12496 réponses à ce sujet

[jncicesp]

I think people also count Quality when they think whats fair and thats all Really subjective. If they had a really in depth non companion LI lots of people would call it unfair if someone else had an option for a companion whos just as in depth or important to the story. 

Even in games Ive played where I am given a choice it's always(except in me3 cause Liara wins) the one that is normally just locked from my gender.

 

In DA2 I did spend half of my first playtrough assuming I could romance Aveline and went out of my way to not start any romance with anyone else. I wouldn't call it unfair that she was the only one who did Interest me and I couldn't romance her. If she was a romance option for male characters only I would think its unfair.. which is what I thought until I looked it up online

[daveliam]

I don't see Merrill being even remotely relevant to DAII plot. To me, she is the character, most removed from DAII story. Hell, even half-made Sebastian had bigger impact, than her.

 

Sorry, let me clarify.  While she's not related to the two main plot lines (i.e. Qunari invasion and Mage/Templar Rebellion), she has a separate mandatory questline in Act 1, which is directly related to the Flemeth story in the prologue.  It's certainly not as closely related as Anders and Isabela, but it's way more related than Fenris, who is optional and you don't have to do any of his quests to progress.

[WildOrchid]

As far as 'main romance' vs. non-main (or plot-important vs. not), it's not a huge sticking point for me as far as this discussion is concerned.  Comparing Leliana and Morrigan's romance from DA:O, my issue isn't that Morrigan is more plot-central it's mainly that Leliana had less content in general and literally no banter existed for the f/f Leliana/Warden romance.

 

 

Yup. This is what a 'main romance' is. A romance that is tied to the story. Leliana pretty much was a "side" character, and so was Zevran.

Either make all the romances plot central or don't make them at all and i really dislike it when the straight romances seem to have more content and banter and etc.

Hopefully in DAI's case there won't be any romance that has more content than other romances.

[renfrees]

Sorry, let me clarify.  While she's not related to the two main plot lines (i.e. Qunari invasion and Mage/Templar Rebellion), she has a separate mandatory questline in Act 1, which is directly related to the Flemeth story in the prologue.  It's certainly not as closely related as Anders and Isabela, but it's way more related than Fenris, who is optional and you don't have to do any of his quests to progress.

Just because she has a mandatory recruitment makes her relevant to DAII plot... how? Or let me rephrase - how is releasing Flemeth relevant to DAII plot? It might (or mostly likely - will) be relevant to future installments, but to the game you currently playing? Other than that, the Dalish plot is totally collateral, with the same relevance as the Bone Pit quests.

[daveliam]

Just because she has a mandatory recruitment makes her relevant to DAII plot... how? Or let me rephrase - how is releasing Flemeth relevant to DAII plot? It might (or mostly likely - will) be relevant to future installments, but to the game you currently playing? Other than that, the Dalish plot is totally collateral, with the same relevance as the Bone Pit quests.

 

There is a mandatory story arch where a mage explores the use of blood magic and demon possession for personal gain.  In a story where the main plot relates to a war between mages and templars, who don't trust mages because they think that they will all turn to blood magic.  Just because her blood magic isn't used in front of Meredith, doesn't mean that the theme behind her story doesn't relate to the main plot line about mages.  Fenris' storyline is also tangentially related, but, again, you don't even need to recruit him.

[jncicesp]

Just because she has a mandatory recruitment makes her relevant to DAII plot... how? Or let me rephrase - how is releasing Flemeth relevant to DAII plot? It might (or mostly likely - will) be relevant to future installments, but to the game you currently playing? Other than that, the Dalish plot is totally collateral, with the same relevance as the Bone Pit quests.

At least it's a lot of story Just for her?...thats not the same but its at least something maybe to make up for her lesser plot involvement, she has two gifts which is more than Anders, she has her shrine talking moment in act 2 or 3.. other companions comment on her killing the Keeper, any elf thing that comes up she usually speaks up.

