190 réponses à ce sujet

[nightscrawl]

Plaintiff wrote...

Here we go again, with the "no true roleplayer" fallacy.

I'm pretty sure that, since roleplay largely occurs only in the head of the player, personal preference is the only thing that matters when it comes to roleplaying, and thus the goal of the game developer is to satisfy as many different preferences as is reasonable.

I don't recall David Gaider or any other staff member saying that romances were not based on player preference. They've said, multiple times, that the whole point of including same-sex romance was to try and be more fair to the non-heterosexual members of the audience. If there are heterosexuals roleplaying gay characters, then good for them, but that's not why the same-sex romance content was created and nobody claims that it is.

I don't disagree with this. I'll just add that it's certainly possible for someone to roleplay a character completely contrary to their own preferences, simply because they enjoy crafting the story that way.

I'm reminded of James Woods talking about playing Byron De La Beckwith in Ghosts of Mississippi, who said something to the effect of how the character was everything he hated. Similarly with Stanley Tucci in The Lovely Bones, who thought this was the most despicable person he ever played, and he even played Adolf Eichmann, one of the orchestrators of the Holocaust.

That said, it seems like this type of RP is more doable with PnP, because it seems like the visual nature of the game and physically controlling an avatar encourages you to put more of yourself into the character. Maybe that's just me though...

[MaggieSh]

I don't understand why personal preference has anything to do with a roleplay romance.

I hate Morrigan, as a person she sucks IMO. But I almost always romance her if I'm playing an evil dude.
I think Alistair is a wimp. And he is very far from my type. I still romance him if I'm being a goody goody.
Leliana is nowhere near my type of girl. especially with her shoe fetish. Uck. If they had slimmed down Izzy, she would have been it for me. Beside the point, I still romance Leliana if it fits the story I'm crafting in that playthrough.

So I don't see what your hang ups have to do with it.

[Fisto The Sexbot]

Plaintiff wrote...

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

MaggieSh wrote...

Well that was just...sad.

I mean, yes, he doesn't have to make something he doesn't want to. I understand that. But I mean. :/ I don't know, that whole thread just seemed very dismissive of all of us. Why given an opinion if that's the response we're going to get?

I'm curious as to why he thought dwarf romances are 'niche'. Does he finally admit that romances are there based on the guy or gal that's playing the game's preferences, and not 'roleplaying content' at all, like most of us know?

I'm not sure if anyone gets me on this, but I initially thought romances were strictly supposed to be a story element, and not based on what the player would like to date in real life? Is he basically reluctant to create a dwarf LI because he's afraid no one would want to date it?

Here we go again, with the "no true roleplayer" fallacy.

I'm pretty sure that, since roleplay largely occurs only in the head of the player, personal preference is the only thing that matters when it comes to roleplaying, and thus the goal of the game developer is to satisfy as many different preferences as is reasonable.

I don't recall David Gaider or any other staff member saying that romances were not based on player preference. They've said, multiple times, that the whole point of including same-sex romance was to try and be more fair to the non-heterosexual members of the audience. If there are heterosexuals roleplaying gay characters, then good for them, but that's not why the same-sex romance content was created and nobody claims that it is.

I'd say gay romances are more an issue of accessibility, rather than personal preferences.

I'm curious to know how romance subplots would even fit in with some kind of 'general preference' for roleplayers since romances, outside of Bioware games, are not something that get requested *that* often for roleplaying games. Is Bioware really so clever as to know what character personalities are more popular and which romances fit best, especially if, as you say, roleplaying occurs largely in the player's head?

If Bioware is trying to create LIs based on the player's possible real life preferences, then that has nothing to do with roleplaying, since the character you play shouldn't be 'you' and his/her interests definitely not tantamount to 'what the player expects from a relationship.'

My point is, if romances are not even intended as a roleplaying resource, why are they still in roleplaying games?

[Plaintiff]

MaggieSh wrote...

I don't understand why personal preference has anything to do with a roleplay romance.

