191 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Face of Evil wrote...

"Hefty" Rivalry penalty my ass. I took the 10 points and still had Anders at full friendship by mid-Act 2.

Jesus Christ, are people EVER going to stop whining about this?

They won't. To make this even more hilarious you get more rivalry points automatically for recruiting Fenris as a mage.

The mind boggles.

[Ryzaki]

Sopa de Gato wrote...

It's the principle of the matter. It's the only situation in the game I'm aware of that does this - any other friendship/rivalry changes are limited to actual events and things Hawke does (or does not do) as is intended. They aren't supposed to be like/dislike points like with Origins, but instead geared toward that character's cause or motivations.

Wrong.

Recruit Fenris as a mage. no matter WHAT you do or say you WILL get Rivalry.

Also you can negate Anders rivalry points from picking the broken heart from the beginning.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 24 décembre 2013 - 04:50 .

[daveliam]

Ryzaki wrote...

Face of Evil wrote...

"Hefty" Rivalry penalty my ass. I took the 10 points and still had Anders at full friendship by mid-Act 2.

Jesus Christ, are people EVER going to stop whining about this?

They won't. To make this even more hilarious you get more rivalry points automatically for recruiting Fenris as a mage.

The mind boggles.

Wow, I had no idea about that.  You would think that people would complain about that more.  It almost makes me think that people are just using the Anders rivalry points as a convenient excuse to legitimize their issues with being hit on by a guy.....

Modifié par daveliam, 24 décembre 2013 - 04:51 .

[shit's fucked cunts]

Ryzaki wrote...

They won't. To make this even more hilarious you get more rivalry points automatically for recruiting Fenris as a mage.

The mind boggles.

That's logical.

I'm not sure if you know this, but Fenris isn't that fond of mages.

Modifié par Zazzerka, 24 décembre 2013 - 05:21 .

[Ryzaki]

Zazzerka wrote...

daveliam wrote...

They won't. To make this even more hilarious you get more rivalry points automatically for recruiting Fenris as a mage.

The mind boggles.

That's logical.

I'm not sure if you know this, but Fenris isn't that fond of mages.

I didn't say it wasn't logical.

I'm simply pointing out the QQing about rivalry at least you can cancel out Anders'. (You can completely AVOID any and all flirting attempts by simply picking snarky options instead of the nice guy option twice in a row and even get friendship points in that convo). There's no way to do that with Fenris. I think the most you can do is minimize to about 5 or 10 points.

It's logical for Anders to get pissy about being rejected that doesn't stop the complaining.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 24 décembre 2013 - 05:00 .

[KainD]

Sith Grey Warden wrote...

I wouldn't go that far. Recent studies have found things like that men and women physiologically react differently to things like a baby's cry due to hormonal differences.

Miniscule. And then there are women that hate children, and react to their cry as something annoying. 

Modifié par KainD, 24 décembre 2013 - 04:58 .

[shit's fucked cunts]

Ryzaki wrote...

I didn't say it wasn't logical.

I'm simply pointing out the QQing about rivalry at least you can cancel out Anders'. (You can completely AVOID any and all flirting attempts by simply picking snarky options instead of the nice guy option twice in a row and even get friendship points in that convo). There's no way to do that with Fenris. I think the most you can do is minimize to about 5 or 10 points.

It's logical for Anders to get pissy about being rejected that doesn't stop the complaining.

Fair enough. Both rivalry gains make sense to me.

Personally, the +10 rivalry for asking why Poll ran from Merrill was more annoying.

[Ryzaki]

Zazzerka wrote...

Fair enough. Both rivalry gains make sense to me.

Personally, the +10 rivalry for asking why Poll ran from Merrill was more annoying.

To me as well but I can't help but facepalm when one complains about one but not the other when both were understandable.

I assumed it was cause how Hawke said it. "What did you do that this man would run away to his death." it can be taken as accusatory I guess. *shrugs*

[Statare]

Sith Grey Warden wrote...

KainD wrote...

M25105 wrote...

This is exactly what I'm talking about. We don't need more chicks with dicks, where there is no difference at all. Men and women are different, it's not rocket science and that difference goes beyond genitals.

The difference is miniscule and practically non-existant if both are brought up in the same enviroment with the same atitutude. 

I wouldn't go that far. Recent studies have found things like that men and women physiologically react differently to things like a baby's cry due to hormonal differences.

