289 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

check your privilege Hanar

[Former_Fiend]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Wow people. I'm going to check out if that is what you're going to use. That is ridiculous. Every character in the game not wanting to get with your PC is equal to the Civil Rights movement? How am I even supposed to respond to that?

Oh, and balanced =/= equal. If I stated that, then I was wrong.

I don't have a problem with every character in the game not wanting to shack up with my PC. I don't have a problem with every character in the party not wanting to shack up with my PC. The fact that we're most likely getting 4 out of 9 as a possibility tells me that the majority of the party isn't going to want to shack up with my PC, and I'm perfectly fine with that.

All I'm saying is I think everyone should have options. If you wanted to play your warden as gay, your option was Zeveran or no one. If you wanted to play your warden as Lesbian, your option was Leliana or no one. If you didn't like either of those two, and a lot of people didn't, you were sh*t out of luck.

[sandalisthemaker]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Wow people. I'm going to check out if that is what you're going to use. That is ridiculous. Every character in the game not wanting to get with your PC is equal to the Civil Rights movement? How am I even supposed to respond to that?

Oh, and balanced =/= equal. If I stated that, then I was wrong.

You make a deal out of having an equal number of options for male and female, but not for gay and straight characters. 

An equal number is what I (and Blackrising) was talking about this whole time. In DAO there are two straight options for males but only 1 gay option.  There were two straight options for females, and only 1 gay option. 

That is what I am getting at. 

Having 2 gay options and 2 straight options per gender would be  balanced. 

[sandalisthemaker]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

sandalisthemaker wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Wow people. I'm going to check out if that is what you're going to use. That is ridiculous. Every character in the game not wanting to get with your PC is equal to the Civil Rights movement? How am I even supposed to respond to that?

Oh, and balanced =/= equal. If I stated that, then I was wrong.

You make a deal out of having an equal number of options for male and female, but not for gay and straight characters. 

An equal number is what I (and Blackrising) was talking about this whole time. In DAO there are two straight options for males but only 1 gay option.  There were two straight options for females, and only 1 gay option. 

That is what I am getting at. 

Having 2 gay options and 2 straight options per gender would be  balanced. 

You want the DA2 system, and I've stated that I don't. I feel that it's okay for there to be more straight options than gay options; there are more straight people out there than gay people. That's why having every character being a bi-sexual is strange.

You are not reading my post then.
Although I like DA2's approach, I am okay with set sexualities so long as there are an equal number of options per sexuality.
You may not want there to be an equal number of gay options, and think that that is somehow strange or abnormal or whatever, but that is what the devs have stated they want to do if they do decide to go back to set sexualities.

[Former_Fiend]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

sandalisthemaker wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Wow people. I'm going to check out if that is what you're going to use. That is ridiculous. Every character in the game not wanting to get with your PC is equal to the Civil Rights movement? How am I even supposed to respond to that?

Oh, and balanced =/= equal. If I stated that, then I was wrong.

You make a deal out of having an equal number of options for male and female, but not for gay and straight characters. 

An equal number is what I (and Blackrising) was talking about this whole time. In DAO there are two straight options for males but only 1 gay option.  There were two straight options for females, and only 1 gay option. 

That is what I am getting at. 

Having 2 gay options and 2 straight options per gender would be  balanced. 

You want the DA2 system, and I've stated that I don't. I feel that it's okay for there to be more straight options than gay options; there are more straight people out there than gay people. That's why having every character being a bi-sexual is strange.

We're not talking about everyone in the world. We're talking about four people out of nine people out of however many millions of people make up the world of Thedas. That does not have to be an accurate representation of statitstics. I could get five of my straight friends and four of my bisexual friends together right now and go have a party with them; it wouldn't be weird, it would be ten random people who are not a reflection of the larger populus. 


I will say that one thing I do not want them to do is take characters who were previously established to be straight and have them turn out to be bisexual just for the benefit of our PC, That would leave a bad taste in my mouth.

But having four random people in a party be bi? I don't see what's wrong with that.

[sandalisthemaker]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

sandalisthemaker wrote...
You are not reading my post then.
Although I like DA2's approach, I am okay with set sexualities so long as there are an equal number of options per sexuality.
You may not want there to be an equal number of gay options, and think that that is somehow strange or abnormal or whatever, but that is what the devs have stated they want to do if they do decide to go back to set sexualities.

