Ce sujet est fermé
Ok no one of consequence wants Dorion..
Dude, even if you're just joking that's a little rude, don't you think? It'd be kind of weird if everyone wanted to romance the same characters, right? You're perfectly able to like Cullen (or whatever) without shitting on people that would rather romance another guy.
Thanks for that response, I think you actually phrased that very eloquently.
Then I ask - why do they apply the realism argument only to romances? I'd like to understand where this line is between realism and fantasy, so these kinds of arguments can hold more weight. As far as I can tell there is no line, it's more a squiggly mess.
Thank you for the praise. I pride myself on my writing ability, so your compliment means a lot to me.
As for your question, I think they apply the realism argument to romances because romances were the topic of discussion. It wasn't an off-topic or unrelated statement made by Cameron Lee; it was a comment on how they are approaching romances in their upcoming game. As for a line? I would say it is up to the content creators where that line is drawn, but if they did their job well, then the line won't be obvious at all. Bioware prefers to treat their dragons as very intelligent beasts, but beasts nonetheless. If you turn your gaze to the Lord of the Rings universe, you have talking dragons. It's all a matter of preference.
As for Dragon Age, every aspect of their game is based on some aspect of reality. Dragons move and behave like an amalgam of various real animals. Dwarves, elves, and qunari may all be different races, but they all have the same number of senses and feel the same emotions as real humans. Weapon designs may be different or ridiculous, but they are still based on real weapons like swords, axes, staves, and more. Even magic comes from having a connection to the dream realm (The Fade), which is a concept that exists in several cultures and most are familiar with it. Buildings may have strange architecture, but they still appear to follow the laws of physics. One of the reasons I like Dragon Age, is because it is far more realistic than most other fantasy settings.
Does it limit player choice? Yes. Is it more realistic? Yes. Like I said, it's a matter of preference that is ultimately decided by the content creators. Whether we like it or not, is up to us.
I definitely prefer this approach - as long as they're going 2/2/2 so that the Inquisitor gets an equal number of options whether they're straight or gay. Straight male, gay male and lesbian PCs would have exactly the same number of choices they had in DA2. (Straight female PCs got Sebastian as an extra option.) As a bonus, bisexual PCs would have a whopping six options that way.
The reason I prefer this approach is that it's the only way we're ever going to get gay companions who are also love interests.
(And we already know that it's unlikely they'll go the ME3 route and make both the gay romances NPCs. It seems like Cullen is an NPC romance, and if Cullen is gay in DAI I will eat my Inquisitor's helmet.)
Dude, even if you're just joking that's a little rude, don't you think? It'd be kind of weird if everyone wanted to romance the same characters, right? You're perfectly able to like Cullen (or whatever) without shitting on people that would rather romance another guy.
I really don't get what's so apparently wrong with Dorian.
Dude, even if you're just joking that's a little rude, don't you think? It'd be kind of weird if everyone wanted to romance the same characters, right? You're perfectly able to like Cullen (or whatever) without shitting on people that would rather romance another guy.
Preach 
I'll never understand why some people seem so excited at the prospect of Bioware punishing others by taking away content from them, whether it's because of their choice of sexual preference or their choice of player race.
There seems to be a misunderstanding that a lot of people have. "Realism" has nothing to do with magic, it has everything to do with the role the world portrays. When you've got a magical universe which pixies can turn people into unicorns, you've got to accept this universe because it exists and the world explains to us that it exists. A dragon's existence in the world of Thedas is realistic in the context of the universe, as does the use of magic and the Darkspawn and what say you.
However, sexuality in the Dragon Age has been portrayed in a very normal way. Women and men procreate, sexuality exists and gender expectations exist. To believe that everyone the player encounters has flexible sexuality which bends in the direction which the player fits destroys said world, the fact remains that some Thedosian people--just like real life--are gay, straight and bisexual.
To mock the "realism" shows ignorance of what someone means when talking about realism and serves little purpose.
I disagree. Those grounding their arguments in "realism" are attempting to give a mantle of superiority to their views by appealing to the expectations we have from the real world, much like those who were upset at Cassandra's iron gate-smashing. Those who see no problem with this lack of "reality," or even find entertainment in it, are merely employing the obvious counter-argument- that this game is not necessarily going to reflect "realism" and that therefore what they find "fun" is just as legitimate.
You and those like you have enjoyment decreased when the fantasy world you adventure in diverges from certain norms you expect- realistic physics when magic isn't involved and sexuality, just as examples. Other people find enjoyment increased by those same divergences. The two sides are simply going to disagree, but neither side is "right."
The attacks on realism are therefore not from ignorance, but knowledge of what underlays the desire for that realism.
This thread strikes me as a case of "Be careful what you wish for." For literally years, fans have been screaming about the inherent flaws of ambiguous sexuality or outright bisexuality, and they got what they wanted. Now folks are complaining about it.
