Ce sujet est fermé
I was more for the playersexual thing improved with restrictions based on choices, but the 2/2/2 system is totally fine by me. I can only understand the disappointment about not being able to romance the character you want. But no, the system isn't really something horrible, unfair or worse, according to some.
There is no evidence that it is not horrible, unfair, or worse.
So now I'm sort of thinking... Yeah I don't think set sexualities make sense in the world of Thedas, buuuuuut who am I to argue taking something away from people who might really benefit from it.
Oh, I think set sexualities within the world itself is quite appropriate. When it comes to LIs, however, I think it just adds unnecessary gate limitations on people's roleplaying and personal story-creation that they wish to see. As I said in my previous post a minute ago, we have companions and advisers and countless major and minor NPCs out in the world that can be colored with diversity and representation of various sexualities, and show many different kinds of relationships beyond even what an Main Character and LI could have. As a racial minority and a sexual orientation minority, yes, it IS important to see "myself" represented and acknowledged within our media. I understand that completely and personally. It has meaning.
I just fail to see why the rule of measure for such representation and diversity needs to solely revolve around LIs themselves.
There is no evidence that it is not horrible, unfair, or worse.
XD
Now now! We might all end up with an equal amount of non companion LIs. (It'd be interesting and hilarious if only Cass and 1 more male companion were LIs and the rest of the LIs were non companions).
Least we'd have some backstory with the mooks though so it'd have that silver lining.
Oh, I think set sexualities within the world itself is quite appropriate. When it comes to LIs, however, I think it just adds unnecessary gate limitations on people's roleplaying and personal story-creation that they wish to see. As I said in my previous post a minute ago, we have companions and advisers and countless major and minor NPCs out in the world that can be colored with diversity and representation of various sexualities, and show many different kinds of relationships beyond even what an Main Character and LI could have. As a racial minority and a sexual orientation minority, yes, it IS important to see "myself" represented and acknowledged within our media. I understand that completely and personally. It has meaning.
I just fail to see why the rule of measure for such representation and diversity needs to solely revolve around LIs themselves.
This is exactly how I feel.
Does it need to be "horrible, unfair or worse" for people to suggest the previous system was more enjoyable for them? Why isn't disappointment enough?
Yea, I'm just disappointed.
But then I've never been arguing in favor of equal representation, just maximum choices.
Sexuality is a huge part of ones identity and influences self perception as well as the way to present oneself and interact with people.
Speak for yourself, mate.
XD
Now now! We might all end up with an equal amount of non companion LIs. (It'd be interesting and hilarious if only Cass and 1 more male companion were LIs and the rest of the LIs were non companions).
Least we'd have some backstory with the mooks though so it'd have that silver lining.
That's not what I'm referring to. I have no problem with NPC LIs. I have a problem with a RPG, which exist and thrive on player choices, to limit said player choices.
Yea, I'm just disappointed.
But then I've never been arguing in favor of equal representation, just maximum choices.
I want choices and representation. Just the LIs are for everyone and the companions can be anything. 
ah well.
That's not what I'm referring to. I have no problem with NPC LIs. I have a problem with a RPG, which exist and thrive on player choices, to limit said player choices.
Well all choices are limited to be fair. We're probably not gonna be able to tell Celene to jump off a bridge for one. Though I would love more insulting choices even if they lead to a bad end. Like refusing a characters help just to either die or a have a much harder time getting to your destination. But that's due to my love of VNs.
Sexuality is a huge part of ones identity and influences self perception as well as the way to present oneself and interact with people. It might not be as important in the DA-Setting as it would be in the real world or settings where sexuality is more of an issue, but as a (unprofessional) writer myself I tend to create characters whose sexuality has an impact on their behaviour and sometimes the story.
Nope. Not for me, at least. My personality and identity comes from my choices, beliefs, and things that I have experienced, NOT because I am sexually attracted to guys.
Speak for yourself, mate.
Agreed. If anything, personality has a much bigger impact on sexuality and is completely unrelated to sexual orientation. I believe that how a character goes about the former says much more about him/her than the latter ever could.
