947 réponses à ce sujet

[Blackrising]

Urazz wrote...

Vapaä wrote...

Chari wrote...

Diverse sexualities, personalities,. races, genders, ages...
Meaning that we won't get the same ****y or sweet girls, hot elf or i-am-so-sad human guy all bi every DA game
It's getting boring...
At least give us some qunari then

Then choices are not the way of diversity...except for "sexual diversity" but even in DAO the straightness of Ali/Morri wasn't an important part of their character

I'd say scrap that, there are plenty of areas to be diverse, without restricting arbitraly the player

Actually, I think it was part of their character.  Maybe not important like you say but it is part of their character.  It ruins the character if you just make them player-sexual just for the sake of making sure gay people have the same amount of relationships as everyone else in a game.  Not everyone is gay or  bisexual and thus the characters should be treated as such as it can be jarring to do something like that..

And here we go again.
Why, for the love of god, would it ruin a character if they just so happen to be not a hundred percent set on their sexuality? (Newsflash: It happens more often than you think.)
Why would Morrigan suddenly be a badly-written, cheap characer just because in a distant parallel universe, she might be kissing a female Warden instead of a male one?
What would change about Morrigan if a female Warden had been allowed to romance her? Let me spell it out for you. N.O.T.H.I.N.G.
She'd be the same fascinating, three-dimensional character she is now, except a lot of players would have been a lot happier thanks to not being denied an option they would have loved to have.

But yeah, who are we to ask for the same options as straight gamers? Preposterous, that's what it is. How dare I care more about enjoying the game than having an absolutely average distribution of sexuality?

How come I NEVER see threads about restricting romances according to a character's personality? Why would Morrigan date a goody-two-shoes templar? Why would Alistair date a bloodmage? Why would Fenris date a mage? Why would Anders date a templar? Why would Leliana date a cruel a**hole? Why would ANY of them date an ugly jerk?
Why is it ALWAYS the sexuality that bothers people?
Why can't ANYONE SIMPLY LET ME ENJOY A GAME THAT DOESN'T EXCLUDE ME FROM ANY OPTIONS.
GODDAMMIT.
*flips table*

(I might have talked myself into a rage here. Time to go to sleep.)

[Vapaa]

Chari wrote...

So let's ignore the characters' personalities and backstories?

Jesus, since when bisexuality takes away personality and backstory ?

[Lorisca]

franciscoamell wrote...

Does anyone remember which DAO companion was first revealed?

I think Alistair

[Chari]

Blackrising wrote...

Urazz wrote...

Vapaä wrote...

Chari wrote...

Diverse sexualities, personalities,. races, genders, ages...
Meaning that we won't get the same ****y or sweet girls, hot elf or i-am-so-sad human guy all bi every DA game
It's getting boring...
At least give us some qunari then

Then choices are not the way of diversity...except for "sexual diversity" but even in DAO the straightness of Ali/Morri wasn't an important part of their character

I'd say scrap that, there are plenty of areas to be diverse, without restricting arbitraly the player

Actually, I think it was part of their character.  Maybe not important like you say but it is part of their character.  It ruins the character if you just make them player-sexual just for the sake of making sure gay people have the same amount of relationships as everyone else in a game.  Not everyone is gay or  bisexual and thus the characters should be treated as such as it can be jarring to do something like that..

And here we go again.
Why, for the love of god, would it ruin a character if they just so happen to be not a hundred percent set on their sexuality? (Newsflash: It happens more often than you think.)
Why would Morrigan suddenly be a badly-written, cheap characer just because in a distant parallel universe, she might be kissing a female Warden instead of a male one?
What would change about Morrigan if a female Warden had been allowed to romance her? Let me spell it out for you. N.O.T.H.I.N.G.
She'd be the same fascinating, three-dimensional character she is now, except a lot of players would have been a lot happier thanks to not being denied an option they would have loved to have.

But yeah, who are we to ask for the same options as straight gamers? Preposterous, that's what it is. How dare I care more about enjoying the game than having an absolutely average distribution of sexuality?

How come I NEVER see threads about restricting romances according to a character's personality? Why would Morrigan date a goody-two-shoes templar? Why would Alistair date a bloodmage? Why would Fenris date a mage? Why would Anders date a templar? Why would Leliana date a cruel a**hole? Why would ANY of them date an ugly jerk?
Why is it ALWAYS the sexuality that bothers people?
Why can't ANYONE SIMPLY LET ME ENJOY A GAME THAT DOESN'T EXCLUDE ME FROM ANY OPTIONS.
GODDAMMIT.
*flips table*

(I might have talked myself into a rage here. Time to go to sleep.)

