Ce sujet est fermé
I'm not against romances, but I don't like the fact that you can make everyone jump in bed with you by just pressing the heart icon and giving gifts. You can be a blood mage and romance Fenris. You can be extremely pro Templar and insult Anders at every turn and still he's willing to bang you.
The romance system needs an overhaul IMO.
It really does
@ TurretSyndrome: I have no intention of getting into a flame war with you, but I would like you to go back through this thread and actually read what I've stated. If you did, then you would see that not only do I not state that romances are an essential part of the story, but that quantitatively, they are a small (yet, I argue, disproportionately enjoyable) portion of the storyline. Additionally, you would also see that I state that I would buy a Bioware game without romances.
You claim that romances aren't part of the storylines, but I don't agree with your statement at all. Character development is an essential part of the storylines and the romance arcs directly influence character development in the main storylines for most of the romanceable characters. You can argue that they aren't part of the story because you don't want them to be, but it doesn't make that the truth.
Finally, if you were to come into the thread and use reasoned logic and polite discussion, you would perhaps not receive numerous people dismissing your points. Instead, you come into a thread and use veiled insults and hyperbole as if lends credence to your arguments. I'd be happy to continue the conversation with you, but I won't do so if you continue to use the tone that you are using.
I started off by giving my opinion on the subject, I don't believe I was actually directing my thoughts at anyone. When I responded to your post, I was stating that what you said is not true and provided a couple of examples for it, wasn't my intention to get into a flame war either.
Anyway, I stand by my argument that they are merely side content. Just as there are side quests in the game, there are romances, none of them being central to the main story. The fact that not indulging in any of them doesn't affect it, proves it. That's how Dragon Age has always been. The difference is, you consider them central, which is fine. It is simply you giving them more prominence than say side quest no. 57, and I see no problem in that. They are not part of the actual story is not because I don't want them to be, as you seem to assume, but because they are in the optional content category.
It really does
To be fair to BioWare, they did state that the Friendship/Rivalry system was not making a return in Inquisition. What's more is that the player can dismiss companions again, so it's not like you can have rivalmances like you could in DA2. From what I've seen, if you upset your companions enough in Inquisition, they might just leave.
@Turret. So, it's optional. That means it should just be discarded? I see where you're are coming from, but you are refusing to do the same for others. For many people, this really adds and enriches their RP experience. Not just so they can live out "romantic fantasies," either, which is a rather silly thing to say in the age of the internet now isn't it?
You're also not offering any sort of alternatives, just the vague excuse of "It's not worth it to me." Contrary to how you are acting, there is other folk in this discussion that also feel like romances don't have much value to offer. The reason why you're getting singled out is because, unlike those other posters, you're just stating that BioWare should "get rid of it" just because you don't like it.
FYI, folks posting in here like romance in their BioWare games. How you jump from that to "you want romance in all your games," baffles me.
Heh, Jowan friendzones you. No, familyzones you. He sees you as a sister if you ask him why the two of you never got together.
DON'T REMIND ME. Though I kinda get the impression he might've been interested if you had said something before he met Lily. He kinda implies he never thought you'd like him in that way, and he's like "I-I love Lily! Why are you telling me this now?"
Once I saw there was an option to say you like him more than a friend, I headcanoned it that my warden still has feelings for him when she meets him at the Arl's dungeon, and is why she lets him go even when everyone else thinks it's a bad idea.
I'm not against romances, but I don't like the fact that you can make everyone jump in bed with you by just pressing the heart icon and giving gifts. You can be a blood mage and romance Fenris. You can be extremely pro Templar and insult Anders at every turn and still he's willing to bang you.
The romance system needs an overhaul IMO.
I would be happy with things like this being acknowledged. If your ideological standpoints substantially diverge, I think they should either make it so the romance is closed off to you OR you have to make some effort to convince the other person of your point of view. Honestly, though, it seems like at some points it doesn't make sense for these people to keep tagging along with you at all, after you violated every last tenant of their belief system and maybe insulted them a few times, for good measure. The romance system doesn't seem like the only problem with contrary interaction.
Because Cullen ran away and Jowan had a girlfriend(
)but I agree about Bann Teagan,that man was asking for it!
