617 réponses à ce sujet

[Master Warder Z_]

Yet another thing to blame Anders for.

 

Damnit, Anders.

 

He ruined a lot of things.

[In Exile]

That's exactly why.  The devs confirmed that they wouldn't go with that approach after the backlash from Anders.

Which I always found a little weird, because I always thought Fenris was way more flirty. 

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

Partially because they removed all attempts by the companions to start the romance, probably due to the weird Anders backslash from DA2. But even looking past that, what is really so bad about the fact that you have to turn someone down? It doesn't affect the relationship afterwards, it doesn't stop any other relationships because locking in a relationship requires a very, very specific choice that is really underlined when it happens. Based on what is discusses here I would assume nobody ever turns anyone down in real life because body language, people.

 

 

That's exactly why.  The devs confirmed that they wouldn't go with that approach after the backlash from Anders.

 

 

Yet another thing to blame Anders for.

 

Damnit, Anders.

 

But there was a valid problem with Ander's scene. It was handled clumsily by the devs. There was no reason to have it immediately after he killed Karl, and no reason at all to have 2 options. Romance or no romance.  The problem had nothing to do with 'eww a dude flirted with me', that complaint is simply what got noticed most.

 

But I've said this before and it doesn't seem to be sticking. They ever listen. Noone ever listens. /Cullen.

 

it would seem, as mentioned in the other thread, that having the 'heart option' marked a la DA would make everyone happy. as long as not handled like Anders.

[ThomasBlaine]

I can't argue with the fact that we have the potential to spur on future lifeforms however I just don't see humans as that special - we're basically clever monkeys - with all the genetic baggage that entails. Protecting other species purely for their own sake isn't something that seems to come naturally - to any species on Earth.

 

 

"We've zero data about the long-term sustainability of species after they reach the point of sentience" ... that's a fair point but I don't believe evolution stops with sentience. When I stated "the odds on us making it to a billion years are so statistically improbable it's not even worth debating." I was referring specifically to H0m0 sapiens (stupid profanity filter), I don't believe this particular species of humanity will survive a billion years - no other multi-cellular life on Earth has. Evolving into something else isn't a "possibility" it's a virtual certainty if we're not wiped out first.

 

I have no "dread" for the long term continuation of the species - it doesn't have one, no species does. Chickens share common genetic traits with the Therapod dinosaurs, they may well be descended from them - but you can't say a chicken is a Deinonychus.

 

...and how does the fact that I have no desire for offspring make me hypocritical? I suspect you're being deliberately obtuse.

 

Nobody said humans were special, just advanced past a specific point beyond any other known species, monkey-like or not. And protecting anything outside their own territory and immediate social group isn't something that has ever come naturally to any species on Earth. Humans are getting more and more on top of that though.

 

All true, but you implied that it would be fortunate for us to go extinct or at least evolve into something else in the context of us causing environmental damage, and then specified that by extinction in and of itself you meant "probably further evolution". The two thoughts don't connect, human evolution isn't going to make our technology any less damaging to the environment. Human engineering, human politics and human cultural conditioning are. Or whatever we decide to call ourselves when we agree that we've outgrown the sapiens thing. You're basically suggesting that humanity will gradually develop into creatures that somehow have no use for harmful technology anymore, which is theoretically impossible given the functions of technology(compensating for weaknesses) and evolution(removing weaknesses that can't be compensated for) respectively, as a certainty. Which is my point, we just don't know how advanced technology affects the evolutionary process of a species, much less vice versa.

 

And nobody has said a word about humanity or our future counterparts literally being around forever, as that's what you keep arguing against.

 

Your lack of desire for offspring isn't any of our business, I was vaguely thinking about population problems but wouldn't know and shouldn't have commented, but the desire to live another moment longer yourself while talking happily about the mass extinction of some future generation of humanity sounds pretty hypocritical to me. Unless you intellectually condemn your own life and the lives of everyone you love as well, in which case it's just sad. Or unless you were just talking about evolution in that instance as well, in which case my objection is the one you read in the second paragraph.

[Hiemoth]

Which I always found a little weird, because I always thought Fenris was way more flirty. 

 

Really? I honestly can't think of a single flirty scene from Fenris unless you flirted with him first and even then it was pretty awkward.

 

But there was a valid problem with Ander's scene. It was handled clumsily by the devs. There was no reason to have it immediately after he killed Karl, and no reason at all to have 2 options. Romance or no romance.  The problem had nothing to do with 'eww a dude flirted with me', that complaint is simply what got noticed most.

 

But I've said this before and it doesn't seem to be sticking. They ever listen. Noone ever listens. /Cullen.

