680 réponses à ce sujet

[Fiacre]

FreshIstay wrote...

Fiacre wrote...

FreshIstay wrote...

Im not suggesting that you feel sorry for Men who throw Hissy Fits when rejected.  All men dont do this.
I agree,  You Move on. and Yes, Women can be rejected to, but are you honestly going to say that Women pursue Men more then Men pursue Women? even If they did I'd have a hard time beilieving they wouldnt be succsessful in most of their endeavors.

Well, while I don't identify as such, I have a female body and I've never lucked out yet. (Incidentally -- men often do a lot more than throw hissy fits, and even those can be quite hurtful. there are also far too many people that think that being nice tro someone means that the other should be grateful and be receptive to their sexual advances -- that's not everyone, of course not, but a lot of women have had experiences with these kinds trying to pursue them. It's not fun, believe me.)

And anyway, one would think that of a man is not interested, he won't suddenly be interested just because the woman pursues him. Especially when her goal is an actual relationship, not casual sex.

Welp, Every Male that I've ever conquered a social event with never threw a hissy fir or called a woman out of her name because he was rejected, "Oh well, NEXT!"....someone's bound to say yes, that's the theory.

How would you know if a Man is interested or not without talking to him.?

There's a difference between asking at an appropriate time and in an appropriate way (multplayergames with strangers are not the time and as has been shwon, these people certainly don't care about the second point) and the experience a lot of women have with men that randomly walk up to them, get told they're not interested and then start calling them insults. It's nice that you haven't seen it happening, but I know quite a few women where that happened, have heard enough stories and have had my own experiences.

So, I'm not talking about respectfully inquiring if someone's interested (and I'd expect the same respect from a woman pursuing a man -- from pretty much any person pursuing someone), but that's just not what often happens, and that's what women get tired of. There's positive attention and then there's negative attention. And there's attention from people who don't necessarily mean badly, but don't realize that they're offensive/hurtful.

[SpunkyMonkey]

krul2k wrote...

the day ppl go on a game an actually dont harass anyone in any sort of way will be the day im happy but prob long buried

Another reason for BW to keep their games from being MP for me. I much prefer playing offline.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 19 décembre 2012 - 03:16 .

[Zkyire]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'm not a fan of achievements for accomplishing sex, whether they be in a BioWare game or not.  Though, an achievement for completing a romance arc is NOT the same thing, since there's no requirement for a romance arc to be concluded with sex (or to even contain sex).  Sometimes BioWare games do this, but other times sex is the finishing point.  So yes, I think providing an achievement for that is not a good thing.  The problem with The Witcher is that all that matters is the sex.  It sends a different message, whereas I am not aware of any BioWare games that ding the achievement (or some other type of reward) simply for having sex.

But so what? Geralt is constantly on the move from one village to the next, one town to the next, one city to the next. He's not trying to settle down. And it'd be worse for him to get someone's hopes up and then leave them. Additionally, Geralt is also infertile, so if he does get into a committed relationship with someone and they end up wanting children well.. they'll be diappointed there too.

Besides, all that sex stuff is optional content, nobody forces you to play it. Like we're constantly told on these forums, don't like the "romances"; don't do them.

And as for objectifying women? In the Witcher series, the Lodge of Sorceresses are among the most powerful and influential people on the continent. Just because Geralt gets the option to bed a handful of commoners doesn't mean that women are, on the whole, objectified.

[AlexJK]

Zkyire wrote...

Just because Geralt gets the option to bed a handful of commoners doesn't mean that women are, on the whole, objectified.

The collectible sex cards do though.

[AlexanderCousland]

Gazardiel wrote...

Hey, just wanted to say I think it's great that you're keeping chill about all this.  I know I threw a lot of stuff at you, but it's because you truly seem to want to get along and understand. 

