1981 réponses à ce sujet

[Silfren]

Zeldrik1389 wrote...

To be honest, I don't mind that all LIs to be bisexual. It just, imo, gives players more options to choose. And it doesn't really affect the way I play game. However, one thing that I really really hate is LI just throw themselves at you. It's weird seeing character just hit on you times after times, even though they are definitely not your type. Hell, it's even disgusting when characters that I hate do that, even though I constantly throw **** at him. I hope they make a clear line between Friend / Rival and LI :|

But the LIs DON'T throw themselves at you.  In both Origins and DA2, it was the player who initiated the romance.  Certain characters like Zevran and Isabela may happily flirt with you and need no dialogue triggers from the PC to tell you they find you attractice, but only the PC ever actually initiated romance dialogue. 

Exceptions to this have always been game bugs, so far as I know, and that's not really relevant to the discussion at all, for obvious reasons.  Nevertheless, I asked why people considered bisexual/playersexual LIs to be bad writing, and this doesn't really address that.

[JWvonGoethe]

Ryzaki wrote...

I liked how DAO initated romances but the 4 m/f LIs and 1 s/s LI per gender was meh. I like 4 bi LIs. Feels more balanced and at least that way the plot heavy relevant LIs are accessible to everyone.

Yes, I said the same thing in my original post. I prefer having all the LIs available to the PC, regardless of what gender they are. The only thing I would change is that I would like all LIs to mention their previous sexual experiences  a lot more (or mention their non experiences if they are virgins.) And if a character who has previously only slept with men gets into a relationship with a female PC, then I don't see why that would be a problem, as long as there is a line of dialogue where the character states "Hey, this is my first relationship with a woman."

The way it felt in DA2 was that the writers refrained from having the LIs speak about their past relationships so that they wouldn't have a pre-defined sexuality, meaning they could sleep with any PC, regardless of gender. But I think having them not speak about their past relationships (or lack thereof) made them less interesting as characters.

[Plaintiff]

Dragon XIX wrote...

For me, it's more about making the PC's choice of gender feel special.   At present, it feel's like everything is just copy-pasted from the male PC.   Having exclusive content for female PCs helps make it feel like I didn't make the wrong choice.

Though, I would rather prefer the female PC sat properly than have exclusive romances.

Well, I heard that female PCs in DA:I get a dishwashing minigame, while male PCs can sign up for spitting contests.

[LinksOcarina]

Just food for thought, but it takes metagame knowledge to even make that sort of charge of "all characters" being essentially gender neutral in regards to relationships, and really shouldn't have much of a bearing in-game since only three out of the nine possible romances flirt with you first.

And considering the romances in both games, while nice and add to the story, are still somewhat sub-plot and interchangable to begin with, it's kind of a moot point to worry about the characters sexuality when they are catering to the player like that. 

So I still fail to see why people complain about the romances in the end, for my money they were all well written, even Sebastian's.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 28 juin 2013 - 05:06 .

[LPPrince]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

I'd appreciate it if potential romance options were interested in characters besides the PC, like people in or even out of the party, regardless of their sexuality. As well as having someone's sexuality better reflected as part of who they are.

You mean, like how Fenris developed a relationship with Izzy?  Yet you single Fenris out as feeling "playersexual".  Are you sure that's not because you gave Fenris and Merrill (but not Izzy and Anders) a sexual identity on the basis of . . . nothing and when they violated it, it felt "weird" to your preconceptions?

So, as long as they preestablish a sexual identity for a character, you're fine with it, but if it's up in the air and undefined it feels weird?

There may not be any such thing as "sexual identity" in Thedas--they don't have serious cultural bias against homosexuality, after all, so being consistently and determinedly heterosexual may actually be the unusual there.  It was that way in parts of the ancient world, after all, such as Greece or Japan.

I just gave Fenris and Merrill as examples. Anders is also part of the playersexual camp. Isabella I consider bisexual, since she was established in DAO as open to romances with both men and women, and she had the stereotype(unfortunately) of someone interested in both sexes that flirts with everyone and has tons of sex, that stereotypical character trait being just that- a character trait.