 

it would seem, as mentioned in the other thread, that having the 'heart option' marked a la DA would make everyone happy. as long as not handled like Anders.

 

But then how would it be handled? It requires the other party to flirt with the PC, at which point the PC can either respond positively, which warms up the romance, or turn them down, which ends the romance. What other option should there be? For the player just not react in a situation where someone where explicitely expresses their interest in them? How is that good design?

 

As for the Anders backlash, what you point out about the timing is valid, but I've almost seen that brought up on the discussion. It is very rarely about when it happens, which is a valid criticism, but rather that Anders hit on Hawke, where it is usually even specified that it happens with the male Hawke even though the exactly same thing happens with female Hawke. Add to that that there is very little complaints about Isabella very directly flirting wtih Hawke's of both genders.

[daveliam]

But then how would it be handled? It requires the other party to flirt with the PC, at which point the PC can either respond positively, which warms up the romance, or turn them down, which ends the romance. What other option should there be? For the player just not react in a situation where someone where explicitely expresses their interest in them? How is that good design?

 

As for the Anders backlash, what you point out about the timing is valid, but I've almost seen that brought up on the discussion. It is very rarely about when it happens, which is a valid criticism, but rather that Anders hit on Hawke, where it is usually even specified that it happens with the male Hawke even though the exactly same thing happens with female Hawke. Add to that that there is very little complaints about Isabella very directly flirting wtih Hawke's of both genders.

 

^ This.  I totally agree the Anders scene could have been handled better.  There could have been a time break between killing his ex-boyfriend and getting all flirty with you.  And they could have had him acknowledge his relationship with Karl with FemHawke. 

 

But, unfortunately, many of the complaints about that scene are initially framed as "the timing was bad" or "you either have to sleep with Anders or get a billion rivalry points!!!1!!" (slight exaggeration), but the longer that the posters talk about it, it becomes painfully clear that the real issue is a <gasp> man hitting on their bro PC character.  Not always, but enough for it to be very noticeable thing.

[Getorex]

Nice try. But no. The backstory was Kaiden was a bro, the rpg aspect for that player was that Shep and Kaiden were buddies. They KNEW each other. It's HIS rpg story, not yours. You don't get to stick your preference into his story. So, they are buds since ME1 then in ME3 Kaiden gets all horney for his buddy and wrecks the rpg by stepping out of character, both for Kaiden, period, and for the rpg story that was backing HIS story. It was out of character and wrong footed. They need to not make that stuff happen because of a clumsy or bad move in convo by the player. A simple heart symbol prevents the jarring wrecking of story continuity for the player. Especially when some of the wheel options are ambiguous.

I accidently punched the reporter in ME1 because I saw the renegade option and took it thinking an angry outburst would come forth. Instead I punched her. Happens with romance too. Can't be too nice or you set off an unwanted romance chain. It. Can. Be. Done. Better.

Get it? As bros of years in his story, his Shep and Kaiden would know each other and Kaiden wouldn't suddenly step out of character and think Shep is gay.

[daveliam]

Except that in my game Shep and Kaidan had chemistry from the very beginning (ME1, which was always why Shep was single and avoiding the female flirts as best as he could -- granted he didn't allow any of them to die simply for flirting with him......).  Shep was always interested, but Kaidan needed time (and almost losing Shep) to realize that he wanted more than just being 'bros'.  Why do you think that your interpretation of the game is any more valid than anyone else's?  You said it, it's an RPG that allows you to shape the story for Shep.  So recognize that other people will play differently than you do and stop QQing because things aren't exactly how you want them to be.......

[Hiemoth]

Yet another thing to blame Anders for.

 

Damnit, Anders.

 

Anders continues his journey on being the most effective villain ever in a Bioware game. Well played, Mr. Anders, well played.

[Hiemoth]

Nice try. But no. The backstory was Kaiden was a bro, the rpg aspect for that player was that Shep and Kaiden were buddies. They KNEW each other. It's HIS rpg story, not yours. You don't get to stick your preference into his story. So, they are buds since ME1 then in ME3 Kaiden gets all horney for his buddy and wrecks the rpg by stepping out of character, both for Kaiden, period, and for the rpg story that was backing HIS story. It was out of character and wrong footed. They need to not make that stuff happen because of a clumsy or bad move in convo by the player. A simple heart symbol prevents the jarring wrecking of story continuity for the player. Especially when some of the wheel options are ambiguous.

I accidently punched the reporter in ME1 because I saw the renegade option and took it thinking an angry outburst would come forth. Instead I punched her. Happens with romance too. Can't be too nice or you set off an unwanted romance chain. It. Can. Be. Done. Better.

