1220 réponses à ce sujet

[Cimeas]

Eragon- wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

Again, they are not bi. They....ah, hell, what's the point.

Apologies.  I meant playersexual. 
 
My point was that it shouldn't just magically be that companions are whatever sexuality the PC happens to be at that point.  Your sexuality is part of your personality, not something that should just be flipped at the drop of a hat. 

Modifié par Cimeas, 07 septembre 2013 - 06:30 .

[Silfren]

lady_v23 wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Royal-Archer wrote...

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

If we must have openly ******/bisexual characters in a medieval world, then can they at least all be playersexual, so that it can be left to the player's discretion? (except in cases like Sebastian -- it makes sense that only a female Hawke could romance him. The others you could at least somewhat believe.)

For example; if I have a male Hawke who romances Merrill and/or Isabela exclusively, then Fenris and Anders are both heterosexuals in my game. It is fine for someone else to pursue same-sex romances, but it doesn't take place in my game. . therefore I don't view those characters as bisexual simply because the option is presented. Obviously I understand characters that are actually sexually explorative/immoral (based on your point of view), like Isabela and Zevran, but characters like Leliana or Fenris should definitely be left to the player's discretion. (which they really were, and I like that)

So, in my game it doesn't take place and in your game it does. Everyone's happy, and we don't have to restrict a video game character to something unnecessarily "realistic."

I really do feel that is the best way to make everyone happy in this situation. :/ 

The main reasoning I see which I can understand, at least from the straight male point of view, is that even if it only happens once - a guy friend of yours hitting on you, and you having to turn him down, sort of makes everything afterward extremely awkward. I even feel the same way when I have to, in game, turn down female friends as well.

A way to avoid this is to make it so those 'heart' options that trigger romances are entirely initiated by the player - if you don't pick it, it's never brought up. In DA:II, just being nice to Anders without picking the heart options will get you to a spot where you /have/ to turn him down if you don't want to pursue a relationship with him. I even recall a dialogue with Fenris, after you give him the book, he tells you he can't read. You have an option to tell him hey, I could help you - but it's a flirt option, otherwise you have to tell him he's on his own there which I think is a shame. Sometimes the non-flirt option isn't even friendly.

I believe that with the new description bar above the dialogue wheel, will make it specially hard to accidentally romance someone.  But I do get your point.

Please.  You couldn't accidentally romance someone in DA2 unless your hand slipped while you were clicking.  That heart icon was nothing if not obvious.

[mupp3tz]

Silfren wrote...
I'd hate it, for the reasons I've already mentioned and which have been covered several times over.  I would hate any option that forced me to play a character I don't want to play in order to experience the romance I want.  If I want to play a female PC but my favorite love interest is a gay man or straight woman, I'm cut off.  This is not okay, when the playersexual option would eliminate that setup.

I completely get that player sexual is the most fair in terms of numbers, but I'm one of those who dislikes it as it feels like a cop out. I don't know. I guess I'm a player who doesn't view the romances as a major part of my playthrough. I'm okay with not pursuing one if the options suck or, alternately, having a different gender PC to see what a romance path with so-and-so is like if I'm really curious.

But, at the end of the day, player sexual has valid arguments.. I'm just not a fan.

Modifié par M U P P 3 T Z, 07 septembre 2013 - 06:33 .

[Daissran]

Playersexual makes sense though...

Everyone's happy, no one gets the short end, you have variation, different paths for romances, you get to experience the relationships as both a female and a male, different playthroughs. It works really well.

[lady_v23]

Silfren wrote...

lady_v23 wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Royal-Archer wrote...

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

If we must have openly ******/bisexual characters in a medieval world, then can they at least all be playersexual, so that it can be left to the player's discretion? (except in cases like Sebastian -- it makes sense that only a female Hawke could romance him. The others you could at least somewhat believe.)

For example; if I have a male Hawke who romances Merrill and/or Isabela exclusively, then Fenris and Anders are both heterosexuals in my game. It is fine for someone else to pursue same-sex romances, but it doesn't take place in my game. . therefore I don't view those characters as bisexual simply because the option is presented. Obviously I understand characters that are actually sexually explorative/immoral (based on your point of view), like Isabela and Zevran, but characters like Leliana or Fenris should definitely be left to the player's discretion. (which they really were, and I like that)

So, in my game it doesn't take place and in your game it does. Everyone's happy, and we don't have to restrict a video game character to something unnecessarily "realistic."