[Darth Krytie]

--snip--

 

I think it'd be a definite improvement to the game as a whole if the idea of 'set sexualities' went beyond the small pool of romances and expanded to include all the companions altogether and important or at least named NPCs. (As in have representation of more than just 'presumed straight' in the pool of characters you interact with...)

 

I think sometimes when you hear 'we're going to set sexualities' as opposed to 'all bi', it translates to 'fewer cases of representation' even if it's not true or fair. But a lot of that comes from nearly all representation being from the romances. If they actually had more representation outside of romances, perhaps there wouldn't be as much of a resistance to it.

 

I know that I wasn't opposed to the theory of how the ME3 romances were to play out, but the implementation could have used a bit of work.

 

Though, on the notion of fairness. I do agree that what's fair to one person isn't necessarily what another considers fair. And if we're all being honest, most of us would consider 'I'm upset that I'm gated from X' = 'this is unfair'.

 

I do think as long as there's a reasonable attempt to provide options to everyone. You might not always like those options, but just HAVING options is a good thing. Unfair to me is not having options at all.

 

 

 

On the topic of 'main romances', I do think that what tends to be perceived as a main romance, are ones that are tied to the plot and have more romantic scenes.

 

In ME3, Garrus is one of the first squaddies you pick up, has at least a romantic line in all his little cutscenes, even has a few extra lines in the DLC on top of the "romance" scenes as opposed to say...Steve or Samantha, who basically get the romance scenes, and little else.

 

In DA:O, Morrigan and Alistair had more content simply because your Warden could see them again after Origins was over. You got some semblance of closure with Morrigan in Witch Hunt, and depending on your choices, could at least see Alistair in Awakening. Plus, both of them were more central to the plot than either Leliana and Zevran were.

 

In DA:2, I think they did a better job of not having a "main" romance. Isabela, Anders, and Fenris were all fairly equal in terms of importance. (Merrill really was divorced from most of the plot after the quest of retrieving her.) And the main companions seemed to be Varric and Aveline--as they got most of the bonus cut-scenes.

 

Now, it seems the big thing is in terms of how to make a romance not feel 'inferior' depends on how soon you can recruit them. If you get them near the tail-end of the game, they're going to feel tacked on. If you only get to take them with you (if you can take them with you at all), when the game's mostly done...it's gonna feel inferior to the people who get their romance first thing. (This is one of the best reasons why I hope Cassandra is bi and can be in love with my Inquisitor).

 

And to make the NPC romances not feel as 'lesser' than the companion ones, hopefully get them really early into the game and have more than just the same, repeating ambient dialogue after you get your one or two romance dialogues.

 

tl;dr I think so long as people don't have to wait way too long to get their options, the issue of unfairness will be minimized. As well as having the NPC romances as balanced with the companion ones as much as possible.

[renfrees]

There is a mandatory story arch where a mage explores the use of blood magic and demon possession for personal gain.  In a story where the main plot relates to a war between mages and templars, who don't trust mages because they think that they will all turn to blood magic.  Just because her blood magic isn't used in front of Meredith, doesn't mean that the theme behind her story doesn't relate to the main plot line about mages.  Fenris' storyline is also tangentially related, but, again, you don't even need to recruit him.

Eh, but she hasn't used blood magic for personal gain. And her use of blood magic is what - good, bad? It depends on your views, really. If you want to look that way, I'd suggest you take your attention towards Quentin. That one story explains to me more about personal gains, than whole of Merrill's storyline. If you want to look towards possession - well, Anders is here as a way more striking example.

[Ianamus]

Yup. This is what a 'main romance' is. A romance that is tied to the story. Leliana pretty much was a "side" character, and so was Zevran.

Either make all the romances plot central or don't make them at all and i really dislike it when the straight romances seem to have more content and banter and etc.

Hopefully in DAI's case there won't be any romance that has more content than other romances.

 

If we are getting 6 LI's making every single one of them just as relevant to the main plot will be incredibly difficult. 

