2576 réponses à ce sujet

[RevilFox]

Eh? I always thought that *Hawk* was *Isabella's* eye candy more than the reverse.

That may be true, but it doesn't disqualify Isabella as being both very sexual and sexualized. This is pretty much exactly how she presents herself. Which, as I stated before, is fine so long as it's not the only way women present themselves. I actually like Isabella quite a bit. So much so that I've never played through DA2 without romancing her. I just can't bring myself to do it. I only found out recently that her and Fenris hook up if she isn't romanced, which I think is awesome. 

[Seraphim24]

 

Not with logic like that it wasn't.

 

No one said BioWare is perfect, though others' reasons for thinking BioWare falls short are probably much different than yours, such that they see your suggestions as leading BioWare down an even worse path if BioWare actually listened, which I can't say I disagree with. It seems like you simply want BioWare to be something it's not and never will be. What dissatisfies you so much about JRPGs that BioWare is doing right?

 

I think I already said multiple times, at least it's a video game. I don't care how good a VN is, there's just something different about the experience that makes it unreliable. I believe the original JRPGs (Squaresoft era) had a much greater blend of gameplay and artistry, but lost favor due to arbitrary hatreds and probably just flat inability to re-create those kinds of experiences. I also noted earlier how I found most anime to fail almost every rule people here have been perpetuating regarding internal consistency and all that.

 

In the vacuum, there's been this incessant assumption that somehow JRPGs are good for their characters and art, and western games for the interesting mechanics, as if it had to be that way. Just like this thread insists that DA has to be tame and staid. TSR D&D and Meffect were pretty wild, I'd say, also.

 

The reason Nintendo ruled the world is because they could manage both.

 

Honestly and everyone has their moments of sexism and things like that. You try to minimize it, but things like this are going to creep all over the place. I also think the issue is more complicated, is it sexist to treat women as potential romantic partners but not men as a straight male? Well, no, that just naturally follows from the internal logic there, but you are fundamentally discriminating against men romantically, as a straight man.

 

It it sexist to seemingly enforce norms about clothing on female companions but not male ones? Well, maybe, maybe not, maybe Cassandra just really likes armor and Vivienne likes dressing like a vicious spinster Maleficent. Whatever. It just has been odd.

[xkg]

Bioware and their fans are blind to that fact which I have been trying to illustrate for some time.

 

WOW. Amazing. I've seen people with big egos but you are like .... the sum of them all.

 

WOW

[Seraphim24]

Me too!

 

WOW
 

That was fun, I feel like this discussion is not nearly as contentious as it seems. I just don't like a lot of things, you guys that are really happy with it don't even really have to be here right?

[RevilFox]

Well I agree it's pretty arbitrary, but video games to me mean interactivity. It means I get to play the thing that I want to play in the center of the action. There isn't really a decisive way to prove or disprove it based on game design theory, but instinctively I treat them as separate because that is simply how I play video games.

 

I mean heck my avi is from Super Smash. A character in the game is synonymous with them being playable. It's like an inherent video game logic from a different era that seems to have spiraled off into the aether for some reason.

Well...yes. As it pertains to a fighting game I agree with you. A fighting game is all about the fighting. While it may have story elements to it, that is not what (usually) brings people to play these games. With an RPG, the story is what tends to bring people to these games more than the actual gameplay itself (although I agree that poor gameplay can cause people to not play a game. I had this problem with The Witcher). 

 

By definition, a bot doesn't have agency.

This is true, but sort of nonsensical. You may as well say that no TV or Movie character has ever had agency, because they are only doing the things that were written for them to do. I suppose it's more accurate to say that these character have representational agency, but I find that to be a semantics argument that isn't really needed. 

[Seraphim24]

RPGs too, I can't think of many games that had dedicated side characters in many ways.... that doesn't have much to do with outfits again though. Someone specifically asked me about Josephine, so I gave my opinion but in retrospect that obviously led to way too much side-tracking.

[AresKeith]

Bioware and their fans are blind to that fact which I have been trying to illustrate for some time.

 

No, you haven't lol

[AzureAardvark]

This is true, but sort of nonsensical. You may as well say that no TV or Movie character has ever had agency, because they are only doing the things that were written for them to do. I suppose it's more accurate to say that these character have representational agency, but I find that to be a semantics argument that isn't really needed. 

 

I was going for the simplest possible definition.

I didn't particularly want to get into a "how much 'agency' do you give your NPCs vs your PCs" type of debate.

[eyezonlyii]

RPGs too, I can't think of many games that had dedicated side characters in many ways.... that doesn't have much to do with outfits again though. Someone specifically asked me about Josephine, so I gave my opinion but in retrospect that obviously led to way too much side-tracking.

Isn't Zelda a side character in a game with her name on the cover? I mean how many times have you played as her outside of super smash?

