19658 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

There is only ONE double standard here and that is the one you are defending. In the real world gays represent about 5% of the population perhaps? Yet you seem to expect an unrealistic proportion of content to be made to specifically appeal to that piece of the market. That's not accurate representation. That's not some sort of achievement. Of course you're going to have to lower your expectations when those expectations aren't grounded in reality. That's life for everybody. But I suppose you'll just claim I have "straight privilege" or "white privilege" or some other nonsense. One moment you'd speak of "respect" and in the next you'd dismiss other viewpoints as "privileged". Do you think those in question have never had to work for a living, never had to deal with any challenges, are less worthy than others? That is nothing short of arrogance as is this entire postmodern use of the concept of "privilege".

 

Just so I'm clear here, you think that society at large treats LGBT people equivalently to people like you and me, and that neither group is the victim of systemic, targeted attacks based on their sexuality.  I'm less aware of people being murdered or picked on because they are straight. 

 

 

Further, as a straight person, there's nothing stopping me from still wanting to play LGBT content.  About 15% of the people pick evil choices, yet we still try to give more than 15% evil choices in our game, so the demographics argument is a red herring and irrelevant.  Unless your argument is that we shouldn't be very fair towards them either.

 

If you consider the term privilege to be disrespectful, then why isn't it for me?  I'm a straight white guy and I can recognize "by being straight, white, and a male, I am granted some opportunity and have the benefits of a legacy in North America where myself, and my family, are not overcoming issues with systemic discrimination based on the fact that I am white, straight, or a man.  Particularly in North America.

 

 

Sure, people have to work for a living, and presumably work hard.  I've never said anything like that, but you misunderstand the term privilege.  It doesn't mean "life is as easy as can be with no challenge."  It if I take the challenges that I have in life, there's a greater chance that I'd have had to face additional challenges on top of that if I wasn't a straight, white person.  It doesn't mean that life is as easy as can be for me.  It means though, if I get pulled over by a police officer the odds are I can get away with a warning more easily.  It means that if I get stopped for a "random" check at customs, there's likely a very clear reason why (i.e. I filled out my declaration incorrectly).  Heck, if I forgot something and went running in an airport... people aren't going to blink an eye.  It means that my dad's parents didn't have to worry about their property being devalued simply because a non-white person moved in as a neighbour, meaning that when my grandma died, there was a bit more inheritance money that went to my parents to take care of their debt, and as such my inheritance will be a bit better because my parents will have more equity when they die.  All because they don't have a legacy of having to deal with the implicit racism that would devalue their property because some racists felt that a black person living in their neighbourhood was undesirable.  This is the type of thing that makes "I'm sure he's a nice person" types implicitly racist, because they also see "But I just lost a few thousand dollars of equity because he moved in beside me!"

 

 

 

Note that this doesn't make me feel like I should feel guilty.  But I do think that I should feel aware, and make a conscious effort to enable the benefits that I am able to enjoy across all people.  But hey, that makes me "arrogant" in your terms, so there's that I guess?

[SurelyForth]

RE: Iron Bull

 

I want the Iron Bull romance to be devoid of blushing and stammering. I want it to be two parts mayhem, two parts banging, and one part reflection over himself/the Qun, and then back to the mayhem and banging. I feel like "promiscuous person struggling with their feelings" has been done to death, and while Iron Bull definitely has conflict built into his background, it would be awesome if that was contained in the friendship arc and the romance arc was just about fun in the face of the end of the world until one day he wakes up and is like "I love you" and the Inquisitor fist-bumps him, and they go back to sleep before realizing they're both naked and wrapped in drapes in the middle of the Skyhold dining hall during brunch.

[Phate Phoenix]

Yeees.

 

And yeah to me that would be a great NPC romance because it could be expanded on even just by dungeons. There could be little things like if the PC told the villian he/she had a favorite food there would be some in the kitchen (along with other food obviously to make it less obvious) if you say broke into their main palace or something (Sort of like MOTA). And if you felt trolly you could try to eat it. If friends/lovers nothing happens (maybe it's even good and gives a minor stat boost) maybe if they dislike you protag it's a bad and lowers your stats. Small things like that. The guards could be more talkative (since they got more amicable guards for less chances of harm occuring) hell maybe even the way you deal with the guards could increase/decrease their affection depending on their personality. Do they value cunning? Brute force? Sparing as many people as you can? So on.

