554 réponses à ce sujet

[jncicesp]

MevenSelas wrote...

jncicesp wrote...

Morrigan and Alistair are pretty much nonsexual beings in my mind.

She really seemed to enjoy the company of my dwarf Warden. 

I think she hated mine:?...no matter who I kill

[AresKeith]

jncicesp wrote...

I suck at using the quote thing.

You said it makes them seem cheap. so does making them end up agreeing with you over anything they hold strongly.

If them only liking one type of person is important I really dont think they should end up with Your character but some other party member or an npc or something.

I already why I cant but why cant you just only romance certain characters with a certain gender or race?
I could get over restrictions but I dont agree with them being in the game for any reason, I dont think they make any partymember more complex and they take away options on making the story different from playthough to playthough

Yea doing multiple quotes are a bit annoying

I didn't say it makes them cheap, just cheapens them in ways of feeling more alive as characters. And I agree that them agreeing with you over anything also cheapens them

Bioware technically does that with some party members anyway in both ME and DA (still hoping Varric and Grey Warden aren't romancable)

They don't take away options on making the story different. And while it doesn't make them more complex, it does make them feel more alive as they already were than it does with "playersexual"

[Seishoujyo]

Veruin wrote...

Please do.

I didn't realize changing he to she (or completely avoiding gender tones, which is what they seem to go with), was expensive.  The romances are shallow enough that they aren't expensive to do bi LIs in the first place.  They are
not near as indepth as you think.

Cheaper than 6 set orientation characters since Bioware is deadset on equal choices.

That's not why they closed the LI forums.

Changing he to she is a lazy job, do it properly or don't do anything. Kaidan would never talk to a man the same way he would talk to a women, he would be more romantic to a girl (I m saying "would" because I never romanced him, it's the logical thing if you re writing a good romance, Iromanced Ashley, Miranda and Miranda again, and for DA Morrigan and
Merril, never a guy just Alistair for my only female playthrough).

The good way would be only 6 LI but 6 fully fleshed romances or 5 (3 girls and 2 men because we know more guys are playing videogames so male LI should be more important).

Let'ssay Cassandra only likes men but only rogues and warriors if you re a mage you re screwed. Vivienne likes everyone and is bi, and the blond elf only likes humans and elfs. Things would be more interesting than "everyone loves everyone welcome to Disneyland" because it's pretty much like this in DA2 this is lame. And Kaidan who became bi between ME2 and ME3, well....

AresKeith wrote...

:mellow::huh:

Come here I have a cookie for you, don't be affraid

Modifié par Seishoujyo, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:03 .

[Seishoujyo]

Sorry to delete please.

Modifié par Seishoujyo, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:05 .

[Han Shot First]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

The downside is that it makes the companion characters feel a little less real. Their personalities and interests are now being issued to them by the player character rather being determined by those characters themselves.

How so?

Assigning sexual orientation to a fictional character is entirely arbitrary.  People want to talk about the backgrounds, personalities, and identities of these characters, but the only thing orientation would change is whether they've dated (or wed) males, females, both, or neither.

I've not seen much in the way of gender role-playing (where males are expected to do this and females are expected to do that) in Thedas.  They are pretty much equal, so the gender of the person(s) with whom they are intimate is largely irrelevant and tells us next to nothing about them.

I thought I explained it fairly well in the bit you snipped out.

Playersexual characters are less real because their sexual identity is being issued to them by the player, like it was a piece of equipment. The real world doesn't work that way. You don't get to define what other people's sexual interests are. That is something they have to choose for themselves.

Or alternatively, instead of playersexual characters you can have an entire squad full of people who are bisexual. Since Thedas is a fictional world I suppose the writers could decide nearly everyone is bi. It doesn't have to be a mirror reflection of own world. This is just my personal preference however, but I'd rather see Thedas mirror our own world in that regard. I'd rather it contain people with a mix of sexual preferences than just going the "they're all bi" route.

[Quill74Pen]

Hmm. In all seriousness, I wonder what the reaction would be if Bioware included a character or two who was either a transwoman or a transman. (However the heck such a transformation would be accomplished in a world sorely lacking technology to do just that.)

[The Elder King]

Quill74Pen wrote...

Hmm. In all seriousness, I wonder what the reaction would be if Bioware included a character or two who was either a transwoman or a transman. (However the heck such a transformation would be accomplished in a world sorely lacking technology to do just that.)

Magic?

[CybAnt1]

In the battle of game budgets vs. purported 'realism' ... guess which wins.

Personally, I think it's less realistic that everybody's bi, than that everybody desires humans, elves, dwarves, and qunari equally. (Well, at least the playersexual companions do.) Especially given that romances sometimes lead to children, and the elves and dwarves have incentive not to reproduce with non-folk of their kind. As of this moment, we don't know if kossith & humans can reproduce, and what the result is.

[Veruin]

Quill74Pen wrote...

