221 réponses à ce sujet

[Nefla]

They weren't cut because they're controversial, they were cut because they require choice and dialogue. Better to just keep the hoards of mindless drones spewing out of rifts for the player to kill so they can get +2 power.

[Fearsome1]

We are definitely going to get scary, sexy Desire Demons back at some point! We just haven griped loudly enough yet to entice the devs to cough up those otherworldly creatures.

[o Ventus]

 

They are. 

Her vagina is never seen in her scene. In fact, her model doesn't even have one. 

 

Are they really? Then why is one generally censored while the other isn't?

 

You said her crotch, not her actual genitals.

[Fireheart]

The fact is they should've had more demons in a game about demons. Still, I hated those terrors and despair demons. The terrors knock you down too much, annoying as FUCCCC. And the despair demons always moving away when you attack them. But seriously, I was tired of always seeing the same demons at every rift. Bioware needs more/better monster/enemy designers.

[NaclynE]

To be honest desire demon's are synanomous with the DRAGON AGE franchise. The desire demon's been in DAO/DAA and DA 2 so why not DAI? Frankly having them not show up is like not having a dragon be in the game either. Desire demon's are a part of the DA lore. Just suddenly giving up on them is like wth.

[Fireheart]

Oh, I know. I'm just responding to the notion that it's "fair".

T*tties are okay when they're on-screen, but a d**k is obscene (and also actually illegal, in many cases outside pornography or private use). I don't understand why.

Aren't penises and vaginas genitals, though? Breasts are mammary glands, they aren't supposed to be sexual. I totally understand why it's okay to show breasts but not penises. And if they show those, they need to show vaginas too. At least breasts are apart of the chest, so they are shown equivalent to a man's chest.

#FREE THE NIPPLE!

[TevinterSupremacist]

I doubt nudity was a reason, considering there's full-frontal female nudity in the game from both Sera and Cassandra.

There's sort of a difference, nudity during sex scene with a LI that you had a build-up character arc till that point is not the same as "magical seductive bewbz out of nowhere". The latter is seen as "gratuitous" and more questionable, by some.

 

Pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff NONESENSE! Nonesense I tell ya.Gratuitous=uncalled for. Magical bewbz out of nowhere are NEVER uncalled for. NEVER.

[Giantdeathrobot]

I'm not sure how demon ladies whose only claim to fame is feeling themselves up while trying to make you do bad things are so emblematic of the franchise. We see, what, 2 of them in Origins (3 with Shale's DLC) and 1-2 in DA2? 

[berelinde]

 

The difference is that sloth demons and such doesn't make an appearance because they just doesn't, not because they were cut apart. But Desire demons does make one, and tadaa! It's totally different than the DA:O and DA2' ones.

 

Coincidence? Yeeeah, right...

The demon in question was from the novels, where it was described as appearing as a male, with dark hair and a beard. This isn't just some random desire demon, it's one with a bit of personality. That being the case, it makes sense for the demon to manifest in a form it has used before, that of a bearded male, not a purple succubus.

 

So, was it a coincidence that the desire demon wasn't a self-fondling, statuesque female? Absolutely not! It was completely intentional. But that doesn't mean that they changed the design in order to avoid angering the social justice warriors. They changed the design because they wanted it to look like the one from the book (but they forgot the beard!). Or maybe you think they should go back and rewrite the book.

[berelinde]

^^Yeah, I checked the image on the wiki after I made the post. His 5 o'clock shadow looks much more pronounced on my monitor, but I don't have any cinematic tools installed that let me get close enough for a good look. Regardless, "a dark haired guy (brown might be considered dark hair) with a bad shave" is still closer to the book than "visually female with purple flames for hair".

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Are they really? Then why is one generally censored while the other isn't?

 

You said her crotch, not her actual genitals.

Double standards in cultures. Personally I think either both should be censored or neither should be censored since they are the same thing. 

