158 réponses à ce sujet

[RetroActiv]

Plaintiff wrote...

I think it would be too much work to be feasible. The only way I can see it happening is if Bioware allows players to romance multiple characters at once, but did not have the fact acknowledged by any of the characters being romanced.

Too much work? How do you figure that? A polyamorous relationship could be established in one conversation in Jade Empire as long as you seperatley persued romances with both parties up until that point.

[AlexanderCousland]

motomotogirl wrote...

It's an uncommon lifestyle choice so it would seem odd to include it randomly in a game.

Sexuality is a state of being and not a lifestyle choice, so it does make sense to include various types within the game.

Damn, i could have swore you were arguing for more homosexual representation on another thread, now the switch 

[Maria Caliban]

I'd be interested in seeing how BioWare tackled non-monogamous relationships. You had the option to have an open relationship with Isabela, but it still seemed to be a couple and not a romance with more than two partners.

[AlexanderCousland]

Plaintiff wrote...

I think it would be too much work to be feasible. The only way I can see it happening is if Bioware allows players to romance multiple characters at once, but did not have the fact acknowledged by any of the characters being romanced.

Morrigan and Lelianna have dialouge flags if you romance both of them they wil force you to choose between them, (Zev and Alistair as well, all romanceable character' s have the flag) if they switched the dialouge just a tad and added a plus one in the love scence it' s theoretically possible.

[Battlebloodmage]

I personally don't mind, but the word "resources" keep popping up when it comes to implementing a variety of different romances. Since I am a jealous type, I'm not sure if I want to "share" my partner with someone else in real life or in game. If Bioware thinks it's a good idea of implement it then goes nuts, I guess.

Modifié par Battlebloodmage, 14 janvier 2013 - 07:04 .

[EpicTragedy]

RetroActiv wrote...

OP you're talking about polyamory and not necessarily polygamy as just about all romances thus far don't result in marriage. Personally I am very open to the expansion of romance options beyond the exclusive monogomous romances. 

Fair enough, although I don't know why you nitpick about correcting me on that when you go and misuse "monogamous" in the same way the very next sentence without even spelling it right.

[RetroActiv]

Battlebloodmage wrote...

I personally don't mind, but the
word "resources" keep popping up when it comes to implementing a variety
of different romances. Since I am a jealous type, I'm not sure if I
want to "share" my partner with someone else in real life or in game. If
Bioware thinks it's a good idea of implement it then goes nuts, I
guess.

it's been pointed out by FreshIstay how easily a basic polyamorous option could be included by simply removing certain flags where characters force the PC to choose plus a brief conversation,cutscene acknowledging the polyamorous romance.

Modifié par RetroActiv, 14 janvier 2013 - 07:39 .

[esper]

RetroActiv wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I think it would be too much work to be feasible. The only way I can see it happening is if Bioware allows players to romance multiple characters at once, but did not have the fact acknowledged by any of the characters being romanced.

Too much work? How do you figure that? A polyamorous relationship could be established in one conversation in Jade Empire as long as you seperatley persued romances with both parties up until that point.

The problem is that doing it like that have a huge risk as coming off as cheap fanservice where the two women fawns over one man (or the other way around, but it is rarely the other way around). And I do think that Jade Empire was just that.
There needs to be a build off of the romantic and/sexual kind between the other two partners as well or we are not going into a polyarmours/polygamic relationship, we are going into a harem fantasy.

Edit and that build up would not be cheap and risk going off in all the wrong ways, because the polyamoures li's still have to double as monogamic (spelling?).

Modifié par esper, 14 janvier 2013 - 07:44 .

[RetroActiv]

EpicTragedy wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

OP you're talking about polyamory and not necessarily polygamy as just about all romances thus far don't result in marriage. Personally I am very open to the expansion of romance options beyond the exclusive monogomous romances. 

Fair enough, although I don't know why you nitpick about correcting me on that when you go and misuse "monogamous" in the same way the very next sentence without even spelling it right.

It's hardly nitpicking. There is a clear distinction between what polyamory is and what polygamy is.You seem to be confused by my usage of the word "monogamous". Currently full romances have been exclusively monogamous . Including polyamorous romances would be expanding beyond the restriction of monogamous romance. Hope that cleared things up for you.

