9318 réponses à ce sujet

[Lady Nuggins]

Yeah...I get nervous above Cass and Viv. I want to give Bioware enough credit to not go with a Isabela/Aveline esque relationship with them...but Cass is a strong female warrior while Viv is...vaguely...fashion obsessed. And I just see that similar antagonism that Isabela/Aveline and even to a lesser extent, Leliana and Morrigan had, steming from that relationship (where they are critical of one parties appearance and clothing choices etc). If two characters are going to get into it over fashion I'd prefer it was like...idk, Dorian and Iron Bull? Or...just...not the women yet again.

 

I mean... companions not getting along is just one of the many delights of Dragon Age.  And Viv is a mage, which in itself might be a point of contention between them.  But seriously, I'm so tired of the "women are all catty and never get along" trope, and I'm especially tired of it appearing for characters like Viv who are treated as shallow and vapid.  I'm really really hoping that the fact that Viv has broken so many other expectations means that she will not be reduced to that, though.  I don't want another Miranda, who goes through the games being called a b*tch by every other character even when she's actually quite nice most of the time.

[In Exile]

I mean... companions not getting along is just one of the many delights of Dragon Age.  And Viv is a mage, which in itself might be a point of contention between them.  But seriously, I'm so tired of the "women are all catty and never get along" trope, and I'm especially tired of it appearing for characters like Viv who are treated as shallow and vapid.  I'm really really hoping that the fact that Viv has broken so many other expectations means that she will not be reduced to that, though.  I don't want another Miranda, who goes through the games being called a b*tch by every other character even when she's actually quite nice most of the time.

 

That was pretty bizarre, since the only character I thought actually fit that definition was Jacob. 

[oceanicsurvivor]

I mean... companions not getting along is just one of the many delights of Dragon Age.  And Viv is a mage, which in itself might be a point of contention between them.  But seriously, I'm so tired of the "women are all catty and never get along" trope, and I'm especially tired of it appearing for characters like Viv who are treated as shallow and vapid.  I'm really really hoping that the fact that Viv has broken so many other expectations means that she will not be reduced to that, though.  I don't want another Miranda, who goes through the games being called a b*tch by every other character even when she's actually quite nice most of the time.

I don't mind characters not getting along, thats half the fun of party banter . I dislike the idea of more female characters whose criticism of the other centers at all around the others appearance. It isn't the only thing Leliana and Morrigan disagree on, but Leliana being critical of Morrigans dress is there, and Isabela generally disliked how Aveline presented herself too (and vice versa). (sorry if I'm expressing myself unclearly! )

[Lady Nuggins]

I don't mind characters not getting along, thats half the fun of party banter . I dislike the idea of more female characters whose criticism of the other centers at all around the others appearance. It isn't the only thing Leliana and Morrigan disagree on, but Leliana being critical of Morrigans dress is there, and Isabela generally disliked how Aveline presented herself too (and vice versa). (sorry if I'm expressing myself unclearly! )

 

You're being perfectly clear.   Yeah, it's not just the fact that they don't get along, but the way they always tear each other down based on either how they look or how much sex they have.  

 

I don't mind characters not getting along either.  In fact, I love walking around with a party full of hate sometimes.  But you make an excellent point: with only three female characters, we have no options for an all-female party.  That means that all of their interactions with each other matter a lot more than they would if they were not the only female characters there.  If Cas and Viv don't get along, that means that 2/3 of the women in DAI hate each other.  That will be really sad.

 

This is the problem that comes with limiting your female characters.  It means that every female character matters a lot more.  If one of those characters is poorly written, or a horribly sexist trope, then it's a much bigger problem than if it were one crappy character among many.

[oceanicsurvivor]

You're being perfectly clear.   Yeah, it's not just the fact that they don't get along, but the way they always tear each other down based on either how they look or how much sex they have.  

 

I don't mind characters not getting along either.  In fact, I love walking around with a party full of hate sometimes.  But you make an excellent point: with only three female characters, we have no options for an all-female party.  That means that all of their interactions with each other matter a lot more than they would if they were not the only female characters there.  If Cas and Viv don't get along, that means that 2/3 of the women in DAI hate each other.  That will be really sad.

 

This is the problem that comes with limiting your female characters.  It means that every female character matters a lot more.  If one of those characters is poorly written, or a horribly sexist trope, then it's a much bigger problem than if it were one crappy character among many.

