173 réponses à ce sujet

[sandalisthemaker]

IanPolaris wrote...

sandalisthemaker wrote...

The real world has no bearing on Thedas.
You are advocating limiting content for a group of gamers simply because they are a minority.

Read my above posts.  I am doing no such things.  I am simply tired of pandering.

-Polaris

I did read your post.
You basically said that since non-straights are a minority IRL they should be a minority in Thedas.
This results in less options for non-straight romances.
I guess "pandering" is wrong when it is done to sexual minorites.

Modifié par sandalisthemaker, 13 juin 2013 - 07:41 .

[Battlebloodmage]

WittingEight65 wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

WittingEight65 wrote...

I think there should be straight LIs. Like, in my opinion, Cullen should be straight because he was raised in the chantry and he is/was a Templar.

None of your reasons is remotely explained why Cullen should be straight, just saying. 

Alistair was raised in the chantry and was, or almost was, a Templar.

Maybe I just see the Chantry as the Catholic Church, lol.

I know a gay guy from UCLA, all guys at UCLA must be gay. I don't see the connection there. There are gay Christians out there as well. I believe it's something you were born with, not something you can be taught. There are gay children come out of straight household just as there are straight children come out of gay household. I would prefer not to expand too much on it since it could get political.  

Modifié par Battlebloodmage, 13 juin 2013 - 07:39 .

[wright1978]

IanPolaris wrote...

franciscoamell wrote...

I aprove of more gay characters.

My gayshep romanced Kaidan though, just saying...

I would approve of this as well as well as more straight LI's as well.  If we wanted to do this 'right' then some LI's should be ******-sexual exclusive, some should be hetro-sexual exclusive, and some should be bi-sexual, but everyone should have at least two options when the dust settles.

This IMHO would be the ideal case.

-Polaris

Obviously that would be the ideal situation. Since apparently that isn't possible currently given resources the current compromise is best solution imo. No different to the compromise where character gender & appearance & possibly background is likely to exist but the ideal world of different origins won't.

[LoonySpectre]

As far as I remember, nobody in the setting ever said anything remotely bad about gay relationships. The Warden can harshly refuse Zevran's advances, but even he just basically says "I'm not into men", not "gay is bad".

[franciscoamell]

Nvm.

Modifié par franciscoamell, 13 juin 2013 - 07:41 .

[ElitePinecone]

IanPolaris wrote...

franciscoamell wrote...

I aprove of more gay characters.

My gayshep romanced Kaidan though, just saying...

I would approve of this as well as well as more straight LI's as well.  If we wanted to do this 'right' then some LI's should be ******-sexual exclusive, some should be hetro-sexual exclusive, and some should be bi-sexual, but everyone should have at least two options when the dust settles.

This IMHO would be the ideal case.

-Polaris

This is still not realistic, going by your definition above. You're contradicting yourself here, or does realism only apply when there's a chance nobody romancable will be heterosexual? 

[Battlebloodmage]

IanPolaris wrote...

nerdage wrote...

WittingEight65 wrote...

I think there should be straight LIs. Like, in my opinion, Cullen should be straight because he was raised in the chantry and he is/was a Templar.

Just fyi, as far as I'm aware the Chantry has no official stance on sexuality.

True, but the chantry characters we do meet do seem to be strongly hetrosexual but the sample size is limited (Sebastian and Cullen).  Cullen is clearly hetrosexual (talk with him as a female and male mage and you can quickly confirm this) and so is Sebastian.  I discount Lelianna because she isn't a formal member of the Chantry (being only a Lay Sister and never having actually taken vows).

-Polaris

Or that he just wasn't in male mage. 

[Nole]

Battlebloodmage wrote...

WittingEight65 wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

WittingEight65 wrote...

I think there should be straight LIs. Like, in my opinion, Cullen should be straight because he was raised in the chantry and he is/was a Templar.

None of your reasons is remotely explained why Cullen should be straight, just saying. 

Alistair was raised in the chantry and was, or almost was, a Templar.

Maybe I just see the Chantry as the Catholic Church, lol.

I know a gay guy from UCLA, all guys at UCLA must be gay. I don't see the connection there. There are gay Christians out there as well. I believe it's something you were born with, not something you can be taught. There are gay children come out of straight household just as there are straight children come out of gay household. I would prefer not to expand too much on it since it could get political.  