Also, here's a protip on winning with the ladies - my most successful guyfriends all had good friendships (platonic - no sex, lots of respect and trust) with gals, especially other female gamers.  We're not monolithic (just as guys aren't), so of course there are some who try to use their gender to get ahead and manipulate people, just as there are guys who are sleazebags.  But the serious gamers are people whose respect you can earn by playing well in-game with them and by being a good comrade-in-arms.

Think of Guardsman Donnic - he was focused on doing his job and didn't want any special treatment, and was a brave, honest guy who respected Aveline for how hard she worked.  That is a super-turnon for a lot of powerful women. 

If you focus on cultivating those types of positive relationships, you'll likely end up with some great wingwomen who will give you great tips on how to get in with a gal (as opposed to Maxim tips).  Not to mention, a lot of smart women (a large proportion of those who game) appreciate good conversation (as opposed to "wnt 2 c my p3n0r?") and thoughtful discussions.  It's a bit trickier than choosing "Diplomacy" all the time, but the payoff is much higher in terms of having more fun in games and in getting the hookup on how to really be a cool guy. 

Im just loving all this relationship advice Im receiving.  It's seems alot of people are under the impression that I need it. It has been a very insightful conversation with you all for sure. Im glad we were allowed to have it, without anyone going DANGER ZONE on us.   be back later, and im going to add you.

[Zkyire]

AlexJK wrote...

Zkyire wrote...

Just because Geralt gets the option to bed a handful of commoners doesn't mean that women are, on the whole, objectified.

The collectible sex cards do though.

Some women being objectified does not mean all women are objectified.

Therefore the statement that "doesn't mean that women are on the whole, objectified" is true.

I'd also like to point out how hypocritical it is for Dragon Age devs and fans to complain about the Witcher series' treatment of women, when Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2 both allow the PC to have sex with prostitutes. And that both Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2 have scantily-clad women who are oviously there for fanservice, but then use the excuse "But.. that's fits their personality, man!" So long as you have that stuff in your games; you can't complain about that kind of stuff in other games. *cough* complaining about how Triss is dressed*cough*.

I suppose when Dragon Age devs make scantily-clad women it's "empowering" but when CD Projekt do it, it's "objectification".

Modifié par Zkyire, 19 décembre 2012 - 03:35 .

[Herr Uhl]

Zkyire wrote...

AlexJK wrote...

Zkyire wrote...

Just because Geralt gets the option to bed a handful of commoners doesn't mean that women are, on the whole, objectified.

The collectible sex cards do though.

Some women being objectified does not mean all women are objectified.

Therefore the statement that "doesn't mean that women are on the whole, objectified" is true.

So, unless you can sleep with every single woman they're not objectified? As a sidenote, are there any females that are named other than the crones that you can't sleep with (other than the Madame) in witcher 1.

[AlexJK]

Zkyire wrote...

Some women being objectified does not mean all women are objectified.

Therefore the statement that "doesn't mean that women are on the whole, objectified" is true.

Sorry, no, language fail. If some women are objectified, then the statement "women are objectified" is true. The fact that some female characters aren't does not negate that.

The qualifier "on the whole" doesn't mean "in every case without exception".

Modifié par AlexJK, 19 décembre 2012 - 03:33 .

[Zkyire]

AlexJK wrote...

Zkyire wrote...

Some women being objectified does not mean all women are objectified.

Therefore the statement that "doesn't mean that women are on the whole, objectified" is true.

Sorry, no, language fail. If some women are objectified, then the statement "women are objectified" is true. The fact that some female characters aren't does not negate that.

"Language fail". Oh we're going there.

"women are objectified" implies all women are objectified.

"some women are objectified" implies some but not all women are objectified.

[SpunkyMonkey]

AlexJK wrote...

Zkyire wrote...

Some women being objectified does not mean all women are objectified.

Therefore the statement that "doesn't mean that women are on the whole, objectified" is true.

Sorry, no, language fail. If some women are objectified, then the statement "women are objectified" is true. The fact that some female characters aren't does not negate that.

Just out of interest, and i have no real prefference on this myself, but do you think that prostitutes in games should be objectified to reflect realism, or would you sooner have it so that such an approach is altered in order to send out a better message?

