399 réponses à ce sujet

[WildOrchid]

There are children present . Stop that.

 

LOL

[TK514]

I found Krem to just be there.  If the character had never been written, nothing of value to the story would have been lost.  Glad some people like him, though.  The more fans, the more likely there will be more games.

[daveliam]

Also, on the subject of Shale, I had initially thought she was an effeminate male before becoming a golem and was really excited about it. All we had were super butch dwarf males and neutral ones, but no "camp" ones. I thought the "behavior spectrum" was being expanded upon, but it wasn't, and it may never when it comes to dwarves. Personality-wise, the female dwarves have far more variety so far. I will admit, I was disappointed to discover Shale was a female dwarf all along, not that it means anything as a golem. I still adore her to bits--no less than I would if she actually had been a "he." Her personality helped with that. Effeminate and vain, but still tough and scrappy? Those are super fun combinations, and I'm hoping we can see that in a male dwarf someday, just not to the point of flamboyance.

Edit: TFW you didn't think you wrote a wall of text, but you actually did...

 

Totally off topic, but I have been kind of in love with the idea of a companion for DA4 that fits your description.  A flamboyantly ostentatious dwarven Ambassadoria member (fabulous sword and fabulous shield included).  I'm thinking like Zidler from Moulin Rouge! or Ferdinand Lyle from Penny Dreadful.  I think that would be awesome.

[Former_Fiend]

I liked Krem in that he was able to represent and convey a fair amount of information fairly quickly.

 

Through Krem we learn more about both Tevinter and the Qunari. We learn about the Tevinter citizenry; he's the only soporati we interact with, and that gives us a counter view to escaped slave Fenris and Altus Dorian. He gives us the perspective of the struggles of the working class in a society that practices slavery, he gives us insight into the gender roles of that society, and it's because of him that we know the Qunari gender roles mean gender, not biological sex. 

 

That's a fair bit of information from a fairly minor npc who, aside from that, is just kind of a cool character. 

[CDR Aedan Cousland]

Totally off topic, but I have been kind of in love with the idea of a companion for DA4 that fits your description.  A flamboyantly ostentatious dwarven Ambassadoria member (fabulous sword and fabulous shield included).  I'm thinking like Zidler from Moulin Rouge! or Ferdinand Lyle from Penny Dreadful.  I think that would be awesome.

 

I would love that so much! Especially if he has the same accent as Shale. It feels more natural and less fake and/or mocking in an English accent, in my opinion. And there are too few dwarves with English accents anyway! Since we've had a few games in a row with male dwarf companions and only one expansion with a female dwarf, though, chances are we may not get our fabulous male dwarf in DA4 (unless we get one male and one female!) I'm still betting we'll get Harding, but she's incredibly milquetoast compared to what we're describing.

 

If it never happens, well... I guess I could just make my own stories and add a fella like that to them.

 

Also, if anyone was wondering what I meant when I said I didn't want him to be flamboyant, I was referring to over-the-top stereotypes such as lisping and other unpleasant things. That's just what my mind thinks of when I hear the word "flamboyant." (No clue if those characters you mentioned lisp or what-have-you, as I am not a musical fan and thus know nothing about them. Looked 'em up though, and I really like the Ferdinand's look!) Fabulousness, vanity, and general effeminacy are great, especially if he's got a scrappy/spar-enthusiast attitude to mix things up a bit. Wouldn't want him to be flat, or be considered too "gimmicky."

 

/off-topic

[Bhryaen]

Oh, I never wanted Krem to shut up; I thought I'd made that clear (thought being the key word here. I proofread what I wrote multiple times, but I guess I still neglected to make certain POV's clear.) Krem was perfectly fine. Bioware's approach was just poorly done in certain cases, that it made me want to tell them to shut up. I also meant that the several options to pester inquire Krem about his identity acted as that aforementioned neon sign, not simply having an entirely optional conversation about it in some fashion. Again, I likely neglected to connect the two while writing up my wall o' text.

 

I think there's slight pressure to choose those "tell me more" options when they keep showing up, for information's sake, or even if you just want to get the damned thing out of your dialogue menu. (Anyone else annoyed that Varric's options never seem to go away?) The biggest issue is that a couple of those inquiries result in the player getting snapped at by whomever they're talking to. If someone wishes to learn more about something, getting snippy at them because they didn't ask their question in the most sensitive, hand-holdy way turns them off from wanting to learn more about what you are/what makes you--and others like you--tick/etc. And the fact that most of the inquiries were purposely phrased in decidedly ignorant ways by Bioware just makes it feel like a bigger lecture. On the whole, I feel it was handled poorly. If they'd kept it subtle, then gave you the options to casually chat with Krem (maybe Bull, but talking about Krem's private business to anyone other than Krem is rude IMO--feels like gossiping) about it later, and not in ways that would result in you getting yelled at, I believe that would have been the ideal way to handle it.