Modifié par RetroActiv, 14 janvier 2013 - 07:55 .

[RetroActiv]

esper wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I think it would be too much work to be feasible. The only way I can see it happening is if Bioware allows players to romance multiple characters at once, but did not have the fact acknowledged by any of the characters being romanced.

Too much work? How do you figure that? A polyamorous relationship could be established in one conversation in Jade Empire as long as you seperatley persued romances with both parties up until that point.

The problem is that doing it like that have a huge risk as coming off as cheap fanservice where the two women fawns over one man (or the other way around, but it is rarely the other way around). And I do think that Jade Empire was just that.
There needs to be a build off of the romantic and/sexual kind between the other two partners as well or we are not going into a polyarmours/polygamic relationship, we are going into a harem fantasy.

Edit and that build up would not be cheap and risk going off in all the wrong ways, because the polyamoures li's still have to double as monogamic (spelling?).

I think it was very tastefully handled in Jade Empire. Sure there were issues of jealousy  between Dawn Star and Silk Fox but they spend time together and bond (we don't see this but they say as much) and mutually accept the polyamorous relationship. The player already has the ability sleep with prostitutes while in a relationship, sleep with every possible love interest before deciding one and have meaningless three ways. I think if anything those things are for more indicitive of cheap fan service for players who want to sleep with everyone and everything than a tasteful and meaningful polyamorous romance option.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

I'm a bad person and I like jealousy and the associated ego trip

[Plaintiff]

FreshIstay wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I think it would be too much work to be feasible. The only way I can see it happening is if Bioware allows players to romance multiple characters at once, but did not have the fact acknowledged by any of the characters being romanced.

Morrigan and Lelianna have dialouge flags if you romance both of them they wil force you to choose between them, (Zev and Alistair as well, all romanceable character' s have the flag) if they switched the dialouge just a tad and added a plus one in the love scence it' s theoretically possible.

What you just suggested is basically what I suggested. It would be brought up in one conversation and never again. But it would take much more than that to make a polyamorous romance as genuine and involved as the romances are currently, and every time a new person is added into the equation, it gets more complex.

Exactly how many relationships is the game expected to acknowledge at once? Are all the characters open to polyamorous relationships? Can they all be romanced concurrently? What about characters like Fenris and Anders, or Morrigan and Leliana, who strongly dislike each other? Would they be okay with the player character messing around with each of them? Do the romanceable characters also have relationships with each other, or maybe other NPCs? Or do they all just fawn over the PC separately?

In real life, polyamorous relationships are complicated. Bioware could do what you suggested but that wouldn't be polyamory, it would be the player character romancing several party members at once, with the party members themselves by and large acting as though the other relationships didn't exist.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 14 janvier 2013 - 08:18 .

[EpicTragedy]

RetroActiv wrote...

EpicTragedy wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

OP you're talking about polyamory and not necessarily polygamy as just about all romances thus far don't result in marriage. Personally I am very open to the expansion of romance options beyond the exclusive monogomous romances. 

Fair enough, although I don't know why you nitpick about correcting me on that when you go and misuse "monogamous" in the same way the very next sentence without even spelling it right.

It's hardly nitpicking. There is a clear distinction between what polyamory is and what polygamy is.You seem to be confused by my usage of the word "monogamous". Currently full romances have been exclusively monogamous . Including polyamorous romances would be expanding beyond the restriction of monogamous romance. Hope that cleared things up for you.

I don't dispute the distinction being clear or not. I dispute your criticism of my misuse of polygamy, which as you correctly noted specifically refers to marriage, when you in turn the next sentence misuse monogamy for the very same reason.

There is no confusion here, on my part at least. Monogamous is in specific reference to marriage between two individuals. Full romances have not been exclusively monogamous at all, in fact I can't even think of one romance in the DA//ME series that involved an actual marriage. There are no "monogamous relationships" in the games if you want to be clear about it, which is what you wanted bringing up the distinction in the first place between polyamorous and polygamous.

Modifié par EpicTragedy, 14 janvier 2013 - 08:14 .

