665 réponses à ce sujet

[Muspade]

I'm just saying because this isn't the most questionable topic I've seen on this board not by a long shot.

I doubt anything can match people pushing to implement a heartless most likely abusive relationship.

I give it a year.

[Hazegurl]

Okay, you are talking about bleach, here I am.  I am pretty certain that nobody in this thread wants Aizen as LI ( or someone like him ), no matter what they think about darker romanceable characters. Unless they want to be treated like sh*t and a useful tool every second of their life, with false hopes and no love at all. The guy can't feel anything for anyone, not even his most loyal servant or a special snowflake. He would kill and betray you immediately if it could serve his purpose, would let you be killed while he could actually save you if he found you useless at one time ( and he could even do the same to useful tools actually lol ). And again given what I read in this thread, yep, nobody wants this. 

True but he does have some good dark qualities. Smart, goal oriented, strong, gives no fluffs about rules and regulations, willing to test the limits of unethical research and behavior. I found Aizen himself to be more asexual than anything. And I do not want. Add passionate, and tone down the sociopathy ("My body holds a heart that cannot love"-dandy) and I'll have my LI.   

[Xilizhra]

Because people don't consider how their actions might be perceived by others, especially not people who are weak and dependent. People should be made aware of such things, and the best way to make the lesson stick is to make them uncomfortable.

 

Given the fact that flirting to the point of sex would be optional (whereas you could simply flirt without sex, or never flirt at all), it's something of a self-inflicted faux pas. Think of it as the RPG equivalent to the question 'can an intern ever have consensual sex with the President?' Only instead of being an Arkansasian with control of the most powerful institutions on the planet, you have a death-dealing god of war who massacres entire military formations and who can conduct murder for the flimsiest of reasons making advances on a desperate war refugee.

The trouble is that this scenario has literally no reason to exist aside from making people uncomfortable. Not only is this something that virtually no one wants in one's LI, it'd be an open opportunity for certain people to actually get away with and enjoy rape in-game, and I seriously doubt that Bioware would ever want to allow for that.

 

I'm just saying because this isn't the most questionable topic I've seen on this board not by a long shot.

What is? Tali's sweat? That wasn't creepy, that was just oddly specific.

[KainD]

Why would I care at this point?

 

Are we just going to say I do, so that I agree with your attempts to define it into sounding more acceptable when using the same words that generally have less favorable definitions that wouldn't support your intended conclusion?

 

I mean, there's leading questions, and then there's this. If you're just going to keep trying to selectively redefine things to fit your desired endstate so that you can argue by exception, you can look to someone else to validate your preferences. This is just getting sad.

 

At this point I am trying to understand for myself what I am asking for, or what I should ask for instead. Because for example at first I was asking for a sociopath LI, then people came in with definitions and said ''well no, a sociopath is not a person that is capable of love in a sense that you want it to be.'' Now I want to know what AM I asking for then? I am not looking for validation, I am trying to get to the bottom of my preferences. 

[Ryzaki]

I doubt anything can match people pushing to implement a heartless most likely abusive relationship.

I give it a year.

 

*shrug*

 

What is? Tali's sweat? That wasn't creepy, that was just oddly specific.

 

No the whole I want to be able to dismember all the companions and whatnot.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Really? Last I checked even Terrorists had loved ones. Even some serial killers teamed up and had loyalty and/or affection for each other. Does that make them good people based solely on them being able to love? IMO no, they are still rotten, but yes people can commit heinous crimes and still kiss their children goodnight.  Welcome to the real world.

 

Also, why are you still on the raping and animal abuse? A person can be an "evil" person without ever doing any of those things. A banker can deny an old lady with no family a loan knowing that if she doesn't get it she could lose her house and end up dead on the street for the upcoming winter. He could do it and not bat a flipping eye about it and go take his kids to Disneyland for the winter with his bonus. I'm sure his family loves him dearly and he loves them too, and the old lady who's freezing to death probably thinks he's Satan incarnate.

Terrorists ARE doing it for a higher purpose. Essentially, they think they are the good guys. That's why seemingly innocent young people can get sucked into sacrificing their own lives. That's nothing like Ed Gein. Welcome to the real world? What? The real world is horrific. They'd probably do this instead of kissing them. Ryazaki was just saying she knows it isn't realistic and that was the point, and I can agree with her idea since hers isn't actually all that evil.