 

And yes helping them, maybe they ask you minor stuff about the main plot and you can share it because it's something minor and they can end up exploiting it for their goals. (like you admit to not getting along with a certain companion and they use that to convince said companion to betray the PC by spying for them. Or they ask for certain items and the PC gives them to them not thinking much of it *said item is probably what they need for their master plan :3* and then asks them to repay the favor and they give you something potentially booby trapped.)

 

Yeeees. I'd hope that could be an alternate ending.

 

THAT WOULD BE THE MOST AMAZING THING.

 

And of course you'd have that character with you saying, "No, no, no, don't eat that. That could be poisoned. I know that look. Stop looking at it like that. No, Hero, no STOP--"

 

*OMNOMNOMNOM*

 

"...If you're poisoned I'm not helping you."

[Phate Phoenix]

One thing I worry about with the villain relationship is that it could easily come across as abusive and really unhealthy. I realize people suggest that about some already, but I feel like this one inherently toes the line.  

 

It'd have to be handled carefully, that's for sure. Like, with great, big, flashing warning signs if need be. No sexual contact until after the big villainous reveal. Fighting would have to handled carefully, too. But I think it could be done well, though, and it's an interesting narrative I, personally, haven't played before. 

[GameBoyish]

*Solas voice* ITS MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT!

There's a picture for this.

[Allan Schumacher]

My opinion is that straight women getting more options is only extremely marginally better than straight men getting more options. Straight romance, generally, is ingrained in almost all media and straight women have gotten substantially more options in nearly every Bioware game. To me, there's almost no difference. 

 

I can understand that, and it's the type of thing that I trip up on (the idea that all people asking for more all want the same thing more).

 

Or that sometimes things are not even in direct alignment.  A white woman looking at Uhura with Spock as though "Nooo, she's giving up her strong womanly independence."  While a black woman looking at Uhura with no Spock may see it as as "By virtue of being black, you're not worthy of being in a relationship with these white looking men."

 

 

So yeah, we're still going to make mistakes because some of these perspectives are things we don't realize.  Many of these different perspectives I've only learned in the past couple of months.  And people might get upset about it (and they probably will) so it'll be about reconciling that, improving perspective, and iterating on our efforts to do better.

[Ryzaki]

THAT WOULD BE THE MOST AMAZING THING.

 

And of course you'd have that character with you saying, "No, no, no, don't eat that. That could be poisoned. I know that look. Stop looking at it like that. No, Hero, no STOP--"

 

*OMNOMNOMNOM*

 

"...If you're poisoned I'm not helping you."

 

I know I need to stop especially since it's not happening and I'm getting myself hyped for no reason

 

lmao yes and then the "That wasn't poisoned? wut?" reaction if you're on the friendship/lovers path with the PC going "I told you so!" or "worth it." with a trollface. And the poison version wouldn't be lethal of course because that'd be a wee bit suspicious the food the protag prefers is poisoned in le villian's manor (particularly if this isn't common knowledge) so it's merely bad XD (or maybe the villian's a bit of a troll and wants to give them the runs. Who knows XD)

 

 

It'd have to be handled carefully, that's for sure. Like, with great, big, flashing warning signs if need be. No sexual contact until after the big villainous reveal. Fighting would have to handled carefully, too. But I think it could be done well, though, and it's an interesting narrative I, personally, haven't played before. 

 

Well the ship in my avie has sexual content before the reveal that he's...part of the problem. (Unknowingly! But yeah...still.)

 

As for fighting it's really  my preference that the villian in this scenario has underlings doing most of his/her fighting for him (mostly because he/she knows he/she can't fight hand to hand with the protagonist and win so they prefer to manipulate and get other people (including the protagonist) to do their fighting for them). I'm not that fond of hyper soldier villians as I am the book keeper with their finger in all the pots and such. Plus I prefer talking the monster to death final battles or them being able to summon demons and such to do their fighting for them. Maybe their dragon is the one who does most of the brute force work.

 

I like my villians being non action guys. What can I say. I blame Lelouch. XD

 

Edit: I mean as in the terrible at combat compared to the PC not the coward version XD

 

But yeah agreed.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

It'd have to be handled carefully, that's for sure. Like, with great, big, flashing warning signs if need be. No sexual contact until after the big villainous reveal. Fighting would have to handled carefully, too. But I think it could be done well, though, and it's an interesting narrative I, personally, haven't played before. 