 

She's Link's version of Josephine. Or maybe Leliana in Ocarina of Time.

[Voragoras]

How I view Kefka's argument at the moment:

 

[Seraphim24]

No, you haven't lol

 

 Bioware and their fans are blind to that fact which I have been trying to illustrate for some time.

 

Isn't Zelda a side character in a game with her name on the cover? I mean how many times have you played as her outside of super smash?

 

She's Link's version of Josephine. Or maybe Leliana in Ocarina of Time.

 

She's not really a central character period, only in Link to the Past but even then it's very limited. I easily treat Zelda as being about Link without much consternation.

 

I'm not entirely sure why the game needs so many characters period... 9 companions... 3 advisors... who people are arguing are basically characters. It's all very bizzare to me.

[xkg]

Me too!

 

WOW
 

That was fun, I feel like this discussion is not nearly as contentious as it seems. I just don't like a lot of things, you guys that are really happy with it don't even really have to be here right?

 

Ok. So i'll ask you one more time (for the 3rd time).

 

Why are you here. This time let's sum a few things up:

 

1. According to you, western developers are in stone age compared to their Japanese counterparts. Bioware is a western developer.

2. Bioware are not listening to you, because they are "blind" to the truth, knwon only to you.

3. You like JRPGs style, you dont like the style of WRPGs. This forum is dedicated to WRPG.

4. You're not one of the fans of Bioware (you hinted at that with

    "Bioware and their fans are blind to that fact which I have been trying to illustrate for some time").

 

So, why don't you go to some Japanese developer forum. They have a lot of dedicated forums in English.

And you can always go to Hongfire.com to talk about all the Japanaese games and anime stuff.

 

Will you answer me this time or just pretend you didn't saw my post, again.

[RevilFox]

RPGs too, I can't think of many games that had dedicated side characters in many ways.... that doesn't have much to do with outfits again though. Someone specifically asked me about Josephine, so I gave my opinion but in retrospect that obviously led to way too much side-tracking.

I would argue that just because it has rarely been done doesn't it can't or shouldn't be done, but you are correct in that we're outside the scope of this thread at this point. Probably a discussion better had in the "Could we please see more of the Lady Inquisitor" thread, which has grown into being more about female representation in general. 

[Seraphim24]

There are still plenty of JRPGs being produced, not just VNs. Of course, you already know this, you've been posting in the JRPG thread. What's wrong with their gameplay?

 

A lot of people don't really care for Dragon Age's gameplay, but in fact care more about the characters and the way they're represented. I'm sure that sounds totally alien to you, but it's true. So understand that the thing you want has the potential to take away the one thing other people like about the series.

 

About the sexism stuff, just whatever.

 

There's not a lot wrong with their gameplay, it varies from game to game. Some are better than others, some are worse than others, some are better than western games, some are not. There are dozens of distinctions between a Star Ocean or an Ar Tonelico gameplay wise, even though they both come under the label of JRPG.

 

Your part about this being alien to me is exactly what I find so interesting. They are basically somewhat alien to me, but I find this despite not being a particularly standardized gamer. I seek something different but I don't see it here, which again includes outfits.

 

If you want empowered female characters you can find that in Japanese games for the most part... I mean that most recent trailer? It felt like there were channeling Die Hard or some kind of comic book movie. I guess they decided to side with the DA2 crowd for the DA:O crowd for the most part.

[Seraphim24]

Ok. So i'll ask you one more time (for the 3rd time).

 

Why are you here. This time let's sum a few things up:

 

1. According to you, western developers are in stone age compared to their Japanese counterparts. Bioware is a western developer.

2. Bioware are not listening to you, because they are "blind" to the truth, knwon only to you.

3. You like JRPGs style, you dont like the style of WRPGs. This forum is dedicated to WRPG.

4. You're not one of the fans of Bioware (you hinted at that with

    "Bioware and their fans are blind to that fact which I have been trying to illustrate for some time").

 

So, why don't you go to some Japanese developer forum. They have a lot of dedicated forums in English.

And you can always go to Hongfire.com to talk about all the Japanaese games and anime stuff.

 

Will you answer me this time or just pretend you didn't saw my post, again.

 

Because I see you guys here celebrating and pumping your fist and I can't fathom why. To get more personal, I see things like that letter against Brianna Wu or something and it's mortifying, it's terrible. Clearly, something is going on in gaming that is very bad.

 

However, when I come to Bioware, I don't see anything better really. I've been saying I think cute outfits would be fun and it's like 60 pages of ridicule. I've been saying more female characters and it's pages of ridicule. I've been saying the characters are all mostly just too generic and over aggressive and psycho, pages or ridicule. I'll grant that often people are respectful and give reasons that seem pretty logical. It ultimately feels like an equal amount of hatred, just directed in the other direction.

