248 réponses à ce sujet

[legbamel]

Being ninja-manced by Leliana made me much more suspicious of her, though meta-gaming tells me it's just game mechanics. Between her bizarre fit of jealousy and that freaky eyelash comment I consider her much less stable than I did at first (which wasn't very, with the whole "Maker talks to me in my dreams" explanation). Add on her bard background and there's very little reason for your Warden to take what she says at face value.

[Bionuts]

I always thought Leliana was simply playing the "shy, innocent" act.

[Plaintiff]

It's not possible to have a "healthy" relationship in the Dragon Age universe because your options are only major characters, and none of them will be "stable". They will all have problems because a character without problems is a boring one.

[AtreiyaN7]

Trista Hawke wrote...

Edit: Also no one is considering your hero's other companions watching the dysfunction happening. Should the correct interaction choices be made with surrounding companions, perhaps one of them can step up and defend your hero against a bullying companion, ergo saving your hero from him/herself and a volatile situation.

Examples:

1. abusive LI is put in her/his place by another companion who is in love with your protag
2. abusive LI is put in her/his place by another companion who considers you to be their best friend
3. abusive friend companion is put in his/her place by your LI
4. abusive family member companion is put in his/her place by either your best friend or LI, or a group intervention by all of your companions you have gained friendship with
3. abusive friend or LI companion is put in his/her place by a family member companion
4. no one puts anyone in his/her place and your hero resolves him/herself to a volatile situation (coupled with some kind of incentive that positively impacts the rest of your gameplay. Like... you put up with abuse and you gain so much in experience, or a special item, or something. You're bought off, basically.)
5. your hero is eventually presented with an option to end a volatile situation with an abusive companion which has is positive for your hero but bears slightly negative consequences on the rest of your gameplay (you lose out on experience, a special item, etc), inciting the player to think heavily on the decision before proceeding.

I've seen people complain about how Hawke being an idiot; but while I disagree with that assessment, I have
to say that any protagonist who does get themselves into an abusive relationship in a game and then just lets it go on and on and on probably deserves to be crowned with the title of Biggest Idiot in the DA-verse. The majority of outcomes on that list of yours makes me think that the hypothetical protagonist in this situation is either A) incredibly stupid  incredibly weak or C) incredibly incompetent.

At the end of the day, being a victim is not particularly appealing - not if you have the slighest bit of common sense or have ever experienced any kind of abuse IRL, OR if you've ever watched or read news stories about domestic violence. Being a human punching bag or having someone scream the worst possible things you can say to another human being (for hours on end) is...not...fun. I will point out that I once watched a story on tv about a woman whose abusive boyfriend/husband ended up blowing most of her face off with a shotgun. She lived, but it was not a pretty sight. I vaguely recall that they were trying to do reconstructive surgery, but her face had essentially been obliterated.

I mean, sorry, but you're expecting me to believe that the protagonist responsible for (maybe) saving the world will be cowering before her LI while he gives her a split lip and a pair of black eyes? Where is the logic in this? Again, I can see some sort of sidequest involving outside parties unrelated to the protagonist, but this fixation on actually playing the victim of an abusive companion or having companions who are victims of OTHER abusive companions just strikes me as being weird at this point. This kind of thing should not be treated lightly or as if it would be fun - because it just isn't fun. It's something serious, and unless you can tell an extremely convincing story and get people to suspend their disbelief, it's going to fail.

I don't have a problem IF, say, we had a companion who was a conflicted double agent/spy that ends up stirring up a whole lot of trouble depending on the nature of your relationship. I would applaud a character who skillfully deceived me until a critical turning point, because it would mean that they've been an extremely clever professional who's good at their job. But I sure as heck would not be happy in a situation that makes me view my character as a completely brain-dead moron/punching bag.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 23 juillet 2013 - 08:52 .

[Medhia Nox]

I don't think it's easy to mix hero fetishism with more serious topics like abuse that require a delicate and mature hand to deal with expertly.

These games already go a long way to glorify violence as a viable solution to all of the world's problems without ANY of the drawbacks.

We hardly need more.

[Adela]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Trista Hawke wrote...

Edit: Also no one is considering your hero's other companions watching the dysfunction happening. Should the correct interaction choices be made with surrounding companions, perhaps one of them can step up and defend your hero against a bullying companion, ergo saving your hero from him/herself and a volatile situation.

