Isn't this thread supposed to be about romances, or lack thereof?
It's already been discussed, I mentioned how I'd prefer my promiscuous feMC with borderline personality disorder and whom can't be in healthy relationships should be given casual sex options or a dysfunctional relationship with an alpha bad boy, not sappy "romances".
I think part of the stigma around romances also has to do with stereotypes about gamers being socially awkward and inept at romance IRL; as such there's a perception that romance mechanics are a vehicle for gamers to experience vicariously what they have no hope of doing in real life. But yeah, it does get annoying. It'd be nice if we could just dispense with the whole practice of attributing bad motives to people who like different things than us.
Having said all of that, I've got some very deep skepticism about romance mechanics in games (I may have expressed some of that on the first pages of this thread or another, similar one). Story content, romance or otherwise, typically functions as reward for gameplay. You shoot up a bunch of bad guys or successfully negotiate a tricky dialogue sequence and get story as a reward for your efforts. I don't know about you guys, but I tend to think of intimacy (even of the one-night stand variety) as something that is freely given, rather than earned. And I'm not sure that computers, completely lacking in empathy and emotion, can ever really simulate this dimension of intimacy.
I think this is what contributes to the stereotype of romance mechanics as "Say nice things; get sex as a result." Would the problem really be fixed if you had to say a couple mean things instead? Or is the problem that romance itself is being contextualized as a reward for doing things, whether they are nice, mean or somewhere in between?
Those are my thoughts right now. I'd love to be relieved of my skepticism. Maybe I'm just missing something here; I dunno.
but I tend to think of intimacy (even of the one-night stand variety) as something that is freely given, rather than earned.
And you'd be wrong.
I think part of the stigma around romances also has to do with stereotypes about gamers being socially awkward and inept at romance IRL; as such there's a perception that romance mechanics are a vehicle for gamers to experience vicariously what they have no hope of doing in real life. But yeah, it does get annoying. It'd be nice if we could just dispense with the whole practice of attributing bad motives to people who like different things than us.
Given the big focus on here for cheesy and poorly written content that amounts to a mere few minutes in a game that takes dozens of hours to complete, and has zero to due with any kind of character, narrative, story development or theme, It's not hard to come to that conclusion. That they're so easily done and have no requirements for them beyond mere gender/sexual orientation ones also speaks volumes of their "quality".
I have yet to play any game where I can take player initiated sex or "romance" all that seriously for such reasons, whether in ME,DA, Witcher or Persona.
And you'd be wrong.
Nuh-uh! You're wrong.
Given the big focus on here for cheesy and poorly written content that amounts to a mere few minutes in a game that takes dozens of hours to complete, and has zero to due with any kind of character, narrative, story development or theme, It's not hard to come to that conclusion. That they're so easily done and have no requirements for them beyond mere gender/sexual orientation ones also speaks volumes of their "quality".
I have yet to play any game where I can take player initiated sex or "romance" all that seriously for such reasons, whether in ME,DA, Witcher or Persona.
I have no idea how your argument is supposed to work, even granting that the romance quality of RPGs is generally very poor (which I'm more than willing to do). Does the quality of the fictional content you consume correlate with your success with the opposite sex in real life? I've got reservations about that one.
Anyway, this thread isn't about the demographics of RPG players, their love lives, etc. So I really see no reason to continue with this line of discussion (and have probably extended it too far already).
Nuh-uh! You're wrong.
Nope, you're wrong.
I have no idea how your argument is supposed to work, even granting that the romance quality of RPGs is generally very poor (which I'm more than willing to do). Does the quality of the fictional content you consume correlate with your success with the opposite sex in real life? I've got reservations about that one.
Anyway, this thread isn't about the demographics of RPG players, their love lives, etc. So I really see no reason to continue with this line of discussion (and have probably extended it too far already).
It's quite simple, the lack of such content and the poor quality of it doesn't justify the attention that it gets on here, where I've seen 5+ threads dedicated to "romance" numerous times on the DA:I forum(not including character threads). I've seen people on here outright say that "romance" is a primary reason why they even buy these games, and one case where someone flat out admitted that he considers DA generic fantasy and only buys it for the gay 'mances.
It's downright bizarre to say the least. There's good reason why the BSN is a laughing stock on other forums.
I have no idea how your argument is supposed to work, even granting that the romance quality of RPGs is generally very poor (which I'm more than willing to do). Does the quality of the fictional content you consume correlate with your success with the opposite sex in real life? I've got reservations about that one.