[AlexJK]

Zkyire wrote...

"women are objectified" implies all women are objectified.

No, it does not, in the same way as the statement "people play sports" does not mean all people play sports.

Modifié par AlexJK, 19 décembre 2012 - 03:40 .

[Zkyire]

AlexJK wrote...

Zkyire wrote...

"women are objectified" implies all women are objectified.

No, it does not.

The statement "people play sports" does not mean all people play sports.

Have you played the Witcher 1 and 2?

[berelinde]

Zkyire wrote...

AlexJK wrote...

Zkyire wrote...

Just because Geralt gets the option to bed a handful of commoners doesn't mean that women are, on the whole, objectified.

The collectible sex cards do though.

Some women being objectified does not mean all women are objectified.

Therefore the statement that "doesn't mean that women are on the whole, objectified" is true.

If someone were to make you a sandwich with excrement smeared on the top slice of bread, it wouldn't ruin the whole sandwich, right? I mean, all you have to do is remove the offending part.

Personally, I'd eat at a deli that didn't use carp as a condiment in the first place.

Edit (to reflect edits made to the quoted post): There is a *world* of difference between a prostitute and a commoner. In case it isn't obvious, patronizing willing prostitutes is supporting the economy while treating commoners as sex toys is disrespectful. As a secondary point, both genders are available as paid companions, but I don't recall any seducible male commoners.

Modifié par berelinde, 19 décembre 2012 - 03:52 .

[AlexJK]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Just out of interest, and i have no real prefference on this myself, but do you think that prostitutes in games should be objectified to reflect realism, or would you sooner have it so that such an approach is altered in order to send out a better message? 

That's an interesting question. Looking specifically at The Witcher - I personally don't have a problem with the inclusion of prostitutes in the game, and the accompanying sex scenes. It's an adult game and adult themes are acceptable.

I dislike the sex cards, which encourage the player to pursue those sex scenes with a Pokemon collect-em-all mentality. That just doesn't sit well with me - it quite literally objectifies those female characters by turning them into cards to be collected.

Zkyire wrote...

Have you played the Witcher 1 and 2?

1, yes, and completed.
2, yes, but only the first 3-4 hours of gameplay, the (awful) combat system defeated me. That was before the latest set of patches and updates though, so I'll probably try it again sometime in 2013.

Modifié par AlexJK, 19 décembre 2012 - 03:48 .

[SpunkyMonkey]

AlexJK wrote...

That's an interesting question. Looking specifically at The Witcher - I personally don't have a problem with the inclusion of prostitutes in the game, and the accompanying sex scenes. I do dislike the sex cards, which encourage the player to pursue those sex scenes with the Pokemon mentality. That just doesn't sit well with me - it, quite literally, makes those female characters into objects to be collected.

Thankyou. You see, having just thought about it, for me prostitutes are essentially objects and I actually think it's more dangerous to glamourize their proffesion by not objectifying them in that case. The Witcher goes way overboard with sex as a whole, and the card game is just tacky and certainly shouldn't be present for non-prostitutes (or even present at all IMO as it takes away from the game).

But just thinking about it now, to me it makes sense to treat prostitutes as collectables because essentially that's what they are, and IMO films such as Pretty Woman do more damage by selling a fairy-tale fantasy on the back of a sordid, and downright dangerous reality. The unpleasantness of having prostitues as collectables reflects the unpleasantness of such a lifestyle.

But it's not something I feel strongly about either way, it was just a thought I had whilst reading this thread.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 19 décembre 2012 - 03:57 .

[HTTP 404]

It is interesting to see that there are a lot of female gamers that like dragon age. its a good thing.

also why and how do these threads bring up the witcher? haha. I liked both the witcher and dragon age, one is neither better or worse to me. They are different to me.

[Herr Uhl]

HTTP 404 wrote...