 

This lecturing (not just the presence of and niggling bother to choose options that inquire for more information) is what I was talking about when I said being preachy just turns people away, rather than getting them to ally with you in whatever way you'd prefer. If they'd added tonal options to the inquiries (say, "sensitive," neutral, and "ignorant"), even that would have worked out better than: [Ask only question I have the option of asking] -> [Get bitched out]

 

Anyway, I'm glad we agree that the cutscene conversation was weirdly... handled?  The most sensitive option, "Did you always know?" seemed like it came out of nowhere and had no context, no continuity. If I was Krem, and the Inquisitor had asked me that after my little binding advice quip, I'd be like, "Did I always know what? Did I always know I'd leave Tevinter to be a mercenary? Did I always know that I'd be best friends with an oxman, of all things? Can you be more specific?" It almost feels like the best options to keep the conversation going smoothly are the ignore and the "I didn't even realize!" options. At least the latter still seems to fit and it only results in sarcasm rather than a "how dare you!" The sensitive option won't get you yelled at either, of course, but again, it just feels like it's missing something and thus, should not be picked, for immersion reasons.

 

Also, on the subject of Shale, I had initially thought she was an effeminate male before becoming a golem and was really excited about it. All we had were super butch dwarf males and neutral ones, but no "camp" ones. I thought the "behavior spectrum" was being expanded upon, but it wasn't, and it may never when it comes to dwarves. Personality-wise, the female dwarves have far more variety so far. I will admit, I was disappointed to discover Shale was a female dwarf all along, not that it means anything as a golem. I still adore her to bits--no less than I would if she actually had been a "he." Her personality helped with that. Effeminate and vain, but still tough and scrappy? Those are super fun combinations, and I'm hoping we can see that in a male dwarf someday, just... not to the point of flamboyance.

 

Edit: TFW you didn't think you wrote a wall of text, but you actually did...

Oh, I'm a WoT (in both senses) addict myself- whether I or anyone else likes it or not- so I'm not in any position to judge your own.

 

You explained your position a lot better- thanks. I take it your main concern is that initial introduction of the subject, not the conversation options you get afterward. I see nothing jarring or annoying with the option to "pester" (genuinely caring about Krem and wanting to know about or even just being curious about) Krem after that oddly-segued intro. It's like having conspicuously XXX stores along 8th Ave in NYC right by the train station: maybe you'd rather not have that "option" there every time you walk north of the train station, but at least you're not forced to go in. And Krem's background isn't an XXX store. Having the option to "pester" him (or Bull) about his past is more a willing exploration of their character than anything compulsory. If Krem discusses it, I don't see any neon signs flashing any more than, as in the example above, I see when asking Fiona about her Warden past.

 

About Varric and some others too, I think- I agree. You still get the option to ask him more about himself, and when you do: "Goodbye" is your only option. heh But that's more of a technical issue than one concerning the writing- i.e., they should've dropped that off after the last question was finished. I keep going back to it because it seems like there'll be more content.

 

I also sorta like the point about presumptuousness. The topic is presented as if your protagonist isn't transgender themselves and knows nothing of the experience and is seeking to understand. You could more or less head-canon that your Inky is transgender or knows someone from back in their origin who is. (They don't exactly give you much to work with in DAI's origin stories anyway.) But the same complaint is made about dwarves and elves being presented with options to ask about dwarven/elven heritage that they arguably really ought to know already. I don't mind them because I'm a content junkie and, as a player, am not necessarily well-versed on the lore myself, despite actually playing elven/dwarven/qunari/ or even human. Krem hands out an interesting bit of lore regarding Tevinter and the Qunari in some brief, casually-stated comments- lore I wouldn't have known about otherwise, and delivered with great voice acting talent. So I appreciate the option to inquire about it- even with Bull.

 

