1109 réponses à ce sujet

[Vegeta 77]

I am fine if you want to give some more to the straight men but not just us everyone should get these romances including the lgbt community. It is only fair every gets the heartbreak romance. Not just straight men should get it more often and no one else.

[Zjarcal]

All romances should end up in heartbreak (except whoever I chose of course).

[Abelas Forever!]

I am fine if you want to give some more to the straight men but not just us everyone should get these romances including the lgbt community. It is only fair every gets the heartbreak romance. Not just straight men should get it more often and no one else.

No one is saying that straight men should only get heartbreak romances and no one else. People are just saying that there is imbalance what comes to hearbreak romances and they want to tell this to devs.

[TevinterSupremacist]

I haven't turned a blind eye to anything you've said. I've explained how it's relevant, and you simply keep arguing the same extreme argument that criticizing how something is written adds a quota. You can't argue that talking about female romances wouldn't add a quota, but then that comparing them to male romances will. 

 

Bioware is equally likely to do the following -

 

"We would like some happy romances" -> "Oh, we need a certain number of happy romances and sad romances, better add a quota"

"We would like a similar number of happy romances as the men" -> "Oh, we need a certain number of happy and sad romances, better add a quota"

 

You can't argue one of those is more likely than the other.

 

I also wouldn't say that I am being patronizing by agreeing with the multiple men in this topic who have complained that their romances are boring and they would like some tragedy too.

 

I repeatedly said that criticising how something is written might or might not add a quota, depending on what the content of the critique is.

Of course you can talk about female romances without adding a quota. Quota begins when you express a desire for ballance.

 

No, your example relies on the hypothesis that bioware definately needs a number of happy and sad romances. Bioware might not need happy/sad romances at all though.

"We would like some happy romances"(for females) -> "Okay, we need more happy romances for women, let's make more happy romances"

"We would like a similar number of happy romances as the men" -> "Oh, we need an equal/similar of happy and sad romances among men and women, let's start checking what we did so far and adjust our upcoming romances to achieve ballance"

Which of the two sounds like a forced quota? One is "try to increase this number", the other is "keep an equal or compareable percentage among these two numbers"

Both rely on you changing a number(s) but only one enforces a quota you ought to meet. "Increasing a number" doesn't have a single, exact goal to compare it against and deem it ok or not,you could add one more, two , double them, whatever you want, it's way open. However, achieving a ballance has an exact goal to compare it against, that of equal distribution. That's far more constricting.

 

No, you were patronising by saying "men could enjoy that". Agreeing with an individual poster on what said individual poster enjoys isn't patronising, I never said that.

[gay_wardens]

So this is how a video game series dies. Community focuses on the most inconsequential parts of the game and the devs listen.

[TevinterSupremacist]

So this is how a video game series dies. Community focuses on the most inconsequential parts of the game and the devs listen.

A member of the bioware team calling it "dating sim with a 'save the world mingame' in it" should have been your first clue.

[Ascendra]

So this is how a video game series dies. Community focuses on the most inconsequential parts of the game and the devs listen.

Riiiiight. A 100+ hour game where romance content is given what - 3 conversations in total? Which is what - about 40 minutes of the entire game? Yep, i can see DA totally dying if they add a couple more.

A member of the bioware team calling it "dating sim with a 'save the world mingame' in it" should have been your first clue.

Please provide a link to the exact quote, or it did not happen and your argument is invalid.

[whitless256]

Riiiiight. A 100+ hour game where romance content is given what - 3 conversations in total? Which is what - about 40 minutes of the entire game? Yep, i can see DA totally dying if they add a couple more.


Please provide a link to the exact quote, or it did not happen and your argument is invalid.

 

 

I googled it and several articles and some tweets came up.  This is just the one from the top of the list.   Last paragraph of the article.  

 

http://www.torontosu...on-ups-the-ante

[Phate Phoenix]

Please provide a link to the exact quote, or it did not happen and your argument is invalid.