The one thing that I really, really would want avoided is any sorts of flirtatious dialog, innuendos, or basically anything romantic during any sort of capture scenes or scenes where the villain is in a dominate position over the PC. For me, that would be extremely uncomfortable. It would need to be a VERY VERY obvious conscious trigger of that dialogue by the PC if they were going that route.  

[Ryzaki]

The one thing that I really, really would want avoided is any sorts of flirtatious dialog, innuendos, or basically anything romantic during any sort of capture scenes or scenes where the villain is in a dominate position over the PC. For me, that would be extremely uncomfortable. It would need to be a VERY VERY obvious conscious trigger of that dialogue by the PC if they were going that route.  

 

Ah I can understand this. I was working under the impression that this sort of thing wouldn't happen because you wouldn't learn they were the big bad til really late in the game. And torture scenes and the like would only occur in the dislike variations and there's clearly no flirtatious innuendos there.

 

But yeah I would not want this. It was awkward as hell in Shadow Hearts where the big bad pretty much leers at you during the torture scene.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I value representation more than those that were upset because of "realism" or anything like that.  I'm more concerned with people saying "I like to see people like me because I rarely do" and was able to make the connection of going "yes, I can understand that and it seems pretty clear."

 

I used to be more keen on "playersexuality" and the notion of the characters were "ambiguous" in the sense that, from the outside looking in we couldn't definitively state that a character was a particular orientation.  Until I learned that bisexuals (and perhaps bisexuals) have to battle that all the time.  Stuff like that, (coupled with my own frustration towards those that would always decry how unrealistic it was) made me reevaluate.  I made a choice to refer to them as bisexuals because there's a valid case that any of the companions can be shown as being attracted to either men or women.  (Someone like Maria can probably recall that I used to speak more for the other side, as I remember her pointing out that my original defenses of metagaming weren't really applicable).

 

So when I say that I moved away from referring to Merril (or Fenris) as "ambiguous" it was more from the outside perspective (Allan can look at Merril and say she is gay, straight, or bisexual), as opposed to any concept of "Merril is uncertain/unclear of her own sexual orientation." 

 

 

In the context of DA2's romances, there was a very even split between who would like something like that and who preferred not to, when discussing LGBTQ content at PAX Prime.

 

Before this thread, the concept of someone with your sexuality was foreign to me.  Like, entirely oblivious.  And it was reinforced because my mind kept trying to put you somewhere else. (i.e. maybe they're pansexual and gender is irrelevant... maybe they're demisexual because you need that deep connection... although can't demisexuals still have preference!?  I don't know!!! System crash: CONFUSED!!!).  I still struggle with things like non-binary gender because in my past 30+ years, that was all there was to me.

 

 

Hopefully that can help provide some context!

That helped provide a lot of context. Thank you.

 

And apologies for the confusion I cause.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I can understand that, and it's the type of thing that I trip up on (the idea that all people asking for more all want the same thing more).

 

Or that sometimes things are not even in direct alignment.  A white woman looking at Uhura with Spock as though "Nooo, she's giving up her strong womanly independence."  While a black woman looking at Uhura with no Spock may see it as as "By virtue of being black, you're not worthy of being in a relationship with these white looking men."

 

So yeah, we're still going to make mistakes because some of these perspectives are things we don't realize.  Many of these different perspectives I've only learned in the past couple of months.  And people might get upset about it (and they probably will) so it'll be about reconciling that, improving perspective, and iterating on our efforts to do better.

Well, I said in my previous post that I feel like the only real solution is to give everyone equal numbers with relative content, and that's really all I can revert back to on the topic. To me, anything other than that is falling short of ideal. Outside of that, I look at it in terms of who has gotten the most to least options over the course of Bioware's history, but maybe also it should be considered that Dragon Age can't always make up for what they're doing with Mass Effect, etc. What it really comes back to is that equality is the ideal, sooner than later. I feel like it actually is worth cutting an "extra" romance sometimes and folding that back into current romances or friendship paths to maintain equality, also. By doing that, nobody is being favored, especially if it goes into friendship content. Everyone has access and romances remain equal. Because my understanding is that development isn't a "use it or lose it" situation with resources towards individual romances and what goes into them could be spent somewhere else.

