303 réponses à ce sujet

[TheChris92]

TheChris92 wrote...

fchopin wrote...

Because the other romances fit with the story so they become part of the story and i enjoy doing them.If Bioware want to do player sexual romances good luck to them.

How? They are all optional content. They add nothing to the story except for layers to the overall experience. I could go through the game and not experience a single one of them and it would have meant precisely as much.

What I'm trying to get at here is that you seem to think that sexuality also defines personality -- As if you can place all people that fancies the same sex into one category and say "That's how they act, behave, feel or live". This is not true at all. Anders change of character doesn't really have anything to do with that.

Personally, I don't really give a fudge about the romances anymore. They can remove them entirely if they like. I do, however, feel like adding a voice here for people who might enjoy them.

Modifié par TheChris92, 18 février 2014 - 04:45 .

[CuriousArtemis]

fchopin wrote...

spirosz wrote...

Their sexuality doesn't define them though.  They can involve themselves in the same activities as someone who prefers something different, yet both have the same motivations, goals, characteristics, etc.  

It does define them as that is what they like.
They don’t change like females changing hair colour.

S/he thinks only women color their hair. I think it's pretty apparent there's a gender issue here. I wouldn't bother furthering the discussion.

[Iakus]

Chashan wrote...

Those are actual gameplay-elements; level-design.

Seems reasonable to prioritise those. Of course, BW's approach to root out the entire concept of exploration via vehicles entirely, to stick with ME1, wasn't the way to go, far as I am concerned.

Personally, I consider dialogue and interaction (including romances)  to be gameplay elements.  And extremely important ones at that.

Of course, I still think BG2 is the greatest game Bioware ever made

Edit: @AresKeith: 

Agreed

Modifié par iakus, 18 février 2014 - 04:46 .

[spirosz]

Dialogue is a gameplay element, as much as combat.

[fchopin]

spirosz wrote...

Music is a part of me, but it doesn't define me as a whole - it doesn't choose to make me kind, emotional, view the things the way I view them.  Sexual preference does not define someone as a whole.  

A part never defines a whole as it is only a part.
To define a whole you need all the parts but each part is what makes the whole and the whole would never be the whole without all the parts.
Sexual preferences are part of the whole.

Modifié par fchopin, 18 février 2014 - 04:48 .

[Tric]

fchopin wrote...

spirosz wrote...
No... it doesn't.  Sexuality is a part of a person, it does not define them.  It might motivate them to pursue certain parts of life because of how society has developed and twisted what is and what can be "normal" - but at the end of the day, someone's sexuality does not represent who the person and what their CORE is and Anders or whoever else is no different.  

Tell me what the difference is between part of a person and a defined person.
Is not the "part" part of a person?

A person's personality can be made of many different parts, sexuality being only one of them and for a lot of people it's not even that important and it's certainly not exact same thing like you imply when you give equal importance to a character's core beliefs to the type of body/gender they're attracted to.
Regardless of that it's much more usual for the way society and people react to someone's sexuality to affect them and, consequently, their personality rather than the sexuality itself.

If sexuality is that large part of a person that any change (let's ignore for now that some people's sexuality is fluid) will lead to a complete contradiction of their original character and make them act contrary to their beliefs then perhaps you could provide an example where that's happened. Also an example where a character's personality was harmed for their romance being open to both gender PCs.

Because, even though you keep repeating that, you haven't shown us any example.

(Sorry if this is all a jumbled mess, typing on a tablet isn't very easy... )

Modifié par SomethingSome, 18 février 2014 - 04:52 .

[Dominus]

Sexual preference does not define someone as a whole.

I second that. I'd be more interested to see romantic branches based on actions made with said Love Interest than which gender you were born with. Yes, it's going to have an effect to some degree, but I don't think that'd necessarily be a major point of focus for the romance budget. Not unless toys are involved - then I guess it's okay. 

Personally, I don't really give a fudge about the romances anymore. They can remove them entirely if they like. I do, however, feel like adding a voice here for people who might enjoy them.

I'm on a similar boat. If they can pull off high-quality romance sub-plots, I'm fine with that...but it's ultimately icing on the cake from my perspective.