Regarding the initial convo though, it felt abrupt because nothing preceding that set of choices made them seem natural as the only conversation options that made sense. There should have at least been a way to ask about something other than Krem's sex/gender. Why was it so important to my Inky at that moment that inquiring about it was all she wanted to do? I mean, it's a personal question, no? Do I have to play a nosy parker? Apparently so. Why can't my Inky be more "subtle?" I remember wanting to be. As Bull is introducing the rest of his crew, you also have options to ask the other Chargers about themselves- or not- but there's no reaction to have, just questions. In Krem's case you must react one way or another to the gender issue. I didn't know there was at least one option that got disapproval. In that case then, yep, you're right: just like the religious stuff. But that aspect isn't what irked me, just as I wasn't irked about Cassandra giving disapproval for me saying I don't believe in the Maker: it's an essential part of her character both to ask me and judge me from her point of view. (Well, I was irked by that too, but it an IC sort of irked.) Just as Krem or Bull are perfectly legitimately able to disapprove of me for being anti-transgender or less-than-sensitive or whatever. It's a product of their personalities. What irked me was that I was essentially corralled by the game choices into making some sort of statement about it when it didn't even fit the context. I as a player wasn't even thinking at that moment that I should ask about it. It seemed more of a cozy affair where I just lay back, trade some ales with the gang, and hear their stories- more passive than reacting to things I hear. Now, if my Inky had pursued the gender thingy at that moment- rather than it being a forced set of options- and then made some "non-hand-holdy" response, as you put it, then at least there would be a meaningful context to the disapproval (or "lecturing," whatever it is). Or if Krem had just been harassed by some Inquisition troop because the troop was prejudiced against transgender folks, there might be a context in which the only responses would be to ask about it (though I could also see just being concerned that Krem's OK, what the troop's name was, etc.) And it's hard to head-canon even that Bull was forcing you to ask about it since he isn't the one that put those four exclusively "react to Krem's gender" options in front of you. You're right: it's not Krem or Bull who were "in-your-face" about it; it was the writers.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to say that exchange was "poor writing," however, and, in fact, I'd say the ensuing exchanges with Krem are very good, but I would say that it was sloppy and not as imaginative as it should've been. Not that sloppy writing is exclusive to that Krem dialog when there are a number of other examples- as in the case of developing Bianca as a character or Varric's personal story, for instance. That the Krem dialog in particular has gotten as much negative player reaction as it has- and the kind of reaction it has- is not entirely (to the degree it is at all) a product merely of offended literary sensibilities. The literary criticism is valid, but only with the perspective of evaluating it within the context of the entire game. The issue of "transgenderhood" itself is touchy for some- regardless of whether it's in RL or a game. And there's a lot of presumptuousness about the political tendencies of the writers that ends up as mere ad hominem. Even if the devs were a bunch of hardened "PC SJW's," what would it matter? The sweepingly vast majority of DA content doesn't reflect that sort of political hamfistedness- and even the Krem case of bending the stick a bit too far was not so impactful on the game as to raise an eyebrow otherwise. That people get so hyperbolic about it is more indicative of the accuser than the accused. Perspective is often lacking. Perhaps you know this, but it merited at least a mention given that it's the Krem case that's gotten this much traction rather than the Bianca one. Your points are fair.

 

Btw, thanks for the exchange. One of the best (most thoughtful, enlightening, mature- that sort of thing) that I've had on the BW forum regarding differences of opinion. Sensibility is a lovely thing.

[Ryzaki]

Boo outta likes when this thread gets so likable. Typical.

 

But yeah now that you guys mention it those dialogue response ARE odd. It's like the only normal option is to move the conversation along.

[CDR Aedan Cousland]

Oh, I'm a WoT (in both senses) addict myself- whether I or anyone else likes it or not- so I'm not in any position to judge your own.

 

You explained your position a lot better- thanks. I take it your main concern is that initial introduction of the subject, not the conversation options you get afterward. I see nothing jarring or annoying with the option to "pester" (genuinely caring about Krem and wanting to know about or even just being curious about) Krem after that oddly-segued intro. It's like having conspicuously XXX stores along 8th Ave in NYC right by the train station: maybe you'd rather not have that "option" there every time you walk north of the train station, but at least you're not forced to go in. And Krem's background isn't an XXX store. Having the option to "pester" him (or Bull) about his past is more a willing exploration of their character than anything compulsory. If Krem discusses it, I don't see any neon signs flashing any more than, as in the example above, I see when asking Fiona about her Warden past.

 

About Varric and some others too, I think- I agree. You still get the option to ask him more about himself, and when you do: "Goodbye" is your only option. heh But that's more of a technical issue than one concerning the writing- i.e., they should've dropped that off after the last question was finished. I keep going back to it because it seems like there'll be more content.

 

I also sorta like the point about presumptuousness. The topic is presented as if your protagonist isn't transgender themselves and knows nothing of the experience and is seeking to understand. You could more or less head-canon that your Inky is transgender or knows someone from back in their origin who is. (They don't exactly give you much to work with in DAI's origin stories anyway.) But the same complaint is made about dwarves and elves being presented with options to ask about dwarven/elven heritage that they arguably really ought to know already. I don't mind them because I'm a content junkie and, as a player, am not necessarily well-versed on the lore myself, despite actually playing elven/dwarven/qunari/ or even human. Krem hands out an interesting bit of lore regarding Tevinter and the Qunari in some brief, casually-stated comments- lore I wouldn't have known about otherwise, and delivered with great voice acting talent. So I appreciate the option to inquire about it- even with Bull.