I really do feel that is the best way to make everyone happy in this situation. :/ 

The main reasoning I see which I can understand, at least from the straight male point of view, is that even if it only happens once - a guy friend of yours hitting on you, and you having to turn him down, sort of makes everything afterward extremely awkward. I even feel the same way when I have to, in game, turn down female friends as well.

A way to avoid this is to make it so those 'heart' options that trigger romances are entirely initiated by the player - if you don't pick it, it's never brought up. In DA:II, just being nice to Anders without picking the heart options will get you to a spot where you /have/ to turn him down if you don't want to pursue a relationship with him. I even recall a dialogue with Fenris, after you give him the book, he tells you he can't read. You have an option to tell him hey, I could help you - but it's a flirt option, otherwise you have to tell him he's on his own there which I think is a shame. Sometimes the non-flirt option isn't even friendly.

I believe that with the new description bar above the dialogue wheel, will make it specially hard to accidentally romance someone.  But I do get your point.

Please.  You couldn't accidentally romance someone in DA2 unless your hand slipped while you were clicking.  That heart icon was nothing if not obvious.

I would agree.. but then there is Anders..<_<

[Maria Caliban]

I'd prefer bisexual companions who love you/dump you based on your viewpoint and actions. Fenris liking men and women didn't bother me, Fenris liking blood mages who supported slavers did.

[Angrywolves]

Seems phony to me and unrealistic.

[Silfren]

Cimeas wrote...

Silfren wrote...

M U P P 3 T Z wrote...

Curious how you guys feel about the following 2 non-player sexual scenarios, assuming 6 LI's:

I) 1 straight male, 1 straight female, 2 bi males, and 2 bi females
Heterosexual PC gets 3 options, Homosexual PC gets 2 options, and Bisexual PC gets 5 options.

II) 1 straight male, 1 straight female, 1 bi male, 1 bi female, 1 gay male, and 1 lesbian female
Heterosexual PC gets 2 options, Homosexual PC gets 2 options, and Bisexual PC gets 4 options.

I'm not looking for a huge debate, but would either be acceptable or would you hate it?

I'd hate it, for the reasons I've already mentioned and which have been covered several times over.  I would hate any option that forced me to play a character I don't want to play in order to experience the romance I want.  If I want to play a female PC but my favorite love interest is a gay man or straight woman, I'm cut off.  This is not okay, when the playersexual option would eliminate that setup.

You know how sometimes, when you like someone, they don't like you back?  Maybe because they aren't attracted to your gender because they're gay or straight? 

HOW IS THAT WRONG?

I'm confused as to this entitlement attitude that every LI must be bi because even if the devs feel a character should be gay or straight the player deserves to play with whoever they want and as such they must become bi. 

For one, it's a game, not real life, and the point of the game is to entertain players.  It's not meant to simulate real life where people have to live with the very real possibility of being romantically rejected. 

What?  Did you think that Dragon Age was a real life simulator?

Also, people keep saying bi.  I didn't say bi.  I've been saying playersexual.  Not the same thing at all.

[lady_v23]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'd prefer bisexual companions who love you/dump you based on your viewpoint and actions. Fenris liking men and women didn't bother me, Fenris liking blood mages who supported slavers did.

getting dumped would be a very interesting thing to see.

[Silfren]

Cimeas wrote...

Eragon- wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

Again, they are not bi. They....ah, hell, what's the point.

Apologies.  I meant playersexual. 
 
My point was that it shouldn't just magically be that companions are whatever sexuality the PC happens to be at that point.  Your sexuality is part of your personality, not something that should just be flipped at the drop of a hat. 

Says who?  I don't agree that it necessarily is, sexuality being a fluid thing and not set in stone, and anyway, I reject the idea that in a world that does NOT contain the same cultural/religious hangups regarding sex, it would have the same significance.  Societies that just don't give a good g*ddamn about sexual orientation aren't going to produce individuals who give it that much significance either.

[Battlebloodmage]

I wonder how long this thread can stay civil.

[Valdrane78]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'd prefer bisexual companions who love you/dump you based on your viewpoint and actions. Fenris liking men and women didn't bother me, Fenris liking blood mages who supported slavers did.

