270 réponses à ce sujet

[esper]

DPSSOC wrote...

I've seen this brought up before and I feel the need to remind people of a harsh truth about the human condition. We're animals, for all our technology and sophistication we're still just animals. As animals there are two drives that we all possess, that never go away, and that effect pretty much everything we do to varying degrees. Survival and sex. Our sexuality, who we want to have sex with and how much, factors in to almost any interaction we have with people to a certain degree (YMMV), we behave differently towards people we find desirable than we do towards those we don't.

This is why a character's sexuality really should be decided early on and encorporated throughout; Isabela, Zevran, and Leliana do this well because the fact that they are bisexual is factored in to how they behave towards people (not just the obvious ways and not just the PC). You don't need a backstory that demands it, none of them to date have, but if a character is bi/homosexual make them bi/homosexual, don't make them herosexual where you strip them of any hints of sexuality outside their interaction with the PC.

Example from another Bioware game is Liara in ME1. The character is utterly sexless and outside of interacting with Shepard expresses no interest in anyone of any species or gender. Ashley and Kaidan on the other hand do, because their orientation is not dependent on the PC. If you're female Ashley is still attracted to men and interactions change (Ash's sister talking about Kaidan as opposed to Shepard), vice versa with Kaidan (Kaidan's response when asked if he's interested in Liara). In this regard Ashley and Kaidan are much stronger characters because Liara might as well be a robot. I can't really comment on if this changes in ME2/3 because I avoided Liara like the plague in those games (do not like the character can't say why).

Yes, because all people expresses sexual interested constantly. and then they flash up a big neosign showing their sexual orientation afterswards. Just in case the point was missed the first time.

As an asexual, I can say that I understand Liara's not showing interest unless she has feelings/intellectual interest, as that is something I wouldn't do either. I greatly sympathize with her way of falling in love. It is very similar to my own way, though I would never shift to the physical at all. As a bi-orientated girl, I can gurantee that only my one very specific friend and my mother knows this, because you know. Those two people were the only one two to ask.

There is no way to act bi, unless the characters inform the players of their collective sexual past right of the bat, which would be contrived and out of character for shy/introverst personalities.

Why should they inform you?

[Zkyire]

esper wrote...
As an asexual, I can say that I understand Liara's not showing interest unless she has feelings/intellectual interest, as that is something I wouldn't do either. I greatly sympathize with her way of falling in love. It is very similar to my own way, though I would never shift to the physical at all. As a bi-orientated girl, I can gurantee that only my one very specific friend and my mother knows this, because you know. Those two people were the only one two to ask.

There is no way to act bi, unless the characters inform the players of their collective sexual past right of the bat, which would be contrived and out of character for shy/introverst personalities.

Why should they inform you?

Asexual means you have no sexual desires towards anyone.

Bisexual means you have sexual desires towards men and women.

You can be one of the two.

But you cannot be both.

[esper]

Zkyire wrote...

esper wrote...
As an asexual, I can say that I understand Liara's not showing interest unless she has feelings/intellectual interest, as that is something I wouldn't do either. I greatly sympathize with her way of falling in love. It is very similar to my own way, though I would never shift to the physical at all. As a bi-orientated girl, I can gurantee that only my one very specific friend and my mother knows this, because you know. Those two people were the only one two to ask.

There is no way to act bi, unless the characters inform the players of their collective sexual past right of the bat, which would be contrived and out of character for shy/introverst personalities.

Why should they inform you?

Asexual means you have no sexual desires towards anyone.

Bisexual means you have sexual desires towards men and women.

You can be one of the two.

But you cannot be both.

And you, sir (or woman) understand nothing off being asexual.

I am not aromantic.

But I am just going to give you a link to explain it in much better, clearer words than mine:

http://www.asexualit...family.html#ff1

This is a typical fail assumptions of a sexual person, though. I don't blame you for it.
I mean I can't understand a character of a person like Isabella, but I know that some (hypersexuals?) think that way.