 

Regarding the initial convo though, it felt abrupt because nothing preceding that set of choices made them seem natural as the only conversation options that made sense. There should have at least been a way to ask about something other than Krem's sex/gender. Why was it so important to my Inky at that moment that inquiring about it was all she wanted to do? I mean, it's a personal question, no? Do I have to play a nosy parker? Apparently so. Why can't my Inky be more "subtle?" I remember wanting to be. As Bull is introducing the rest of his crew, you also have options to ask the other Chargers about themselves- or not- but there's no reaction to have, just questions. In Krem's case you must react one way or another to the gender issue. I didn't know there was at least one option that got disapproval. In that case then, yep, you're right: just like the religious stuff. But that aspect isn't what irked me, just as I wasn't irked about Cassandra giving disapproval for me saying I don't believe in the Maker: it's an essential part of her character both to ask me and judge me from her point of view. (Well, I was irked by that too, but it an IC sort of irked.) Just as Krem or Bull are perfectly legitimately able to disapprove of me for being anti-transgender or less-than-sensitive or whatever. It's a product of their personalities. What irked me was that I was essentially corralled by the game choices into making some sort of statement about it when it didn't even fit the context. I as a player wasn't even thinking at that moment that I should ask about it. It seemed more of a cozy affair where I just lay back, trade some ales with the gang, and hear their stories- more passive than reacting to things I hear. Now, if my Inky had pursued the gender thingy at that moment- rather than it being a forced set of options- and then made some "non-hand-holdy" response, as you put it, then at least there would be a meaningful context to the disapproval (or "lecturing," whatever it is). Or if Krem had just been harassed by some Inquisition troop because the troop was prejudiced against transgender folks, there might be a context in which the only responses would be to ask about it (though I could also see just being concerned that Krem's OK, what the troop's name was, etc.) And it's hard to head-canon even that Bull was forcing you to ask about it since he isn't the one that put those four exclusively "react to Krem's gender" options in front of you. You're right: it's not Krem or Bull who were "in-your-face" about it; it was the writers.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to say that exchange was "poor writing," however, and, in fact, I'd say the ensuing exchanges with Krem are very good, but I would say that it was sloppy and not as imaginative as it should've been. Not that sloppy writing is exclusive to that Krem dialog when there are a number of other examples- as in the case of developing Bianca as a character or Varric's personal story, for instance. That the Krem dialog in particular has gotten as much negative player reaction as it has- and the kind of reaction it has- is not entirely (to the degree it is at all) a product merely of offended literary sensibilities. The literary criticism is valid, but only with the perspective of evaluating it within the context of the entire game. The issue of "transgenderhood" itself is touchy for some- regardless of whether it's in RL or a game. And there's a lot of presumptuousness about the political tendencies of the writers that ends up as mere ad hominem. Even if the devs were a bunch of hardened "PC SJW's," what would it matter? The sweepingly vast majority of DA content doesn't reflect that sort of political hamfistedness- and even the Krem case of bending the stick a bit too far was not so impactful on the game as to raise an eyebrow otherwise. That people get so hyperbolic about it is more indicative of the accuser than the accused. Perspective is often lacking. Perhaps you know this, but it merited at least a mention given that it's the Krem case that's gotten this much traction rather than the Bianca one. Your points are fair.

 

Btw, thanks for the exchange. One of the best (most thoughtful, enlightening, mature- that sort of thing) that I've had on the BW forum regarding differences of opinion. Sensibility is a lovely thing.

 

I agree; I appreciate the exchange, as well! It's made me realize how I could have made my points more succinctly to avoid misunderstanding. In fact, I'll keep trying and see if I can sum up my point in no more than one paragraph.

 

So, besides the cutscene introducing the Chargers to us where we have really abrupt options--should we elect not to just move the conversation along--to discuss Krem's identity right then and there, my complaint is that a couple of the "tell me more" options don't allow us to choose how our Inquisitors ask Krem (and Bull) about Krem's identity. The one option discussing specifically his identity with Bull gets you lectured at, with negative intonations. One of the two "tell me more" options with Krem gets you snapped at, as well. No friendly corrections (if you're gonna make our characters look ignorant, Bioware, can you please not make NPCs get mad at us?), just "Argh! How dare you!" I just wanted to learn more and clear the dialogue menu at the same time. ;_; While these instances are the ones that stuck out the most to me, this happens with other characters and other discussions, too. For instance: "Orsino's fate made no sense." [Varric slightly disapproves.] Oh, sorry I was trying to learn more; it won't happen again.

 

So, to sum up, the way Bioware set the dialogue system up made it feel like I was being punished by trying to learn more (and clear up my dialogue options). This is what made it feel like Bioware was eager to lecture us, now that I think about it. We have to go out of our way to metagame in order to avoid specific inquiries that would result in either an unpleasant reaction or disapproval. If I'm gonna get disapproval or lectured at, I want it to be because I consciously chose for it to happen. It's not fair if I'm not expecting it. The inaccurate paraphrases present a similar issue. I want to be nice to everyone (except people who don't deserve it, lol) in games, so I feel crappy when something I choose results in my Inquisitor unexpectedly saying something cringeworthy that gets him yelled at.