I disagree.  You can't help who you love, it isn't a choice, it is just something that happens.  There are plenty of real world cases where the two love birds had very different views on things and still made it work.  Loving someone despite their faults is the whole point anyways.

However, as with anything, there are times when it doesn't work, then it fails spectacularly.

[Silfren]

lady_v23 wrote...

Silfren wrote...

lady_v23 wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Royal-Archer wrote...

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

If we must have openly ******/bisexual characters in a medieval world, then can they at least all be playersexual, so that it can be left to the player's discretion? (except in cases like Sebastian -- it makes sense that only a female Hawke could romance him. The others you could at least somewhat believe.)

For example; if I have a male Hawke who romances Merrill and/or Isabela exclusively, then Fenris and Anders are both heterosexuals in my game. It is fine for someone else to pursue same-sex romances, but it doesn't take place in my game. . therefore I don't view those characters as bisexual simply because the option is presented. Obviously I understand characters that are actually sexually explorative/immoral (based on your point of view), like Isabela and Zevran, but characters like Leliana or Fenris should definitely be left to the player's discretion. (which they really were, and I like that)

So, in my game it doesn't take place and in your game it does. Everyone's happy, and we don't have to restrict a video game character to something unnecessarily "realistic."

I really do feel that is the best way to make everyone happy in this situation. :/ 

The main reasoning I see which I can understand, at least from the straight male point of view, is that even if it only happens once - a guy friend of yours hitting on you, and you having to turn him down, sort of makes everything afterward extremely awkward. I even feel the same way when I have to, in game, turn down female friends as well.

A way to avoid this is to make it so those 'heart' options that trigger romances are entirely initiated by the player - if you don't pick it, it's never brought up. In DA:II, just being nice to Anders without picking the heart options will get you to a spot where you /have/ to turn him down if you don't want to pursue a relationship with him. I even recall a dialogue with Fenris, after you give him the book, he tells you he can't read. You have an option to tell him hey, I could help you - but it's a flirt option, otherwise you have to tell him he's on his own there which I think is a shame. Sometimes the non-flirt option isn't even friendly.

I believe that with the new description bar above the dialogue wheel, will make it specially hard to accidentally romance someone.  But I do get your point.

Please.  You couldn't accidentally romance someone in DA2 unless your hand slipped while you were clicking.  That heart icon was nothing if not obvious.

I would agree.. but then there is Anders..<_<

No, there isn't.  There was an awkward dialogue moment, yes, but unless you picked the heart icon, the romance DID NOT HAPPEN.  You could NOT romance him accidentally; you had to pick that icon to do it.  

[Shadow Fox]

lady_v23 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'd prefer bisexual companions who love you/dump you based on your viewpoint and actions. Fenris liking men and women didn't bother me, Fenris liking blood mages who supported slavers did.

getting dumped would be a very interesting thing to see.

Alistair

[AutumnWitch]

I think David said they did that before the knew that so many women were playing BW games. I dont think it will be a problem again. I suspect you will have 2 of each and one will be a sweet normal type of person (Merrill) and the other will be a little less main stream (Isabela). That being said I they have hinted that the romance stuff will be about as significant to the game as it was in DA2 .

[lady_v23]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

lady_v23 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'd prefer bisexual companions who love you/dump you based on your viewpoint and actions. Fenris liking men and women didn't bother me, Fenris liking blood mages who supported slavers did.

getting dumped would be a very interesting thing to see.

Alistair

right.  I never did romance him.

[Maria Caliban]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

lady_v23 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'd prefer bisexual companions who love you/dump you based on your viewpoint and actions. Fenris liking men and women didn't bother me, Fenris liking blood mages who supported slavers did.

getting dumped would be a very interesting thing to see.

Alistair

Morrigan in vanilla DA:O.

AutumnWitch wrote...

I think David said they did that before the knew that so many women were playing BW games.

They did it throughout the ME series.

Different development teams, different viewpoints on matters. That the fantasy RPG is more progressive than the science fiction one is amusing.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 07 septembre 2013 - 06:51 .

[Silfren]

Valdrane78 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'd prefer bisexual companions who love you/dump you based on your viewpoint and actions. Fenris liking men and women didn't bother me, Fenris liking blood mages who supported slavers did.

I disagree.  You can't help who you love, it isn't a choice, it is just something that happens.  There are plenty of real world cases where the two love birds had very different views on things and still made it work.  Loving someone despite their faults is the whole point anyways.