 

Those are things that InExile mentioned, which you then defended with, "all evil is subjective and a POV" which those are most certainly not. The banker's just doing his job.

 

I don't think of it as 'boring' as such, it's more that the range of what people's idea of 'role playing' differs significantly. Some people just can't dissociate playing a dark character or romancing a dark character from their own personal irl morals and actions and some just don't enjoy playing darker characters or romancing LI with darker personalities. How many times have I heard people here say they can only play their own gender, or only play human, or their own sexuality? Lots!

Having said that, I think its good to have a range of actions or companions who take a darker path and it should be available to those that enjoy them. Having only played RPGs since 2006 myself, I'm only just starting to enjoy the different paths you can take. One day I might even be able to enjoy playing an evil character or romancing a LI who I currently find (on a personality level) unattractive.

Could you handle a sexist LI though

[KainD]

it'd be an open opportunity for certain people to actually get away with and enjoy rape in-game, and I seriously doubt that Bioware would ever want to allow for that.

 

Well they did allow the player to allow a rape to happen in the city elf Origin for money. 

[Dean_the_Young]

The trouble is that this scenario has literally no reason to exist aside from making people uncomfortable. Not only is this something that virtually no one wants in one's LI, it'd be an open opportunity for certain people to actually get away with and enjoy rape in-game, and I seriously doubt that Bioware would ever want to allow for that.

 

Yawn. It wasn't rape the first time you called it that, Xil, and it's not rape now. Rape is defined through a lack of consent, whether physical or through coercion. There is no force, and there is no actual coercion on the part of the player.

 

In fact, the last time you discussed this, you were all for bedding the refugee... so long as you could tell them that they could say no. Which rather missed the point of the character arc, and the moral of the story, and why there is any creep factor involved.

 

 

As for Bioware not allowing it... well, they allow far worse things than misunderstandings.

[Dean_the_Young]

At this point I am trying to understand for myself what I am asking for, or what I should ask for instead. Because for example at first I was asking for a sociopath LI, then people came in with definitions and said ''well no, a sociopath is not a person that is capable of love in a sense that you want it to be.'' Now I want to know what AM I asking for then? I am not looking for validation, I am trying to get to the bottom of my preferences. 

 

Sounds like you want a sociopath with an exception spot for you.

[In Exile]

Er... what? Anders never blew up at me once, albeit not in a romance; he never even raises his voice except in combat or when Justice takes over.

Anders is very different outside of the romance scenes in terms of his overall stability.

[KainD]

Sounds like you want a sociopath with an exception spot for you.

 

Alrighty then, that's sorted. 

[Ryzaki]

Oh, I'm under no delusion that people wouldn't metagame around it their second or third time- it's the people who get caught on the first time that are the ones I really hope to make think.

 

For the record, I don't consider the scenario particularly fit for one or the other. It would be deliberately cast so that while flirting to sex might be caddish, there would never be any implicit or explicit threat or intimidation on the PC's part. In fact, the revelation that the refugee did have those fears would be the major plot twist of the arc, and intended to take the player by surprise. The moral of the story is 'be careful about how the weak perceive the strong'- not 'role play a jerk, rape a refugee.' The only people who get that ding are those who simply click every flirt button they see.

 

Which, if we want to be straight, is a terribly pavlovian response.

 

Fair enough.

 

I have a strong disliking of gotcha moments though.

 

Nope. No assumptions needed- just a desire to make you think. Anita Sarkeesian may think that video games need to make better people by removing even the possibility to be wrong, but I think making people think about situations they will probably never find themselves in is the advantage RPGs have to helping people develop emotionally and mature.

 

I think blindsiding players with the consequences of typical actions and established patterns is the only way to confront tropes so established that they aren't controversial.

 

I mean, you kind of said it yourself- that you would never be able to think about flirting with someone desperate who you just rescued from peril ever again. Well, why did you ever think it was a decent thing to do in the first place? Do peasants and NPCs exist to be properly grateful and whatever you want after you save that day, to the point of whatever the [Flirt] line offers when it shows up?

 

Not without my character being a creeper ass is a qualifier I should've put in there.

 

Nope. But if my PCs hitting on someone and they don't get shut down I'm not expecting a "well I didn't think you actually gave me the chance to say no." wiggle.  Especially not if my PC asked if they were sure.

