I'm a little obsessed with crossbows. Before release, I was hoping against hope for them to be an option in DAI.
So, crossbows are one thing that The Witcher has that I wish DAI did.
Oh, I got the impression your were complaining about the DLC, my bad.
Oh, I got the impression your were complaining about the DLC, my bad.
That would indeed be a weird thing to complain about.
No worries, I was vague. It's quite the opposite, though, I promise. There are quite a few free DLCs, and one of them gives me crossbows. Things are looking up.
Ouch! lol!!
I think that is more of a problem with the DA team than the ME one, but then again with the success of DAI and the fans compliants about certain characters in ME we may not get companions like Kaidan or Ashley anymore. Kaidan is considered boring and Ashley is considered a b**ch. And both are hated for not dropping everything in their lives to follow the PC. Ashley will always be a straight military girl, and Kaidan is a bisexual/homosexual (depends on how you see him) who doesn't sleep with everything that isn't nailed down and is pretty much a laid back guy.
I swear if I ever see another promiscuous Bisexual character again, it will be way too soon.
It was meant to wound, there isn't much hope of seeing true diversity (in the sense of competing core character elements) anytime soon. DA too seems to drift towards defining people by what their **** or *** are busy doing rather than what's on the inside (more often than not).
Or maybe it's just their fans, I don't know.
ME didn't really have that but it started bleeding in later in the series until you got 3 which was pretty full blast in that sense I think.
It was meant to wound, there isn't much hope of seeing true diversity (in the sense of competing core character elements) anytime soon. DA too seems to drift towards defining people by what their **** or *** are busy doing rather than what's on the inside (more often than not).
Or maybe it's just their fans, I don't know.
ME didn't really have that but it started bleeding in later in the series until you got 3 which was pretty full blast in that sense I think.
Perhaps its a combo. Most fans seemed to argue vehemently in favor of set sexualities because they believed it defined the characters. I personally think that opinion is hogwash but apparently not BioWare. Therefore the major concern with companions will be "Can I romance them?" and "Are they gay, straight, bisexual, asexual, demisexual, etc. moreso than "How does this character serve the plot?" "Are they important to the narrative?"
I think I said this before in this thread but I'll say it again, if they're going to have romances then they should reduce the number to plot important characters and make them all romancable by both genders and just focus on developing them within the plot and leave their sexuality out of it. If a fan wants to think they are gay,straight, or bi then let them.
For all other sexual shenanigans...(here's my controversial opinion 
) add a whorehouse. That way at least BW wouldn't be force feeding 10 companions into a game to account for every fan's sexuality, in-game gender, and particular bedroom tastes. But the way it's going now, the next DA game will have 20 LIs who are all just archtypes waiting to get banged by the PC as a reward for doing their busywork.
If I were to pull the discussion back on topic I do like that their are two main romances in TW3, and everyone else is either a one night stand, or a wh**e. Although, my only complaint about the romances in TW3 is that Triss didn't seem to get a lot of content compared to Yen and the characters only seem to acknowledge Yen as "the one" even after picking Triss. That sucked. 
Dorian is a very good example of why a set sexuality is important. In his case it really enhances his background and his development in DA:I. Arguably the best character in DA:I.
Whilst i'm an avid supporter of characters having a set sexuality i'm in agreement with Hazegurl's point about characters sexualities being more important than their relevance to the plot. Bioware have painted themselves into a corner, even if they have done so willingly. The problem with being the shining beacon of inclusiveness is now they have to be exactly that, inclusive. All the time.
Now they have to create characters first and foremost to fill a quota; Gay man, straight man, bisexual man, gay woman, straight woman, bisexual woman at the very least. Now we also have trans characters as well, so it's only a matter of time before there are demands to have a trans companion in every game. I have no doubt that Maevaris will be a companion in DA4 (which is a shame because not only do I dislike companions that were introduced in the EU like Cole, but also because it seems the majority want to see her inclusion because she's trans more so than because she's a good character.) The list is ever expanding too, and there's only so many requests that Bioware can adhere to. Asexual, demisexual companions, polyamorous companions etc. Where do Bioware draw the line? Does everyone "deserve" to be represented? Furries perhaps, or even otherkin, transethnic people? Transabled? (yes, that's actually a thing i'm afraid to say, look it up.) At some point Bioware is going to have to become somewhat exclusionary just to keep their games from becoming too ridiculous.
