554 réponses à ce sujet

[daveliam]

LPPrince wrote...

Four or five to me seems like quite a lot, given the amount of companions we may have.

Compare-

Mass Effect had six companions, two of which were romanceable in any one playthrough.

Dragon Age: Origins had ten companions, nine at a time, three of which were romanceable in any one playthrough

Mass Effect 2 had thirteen companions, twelve at a time, three of which were romanceable in any one playthrough(not counting Samara/Morinth as romances)

Dragon Age 2 had nine companions, eight at a time, four/five were romanceable in any one playthrough(Sebastian is FemHawke exclusive)



I don't want to feel like half or more than half of the people with me would drop their britches if I make the effort.

Yeah, but again, I feel like the equity issue isn't being taken into account.  Here's how I see the breakdown (I count Liara as female since asari are "an all female race"):

ME:  Six Companions total.  Straight male shep = 2 options.  Straight female shep = 1 option.  Lesbian shep = 1 option.  Gay male shep = 0 options.  Not equitable or fair at all.

DA: O:  9-10 companions.  Straight male warden = 2 options.  Straight female warden = 2 options.  Lesbian warden = 1 option.  Gay male warden = 1 option.  Better but still not equitable.

ME 2:  12-13 companions (I also won't count Samara/Monrinth/Kelly).  Straight male shep = 3 options.  Straight female shep = 3 options.  Lesbian Shep = 0 options.  Gay male shep = 0 options.  Worst of all of the games imo.

DA 2:  8-9 companions.  Straight male Hawke = 2 options.  Straight female Hawke = 3 options.  Lesbian Hawke = 2 options.  Gay male Hawke = 2 options.  By far the  most equitable at this point.

The only reason why there would need more options is if they want to create a variety of set sexualities and still give every player options.  You can see by this that the only way that I, as a gay male character, get a choice at all in my romance option is if they are all bisexual OR, as ME 3 demonstrates, they increase the total number of LIs.

[LPPrince]

I don't know if Bioware plans to implement purely homosexual romances in the future. So far they've had hetero, bi, and player.

A game like Mass 2 with such a huge cast could've had hetero, ******, and bi romances and it wouldn't of felt like a harem.

But how many people will be our squadmates in DA:I?

6?

8?

15?

Making the majority of the people you travel with romance options I see as a problem. I can go grab 10 of my friends and say "Lets go on an adventure!" and I'm sure all but at the most two would not be even remotely interested in me.

Which says quite a bit about Hawke, apparently. Or me.

Bummer.

Modifié par LPPrince, 05 février 2014 - 09:55 .

[mikeymoonshine]

LPPrince wrote...

Four or five to me seems like quite a lot, given the amount of companions we may have.

Compare-

Mass Effect had six companions, two of which were romanceable in any one playthrough.

Dragon Age: Origins had ten companions, nine at a time, three of which were romanceable in any one playthrough

Mass Effect 2 had thirteen companions, twelve at a time, three of which were romanceable in any one playthrough(not counting Samara/Morinth as romances)

Dragon Age 2 had nine companions, eight at a time, four/five were romanceable in any one playthrough(Sebastian is FemHawke exclusive)



I don't want to feel like half or more than half of the people with me would drop their britches if I make the effort.

But that's kinda unfair. Why is it unrealistic that 3 or four people in your life might have a relationship with you if you persued them? There are just as many characters that won't or are harder to romance by certain characters. 

Isabella will sleep with anyone

Fenris flirts with you but allot of work has to go into it if you actually want anything to happen.

Varric and Aveline are not interested,

Sebastian has to be pushed 

Anders origionally seems more into male Hawke and he will reject you if you make a deal with the deamon. 

Similar things can be said of DAO. 

[LPPrince]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

and often to fill a quota. 

And I wish it wasn't so. I wish that if they found that they made no heterosexual romances they'd go, "Well, lets carry on!" and continue as they were. But far too often its the opposite.

Bioware's doing good giving more options for all sorts of PCs, certainly better than some other folks do.

I just wish it was done in a way that improved the narrative and didn't go too far in the "I can't believe all these people could potentially sleep with me" zone.

[CybAnt1]

What people are calling "playersexual" means:

1) the romanceables don't care about PC's gender
2) ALSO "" their race - please note, now that race selection is an option, it comes into play, too
3) "" their class, spec, background - well, they never have

and in Origins, they didn't seem to care about race, but there were some that cared about gender.

In DA2, all Hawkes were human, but only Sebastian wouldn't open up to even chaste bromance with a male. And he was DlC.

There are rare situations where I can see things from the developer's perspective :innocent:, and this is one.

Sure, it would be more realistic for the companions to have preferred tastes in both gender and race. The race thing - especially given racial attitudes toward reproduction - should come into play, but didn't in Origins.

But we know there will be 9 companions and I'm damn well betting only 4 will be romance-able. Budgets, and all.