Double edit. If you actually go into the site I recommend, going to the relantionships part of the forums. It shows, how, wildly asexual differs in preferences.

Modifié par esper, 20 janvier 2013 - 05:08 .

[Avaflame]

I'm not sure if this has already been addressed or not, but I'm not seeing where all the nitpicking over David's comments over The Witcher are coming from. He never states that every female character or companion is romanceable (or rather, ****able), he says that the mechanic for how any sexual encounters are handled gears the player towards a certain state of mind towards any female characters. That it makes you wonder if you can have sex with them, how you might be able to have sex with them, what have you done wrong if they haven't had sex with you etc.

Whereas in DA:O/2 you don't meet say, Macha, and think 'What do I have to do to have sex with her?'

Edit: 

DPSSOC wrote...

Gaider was saying that making all companions romanceable would cheapen them, they wouldn't be characters anymore they'd be objectives, what do I need to do to romance this character.  He compares this to the Witcher where, on a first run, the card mechanic turns every female character into a puzzle of "How do I sleep with you."  Whether or not you can sleep with every female character isn't the point he's making, the point is that the mechanic gets the player into that state of mind.

You don't know when you load up the game for the first time that you can't sleep with everyone, so every female character becomes a puzzle to figure out how.  You didn't get to sleep with this character but maybe you just did something wrong, back up try again, and again, until you figure it out.

Think of it like the Super Mario Bros (original NES) when you first realize you can go down the pipes you try to go down all the pipes, because there are goodies down there and you don't want to miss them.

Ah, and I see you've already swooped in and made my point, just much, much better. I especially like your Mario analogy, it's both awesome and accurate.

Modifié par Avaflame, 20 janvier 2013 - 05:13 .

[Karma]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

1. Not having a set 'doomed romance' interest (of those available as romantic interests).

This.

I don't want any set doomed love interests for my heroine either. She at least wants a chance to be moderately happy. Maybe that happiness comes with a price. Maybe she can doom the romance with what she says or does to the LI or to another character in the game. Maybe she can make a choice in the main plot or in a side plot that ends up dooming the LI later in the game. As in real life romances, there should be at least two possible outcomes for any romance.

Selene Moonsong wrote...
2. Opposites attract.

5. Romanced based of character's actions

And this.

A romance that wouldn't have otherwise developed materializes based on the player's actions in the main plot is a great idea.

Selene Moonsong wrote...
4. Tragic

6. Forbidden romance

7. Unrequited romance

And this too.

I might add flings - relationships that are just about sex. Both parties are fully aware from the beginning that the relationship is going nowhere serious. Maybe the companion is married, in love with someone else, or just looking to fullfill his/her physical needs.

It's also acceptable that a romanceable companion is homosexual and is just not interested in my heroine. She'll get over it, or she'll just hang out in the friend zone forever.

Modifié par satans_karma, 20 janvier 2013 - 05:15 .

[esper]

Avaflame wrote...

I'm not sure if this has already been addressed or not, but I'm not seeing where all the nitpicking over David's comments over The Witcher are coming from. He never states that every female character or companion is romanceable (or rather, ****able), he says that the mechanic for how any sexual encounters are handled gears the player towards a certain state of mind towards any female characters. That it makes you wonder if you can have sex with them, how you might be able to have sex with them, what have you done wrong if they haven't had sex with you etc.

Whereas in DA:O/2 you don't meet say, Macha, and think 'What do I have to do to have sex with her?'

It comes from some people liking the witcher and feeling the need to defend it.
Just like I get a little bit defensive everytime someone as much as hint that you have to 'either act sexual interested to be romantic interested in a person'. - This is not even untrue for asexual, completely normal introverst would properly feel uncomfortable sharing too much too, both in obvious attraction and personal history.

That and that all bi act like Leliana and Zev.

Modifié par esper, 20 janvier 2013 - 05:17 .