Examples:

1. abusive LI is put in her/his place by another companion who is in love with your protag
2. abusive LI is put in her/his place by another companion who considers you to be their best friend
3. abusive friend companion is put in his/her place by your LI
4. abusive family member companion is put in his/her place by either your best friend or LI, or a group intervention by all of your companions you have gained friendship with
3. abusive friend or LI companion is put in his/her place by a family member companion
4. no one puts anyone in his/her place and your hero resolves him/herself to a volatile situation (coupled with some kind of incentive that positively impacts the rest of your gameplay. Like... you put up with abuse and you gain so much in experience, or a special item, or something. You're bought off, basically.)
5. your hero is eventually presented with an option to end a volatile situation with an abusive companion which has is positive for your hero but bears slightly negative consequences on the rest of your gameplay (you lose out on experience, a special item, etc), inciting the player to think heavily on the decision before proceeding.

I've seen people complain about how Hawke being an idiot; but while I disagree with that assessment, I have
to say that any protagonist who does get themselves into an abusive relationship in a game and then just lets it go on and on and on probably deserves to be crowned with the title of Biggest Idiot in the DA-verse. The majority of outcomes on that list of yours makes me think that the hypothetical protagonist in this situation is either A) incredibly stupid  incredibly weak or C) incredibly incompetent.

At the end of the day, being a victim is not particularly appealing - not if you have the slighest bit of common sense or have ever experienced any kind of abuse IRL, OR if you've ever watched or read news stories about domestic violence. Being a human punching bag or having someone scream the worst possible things you can say to another human being (for hours on end) is...not...fun. I will point out that I once watched a story on tv about a woman whose abusive boyfriend/husband ended up blowing most of her face off with a shotgun. She lived, but it was not a pretty sight. I vaguely recall that they were trying to do reconstructive surgery, but her face had essentially been obliterated.

I mean, sorry, but you're expecting me to believe that the protagonist responsible for (maybe) saving the world will be cowering before her LI while he gives her a split lip and a pair of black eyes? Where is the logic in this? Again, I can see some sort of sidequest involving outside parties unrelated to the protagonist, but this fixation on actually playing the victim of a abusive companion or having companions who are victims of OTHER abusive companions just strikes me as being weird at this point. This kind of thing should not be treated lightly or as if it would be fun - because it just isn't fun. It's something serious, and unless you can tell an extremely convincing story and get people to suspend their disbelief, it's going to fail.

I don't have a problem IF, say, we had a companion who was a conflicted double agent/spy that ends up stirring up a whole lot of trouble depending on the nature of your relationship. I would applaud a character who skillfully deceived me until a critical turning point, because it would mean that they've been an extremely clever professional who's good at their job. But I sure as heck would not be happy in a situation that makes me view my character as a completely brain-dead moron/punching bag.

100% AGREED, its obvious that this person has never had issues like this in real life and for some reason considers it would be "fun"  to experience this in-game  witch personally i really dont see the point in it at all , she doesnt take into concideration that other ppl that have had this kind of stuff in RL might be disturbing to them if they would have to deal with it in a game as well , i really doubt that BW will concider such conflict  knowing that alot of ppl may not find it appealing witch can lead to loss of customers on their part for implementing this nonsense

[legbamel]

Ooh, yes. A spy and betrayer would be amazing. I have no problem with people who aren't nice to my PC and I love good drama. I just don't see the appeal of putting the PC in a position of inexplicable weakness with regard to a single NPC while he or she is epic in every other circumstance or including drama and useless characters for the sake of "dark".

[CronoDragoon]

I think the real discussion here is to what degree NPCs should be allowed to act in ways that the player would not want. To me Trista's focus on a character manipulating the MC reflects a desire for more independent action by your party members or characters in general, a la Anders and the Chantry.

It doesn't even need to be about broken people so much as perhaps people who do not agree with you, aren't your lapdogs, and have their own agendas. In this sense I think DA has always been much better than ME.

[Medhia Nox]

@ag99: I have had some not insignificant bad things happen in my life - and I would not mind those things explored in a story.

Your train of thought should continue - while it might very well be true that someone who has never suffered deeply in life might suggest suffering as a "fun" thing to explore - it is also true that someone who is "overly" sensitive to suffering has not reconciled their suffering and might not be the best judge as to whether something is "too much". However, because they are still on their journey of recovery does not instantly mean that unpleasant topics should never be explored. It simply means that a certain story is "not for them".

