nah, I'm just a smartass. The quoted post was quite truthful.
I think it'd be hilarious if the first time we actually see a quad, it's a Krogan reaching down with both hands, scooping it up and dropping it on the table.
Funny, but kind of ridiculous.
I approve I guess.
Yes, to appropriate nudity. No to jiggle animations. Sorry, but they look absolutely stupid.
Guest_1m1m1m_*
Clearly these people haven't attended primary school sex ed yet, and therefore clearly shouldn't be posting in a forum for games with adult content.
All you need to post here is a registered game (tied to your Origin account), AFAIK. They don't even ask for age.
You could be 5 and still sign up for an account here. I remember their old forums asked for your age though.
I missed using this.
If your LI likes a certain hobby, and you buy her something related to that, it shows that you care about them.
Take Traynor for example. She likes chess. So maybe instead of keeping Oleg's chess board for yourself, if you romanced her, you would have the option to give it to her. Else, it stays with you.
Just another form of romance that people aren't seeing.
Giving someone a gift is not a romantic relationship. It can be part of a romantic relationship, but that's all. I'm not in a dozen romantic relationships on my birthday every year, am I?
Sound like they all have unrequited feeling for you, you just haven't realized it yet. 
I think it would be best to show boobs like in Witcher 3 but have an option to turn of all nudity. Everyone will be happy.
This thread is way better than the one for prudes. I'd literally rather bioware work on nude models or jiggle physics than waste time on pointless censor toggles for children who are obviously playing the wrong game.
I read the first couple of pages of the other thread, and while I disagree with the idea of implementing those toggles due to the huge cost it would require, the idea itself was put forward in a mature and well-articulated manner - and, more importantly, one that acknowledged and respected that you might disagree. That you're now labelling him a child in this mock-thread says more about you than him.
Some of you could consider your tolerance and respect for differing opinions. Or, in other words, being more mature (yes, there's that word again. I know it's less fun when it doesn't refer to seeing more naked breasts, but give it a shot anyway).
Guest_1m1m1m_*
Giving someone a gift is not a romantic relationship. It can be part of a romantic relationship, but that's all. I'm not in a dozen romantic relationships on my birthday every year, am I?
It's not always about sex either.
It's not always about sex either.
I read the first couple of pages of the other thread, and while I disagree with the idea of implementing those toggles due to the huge cost it would require, the idea itself was put forward in a mature and well-articulated manner - and, more importantly, one that acknowledged and respected that you might disagree. That you're now labelling him a child in this mock-thread says more about you than him.
Some of you could consider your tolerance and respect for differing opinions. Or, in other words, being more mature (yes, there's that word again. I know it's less fun when it doesn't refer to seeing more naked breasts, but give it a shot anyway).
I don't care how mature and well articulated one's manner of putting forth a stupid idea is, or its respecting that I might disagree. It is still a stupid idea. If some minority extremist homophome made a similar thread asking for a gay toggle because it offends them, or an Islamofacist one for all female characters to be given niqab because not doing so offends them, I would similarly ridicule them no matter if their diction were as eloquent as Shakespeare's.
Bryan Johnson (a developer) has been posting in that thread telling everyone how time consumingly difficult such censors would be to implement and how many zots it would use for a feature that would ultimately be used only by an extremely small minority of players, which is commendable behavior. Yet people still continue to pointlessly argue for it even though it would objectively make for a worse game for the 99.999% of us that aren't prudes or children because of the wasted resources. It isn't "mature" to tolerate stupid simply out of fear of causing offense, and indeed staying quiet sometimes encourages such people to continue spewing nonsense. If people don't want their silly worldviews challenged, they shouldn't post them on a public forum.
There's a very easy solution if one doesn't want to experience nudity/ violence in their entertainment, choose entertainment that doesn't involve them. It isn't that hard. Don't like the sex and violence in GoT? Don't watch it, and watch History's Vikings, How to Train your goddamn Dragon, or something else that fits your tastes better instead. Don't go trying to waste resources to fundamentally change the piece of art and expect the people (both writers and consumers) who are fine with how it is to simply go along with it.
Guest_1m1m1m_*
No, but romance usually involves sex. Giving someone a gift is not a romance.
I've known some people IRL, who are married for mere companionship. They find something they both have in common. And, that's why they stayed together. It was never about sex.