Characters, especially companions should be there first and foremost to serve the plot, not to make a certain part of the player base feel included. If they can do both then great. Hopefully Bioware will improve on creating plot relevant companions for future DA titles.
Dorian is one of my favorite characters but not for his sexuality. While I think his personal quest was moving I think more could have been done with him other than an arranged marriage plot. Like the old friends he knew who became Venatori, or helping out more with Tevinter matters considering that Cory's whole focus was on restoring Tevinter. Perhaps Dorian could have been a spy who believes he's saving his country et al. If Dorian was let's say...in Calpurnia's shoes, but romancable and of course given more screen time than Calpernia. it would have made for a very interesting story.
Dorian is one of my favorite characters but not for his sexuality. While I think his personal quest was moving I think more could have been done with him other than an arranged marriage plot. Like the old friends he knew who became Venatori, or helping out more with Tevinter matters considering that Cory's whole focus was on restoring Tevinter. Perhaps Dorian could have been a spy who believes he's saving his country et al. If Dorian was let's say...in Calpurnia's shoes, but romancable and of course given more screen time than Calpernia. it would have made for a very interesting story.
I think the fact that he was gay added to his background and his personal quest. It made it more believable, I guess. He ended up being my favorite character in this game, for sure. And this is coming for a straight white male gamer.
I think the fact that he was gay added to his background and his personal quest. It made it more believable, I guess. He ended up being my favorite character in this game, for sure. And this is coming for a straight white male gamer.
Dorian is my favourite character too along with Cassandra. It's why i'm actually sad that Gaider is leaving the franchise, he's usually written my favourite characters from every game. Oh and i'm also a straight white male gamer.
Perhaps its a combo. Most fans seemed to argue vehemently in favor of set sexualities because they believed it defined the characters. I personally think that opinion is hogwash but apparently not BioWare. Therefore the major concern with companions will be "Can I romance them?" and "Are they gay, straight, bisexual, asexual, demisexual, etc. moreso than "How does this character serve the plot?" "Are they important to the narrative?"
I think I said this before in this thread but I'll say it again, if they're going to have romances then they should reduce the number to plot important characters and make them all romancable by both genders and just focus on developing them within the plot and leave their sexuality out of it. If a fan wants to think they are gay,straight, or bi then let them.
For all other sexual shenanigans...(here's my controversial opinion
If I were to pull the discussion back on topic I do like that their are two main romances in TW3, and everyone else is either a one night stand, or a wh**e. Although, my only complaint about the romances in TW3 is that Triss didn't seem to get a lot of content compared to Yen and the characters only seem to acknowledge Yen as "the one" even after picking Triss. That sucked.
And yet every single one of those characters, whether they are bisexual, asexual, demisexual, panromantic bisexual otherskin with BDSM tendencies, they will ultimately just be another Merrill or Ashley or Alistair on some level or another.
Regarding DLC BioWare can certainly learn from CDPR.
Avaar armour and mount = Pay for it
Similar stuff in Witcher = Free
People can point at free multiplayer DLC until the cows come home but there's a lot of players who'll gain no benefit from that at all. To my knowledge the black emporium barely added anything (in terms of new armour) which means my qunari still looks awful in the very limited amount of armour in game.
Whilst i'm an avid supporter of characters having a set sexuality i'm in agreement with Hazegurl's point about characters sexualities being more important than their relevance to the plot. Bioware have painted themselves into a corner,
Nothing new here.
Perhaps its a combo. Most fans seemed to argue vehemently in favor of set sexualities because they believed it defined the characters. I personally think that opinion is hogwash but apparently not BioWare. Therefore the major concern with companions will be "Can I romance them?" and "Are they gay, straight, bisexual, asexual, demisexual, etc. moreso than "How does this character serve the plot?" "Are they important to the narrative?"....