 

Eh, two paragraphs. It'll do!

[Bhryaen]

I agree; I appreciate the exchange, as well! It's made me realize how I could have made my points more succinctly to avoid misunderstanding. In fact, I'll keep trying and see if I can sum up my point in no more than one paragraph.

Forgive me if I don't keep to the same standard. I haven't yet learned that excess blabber is necessarily a bad thing.

 

So, besides the cutscene introducing the Chargers to us where we have really abrupt options--should we elect not to just move the conversation along--to discuss Krem's identity right then and there, my complaint is that a couple of the "tell me more" options don't allow us to choose how our Inquisitors ask Krem (and Bull) about Krem's identity. The one option discussing specifically his identity with Bull gets you lectured at, with negative intonations. One of the two "tell me more" options with Krem gets you snapped at, as well. No friendly corrections (if you're gonna make our characters look ignorant, Bioware, can you please not make NPCs get mad at us?), just "Argh! How dare you!" I just wanted to learn more and clear the dialogue menu at the same time. ;_; While these instances are the ones that stuck out the most to me, this happens with other characters and other discussions, too. For instance: "Orsino's fate made no sense." [Varric slightly disapproves.] Oh, sorry I was trying to learn more; it won't happen again.

 

So, to sum up, the way Bioware set the dialogue system up made it feel like I was being punished by trying to learn more (and clear up my dialogue options). This is what made it feel like Bioware was eager to lecture us, now that I think about it. We have to go out of our way to metagame in order to avoid specific inquiries that would result in either an unpleasant reaction or disapproval. If I'm gonna get disapproval or lectured at, I want it to be because I consciously chose for it to happen. It's not fair if I'm not expecting it. The inaccurate paraphrases present a similar issue. I want to be nice to everyone (except people who don't deserve it, lol) in games, so I feel crappy when something I choose results in my Inquisitor unexpectedly saying something cringeworthy that gets him yelled at.

 

Eh, two paragraphs. It'll do!

I'm not sure why I got a different impression from the post-Charger-meeting exchanges than you did. If Bull or Krem seemed "curt" in their replies, it didn't seem to me in any way unlike their characters as gruff merc sorts, and I didn't come away feeling judged or as if I'd rankled feathers. Do they make some off-the-cuff reaction before their reply? After all, they don't just snap at you and tell you to buzz off. They go ahead and answer your question and then any more on the dialog wheel you choose, never seeming to have their temper raised past their usual low-key demeanor. And that's despite that Bull has likely been defending Krem for many years by then, used to having to field reactions a lot more hostile than our Inky's queries. The very way Bull met Krem involved it. But I didn't sense any resentment from them. Maybe I'll have to go back to see if my impression will change, but I think I spoke to both of them twice due to reloads, never felt snapped at. They're both good for being smart-offs, and their snappiness is often part of their "charm," so maybe that rubs people the wrong way? Dunno.

 

There also doesn't seem anything unfair about gruffness- even unexpected gruffness- on the part of NPC replies. It keeps things lively to know you never know what you're going to get when you start prying. I hear what you're saying about wanting a more reasonable exchange when your intentions are reasonable. I can definitely empathize. But if every character were reasonable, it'd make for a fairly bland game that's nothing like the all-too-irrational world. Not that getting lectured is lovely- and if everyone was unreasonable it would just be unpleasant- but I suppose I always reserve the right to not take people seriously if they deign to lecture me.    Maybe I heard Iron Bull's brief "lecture" and just smirked. "Whatever, Bull..." *rolls eyes* So long as it's believable for the character and context, and, as we've mentioned, so long as you're not unreasonably compelled by the game to be on that potential discursive whipping board, so be it. I was more miffed at one early interaction with Solas where he was essentially trapping me into arguing with him while the dialog options were insufficient to extract myself from the trap. It wasn't his trap that annoyed me as much as how lacking in wit my protagonist apparently was given the selection of available replies. I think I ended up choosing the worst one. hahaha

 

Regarding the approval system... yeah, that could use some tweaks. It gets downright frustrating at times- enough that I seriously just want to ignore it and let the chips fall where they may. That Varric example is a good one, but the some of the "greatly disapproves" instances have been asinine. And when I had Blackwall speak to the Adamant Wardens, I got "Iron Bull Approves" despite having Bull stay at Haven and Skyhold nearly the whole game- so there are some glitches as well. And I agree about the paraphrases also. Not knowing what the NPCs are going to say is part of the fun, but not knowing what I'm going to say makes speaking at all like a guessing game. It'd be nice to have a "mouse-over" option to see what the actual full text will be. More than once I've selected what seemed like the most considerate reply and see my Inky barking out something garrulous, forcing me to resort to a reload. Those are game-wide issues though.