Renegade interupt during romance scene.
"Turn around you blue s**t!"
"Say that again, master!"
'70th porn music starts playing'
Sounds good to me.
I've known some people IRL, who are married for mere companionship. They find something they both have in common. And, that's why they stayed together. It was never about sex.
I've known some people IRL, who are married for mere companionship. They find something they both have in common. And, that's why they stayed together. It was never about sex.
Guest_1m1m1m_*
That's only part of a romantic relationship. I'm not in a romantic relationship with my best friend, even though we share the same interests and hang out all the time.
Stop arguing for the sake of arguing. A romance without sex or sexual attraction is not normal. It's unusual.
I am free to believe what a relationship is, and you are free to disagree with me.
Stop arguing for the sake of arguing. A romance without sex or sexual attraction is not normal. It's unusual.
It isn't a romantic relationship at all, because those are defined by sexual attraction. I'd wager that marriages which don't involve sex are practically nonexistent in human society, even among those that are arranged or done for economic/social reasons. It simply makes no sense when nothing is stopping one from simply living together with their platonic friend without all the legal hassles introduced by the institution of marriage.
However, I doubt that relationship that the other poster was referring to was actually nonsexual. People will think up any number of reasons to justify or explain sexual attraction due to social hangups.
There are also people who practice other forms of sexual intimacy, like tantra - the practice of which can make the prospect of watching "nude" pixel models flop around (and call that romance / sex) about as interesting as watching them take a dump. Bleah.
Why should such extremely obscure minority views be catered to with content that will largely go unused at the expense of other aspects of the game? Arranged marriage, polygamy and sexual relations with livestock are all more widespread than any type of "romantic" (in quotes because of the definition provided above) relationship that is not in any way physical, yet good luck seeing those things represented. The existence of a thing does not mean that it needs to be represented on a checklist, especially at the expense of content that most people would actually care about having.
If they don't like watching the sex scenes, than their monitor/TV probably has an off switch. No point in bioware wasting time on doing an alternative scene. If they find sexual relationships in and of themselves objectionable.....well....don't do them? Last I checked they were optional.
It isn't a romantic relationship at all, because those are defined by sexual attraction.
This is factually inaccurate. There are people who cannot experience sexual attraction that are still in romantic relationships.
This is factually inaccurate. There are people who cannot experience sexual attraction that are still in romantic relationships.
Oh really, I'm "factually" inaccurate about a general term? Then please show me a scholarly definition of romantic love from a psychologist, anthropologist or sociologist that doesn't include sexual attraction. You can't, because it is a mere colloquialism used to describe and explain various mating/ courtship processes physical and mental. If I really wanted to, I could add that the consensus of various experiments by academics in the social sciences community is that the concept is nothing more than a means to marginalize and discourage reproductive rivals, and thus ceases to have meaning if there is no reproductive behavior or chemical processes associated with it involved. How a minority of asexuals choose to use the term for what are more appropriately called platonic relationships is irrelevant.
Moreover, why does any of that matter to the topic of the discussion? Are asexuals offended by sex? If so, what makes their offense any more deserving of attention than the aforementioned people who ask for things like gay toggles?
Yes! As long as both sexes get equal amount of sexy. It shouldn't be a predominantly male fantasy.
MORE SEXY!
Tasteful nudity is all I ask: If you're going to do it, do it right. I think the Witcher does this well. Granted, I don't think they're going to get into the kinkier stuff of course. We'll leave that for headcanon, mainly because actually putting it in would make the game AO, which wouldn't fly for most distributors.
Unless you're doing something that intentionally warrants excess (random encounter on GTA levels of sleazy). Then by all means, go nuts (pun intended).
Agree that if 'full bore' was introduced, it would be best if it was an optional mode but if we can have violent exploding head shots, what's wrong with boobs, bums and willies? The ME community apparently screams out for maximum diversity of orientation in the BW characters but actual sex? Fetch the smelling salts! Seems no group is immune from repression but that's another conversation.
I am free to believe what a relationship is, and you are free to disagree with me.
Well, bud, I do hate to be a stick in the craw here, but we're defining things in terms of human sexuality, not a subjective or relative opinion here.
Factually, you kind of are incorrect. Not that I don't empathize with you, but it's wrong in this case.
More man pieces please.
Spoiler
I should probably edit this before I get banned.
Retour en haut
