1981 réponses à ce sujet

[kinderschlager]

SeismicGravy wrote...

I'd just like to say for those that are not to happy about having bisexual LI's:

Go on the internet and count how many times you see a post complaining that they couldn't romance Traynor with Manshep, or Miranda with Femshep.

You may be surprised.

The cruel truth is that having bisexual Li's is pretty much the only way to please the majority of players these days.

i wouldn't say it's the CRUEL truth, it is THE truth. vidoe game makers no longer cater to a select portion of the population, they haven't for YEARS. they make games to appeal to as many people as possible. with the insane cost a game like ME3 or DA2 costs to make, it's the only viable option.

there's a video of david gaider talking about sex and video games floating around the internet somewhere, watch it, HIGHLY informative, really lets you understand why he can get so trollish over these topics.

(come to think of it, i'm suprised he hasn't chimed in on this topic)

[Gotholhorakh]

SeismicGravy wrote...

I'd just like to say for those that are not to happy about having bisexual LI's:

Go on the internet and count how many times you see a post complaining that they couldn't romance Traynor with Manshep, or Miranda with Femshep.

You may be surprised.

The cruel truth is that having bisexual Li's is pretty much the only way to please the majority of players these days.

I think the "cruel truth" about the majority is that having straight characters and romances pleases the majority of players pretty well.

That's not the same as who will complain (or how much), granted - but let's not deceive ourselves.

[Sable Rhapsody]

kinderschlager wrote...
(come to think of it, i'm suprised he hasn't chimed in on this topic)

He has chimed in on sexuality in BioWare's games before, repeatedly.  Can't blame him if he's sick of chiming in on things like this on the forums only to get taken horribly out of context for the frillionth time 

Modifié par Sable Rhapsody, 29 juin 2013 - 10:18 .

[d-boy15]

The truth is BSN seem to care about romance than other thing in Bioware game.

It would be really sad if the selling point of Bioware right now is romance. How they can fallen so low...

Modifié par d-boy15, 29 juin 2013 - 10:19 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

d-boy15 wrote...
The truth is BSN seem to care about romance than other thing in Bioware game.

I'd say that's just human nature, not BSN or BioWare's fans in particular  Besides, BSN is a very small slice of their consumer base.

[Xilizhra]

I guess I don't see anything in DA2 that implies that the companions are ever defined by the character. There is a heavily implied flirtation between Merrill and Carver.

Not in ten thousand years. This is one-sided; there is no attraction from Merrill to Carver whatsoever.

[Thomas Andresen]

[quote]Ryzaki wrote...

[quote]iakus wrote...

[quote]Thomas Andresen wrote...
And how does the romances in DAII qualify as the latter rather than the former?[/quote]

When DA2 LI sexualities became defined by who Hawke flirted with.[/quote]

And when pray tell does this happen?

[/quote]
It's funny how no one seems to have a straight answer for this.

[quote]Ryzaki wrote...

The romances in Skyrim were hardly romances. I mean...really. You chose the most stripped down version of romances to prove all bi LIs were bad? Fable has similar terribad romances and they have varations.

I would hardly compare DA2's romances to Skyrim's. At all. The Skyrim romances are closer to Fable's than anything.
[/quote]
I'd take Fable 3's romances over Skyrim's any day of the week.

[quote]Sopa de Gato wrote...

By this I mean Anders In Name Only, who had a great deal of his previous characterization and personality scrubbed off and reshaped him into a playersexual love interest. This is especially blatant when you compare MaleHawke's dialogue with him to FemHawke's. Why was it even necessary to remove that?
[/quote]
It's not unusual that when a character "changes hands", in terms of who wrote them(which is what happened from Awakening to DAII), that character "feels" different to the audience. The most vivid example, in my experience, of where that has been a bad thing is Matrim Cauthon in the Wheel of Time series. It's also why I loathe the idea of Star Wars EU works that features people and/or events from the films.

[quote]Ryzaki wrote...