Because at the right moment they are supposed to be. Maybe in future they'll change, maybe in past they were different. But right now, in this exact moment they have to make a choice.
Morrigan made her choice, she's not into women. If you actually respect and like Morrigan you'll respect her choice. If you want a character be nothing but Player's toy, then... Morrigan disapproves -15

Hey, you don't see me complaning that I can't romance qunari. And implying that everyone who wants properly and well-written romances is a homophobe... generalizing much?
If you want an orgy I'd advise some japanese novels or anime. There everyone sleeps with everyone. Here creators actually care about characters. If the romance fits them, they do it. If it doesn't, they don't. Simple as that

There is not enough restriction, here I agree. Though neither Warden or Hawke can be a true templar. They may use the techniques but that doesn't make them Templar just like being a Berserker doesn't make one a dwarf. DA2 has that riduclous rivalry romance where you can destroy everything Merril and Anders believe in and still sleep with them. Luckily they seem to be keen on avoiding it in DA:i. 

I'm bothered by so much in DA2 that you have no idea. Retcon, plot holes, Ass Pull rewritten Merril and Anders, silly plot, bad graphics, elves design, too much action in an RPG game... This theme is one of them. 

Relax

[Magdalena11]

Chari wrote...

What'sthe reason behind choosing a sexuality of character? If it is to pander the fans then it is bad writing. If it is actually a part of the character's bakstory and beliefs then it is good. DA2 did it just to pander the fans, meaning it was bad. DA:I and DA:O do it for the sake of character building, which is good

I'm OK with pandering to the fans if by that you mean listening to feedback and acting upon it.  I didn't mind the way it was done in DA2 at all, to be honest.  I wouldn't expect every potential LI to proudly stand on a soap box and proclaim sexual fluidity at the first sign of flirtation.  That would be a copout and it appeared in DAO for both Zevran and Leliana, if a little later in the romance arc.  I wasn't too crazy about gaining rivalry points with Anders for turning him down as a male Hawke but that fit in with Anders' impulsive nature as well.

[Chari]

Vapaä wrote...

Chari wrote...

So let's ignore the characters' personalities and backstories?

Jesus, since when bisexuality takes away personality and backstory ?

Sexuality is a part of character, it is a result of biological attraction, the way one was brough up and where - culture, beliefs, examples, choices. It is not a fancy dress one can change any time they want. It is fundemental, it may change but changes take time, experience and outer reasons
Changing sexuality is like changing taste, religious beliefs and other stuff which makes you you

[Chari]

Magdalena11 wrote...

Chari wrote...

What'sthe reason behind choosing a sexuality of character? If it is to pander the fans then it is bad writing. If it is actually a part of the character's bakstory and beliefs then it is good. DA2 did it just to pander the fans, meaning it was bad. DA:I and DA:O do it for the sake of character building, which is good

I'm OK with pandering to the fans if by that you mean listening to feedback and acting upon it.  I didn't mind the way it was done in DA2 at all, to be honest.  I wouldn't expect every potential LI to proudly stand on a soap box and proclaim sexual fluidity at the first sign of flirtation.  That would be a copout and it appeared in DAO for both Zevran and Leliana, if a little later in the romance arc.  I wasn't too crazy about gaining rivalry points with Anders for turning him down as a male Hawke but that fit in with Anders' impulsive nature as well.

Eh, there is difference between listening to fans and pandering them. Cullen is fan pandering, even if not a bad one, I guess? Adding more RPG elements, returning customizable appearance is listening to fans.

It was lazy and didn't fit Anders. Or, more like contradicted DA:A Anders. Isabella was quite fine, she always was this way. Fenris was a new dude but Merril... Merrils from DA:O and DA2 are two different characters. Retcon and plot hole as well

It all depends on the story and characters. If it fits them, that's great. If it doesn't it better be left out

[Vapaa]

Chari wrote...

It is not a fancy dress one can change any time they want.

You're the only one who talks about "changing", I didn't

A character can have strong personality, an interesting background and be bisexual, shocking, I know

[Chari]

Vapaä wrote...

Chari wrote...

It is not a fancy dress one can change any time they want.

You're the only one who talks about "changing", I didn't

A character can have strong personality, an interesting background and be bisexual, shocking, I know

Who said they can't? I love Lelianna and Zevran, Samara and Aria
I mean that sexuality should depend on the character, and not fans' lust

[Vapaa]

Chari wrote...

Who said they can't?

You said:

Chari wrote...

So let's ignore the characters' personalities and backstories?

[mitthrawuodo]

More non-companion LIs. If we have a castle then seducing the blacksmith or cook should be an option.

Modifié par mitthrawuodo, 31 août 2013 - 12:59 .

[Chari]

Vapaä wrote...

Chari wrote...

Who said they can't?

You said:

Chari wrote...

So let's ignore the characters' personalities and backstories?