Hmm. In all seriousness, I wonder what the reaction would be if Bioware included a character or two who was either a transwoman or a transman. (However the heck such a transformation would be accomplished in a world sorely lacking technology to do just that.)

There's that Maevarious (whatever) woman and Serendipity.  The general reaction seemed to be "Who......cares?"  or "Meh."

[The Elder King]

CybAnt1 wrote...

In the battle of game budgets vs. purported 'realism' ... guess which wins.

Personally, I think it's less realistic that everybody's bi, than that everybody desires humans, elves, dwarves, and qunari equally. (Well, at least the playersexual companions do.) Especially given that romances sometimes lead to children, and the elves and dwarves have incentive not to reproduce with non-folk of their kind. As of this moment, we don't know if kossith & humans can reproduce, and what the result is.

Humans don't have incentive in the case of dwarves too, since the offspring is an half-dwarf. 

[Hellion Rex]

@Veruin, indeed. Considering she was a high ranked magister of the Imperium, clearly no one really cared about it.

[Han Shot First]

Quill74Pen wrote...

Hmm. In all seriousness, I wonder what the reaction would be if Bioware included a character or two who was either a transwoman or a transman. (However the heck such a transformation would be accomplished in a world sorely lacking technology to do just that.)

Locked threads.

Maybe some banning.

Memes.

[The Elder King]

eluvianix wrote...

@Veruin, indeed. Considering she was a high ranked magister of the Imperium, clearly no one really cared about it.

Indeed. Though it might be different in Andrastian society. 

[jncicesp]

AresKeith wrote...

jncicesp wrote...

I suck at using the quote thing.

You said it makes them seem cheap. so does making them end up agreeing with you over anything they hold strongly.

If them only liking one type of person is important I really dont think they should end up with Your character but some other party member or an npc or something.

I already why I cant but why cant you just only romance certain characters with a certain gender or race?
I could get over restrictions but I dont agree with them being in the game for any reason, I dont think they make any partymember more complex and they take away options on making the story different from playthough to playthough

Yea doing multiple quotes are a bit annoying

I didn't say it makes them cheap, just cheapens them in ways of feeling more alive as characters. And I agree that them agreeing with you over anything also cheapens them

Bioware technically does that with some party members anyway in both ME and DA (still hoping Varric and Grey Warden aren't romancable)

They don't take away options on making the story different. And while it doesn't make them more complex, it does make them feel more alive as they already were than it does with "playersexual"

I know sorry I used the wrong word. I alot of things cheapen characters that actaully make things better  Like
companion Customization in armor
them still following you after you did something they call awful
Them telling you every little thing they want to do or are thinking about
..Those are usually considered good things.

They do and thats good, just cause you go after someone in a game doesnt mean you should get them, but I Think anyone so Set on what they like should always be that type.

If you cant romance someone when theyre Supposed to be romanced(like most people in me2) or when theyre just an option at all. Thats taking away an option and choices for the story(Depending on how close you hold romances and companion interactions to the story of your chrarcter you make or the plot)

Theyre better than 'playersexual'? or equal to?

Modifié par jncicesp, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:24 .

[mopotter]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

mopotter wrote...

This is what I disliked about the romances in DA2.  I would have been much happier if Fenris and Andres were true to their ideas.  I didn't like the idea that Hawke was sooooo AWSOME that it was possible for me to get Fenris' help in fighting for the mages at the end of the game.  And the same with Anders.  The fact that he helps me fight against the Mages, was really rather boring to me.   At least Sabastion had one belief you couldn't move him from.  I like that in a character.

I would agree with restricting romance options based on some PC choices, alignments, ideologies, etc. - but not race, class, or gender.

What the character says and does in-game should be deciding factors, not what the player chose during character creation.

For me, my character creation is just as important to me as how the NPC reacts to them, and I know it's just my game style, but I like the idea of some characters being straight or gay, just as much as having them different in their ideologies.  It just adds another quaility for what I'm going to replay as.   I'd also like a really good friendship dialogue.

I prefer playing as female because I am one, but if I have a LI who isn't into women I find it fun to play a guy.  DAO I played 1 male Wardens for Morrgain  I only played 3 male Shepards and I only played them because of Ash, Jack and Miranda.  DA 2  I didn't bother playing a male because I didn't have a reason to.

Like I said, it's my game style.  Mostly though, I want good dialogue that reflects something about my character as well as reflects the NPC's views and I hope they don't all accept everything my character does because I do find the "oh you are so wonderful, you are so right, how did I ever think something otherwise, give me presents and I'll do whatever  you want even if yesterday I said I hated it" is really yucky.    I'm thinking of ME2 Tali romance when Shepard was a real jerk to her in ME1 she should have told him to go take a hike in ME2.

[Quill74Pen]

Veruin wrote...

Quill74Pen wrote...

Hmm. In all seriousness, I wonder what the reaction would be if Bioware included a character or two who was either a transwoman or a transman. (However the heck such a transformation would be accomplished in a world sorely lacking technology to do just that.)