 

I appreciate that all companions have to be different, and I would rather the developers didn't have a conversation that went "This companion can't be a romance because they aren't plot relevant enough" or "No, we can't tie Cassandra into the main questline as much because she's an LI"

 

There is more to the characters than their romance arc, though many here seem to forget that, and the story the developers want to tell with that character, whether relevant to the main storyline or not, is more import than making every single character who is an LI have the same amount of impact on the main plot. 

 

If they feel that the quirky side character who is completely optional would make a better LI than one of the "main players" I'm not going to begrudge them making that character a romance option. 

[Ianamus]

I think it'd be a definite improvement to the game as a whole if the idea of 'set sexualities' went beyond the small pool of romances and expanded to include all the companions altogether and important or at least named NPCs. (As in have representation of more than just 'presumed straight' in the pool of characters you interact with...)

 

I think sometimes when you hear 'we're going to set sexualities' as opposed to 'all bi', it translates to 'fewer cases of representation' even if it's not true or fair. But a lot of that comes from nearly all representation being from the romances. If they actually had more representation outside of romances, perhaps there wouldn't be as much of a resistance to it.

 

The original statement by Bioware only said "Characters in Inquisition will be having set sexualities and express them more" or something to that extent. It didn't say anything about the companions or the romance options specifically, that was all assumption on behalf of the forum.

[WildOrchid]

If we are getting 6 LI's making every single one of them just as relevant to the main plot will be incredibly difficult. 

 

If that's the case, then the only fair would be the "main" ones being bi.

[azarhal]

Just to be clear, when I read this I see that you also would prefer that we do not have symmetry for class specializations, talent trees, class/race quests, class/race reactivity, or even class specific conflict resolution?

 

Just to be clear, when I'm talking about symmetry not being realistic, I'm talking about the popular 2/2/2 distribution with 2 NPCs being the same orientation, the 2 elves the same orientation and the 2 human companions the same orientation.

 

If you were talking about symmetry in term of occurrence, I don't care for even distribution as long as everyone get choices here and there. I guess I got a ratio of what is acceptable though. For example, having 1 choice for a class, but 3 for the others isn't right in my mind, but having 2 choices for two classes and 4 for the other one I'm fine with.

 

Also, I see romance, quests and class/race reactivity and even spec to fall into a different category than talent trees which means I view them with a different perspective. Talent trees are segregated from the game settings and lore, while the romance, quests and class/race aren't to me.

 

Although, I have no problem if a class has more talent trees or talents, this is mostly because I think that "rogue" and "mage" are more utility classes and warrior should be "low maintenance" like in the good old D&D.  I dislike the MMO concept of mirrored classes.

 

As for the rest, I don't want symmetry in a setting like DA with well established racial tensions and social tensions. The lore should be reflected in the game where it is appropriate and if this mean having a super hard time as an non-mage in Tevinter I'm all for it.

[Sherbet Lemon]

In DA:O, Morrigan and Alistair had more content simply because your Warden could see them again after Origins was over. You got some semblance of closure with Morrigan in Witch Hunt, and depending on your choices, could at least see Alistair in Awakening. Plus, both of them were more central to the plot than either Leliana and Zevran were.

 

 

I agree.  I get why people hate the idea of main romances or the notion that romances are central to the plot, but that doesn't change how people interpret them.  The intent may have been different when created, but I would argue that there is a reason why people take on that interpretation.

 

In my experience, the DR raised the stakes dependent upon who was romanced.  Two of  wardens romanced both Alistair and Leliana as well as receiving the "sister/friendship" dialogue with Morrigan which is one of my favorite parts of the game.  When my Warden romanced Alistair, I would say that the stakes felt much higher.  It was a much more difficult choice to turn her down because my warden was condemning either herself or the person she loved to death, to getting their soul destroyed.  When one of my other Wardens romanced Leliana, my sense of urgency or dread was not the same.  It's not that my Warden didn't care about Alistair as a friend because she did; it just didn't feel as dire and heart wrenching.  Alistair took the final blow and while my Warden was sad for the loss of her friend and the loss of her king, she carried on.  The Warden who lost her love did the same, but the impact of that decision was felt much more readily.