In fields like neuropsychology and neuroscience, there is a phenomenon called the "file drawer effect" that is especially observable in studies of sexual difference. Only studies that show sexual difference are published and studies that show no difference (null findings) are put away in the repository of unpublished obscurity. It has been noted that for every study that found signifigant difference there are handfulls of studies that found no signifigant difference between the sexes. It is largely unknown what the observable differences between the genders may be, because it is hard to cite these unpublished, though equally valid, studies. A meta-analysis, or summary of gender difference studies, is not possible with out signifigant bias because all null findings would be omitted. With the advent of the internet and virtual databases, this is becoming less an issue, but much slower than you'd expect.

The extent to which the male and female brain are different, and how that difference develops, is largely unknown. It is an observable factor that the difference in the same gender brain, aka between male brains, is more severe than the difference between the genders. So, from male to male or female to female the brain is more different than between male and female brains. This is the problem with using averages in these fields in general. The individual always differs from the 'norm' (a mathematical caluclation, not an actuality) in signifigant ways, making the quantification of an average male or average female brain, and then comparison between these averages, pointless. It just sells subscriptions to journals.

End of nerd rant.

[Kallimachus]

Zazzerka wrote...

daveliam wrote...

They won't. To make this even more hilarious you get more rivalry points automatically for recruiting Fenris as a mage.

The mind boggles.

That's logical.

I'm not sure if you know this, but Fenris isn't that fond of mages.

It's also logical to be hurt when someone rejects your advancement, no matter how gently he or she does that.

I'm not sure you know this, but Anders is human (well... mostly).

[Iakus]

Kallimachus wrote...

It's also logical to be hurt when someone rejects your advancement, no matter how gently he or she does that.

I'm not sure you know this, but Anders is human (well... mostly).

It's an ecxample of hwo screwed up the friendship/rivalry system was.

You get as much rivalry refusing Anders' advances as you do from handing Ketojen over to the Qunari for execution.

That's just messed up.

[Spaghetti_Ninja]

I would like more Sizism. I want people to attempt to play football with me.

And then, I cut off their balls AND THEY CANT EVEN SEE ME GO DWARFS HAR HAR HAR

[shit's fucked cunts]

Kallimachus wrote...

It's also logical to be hurt when someone rejects your advancement, no matter how gently he or she does that.

I'm not sure you know this, but Anders is human (well... mostly).

Ryzaki set me straight. Ease off, turbo.

[Hellion Rex]

Kallimachus wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

Kallimachus wrote...

So basically want bioware to be offensive to portions of their potential customers, because it makes you (and maybe a few other over privileged people like you) feel better? How is that even good business sense?
Oh, and for those who think "the witched did it right", for me the Witcher 2 felt as if CD Project Red took my money, then turned and spat in my face. I couldn't bring myself to finish the game, and probably never will.

What was so bad about the Witcher 2 (other than that combat)?

Go see my two posts on the twitter thread from yesterday.

They didn't even try to make excuses like "that's only the opinion of this character" (bogus as those are unavoidably), the game treats homosexuality as unsettling, abnormal, a mark of depravity (if not the depravity itself), and so deserving of death (and not just by implication, the servants wails of "Have mercy, He made me do it!" pretty much says it all)

Is it really that bad? I am unfamiliar with the Witcher games.

[Toasted Llama]

Zatche wrote...

It's true there are trends that genders tend to follow regarding personality and skill, which has a lot to do with upbringing and society's expectations.

This is exactly what is wrong with moral equality knights.

Here's a simple biology lesson:

The male and female gender are significantly different due to biologic and evolutional reasons. The very fact that such a thing as genders exists supports this.

A stronger male that protects the female and hunts, while the female nurses the offspring has proven to be very successfull. This sounds really unintelligent and very primitive, but yeah, we were that primitive for a loooooong time. This is basically stuck in our genes and hasn't changed simply because, millions of years later, our brains decide "Every gender is equal **** yeah!" Especially because gender equality didn't even exist untill the last ehh, what... Couple of hundreds of years?

Maybe we are all equal on a rational/mental level, but we will never be equal on a physical level. Does this mean one gender is better than the other? Nope and that is true sexism.

[daveliam]

Toasted Llama wrote...

This is exactly what is wrong with moral equality knights.

Here's a simple biology lesson:

The male and female gender are significantly different due to biologic and evolutional reasons. The very fact that such a thing as genders exists supports this.

A stronger male that protects the female and hunts, while the female nurses the offspring has proven to be very successfull. This sounds really unintelligent and very primitive, but yeah, we were that primitive for a loooooong time. This is basically stuck in our genes and hasn't changed simply because, millions of years later, our brains decide "Every gender is equal **** yeah!" Especially because gender equality didn't even exist untill the last ehh, what... Couple of hundreds of years?