It'd be really interesting to me if they wrote a character in who is say bisexual, but was hurt romantically(think cheating) by someone in the past and has because of that event began leaning towards being interested in solely the opposite gender of the person who hurt him/her.

Thinking about it now...I think part of my problem with playersexuality is that these characters don't say "No" and leave it at that.

Like, I'd appreciate it if I was turned DOWN by a character and had no chance with them. Sometimes because of sexual prefences, sometimes because of the type of person my character is, etc etc.

I think there should be denials. Ex-

Mass Effect 3's Samantha Traynor. She was awesome, I liked that she was a lesbian, did not fit any lesbian stereotypes, and if a male Shepard flirted with her and tried to get things going, it comes off awkward, she expresses her sexual preference, and then they laugh and joke about her turning him down.

I don't know if ME3's Steve Cortez can be approached by a FemShep, since in one of the first conversations you have with him he establishes he had a husband, but it would've been nice. He was gay, and again- no stereotypes and it was totally accepted as if it were nothing out of the ordinary.

I'd prefer more romance options along the lines of Sam and Steve than the DA2 quadruplets.

Modifié par LPPrince, 28 juin 2013 - 05:09 .

[jillabender]

daaaav wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

So, the real problem is that you can't relate to a character unless you know what type of sex they prefer?  That characters who don't come out and announce it are somehow strange and strained characters?

I find this concept peculiar, but it may actually be true--a lot of people go to great pains to advertise their sexuality at least somewhat.

I don't think you'll find those words in my single sentence response... In fact I said nothing at all about my preferences. I was merely highlighting an implication of this phenomenan and how it limits characterisation in certain circumstances. No. Not all characters need to have implicitly logged sexual histories for people to identify with them but to scrub them entirely? That is something else.

I agree that a character's past sexual experiences can be an interesting part of his or her backstory, and set sexualities can sometimes provide opportunities in this regard.

But I think it's worth pointing out that we do learn about the past sexual experiences of companions in DA2 - after all, there are moments like Anders talking about his relationships in the Circle ("it gave the templars too much power to have something you couldn't stand to lose"), Bethany confiding to Isabela that she's a virgin, and of course, Isabela admitting to Merrill that she's had many lovers, but "fewer than some think."

[Eveangaline]

LPPrince wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

I'd appreciate it if potential romance options were interested in characters besides the PC, like people in or even out of the party, regardless of their sexuality. As well as having someone's sexuality better reflected as part of who they are.

You mean, like how Fenris developed a relationship with Izzy?  Yet you single Fenris out as feeling "playersexual".  Are you sure that's not because you gave Fenris and Merrill (but not Izzy and Anders) a sexual identity on the basis of . . . nothing and when they violated it, it felt "weird" to your preconceptions?

So, as long as they preestablish a sexual identity for a character, you're fine with it, but if it's up in the air and undefined it feels weird?

There may not be any such thing as "sexual identity" in Thedas--they don't have serious cultural bias against homosexuality, after all, so being consistently and determinedly heterosexual may actually be the unusual there.  It was that way in parts of the ancient world, after all, such as Greece or Japan.

I just gave Fenris and Merrill as examples. Anders is also part of the playersexual camp.

But he has both an ex boyfriend and mentions sleeping with isabella at the rose. Wouldn't that put him firmly in bisexual?

[LPPrince]

First time I'm hearing about him and Isabella at the Rose. As for Karl(are we talking about Karl?), dialogue changes depending on your PC's gender- with a FemHawke, it doesn't seem like they were ever together and it looks like they were just friends. With a ManHawke, thats when it seems there was a relationship.

[Eveangaline]

LPPrince wrote...

First time I'm hearing about him and Isabella at the Rose. As for Karl(are we talking about Karl?), dialogue changes depending on your PC's gender- with a FemHawke, it doesn't seem like they were ever together and it looks like they were just friends. With a ManHawke, thats when it seems there was a relationship.

I'm sorry, I mean the pearl. The one in ferelden. It's a companion banter, but yes they mention he did kinky things with electricity.

And hasn't gaider said that just because he doesn't mention it to femhawk, that doesn't mean it doesn't happen?