 

It was something, gosh, I think Patrick Weekes said at one of the GaymerX2 panels. It was also a joke. 

[Addai]

Well it's still weird he thinks he's too damaged for you, but is then willing to flirt with Josie whether he's romanced or not. Either his issues aren't too much for HER (unlike you), or he's just leading her on. Or he was lying to you in the romance about his issues being the problem, and just didn't like you that much.  Everything I hear about this guy makes me hate him...

He flirts with the Inquisitor, too, but doesn't intend it to go anywhere. Josie and Blackwall are your traditional knight and unattainable noble lady. The writer said one of the songs she listened to while writing Blackwall was The One That Got Away by the Civil Wars: "I never meant to get us in this deep/ I never meant for this to mean a thing." Sure you can say he shouldn't have flirted at all if he didn't have any intentions, but the guy is human.

 

I'm sure the intent behind companions having agendas and relationships outside the PC's world is that it makes them more real. I hated Alistair-Leliana, too, though mostly because I just hated Leliana. lol Anyway that DLC was just all wrong.

[TevinterSupremacist]

Please provide a link to the exact quote, or it did not happen and your argument is invalid.

Googling can help you lots, here's an interview where it was mentioned.

http://www.torontosu...on-ups-the-ante

 

Laidlaw mentions this quote and refers to it as a joke...even if we assume the original commenter meant it as a joke, when you've reached a place where this line is relevant, even as a joke, you're already far off.

[Uirebhiril]

Googling can help you lots, here's an interview where it was mentioned.

http://www.torontosu...on-ups-the-ante

 

Laidlaw mentions this quote and refers to it as a joke...even if we assume the original commenter meant it as a joke, when you've reached a place where this line is relevant, even as a joke, you're already far off.

 

It is, if anything, an indication that they know people appreciate and enjoy the unique stories brought by each companion. Romances are a natural development of that, and something people often like as it lets them see another layer of a particular character. BioWare are one of the few that do it, not to mention do it right. Why wouldn't they be aware or make jokes over this?

[Ascendra]

Googling can help you lots, here's an interview where it was mentioned.
http://www.torontosu...on-ups-the-ante

Laidlaw mentions this quote and refers to it as a joke...even if we assume the original commenter meant it as a joke, when you've reached a place where this line is relevant, even as a joke, you're already far off.

Oh enlightened one, thanks for opening my eyes to the power of google, my life would never be the same. Or not. Because I know this quote. Asking for a link for such statements that are twisted to support ridiculous arguments about how additional content (especially romance) is ruining the game is merely a precaution. In truth both such statements and those that turn joke quotes by the developers into support of such statements are getting very very old and very tiring.
Anyway, i do not wish to derail the thread and turn it hostile.
So, peace.

[whitless256]

Oh enlightened one, thanks for opening my eyes to the power of google, my life would never be the same. Or not. Because I know this quote. Asking for a link for such statements that are twisted to support ridiculous arguments about how additional content (especially romance) is ruining the game is merely a precaution. In truth both such statements and those that turn joke quotes by the developers into support of such statements are getting very very old and very tiring.
Anyway, i do not wish to derail the thread and turn it hostile.
So, peace.

 

I don't think he was suggesting that romance ruins the game.  Rather, I think he's saying that if the devs are forced to put increasingly more focus on romance content rather than the main story/game mechanics etc, there could be a risk to the quality of future games.  That's how I interpreted the comment.  

I think this is an issue that's a way's down the road, but it's certainly valid to the discussion.  

[Abyss108]

I repeatedly said that criticising how something is written might or might not add a quota, depending on what the content of the critique is.

Of course you can talk about female romances without adding a quota. Quota begins when you express a desire for ballance.

 

No, your example relies on the hypothesis that bioware definately needs a number of happy and sad romances. Bioware might not need happy/sad romances at all though.