[RetroActiv]

EpicTragedy wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

EpicTragedy wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

OP you're talking about polyamory and not necessarily polygamy as just about all romances thus far don't result in marriage. Personally I am very open to the expansion of romance options beyond the exclusive monogomous romances. 

Fair enough, although I don't know why you nitpick about correcting me on that when you go and misuse "monogamous" in the same way the very next sentence without even spelling it right.

It's hardly nitpicking. There is a clear distinction between what polyamory is and what polygamy is.You seem to be confused by my usage of the word "monogamous". Currently full romances have been exclusively monogamous . Including polyamorous romances would be expanding beyond the restriction of monogamous romance. Hope that cleared things up for you.

I don't dispute the distinction being clear or not. I dispute your criticism of my misuse of polygamy, which as you correctly noted specifically refers to marriage, when you in turn the next sentence misuse monogamy for the very same reason.

There is no confusion here, on my part at least. Monogamous is in specific reference to marriage between two individuals. Full romances have not been exclusively monogamous at all, in fact I can't even think of one romance in the DA//ME series that involved an actual marriage. There are no "monogamous relationships" in the games if you want to be clear about it, which is what you wanted bringing up the distinction in the first place between polyamorous and polygamous.

*sigh* Okay let me make things clearer for you. Traditionaly monogamy refers to marriage but in common usage monogamy also refers to one exclusive romantic/sexual partner irrespective of marriage.  This is generally not the case for the term Polygamy. Apparently you didn't realize this and I just assumed you would, hence your confusion. I hope we're on the same page now. Either way i'd like to move on and get back to the topic at hand.

Modifié par RetroActiv, 14 janvier 2013 - 08:30 .

[n7stormrunner]

if it doesn't give give the devs a head this could... more so if some outside it can have a problem and you can try to explain it to them.... or tell them it's none of their business, whichever you prefer

[EpicTragedy]

RetroActiv wrote...

EpicTragedy wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

EpicTragedy wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

OP you're talking about polyamory and not necessarily polygamy as just about all romances thus far don't result in marriage. Personally I am very open to the expansion of romance options beyond the exclusive monogomous romances. 

Fair enough, although I don't know why you nitpick about correcting me on that when you go and misuse "monogamous" in the same way the very next sentence without even spelling it right.

It's hardly nitpicking. There is a clear distinction between what polyamory is and what polygamy is.You seem to be confused by my usage of the word "monogamous". Currently full romances have been exclusively monogamous . Including polyamorous romances would be expanding beyond the restriction of monogamous romance. Hope that cleared things up for you.

I don't dispute the distinction being clear or not. I dispute your criticism of my misuse of polygamy, which as you correctly noted specifically refers to marriage, when you in turn the next sentence misuse monogamy for the very same reason.

There is no confusion here, on my part at least. Monogamous is in specific reference to marriage between two individuals. Full romances have not been exclusively monogamous at all, in fact I can't even think of one romance in the DA//ME series that involved an actual marriage. There are no "monogamous relationships" in the games if you want to be clear about it, which is what you wanted bringing up the distinction in the first place between polyamorous and polygamous.

*sigh* Okay let me make things clearer for you. Traditionaly monogamy refers to marriage but in common usage monogamy also refers to one exclusive romantic/sexual partner irrespective of marriage.  This is generally not the case for the term Polygamy. Apparently you didn't realize this and I just assumed you would, hence your confusion. I hope we're on the same page now. Either way i'd like to move on and get back to the topic at hand.

I don't know where you're getting the "common usage" distinction from. It seems rather arbitrary to me, but I won't dispute it. There wasn't really any confusion aside from me going by the book definitions and you going by "common usage".

Modifié par EpicTragedy, 14 janvier 2013 - 10:06 .

[Dean_the_Young]

RetroActiv wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I think it would be too much work to be feasible. The only way I can see it happening is if Bioware allows players to romance multiple characters at once, but did not have the fact acknowledged by any of the characters being romanced.

Too much work? How do you figure that? A polyamorous relationship could be established in one conversation in Jade Empire as long as you seperatley persued romances with both parties up until that point.

Oh, so you want a end-game threesome with unrelated romance lines focused on the main character. That's not really polyamory as much as a harem scenario, but sure. That's doable.

