15 réponses à ce sujet

[OrayMoor]

I am really concernd about the romance option for Straight female inquisitor.

 

This is what happen to femshep in the ME2&3:

In ME2 Swoman got 3 option, lets say that 33% romanced Garrus, 33% Thane and 33% Jacob. Then they got to ME3. You could only romance garrus if you have romanced him in ME2, so 66% of woman are locked out of Garrus. Then Thane dies, and you can chose to start a romance with Kaiden or die alon. Than Jacob (the basterd) cheats on you with Hawke and his mission was one of the last, by that time you can't start a romance with anybody and your forced to die alon. So in ME3 Sfemale got only 1.33 romance option, Lfemale got 2 (and Samantha was awesome, the Sguys had defently something to be jaluse of, she saves the friking world with a touth brush!!!XD) Gguys got 2 and Sguys got 5. Sfemshep got screwed.

 

In DA2 we basicly got two broody guys (a terorist and an ex slave) and we also always seem to get the romance that ends in death. I'm getting really sick and tierd of those two.

 

I personaly have no intrest what so ever in the Iron bull. I don't mean to offend, he seems like a really cool character. Its just that no self respecting woman would want to date a guy that beds everything that moves.

 

So I want to know if there are others in this forum that have the same worrys as me? And what kind of romances would you want to see in DAI and future Bioware games?

 

In this post we mean no offence to anybody. I congratulat gay guys for geting Dorian he seems like a really cool character, and I am happy that you are finally getting representation. I'm just worrid about the option I will get in DAI, and I would like to disscuss it with my fellow strait woman character planner without being harrased. Thank you for your understanding.

 

I know I have speling mistakes, English is my thierd launguge. So I appologies.

 

When your talking about Sfemale romances, you can refer to which ever game you want : )

[Allan Schumacher]

I disagree with the notion that we cater towards gay men.  I mean, until DAO did we even have a romance for gay men?

 

That said, I don't disagree that we could do better by women (i.e. Mass Effect 3).  The problem I have though is that when talking about romance content, there seems to be a good number of straight females that are excited about their romance prospects as well.  So I have conflicting perspectives that, based on what has been released so far, about whether or not we're being appreciative towards women in this game and their potential romance partners.

[Allan Schumacher]

You cater to MEN, gay and straight was my point.

 

Still don't agree... gay men have consistently been a part of the demographic that we have overlooked, especially in the realm of romances.  Straight men?  Absolutely we cater towards them.  But you also specifically called out that we now cater towards gay men. I have to ask what makes you think that we now cater towards gay men.

[Allan Schumacher]

Oddly enough, this very topic came up on another forum not to long ago in regards to the Dorian character. Most feel that as gay men, since that was the demographic the topic was aimed towards, Bioware just does a poor job of implementing gay characters altogether. The characters generally tend to be perceived as cartoonish, gay for the sake of being gay, and outright demeaning in the portrayal of gay men. 

 

Any examples in particular?  I can't speak on behalf of gay men, though my experiences are not really in alignment with yours.  I've seen a variety, but I don't usually see gay men complain about a character that is "gay for the sake of being gay" in our games (especially regarding gay men, since they have been so few and far between).

[Allan Schumacher]

I think some peoples problems are the feeling that with both Dorian and Sera BW is doing the proverbial "dangling the carrot on the stick"Both characters seem to have been designed at least physically to be attractive to the opposite sex,the fact that their sexuality was not confirmed straight away but allowed to "stew" and percolate threw the fanbase meant that by the time they were confirmed as gay I doubt any BW staff could say they were unaware of the straight community wanting to romance these characters.

 

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that there's a significant overlap between "attractive to the opposite sex" and "attractive to the same sex."  Some feel we did the same for Cassandra in that she is "clearly bisexual" and whatnot.  Maybe Cassandra is just, in general, reasonably attractive to a lot of men and women?

 

I suspect there's a lot of the straight community that wants to romance any of the characters.  Same goes for the gay community.

[Allan Schumacher]

For Dorian, it was said that as a character he seemed to have been created for the sake of being fully gay. I think the exact wording of the post went something like Bioware created Dorian less to have a functional character as much as a fully gay character that exists just to have a character that is fully gay. The arrogance (being suave), as it was perceived of Dorian, doesn't make him an interesting character due to the fact that his sexuality seems to be more attuned towards being gay instead of a character in a world that is gay. Or something along those lines.