I said that making everyone bi, or gay, or straight while ignoring how much it fits their personalities, culture and backstories is bad writing

[Blackrising]

@Chari:
I'm...just not gonna answer you anymore.
You don't listen. At all. You put words in my mouth. You blatantly make stuff up to suit your needs or use completely senseless arguments.
And when that doesn't work, you revert back to equating the desire for inclusion with porn and orgies.
Therefore I have nothing more to say to you.

[Chari]

Blackrising wrote...

@Chari:
I'm...just not gonna answer you anymore.
You don't listen. At all. You put words in my mouth. You blatantly make stuff up to suit your needs or use completely senseless arguments.
And when that doesn't work, you revert back to equating the desire for inclusion with porn and orgies.
Therefore I have nothing more to say to you.

Okay :3
This is your opinion. I respect that

[Vapaa]

Chari wrote...

I said that making everyone bi, or gay, or straight while ignoring how much it fits their personalities, culture and backstories is bad writing

Well...they're just bi, that's all there is to it

Modifié par Vapaä, 31 août 2013 - 01:17 .

[Chari]

Vapaä wrote...

Chari wrote...

I said that making everyone bi, or gay, or straight while ignoring how much it fits their personalities, culture and backstories is bad writing

Well...they're just bi, that all there is to it

It doesn't fit everyone. It wouldn't fit Samantha, it wouldn't fit Jack, it wouldn't fit Miranda or Alistair
Sometimes people have different preferencies in sexual relations

[Vapaa]

Chari wrote...


It doesn't fit everyone. It wouldn't fit Samantha, it wouldn't fit Jack, it wouldn't fit Miranda or Alistair
Sometimes people have different preferencies in sexual relations

Nobody is going to change those people, we're talking about new LIs

[WildOrchid]

Chari wrote...

It doesn't fit everyone. It wouldn't fit Samantha, it wouldn't fit Jack, it wouldn't fit Miranda or Alistair
Sometimes people have different preferencies in sexual relations

There's absolutely no difference between a gay/bi/straight person (only sexuality). We all are the same. Sexuality does not define a person.

There wouldn't be any difference between Sam, Jack or Miri if they were straight/bi/gay, they would've had the same character.

You speak like as if sexuality is something that changes someone's personality.


@Blackrising, i totally agree with everything you said.

Modifié par WildOrchid, 31 août 2013 - 01:28 .

[Chari]

Vapaä wrote...

Chari wrote...


It doesn't fit everyone. It wouldn't fit Samantha, it wouldn't fit Jack, it wouldn't fit Miranda or Alistair
Sometimes people have different preferencies in sexual relations

Nobody is going to change those people, we're talking about new LIs

If it fits them, surely. If it doesn't then better no. Based on the news they seem to follow the right path and make the characters first and then choose a sexuality for them which fits them 

[Eragon-]

"Fitting" a sexuality into a given personality, to me, is an exercise in futility. I don't know why DA team is going this route. I don't see this going down well.

[Chari]

WildOrchid wrote...

Chari wrote...

It doesn't fit everyone. It wouldn't fit Samantha, it wouldn't fit Jack, it wouldn't fit Miranda or Alistair
Sometimes people have different preferencies in sexual relations

There's absolutely no difference between a gay/bi/straight person (only sexuality). We all are the same. Sexuality does not define a person.

There wouldn't be any difference between Sam, Jack or Miri if they were straight/bi/gay, they would've had the same character.

You speak like as if sexuality is something that changes someone's personality.


@Blackrising, i totally agree with everything you said.

A sexuality is a result of lots of aspects of one's life. It is a part of personality

[Chari]

Eragon- wrote...

"Fitting" a sexuality into a given personality, to me, is an exercise in futility. I don't know why DA team is going this route. I don't see this going down well.

They have been choosing LIs from actual characters since the beginning. First of all they make a character, then choose who will be LIs and how their romance works

[WildOrchid]

Chari wrote...

A sexuality is a result of lots of aspects of one's life. It is a part of personality

A person's personality will remain the same no matter the person's sexuality. I would've been the same person if i was straight.

Why it's so hard for people to understand that omfg.

[Chari]

WildOrchid wrote...

Chari wrote...

A sexuality is a result of lots of aspects of one's life. It is a part of personality

A person's personality will remain the same no matter the person's sexuality. I would've been the same person if i was straight.

Why it's so hard for people to understand that omfg.

Their outlook at romance, sexuality and people will be different. A choice of a partner depend on it. One would view opposite or the same sex differently, slightly or majorly. 
These are all small and big aspects of a characters which make a person person. Everything matters, from a good taste to the preferences in sex

[dragondreamer]

The idea that all people of a certain sexual orientation have the same outlook on romance, sexuality, and people is basically a description of a stereotype.