 

Very true! And yeah, I agree with your earlier statement, I would much rather see Cass and Viv disagreeing on ideological and not...fashion related? grounds. Same with Sera being seen maybe as untrustworthy because she is a thief...not because of how she is dressed. (which is always the vibe I got from my companions when they told me not to trust Morrigan and Isabela). And Sera and Viv might have a big class difference/disagreement, since one is sitting in the Court of Orlais and the other is scraping by day to day in its poorest districts. Those are the conversations I would much rather see.

[karushna5]

I don't mean to come across as pushy or anything, but I would like to say that I actually appreciated the Witcher games and did not see the grave offenses people on this board so often accuse those games of. TW2 had several strong, powerful and interesting female characters: Philippa, Saskia, Philippa's apprentice (forgot her name at the moment), Ves. They had their own goals and purposes and worked to achieve those, independently. DA, despite all Bioware's talk about inequality, did not have that many strong women in charge. Anora comes to mind, but she actually doesn't accomplish a single thing in the game on her own. Only in possible epilogue slides is she useful. DA2 had Meredith, but she was barking mad, so ehh.. I'm hesitant to include the Chantry people, because again, despite it being claimed that the Revered Mothers are important and have power, I don't recall seeing them do anything useful in either game. 
 
If you want to follow the "no sexism" rule, I think DA could easily be excluded as well. Desire demons, Isabela getting the STD jokes and often being confronted with her promiscuous behavior while Zevran face no such confrontations, Lady Warden being royally screwed over if she went for the romance that has been dangled in front of her nose like a carrot from the beginning, getting dumped because she is infertile while none of the other royal outcomes mentions anything about an heir either and solo Anora and Anora & Alistair are unlikely to have a child either. City elf is being threatened with rape, male is not. Far more men in positions of power: Behlen, Harrowment, Eamon, Howe, Loghain, Greagoir, Irving, Zathrian.

Definitely not pushy, discourse is important and it isnt discourse if we all agree. You make a valid point.

But boy, if I tried to boycott everything sexist I would have to be a hermit somewhere with no human contact. Not like it is a conspiracy theory, but the media and nearly everyone has some sexist views because of sociological and historical precedent. I definitely have a whole bag to unpack because of sexist viewpoints that are everywhere. It is impossible to let go of all of them.

My issue is the casualness of Witcher2 when it comes to sexual assault which the franchise in general seems fascinated with as a story point. I have similar issues with city elf origin, and a whole boat load of seething rage when it comes to DA2 practically using it as a "so there" point. It is my berserk button. I try to be at least somewhat reasonable when I get in conversations, but whenever I talk about it I feel I become a raging madwoman incapable of being calm. Media has difficulty at making me show feelings. If it does, then it means I hate it because those feelings are never cathartic but incredibly painful to me.

Witcher2 made me cry for hours, If I had been a city elf my first play-through I may not be a DA fan today for similar reasons. So if I talk about Witcher2 it is with a whole lot of extra bitterness attached.

But there I go mentioning it again, I think I may take a vacation from the forums a bit so that cooler heads than mine can discuss it/not discuss it as they see fit in what it means and its(over?) reliance in a story/video game. Sorry XD

[oceanicsurvivor]

I don't mean to come across as pushy or anything, but I would like to say that I actually appreciated the Witcher games and did not see the grave offenses people on this board so often accuse those games of. TW2 had several strong, powerful and interesting female characters: Philippa, Saskia, Philippa's apprentice (forgot her name at the moment), Ves. They had their own goals and purposes and worked to achieve those, independently. DA, despite all Bioware's talk about inequality, did not have that many strong women in charge. Anora comes to mind, but she actually doesn't accomplish a single thing in the game on her own. Only in possible epilogue slides is she useful. DA2 had Meredith, but she was barking mad, so ehh.. I'm hesitant to include the Chantry people, because again, despite it being claimed that the Revered Mothers are important and have power, I don't recall seeing them do anything useful in either game. 

