Ce sujet est fermé
No, the real problem is they don't feel like complete, fully realized characters, because a part of their personality has been reduced to a gameplay mechanic. Knowing this as the player, it hurts my immersion in their part of the story.
Pretty much the entirety of their personalities is tied into a gameplay mechanic. It is called the friendship/rivalry meter.
Pretty much the entirety of their personalities is tied into a gameplay mechanic. It is called the friendship/rivalry meter.
That's not controlling their personality, though. That's merely their reaction based on their personality.
That's not controlling their personality, though. That's merely their reaction based on their personality.
Yeah, but anyway, sexuality =/= personality. The DA2 companions had the same personality whether you romanced them as male or female.
Wait, so, all the gays are mermaids?
Or all the gays are pirates?
Either way, beach party at Mockingword's place; the fruity cocktails are on me!
You just try it, boy. I've got my bible and my shotgun.
No, the real problem is they don't feel like complete, fully realized characters, because a part of their personality has been reduced to a gameplay mechanic. Knowing this as the player, it hurts my immersion in their part of the story.
If that is the argument (I still don't agree, but that's beside the point), I stand by my earlier proposal of 2 gay, and 2 Bi Li's. Fully realized characters, set sexualities: problem solved.
That's not controlling their personality, though. That's merely their reaction based on their personality.
But they reacted based on the games limitations. There were times I did things someone would agree with but based on the wording I got rivalry points. Like when you offer to find Ninette with Isabela in the party in Act 1. This is a resource limitation, that I can't take Isabela aside and say "I don't want to bring her back to him I just want to make sure she isn't dead."
And frankly to move away from playersexual...if we really can't accept four hardcore bisexual individuals kicking butt together, offer up two Li's who are bisexual, fully realized bi characters. Then have one male/one female li who when in a same sex relationship offer a SINGLE LINE to the effect of 'I've never actually been with a X before (but hey, since Thedas has no real social stigmas or religious condemnation surrounding this issue I can totally roll with this)" and then they just move on with the regular romance. Because hey, sometimes you just meet a person and you like them, and in the end it doesn't matter. And this happens in the real world of ours, and remain fully formed individuals even when they recieve an attraction curve ball.
Screw equality and fairness. I need my fantasy worlds to reflect the real-world distribution of sexuality, which is unknown. Gays get enough special treatment as it is. They took our rainbows and fruity cocktails and now they're invading our video games. Enough is enough! I say we drive them back into the sea from whence they came!
And they ruined all of our best names, like Bruce, and Lance, and Julian.
That's not controlling their personality, though. That's merely their reaction based on their personality.
But that makes a way bigger impact on their responses. Friendship vs. Rivalry actually makes a change in a companions perspnality/attitude, whereas their sexuality has literally no impact on the changes in personality/attitude. Hence why I I don't understand the argument.
(1)Yeah, but anyway, sexuality =/= personality. (2)The DA2 companions had the same personality whether you romanced them as male or female.
(1) Of course not; I don't recall anyone making that claim here. (2) http://forum.bioware...ers/?p=16253526
If that is the argument (I still don't agree, but that's beside the point), I stand by my earlier proposal of 2 gay, and 2 Bi Li's. Fully realized characters, set sexualities: problem solved.
Fine, it's better than the playersexual mechanic. But if you subscribe to the equality deal that the pro-playersexual folks want, you'd still need 2 straight characters (companions or otherwise). That's what I can get behind.
But they reacted based on the games limitations. There were times I did things someone would agree with but based on the wording I got rivalry points. Like when you offer to find Ninette with Isabela in the party in Act 1. This is a resource limitation, that I can't take Isabela aside and say "I don't want to bring her back to him I just want to make sure she isn't dead."
That seems like a separate issue. I call that an unintended inconsistency with the writing, not an intended part of a gameplay mechanic.
Guest_Dobbysaurus_*
Why not just cut out LI's out of the game and this problem will be all solved
No!! Then how would I ever have a bf??!!!