[Paul E Dangerously]

I just find it kind of funny that people keep harping on "We want choice to matter!", just not when it comes to the character having any sort of set sexuality or even being locked out because of opposing viewpoints, because that would be a bad thing if PC X can't hump NPC Y.

I think part of what irritated a lot of people about it is not only the gay/bi/player - sexual nature of it (though they do exist) but that they see Bioware trying harder and harder to push this out into the open in a time where you can do less and less with these characters gameplay wise. You can't change their armor, (sometimes) can't change their weapons, can't get rid of them from your party, are pretty much forced to go along with anything stupid they do that a PC with an INT over 8 would be able to see coming, and on top of that just don't measure up to the level of characters in previous installments.

Hell, I didn't even have a problem with Merill or Fenris (player)sexuality and the way they were written - though I still do think it's lazy- but Anders had about the subtlety of a hand grenade. He's gay. Did he mention that? Because he's gay. The very first thing you do is go to rescue his lover. Then he slaps you with a massive penalty to rivalry points in the very first conversation if you turn him down.

More choice for romances is a good thing, but the "everything for everyone" approach DAII had that even ME3 didn't think was a good idea, greatly decreased player options when it comes to NPCs in general, questionable writing, and what a lot of people see as too much attention being put toward sex and romance in general is not a good combination.

Modifié par Sopa de Gato, 28 juin 2013 - 05:19 .

[Darkfighter99]

LPPrince wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

I'd appreciate it if potential romance options were interested in characters besides the PC, like people in or even out of the party, regardless of their sexuality. As well as having someone's sexuality better reflected as part of who they are.

You mean, like how Fenris developed a relationship with Izzy?  Yet you single Fenris out as feeling "playersexual".  Are you sure that's not because you gave Fenris and Merrill (but not Izzy and Anders) a sexual identity on the basis of . . . nothing and when they violated it, it felt "weird" to your preconceptions?

So, as long as they preestablish a sexual identity for a character, you're fine with it, but if it's up in the air and undefined it feels weird?

There may not be any such thing as "sexual identity" in Thedas--they don't have serious cultural bias against homosexuality, after all, so being consistently and determinedly heterosexual may actually be the unusual there.  It was that way in parts of the ancient world, after all, such as Greece or Japan.

I just gave Fenris and Merrill as examples. Anders is also part of the playersexual camp. Isabella I consider bisexual, since she was established in DAO as open to romances with both men and women, and she had the stereotype(unfortunately) of someone interested in both sexes that flirts with everyone and has tons of sex, that stereotypical character trait being just that- a character trait.

It'd be really interesting to me if they wrote a character in who is say bisexual, but was hurt romantically(think cheating) by someone in the past and has because of that event began leaning towards being interested in solely the opposite gender of the person who hurt him/her.

Thinking about it now...I think part of my problem with playersexuality is that these characters don't say "No" and leave it at that.

Like, I'd appreciate it if I was turned DOWN by a character and had no chance with them. Sometimes because of sexual prefences, sometimes because of the type of person my character is, etc etc.

I think there should be denials. Ex-

Mass Effect 3's Samantha Traynor. She was awesome, I liked that she was a lesbian, did not fit any lesbian stereotypes, and if a male Shepard flirted with her and tried to get things going, it comes off awkward, she expresses her sexual preference, and then they laugh and joke about her turning him down.

I don't know if ME3's Steve Cortez can be approached by a FemShep, since in one of the first conversations you have with him he establishes he had a husband, but it would've been nice. He was gay, and again- no stereotypes and it was totally accepted as if it were nothing out of the ordinary.

I'd prefer more romance options along the lines of Sam and Steve than the DA2 quadruplets.

I'm sorry but this throws me off, since I remember david gaider say (I don't where that post is somewhere in the DA2 board) if they had to choose two straight LI and two bi LI, it would've been Isabela and fenris considering Fenris's past with Danarius. (regardless of player gender fenris was "abuse" by him,) Yes, I know it wasn't mention in the DA2, but it was sorta implied.

[LPPrince]

Eveangaline wrote...

And hasn't gaider said that just because he doesn't mention it to femhawk, that doesn't mean it doesn't happen?