 

If you want to follow the "no sexism" rule, I think DA could easily be excluded as well. Desire demons, Isabela getting the STD jokes and often being confronted with her promiscuous behavior while Zevran face no such confrontations, Lady Warden being royally screwed over if she went for the romance that has been dangled in front of her nose like a carrot from the beginning, getting dumped because she is infertile while none of the other royal outcomes mentions anything about an heir either and solo Anora and Anora & Alistair are unlikely to have a child either. City elf is being threatened with rape, male is not. Far more men in positions of power: Behlen, Harrowment, Eamon, Howe, Loghain, Greagoir, Irving, Zathrian.

I'll put this about the Witcher in spoilers so its easier to avoid then karushna5

Spoiler

I don't know if I agree with this fully. Admittedly I haven't played the Witcher 2 in quite a while but, what I remember was actually pretty gross. Philippa and her male counterpart wizard on the other side of act 2 are both presented as power hungry individuals with 'same sex' attraction. Phillipa is gay and is into bondage...if I recall, she even leaves her partner tied up and moaning while she and Geralt have a convo in the room (so its pretty obvious this is to titillate the male audience)?  and the other,male character its strongly hinted is actually pedophile. So, two of the most morally grey to outright corrupt characters in the game are supposed to represent the LGB community. (Even though being a pedophile and a gay person are not the same thing and...ok, post for another place).

 

Beyond that Ves is put through deplorable and casually referenced assult. And then Geralt gets to decide how to deal with her attacker. That's not agency for Ves, thats using her as a prop for a male character (Geralt).

 

Saskia I remember being pretty cool, but she also spent the majority of the game in a coma. (not unlike Triss who also went missing for the majority of the game) Frankly, that makes it seem more like they didn't know what to do with their female character imo.

 

Certainly Bioware has similar faults, but at the end of the day I think that their treatment/writing of women is a lot more conscientious about what they are saying then the Witcher writers ever were. That isn't to say they don't have their fair share of missteps and don't fall for a couple tropes and painful cliches, since obviously they have, but there was a general carelessness to the Witcher 2 that I could never accuse Bioware of.

[aTigerslunch]

So I was right on claiming since few women means they are worth twice of men?

That is what I got out of most of it.

Witcher 2, stuck playing that awful guy. At least he wasnt overly muscle bound I guess. Id prefer Dragons Dogma instead.

Edit: I wasnt aware they had those two in Witcher 2, guess I didnt get far into it.

[Dutchess]

Definitely not pushy, discourse is important and it isnt discourse if we all agree. You make a valid point.

But boy, if I tried to boycott everything sexist I would have to be a hermit somewhere with no human contact. Not like it is a conspiracy theory, but the media and nearly everyone has some sexist views because of sociological and historical precedent. I definitely have a whole bag to unpack because of sexist viewpoints that are everywhere. It is impossible to let go of all of them.

My issue is the casualness of Witcher2 when it comes to sexual assault which the franchise in general seems fascinated with as a story point. I have similar issues with city elf origin, and a whole boat load of seething rage when it comes to DA2 practically using it as a "so there" point. It is my berserk button. I try to be at least somewhat reasonable when I get in conversations, but whenever I talk about it I feel I become a raging madwoman incapable of being calm. Media has difficulty at making me show feelings. If it does, then it means I hate it because those feelings are never cathartic but incredibly painful to me.

Witcher2 made me cry for hours, If I had been a city elf my first play-through I may not be a DA fan today for similar reasons. So if I talk about Witcher2 it is with a whole lot of extra bitterness attached.

But there I go mentioning it again, I think I may take a vacation from the forums a bit so that cooler heads than mine can discuss it/not discuss it as they see fit in what it means and its(over?) reliance in a story/video game. Sorry XD

 

I'm sorry if talking about it brings up bad memories for you. I can definitely see having problems with TW2 if it deals with issues that are upsetting and hit close to home, though I personally did not have the impression they were being casual about sexual assault (one scene brought tears to my eyes; only ME3 with Mordin's death achieved the same). It is used to make a character even more unlikable and making it easier to kill him or more difficult to spare him, and I agree that can be seen as a cheap and easy way to achieve that. It's a popular way of showing who's in power and who are being oppressed. Like you say, DA is guilty of this as well, perhaps even more than the Witcher. "Look, elves are being oppressed by humans!" "Look, mages being oppressed by templars!". 

 

The point of power imbalances and who are bad people can be made in other ways, and hopefully the writers will learn that and try to use other means to get it across.