Maybe we are all equal on a rational/mental level, but we will never be equal on a physical level. Does this mean one gender is better than the other? Nope and that is true sexism.

Gender is a social construct.  You are talking about biological sex.  Those are two different concepts.

[AlexanderCousland]

Kallimachus wrote...

It's also logical to be hurt when someone rejects your advancement, no matter how gently he or she does that.

I'm not sure you know this, but Anders is human (well... mostly).

Him being hurt is actually a desired effect for me. Im disappointed my Hawke acted like it was just another day in the neighborhood when Anders hit on him despite picking a negative response. IM NOT SAYING I want the PC to drop F bombs or commit hate crimes, But I do want to be able to let the Companions know "Im not cool with that" in a very assertive manner. It would also be nice to see NPC's react the same way some of you guys do here on BSN. 

[GreyLycanTrope]

eluvianix wrote...

Kallimachus wrote...
Go see my two posts on the twitter thread from yesterday.

They didn't even try to make excuses like "that's only the opinion of this character" (bogus as those are unavoidably), the game treats homosexuality as unsettling, abnormal, a mark of depravity (if not the depravity itself), and so deserving of death (and not just by implication, the servants wails of "Have mercy, He made me do it!" pretty much says it all)

Is it really that bad? I am unfamiliar with the Witcher games.

It's easy to see it that way but not quite the case, the character in question was rather depraved and trecherous person that just happened to be gay but the reason he was killed wasn't because he was depraved but because he cause the deaths of several other characters. In fact we don't even find out he's gay until literally the scene in which he gets murdered but that was way after he was already shown to be a complete bastard. The "have mercy" bit is just the servant saying he has no particular loyalty to the guy despite being caught in bed with him, so he doesn't wouldn't get murdered as well since the whole affair is supposed to be covert.

Here's the essence of what happens and the context for it:
"The sorcerer was Henselt's creature in full, a lackey who served his master in any way possible.
This included tracking real and imagined spies and thwarting conspiracies on the monarch's life. He was also among those chiefly responsible for the deaths of Vernon's men, whose grisly demise Henselt himself had ordered.


Dethmold fled, unwilling to risk a clash with the witcher. It proved a sound decision, which bought him a bit more time in this life.


Their next meeting proved to be their last, as Dethmold died at the hands of the vengeful Roche.
Geralt never revealed the details of the sorcerer's demise. I've concluded that it must have been quite savage, though I would prefer to hope that Vernon's threats had been but figures of speech..."



Really though he's not the only depraved villain in the series he's just the only one that happens to be gay as well.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 24 décembre 2013 - 05:44 .

[daveliam]

Greylycantrope wrote...

It's easy to see it that way but not quite the case, the character in question was rather depraved and trecherous person that just happened to be gay but the reason he was killed wasn't because he was depraved but because he cause the deaths of several other characters. In fact we don't even find out he's gay until literally the scene in which he gets murdered but that was way after he was already shown to be a complete bastard. The "have mercy" bit is just the servant saying he has no particular loyalty to the guy despite being caught in bed with him, so he doesn't wouldn't get murdered as well since the whole affair is supposed to be covert.

Here's the essence of what happens and the context for it:
"The sorcerer was Henselt's creature in full, a lackey who served his master in any way possible.
This included tracking real and imagined spies and thwarting conspiracies on the monarch's life. He was also among those chiefly responsible for the deaths of Vernon's men, whose grisly demise Henselt himself had ordered.


Dethmold fled, unwilling to risk a clash with the witcher. It proved a sound decision, which bought him a bit more time in this life.


Their next meeting proved to be their last, as Dethmold died at the hands of the vengeful Roche.
Geralt never revealed the details of the sorcerer's demise. I've concluded that it must have been quite savage, though I would prefer to hope that Vernon's threats had been but figures of speech..."



Really though he's not the only depraved villain in the series he's just the only one that happens to be gay as well.

Thank you for providing this explanation.  I also am unfamiliar with The Witcher, so I was concerned when I read the original post.  However, your explanation paints a different story.  I have no issues with gay characters being evil provided that they aren't evil because they are gay and that there are also gay characters that aren't evil to balance it out.  Your explanation sounds like this character was evil and happened to be gay, which isn't an issue for me.

[Ryzaki]

FreshIstay wrote...
Him being hurt is actually a desired effect for me. Im disappointed my Hawke acted like it was just another day in the neighborhood when Anders hit on him despite picking a negative response. IM NOT SAYING I want the PC to drop F bombs or commit hate crimes, But I do want to be able to let the Companions know "Im not cool with that" in a very assertive manner. It would also be nice to see NPC's react the same way some of you guys do here on BSN. 