It is interesting to see that there are a lot of female gamers that like dragon age. its a good thing.

also why and how do these threads bring up the witcher? haha. I liked both the witcher and dragon age, one is neither better or worse to me. They are different to me.

It is the largest similar type of game on the market (setting wise, gameplay is a bit different). It is kind of predictable.

[Gazardiel]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Thankyou. You see, having just thought about it, for me prostitutes are essentially objects and I actually think it's more dangerous to glamourize their proffesion by not objectifying them in that case. The Witcher goes way overboard with sex as a whole, and the card game is just tacky and certainly shouldn't be present for non-prostitutes (or even present at all IMO as it takes away from the game).

But just thinking about it now, to me it makes sense to treat prostitutes as collectables because essentially that's what they are, and IMO films such as Pretty Woman do more damage by selling a fairy-tale fantasy on the back of a sordid, and downright dangerous reality. The unpleasantness of having prostitues as collectables reflects the unpleasantness of such a lifestyle.

I'm not against having prostitutes in a game setting if it makes sense for that particular setting.  Even better is to not hide the bad part of it - having a quest where you help out some prostitutes who are getting hurt by thugs (there was one in The Witcher 1, I recall), having background dialogue where you hear why some of these people became prostitutes, having the bastard children running around - those make it real and don't just offer them as an easy conquest.  There is a "gaming rhetoric" (Ian Bogost) involved where you can have players enact certain types of narratives or ideas in a game setting that educate and emphasize realism, and those that perpetuate ignorance and exploitation.  So I don't agree with making  prositutes collectible, unless that becomes part of your PC's character and they're later judged for it - it's too easy otherwise.  Again, it's even better if there are male prostitutes available.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Gazardiel wrote...


I'm not against having prostitutes in a game setting if it makes sense for that particular setting.  Even better is to not hide the bad part of it - having a quest where you help out some prostitutes who are getting hurt by thugs (there was one in The Witcher 1, I recall), having background dialogue where you hear why some of these people became prostitutes, having the bastard children running around - those make it real and don't just offer them as an easy conquest.  There is a "gaming rhetoric" (Ian Bogost) involved where you can have players enact certain types of narratives or ideas in a game setting that educate and emphasize realism, and those that perpetuate ignorance and exploitation.  So I don't agree with making  prositutes collectible, unless that becomes part of your PC's character and they're later judged for it - it's too easy otherwise.  Again, it's even better if there are male prostitutes available.

Male prostitues would be great to add to the realism. The only slight concern I have is that, as far as I am aware (if you have any links or info to prove otherwise I would welcome the education) male prostitution in medival times was largely M/M based, and it would seem odd if it were treated so that females hiring males were common place.

The odd female hiring a male is fair enough, but I couldn't see masses of females hiring masses of males simply because females don't have that instinct just to have sex with someone in the same way men do. From what I've experienced sex is much more emotional for a woman, and the majority look for security and love over just sex.

I'm not saying that women hiring men isn't plausable or do-able, I just think it should be far less common place than when it's the other way around for the sake of game realism. Even if things are more equal now, I struggle to buy into 100% sexual equality when the game is based in a medival world.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 19 décembre 2012 - 04:30 .

[Gazardiel]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...
Male prostitues would be great to add to the realism. The only slight concern I have is that, as far as I am aware (if you have any links or info to prove otherwise I would welcome the education) male prostitution in medival times was largely M/M based, and it would seem odd if it were treated so that females hiring males were common place.

The odd female hiring a male is fair enough, but I couldn't see masses of females hiring masses of males simply because females don't have that instinct just to have sex with someone in the same way men do. From what I've experienced sex is much more emotional for a woman, and the majority look for security and love over just sex.

I'm not saying that women hiring men isn't plausable or do-able, I just think it should be far less common place than when it's the other way around for the sake of game realism. Even if things are more equal now, I struggle to buy into 100% sexual equality when the game is based in a medival world.