That being said - I do not believe any real deep topics have any place in Bioware games (or mostly anywhere in the young gaming genre that has done very little to show any real depth of solution beyond killing).

[MWImexico]

@ op:
That still seems to be the fantasme of a masochist. Weird.

Trista Hawke wrote...
... or play into your hero's "learned helplessness", realizing that your hero is still, after all, just human. He/She has flaws and issues too - despite being capable of saving the world.

so, my character should be treated like sh*t to realise that, after all, he's just human? No thanks there are others more fun ways.

Modifié par MWImexico, 23 juillet 2013 - 08:56 .

[Adela]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@ag99: I have had some not insignificant bad things happen in my life - and I would not mind those things explored in a story.

Your train of thought should continue - while it might very well be true that someone who has never suffered deeply in life might suggest suffering as a "fun" thing to explore - it is also true that someone who is "overly" sensitive to suffering has not reconciled their suffering and might not be the best judge as to whether something is "too much". However, because they are still on their journey of recovery does not instantly mean that unpleasant topics should never be explored. It simply means that a certain story is "not for them".

That being said - I do not believe any real deep topics have any place in Bioware games (or mostly anywhere in the young gaming genre that has done very little to show any real depth of solution beyond killing).

True but for those of us who are more "sensiteve" to this subject, find this really disturbing namely my self i have gone through some things in my life that i had to get therapy for and certantly dont wanna get reminded  of it  weather its in game movies or books i try to avoid that as much as possible  when i play a game i play it to get away from those thing   and DA being a fantasy game, even a "dark" fantasy game it still has a middle ground or a "sylver lining" for everything  in the story its not all black and white personally i liked what they have done with companions so far they have that middle ground  and not  just bat sht crazy like the OP wants. As others have said before it doesnt make any sense for a hero to hang out with this kind of ppl let alone put up with them then the protagonist wouldn't be considered as a hero it would be considered as a push-over

[Medhia Nox]

@ag99: And for someone who has seen an excessive amount of violence? Do you think they would have the right to be "sensitive" to the subject of violence solving every problem in a video game? Would to respect and support their opinion if they began asking for it to be stopped entirely because it makes them feel uncomfortable?

Personally - I find nearly all of the DA NPCs largely damaged in some way and I would never be friends or "hang out" with any of them. But I wouldn't want them to not be available.

@CronoDragoon: Now that I fully support. NPCs should have their own agenda and it should not be "sycophant".

I loathe Anders - if there's any "success" in the character, it is my utter hatred for the very concept of Anders as a character - "something" about him triggers such a strong sense of genuine revulsion (only when thinking about the character of course - I couldn't care less otherwise).

The only thing I would have asked in the DA storyline - was to oppose Anders and not sit by idly while "I" knew exactly what he was doing - and so too would Hawke.

[Jonathan Seagull]

Trista Hawke wrote...

4. no one puts anyone in his/her place and your hero resolves him/herself to a volatile situation (coupled with some kind of incentive that positively impacts the rest of your gameplay. Like... you put up with abuse and you gain so much in experience, or a special item, or something. You're bought off, basically.)
5. your hero is eventually presented with an option to end a volatile situation with an abusive companion which has is positive for your hero but bears slightly negative consequences on the rest of your gameplay (you lose out on experience, a special item, etc), inciting the player to think heavily on the decision before proceeding.

I'm sorry, this is gross.  "Put up with abuse and you'll be rewarded!"

Or "Put an end to it and be punished."  No.  Just no.  Also, everything Atreiya said.

[ilikesocks]

Jonathan Seagull wrote...

Trista Hawke wrote...

4. no one puts anyone in his/her place and your hero resolves him/herself to a volatile situation (coupled with some kind of incentive that positively impacts the rest of your gameplay. Like... you put up with abuse and you gain so much in experience, or a special item, or something. You're bought off, basically.)
5. your hero is eventually presented with an option to end a volatile situation with an abusive companion which has is positive for your hero but bears slightly negative consequences on the rest of your gameplay (you lose out on experience, a special item, etc), inciting the player to think heavily on the decision before proceeding.

I'm sorry, this is gross.  "Put up with abuse and you'll be rewarded!"

Or "Put an end to it and be punished."  No.  Just no.  Also, everything Atreiya said.

Agreed.

[lady_v23]

A little dysfunction? Sure! Why not? Just a little though.