You wanted your Hawke to act overly dramatic after he rejected Anders? Why? I mean a hilariously rude rejection is one thing but making it a big deal is quite another. (That said since alot of your companions are dismissable in DAI you can solve this issue by simply dismissing him/her and no need for additional over dramatic content).

If my female character can reject male characters in an overly harsh manner as well that'd be great and males to females...heck harsh rejections for everyone would be nice. (Seriously I was wondering where my renedouche rejections to Jack and Tali where). Some of your rejections of Alistair were hilarious in DAO I'd like some more on that level.

Harsh rejections (with harsh approval loses) would be nice. But only if they're across the board.

Most of the harsh rejections for females come after you've already started romancing them which...kind of kills the purpose to me.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 24 décembre 2013 - 05:54 .

[Hellion Rex]

FreshIstay wrote...

Kallimachus wrote...

It's also logical to be hurt when someone rejects your advancement, no matter how gently he or she does that.

I'm not sure you know this, but Anders is human (well... mostly).

Him being hurt is actually a desired effect for me. Im disappointed my Hawke acted like it was just another day in the neighborhood when Anders hit on him despite picking a negative response. IM NOT SAYING I want the PC to drop F bombs or commit hate crimes, But I do want to be able to let the Companions know "Im not cool with that" in a very assertive manner. It would also be nice to see NPC's react the same way some of you guys do here on BSN. 

No offense to you or your preferences, but I don't think we will get much more of an "assertive response" than we got in DA2. 

[TKavatar]

eluvianix wrote...

Kallimachus wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

Kallimachus wrote...

So basically want bioware to be offensive to portions of their potential customers, because it makes you (and maybe a few other over privileged people like you) feel better? How is that even good business sense?
Oh, and for those who think "the witched did it right", for me the Witcher 2 felt as if CD Project Red took my money, then turned and spat in my face. I couldn't bring myself to finish the game, and probably never will.

What was so bad about the Witcher 2 (other than that combat)?

Go see my two posts on the twitter thread from yesterday.

They didn't even try to make excuses like "that's only the opinion of this character" (bogus as those are unavoidably), the game treats homosexuality as unsettling, abnormal, a mark of depravity (if not the depravity itself), and so deserving of death (and not just by implication, the servants wails of "Have mercy, He made me do it!" pretty much says it all)

Is it really that bad? I am unfamiliar with the Witcher games.

As a bi guy I didn't feel any intentional homophobia from the devs.

Dethmold is a horrible depraved person that uses rape as an instrument of power. And it just so happens that he's bi (he probably raped Ves as well, besides most magic users have messed up sexualities).  His death has nothing to do with his sexuality and everything to do with the fact he kidnapped Anais, raped Ves and because it fits Vernon's character very well.

Besides there are plently of straight characters who are just as sick and horrible like Loredo.

[Kallimachus]

FreshIstay wrote...

Kallimachus wrote...

It's also logical to be hurt when someone rejects your advancement, no matter how gently he or she does that.

I'm not sure you know this, but Anders is human (well... mostly).

Him being hurt is actually a desired effect for me. Im disappointed my Hawke acted like it was just another day in the neighborhood when Anders hit on him despite picking a negative response. IM NOT SAYING I want the PC to drop F bombs or commit hate crimes, But I do want to be able to let the Companions know "Im not cool with that" in a very assertive manner. It would also be nice to see NPC's react the same way some of you guys do here on BSN. 

This is something I fail to understand completely. If someone hits on you and you are not interested in them, that gives you the rught to act rudely towards them? Or complain as if you were sexually harrassed? If that were so, none of "YOU GUYS" would be able to hear your own voice over the multitudes of women reacting that way to "you guys", not just on BSN but everywhere in the world.

[Ryzaki]

Kallimachus wrote...

This is something I fail to understand completely. If someone hits on you and you are not interested in them, that gives you the rught to act rudely towards them? Or complain as if you were sexually harrassed? If that were so, none of "YOU GUYS" would be able to hear your own voice over the multitudes of women reacting that way to "you guys", not just on BSN but everywhere in the world.

Honestly that's exactly why I want it. Female NPCs giving rude rejections would be beautiful (and some of those flirt lines need a roll eyes response).

God paragon's Shep's "You want this" made me face desk. So soooooo bad. Miranda should've verbally ripped him apart for that stupidity.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 24 décembre 2013 - 05:59 .