 

A few other posts mentioned how the character is a Mage and they didn't like the correlation between being a mage while also being fully gay character, and they cited their perception of Gaiders writing allegory. As well as some talk about how the character orientations are locked.  

 

That's about all I can remember. 

 

In my experience the people that feel that Dorian is "gay just for the sake of being gay" are people that can rationalize that excuse for any gay character's existence.  I'm sure there are some gay men that feel Dorian is ostensibly offensive.  I think it's a bit early to say so, however.  It's still a perspective that I'm not too familiar with seeing a gay man say, however.

 

Dorian is a character in a world that is gay, and that actually provides some level of intrigue given his nature as a Tevinter Mage.

[Allan Schumacher]

They had romances since BG2.  *shrugs*  If they took it out... I may still play for character building, I dont play Bioware games to hack and slash level up.   I'd go with Diablo or a Dungeon Hack game instead. Which actually makes me think of a couple that would fit that bill, too many out there that just... meh ....It would end up like most other games already on market. I find Bioware unique cause they really get into character building better than others I seen that tried. Where *your* choice/decisions and such change improve or worsen a character's attitudes.

 

If we didn't have romances the content would most likely be replaced with other companion focused writing, since on the whole we recognize that our companions are a big draw for our games.

[Allan Schumacher]

I suppose I just don't really enjoy that type of power fantasy. I prefer the "the hero has the authority/reason/opportunity to change significant parts of the world" aspect. As if building the world you think would be best could be the reward of killing X enemies and engaging in dialogue with everyone you met.

I just think the stories that could be told about how the world deals with large scale changes is much more interesting than having computer characters tell "me" they love "me."

 

 

You can find varied responses to me asking the forum here:

http://forum.bioware...2#entry16381286

[Allan Schumacher]

I quickly read about ten pages of responses. Pretty much exactly what I would expect - a large majority of responses saying they wouldn't buy such a game or that the romance content is the sole or number one reason they play the games. And the same responses of not playing/buying/enjoying the game even when you clarified the content would likely be replaced with more/deeper companion interaction, just not romance.

It seemed not many of those people found the stories told in ME and DA (the universes built, the skill in investing players in the characters and events that occur, the difficutly of choices that are presented in morally grey lights) are things that Bioware does well or better than anyone else. Just the romance.

 

I saw about 10 pages that explained that people like it for the emotional connection it provides, as well as how it's a form of expression that they really enjoy, especially in terms of LGBTQ expression.

 

On some level you have to learn to read between the lines.  I do not agree that people stuck to their perspectives as the discussion went on though.  There's an important thing to realize with most fans: they often ask for things they are familiar with.  If you suggest taking that away, even with an explanation (and mine was hardly thorough), often it's the experience that is required in order to convince people.  It's part of the challenges with a thought experiment.

 

If we just made a dating game without the story, I'm sure we'd lose a lot of those people too (some mentioned that when critiquing the way I framed my question).  So I disagree that it's "just the romance."

 

 

It happens with most fans I'd say, regardless of which game aspects they like.  Imagine that BioWare comes up to Fast Jimmy and suggests "Hey Jimmy, this aspect of our games that you consider great.  We're going to change it.  Just imagine it replaced with something else that's similar that you'll probably like."  Have you ever been burned by BioWare moving in a direction that we felt was an improvement, only for it to mean that the product is less enjoyable for you?

 

 

In the end what I ended up seeing was several pages of people talking about what it is about the romances that they really value and feel adds to the game.  Particularly because, in the views of many, it's uniquely attributable to our games.

[Allan Schumacher]

They are in the group along with males in general that are now promoted and catered to/considered by Bioware for marketing.  For example, where was the big hullaballoo in the "news" over Sera's lesbian character?  News stories and interviews, tweeting, while not press releases show up when I look for Dragon Age Inquisition "news".  No female developer at Bioware comes out and interviews on how happy she is to have strong women like Flemeth or how Bioware rejects the notion that they must cater to straight male gamers because women are a huge part of the market...we're simply not discussed.

I'm certainly biased, but what do you mean by "hullaballoo" because there was no shortage of controversy on the forums with respect to Sera being a lesbian. I assume you're referring to the lack of general media buzz that came as a result (which I, admittedly, have less visibility into especially with respect to our own game).