 

The argument could be made for the battle against the Arishok.  My Hawkes who romanced Isabela felt a much more personal reason to protect her than my Hawkes who didn't.  It's not that she didn't care about their friendship, but the impact was not similar.

 

Ack sorry for rambling now.

[Ianamus]

If that's the case, then the only fair would be the "main" ones being bi.

 

I don't think having a less plot relevant LI is in any way less "fair", in all honesty. And I don't understand the obsession that all romance options have to be completely uniform in all regards to be "fair". They are different characters with different stories and different romance arcs. Obviously some will be more tied to the plot than others. 

 

I don't generally like the argument, but if someone wants a game where all romance options are completely 100% equal in terms of length, scope and relevancy to the story then they should play a romance-based visual novel, where the romances themselves are the plot.

[jncicesp]

I don't think having a less plot relevant LI is in any way less "fair", in all honesty. And I don't understand the obsession that all romance options have to be completely uniform in all regards to be "fair". They are different characters with different stories and different romance arcs. Obviously some will be more tied to the plot than others. 

 

I don't generally like the argument, but if someone wants a game where all romance options are completely 100% equal in terms of length, scope and relevancy to the story then they should play a romance-based visual novel, where the romances themselves are the plot.

Well odds are you're going to be interested in the main plot a lot more than just someones personal story, that doesn't make it less but Idk if people should be pleased with being told to care about a personal story or side story just because its the only thing that makes a certain character interesting.

 

I actually looked cause people kept bringing up that you'd like them if you like romance a lot in games and its actually a little hard to find a romance visual nove that would suit my apparent only interest...being female main character and female love interest.

idk if I looked all to well though, just saying i checked a little.

Even then its not the same at all as a story I go out out of my way to play and want action, adventure and romance all in it. meaning dragon age is a game I like so much i'd play them even without romances, but they're there so.

Modifié par jncicesp, 12 mai 2014 - 03:07 .

[Sherbet Lemon]

I don't think having a less plot relevant LI is in any way less "fair", in all honesty. And I don't understand the obsession that all romance options have to be completely uniform in all regards to be "fair". They are different characters with different stories and different romance arcs. Obviously some will be more tied to the plot than others. 

 

 

The point is that traditionally these "arc" have been gated by gender (and by proxy heterosexuality) and those of who like to play s/s are left out of the experience. Because Anders and Isabela were open to gay and lesbian content, players were able to experience that same sense of impact and personal involvement that straight players have had in the past (versus Morrigan and Alistair). This is where fairness comes into play and speaks to exclusion that minorities have felt when it comes to media.

[Ianamus]

The point is that traditionally these "arc" have been gated by gender (and by proxy heterosexuality) and those of who like to play s/s are left out of the experience. Because Anders and Isabela were open to gay and lesbian content, players were able to experience that same sense of impact and personal involvement that straight players have had in the past (versus Morrigan and Alistair). This is where fairness comes into play and speaks to exclusion that minorities have felt when it comes to media.

 

Looking at the last 5 bioware games:

 

Mass Effect 1: 

• Most plot relevant LI(s): Liara
• Availability: both genders

Dragon Age Origins:

• Most plot relevant LI(s): Alistair and Morrigan
• Availability: only opposite gender

Mass Effect 2:

• Most plot relevant LI(s): Miranda
• Availability: only opposite gender

Dragon Age 2:

• Most plot relevant LI(s): Anders
• Availability: both genders

Mass Effect 3:

• Most plot relevant LI(s): Liara
• Availability: both genders

 

It actually seems pretty even with regards to who has access to the most plot relevant companions. 

