19658 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

 Sorry don't believe in that sort of coincidence.

 

Reality, and scientific studies on the human tendency to see patterns in chaos, don't require your belief.

[Maria Caliban]

Real life and other games are irrelevant. I don't even play 99% of the games out there.

If that were true, there'd be no need to have any same-sex romances.

The reason BioWare makes sure that there are same-sex romances in its games (and will continue to do so) is because of real life and other games. They are reacting to a perceived lack and injustice.

[wright1978]

Reality, and scientific studies on the human tendency to see patterns in chaos, don't require your belief.

 

Humans regularly interfere with pure chance, ask any casino.

[wright1978]

You're assuming that the avisors spend all game standing in a single room. 

 

And what does this have to do with the romance paths, anyway? All of the romance content in Dragon Age 2 involved standing and talking in a room. Occasionally lying down and talking in said room. 

 

Romance experience encompasses are far more than the limited specific romance content(due to it being optional content) as devs themselves have admitted in past.

[Vegeta 77]

There is a big difference from a squad mate and npc.  A npc romance is not equal to a squad romance a npc li is inferior.

[Ianamus]

Romance experience encompasses are far more than the limited specific romance content(due to it being optional content) as devs themselves have admitted in past.

 

It encompasses nothing that is unachievable by a non-companion character. 

[Dean_the_Young]

Humans regularly interfere with pure chance, ask any casino.

Casinos str, in fact, the industry that has the most developed studies and understanding about how people will see project patterns onto chance events even if there is no pattern to be found. The entire premise of the gambler's fallacy is thanks to them. Casinos are an industry built around being a tax on people who don't understand math.

 

Which is why using gambling revenues to fund education budgets always struck me as hilarious.

[Maria Caliban]

Because i don't believe in the sort of almighty coincidence that would have to exist for that split to occur randomly other than by deliberate manipulation.

Deliberate manipulation like NPCs that are suddenly getting as much content as companions when they are LIs for straight PCs.

Casinos, in fact, the industry that has the most developed studies and understanding about how people will see project patterns onto chance events even if there is no pattern to be found. The entire premise of the gambler's fallacy is thanks to them. Casinos are an industry built around being a tax on people who don't understand math.

Which is why using gambling revenues to fund education budgets always struck me as hilarious.

People who frequent Las Vegas casinos tend to be well-educated. The average casino does not make the majority of its income from gambling.

[Mistic]

If that were true, there'd be no need to have any same-sex romances.

The reason BioWare makes sure that there are same-sex romances in its games (and will continue to do so) is because of real life and other games. They are reacting to a perceived lack and injustice.

 

Agreed. In fact, it's not even for justice. It's just doing business in a smart way. Gaider said it before (ok, the article was about female gamers, but the point still applies):

 

"The leap from being someone who plays a videogame to someone who plays a hardcore videogame (such as the kind BioWare makes, let’s face it) is far shorter than the leap from non-gamer to the same. So the question, if one looks at it from a purely business perspective, and particularly for an industry where costs are rising dramatically and the number of units of a AAA game required to ship just to stay afloat increases every year, shouldn’t be “how do we better fight for a larger share of our traditional audience?” but rather “how do we better entice a larger portion of the entire gamer audience to play our game?”

[wright1978]

You could very well be right. I haven't even played this.

 

I'll say this though. ME3 sucked without Jack (my ME2 romance). I already experienced what an NPC romance was like there. If they can improve on that, I happily welcome it. But I doubt they will. There's a whole other element that goes along with a bonafide squadmate.

 

Yeah i doubt it unless they are allowed out with Inquisitor for large numbers of missions which would really make the whole advisor/comnpanion distinction rather pointless

[Xilizhra]

I'm all for everyone having a good game experience. We all pay the same price for the same product. And I'm all for correcting injustices. I just don't want to feel the brunt of that justice. If you want to really change something, direct it to the people on top. Not the bottom.

Wait, are we not on the bottom?

