1942 réponses à ce sujet

[Lady Artifice]

My Immortal must be a masterpiece of serious writing then, huh?

 

One has nothing to do with the other. 

 

I know nothing about your immortal, whatever he or she is, but tongue-in-cheek is not suppose be serious. There  are many instances where DAI doesn't take itself seriously and this is one of them.

 

 

My Immortal is an infamous internet fan-fiction. It has no coherent plot, and terrible spelling/grammar. It's sometimes been suggested that it's terrible on purpose. For some reason, Helvescient seems to think that the existence of a terrible tongue-in-cheek (supposedly) work of fiction renders all other tongue-in-cheek works of fiction equally bad. 

 

Which, if that's the case, compounds fallacy on top of fallacy. 

[o Ventus]

Constantly talking about it, BDSM references, lines like "He's been taking it"...

 

Maybe not sex hungry, but written atrociously. Newgrounds flash games had better writing than half of Inquisition's romances.

 

"He's been taking it" was a joke. How you managed to miss that is beyond me, and frankly, I don't want to know. He talks about sex a lot because he's promiscuous. Promiscuity =/= "sex hungry". He doesn't go out of his way and drop what he's doing to go f**k somebody. When he gets together with the Inquisitor, he remains faithful and committed (He calls the Inquisitor "My Heart", even in the video you linked). Same goes for if he gets with Dorian.

 

He talks about sex quite a bit.  The only reason they don't have more sex scenes in the game is the cost in man hours.  Listen to their party banter dialogue.  Bull had sex with people in Haven, in Skyhold, he'll sex up Dorian if you give him none and he gets frisky with Cassandra when she kills a lot of people while fighting.

 

Sera is flirting with you way on about why she's helping because you're so pretty, etc.

 

I already went over this above. His banter with Cassandra isn't indicative of anything, because again, it's a joke.

 

If the line being drawn is "he likes having sex", then a good 99.9999% of the world's population is "sex hungry". But then if you're going to dilute the label that much, why apply it at all when everyone fills it? 

[Zobert]

"He's been taking it" was a joke. How you managed to miss that is beyond me, and frankly, I don't want to know. He talks about sex a lot because he's promiscuous. Promiscuity =/= "sex hungry". He doesn't go out of his way and drop what he's doing to go f**k somebody. When he gets together with the Inquisitor, he remains faithful and committed (He calls the Inquisitor "My Heart", even in the video you linked). Same goes for if he gets with Dorian.

[/quote]

 

 

Promiscuity is sex hungry.  I have no clue, none whatsoever, I mean zero how you think that sleeping with everyone from Haven to Skyhold is not indicative of being sex hungry.  Is a promiscuous person on a sex diet?  Are they abstaining from a sex meal?

 

No.

 

 

I already went over this above. His banter with Cassandra isn't indicative of anything, because again, it's a joke.

 

If the line being drawn is "he likes having sex", then a good 99.9999% of the world's population is "sex hungry". But then if you're going to dilute the label that much, why apply it at all when everyone fills it?

 

 

Go over it, write a book, do a podcast on it...I don't know that it IS a joke with Cassandra.  It could be testing the waters.  We all take away something different, your take being no more valid than mine or the dude that wants my leftover sandwich at the subway.

 

No one said that  someone who just "likes having sex" means you're sex hungry although it could since sex is natural like eating.  Bull talks about it more than anyone else in the party, actually he's the only one in the party to talk about it or that you hear reports back on because he's been dipping the wrong people.

[TheOgre]

mixed thoughts in this here

I do like the idea of maybe a hardened soul, or maybe a depressed or socially awkward romance that has depth to it and takes quite the effort to break the shell.

[Handsome Jack]

I already went over this above. His banter with Cassandra isn't indicative of anything, because again, it's a joke.

 

If the line being drawn is "he likes having sex", then a good 99.9999% of the world's population is "sex hungry". But then if you're going to dilute the label that much, why apply it at all when everyone fills it? 

