221 réponses à ce sujet

[Qun00]

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

What I meant was, why would the devs care what feminists think?

It's just a specific group.

If you keep modifying your work to please every single person in the world, it's gonna become a mess.

[Abyss108]

What I meant was, why would the devs care what feminists think?

It's just a specific group.

If you keep modifying your work to please every single person in the world, it's gonna become a mess.

 

Except this isn't what they are doing. They probably removed them due to time constraints. 

 

If they did remove them due to what people said, that just means they listen to criticism, and happened to agree with this piece. 

 

I could take any group of people and say Bioware should ignore them because they are a "specific group". The people who want the tactical camera back are a "specific group". The people who want the desire demons back are a "specific group". No different than listening to the specific group who thinks the previous implementation of desire demons are bad.

[Medhia_Nox]

Hopefully they "cut" desire demons because they're childish and poorly imagined concepts.

 

Even the lazy bearskarne sloth demon in the mage intro is more universally "sloth" than any presented desire demon is "desire" so far.

 

Pride, Sloth and Desire were really poorly imagined... that they kept those stupid purple monstrosities as "Pride Demons" actually surprised me.

 

I found some of the new designs to be much more evocative.  Envy and Despair in particular - Fear I thought was rather stupid looking (though the avatar of fear or whatever it's called was very interesting).

 

Bioware should just please stop using demons... all they are in DA are "themed monsters" and do nothing I'd considered uniquely "demonic". 

[rigron]

Yes they were, and it´s a shame. Desire demons have always been my favorite demons and I expected a good Desire Demon side quest like Connor´s in DA: Origins for Inquisition.

 

There doesn't have to be a reason for anything? You really think Bioware's writers sat around a table and said to themselves "okay, how can we NOT show Desire demons in this game?" as opposed to just writing a story that didn't involve desire demons?

 

There are also no Hunger or Sloth demons, but for some reason I doubt you'd say that they're avoiding offending fat and lazy people.

 

Sloth demons have been replaced by Despair demons and Hunger demons have been almost nonexistant throught the entire saga, I think we have only encounter 2 in total amongs all DA games and DLCs the 2 of them had very little involvement and power given the fact that they are the 2nd weakest demons, standing over just Rage demons in the power pool.

[MACharlie1]

Yes they were, and it´s a shame. Desire demons have always been my favorite demons and I expected a good Desire Demon side quest like Connor´s in DA: Origins for Inquisition.

 

 

Sloth demons have been replaced by Despair demons and Hunger demons have been almost nonexistant throught the entire saga, I think we have only encounter 2 in total amongs all DA games and DLCs the 2 of them had very little involvement and power given the fact that they are the 2nd weakest demons, standing over just Rage demons in the power pool.

I think people get Sloth demons confused with Abominations.

 

This is an Abomination. Commonly thought to just be a Sloth demon. 

[Qun00]

Except this isn't what they are doing. They probably removed them due to time constraints.

If they did remove them due to what people said, that just means they listen to criticism, and happened to agree with this piece.

I could take any group of people and say Bioware should ignore them because they are a "specific group". The people who want the tactical camera back are a "specific group". The people who want the desire demons back are a "specific group". No different than listening to the specific group who thinks the previous implementation of desire demons are bad.

There's a great deal of difference between complaints from one or two people and an opinion shared by a large percentage of the franchise's overall fandom.

Just like there isn't anyone who doesn't agree that Qunari women need better hair options.

Hopefully they "cut" desire demons because they're childish and poorly imagined concepts.
 
Even the lazy bearskarne sloth demon in the mage intro is more universally "sloth" than any presented desire demon is "desire" so far.
 
Pride, Sloth and Desire were really poorly imagined... that they kept those stupid purple monstrosities as "Pride Demons" actually surprised me.
 
I found some of the new designs to be much more evocative.  Envy and Despair in particular - Fear I thought was rather stupid looking (though the avatar of fear or whatever it's called was very interesting).
 
Bioware should just please stop using demons... all they are in DA are "themed monsters" and do nothing I'd considered uniquely "demonic".

These demons literally have no identity beyond what they represent.

As Cole puts it, " They just... are."

Of course their design is supposed to be obvious to some extent in order to effectively convey that.

[fizzypop]

@fizzypop - What about the Bull D:

He was exempt because of how ****** rad he is. Also those horns not real, made with playdoh.

[fizzypop]

Desire Demons were driven away by the Breach because apparently Theodosians no longer have desires.

You know I can't blame them. There is a big ass hole in the sky.

[Abyss108]

There's a great deal of difference between complaints from one or two people and an opinion shared by a large percentage of the franchise's overall fandom.

Just like there isn't anyone who doesn't agree that Qunari women need better hair options.
 

 

Its not one or two people though. Not to mention, just because something is popular, doesn't mean its correct.

 

More people enjoy games like Call of Duty than Dragon Age. Doesn't mean Bioware should listen to that more popular opinion and stop making RPGs. They can choose who they want to appeal to.