Get it? As bros of years in his story, his Shep and Kaiden would know each other and Kaiden wouldn't suddenly step out of character and think Shep is gay.

 

Out of curiosity, shouldn't exactly the same logic apply to Ash if you play a gay Shepard? She should know it after years and make no moves on Shepard?

[Ahglock]

Out of curiosity, shouldn't exactly the same logic apply to Ash if you play a gay Shepard? She should know it after years and make no moves on Shepard?

 

Yes it should.  The issue and why things like Tags, colored wording, heck even toggles kind of make sense is the game world does not do a even half decent job of representing actual dialogue and relationships.  I'm the most anti-social ass hat you can immagine and I still picked up on things like sexual orientation. relationship status etc of my coworkers in less time than the PC is supposedly spending with his crew and team. 

[In Exile]

Really? I honestly can't think of a single flirty scene from Fenris unless you flirted with him first and even then it was pretty awkward'.

 

His "If I knew Ansom would find a man so capable..." (or whatever that dwarf's name was)  line always came off as super flirty (and suave to me), but that might just be my usual Gideon Emery can read the phone book to me and sound hot syndrome. Other lines, too, but nothing stands out to me in quite the same way. 

[In Exile]

But, unfortunately, many of the complaints about that scene are initially framed as "the timing was bad" or "you either have to sleep with Anders or get a billion rivalry points!!!1!!" (slight exaggeration), but the longer that the posters talk about it, it becomes painfully clear that the real issue is a <gasp> man hitting on their bro PC character.  Not always, but enough for it to be very noticeable thing.

 

Which is interesting, because I never even saw the conversation until I tried really hard to get it, since I just get preempting it by snarking at him. 

[In Exile]

Nice try. But no. The backstory was Kaiden was a bro, the rpg aspect for that player was that Shep and Kaiden were buddies. They KNEW each other. It's HIS rpg story, not yours. You don't get to stick your preference into his story. So, they are buds since ME1 then in ME3 Kaiden gets all horney for his buddy and wrecks the rpg by stepping out of character, both for Kaiden, period, and for the rpg story that was backing HIS story. It was out of character and wrong footed. They need to not make that stuff happen because of a clumsy or bad move in convo by the player. A simple heart symbol prevents the jarring wrecking of story continuity for the player. Especially when some of the wheel options are ambiguous.

I accidently punched the reporter in ME1 because I saw the renegade option and took it thinking an angry outburst would come forth. Instead I punched her. Happens with romance too. Can't be too nice or you set off an unwanted romance chain. It. Can. Be. Done. Better.

Get it? As bros of years in his story, his Shep and Kaiden would know each other and Kaiden wouldn't suddenly step out of character and think Shep is gay.

 

That's wrong. ME1 and Shepard didn't serve together prior to the Normandy, so they didn't know each other at the start of ME1. And Kaiden all but declares he's in love with you in ME2. But more importantly, sometimes people will make confessions of romantic interest in that way even to someone they may think isn't interested in them - even if they think they're straight. That's not really out of character. 

 

There's no continuity for other characters in any story. You get control over your character (and even that's debatable to some degree). But NPCs are totally in the hands of the writers/designers. 

[Lady Artifice]

^ This.  I totally agree the Anders scene could have been handled better.  There could have been a time break between killing his ex-boyfriend and getting all flirty with you.  And they could have had him acknowledge his relationship with Karl with FemHawke. 

 

But, unfortunately, many of the complaints about that scene are initially framed as "the timing was bad" or "you either have to sleep with Anders or get a billion rivalry points!!!1!!" (slight exaggeration), but the longer that the posters talk about it, it becomes painfully clear that the real issue is a <gasp> man hitting on their bro PC character.  Not always, but enough for it to be very noticeable thing.

 

That's the most common concern, I agree. On the other hand, there's also the issue that a Hawke of either gender might have an incompatible orientation in order to reciprocate with Anders, and yet the only turn down option available is rather unfriendly tone wise. I've always asserted that the issue doesn't lie in Anders approach, but in Hawke's limited ability to respond. 

 

I was personally taken out of the moment, because that's not the way I'd ever expect my main Hawke to respond. She would have been gentle. 

[Erstus]

The only good Anders is a dead Anders

Knife him everytime

[Hiemoth]

His "If I knew Ansom would find a man so capable..." (or whatever that dwarf's name was)  line always came off as super flirty (and suave to me), but that might just be my usual Gideon Emery can read the phone book to me and sound hot syndrome. Other lines, too, but nothing stands out to me in quite the same way. 