And my question becomes...why not. She ends up preganant in the DR ending anyway. There simply becomes one more additional varation.

God baby/Normal baby/no baby.

God Baby and Normal baby could be similar. Or god baby and no baby at all could be similar. Not to mention...it's an epilogue slide. That's hardly damaging to resources.

[/quote]
Going to agree emphatically with this. There is already a flag keeping tabs on who slept with Morrigan that night in Redcliffe. The only thing that would change for a female PC who romanced Morrigan, from a female PC who didn't romance Morrigan, would be the ring.

[quote]iakus wrote...

Silly concern?  Maybe.

[/quote]
If you recognise that, why don't you examine more closely why it concerns you?

[quote]LarryDavid wrote...

So what bothers me is that people from your side of the argument, consider their subjective definitions of 'fair' and 'equal' to be the moral ones and accordingly act like they have all the justice in the world to back them up.
[/quote]
Except there really only is one definition of "fair" and "equal". Highlighting the relevant definition of "fair":
[quote]Just, equitable.
He must be given a fair trial.[/quote]
The relevant definition of equal:
[quote](not comparable) The same in all respects.
Equal conditions should produce equal results.[/quote]

What the LGBT community wants in terms of player romances in BioWare's games is for their preferences to be treated with the same amount of respect as straight people's preferences. And that is what "fair and equal treatment" is about. "Fair" and "equal" doesn't give a crap about the "majority".

[quote]ParatrooperSean wrote...

I think gays comprise about 3% of the population.
[/quote]
And why would you think that? No, really. Here, let me educate you.

[quote]Xilizhra wrote...

[quote]I guess I don't see anything in DA2 that implies that the companions are ever defined by the character. There is a heavily implied flirtation between Merrill and Carver.[/quote]
Not in ten thousand years. This is one-sided; there is no attraction from Merrill to Carver whatsoever.[/quote]
Yep. Carver's flirtations does seem to fly far above Merrill's head.

Modifié par Thomas Andresen, 29 juin 2013 - 11:04 .

[Sutekh]

Thomas Andresen wrote...

ParatrooperSean wrote...

I think gays comprise about 3% of the population.

And why would you think that? No, really. Here, let me educate you.

Yes, the stat is way off. But, more importantly, it is irrelevant. Thedas is not Earth.

Sometimes I wonder what would be the "realism" argument if a game took place in say... ancient Greece or Rome. Would people go on applying modern data to different times and cultures, or would they not, given that we have historical facts and written testimonies?

[Thomas Andresen]

Sutekh wrote...

Sometimes I wonder what would be the "realism" argument if a game took place in say... ancient Greece or Rome. Would people go on applying modern data to different times and cultures, or would they not, given that we have historical facts and written testimonies?

I think it is most likely that many would ignore said historical facts and written testimonies. As in, be convinced they are false or non-existent.

Modifié par Thomas Andresen, 29 juin 2013 - 11:35 .

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

What is being talked with about playersexual characters or subjective sexuality, or whatever the official term is, they're saying that these characters do or do not hold these traits based entirely on who the player is. Not on what the NPC is.  The player is not shaping the NPC, the player is defining the NPC

Exactly this.

For me, it's actually not just about pcsexual vs bisexual. It's about giving the impression that any npc/main character has the ability to say no to the Warden/Hawke. That can be based on gender "You're not my type", ideology "I'm a Templar, you're a Mage", or many other grounds.

Basically, I'd rather see a few more companions who take a leaf out of Aveline's book.

Or ideally, I wouldn't mind seeing romances scrapped altogether, but I somehow doubt that's going to happen.

[Thomas Andresen]

Il Divo wrote...

Exactly this.

For me, it's actually not just about pcsexual vs bisexual. It's about giving the impression that any npc/main character has the ability to say no to the Warden/Hawke. That can be based on gender "You're not my type", ideology "I'm a Templar, you're a Mage", or many other grounds.

Basically, I'd rather see a few more companions who take a leaf out of Aveline's book.