 

Why should I be siding with if it's clearly not these crazy gamers? Well, presumably Bioware or someone that is standing against this. All I'm sensing is just a different brand of hatred though. I view these experiences as riddled with issues.

 

Just trying to make sense of things, really. I would think if a nice girl (or heck, nice guy) wandered into gaming and who knew nothing about anything, they aren't attracted to BW anymore than other western dev. So why are they convinced their different? That's again what I come back to in this analysis.

 

I'd be just as inclined to write it off as both you guys deserving each other for the level of hatred you guys show for all kinds of things, if I didn't have at least a somewhat decent history of BW games to prove they can make some pretty cool things here and there.

[RevilFox]

Because I see you guys here celebrating and pumping your fist and I can't fathom why. To get more personal, I see things like that letter against Brianna Wu or something and it's mortifying, it's terrible. Clearly, something is going on in gaming that is very bad.

 

However, when I come to Bioware, I don't see anything better really. I've been saying I think cute outfits would be fun and it's like 60 pages of ridicule. I've been saying more female characters and it's pages of ridicule. I've been saying the characters are all mostly just too generic and over aggressive and psycho, pages or ridicule. I'll grant that often people are respectful and give reasons that seem pretty logical. It ultimately feels like an equal amount of hatred, just directed in the other direction.

 

Why should I be siding with if it's clearly not these crazy gamers? Well, presumably Bioware or someone that is standing against this. All I'm sensing is just a different brand of hatred though. I view these experiences as riddled with issues.

 

Just trying to make sense of things, really.

 

About 70 pages ago I gave my opinion on the topic of this thread, which was, essentially, that I have no problem with getting the option for my mage and/or rogue to have sexual and sexualized outfits, but that I think warriors should probably have at least the majority of their armor be realistic. Although I have no issue with it being more ornamental than was used in real life, I'd prefer it actually cover their body.

 

Please note that I specifically said that if I wanted my mage/rogue  to dress as a dominatrix or wear something akin to Isabella in DA2,I should be able to do so. I was not ridiculed once. I've also said that I haven't read the majority of your posts (which is true), but I somehow doubt the idea that you want the option of cute outfits is what's generating the discussion. 

[eyezonlyii]

She's not really a central character period, only in Link to the Past but even then it's very limited. I easily treat Zelda as being about Link without much consternation.

 

I'm not entirely sure why the game needs so many characters period... 9 companions... 3 advisors... who people are arguing are basically characters. It's all very bizzare to me.

Because why not? It'll take more than one person to fix the world. So long as they're all fleshed out, it shouldn't matter how many there are. 

 

Because I see you guys here celebrating and pumping your fist and I can't fathom why. To get more personal, I see things like that letter against Brianna Wu or something and it's mortifying, it's terrible. Clearly, something is going on in gaming that is very bad.

 

However, when I come to Bioware, I don't see anything better really. I've been saying I think cute outfits would be fun and it's like 60 pages of ridicule. I've been saying more female characters and it's pages of ridicule. I've been saying the characters are all mostly just too generic and over aggressive and psycho, pages or ridicule. I'll grant that often people are respectful and give reasons that seem pretty logical. It ultimately feels like an equal amount of hatred, just directed in the other direction.

 

Why should I be siding with if it's clearly not these crazy gamers? Well, presumably Bioware or someone that is standing against this. All I'm sensing is just a different brand of hatred though. I view these experiences as riddled with issues.

 

Just trying to make sense of things, really. I would think if a nice girl (or heck, nice guy) wandered into gaming and who knew nothing about anything, they aren't attracted to BW anymore than other western dev. So why are they convinced their different? That's again what I come back to in this analysis.

Umm...the bolded parts are patently false. You've been arguing for 60 pages about haven't revealing armor on a field of battle, and everyone is telling you why that would not work within this setting

 

armor≠clothing. No one is arguing against pretty clothes, as the last 78 pages will reveal to you.

 

No one said there should be less female characters, only that female characters that aren't playable still count as characters. Which is why I brought up the Zelda argument that you tried to sidestep. Earlier in the thread, you brought up how she is not a damsel in distress and gave a synopsis of a few games in which her capture wasn't because she was weak but because she allowed it to happen, or just happened to be the one that Ganondorf needed. Ergo, she is a female character with agency. And is not playable. 

 

I actually forget that this thread wasn't even started by you in the first place and that the original post was for more feminine armor, not necessarily sexual armor.

[Seraphim24]

I think this just kind of shows a failure to understand a lot of potential female (or male) gamers though. They care about what stuff looks like, it is absolutely essential, period. The art direction is just terrible, in every sense of the word, beyond just character armors, really. Stuff has to look good.

 

It might not be intentionally insulting them, but I think they fail to understand the depth of superficial things and how that motivates and stimulates people to action. When people write it off they have their logical reasons for doing so, but unfortunately it's missing the point and it comes off as insulting to people who care about that kind of thing.