 

Blindsiding a player with the flaws of the typical NPC flirt option would be the Bioware romance equivalent to what Spec Ops: The Line was for the FPS genre.

 

That would be immensely aggravating. I don't need a game preaching at me.

 

Success!

 

I proposed a scenario to creep people out, and it made it! Officially! Dayum, I am good!

 

[Xilizhra]

Yawn. It wasn't rape the first time you called it that, Xil, and it's not rape now. Rape is defined through a lack of consent, whether physical or through coercion. There is no force, and there is no actual coercion on the part of the player.

 

In fact, the last time you discussed this, you were all for bedding the refugee... so long as you could tell them that they could say no.

 

 

As for Bioware not allowing it... well, they allow far worse things than misunderstandings.

This isn't about legal definition so much as it is about the principle of the thing, public perception, and Bioware's image. It's not the kind of thing they'd want to touch.

 

Also, for clarity's sake, I was for it provided that they understood they could say no.

 

However, I'm interested in this as a theoretical exercise, so I'd be interested in what you would write regarding this character, and the dialogue options that would lead up to this. And, most importantly, what precisely their reactions would be.

[Hazegurl]

 

 

Those are things that InExile mentioned, which you then defended with, "all evil is subjective and a POV" which those are most certainly not. The banker's just doing his job.

 

 

Because it is subjective. Just because one person thinks someone is evil doesn't mean they are. It's an opinion not a fact. I can tell you now that no one really cares if you are "just doing your job" If you are a contributor to their pain they view you as just as guilty. It reminds me of that movie "Drag me to Hell." where the gypsy lady curses the chick that turned her down for a loan. Sure the protag was just doing her job but she was the only person the gypsy lady knew as the face of her hardship and therefore chose her. You can cry all you like about just doing your job. It doesn't mean that person is going to view you as some innocent lamb. 

[KainD]

Hey, Dean. One last question to you on my particular subject. Do you think a Yandere fits a profile of a sociopath with an exception? 

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Because it is subjective. Just because one person thinks someone is evil doesn't mean they are. It's an opinion not a fact. I can tell you now that no one really cares if you are "just doing your job" If you are a contributor to their pain they view you as just as guilty. It reminds me of that movie "Drag me to Hell." where the gypsy lady curses the chick that turned her down for a loan. Sure the protag was just doing her job but she was the only person the gypsy lady knew as the face of her hardship and therefore chose her. You can cry all you like about just doing your job. It doesn't mean that person is going to view you as some innocent lamb. 

 

Yes those are people looking out for themselves and doing their jobs, like I said. Now tell me how killing for fun can be "an opinion not a fact"

[Dean_the_Young]

Fair enough.

 

I have a strong disliking of gotcha moments though.

 

Fair enough. Of course, what you don't like can be good for you. Unpleasant truths and all that.

 

 

 

 

 

Not without my character being a creeper ass is a qualifier I should've put in there.

 

Nope. But if my PCs hitting on someone and they don't get shut down I'm not expecting a "well I didn't think you actually gave me the chance to say no." wiggle.  Especially not if my PC asked if they were sure.

 

 

That's kind of the point. Most PC players... really don't think about how the weaker side lives, ever. It's two fold- first, the PC itself is a power fantasy, but secondly even the players themselves are overwhelmingly affluent, rich, secure westerners with liberal beliefs and values and enough security that they can spend plenty of time playing luxury goods like video games. We are not a fanbase that particularly has to worry about 'no' being met with final, unappealable force.

 

How many Bioware players do you think have ever even dealt with someone who was terrified of them? As in, genuinely terrified, to the point that the alternative to ingratiating yourself with the strong is to risk death and worse? Where you feel you can't risk being honest, because the people who claim to respect choice the most are often the harshest to punish defiance?

 

Sometimes trust has to be earned, and not expected simply because you know you have good (or at least non-malevolent) intentions. Someone who attempts and is willing to sleep with a refugee at the first opportunity clearly is not seeking that trust before trying something that we generally should be based on trust.

 

Video games tackled racism and forced players to deal with in in various forms, which is good. Bioware is tackling same sex relationships, which is good as well. But so few games actually address the fears of the weak- and that's not so good. That's not so good at all.

 

 

 

 

That would be immensely aggravating. I don't need a game preaching at me.