I just want to make it clear that I'm not a bigot-- you didn't claim I was, but I just got that vibe after re-reading my post. The only reason I jumped to the DA2 system with you is because every character that was romanceable was available to both a Male and Female Hawke. That's obviously the easiest way for the gay and straight options to be equal.

Yes. The DA2 system was the easiest way to have an equal number of gay and straight options.

The only other option I could think of is having two straight options and two gay options, as you have been implying, but that does create an issue with oversaturation of characters and the "right" people not being the straight or gay option. Of course, every system has it's flaws. Is this what you were suggesting?

And yes. That is what I am suggesting *if* they do not go with the DA2 approach again.
Sure there is always the risk that the LI that I like the most is incompatible with my Inquisitor, but as long as I have 2 to choose from instead of only having 1 then I will be fine with it.

I have no problem with playing as the gender of Inquisitor that will allow me to romance the "unavailable" LI, but again, I would like to have gay option*s* as in more than one. 

Modifié par sandalisthemaker, 02 octobre 2013 - 02:31 .

[wolfhowwl]

FaWa wrote...
Are you implying that the battle for more pixelated gayness isn't equivalent to the Civil Rights Movement?

[InvincibleHero]

FaWa wrote...

**** did I get here too late?

Ok here's the deal
I don't care about having some people be straight and some be gay, but when literally all of the important characters are straight and the bi ones are just stereotypes, it kinda rubs one off the wrong way.

In ME3 they obviously couldn't randomly throw a gay character in and have him/her be important to the story without adding a bisexual option to an existing character.

In DA3 they have a chance to show that gay romances aren't valued less than straight ones.

So you take issue with what is presented rather than be pleased they included romances for all preferences to begin with? Kind of presumptuous don't you think?

I could hate all the straight romances they put in, but wouldn't kvetch about it. There could be a perfect character that I would want in the game but is unavailable to player characters but I wouldn't whine please me satisfy me make it what I want. They are not psychic and can tailor a game to my likes/dislikes. The fact they tried and gave some options is enough to satisfy me. 

I never used some of the options in ME 3 DA:O and other games but I am glad other people found value in them. People expect too much and appreciate too little the hard work they already give us in making games we are to play for entertainment. Are the devs not allowed to create things as they wish being you know it is their story and world and we just play in it?

[sandalisthemaker]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Yeah, that seems reasonable. Honestly, I feel that I've always had more of a problem with the playersexual concept than the execution. It makes things feel a little cheap when I know about it, but I didn't know about it in my first playthrough, and I didn't notice anything strange. In a way, I feel that a character being unavailable for whatever reason makes things more interesting in my eyes. Sort of makes them feel unique. I do understand why the playersexual approach would be appealing to somebody though, when people state their arguments as you two have.

I just want the same amount of romance content as a straight player.  That's pretty much what it boils down to.

This isn't supposed to happen you know.
We're supposed to keep arguing back and forth incessantly.

But I think we've reached a middle ground so to speak.

So cheers.

[Former_Fiend]

sandalisthemaker wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Yeah, that seems reasonable. Honestly, I feel that I've always had more of a problem with the playersexual concept than the execution. It makes things feel a little cheap when I know about it, but I didn't know about it in my first playthrough, and I didn't notice anything strange. In a way, I feel that a character being unavailable for whatever reason makes things more interesting in my eyes. Sort of makes them feel unique. I do understand why the playersexual approach would be appealing to somebody though, when people state their arguments as you two have.

I just want the same amount of romance content as a straight player.  That's pretty much what it boils down to.

This isn't supposed to happen you know.
We're supposed to keep arguing back and forth incessantly.

But I think we've reached a middle ground so to speak.

So cheers.

Will wonders never cease.

[Fardreamer]

Contrary to popular belief, Anders wasn't truly bisexual. You got bigger Friendship/Rivalry changes by flirting with him if you were playing as a female character. So while you could romance him as a male... he definitely preferred female company.

I think what most people mean by having every character being bisexual is "unrealistic" is that in DA:O it made sense for the 2 bisexual characters to be that way. Zev was a pleasure seeker, no matter what form it came in. Leliana was seduced by a more powerful and charming woman. Not to mention being a bard meant you needed to be able to seduce anyone.

In DA2 the only character that really made any sense for bisexuality was Isabela. She often talked about her attraction to both women and men. Fenris, Anders, and Merrill never hinted at attraction to their same gender. In Awakening, Anders was strictly straight. Now, of course this doesn't mean someone might be not be open to the idea of romancing their same gender. But there should be extra dialogue to make it make sense. Fenris should talk about how he's never felt this way about a man before, but Hawk has been the only true companion he's ever had... etc. Merrill should show some hesitation even though she's clearly interested There should be more vulnerability/timidness in their first time with another of their gender, especially if they're traditionally straight.