[Donk]

There are children present . Stop that.

Lmao

[CDR Aedan Cousland]

Forgive me if I don't keep to the same standard. I haven't yet learned that excess blabber is necessarily a bad thing.

 

I'm not sure why I got a different impression from the post-Charger-meeting exchanges than you did. If Bull or Krem seemed "curt" in their replies, it didn't seem to me in any way unlike their characters as gruff merc sorts, and I didn't come away feeling judged or as if I'd rankled feathers. Do they make some off-the-cuff reaction before their reply? After all, they don't just snap at you and tell you to buzz off. They go ahead and answer your question and then any more on the dialog wheel you choose, never seeming to have their temper raised past their usual low-key demeanor. And that's despite that Bull has likely been defending Krem for many years by then, used to having to field reactions a lot more hostile than our Inky's queries. The very way Bull met Krem involved it. But I didn't sense any resentment from them. Maybe I'll have to go back to see if my impression will change, but I think I spoke to both of them twice due to reloads, never felt snapped at. They're both good for being smart-offs, and their snappiness is often part of their "charm," so maybe that rubs people the wrong way? Dunno.

 

There also doesn't seem anything unfair about gruffness- even unexpected gruffness- on the part of NPC replies. It keeps things lively to know you never know what you're going to get when you start prying. I hear what you're saying about wanting a more reasonable exchange when your intentions are reasonable. I can definitely empathize. But if every character were reasonable, it'd make for a fairly bland game that's nothing like the all-too-irrational world. Not that getting lectured is lovely- and if everyone was unreasonable it would just be unpleasant- but I suppose I always reserve the right to not take people seriously if they deign to lecture me.    Maybe I heard Iron Bull's brief "lecture" and just smirked. "Whatever, Bull..." *rolls eyes* So long as it's believable for the character and context, and, as we've mentioned, so long as you're not unreasonably compelled by the game to be on that potential discursive whipping board, so be it. I was more miffed at one early interaction with Solas where he was essentially trapping me into arguing with him while the dialog options were insufficient to extract myself from the trap. It wasn't his trap that annoyed me as much as how lacking in wit my protagonist apparently was given the selection of available replies. I think I ended up choosing the worst one. hahaha

 

Regarding the approval system... yeah, that could use some tweaks. It gets downright frustrating at times- enough that I seriously just want to ignore it and let the chips fall where they may. That Varric example is a good one, but the some of the "greatly disapproves" instances have been asinine. And when I had Blackwall speak to the Adamant Wardens, I got "Iron Bull Approves" despite having Bull stay at Haven and Skyhold nearly the whole game- so there are some glitches as well. And I agree about the paraphrases also. Not knowing what the NPCs are going to say is part of the fun, but not knowing what I'm going to say makes speaking at all like a guessing game. It'd be nice to have a "mouse-over" option to see what the actual full text will be. More than once I've selected what seemed like the most considerate reply and see my Inky barking out something garrulous, forcing me to resort to a reload. Those are game-wide issues though.

 

I don't consider verbosity a bad thing, but I worry I'm wasting others' time or scaring them away (the latter being far more likely) by writing so much. I doubt I'll ever get the hang of keeping things short and sweet. Every time I think I can make a quick point, I find myself having more to say! It never ends!

 

Yeah, Bull never yelled (as far as I'm aware?), he just sounds... irritated at the Inquisitor, and then calmly explains his position. Still felt like a minor lecture, but it's better than actually being yelled at. I do enjoy my hyperbole, though. I haven't gotten to this point with Bull and his Chargers more than once, but I'm getting back to it fairly soon, as I've resumed recruiting Bull after not having done it in a while. Point is, I don't have the conversations that follow memorized, so I can't quote things verbatim. I remember when talking to Krem, there was an option that resulted in the Inquisitor saying something like, "When did you choose to start living as a man?" I took it to mean, "When did you decide to follow your feelings and live the way that feels right to you/live openly?" Krem, however, took it to mean, "When did you choose how you feel inside?" and got quite offended at my Inquisitor. Normal conversation followed, but it left me with a bad taste in my mouth, regardless.

 

I'm okay with not knowing how the people I'm interacting with will react (that's life), but what I don't like is not knowing what my own character is going to say to make them react the way they do. I like having full control over my characters right down to what they say, when possible, and the unpredictability of my own character made me feel like I was playing someone else's character, making me completely at the mercy of Bioware. It's a little stressful, especially when you have to reload as a result. I'm all for trial and error, but we shouldn't have to do it due to our own characters' "autonomy."

