Ce sujet est fermé
Romance threads that talk about what people would like to see in the next game. Who they wish to be romanceable, what races, etc. While it's more specific to the gay and bisexual people and those who are interested to play lesbians, gay or bisexual Pcs while being straight, this is a thread romance that can show you how many posts developped you can find.Darth Brotarian wrote...
What the hell is s/s and m/m?
Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 octobre 2013 - 05:33 .
I would never be a hardcore fan of something that I don't know the ending of.Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Even hardcore fans might not finish a game. For some of us, finishing the game isn't particularly important. But that doesn't mean we're not heavily invested in the game, or that we haven't played it for hundreds of hours. We just didn't play it in a way that produced finishing results.Br3ad wrote...
Anyway, most gamers don't even finish the game. How many of your friends did. If they finished it, they aren't as causal as you may think.
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Xilizhra wrote...
Oh, good grief. You can't discern whether any damage is actually being done without being able to look at them in real life, otherwise it's just your own prejudices.
So if it's just a bunch of like-minded people having discussions, why worry about them at all?EntropicAngel wrote...
Xilizhra wrote...
Oh, good grief. You can't discern whether any damage is actually being done without being able to look at them in real life, otherwise it's just your own prejudices.
Who said anything about damage?
One can have predilections that don't do any damage but if acted out IRL would, we both know.
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Even hardcore fans might not finish a game. For some of us, finishing the game isn't particularly important. But that doesn't mean we're not heavily invested in the game, or that we haven't played it for hundreds of hours. We just didn't play it in a way that produced finishing results.
Modifié par EntropicAngel, 04 octobre 2013 - 05:38 .
You have a different definiton of what a causal gamer is. Doesn't really change my point in the slightest. If they finished DA, they weren't casual about it, even if they are usually more causal about gaming in general.Mdoggy1214 wrote...
Br3ad wrote...
They've already done more than just about 2/3 of the people that purchased Dragon Age. Not that causal.
You know it's pretty obnoxious to tell me I'm wrong about my friends when you don't even know them and I've know most of them for 15+ years now. I know they're hobbies, I know they're personal lives, and I know what they like and dislike. I am telling you, right now. They aren't that into video games. During High School and especially College they had a lot more down time to spare, so they played some video games, but for the most part they aren't big gamers.
Again missing the point. I'm saying that it doesn't take emotional investment to romance Bastilla. It's an extremly easy thing to do, without even picking the flirtacious dialogue.As to KotOR, most of the emotional investment came from the end. The rest of it was me throwing down some of the worst flirtacious dialogue I have ever heard. Sure, the end took investment, but the rest of it was, "Girl, you know you want this." Still a lot better than Carth or Juhani.
So you had a different experience than I did. I was pretty invested with my relationships with the characters since the start of the game.
Mdoggy1214 wrote...
Br3ad wrote...
They've already done more than just about 2/3 of the people that purchased Dragon Age. Not that causal.
You know it's pretty obnoxious to tell me I'm wrong about my friends when you don't even know them and I've know most of them for 15+ years now. I know they're hobbies, I know they're personal lives, and I know what they like and dislike. I am telling you, right now. They aren't that into video games. During High School and especially College they had a lot more down time to spare, so they played some video games, but for the most part they aren't big gamers.As to KotOR, most of the emotional investment came from the end. The rest of it was me throwing down some of the worst flirtacious dialogue I have ever heard. Sure, the end took investment, but the rest of it was, "Girl, you know you want this." Still a lot better than Carth or Juhani.
So you had a different experience than I did. I was pretty invested with my relationships with the characters since the start of the game.
While I'm clined to except your point, I find that romance always add to the character of the PC, the LI, and the story, I'm not sure that optional is the right wording. It is however, just not something that everyone wants to hear about, or beratted about. Nor do a lot of us like to read the arguments that spawn from such attachments. Also, most casual gamers don't talk about the game on the internet. They just buy them and play them. They are the silent majority.philippe willaume wrote...
For me the point of romance is that it is a really nice role playing elements but I would prefer a more complex characterization of the companion.
Yes some people get attached to a character and so what... no child or animal is hurt in the making of the movie.
In fact you don't even need romance for that to happen.
besides are we really sure that it is that optional,
http://imgur.com/a/SUo9r see who did the warden romance
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Xilizhra wrote...
So if it's just a bunch of like-minded people having discussions, why worry about them at all?
addiction21 wrote...
So this has nothing to do with BioWares stance and more of posters throwing stones at each other while Allan has to play babysitter.