 

I said 'crotch' because it was quicker to write than 'penis and/or vagina'. You are right, genitals is a better term and I should have used that. 

[MissMayhem96]

Isn't Imshael in the Sueldin Keep a desire demon? *Ahem* Choice. Spirit.

I could be mistaken, I forgot if Michel tells the inquisitor what sort of demon is in the keep.

[cJohnOne]

Aww the thread fizzled out.  Maybe a desire demon will offer you a deal.

[NaclynE]

I agree, but all i get are the same dumb answers that there just wasn't a place in the story where they really could have fit in which i think is total bullsh!t. Here's hoping for a DLC that will bring them back. Also what about abominations? sylvans? golems? rock wraiths? ash wraiths? skeletons? ogres? shrieks? Where they also too controversial to be put into this game too? I agree that Bioware needs more/better monster/enemy designers cause the current ones don't have a clue on what they are doing.

 

Well abominations and (kind of sort of) skeletons were in DAI but were treated unimportant/normal goons in DAI. But I defenetly agree with the list though. Especially the ogres. It was a nice change of pace dealing with humans more than monsters in DAI but why not an even balance of monsters and humans?

 

Regardless bring them desire demons back! Lol.

[Qun00]

They're only controversial for a very specific group aka extreme feminists. I don't see how it should matter enough to cause changes.

Moreover, desire demons are the pure embodiment of one of the aspects of human nature. They're genderless and can present themselves in any form that is appealing to the victim.

But if the devs must worry about the slower fans, the presence of "male" desire demons should be enough to get the point across.

[Sifr]

Or it could be a mistake on the developers part just like with Nathaniel Howes eyes are different in colors between Dragon Age Awakening and Dragon Age II - gray in Dragon Age Awakening and light brown in Dragon Age II. And Please don't say he wore contacts. 

 

With all these mistakes about eyes changing colour, am I the only one who kinda wishes that they'd made it part of Origins/Awakening that becoming a Warden automatically alters eye colour to the same supernatural blueish-white from the Sacred Ashes trailers?

 

Not only would it have solved these problems with keeping track of individual eye colours (which seems to happen a lot to Warden characters across installments), it would also fit with how Wardens are often described as having a piercing gaze, as well as a nice little allusion to how Wardens are suffering from extremely halted ghoulification and will eventually develop the same milky-white eyes shared by all ghouls and the Darkspawn?

 

They're only controversial for a very specific group aka extreme feminists. I don't see how it should matter enough to cause changes.

Moreover, desire demons are the pure embodiment of one of the aspects of human nature. They're genderless and can present themselves in any form that is appealing to the victim.

But if the devs must worry about the slower fans, the presence of "male" desire demons should be enough to get the point across.

 

Well said!

 

It's a daft argument to me because all spirits and demons are genderless anyway, so what they chose to appear as presumably is more down to whim that anything else? We've already seen this with Pride Demons, with Mouse in Origins who pretended to be a male mage who failed his Harrowing, while Solas' friend in Inquisition instead manifested as a woman after being freed from the binding circle?

 

While they can appear as what they think their target might find appealing, I don't think that's always the reason, since it's really doubtful that they would use sexuality in the case of Feynriel, Connor, Amelia and Lady Harriman, two of whom were small children? Instead we see that they either pretended to be somebody or thing else, such as Feynriel's father or a small cat? It's also likely that Connor was tempted by a benign form? Lady Harriman is probably to have been more tempted by the power offered than anything else, so the form chosen would probably have been immaterial?

 

What really confuses me about this "controversy" is that while some people hate the over-sexualised "female" desire demons, they also hate the idea of "male" desire demons even more, think that if they existed they'd have appeared before, or would consider their inclusion to be pandering or attempting to appease the feminist crowd?