Some stuff that trips me up though is that I don't feel like we're not discussing women. For example:
Dozens of retweets for the "CupcakeQuisition" (including me encouraging users of this thread to let media outlets know there was some good news regarding women representation in gaming rather than just the bad out of E3). Which The Escapist actually did report on. Link. It's certainly been something I have been invested in, and have tried to provide a space free as well as leverage my influence as "BioWare developer" when tweeting about it and retweeting about it. The initiative started because we made a trailer featuring the woman Inquisitor, as well as other things such as playing as a female in some of our E3 videos, gender neutral box art, and so forth. Aaryn tweeted that we did a female trailer because it matters too.

Though it was exceptionally disheartening that only The Escapist responded. I think one of the posters got a response from one place that was simply "Yeah we saw that at E3. Pretty cool." So I can definitely agree that there's huge issues with male default in society, especially accented because happy news often isn't reported.

We've done a brief video interview with Alix Wilton Regan (one of the two voices used for the Female Inquisitor) which can be found here. None of the other voice actors for the Inquisitor have been interviewed yet.

Is it more that you'd still like to see more? Because your first posts seemed to be more directed towards the specific romance choices available to you, but it seems you have moved towards a different picture now? (Which is fine, I'm just trying to frame the discussion in my mind to better understand it).

 

So in the default which is always a "male" world, there is now the gay male gamer's story being told in the press, etc.

I agree that the press proliferated Dorian like crazy, and I'm not sure why Sera wasn't also proliferated to the same extent. I suppose David could have not made a comment towards Dorian being gay. Perhaps we should have mentioned that Sera was a lesbian in her interview rather than confirmed via twitter to give it more visibility. What solutions would you suggest for remedying this, because I'll admit I struggle to see the distinction between where BioWare's responsibility is and where the news outlets reporting on news is? I think, as a society, male homosexuality as seen as more "outrageous" than female homosexuality, but that may be my privilege speaking.

I think there's a degree of intersectionality here that I'll admit, I don't fully understand and lack the experience to recognize. So if you can help out, please do.

[Allan Schumacher]

I feel Mass Effect'd again.

 

 

So reading the rest of the posts, I can definitely understand the concerns regarding Mass Effect 3.  We have more romance reveals undoubtedly happening at some point.  Right now there are two confirmed romance for a heterosexual woman (Iron Bull and Cullen).  Two confirmed romances for a lesbian woman (Sera and Josephine).

 

I can understand if Iron Bull and Cullen are not interesting for you.  Though at the same time, for any particular game, there's going to be some people that do not find any of the romances interesting, unfortunately.  So I'll need help unveiling what is bad luck, and what is a greater reflection of systemic issues perpetuating themselves.  It seems better than ME3 to me, but it doesn't to you.

[Allan Schumacher]

I'll point out that I said "responses that say X." Because that's exactly (word for word, in many cases) what the responses read. Many (I'd wager a majority, especially starting out) of the statements were exactly "I wouldn't buy it."

 

Yes well, if I took responses always to what they say word for word, I don't think I'd be doing a good job.  Otherwise when someone says BioWare is lazy, they literally mean we don't work hard as opposed to they mean the thing they are critiquing doesn't look as well as they'd prefer.  Or that when we don't listen, they actually mean that we're oblivious to what they say (despite the fact they're talking directly to me or someone else) when they really mean to say that they feel the direction we're moving in is not in alignment , or that they actually feel our writers are incompetent because they often have to have characters cut.

 

As for the quotes, lets look at the first posts (bold emphasises are mine):

 

"I might not buy the game to be honest"

"I'd be really unhappy. I actually don't know if I'd still buy it."

"Wouldn't bother me at all"

"Romances are what makes Bio games excellent.... Without romances Bio games would be much poorer." (I can't discern how it affects their willingness to purchase, but I'll take it as a negative)

"It wouldn't bother me either."

"I'd be put out, but it wouldn't stop me from buying the game."

"Personally, I don't care either way. I can play with or without romances."

"Well, romance, specifically same-sex romance, is what makes me favour Bioware games... If the romance element was taken out of a Bioware game, then I would be disappointed, and I probably wouldn't buy it, unless that title offered something else that piqued my interest"

"So long Bioware warn people before the release that there won't be romance, I'll be fine."

"Personally I would be completely fine without it."

"I would still buy it, but I would spend much less time playing it."

"Romance ain't the reason I buy the game."