Lily was shipped off to Aeonar and she hated Jowan after finding out he practiced BM. I still loved him, he should've rebounded with me. 
I'm not against romances, but I don't like the fact that you can make everyone jump in bed with you by just pressing the heart icon and giving gifts. You can be a blood mage and romance Fenris. You can be extremely pro Templar and insult Anders at every turn and still he's willing to bang you.
The romance system needs an overhaul IMO.
Yeah I believe they were getting rid of rivalmances. There was literally nothing I could do or say to not make Anders fall for me.
Yeah I believe they were getting rid of rivalmances. There was literally nothing I could do or say to not make Anders fall for me.
Handing Feynriel over to Torpor does it for sure. Kinda extreme, but that'll do it. 
Handing Feynriel over to Torpor does it for sure. Kinda extreme, but that'll do it.
Fair enough. Aside from being a horrible, evil person. Still strange you can side with the Templars at every turn and he still loves you. It just seems to make him more resolute about changing your mind, if anything.
@ TurretSyndrome (damn my stupid tablet interface for not letting me quote....):
I think that the strong reaction, as least from my perspective, is that your initial statement was that they should "focus on the story aspect" instead of romance. This statement indicates that romance isn't part of the story. What is becoming clearer to me as we discuss it, is that you were referring to "main storyline" and not side characters, optional content, sidequests, DLCs, or expansions. That's a very different thing. All of those things that I just listed are part of the story. They just aren't the part of the story that you want to see developed further. I agree with you 100% (and never have stated otherwise) that romances and sidequests are not part of the main-storyline. They can influence the main storyline in some ways and they can certainly help develop characters from within the main storyline, but they aren't necessarily part of it. I have admitted that I am biased because I disproportionately enjoy the romance aspect of the game compared to other ancillary game features. Not enough for me to stop buying games if it's not there, but enough for me to be a bit disappointed if it were removed. You, however, seem to be stating your opinion as fact and that is where the misunderstanding between us happened.
I'm not against romances, but I don't like the fact that you can make everyone jump in bed with you by just pressing the heart icon and giving gifts. You can be a blood mage and romance Fenris. You can be extremely pro Templar and insult Anders at every turn and still he's willing to bang you.
The romance system needs an overhaul IMO.
I liked that heart icon because then I knew that I was flirting. I had a couple of occasions in Mass Effect when I intented to be friendly but ended up flirting. But yes the mechanics how romances work could be better. I think just giving gifts to your LI shouldn't be enough. However it should also be possible to disagree. I didn't like that I had to be extra careful with Fenris in DA2 when I was a mage and wanted to support mages while Fenris was in my party. I wanted to friendly romance Fenris so it was quite difficult. I believe that the romance mechanics will get better. In DA2 you couldn't give endless amount of gifts and what I have heard about the romances in DAI is that you can disagree with your LI. I believe that could be interesting.
And yet they keep bumping this threads and making sure where it can be read by more people. It makes me chuckle. You'd think the folks that were against this content might, I don't know, write BioWare or do something more productive than bump a thread on a subject that they hate.
Lol. 
Me, personally, what makes me chuckle is when in the same post, someone is telling that romances are ridiculous, and useless and shouldn't be there because not enought realistic, not enough developed, and that don't feel organic, but at the same time screaming that the romance area should only be something really minor, with a very small budget. Ah, okay. So how could we ever adress your issue exactly ?
Maybe I'm brilliant or maybe this is due to my fever, but I've suddenly got a weird idea about Cullen and Cassandra, based on those comments of D.Gaider on Tumblr (sth about loling at fanboys and fangirls who want Cassandra as a LI) and Cullen's VA tweeting about some... "hot" lines?
What if in the end neither Cassandra nor Cullen will be LIs but... like Avelin and Donnic will end up together? Or maybe one (or both) are LIs, but if you don't romance them, they end up as a couple?
Now that would some golden trolling
To be fair to BioWare, they did state that the Friendship/Rivalry system was not making a return in Inquisition. What's more is that the player can dismiss companions again, so it's not like you can have rivalmances like you could in DA2. From what I've seen, if you upset your companions enough in Inquisition, they might just leave.