 

No one is going to pretend it's necessarily easy to make these kinds of decisions, in fact, I'm sure they may very well not want to insult people, but they're making the wrong decisions in so many areas. Also, they might just not possess the core competency for this kind of thing. Trying to make up for that flagrant error with oh we market our female inquisitor or look we have playable female companions strikes me as having made the core decisions but then kind of sending a lot of material out to placate people who might not like the core decision.

 

I gurantee that twisting people's interest in superficial things into a judgment against their ability or dignity or whatever, or subverting those desires with completely made up rules about video games which have no inherent rules whatsoever regarding realism, is completely guranteed to annoy the living daylights about these potential female or male gamers you apparently think your protecting.

 

How much more freaking obvious can I make this?

[Seraphim24]

Because why not? It'll take more than one person to fix the world. So long as they're all fleshed out, it shouldn't matter how many there are. 

 

Umm...the bolded parts are patently false. You've been arguing for 60 pages about haven't revealing armor on a field of battle, and everyone is telling you why that would not work within this setting

 

armor≠clothing. No one is arguing against pretty clothes, as the last 78 pages will reveal to you.

 

No one said there should be less female characters, only that female characters that aren't playable still count as characters. Which is why I brought up the Zelda argument that you tried to sidestep. Earlier in the thread, you brought up how she is not a damsel in distress and gave a synopsis of a few games in which her capture wasn't because she was weak but because she allowed it to happen, or just happened to be the one that Ganondorf needed. Ergo, she is a female character with agency. And is not playable. 

 

I actually forget that this thread wasn't even started by you in the first place and that the original post was for more feminine armor, not necessarily sexual armor.

 

Other threads.

[eyezonlyii]

I think this just kind of shows a failure to understand a lot of potential female (or male) gamers though. They care about what stuff looks like, it is absolutely essential, period. The art direction is just terrible, in every sense of the word, beyond just character armors, really. Stuff has to look good.

 

It might not be intentionally insulting them, but I think they fail to understand the depth of superficial things and how that motivates and stimulates people to action. When people write it off they have their logical reasons for doing so, but unfortunately it's missing the point and it comes off as insulting to people who care about that kind of thing.

 

No one is going to pretend it's necessarily easy to make these kinds of decisions, in fact, I'm sure they may very well not want to insult people, but they're making the wrong decisions in so many areas. Trying to make up for that flagrant error with oh we market our female inquisitor or look we have playable female companions strikes me as having made the core decisions but then kind of sending a lot of material out to placate people who might not like the core decision.

Only in your opinion though. There are obviously plenty of people who enjoy the art direction. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it bad. And that is the crux for all the bad blood in this thread. You present your opinions as facts, instead of what they are. 

 

I'm not motivated by seeing a woman running around in a midriff exposing outfit in any way; and even less so when the situation does not call for one. But if the art direction for the medium allows for it, then so be it. So long as the presentation is done with the "lens" of the viewer being appropriate as well.

[Muspade]

I think this just kind of shows a failure to understand a lot of potential female (or male) gamers though. They care about what stuff looks like, it is absolutely essential, period. The art direction is just terrible, in every sense of the word, 

There you go again.

Why is anyone arguing with Kefka, again?

[RevilFox]

 They care about what stuff looks like, it is absolutely essential, period. The art direction is just terrible, in every sense of the word, beyond just character armors, really. 

 

"They care about what stuff looks like..."

Nobody is arguing against this.

 

"The art direction is just terrible, in every sense of the word, beyond just character armors, really."

 

People are arguing with this, and rightfully so. I happen to really like the art direction in general. I do not think it's perfect, but overall I enjoy it very much. 

[FiveThreeTen]

I think this just kind of shows a failure to understand a lot of potential female (or male) gamers though. They care about what stuff looks like, it is absolutely essential, period. The art direction is just terrible, in every sense of the word, beyond just character armors, really. Stuff has to look good.

 

It might not be intentionally insulting them, but I think they fail to understand the depth of superficial things and how that motivates and stimulates people to action. When people write it off they have their logical reasons for doing so, but unfortunately it's missing the point and it comes off as insulting to people who care about that kind of thing.

 

No one is going to pretend it's necessarily easy to make these kinds of decisions, in fact, I'm sure they may very well not want to insult people, but they're making the wrong decisions in so many areas. Also, they might just not possess the core competency for this kind of thing. Trying to make up for that flagrant error with oh we market our female inquisitor or look we have playable female companions strikes me as having made the core decisions but then kind of sending a lot of material out to placate people who might not like the core decision.

Look I think you made your point. Some people disagree with you for various reasons, that happens. Your over-exgerations and rude comments just don't help your argument.

[eyezonlyii]

There you go again.

Why is anyone arguing with Kefka, again?

Pavlovian response