[LiaraShepard]

Looking at the last 5 bioware games:

 

Mass Effect 1: 

• Most plot relevant LI(s): Liara
• Availability: both genders

Dragon Age Origins:

• Most plot relevant LI(s): Alistair and Morrigan
• Availability: only opposite gender

Mass Effect 2:

• Most plot relevant LI(s): Miranda
• Availability: only opposite gender

Dragon Age 2:

• Most plot relevant LI(s): Anders
• Availability: both genders

Mass Effect 3:

• Most plot relevant LI(s): Liara
• Availability: both genders

 

It actually seems pretty even with regards to who has access to the most plot relevant companions. 

 

as for Liara... With "both genders" you mean straight men and lesbian women, don't you? What's with gays and straight femals?

 

And I see no plot relevant character who's only available to the same gender.

[Rowe]

The point is that traditionally these "arc" have been gated by gender (and by proxy heterosexuality) and those of who like to play s/s are left out of the experience. Because Anders and Isabela were open to gay and lesbian content, players were able to experience that same sense of impact and personal involvement that straight players have had in the past (versus Morrigan and Alistair). This is where fairness comes into play and speaks to exclusion that minorities have felt when it comes to media.

 

Agreed. It makes it feel like the s/s content is an afterthought that is treated as less important. It's not about "fairness" so much as it is about "inclusion." If there's no reason to exclude certain players, then why do it?

[WildOrchid]

 

And I see no plot relevant character who's only available to the same gender.

 

Boom.

Also Liara was only available to straight dudes and gay women.. but keep in mind that, as much as i LOVE asari, they were designed for male titilation.

[Ianamus]

 

Also Liara was only available to straight dudes and gay women.. but keep in mind that, as much as i LOVE asari, they were designed for male titilation.

 

And what exactly is the difference between being designed to titillate straight or bisexual men and being designed to titillate bisexual or lesbian women? 

 

I'm pretty sure they were simply designed to be attractive to anyone who considers females attractive, not to straight men specifically. 

[Ianamus]

 

 

Also Liara was only available to straight dudes and gay women.. but keep in mind that, as much as i LOVE asari, they were designed for male titilation.

 

And what exactly is the difference between being designed to titillate straight or bisexual men and being designed to titillate bisexual or lesbian women? 

 

I'm pretty sure they were simply designed to be attractive to anyone who considers females attractive, not to straight men specifically. 

 

 

 

 

And I see no plot relevant character who's only available to the same gender.

 

 

Boom.

 

Um... so you've been complaining about set sexualities in Inquisition and saying that everyone should be bisexual, and then point out in a negative manner that no "plot relevant" LI has been available only to the same gender?

 

 

Boom.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Yup. This is what a 'main romance' is. A romance that is tied to the story. Leliana pretty much was a "side" character, and so was Zevran.

Either make all the romances plot central or don't make them at all and i really dislike it when the straight romances seem to have more content and banter and etc.

Hopefully in DAI's case there won't be any romance that has more content than other romances.

The fact that certain romance options have more content than others almost always stems from them being plot-central (or, more generally, more than just a side-character). Even from a writer's perspective, plot-central characters in general are given more focus and work (because they have to be), so they tend to end up with deeper romance content than others. Lately, this has been especially apparent in BioWare games, and I could name several examples across the Mass Effect and Dragon Age games right off the bat.

 

Whether or not it's fair is a whole other can of forms, though. As has already been stated, people will unfailingly find unfairness when it comes to such a multifaceted aspect of a game--almost all the time. Hell, even DA2's 'all-bi' romances were called unfair, despite them being as close to fair as you could possibly get given the fact that they were available to everyone no matter the demographic.

 

I have a few thoughts regarding the distribution of romances in DA:I, but my more cynical side tells me it will be closer to ME3's system, which would be a bummer.

[WildOrchid]

 

 

Um... so you've been complaining about set sexualities in Inquisition and saying that everyone should be bisexual, and then point out in a negative manner that no "plot relevant" LI has been available only to the same gender?

 

 

Boom?

 

 

Set sexualities have already been decided in the game and if it has to be this way, then yes i want gay characters to be plot relevant.

If everyone was bi, i wouldn't have any problem.