 

Again, I'm sorry to accidentally drag up a painful issue for you. I wrongly assumed your grips with TW were with the sex scenes, naked women and possibly the infamous "sex card" in the first game. I hope you don't feel the need to avoid the forums. From what I have seen you do a good job at remaining calm, and sometimes more heated discussion and debate can be good too, especially when it comes to things like this.

[Stelae]

Funnily (disappointingly) enough the only review of The Last of Us I happened to read said something like "Finally, a game by men, for men!!1!1!!"

 

I enjoyed the heck out of that game and will probably be buying the remastered version for PS4. But honestly I do not think it's a progressive game (for the purposes of this thread) or really a good example to use. The main protagonist is still a beardy white dude. The sidekick is a really cool girl, but it's still the same old trope of "man protects girl and loves her like daughter" that drives the story. When the girl actually starts taking care of herself it's seen as an incredible period of growth and development, like, "WOW look a girl can actually use a gun! She is so special!"

 

It's cool that she was on the cover and that the game sold well but at the end of the day she was not the main protagonist. She is more or less a storytelling tool for the main guy

I agree to an extent, and I actually think the popularity of the game with reviewers was because of the "Dad Game" phenomenon.  The average gamer age is about 30; a lot of gamers are parents and having to look after a (precious, precocious, strong but vulnerable) child is more relevant to them that it might have been back when they were teenagers with power fantasies ... or perhaps the power fantasies have changed ... (see also chapter 1 of The Walking Dead, Bioshock infinite and so on)

 

She actually develops as a character, I think, as the game goes on. She is a storytelling tool, yes, but she's got a fair bit more agency by the end; I think she knows what is going on in the ending (avoiding spoilers) but has made her own decisions about what she wants.

 

But the DLC was quite wonderful, and she and her girlfriend were strong characters in a really good story.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

So I was right on claiming since few women means they are worth twice of men?

That is what I got out of most of it.

Witcher 2, stuck playing that awful guy. At least he wasnt overly muscle bound I guess. Id prefer Dragons Dogma instead.

Edit: I wasnt aware they had those two in Witcher 2, guess I didnt get far into it.

How is Geralt awful? I found him MUCH more likable than Shepard, and he's a complete gentlemen with women, instead of telling them "who said anything about love? I just wanna fuckya".

 

Unless you're referring to his physical features. Which is kinda mean of you. He's supposed to be ugly, yet I thought he was quite handsome in W2, and now completely dashing with his new beard. And yeeaa, I'd call him scrawny by videogame standards.

[aTigerslunch]

Haven't checked out Witcher before Witcher 2? I know he sleeps with one woman in each town. To collect cards, I dropped the game after one town.

Witcher 2 sleeps with, again, woman per town. As I did make it to the dwarves town, one was a succubus. Which technically should of died at but didnt for some reason not aware of.

Its not his appearance, ok, maybe his treatment of women can be alright maybe, but I dont do that sleeping around stuff. Especially when he should be having Triss as what looked to be his girlfriend or partner instead. Now if it wasnt that way, then I prefer her not to been there at the beginning.
Its mostly to appease young men is what I see.

I actually not romanced with maleshep as renegade kept stopping that possibility. Not done a paragon play with maleshep yet but not worried about it as I see how much of anything I do, is kinda pointless at the end.

[Stelae]

How is Geralt awful? I found him MUCH more likable than Shepard, and he's a complete gentlemen with women, instead of telling them "who said anything about love? I just wanna fuckya".

 

Unless you're referring to his physical features. Which is kinda mean of you. He's supposed to be ugly, yet I thought he was quite handsome in W2, and now completely dashing with his new beard. And yeeaa, I'd call him scrawny by videogame standards.

I can only speak for the bit of the first one that I played, but he was pretty damned ghastly in it.  Complete gentlemen do not collect women like trophies.  And oh look, another amnesiac warrior.  How very original; I can see I'm in for an exciting new story here ... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

That, combined with the fact that whoever wrote the female characters spent more on jiggle physics than dialogue or personality and the combat was overly mashy and silly, and the game itself was glacially slow, did nothing to endear it to me. 

 

He may well have improved over time.  But I have better things to spend mine on than waiting to see if someone ends up more likeable than the Ebola virus, when they start out as slightly less so.