Aveline's romance arc(or lack thereof) was more along the lines of "I see you as family" than anything about who Aveline's "type" was.

[Il Divo]

Thomas Andresen wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Exactly this.

For me, it's actually not just about pcsexual vs bisexual. It's about giving the impression that any npc/main character has the ability to say no to the Warden/Hawke. That can be based on gender "You're not my type", ideology "I'm a Templar, you're a Mage", or many other grounds.

Basically, I'd rather see a few more companions who take a leaf out of Aveline's book.

Aveline's romance arc(or lack thereof) was more along the lines of "I see you as family" than anything about who Aveline's "type" was.

Excellent point! I shall add to my list:

It's about giving the impression that any npc/main character has the ability to say no to the Warden/Hawke. That can be based on gender "You're not my type", ideology "I'm a Templar, you're a Mage", familiarity "I view you as family", or many other grounds.

[Thomas Andresen]

So long as you don't start saying DAII was inferior to DAO in this respect, I'll give you that. If you do, I'd ask you to elaborate or concede that it's nothing more than your very own opinion.

[Il Divo]

Thomas Andresen wrote...

So long as you don't start saying DAII was inferior to DAO in this respect, I'll give you that. If you do, I'd ask you to elaborate or concede that it's nothing more than your very own opinion.

Well, that's not something I'd get into.

But in short: I want there to be more opportunities for the PC to get shot down, in a variety of ways. The Traynor encounter in ME3 struck me as very entertaining, from the perspective of a male Shepard for example.

[Gotholhorakh]

d-boy15 wrote...

The truth is BSN seem to care about romance than other thing in Bioware game.

It would be really sad if the selling point of Bioware right now is romance. How they can fallen so low...

Yeah, but that's a high proportion of people who go on internet forums. I think most people who game do it for the game, not the romance, and that people who like to talk endlessly about games and people who are heavy into romance, overlap more.

Thomas Andresen wrote...

ParatrooperSean wrote...

I think gays comprise about 3% of the population.

And why would you think that? No, really. Here, let me educate you.

Sometimes people disagree with an idea not because they are uneducated, but because it's a load of complete balls. Unthinkable, I know.

[Sjpelke]

Sutekh wrote...

Thomas Andresen wrote...

ParatrooperSean wrote...

I think gays comprise about 3% of the population.

And why would you think that? No, really. Here, let me educate you.

Yes, the stat is way off. But, more importantly, it is irrelevant. Thedas is not Earth.

Sometimes I wonder what would be the "realism" argument if a game took place in say... ancient Greece or Rome. Would people go on applying modern data to different times and cultures, or would they not, given that we have historical facts and written testimonies?

Think this is what the whole point is about 'realism'. Going from known facts which people tend to use as a reference to explain (or label if you will) what they see or experience.

Thedas is fictional and as there are no historical facts and written testimonies, modern times are the only reference which they can relate to. On a side note; as the setting is medieval(ish) historical facts from that period are applicable.

[nightscrawl]

TsadeeHekate wrote...

On a side note; as the setting is medieval(ish) historical facts from that period are applicable.

No, they're not. It is entirely possible for societies in a fictional world to have different views on sexuality than we do, or did 900 years ago. One of the biggest things that informed, and still informs, our view on things is that all major religions are patriarchal, whereas in Thedas the major religion, Andrastianity, is matriarchal. Putting women in leadership roles elevates their position in society in a way that has never been experienced with the real world on a large scale. That issue alone is enough to render any real world historical comparisons moot.

[kinderschlager]

nightscrawl wrote...

TsadeeHekate wrote...

On a side note; as the setting is medieval(ish) historical facts from that period are applicable.

No, they're not. It is entirely possible for societies in a fictional world to have different views on sexuality than we do, or did 900 years ago. One of the biggest things that informed, and still informs, our view on things is that all major religions are patriarchal, whereas in Thedas the major religion, Andrastianity, is matriarchal. Putting women in leadership roles elevates their position in society in a way that has never been experienced with the real world on a large scale. That issue alone is enough to render any real world historical comparisons moot.

careful, you are using logic, people hate when you do that

[Thomas Andresen]

Gotholhorakh wrote...