 

I appreciate that you guys are trying and especially that you take the time to listen to our concerns, though, so thank you for that. 

[Phate Phoenix]

I know I need to stop especially since it's not happening and I'm getting myself hyped for no reason

 
I knoooow.  But, perhaps by talking about it and bringing it up, we could inspire someone, somewhere, to make this kind of thing happen.

 

Well the ship in my avie has sexual content before the reveal that he's...part of the problem. (Unknowingly! But yeah...still.)
 
As for fighting it's really  my preference that the villian in this scenario has underlings doing most of his/her fighting for him (mostly because he/she knows he/she can't fight hand to hand with the protagonist and win so they prefer to manipulate and get other people (including the protagonist) to do their fighting for them). I'm not that fond of hyper soldier villians as I am the book keeper with their finger in all the pots and such. Plus I prefer talking the monster to death final battles or them being able to summon demons and such to do their fighting for them. Maybe their dragon is the one who does most of the brute force work.
 
I like my villians being non action guys. What can I say. I blame Lelouch. XD
 
But yeah agreed.

 

The reason I bring up sex is that there could be some consent issues there that I think should be best avoided. Perhaps you could even flip that around--perhaps the PC makes the first move and villains turns them down because of it. I know that stinks of 'not as much of a jerk as they could be',  but if the character is grey, then it helps reinforce that they aren't evil incarnate.

 

I actually prefer my villains to be the "person behind the scenes", too, where they have people for fighting.   So, like, in Dragon Age, perhaps a noble of some kind. A noble who plays The Game very well, even.

 

 

The one thing that I really, really would want avoided is any sorts of flirtatious dialog, innuendos, or basically anything romantic during any sort of capture scenes or scenes where the villain is in a dominate position over the PC. For me, that would be extremely uncomfortable. It would need to be a VERY VERY obvious conscious trigger of that dialogue by the PC if they were going that route.

 

Agreed. Like, with the big Golden Heart icon and everything. It would have to be blatant.

[Grieving Natashina]

That helped provide a lot of context. Thank you.

 

And apologies for the confusion I cause.

If it means anything, I don't think you need to apologize myself. 

 

Maybe this will make you feel better.  Remember DG's post on the forums linked from his tumblr where he talked about the "laser-focus of female companions" after the 6:3 split was confirmed?  Well, he picked my quote specifically as the starting ground for his point.  It wasn't personal I'm sure, as he was addressing the whole thread.  However, after seeing that hit all sorts of websites, it was pretty embarrassing for me.  Still, a lot of clarity and comfort of mind (for me at least) came out of the whole thing and how BioWare was trying to look at things going forward.

 

I can also tell that you're having a rough night.   It's just been weird all around.  See, it's what's called a "Super Moon" out right now.  This is the time of year where the moon is closest to the earth.  Every once in a rare while, this coincidences with the full moon.  So it's like an extra dose of weird, but this is the last night of it.  May things seem easier for you tomorrow.  

[Former_Fiend]

One thing I worry about with the villain relationship is that it could easily come across as abusive and really unhealthy. I realize people suggest that about some already, but I feel like this one inherently toes the line.  

 

I don't know that would necessarily be a problem for a relationship with a specifically villainous character. 

 

I think people dislike relationships with any perceived abusive qualities with the "standard" LI's because there's a perception that those relationships are supposed to be healthy.

 

I don't think a hypothetical relationship with a major villain would have that qualifier attached to it.

[HuldraDancer]

 Agreed. Like, with the big Golden Heart icon and everything. It would have to be blatant.

 

Is it wrong that I probably would click on that heart without a second thought? >>

[Ryzaki]

Phate Phoenix, on 14 Jul 2014 - 11:42 PM, said:
   

I knoooow.   But, perhaps by talking about it and bringing it up, we could inspire someone, somewhere, to make this kind of thing happen.

Hopefully fingers crossed for the next Dragon Age game myself XD
 

 

The reason I bring up sex is that there could be some consent issues there that I think should be best avoided. Perhaps you could even flip that around--perhaps the PC makes the first move and villains turns them down because of it. I know that stinks of 'not as much of a jerk as they could be',  but if the character is grey, then it helps reinforce that they aren't evil incarnate.