[Avaflame]

esper wrote...

It comes from some people liking the witcher and feeling the need to defend it.
Just like I get a little bit defensive everytime someone as much as hint that you have to 'either act sexual interested to be romantic interested in a person'. - This is not even untrue for asexual, completely normal introverst would properly feel uncomfortable sharing too much too, both in obvious attraction and personal history.

That and that all bi act like Leliana and Zev.

I didn't really want to get into the bi/****** sexual tangent, though I will say that I don't really think either of those two characters are even stereotypes anyway. As to your romantic interest vs sexual interest I will agree (I think this is what you're saying) that those two things don't always come hand in hand. I myself identify as a homosexual, and yet have very little sexual interest in other men for the exact reason you mentioned above.

Modifié par Avaflame, 20 janvier 2013 - 05:31 .

[DPSSOC]

esper wrote...
Yes, because all people expresses sexual interested constantly. and then they flash up a big neosign showing their sexual orientation afterswards. Just in case the point was missed the first time.

If you're observant yes.  Characters, like people, can be read.  It's more difficult because we don't have the benefit of reliable body language, and in the case of a poor performance we can't always rely on tone, but you can read them.  I've known several of my coworkers were bi/homosexual long before I got confirmation (meeting their significant other in most cases) simply by observing their non-romantic interactions with people.  The way a person faces you, the tone they use, where they look, if they gesture, how they gesture, if/when they attempt physical contact (hand on the arm, pat on the shoulder, etc), all of these things tell you how they feel about you.

esper wrote...
As a bi-orientated girl, I can gurantee that only my one very specific friend and my mother knows this, because you know. Those two people were the only one two to ask.

 
I'd put money on you being wrong.  Those may be the only two people who have confirmation, but I'd put money on at least one other person you deal with regularly (coworker, classmate, etc.) having figured it out.

esper wrote...
There is no way to act bi, unless the characters inform the players of their collective sexual past right of the bat, which would be contrived and out of character for shy/introverst personalities.

Why should they inform you?

I knew Lelianna was bi before it was out and out stated.  Between party banter and her first conversation about Marjolaine (when she explains what happened in Orlais and why she's in Fereldan) I had her pegged.  We don't need the character to come out and tell us, if they're written and performed well their behaviour will.

I'm not calling on the writers to craft stereotypes, nor do I need/want every character to broadcast their sexual orientation, I'm asking that they pay attention to the subtle ways people communicate information about themselves to one another.  Little hints in how and what we say to people that express who/what we are.

Good example of what I'm talking about is Carver.  How he talks to Hawke makes it very clear, very quickly how he feels towards his older sibling (jealousy, resentment, etc.) long before he outright states it.

[Wulfram]

You had Leliana pegged because she spend a bunch of time talking about an ex-girlfriend. People don't necessarily have plot relevant "ex"es.

[nightscrawl]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I think it's funny that the examiner links to Game Banshee instead of David's publicly available tumblr. I don't understand why sites like these always rely on secondary sources.

Of course, they then slap on the questionable title ''Dragon Age 3' writer voices displeasure with romance elements' which suggests their reading comprehension is.. well, about as good as the average forum goers.

This is not limited to game news websites. Many sites link to second hand articles. I typically have to click though a so-called source link 2-3 times before I get to the actual source of an article.

This is what has replaced newspapers. Lovely.

[DPSSOC]

Wulfram wrote...

You had Leliana pegged because she spend a bunch of time talking about an ex-girlfriend. People don't necessarily have plot relevant "ex"es.

If that were the case, it's not, how would I have pegged her for bi based on her talking about an ex-girlfriend?  This is her third conversation, she hasn't expressed any interest on her own and I haven't expressed any in her.

[Wulfram]

You can fairly safely guess she's interested in the male protagonist because she's an attractive female party member. With whom there are flirtatious sounding dialogue options, even if you didn't take them.