 

As for the approval/disapproval, I liked the way DA2 did it best. If a companion isn't there with you, they will be 100% unaffected by your choices. Of course, it also meant substantially more party management because of that. In DAI it's like everyone is omniscient or something. Cole makes sense, in that case, but no one else. By all means, after an important event we can talk about what happened, and then you approve/disapprove where applicable, but not right as it happened as if you were there. Plus side is, you don't have to care so much about who's in your party or manage your party as often thanks to everyone's omniscience!

[BabyPuncher]

That doesn't matter. Sexuality and gender identity are unrelated.

 

Edit:

 

I would say a correlation rate of 90% to 95% means they're very related.
 

[Jaison1986]

I liked Krem in that he was able to represent and convey a fair amount of information fairly quickly.

 

Through Krem we learn more about both Tevinter and the Qunari. We learn about the Tevinter citizenry; he's the only soporati we interact with, and that gives us a counter view to escaped slave Fenris and Altus Dorian. He gives us the perspective of the struggles of the working class in a society that practices slavery, he gives us insight into the gender roles of that society, and it's because of him that we know the Qunari gender roles mean gender, not biological sex. 

 

That's a fair bit of information from a fairly minor npc who, aside from that, is just kind of a cool character. 

 

No, it's just an retcon that the fandom denies to death because we are too politically correct to admit it.

[rapscallioness]

I really like Krem's voice.

[Jandi]

No, it's just an retcon that the fandom denies to death because we are too politically correct to admit it.

 

It was funny to get Stens approval low on purpose, then beat his ass as a fem elf in Origins.

[Jaison1986]

It was funny to get Stens approval low on purpose, then beat his ass as a fem elf in Origins.

 

I would like to think Iron Bull lied to Krem so he could feel a little better. That feels less disingenuous then bending over the lore for the sake of an minor character.

[Jandi]

I would like to think Iron Bull lied to Krem so he could feel a little better. That feels less disingenuous then bending over the lore for the sake of an minor character.

 

Well they've changed the Qunari quite a bit in many ways since Origins so personally I just *shrug* at it.

[IRON SKORPIQN]

As a man, listening to a female voice come from a "Man" (Physically or Mentally) is quite jarring and it does trigger a macho response as men genetically can be offended by anything that can be perceived as weakness in other Men. Men, like dogs are generally pack animals. This is inherent.

 

Being a modern more sophisticated man however, in greater control of my instincts with an almost dangerously open-minded self-awareness... I find Krem an interesting, entertaining anomaly but nothing sensational.

 

I would think that a good % of people who apparently really like Krem, are really just eager to show they're accepting and understanding more than interested in him characteristically in general... bandwagon do gooders, so to speak and those generally infected with Political Correctness walking around on egg shells everyday in fear of offending someone.

[Former_Fiend]

No, it's just an retcon that the fandom denies to death because we are too politically correct to admit it. 

 

 

Oh, I'm fully prepared to admit that it's a retcon. 

 

Doesn't make it unofficial.

[Donk]

As a man, listening to a female voice come from a "Man" (Physically or Mentally) is quite jarring and it does trigger a macho response as men genetically can be offended by anything that can be perceived as weakness in other Men. Men, like dogs are generally pack animals. This is inherent.

Being a modern more sophisticated man however, in greater control of my instincts with an almost dangerously open-minded self-awareness... I find Krem an interesting, entertaining anomaly but nothing sensational.

I would think that a good % of people who apparently really like Krem, are really just eager to show they're accepting and understanding more than interested in him characteristically in general... bandwagon do gooders, so to speak and those generally infected with Political Correctness walking around on egg shells everyday in fear of offending someone.

Not entirely true. I am not politically correct in the slightest. I just remember a time where it was far from politically correct to be transgender.. Or gay.
And I see the same attitudes, the same people who bash political correctness now and complain about "agenda" till the cows come home, are exactly the same or worse than the current "PC" or "SJW" movement. If not actually worse, because of hypocrisy.

[Nefla]

I would like to think Iron Bull lied to Krem so he could feel a little better. That feels less disingenuous then bending over the lore for the sake of an minor character.

I actually agree with this. Bull as an individual being compassionate, accepting, and loyal is more appealing to me than the alien, controlling, extremely strict and practical Qun suddenly being accepting of diversity and choice, having priests act as prostitutes for those who want to get laid, etc...I like the idea of Iron Bull kind of being in denial about how awesome the Qun is in general.

[BansheeOwnage]

 

There are children present . Stop that.

Really? Are you bringing yours or something?

 

 

So, to sum up, the way Bioware set the dialogue system up made it feel like I was being punished by trying to learn more (and clear up my dialogue options). This is what made it feel like Bioware was eager to lecture us, now that I think about it. We have to go out of our way to metagame in order to avoid specific inquiries that would result in either an unpleasant reaction or disapproval. If I'm gonna get disapproval or lectured at, I want it to be because I consciously chose for it to happen. It's not fair if I'm not expecting it. The inaccurate paraphrases present a similar issue. I want to be nice to everyone (except people who don't deserve it, lol) in games, so I feel crappy when something I choose results in my Inquisitor unexpectedly saying something cringeworthy that gets him yelled at.