[Bugsie]

I agree to an extent, and I actually think the popularity of the game with reviewers was because of the "Dad Game" phenomenon.  The average gamer age is about 30; a lot of gamers are parents and having to look after a (precious, precocious, strong but vulnerable) child is more relevant to them that it might have been back when they were teenagers with power fantasies ... or perhaps the power fantasies have changed ... (see also chapter 1 of The Walking Dead, Bioshock infinite and so on)
 
She actually develops as a character, I think, as the game goes on. She is a storytelling tool, yes, but she's got a fair bit more agency by the end; I think she knows what is going on in the ending (avoiding spoilers) but has made her own decisions about what she wants.
 
But the DLC was quite wonderful, and she and her girlfriend were strong characters in a really good story.

I think the evolution of the 'Dad game' is kind of interesting in that, if anything it proves games can evolve beyond a single 'type' of hero (albeit an older version of what we have now). I haven't played The last of us to make comment, but, yes the Walking dead was definitely of that type. Interesting also is that a DLC featured Ellie(?) and season 2 of the Walking Dead, you play as Clementine, which so far has been awesome, the only real issue I've had is ascribing some very adult traits and decisions to a child.

In regard to the Witcher2, the only thing currently putting me off (I haven't got far) is how clunky the combat feels.

[9TailsFox]

So I was right on claiming since few women means they are worth twice of men?

That is what I got out of most of it.

Witcher 2, stuck playing that awful guy. At least he wasnt overly muscle bound I guess. Id prefer Dragons Dogma instead.

Edit: I wasnt aware they had those two in Witcher 2, guess I didnt get far into it.

Geralt suppose to be perfect he what we call supersolder. He is genetically mutated to be perfect he is stronger then normal human, enhanced vision even seeing in dark, You kinda need it to fight trolls 3 times your size and giant dragons. And Geralt is man who like to sleep with women, then it become crime? But it's just sex for him because his true love is Yennefer. And watch Witcher 3 trailer you can accuse Geralt many things but not respecting women is not one of them, he is sexist toward man, he killed guards who just did their job, hanged criminal which was women. We don't know circumstances of crime so i can be wrong, but it was exactly what narrator of trailer said.

[aTigerslunch]

Geralt suppose to be perfect he what we call supersolder. He is genetically mutated to be perfect he is stronger then normal human, enhanced vision even seeing in dark, You kinda need it to fight trolls 3 times your size and giant dragons. And Geralt is man who like to sleep with women, then it become crime? But it's just sex for him because his true love is Yennefer. And watch Witcher 3 trailer you can accuse Geralt many things but not respecting women is not one of them, he is sexist toward man, he killed guards who just did their job, hanged criminal which was women. We don't know circumstances of crime so i can be wrong, but it was exactly what narrator of trailer said.

Maybe read my next post. one at 2:58

by the way, you just proved my point of me not liking him when he has someone he loves.

[In Exile]

I think the evolution of the 'Dad game' is kind of interesting in that, if anything it proves games can evolve beyond a single 'type' of hero (albeit an older version of what we have now). I haven't played The last of us to make comment, but, yes the Walking dead was definitely of that type. Interesting also is that a DLC featured Ellie(?) and season 2 of the Walking Dead, you play as Clementine, which so far has been awesome, the only real issue I've had is ascribing some very adult traits and decisions to a child.

In regard to the Witcher2, the only thing currently putting me off (I haven't got far) is how clunky the combat feels.

 

The "dad" game is interesting, because aside form how little I care for zombies/apocalypses, there was absolutely nothing in that game's story that interested me or resonated with me. The fact that (1) I'm not a dad and (2) never plan on being one might have played a significant role in that. 

[oceanicsurvivor]

Geralt suppose to be perfect he what we call supersolder. He is genetically mutated to be perfect he is stronger then normal human, enhanced vision even seeing in dark, You kinda need it to fight trolls 3 times your size and giant dragons. And Geralt is man who like to sleep with women, then it become crime? But it's just sex for him because his true love is Yennefer. And watch Witcher 3 trailer you can accuse Geralt many things but not respecting women is not one of them, he is sexist toward man, he killed guards who just did their job, hanged criminal which was women. We don't know circumstances of crime so i can be wrong, but it was exactly what narrator of trailer said.

 

See...Geralt being in love with Yennefer is super confusing...since it totally seems like he and Triss are a thing...but then he spends all his time talking about this other girl. So...thats not the most respectful thing ever...especially when women are then turned into trading cards like Pokemon. Sleeping with women isn't a crime, but that is certainly gross to a lot of people.