 

 

Bioware (and even Bethesda) games already moralize at you: not just on what they say, but also on what they don't say, and don't make an issue of.

 

The most progressive message in ME3 wasn't an advertisement that it had same-sex romances, or any dialogue that went 'you're gay? That's alright!' It was the fact that the player could engage in a same-sex romance and no one in the game cared or thought in controversial. That was a powerful use of silence.

 

Bioware plots frequently have themes you can agree with or disregard. Being a moral underlying a story is not the same as explicit preaching.

 

 

 

 

Well, at least I can still make you laugh.

 

Night, Ryzaki. I'll see you some time tomorrow.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

I mean if all you want is LI who turns down loans alot then I certainly don't see why not.

[KainD]

Now tell me how killing for fun can be "an opinion not a fact"

 

Well it's quite simple. Evil means immoral, and morals are subjective. So if a person doesn't consider killing for fun to be evil, or doesn't follow a moral code all together, then it's not evil in their eyes. 

[jellobell]

So you want an LI that's...unsympathetic? Can't see that a lot of people would find that very appealing.

 

Also I can see a relationship with such a character quickly becoming abusive (though that seems to have already been pointed out). If a person isn't able to treat people with respect they aren't going to make a very good romantic partner. That's why I'm glad that Obsidian didn't actually go there with Bishop. Anything more traditionally romantic just wouldn't have worked.

 

I do, however, think it's possible to do a "romance" with a profoundly messed-up character. Take, for example, Atton from KOTOR 2. Atton is a former Jedi-killer for the Sith. Before that, he was a republic soldier fighting the Mandaloreans. When the Exile meets him he's left that life behind, but through your influence you are able to either help him heal or undo all the progress he's made.

 

I think the Exile's relationship with Atton works because 1) the Exile is established as being rather messed-up him/herself (massive case of PTSD at minimum), 2) Atton never abuses, threatens, or otherwise plays mind-games with the Exile. He's in fact very considerate of their feelings and holds the Exile in high regard. 3) You can visibly influence him. Not in a "I will fix all of your problems and now you are better" sort of way. He's always going to be broken. But you can effect some positive change (*cough, cough*, Anders). And by that token you can also effect a whole lot of negative change as well. 4) It's not a full Bioware-style love 'n sexytimes romance. There are definitely feelings there, but they are never consummated or even really talked about. This prevents it from becoming creepy, because really, neither character is ready for that kind of relationship at that moment in time. But the game leaves it open to the possibility that there will be.

 

I think the Anders romance is as dark as Bioware are going to be willing to go, and Anders' issues are actually kind of tame compared to Atton's. But I think a "romance" with a messed-up sort of character would be better in a form that wasn't an "all boxes ticked, sex in the final scene" type of romance. So an unconsummated attraction or a really intense friendship.

[Ryzaki]

Fair enough. Of course, what you don't like can be good for you. Unpleasant truths and all that.

 

That's kind of the point. Most PC players... really don't think about how the weaker side lives, ever. It's two fold- first, the PC itself is a power fantasy, but secondly even the players themselves are overwhelmingly affluent, rich, secure westerners with liberal beliefs and values and enough security that they can spend plenty of time playing luxury goods like video games. We are not a fanbase that particularly has to worry about 'no' being met with final, unappealable force.

 

How many Bioware players do you think have ever even dealt with someone who was terrified of them? As in, genuinely terrified, to the point that the alternative to ingratiating yourself with the strong is to risk death and worse? Where you feel you can't risk being honest, because the people who claim to respect choice the most are often the harshest to punish defiance?

 

Meh.

 

lol overwhelmingly affluent? Me? I'm eating goddamn ramen noddles because I splurged. I might be more wealthy than some people in third world countries but that doesn't make me affluent or rich in the least. As for no being met with final unappealable force yeah that's probably true for most of us. Many of us are also not in a position to force anyone in that position either.

 

A handful? So what is the point of its implementation?

 

Sometimes trust has to be earned, and not expected simply because you know you have good (or at least non-malevolent) intentions. Someone who attempts and is willing to sleep with a refugee at the first opportunity clearly is not seeking that trust before trying something that we generally should be based on trust.

 

Video games tackled racism and forced players to deal with in in various forms, which is good. Bioware is tackling same sex relationships, which is good as well. But so few games actually address the fears of the weak- and that's not so good. That's not so good at all.