 

I've seen that mentioned before, but I've never been able to hear it as anything close to flirty and, considering the characer, I don't think it was ever meant as such. However, that wasn't meant to be dismissive as it actually illustrates a central problem in these discussions. Scientifically, both genders are actually really bad at not only picking up when someone is flirting with them, but also wrongfully thinking that someone is flirting with them. That's essentially what writers are dealing with when writing those scenes, which makes them so difficult to implement in these games and why some read some scenes as the NPC just throwing themselves at the PC while some completely miss scenes meant to be flirtatious.

 

In a weird way, that Traynor shower scene is actually surprisingly realistic.

 

 

Yes it should.  The issue and why things like Tags, colored wording, heck even toggles kind of make sense is the game world does not do a even half decent job of representing actual dialogue and relationships.  I'm the most anti-social ass hat you can immagine and I still picked up on things like sexual orientation. relationship status etc of my coworkers in less time than the PC is supposedly spending with his crew and team. 

 

To be honest, it's statistically pretty unlikely you've picked up all of your coworkers relationship statuses and sexual orientations unless it is a very small workplace and you're all pretty close. But to the larger issue, what the complaint here doesn't seem to be about how well the game represents something, but rather that what is asked for is pretty much impossible to implement. Is the wish here that we get to play through a morning coffee session with the crew where there is a subtle hint about someone's marriage? They have limited dialogue's and scenes where they are trying to pass through massive amounts of information.

 

Besides, the toggle for these things would be a horrible idea.

[Commander Rpg]

The only good Anders is a dead Anders

Knife him everytime

Anders isn't good even being dead.

[Ahglock]

To be honest, it's statistically pretty unlikely you've picked up all of your coworkers relationship statuses and sexual orientations unless it is a very small workplace and you're all pretty close. But to the larger issue, what the complaint here doesn't seem to be about how well the game represents something, but rather that what is asked for is pretty much impossible to implement. Is the wish here that we get to play through a morning coffee session with the crew where there is a subtle hint about someone's marriage? They have limited dialogue's and scenes where they are trying to pass through massive amounts of information.

 

Besides, the toggle for these things would be a horrible idea.

 

Everyone at work I've spent enough time where forming a interest was likely I figured out quickly.  Anything normandy crew and squad size or less you'd likely figure out in a month or two of casual conversation. Heck you have a very solid chance on sexual orientation of picking it out on your first meeting, relationship status well people constantly talk about their boyfriend/husband/girlfriend etc maybe not directly to you if you are not close to them but its not hard to find out. But yes, the point is you aren't having coffee you aren't having idle onversations etc so all the clues either of you would put out is lost.  So yes they do have limited scenes etc. and if they can't add enough or it would just be boring as hell as I don't want a eat breakfast simulator then other features that bridge that gap are useful.   So something like the heart icon or yes toggle helps bridge that distance.  Maybe if this ws LA Noir level facial expressions or they gave the full dialogue line, but they dont go that far. I have yet to bump into being ninjamaced but if other people have and a simple pink color to the text would stop that why not?

[Zekka]

The problem with this choice is that DA:O doesn't actually convey the werewolves are useful. They're basically a legion of meatbuckets you indiscriminately mow down with little-to-no regard for them, and ultimately the game doesn't do anything to convince you that their military strength, even if you accept it, matters. 

 

I don't disagree with you in the abstract, but overall, not persuasive. 

 

My DA:O choice, IMO, is the Anvil of the Void. Because on an abstract level even, having golems versus the unending hordes of darkspawn might be all that keeps the dwarves from extinction. 

When I played, the werewolves were mowing down all the darkspawn.

[Fredward]

So there's quite a bit of room for improvement in allowing players to choose when their character will flirt and with whom.

 

Maybe? Like in DAI? But there's a meaningful distinction between flirting that leads somewhere (whether you're aware of it or not, like Alistair and Leliana in DAO) and flirting which goes nowhere unless you click on the giant glowing neon sign at the end. Which I think is the case with most of Bioware's characters. Sometimes people flirt and I'd prefer they have some semblance of autonomy in this regard rather than hoarding action and reaction all into the player's sphere. Cortez, specifically, who this conversation was about is an example of such. He flirts but it goes nowhere unless you want it to. Vega too, pretty sure you can display disinterest/displeasure whenever he flirts as well. Traynor doesn't go anywhere either unless you choose to enter the shower with her. etc.
 

[Chealec]

Nobody said humans were special, just advanced past a specific point beyond any other known species, monkey-like or not. And protecting anything outside their own territory and immediate social group isn't something that has ever come naturally to any species on Earth. Humans are getting more and more on top of that though.

