12 réponses à ce sujet

[LPPrince]

Mike.

 

Mr. Laidlaw.

 

Do you know the ramifications of what you've just done

 

 

 

Mike Laidlaw's Clarification Tweet(Most in a DA game)- https://twitter.com/...590524741062657

[David Gaider]

Do you know the ramifications of what you've just done

 

SIgh.

 

There will be no keeping expectations in check now, I suppose.

[Allan Schumacher]

The statement wouldn't include SWTOR.  WHich is probably not that surprising because by virtue of being made in a different studio it's easy to overlook.  (I did myself).

[David Gaider]

See, I would feel a lot more reassured by that if I knew what he meant about 'particular group'. Does he mean every combination of race, gender and orientation has options, or does he only mean that no particular race is favoured? There could be four options for dwarves in total, but if three of them are female that's not much good to my Inquisitor.

 

By "particular group" I mean "in real life."

 

Worrying about the distribution between male and female players, and one of them feeling like content geared at them was an afterthought, I am fine with. Worrying about a distribution amongst sexualities, and making it so that gay or bisexual players don't feel they won't have choices, I am also fine with. Worrying about "players who like playing dwarves" or "players who like playing humans" or whatever other races, that I'm not as concerned about. Which is why I'm saying you will have options, but you may not have the same number of options depending on what race you select.

 

It's fine if someone doesn't like that idea. Some folks, we're quite aware, aren't happy that romances are being gated at all and would prefer to have all romances available to all PC's. I would suggest not panicking just yet, as not all romances are even race-gated and the options have not all suddenly dried up as someone might fear, but I suppose until and unless they learn otherwise they can justifiably choose to be pessimistic. Maybe we'll put up the chart (yes, there's actually a chart) at some point, and having said information will make you feel better before you play the game, but that's not really my decision.

[Allan Schumacher]

Depth in regards to story telling is a very general term. Usually when applied to an argument regarding a character or story arc, it's meant to describe when something added or used to create this piece of fiction grounds the character/story in a way that connects the player/reader/ watcher to the mythos in a very real and organic way.

'Depth' when I used it to describe the Inquisition romances was meant in this manner. It makes the characters more 'real', more relatable, and therefore makes them deeper and more well rounded examples of fictional characters (much unlike what we had to suffer through DA2 with).

Writing a character is easy, making that character feel alive is more difficult. A good character will feel like a real person. Regardless of their visual appearance, their presence should invoke a sense of individuality instead of just being a bland chess piece written in order to pander to the masses of romantic fan fiction writers.

 

When I read this post, however, it comes across as suggesting that bisexual people are less real.  While they may be less "relatable" I'm not sure if that is a compelling reason to not have bisexual content.

[Allan Schumacher]

I don't disagree.  (To be clear, I put "relatable" in quotation marks strictly from the standpoint of "this person is different than I am" and don't mean it in a disparaging sort of way).

 

On the topic of realism, the most unrealistic aspect of our romances is that your potential partners are so utterly and exceptionally limited.  I mean, in DAO there's at most 3 people interested in having a long term relationship with you, while in DA2 there's at most 4.  I can't decide that that cute shop clerk is fascinating and ask her out on a date.

 

As such, the reality is that our romances are always created under the exceptional unrealistic circumstances of "needing us to create them."

[Allan Schumacher]

Well, in my recent DAO run, I was able to hit on Bella in Redcliffe.  And that kiss she gave was rather a show-stopper for the inn 

 

But yes, while the world is by necessity a created structure and thus "not real" it is the desire to make it seem natural and "realistic" that is important.

 

That's where I run into roadblocks though.  Suggesting that meeting a small number of bisexual people is unrealistic is a road I'm not comfortable driving down.  Especially when I'm skeptical that people would leverage the realism argument if all the romances were heterosexual.

 

If bisexual companions (especially only 4, and especially since there's still non-bisexual companions - they just don't romance the player) make a world seem unnatural or less realistic, it may be on the player to utilize some introspection on why they feel that way, in my opinion.

[Allan Schumacher]

Talking to another BSNer on the Xbox One right now about this very subject, he brought up that he felt it odd that these bisexual companions were all the ones that would romance us, but the non-bisexual companions weren't interested.

 

Why is that odd?  Is there anything beyond "these are the experiences I'm most exposed to and therefore am most comfortable with?"

[Allan Schumacher]

I may have been that guy.

 

It wasn't entirely to do with the characters being bisexual, just that having even a little disparity based on gender avoids it looking as if the majority of the party is trying to get into your characters pants. Just another realism thing.

 

Again, I dislike the "realism" thing.  Unless you're equating "these people are bisexual and this many of them isn't realistic to me" at which point I contend: at which point is it the game developer's responsibility to be fair and accurate with representation, and at what point does the game player need to step back and challenge some of the assumptions they make about things.

 

 

 

 

I don't think that's what makes it "unrealistic".  I mean, it might seem unusual, but Thedas is a world where sexuality isn't considered a big deal.  It's the vague way it was implemented in DA2, where it felt like the character's sexuality was in some nebulous state until the player chooses whether to hit the heart icon or not.

 

That felt unrealistic.

 

Or is it that, on the surface level, the ability to confuse a bisexual person with a heterosexual or homosexual is an easy mistake to make?  If I see a bisexual in a monogamous relationship, it's not hard for me to assume that that person is heterosexual/homosexual based on their partner, even though my assumption is not the least bit correct.

 

It is not difficult for me to say that all 4 of the romance interests in Dragon Age 2 are bisexual.  From what I've learned talking with bisexuals on this forum (and elsewhere), it's not at all uncommon for them to be mistaken for something other than bisexual.  In fact, it's not uncommon for them to be told they aren't actually bisexual by an outside observer (I can only imagine how aggravating this must be).  Is there any chance you're making a similar mistake now based on the assumptions you have about bisexuality?

 

What did the characters in DA2 have to do, aside from openly state that they're bisexual?

[Allan Schumacher]

Really? It's the only shorthand for it I've seen, like ever. Is there another shorthand y'all used or did y'all just always full-term it?

 

I learned both the terms at the same time.  But until recently I was oblivious to the concept of asexuality as well.

[Allan Schumacher]

It's just weird to hear all this about LGBT rep when its just B with an admittedly bad rep of T in the last game.

 

Now though, we're seeing LGBT rep in full. Well, if Maevaris shows up, or someone else who's transgender. Glad she was done right, according to transgender individuals who commented on her. I have yet to hear/read anything negative about her that wasn't obvious hate for the sake of it.

 

The representation also applies to the player character.

 

If you have 4 romanceable characters, yes they are all bisexual, but the player character can be bisexual, straight, or gay.  And no matter which one they choose, they will still have choice.

 

In terms of other forms of representation we can still use non-romanceable characters for that representation too.

[Allan Schumacher]

Mae's confirmed not be showing up in this game, as she became a character too late to be implemented. However, the fans like her, the writers like her, and she's interesting. So I have high hopes for the next game, considering they're on a five-game contract or something (so I hear).

 

I think once upon a time Mike made a comment about 5 dragon ages or whatever, but we're not on an X game contract.  We can stop doing Dragon Age after DAI, or if we feel like we can keep doing interesting things and the franchise is successful, continue making more.

[Allan Schumacher]

Thread closed on account of it being bumped to repost the OP of a different thread.