19658 réponses à ce sujet

[Syledir]

Ducking the question there.

You've said that if they can't implement a romance as bisexual and for all races, it should be cut. I asked what DA:O romance you'd have cut. Now you claim that nothing should be cut and the developer saying there are resource restrictions are wrong.

This is the real problem: Fans will claim they understand that there's limited time and budget, but ultimately believe that the developers not giving them everything they want is just the devs being lazy.

I am not saying it should be cut. Especially not retroactively. I am saying, during the development of the game. As soon as the cinematic team cannot keep up with the writing team, unless they restrict their work to certain races or genders, they shouldn't do it and either keep their ideas for future games/DLC or use them to flesh out romances they are already working on.

 

I never said that the devs are being lazy. Quite the opposite actually. I said: "I am pleased that Bioware genuinly cares to give us as many high quality romances as possible."

 

Also, I am not ducking the question. You never asked what DA:O romance I would have cut. You asked: "Does anyone think Dragon Age: Origins would be better without the Alister and Morrigan romances? Or if they made Morrigan bisexual but cut Alistar's romance?" But since you asked, I would rather cut Kaitlyn, Bella, Telli, Mardy, Gorim, Dairren, Iona, Cammen, Gheyna, The Desire Demon, Isabela and The Pearl Employees before I cut Alistair or Morrigan. Enough content for you? No? Alright, fine.

 

If I had to choose two romanceable NPCs out of Alistair, Morrigan, Zevran and Leliana I would say keep Alistair and Leliana. Alistairs romance can have so many different outcomes. It's just great. Does he kill the Archdemon or you or neither. Does he stay with the Wardens or does he choose the crown? Does he marry Anora? I could go on and on. Zevran doesn't bring as much to the table.

 

Leliana and Morrigan are a tough choice, but I would still go with Leliana because of a possible happy end between her and the Warden. Morrigan follows her agenda and leaves you at the end, no matter what. Besides, her character arc works just as well, if your Warden and her develop a friendship.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I played a male Shepherd in ME2, but it's not like the statistics relating to my interest in a m/m option could be collected. Just another of those in the "no romance" bracket. 

[Panda]

Off topic a bit, but would you blame Anders or Justice for the actions of Anders ...

 

To me they aren't seperate beings so I'd blame DA2 Anders who is combination of both.

[SurelyForth]

What I didn't like about Mass Effect (besides the lack of options for me) was that it seemed like they wrote way too little friendship content in order to allocate those resources towards piling up more LIs. While that might not hurt the romance content, itself, I think it isn't actually a great way to handle romances. I'd rather they limited the number down to a couple choices for everyone and didn't cut so much content from non-LI development paths. 

 

I agree, and if there's anything that has me nervous about DAI it's that the overall companion interaction will be diluted by both the focus on open world exploration and the number of love interests. 

 

As much as I have kvetched and vented about the romance in DAI, I think my single biggest concern with the system is that I won't be able to satisfactorily explore my PC's relationship with all of her companions, because a bunch of them will have content hidden behind a Romance Wall (must be 8 ft and identify as Mr. Inquisitor to access). It's not as much of a concern with companions who aren't love interests, but I worry about situations like Jack and FemShep (or Sheploo/Garrus, in ME2) where the romance path gets way more attention overall.  

[AkiKishi]

The only real problem is running out of conversation too early. This could be easily be exasperated by DA:I's larger size.

[Grieving Natashina]

That depends how you look at it. 80% played the standard MShep in ME2. Quite logical to skew content for the next game in that direction.

 

Well, I guess it's time to break this back out.  The original thread is lost to the archives, but you can read about it more here. It's from David Gaider, back in 2011: 

 

http://www.nomorelos...-it-by-bioware/

 

 

"The romances in the game are not for “the straight male gamer”. They’re for everyone. We have a lot of fans, many of whom are neither straight nor male, and they deserve no less attention. We have good numbers, after all, on the number of people who actually used similar sorts of content in DAO and thus don’t need to resort to anecdotal evidence to support our idea that their numbers are not insignificant… and that’s ignoring the idea that they don’t have just as much right to play the kind of game they wish as anyone else. The “rights” of anyone with regards to a game are murky at best, but anyone who takes that stance must apply it equally to both the minority as well as the majority. The majority has no inherent “right” to get more options than anyone else.

 

More than that, I would question anyone deciding they speak for “the straight male gamer” just as much as someone claiming they speak for “all RPG fans”, “all female fans” or even “all gay fans”. You don’t. If you wish to express your personal desires, then do so. I have no doubt that any opinion expressed on these forums is shared by many others, but since none of them have elected a spokesperson you’re better off not trying to be one. If your attempt is to convince BioWare developers, I can tell you that you do in fact make your opinion less convincing by doing so.

