221 réponses à ce sujet

[o Ventus]

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.

 

Nobody argued that the groups are different from one another. No, Cannibals and Assault Troopers are not "very different" in combat structure. You fight them using the exact same tactics. Literally the only difference is that the Cannibal has slightly more health, and that the Assault Trooper can evade projectile-based powers. That doesn't radically shift how you approach fighting them. How are Nemesese and Rocket Troopers fundamentally different? They're both low-health, low-shield, high-damage snipers. The only difference in their behavior is that the Nemesis deals single-target damage and fires hitscan projectiles while the Rocket Troopers fires a moving projectile that deals splash damage. Again, the unit itself is different, but the archetype is the same. Nobody on either side is arguing the synergy between the enemy factions, I'm discussing the variety of the units, now how well they work together.

 

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.

 

I never said that 3 had the least variation. Did you not read the very first sentence of the post you quoted?

 

Your entire angry rant here is "your point is bad", but you haven't actually stated why or provided any counter points. Please, learn to read, then learn to debate, and then come back to me.

[Hiemoth]

Nobody argued that the groups are different from one another. No, Cannibals and Assault Troopers are not "very different" in combat structure. You fight them using the exact same tactics. Literally the only difference is that the Cannibal has slightly more health, and that the Assault Trooper can evade projectile-based powers. That doesn't radically shift how you approach fighting them. How are Nemesese and Rocket Troopers fundamentally different? They're both low-health, low-shield, high-damage snipers. The only difference in their behavior is that the Nemesis deals single-target damage and fires hitscan projectiles while the Rocket Troopers fires a moving projectile that deals splash damage. Again, the unit itself is different, but the archetype is the same. Nobody on either side is arguing the synergy between the enemy factions, I'm discussing the variety of the units, now how well they work together.

 

 

 

 

I never said that 3 had the least variation. Did you not read the very first sentence of the post you quoted?

 

Your entire angry rant here is "your point is bad", but you haven't actually stated why or provided any counter points. Please, learn to read, then learn to debate, and then come back to me.

 

I must begin with a slight apology, as I did honestly miss your first sentence and as it was a response to direct comment on how ME3 doesn't have less variation in enemies, read it as such. My regret is slightly reduced by your instant jump to personal insults, which is obviously a sign of good debater, but it is still worth apologizing for. Even though I still completely disagree with everything you wrote after I asked someone to read it out loud to me.

 

 As for the first paragraph, and how my main point was that your argument was bad. It was in my opinion? I stated is as those units are different? Exactly what was supposed to my counter-argument? That Cannibals, since they eat their dead will cluster around a dead enemy and thus that can be used to drag them out of hiding, which assault troopers do not do? Or since they are larger in size, they are not actually as adept in taking cover? Also that if there is a Marauder in the field, they can create a force field for husks, which Centurion's cannot do for assault troopers, but who in turn can use smoke grenades? Or that rocket troopers fire a slower projectile that can be reacted to, but don't change position such as Nemesises do?

 

This all comes back to my central argument in response, which you either ignored, did not understand or was badly explained. Your whole argument that there is no difference is only valid if those categories are so broad that you can force them all in to them. Thus I do not feel it adds any true value to a discussion, as there was clearly an effort from the ME developers to add variability to the different enemies and groups. To dismiss it simply because well yeah, they're all still grunts even if their behaviour and synergy is changed between groups, just sets up an insanely high barrier on what really be considered different.

[TotoroTori]

I was actually kind of sad for no sexy desire demon, or feminine like outfits for the female players (Or unique gender hairstyles)  or even 'sexy armor'. I mean I rolled my eyes at the bikini armor joke.

 

And I am a girl but it kind of made me frown.

[NaclynE]

I'm sorry for being unclear here and I am sorry if I offended any female posters. I should of explained things a bit better.

 

Maybe what I should of said was I feel since DAO i feel like the game is more built around a male character and not a female character. I feel like there have been many instances where the dialog and dialog choices pertain to a male character as opposed to any gender. There have been some instances where it does pertain to a female only like how it was either a abonimation or that evil sorceror guy explains how supposedly Cullen had sexual thoughts about your female mage character and there is a dialog choice to act all embarressed. However other instances like if you have your female mage character obtain power from the desire demon to get blood magic the desire demon responds to your female mage as more of a man than a woman and even goes "down under" a way a woman would go on a man.

 

I feel this big team is more noticeable in DA 2. The only real times it seems to be a gender thing is if you are trying to romance Aveline as a man or romance Sebastian as a woman or Carver/Bethany. 80% of DA 2 it seems to be built around male Hawke and never female hawke  

 

DAI Seems to be a bit better as far as showing a difference between a male or female Inquisitor but I feel like in probably another DA game maybe BIOWARE can express a storyline build around a female lead and a male lead.

 

I admit BIOWARE isn't perfect and I had some gripes with them way back in DAO (My first warden that I finished with was a female african american looking human noble who was apparently raised by white parents) but it seems like BIOWARE does listen to fans and gripes about things. Frankly I do agree that maybe there should be a male desire demon. It should be easy to do. Have him look all muscular, shirtless, and have him wear a speedo and sound sexy. Give girl gamers something to like too.

 

Also again if I have offended any female posters in my previous post I wasn't trying to and I'm trully sorry. Much respect to girl gamers. I do have a sister who plays video games and she's older than me.