I just saw your signature. Okay, you want Cullen to be gay, I get it.

[IanPolaris]

Medhia Nox wrote...

All Bioware games are Hero-centric.

Sure, but not herosexual.  That's new and IMHO it is pandering.  In fact if you go back to BG2: Shadows of Amn and Throne of Bhaal, who you could romance was actually a very complicated little formula and you had to be compatible (and it meant that Dwarves and Gnomes could only get some Dark Elf action as it were).

Are all Bioware games copouts?

Not the same thing.   You are making a false comparison here.

The Reapers wait for Shepard to "win". The Archdaemon waits for the Warden.

So what?

Why should the romances be exclusively Non-Hero-centric?

They aren't.  If you look at the various romances over the years in BW games, they are very hero-centric.  However, that doesn't mean that all people will want to have sex with the hero regardless of gender, race, or background.  That really harms willing suspension of disbelief and I consider it pandering.

You're not pandering to anyone IanPolaris - you don't have anything to do with this video game. You are totally irrelevant to Bioware or Bioware's games.

I have a right to my own opinions, and Bioware will do what it pleases.  However, if I think it's pandering, I will say so.

-Polaris

[BioWareMod03]

Just a quick reminder that religious or political discussion is not welcome on these forums. Let's try to stay on topic please.

[Battlebloodmage]

WittingEight65 wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

WittingEight65 wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

WittingEight65 wrote...

I think there should be straight LIs. Like, in my opinion, Cullen should be straight because he was raised in the chantry and he is/was a Templar.

None of your reasons is remotely explained why Cullen should be straight, just saying. 

Alistair was raised in the chantry and was, or almost was, a Templar.

Maybe I just see the Chantry as the Catholic Church, lol.

I know a gay guy from UCLA, all guys at UCLA must be gay. I don't see the connection there. There are gay Christians out there as well. I believe it's something you were born with, not something you can be taught. There are gay children come out of straight household just as there are straight children come out of gay household. I would prefer not to expand too much on it since it could get political.  

I just saw your signature. Okay, you want Cullen to be gay, I get it.

If you say so. 

[IanPolaris]

ElitePinecone wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

franciscoamell wrote...

I aprove of more gay characters.

My gayshep romanced Kaidan though, just saying...

I would approve of this as well as well as more straight LI's as well.  If we wanted to do this 'right' then some LI's should be ******-sexual exclusive, some should be hetro-sexual exclusive, and some should be bi-sexual, but everyone should have at least two options when the dust settles.

This IMHO would be the ideal case.

-Polaris

This is still not realistic, going by your definition above. You're contradicting yourself here, or does realism only apply when there's a chance nobody romancable will be heterosexual? 

Not really.  I aknowledge that not all game play will be completely realistic, and I aknowledge that having homosexual players have fewer options than hetrosexual players is intrinsically unfair.  What I am suggesting is the best compromise IMO that damages what is "realistic" the least.

-Polaris

[Lennard Testarossa]

ElitePinecone wrote...
Did *anyone* complain about the realism of the romances when they were all only opposite-gender?

Why would they have complained? It is entirely realistic. The probability of four people being straight in a random sample of four is roughly 65%...it is more likely that all four will be straight than that there is even a single homosexual or bisexual person among them. The likelihood of four people being bisexual in a random sample of four is roughly 0,000625%...

need I say more?

Modifié par Lennard Testarossa, 13 juin 2013 - 07:45 .

[sandalisthemaker]

Lennard Testarossa wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...
Did *anyone* complain about the realism of the romances when they were all only opposite-gender?

Why would they have complained? It is entirely realistic. The probability of four people being straight in a random sample of four is roughly 65%...it is more likely that all four will be straight than that there is even a single homosexual or bisexual person among them. The likelihood of four people being bisexual in a random sample of four is roughly 0,000625%...

need I say more?

This does not matter.
Why is the ratio of sexual orientation the thing that breaks people's sense of reality in a *fantasy game* with dragons and magic?

[Nole]

GodWood wrote...

I remember when I first played KotOR as a male character I wanted to romance Juhani. Unfortunately for my PC she was a lesbian.