There's a direct correlation between your IRL romantic success and getting Isabela to come back at the end of Act 2 of DA2 your very first try.
It's quite simple, the lack of such content and the poor quality of it doesn't justify the attention that it gets on here, where I've seen 5+ threads dedicated to "romance" numerous times on the DA:I forum(not including character threads). I've seen people on here outright say that "romance" is a primary reason why they even buy these games, and one case where someone flat out admitted that he considers DA generic fantasy and only buys it for the gay 'mances.
It's downright bizarre to say the least. There's good reason why the BSN is a laughing stock on other forums.
Nope, you're wrong.
*sigh*
Suffice it to say that I've seen this video before and am completely unimpressed by its contents. I really don't have the time or the patience to get into a protracted debate on this subject right now, as it would massively derail the thread. If you need to continue the discussion, you can PM me instead.
Oh, yay! It's the insult game!
Complaining that you can't play as your own made-up self-insert in a videogame RPG is like an actor complaining that he can't play his own made-up self-insert in a movie. It's just ridiculous.
Oh? I didn't realize I was getting paid to play a video-game. I better get serious and act like a professional: I have a boss that dictates how I play RPGs, after all.
(Since you seem to be confused as to what I'm complaining about, I'll explain it in simple terms: I am NOT complaining that in Witcher 3 I can't 'play as my own made up self-insert'. I AM complaining that people who enjoy Witcher 3 want to TAKE AWAY my ability to 'play as my own made up self-insert' in Bioware games)
Neither Geralt or any BW character is your self-insert. Role Playing =/= LARPing.
My Bioware character is whoever the hell I want it to be, that's kind of why I like Bioware's games. Gerault, not so much.
I love the fact that you both resort to, 'the way you play video games is wrong!' for lack of a better argument.
I'll say it again, because you obviously don't understand what I'm trying to get across: FOR THOSE WHO ENJOY BIOWARE GAMES FOR THE SAME REASONS I DO (RIDICULOUS OR NO), WITCHER 3 DOES NOT OFFER AN ALTERNATIVE.
Whether or not you agree with the reasons I enjoy Bioware games is kind of besides the point.
*sigh*
Suffice it to say that I've seen this video before and am completely unimpressed by its contents. I really don't have the time or the patience to get into a protracted debate on this subject right now, as it would massively derail the thread. If you need to continue the discussion, you can PM me instead.
All that needs to be said is that the video is factually incorrect in a substantial number of places, which collapses about everything it says like a house of cards.
*sigh*
Suffice it to say that I've seen this video before and am completely unimpressed by its contents. I really don't have the time or the patience to get into a protracted debate on this subject right now, as it would massively derail the thread. If you need to continue the discussion, you can PM me instead.
I can't say I really care that you're not impressed by the well-studied and properly-sourced facts presented in that video.
All that needs to be said is that the video is factually incorrect in a substantial number of places, which collapses about everything it says like a house of cards.
You almost make it sound as if I linked a feminist video.
All that needs to be said is that you have no clue what the hell you're talking about.
I think part of the stigma around romances also has to do with stereotypes about gamers being socially awkward and inept at romance IRL; as such there's a perception that romance mechanics are a vehicle for gamers to experience vicariously what they have no hope of doing in real life. But yeah, it does get annoying. It'd be nice if we could just dispense with the whole practice of attributing bad motives to people who like different things than us.
Having said all of that, I've got some very deep skepticism about romance mechanics in games (I may have expressed some of that on the first pages of this thread or another, similar one). Story content, romance or otherwise, typically functions as reward for gameplay. You shoot up a bunch of bad guys or successfully negotiate a tricky dialogue sequence and get story as a reward for your efforts. I don't know about you guys, but I tend to think of intimacy (even of the one-night stand variety) as something that is freely given, rather than earned. And I'm not sure that computers, completely lacking in empathy and emotion, can ever really simulate this dimension of intimacy.
I think this is what contributes to the stereotype of romance mechanics as "Say nice things; get sex as a result." Would the problem really be fixed if you had to say a couple mean things instead? Or is the problem that romance itself is being contextualized as a reward for doing things, whether they are nice, mean or somewhere in between?
Those are my thoughts right now. I'd love to be relieved of my skepticism. Maybe I'm just missing something here; I dunno.
One of the most absurd aspects that stereotype, imo, is the assumption that people into stereotypically "nerdy" things come in only one gender, or that socially awkward people couldn't at least find other socially awkward people with which to form relationships.