Modifié par DominusVita, 18 février 2014 - 04:49 .

[spirosz]

fchopin wrote...

spirosz wrote...

Music is a part of me, but it doesn't define me as a whole - it doesn't choose to make me kind, emotional, view the things the way I view them.  Sexual preference does not define someone as a whole.  

A part never defines a whole as it is only a part.
To define a whole you need all the parts but each part is what makes the whole and the whole would never be the whole without all the parts.
Sexual preferences are part of the whole.

Yes, it is part of of the "whole" to an extent, but you're stating it as the driving factor for Anders, which is not the case.  His sexuality does not define his motivations outside of who he is attracted to.  His motivations are a stigma of his experiences of being a MAGE, not because of his sexaulity.  

You can be gay, straight, bi - whatever and still be an asshole, or be the nicest person in the world - their sexaulity isn't relevant to why that is the case, their experiences and their choices as a being, a person - is what defines them. 

Modifié par spirosz, 18 février 2014 - 04:53 .

[Iakus]

spirosz wrote...

You can be gay, straight, bi - whatever and still be an asshole, or be the nicest person in the world - their sexaulity isn't relevant to why that is the case, their experiences and their choices as a being, a person - is what defines them. 

What can change the nature of a man? 

[spirosz]

iakus wrote...

spirosz wrote...

You can be gay, straight, bi - whatever and still be an asshole, or be the nicest person in the world - their sexaulity isn't relevant to why that is the case, their experiences and their choices as a being, a person - is what defines them. 

What can change the nature of a man? 

What do you think. 

[CybAnt1]

In an ideal world, the romances would vary along a number of variables. Not just gender and sexual orientation, but maybe also race, class, background/origin, specialization, and of course your actions and behavior.

Maybe there are some people who won't date non-nobility. It's marry up or nothing. Or will avoid blood mages. Or simply are not interested in either dwarves or qunari. Maybe they don't want to marry and reproduce with a mage because - think of the children (i.e. Connor).

All these COULD be limitations on 'player-sexuality'. But yes, this is one case where I think they just don't appear, because fan reaction/popularity plus "voice lines, romantic or not, are expensive" trumps world-diversity-realism.

[spirosz]

CybAnt1 wrote...
All these COULD be limitations on 'player-sexuality'. But yes, this is one case where I think they just don't appear, because fan reaction/popularity plus "voice lines, romantic or not, are expensive" trumps world-diversity-realism.

Basically. 

[Ianamus]

spirosz wrote...

fchopin wrote...

SomethingSome wrote...
And yet you still haven't explained how a character not having a set sexuality/being open for all genders means that

For me a characters sexuality is part of the person and cannot be separated so it should be set like the characters character.
What is it so hard to understand?

Their sexuality doesn't define them though.  They can involve themselves in the same activities as someone who prefers something different, yet both have the same motivations, goals, characteristics, etc.  

I appreciate this, but at the same time changing a characters sexuality based on the player character is no different to changing their hobbies, sense of humor or personality based on the PC. They may all only be parts, but having them shift based on the player characters gender or race makes aspects of the character rely on the existence of the PC, which is something I'm against. 

[spirosz]

Oh, I'm not for changing a character's sexuality based on the PC, I'm only arguing that sexuality doesn't define an individual.

[Iakus]

spirosz wrote...

iakus wrote...

spirosz wrote...

You can be gay, straight, bi - whatever and still be an asshole, or be the nicest person in the world - their sexaulity isn't relevant to why that is the case, their experiences and their choices as a being, a person - is what defines them. 

What can change the nature of a man? 

What do you think. 

If there is anything I have learned in my travels across the Planes, it is that many things may change the nature of a man. Whether regret, or love, or revenge or fear - whatever you believe can change the nature of a man, can. I’ve seen belief move cities, make men stave off death, and turn an evil hag's heart half-circle. This entire Fortress has been constructed from belief. Belief damned a woman, whose heart clung to the hope that another loved her when he did not. Once, it made a man seek immortality and achieve it. And it has made a posturing spirit think it is something more than a part of me.