But of course I can't read your mind or precisely know what dialogue you'd seen.

[Sutekh]

DPSSOC wrote...

If you're observant yes.

How do you tell? Apart from direct observation, I mean (meeting the significant other, having conversations mentioning without ambiguity those persons are bi etc...).

Is there an official Bisexual Behavior Code?

[BlazingSpeed]

Khayness wrote...

His spin on the romances actually sound interesting, but the gamer audiance no longer tolerates investment met with failure.

Which is a shame, since RPGs are obsessing over choices and consequences as of late, but few games have the balls to make you pay for your actions if neccessary.

[Apathy1989]

I agree with most of what he said. I also feel that while DAO had better options (I preferred Morrigon and Leliana to Isabela and Merril), the implementation of romances was probably better in DA2.

• No cheesy romance scenes.
• Romances could end based on player actions (think of attacking Anders here)
• NPC romances - Donnic and Aveline.
• Doomed/tragic romance with Anders (although my Leliana romance became a tragedy when my warden died)
• Unrequited love if you wanted Aveline, which was great to have

I think in the future though, I would like to see the removal of the 'payout'. KOTOR games had it better, where characters would only ever kiss and eventually declare love or affection, but no juvenile payout. I would also love to see more implementation of the romance into the stories, even if it was something simple like putting a romantic interest in danger for the player to worry about.

[xAmilli0n]

Khayness wrote...

His spin on the romances actually sound interesting, but the gamer audiance no longer tolerates investment met with failure.

Which is a shame, since RPGs are obsessing over choices and consequences as of late, but few games have the balls to make you pay for your actions if neccessary.

I agree on both counts.  What is the point if you can't lose, or you don't feel like there is the potential for things to go badly? I am not just talking about a game over "you made the wrong choice" screen, I'm talking bad outcomes for romances, plot points, and the game as a whole.

I would love to see this in more games (maybe we will see it in DA:I?).

[esper]

DPSSOC wrote...

esper wrote...
Yes, because all people expresses sexual interested constantly. and then they flash up a big neosign showing their sexual orientation afterswards. Just in case the point was missed the first time.

If you're observant yes.  Characters, like people, can be read.  It's more difficult because we don't have the benefit of reliable body language, and in the case of a poor performance we can't always rely on tone, but you can read them.  I've known several of my coworkers were bi/homosexual long before I got confirmation (meeting their significant other in most cases) simply by observing their non-romantic interactions with people.  The way a person faces you, the tone they use, where they look, if they gesture, how they gesture, if/when they attempt physical contact (hand on the arm, pat on the shoulder, etc), all of these things tell you how they feel about you.

Again I need to remind you that introverts/shy/low sexdrive/ asexual / or people just disliking touching strager exists.

And then we haven't even talked about the people who have an excissive control over their body langue or can manipulate/supress it at will. Those are rare, but they do exist.

They may not display those signals at all, and they might display them incorrect, such as an asexual simply being friendly without being sexual interested or even romantically interested at all.

And how again do you expect a character like Liara, who is
A, Not human
B, Isolated for society in more than a human life
C, From a monogender race which have no need to biology need to even understand the difference between male/female humans unless she should fall from her.

DPSSOC wrote...

esper wrote...
As a bi-orientated girl, I can gurantee that only my one very specific friend and my mother knows this, because you know. Those two people were the only one two to ask.

 
I'd put money on you being wrong.  Those may be the only two people who have confirmation, but I'd put money on at least one other person you deal with regularly (coworker, classmate, etc.) having figured it out..

In that case I have sadistic friend who makes a commen occurrence out flatly stepping over my sexuality and oritentation. I simply prefer to think they are ignorant, and consider my friends who know what I am's reaction when I told him, then no. I don't think so.

I am not ruling out one or two of them having read the clues, but in that case I am properly going to be angry when they reveal that they knew all along, due to act around me.

esper wrote...
There is no way to act bi, unless the characters inform the players of their collective sexual past right of the bat, which would be contrived and out of character for shy/introverst personalities.