[o Ventus]

As for the first paragraph, and how my main point was that your argument was bad. It was in my opinion? I stated is as those units are different? Exactly what was supposed to my counter-argument? That Cannibals, since they eat their dead will cluster around a dead enemy and thus that can be used to drag them out of hiding, which assault troopers do not do? Or since they are larger in size, they are not actually as adept in taking cover? Also that if there is a Marauder in the field, they can create a force field for husks, which Centurion's cannot do for assault troopers, but who in turn can use smoke grenades? Or that rocket troopers fire a slower projectile that can be reacted to, but don't change position such as Nemesises do?

 

Yes, that is a valid counter argument, if worded a bit poorly. One to which I would respond: the Cannibals eating their allies is an added feature exclusive to them, yes, but it doesn't radically change how you approach fighting them. Again, I already said that the factions and units are different and have differences between them, but they fulfill the same archetypes. Keyword: ARCHETYPES. Just because the Cannibal eats dead allies doesn't make them any less a standard infantry mook. Their eating ability doesn't even benefit them much in the long run because the armor plating they get covers so little of their body, and they root themselves in place while eating.

 

 

This all comes back to my central argument in response, which you either ignored, did not understand or was badly explained. Your whole argument that there is no difference is only valid if those categories are so broad that you can force them all in to them. Thus I do not feel it adds any true value to a discussion, as there was clearly an effort from the ME developers to add variability to the different enemies and groups. To dismiss it simply because well yeah, they're all still grunts even if their behaviour and synergy is changed between groups, just sets up an insanely high barrier on what really be considered different.

 

I never said there was no difference. I said they're "more or less the same", indicating little or very little difference. I acknowledge that they are different, but they are also very similar, and the way I see it, the similarities outweigh the differences.

 

The unit types have differences, but the way you are made to approach them isn't different or unique.

 

You also keep mentioning synergy, which nobody besides you has even brought up or argued.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

A futanari desire demon! Hell yes I would LOVE to see that on the next game or one of the mods for the Dragon Age series. I would make my female mage for that. Imagine the possibilities!

[Just My Moniker]

A futanari desire demon! Hell yes I would LOVE to see that on the next game or one of the mods for the Dragon Age series. I would make my female mage for that. Imagine the possibilities!

 

[thats1evildude]

(Sigh) Stop necro'ing threads.

[Just My Moniker]

(Sigh) Stop necro'ing threads.

[Darvins]

Some Chick named Liana Kerzner seems to think so.  I found an Article in the TechRaptor forums entitled "Why Feminist Frequency Almost Made me Quite Writing About Video Games"  If someone could link that for me I'd Appreciate it. 

 

Anyways if true that would be too bad to not have desire demons anymore.  What do you think of desire demons?

 

The appearance and nature was changed to represent something somewhat more subtle than 'Teenage straight Male might desire this' to something a little more 'They look for what you want, you really want deep inside, and offer you it' which improved them around 100000% See 'Choice Spirit'

[thats1evildude]

Can we stop referring to Imshael as a desire demon? He's a Forbidden One, part of a group of spirits that are in a class by their own. Imshael is the only "choice spirit" in existence.

The average desire demon still defaults to female. That's stated clearly in the lore of DAI.

[Donk]

Oh I thought desire demons were like Asari. Neither male nor female. and perfectly acceptable as a romance option for straight females.

[thats1evildude]

All spirits are technically genderless, since they don't sexually reproduce. Still, they default to forms we think as male or female.

You look at a despair demon, you think "old lady." Pride demons come off as male to the writer of the article the OP mentioned.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

They should have compromised and made futanari desire demons. Something for everyone!

Yes!(3x) I would love that! I would make my female human, elven and a qunari mage for this ****!!

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

Hey is there a mod for a desire demon with a futa ability? If so don't hesitate to reply.

[kimgoold]

I'm female and had no problems with Desire Demons DAO & DA2. This is PC BS!. These same people got the armours changed as well, its Just A Game.

[NaclynE]

They should have compromised and made futanari desire demons. Something for everyone!

 

In a subject similar to this I did say they could have male desire demons which are super buff shirtless demon guys with long flowing hair having manish voices wearing speedos or something to satisfy female players.

[SentinelMacDeath]

well, it makes really no sense to make them look "hot" since they take the form of your desire anyways, but man ... controversial? Because of the boob grabby grabby action? The nips weren't even exposed! Am I supposed to feel ashamed when I see boobs? 

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

well, it makes really no sense to make them look "hot" since they take the form of your desire anyways, but man ... controversial? Because of the boob grabby grabby action? The nips weren't even exposed! Am I supposed to feel ashamed when I see boobs?

No. You don't have to be ashamed. They might as well rate the game A for adults instead of M for mature.

[shortbreadspacer]

Doesn't Dorian refer to the desire demon he met in the Fade as a "he"? Too bad we never got to see the male version.

[d1ta]

Idk, but I dont think so..

Why only stop at 'desire demon' ?

IIRC, I didn't get to meet Sloth demon in DAI as well, so is it cut content? Is BW being lazy? BW is afaraid to offend a group of people?

No.

We already have new and varying mooks on the field, some old baddies return (drakspawn) and some do not (desire, sloth, whatever).

You cant expect BW to keep on adding new baddies for us to kill in the next game while keeping all the old ones from previous games.

[LorenzEffect]

I don't remember any controversy about the desire demons, period.