642 réponses à ce sujet

[Rawgrim]

Plaintiff wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
She takes a shot a Liara, but also takes a shot at Jack, Miranda, and Tali later on if you romanced them too based on looks and perceived personality.

So Ashley's just kind of a **** generally? Mystery solved, I guess.

Pretty much.

[Battlebloodmage]

draken-heart wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I feel I should point out that I play plenty of games where there are no homosexual characters at all. It's not like I have a lot of choice in that regard, after all.

Mass Effect puts a bad taste in my mouth because the developers made the conscious decision to provide lesbian content while excluding gay men. It causes me to suspect that the lesbian content was put there, not for the sake of being progressive, but for the titillation of an implied audience of teenage boys.

once again off-topic. This thread was supposed to be about the inclusion of NPC S/S romances to DA: I, and I tried to get it back on that track, but I can see it is too far gone.

It wouldn't have gone too far if the topic was simply NPC romance, just saying. 

[lil yonce]

Plaintiff wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
She takes a shot a Liara, but also takes a shot at Jack, Miranda, and Tali later on if you romanced them too based on looks and perceived personality.

So Ashley's just kind of a **** generally? Mystery solved, I guess.

If you want to call it that. Someone she loved did just dump her for someone else. She's otherwise friendly and awesome. Doesn't Kaidan take a shot at Garrus, Jacob, and Thane too? I thought he did.

[Plaintiff]

Youth4Ever wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Youth4Ever wrote...
She takes a shot a Liara, but also takes a shot at Jack, Miranda, and Tali later on if you romanced them too based on looks and perceived personality.

So Ashley's just kind of a **** generally? Mystery solved, I guess.

If you want to call it that. Someone she loved did just dump her for someone else. She's otherwise friendly and awesome. Doesn't Kaidan take a shot at Garrus, Jacob, and Thane too? I thought he did.

I wouldn't know. I didn't romance anyone at all until ME3.

[Edrick1976]

I dont have a problem with same sex romance however I would like to not take a negative hit in my relationship with anyone if I deside not to do such a romance like they did in DA2.

[Xilizhra]

I don't agree with the bolded.

It's sort of a matter of fact, not just opinion.

[Soundsystem]

EntropicAngel wrote...
Xil, respecting someone has nothing to do with thinking one is better than them, or even further, thinking that one's species/race is better than theirs.

There are a lot of people I don't respect, and conversely a lot of people I do respect. That has nothing to do with the basic fact that we are all humans. Or, in Ashley's case, that we are all sentients. It just isn't the same.

There is a difference between me saying "I don't respect (insert any ME alien) because they said or did _____" and saying that one doesn't respect aliens, full stop.

For one thing it's reducing all aliens to one homogenous group who all have the same characteristics and think the same way, which is racist. For another it says respect is based on what someone looks like, not on their actions or viewpoints or personality.

Why are people so afraid of using that word (or sexist or bigot as mentioned earlier)? We've come to this place where it seems to be worse to say someone is being racist than for them to actually be racist; even if that someone is just a video game character.

EntropicAngel wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I don't think it's racist to acknowledge that a group of people is working from an obvious disadvantage, and to try and fix that. The majority already receives preferential treatment by default, even if it's not overtly acknowledged. So I don't believe it's unfair to give minorities the same opportunities that the majority already has. Until we can truly, finally purge the systemic bigotry from our institutions that gives preferential treatement to the majority, I think scholarships for minorities should continue to exist.

We create special laws to protect the rights of women, because without those laws, women would be unfairly disadvantaged to men. Is that also preferential treatment?

I don't agree with the bolded.

And, depends on what those laws are and whether they are actually unfairly advantaged (women).

But, this is a...volatile topic.

I mean.. you can disagree with things that are proven facts. Buuuuut. It's really not going to do much. 

[Lennard Testarossa]

Xilizhra wrote...
It's sort of a matter of fact, not just opinion.

Clearly, peasants received preferential treatment compared with nobles.

Modifié par Lennard Testarossa, 15 février 2013 - 07:20 .

[Maclimes]

I thought the title was referring to S/S NPC-on-NPC romance. I was going to jump in with "WADE AND HERREN!"

But this is just an inexplicably homosexual-specific version of the Kelly Chambers proposition.

Am disappoint.

EDIT TO ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTE:

Let's focus on getting ANY non-companion romances first, then we'll hash out the details. As it stands, I suspect we will not have another Chambers situation. I don't see why this thread had to be s/s.

Couldn't it have been "How about NPC romances, huh? Maybe some could be gay?"

Modifié par Maclimes, 15 février 2013 - 07:47 .

[draken-heart]

Maclimes wrote...

I thought the title was referring to S/S NPC-on-NPC romance. I was going to jump in with "WADE AND HERREN!"

But this is just an inexplicably homosexual-specific version of the Kelly Chambers proposition.

Am disappoint.

EDIT TO ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTE:

Let's focus on getting ANY non-companion romances first, then we'll hash out the details. As it stands, I suspect we will not have another Chambers situation. I don't see why this thread had to be s/s.

Couldn't it have been "How about NPC romances, huh? Maybe some could be gay?"