Why should they inform you?

DPSSOC wrote...

I knew Lelianna was bi before it was out and out stated.  Between party banter and her first conversation about Marjolaine (when she explains what happened in Orlais and why she's in Fereldan) I had her pegged.  We don't need the character to come out and tell us, if they're written and performed well their behaviour will.

I'm not calling on the writers to craft stereotypes, nor do I need/want every character to broadcast their sexual orientation, I'm asking that they pay attention to the subtle ways people communicate information about themselves to one another.  Little hints in how and what we say to people that express who/what we are.

Good example of what I'm talking about is Carver.  How he talks to Hawke makes it very clear, very quickly how he feels towards his older sibling (jealousy, resentment, etc.) long before he outright states it.

You know because Leliana is extrovert and so is Zev.
And introvert character would not have discussed shoes with Morrigan, (or was it a dress? It involved a neck line as I remember it, so I think dress), or the wardens' hair and all the other things.

Take Fenris instead, his first come on is so subtle that it is almost not there. In fact it can be argued for being a compliment and not an romantic interest (and do to his history it properly isn't)

And then it takes aggressive flirting from either Hawke or Isabella to get a response and Isabella's first starts to really get a fully positive response doing act 2. As for all these little clues you talk about, they are never going to be shown in a banter scenerio (where most of this information will be, and dialog scenerio would exactly involve the character needlessly in a contrived way).

Just because the characters doesn't show it right off the bat or manage to keep an orientation and perhaps even an attraction hidden in a game, it doesn't you can just assume otherwise.

If not think else keep in mind that games cannot give us human interaction. That doesn't mean that we have to be stuck with all the bi or homosexual LI's being extroverst just so that they players don't get it wrong.

As for Carver, no it is clear. He is jealouus, oh yes. He feels that he lives in Hawke shadows. He is competetive. Much. But it as as much 18 year old teenage identity crisis and finding out where he stand in his life. It is also very clear that he actually loves his older sibling (he is very protective) and in fact in case of Carver/Bethany he proves most loyal.

For Bethanay will resent and be bitter on Hawke for a Grey Warden life, but even templar Carver will jump to his sibling defense, and Grey Warden Carver clearly loves his new carrier.

Modifié par esper, 20 janvier 2013 - 06:23 .

[Avaflame]

Sutekh wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...

If you're observant yes.

How do you tell? Apart from direct observation, I mean (meeting the significant other, having conversations mentioning without ambiguity those persons are bi etc...).

Is there an official Bisexual Behavior Code?

In a perfect world, sexuality wouldn't be able to be recognised without confirmation. But let's be realistic; surely what DPSSOC is saying isn't utterly ignorant and closed-minded, which is what I feel you're getting at. I personally think you can find out nearly whatever you want about a person without confirmation on pure observation alone. I don't think sexuality is excluded from that. I can understand the frustration at feeling of people putting you into a particular box based on your sexuality, but I don't think (or at least I really hope) that is what's happening, (s)he's just acknowledging that yes, those tells are there. There might be a lot of gay stereotypes I don't fit into, but I'm self-aware enough to realise that there are also plenty more that I do, and that people can generally assume (even if it they are not right to do so, regardless of its accuracy) my sexuality from those traits.

While you can never truly KNOW without confirmation, are you saying you've never been absolutely CERTAIN on someone's sexuality? You can be wrong of course, but I don't think we need to drill someone everytime they use an absolute, considering you can't really use absolutes on ANY topic.

[Rawgrim]

Plaintiff wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...
In the second Witcher game you can romancehave sex with even fewer women, i think. But if you have read the books, this sort of thing is very much in Geralt`s character. The guy is a man-****. The game is based on the books, after all.

So... it's okay for the videogames to objectify women, because the books do it, and being sexist is part of Geralt's character?