 

True. I don't mind if the villian decides to go through with it if the PC asks first though. But yes ideally the villian would not suggest it first. Maybe they'd advise against it and the player can decide whether or not to proceed?

 

I actually prefer my villains to be the "person behind the scenes", too, where they have people for fighting.    So, like, in Dragon Age, perhaps a noble of some kind. A noble who plays The Game very well, even.

Yes I love that so much. That would be lovely. Though maybe someone from a merchant house so the merchant cover works XD

 

 

 

Agreed. Like, with the big Golden Heart icon and everything. It would have to be blatant.

Agreed. If there is a capture scene with flirts I'd prefer the villian LI to be more serious during it and if anyone must be the flirt it's all on the PC's options. Maybe if the villian is used to your PC being a flirty troll he/she can crack a smile but yeah no villian leering at tied up PC please. Least not without the PC starting the leering.

 

 

Is it wrong that I probably would click on that heart without a second thought? >>

 

Nope. I'd smash it so hard.

[HuldraDancer]

Nope. I'd smash it so hard.

 

Good to know I'm not the only one 

 

I usually end up getting a crush on most big bad or 'crazies' in movies, books or games so I'd jump at a romance the big bad option >>

[In Exile]

It'd have to be handled carefully, that's for sure. Like, with great, big, flashing warning signs if need be. No sexual contact until after the big villainous reveal. Fighting would have to handled carefully, too. But I think it could be done well, though, and it's an interesting narrative I, personally, haven't played before. 

 

It could make those "captured by the villain" scenes very different. In the usual case, no romance it's the DA:O style dungeon. In the romance scenario, suddenly it's  a much fancier room in the Keep, and a more heartfelt attempt at conversion by the villain.

 

The issue is in creating a villain who isn't insane - some issue that appeals to people, but that is still a source of conflict. That's a problem for RPGs with existential threats. I think the scenario where this works better is a kind of "unite the land" scenario (think Suikoden). 

 

Taking the DA lore example, think about Emperor Drakon creating Orlais. As he steamrolls across city states and conquers them, he could easily be the villain - he is, after all, building a massive empire by crushing different societies - but we can introduce enough of a conflict of values - e.g. stability vs. chaos, etc. - and avoid getting his hands too dirty and the "protagonist" states hands too clean. This way, in the end, it makes siding with the villain justifiable. 

 

You can still have an RPG, it just can't be an epic "world is ending" plotline. 

[In Exile]

The one thing that I really, really would want avoided is any sorts of flirtatious dialog, innuendos, or basically anything romantic during any sort of capture scenes or scenes where the villain is in a dominate position over the PC. For me, that would be extremely uncomfortable. It would need to be a VERY VERY obvious conscious trigger of that dialogue by the PC if they were going that route.  

 

I think the trick is - if there is a romance path - to specifically and very intentionally have the villain shy away from any explicit assertion of actual dominane over the PC. Basically, a "capture" is reduced to the villain disarming the PC enough that you're not going to try and rip his or her villanous throat out without actually threatening your person or turning into an lunatic/perverse crush on you. 

 

It has to be something more like - you, the Protagonist, are an talented and capable person, and the villain is drawn to that. It's basically the reverse of the hero telling the villiain to turn away from the dark side, so to speak. 

[leaguer of one]

Just so I'm clear here, you think that society at large treats LGBT people equivalently to people like you and me, and that neither group is the victim of systemic, targeted attacks based on their sexuality.  I'm less aware of people being murdered or picked on because they are straight. 

 

 

Further, as a straight person, there's nothing stopping me from still wanting to play LGBT content.  About 15% of the people pick evil choices, yet we still try to give more than 15% evil choices in our game, so the demographics argument is a red herring and irrelevant.  Unless your argument is that we shouldn't be very fair towards them either.

 

If you consider the term privilege to be disrespectful, then why isn't it for me?  I'm a straight white guy and I can recognize "by being straight, white, and a male, I am granted some opportunity and have the benefits of a legacy in North America where myself, and my family, are not overcoming issues with systemic discrimination based on the fact that I am white, straight, or a man.  Particularly in North America.