I'm basing this on my earlier post where I emphasized that in fantasy settings, there is authorial power to change nearly anything - you're going for plausibility, not realism.  While they're often based in medieval concepts, there is plenty of room to wiggle in terms of how things play out, often in terms of "what ifs".  What if the Savior was female?   Well, we have the female-run Chantry with Andraste as their primary icon.  What if there was effective and safe birth control?  We can have more sexually liberated women.  What would a male prostitute offer to women? Maybe having a guy who focuses completely on a woman's pleasure and who starts with an awesome backrub would be in demand. Maybe someone to whom she can gripe about her husband who is just an "inseminator" and who makes her feel worthwhile and sexy (which is a large part of the service of some escorts, even for men) would be the appeal.  There are many possibilities that invite creativity. 

As far as the sexual politics specifically go, YMMV on what strikes one as odd or off or unrealistic and what strikes one as plausible.  There are plenty of unrealistic aspects to these games, so why should we let something that is minor and easy to incorporate hold us up when it would give some extra depth and nuance to the game?  There will always be metagame concerns when designing a game, so why not offer options that aren't world-breaking but that make a game more appealing to other types of players?  (I don't really see having male prostitutes available as 100% gender equality - but it's a good provocation.  Ron Moore, in Battlestar Galactica shot scenes of a strip club with male and female strippers (and straight and gay patrons), but the male strippers were cut in the final edits - he was big on being provocative within the scifi space opera genre) 

P.S. Are male prostitutes really more realism-breaking than double-D boobs on every woman aged 14-60?   

Modifié par Gazardiel, 19 décembre 2012 - 04:43 .

[Dhiro]

FreshIstay wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

I'd like to clarify that I'm not a woman, and as such I have no right to speak to them. I feel uncomfortable in a personal level. I think it's important to clarify that.

And instinct is the excuse people use not to take up their responsabilities as thinking beings that can make decisions for themselves.

Umm...I think your lying about not being a Woman. really.

If you were Male you would understand that we want to have sex, in-fact our sexual function is to inseminate things  So we go out into the world and look for people to inseminate and you would also understand stand that alot of males carry with us DIFFERENT PERSONALITIES,  and the personality most men and women in this Forum seem to have an Issue with is the "sleeze-ball" personality, which unfortunately  give's the rest of us Inseminator's a bad rap.
 

So if your uncomfrotable with the idea that Women are romantic interests that you have to pursue if you want Romance..then It's kind of hard for me to beleive youre a guy....just sayin.

How old are you, mister?

[Cell1e]

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...

Not trying to be sexist just curious but for some reason the whole Dragon Age series seems like it is written to appeal more to the female audience, anyone else get this impression? Not having a go at anyone I just find it 'unique', to be fair it would seem most games these days are writen to appeal more to males, I mean we got the far superior Witcher series so I guess it is about time women got a series of games made to appeal more to them, all the more power to ya girlfriend.

Considering the fanbase perhaps it is time to put a female lead on the cover? I mean the canon Warden and Hawke were both depicted as male so perhaps it is time for a female to take the lead? 

Oh a big 'HOORAY' from me for your ideas!! 

Im a gaming woman and have been pathetically grateful to discover games that give women a chance to play as women and now Im loving the character creation, the romantic storylines and the choice of girly armours! (although Bioware arent very good at making nice armours to be sure) oh and all and any storylines that give us gals a chance to shine!

I just wish more game companies would get on board with this!

[Cell1e]

HTTP 404 wrote...

It is interesting to see that there are a lot of female gamers that like dragon age. its a good thing.

also why and how do these threads bring up the witcher? haha. I liked both the witcher and dragon age, one is neither better or worse to me. They are different to me.

Thats true its weird about the witcher being mentioned...it was a good rpg but I just wish I could have been a girl witcher as Im getting used to only playing as a women and damn I like it!!

However definitely worth the time and money, was a nice rpg. (PS but i dont replay it as I am too spoilt with being female now in other games, in fact my husband will tell you I never buy games anymore that I cant play as female. I have become very fussy!)