However, as with anything, there are times when it doesn't work, then it fails spectacularly.

Eh, this is only true to a point.  Yes, people can love someone against all reason and sense, and of course there is nothing implausible about romances based on an abusive dynamic.  But it IS odd that Fenris would happily romance a pro-slavery blood mage.  That's not a simple case of having slightly different political views.   It's certainly plausible that Fenris could love such a Hawke, but NOT without some serious internal conflict within himself AND some serious screamfests with Hawke herself.  I would absolutely expect to see a character in that situation seriously struggling, given the psychological implications.  It's definitely not a situation that could or should be covered with one scene and three dialogues.

Loving someone despite their faults is not not NOT what Fenris loving a pro-slavery blood mage Hawke is about.  An OCD person and and absentminded slob loving each other is an example of loving someone despite their faults.  An anti-mage former slave being in love with a blood mage slaver is a totally different animal entirely.

Modifié par Silfren, 07 septembre 2013 - 06:54 .

[The Antagonist]

0:0 ratio would be perfect

Modifié par codenamesource, 07 septembre 2013 - 06:51 .

[Phate Phoenix]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

lady_v23 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I'd prefer bisexual companions who love you/dump you based on your viewpoint and actions. Fenris liking men and women didn't bother me, Fenris liking blood mages who supported slavers did.

getting dumped would be a very interesting thing to see.

Alistair

Morrigan in vanilla DA:O.

In ME3 you had Jacob.

...Sort of.

[lady_v23]

Silfren wrote...

lady_v23 wrote...

Silfren wrote...

lady_v23 wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

Royal-Archer wrote...

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

If we must have openly ******/bisexual characters in a medieval world, then can they at least all be playersexual, so that it can be left to the player's discretion? (except in cases like Sebastian -- it makes sense that only a female Hawke could romance him. The others you could at least somewhat believe.)

For example; if I have a male Hawke who romances Merrill and/or Isabela exclusively, then Fenris and Anders are both heterosexuals in my game. It is fine for someone else to pursue same-sex romances, but it doesn't take place in my game. . therefore I don't view those characters as bisexual simply because the option is presented. Obviously I understand characters that are actually sexually explorative/immoral (based on your point of view), like Isabela and Zevran, but characters like Leliana or Fenris should definitely be left to the player's discretion. (which they really were, and I like that)

So, in my game it doesn't take place and in your game it does. Everyone's happy, and we don't have to restrict a video game character to something unnecessarily "realistic."

I really do feel that is the best way to make everyone happy in this situation. :/ 

The main reasoning I see which I can understand, at least from the straight male point of view, is that even if it only happens once - a guy friend of yours hitting on you, and you having to turn him down, sort of makes everything afterward extremely awkward. I even feel the same way when I have to, in game, turn down female friends as well.

A way to avoid this is to make it so those 'heart' options that trigger romances are entirely initiated by the player - if you don't pick it, it's never brought up. In DA:II, just being nice to Anders without picking the heart options will get you to a spot where you /have/ to turn him down if you don't want to pursue a relationship with him. I even recall a dialogue with Fenris, after you give him the book, he tells you he can't read. You have an option to tell him hey, I could help you - but it's a flirt option, otherwise you have to tell him he's on his own there which I think is a shame. Sometimes the non-flirt option isn't even friendly.

I believe that with the new description bar above the dialogue wheel, will make it specially hard to accidentally romance someone.  But I do get your point.

Please.  You couldn't accidentally romance someone in DA2 unless your hand slipped while you were clicking.  That heart icon was nothing if not obvious.

I would agree.. but then there is Anders..<_<

No, there isn't.  There was an awkward dialogue moment, yes, but unless you picked the heart icon, the romance DID NOT HAPPEN.  You could NOT romance him accidentally; you had to pick that icon to do it.  

You do have a point.

[CuriousArtemis]

Cimeas wrote...

Your sexuality is part of your personality, not something that should just be flipped at the drop of a hat. 

Sexuality is biological... it doesn't affect your personality.  How your culture views your sexuality may affect your personality though.

lady_v23 wrote...

getting dumped would be a very interesting thing to see.

I think Anders will dump you if you make a deal with the demon in the Fade 

[Taleroth]

Men, women, I'm not so picky.

As long as they're voiced by Claudia Black.