To me it feels like the inquisitor is somewhat abusive and a bit of a predator trying to "romance" many of the characters in this game due to how player driven the initiations of many of them are, I know bioware tried to reduce the amount of in your face romance dialogue but personally, all that achieved is making them feel very onesided.
I think bioware could do well with stripping the amount of possible paths down to 2-4 in total again.
Whilst i'm an avid supporter of characters having a set sexuality i'm in agreement with Hazegurl's point about characters sexualities being more important than their relevance to the plot. Bioware have painted themselves into a corner, even if they have done so willingly. The problem with being the shining beacon of inclusiveness is now they have to be exactly that, inclusive. All the time.
Now they have to create characters first and foremost to fill a quota; Gay man, straight man, bisexual man, gay woman, straight woman, bisexual woman at the very least. Now we also have trans characters as well, so it's only a matter of time before there are demands to have a trans companion in every game. I have no doubt that Maevaris will be a companion in DA4 (which is a shame because not only do I dislike companions that were introduced in the EU like Cole, but also because it seems the majority want to see her inclusion because she's trans more so than because she's a good character.) The list is ever expanding too, and there's only so many requests that Bioware can adhere to. Asexual, demisexual companions, polyamorous companions etc. Where do Bioware draw the line? Does everyone "deserve" to be represented? Furries perhaps, or even otherkin, transethnic people? Transabled? (yes, that's actually a thing i'm afraid to say, look it up.) At some point Bioware is going to have to become somewhat exclusionary just to keep their games from becoming too ridiculous.
Characters, especially companions should be there first and foremost to serve the plot, not to make a certain part of the player base feel included. If they can do both then great. Hopefully Bioware will improve on creating plot relevant companions for future DA titles.
I demand equal representation for all. Transforming desire demon that can be male or female. My otherkin alpha werewolf won't feel fairly represented without that option, and its only fair because Cole was a spirit/demon, why not!?
In seriousness, I really hope that is a slippery slope at best.
I'm a little obsessed with crossbows. Before release, I was hoping against hope for them to be an option in DAI.
So, crossbows are one thing that The Witcher has that I wish DAI did.
Don't get too excited about the crossbows in Witcher though, they're more utility than anything else. Primarily used to bring down aerial opponents such sirens or harpies and underwater combat. Only moderately useful in some situations with explosive bolts which can ignite foes, but sword and magical signs are still your bread and butter.
Snip
If I were to pull the discussion back on topic I do like that their are two main romances in TW3, and everyone else is either a one night stand, or a wh**e. Although, my only complaint about the romances in TW3 is that Triss didn't seem to get a lot of content compared to Yen and the characters only seem to acknowledge Yen as "the one" even after picking Triss. That sucked.
<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
The idea of a whor*hou* with both male and female who**s and possibly other nonsense should satify those that need their digital sexual fix, allowing for the company to focus on the main character(s). After all, I can't imagine a Dragon Age game where romance is the main story arc (well maybe some Japanese manga games). And, please, avoid designing romance subplot(s) as quests, as it reminds me of that wonderfull American idiom "Wham Bang.. thank you maam". What a disaster that is in DAI (referring to Cass romance).
As for Yen vs Triss, my preference is Triss. But, hey, maybe I can get into Yen's virtual pants. A difficult goal, as I understand it. The game's focus is on Geralt's hunting adventures. This is the way games should be written. Put nudity/romance at the bottom of the pile and make the romance option a contorted path. This ought to leave the developer freedom to actually write a good game (graphics aside).
Dorian is a very good example of why a set sexuality is important. In his case it really enhances his background and his development in DA:I. Arguably the best character in DA:I.
<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
Are you saying that you bought the game for a set sexuality and "good character development"?
'Cause I bought the game from Bio's marketing pitch about:
1. Thedas in danger!
2. Mage Templars at each other's throats!
3. Civil war in Orlais!
4. Demons entering Thedas attacking the populace!
5. Chantry's power broken!
5. Rip in the sky that must be closed or it's the end of the world!
You know, something along those lines. 
and I'm still waiting for those exclamation points to appear in BOLD while playing the game.