No!! Then how would I ever have a bf??!!!
how u doin bb
You are making me repeat myself on the matter of number of available preferred romance options. If I would be in your boots when I play DA:I and I see there's only one LI of my preferred taste and I see you have 2 or 3 of them, you know what? I won't complain. Because I know that people from LGBT having been having fewer LI options than me in the previous games.
And if I do happen to complain about it(this is a hypothetical situation, in reality I really won't care that I have only one LI that I prefer in the game so please bear that in mind), I would like Bioware to tell me something like "too bad, better luck next game", rather than sacrificing character quality by making all companions playersexual.
I think it's fair to want to have more or equal number of options for LI of your sexual preference, especially when you haven't had more than one LI of your sexuality in the previous games. If you make a thread about it, I would even advocate for more LI for your group on that thread, because in the end that still preserves character quality.
I played ME series a while back so I don't remember the specifics like each romanciable character's sexual orientation, but as far as Dragon Age is concerned, it was only unfair to you in Origins(I'm assuming you're gay or lesbian, forgive me if not). With that said, if DA: I will have characters with set sexualities like in Origins, then I wouldn't mind if there was only one preferred LI for me and two for you. In fact, I'd be happy for you, and stay happy myself since there are no player sexual characters that would otherwise break my immersion and reduce the overall quality of the game. Game quality is the most important to me, and I'd rather see developers preserve that, than menial things like which sexuality group got the most preferred LI and try to solve that problem.
You say that now and I believe that you think this. However, if this was the case in DA: I, then the case in the next ME game, then in the next DA game after that, you'd probably be pretty annoyed and would definitely be within your right to complain about it.
Now imagine that after the above scenario, they make all of the LI's playersexual, you would probably be okay with that (or at least not mind it as much as you do now). You would also probably be pretty annoyed at the gay and lesbian players if they were telling you to just suck it up after getting their way for several games in a row.
No!! Then how would I ever have a bf??!!!
You have a Moxxi avi, you'll be fine
Hm. The thread's really exploded since I last read it.
I've seen some very compelling arguments from people on both sides. I can't at all argue that maybe the "playersexual" thing does cheapen non-straight sexuality, though I don't think most people are going to think people's gender preference is going to bend to their will in the real world.
Ideally, we'd all get at least two LIs, two straight, two gay, two bi, with bisexual players getting the biggest range. The playersexual thing does enable everyone to have the option of going after anyone, which is a mixed bag really. I mean I like the idea so people don't complain--some people refuse to play the opposite sex at all. I do so rarely. What if the only male character I like is strictly gay? Yes, too bad, deal with it. Except that it's a game, and isn't it supposed to be about having fun? And yet, if that isn't who the character is, should they bend to my will as the player?
So now I'm just kind of torn. I still don't think the "playersexual" thing is really inherently bad, though intent isn't magic. It gives everyone every option. Yes, it might be better to just make them automatically bisexual, but then you'd have players who didn't think the men were manly enough or didn't like the idea their girlfriend had been with dudes. Sad but true. And, in a singleplayer RPG, the player basically IS the center of the universe, let's face it.
My thought is that when you start that game, the given character is already whatever preference is attracted to the player character. Which is indeed somewhat problematic, though it gives everyone the same number of choices (and choices are good). But it would be more problematic if a gay character were to turn straight for the player during the actual playthrough.
And I didn't realize that I'd missed out on Anders having a gay lover; that really shouldn't have been removed for the sake of female players. If you're going to make everyone equally romanceable to everyone, you need to do so in such a way that, although they may react differently to different genders, the content for those LIs is more or less the same. This also means that the romances need to be written equally well for either gender. No more "Well, Fenris was better for men, and Merrill was better for women..."