Or in this case, the existence of the PC

[AresKeith]

spirosz wrote...

CybAnt1 wrote...
All these COULD be limitations on 'player-sexuality'. But yes, this is one case where I think they just don't appear, because fan reaction/popularity plus "voice lines, romantic or not, are expensive" trumps world-diversity-realism.

Basically. 

And it's a shame too

[spirosz]

Personally, I'd prefer if they were who they are, regardless if you choose to roleplay a male or female, but then I guess one could argue that you could meta-game, bah.

[syllogi]

iakus wrote...

spirosz wrote...

iakus wrote...

spirosz wrote...

You can be gay, straight, bi - whatever and still be an asshole, or be the nicest person in the world - their sexaulity isn't relevant to why that is the case, their experiences and their choices as a being, a person - is what defines them. 

What can change the nature of a man? 

What do you think. 

If there is anything I have learned in my travels across the Planes, it is that many things may change the nature of a man. Whether regret, or love, or revenge or fear - whatever you believe can change the nature of a man, can. I’ve seen belief move cities, make men stave off death, and turn an evil hag's heart half-circle. This entire Fortress has been constructed from belief. Belief damned a woman, whose heart clung to the hope that another loved her when he did not. Once, it made a man seek immortality and achieve it. And it has made a posturing spirit think it is something more than a part of me.

Or in this case, the existence of the PC

Actually, I think the correct answer is sexy, irresistable, female zombies.

[AresKeith]

spirosz wrote...

Personally, I'd prefer if they were who they are, regardless if you choose to roleplay a male or female, but then I guess one could argue that you could meta-game, bah.

Pretty much why I say the characters should have their own preference and the PC shouldn't interfere with that

[fchopin]

spirosz wrote...

Oh, I'm not for changing a character's sexuality based on the PC, I'm only arguing that sexuality doesn't define an individual.

No part of the whole defines an individual, all the parts are needed.

[Tric]

EJ107 wrote...
I appreciate this, but at the same time changing a characters sexuality based on the player character is no different to changing their hobbies, sense of humor or personality based on the PC. They may all only be parts, but having them shift based on the player characters gender or race makes aspects of the character rely on the existence of the PC, which is something I'm against. 

But are they changing sexuality? Fenris and Merrill never talk about their preferences, Anders talked about wanting a prettty girl on his arm but that doesn't exclude the possibility of him being bisexual. And Isabela's always been very openly bi.

Modifié par SomethingSome, 18 février 2014 - 05:12 .

[KaiserShep]

I don't see what the big deal is. It's a game. If companions alternate between "modes" based on the PC, what difference does it make to the character's personality? Most characters tend to lack any specificity in this regard anyway.

[syllogi]

fchopin wrote...

spirosz wrote...

Oh, I'm not for changing a character's sexuality based on the PC, I'm only arguing that sexuality doesn't define an individual.

No part of the whole defines an individual, all the parts are needed.

And you seem to have a problem if the sexuality parts aren't carefully defined, but that's not bad writing.  People don't clearly state their sexual orientation to you when you meet them, unless you're on an online dating site.  In real life, you learn about people as you go along, and sometimes you don't learn that stuff until you show interest in them.

There is nothing unrealistic about bisexuality.  There's nothing unrealistic about someone who was never interested in a certain gender before suddenly deciding that for the right person, they'll change.  There's nothing unrealistic about someone choosing not to disclose their sexuality unless it's relevant.

These are your personal problems, and you can blame the writing and call the characters flat all you want, but many people were able to see that there was more to the DA2 companions than their sexual orientations and enjoyed their characterization.   Simply repeating your opinion ad nauseum doesn't make it true for everyone. 

[Cainhurst Crow]

I hope they get ride of alignment ignoring romances or action ignoring ones like in DA2 or DAO. When I do something horrible that someone is appalled by, I shouldn't be able to charm them into bed just because im the PC with ultimate power.

Of course this is a little harder to program correctly then just writing gender different dialogue, sp In doubt that will happen.

[Arch1eviathan]

good lord