@Turret. So, it's optional. That means it should just be discarded? I see where you're are coming from, but you are refusing to do the same for others. For many people, this really adds and enriches their RP experience. Not just so they can live out "romantic fantasies," either, which is a rather silly thing to say in the age of the internet now isn't it?
You're also not offering any sort of alternatives, just the vague excuse of "It's not worth it to me." Contrary to how you are acting, there is other folk in this discussion that also feel like romances don't have much value to offer. The reason why you're getting singled out is because, unlike those other posters, you're just stating that BioWare should "get rid of it" just because you don't like it.
FYI, folks posting in here like romance in their BioWare games. How you jump from that to "you want romance in all your games," baffles me.
I never said it should be discarded, I said it would be nice to see a game without them not being of the focus of the developers. I mean we've seen work like Awakening that had no romances, so what's wrong for wanting a game with a limited time frame as DA 2 without them? Remember, romances are certainly no side quest content where you can work on it later. A lot of time and effort is probably being put in to get them right, despite the actual content being as low as some of the secondary quests. It is because of this I feel that they can be put aside for a game every now and then, they don't need to be mandatory for every game to be released. You can disagree with that, but that is how I feel.
@ TurretSyndrome (damn my stupid tablet interface for not letting me quote....):
I think that the strong reaction, as least from my perspective, is that your initial statement was that they should "focus on the story aspect" instead of romance. This statement indicates that romance isn't part of the story. What is becoming clearer to me as we discuss it, is that you were referring to "main storyline" and not side characters, optional content, sidequests, DLCs, or expansions. That's a very different thing. All of those things that I just listed are part of the story. They just aren't the part of the story that you want to see developed further. I agree with you 100% (and never have stated otherwise) that romances and sidequests are not part of the main-storyline. They can influence the main storyline in some ways and they can certainly help develop characters from within the main storyline, but they aren't necessarily part of it. I have admitted that I am biased because I disproportionately enjoy the romance aspect of the game compared to other ancillary game features. Not enough for me to stop buying games if it's not there, but enough for me to be a bit disappointed if it were removed. You, however, seem to be stating your opinion as fact and that is where the misunderstanding between us happened.
I suppose you can say that it is part of the story when you indulge in one romance, and it isn't when you don't.Also, I believe I said that I would like for Bioware to develop a game without romances for once. Meaning, I wanted them to explore a new direction for one game where there isn't much focus on things like romances and the pressure of doing them right and satisfying every fan who wants them in it. Romances may not have that much content but they certainly are nowhere near as easy to craft as say side quests.
In DA 2, even though the game had a much smaller time frame than DA:O, it was able to deliver more content than in DA:O, yet it lacked in many other aspects. Now, I'm not implying that the work on romances resulted in the quality drop of the rest of the game, but assuming that their inclusion had no effect on the rest of lackluster segments of the story would be wrong.
I liked that heart icon because then I knew that I was flirting. I had a couple of occasions in Mass Effect when I intented to be friendly but ended up flirting.
That happens to me constantly in real life though? It's really hard to be nice to a guy without him thinking you want him.
I like the heart because it helps avoid super weird situations like ending up in a romance with Leliana without the slightest clue that you were. That was one of the most jarring things for me about Origins.
That happens to me constantly in real life though? It's really hard to be nice to a guy without him thinking you want him.
I second that!In fact it's difficult to be nice to anyone without some of them taking it the wrong way...(This or I'm possibly a ninja flirt. 
)
Truth be told,even though the heart Icon response were not exactly what I imagined my character would say,I avoided many confusing situations(Yes I'm starring at you Anders!)
In DA 2, even though the game had a much smaller time frame than DA:O, it was able to deliver more content than in DA:O, yet it lacked in many other aspects. Now, I'm not implying that the work on romances resulted in the quality drop of the rest of the game, but assuming that their inclusion had no effect on the rest of lackluster segments of the story would be wrong.
That's kinda a silly argument. Yes DA2 would be stronger in some areas if resources were taken from Romances and put there. But the obvious solution is that DA2 needed more resources put into the game, not content removed.
Yes, because that is precisely how "resources" work. You can simply draw x amount of "resources" from A and put that directly into B.