 

And if there is any doubt why such an opinion might be met with hostility, it has to do with privilege. You can write it off as “political correctness” if you wish, but the truth is that privilege always lies with the majority. They’re so used to being catered to that they see the lack of catering as an imbalance. They don’t see anything wrong with having things set up to suit them, what’s everyone’s fuss all about? That’s the way it should be, any everyone else should be used to not getting what they want.

 

The truth is that making a romance available for both genders is far less costly than creating an entirely new one. Does it create some issues of implementation? Sure– but anything you try on this front is going to have its issues, and inevitably you’ll always leave someone out in the cold. In this case, are all straight males left out in the cold? Not at all. There are romances available for them just the same as anyone else. Not all straight males require that their content be exclusive, after all, and you can see that even on this thread.

 

Would I do it again? I don’t know. I doubt I would have Anders make the first move again– at the time, I thought that requiring all romances to have Hawke initiate everything was the unrealistic part. Even if someone decides that this makes everyone “unrealistically” bisexual, however, or they can’t handle the idea that the character might be bisexual if they were another PC… I don’t see that as a big concern, to be honest. Romances are never one-size-fits-all, and even for those who don’t mind the sexuality issue there’s no guarantee they’ll find a character they even want to romance. That’s why romances are optional content. It’s such a personal issue that we’ll never be able to please everyone. The very best we can do is give everyone a little bit of choice, and that’s what we tried here."

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Also, if you think the ME team is going to be much different, I will direct you to this panel from the 2014 GDC done by Manveer Heir:

 

http://www.gdcvault....omophobia-Where

 

So, I wouldn't recommend holding onto the belief that the DA or ME teams are going to skew the content in their next games towards the 80% that played a M!Shep, to the exclusion of other minority groups.  Or even as an overwhelming majority.  Would equal options in our video games be oh so bad?  Many of the players don't see it as as waste of time.  Obviously BioWare doesn't see LBGTQ and PoC representation as a waste of time.  In fact, that's something they've stood by even when groups have sent them bags of hate mail, publically spoke out against them, and frankly gave them every reason why they shouldn't do LGBTQ content, and try to give more equal representation.   Not more representation, but equal.  It's taking time, and it's slow going, but they really are making strides.

 

Plus, it's interesting to see that you're assuming that the 80% was all straight male.  Or even all men.  I've met plenty of role players, men and women, that enjoy gender-bending in RPGs.  Sometimes it's because it's who/what they identify with more.  Sometimes it's to be the hero.  Sometimes, it's as simple as "If I'm going to stare at a butt in a game, it might as well be one that's attractive to me."

[Deviija]

I think this was mainly an ME2 problem, which too be fair, had a ridiculous number of characters in general, and no party banter/background dialogue to flesh them out alongside their animation heavy conversations. 

 

That is one thing that bothered me quite heavily with the ME series.  Essentially, you could bring any combination of companions with you on missions and they would all say the same default script lines.  Completely interchangeable.  Even if it was a decision made to help further plot or make a point of something relating to the mission, it just made me feel that it didn't really matter who I brought with me -- they'd all have a default personality, completely interchangeable, and zero unique banters or dialogues.  The only unique banters/dialogues were few and only in social world hubs, like the Citadel, if you're running around and trigger it, I believe.  Still, not much even then.  Likely due to large casts of characters and limitations, but it really took away from things for me.

[AkiKishi]

That's fine I just don't agree with it , or any of Biowares reflecting real world groups and values in the game. The game world is just that, the game world a separate entity. I know DG's views since he made it very clear that he will prioritise real world groups over in game racial fairness someowhere at the start of the thread (could have been me who reposted it).

[Mukora]

To be fair- they changed that completely in ME3.

They did all of the companion interaction a lot better in ME3, actually.

Also, for those worrying about content in DAI being cut out if you don't romance someone: Consider that that has yet to happen in a Dragon Age game. Leliana, Alistair, Morrigan, Zevran, Fenris, Merril, Isabela, and Anders still had a lot of content for people who didn't romance them.

[Grieving Natashina]

That's fine I just don't agree with it , or any of Biowares reflecting real world groups and values in the game. The game world is just that, the game world a separate entity. I know DG's views since he made it very clear that he will prioritise real world groups over in game racial fairness someowhere at the start of the thread (could have been me who reposted it).

I'm not sure what you're getting at.  You mentioned ME2 and the number of players that played a male Shep is the reason that "future games would be skewed this way."  Which, by the various mission statements made by BioWare, isn't true.