I hate Morrigan, as a person she sucks IMO. But I almost always romance her if I'm playing an evil dude.
I think Alistair is a wimp. And he is very far from my type. I still romance him if I'm being a goody goody.
Leliana is nowhere near my type of girl. especially with her shoe fetish. Uck. If they had slimmed down Izzy, she would have been it for me. Beside the point, I still romance Leliana if it fits the story I'm crafting in that playthrough.

So I don't see what your hang ups have to do with it.

The kind of story you want to craft is a personal preference. Everything in roleplay is personal preference because you are making choices in the hope that the story will play out according to your specific goal/desire.

[Plaintiff]

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

MaggieSh wrote...

Well that was just...sad.

I mean, yes, he doesn't have to make something he doesn't want to. I understand that. But I mean. :/ I don't know, that whole thread just seemed very dismissive of all of us. Why given an opinion if that's the response we're going to get?

I'm curious as to why he thought dwarf romances are 'niche'. Does he finally admit that romances are there based on the guy or gal that's playing the game's preferences, and not 'roleplaying content' at all, like most of us know?

I'm not sure if anyone gets me on this, but I initially thought romances were strictly supposed to be a story element, and not based on what the player would like to date in real life? Is he basically reluctant to create a dwarf LI because he's afraid no one would want to date it?

Here we go again, with the "no true roleplayer" fallacy.

I'm pretty sure that, since roleplay largely occurs only in the head of the player, personal preference is the only thing that matters when it comes to roleplaying, and thus the goal of the game developer is to satisfy as many different preferences as is reasonable.

I don't recall David Gaider or any other staff member saying that romances were not based on player preference. They've said, multiple times, that the whole point of including same-sex romance was to try and be more fair to the non-heterosexual members of the audience. If there are heterosexuals roleplaying gay characters, then good for them, but that's not why the same-sex romance content was created and nobody claims that it is.

I'd say gay romances are more an issue of accessibility, rather than personal preferences.

I'm curious to know how romance subplots would even fit in with some kind of 'general preference' for roleplayers since romances, outside of Bioware games, are not something that get requested *that* often for roleplaying games. Is Bioware really so clever as to know what character personalities are more popular and which romances fit best, especially if, as you say, roleplaying occurs largely in the player's head?

If Bioware is trying to create LIs based on the player's possible real life preferences, then that has nothing to do with roleplaying, since the character you play shouldn't be 'you' and his/her interests definitely not tantamount to 'what the player expects from a relationship.'

My point is, if romances are not even intended as a roleplaying resource, why are they still in roleplaying games?

The existence of romance content fits in with the general preference of people who want romance content.

The option to avoid it fits in with the general preference of people who do not.

Bioware isn't trying to create love interests that everyone will like, but clearly they expect some people to like them.

And I'll roleplay as myself if I please, I don't see why I shouldn't.

[Fisto The Sexbot]

Plaintiff wrote...

MaggieSh wrote...

I don't understand why personal preference has anything to do with a roleplay romance.

I hate Morrigan, as a person she sucks IMO. But I almost always romance her if I'm playing an evil dude.
I think Alistair is a wimp. And he is very far from my type. I still romance him if I'm being a goody goody.
Leliana is nowhere near my type of girl. especially with her shoe fetish. Uck. If they had slimmed down Izzy, she would have been it for me. Beside the point, I still romance Leliana if it fits the story I'm crafting in that playthrough.

So I don't see what your hang ups have to do with it.

The kind of story you want to craft is a personal preference. Everything in roleplay is personal preference because you are making choices in the hope that the story will play out according to your specific goal/desire.

It's personal preference based on what my character would want to do, not how I would react, and there is not one 'definite' ending, there are several... based on the character you are playing.

The 'goal' of the story changes with the character.

[Plaintiff]

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

MaggieSh wrote...

I don't understand why personal preference has anything to do with a roleplay romance.

I hate Morrigan, as a person she sucks IMO. But I almost always romance her if I'm playing an evil dude.
I think Alistair is a wimp. And he is very far from my type. I still romance him if I'm being a goody goody.
Leliana is nowhere near my type of girl. especially with her shoe fetish. Uck. If they had slimmed down Izzy, she would have been it for me. Beside the point, I still romance Leliana if it fits the story I'm crafting in that playthrough.