Yeah i don't buy Bioware games to romance people, it is just something extra that it is in the game. I would actually be fine if they stopped with the romance sub-plots. Is that wise to say in here?
<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
Are you saying that you bought the game for a set sexuality and "good character development"?
'Cause I bought the game from Bio's marketing pitch about:
1. Thedas in danger!
2. Mage Templars at each other's throats!
3. Civil war in Orlais!
4. Demons entering Thedas attacking the populace!
5. Chantry's power broken!
5. Rip in the sky that must be closed or it's the end of the world!
You know, something along those lines.
Nope. Not saying that. But I do want the characters to be as believable and as well written as possible. But those things you list up were things I expected to see as well. + all those story-heavy side quests each area were to have.
Yeah i don't buy Bioware games to romance people, it is just something extra that it is in the game. I would actually be fine if they stopped with the romance sub-plots. Is that wise to say in here?
Probably fine here, I wouldn't recommend saying it in the Story, Campaign & Characters section though, unless you want to be lynched. I agree 100% though.
Guest_john_sheparrd_*
To me it feels like the inquisitor is somewhat abusive and a bit of a predator trying to "romance" many of the characters in this game due to how player driven the initiations of many of them are, I know bioware tried to reduce the amount of in your face romance dialogue but personally, all that achieved is making them feel very onesided.
I think bioware could do well with stripping the amount of possible paths down to 2-4 in total again.
Personally i think BioWare should just make 2 "main" romances that are ingrained in the plot and then 1 or 2 secondary romances.
Do not reveal their sexuality beforehand, infact barely mention romances at all, it's not a primary focus or rather it shouldn't be -.-
You can never make everyone happy, which is precisely what BioWare is doing and failing miserably as a result.
Guest_john_sheparrd_*
Yeah I agree and they always come of as preachy tooWhilst i'm an avid supporter of characters having a set sexuality i'm in agreement with Hazegurl's point about characters sexualities being more important than their relevance to the plot. Bioware have painted themselves into a corner, even if they have done so willingly. The problem with being the shining beacon of inclusiveness is now they have to be exactly that, inclusive. All the time.
Now they have to create characters first and foremost to fill a quota; Gay man, straight man, bisexual man, gay woman, straight woman, bisexual woman at the very least. Now we also have trans characters as well, so it's only a matter of time before there are demands to have a trans companion in every game. I have no doubt that Maevaris will be a companion in DA4 (which is a shame because not only do I dislike companions that were introduced in the EU like Cole, but also because it seems the majority want to see her inclusion because she's trans more so than because she's a good character.) The list is ever expanding too, and there's only so many requests that Bioware can adhere to. Asexual, demisexual companions, polyamorous companions etc. Where do Bioware draw the line? Does everyone "deserve" to be represented? Furries perhaps, or even otherkin, transethnic people? Transabled? (yes, that's actually a thing i'm afraid to say, look it up.) At some point Bioware is going to have to become somewhat exclusionary just to keep their games from becoming too ridiculous.
Characters, especially companions should be there first and foremost to serve the plot, not to make a certain part of the player base feel included. If they can do both then great. Hopefully Bioware will improve on creating plot relevant companions for future DA titles.
Yeah i don't buy Bioware games to romance people, it is just something extra that it is in the game. I would actually be fine if they stopped with the romance sub-plots. Is that wise to say in here?
The funny thing is they didn't exist in the first place, they were eventually pushed into game after game (BG2, DA:O, DA2, etc). Finally, it seems like people are realizing this isn't really necessarily making things more fun.
And it's not a big deal to say now I'd say, a year ago maybe, but now people seem to have figured out you don't make an amazing experience simply by slapping a label and some sex scenes into your video game.
TW3 succeeding without a handy map-guide to choose your own adventure sexual companion is evidence it is not at all necessary to make a compelling experience for people.
Retour en haut