@Mes, I am sorry, I linked the wrong post.
http://forum.bioware...ion/?p=16479515
Who says it's the only limiting factor? We've not said how the romances will work at all, so that's quite the assumption.
I understand the concern about possibly ending up with the "short end of the stick", but I'm not sure where the DA team has yet given the impression that will be so. I'm not going to tell you that your concerns don't have validity—I'm actually quite familiar with how it feels to have my interests treated as a secondary concern when it comes to popular entertainment—but I'm hoping that concern need not equate with panic at this point. We've got a lot of time yet to discuss this.
Personally, I'd rather the conversation didn't start with a discussion of what is "realistic". That's not a bar the DA team uses to judge any of our content—not in a fantasy game. There's an argument that can be made about internal plausibility within the setting, but the realism that Cam was trying to talk about in that interview was with regards to character depictions and the variety of viewpoints that can be touched on depending on the approach. I hope that's clear. If not, it's something we'll certainly be discussing more in the months to come.
There is no evidence that it is not horrible, unfair, or worse.
I think a lot of people would be worried from Mass Effect, despite the dev teams consisting of separate people.
I think a lot of people would be worried from Mass Effect, despite the dev teams consisting of separate people.
We just have to look at Origins.
Options for straight men:
Leliana
Morrigan
Options for straight women:
Alistair
Zevran
Options for gay men:
Zevran
Options for gay women:
Leliana
Yeah, that seems fair. 
While I can see the argument of "Just make the non-LI companions be the LI's" I don't think it's anywhere near as simple as that.
Let's look at the companions in Origins. Say they had the 4 bisexual approach that so many want but also want to represent all sexualities. Leliana, Morrigan, Alistair and Zevran are all bisexual, so we'd need the other companions to represent the different sexualities.
That gives us Oghren, Wynne, Sten shale and Dog. Erm...
And that's the problem. With practically half of the companions being LI's saying that they all must be bisexual is really limiting if you want to include that diversity. If they wanted to do it in Origins at least one of the above would have to be scrapped. If you want to represent everyone then out of those four or so non-LI's you'd have to have one straight and one gay at least, so half of their sexualities are predetermined before the characters even have a chance to be conceived.
What about a bisexual companion who isn't an LI? Not likely to happen if approximately 50% of your cast have to be bisexual by mandate to fill the LI quota.
Oh, I think set sexualities within the world itself is quite appropriate. When it comes to LIs, however, I think it just adds unnecessary gate limitations on people's roleplaying and personal story-creation that they wish to see. As I said in my previous post a minute ago, we have companions and advisers and countless major and minor NPCs out in the world that can be colored with diversity and representation of various sexualities, and show many different kinds of relationships beyond even what an Main Character and LI could have. As a racial minority and a sexual orientation minority, yes, it IS important to see "myself" represented and acknowledged within our media. I understand that completely and personally. It has meaning.
I just fail to see why the rule of measure for such representation and diversity needs to solely revolve around LIs themselves.
Yeah I'm in agreement with you.
However, that sort of reminds me of something. Gaider said in response to people's concerns regarding there only being 3 female companions as opposed to 6 male something along the lines of "but you should be happy because there are plenty of important female NPCs in the game too."
I can understand that, BUT... An NPC fundamentally cannot compete with a companion. It's just not the same AT ALL. As a woman, I don't feel like I should be put in this situation where I should basically have to choose between either having more female companions or having more female NPCs. I want BOTH. 
And deserve BOTH.
So back to the sexualities thing - yeah they may throw in a gay guy NPC in some village or stationed at some keep, but it would not be as effective as having a gay companion.
I'm only saying this stuff because I'm beginning to warm up to the idea of the 2/2/2 split, even though I would honestly still prefer bi/playersexual.
We just have to look at Origins.
*snip*Yeah, that seems fair.
Don't forget the one night stands/suggested relationships you got ;P
Wasn't HN the only one who could express an interest in s/s in the origin I mean? Pretty sure you could only flirt with Gorim as a female, CE had no one to hit on except their spouse who's always the o/s, Mage could express interest in Jowan and Cullen if female, from what little I can remember of Dalish you had to be female to say you had something more with Tamlen...and so on. I mean even if the PC hit on someone of the s/s to only get rejected at least that'd been something. As it is I think the only dude a mwarden can hit on that's not Zevran is that dude in his origin. FemWarden gets the female version and Isabela at least.