 

As Zobert pointed out liking sex doesn't make one sex-hungry. It's the fact he CONSTANTLY talks about it, CONSTANTLY talks about wanting it, frequently makes sex jokes, and frequently acknowledges he's slept with countless people that makes him sex hungry. Sure, he claims to go monogamous for the Inquisitor, but even then that doesn't change the facts.

 

If you get on a train once a hundred other people have ridden it, it's not exactly an "exclusive" train, even if you're the only one on board. Catch my drift? Good.

 

I'm really tired of seeing the media, particularly game media, pushing polygamy and promiscuity and the "norm" whereas monogamy, loyalty, and moderation are viewed as "outdated" or "undesirable", or at best "temporary". It doesn't make for good writing anyway if your character's only real calling card is that they really love sex. Might get a few laughs on a comedy show, but not in a serious fantasy RPG from a writing team that would've been ashamed of this same script 6 or 7 years ago.

 

Sure, plenty of the characters profess their undying singular love to the Inquisitor in the right circumstances, but some, especially ones like Isabella, Zevran, Sera, or Bull, have been having romps and flings countless times more and will continue to have them in the future. At least with Isabella and Zevran they seemed reluctant, as if they felt they weren't getting enough emotional fulfillment. Sera and Bull are just "lol its ok be urself" without any form of conscience or the inevitable repercussions of having dozens of romance partners. It's unrealistic as could possibly be.

[Zobert]

One has nothing to do with the other. 

 

 

My Immortal is an infamous internet fan-fiction. It has no coherent plot, and terrible spelling/grammar. It's sometimes been suggested that it's terrible on purpose. For some reason, Helvescient seems to think that the existence of a terrible tongue-in-cheek (supposedly) work of fiction renders all other tongue-in-cheek works of fiction equally bad. 

 

Which, if that's the case, compounds fallacy on top of fallacy. 

 

 

Did anyone miss that he was using the literary device "sarcasm"?  Like I don't mean to be a ****** here but, he was being sarcastic.

[Handsome Jack]

My Immortal is an infamous internet fan-fiction. It has no coherent plot, and terrible spelling/grammar. It's sometimes been suggested that it's terrible on purpose. For some reason, Helvescient seems to think that the existence of a terrible tongue-in-cheek (supposedly) work of fiction renders all other tongue-in-cheek works of fiction equally bad. 

 

My main sarcastically-made point is that just because writing is intentionally cheesy or bad does NOT make it a good thing to have. Antihumor isn't 100% funny all of the time.

[Zobert]

I'm sex hungry with my BF and I'm monogamous.  It's not a judgement against the Iron Bull the way it is when I say things like his boobs are too damn big and his head is too damn small.

 

I don't think to place moral judgements on bits of computer code.

[ThreeF]

They're both "cheesy" but Zevran did the cheesy first, did it with an accent, was more sophisticated (see his banter with Wynne) it just feels tired by this point.  But I know there are Bull fans.  I just can't get into the boobs that are 5x the size of his head.  He's like the polar opposite of Tweedy Bird.  I don't know how Tweedy flies or how Bull sees his own feet.

I think you are letting boobs get in the way. That particular scene was done over the top on  purpose (whenever one likes this approach or not is a different matter). With Zevran flirts I'm not all that sure it was done entirely on purpose, but I think in both cases it's very relevant that they are both kinky, especially Bull, I kind of suspect it was done this way to keep things light, not everyone wants to walk into "The Secretary" by accident.

 

 

Cheesy's one thing. Alistair or Zevran's lines were cheesy. They were humorously so. Bull, along with many others in Inquisition, is unfunnily cheesy to the point of being awkward and poorly-written. "lolrandom" is not an excuse for dialogue that sounds like it came from a DeviantART trollfic.

 

I miss the days when Dragon Age was a dark game with a dark tone and sprinkles of comedy to lighten things up. Now it's a total farce with a mocking and "cheesy" tone with occasional dark moments (hardly dark compared to Origins) to remind you it's the empty, dried-up husk of what Bioware's games once were before EA sucked their profitable blood to its last droplets.