Given that, and that there will be people who complain a LI is "unavailable" due to either gender or race, and further people who will complain they have no choice between 2 LIs and are stuck with one for similar reasons, they HAVE to go the playersexual route.

P.S. sometimes I do get the feeling that some people think bisexuals wear nothing but Bi and Proud T-shirts 7 days a week, and that they are constantly discussing both the men and women they have dated with every random stranger.

Sometimes bi people are bi and you just don't know that until it comes up. That's life. Here, and maybe also on Thedas.

Modifié par CybAnt1, 05 février 2014 - 10:02 .

[Rotward]

I want them to be more like KotOR honestly. Disclaimer: it's been some time since I played KotOR.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

It is IRL

It isn't always IRL.  My identity has little or nothing to do with my sexual preference.

[Pasquale1234]

LPPrince wrote...

I just wish it was done in a way that improved the narrative and didn't go too far in the "I can't believe all these people could potentially sleep with me" zone.

I'm totally on board with reducing the number of companions willing to drop their drawers for the PC as long as it isn't sex or race based.  PC choices, not player CC choices.

I think the rivalmance concept did a lot of damage to people's impressions of playersexuality.  That crap treatment and directly opposing ideologies would not dissuade DA2's LIs gave people a somewhat warped impression of the playersexuality aspect.

[LPPrince]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

I just wish it was done in a way that improved the narrative and didn't go too far in the "I can't believe all these people could potentially sleep with me" zone.

I'm totally on board with reducing the number of companions willing to drop their drawers for the PC as long as it isn't sex or race based.  PC choices, not player CC choices.

I'm for PC choices and player CC choices. Given its the player in the end still making all the decisions.

But its cool to discuss the differing viewpoints.

[Wulfram]

I'd rather keep the number of characters interested in the PC down by having them react to the PC's acts than the PC's gender. Everyone being Bi might not be realistic, but it's an acceptable way to counter the artificial scarcity of people who the PC is able to get to know to any real degree.

Though personally I'm only really bothered when too many characters make a pass at the PC, like if you had a male character in ME2. If most of them are willing to wait for the PC to make a move it doesn't bother me so much because I don't really see there being any real romantic tension between the characters - maybe they had the odd idle thought, because odd idle thoughts happen, but the PC is obviously not interested/head over heals in love with someone else, so it's obviously not going anywhere and the other character presumably isn't dwelling on it.

[CybAnt1]

I think the rivalmance concept did a lot of damage to people's impressions of playersexuality.  That crap treatment and directly opposing ideologies would not dissuade DA2's LIs gave people a somewhat warped impression of the playersexuality aspect.

Rivalmances seemed too BDSMish to me. Like there was a lot of grudge ****ing going on. "I hate your worldview, your actions stink, but DO ME." 

I never did any. It felt too creepy. 

[Pasquale1234]

LPPrince wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

and often to fill a quota. 

And I wish it wasn't so. I wish that if they found that they made no heterosexual romances they'd go, "Well, lets carry on!" and continue as they were. But far too often its the opposite.

At what point do you suppose they'd recognize that?  As I mentioned before, assigning orientation to a fictional character is entirely arbitrary.  It changes nothing else about the character.

I'm for PC choices and player CC choices. Given its the player in the end still making all the decisions.

In the case of the PC, the player is only reflecting the choices that are consistent with the chacter concept / design - which may be very different from what a player doing a self-insert would choose.

Regardless, the more content gated, the more content unavailable on any given playthrough.  It is very expensive to develop optional content, and when the gate lies in the CC, a lot of players will never ever see it.  It seems like a waste to me.

[KaiserShep]

I never tried rivalmance. I don't think my Hawke needs to go the hate f*ck route.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 05 février 2014 - 10:54 .

[Pasquale1234]

CybAnt1 wrote...

I think the rivalmance concept did a lot of damage to people's impressions of playersexuality.  That crap treatment and directly opposing ideologies would not dissuade DA2's LIs gave people a somewhat warped impression of the playersexuality aspect.

Rivalmances seemed too BDSMish to me. Like there was a lot of grudge ****ing going on. "I hate your worldview, your actions stink, but DO ME." 

I never did any. It felt too creepy.

I agree.  I just couldn't.... go there.

[Wulfram]

CybAnt1 wrote...

Rivalmances seemed too BDSMish to me. Like there was a lot of grudge ****ing going on. "I hate your worldview, your actions stink, but DO ME." 

I never did any. It felt too creepy. 

I think that depends on the character.  Merrill's rivalmance isn't like that at all.

Well, it could probably be played like that, since the game doesn't really distinguish "I care about you and don't want you to get hurt" from "I think you're evil", but I do think the first was what was intended.

[Ianamus]

LPPrince wrote...

I don't know if Bioware plans to implement purely homosexual romances in the future. So far they've had hetero, bi, and player.