"don't even play like thattttt"  (I'll take this one as a negative)

"But for DA4 and beyond, I don't care if romances are available."

"I would be extremely disappointed if they weren't there."

 

That is the first 15 responses (excluding posters that posted multiple times). Of that, 9 of them state they wouldn't care or would still buy even if disappointed.

 

 

So no, the statements were not exactly "wouldn't buy it."  You can probably find some other sort of cutoff that would make it a majority, but I picked 15 because it was the closest multiple of 5 that went to the end of my page.  It doesn't seem like your recollection is accurate, but rather that your perception (and the inherent biases within it) have skewed your impression into overstating a particular viewpoint representation.  Note that this isn't that uncommon, PBS Myth 6 details an experiment where teachers forced themselves to give 50/50 attention between boys and girls, and the boys felt the girls received upwards of 90% of the attention.

 

 

Yes. Except I've usually just been told "deal with it." But that's an entirely different discussion.

 

I'm not sure it is a different discussion.  Plenty of romance people get told to deal with it.  Further, any chance that people perceive your comments to be equivalent to you telling them to just deal with it?  Additionally, is there jadedness that you're told to deal with it while you feel that romance people are exempt from such responses?

 

 

It still didn't surprise me in the least. Nor does it make any less of a huge mountain for Bioware to climb if you ever decided to not include it, for whatever reasons. That's the thrust of my post, I suppose. Not that I find it incredulous that people like the romances or that there is value in them that I do not share, but that people behave to the suggestion of taking them out in exactly the way I'd expect and that it makes it nearly impossible to separate Bioware from its romance content going forward in future titles.

 

What I get out of the discussion is that people would, for the most part, be open to it as long as the game still delivered on emotional engagement, LGBTQ representation, and a focus on the companions/party members, because that's why they play our games.  Why do our interpretations vary so much, especially since I'm on the record in that thread (numerous times) as saying that romance content is not a requirement for me.

[Allan Schumacher]

Have you ever done studies on what else people find uniquely attributable to your games?

 

I'm not aware of any.  When I use that term it was simply a phrase used in the discussion thread quoted.

 

I'm sure there are other things that other people value in our games that they consider uniquely attributable.

[Allan Schumacher]

We have 1 straight male to romance so far that I know of.  That person is not a companion.  That means we miss out on that whole experience that we had with our "friends" (and they feel like friends by the end of the game) with this person.  This feels like another Mass Effect all over.  We have one option left to romance a companion and we know now that he's not human (not that I care) or that we choose the Bull (I would have anyway) for just a romp.

 

So, in closing it does feel like we're the afterthought of those groups who have supported you because, let's face it, you DO know that the difference between Dragon Age and Skyrim is the romance, commeraderie and interpersonal stuff.  Giving us that same level of enjoyment that the males will get would be nice.

 

Or not.

 

There may be more news to come regarding romances.  I know that, because of ME3, non-companion romances seem innately inferior as well.  If you're still on the fence and that's the only romance option for you, maybe wait a bit and check to see how people like how the romance content is done.  I'd rather you wait and make the best choice for yourself than jump on the game only to feel disappointed and/or disregarded.

[Allan Schumacher]

Cullen is interesting but he's not a companion.  Iron Bull is interesting.  As I've said I would have made a million babies with the Arishok.  I hope I'm wrong.  I want to be wrong.  I posted in the concern page for a reason.

 

I'd like us to have companions that we can romance and I don't think that's too much to ask. 

 

I don't mean to pick at you, but you guys do such a great job making us feel lost in that game.  I was tearing up over leaving Varic in DA:2.  Like even though that game had the same "sets" it didn't matter because I had the best dwarf in the world with me!

 

There's nothing wrong with posting your concerns.  There's still several months worth of information coming so I hope that the news to come puts you in a more comfortable place with respect to what you think you'll get out of the game.

[Allan Schumacher]

I can't name many AAA Rtwp RPGs.

 

Fair enough.  Depending on who you ask, arguably there are none?

 

Though I do want to point out that this isn't an indication of "we put this in because people find it uniquely attributable to our game."  The discussion spawned out of the idea of why people feel romance content is important to our game.  For those people, it's possible that they consider it a feature on par with RtwP combat mechanics.  I'm sure some have decided to not buy our game because we deviated too much from RtwP combat mechanics.

 

It's neither good nor bad to prefer one over the other, in my opinion.