 

All true, but you implied that it would be fortunate for us to go extinct or at least evolve into something else in the context of us causing environmental damage, and then specified that by extinction in and of itself you meant "probably further evolution". The two thoughts don't connect, human evolution isn't going to make our technology any less damaging to the environment. Human engineering, human politics and human cultural conditioning are. Or whatever we decide to call ourselves when we agree that we've outgrown the sapiens thing. You're basically suggesting that humanity will gradually develop into creatures that somehow have no use for harmful technology anymore, which is theoretically impossible given the functions of technology(compensating for weaknesses) and evolution(removing weaknesses that can't be compensated for) respectively, as a certainty. Which is my point, we just don't know how advanced technology affects the evolutionary process of a species, much less vice versa.

 

And nobody has said a word about humanity or our future counterparts literally being around forever, as that's what you keep arguing against.

 

Your lack of desire for offspring isn't any of our business, I was vaguely thinking about population problems but wouldn't know and shouldn't have commented, but the desire to live another moment longer yourself while talking happily about the mass extinction of some future generation of humanity sounds pretty hypocritical to me. Unless you intellectually condemn your own life and the lives of everyone you love as well, in which case it's just sad. Or unless you were just talking about evolution in that instance as well, in which case my objection is the one you read in the second paragraph.

 

It's really not that complicated:

 

In a thousand years the human species will be the same as we are now - but with better gadgets and maybe different problems (longevity perhaps).

In a million it'll probably be unrecognisable or gone.

In a billion it probably won't even be a footnote in history.

In 5 billion there won't even be a habitable Earth any more.

 

The future extinction of the current human species is inevitable. It's not hypocritical to state a fact.

I'm not emotionally invested though.

 

 

My personal belief is simply that humanity, as it is now, is problematic - we're still too monkey to play nice with the toys we've made.

 

Would the planet, overall, be better off if humanity as it is now, went extinct? Probably.

Would the planet, overall, be better off if humanity learned to play nice; if we further evolved socially or mentally? Probably.

 

There's no disconnect; people just need to move beyond the monkey - and I hope we do so before we start colonising other worlds - but I have no stake in this.

[Applepie_Svk]

Anders continues his journey on being the most effective villain ever in a Bioware game. Well played, Mr. Anders, well played.

 

Batshit crazy man, batshit crazy...

[Getorex]

Maybe? Like in DAI? But there's a meaningful distinction between flirting that leads somewhere (whether you're aware of it or not, like Alistair and Leliana in DAO) and flirting which goes nowhere unless you click on the giant glowing neon sign at the end. Which I think is the case with most of Bioware's characters. Sometimes people flirt and I'd prefer they have some semblance of autonomy in this regard rather than hoarding action and reaction all into the player's sphere. Cortez, specifically, who this conversation was about is an example of such. He flirts but it goes nowhere unless you want it to. Vega too, pretty sure you can display disinterest/displeasure whenever he flirts as well. Traynor doesn't go anywhere either unless you choose to enter the shower with her. etc.
 

 

Your distinctions are only valid and true in RL.  In a game with VERY tight parameters and VERY VERY short (and shallow) interactions, those distinctions dont fly and are best left out.  You would be talking about a game far too complex to ever be made or released.  Keep it simple.

 

A character knows if they want/don't want to "flirt' with an NPC and whether they want/don't want those characters to get it on in some way.  Leave it at that and make that work. 

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

Really? I honestly can't think of a single flirty scene from Fenris unless you flirted with him first and even then it was pretty awkward.


But then how would it be handled? It requires the other party to flirt with the PC, at which point the PC can either respond positively, which warms up the romance, or turn them down, which ends the romance. What other option should there be? For the player just not react in a situation where someone where explicitely expresses their interest in them? How is that good design?

As for the Anders backlash, what you point out about the timing is valid, but I've almost seen that brought up on the discussion. It is very rarely about when it happens, which is a valid criticism, but rather that Anders hit on Hawke, where it is usually even specified that it happens with the male Hawke even though the exactly same thing happens with female Hawke. Add to that that there is very little complaints about Isabella very directly flirting wtih Hawke's of both genders.

I'm not following. I was saying to handle it by giving the player cues for when to flirt, not the npc.

In Isabela's case it was entirely different. You can choose to respond positively negatively or not at all. In Anders case you were presented with a heart and a broken heart, nothing else. To a new player it looks like you have to either enter a romance or reject a romance, permanently for all you know at that point.

I never had any flirty scenes with Fenris, and as you noted Noone of either gender complained about Isabela. It's almost as if the gender thing wasn't really the issue.