We just have to look at Origins.
Options for straight en:
Leliana
Morrigan
Options for straight women:
Alistair
Zevran
Options for gay men:
Zevran
Options for gay women:
Leliana
Yeah, that seems fair.
I find it a bit ridiculous to point out the past with DAO just to make your point valid. Bioware wasn't as progressive at that time. The DA team has evolved and has not the same mindset than during the period of DAO between 2005 and 2009.
Didn't David Gaider say that they would only go for the set sexualities again if they could allow the same amount of options for everyone ?
Don't forget the one night stands/suggested relationships you got ;P
Wasn't HN the only one who could express an interest in s/s? Pretty sure you could only flirt with Gorim as a female, CE had no one to hit on except their spouse who's always the o/s, Mage could express interest in Jowan and Cullen if female, from what little I can remember of Dalish you had to be female to say you had something more with Tamlen...and so on.
I don't count flings.
Yes, HN was the only origin who could establish themselves as bisexual or homosexual prior to meeting Leliana and Zevran.
We just have to look at Origins.
Options for straight men:
Leliana
Morrigan
Options for straight women:
Alistair
Zevran
Options for gay men:
Zevran
Options for gay women:
Leliana
Yeah, that seems fair.
Good point.
Add to that the fact that Zevran and Lelianna were bi and not gay. So no representation for gay people at all.
Hopefully Inquisition will be better.
Does it need to be "horrible, unfair or worse" for people to suggest the previous system was more enjoyable for them? Why isn't disappointment enough?
I was just disappointed at first.
Now I'm annoyed by the news since I've convinced myself I will get the short-end of the stick again (I'm pretty sure the lesbian-only option will be with the non-companion). Honestly, if the non-companion LI thing wasn't happening, I'd still be disappointed but accepting.
I find it a bit ridiculous to point out the past with DAO just to make your point valid. Bioware wasn't as progressive at that time. The DA team has evolved and has not the same mindset than during the period of DAO between 2005 and 2009.
Didn't David Gaider said that they would only go for the set sexualities again if they could allow the same amont of options for everyone ?
No, he said his preference was that everyone gets at least two choices. He made no confirmation of what they would actually do at all.
Good point.
Add to that the fact that Zevran and Lelianna were bi and not gay. So no representation for gay people at all.
Hopefully Inquisition will be better.
Here's hoping. I mean for God's sake, we're going to Orlais. We hopefully will see more representation in this installment.
No, he said his preference was that everyone gets at least two choices. He made no confirmation of what they would actually do at all.
After DAII, in many topics complaining about the all bi system in the old bsn, David Gaider said several times that they would always favor fairness before variety, realism or I don't know what.
Now, I get that he isn't the chief, but that was clear to me.
While I can see the argument of "Just make the non-LI companions be the LI's" I don't think it's anywhere near as simple as that.
Let's look at the companions in Origins. Say they had the 4 bisexual approach that so many want but also want to represent all sexualities. Leliana, Morrigan, Alistair and Zevran are all bisexual, so we'd need the other companions to represent the different sexualities.
That gives us Oghren, Wynne, Sten shale and Dog. Erm...
And that's the problem. With practically half of the companions being LI's saying that they all must be bisexual is really limiting if you want to include that diversity. If they wanted to do it in Origins at least one of the above would have to be scrapped. If you want to represent everyone then out of those four or so non-LI's you'd have to have one straight and one gay at least, so half of their sexualities are predetermined before the characters even have a chance to be conceived.
What about a bisexual companion who isn't an LI? Not likely to happen if approximately 50% of your cast have to be bisexual by mandate to fill the LI quota.
That's really only if they feel the need to show each sexuality in each game. You could have a gay male character in one game, gay female in the next. And of course that's having them limit themselves to companions which really isn't necessary for this scenario. Important gay female NPC this game, gay female companion next game.
A bisexual companion who isn't an LI isn't likely even without the 4 bi LIs scenario.
Edit: Isn't not is. LOL
Retour en haut