There's that Maevarious (whatever) woman and Serendipity.  The general reaction seemed to be "Who......cares?"  or "Meh."

I haven't heard of those characters in DA before. I take it they're from other games or did I simply miss references/appearances to/by them?

Modifié par Quill74Pen, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:27 .

[Thomas Andresen]

hhh89 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

@Veruin, indeed. Considering she was a high ranked magister of the Imperium, clearly no one really cared about it.

Indeed. Though it might be different in Andrastian society. 

That's utter crap.

In a society that isn't prejudiced about sexualities, suddenly you expect them to be prejudiced about one particular brand?

I haven't heard of those characters in DA before. I take it they're from other games or did I simply miss references/appearances to/by them?

Serendipity is a prostitute in the Blooming Rose in Kirkwall. Maevaris is a character from Gaider's comic series.

Modifié par Thomas Andresen, 28 janvier 2014 - 01:31 .

[AresKeith]

Quill74Pen wrote...

Veruin wrote...

Quill74Pen wrote...

Hmm. In all seriousness, I wonder what the reaction would be if Bioware included a character or two who was either a transwoman or a transman. (However the heck such a transformation would be accomplished in a world sorely lacking technology to do just that.)

There's that Maevarious (whatever) woman and Serendipity.  The general reaction seemed to be "Who......cares?"  or "Meh."

I haven't heard of those characters in DA before. I take it they're from other games?

Maevarious is from one of the DA comics and is Varric's cousin, Serendipity is from a DA2 dlc (I think?)

[mopotter]

Toasted Llama wrote...

Veruin wrote...

You pick your gender when you create a character. It is just as much innate as race is.  Want to romance character X?  Write/create a character that would be able to romance them.

BUT BUT BUT THEN MY SELF-INSERT--AKJHASJHD I MEAN CANON INQUISITOR CAN'T ROMANCE X OR Y CHARACTER! D:


I honestly don't get it when people have a problem with making another character to explore a romance path of a companion, simply because their first character unfortunately didn't fit into their set preferences. Whoop dee ****ing doo I need to make another character. It's not like you totally missed like 66% of the game-play because you choose to play as for example, a mage instead of a warrior/rogue.

I mean, it's a role-playing game. ROLEplaying. Not write-your-own-perfect-fantasy-story. There's something called fanfiction and books to do that.

Or you know.


IMAGINATION!

*GASP*

I don't get it either.  

[AresKeith]

jncicesp wrote...

Theyre better than 'playersexual'? or equal to?

I think that set sexuality is better than playersexual

[Spectre slayer]

AresKeith wrote...

Quill74Pen wrote...

Veruin wrote...

Quill74Pen wrote...

Hmm. In all seriousness, I wonder what the reaction would be if Bioware included a character or two who was either a transwoman or a transman. (However the heck such a transformation would be accomplished in a world sorely lacking technology to do just that.)

There's that Maevarious (whatever) woman and Serendipity.  The general reaction seemed to be "Who......cares?"  or "Meh."

I haven't heard of those characters in DA before. I take it they're from other games?

Maevarious is from one of the DA comics and is Varric's cousin, Serendipity is from a DA2 dlc (I think?)

Yes, Maevaroius is from the comics, Serendipity is in the base game aswell at the blooming rose.

[The Elder King]

Thomas Andresen wrote...
That's utter crap.

In a society that isn't prejudiced about sexualities, suddenly you expect them to be prejudiced about one particular brand?

I'm not saying that it is. My point is that since we don't know anything about transgenders's treatments other than a single example in a different society, we can't say for sure it wouldn't happen. I didn't mean to attack Andrastian society.
About prejudices, though, you should remembef that prejudices based on gender existed in Orlais. It's not like Thedas was always a world where there wasn't gender differences.

[Seishoujyo]

AresKeith wrote...

Maevarious is from one of the DA comics and is Varric's cousin, Serendipity is from a DA2 dlc (I think?)

No Serendipity is the hooker from the Blooming Rose in DA2, actually a guy dressed in a women.

[CuriousArtemis]

I prefer the DA2/playersexual version to the DA:O version. Mostly because I never did get to romance Alistair. People who only like to play a certain type of PC (a gay man, or a lesbian woman, for instance) don't get to romance their character of choice when choice is removed like that

Plus I don't think set sexualities add anything to a character's ... um, character (lol). For example, I don't think making Fenris straight or Merrill straight would have added to their characters. They are still the same person.

I'd be curious to see the results of a poll showing how many people romanced each character. I wonder if characters in DA2 were generally romanced more than the two straight characters in DA:O.

I mean, how many people didn't want to create a male to romance Morrigan, or a female to romance Alistair. But then along comes DA2 and suddenly they don't have to.

[AresKeith]

Spectre slayer wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Maevarious is from one of the DA comics and is Varric's cousin, Serendipity is from a DA2 dlc (I think?)

Yes, Maevaroius is from the comics, Serendipity is in the base game aswell at the blooming rose.

Ah ok, never really paid attention to Serendipity so just knew the name but not where