 

And all of this completely ignores the fact that demons appearing as naked ladies didn't even make sense in the first place. It was completely immersion breaking when a desire demon thinks that is appealing to me. It just screams "this is a game and we think our audience is straight boys, have some BOOBIES~"

[o Ventus]

 

Sloth demons have been replaced by Despair demons and Hunger demons have been almost nonexistant throught the entire saga, I think we have only encounter 2 in total amongs all DA games and DLCs the 2 of them had very little involvement and power given the fact that they are the 2nd weakest demons, standing over just Rage demons in the power pool.

No they haven't. Despair Demons and Sloth Demons are different. Despair Demons were originally thought to be offshoots of Sloth Demons, but this is no longer the case. In any matter, your reply doesn't acknowledge the point of my post.

[KaiserShep]

Hopefully they "cut" desire demons because they're childish and poorly imagined concepts.

 

Even the lazy bearskarne sloth demon in the mage intro is more universally "sloth" than any presented desire demon is "desire" so far.

 

Pride, Sloth and Desire were really poorly imagined... that they kept those stupid purple monstrosities as "Pride Demons" actually surprised me.

 

I found some of the new designs to be much more evocative.  Envy and Despair in particular - Fear I thought was rather stupid looking (though the avatar of fear or whatever it's called was very interesting).

 

Bioware should just please stop using demons... all they are in DA are "themed monsters" and do nothing I'd considered uniquely "demonic". 

 

I did like Topor in DA2's Fade Sequence. While it just looked like another shade, it did present an interesting choice. Funny how Merrill can gain rivalry if you reject it. Stupid bloodmage.

[Personette]

 

 

I found some of the new designs to be much more evocative.  Envy and Despair in particular - Fear I thought was rather stupid looking (though the avatar of fear or whatever it's called was very interesting).

 

 

Envy is so phallic I can't think of anything else when I see it. Freud would have such an easy time with whoever designed it. 

[NaclynE]

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.

 

I am not going to argue with this point.

 

However the only thing I will say that I may get hatemail for is I think one of the reasons why the desire demons have been female in DAO/DAA and DA 2 is the people are trying to imply that the world of DA is "Male dominant" so it's far more common to see female desire demons who entice men to become their pets or allow themselves to get possessed or be controlled. I know it sounds sexsist but I tottally agree that there should be male desire demons too. Frankly the demons gotta breed somehow you know? I am up for seeing different gendered monsters. At least in DAI they do have different gendered henchmen so why not monsters too?

 

PS: If I offended anyone in this post i'm sorry and I wasn't trying to. Frankly I the DA universe seems to be untapped and I feel there's room for anything but from what i've seen in DAO/DAA and DA 2 it just seems like in some cases the world seems to cater to one gender as far as the commonality of female desire demons. I feel that's messed up and there is room for male even though I know the female desire demons do seduce women too.

[Abyss108]

I am not going to argue with this point.

 

However the only thing I will say that I may get hatemail for is I think one of the reasons why the desire demons have been female in DAO/DAA and DA 2 is the people are trying to imply that the world of DA is "Male dominant" so it's far more common to see female desire demons who entice men to become their pets or allow themselves to get possessed or be controlled. I know it sounds sexsist but I tottally agree that there should be male desire demons too. Frankly the demons gotta breed somehow you know? I am up for seeing different gendered monsters. At least in DAI they do have different gendered henchmen so why not monsters too?

 

PS: If I offended anyone in this post i'm sorry and I wasn't trying to. Frankly I the DA universe seems to be untapped and I feel there's room for anything but from what i've seen in DAO/DAA and DA 2 it just seems like in some cases the world seems to cater to one gender as far as the commonality of female desire demons. I feel that's messed up and there is room for male even though I know the female desire demons do seduce women too.

 

Well the problem here, is that it still doesn't make sense when a desire demon appears to a straight women as female. They can change their appearance easily so why wouldn't they just switch?

 

And I actually think Thedas is slighty female dominated, since the chantry was founded. Its the most powerful religion in Thedas and can only be lead by women. Andraste, Cassandra, Leiliana, Meridith - all the high ranks are filled by women. We have a female Empress Celene, female gray warden leader at adamant, Feraldan can be ruled by a women... I've never any evidence that modern Thedas is male dominated.

 

[Herr Uhl]

 

Frankly the demons gotta breed somehow you know?

 

I think you misunderstand how spirits and demons work. They are manifestations of magical energy, not living (biologically speaking) beings.

 

When they die, their energy goes back and a new spirit comes to be. Spirits and demons seem to be a zero sum game.

[Icy Magebane]

Well the problem here, is that it still doesn't make sense when a desire demon appears to a straight women as female. They can change their appearance easily so why wouldn't they just switch?

 

And I actually think Thedas is slighty female dominated, since the chantry was founded. Its the most powerful religion in Thedas and can only be lead by women. Andraste, Cassandra, Leiliana, Meridith - all the high ranks are filled by women. We have a female Empress Celene, female gray warden leader at adamant, Feraldan can be ruled by a women... I've never any evidence that modern Thedas is male dominated.