[Maria Caliban]

I'm all for everyone having a good game experience. We all pay the same price for the same product. And I'm all for correcting injustices. I just don't want to feel the brunt of that justice. If you want to really change something, direct it to the people on top. Not the bottom.

You are all for correcting injustices except if that leads to a *single game* where you'd have as many options as a gay player, but one of those options might be slightly inferior.

I mean, we know that the advisers have as much dialogue as the companions, their own quest line, their own affection path, and can travel with you in the world at times. But they're not full companions, so this is just not right.

That's some serious dedication to correcting injustices you have.

[wright1978]

Deliberate manipulation like NPCs that are suddenly getting as much content as companions when they are LIs for straight PCs.
 

 

So equal that that straight players get forced to endure/suffer them on their own. Yeah equal my ***.

[ClassicBox]

I don't think advisor relationships will be inferior. It was stated they got the same budget, so it can be assumed they have the same amount of content. However, if you like taking them along with you to battle/missions, that is a personal preference and unfortunately it might feel lesser to you. But equality wise, as far as scenes/dialogues/interactions/etc, I would guess they are the same. ^^

[Cat Fancy]

The sexual orientations of companions and advisers are preposterously contrived in this game. Also, so are their classes and combat specializations. Why is there always a balanced spread of mages, rogues, and warriors? Why have there been so many mage party members in these games? They can't be that thick on the ground.

I'm skeptical that straight players will get shafted this game.

[Maria Caliban]

So equal that that straight players get forced to endure/suffer them on their own. Yeah equal my ***.

You are not SUFFERING.

You can date Cassandra(bi) and Scribbles(str)... or you can date Cassandra(str) and Scribbles(bi). Whether they're bisexual or straight, you'll be getting the same options.

I'm skeptical that straight players will get shafted this game.

The women will but they are into that sort of thing.

[Jewlie Ghoulie]

I also think it's not fair that even if it were true (Which I obviously don't think it is) that heterosexual players (Namely men, because I see more complaints from them, not that none exist from women) are getting the short end ,what about all the games where  homosexuals got the ''short end''. In game  where they had no options (Gay men in Me1&2 I.e ) or only one option (Zevran/Leli and in ME1 Liara). 

 

I think all of the complaints are unfair and generally aesthetic. You're entitled  to feel this way an  I won't try to change you  mind but have you thought about it from this  perspective? 

[azarhal]

Agreed. In fact, it's not even for justice. It's just doing business in a smart way. Gaider said it before (ok, the article was about female gamers, but the point still applies):

 

"The leap from being someone who plays a videogame to someone who plays a hardcore videogame (such as the kind BioWare makes, let’s face it) is far shorter than the leap from non-gamer to the same. So the question, if one looks at it from a purely business perspective, and particularly for an industry where costs are rising dramatically and the number of units of a AAA game required to ship just to stay afloat increases every year, shouldn’t be “how do we better fight for a larger share of our traditional audience?” but rather “how do we better entice a larger portion of the entire gamer audience to play our game?”

 

Interesting enough, I'm following a discussion on another forum where "hardcore male RPG gamers" are annoyed by romance in games (with BioWare has the example). Some even blame the "focus" on that feature has a reason why the "quality declined". All the stuff in quotes is subjective of course.  Broadening the game horizon can also result in lost sales and that just on the perception that the studio stopped catering to you (when it haven't).

 

I think we see something similar in this thread. People are annoyed when they feel that they are not catered to regardless if it is true or not. Nothing that is going to be said is going to make them change their mind at this point.

 

Although, I'm extremely surprised that people make their "shopping list" so early. We don't even know the characters that much, the returning ones had years to change their perspective on things. For example, Cullen might be the knew host of Justice now...

[wright1978]

You are not SUFFERING.

You can date Cassandra(bi) and Scribbles(str)... or you can date Cassandra(str) and Scribbles(bi). Whether they're bisexual or straight, you'll be getting the same options.

 

Not equal if both straight orientations are deliberately given access to less companion romances.

If its the second scenario, yes that's equal because companion romances are restricted equally and the lovely NPC romances you view as so equal are available equally.