Could add NPC romances of all orientations.I was referring specifically to NPC romances where the people involved are exclusively same sex.

My idea was more about how exclusive homosexual Romances are still somewhat new and it is still unsure how these romances would be accepted for companions, and thus it would be better to allow those who wanted those romances to have them without risking troubles from having homosexual companion romances.

Modifié par draken-heart, 15 février 2013 - 08:01 .

[Harle Cerulean]

Maclimes wrote...

I thought the title was referring to S/S NPC-on-NPC romance. I was going to jump in with "WADE AND HERREN!"

But this is just an inexplicably homosexual-specific version of the Kelly Chambers proposition.

Am disappoint.

EDIT TO ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTE:

Let's focus on getting ANY non-companion romances first, then we'll hash out the details. As it stands, I suspect we will not have another Chambers situation. I don't see why this thread had to be s/s.

Couldn't it have been "How about NPC romances, huh? Maybe some could be gay?"

Yes, but while the OP would like us all to forget about it, part of the reason for their thinking, and this thread, was that if same sex romances are NPCs, people don't have to deal with teh ghey in their parties.  To quote from where they started fixating on this idea in the F/F romance thread:

draken-heart wrote...

"F/F Non-party romance. It would ensure that those who do not want to have a lesbian romance do not have to lose out on a party member."

and

draken-heart wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Since when did not wanting to romance someone mean they weren't recruited?

depends, if they did not know but recruited them they may not use them at all, even if they needed that person for their party.

and

draken-heart wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

I'm still not seeing the idea behind draken's post, losing out on a party member because of refraining from romancing them...

*brain splatter*

sorry about that. It is kind of like if the character is gay but they are needed and end up flirting first, it could put them off and make people not use them, making the character useless. Non-party F/F eliminates the problem of debating whether or not to ignore a character you want to use simply because they are homosexual and overly flirting.

The entire idea spawned out of coddling bigots who can't put on their big kid underpants, say "Not interested," and move on when confronted with someone of the same sex who flirts with them.

Modifié par Harle Cerulean, 15 février 2013 - 08:01 .

[draken-heart]

Harle Cerulean wrote...
-snip-

yes, I said that, but I thought about it and realized it was more about ensuring that the character is given a promising light before the "reveal" that they are ghey.

no build up like with Anders revealing to a Lord Hawke that he had a sexual relationship made me never want to make a male Hawke, simply because there is nothing there for me to trust outside of him being a healer who MAY like my guy character.

Modifié par draken-heart, 15 février 2013 - 08:13 .

[Battlebloodmage]

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

[draken-heart]

Battlebloodmage wrote...

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

I was talking about how, if you play a Male Hawke, there is the mention of Karl, but nothing there to build up to that reveal. Out of the blue.

[Battlebloodmage]

draken-heart wrote...

Maclimes wrote...

I thought the title was referring to S/S NPC-on-NPC romance. I was going to jump in with "WADE AND HERREN!"

But this is just an inexplicably homosexual-specific version of the Kelly Chambers proposition.

Am disappoint.

EDIT TO ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTE:

Let's focus on getting ANY non-companion romances first, then we'll hash out the details. As it stands, I suspect we will not have another Chambers situation. I don't see why this thread had to be s/s.

Couldn't it have been "How about NPC romances, huh? Maybe some could be gay?"

Could add NPC romances of all orientations.I was referring specifically to NPC romances where the people involved are exclusively same sex.

My idea was more about how exclusive homosexual Romances are still somewhat new and it is still unsure how these romances would be accepted for companions, and thus it would be better to allow those who wanted those romances to have them without risking troubles from having homosexual companion romances.

We must think about those poor straight people having to subject to gay romance. If they don't want to do the romance then just don't, David Gaider stated that he's likely not gonna have situation where Anders hitting on you, so it's most likely be player initiating. I don't see what the risks are.

[Harle Cerulean]

Battlebloodmage wrote...

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

Precisely.  There is no reason to have the gay romances be more subtle / less visible than the straight romances.  It presumes that I should be perfectly fine with using a character who flirts with me and is the opposite gender, but other people shouldn't be faced with having to use with a character who flirts with them and is the same gender.

[Battlebloodmage]

draken-heart wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

I was talking about how, if you play a Male Hawke, there is the mention of Karl, but nothing there to build up to that reveal. Out of the blue.

Just like Cortez's dead husband comes out of nowhere or Jacob's past relationship with Miranda or Cailan's relationship with Anora? He just happens to have a boyfriend, as if it would be different from someone who has a girlfriend out of nowhere. Do they need to explain that also? If straight characters don't need a reason to be straight then gays also don't need exposition or explaination to why they're gay.

Modifié par Battlebloodmage, 15 février 2013 - 08:32 .

[draken-heart]

Battlebloodmage wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

I was talking about how, if you play a Male Hawke, there is the mention of Karl, but nothing there to build up to that reveal. Out of the blue.

Just like Cortez's dead husband comes out of nowhere? He just happens to have a boyfriend, as if it would be different from someone who has a girlfriend out of nowhere. Do they need to explain that also?

