12496 réponses à ce sujet

[renfrees]

You're going off-topic. He's a writer, that's all that matters. You're not going romance him.

[shit's fucked cunts]

I knew it long before I did Tumblr, Zazz.

 

Well maybe it's your gaydar.

 

YOUR DAVID GAYDAR

 

Goddamn it.

[Mockingword]

I didn't know it until recently, but seriously, who even cares?

[Mockingword]

You're going off-topic. He's a writer, that's all that matters. You're not going romance him.

CRUSH MY DREAMS, WHY DON'T YOU

[Hellion Rex]

So...where were we before this got seriously off topic?

[Vapaa]

Wasn't that said the GaymerX convention ? I remember knowing it at that occasion

[Vapaa]

So...where were we before this got seriously off topic?

 

If everyone was LI who would you pick.

 

Sera, but for RP reasons.

[Ianamus]

So...where were we before this got seriously off topic?

 

Arguing over whether Gaiders comments that he wants everyone to have at least two options is enough evidence for people to stop worrying about it.

[Maria Caliban]

You're going off-topic. He's a writer, that's all that matters. You're not going romance him.

That you know of.

[Hellion Rex]

Arguing over whether Gaiders comments that he wants everyone to have at least two options is enough evidence for people to stop worrying about it.

I believe that we are indeed gonna get equal options, however that pans out.

[Darth Krytie]

Can we all move hastily away from discussing Gaider's personal business?

 

 

Given the tone of the Devs who have actually commented on it, I honestly believe there will equality in options given that we're going to have the whole textually set sexualities (instead meta-implied sexualities).

 

As a whole, BW seems to be moving towards more inclusion not less.

 

I've had my worries, but I also have a bit of faith too.

[azarhal]

Apparently he agrees with Gaider since the romance system is going the direction he wanted

 

Is it? I remember reading a long time ago that the same Gaider didn't like non-companion romances and we are getting at least one of them (Cullen).

 

The idea is to have at least two choices per preferences, not equality. They also decided on set sexuality (as in some are going to be gay, some are going to be straight and others bisexual), but it doesn't mean it is going to be equal across genders.

 

There could be across both gender a single gay-only romance, a single straight romance and all the rest are bisexual for all we know. Basically something like this:

 

2 bisexual women gives 2 straight men choices and 2 lesbian choices.

1 gay and 1 bisexual and 1 straight men gives 2 gay choices and 2 straight women choices.

 

Everyone get at least 2 choices, there is a mix of sexuality among the characters and there is only 5 romances.

[Iakus]

 

Given the tone of the Devs who have actually commented on it, I honestly believe there will equality in options given that we're going to have the whole textually set sexualities (instead meta-implied sexualities).

 

 

Indeed.  I don't think they would have gone this route otherwise

[Nocte ad Mortem]

As a whole, BW seems to be moving towards more inclusion not less.

 

I've had my worries, but I also have a bit of faith too.

This is what makes me hopeful, also. With DA2's system and ME3's addition of homosexual LIs, even if they could have been better handled, it seems the slant is towards more progressive, not less. It would be surprising now if they took a step back. With the trend, it makes more sense for the options to be at least mostly equal.

 

My guess is, the only contention we might have is some people getting more companions LIs vs NPCs. 

[wright1978]

I doubt there will be issues around equality of numbers. My fears are completely around the notion of choice being eroded via NPC romances, which imo aren't of equal status or value to companion romances.

[Darth Krytie]

I doubt there will be issues around equality of numbers. My fears are completely around the notion of choice being eroded via NPC romances, which imo aren't of equal status or value to companion romances.

 

Question: Would you still feel the same way if all the romance-centric content was equal between companions and NPC? Like, if there was no romance-specific content accessed "on the road" and all the romance stuff at the Keeps was balanced? 

 

Or if there is "on-the road" content, but NPC romances had some NPC-centric romance content you get in lieu of "on the road" content...would you still think that they're not of equal value?

[LiaraShepard]

Question: Would you still feel the same way if all the romance-centric content was equal between companions and NPC? Like, if there was no romance-specific content accessed "on the road" and all the romance stuff at the Keeps was balanced? 

 

Or if there is "on-the road" content, but NPC romances had some NPC-centric romance content you get in lieu of "on the road" content...would you still think that they're not of equal value?

 

hmmm, I think it's not only the additional content on road but also the knowledge of being on journey with your LI that matters. I think having a companion as LI gives us the feeling of experiencing the same adventure. It feels like those love storys in books where the heroes fall in love with each other while slaying dragons. It's very idealized compared to someone who waits at home till the hubby comes back....Of course, it doesn't have to be this way. NPC relationships can work out quite well. But I haven't seen this so far. Steve, Samantha and Kelly never got close to companion relationships.