So I don't see what your hang ups have to do with it.

The kind of story you want to craft is a personal preference. Everything in roleplay is personal preference because you are making choices in the hope that the story will play out according to your specific goal/desire.

It's personal preference based on what my character would want to do, not how I would react, and there is not one 'definite' ending, there are several... based on the character you are playing.

The 'goal' of the story changes with the character.

A character that you created and guide.

So it's still your personal preference that dictates that story. Your personal preference simply changes.

[Fisto The Sexbot]

Plaintiff wrote...

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

MaggieSh wrote...

Well that was just...sad.

I mean, yes, he doesn't have to make something he doesn't want to. I understand that. But I mean. :/ I don't know, that whole thread just seemed very dismissive of all of us. Why given an opinion if that's the response we're going to get?

I'm curious as to why he thought dwarf romances are 'niche'. Does he finally admit that romances are there based on the guy or gal that's playing the game's preferences, and not 'roleplaying content' at all, like most of us know?

I'm not sure if anyone gets me on this, but I initially thought romances were strictly supposed to be a story element, and not based on what the player would like to date in real life? Is he basically reluctant to create a dwarf LI because he's afraid no one would want to date it?

Here we go again, with the "no true roleplayer" fallacy.

I'm pretty sure that, since roleplay largely occurs only in the head of the player, personal preference is the only thing that matters when it comes to roleplaying, and thus the goal of the game developer is to satisfy as many different preferences as is reasonable.

I don't recall David Gaider or any other staff member saying that romances were not based on player preference. They've said, multiple times, that the whole point of including same-sex romance was to try and be more fair to the non-heterosexual members of the audience. If there are heterosexuals roleplaying gay characters, then good for them, but that's not why the same-sex romance content was created and nobody claims that it is.

I'd say gay romances are more an issue of accessibility, rather than personal preferences.

I'm curious to know how romance subplots would even fit in with some kind of 'general preference' for roleplayers since romances, outside of Bioware games, are not something that get requested *that* often for roleplaying games. Is Bioware really so clever as to know what character personalities are more popular and which romances fit best, especially if, as you say, roleplaying occurs largely in the player's head?

If Bioware is trying to create LIs based on the player's possible real life preferences, then that has nothing to do with roleplaying, since the character you play shouldn't be 'you' and his/her interests definitely not tantamount to 'what the player expects from a relationship.'

My point is, if romances are not even intended as a roleplaying resource, why are they still in roleplaying games?

The existence of romance content fits in with the general preference of people who want romance content.

The option to avoid it fits in with the general preference of people who do not.

Bioware isn't trying to create love interests that everyone will like, but clearly they expect some people to like them.

And I'll roleplay as myself if I please, I don't see why I shouldn't.

I was more suggesting that resources should be spent elsewhere if romances are not in the interest of making a better roleplaying game.

You are free to play the game however you like... but then, semantics aside, what constitutes 'roleplaying' would be fundamentally different in this discussion.

[Fisto The Sexbot]

Plaintiff wrote...

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

MaggieSh wrote...

I don't understand why personal preference has anything to do with a roleplay romance.

I hate Morrigan, as a person she sucks IMO. But I almost always romance her if I'm playing an evil dude.
I think Alistair is a wimp. And he is very far from my type. I still romance him if I'm being a goody goody.
Leliana is nowhere near my type of girl. especially with her shoe fetish. Uck. If they had slimmed down Izzy, she would have been it for me. Beside the point, I still romance Leliana if it fits the story I'm crafting in that playthrough.

So I don't see what your hang ups have to do with it.

The kind of story you want to craft is a personal preference. Everything in roleplay is personal preference because you are making choices in the hope that the story will play out according to your specific goal/desire.

It's personal preference based on what my character would want to do, not how I would react, and there is not one 'definite' ending, there are several... based on the character you are playing.

The 'goal' of the story changes with the character.

A character that you created and guide.

So it's still your personal preference that dictates that story. Your personal preference simply changes.

But you are not your character.... which makes it different than say, watching a movie or reading a book and expecting the ending you'd like. Like I did with The Walking Dead game (but didn't get). Which is what I was getting at.

