1981 réponses à ce sujet

[Lebanese Dude]

AresKeith wrote...

I just don't see why they didn't just make a new character

I suppose it would have been more sensible to just make a new character.

I just don't think it's as big of a deal as people make it out to be.
Frankly, I didn't even remember her her character in origins.

Modifié par Lebdood, 29 novembre 2013 - 06:34 .

[AresKeith]

Lebdood wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

I just don't see why they didn't just make a new character

I suppose it would have been more sensible to just make a new character.

I just don't think it's as big of a deal as people make it out to be.
Frankly, I didn't even remember her her character in origins.

As bland as she was in DAO, I still prefer that Merrill to DA2 Merrill. She would still be consistent and wouldn't look like a child

[Seboist]

Lebdood wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

I just don't see why they didn't just make a new character

I suppose it would have been more sensible to just make a new character.

I just don't think it's as big of a deal as people make it out to be.
Frankly, I didn't even remember her her character in origins.

Continuity in a story is a pretty big deal.

[CuriousArtemis]

I have no idea what the rest of you are arguing about or what it has to do with the topic of this thread. You seem to be arguing about why you dislike/like the characters you dislike/like. I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish.

As to the OP, yes, I thought the characters in both games were excellently written. My all-time favorite DA companions are Fenris, Isabela, and Alistair. I might throw in Zevran as a fourth. I've romanced all of those except Alistair. So I hope that answers your question.

[Angrywolves]

uh no they weren't . The characters in DA2 were poorly written. The discussion doesn't have to accomplish anything . shrugs.

[draken-heart]

What I would like to see, even though I found it okay, is that the companions discuss it. Like if Cassandra is Bi/Player-sexual, she could discuss with a Female Inquisitor that she never had feelings for another woman before. Would have made it more believable with Merrill.

Might Romance Izzy on my warrior this time around.

[KC_Prototype]

Because if they have an established then a character's sexuality should reflect that. Morrigan shouldn't be bi because she isn't keen on trying new things. If DA2 followed that, Isabella would be bi but not Merrill and Anders would bi but Fenris. Also, DA2's shortcomings with romance was the unbalanced between number of female romance options and number of male romance options, Aveline should of been a female romance option.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Good writing? I'm just hoping for consistency and the occasional laugh.

Characterization? As long as we're not running on the Davey model we should be good.

Sexuality? Fine if only because waifu/husbando wars never get old.

Aaaaand that about covers it.

[Jigglypuff]

everyone should be available, it should be like a buffet, pick and choose and if people don't like it they will just have to deal.

[Androme]

 People are so quick with saying: ''Don't try to define what an RPG is!'' yet in the next heartbeat say: ''Define what sexuality is!''.

People are also very quick with saying: ''Don't compare X to Y, they have two entirely different personalities!'', yet apparently there are no differences between the two genders, and apparently being homosexual, asexual, bisexual or whatever-sexual should be the norm as heterosexuality is.

This forum is driving me mad. The hypocrisy and detachment from reality is maddening.

Modifié par Androme, 30 novembre 2013 - 06:19 .

[WildOrchid]

KC_Prototype wrote...

Because if they have an established then a character's sexuality should reflect that. Morrigan shouldn't be bi because she isn't keen on trying new things. If DA2 followed that, Isabella would be bi but not Merrill and Anders would bi but Fenris. Also, DA2's shortcomings with romance was the unbalanced between number of female romance options and number of male romance options, Aveline should of been a female romance option.

''New things'? If she liked women too it wouldn't be a 'new thing' but something that would come normal to her just like she did with dudes. Being bi is not about 'trying a new thing'.

[Lebanese Dude]

Androme wrote...

 People are so quick with saying: ''Don't try to define what an RPG is!'' yet in the next heartbeat say: ''Define what sexuality is!''.

People are also very quick with saying: ''Don't compare X to Y, they have two entirely different personalities!'', yet apparently there are no differences between the two genders, and apparently being homosexual, asexual, bisexual or whatever-sexual should be the norm as heterosexuality is.

This forum is driving me mad. The hypocrisy and detachment from reality is maddening.

Probably because sexual orientation and gender has nothing to do with personality....

Keep up.

[Kidd]

What I have learnt from skimming this thread,

- Bisexuality is uncertainty
- I am promiscuous (cause otherwise it doesn't fit my personality)
- Merrill is straight because reasons
- I do not exist
Pretty cool.

No but seriously, why is this thread still open?

[Plaintiff]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

What I have learnt from skimming this thread,

- Bisexuality is uncertainty
- I am promiscuous (cause otherwise it doesn't fit my personality)
- Merrill is straight because reasons
- I do not exist
Pretty cool.

No but seriously, why is this thread still open?

Don't you see? Threads like this are needed, to teach the LGBT community how to behave so they don't confuse the heteronormatives.

[Lebanese Dude]

Plaintiff wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

What I have learnt from skimming this thread,

- Bisexuality is uncertainty
- I am promiscuous (cause otherwise it doesn't fit my personality)
- Merrill is straight because reasons
- I do not exist
Pretty cool.

No but seriously, why is this thread still open?

Don't you see? Threads like this are needed, to teach the LGBT community how to behave so they don't confuse the heteronormatives.

[Plaintiff]

Lebdood wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

What I have learnt from skimming this thread,

- Bisexuality is uncertainty
- I am promiscuous (cause otherwise it doesn't fit my personality)
- Merrill is straight because reasons
- I do not exist
Pretty cool.