One of the most shy, timid, introverted, and often awkward guys I knew in high school was married the year he graduated, to a girl who was considerably more extroverted than he is.
Another huge problem is the assumption that the impulse to enjoy romantic stories is decreased by being involved a romantic relationship. That's where the stereotype reaches the point of complete obstinate idiocy, because you have to basically ignore all evidence (like the popularity of romantic comedies as "date movies") at that point.
You almost make it sound as if I linked a feminist video.
All that needs to be said is that you have no clue what the hell you're talking about.
I make it sound as if you linked to a video that barely has a basic understanding of economics, sociology, and psychology. Which, entirely concidentally, you did.
I can't say I really care that you're not impressed by the well-studied and properly-sourced facts presented in that video.
You almost make it sound as if I linked a feminist video.
All that needs to be said is that you have no clue what the hell you're talking about.
Since you seem to be confused as to what I'm complaining about, I'll explain it in simple terms: I am NOT complaining that in Witcher 3 I can't 'play as my own made up self-insert'. I AM complaining that people who enjoy Witcher 3 want to TAKE AWAY my ability to 'play as my own made up self-insert' in Bioware games)
.
Then ignore them. I got sick of some of the folks pushing that same mentality and I decided to leave them alone. It's not worth it. A bunch of people on the internet shouldn't be able to take away your love of a game. Folks told me that ME3 was trash due to the endings, yet I found myself mostly disagreeing with them (except for the Starbrat. I agree with a lot of fans there.) I was told that DA2 was a waste of time, and I ended up playing that more than DA:O.
I've had largely a different experience with most TW fans. The reaction that I usually get has been a civil "I respect where you are coming from, even though I disagree."
I make it sound as if you linked to a video that barely has a basic understanding of economics, sociology, and psychology. Which, entirely concidentally, you did.
Yeah I'm sure that the dozens of economist, sociologist and psychologist Phd graduates who extensively studied this subject and wrote multiple peer-reviewed papers on this subject lack a basic understanding of economics, sociology and psychology. And I'm sure you know a lot more about all these subjects than these Phd graduates who actually studied these subjects.
Sure buddy.
did anyone with even a passing understanding of economics have any part in the making of this video?
Yep, Phd graduates in applied economics have worked on that video together with psychologists and anthropologists.
Here's a better idea. Simply don't pursue any romances in-game. No one forces you to do so. And yes, they may present you with several opportunities to partake, but the choice is always yours.
Your dislike of romances does not extend to every fan and developer that you can think of. There are just as many people who love (no pun intended) Bioware's romances. Please be mindful and respectful of opinions that differ from your own.
One of the most absurd aspects that stereotype, imo, is the assumption that people into stereotypically "nerdy" things come in only one gender, or that socially awkward people couldn't at least find other socially awkward people with which to form relationships.
Another huge problem is the assumption that the impulse to enjoy romantic stories is decreased by being involved a romantic relationship. That's where the stereotype reaches the point of complete obstinate idiocy, because you have to basically ignore all evidence (like the popularity of romantic comedies as "date movies") at that point.
The existence of the female equivalent of the omega male neckbeard is quite well known actually, the only difference is that they have neon colored clown hair instead of fedoras.In fact, I'd say that on average, female gamers are more likely to exhibit the usual negative gamer stereotypes than males based on my experiences. I just have to smh at male simps in the gaming community whom think that a woman that games makes her somehow more desirable.
Voila! Those two stereotypes sound perfectly matched.
Comparing a romantic comedy flick where the focus is romance to a long winded RPG(or glorified TPS in ME's case) with a mere couple of minutes of "romance" is just..... LOL.
::shrug::
Agree to disagree there. I think most of these shallow, over general assertions you're making are pretty LOL.
Yep, Phd graduates in applied economics have worked on that video together with psychologists and anthropologists.
Then they need to talk with the writer of this http://www.businessi...debunked-2014-2
All I see there is a complete misunderstanding of the video.
Edit: Finally got to completely read that link. As expected, it's written by a feminist woman who believes the patriarchy boogyman is real and "right-wing" and "sexist" are somehow synonymous to each other.
Sorry, but I can't that link you posted seriously. All she does is misrepresent the video, misunderstand it, misconstrue facts and use feminist-jutsu on the numbers to somehow twist and turn pretty obvious patterns to fit her feminist narrative.
I'd like to see you try again and show me a rebuttal from a real scientist.
Retour en haut
