1981 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

Hazegurl wrote...

I don't think the novelty of the character interaction can wear off but that the novelty of the interaction about that particular topic can wear off. Do we really need mulitple dialouge of Isabella talking about how much she likes sex with women with an inexperienced female character. The interaction was great with Bethany and Isabella, but that's all we really need before it becomes nothing more than a repeat with another character spliced in the scene.

I addressed this with Kali, but I think you're selling the concept short. It's true that the novelty of any particular character interaction can wear off, but this is the sort of thing which can already be applied to Bioware characters as written. Were you bored of Isabela being a sex maniac? Or Oghren being a drunken lout? Maybe yes, maybe no. Personally, neither bothered me. There may be a point where Bethany's lack of sexual experience would grow tiresome, but I don't think that immediately occurs after the "one and done" conversation.

I also don't see how "playersexual" LIs are limited. They are all developed the same IMO. Once again the subject of limitations on character interactions is coming up so I have to ask. In what ways are your interactions with Isabella better than Merrill or Fenris based solely on her sexuality?

Well, I have brought up the Bethany/Traynor examples quite a few times. Characters from different backgrounds have different perspectives. Isabella, who clearly enjoys sex in all its forms, could have very different character interactions with a Fenris who is exclusively gay vs. one who is exclusively straight. A Fenris who is gay might awkwardly brush her off, while a straight Fenris mightbe more open/amused by the idea.

 

I think people would still complain that Ashley was "playersexual" and thus not her own person. As for LIs being auto attached to the PC. You can say the same with all of the LIs. Even if a LI is straight, if you create a PC of the opposite gender then all the straight LIs automatically come with that package. 

Again, this doesn't work. Player-sexual refers to the idea that companions don't have a defined sexuality- it changes to suit the player. This cannot be the case for straight LIs because they are straight regardless of how you design your character. The same applies to Ashley. Yes, she may romance both a male and female character using my suggestion, but she is given better definition as a character.

I don't think BioWare has to cut romance options period. You can just decide not to bed anyone and still express your sexuality at ****houses.

Fair enough, but then this is also someone who's grown bored of Bioware romances period and would prefer to see them explore other venues.

[LarryDavid]

Darth Death wrote...

kumquats wrote...

People are born gay, it's not a choice.

Nope. People aren't born gay, it's a choice... A choice some people don't want to take responsibility for.

Biology fail.

[Thomas Andresen]

Darth Death wrote...

kumquats wrote...

People are born gay, it's not a choice.

Nope. People aren't born gay, it's a choice... A choice some people don't want to take responsibility for.

Let me help you.

There is no consensus among scientists about the causes of why a person develops a particular sexual orientation; however, biologically-based theories for the cause of sexual orientation are favored by experts, which point to genetic factors, the early uterine environment, or both combinations.

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

Kallimachus wrote...

Except that she was never unveiled as a lesbian. I never realized she was supposed to be gay until after the game, when I read it online.

You might want to review Shepard's interaction with Traynor while playin chess. It doesn't matter whether you read online or not. I didn't know Traynor was a lesbian, that is my point. Then I hit on her and she awkwardly said no, expressing a preference for women. Memorable character interaction. Not possible if Traynor is bisexual.

An excellent example.

[Thomas Andresen]

iakus wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

You might want to review Shepard's interaction with Traynor while playin chess. It doesn't matter whether you read online or not. I didn't know Traynor was a lesbian, that is my point. Then I hit on her and she awkwardly said no, expressing a preference for women. Memorable character interaction. Not possible if Traynor is bisexual.

An excellent example.

Guess what.

It is entirely possible to have that kind of interaction with a character who isn't romance-able by either gender.

[Iakus]

Thomas Andresen wrote...

iakus wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

You might want to review Shepard's interaction with Traynor while playin chess. It doesn't matter whether you read online or not. I didn't know Traynor was a lesbian, that is my point. Then I hit on her and she awkwardly said no, expressing a preference for women. Memorable character interaction. Not possible if Traynor is bisexual.

An excellent example.

Guess what.

It is entirely possible to have that kind of interaction with a character who isn't romance-able by either gender.

