303 réponses à ce sujet

[AlexJK]

Writ3Wing3r wrote...

California actually, and I was attempting to make a serious point while simultaneously being funny.

Ah. Yeah, that didn't come across.

fchopin wrote...

It may be ridiculous to you but i like consistent companions that can be reused in different games with the same personality and not changed so people can get laid with everyone and made cheap.

Nothing is "changing" in your game. Whatever happened in your playthrough will remain consistent (thanks to the Keep and consistent world states) in DAI and future games. Nothing in your playthrough is "changing". Do you have a problem playing as Mage Hawke because if you'd played as Warrior Hawke instead then Carver would be dead? Does this create a logical inconsistency for you? If not, why not?

Why would i befriend an NPC if i know they can be changed at someone’s whim?

You do know that the NPCs are all fictional characters, written by Bioware employees, and subject to change as needed, at their whim, right? I mean, why does playersexuality bring this issue up specifically?

[Commander Kurt]

KainD wrote...

Commander Kurt wrote...

Gender must be at the bottom of that list... Right..? If not, then why?

People are slow, can't keep up with the time. 

Well, to be fair, time does move a bit slower in some places.

AlexJK wrote...

Because sexual differences are a real-world thing which people feel very strongly about. (Note that homophobia has been mentioned in this topic already despite it having nothing to do with the OP.)

Some people aren't willing to accept that gender roles might be different in the fantasy world of Thedas; or - leaving world and story aside for a moment - that there are practical reasons for making certain writing decisions so that content can be included which otherwise *would not feature at all*.

And of course, while some people are trying to add constructively to the debate, others just want to make a fuss and complain about something - such is the way of Internet forums!

I take it you don't place it very high on the list yourself..?

Gender roles, certainly. Basic psychology differing for the sexes, possibly that too. But I'm just guessing here, hard to know really.

[Commander Kurt]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Commander Kurt wrote...


Gender must be at the bottom of that list... Right..? If not, then why?

Easiest to do, I think anyway. Personally, I feel there might not be any reactivity at all in this game so I aim low to keep my expectations reasonable.

It probably is, good point. But I guess you could just as easily have limited reactivity for the other choices, and I still feel it would make more sense. I mean, if a bisexual Cass reacted about one thing and one thing only, would it be that you're a blood mage or that you're a girl?

Ha, I envy your hold on your expectations. Wish I had mine so masterfully culled.

[AlexJK]

Commander Kurt wrote...

I take it you don't place it very high on the list yourself..?

If time and money were infinite (!!), I suppose it would be great if there could be several romances available for each different sex/sexuality of player, all with different backgrounds, reactivity to their sexuality, prejudices and preferences, etc... but (quick count) that's at least 12 different, detailed and complex companions just needed for the romances.

Also, it would be a dating sim. Obviously, that's not something that Bioware are going to do - nor is it a reasonable request, nor one that I'm making!

I agree with your earlier post that it is much more interesting to have romance arcs vary based on race, class, background and situation, rather than gender. Think of all the possibilities! I particularly liked the mage/Fenris romance in DA2. Much more interesting to deal with the fact that he hated mages and their association with slavery, but could grow to respect and love Hawke!

I liked the fact that characters were "playersexual" in DA2 - more options to choose from, in both my female and male playthroughs. That said, I won't be upset if BW take a different approach in DAI. As David G. always points out; they're optional content.

Modifié par AlexJK, 18 février 2014 - 11:51 .

[The Elder King]

Why would 12 LI be needed? Woudn't 6 LI (2 hetero, two gay and two bi) be enough?

[Ellanya]

Star fury wrote...

I hate "playersexual" **** with a passion.

Totally agree!

[AlexJK]

hhh89 wrote...

Why would 12 LI be needed? Woudn't 6 LI (2 hetero, two gay and two bi) be enough?

Assuming that you want more than one option of each sex/sexuality combination to choose from, then for complete coverage of straight/gay/bisexual:

2 straight male
2 straight female
2 gay male
2 gay female
2 bisexual male
2 bisexual female

And that assumes that 2 choices in any given category is enough. You could overlap the bisexual options to reduce numbers, but if that's why you're doing it then it's just "playersexual"... right?

Modifié par AlexJK, 18 février 2014 - 11:47 .

[fchopin]

AlexJK wrote...

Nothing is "changing" in your game. Whatever happened in your playthrough will remain consistent (thanks to the Keep and consistent world states) in DAI and future games. Nothing in your playthrough is "changing". Do you have a problem playing as Mage Hawke because if you'd played as Warrior Hawke instead then Carver would be dead? Does this create a logical inconsistency for you? If not, why not?