I'd have thought people would have wanted more interaction between the other links in a polyamory. And some actual relationship drama or development across the relationships. But sure, if you get rid of those then a -insert number here-some isn't too much work.

[esper]

RetroActiv wrote...

esper wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I think it would be too much work to be feasible. The only way I can see it happening is if Bioware allows players to romance multiple characters at once, but did not have the fact acknowledged by any of the characters being romanced.

Too much work? How do you figure that? A polyamorous relationship could be established in one conversation in Jade Empire as long as you seperatley persued romances with both parties up until that point.

The problem is that doing it like that have a huge risk as coming off as cheap fanservice where the two women fawns over one man (or the other way around, but it is rarely the other way around). And I do think that Jade Empire was just that.
There needs to be a build off of the romantic and/sexual kind between the other two partners as well or we are not going into a polyarmours/polygamic relationship, we are going into a harem fantasy.

Edit and that build up would not be cheap and risk going off in all the wrong ways, because the polyamoures li's still have to double as monogamic (spelling?).

I think it was very tastefully handled in Jade Empire. Sure there were issues of jealousy  between Dawn Star and Silk Fox but they spend time together and bond (we don't see this but they say as much) and mutually accept the polyamorous relationship. The player already has the ability sleep with prostitutes while in a relationship, sleep with every possible love interest before deciding one and have meaningless three ways. I think if anything those things are for more indicitive of cheap fan service for players who want to sleep with everyone and everything than a tasteful and meaningful polyamorous romance option.

I think it was handled rather horrrible in Jade Empire and was indeed going straight into a harem fantasy. Which is not the same as polyamourous/polygamic relentionship. Doubled by the fact that Dawn Star and Silk Fox always comes off as not being the best of friends (to say it midly), they just agree to share the protagonist (hence harem fantasy)

As for the brothels and the like they are for the aromantic character, the sleeping with everyo Li is a player choice and yes it is handled poorly which already shows you how difficult it is to do this properly and why a polyamourous relentionship would be difficult to do.

We need more than one little dialog. We need several dialogs build up in banters, preferably, equal to the number of dialogs/build up the monogamous relationships have, but instead of just having it between two people we know need to have it between three people. The resources would be consuming.

[Gazardiel]

re: terminology. Unfortunately, the term "monogamy" is misused when "monoamory" would be more accurate (there is the uncomfortable implication that all loving relationships are destined to become marriages). I suspect that "polygamy" tends to represent one man and multiple women because of its political history in various cultures (I think there is only one culture in Tibet that currently practices polyandry).

There are different layers to this that should be hashed out:

1) Threesome/Foursome/Moresome: I don't see this as polyamory - it's a configuration of sex. And while some polyamorous units may engage in sex this way, my understanding is that there usually are timeshares where someone spends time with a primary partner and secondary partners separately.

2) Seeing multiple people: this would be the equivalent of making the romance flags invisible to other companions/NPCs - maybe like an open relationship or casual dating. If you don't talk about it at all, then I don't see it as something serious/committed (strong open relationships use good communication at least about the fact that it's open).

3) Committed polyamory: this would require acknowledgement and probably a discussion by the involved NPCs, as well as an in-character resolution/acceptance. This would require extra scripting and, while not impossible, would need some writing to cover outcomes.

I'm not against having the last available at some point as an option, but it would be tricky to implement. Perhaps if BW wanted to be inclusive, they could start with having one of these relationships in the background of a quest NPC's story.

[Noviere]

I'm not opposed to it, though I question the value of including it. I just don't know how believably it could be implemented, I guess... Two of the companions love you, and each other, and are open to a three-way relationship? I have a feeling it will just feel like fan service.

Modifié par Noviere, 14 janvier 2013 - 12:14 .

[RetroActiv]

esper wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

esper wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I think it would be too much work to be feasible. The only way I can see it happening is if Bioware allows players to romance multiple characters at once, but did not have the fact acknowledged by any of the characters being romanced.

Too much work? How do you figure that? A polyamorous relationship could be established in one conversation in Jade Empire as long as you seperatley persued romances with both parties up until that point.