*hint* You are not suppose to laugh with it (as in "oh so clever!"), but at it (as in "oh so cheesy!"), this is what I mean "not taking oneself seriously". Now, if you want your games all serious and proper, be it comedy or tragedy, that's another thing entirely.

 

 

My Immortal is an infamous internet fan-fiction. It has no coherent plot, and terrible spelling/grammar.

I see, thanks for clarification!

[Zobert]

I think you are letting boobs get in the way.

 

 

It could be that I'm jealous.

[Andreas Amell]

I find it difficult to take any romance in these games very seriously because it's not focused heavily in the narrative. You get new options in knowing a love interest but don't spend a significant amount of time to say he or she is the 'one'. It mostly like getting that high school fling that could be your first time, but not the last.

[Lady Artifice]

Did anyone miss that he was using the literary device "sarcasm"?  Like I don't mean to be a ****** here but, he was being sarcastic.

 

 

My main sarcastically-made point is that just because writing is intentionally cheesy or bad does NOT make it a good thing to have. Antihumor isn't 100% funny all of the time.

 

 

I caught the sarcasm. It was the main point I took issue with. Obviously anti-humor isn't automatically or universally funny.

 

Whether or not an effect is done intentionally in fiction, however, is an essential consideration in the analyses of that fiction. Not considering the intent of a joke is like not considering genre or context. So Helvescient's sarcastically made point did nothing to counter ThreeF's. 

 

Edit: So just about everyone was being sarcastic. 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

mixed thoughts in this here

I do like the idea of maybe a hardened soul, or maybe a depressed or socially awkward romance that has depth to it and takes quite the effort to break the shell.

That would be an interesting friendship and/or romance for a companion. 

[Zobert]

I caught the sarcasm. It was the main point I took issue with. Obviously anti-humor isn't automatically or universally funny.

 

Whether or not an effect is done intentionally in fiction, however, is an essential consideration in the analyses of that fiction. Not considering the intent of a joke is like not considering genre or context. So Helvescient's sarcastically made point did nothing to counter ThreeF's. 

 

Sarcasm can be a lowbrow type of humor but that doesn't negate the intent or subject.  People claim that the cheese is intentional, something none of us can know.  People claim that the cheese implies the opposite, that Bull is not a sex fiend, that also cannot be proven with the data we have.

 

In short we have our opinions, none valid or invalid by nature of them being opinions.

 

If they wanted us to believe Bull a non-sex loving, chaste member of the Qun then they failed because it would be universally "gotten".

[o Ventus]

As Zobert pointed out liking sex doesn't make one sex-hungry. It's the fact he CONSTANTLY talks about it, CONSTANTLY talks about wanting it, frequently makes sex jokes, and frequently acknowledges he's slept with countless people that makes him sex hungry. Sure, he claims to go monogamous for the Inquisitor, but even then that doesn't change the facts.

 

Except he doesn't *constantly* talk about it. Not by any stretch. If someone is "sex hungry", they wouldn't reserve themselves for a single person, by definition.

 

 

I'm really tired of seeing the media, particularly game media, pushing polygamy and promiscuity and the "norm" whereas monogamy, loyalty, and moderation are viewed as "outdated" or "undesirable", or at best "temporary". It doesn't make for good writing anyway if your character's only real calling card is that they really love sex. Might get a few laughs on a comedy show, but not in a serious fantasy RPG from a writing team that would've been ashamed of this same script 6 or 7 years ago.

 

There's 1 companion in each game that is promiscuous. Zevran, Isabela, and Bull. That's 3 out of 40 companions (counting each DLC, with the exception of the darkspawn thralls in Darkspawn Chronicles and Mhairi). Yeah, they sure are pushing promiscuity as the "norm" when less than 10% of the cast is actually promiscuous. You sound like a bitter middle-aged Republican complaining about how sex is poisoning the world and that promiscuity is actually killing people.

