155 réponses à ce sujet

[Lennard Testarossa]

Xilizhra wrote...
And why would you want those who do choose a romance to be cut off from this interaction?

Didn't I explain that in my post? You're spending time with your LI, so you can't spend the time with your friends. You choose to do one thing, so you can't do the other.

[Xilizhra]

Lennard Testarossa wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
And why would you want those who do choose a romance to be cut off from this interaction?

Didn't I explain that in my post? You're spending time with your LI, so you can't spend the time with your friends. You choose to do one thing, so you can't do the other.

Is there a logical reason, out of game, to only insert that scene there as opposed to elsewhere?

[Lennard Testarossa]

Xilizhra wrote...
Is there a logical reason, out of game, to only insert that scene there as opposed to elsewhere?

It adds replay value and makes the world more reactive to what you do. It is rather annoying to have a romance affect nothing but the romance itself. It makes them feel like some kind of minigame.

[David Gaider]

Again: we have romances as optional content. We also have friendship/rivalry for party members you interact with even if you choose not to romance them. If you don't want to have any romances, that's certainly up to you... but, as I said before, the non-romance content available is the rest of the game. Not using optional content is not a badge of distinction where we give you a cookie for skipping it.

[Dave of Canada]

Wouldn't mind a drinking scene where you're going out with the bros instead of a romance scene.

[Lennard Testarossa]

David Gaider wrote...
Again: we have romances as optional content. We also have friendship/rivalry for party members you interact with even if you choose not to romance them. If you don't want to have any romances, that's certainly up to you... but, as I said before, the non-romance content available is the rest of the game. Not using optional content is not a badge of distinction where we give you a cookie for skipping it.

Why do I get the feeling you didn't read a single post in this thread?

[David Gaider]

Lennard Testarossa wrote...
Why do I get the feeling you didn't read a single post in this thread?

I did not read a single post in this thread, other than the first one.

[KainD]

David Gaider wrote...

Lennard Testarossa wrote...
Why do I get the feeling you didn't read a single post in this thread?

I did not read a single post in this thread, other than the first one.

Yes you did, you read Lennard's post! 

[Todd23]

David Gaider wrote...

Again: we have romances as optional content. We also have friendship/rivalry for party members you interact with even if you choose not to romance them. If you don't want to have any romances, that's certainly up to you... but, as I said before, the non-romance content available is the rest of the game. Not using optional content is not a badge of distinction where we give you a cookie for skipping it.

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

Lennard Testarossa wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
This is utterly illogical.

That so? Please show me the logical fallacy.

If you spend time with your LI before an impending critical event, you can't spend that time with a friend. Just like there could be some special interaction with your LI that only happens at that specific time, there could also be some special interaction with a companion that can only happen at that specific time.

And why would you want those who do choose a romance to be cut off from this interaction?

You're dodging the question, Xil. You're the one who claimed it was illogical: changing it to a 'but I don't want it' isn't an honest follow-up.

As for why, why not? Mutually-exclusive content is a cool, and pretty accepted, way to show consequences for character choices. It's not that different from exclusive content, except that rather than something or nothing you get something or something else.

DA2 already had it successfully in the form of who comes to comfort Hawk after the mother's death: if not romanced, you get Aveline. Compared to that, what's Single's Night on Love Interest Culmination Night?

[SmokePants]

I don't think you need a "cookie" for having a non-romance playthrough, but some exclusive content would be nice.

In BioWare games, it always feels like I have to romance someone to wring as much content out of the experience as possible. It would be nice if "no ramance" was treated like another romance option. And no, I'm NOT talking about a scene where the protagonist is taking a bubble bath.

[Plaintiff]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Lennard Testarossa wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
This is utterly illogical.

That so? Please show me the logical fallacy.

If you spend time with your LI before an impending critical event, you can't spend that time with a friend. Just like there could be some special interaction with your LI that only happens at that specific time, there could also be some special interaction with a companion that can only happen at that specific time.

And why would you want those who do choose a romance to be cut off from this interaction?

You're dodging the question, Xil. You're the one who claimed it was illogical: changing it to a 'but I don't want it' isn't an honest follow-up.

As for why, why not? Mutually-exclusive content is a cool, and pretty accepted, way to show consequences for character choices. It's not that different from exclusive content, except that rather than something or nothing you get something or something else.

DA2 already had it successfully in the form of who comes to comfort Hawk after the mother's death: if not romanced, you get Aveline. Compared to that, what's Single's Night on Love Interest Culmination Night?

Then Bioware already accounts for people who don't do romance content.