No it is not consistent, i know if i change my character then the NPC will change and will not be the same person.
We know how Morrigan and Alistair will react to most situations as they were set characters in DAO and if they change this everyone will be upset same as Ashley in ME3 was changed.
By making NPC’s change depending on player character the NPC’s become non people but just play things without personality. Why not just make a pleasure machine so we don’t even have to talk to them.

AlexJK wrote...
You do know that the NPCs are all fictional characters, written by Bioware employees, and subject to change as needed, at their whim, right? I mean, why does playersexuality bring this issue up specifically?

Yes i know that NPC’s are not real people same as movie characters are not real people so what are you trying to say. By changing someone’s personality you make them cheap and irrelevant.
It takes tragic events or something special to change people even if writers don’t like to admit it.

Modifié par fchopin, 18 février 2014 - 12:32 .

[The Elder King]

@AlexJK: Two choices is what we got in DAO (hetero) and vanilla DA2 (everyone), unless you're bisexual PC. I personally think it could be enough.
Why would using bisexual characters to reduce the number of LI (since resources aren't infinite) be considered playersexual? 
While my favourite choice would be the 6 LI approach, I don't have a problem with DA2 approach if Bioware doesn't have the resources to do different, multiple LIs for everyone.

Modifié par hhh89, 18 février 2014 - 12:00 .

[Tric]

Of everything the LIs could react to gender has to be the absolutly least important for me.

Ingame decisions > Specializations > Race > Gender

I much rather a templar refuse a bloodmage than get a whole different romance based on my character's gender.


@fchopin
I sincerely don't get what your issue with this is. Is this about Awakening Anders again?

Because knowing that someone dated guys before doesn't mean they won't date women later on and vise versa, and just so you know, sexuality is fluid for some people, there's no need for a "traumatic event" for it to change.

Also, a lot of people's personality isn't defined by their sexuality, and, at times, when it is it's due to how the world/society reacts to it.

Modifié par SomethingSome, 18 février 2014 - 12:10 .

[Mathias]

It makes no sense to me that every single person in Thedas be Bisexual. Having 1 or 2 party members who are Bi is one thing, but to have all romances be accessible to all genders is pretty stupid. It does cheapen the romance for a lot of people, whether some want to admit it or not.

[AlexJK]

 

fchopin wrote...

By making NPC’s change depending on player character the NPC’s become non people but just play things without personality.

I'm sorry, I don't see the issue here. (And your insistence on using terms like "play thing" and "pleasure machine" is irritating.) Events in the game occur, and characters act, differently depending on your player sex and class - this is not unique to romance content. I clearly don't share whatever belief you hold that this is a problem.

hhh89 wrote...

Why would using bisexual characters to reduce the number of LI (since resources aren't infinite) be considered playersexual?

It wouldn't, necessarily (and indeed that was the case, and wasn't described as such, in DAO; though I remember enough complaints about people not having access to a gay-only option despite the options that were available...)

I was just illustrating that in my hypothetical example offering multiple options for all sex/sexuality combinations (assuming M/F and S/G/B to be "all" for the purposes of this conversation), it wouldn't be an option.

The "playersexual" concept exists for one reason - to allow more players access to more content. I really can't see that as a bad thing.

Modifié par AlexJK, 18 février 2014 - 12:24 .

[fchopin]

SomethingSome wrote...

@fchopin
I sincerely don't get what your issue with this is. Is this about Awakening Anders again?

Because knowing that someone dated guys before doesn't mean they won't date women later on and vise versa, and just so you know, sexuality is fluid for some people, there's no need for a "traumatic event" for it to change.

Also, a lot of people's personality isn't defined by their sexuality, and, at times, when it is it's due to how the world/society reacts to it.

I did not even know about Anders in Awakening as i did not play the game till i played DA2.
Surprisingly i liked Anders in Awakening and have no idea what they did to him in DA2 as he is a completely different person in DA2. So no this has nothing to do with Anders but with cheap NPC’s that are created just for self gratification.
People have been criticizing The Witcher in the past for cheap sex but i think the problem is with Bioware. It is time Bioware shows as that they can create a good story without cheap tricks.

[mikeymoonshine]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

It makes no sense to me that every single person in Thedas be Bisexual. Having 1 or 2 party members who are Bi is one thing, but to have all romances be accessible to all genders is pretty stupid. It does cheapen the romance for a lot of people, whether some want to admit it or not.