Funnier if the character is, though.

[Thomas Andresen]

iakus wrote...

Thomas Andresen wrote...
Guess what.

It is entirely possible to have that kind of interaction with a character who isn't romance-able by either gender.

Funnier if the character is, though.

Why?

[Plaintiff]

Il Divo wrote...
You might want to review Shepard's interaction with Traynor while playin chess. It doesn't matter whether you read online or not. I didn't know Traynor was a lesbian, that is my point. Then I hit on her and she awkwardly said no, expressing a preference for women. Memorable character interaction. Not possible if Traynor is bisexual.

It's only "memorable" because meeting any videogame character who isn't "straight by assumed default" is extremely rare.

The fact that Traynor is "memorable" only by virtue of her sexuality just highlights the fact that society, and thus media, treats homosexuals like some alien beast. By comparison, the heterosexual characters get many memorable moments that have nothing to do with their sexuality.

This just goes to show that making characters of a set sexuality doesn't make them better characterized at all, it just means that the characters with alternate sexualities get that facet of their characters emphasized to the exclusion of any other traits. Relying on Traynor's sexuality to create "memorable moments" not good characterization in the least, it is in fact incredibly lazy and reductive.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 03 juillet 2013 - 04:32 .

[Iakus]

Thomas Andresen wrote...

iakus wrote...

Thomas Andresen wrote...
Guess what.

It is entirely possible to have that kind of interaction with a character who isn't romance-able by either gender.

Funnier if the character is, though.

Why?

How does one explain humor?  In part, it's the knowledge that, in another universe, she could be romanceable.  It's the twist of fate,  It's flirting with Aveline, taken to another level. 

[Iakus]

Plaintiff wrote...

The fact that Traynor is "memorable" only by virtue of her sexuality just highlights the fact that society treats homosexuals like some alien beast. By comparison, the heterosexual characters get many memorable moments that have nothing to do with their sexuality.

The moment was memorable.  Traynor herself was an awesome character anyway.  Smart, slightly nerdy, someone I could see being friends with even without romancing her. 

And a better analyst than the Shadow Broker.

[Plaintiff]

iakus wrote...

Thomas Andresen wrote...

iakus wrote...

Thomas Andresen wrote...
Guess what.

It is entirely possible to have that kind of interaction with a character who isn't romance-able by either gender.

Funnier if the character is, though.

Why?

How does one explain humor?  In part, it's the knowledge that, in another universe, she could be romanceable.  It's the twist of fate,  It's flirting with Aveline, taken to another level. 

Do you let out a little chuckle every time you meet a lesbian?

[Plaintiff]

iakus wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

The fact that Traynor is "memorable" only by virtue of her sexuality just highlights the fact that society treats homosexuals like some alien beast. By comparison, the heterosexual characters get many memorable moments that have nothing to do with their sexuality.

The moment was memorable.  Traynor herself was an awesome character anyway.  Smart, slightly nerdy, someone I could see being friends with even without romancing her. 

And a better analyst than the Shadow Broker.

That's not better.

If Traynor has many memorable moments regardless of her sexuality, then "set sexuality makes memorable moments" is a bad argument, because it's not needed. Why do we need "memorable moments" based on sexuality, when they can be based on practically anything else?

Modifié par Plaintiff, 03 juillet 2013 - 04:38 .

[Magdalena11]

It's been said before and I'll say it again. If you want a straight romance, play it that way. These games are written to be fun for everyone. No one holds a gun to my head and tells me to play a gay or lesbian character.

People have commented before that it stinks that in the second conversation with Anders, a male character can't gain approval without flirting. I agree that this is unfortunate but IRL it's like that too. There are some people who are more blatant than others and there are some that are easily offended. There are plenty of chances to gain back approval later and with a PC and the console it's possible to make the rivalry go away.

It just makes sense to make potential LIs player-sexual since Bioware has no idea how its customers are going to want to play it. I play the game how I want and don't worry if I step on a virtual toe. This is one reason that I like the friend/rival system better than the strict approval system. My companions can still respect me even if we disagree.

[Iakus]

Plaintiff wrote...