Thomas Andresen wrote...

ParatrooperSean wrote...

I think gays comprise about 3% of the population.

And why would you think that? No, really. Here, let me educate you.

Sometimes people disagree with an idea not because they are uneducated, but because it's a load of complete balls. Unthinkable, I know.

Except that this time, they are ill-advised, at best.

nightscrawl wrote...

TsadeeHekate wrote...

On a side note; as the setting is medieval(ish) historical facts from that period are applicable.

No, they're not. It is entirely possible for societies in a fictional world to have different views on sexuality than we do, or did 900 years ago. One of the biggest things that informed, and still informs, our view on things is that all major religions are patriarchal, whereas in Thedas the major religion, Andrastianity, is matriarchal. Putting women in leadership roles elevates their position in society in a way that has never been experienced with the real world on a large scale. That issue alone is enough to render any real world historical comparisons moot.

Well said.

Modifié par Thomas Andresen, 29 juin 2013 - 12:38 .

[LinksOcarina]

TsadeeHekate wrote...

Sutekh wrote...

Thomas Andresen wrote...

ParatrooperSean wrote...

I think gays comprise about 3% of the population.

And why would you think that? No, really. Here, let me educate you.

Yes, the stat is way off. But, more importantly, it is irrelevant. Thedas is not Earth.

Sometimes I wonder what would be the "realism" argument if a game took place in say... ancient Greece or Rome. Would people go on applying modern data to different times and cultures, or would they not, given that we have historical facts and written testimonies?

Think this is what the whole point is about 'realism'. Going from known facts which people tend to use as a reference to explain (or label if you will) what they see or experience.

Thedas is fictional and as there are no historical facts and written testimonies, modern times are the only reference which they can relate to. On a side note; as the setting is medieval(ish) historical facts from that period are applicable.

Can I point out something as a trained historian for a moment? 

One of the big things we see in a lot of media is how they become allegorical to modern themes, which then gives the authors intent away if they were written to be a specific parody of something.

To ty to compare historical facts to Dragon Age, be it from a medieval setting (which Dragon Age really isen't in, its more Rennisance if you want to get technical) or through a modern lens is a major disservice since it invites allegorical themes to be present in-game.

This is one of the few cases where you need to look at the lore of the game to see the stances on things in the past and present. The faux history of Thedas, if you will. 

[Sjpelke]

nightscrawl wrote...

TsadeeHekate wrote...

On a side note; as the setting is medieval(ish) historical facts from that period are applicable.

No, they're not. It is entirely possible for societies in a fictional world to have different views on sexuality than we do, or did 900 years ago. One of the biggest things that informed, and still informs, our view on things is that all major religions are patriarchal, whereas in Thedas the major religion, Andrastianity, is matriarchal. Putting women in leadership roles elevates their position in society in a way that has never been experienced with the real world on a large scale. That issue alone is enough to render any real world historical comparisons moot.

You are right about that. The reason why I wrote that is that people tend to go from what they know about actual facts that are from our time and age at some point, looking for references. The setting is medieval looking, so is most of their technology, therefor the reference.

The black divine and the white divine are opposites of each other, so is their point of view in regards of holding power in the society in Thedas. That is very opposite to what is known from medieval Europe in that regard which underlines the fact that Thedas is fictional.

Thedas is a fictional world of course and the roles of men and women can be filled in whatever way the writers want them to be.

Writing a character with believes, point of view on whatever subject and what actions result from that in a story is related to the basics of that world given. Characters in a story act from their environment/world they live in, working with what they encounter and experience. So is the view of one character to another if that 'worldview' is taken in account. Good writing is about making the characters believeble in the setting given, acting from that environment/ culture/beliefs.

[LPPrince]

Silfren wrote...

*sigh* The quote you're looking for is in this thread, actually, exactly as you said it would be the first time you mentioned it. If you want it that badly, go through each page of the thread and do a cntrl+f search for "gaider."  It isn't that hard, and it won't take that much time. 