Wonderful, isn't it?
Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 04 octobre 2013 - 05:41 .
In your second example, the kid is doing damage. In the first, it's theoretically possible, but most people who post on romance threads will be enthusiastic supporters of that romance, and the nature of that environment is generally welcoming to most of the people who'd be inclined to post in it long-term, with the exception of weird upheavals such as what happened with Miranda.EntropicAngel wrote...
Xilizhra wrote...
So if it's just a bunch of like-minded people having discussions, why worry about them at all?
Because it repels others on the forums. It hinders discussion among not-so-likeminded people.
And, because of the future. If you find out a child ritualistically takes a woodland animal and cuts it up and burns the remains, do you let it go because it's not doing any damage.
Mainly the first, though.
The bsn as usual after a few pages in a romance thread lol.Darth Brotarian wrote...
addiction21 wrote...
So this has nothing to do with BioWares stance and more of posters throwing stones at each other while Allan has to play babysitter.
Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 octobre 2013 - 05:43 .
Br3ad wrote...
You have a different definiton of what a causal gamer is. Doesn't really change my point in the slightest. If they finished DA, they weren't casual about it, even if they are usually more causal about gaming in general.
Again missing the point. I'm saying that it doesn't take emotional investment to romance Bastilla. It's an extremly easy thing to do, without even picking the flirtacious dialogue.
If it's against these woodland critters, then hell yeah.EntropicAngel wrote...
If you find out a child ritualistically takes a woodland animal and cuts it up and burns the remains, do you let it go because it's not doing any damage.
Darth Brotarian wrote...
Mdoggy1214 wrote...
Br3ad wrote...
They've already done more than just about 2/3 of the people that purchased Dragon Age. Not that causal.
You know it's pretty obnoxious to tell me I'm wrong about my friends when you don't even know them and I've know most of them for 15+ years now. I know they're hobbies, I know they're personal lives, and I know what they like and dislike. I am telling you, right now. They aren't that into video games. During High School and especially College they had a lot more down time to spare, so they played some video games, but for the most part they aren't big gamers.As to KotOR, most of the emotional investment came from the end. The rest of it was me throwing down some of the worst flirtacious dialogue I have ever heard. Sure, the end took investment, but the rest of it was, "Girl, you know you want this." Still a lot better than Carth or Juhani.
So you had a different experience than I did. I was pretty invested with my relationships with the characters since the start of the game.
Not that into video games =/= casual for dragon age. Just saying.
I'm not much of a live action tv series fan, but I still love the crap out of game of thrones like a diehard tv series fan would.
David Gaider wrote....
Actually, I would not.Surprising? Perhaps. If we had more resources, I suppose I wouldn’t mind allowing the player to try romancing every follower, but to allow them to successfully do so? No, I can’t say that appeals to me very much for two main reasons:1) Romances are a side show, not the main game. Yes, some people like them a lot, and I have absolutely no beef with them doing so. In fact, it’s very gratifying. While I suppose a game could be made where the romantic plot takes a level of importance equal to that of the critical path, that has never been the case with the games BioWare makes. These plots are tertiary, optional content… something to add to your enjoyment, and add to your level of emotional investment in the characters… and that seems to get forgotten when people discuss it at length.Such is the case whenever any piece of content gets discussed online. Under a microscope, whatever you’re discussing seems like all there is… and thus is clearly the most important thing ever. I cannot do that. I always have to keep my eye on the bigger picture, and there is an entire rest of the game that needs to be contended with… which includes a lot of elements that have much more pertinence to the game than who someone does or doesn’t get to have sex with. Romances are a nice extra, and naturally we’re always going to struggle with how to do them right, but they’re well down the list on things I need to concern myself with. I could, in fact, happily have a game without any romances at all… or spend an equal amount of time developing relationships with followers that are non-romantic.Occasionally the focus on romances reaches such a fever pitch that idea seems rather attractive, actually. But only occasionally.2) I dislike the idea of every character being sexually available to the player. Not that it cheapens them, necessarily, but it would lend itself towards their objectification. Take the first Witcher