Modifié par Fisto The Sexbot, 05 janvier 2013 - 01:12 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

nightscrawl wrote...

Post all the screenshots you want of your dwarf PC or various NPCs. If they are mods or face morphs THEY DO NOT COUNT, especially when a significant chunk of the player base is on console.

Sure, mods and face morphs show possibilities, but they are not faces that Bioware designed. The opinions of Bioware are what matter in this instance since their designers are going to be the ones creating any NPCs.

Varric is Bioware developed...

[Addai]

Alistair's a mess. I can't agree that he fits in with the low-drama romance. Though he's not as whiny as the alpha males make him out to be.

The writers have to believe something before they can convincingly write it. If their hearts aren't in it, you don't want them making an attempt. Also the games are a commercial product and they're under pressure to make money, so I think a bit tied to the telemetry data. Bad news for those of us who didn't particularly like Cousland or Amell.

Modifié par Addai67, 05 janvier 2013 - 08:18 .

[MaggieSh]

So, hey, argument about dwarves aside from their physique:

I would love to romance a dwarf from the noble or merchant caste, perhaps who has abandoned home because s/he objected to the caste system, or because s/he didn't like his/her sexuality being decided for them based on a need for reproduction. I would love to delve into that mentality, into the politics of dwarven culture.

[daft inquisitor]

 What about a Castless? You don't wanna romance a Duster and bring up all that drama? 

[Jonata]

MaggieSh wrote...

So, hey, argument about dwarves aside from their physique:

I would love to romance a dwarf from the noble or merchant caste, perhaps who has abandoned home because s/he objected to the caste system, or because s/he didn't like his/her sexuality being decided for them based on a need for reproduction. I would love to delve into that mentality, into the politics of dwarven culture.

Couldn't agree more.

Dwarven culture is a complex equilibrium between survival needs, ancient traditions and political intrigues. Some of the best "grey" personalities in the entire franchise were Dawrfs, like Caridin, Branca or even Bhelen. There's a lot more than just classic dwarfs like Oghren in that culture and I would absolutely love to get to experience some of that complexity with a truly deep companion.  

[Dabrikishaw]

nightscrawl wrote...

Here is the relevant David Gaider quote...

David Gaider wrote...

Insofar as romances with dwarves go, we might add one at some point-- for the right character. I've joked about finding dwarf romance icky in the past, but I have no particular objection so long as the dwarf in question doesn't look child-like.

There is also another thread where he did some back and forth about dwarven LI.


Note that he doesn't say that he thinks ALL dwarves are child-like.

Epic.

[MaggieSh]

ShadowDragoonFTW wrote...

 What about a Castless? You don't wanna romance a Duster and bring up all that drama? 

Well the Casteless don't need to worry about who they reproduce with, unlike members of the upper Castes, that was the point of that drama.

There wouldn't be much drama with a Casteless simply from the dwarven aspect of them, since we'll be playing as a human, which is what I was arguing.

[nightscrawl]

Elton John is dead wrote...

nightscrawl wrote...

Post all the screenshots you want of your dwarf PC or various NPCs. If they are mods or face morphs THEY DO NOT COUNT, especially when a significant chunk of the player base is on console.

Sure, mods and face morphs show possibilities, but they are not faces that Bioware designed. The opinions of Bioware are what matter in this instance since their designers are going to be the ones creating any NPCs.

Varric is Bioware developed...

Yeah, I knew someone was going to say that. I did not qualify my statement because I wanted to be pithy. I don't think they will have an issue with designing the male dwarves, rather with the females, and the female dwarf picture in that post was modded, so my point still stands.

I'll just post what I wrote in the thread containing DG's comments:

nightscrawl wrote...

I doubt your character devs will have too much issue with the male dwarves, so I'm guessing the females are (potentially) problematic. I've seen some lovely female dwarf avatars here on the BSN, but they can look a bit on the young side. However, considering Sigrun, who was just totally awesome and not child-like, I think they can manage something down the road.

[MaggieSh]

I am so sick of these childlike comments.

Merrill. Wtf. I love her, but that girl's body and face screams statuary.