I wouldn`t say they are objectified. I can only comment on the second witcher game, though. I have barely played the first one. But Triss, the main love interest in that game, is a pretty solid character with plenty of depth. So its not like she is just someone to have sex with.

If the game is to be based on a book series, the games should follow them as closely as possible, yes. If people like it or not, thats their business.

[Endurium]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

He said, "Take the first Witcher game, for instance— I enjoyed many things about that game, but the collectible sex card mechanic? Ultimately it rendered every female character in the game into a puzzle to be solved. What do I do to sleep with them?"

Can you sleep with this character? Does this character equote to every female characters as well?
 

There are only about 21 possible cards per play-through, and all but two are optional. Those that aren't optional are tied to romantic interests from Geralt's past, so he's hardly objectifying them. Three cards are from prostitutes, who have objectified themselves, and so on. Generally the women in The Witcher sleep with Geralt for their own reasons, not the least of which is the aura of mysteriousness surrounding his being a Witcher, including how their skin tingles when in contact with his. Also once upon a time women were less assertive, and if saved by a strong, capable man, would generally subject themselves to him. That's no longer popular in anything but fiction, yet it's part of our history and reflected in The Witcher.

DA2 companions, of their own accord, offer a chance at a fling via a heart-shaped response. I appreciate the warning and avoided it at all costs. Though I gave Merrill a chance in my first game, I will not have flings with any companion in future DA2 playthroughs, assuming that ever happens. They simply don't interest me enough, and I'm hetero.

DAO companions... hmmm. I had the choice of a crazy bard, a mouthy witch, and an assassin I never allow to live. Again, only worth talking to companions to get personal quests, and leaving it at that.

I think it was Gaider who once said, regarding BG2, that the romances were an experiment that turned out to be popular, so Bioware would look to improving them in future games. It was never said they'd be anything more than a side-quest type of thing, which is fine with me.

Thankfully DA companions seem to have an amount of dialog comparable to Baldur's Gate 2 + ToB. Hopefully the DA franchise doesn't go the way of Mass Effect and give us two or three love chats tied to chapter transitions. Talk about sudden!

Modifié par Endurium, 20 janvier 2013 - 06:37 .

[BlazingSpeed]

simfamSP wrote...

Why the **** does it bother people that romanceble characters are bisexual? They are still the same freaking characters whether gay or straight! It's not like Anders walks around with a carrier purse and wears a pink scarf when Male Hawke is around; yet when Female Hawke is there, he's ripped as **** and spends most of his day doing squats in his clinic -.-

They are interesting characters. Period. Bi, straight or gay, the DA team writes them all the same -.-

There is a difference between how the Dragon Age characters are/were written like how Leliana and Zevran are compared to the DA2 cast were written basic-ly the same regardless of if you PC is male or female.

And lol at Gaider talking about those optional sex cards from The Witcher the fact that you could have an optional (meaning you had to go out of your way to find it...) no strings fling with a woman that wasn't a postitute just gave the Witcher world a bit more variety.

[esper]

BlazingSpeed wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

Why the **** does it bother people that romanceble characters are bisexual? They are still the same freaking characters whether gay or straight! It's not like Anders walks around with a carrier purse and wears a pink scarf when Male Hawke is around; yet when Female Hawke is there, he's ripped as **** and spends most of his day doing squats in his clinic -.-

They are interesting characters. Period. Bi, straight or gay, the DA team writes them all the same -.-

There is a difference between how the Dragon Age characters are/were written like how Leliana and Zevran are compared to the DA2 cast were written basic-ly the same regardless of if you PC is male or female.

And lol at Gaider talking about those optional sex cards from The Witcher the fact that you could have an optional (meaning you had to go out of your way to find it...) no strings fling with a woman that wasn't a postitute just gave the Witcher world a bit more variety.

The fact that there was sex cards for the woman is the problem.
It makes them collectable, which objectfies.