[pallascedar]

Question: Would you still feel the same way if all the romance-centric content was equal between companions and NPC? Like, if there was no romance-specific content accessed "on the road" and all the romance stuff at the Keeps was balanced?

Or if there is "on-the road" content, but NPC romances had some NPC-centric romance content you get in lieu of "on the road" content...would you still think that they're not of equal value?

And that's the thing: we know so little about NPC romances. It's silly to write them off as worse when we know nothing about how they will play out. They could be the best characters that will invoke jealousy to those they're not available to.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I'm one that thinks companion romances are superior even if they do get the exact same amount of romance specific lines as NPCs. The romance specific lines aren't the entire relationship, for my experience. It's more organic, in my opinion, to consider all interaction with the character as part of the overall relationship. I mean, it's like a relationship with a real person. Your "romantic" end of the relationship doesn't shut off because you're talking about politics or work. It's all something that goes into shaping your opinion of the other person and, hopefully, growing closer to them. 

 

I also like the dynamic better with companions being a big part of the adventure. I'm not into the "someone to come home to" dynamic, although I respect that some are. For me, it means more to have the LI with you and have them as part of the decisions and the battles you go through. I like to think of them as an equal, fighting beside me and sharing the whole experience. I just can't see how an NPC could offer the same experience.  

[wright1978]

Question: Would you still feel the same way if all the romance-centric content was equal between companions and NPC? Like, if there was no romance-specific content accessed "on the road" and all the romance stuff at the Keeps was balanced? 

 

Or if there is "on-the road" content, but NPC romances had some NPC-centric romance content you get in lieu of "on the road" content...would you still think that they're not of equal value?

 

Yes i'd feel the same way. A massive part of the bond that gets established with a LI comes from the wider non romance specific content and therefore i can't see a way NPC romance can compete 40+ hours on the road content.

[Nightdragon8]

Yes i'd feel the same way. A massive part of the bond that gets established with a LI comes from the wider non romance specific content and therefore i can't see a way NPC romance can compete 40+ hours on the road content.

it all depends on wither or not talking isn't done in the camps, in safe zones or not, and if htats te case, I don't see why the NPC can't be there also. I mean other than banter there isn't much 'on the road' as you may think. and considering the health regen system change you will be camping more than normal.

[In Exile]

Question: Would you still feel the same way if all the romance-centric content was equal between companions and NPC? Like, if there was no romance-specific content accessed "on the road" and all the romance stuff at the Keeps was balanced? 

 

Or if there is "on-the road" content, but NPC romances had some NPC-centric romance content you get in lieu of "on the road" content...would you still think that they're not of equal value?

 

Although I'm interjecting, to me if the content was equivalent it would be different, with the caveat that (as Nightdragon8 points out) that the NPC is in an easily accessible place for triggering dialogue. 

[wright1978]

it all depends on wither or not talking isn't done in the camps, in safe zones or not, and if htats te case, I don't see why the NPC can't be there also. I mean other than banter there isn't much 'on the road' as you may think. and considering the health regen system change you will be camping more than normal.

Banter a pretty big thing and then there's the whole experiencing the unfolding story together which a companion has over an NPC.

I certainly badly missed Miranda as my companion romance in ME3 when she was just an NPC met a various points throughout the game in comparison with the joyous experience in ME2 where she was there 24/7 alongside me as the story unfolded.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

What I don't understand is, why wouldn't they just make 6 companion romances if they were putting even more effort into creating a whole new system for NPCs to be almost as important as companions? What is the benefit of it being NPCs if not that they're easy to do, like they have been in the past? I'm a bit skeptical of NPC romances, because I can't see much other reason for them to exist other than that they usually take less resources.  

 

Why do you guys think they decided to add NPC romances over just including more companion romances? Do you think they just didn't have 6 companions suitable for a romance for story reasons?  

[LiaraShepard]

What I don't understand is, why wouldn't they just make 6 companion romances if they were putting even more effort into creating a whole new system for NPCs to be almost as important as companions? What is the benefit of it being NPCs if not that they're easy to do, like they have been in the past? I'm a bit skeptical of NPC romances, because I can't see much other reason for them to exist other than that they usually take less resources.  

 

Why do you guys think they decided to add NPC romances over just including more companion romances? Do you think they just didn't have 6 companions suitable for a romance for story reasons?  

 

Maybe because there were so many people asking for them.