"We would like some happy romances"(for females) -> "Okay, we need more happy romances for women, let's make more happy romances"

"We would like a similar number of happy romances as the men" -> "Oh, we need an equal/similar of happy and sad romances among men and women, let's start checking what we did so far and adjust our upcoming romances to achieve ballance"

Which of the two sounds like a forced quota? One is "try to increase this number", the other is "keep an equal or compareable percentage among these two numbers"

Both rely on you changing a number(s) but only one enforces a quota you ought to meet. "Increasing a number" doesn't have a single, exact goal to compare it against and deem it ok or not,you could add one more, two , double them, whatever you want, it's way open. However, achieving a ballance has an exact goal to compare it against, that of equal distribution. That's far more constricting.

 

No, you were patronising by saying "men could enjoy that". Agreeing with an individual poster on what said individual poster enjoys isn't patronising, I never said that.

 

Not a lot I can say to you, when we actually agree on most points. Forcing a quota is bad. Artificially forcing an equal number of happy/sad romances before male/female is bad. No disagreements here. I'm not sure whether you misunderstand what I'm saying, or are twisting my arguments on purpose.

 

"Balance" is not something they should actively work towards, so much as they should examine WHY the current imbalance exists. Balance is the end effect of thinking about the romances in the same way, not something that should occur by artificially changing things.

 

If you flip a coin 1000 time, you should get around 500 heads/tails. If you get 950 heads, there's an imbalance. You don't fix that imbalance by manually flipping 450 of them back, you examine what caused that imbalance to exist in the first place. Maybe you just got really unlucky. Or maybe there actually was some other factor there that you should consider. Same situation here. Not asking them them to force changes, just to examine why the imbalance is there. Balance will naturally follow from that.

 

And that's all I have to say on that! Repeating the same arguments at each other really isn't going to get anyone anywhere. 

 

He flirts with the Inquisitor, too, but doesn't intend it to go anywhere. Josie and Blackwall are your traditional knight and unattainable noble lady. The writer said one of the songs she listened to while writing Blackwall was The One That Got Away by the Civil Wars: "I never meant to get us in this deep/ I never meant for this to mean a thing." Sure you can say he shouldn't have flirted at all if he didn't have any intentions, but the guy is human.

 

I'm sure the intent behind companions having agendas and relationships outside the PC's world is that it makes them more real. I hated Alistair-Leliana, too, though mostly because I just hated Leliana. lol Anyway that DLC was just all wrong.

 

hmm, I can see your point. Guess it's kinda like Solas romance in that way (keeps telling himself he shouldn't, but keeps coming back!). I still hate the guy for a bunch of reasons, but the flirting isn't one of them anymore!

 

I never knew Alistair-Leiliana was a thing! I remember Fenris-Isabela from 2 though! I sorta liked that, nice to know they had lives outside of Hawke!

[Aletheia]

This was posted in the Solas thread and I must say that it clarified a lot of my feelings on the emboldened part of this quote. Making an inevitable (death, cheating/breakup, leaving) outcome for a romance option without the players choice takes away player contingency and thus breaks the illusion of choice and thus the relationship to the character. The player becomes resentful of the romance.  The explanation on player contingency comes up at the 4:41 mark in the video if you want to get to that part first.

 

It fits. I deleted a character, my elven mage before Mythals temple because i really dont want to go through that drama. I mean the kind, like thane got handles stressed me immensely (I think its because my mother died at that time and I was always good as escaping emotions, so loosing this figure was a kind of ersatzobjekt, an icon  in her stead that allowed me to grieve for a fictional character because i could not for a real one.

 

but since that this **** is stained/strained for me and I can live with some drama, but not too much..SO having indications would be cool because i DO have the feelings often characters are written to "play coy" like saying "it wont work" and general angsting all around. which makes distinguishing not easy

[Reva-C]

I'm still not over Thane......if I can sit through that, I can face anything LI's have to throw at me.....

[kaidanluv]

 

Not all of us want Cullen or Kaidan types, and Cullen/Kaidan types are not the only kind of love interest that can both be interesting and end well.