 

Now you are talking about the racial gating I assume?  Well, we'll have to deal with the technical issues.  That's just a fact of game design life, whether us as players choose to be angry about it or not.   I don't like it either, and even did my own ranting about it last week.  However, after reading Allan's posts, I'm warming to the idea a little.  After a lot of thought, I think we shouldn't judge how good or bad this gating is going to be this far before the game is out.  I'm not saying be super happy about the idea, but perhaps an open mind is best.  It'll save us all a lot of trouble in the long run.

[Vapaa]

That's fine I just don't agree with it , or any of Biowares reflecting real world groups and values in the game. The game world is just that, the game world a separate entity. I know DG's views since he made it very clear that he will prioritise real world groups over in game racial fairness someowhere at the start of the thread (could have been me who reposted it).

 

It's not a bad thing, since the game is aimed at people in the real world.

[Grieving Natashina]

It's not a bad thing, since the game is aimed at people in the real world.

I'm out of likes, so I'll simply say this too.  

[Darth Krytie]

What I didn't like about Mass Effect (besides the lack of options for me) was that it seemed like they wrote way too little friendship content in order to allocate those resources towards piling up more LIs. While that might not hurt the romance content, itself, I think it isn't actually a great way to handle romances. I'd rather they limited the number down to a couple choices for everyone and didn't cut so much content from non-LI development paths. 

 

Mass Effect 3 was much better about doing a friendship path in lieu of romance. Mass Effect 1&2 really did lack in a way to be nice without ninjamancing people.

[Deviija]

That isn't necessarily true. They might convey similar thoughts, but do it with their own style. Like meeting the tank bred Krogan in ME2.. everyone says something a little different (although Mordin is the most curious, given his genophage research). Jack and Grunt usually have the most funny and heartless lines in general.

 

I was primarily thinking of ME1, as the series did get progressively better about unique dialogue in each installment, but if you peek at the wikia where all the unique dialogues on missions are outlined, it is easier to see.     

[Ianamus]

I do love how when it comes to "realistic" argument with regards to gender gating people are so quick to jump down peoples throats and complain that Dragon Age is a fantasy setting and doesn't need to reflect the real world. 

 

But as soon as somebody says that it doesn't need to include LGBT characters at all because it doesn't need to reflect the real world, suddenly reflecting the real world is important. 

 

So which is it? Do the sexualities of the characters in the game need to reflect those of people in the real world or not?

[AkiKishi]

I'm not sure what you're getting at.  You mentioned ME2 and the number of players that played a male Shep is the reason that "future games would be skewed this way."  Which, by the various mission statements made by BioWare, isn't true.

 

Now you are talking about the racial gating I assume?  Well, we'll have to deal with the technical issues.  That's just a fact of game design life, whether us as players choose to be angry about it or not.   I don't like it either, and even did my own ranting about it last week.  However, after reading Allan's posts, I'm warming to the idea a little.  After a lot of thought, I think we shouldn't judge how good or bad this gating is going to be this far before the game is out.  I'm not saying be super happy about the idea, but perhaps an open mind is best.  It'll save us all a lot of trouble in the long run.

 

Actually I was saying that could be a reason  why the romances in ME3 were skewed that way.

[Vapaa]

Actually I was saying that could be a reason  why the romances in ME3 were skewed that way.

 

So you're suggesting the straight Femshep romances were deliberatly screwed over because only 20% of players play Femshep ?

[Darth Krytie]

I do love how when it comes to "realistic" argument with regards to gender gating people are so quick to jump down peoples throats and complain that Dragon Age is a fantasy setting and doesn't need to reflect the real world. 

 

But as soon as somebody says that it doesn't need to include LGBT characters at all because it doesn't need to reflect the real world, suddenly reflecting the real world is important. 

 

So which is it? Do the sexualities of the characters in the game need to reflect those of people in the real world or not?

 

They say that LGBT people exist and should get content for them and the game world needn't reflect the bigotry of the real world. That's the important but necessary distinction.

[AkiKishi]

I do love how when it comes to "realistic" argument with regards to gender gating people are so quick to jump down peoples throats and complain that Dragon Age is a fantasy setting and doesn't need to reflect the real world. 

 

But as soon as somebody says that it doesn't need to include LGBT characters at all because it doesn't need to reflect the real world, suddenly reflecting the real world is important. 

 

So which is it? Do the sexualities of the characters in the game need to reflect those of people in the real world or not?

 

Here's my spin on things. 

 

I'm all for anything that makes the character more like a person and less like a virtual sex doll. That includes set sexualities and NPC choices based on personality and background.

I'm all for the correct representation according to the area of the world the game is set in. 

I'm not a fan of reducing things to 2/2/2 or some other formulaic number with nothing to do with the game world. 

 

 

In a nutshell I will always put the integrity of the game world above real world concerns. 

[AkiKishi]

So you're suggesting the straight Femshep romances were deliberatly screwed over because only 20% of players play Femshep ?

 

Who knows, only the people who designed the game could answer that.