[Solmanian]

David Gaider wrote...

Again: we have romances as optional content. We also have friendship/rivalry for party members you interact with even if you choose not to romance them....

So is that a confirmation that the highly criticized friendship/rivalry system from DA2 will return in DA:I?

[Plaintiff]

SmokePants wrote...

I don't think you need a "cookie" for having a non-romance playthrough, but some exclusive content would be nice.

In BioWare games, it always feels like I have to romance someone to wring as much content out of the experience as possible. It would be nice if "no ramance" was treated like another romance option. And no, I'm NOT talking about a scene where the protagonist is taking a bubble bath.

In Bioware games, I feel like I have to do optional sidequests in order to wring as much content out of the game as possible. It would be nice if "no sidequests" was treated like a sidequest.

[Solmanian]

KainD wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Lennard Testarossa wrote...
Why do I get the feeling you didn't read a single post in this thread?

I did not read a single post in this thread, other than the first one.

Yes you did, you read Lennard's post! 

Cue the "bioware are pathological liars" crowd...

[Dean_the_Young]

Plaintiff wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Lennard Testarossa wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
This is utterly illogical.

That so? Please show me the logical fallacy.

If you spend time with your LI before an impending critical event, you can't spend that time with a friend. Just like there could be some special interaction with your LI that only happens at that specific time, there could also be some special interaction with a companion that can only happen at that specific time.

And why would you want those who do choose a romance to be cut off from this interaction?

You're dodging the question, Xil. You're the one who claimed it was illogical: changing it to a 'but I don't want it' isn't an honest follow-up.

As for why, why not? Mutually-exclusive content is a cool, and pretty accepted, way to show consequences for character choices. It's not that different from exclusive content, except that rather than something or nothing you get something or something else.

DA2 already had it successfully in the form of who comes to comfort Hawk after the mother's death: if not romanced, you get Aveline. Compared to that, what's Single's Night on Love Interest Culmination Night?

Then Bioware already accounts for people who don't do romance content.

In some ways, and not for others.

If your argument is 'you should be satisfied with what you've got', then I'd suggest that's a weak one: that could be used to roll back unique romance content, after all, because as long as there's some recognition for a romance than that could be claimed to be 'accounting for' even if it's not unique content.

[someguy1231]

David Gaider wrote...

Again: we have romances as optional content. We also have friendship/rivalry for party members you interact with even if you choose not to romance them. If you don't want to have any romances, that's certainly up to you... but, as I said before, the non-romance content available is the rest of the game. Not using optional content is not a badge of distinction where we give you a cookie for skipping it.

Tons of games do this. Most of the Metal Gear Solid games give you tons of weapons and CQC moves to kill your opponents, but you get the best rewards for avoiding your enemies. Similarly, Dishonored has many weapons and abilities to kill your opponents, but you'll get the best ending (as well as achievements) if you complete the game without killing anyone or without letting anyone see you, as well as an achievement for completing the game without buying any magic abilities. The DLC for Deus Ex: HR had an achivement to complete it using only your fists. Even Bioware gave us an achievement if we complete a section of the "Arrival" DLC for ME2 in a stealthy manner. And if you want an example that is also romance-related, marriage in Fallout 2 was widely considered worthless and more trouble than it was worth, so the game implicitly "rewarded" players who avoided it.

My point is, David, games reward us for playing in a certain way that bypasses a large amount of optional content all the time. Why should romances be any different?

[Plaintiff]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Lennard Testarossa wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
This is utterly illogical.

That so? Please show me the logical fallacy.

If you spend time with your LI before an impending critical event, you can't spend that time with a friend. Just like there could be some special interaction with your LI that only happens at that specific time, there could also be some special interaction with a companion that can only happen at that specific time.

And why would you want those who do choose a romance to be cut off from this interaction?

You're dodging the question, Xil. You're the one who claimed it was illogical: changing it to a 'but I don't want it' isn't an honest follow-up.

As for why, why not? Mutually-exclusive content is a cool, and pretty accepted, way to show consequences for character choices. It's not that different from exclusive content, except that rather than something or nothing you get something or something else.

DA2 already had it successfully in the form of who comes to comfort Hawk after the mother's death: if not romanced, you get Aveline. Compared to that, what's Single's Night on Love Interest Culmination Night?

Then Bioware already accounts for people who don't do romance content.

In some ways, and not for others.

If your argument is 'you should be satisfied with what you've got', then I'd suggest that's a weak one: that could be used to roll back unique romance content, after all, because as long as there's some recognition for a romance than that could be claimed to be 'accounting for' even if it's not unique content.