The problem is that doing it like that have a huge risk as coming off as cheap fanservice where the two women fawns over one man (or the other way around, but it is rarely the other way around). And I do think that Jade Empire was just that.
There needs to be a build off of the romantic and/sexual kind between the other two partners as well or we are not going into a polyarmours/polygamic relationship, we are going into a harem fantasy.

Edit and that build up would not be cheap and risk going off in all the wrong ways, because the polyamoures li's still have to double as monogamic (spelling?).

I think it was very tastefully handled in Jade Empire. Sure there were issues of jealousy  between Dawn Star and Silk Fox but they spend time together and bond (we don't see this but they say as much) and mutually accept the polyamorous relationship. The player already has the ability sleep with prostitutes while in a relationship, sleep with every possible love interest before deciding one and have meaningless three ways. I think if anything those things are for more indicitive of cheap fan service for players who want to sleep with everyone and everything than a tasteful and meaningful polyamorous romance option.

I think it was handled rather horrrible in Jade Empire and was indeed going straight into a harem fantasy. Which is not the same as polyamourous/polygamic relentionship. Doubled by the fact that Dawn Star and Silk Fox always comes off as not being the best of friends (to say it midly), they just agree to share the protagonist (hence harem fantasy)

As for the brothels and the like they are for the aromantic character, the sleeping with everyo Li is a player choice and yes it is handled poorly which already shows you how difficult it is to do this properly and why a polyamourous relentionship would be difficult to do.

We need more than one little dialog. We need several dialogs build up in banters, preferably, equal to the number of dialogs/build up the monogamous relationships have, but instead of just having it between two people we know need to have it between three people. The resources would be consuming.

I definitly think you're reaching a bit with the "harem fantasy" accusation. There just wasn't nearly enough to it to dig that deep.  Nevertheless of course it's your opinion not to like it and naturally it would  merely be an option for those who are interested, "harem fantasy" or no. At the very least it's a lot more tasteful than tumbling with prostitutes or having meaningless one night stand orgies which are options currently available. My PC never partakes in such behavior but still I don't think it should be restricted just because i don't like it.

Modifié par RetroActiv, 14 janvier 2013 - 12:05 .

[Gazardiel]

RetroActiv wrote...
I definitly think you're reaching a bit with the "harem fantasy" accusation. There just wasn't nearly enough to it to dig that deep.  Nevertheless of course it's your opinion not to like it and naturally it would  merely be an option for those who are interested, "harem fantasy" or no. At the very least it's a lot more tasteful than tumbling with prostitutes or having meaningless one night stand orgies which are options currently available. My PC never partakes in such behavior but still I don't think it should be restricted just because i don't like it.

While it may not necessarily be "harem fantasy," there is definitely a bias in seeing MFF or FMF relationships as "normal" and even attractive while MMF, MFM are seen as "abnormal" or disgusting (I've heard "the Devil's Threesome" used before).  And looking at media (even across cultures - see Tenchi Muyo), there is definitely a higher visibility of multiple females settling down and accepting the need to "share" a male while the inverse is very rare (and usually involves lots of fighting).  So it is reasonable to critique the predominance of a particular script for MFF/MFM setups in media.

(Fair warning: I have counterarguments to the "it's historically accurate and biologically grounded" approach and I'm not afraid to use them)

[deatharmonic]

Eh... I'm not strictly against seeing this in game, but I'm not sure it'd feel believable to convince two of your companions to engage in a relationship like that. Especially since BW has given such precedence to making companions more like individuals and less like pawns, so I guess it would feel like I have more control over them than necessary. Romances are already very player-centric in that the player is always the one who initiates romances, so you set your sights on your potential love target and say the right things until, bingo! So I don't think it would feel organic enough to talk two targets into a polygamous relationship.

Having said that, I like a love triangle or two, I'm a sucker for a bit of drama.

[esper]

RetroActiv wrote...

esper wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

esper wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I think it would be too much work to be feasible. The only way I can see it happening is if Bioware allows players to romance multiple characters at once, but did not have the fact acknowledged by any of the characters being romanced.

Too much work? How do you figure that? A polyamorous relationship could be established in one conversation in Jade Empire as long as you seperatley persued romances with both parties up until that point.