 

Killing random guards is not sexists towards men. its sociopathic maybe, but that applies to most video game protags.

 

The "Dad Game" is really just an evolution of the save the princess mechanic. Guys went from saving their girlfriend to saving their daughter as the industry aged. Just like the original trope, it works ok when its done well, but its quickly turning redundant.

[9TailsFox]

Killing random guards is not sexists towards men. its sociopathic maybe, but that applies to most video game protags.

 

The "Dad Game" is really just an evolution of the save the princess mechanic. Guys went from saving their girlfriend to saving their daughter as the industry aged. Just like the original trope, it works ok when its done well, but its quickly turning redundant.

Geralt see 3 man hanging women, we can only guess what he would do if it was 3 women hanging man, do you honestly believe he just kill them and if he do, do you even imagine outcry of feminists.

 

"its quickly turning redundant." So if we reverse and have more stories where women save her boyfriend it quickly turn redundant. Because "Simpsons already did it" If you don't get references it's from south park, it means everything you can imagine it was already done. Even if you think your indie is new someone already done it you just don't know. like some man suing Ubisoft because Animus concept was in old book nobody knows about.

[Devtek]

See...Geralt being in love with Yennefer is super confusing...since it totally seems like he and Triss are a thing...but then he spends all his time talking about this other girl. So...thats not the most respectful thing ever...especially when women are then turned into trading cards like Pokemon. Sleeping with women isn't a crime, but that is certainly gross to a lot of people.

 

Can't read the original material myself (all but one book is in polish w/ no translation) but from what I gather is that Yennefer is the woman he is in love with, they lived together / adventured together (as Witchers and Sorceresses tend to do in that universe IIRC, something to do with both of them being sterile maybe).  He becomes involved with Triss because he thinks that Yennifer is dead after she sacrifices herself to bring him back from the dead,and he is finally moving on...but she isn't actually dead but riding around with some wraiths that are actually elves or something. I do admit it is kind of confusing but when you think the love of your life is dead your sexual activities may get a bit warped.  Also as for his sleeping with anything that moves, I always interpreted it as him not really caring one about sex all due to his inability to have children and just going through the motions b/c that is what is expected of a Witcher (to be a super human lover, fighter etc There are a number of instances where the women EXPECT him to be that way, whether that is part of the sexism of the game or simply game lore I don't really know)...also he is a mutant...who women could have a fling with if they wanted to and not have the risk of a child /disease (since he is immune) in a time period where such things would be rampant...i assume...i have no idea, almost 4am, kind of loopy waiting for my shift to end.

[aTigerslunch]

I kill equally and all.

He has a thing with Triss as he believes his lovers dead. Ok, that still allows cheating?

[In Exile]

Geralt suppose to be perfect he what we call supersolder. He is genetically mutated to be perfect he is stronger then normal human, enhanced vision even seeing in dark, You kinda need it to fight trolls 3 times your size and giant dragons. And Geralt is man who like to sleep with women, then it become crime? But it's just sex for him because his true love is Yennefer. And watch Witcher 3 trailer you can accuse Geralt many things but not respecting women is not one of them, he is sexist toward man, he killed guards who just did their job, hanged criminal which was women. We don't know circumstances of crime so i can be wrong, but it was exactly what narrator of trailer said.

 

I'm going to throw this out here, but Geralt doesn't deserve a medal for not being a sexism or mysogynism in a trailer. That's like saying a game is a progressive because it doesn't have homophobic slurs in the trailer. 

[oceanicsurvivor]

"its quickly turning redundant." So if we reverse and have more stories where women save her boyfriend it quickly turn redundant. Because "Simpsons already did it" If you don't get references it's from south park, it means everything you can imagine it was already done. Even if you think your indie is new someone already done it you just don't know. like some man suing Ubisoft because Animus concept was in old book nobody knows about.

Well sure, if for the next 100 years that was what 90% of media was, then, yeah, I'd be a bit bored.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Haven't checked out Witcher before Witcher 2? I know he sleeps with one woman in each town. To collect cards, I dropped the game after one town.

Witcher 2 sleeps with, again, woman per town. As I did make it to the dwarves town, one was a succubus. Which technically should of died at but didnt for some reason not aware of.

