Ce sujet est fermé
High Maintenance! My decision to friendmance him as a mage completely turned the course of my first playthrough. For the better, in my opinion, but high maintenance is still a bit of an understatement.
I've seen the videos and I think the Anders rivalmance is somehow worse. I do agree though, it seems like an understatement. I just wasn't sure how to word it without getting into full blown hyperbole.
I am 100% here (there?) for Leliana and Sera. I hate that all of the NPC romances/flirtations thus far have been m/f (although I don't oppose Alistair/Leliana and I like Isabela/Fenris, I prefer both Leliana and Isabela with women).
I could greatly admire someone who looked like a qunari, but I would probably still have qualms about dating them. I don't mind characters having reservations about dating members of other species.
My argument is more about the combination of the two; being in a (presumably) serious relationship with someone who is the exact opposite of what that person wants in a relationship while at the same time refusing to be in a relationship with someone who is everything they'd want in a partner because of their race.
If, for instance, I could romance Varric as a dwarf female who kicks dogs and eats kittens and has no sense of humor, but couldn't romance him as a human woman who was good hearted, helped and protected people, and had a snarky personality, then there is a problem.
Anyone who puts *that* much emphasis on physical appearance over the content of a person's character in a romantic partner is beyond shallow.
My argument is more about the combination of the two; being in a (presumably) serious relationship with someone who is the exact opposite of what that person wants in a relationship while at the same time refusing to be in a relationship with someone who is everything they'd want in a partner because of their race.
If, for instance, I could romance Varric as a dwarf female who kicks dogs and eats kittens and has no sense of humor, but couldn't romance him as a human woman who was good hearted, helped and protected people, and had a snarky personality, then there is a problem.
Anyone who puts *that* much emphasis on physical appearance over the content of a person's character in a romantic partner is beyond shallow.
Hence why rivalmances shouldn't be allowed.
I suspect that something akin to that is not going to be present in the game.
Hence why rivalmances shouldn't be allowed.
'Hence' or 'which is why.'
'Hence why' is like like saying 'which is why why.' It's just a personal grammatical pet peeve of mine, sorry.
My argument is more about the combination of the two; being in a (presumably) serious relationship with someone who is the exact opposite of what that person wants in a relationship while at the same time refusing to be in a relationship with someone who is everything they'd want in a partner because of their race.
If, for instance, I could romance Varric as a dwarf female who kicks dogs and eats kittens and has no sense of humor, but couldn't romance him as a human woman who was good hearted, helped and protected people, and had a snarky personality, then there is a problem.
Anyone who puts *that* much emphasis on physical appearance over the content of a person's character in a romantic partner is beyond shallow.
It's not only appearance but it's a matter of cultural and even physical compatibility. The differences between dwarves and humans are just more extreme than those between real examples of races. For example, the lack of dwarven magic and dwarven resistance to lyrium alone is a sign of obvious biological differences. Sometimes these groups are just too different to be able to engage in meaningful relationships with one another.
I suspect that something akin to that is not going to be present in the game.
I'm hoping not; in my original post on the subject I noted that since we don't know exactly how the romance system will play, something like this can't be held as a concrete objection to it.
But it isn't like this kind of thing hasn't happened in Dragon Age games before. So there is president.
My argument is more about the combination of the two; being in a (presumably) serious relationship with someone who is the exact opposite of what that person wants in a relationship while at the same time refusing to be in a relationship with someone who is everything they'd want in a partner because of their race.
If, for instance, I could romance Varric as a dwarf female who kicks dogs and eats kittens and has no sense of humor, but couldn't romance him as a human woman who was good hearted, helped and protected people, and had a snarky personality, then there is a problem.
Anyone who puts *that* much emphasis on physical appearance over the content of a person's character in a romantic partner is beyond shallow.
If you don't find someone attractive, there's no way around it.
