109 réponses à ce sujet

[Taleroth]

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

He brought up the side quest as a comparison. Both a side quest and a romance are "optional content" and are in the same situation. If you don't do a side quest, you shouldn't expect anything special for not doing it, just like a romance.

If all the sidequests suck, is someone in the wrong for asking for a different type of sidequest?

They don't want to be rewarded for not doing something. They want something they like to do.

[thats1evildude]

Taleroth wrote...

If all the sidequests suck, is someone in the wrong for asking for a different type of sidequest?

If all the optional content in a game doesn't appeal to you, then perhaps you should be playing a different game.

I know it's hard to grasp, this idea that a single creative work can't be all things to all people.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 12 septembre 2013 - 07:15 .

[JerZey CJ]

Taleroth wrote...

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

He brought up the side quest as a comparison. Both a side quest and a romance are "optional content" and are in the same situation. If you don't do a side quest, you shouldn't expect anything special for not doing it, just like a romance.

If all the sidequests suck, is someone in the wrong for asking for a different type of sidequest?

They don't want to be rewarded for not doing something. They want something they like to do.

They are not. But if they just don't like/want to do any of them just because they're picky, then they are free to not do them. But they should not request some alternative to not doing the OPTIONAL content.

[Blackrising]

Not doing something doesn't really require a reward, I think.

That said, if they were to include some kind of extra content for those who choose not to romance anyone, I wouldn't care either.
It doesn't affect me, but who am I to refuse other people something that will make them enjoy the game more?

[Lluthren]

You buy some dances at the bar with your bro and get into a fight.
You get a tattoo or a piercing. You have a moment with your companions.

It would be nice to have non-romance only moments for the PC. I'm not going to romance someone with all my playthroughs.

[Dean_the_Young]

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

I'm pretty sure this has come up before and the dev response was that it is optional content and that you are essentially asking for more content for not doing optional content.

Which sounds absurd, until you realize that that's the stated desire of many an RPG player.

Choice A results in sequential content. Since Choice A is optional, sequential content is by definition optional content.

But, being that this is an RPG, why wouldn't I want or expect Choice not-A (aka Choice B, or Choice C, or anything but Choice A) to also provide optional, sequential content specific to that choice? 

One of the major draws about RPGs is that they do, in fact provide optional content that reflects not choosing other optional content. It's kind of the crux of the entire 'choose your dialogue option' dialogue system, and a major part of Big Decisions.

The thing, though, is that it's not the same kind of choice; what you're referring to is a decision point as to how to continue a story, and wanting equal amounts of content for both choices. That's reasonable. However, if we talk about something not romance--say, an optional sidequest--how many people would want extra content for those who choose not to do the sidequest? And why? It makes no sense, and doesn't make much more with romance.

How is this a different delimma than from the people who want something different or more within the romance?

And why are we bringing up a non-romance sidequest, unless romances have romance specific side quests? In which case, again, how is the delimma different?

He brought up the side quest as a comparison. Both a side quest and a romance are "optional content" and are in the same situation. If you don't do a side quest, you shouldn't expect anything special for not doing it, just like a romance.

If you want to get incredibly pendantic, the entire game is optional. It makes a poor category of equivalency when things that can be broadly grouped don't serve similar roles or purposes, and you aren't exactly selling the equivalence. Is anyone who enjoys romances really going to claim they are the equivalent to the side quests of the same game? 

I can't think of any side quest in Mass Effect that served a narrative role equivalent to, say, the Normandy lockdown locker scene. And I'm pretty sure the chantry board quests of DAO don't have a fifth of the following and fanbase of Swoop-shipping. Perhaps you see otherwise?

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 13 septembre 2013 - 12:36 .

[Dean_the_Young]

thats1evildude wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

If all the sidequests suck, is someone in the wrong for asking for a different type of sidequest?

If all the optional content in a game doesn't appeal to you, then perhaps you should be playing a different game.

I know it's hard to grasp, this idea that a single creative work can't be all things to all people.

I agree. And as far as dating sims go, Bioware games really aren't all that impressive. So why don't we jettison what they aren't that good at (healthy romances) and focus more on what they have a better grounding on (platonic relationships)?

The answer being, obviously, preferences that are equally legitimate even if different from my own.

[Dean_the_Young]

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

Taleroth wrote...

JerZeyCJ2 wrote...

He brought up the side quest as a comparison. Both a side quest and a romance are "optional content" and are in the same situation. If you don't do a side quest, you shouldn't expect anything special for not doing it, just like a romance.

If all the sidequests suck, is someone in the wrong for asking for a different type of sidequest?

They don't want to be rewarded for not doing something. They want something they like to do.

They are not. But if they just don't like/want to do any of them just because they're picky, then they are free to not do them. But they should not request some alternative to not doing the OPTIONAL content.

In an RPG? Recognition of choices is kind of a Big Deal.

Insisting that only one path of a significant role-playing choice be explored strikes me as not only bizaar, but more than a little crass. I know plenty of people who didn't care because they never did the alternative, but I can hardly remember anyone praising ME2's carryover cameos for being so lopsided towards Paragon. For those who role played something other than Paragon, the lack of an alternative for the optional Paragon content was hardly a great situation.

If Bioware is going to treat romance roleplaying options as a big deal (and it's kind of hard to claim they aren't, given the relative attention a typical romance gets compared to other roleplaying elements). then it's hardly absurd for players to want the other route of the role playing option to be developed.

[Angrywolves]

Most of us aren't interested in bromances.
shrugs.