A game like Mass 2 with such a huge cast could've had hetero, ******, and bi romances and it wouldn't of felt like a harem.

But how many people will be our squadmates in DA:I?

6?

8?

15?

Making the majority of the people you travel with romance options I see as a problem. I can go grab 10 of my friends and say "Lets go on an adventure!" and I'm sure all but at the most two would not be even remotely interested in me.

Which says quite a bit about Hawke, apparently. Or me.

Bummer.

Well, Mass Effect 3 had purely homosexual romances. I think that adding some non-companion romances was a good idea, with regard to diversity and the whole "Half your party are romanceable" thing. That said I don't want it to become a situation where the homosexual only LI's are the ones who aren't companions, and hopefully any future games that go that route would mix it up a bit. 

Modifié par EJ107, 05 février 2014 - 11:02 .

[LPPrince]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

and when the gate lies in the CC, a lot of players will never ever see it.  It seems like a waste to me.

It was stated the dev team is now less worried about some players not seeing all content.

So we'll see if that affects romance content as well as other things.

[Pasquale1234]

LPPrince wrote...
It was stated the dev team is now less worried about some players not seeing all content.

So we'll see if that affects romance content as well as other things.

Based on in-game character choices or player CC choices?

The primary example I can think of was Hawke having to fight both Orsino and Meredith.  Do you have any other examples of what this might be in reference to?

[Veruin]

Considering most players don't even finish the game in the first place, I'm not sure the "A lot of players never see it" holds much water.

[LPPrince]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...
It was stated the dev team is now less worried about some players not seeing all content.

So we'll see if that affects romance content as well as other things.

Based on in-game character choices or player CC choices?

The primary example I can think of was Hawke having to fight both Orsino and Meredith.  Do you have any other examples of what this might be in reference to?

Neeeeeigh. Its as vague a statement as one can be.

[LPPrince]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

I honestly do feel that having a variety of homosexual and heterosexual romances encourages multiple playthroughs, since you'd have to play as a male and a female to experience all of the content in the game. I like that concept.

Though I'm speaking as a guy who doesn't really treat games as a way to create "me", if that makes sense.

I replayed DAO quite a bit. Experienced each and every romance option.

DA2, only once. :/

[Br3admax]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...
It was stated the dev team is now less worried about some players not seeing all content.

So we'll see if that affects romance content as well as other things.

Based on in-game character choices or player CC choices?

The primary example I can think of was Hawke having to fight both Orsino and Meredith.  Do you have any other examples of what this might be in reference to?

I'm sorry, what? That wasn't even about fans seeing all content, that was about them throwin in another boss fight for the lulz.

[Pasquale1234]

Br3ad wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...
It was stated the dev team is now less worried about some players not seeing all content.

So we'll see if that affects romance content as well as other things.

Based on in-game character choices or player CC choices?

The primary example I can think of was Hawke having to fight both Orsino and Meredith.  Do you have any other examples of what this might be in reference to?

I'm sorry, what? That wasn't even about fans seeing all content, that was about them throwin in another boss fight for the lulz.

Right.  So even if Hawke supported the mages, players had to experience that content, even though it was nonsensical.

[Grieving Natashina]

I agree with Br3ad for once. He's right; they wanted another boss fight to pad out the game some. I heard that Orisno was supposed to have more of a role, and introduced far before Act 3. Thanks to EA rushing the development time, that had to get cut. People grouse about the Arishok fight, but the Orisno fight is more annoying to me. I was furious when I did my first session, which was pro-Mage.

On topic: I did appreciate how Varric and Aveline were not available to romance. That was a nice touch, especially with helping Aveline hook up with Donnic.  I'd love to see and do more of that in future DA games.

Anyhow, I'm okay with "hero-sexuality." It would be nice to have "set" sexualities for companions, such as having two bi, two gay, two lesbian and two straight romances. Yet, the writers are on a word budget and all of that adds up. So it is much easier to make them available to all races/genders. I doubt we'll have to worry about another LI hitting on the PC first, not after the reaction from last time.

If one doesn't like the romance/romance style, they should just skip it entirely. I didn't know that Genn in NWN vanilla was available as a LI and I still enjoyed the game. Yes, I went for the tiefling in HotU, but I still had fun before I knew he was available.

There was a reason why my Champion in NWN2 was single in the vanilla campaign. It didn't diminish my enjoyment of the game the slightest. Once again, it wasn't until the expansion (MotB) that I found a party member worth the effort. 

It's pretty humorous to me to see people continually complaining about "hero sexuality." I do think as a fan and as a consumer we should ask for more. However, we should all bare in mind what they are capable of doing what they can under budget. I am honestly grateful that Bioware even takes the time to do this, much less with self awareness and a sense of grace.

Completely off-topic: Anyone know where I can buy a digital version of the first Witcher game?  I didn't see it up on steam, unless I overlooked it.

Modifié par Starsyn, 05 février 2014 - 11:43 .