I'm also not opposed to having some 100% gay charcters either.  Maybe that's why we're getting 9 companions this time around.

Modifié par Fardreamer, 02 octobre 2013 - 03:20 .

[Xilizhra]

Er, Merrill never displayed open attraction to either sex, really.

[Former_Fiend]

Fardreamer wrote...

Contrary to popular belief, Anders wasn't truly bisexual. You got bigger Friendship/Rivalry changes by flirting with him if you were playing as a female character. So while you could romance him as a male... he definitely preferred female company.

I think what most people mean by having every character being bisexual is "unrealistic" is that in DA:O it made sense for the 2 bisexual characters to be that way. Zev was a pleasure seeker, no matter what form it came in. Leliana was seduced by a more powerful and charming woman. Not to mention being a bard meant you needed to be able to seduce anyone.

In DA2 the only character that really made any sense for bisexuality was Isabela. She often talked about her attraction to both women and men. Fenris, Anders, and Merrill never hinted at attraction to their same gender. In Awakening, Anders was strictly straight. Now, of course this doesn't mean someone might be not be open to the idea of romancing their same gender. But there should be extra dialogue to make it make sense. Fenris should talk about how he's never felt this way about a man before, but Hawk has been the only true companion he's ever had... etc. Merrill should show some hesitation even though she's clearly interested There should be more vulnerability/timidness in their first time with another of their gender, especially if they're traditionally straight.

I'm also not opposed to having some 100% gay charcters either.  Maybe that's why we're getting 9 companions this time around.

Not everyone who is bisexual has a clean 50/50 preference. Many prefer one gender to the other, but are still attracted to both.

[Plaintiff]

Fardreamer wrote...

Contrary to popular belief, Anders wasn't truly bisexual. You got bigger Friendship/Rivalry changes by flirting with him if you were playing as a female character. So while you could romance him as a male... he definitely preferred female company.

I think what most people mean by having every character being bisexual is "unrealistic" is that in DA:O it made sense for the 2 bisexual characters to be that way. Zev was a pleasure seeker, no matter what form it came in. Leliana was seduced by a more powerful and charming woman. Not to mention being a bard meant you needed to be able to seduce anyone.

In DA2 the only character that really made any sense for bisexuality was Isabela. She often talked about her attraction to both women and men. Fenris, Anders, and Merrill never hinted at attraction to their same gender. In Awakening, Anders was strictly straight. Now, of course this doesn't mean someone might be not be open to the idea of romancing their same gender. But there should be extra dialogue to make it make sense. Fenris should talk about how he's never felt this way about a man before, but Hawk has been the only true companion he's ever had... etc. Merrill should show some hesitation even though she's clearly interested There should be more vulnerability/timidness in their first time with another of their gender, especially if they're traditionally straight.

I'm also not opposed to having some 100% gay charcters either.  Maybe that's why we're getting 9 companions this time around.

Sexuality doesn't have to "make sense".

[Br3admax]

Xilizhra wrote...

Er, Merrill never displayed open attraction to either sex, really.

Yes she does. Even during Act I she says some wierd things during dialogue with Aveline. 

[Shadow Fox]

Truthfully I have no issue with people talking about romances no different then threads about races,combat,armor,weapons etc.

It's when people start being creepy,accusing others of racism/bigotry or drawing political analogies over it that bother me.

[Xilizhra]

Br3ad wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Er, Merrill never displayed open attraction to either sex, really.

Yes she does. Even during Act I she says some wierd things during dialogue with Aveline. 

That's only about Hawke specifically.

[Former_Fiend]

Xilizhra wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Er, Merrill never displayed open attraction to either sex, really.

Yes she does. Even during Act I she says some wierd things during dialogue with Aveline. 

That's only about Hawke specifically.

She mentions that she's sorry the qunari are gone in act 3 because they're "easy on the eyes".

[Heidenreich]

Former_Fiend wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Er, Merrill never displayed open attraction to either sex, really.

Yes she does. Even during Act I she says some wierd things during dialogue with Aveline. 

That's only about Hawke specifically.

She mentions that she's sorry the qunari are gone in act 3 because they're "easy on the eyes".

Hate to break it to you sweetie, but anyone can apreciate someone with a rock hard body with out wanting to jump in bed with them