 

I'm cool with the OP's request and can see where many are coming from with their romance options, but as someone who is very firmly in the Cullen/Kaidan camp and typically tends to romance dudes like them, please don't take them away, either. 

[gay_wardens]

Riiiiight. A 100+ hour game where romance content is given what - 3 conversations in total? Which is what - about 40 minutes of the entire game? Yep, i can see DA totally dying if they add a couple more.

 

It's not that. It's the complaints as a whole. People nitpicking and making Bioware shift their focus from the aspects of gameplay that used to REALLY shine.

[BiggKab]

No clue how bad female PCs have it, don't really push romances using them. After being kicked in the teeth by Morrigan I'm pretty much done with in game love interest. I play games for fun not as a Life simulator while living my current one. So yeah, lighten up on all us a bit lol.

[Ascendra]

It's not that. It's the complaints as a whole. People nitpicking and making Bioware shift their focus from the aspects of gameplay that used to REALLY shine.

 

This isn't a complaint thread. This is a friendly thread with people requesting a continuation of an aspect of the game that they really like. 

 

And what aspects of the game would make it really shine? This is purely your opinion and is in no way factual. I am for example content with the gameplay. I do not like some aspects of it but I can certainly close my eyes to them, because for me its not important, I in fact find other things more important in an rpg - story, characters, open world. But this is my opinion. You have your own opinion which is opposite to mine, and Bio caters to both of us because we represent different groups of paying customers. Doesn't mean it has to favor one over the other. More likely it will address both within its limits. 

Besides Bioware isn't shifting their focus just because people want more snu snu. I doubt fans have this profound effect on a company. If anything I'd assume Bioware does things within their own limitations - budget, word count, etc. It is not a company that runs to write something just because a 40 page thread asks for it. I assume they would not implement an aspect of the game if it may potentially take away from some other aspect. The fact that two romances were added for female players has nothing to do with how the gameplay is built. This isn't a zero-sum situation, especially when people working on a gameplay are different to people that write stories and animate companions. To imply otherwise is I think ridiculous. The fans can politely request (which was done in this thread), beg, demand, threaten, whatever, but they in no way shape company's future direction. Although I believe that a company would listen more to people that ask politely rather than presume that they know better than the developers of what would make their game good.

 

Besides if we take and example from DAO - Morrigan's dlc didn't take away from anything. It merely added a story bit and a closure to people that romanced her (although I could argue that for wardens that did not romance her the dlc is completely irrelevant. I played a female warden and I loved Morrigan, but I did not give a damn where she went). So I do not see how a Solas dlc for example would shift their focus from other aspects of the game. If anything it would add a bit of a story and closure to people that want it, much like Morrigan dlc.

 

I don't think he was suggesting that romance ruins the game.  Rather, I think he's saying that if the devs are forced to put increasingly more focus on romance content rather than the main story/game mechanics etc, there could be a risk to the quality of future games.  That's how I interpreted the comment.  

I think this is an issue that's a way's down the road, but it's certainly valid to the discussion.  

 

No, I understood what he meant, my annoyance was due to using an obviously joke quote to support a statement which In my opinion is no less ridiculous. Again I do not think we as fans can force developers to do anything. To presume we can is a huge overstatement. If anything they would do things within their own limitations that would fit their own narrative. Thats what I believe anyway.

Modifié par Ascendra, 08 janvier 2015 - 10:19 .

[Grieving Natashina]

This isn't a complaint thread. This is a friendly thread with people requesting a continuation of an aspect of the game that they really like. 

 

And what aspects of the game would make it really shine? This is purely your opinion and is in no way factual. I am for example content with the gameplay. I do not like some aspects of it but I can certainly close my eyes to them, because for me its not important, I in fact find other things more important in an rpg - story, characters, open world. But this is my opinion. You have your own opinion which is opposite to mine, and Bio caters to both of us because we represent different groups of paying customers. Doesn't mean it has to favor one over the other. More likely it will address both within its limits. 