game, for instance— I enjoyed many things about that game, but the collectible sex card mechanic? Ultimately it rendered every female character in the game into a puzzle to be solved. What do I do to sleep with them? How do I get their card? Yes, you can ignore the mechanic (I certainly tried, even though I ended up sleeping with several characters purely by accident) but having the mechanic in the first place necessitates a difference in how they are approached, both from a writing and implementation standpoint. As soon as the player is aware it’s possible, you are in fact encouraging them towards a certain type of behavior. Even ignoring the awkwardness of doing that solely to female characters, doing it to all characters equally would still make them be viewed as potential romances and thus change how the player related to them.————I don’t put a lot of stock in the fans who get upset at the amount of discourse regarding the romances, and who are very vocal about how it should be eliminated completely. Yes, some of the discussion can indeed be juvenile… but much of the complaining seems to be centered on the idea this is something only female gamers do. Fangirls. And whatever the fangirls are squeeing excitedly about is obviously diluting the “serious” nature of RPG’s… ignoring just how juvenile other gamers can be about the myriad of obsessions they have in these games as well as the fact that the fixation on romances is hardly exclusive to females at all (as the angst over the Morrigan romance back in the day would clearly attest).I would, however, resist making the romance elements of our games more prominent without also changing the nature of that content. Adding an element of failure, for instance, or by having not all characters be available to all player characters (they’re attracted only to certain types, for instance). Adding different types of romance: tragic romances, romances where your partner cheats on you, romances where the character is already involved in another relationship, characters that don’t know how to relate to someone else on a romantic level or aren’t interested in such. It needn’t all be unhappy, of course, but were I to cross the threshold of making all followers possible to romance I’d at least want to change the approach into something more plausible. To me, the idea that a player should get their followers and then simply select one or more companions to be their romance, and that romance is their cuddly bunny for the entirety of the game and plays out exactly as they wish, would be the worst of both worlds. It would be wish fulfillment on a level that reduced the characters into romantic playthings— sex dolls, really. And I have no interest in creating that, even if there are people who think it’d be grand.Would doing romances in that way actually be popular? Probably not. Take the resolution of the Thane romance arc in ME3, for instance. There are people who did (and still do) think that, having selected Thane as their romance, they should have been able to cure him of his illness and make everything better. Why? Because he’s their romance, and they’re entitled to have it be a happy one. Regardless of whether you think they are justified in feeling so, they do. I don’t think plausibility is really what they’re looking for.So that would leave us at an impasse… some might appreciate such an approach, and some might even enjoy the stories, but I suspect many who are looking for romance in their story are hoping for something more fulfilling… and would likely be put out if their choice ended up getting the short end of the stick (from their point of view) compared to some of the other romances. The discussion would change from “oh! I get to romance this character?” to comparisons with other romances and assurances that, because their character didn’t work out as they envisioned it, that must be because they’re not “legitimate” choices.Just thinking about that makes my brain ache a little, actually.So, no, I’m quite fine with selecting a few characters and having them be romantic options and letting the rest be simply what they are. My preference is that the romances cover a range of styles and sexualities as evenly as we can, and that they have comparable levels of content, and leave it at that. If someone doesn’t find something to their liking in that particular game, chances are we’ll have a whole different batch in the next game (I do find it rather amusing how people always assume we’ll write exactly the same characters in the next game as the current one— even though we never have, the assumption is the same after every game). In the meantime, there are hopefully friendships and rivalries among the followers that you can develop, and reasons to appreciate each of them beyond whether they can be sexed to your liking, as well as that whole other thing we wrote.You know. The plot.
Modifié par Br3ad, 04 octobre 2013 - 05:47 .
Modifié par hhh89, 04 octobre 2013 - 05:51 .
Can't read.Br3ad wrote...
Gaider, the most vocal that I've seen about this:David Gaider wrote....