Do you let out a little chuckle every time you meet a lesbian?

Are you trying to be offensive?

[Plaintiff]

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...
Traynor isn't memorable? This is so subjective that it seems impossible to form anything but a personal argument off of it. I love Traynor and it has nothing to do with her sexuality. She is smart and funny and probably my favorite human character. I'll agree she isn't as deep or complex as any number of Bioware characters I can think of, but to be honest, none of the ME characters are that deep, complex, or unique. I'd consider her interest in synthetics more noteworthy as a character trait than her interest in women personally. The game makes a much bigger deal of that anyway.

I never said she wasn't, but since the entire argument against all-inclusive romances is that it leads to "shallower characters", the obvious implication is that Traynor would somehow be a less interesting and a less well-written character if she was sexually available to both genders.

[syllogi]

iakus wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

The fact that Traynor is "memorable" only by virtue of her sexuality just highlights the fact that society treats homosexuals like some alien beast. By comparison, the heterosexual characters get many memorable moments that have nothing to do with their sexuality.

The moment was memorable.  Traynor herself was an awesome character anyway.  Smart, slightly nerdy, someone I could see being friends with even without romancing her. 

And a better analyst than the Shadow Broker.

As a female gamer who was really hoping for a human female same sex LI in ME3, I liked Traynor as an NPC, but HATED her romance.  It was a terrible disappointment to find out that her romance scene was so incredibly cringeworthy.  I really have to question it when people say they like the way the same sex romances were done in ME3...what was so great about the cheesy, sleezy scene that female Shepards had with Traynor?  I do think she was perfectly nice in every other aspect of her character, but it's pretty insulting when I hear people tell me that her romance was "done right"...it felt embarassing to even watch it on YouTube.  

Personally, I don't want to play Bioware romances at all, if they're going to be like the Traynor romance.  So I really question the people who hold that one up as an example of "done right"...is it right because it's segregated, and you've never tried it, and you don't care that it's terrible?

[Plaintiff]

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...

Also, I don't understand why it's not natural and plausible for Traynor to turn down a dudeShep's advances in game. Isn't this what a lesbian in RL would do with a real dude? Should it be impossible for Shepard to be obtuse or even insensitive where sexuality is involved?  Shepard can certainly be an obtuse or insensitive git where other species are involved. 

How's this relevant? The question is "Why does having a fixed sexuality of any kind make a character 'better'?"

[Magdalena11]

Ummmm.....I'm probably going to get in trouble for saying this but shouldn't discussions of ME player sexuality be on ME's board? I don't play ME and have no idea who the characters are. I gather Shepherd is the protagonist but arguing about Traynor's sexuality doesn't give me any insight into DA sexuality. I'm sorry, I'll shut up now.

[Plaintiff]

Magdalena11 wrote...

Ummmm.....I'm probably going to get in trouble for saying this but shouldn't discussions of ME player sexuality be on ME's board? I don't play ME and have no idea who the characters are. I gather Shepherd is the protagonist but arguing about Traynor's sexuality doesn't give me any insight into DA sexuality. I'm sorry, I'll shut up now.

It's a bit difficult to avoid comparing the two series, since the only Bioware game with characters that are only available in same-sex romances is Mass Effect 3.

[syllogi]

Magdalena11 wrote...

Ummmm.....I'm probably going to get in trouble for saying this but shouldn't discussions of ME player sexuality be on ME's board? I don't play ME and have no idea who the characters are. I gather Shepherd is the protagonist but arguing about Traynor's sexuality doesn't give me any insight into DA sexuality. I'm sorry, I'll shut up now.

People keep bringing up Steve Cortez and Samantha Traynor in this thread, because they're desperately hoping that people who want same sex romances will get the same sort of treatment in the next DA game.  I had to respond, because I am very strongly opposed to the way those romances were implemented, and it really seems like the people who are holding those romances up as examples of how to do it "right" just want to shove same sex romances into the corner where they don't have to see or think about them.

[Thomas Andresen]

Plaintiff wrote...

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...