Personally, I'm not worried. Even in BG2 where straight females got precisely 1 LI and gay/lesbian gamers got none, I was able to find someone to love. (I'm one of the 7 people on Earth who actually liked Anomen). I will find someone to love in DAI as well. Possibly more than one!
Why is that so hard to understand? Some people just CAN'T play other than their own gender. And i don't play the Inquisitor like i'm her. I play her because she's a woman and i'm more comfortable with this gender?
These people clearly miss out on many games then starring set protagonists. Sucks to be them especially if they only play female characters due to the lack of female protagonists but "only male" players would also miss out on great games such as the recent Tomb Raider.
The reason I prefer this approach is that it's the only way we're ever going to get gay companions who are also love interests.
Yeah, that's why I like that option, too. I mean, I'm happy to see an acknowledgement that bi people like me exist, but it kinda sucks that we've never had an exclusively gay LI in Dragon Age.
I really don't get what's so apparently wrong with Dorian.
I just happen to firmly believe that mustaches are the root of all evil. I'll probably get over it if he's a romance that's available to males.
Probably. >_>.
(I'm one of the 7 people on Earth who actually liked Anomen).
We should track down the other five and form a club!
What, and the male protagonist games are all wonderful gems? Please, 90% of anything is garbage, that's a known law. And it doesn't discriminate based on gender.
My point was a great deal of those games were for children. Young children.
For full rage I would wait till we know at least who is who but you can bet that the npcs are going to be bi. I just do not see it any other way to be at least balanced. Worst case scenario the npcs are gay, best care scenario they are straight.
For me character sexualities never impact the immersion factor. They DO impact the fun factor.
Immersion for me is impacted by glitches, frame rate drop, loading screens, that sort of thing. I just still don't believe that a game like Dragon Age should ever do x,y or z because it happens to be more realistic on planet Earth.
I think an advantage of having sexualities is that it also allows us to be more representative of those personalities outside of exclusive romance content.
I understand this will be very disappointing for those that had their heart set on romancing specific people, and that this might not be possible, so I realize that it doesn't come without costs.
DA:O didn't have a good story or gameplay, and it remains to be seen if DA:I will either.
And I can buy a million other games with good stories and gameplay, if that's all I want.
Fine. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
For full rage I would wait till we know at least who is who but you can bet that the npcs are going to be bi. I just do not see it any other way to be at least balanced. Worst case scenario the npcs are gay, best care scenario they are straight.
That's not best case for straight people.
I'll never understand why some people seem so excited at the prospect of Bioware punishing others by taking away content from them, whether it's because of their choice of sexual preference or their choice of player race.
Actually by making content exclusive, Bioware is once again encouraging replayability. It only sucks for the OCD crowd who literally play the same game each time making the same choices in terms of story-choices, what class they pick and what gender they play as.
Honestly I was kind of hoping for 2/2/2 but some of the responses and people in this thread are really making me regret that stance as the last thing I want is to have something in common with the people in this thread cheering that their precious "realism" is included in this game. If they're doing realism they should be going all the way. I wanted the 2/2/2 split for representation but that doesn't seem a concern for most people rejoicing in this thread...
If it's not 2/2/2 or 2/2/1 and is instead 2/2 for straight and bi then I will be pretty judgmental about this whole business. If the NPC romances are the gay/bi ones, I will probably give up on finding equality in romances in BW games, especially after ME3. Playersexualitiy was not equality and was certainly problematic, but at least it gave people a choice.
I play videogames to escape reality, I don't particularly want to face the same straight dominated world that I do in everyday life in something I do for fun. Though I guess I should avoid threads like these then...
I'm out of likes but I really like this. I agree with you. I hope we get a fair 2/2/2 split.
Fine. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Amen!
http://www.ausgamers...ntation-bioware
From article:
Thoughts? Personally, I cool with this. It gives me more incentive to play different characters and classes. I will never understand why some people refuse to play anything other that their gender choice. You AREN'T the Inqusitior, you're just playing as him/her.
I had a feeling it would not be like DA2 and I am predicting it now
1) Qunari Inquisitor will be restricted to Iron Bull
2) Varric will be for Dwarf Inquistors
3) Possibly one male and one female will be straight only
4) The rest will be Bi
How dare you.
omg
Actually by making content exclusive, Bioware is once again encouraging replayability. It only sucks for the OCD crowd who literally play the same game each time making the same choices in terms of story-choices, what class they pick and what gender they play as.
So as long as you get what you want by how you play, who cares what others want by how they play, eh?
I had a feeling it would not be like DA2 and I am predicting it now
1) Qunari Inquisitor will be restricted to Iron Bull
Please, please, let us take steps further away from the bullshit that was BG2's racially restricted romances.
Retour en haut