Actually, I would not.Surprising? Perhaps. If we had more resources, I suppose I wouldn’t mind allowing the player to try romancing every follower, but to allow them to successfully do so? No, I can’t say that appeals to me very much for two main reasons:1) Romances are a side show, not the main game. Yes, some people like them a lot, and I have absolutely no beef with them doing so. In fact, it’s very gratifying. While I suppose a game could be made where the romantic plot takes a level of importance equal to that of the critical path, that has never been the case with the games BioWare makes. These plots are tertiary, optional content… something to add to your enjoyment, and add to your level of emotional investment in the characters… and that seems to get forgotten when people discuss it at length.Such is the case whenever any piece of content gets discussed online. Under a microscope, whatever you’re discussing seems like all there is… and thus is clearly the most important thing ever. I cannot do that. I always have to keep my eye on the bigger picture, and there is an entire rest of the game that needs to be contended with… which includes a lot of elements that have much more pertinence to the game than who someone does or doesn’t get to have sex with. Romances are a nice extra, and naturally we’re always going to struggle with how to do them right, but they’re well down the list on things I need to concern myself with. I could, in fact, happily have a game without any romances at all… or spend an equal amount of time developing relationships with followers that are non-romantic.Occasionally the focus on romances reaches such a fever pitch that idea seems rather attractive, actually. But only occasionally.2) I dislike the idea of every character being sexually available to the player. Not that it cheapens them, necessarily, but it would lend itself towards their objectification. Take the first Witcher game, for instance— I enjoyed many things about that game, but the collectible sex card mechanic? Ultimately it rendered every female character in the game into a puzzle to be solved. What do I do to sleep with them? How do I get their card? Yes, you can ignore the mechanic (I certainly tried, even though I ended up sleeping with several characters purely by accident) but having the mechanic in the first place necessitates a difference in how they are approached, both from a writing and implementation standpoint. As soon as the player is aware it’s possible, you are in fact encouraging them towards a certain type of behavior. Even ignoring the awkwardness of doing that solely to female characters, doing it to all characters equally would still make them be viewed as potential romances and thus change how the player related to them.————I don’t put a lot of stock in the fans who get upset at the amount of discourse regarding the romances, and who are very vocal about how it should be eliminated completely. Yes, some of the discussion can indeed be juvenile… but much of the complaining seems to be centered on the idea this is something only female gamers do. Fangirls. And whatever the fangirls are squeeing excitedly about is obviously diluting the “serious” nature of RPG’s… ignoring just how juvenile other gamers can be about the myriad of obsessions they have in these games as well as the fact that the fixation on romances is hardly exclusive to females at all (as the angst over the Morrigan romance back in the day would clearly attest).I would, however, resist making the romance elements of our games more prominent without also changing the nature of that content. Adding an element of failure, for instance, or by having not all characters be available to all player characters (they’re attracted only to certain types, for instance). Adding different types of romance: tragic romances, romances where your partner cheats on you, romances where the character is already involved in another relationship, characters that don’t know how to relate to someone else on a romantic level or aren’t interested in such. It needn’t all be unhappy, of course, but were I to cross the threshold of making all followers possible to romance I’d at least want to change the approach into something more plausible. To me, the idea that a player should get their followers and then simply select one or more companions to be their romance, and that romance is their cuddly bunny for the entirety of the game and plays out exactly as they wish, would be the worst of both worlds. It would be wish fulfillment on a level that reduced the characters into romantic playthings— sex dolls, really. And I have no interest in creating that, even if there are people who think it’d be grand.Would doing romances in that way actually be popular? Probably not. Take the resolution of the Thane romance arc in ME3, for instance. There are people who did (and still do) think that, having selected Thane as their romance, they should have been able to cure him of his illness and make everything better. Why? Because he’s their romance, and they’re entitled to have it be a happy one. Regardless of whether you think they are justified in feeling so, they do. I don’t think plausibility is really what they’re looking for.So that would leave us at an impasse… some might appreciate such an approach, and some might even enjoy the stories, but I suspect many who are looking for romance in their story are hoping for something more fulfilling… and would likely be put out if their choice ended up getting the short end of the stick (from their point of view) compared to some of the other romances. The discussion would change from “oh! I get to romance this character?” to comparisons with other romances and assurances that, because their character didn’t work out as they envisioned it, that must be because they’re not “legitimate” choices.Just thinking about that makes my brain ache a little, actually.So, no, I’m quite fine with selecting a few characters and having them be romantic options and letting the rest be simply what they are. My preference is that the romances cover a range of styles and sexualities as evenly as we can, and that they have comparable levels of content, and leave it at that. If someone doesn’t find something to their liking in that particular game, chances are we’ll have a whole different batch in the next game (I do find it rather amusing how people always assume we’ll write exactly the same characters in the next game as the current one— even though we never have, the assumption is the same after every game). In the meantime, there are hopefully friendships and rivalries among the followers that you can develop, and reasons to appreciate each of them beyond whether they can be sexed to your liking, as well as that whole other thing we wrote.You know. The plot.
/thread
You have a different definiton of what a causal gamer is. Doesn't really change my point in the slightest. If they finished DA, they weren't casual about it, even if they are usually more causal about gaming in general.
Modifié par Taleroth, 04 octobre 2013 - 05:56 .
Basically, romances are side content, the story will always come first, and the romances that are included will be as good as they can make them. If they can't be that with the resources, they won't be in there. The game isn't about romance.Sylvianus wrote...
Can't read.Br3ad wrote...
Gaider, the most vocal that I've seen about this:David Gaider wrote....
snip
/thread
Modifié par Mdoggy1214, 04 octobre 2013 - 06:01 .
Retour en haut