 

Sure, plenty of the characters profess their undying singular love to the Inquisitor in the right circumstances, but some, especially ones like Isabella, Zevran, Sera, or Bull, have been having romps and flings countless times more and will continue to have them in the future. At least with Isabella and Zevran they seemed reluctant, as if they felt they weren't getting enough emotional fulfillment. Sera and Bull are just "lol its ok be urself" without any form of conscience or the inevitable repercussions of having dozens of romance partners. It's unrealistic as could possibly be.

 

How many "romps and flings" has Sera had? I've never romanced her, but in none of her friendship dialogues does she ever talk about a time where she had a one-off with another person.

 

"Dozens of romance partners". There's no romance involved for the promiscuous people (prior to them actually being *romanced*, I mean). It's sex for the sake of getting off and feeling good. It isn't like they're saying "I love you" to someone and cheating on them right as they turn their back.

[DomeWing333]

If you get on a train once a hundred other people have ridden it, it's not exactly an "exclusive" train, even if you're the only one on board. Catch my drift? Good.

 

I'm really tired of seeing the media, particularly game media, pushing polygamy and promiscuity and the "norm" whereas monogamy, loyalty, and moderation are viewed as "outdated" or "undesirable", or at best "temporary".

 

If from the moment you get on the train, you're the only person who is ever allowed to ride it again, then, yes, it's an exclusive train. Monogamy is monogamy, regardless of prior promiscuity. The fact is, pretty much every romance option Dragon Age has ended with a loyal, monogamous relationship involving the player character. Even if they're dead. So yeah...not really seeing the whole polygamy thing.

 

At least with Isabella and Zevran they seemed reluctant, as if they felt they weren't getting enough emotional fulfillment. Sera and Bull are just "lol its ok be urself" without any form of conscience or the inevitable repercussions of having dozens of romance partners. It's unrealistic as could possibly be.

 

Unrealistic? Because no one in real life ever has casual sex? And every promiscuous person is emotionally unfulfilled and damaged?

[Lady Artifice]

Sarcasm can be a lowbrow type of humor but that doesn't negate the intent or subject.  People claim that the cheese is intentional, something none of us can know.  People claim that the cheese implies the opposite, that Bull is not a sex fiend, that also cannot be proven with the data we have.

 

In short we have our opinions, none valid or invalid by nature of them being opinions.

 

If they wanted us to believe Bull a non-sex loving, chaste member of the Qun then they failed because it would be universally "gotten".

 

No, of course it doesn't, and I didn't take issue with anyone's sarcasm. I was trying to bypass sarcasm entirely and focus on intent, which is perhaps why I came off as obtuse to the use of sarcasm. 

 

And somehow, by doing that I managed to make us veer off into an entire discussion of sarcasm, which is now frustrating me. 

 

ThreeF made a point, and Helvescient countered with an argument I considered to be false logic, regardless of personal opinions. That was the entirety of my point, which had very little to do with Bull. 

[Zobert]

Except he doesn't *constantly* talk about it. Not by any stretch. If someone is "sex hungry", they wouldn't reserve themselves for a single person, by definition.

 

 

Um, he pretty much does because the party banter repeats.  He is also the ONLY one that does.  He's also the one that you get complaints about.  If they didn't want him to seem like a sex hungry bull then maybe they ought to rethink the loop on the banter.  Until such time as they fix it, I can say he's sex hungry.

 

Not that it's a bad thing, as I've said.

 

What's wrong with sex?  Saying something is wrong with a biological urge is like saying it's wrong to take a ****.

[o Ventus]

Um, he pretty much does because the party banter repeats.  He is also the ONLY one that does.  He's also the one that you get complaints about.  If they didn't want him to seem like a sex hungry bull then maybe they ought to rethink the loop on the banter.  Until such time as they fix it, I can say he's sex hungry.

 

No, he actually doesn't. He does mention it more than once, but it is hardly the only thing he talks about. Hell, the entire basis of every single banter between him and Solas is a philosophical debate about the Qun and the illusion (or reality) of choice and free will.

