoah, why did I never get that dialogue? Time to make another ME2 playthrough...

[schalafi]

Just throwing in a quick English lesson...Romancable/ Romanceable,
or any other form of that, are not real words.

Modifié par schalafi, 15 décembre 2012 - 07:24 .

[ObserverStatus]

Medhia Nox wrote...
There's a lot of things that are "integral parts of life" - and with snark, I could say that science has made sex totally irrelevant to "life" now - so why focus on underwear sex?

What has science done? D:

[Nefla]

A "romance" without eventual sex or marriage then sex is called a friendship...

[ejoslin]

Nefla wrote...

A "romance" without eventual sex or marriage then sex is called a friendship...

No.  Romance has to do with feelings, not with the physical act of sex. While sex can be an expression of love, you can have one without the other.

Granted, I wouldn't find a sexless relationship fulfilling, but I'm not all people.  As long as whatever it is is fulfilling to both people, how far it progresses, either physically or emotionally, is enough.

[Fiacre]

ejoslin wrote...

Nefla wrote...

A "romance" without eventual sex or marriage then sex is called a friendship...

No.  Romance has to do with feelings, not with the physical act of sex. While sex can be an expression of love, you can have one without the other.

Granted, I wouldn't find a sexless relationship fulfilling, but I'm not all people.  As long as whatever it is is fulfilling to both people, how far it progresses, either physically or emotionally, is enough.

This. I mean, goodness, people, it's not all about sex. Is a romantic relationship any les valid because two people broke up before they had sex, no matter how long they were with each other and how on love they were? Sex is not the only way to express that you're in love with someone. It's not even the only way to be physically intimate -- I can't  say I make a habit of making out with my friends, or being particularly cuddly with them (at least not in the way I would be with a romantic partner),

And personally, I agree with OP -- I'm not necessarily interested in an asexual romance, but I did like the ability to play a warden whoo might not be ready to have sex with their LI at the point in the relationship where the LI was, or who might haveprefferred to wait until the mess with the Blight was sorted out or even until they were married. (Conversely, I also like the ability to proposition my LI whenever I want -- my Zevran romancing dude going from "no sex out of wedlock and how does gay sex even work" to "Zev, Zev do you want to come into my tent we can try that thing you talked about" would probably have been less amusing if I couldn't actually have him ask Zevran into the tent whenever they were at Camp. And having one of my Morrigan romancing Wardens intitiate sex wouldn't have been a possible characterization choice if I hadn't had the ability to initiate it.)

I also agree that the love scenes in DA2 felt quite odd in that regard -- Fenris' had me thinking that hey, actually Hawke isn't ready for this. Only made more awkward by the fact that he wouldn't be enthusiatically kissing Fenris back after being thrown against a wall. (I will never understand why you can't call fenris out on that, because, uh, Fenris, not cool. As ridiculous -- and inaccurate  -- DA:O's sex scenes may have been, at least no one gets thrown against any walls.)

[Nefla]

You can love someone and be very close and devoted to someone without it being a romance. Parents, children, friends, all loved but not in a romantic way. Sex/sexual attraction is what changes a deep friendship/brotherhood/whatever into a romantic relationship.

[Phate Phoenix]

Nefla wrote...

You can love someone and be very close and devoted to someone without it being a romance. Parents, children, friends, all loved but not in a romantic way. Sex/sexual attraction is what changes a deep friendship/brotherhood/whatever into a romantic relationship.

Wrong. Please stop.

[ejoslin]

Nefla wrote...

You can love someone and be very close and devoted to someone without it being a romance. Parents, children, friends, all loved but not in a romantic way. Sex/sexual attraction is what changes a deep friendship/brotherhood/whatever into a romantic relationship.

Why is it that people have no problem understanding sex without love, but cannot understand romantic love without sex?  What if someone cannot physically have sex?  Does that mean they cannot feel romantic love?  Of course not.  

And while I do think that sexual attraction is often part of the chemestry of a romantic relationship, it most definitely is not what defines it.  There can be a deep sexual attraction without it becoming a romantic relationship (I'm sure most people will agree with this -- especially those in FWB situations).  So it's not the sexual attraction that will necessarily change the friendship to a romantic one.  It's the feelings involved that makes the relationship.

Bah, I'm probably repeating myself at this point.  

Modifié par ejoslin, 16 décembre 2012 - 03:30 .

[Sylvanpyxie]

Nefla said:

Sex/sexual attraction is what changes a deep friendship/brotherhood/whatever into a romantic relationship.

You are wrong.

(Yes, it really is that simple)