First impression of Anders in DA2 did nothing to endear me to him. I only use him because I need a healer and My hawke is not a mage herself.

Cortez has that dutiful soldier attitude that somewhat nullified the reveal of him being ghey. Like with Samantha, who has this cute girl impression.

[draken-heart]

Harle Cerulean wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

Precisely.  There is no reason to have the gay romances be more subtle / less visible than the straight romances.  It presumes that I should be perfectly fine with using a character who flirts with me and is the opposite gender, but other people shouldn't be faced with having to use with a character who flirts with them and is the same gender.

I am only saying that it would be better to keep the gay romances off of the party list as that is currently unknown turf, where as the gay NPC romances did somewhat well for themselves.

[Harle Cerulean]

draken-heart wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

I was talking about how, if you play a Male Hawke, there is the mention of Karl, but nothing there to build up to that reveal. Out of the blue.

Just like Cortez's dead husband comes out of nowhere? He just happens to have a boyfriend, as if it would be different from someone who has a girlfriend out of nowhere. Do they need to explain that also?

First impression of Anders in DA2 did nothing to endear me to him. I only use him because I need a healer and My hawke is not a mage herself.

Cortez has that dutiful soldier attitude that somewhat nullified the reveal of him being ghey. Like with Samantha, who has this cute girl impression.

And again, you are just digging yourself deeper here.  There is nothing to "nullify."  It shouldn't matter whether he'd had a husband or a wife, and if it does matter to someone, they are not worth coddling.

[Battlebloodmage]

draken-heart wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

I was talking about how, if you play a Male Hawke, there is the mention of Karl, but nothing there to build up to that reveal. Out of the blue.

Just like Cortez's dead husband comes out of nowhere? He just happens to have a boyfriend, as if it would be different from someone who has a girlfriend out of nowhere. Do they need to explain that also?

First impression of Anders in DA2 did nothing to endear me to him. I only use him because I need a healer and My hawke is not a mage herself.

Cortez has that dutiful soldier attitude that somewhat nullified the reveal of him being ghey. Like with Samantha, who has this cute girl impression.

That's a matter of opinion, if you don't find him endearing, it shouldn't have anything to do with him liking guys. Both Cortez and Samanthan don't need to explain why they're gay. They don't need to justify anything, they just are, the same way as Anders. Whether they like guys or girls should not be an issue.

Modifié par Battlebloodmage, 15 février 2013 - 08:38 .

[Harle Cerulean]

draken-heart wrote...

Harle Cerulean wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

Precisely.  There is no reason to have the gay romances be more subtle / less visible than the straight romances.  It presumes that I should be perfectly fine with using a character who flirts with me and is the opposite gender, but other people shouldn't be faced with having to use with a character who flirts with them and is the same gender.

I am only saying that it would be better to keep the gay romances off of the party list as that is currently unknown turf, where as the gay NPC romances did somewhat well for themselves.

 

And we are saying that's a bigoted action, becuase it ghettoizes the gay romances.  You're proposing "separate but equal," we are saying that separate is never equal.  Especially since NPC romances are almost impossible to make as satisfying as PC romances, but even without that, the idea that somehow people have a right not to have to deal with gay party members and so we need to keep the gay separate?  No.

Modifié par Harle Cerulean, 15 février 2013 - 08:40 .

[Battlebloodmage]

draken-heart wrote...

Harle Cerulean wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

Precisely.  There is no reason to have the gay romances be more subtle / less visible than the straight romances.  It presumes that I should be perfectly fine with using a character who flirts with me and is the opposite gender, but other people shouldn't be faced with having to use with a character who flirts with them and is the same gender.

I am only saying that it would be better to keep the gay romances off of the party list as that is currently unknown turf, where as the gay NPC romances did somewhat well for themselves.

Except Kaidan is a romantic option for M/M as well, so that turf is not entirely unknown. Whose interest are you keeping the gay romance out for? If people are not open enough to accept gay characters in their rank then that's their problem. 

[draken-heart]

Harle Cerulean wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

As opposed to him being a healer who MAY like your girl character?

I was talking about how, if you play a Male Hawke, there is the mention of Karl, but nothing there to build up to that reveal. Out of the blue.

Just like Cortez's dead husband comes out of nowhere? He just happens to have a boyfriend, as if it would be different from someone who has a girlfriend out of nowhere. Do they need to explain that also?

First impression of Anders in DA2 did nothing to endear me to him. I only use him because I need a healer and My hawke is not a mage herself.

Cortez has that dutiful soldier attitude that somewhat nullified the reveal of him being ghey. Like with Samantha, who has this cute girl impression.

And again, you are just digging yourself deeper here.  There is nothing to "nullify."  It shouldn't matter whether he'd had a husband or a wife, and if it does matter to someone, they are not worth coddling.

people complained that Anders came on too strong to them, and he had a strong fanbase that insisted that there was nothing to build up to Anders revealing the relationship to Karl.

How would exclusively gay companions be recieved by the Majority/main target audience? This is where it needs to be taken in stride, build an image that makes one feel like they should have that companion before revealing "I am gay/lesbian."