That said, I think it's been made clear that we can expect DA:I to continue the trend.  And for what it's worth, I think DA2's method IS the best way to handle it. Why does everyone manage to forget that having a larger pool of LIs does not solve the entirety of the issue?  Even if you have two LIs each for the three primary orientations, as I've already pointed out once, this does not remove the problem of players being locked out of any LIs that they can't romance unless they choose a particular gender; i.e. if a player wants to romance Morrigan they have to roll a male Warden even if they don't want to play that gender, or if they just want to experience her LI as a female Warden. 

To me, this is no less exclusionary than it would be to have no non-hetero options at all, and it seems like an obvious flaw in the "just increase the number of LIs available" solution, but it gets consistently overlooked.  Or maybe it really is just something obvious only to those of us who only ever want to play a PC of a particular gender and kind of resent being locked out of romance content that could easily be made available.

The path of greatest inclusion strikes me as far superior to any recommended solution that involves putting constraints on how players can experience the game.  Not everyone is going to be satisfied by any one solution, so why not privilege the solution that maximizes inclusiveness for players over the one that only potentially affects realism, the latter being an entirely subjective issue, after all?

No need to sigh, I'm just not wanting the same thing that you do. S'all good. But anyway-

Do we reaaally know if DA:I will go that route? Its not a trend if its only happened in DA2. And if the resources are there, it seems things would be closer to DAO than DA2.

The issue you have(presumably) is that you want to romance whoever you want no matter what.

My issue is I don't want to romance whoever I want no matter what. I want some characters to turn me down for reasons like their sexuality and the type of character I'm playing. Because that feels like the characters were written more as real people I can believe in, with differences between one another, like their preferences in who they potentially care for(same sex, both sexes, opposite sex, someone who agrees with their ideals, someone who challenges them, someone who cares for them, etc etc).

I want more Traynors and Cortezes. Specifically if, like Traynor's turning down ManShep, I can have a character refuse my advances because of who they are, or rather, who I am(in the context of the game).

If I really want to experience the romance of a character that was previously unavailable to me, I'd make a new PC that better fit that character's preferences(gender, type of outlook, etc etc).

I'm the kind of person who really just likes to play as one canon PC(of my own making), and if a character is locked off to me romantically, I say kudos. They feel like they were written for the sake of themselves, rather than for the sake of me.

Modifié par LPPrince, 29 juin 2013 - 01:25 .

[Xilizhra]

My issue is I don't want to romance whoever I want no matter what. I want some characters to turn me down for reasons like their sexuality and the type of character I'm playing. Because that feels like the characters were written more as real people I can believe in, with differences between one another, like their preferences in who they potentially care for(same sex, both sexes, opposite sex, someone who agrees with their ideals, someone who challenges them, someone who cares for them, etc etc).

Bisexuals are not "written" as being objects for everyone to take a piece of, and your implications thereof are unpleasant. Also, it's completely possible to be turned down by people who'll just turn everyone down; Varric does this if you haven't romanced anyone else by Act 3. Would this not be satisfactory? If so, why?

[LPPrince]

Xilizhra wrote...

My issue is I don't want to romance whoever I want no matter what. I want some characters to turn me down for reasons like their sexuality and the type of character I'm playing. Because that feels like the characters were written more as real people I can believe in, with differences between one another, like their preferences in who they potentially care for(same sex, both sexes, opposite sex, someone who agrees with their ideals, someone who challenges them, someone who cares for them, etc etc).

Bisexuals are not "written" as being objects for everyone to take a piece of, and your implications thereof are unpleasant.

This is the part where we have to go back to the statement that we should all be careful of what we presume someone else to mean as thats how threads break down.

Because that is not at all what I was implying.

[LPPrince]

And nah, I don't consider Varric turning someone down as satisfactory, although it does help.

I specifically want characters that will in fact engage in a romance with my character under different circumstances than the one my character is currently in.