 

Eh, two paragraphs. It'll do!

Ugh. Don't even get me started on those kinds of options. If I'm asking a question, don't make me sound like an idiot or a jerk. That's what responses are for; questions are supposed to be neutral. I really didn't like that part of the whole Krem thing. The writers force the Inquisitor to look like an idiot, prompting Bull to get angry at you. They could have easily rephrased the question into something better. And that goes for your other examples too. Hopefully they do better next time.

[BansheeOwnage]

I actually agree with this. Bull as an individual being compassionate, accepting, and loyal is more appealing to me than the alien, controlling, extremely strict and practical Qun suddenly being accepting of diversity and choice, having priests act as prostitutes for those who want to get laid, etc...I like the idea of Iron Bull kind of being in denial about how awesome the Qun is in general.

I don't know, I didn't really get "The Qun is all love and rainbows now" from it. I figure the Qun still dictates whatever you are, and maybe if you're lucky, you'll be transgender and be seen as Aqun-Athlok. But I think it might just serve the same purpose all of their other loopholes do. Tallis is good at fighting? Oh, well she can't be a warrior, but she can be a Ben-Hassrath! Oh, this male is a good baker? Well, you're Aqun-Athlok now, sucks to be you! I doubt it would happen often though, but it's just as arbitrary and cruel as the Qun normally is.

 

Part of the reason I think that might be the case is because of Bull's definition for Aqun-Athlok. "Someone born one gender but living like another" is actually not a description of a transgender person, and that always bugged me. Bioware, if you're going to do something like this, do it right. Anyway, it would be a better description cross-dresser by today's cultural standards. But because of the Qun's strict gender roles, it would support my first paragraph. Not that I claim this is the truth though. Just an interpretation.

[Nefla]

I don't know, I didn't really get "The Qun is all love and rainbows now" from it. I figure the Qun still dictates whatever you are, and maybe if you're lucky, you'll be transgender and be seen as Aqun-Athlok. But I think it might just serve the same purpose all of their other loopholes do. Tallis is good at fighting? Oh, well she can't be a warrior, but she can be a Ben-Hassrath! Oh, this male is a good baker? Well, you're Aqun-Athlok now, sucks to be you! I doubt it would happen often though, but it's just as arbitrary and cruel as the Qun normally is.

 

Part of the reason I think that might be the case is because of Bull's definition for Aqun-Athlok. "Someone born one gender but living like another" is actually not a description of a transgender person, and that always bugged me. Bioware, if you're going to do something like this, do it right. Anyway, it would be a better description cross-dresser by today's cultural standards. But because of the Qun's strict gender roles, it would support my first paragraph. Not that I claim this is the truth though. Just an interpretation.

In DA:O and DA2(aside from MotA) I got the impression that the Qunari were extremely rigid and practical with a hive mind mentality and no room for personal goals/desires/etc...You follow your assignment which the government gives to you based on your aptitude, it doesn't matter if you like it or not. You don't get to marry or fall in love, romantic love is something you would be re-educated for. You don't get to choose who you have children with but are required to submit to their breeding program. If you have children, they are immediately taken away and raised by the government, shaped into another drone. People are brainwashed and tightly controlled, they don't even get names. This was interesting to me in that it was so horrible and alien but at the same time had it's appeal to people outside the Qun that were subjected to poverty, crime, rape, enslavement, and so on. At least the Qun offered security and a purpose.

 

Tallis being able to fight even though she's a woman and "women don't fight" as well as the whole concept of aqun athlok just doesn't make sense for a rigid and logical society. The only practical reason I could think of why a woman wouldn't be allowed to fight (and therefore the only reason I could see the Qun having for this) is that women are more reproductively valuable than men and should be kept out of harm's way for the preservation of their people. It doesn't make sense for them to have to jump through hoops to be able to contradict their own rule rather than just making some exceptions. "Women don't normally fight, but this particular woman is so skilled that it's worth the potential reproductive loss to have her fighting for us" makes way more sense than "women can't fight but she's um...a priest, yeah that's it and does preistly things!" or "women can't fight so we'll just call them something else and categorize them as men."

 

The Qun was clearly worked and reworked and changed and added to with each game and the result is to me illogical, contradictory, and not very interesting. It's just like any random human culture overall except for a few tidbits.

[Dieb]

Not entirely true. I am not politically correct in the slightest. I just remember a time where it was far from politically correct to be transgender.. Or gay.
And I see the same attitudes, the same people who bash political correctness now and complain about "agenda" till the cows come home, are exactly the same or worse than the current "PC" or "SJW" movement. If not actually worse, because of hypocrisy.

 

 

Wait.

 

...you're gay?