 

 

Click the "watch on YouTube" button and look at the description for the different sections with Bull.

[Zobert]

If from the moment you get on the train, you're the only person who is ever allowed to ride it again, then, yes, it's an exclusive train. Monogamy is monogamy, regardless of prior promiscuity. The fact is, pretty much every romance option Dragon Age has ended with a loyal, monogamous relationship involving the player character. Even if they're dead. So yeah...not really seeing the whole polygamy thing.

 

 

Unrealistic? Because no one in real life ever has casual sex? And every promiscuous person is emotionally unfulfilled and damaged?

 

Well pre-penicillin and immune boosting drugs promiscuity was deadly for many.  Of course maybe if there weren't so many bears around Bull could use some healing potions to fix his dirty schlong...

 

Promiscuity is an evolutionary adaption for males to create multiple offspring and perhaps even to bond a tribe.  We're not running from sabre toothed tigers at this point in history and sex is now a roll of the dice as far as death thanks to HIV and hyper-hep C--not to bring doom and gloom in.

 

I'm not anti-sex but I'm also not going to throw my hands in the air and act like promiscuity is a healthy thing for people.

 

Social taboos on sex did not start because people hate sex.  Everyone LOVES sex.  It's awesome, it feels good.  Way, way way back some people with extra brain cells observed that people who had a lot of sex got sick and wrote it into their tribal codes and when religion sprang up it got inserted into there.

 

Yes, I'm Debby Downer.

[ThreeF]

No, of course it doesn't, and I didn't take issue with anyone's sarcasm. I was trying to bypass sarcasm entirely and focus on intent, which is perhaps why I came off as obtuse to the use of sarcasm. 

 

And somehow, by doing that I managed to make us veer off into an entire discussion of sarcasm, which is now frustrating me. 

 

ThreeF made a point, and Helvescient countered with an argument I considered to be false logic, regardless of opinions. That was the entirety of my point. 

Yep, masterpiece of serious writing was definitely not my point.

[Zobert]

No, he actually doesn't. He does mention it more than once, but it is hardly the only thing he talks about. Hell, the entire basis of every single banter between him and Solas is a philosophical debate about the Qun and the illusion (or reality) of choice and free will.

 

 

Click the "watch on YouTube" button and look at the description for the different sections with Bull.

 

He talks about sex with Cassandra and boning Dorian.  As I said party banter is on LOOP so if they intended for him to not seem raunchy they should fix that, and the fact that we have to deal with his boning tavern wenches.

 

The fact that they only write so much dialogue does not change the fact that the dialogue is on LOOP.  Ya dig?

[o Ventus]

He talks about sex with Cassandra and boning Dorian.  As I said party banter is on LOOP so if they intended for him to not seem raunchy they should fix that, and the fact that we have to deal with his boning tavern wenches.

 

The fact that they only write so much dialogue does not change the fact that the dialogue is on LOOP.  Ya dig?

You keep bringing this up as if it has any merit. I assume you're not an idiot, so I won't immediately explain why it doesn't. 

 

A LOT of people talk about sex in real life. I'm sure that makes them "sex hungry" too.

[ThreeF]

Well pre-penicillin and immune boosting drugs promiscuity was deadly for many.  Of course maybe if there weren't so many bears around Bull could use some healing potions to fix his dirty schlong...

Thedas now has STD?

 

 

Promiscuity is an evolutionary adaption for males to create multiple offspring and perhaps even to bond a tribe.

 

You might want to rephrase this.

[Zobert]

You keep bringing this up as if it has any merit. I assume you're not an idiot, so I won't immediately explain why it doesn't. 

 

A LOT of people talk about sex in real life. I'm sure that makes them "sex hungry" too.

 

Uhhh yes?  Yes, a lot of people are.  Have you looked at a magazine, album cover, or watched any given SATC epi?  How about Girls?  How about__________?

 

Yes, people are.  I am.  The second I see my bf I'm going to whip that **** out and lay it on him.