Then my question is why doesn't he mention it to FemHawke?

If it still happened, why avoid bringing it up? In this case wouldn't Man and FemHawke be equivalent?

[LPPrince]

Dobbysaurus wrote...

Just remove romances all together. There, problem solved. Equality for everyone.

I said this in the other thread but I'd like to see how a future Bioware game like a DA would go without romances altogether.

Would be cool if we played a character that for whatever reason won't romance anyone, or if we had a squad of people who were just not interested in us.

[LPPrince]

I don't think anyone but a very VERY small few play these games JUST for the romances.

I'd say instead that I believe many people are fond of the romance subplots of Bioware games, enough to get emotionally invested(rightfully so), enough to be sad if a game was released in the future that lacked them.

They(romances) are unnecessary to the core experience, after all. But they do greatly enhance it, and drum up some dollars for Bioware and EA(now), so hey.

Who knows.

Modifié par LPPrince, 28 juin 2013 - 05:36 .

[Cirram55]

The only thing I don't like about taking away the romances is that you are achieving equality by erasing the problem and essentially by giving less to fans. Why can't it be done by giving more? Wouldn't it be a step forward?

[Plaintiff]

Dobbysaurus wrote...

Just remove romances all together. There, problem solved. Equality for everyone.

Yes, strip LGBT presence from your games completely. That will fix everything. Not.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 28 juin 2013 - 05:52 .

[Rixatrix]

I think Bioware has internal statistics that show if/who you romanced.

If those statistics showed players were uninterested in romances, I'm sure they wouldn't bother dishing out the development funds to include them.

[Zeldrik1389]

LPPrince wrote...

Dobbysaurus wrote...

Just remove romances all together. There, problem solved. Equality for everyone.

I said this in the other thread but I'd like to see how a future Bioware game like a DA would go without romances altogether.

Would be cool if we played a character that for whatever reason won't romance anyone, or if we had a squad of people who were just not interested in us.

I've played other games that has no romance whatsoever (most recently Kingdom of Amalur I think). While I still enjoy the game (it has awesome combat system, and beautiful graphic, I would recommend it if you enjoy rpg), I think the lack of romance still affects my play somehow. It doesn't have to be like the Witcher, where you pretty much f@#% your way thru the game, but having it as an option, like a little cream on top of a cake. It's an OPTION, which means you can choose not to romance anyone at all if you like, nobody force you to do it or else you won't be able to finish the game.

[Silfren]

Dobbysaurus wrote...

Just remove romances all together. There, problem solved. Equality for everyone.

This adds nothing to the discussion. 

[Eveangaline]

Dobbysaurus wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Dobbysaurus wrote...

Just remove romances all together. There, problem solved. Equality for everyone.

Yes, strip LGBT presence from your games altogether. That will fix everything. Not.

It doesn't have to strip away the LGBT presence altogether. Just romance options, and yes, even the straight ones.

But of course, that's never going to happen because like I said before, there would be more complaining than ever before. It seems game developers will never be able to win. No matter what they do and how much they give, someone will always be ****ing and moaning about one thing or another. 

Thing is, removing the romances from the game do remove pretty much all the LGBT content. In the game's you run into plenty of people who are married/in love, and essentially all those couples are straight (certainly all the ones that actually say it out loud are, the one exception being Branka and the woman she was with). You're always returning the lost trinkets of dead husbands to their wives or helping a couple and their child escape or dealing with drama in families and all those are pretty much straight families. Even if you take out the romances, there'll be straight people around every corner in the game. Not going to be many if any explicitely gay/bi people.

Edit: Don't know what happened to the formatting a moment ago

Modifié par Eveangaline, 28 juin 2013 - 06:01 .

[Silfren]

Dobbysaurus wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Dobbysaurus wrote...

Just remove romances all together. There, problem solved. Equality for everyone.

This adds nothing to the discussion. 

It seems like nothing adds to the discussion according to you. So maybe, just go talk to yourself? 

Perhaps you should read my OP again? I created this topic to have a discussion about why some people think making LIs bi/playersexual detrimentally affects characterization, etc.  One-liners about ditching romances doesn't cut it.