Besides Bioware isn't shifting their focus just because people want more snu snu. I doubt fans have this profound effect on a company. If anything I'd assume Bioware does things within their own limitations - budget, word count, etc. It is not a company that runs to write something just because a 40 page thread asks for it. I assume they would not implement an aspect of the game if it may potentially take away from some other aspect. The fact that two romances were added for female players has nothing to do with how the gameplay is built. This isn't a zero-sum situation, especially when people working on a gameplay are different to people that write stories and animate companions. To imply otherwise is I think ridiculous. The fans can politely request (which was done in this thread), beg, demand, threaten, whatever, but they in no way shape company's future direction. Although I believe that a company would listen more to people that ask politely rather than presume that they know better than the developers of what would make their game good.

 

Besides if we take and example from DAO - Morrigan's dlc didn't take away from anything. It merely added a story bit and a closure to people that romanced her (although I could argue that for wardens that did not romance her the dlc is completely irrelevant. I played a female warden and I loved Morrigan, but I did not give a damn where she went). So I do not see how a Solas dlc for example would shift their focus from other aspects of the game. If anything it would add a bit of a story and closure to people that want it, much like Morrigan dlc.

I'm sorry I'm out of likes, but all I can say to this is:

 

[Silcron]

Huh, I hadn't realized this. (I'm male, and when I play female characters they're lesbian, so while I know of how most romances turn out, I haven't experienced the male ones myself)

You know, it's actually a good point and, given my distanced knowledge of those tragic romances, I think I'd actually appreciate the heartbreak in a romance. It's not like relationships in Bioware games do not have drama, but apart from Morrigan and now possibly Cassandra I can't remember female LI's abandoning you. And yes, I'm aware Morrigan may not count due to the DLC, so there's that.

Bastila doesn't count, since while she betrays you, you can reunite with her (and Lucasarts canonized that.) Hmm, let me think of SWToR...Well, there's that guy for one of the sith females (you have to be a sith force user and female to romance him, I won't say more because spoilers). He betrays you because of main plot reasons and is actually a boss battle, but since the gameplay dictates that you must have a companion of each (range dps, melee tank, healer...) you cannot execute him, which he so deserved.

I'm trying to think of female examples in that game, I know most on this forum haven't played it, so maybe there's an example Bio made there, but no. The only oother example of female that comes to mind is on the Jedi Knight your padawan Kira Carsen. Thing is, she was born in the Empire and trained not just as a sith but as a Child of the Emperor, brainwashed sith he uses more or less in "Assuming Direct Control" way, but it's kind of unclear if that actually happens of if it's what they're led to believe as part of the brainwashing. Kira, after her first time, in which she realizes she doesn't remember last week she flees ot Nar Shadaa, when a Jedi finds her and convinces her to join the Order. It takes other Child confronting her directly with you present for her to tell you this. But it's not a full betrayal, it's understandable that she doesn't want to go preaching she was born sith when the Empire and the Republic are at war, and she doesn't dump you. (To be fair I may be biased. Kira is my favourite Bioware romance, and that includes DA:I).

I don't know if this was helpfull, but, well. I enjoyed writing so that counts, right?

[Abelas Forever!]

I think Cassandra romance is a hearbreak romance if you want it to be heartbreaking. Because you can always choose should she become a divine or not. Although I'm not sure does she really leave Inquisitor if she becomes a divine? I think it would make sense that she would leave the PC and I think there should not be anything that you can do about it because you already have a choice which is that you don't have to make her divine. I don't find anything wrong about this kind of heartbreak because you have choices. I think the tragedy which comes when you take your sibling with you in the deep roads in DA2 was well made. Your sibling wants to come with you and your mother doesn't want him/her to come with you so you can easily pick one of the choices there and save your sibling just by not taking her/him in the deep roads. If the tragedy is  done like this in romances I would not have any problem with it because then I would have choices again.