Its not his appearance, ok, maybe his treatment of women can be alright maybe, but I dont do that sleeping around stuff. Especially when he should be having Triss as what looked to be his girlfriend or partner instead. Now if it wasnt that way, then I prefer her not to been there at the beginning.
Its mostly to appease young men is what I see.

I actually not romanced with maleshep as renegade kept stopping that possibility. Not done a paragon play with maleshep yet but not worried about it as I see how much of anything I do, is kinda pointless at the end.

I didn't sleep with anyone else in my playthrough. But yea that yennifer stuff is a bit weird, I take it it's mostly a conflict of having to write a new story while working with the books, like his convenient amnesia. Even after a lot of reading to try and make sense of the chronology I'm still super confused.

 

I don't mean the game is a champion for women's rights, but I liked Geralt.

[Dutchess]

I'll put this about the Witcher in spoilers so its easier to avoid then karushna5

Spoiler

I don't know if I agree with this fully. Admittedly I haven't played the Witcher 2 in quite a while but, what I remember was actually pretty gross. Philippa and her male counterpart wizard on the other side of act 2 are both presented as power hungry individuals with 'same sex' attraction. Phillipa is gay and is into bondage...if I recall, she even leaves her partner tied up and moaning while she and Geralt have a convo in the room (so its pretty obvious this is to titillate the male audience)?  and the other,male character its strongly hinted is actually pedophile. So, two of the most morally grey to outright corrupt characters in the game are supposed to represent the LGB community. (Even though being a pedophile and a gay person are not the same thing and...ok, post for another place).

 

Beyond that Ves is put through deplorable and casually referenced assult. And then Geralt gets to decide how to deal with her attacker. That's not agency for Ves, thats using her as a prop for a male character (Geralt).

 

Saskia I remember being pretty cool, but she also spent the majority of the game in a coma. (not unlike Triss who also went missing for the majority of the game) Frankly, that makes it seem more like they didn't know what to do with their female character imo.

 

Certainly Bioware has similar faults, but at the end of the day I think that their treatment/writing of women is a lot more conscientious about what they are saying then the Witcher writers ever were. That isn't to say they don't have their fair share of missteps and don't fall for a couple tropes and painful cliches, since obviously they have, but there was a general carelessness to the Witcher 2 that I could never accuse Bioware of.

 

Some fair points, and interpretation of those aspects may depend on your perspective.

Spoiler

Cynthia (I remembered the name of Philippa's apprentice) is at no point tied down, and she is not moaning when Geralt is in the room. She and Philippa were busy when Geralt walked in. Then Geralt had a conversation with Philippa while Cynthia was still lying on the bed. At first glance this scene might illicit an eyeroll, but when you consider what happens later, it is actually pretty clever. Philippa is used to being in control. She is dominant and likes it that way. At the moment Geralt walks in on her, she thinks she is the one completely in control. However, later we discover that her "submissive" apprentice is actually a Nilfgaardian spy and had her duped. Cynthia perfectly played Philippa, had her believe that she was her superior and that she was in charge. The roles of dominatrix and the submissive one are suddenly reversed. So I disagree that this scene was aimed at arousing the straight male gamer. It tells us something about Philippa's personality and in hindsight shows us how she let her desire to dominate had allowed her to be fooled. Compared to the "the feather! Use the feather!" scene we walk in on in DA2 this is a case of very clever writing and actually does serve another purpose than "oohh, sex! Look, naughty! Huehuehu".

 

As for Philippa being gay... how is that bad? I was under the impression that the whole issue of inclusion was based on that aspects like sexuality or gender do not define a character and are simply a part of them. Philippa likes women. So what? Should she have been portrayed as straight because she is a ruthless woman? Should she have been a man? Inclusion to me does not mean characters of certain ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation can only be portrayed as nice, heroic, intelligent, etc. Loredo was an absolute pig and he was straight. So was king Henselt. Foltest was hothead and had sex with his sister. All the people who matter (as in, play a political role and work to change things to their advantage) in the TW universe are portrayed as cunning and no innocent, nice people. They wouldn't be where they are if they were just nice.

Though I'll concede that having Dethmold be shown as gay does make it a more unfortunate combination. Still, should the guy on his bed have been a woman instead? Would that have made it better, another woman to be used against her will? I don't know. Marjoleine was the only NPC in DAO explicitly shown as being gay, and she was no gentle, innocent flower either. 