 

Or we treat sex in a video game as a reward which has its own issues but doesn't suggest we'd treat actual people the same way. As you said some of us are aware of the difference in fiction and reality.

 

Fictional racism. Against fictional races and usually allows our PC to be as racist as well.

 

And what do you think tackling those fears of the weak is going to result in?

 

Bioware (and even Bethesda) games already moralize at you: not just on what they say, but also on what they don't say, and don't make an issue of.

 

The most progressive message in ME3 wasn't an advertisement that it had same-sex romances, or any dialogue that went 'you're gay? That's alright!' It was the fact that the player could engage in a same-sex romance and no one in the game cared or thought in controversial. That was a powerful use of silence.

 

They don't rely on gotcha moments though. Not so far anyway.

 

Though yes none of the other companions minded. No one seemed to have anything against cross species relationships either for some baffling reason.

 

Bioware plots frequently have themes you can agree with or disregard. Being a moral underlying a story is not the same as explicit preaching.

 

Well, at least I can still make you laugh.

 

Night, Ryzaki. I'll see you some time tomorrow.

 

Which is fair enough. Eh it can veer awfully close (it's one of the reasons I despise the book Mockingjay. The author got so caught up in her preaching war is bad (NO WAY I'D NEVER REALIZED) and that it has heavy psychological trauma on those who suffer it (Katniss becomes a mere shell of herself and loses almost all of her good attributes) that the book became a boring bland mess that had had me disgusted I had wasted my time on the series as a whole.

 

But yeah nite.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Well it's quite simple. Evil means immoral, and morals are subjective. So if a person doesn't consider killing for fun to be evil, or doesn't follow a moral code all together, then it's not evil in their eyes. 

Riiiight, and you don't expect the same person to kill you after sleeping with you, getting bored with you, or the first sign of disagreement.

 

Entertainment: You think it would be funny to see how they move around without legs, or how they will talk without teeth.

 

Now I basically want a LI like that. 

 

But then:

 

I also want my LI to treat ME nicely, as I will treat them, with love and care. 

 

Most people here say that these 2 behaviors are mutually exclusive. 

Are ****** kidding me? Of course they don't belong in the same bloody sentence. Decent people have enough trouble maintaining relationships with "love and care" without dealing with a ****** psychopath.

 

I swear Ryzaki is the only sane person in this thread.

[Hazegurl]

Riiiight, and you don't expect the same person to kill you after sleeping with you, getting bored with you, or the first sign of disagreement.

 

Are ****** kidding me? Of course they don't belong in the same bloody sentence. Decent people have enough trouble maintaining relationships with "love and care" without dealing with a ****** psychopath.

 

I swear Ryzaki is the only sane person in this thread.

Well it wouldn't happen if the devs don't put it in the game.

 

I guess that includes you in the madness as well. Personally I don't recall anyone but you and the rest of the naysayers introducing IRL into this thread. Now you want to pass judgement on people based on IRL situations you cooked up to argue against the LI type being added to a video game. Seems like you're just stressing yourself out over something you blew out of proportion to begin with.

[Hazegurl]

Oh no. I have to change my mind about my Aizen with tweaks idea. I want Lord Darcia III. I just rewatched an episode of Wolf's Rain. I had such a crush on this character a long time ago. Tall, dark(almost gothic dark), handsome, kinda crazy, had goals, not opposed to doing whatever needed to get the job done, had deep love for his wife, and

Spoiler

Killed all the main characters and prevented them from getting to the one place they desired since the start of the story. Then his eye pops up in the remade world and taints the entire new world. The most successful villain in anime.   

 

[Ryzaki]

Oh no. I have to change my mind about my Aizen with tweaks idea. I want Lord Darcia III. I just rewatched an episode of Wolf's Rain. I had such a crush on this character a long time ago. Tall, dark(almost gothic dark), handsome, kinda crazy, had goals, not opposed to doing whatever needed to get the job done, had deep love for his wife, and

Spoiler

Killed all the main characters and prevented them from getting to the one place they desired since the start of the story. Then his eye pops up in the remade world and taints the entire new world. The most successful villain in anime.   

 

*snip*

 

Oh god that man. Oh that man.

 

He made me rage so hard at the end of wolf's rain. That said the only one I ended up caring about was poor Toboe. Poor poor Toboe Well I liked Tsume too but Toboe man.

 

But he was successful.