 

 

Sure, people have to work for a living, and presumably work hard.  I've never said anything like that, but you misunderstand the term privilege.  It doesn't mean "life is as easy as can be with no challenge."  It if I take the challenges that I have in life, there's a greater chance that I'd have had to face additional challenges on top of that if I wasn't a straight, white person.  It doesn't mean that life is as easy as can be for me.  It means though, if I get pulled over by a police officer the odds are I can get away with a warning more easily.  It means that if I get stopped for a "random" check at customs, there's likely a very clear reason why (i.e. I filled out my declaration incorrectly).  Heck, if I forgot something and went running in an airport... people aren't going to blink an eye.  It means that my dad's parents didn't have to worry about their property being devalued simply because a non-white person moved in as a neighbour, meaning that when my grandma died, there was a bit more inheritance money that went to my parents to take care of their debt, and as such my inheritance will be a bit better because my parents will have more equity when they die.  All because they don't have a legacy of having to deal with the implicit racism that would devalue their property because some racists felt that a black person living in their neighbourhood was undesirable.  This is the type of thing that makes "I'm sure he's a nice person" types implicitly racist, because they also see "But I just lost a few thousand dollars of equity because he moved in beside me!"

 

 

 

Note that this doesn't make me feel like I should feel guilty.  But I do think that I should feel aware, and make a conscious effort to enable the benefits that I am able to enjoy across all people.  But hey, that makes me "arrogant" in your terms, so there's that I guess?

Allan, thank you for your statement but we all should know by now not the feed the troll. He/she is not going to get it. If they can't understand coexistence at this point and what to be a jealous little person about it, he'll/she'll never is going to get it.

[Ryzaki]

Good to know I'm not the only one 

 

I usually end up getting a crush on most big bad or 'crazies' in movies, books or games so I'd jump at a romance the big bad option >>

 

 

Same. Everytime there's a villian LI I take it >_> Chikage is still my favorite romance in Hakuoki. He has half the chapters of everyone else and I still can't resist.
 

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I don't know that would necessarily be a problem for a relationship with a specifically villainous character. 

 

I think people dislike relationships with any perceived abusive qualities with the "standard" LI's because there's a perception that those relationships are supposed to be healthy.

 

I don't think a hypothetical relationship with a major villain would have that qualifier attached to it.

Well, I don't want to make the issue too.. personal, I guess, but I'm a little sensitive to the issue because I've been in an abusive relationship before. So, I'm a bit reluctant at the idea, I suppose. It depends on how it was handled. I do not really like the idea of relationships that involve a lot of violence or hostility. Aggressive personalities tend to make me uncomfortable, generally, and it's already lead to me avoiding some in-game romances, but nothing I couldn't handle on a friendship path so far. So, my response is basically.. would I be happy about this taking up a romance slot? Is it something that could bleed through in my game in ways that make me uncomfortable (like the issue I mentioned in a previous post) even if I wasn't engaging the relationship? I have a lot of reservations about it, but I'd have to know more details to take a solid stance.  

[In Exile]

To give an example (as a follow up on this Villain-Conqueror tries to unite the land plot), there could be impassioned appeals like: "This land is in chaos. People are suffering. We need stability; but instead, we have in-fighting. Stand with me, and we can bring peace. Order. Governance."

 

I'm not an especially good writer, so take the dialogue with a huge grain of salt (and not too much laughter!) and just run with the idea. 

[leaguer of one]

To give an example (as a follow up on this Villain-Conqueror tries to unite the land plot), there could be impassioned appeals like: "This land is in chaos. People are suffering. We need stability; but instead, we have in-fighting. Stand with me, and we can bring peace. Order. Governance."

 

I'm not an especially good writer, so take the dialogue with a huge grain of salt (and not too much laughter! ) and just run with the idea. 

The birth of an Anti-Villain. Someone wants to go full Magneto.

[BabyFratelli]

Allan, thank you for your statement but we all should know by now not the feed the troll. He/she is not going to get it. If they can't understand coexistence at this point and what to be a jealous little person about it, he'll/she'll never is going to get it.

 

I know sometimes those people feel like trolls, but I wouldn't be so quick to assume they always are. People aren't going to learn without being called out or having things explained to them. Not that it's anyone's job to try and educate people who don't get it, just that it's okay to try. Though I usually prefer doing it over PM. It's not technically off-topic anyway.