 

I did not feel that Ves' assault was treated casually either. She was shown to be upset by what had happened. Roche is pissed. Roche and Geralt going after Henselt is not only because he raped Ves, but he had all the other members of the Blue Stripes executed. It's up to the player how Geralt is affected by what happened to Ves in this. So, like I mentioned in an earlier post, sexual assault is being used as a (perhaps convenient) tool to make a character a complete pig and make it difficult to spare him. It's fair to be opposed to that, as it can be argued it was not necessary. But again, I disagree that it was handled casually.

 

I'm not sure it is fair to say CDPR did not know what to do with Saskia or Triss and therefore had them unconscious or kidnapped. Triss' disappearance is necessary to give Geralt a personal reason to chase Letho, as otherwise he might decide he does not really owe Foltest or Roche anything (which he doesn't. He was never a bodyguard, and Roche basically blackmailed him into doing his job for him). As a sorceress Triss is a powerful woman, but she lost most of that political power when the king she served died. 

Saskia's poisoning was needed to get Philippa to send you on a quest to collect ingredients for a cure that would also allow her to place Saskia under her spell. Saskia's condition also fueled the unrest in the town and led to the commoners rebelling and demanding Stennis' head because they believed he was guilty of her attempted murder. With her present everything would have gone much more smoothly, but... well, what kind of game would that be? When she is on her feet again she is shown to be a good person and an inspiring leader. Her speech on the walls before Henselt's army arrived was pretty awesome.

 

I can only speak for the bit of the first one that I played, but he was pretty damned ghastly in it.  Complete gentlemen do not collect women like trophies.  And oh look, another amnesiac warrior.  How very original; I can see I'm in for an exciting new story here ... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

That, combined with the fact that whoever wrote the female characters spent more on jiggle physics than dialogue or personality and the combat was overly mashy and silly, and the game itself was glacially slow, did nothing to endear it to me. 

 

He may well have improved over time.  But I have better things to spend mine on than waiting to see if someone ends up more likeable than the Ebola virus, when they start out as slightly less so.

 

Geralt is based on the main character in a series of novels. His amnesia allows the player to determine a lot of Geralt's motivations and beliefs, despite him being a pre-defined character. It makes roleplaying a lot easier and give more freedom. He's also not a regular warrior. Like 9TailsFox said, he is a witcher, a genetically mutated and trained monster slayer. He is no longer an ordinary human and is treated as an outcast and met with distrust by ordinary people, the people he was created for the protect. He is basically a relic from the past, as the Order of the Flaming Rose is now dealing with monsters without demanding payment, while a witcher needs to be paid because he needs to eat as well. Classic, straight-up monsters like vampires, ghouls, etc. are becoming more rare. Should he, as a witcher, stick to slaying monsters like that, while the true monsters are now hiding behind human faces and are driven by greed and hunger for power? Does being a witcher mean it is his destiny to always do everything to protect humans, even against elves who are fighting for a land of their own and have been driven to near extinction by those humans? Yeah, but Zzzzzzzzzz, nothing that could be possibly interesting here. Just another white male warrior.

 

Haven't checked out Witcher before Witcher 2? I know he sleeps with one woman in each town. To collect cards, I dropped the game after one town.

Witcher 2 sleeps with, again, woman per town. As I did make it to the dwarves town, one was a succubus. Which technically should of died at but didnt for some reason not aware of.

Its not his appearance, ok, maybe his treatment of women can be alright maybe, but I dont do that sleeping around stuff. Especially when he should be having Triss as what looked to be his girlfriend or partner instead. Now if it wasnt that way, then I prefer her not to been there at the beginning.
Its mostly to appease young men is what I see.

I actually not romanced with maleshep as renegade kept stopping that possibility. Not done a paragon play with maleshep yet but not worried about it as I see how much of anything I do, is kinda pointless at the end.

 

Look, and this is where you have nobody but yourself to blame for not liking Geralt. Sleeping with all those women is optional. You don't have to. You can stay completely faithful to Triss if that is what you want. You don't have to sleep with succubi, prostitutes or random townswomen. It is very clear which conversational options will result in a casual roll in the hay. Don't pick them if you feel the Geralt you're playing is not the type who engages in such a thing and is instead completely smitten with Triss.