About different believe systems and all this, I agree, up to a point. I do like Fenris even if I do believe that mages should be free, so I don't see why he couldn't like my Hawke just the same. I think I'm going to like Cassandra a lot even if I do think she's not going to agree with most of my choices, so again, I don't see why she couldn't like my Inquisitor too. But I think that in both cases, their relationship would be affected by that discrepancies. So, I don't know, but I think rivalmances did that right. What I think doesn't make sense is that if you're somewhat in the middle of the rivalry/friendship bar you loose them.
I don't think it's a matter of biology, just taste. It could be that NPC x is simply not attracted to anyone of race y. Multiracial couples do exist after all (Maevaris Tilani, anyone?). As someone who is a fan of them, I do hope that Varric is romanceable AND not gated to just one race.
If you don't find someone attractive, there's no way around it.
About different believe systems and all this, I agree, up to a point. I do like Fenris even if I do believe that mages should be free, so I don't see why he couldn't like my Hawke just the same. I think I'm going to like Cassandra a lot even if I do think she's not going to agree with most of my choices, so again, I don't see why she couldn't like my Inquisitor too. But I think that in both cases, their relationship would be affected by that discrepancies. So, I don't know, but I think rivalmances did that right. What I think doesn't make sense is that if you're somewhat in the middle of the rivalry/friendship bar you loose them.
I think rivalmances went too far, in that you disagree with far too many choices for things to work out. If you just disagree with some, just don't have those companions in your party when you make them, if it's a problem.
+ Isabella almost exclusively talking about sex with men 90% of the time before hooking up with Fenris.
Does she? I remember the "men are good for/women are good for" banter between her and Merril, but now that I think about it, I don't remember what prompted it.
Either way though, yeah - I would like to see more relationship-referential banter though (for both companions on their own and PC-NPC ones).
I don't think it's a matter of biology, just taste. It could be that NPC x is simply not attracted to anyone of race y.
I think the biology stance is often seen as more favourable than the taste stance since the taste one can mirror some real life issues that get complicated fast. And it may end up being that the writers want that to get complicated, but if they don't want players to read some of those things that way, it's probably safer to stick to biology, you know?
I think rivalmances went too far, in that you disagree with far too many choices for things to work out. If you just disagree with some, just don't have those companions in your party when you make them, if it's a problem.
I agree with that, maybe there should be a limit. Instead of them leaving you if you're halfway rivalry or friendship, they probably should leave you if you go just too far. That would probaby make more sense, certainly. But I think it's good that the relationship doesn't get stuck because yu have 72% of approval instead of 86%. I think different paths, including one where there's more tension and disagreement, was a good thing.
I don't think it's a matter of biology, just taste. It could be that NPC x is simply not attracted to anyone of race y. Multiracial couples do exist after all (Maevaris Tilani, anyone?). As someone who is a fan of them, I do hope that Varric is romanceable AND not gated to just one race.
I am with this. While when I talk about Varric romance, I do plan on if he is an LI romancing him with my dwarf character, it is because I love the dwarves and I would be excited for a Dwarf/Dwarf romance
But, it doesn't mean I think he should be race gated. Though, I'd understand if he was.
If you don't find someone attractive, there's no way around it.
About different believe systems and all this, I agree, up to a point. I do like Fenris even if I do believe that mages should be free, so I don't see why he couldn't like my Hawke just the same. I think I'm going to like Cassandra a lot even if I do think she's not going to agree with most of my choices, so again, I don't see why she couldn't like my Inquisitor too. But I think that in both cases, their relationship would be affected by that discrepancies. So, I don't know, but I think rivalmances did that right. What I think doesn't make sense is that if you're somewhat in the middle of the rivalry/friendship bar you loose them.
I still find this first argument to be rather shallow; I find the most attractive quality in a person has nothing to do with their physical appearance, but their ability to have a good conversation. Do i have preferences when it comes to physical apperance? Of course. But those are all secondary to a deep, meaningful conversation.
Add to that the fact that I'm still going to make any given inquisitor look like they went running blindfolded through the forest where the ugly trees grow and everyone and their mother is still going to consider them the Maker's gift to anyone who might find them attractive, and the whole thing rings hollow.