Also, I don't understand why it's not natural and plausible for Traynor to turn down a dudeShep's advances in game. Isn't this what a lesbian in RL would do with a real dude? Should it be impossible for Shepard to be obtuse or even insensitive where sexuality is involved?  Shepard can certainly be an obtuse or insensitive git where other species are involved. 

How's this relevant? The question is "Why does having a fixed sexuality of any kind make a character 'better'?"

Hang on. Let me count how many times something to this effect have been asked in this thread.

And there hasn't been a single straight answer to it.

[Abraham_uk]

Please note that I do not subscribe to any "stereotypes" regarding heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, transgender etc... I am merely saying that sexuality is a trait in and of itself.

Being a tennis player is a trait.
Being someone who reads a lot of books is a trait.
Being a video gamer is a trait.
Being a dancer is a trait.
Your gender is a trait.
Your sexuality is a trait.

There is no typical behaviour patterns for each of these traits. But traits are significant.



Sex and sexuality are both huge character traits in their own right.

These determine what kind of love interests you're going to pursue.


But sexuality is so much more than whether you're into men or women, (or both).
It determines what kind of men/women you're into.

Are you into the strong independant type. The submissive shy type. The aggressive type. The assertive type. The verbose type. The intelligent person, or the physical recreation type. What kind of person turns you on. That is covered by sexuality.

In Dragon Age or Mass Effect, sexuality even takes into account inter species relationships.



Now here is another sexuality dimension that most people don't consider.
How do you approach someone you're attracted to?
What kind of love interest are you?


Sexuality is very complicated, and believe it or not is a character trait.

The fact that all of your potential love interests in Dragon Age 2 are potentially into both men and women is significant.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 03 juillet 2013 - 05:09 .

[Hazegurl]

Il Divo wrote...

I addressed this with Kali, but I think you're selling the concept short. It's true that the novelty of any particular character interaction can wear off, but this is the sort of thing which can already be applied to Bioware characters as written. Were you bored of Isabela being a sex maniac? Or Oghren being a drunken lout? Maybe yes, maybe no. Personally, neither bothered me. There may be a point where Bethany's lack of sexual experience would grow tiresome, but I don't think that immediately occurs after the "one and done" conversation.

I'm not selling the concept short. Everyone knows that repetitive writing sucks.

Well, I have brought up the Bethany/Traynor examples quite a few times. Characters from different backgrounds have different perspectives. Isabella, who clearly enjoys sex in all its forms, could have very different character interactions with a Fenris who is exclusively gay vs. one who is exclusively straight. A Fenris who is gay might awkwardly brush her off, while a straight Fenris mightbe more open/amused by the idea.

I know you brought up Traynor and Bethany and neither character is fleshed out by you simply knowing their sexuality. If anything it seems as though both characters are given crap development and tossed by the wayside. Btw, Fenris does awkwardly brush her off, multiple times and guess what? He's also been amused by the idea of Isabella coming on to him. You are basically asking for things that have already been implemented into the game. lol!

Again, this doesn't work. Player-sexual refers to the idea that companions don't have a defined sexuality- it changes to suit the player.

I know what it means, even though I don't think any character is "playersexual" however, you are essentially asking for the same thing. If you, the player, can convince Ash to sleep with you then I don't see how that is any different than her being a "playersexual" character. It pretty much suggests that the PC is so special she can convince Ash to sleep with her.

This cannot be the case for straight LIs because they are straight regardless of how you design your character. The same applies to Ashley. Yes, she may romance both a male and female character using my suggestion, but she is given better definition as a character.

No she doesn't, she still sleeps with a female or male by virtue of them being the main character in your scenario. I don't see how it makes her better defined according to your own criteria of having a set sexuality. Maybe it's just me but "straight" people don't sleep with people of the same sex unless they are bi-curious, bisexual, or just simply gay.  I dont buy that porno fantasy crap of two women having sex cause they just want to even though they are super duper straight. :innocent:

Fair enough, but then this is also someone who's grown bored of Bioware romances period and would prefer to see them explore other venues.

I don't see what else they can explore to make you happy. Unless BioWare decides to pull a total "Crying Game" move on ya. Now that I would pay to see for a lot of posters here.