[daft inquisitor]

MaggieSh wrote...

I am so sick of these childlike comments.

Merrill. Wtf. I love her, but that girl's body and face screams statuary.

*cough* I think you mean "statutory".

http://dictionary.re...se/Statuary?s=t

EDIT: Actually, after seeing nightscrawl's comment about Merril looking like a procelin doll, I realize you actually could have meant statuary... 

Modifié par ShadowDragoonFTW, 05 janvier 2013 - 03:26 .

[nightscrawl]

MaggieSh wrote...

I am so sick of these childlike comments.

Merrill. Wtf. I love her, but that girl's body and face screams statuary.

*Shrug* I also mentioned Merrill in the other thread: "I find that comment about them not looking 'child-like' amusing since that is one aspect I dislike about Merrill. Or perhaps 'child-like' isn't the correct term for her. She looks like a porcelain doll to me, which I don't find very appealing."

Even though I did romance Isabela on one occasion, I actually don't like either of the female models in DA2. It seems to me that you have two extremes: a buxom exotic, or a delicate waif. Poetry and prose is full of tributes to women who are delicate waifs, so it's not like it isn't appealing to some. It just isn't appealing to me, neither is the buxom exotic.

At any rate, this thread is about dwarves, so pointing to Merrill and saying she looked like a child doesn't accomplish anything, particularly since the elf fans have already had their romances.


Going back to the dwarves, I found that one thing that hampered my ability to create a mature looking female dwarf (to my taste, obviously) were the hair options. Many of the styles are quite juvenile looking (even on human females), particularly if you have the shorter hair with the round face that is typical of dwarves. It wasn't until I downloaded a hair mod that I was able to make an acceptable looking lady dwarf.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 05 janvier 2013 - 03:28 .

[Dabrikishaw]

ShadowDragoonFTW wrote...

MaggieSh wrote...

I am so sick of these childlike comments.

Merrill. Wtf. I love her, but that girl's body and face screams statuary.

*cough* I think you mean "statutory".

http://dictionary.re...se/Statuary?s=t

EDIT: Actually, after seeing nightscrawl's comment about Merril looking like a procelin doll, I realize you actually could have meant statuary... 

I could certainly look at it that way.

[MaggieSh]

I agree that the hair is a problem, although I don't think anyone ever looked at Jarvia and saw a child? That woman was sadistic, lethal, yeah she had a big nose, but I would have liked to take a shot at her.

EDIT: Okay, guys, I meant statutory. I'm sorry. My spelling's been off lately, I'm speaking Dutch most of the day and typing English on the internet, my fingers don't always get it right. XD

Modifié par MaggieSh, 05 janvier 2013 - 03:53 .

[nightscrawl]

MaggieSh wrote...

I agree that the hair is a problem, although I don't think anyone ever looked at Jarvia and saw a child? That woman was sadistic, lethal, yeah she had a big nose, but I would have liked to take a shot at her.

No one has said, not even David Gaider said, that it is impossible to create a mature looking female dwarf. I simply stated that it could be problematic, and it is also something that is not at all an issue with the male dwarves.

They need a more refined character creation engine is what they need, and I am hopeful that with Frostbite we will see a larger range of all types of people, of all races and genders, and hopefully fewer clones wandering about. The character design changed from DAO to DA2 and we saw what impact that had on male/female humans, male/female elves, and male dwarves. We spent an entire game cycle without any female dwarves at all, so who knows what they are going to look like, if there are any, in DA3. Any references to them being child-like is based around DAO, so it's a moot discussion really.

The only thing left would be to have a dwarven companion that the writers feel would also make a good LI.

[nightscrawl]

Dabrikishaw wrote...

ShadowDragoonFTW wrote...

MaggieSh wrote...

I am so sick of these childlike comments.

Merrill. Wtf. I love her, but that girl's body and face screams statuary.

*cough* I think you mean "statutory".

http://dictionary.re...se/Statuary?s=t

EDIT: Actually, after seeing nightscrawl's comment about Merril looking like a procelin doll, I realize you actually could have meant statuary... 

I could certainly look at it that way.

LOL I didn't even notice because I took it for the intended spelling.