As for the rest; there are degrees of it. I understand that. My grandfather once told me that the only thing he and my grandmother had in common was that they loved each other, and they were married for thirty years before she passed. But as Maria said, there's a difference between romancing Fenris as a mage who advocates mage freedom, and as a blood mage who dabbles in slavery.
I think the biology stance is often seen as more favourable than the taste stance since the taste one can mirror some real life issues that get complicated fast. And it may end up being that the writers want that to get complicated, but if they don't want players to read some of those things that way, it's probably safer to stick to biology, you know?
But the biology stance makes no sense. It's not possible to say for example that Humans can't ever be attracted to Dwarves and vice versa because of their lyrium resistance or whatnot. Especially when there is an existing canon couple that proves otherwise.
Taste makes sense. And yes, sometimes that does leave nasty implications but it is realistic and it would be lazy to do otherwise. I'd rather deal with Varric simply thinking my Human is kinda gross for being a Human than having Bioware tell me that it's biologically impossible.
I'm still waiting for the Non-LI companion who is completely LI material but refuses to enter into a relationship with the PC because the PC's in shape and they're only attracted to heavyset individuals.
That's realism right there.
You don't need to think that a person is gross not be attracted to them.
That said, I think romance racegating is unfortunate in a game with racial choice. Especially since the qunari and/or dwarf players will probably get the lesser amount of options.
Because there is little inherent difference between the races aside from physicality, there are some real life parallels too.
I still find this first argument to be rather shallow; I find the most attractive quality in a person has nothing to do with their physical appearance, but their ability to have a good conversation. Do i have preferences when it comes to physical apperance? Of course. But those are all secondary to a deep, meaningful conversation.
Add to that the fact that I'm still going to make any given inquisitor look like they went running blindfolded through the forest where the ugly trees grow and everyone and their mother is still going to consider them the Maker's gift to anyone who might find them attractive, and the whole thing rings hollow.
As for the rest; there are degrees of it. I understand that. My grandfather once told me that the only thing he and my grandmother had in common was that they loved each other, and they were married for thirty years before she passed. But as Maria said, there's a difference between romancing Fenris as a mage who advocates mage freedom, and as a blood mage who dabbles in slavery.
Well it's easier to control if the player has picked race A or B than if he has made a really good looking character 
About physical appearance, it depends a lot on the person. Personally, I don't even know what it is that it's important for me to find some attractive. I care a lot for sense of humor and intelligence, and I usually find really attractive kindness, but I'd lie if I say physical appearance doesn't affect my judgment at all... And, in any case, I'm sometimes myself surprised about finding someone attractive, because he has little to none of those qualities 
But there's also people who can be really appreactive about any of those qualities, but still would not be attracted to someone if s/he doesn't find her/him physically attractive, because is just how they feel about it, not because mere shallowness...
What I mean, it's attraction is very complicated 
and it's hard to say what it's right or realistic, IMO
Well it's easier to control if the player has picked race A or B than if he has made a really good looking character
About physical appearance, it depends a lot on the person. Personally, I don't even know what it is that it's important for me to find some attractive. I care a lot for sense of humor and intelligence, and I usually find really attractive kindness, but I'd lie if I say physical appearance doesn't affect my judgment at all... And, in any case, I'm sometimes myself surprised about finding someone attractive, because he has little to none of those qualities
But there's also people who can be really appreactive about any of those qualities, but still would not be attracted to someone if s/he doesn't find her/him physically attractive, because just how they feel about it, not because mere shallowness...
What I mean, it's attraction is very complicated
You're right; it is complicated. The intricacies and variables in attraction are vast.
Which is one of the reasons I think the "realism" argument is bunk; if they had a hundred LI's in one game they could maybe approach something resembling a representation of it. But with six or eight? Any restrictions are going to be entirely arbitrary and needless limits on player choices.
My argument is more about the combination of the two; being in a (presumably) serious relationship with someone who is the exact opposite of what that person wants in a relationship while at the same time refusing to be in a relationship with someone who is everything they'd want in a partner because of their race.
If, for instance, I could romance Varric as a dwarf female who kicks dogs and eats kittens and has no sense of humor, but couldn't romance him as a human woman who was good hearted, helped and protected people, and had a snarky personality, then there is a problem.