 

And as an aside, the argument that "if they existed, they'd have appeared before now" just reminds me of part of the lore about the Qunari, where it's mentioned that the Chantry didn't believe Qunari females existed for centuries, only to be pleasantly surprised when they were invited to Par Vollen and saw that there are a ton of them knocking about? It's kinda weird logic to say "X doesn't exist because I've never seen it"... no wonder the Qunari seem to be mentally facepalming every couple minutes around outsiders?

 

Ultimately, it doesn't seem that Bioware can win either way at this point, so they might as well just keep having them appear, rather than cutting them?

[Poisd2Strike]

I'm not sure how demon ladies whose only claim to fame is feeling themselves up while trying to make you do bad things are so emblematic of the franchise. We see, what, 2 of them in Origins (3 with Shale's DLC) and 1-2 in DA2? 

 

I don't think Desire Demons are necessarily emblematic of the DA franchise.  However, I do think that Bioware should have either excluded them completely from DAI or made Imshael (who appears as a Male) a different type of Demon.  I see it as a case of "If it's not broke, don't fix it"...

[Abyss108]

They're only controversial for a very specific group aka extreme feminists. I don't see how it should matter enough to cause changes.

Moreover, desire demons are the pure embodiment of one of the aspects of human nature. They're genderless and can present themselves in any form that is appealing to the victim.

But if the devs must worry about the slower fans, the presence of "male" desire demons should be enough to get the point across.

 

They are controversial because they do NOT choose to appear as something appealing to the character, they choose to appear as something appealing to a straight male gamer. Make them appear how the lore states they should, and I guarantee you 99% of the complaints will disappear.

[Qun00]

With all these mistakes about eyes changing colour, am I the only one who kinda wishes that they'd made it part of Origins/Awakening that becoming a Warden automatically alters eye colour to the same supernatural blueish-white from the Sacred Ashes trailers?
 
Not only would it have solved these problems with keeping track of individual eye colours (which seems to happen a lot to Warden characters across installments), it would also fit with how Wardens are often described as having a piercing gaze, as well as a nice little allusion to how Wardens are suffering from extremely halted ghoulification and will eventually develop the same milky-white eyes shared by all ghouls and the Darkspawn?
 

 
Well said!
 
It's a daft argument to me because all spirits and demons are genderless anyway, so what they chose to appear as presumably is more down to whim that anything else? We've already seen this with Pride Demons, with Mouse in Origins who pretended to be a male mage who failed his Harrowing, while Solas' friend in Inquisition instead manifested as a woman after being freed from the binding circle?
 
While they can appear as what they think their target might find appealing, I don't think that's always the reason, since it's really doubtful that they would use sexuality in the case of Feynriel, Connor, Amelia and Lady Harriman, two of whom were small children? Instead we see that they either pretended to be somebody or thing else, such as Feynriel's father or a small cat? It's also likely that Connor was tempted by a benign form? Lady Harriman is probably to have been more tempted by the power offered than anything else, so the form chosen would probably have been immaterial?
 
What really confuses me about this "controversy" is that while some people hate the over-sexualised "female" desire demons, they also hate the idea of "male" desire demons even more, think that if they existed they'd have appeared before, or would consider their inclusion to be pandering or attempting to appease the feminist crowd?
 
And as an aside, the argument that "if they existed, they'd have appeared before now" just reminds me of part of the lore about the Qunari, where it's mentioned that the Chantry didn't believe Qunari females existed for centuries, only to be pleasantly surprised when they were invited to Par Vollen and saw that there are a ton of them knocking about? It's kinda weird logic to say "X doesn't exist because I've never seen it"... no wonder the Qunari seem to be mentally facepalming every couple minutes around outsiders?
 
Ultimately, it doesn't seem that Bioware can win either way at this point, so they might as well just keep having them appear, rather than cutting them?

But again, it's a very specific demographic. Why care?

[Sifr]

But again, it's a very specific demographic. Why care?

 

About which, the criticism for or against desire demons (of either gender) being included in future games?