Now I could have thrown a hissy-fit and demand that Bioware force her to accept the wonders of my PC's dick, instead however I accepted that not everyone wants my PC's dick and played a single Revan who had unrequited love for Juhani.

It happened to me with Samantha in ME3, it was a fun momment, lol.

[Battlebloodmage]

GodWood wrote...

I remember when I first played KotOR as a male character I wanted to romance Juhani. Unfortunately for my PC she was a lesbian.

Now I could have thrown a hissy-fit and demand that Bioware force her to accept the wonders of my PC's dick, instead however I accepted that not everyone wants my PC's dick and played a single Revan who had unrequited love for Juhani.

It's all boiled down to the number of choices you can have vs the number of choices you can't. While you can't romance Juhani, there are other girls you could choose from. As this has been discussed many times, as long as they give everyone choices in LI, not a lot of people would complain. If there are 6 LI, I think they could achieve just that.

Modifié par Battlebloodmage, 13 juin 2013 - 07:49 .

[IanPolaris]

sandalisthemaker wrote...

Lennard Testarossa wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...
Did *anyone* complain about the realism of the romances when they were all only opposite-gender?

Why would they have complained? It is entirely realistic. The probability of four people being straight in a random sample of four is roughly 65%...it is more likely that all four will be straight than that there is even a single homosexual or bisexual person among them. The likelihood of four people being bisexual in a random sample of four is roughly 0,000625%...

need I say more?

This does not matter.
Why is the ratio of sexual orientation the thing that breaks people's sense of reality in a *fantasy game* with dragons and magic?

I think it does.  I note that in ME3, two new romances that were entirely homosexual were added yet the same people clamoring for playersexuality/fairness didn't complain about that! (In spite of the fact that statistically two new homosexual exclusive relationship would seem unlikely).

This is why I think there is some pandering by Bioware happening here.

-Polaris

[ElitePinecone]

IceHawk-181 wrote...
 
The point, quite simply, that the level of SOD needed to convince me that it is more likely that 10/10 people are all attracted to the PC character than it is than 1/10 people is un-changeable Straight/Gay/Uninterested is a bit much and smacks of the same political pandering DG and Bioware have become well known for.

It's never been ten out of ten companions, but that's not even the point.

Realism is a stupid, misguided and ridiculous criteria to insist upon. A better one is enjoyment.

More people can enjoy more content when every romancable character is open to both genders. Given the absence of resources to do separate gay/lesbian/bisexual/straight characters, it's the solution that makes the biggest selection of content open to the greatest number of people. 

Throwing around words like 'pandering' and 'political correctness' hardly helps your case, if your concern is about characters and not the specific content. It's rather quaint and endearing to imagine someone yelling at a monitor about the gays infiltrating their videogames, but it does make it rather transparent that you're much more concerned about the particular type of romances than a great crusade for realism in Dragon Age.

[bzombo]

TinuHawke wrote...

Urazz wrote...

Maclimes wrote...

David Gaider has pretty much confirmed that all romance options in DA3 will be available to either gender. But there can always be NPCs who are more limited in their sexuality (such as Wade and Herren).

I much rather have characters that are gay, straight or bisexual by default like we had in Dragon Age: Origins or Mass Effect 3 so that way there are limits on who you can romance.  Making every party member bisexual just seems like sloppy writing in my opinion.

Not this again. Player-sexual. It's not Gaider his fault that all of you are metagaming. 

This is just a cheap way of blowing off someone's opinion. Metagaming or not, it comes off as weak writing.

[IceHawk-181]

The construction of this strawman has gone on long enough methinks.

The complaint is not that there are too many Gay characters.

The complaint is that there are too many PC-Sexual characters irrespective of all other variables.

Bioware needs to get back to writing strong characters in-of-themselves and allowing them to be interested in the PC based on background, interaction, and compatibility, which includes sexuality.

Absolutely no outcry occurred when Samatha or Steve were exclusives, there was no outcry that FemShep could not romance Tali or MaleShep could not bed Garrus...

...because those were established characters and those choices made sense.

A full slate of PC-Sexual characters is a lazy maneuver by writers who are prizing some self-satisfying sense of fan-service and political correctness over their old legacy of creating individual and unique characters that were not putty in the PC's hands.

[imbs]

IceHawk-181 wrote...

The construction of this strawman has gone on long enough methinks.