Anyone who puts *that* much emphasis on physical appearance over the content of a person's character in a romantic partner is beyond shallow.
As I said, I agree player characters should be dumped more often for opposing their love interests on important issues, or especially if they are just straight-up cartoon psychopaths. But physical appearances do matter. Qunari are pretty different from humans (elves and dwarves, less so). Just because you're compatible with someone's personality doesn't mean you should have to overlook their physical appearance. I like lots of women; I'm not sexually attracted to any of them. It might make sense for species-gating to be less restrictive than gender-gating, but I don't think it's existence for a potential love interest is some indication that a character is beyond shallow.
I agree that race-gating is a sticky issue because of real-world parallels and the facts that it kind of seems like humans, elves, and dwarves at least might be members of the same species (they can interbreed, although dwarves seem to have some key differences from the other two with respect to magic). It's also kind of uncomfortable when authors connect mages/mutants/whatever with real world issues. I was sort of shocked and impressed with the goofy-ass "Tranquil Solution" nonsense in Dragon Age 2. That's the nature of speculative fiction sometimes, though.
It would be nice if we could have unlimited choices, but the devs have said we can't and they've decided to give us more (if limited) options than fewer unlimited options. So, because they have (chosen) to have these restricted options, (fantasy) race and gender are both perfectly plausible reason to restrict some options.
I still think restrictions are dumb. It's a video game, let me love who I want to love.
You're right; it is complicated. The intricacies and variables in attraction are vast.
Which is one of the reasons I think the "realism" argument is bunk; if they had a hundred LI's in one game they could maybe approach something resembling a representation of it. But with six or eight? Any restrictions are going to be entirely arbitrary and needless limits on player choices.
Oh, I agree about that. If I find myself defending race-gating it's certainly not because realism, but because I seem to understand that if there are more LIs it's only because there's race gating (and gender-gating) and I think that it's a good thing, especially once we're already down that road with gender gating
You don't need to think that a person is gross not be attracted to them.
That said, I think romance racegating is unfortunate in a game with racial choice. Especially since the qunari and/or dwarf players will probably get the lesser amount of options.
Because there is little inherent difference between the races aside from physicality, there are some real life parallels too.
The grossness was an example.
I agree with you. I never liked the racegating idea, I've just accepted it because word of Higher said it would happen.
As I said, I agree player characters should be dumped more often for opposing their love interests on important issues, or especially if they are just straight cartoon psychopaths. But physical appearances do matter. Qunari are pretty different from humans (elves and dwarves, less so). Just because you're compatible with someone's personality doesn't mean you should have to overlook their physical appearance. I like lots of women; I'm not sexually attracted to any of them. It might make sense for species-gating to be less restrictive than gender-gating, but I don't think it's existence for a potential love interest is some indication that a character is beyond shallow.
We're in agreement on the "LI's should dump/refuse us" issue.
Aside from that; well, it's not that I don't acknowledge that this kind of behavior exists in real life. I'm friends with a (white) woman who vastly prefers black men over white men. I just don't think that kind of preference is worth including in the game. It doesn't add anything to the experience for me. For me, it makes the whole thing less enjoyable.
Oh, I agree abot that. If I find myself defending race-gating it's certainly not because realism, but because I seem to understand that if there are more LIs it's only because there's race gating (and gender-gating) and I think that it's a good thing, especially once we're already down that road with gender gating
There seem to be two different thoughts on how the race gating will be implemented.
One is that we're going to have the core six-eight romances that we were always going to have and some of them might just not be interested in certain races, generally assumed to be dwarves and/or qunari.
The other is that we're going to have those core six-eight and they'll be available to everyone of the proper orientation, and then on top of that, we'll have one or two extras who'll only be available to certain races.
Now, I think it's going to be the first, but I'm opposed to both of them. If we had a female qunari or dwarf companion on the team(both of which I would like as an LI), I would rather they not be LI's at all than have them as LI's only for a qunari or dwarf, respectively.
Retour en haut