The notion of being rewarded for skipping optional content - any sort of optional content - is absurd.

If I choose to skip a sidequest, then I am knowingly refusing the rewards I would receive from it: extra content, gold, exp and rare items.

Should I be given a bonus for choosing to ignore that sidequest? No, of course not, that would be stupid.

[cindercatz]

I think romance should be *very* tightly woven into the game throughout, with lots of scenes that feature different aspects of it across the playthrough. Liara in ME3's the best example, combined with the ability to end a relationship and pursue another and consequences for doing so. Stop treating them like side content and just accept and support them as core content.

The benefit for a non-romance playthrough, of course, is that all of those romance integrated scenes would also change to reflect the single status. Who you romance, the pace at which things develope, and the choice not to be in a romance at any given time in the game should all be heavily integrated into the core plot of the game. They should all matter more, including the single route.

Modifié par cindercatz, 09 mars 2013 - 01:24 .

[Plaintiff]

someguy1231 wrote...
Tons of games do this. Most of the Metal Gear Solid games give you tons of weapons and CQC moves to kill your opponents, but you get the best rewards for avoiding your enemies. Similarly, Dishonored has many weapons and abilities to kill your opponents, but you'll get the best ending (as well as achievements) if you complete the game without killing anyone or without letting anyone see you, as well as an achievement for completing the game without buying any magic abilities. The DLC for Deus Ex: HR had an achivement to complete it using only your fists. Even Bioware gave us an achievement if we complete a section of the "Arrival" DLC for ME2 in a stealthy manner.

None of those are comparable to what you're asking for. You are not skipping optional content, you are, in fact, engaging in optional content by completing a secret challenge. There is no challenge whatsoever in avoiding Bioware's optional romance content.

And if you want an example that is also romance-related, marriage in Fallout 2 was widely considered worthless and more trouble than it was worth, so the game implicitly "rewarded" players who avoided it.

If avoiding romance content is its own reward, then why do you need another one?

My point is, David, games reward us for playing in a certain way that bypasses a large amount of optional content all the time. Why should romances be any different?

No, games reward you for playing in a certain way that is deemed more challenging. Skipping romances is not challenging. It's not the same thing.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 09 mars 2013 - 01:26 .

[Lennard Testarossa]

Plaintiff wrote...

The notion of being rewarded for skipping optional content - any sort of optional content - is absurd.

If I choose to skip a sidequest, then I am knowingly refusing the rewards I would receive from it: extra content, gold, exp and rare items.

Should I be given a bonus for choosing to ignore that sidequest? No, of course not, that would be stupid.

Why is it always "bonus" or "reward"? Judging by this thread, you're not the only one to think of content in rpgs in these terms. If Bioware thinks the same way, this game is destined to be a failure.

It's not about anything being a "reward", it's about consequence. Why can't skipping a certain sidequest set events in motion that ultimately result in a different sidequest, possibly a bigger one?

Modifié par Lennard Testarossa, 09 mars 2013 - 01:37 .

[Plaintiff]

Lennard Testarossa wrote...
Why is it always "bonus" or "reward"? Judging by this thread, you're not the only one to think of content in rpgs in these terms. If Bioware thinks the same way, this game is destined to be a failure.

In a story-based game, content is a reward. The whole point of playing is to see more of the story.

It's not about anything being a "reward", it's about consequence. Why can't skipping a certain sidequest set events in motion that ultimately result in a different sidequest, possibly a bigger one?

If you're deliberately avoiding optional content, why would Bioware give you more optional content? You obviously don't want it.

If they implement this suggestion, then why should those who choose romance be excluded from the "friend" content? And what is the reward, or "consequence" if you prefer for people who choose to neither romance nor engage in the extra "friend" content?

Modifié par Plaintiff, 09 mars 2013 - 01:46 .

[MisanthropePrime]

I hear if you make it to 40 as a virgin you get wizard powers. If you're a mage and make it to 40 as a virgin, do you become a super-wizard?

[TJPags]

I don't really care about this one way or another, but here's a question:

In DA2, those who had left Nathaniel live in DA:A got a quest involving him. For those who killed him, that quest didn't exist, so BW created another quest to make up for it.

Is what the OP is asking for really that different?

[BlueMagitek]

It doesn't sound so much bonus content as it is "better default content". For example:

Instead of Shepard sitting at the locker alone in ME 1 (usually an LI will come by) a non romanceable character will (given this game, it will most likely be either Tali or Pressely given that they can't die or not be recruited). A quick pep talk from another person.

DA2, as noted, does this with Aveline.