The complaint is not that there are too many Gay characters.

The complaint is that there are too many PC-Sexual characters irrespective of all other variables.

Bioware needs to get back to writing strong characters in-of-themselves and allowing them to be interested in the PC based on background, interaction, and compatibility, which includes sexuality.

Absolutely no outcry occurred when Samatha or Steve were exclusives, there was no outcry that FemShep could not romance Tali or MaleShep could not bed Garrus...

...because those were established characters and those choices made sense.

A full slate of PC-Sexual characters is a lazy maneuver by writers who are prizing some self-satisfying sense of fan-service and political correctness over their old legacy of creating individual and unique characters that were not putty in the PC's hands.

M8 what are you doing? This goes for the moderator 4 guy too. This thread was utterly hilarious. Why are you trying to ruin it?

[sandalisthemaker]

IanPolaris wrote...

sandalisthemaker wrote...

Lennard Testarossa wrote...

ElitePinecone wrote...
Did *anyone* complain about the realism of the romances when they were all only opposite-gender?

Why would they have complained? It is entirely realistic. The probability of four people being straight in a random sample of four is roughly 65%...it is more likely that all four will be straight than that there is even a single homosexual or bisexual person among them. The likelihood of four people being bisexual in a random sample of four is roughly 0,000625%...

need I say more?

This does not matter.
Why is the ratio of sexual orientation the thing that breaks people's sense of reality in a *fantasy game* with dragons and magic?

I think it does.  I note that in ME3, two new romances that were entirely homosexual were added yet the same people clamoring for playersexuality/fairness didn't complain about that! (In spite of the fact that statistically two new homosexual exclusive relationship would seem unlikely).

This is why I think there is some pandering by Bioware happening here.

-Polaris

Because male homosexual relationships were non-existant in Mass Effect until ME3. Steve being included was a positive thing for gay players. Most straight players didn't care, hence the few complaints came only from the bigots who did.
The lesbian relationships in the ME series were there to *pander* to straight males first and foremost because (girl on girl is hawt).
Do you have a problem with that sort of pandering BTW?

[Aolbain]

The herosexuality in DA2 makes sense, actually. Why else would these jerks hang around with me in 7 years if they aren't in love with me?

[Kunari801]

Andrastee wrote...

There was a time when people asked for dungeons, paladins, thieves, dark sorcerers, huntresses, dancers and Dragons in video games.

Now they ask for gay characters.

Hey, some of us demand dungeons, paladins, thieves, dark sorcerers, huntresses, Dragons and gay characters!

(Well, given the setting, I'll ask for Templars instead of paladins, but its the same thing really.)

Yeah, what Andrastee said.  :happy:

I really liked Steve's character in ME3, he wasn't your stereotypical feminine acting gay (aka flaming gay). I can't imagine that there won't be any s/s options in DA3, since there were from day one in DA:O. I do hope that one of the s/s characters will have a personality like Steve's.

[IanPolaris]

IceHawk-181 wrote...

The construction of this strawman has gone on long enough methinks.

The complaint is not that there are too many Gay characters.

The complaint is that there are too many PC-Sexual characters irrespective of all other variables.

Bioware needs to get back to writing strong characters in-of-themselves and allowing them to be interested in the PC based on background, interaction, and compatibility, which includes sexuality.

Absolutely no outcry occurred when Samatha or Steve were exclusives, there was no outcry that FemShep could not romance Tali or MaleShep could not bed Garrus...

...because those were established characters and those choices made sense.

A full slate of PC-Sexual characters is a lazy maneuver by writers who are prizing some self-satisfying sense of fan-service and political correctness over their old legacy of creating individual and unique characters that were not putty in the PC's hands.

Exactly,  write and developer the character and THEN decide who that character would like to romance.  Part of this would include the character's sexuality (but that probably would be a very minor component really).  At the end of this, if it turns out that the player-character would or could realistically fit in with what the chacter would like to romance, then allow it.  If not then don't.   IMHO this would at least give the best illusion that any romances would be organic.

I'll give one more example of a near-miss.  Samara in ME2.  Samara really should (IMHO) been a LI for Shepard, but only if he/she were Paragon.  Her character, loss, and conversations with Shepard (if Shep is paragon) all make for a very natural romance opporutnity and setting, and it would be completely believable.

-Polaris