Yes, because that is precisely how "resources" work. You can simply draw x amount of "resources" from A and put that directly into B.
I'm not against romances, but I don't like the fact that you can make everyone jump in bed with you by just pressing the heart icon and giving gifts. You can be a blood mage and romance Fenris. You can be extremely pro Templar and insult Anders at every turn and still he's willing to bang you.
The romance system needs an overhaul IMO.
Yes.
I'd prefer the romances to be dependent on your actions and not on your gender.
While the romances in da2 were fair, they were kind of OOC as you've put about Fenris or Anders.
I second that!In fact it's difficult to be nice to anyone without some of them taking it the wrong way...(This or I'm possibly a ninja flirt.
Truth be told,even though the heart Icon response were not exactly what I imagined my character would say,I avoided many confusing situations(Yes I'm starring at you Anders!)
I guess because typically, men are more sexually aggressive than women? From what I know, when a girl smile at them, a lot of guys immediately jump to conclusion that she likes / interested in him. And a lot of times I ended up being ball buster and told them the disappointing possible truth that she might just being polite (terrible wingman I know). Also our mind tend to see what we want to see. So if we interested in somebody, even their smallest action could be read as suggestion. Not all guys are the same ofc, but I think around 6 or 7/10 guys are happen to be like that. Though I would say, it's better to assume and then got shot down than being someone like me, too careful, never assume anything, and often let the chance slip by lol
Anyhow, the whole "signal" thing is really confusing (to me at least. Typical guy here....) so I'm glad they put that heart Icon there. It cracked me up when Liara and Ashley entered a series of cat fights in ME 1 just because I was being a nice guy. Still, I'm hoping they will make us do more than just being kiss-ass and showering LIs with gift to win their love. if anything, I hope our decision in game actually affect romance. When your character is an ass who killed anybody that get in your way, you can't romance a lawful good character. But if you play a good guy, helping people, they will be touched by those actions and eventually fall for you ... etc...
I think stuff like this is where challenge comes in in communicating, because I think multiple occurrence of someone saying "I am gay" would be as jarring as someone saying "I am not gay" and so forth - both would come across as "in my face." But if people default towards heteronormative perceptions, is it sufficient for it to not be explicitly mentioned in such a way? Hugging was mentioned, but I could see how that could be construed as ambiguous. Context would be important.
Using unambiguous gendered pronouns or gendered names ("Mary is missing, I'm so scared about her, please help") would be one way to imply an romantic connection without making every LGBT character literally state their sexuality, but it's difficult in a setting that uses fictional names.
Heteronormativity is quite a significant issue when examining cultural representations of same-sex relationships, because we are so conditioned to see heterosexual partnerships as the norm - and it has been the norm, in the overwhelming majority of basically all (Western, modern) storytelling. The trope in RPGs of someone having a dead opposite-sex partner is so common that we'd probably think a person talking about their missing same-sex spouse was referring to their sibling. I think that, if I hadn't known about it beforehand, Steve's line about his husband would've made me do a double take.
Perhaps there's a greater willingness to think that if a woman or man mentions an opposite-sex person they care about, they must be in a relationship. But if a man is concerned about a man, or a woman about a woman, there's an initial hesitation to make that same logical assumption? Is that heteronormativity or fear of offending someone?
The second episode of the second season of Telltale's The Walking Dead tackled this by
I just don't assume anyone is in a romantic relationship unless they say so. I don't really understand the reluctance to just SAY it. This seems like how people usually frame conversations. "Please help, my wife is missing!" or "This is my boyfriend, Jim." are just normal ways people introduce relationships with another person. I only see this squeamishness to actually say husband/wife, boyfriend/girlfriend, partner, lover, etc, when you're talking about a same sex couple. It doesn't seem often to me that a heterosexual couple is introduced in anything that they don't just come out and call it a romantic relationship. To me, it's not even so much an issue of people more easily seeing heterosexual relationships from hints. It seems to me that it's less likely that they HAVE to rely on hints to deduce heterosexual relationship dynamics.
What was that quote of Morrigan's from DAO...?That happens to me constantly in real life though? It's really hard to be nice to a guy without him thinking you want him.
Retour en haut