There's no way to make everyone happy. and someone's going to be offended no matter what Bioware does. I'm not even sure if there's really an objectively fair way to do this, and still stick to the budget. And yet I don't think it's fair to limit or take away anyone's options. I had that done to my straight female Shepard in ME3, and again, I'm glad I'd romanced Garrus and left Kaidan alive. Otherwise, I'd have had no one.
I don't want other people to suddenly lose an option, and the "playersexual" way seems to be the only way to ensure that. For that reason I still back it, but I think maybe it needs to be presented, or done differently, so that it doesn't give the notion that gender preference can be flipped like a switch to suit the player. I do agree that sexuality is something you're born with, or at the very least something that develops naturally by the time you reach adolescence--not something wrong with the person, and not caused by how they're raised.
I'm not even sure if a roster of 6 LIs with a 2/2/2 split would be fair at this point, even if it would make sense.
But that makes a way bigger impact on their responses. Friendship vs. Rivalry actually makes a change in a companions perspnality/attitude, whereas their sexuality has literally no impact on the changes in personality/attitude. Hence why I I don't understand the argument.
See my above response to Sandal 2.0 .
Guest_Dobbysaurus_*
You have a Moxxi avi, you'll be fine
But I need my pixel husbandos!
@Galisic: I can't do a proper quote, too stupid apparently. However you said:
Fine, it's better than the playersexual mechanic. But if you subscribe to the equality deal that the pro-playersexual folks want, you'd still need 2 straight characters (companions or otherwise). That's what I can get behind.
You are right, I do subscibe to the "equality deal" that the pro-playsexual foik want. However, I am just trying to subscribe to the "set sexuality and personality" that others want, so I don't really see the difference. Just trying to find a common ground.
Why not just cut out LI's out of the game and this problem will be all solved
But that's not happening this time around, dear.
Perhaps in DA4 they will make it so that the PC is too busy slaughtering Qunari to have time for some luvin.
I would gladly sacrifice romance for a good Qunari slaughterfest.
I'm not even sure if a roster of 6 LIs with a 2/2/2 split would be fair at this point, even if it would make sense.
What makes you think that?
Why not? That way everyone gets the shaft equally.
Similar to playersexuality.
See my above response to Sandal 2.0 .
You mean your response that meant nothing, since nobody's personality changed based on sexuality in DA2? Literally no personality changed based on sexuality, they changed based on friendship/rivalry, that's it.
What makes you think that?
Because someone would still be upset, and because of it taking more budget, certain LIs would almost certainly get more attention than others. The ones getting the most attention would probably be the straight ones. Then the bi ones. And last of all, the afterthought gay/lesbian. No one likes to be an afterthought.
As for taking romance out entirely... Romance is something I enjoy in the Bioware games, because it gives my character a reason to keep fighting. Not that they couldn't find one anyway. And yet, I wouldn't really miss out on much if they didn't have romance at all, so long as I could form an awesome companionship/friendship with my companions/party/squad and learn more about them that way. For me, I don't care about the kisses or the sex scenes. Sure, romance is cute and it's sappy and again I enjoy it, but ultimately I just like seeing my character interact with others on the screen. So if I could see an awesome brotherhood/sisterhood form, I'd probably be just as satisfied. If I wanted porn, or romcoms, or romance novels, that's what I'd be using for my entertainment. I choose games to be a part of a story and direct that story (and also to be creative and kill darkspawn and stuff). Romance is just a nice bonus.
I'm sure that this has been said numerous time by other people, but my preference would be the ME3 approach with multiple straight, gay, and bisexual options for each gender. While it wasn't completely even, everyone got a choice and that's all I really am really asking for: a choice.
If the DA: I team went this route, they would probably be able to make it even for everyone. The main reason that it was so disproportionate in the ME series was because options carried over from prior games, which weren't equitable.
However, that being said, I'm perfectly fine with making them all bisexual from the start. It doesn't ruin immersion or cheapen the characters or strike me as too crazy of a prospect. If the option is all bisexual or no choice for some players (especially when others get a choice), then I prefer to go the all bisexual route.
Retour en haut