Who said anything about every single person in thedas? Have you ever considered that maybe there are just more bisexual people in thedas?

It's not that we don't want to admit it, it's that we don't see the problem, It's no different to any othe change in a character based on a players descision. I think maybe the problem is how much importance you guys put in sexuality. It really doesn't say much about a persons personality at all. 

Sure ok, It's better to have characters that are completely their own people but there are other aspects to think of and it's not just the sexuality thing. Companions to some extent have to be built around your PC or the game wouldn't make sense. 

Modifié par mikeymoonshine, 18 février 2014 - 12:36 .

[mikeymoonshine]

fchopin wrote...

SomethingSome wrote...

@fchopin
I sincerely don't get what your issue with this is. Is this about Awakening Anders again?

Because knowing that someone dated guys before doesn't mean they won't date women later on and vise versa, and just so you know, sexuality is fluid for some people, there's no need for a "traumatic event" for it to change.

Also, a lot of people's personality isn't defined by their sexuality, and, at times, when it is it's due to how the world/society reacts to it.

I did not even know about Anders in Awakening as i did not play the game till i played DA2.
Surprisingly i liked Anders in Awakening and have no idea what they did to him in DA2 as he is a completely different person in DA2. So no this has nothing to do with Anders but with cheap NPC’s that are created just for self gratification.
People have been criticizing The Witcher in the past for cheap sex but i think the problem is with Bioware. It is time Bioware shows as that they can create a good story without cheap tricks.

You have just decided that playersexuality is a "cheap trick" and you are now using that as an argument agaist someone who already told you that they do not feel the same way.

Some people argue that having romance's at all is a cheap trick and fan service. 

[fchopin]

mikeymoonshine wrote...

You have just decided that playersexuality is a "cheap trick" and you are now using that as an argument agaist someone who already told you that they do not feel the same way.

Some people argue that having romance's at all is a cheap trick and fan service. 

I do believe that playersexual is a cheap trick and harms NPC’s as it makes them cheap.
I have no problem with bisexual NPC’s as that does not make NPC’s cheap as long as not all NPC’s are bisexual.

[mikeymoonshine]

fchopin wrote...

mikeymoonshine wrote...

You have just decided that playersexuality is a "cheap trick" and you are now using that as an argument agaist someone who already told you that they do not feel the same way.

Some people argue that having romance's at all is a cheap trick and fan service. 

I do believe that playersexual is a cheap trick and harms NPC’s as it makes them cheap.
I have no problem with bisexual NPC’s as that does not make NPC’s cheap as long as not all NPC’s are bisexual.

Yes but it's futile to argue with someone who already doesn't think that if all you are going to do is keep saying it's a cheap trick. Why is it a cheap trick? 

[fchopin]

mikeymoonshine wrote...

Yes but it's futile to argue with someone who already doesn't think that if all you are going to do is keep saying it's a cheap trick. Why is it a cheap trick? 

Who are the people who say that playersexual is not a cheap trick?
Most people only say that it helps so more people have more choices not that it is the best way.
If you read my posts then you will know what i mean by cheap tricks.If someone believes that playersexual is what they like I will not argue with them.

[mikeymoonshine]

fchopin wrote...

mikeymoonshine wrote...

Yes but it's futile to argue with someone who already doesn't think that if all you are going to do is keep saying it's a cheap trick. Why is it a cheap trick? 

Who are the people who say that playersexual is not a cheap trick?
Most people only say that it helps so more people have more choices not that it is the best way.
If you read my posts then you will know what i mean by cheap tricks.If someone believes that playersexual is what they like I will not argue with them.

There isn't really a best way, that is the problem and I already read your posts. I don't agree with them. 

Modifié par mikeymoonshine, 18 février 2014 - 12:52 .

[Mathias]

mikeymoonshine wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

It makes no sense to me that every single person in Thedas be Bisexual. Having 1 or 2 party members who are Bi is one thing, but to have all romances be accessible to all genders is pretty stupid. It does cheapen the romance for a lot of people, whether some want to admit it or not.

Who said anything about every single person in thedas? Have you ever considered that maybe there are just more bisexual people in thedas?

It's not that we don't want to admit it, it's that we don't see the problem, It's no different to any othe change in a character based on a players descision. I think maybe the problem is how much importance you guys put in sexuality. It really doesn't say much about a persons personality at all. 

Sure ok, It's better to have characters that are completely their own people but there are other aspects to think of and it's not just the sexuality thing. Companions to some extent have to be built around your PC or the game wouldn't make sense. 