The problem is that doing it like that have a huge risk as coming off as cheap fanservice where the two women fawns over one man (or the other way around, but it is rarely the other way around). And I do think that Jade Empire was just that.
There needs to be a build off of the romantic and/sexual kind between the other two partners as well or we are not going into a polyarmours/polygamic relationship, we are going into a harem fantasy.

Edit and that build up would not be cheap and risk going off in all the wrong ways, because the polyamoures li's still have to double as monogamic (spelling?).

I think it was very tastefully handled in Jade Empire. Sure there were issues of jealousy  between Dawn Star and Silk Fox but they spend time together and bond (we don't see this but they say as much) and mutually accept the polyamorous relationship. The player already has the ability sleep with prostitutes while in a relationship, sleep with every possible love interest before deciding one and have meaningless three ways. I think if anything those things are for more indicitive of cheap fan service for players who want to sleep with everyone and everything than a tasteful and meaningful polyamorous romance option.

I think it was handled rather horrrible in Jade Empire and was indeed going straight into a harem fantasy. Which is not the same as polyamourous/polygamic relentionship. Doubled by the fact that Dawn Star and Silk Fox always comes off as not being the best of friends (to say it midly), they just agree to share the protagonist (hence harem fantasy)

As for the brothels and the like they are for the aromantic character, the sleeping with everyo Li is a player choice and yes it is handled poorly which already shows you how difficult it is to do this properly and why a polyamourous relentionship would be difficult to do.

We need more than one little dialog. We need several dialogs build up in banters, preferably, equal to the number of dialogs/build up the monogamous relationships have, but instead of just having it between two people we know need to have it between three people. The resources would be consuming.

I definitly think you're reaching a bit with the "harem fantasy" accusation. There just wasn't nearly enough to it to dig that deep.  Nevertheless of course it's your opinion not to like it and naturally it would  merely be an option for those who are interested, "harem fantasy" or no. At the very least it's a lot more tasteful than tumbling with prostitutes or having meaningless one night stand orgies which are options currently available. My PC never partakes in such behavior but still I don't think it should be restricted just because i don't like it.

But you see that is the problem with the poly-whatever we call it. The resources needed for it to be big enough to avoid that stigma. One conversation simply does not cut it, at least not when the two who shares were previously hostile towards each other (and then we get into should they share or should it be an equal threeway relationship, that is not a simple matter either and there are different forms of poly-relantionships.=. I would for example have been a lot more open to Hawke/Fenris/Isabella or Hawke/Isabella/Fenris or however you write it, if you went the open relationship way with Isabella since she expresses sexual interest in Fenris and he return that interest (as he can return an interest expressed by Hawke).

But having two women who does not get along swimmingly suddenly decide that they can share a man comes off as a harem fantasy.

As for the one night stand orgies and the rest, they are without commitment, it is over and done with, these relationship are not, hence why the one night stand need less resources than longer term continued relationship.

[esper]

Gazardiel wrote...

RetroActiv wrote...
I definitly think you're reaching a bit with the "harem fantasy" accusation. There just wasn't nearly enough to it to dig that deep.  Nevertheless of course it's your opinion not to like it and naturally it would  merely be an option for those who are interested, "harem fantasy" or no. At the very least it's a lot more tasteful than tumbling with prostitutes or having meaningless one night stand orgies which are options currently available. My PC never partakes in such behavior but still I don't think it should be restricted just because i don't like it.

While it may not necessarily be "harem fantasy," there is definitely a bias in seeing MFF or FMF relationships as "normal" and even attractive while MMF, MFM are seen as "abnormal" or disgusting (I've heard "the Devil's Threesome" used before).  And looking at media (even across cultures - see Tenchi Muyo), there is definitely a higher visibility of multiple females settling down and accepting the need to "share" a male while the inverse is very rare (and usually involves lots of fighting).  So it is reasonable to critique the predominance of a particular script for MFF/MFM setups in media.

(Fair warning: I have counterarguments to the "it's historically accurate and biologically grounded" approach and I'm not afraid to use them)

I uses the term harem fantasy to describe a relationship were the all the participants are not equal, as in Jade Empire where Silk Fox and Dawn Star have to 'settle' for sharing which gives too much power to the pc who are the one being shared.