No but seriously, why is this thread still open?

Don't you see? Threads like this are needed, to teach the LGBT community how to behave so they don't confuse the heteronormatives.

I know how they feel, honestly. I get the same way when confronted with algebra problems.

"HOW CAN LETTERS BE NUMBERS? RAAAAAARGHAAAAAAARGH TABLE-FLIP!"

[Lebanese Dude]

Plaintiff wrote...

Lebdood wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

What I have learnt from skimming this thread,

- Bisexuality is uncertainty
- I am promiscuous (cause otherwise it doesn't fit my personality)
- Merrill is straight because reasons
- I do not exist
Pretty cool.

No but seriously, why is this thread still open?

Don't you see? Threads like this are needed, to teach the LGBT community how to behave so they don't confuse the heteronormatives.

I know how they feel, honestly. I get the same way when confronted with algebra problems.

"HOW CAN LETTERS BE NUMBERS? RAAAAAARGHAAAAAAARGH TABLE-FLIP!"

bahaha

Can't argue with math though

[Silfren]

Morocco Mole wrote...

The point is that players shouldn't be punished for it like they are with Anders. Part of this is the ****ty approval system and the part is that Anders can be your only healer and you can be screwed majorly because of that.

Part of the problem, I think, is the perception that taking an approval hit is a punishment.  The idea that you "should" get each companion character to 100% approval--that you're supposed to--is what players bring to the table, not an actual thing Bioware created.  There's nothing at all wrong with having Anders as a rival rather than a friend, and even if it were, nothing about this very first approval hit means that you can't make it up later.  It makes the game slightly different. 

Many--most?--players play the games more than once, if not quite a few times.  There's no reason why each playthrough requires the same makeup of friended or rivaled Companions.

[Silfren]

eluvianix wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

In what way?

You have to really grind out the friendship/rivalry points in a very consistent manner or she leaves you at the end of act 2. If you **** up too much, it is impossible to keep her around.

i guess it just depends on one's personal perspective. I had no issue keeping Isabela as a friend. 

Neither did I.  Not for every playthrough.  After the first one, it all depends on playing the kind of character you want Hawke to be.  If you want Isabela to be your BFF or your lover, then your playthrough, properly done, will reflect that.  Logically it would mean that you made decisions that she agreed with, and probably means you took her along for most of your missions.  If you want a playthrough where your diplomatic Hawke is more morally aligned with Aveline than anyone else, and your lover is Sebastian, the natural consequence of that is going to be that you're not as close to Isabela.  You can't have it all ways for every playthrough without gaming the system--which is easily done through cheat codes, if someone so badly wants to be friends--or rivals--with everyone.  Since you have to meta the game anyway in order to achieve this allegedly optimal outcome, I'd think it would be easier to do that than insist that the approval system should be dropped.

It's kind of astronomically stupid to whine that the game doesn't let you make whatever decisions you want and still have the companions totally agree with you in all things, which is precisely what's being argued against here.  I don't understand it because it seems that a lot of the people griping about this are the same ones who claim to want the companions to have their own identities and opinions and not be puppets for the PC. 

That's EXACTLY what we got in DA2.  Wanting to ditch the approval system altogether would just get rid of that. 

[Silfren]

Morocco Mole wrote...

He's just overall obnoxious, angsty to a ludicrous degree, and one-dimensional because he never shuts up about the mages for one minute.

Being single-minded in his fixation on the mages' plight doesn't make him a one-dimensional character.  There are plenty of actual, real-life, breathing persons who behave exactly as he does, especially as a result of some kind of trauma.  Whatever might be argued about his character, there's nothing one-dimensional about him, and certainly not for that reason.

[Silfren]

Morocco Mole wrote...

You've yet to present a compelling reason why. Why is it okay for him to rack up rivalry points in other situations, but not this one?

I've already said I hate the rivalry/friendship mechanic because it forces you to act in a certain instead of roleplaying how you want. Without being punished anyway.

Except it does nothing of the sort.  You're just assuming that roleplaying how you want should not mean that the companions react negatively to you.  NOTHING stops you from roleplaying how you want, it just means that you have to accept that roleplaying a given way will mean friending certain companions and rivaling others.  And, again, it's not a punishment to have the companions rival you.  This is just your perception based on the idea, apparently, that you only ever roleplay exactly one way.

[Silfren]

Lebdood wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

As the only party member with a social conscience, I find Anders the most appealing by miles.

That's unfair. Aveline comes to mind.

Even Isabela agrees that keeping the ship is a bad idea if you're in a rivalry relationship.

Note that when you're choosing which group to be indentured to in the beginning, Aveline seems to have markedly less of a problem with you joining mercenary killers--murderers for hire--than Athenril's group, even though the latter is presented as the moral option, what with that refusal to become killers or slavers. 

Also take note of her reaction to the elven refugees who seek asylum from the Qunari squatters.

[HiroVoid]

Actually, the mechanic DOES in fact punish going back and forth rather than trying to purposely go in one direction. Chances are that's why it's being revamped again in DA:I.

Edit: ......You might want to cool it down with the five replies in a row, Silf.

Modifié par HiroVoid, 01 décembre 2013 - 02:15 .

[Angrywolves]

Anders was a jerk and a mass murderer. He got the murder knife. He deserved it. Social conscience has nothing to do with anyone liking him. Rolls eyes.