My life is extremely stressful. I play video games to ignore life for a little while. What's the point of playing a game of it reminds of the things I'm ignoring?

I hope we get an option to kill or leave the behind the character. I would certainly hope so, specially if the character is a whiny buffoon.

[Adela]

@Medhia Nox
i never said it should be all sunshine and rainbows either, sure every companion has their issues thats what sets them apart from being one dimensional, but what the OP is suggesting is something that makes no sense like the companion wants to punch the protagonist just because s/he said they want cake or something and just sit there and take it to apparently feel "human".
And as for excessive amount of violence such as war because thats what the game is mostly about, sure its disturbing, but it has a purpose and its saving the world from whatever is happening, and try to save as many ppl as possible witch i said before it has that "middle ground/silver lining" and its not just killing ppl for the sake of killing ppl just because someone think its fun to do so, personally in my playthrough i always try to have a "clean " game and make the best of the situation that i can to save ppl if given the opportunity, that might sound lame to others  but thats just how i like to play my games.

Modifié par ag99, 23 juillet 2013 - 10:08 .

[AtreiyaN7]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@ag99: And for someone who has seen an excessive amount of violence? Do you think they would have the right to be "sensitive" to the subject of violence solving every problem in a video game? Would to respect and support their opinion if they began asking for it to be stopped entirely because it makes them feel uncomfortable?

Personally - I find nearly all of the DA NPCs largely damaged in some way and I would never be friends or "hang out" with any of them. But I wouldn't want them to not be available.

@CronoDragoon: Now that I fully support. NPCs should have their own agenda and it should not be "sycophant".

I loathe Anders - if there's any "success" in the character, it is my utter hatred for the very concept of Anders as a character - "something" about him triggers such a strong sense of genuine revulsion (only when thinking about the character of course - I couldn't care less otherwise).

The only thing I would have asked in the DA storyline - was to oppose Anders and not sit by idly while "I" knew exactly what he was doing - and so too would Hawke.

Here's the difference as I see it: as upsetting as seeing war and violence might be to someone who has been through the horrors of war (or just seen a lot of violence in their life), it's clearly part and parcel of a game that revolves around a major conflict; it is necessarily a part of the game. That being said, violence should not be the go-to solution for every situation.

What the OP wants just strikes me as being a frivolous and poorly thought out depiction of abuse, and I can't accept that as being okay. Also, I very much doubt that any victim of abuse who might potentially play DA:I would expect to suddenly be faced with being thrust into the role of victim again in their lives - all because some random user thought it would be really cool or interesting to explore the topic.

Is domestic violence somehow naturally a part of a mage vs. templar conflict or a humans vs. demons conflict, or any other kind of potentially world-shattering conflict? I think not, personally. The writers should feel free to add a manipulative, duplicitious companion with their own agenda like I've been saying, but I certainly hope that they don't ever do anything even remotely close to the OP's proposed depiction of domestic violence/abuse in the game. I have at least one idea about how it could possibly be implemented in a nuanced way, but it's just never going to work if it directly involves the companions while casting the protagonist in the role of hapless victim.

[LadyJaneGrey]

*sees OP is concerned about desire for normalcy and functionality in character relationships*
*looks at writer list for Dragon Age*

I think you're safe from normal and boring.  They feed on our tears, don't you know.

Also, +1000 to everything Atreiya wrote.  I had a mentally ill stalker for years (may still - hopefully I've shaken him), and I don't want a replay of that in my entertainment, thanks.  <_<

[Ryzaki]

A spy/traitor LI would be awesome though. They sell your PC out and nothing you can do will change that.

Course I'd just avoid them my second playthrough. \\o/

[Adela]

@Trista Hawke
Your right i dont know you, and yes my choice for words might have not been wisely chosen, but for the suggestions that you have posted previously about how the abusive companion bothered me same as what ive said bothered u,jusr because you in particular are capable of separating your personal baggage from a video game doesnt mean that others are

[Magdalena11]

Not everyone plays the same. I reject your normality and I substitute my own. Problem solved.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Ryzaki wrote...

A spy/traitor LI would be awesome though. They sell your PC out and nothing you can do will change that.

Course I'd just avoid them my second playthrough. o/

I would prefer do i can do something to change that as pr*** kill him as good guy influence on him otherwise gaining his approval would be pointless something like zevran who always would betray you no matter what you do even morrigan (possible if she not lying) starts care about PC.