It doesn't cheapen the person, but it cheapens the romance. The more you try to please everybody, the more you restrict yourself creatively on their dialogue and animations during a love scene. They can make the love scene have unique animations depending on your gender, but that takes up more of the budget. NPCs shouldn't be THAT built around your character. I wanted to romance Traynor in ME3, but she was gay. See I couldn't always get my way in that game, and it was for the better. It made me respect her and the game more.

[fchopin]

mikeymoonshine wrote...
There isn't really a best way, that is the problem and I already read your posts. I don't agree with them. 

That is fine everyone is entitled to their opinion.

[AlexJK]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

It doesn't cheapen the person, but it cheapens the romance. The more you try to please everybody, the more you restrict yourself creatively on their dialogue and animations during a love scene.

The animations? So it's the sex scenes that you think are cheapened? Let's get rid of those entirely then, problem solved.

[Commander Kurt]

AlexJK wrote...

Commander Kurt wrote...

I take it you don't place it very high on the list yourself..?

If time and money were infinite (!!), I suppose it would be great if there could be several romances available for each different sex/sexuality of player, all with different backgrounds, reactivity to their sexuality, prejudices and preferences, etc... but (quick count) that's at least 12 different, detailed and complex companions just needed for the romances.

Also, it would be a dating sim. Obviously, that's not something that Bioware are going to do - nor is it a reasonable request, nor one that I'm making!

I agree with your earlier post that it is much more interesting to have romance arcs vary based on race, class, background and situation, rather than gender. Think of all the possibilities! I particularly liked the mage/Fenris romance in DA2. Much more interesting to deal with the fact that he hated mages and their association with slavery, but could grow to respect and love Hawke!

I liked the fact that characters were "playersexual" in DA2 - more options to choose from, in both my female and male playthroughs. That said, I won't be upset if BW take a different approach in DAI. As David G. always points out; they're optional content.

Yeah, I liked it too. Didn't actually complete any of the romances in that game, but I prefer that principle of doing things. 

We all want a good mix of reality and fantasy in the setting, but it seems to be a priority that women and gays are treated differently. Not worse, I don't think (hardly any) people want that, but differently. And you could have reactivity on so many different levels based on what you do rather than who you are, but very few seem to care much about that.

I can see women and gay people preferring a fantasy game where they aren't being treated differently at all (of course, I can see straight males enjoying that as well). I don't see why it's so important for some that this is where the game needs to be realistic. You're able to handwave pretty much if you think the characters feel like real people if not for the detail of playersexuality or them treating men and women the same. 

[Mathias]

AlexJK wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

It doesn't cheapen the person, but it cheapens the romance. The more you try to please everybody, the more you restrict yourself creatively on their dialogue and animations during a love scene.

The animations? So it's the sex scenes that you think are cheapened? Let's get rid of those entirely then, problem solved.

So give the sex scenes the axe so they can streamline the romances more? Yeah that's totally reasonable <_<

[mikeymoonshine]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

mikeymoonshine wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

It makes no sense to me that every single person in Thedas be Bisexual. Having 1 or 2 party members who are Bi is one thing, but to have all romances be accessible to all genders is pretty stupid. It does cheapen the romance for a lot of people, whether some want to admit it or not.

Who said anything about every single person in thedas? Have you ever considered that maybe there are just more bisexual people in thedas?

It's not that we don't want to admit it, it's that we don't see the problem, It's no different to any othe change in a character based on a players descision. I think maybe the problem is how much importance you guys put in sexuality. It really doesn't say much about a persons personality at all. 

Sure ok, It's better to have characters that are completely their own people but there are other aspects to think of and it's not just the sexuality thing. Companions to some extent have to be built around your PC or the game wouldn't make sense. 

It doesn't cheapen the person, but it cheapens the romance. The more you try to please everybody, the more you restrict yourself creatively on their dialogue and animations during a love scene. They can make the love scene have unique animations depending on your gender, but that takes up more of the budget. NPCs shouldn't be THAT built around your character. I wanted to romance Traynor in ME3, but she was gay. See I couldn't always get my way in that game, and it was for the better. It made me respect her and the game more.

Well having 6 romances (2 gay 2 straight 2 bi) would also result in restrictions. They wpould have less time and funds for each romance and so they are still sacrificing story to have more options for players. You could also use this argument to argue for the removal of romances and many have. 

In ME2 you couldn't romance Varric or Aveline no matter how hard you tried and there were people who wanted to so even then you could not always get your way. 

I'm sorry but npc comanions have to be to some extent built around your character. Even charactors like traynor were to some extent, it doesn't work otherwise.