 

Well, the Black Divine is male, but I think that role can also be filled by a woman (maybe...).  The main difference with the Imperial Chantry is that men can be priests, but anyone can fill such a role... Just wanted to point that out, but you are pretty much correct as far as I can tell... although I'd make that "heavily female dominated" rather than slightly.  The Qunari spiritual leaders are all female, and they make up a sizeable amount of the world's population.  Plus, the Qunari philosophy flatly states that females are better at administration and males are mainly just there to fight or do other kinds of grunt work... Although you might hear about a King now and then when reading through the lore, the most visible rulers so far have been female.  Heck, even though Cailan was technically a King, Anora was the brains behind the throne...  I sure don't recall any buffoonish females that could be compared to Cailan in any DA story thus far.

[ZipZap2000]

Both ME3 and DA:I have far less enemy types

 

ME3 has the most enemy types of all three games. 

[Abyss108]

Well, the Black Divine is male, but I think that role can also be filled by a woman (maybe...).  The main difference with the Imperial Chantry is that men can be priests, but anyone can fill such a role... Just wanted to point that out, but you are pretty much correct as far as I can tell... although I'd make that "heavily female dominated" rather than slightly.  The Qunari spiritual leaders are all female, and they make up a sizeable amount of the world's population.  Plus, the Qunari philosophy flatly states that females are better at administration and males are mainly just there to fight or do other kinds of grunt work... Although you might hear about a King now and then when reading through the lore, the most visible rulers so far have been female.  Heck, even though Cailan was technically a King, Anora was the brains behind the throne...

 

Yep, I think Tevinter might be male dominated (possibly? Hard to know when we haven't been there). The black divine has to be a guy. But every location we've been to so far isn't.

 

[Icy Magebane]

Yep, I think Tevinter might be male dominated (possibly? Hard to know when we haven't been there). The black divine has to be a guy. But every location we've been to so far isn't.

 

I think it's most likely split, as in neither gender dominates the other.  What matters in Tevinter is magical ability.

 

Uh... maybe.  It seems that way now, but you are right that we don't have first hand experience, so it's hard to say...

[KaiserShep]

ME3 has the most enemy types of all three games. 

 

Yeah, I don't get where people got the idea that enemy types reduced in variety in the series. And aside from that, ME3 is the only one with insta-kill baddies on any difficulty.

[TevinterSupremacist]

Hopefully they "cut" desire demons because they're childish and poorly imagined concepts.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[o Ventus]

Yeah, I don't get where people got the idea that enemy types reduced in variety in the series. And aside from that, ME3 is the only one with insta-kill baddies on any difficulty.

I'd argue that it's more or less the same. Each faction has different enemies, but they all fulfill the same basic archetypes and are all very similar to one another in that regard (excluding the Collectors, since they were added in DLC). The variety only comes from the special enemy units (of which each faction only has 1 or 2) that don't easily fall into an archetype.

 

Cannibals, Assault Troopers, and Geth Troopers are your standard infantry. Marauders and Centurions (no Geth equivalent) are your +1 mooks. Nemeses, Ravagers, and Rocket Troopers are the defensively weak, offensively strong long-range units. Phantoms and Geth Hunters are the stealthy close-range units. Brutes and Husks are the only exclusively melee units. Juggernauts and Atlas mechs are the slow, bulky tanks.

 

That leaves Combat Engineers, Banshees, and Harvesters as the really unique enemies.

 

So, numerically, there are more enemies in 3, but seeing how most of them can be fought using the same tactics, I wouldn't necessarily say it has more variety.

[Hiemoth]

I'd argue that it's more or less the same. Each faction has different enemies, but they all fulfill the same basic archetypes and are all very similar to one another in that regard (excluding the Collectors, since they were added in DLC). The variety only comes from the special enemy units (of which each faction only has 1 or 2) that don't easily fall into an archetype.

 

Cannibals, Assault Troopers, and Geth Troopers are your standard infantry. Marauders and Centurions (no Geth equivalent) are your +1 mooks. Nemeses, Ravagers, and Rocket Troopers are the defensively weak, offensively strong long-range units. Phantoms and Geth Hunters are the stealthy close-range units. Brutes and Husks are the only exclusively melee units. Juggernauts and Atlas mechs are the slow, bulky tanks.

 

That leaves Combat Engineers, Banshees, and Harvesters as the really unique enemies.

 

So, numerically, there are more enemies in 3, but seeing how most of them can be fought using the same tactics, I wouldn't necessarily say it has more variety.

 

I cannot truly state how much I disagree with that statement. First of all, all three main groups differ from each other already from their basic approach to combat and within in each group, there are huge variations on different tasks. Even if going by the extremely simplified approach pushed here that they all have units which follow basic sentiments is really misleading. Yeah, Cannibals and Assault troopers are infantry, but they are both very different in combat structure. And to be honest, the fact you grouped rocket troopers with nemesises for this argument is kind of mindblowing. And by the way, none of this actually even touches on combat synergy of the different groups.

 

 To go even further, or backwards actually, this argument that they had the least amount variation would require the previous games have more variation. Yet based on such a vague grouping, in that they just kind of need a similar kind of weapon, and not even really that, almost all the combat situations in ME1 and ME2 were the same.