[Endurium]

esper wrote...

BlazingSpeed wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

Why the **** does it bother people that romanceble characters are bisexual? They are still the same freaking characters whether gay or straight! It's not like Anders walks around with a carrier purse and wears a pink scarf when Male Hawke is around; yet when Female Hawke is there, he's ripped as **** and spends most of his day doing squats in his clinic -.-

They are interesting characters. Period. Bi, straight or gay, the DA team writes them all the same -.-

There is a difference between how the Dragon Age characters are/were written like how Leliana and Zevran are compared to the DA2 cast were written basic-ly the same regardless of if you PC is male or female.

And lol at Gaider talking about those optional sex cards from The Witcher the fact that you could have an optional (meaning you had to go out of your way to find it...) no strings fling with a woman that wasn't a postitute just gave the Witcher world a bit more variety.

The fact that there was sex cards for the woman is the problem.
It makes them collectable, which objectfies.

It only objectifies if the player decides to go that route, and in the case of his past associates, the fling happens because they have feelings for each other. In fact five of the women know Geralt from his actions in the past. Furthermore, four of the women are supernatural and view the encounter as a way of supporting Geralt, or in the case of the Queen of the Night, showing appreciation for his choice of preserving them.

Bioware doesn't use sex cards, but because of their reputation with flings, most people playing their games quickly set about finding which companions can be slept with, thereby objectifying them.

Modifié par Endurium, 20 janvier 2013 - 06:56 .

[Selene Moonsong]

satans_karma wrote...

Selene Moonsong wrote...

1. Not having a set 'doomed romance' interest (of those available as romantic interests).

This.

I don't want any set doomed love interests for my heroine either. She at least wants a chance to be moderately happy. Maybe that happiness comes with a price. Maybe she can doom the romance with what she says or does to the LI or to another character in the game. Maybe she can make a choice in the main plot or in a side plot that ends up dooming the LI later in the game. As in real life romances, there should be at least two possible outcomes for any romance.

Not quite what I meant. I don't mind a doomed romance, but I do not like a preset npc character that is always a doomed romance in the game, but to be more as a result of my own character actions or mis-actions and can happen with any romantic interest on any given play through I may make. 

Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 20 janvier 2013 - 07:01 .

[esper]

Endurium wrote...

esper wrote...

BlazingSpeed wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

Why the **** does it bother people that romanceble characters are bisexual? They are still the same freaking characters whether gay or straight! It's not like Anders walks around with a carrier purse and wears a pink scarf when Male Hawke is around; yet when Female Hawke is there, he's ripped as **** and spends most of his day doing squats in his clinic -.-

They are interesting characters. Period. Bi, straight or gay, the DA team writes them all the same -.-

There is a difference between how the Dragon Age characters are/were written like how Leliana and Zevran are compared to the DA2 cast were written basic-ly the same regardless of if you PC is male or female.

And lol at Gaider talking about those optional sex cards from The Witcher the fact that you could have an optional (meaning you had to go out of your way to find it...) no strings fling with a woman that wasn't a postitute just gave the Witcher world a bit more variety.

The fact that there was sex cards for the woman is the problem.
It makes them collectable, which objectfies.

It only objectifies if the player decides to go that route, and in the case of his past associates, the fling happens because they have feelings for each other. In fact five of the women know Geralt from his actions in the past. Furthermore, four of the women are supernatural and view the encounter as a way of supporting Geralt, or in the case of the Queen of the Night, showing appreciation for his choice of preserving them.

Bioware doesn't use sex cards, but because of their reputation with flings, most people playing their games quickly set about finding which companions can be slept with, thereby objectifying them.

Expect many of the romancers doesn't do the romances for the less than two minutes sex scene.

An sex card is still offensive in that it was merely thought up.
It is one of those sexism jokes that is just not funny on any level for me.
It is in fact more offensive than if all the sex scenes was being shown. After all a sex scene is a sex scene.