628 réponses à ce sujet

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

I would like my character to have the option to have sex as often as Geralt does in The Witcher. 

 

And I still want to know how the scale itch got aboard the Normandy SR-2. Implications unpleasant.

[straykat]

I would like my character to have the option to have sex as often as Geralt does in The Witcher. 

 

And I still want to know how the scale itch got aboard the Normandy SR-2. Implications unpleasant.

 

My money is on Kelly.

[Master Warder Z_]

My money is on Kelly.

 

She did love aliens.

[The Real Pearl #2]

Well then you might as well:

 

Spoiler

youtube.com/watch?v=BIR6xcvEpec

Nice cringe video

[Biotic Apostate]

>Thread about relationships and sex

>>"whoremongers"

>>fighting and personal attacks

>>a rival thread with the same wording, but opposite point

 

[Eleonora]

>Thread about relationships and sex
>>"whoremongers"
>>fighting and personal attacks
>>a rival thread with the same wording, but opposite point
 

A typical BSN monday.

[The Real Pearl #2]

Wouldn't be that what?

 

eww rage comics, jesus, even the sh1tposters are cringry in this thread

[Shechinah]

Nope in BW games you never start in a relationship with your companion you are merely flirting with someone you just encountered...giving hint that you might be interested but when said person come to you with the idea to progress to the next stage and then you turn him/her down for X reason you can safely expect this person to avoid repeating this thing the next time since you are not in a relationship.

This is different than telling to your established partner that today you don't feel doing sex. Totally different.

 

I may be misunderstanding what you are saying because this is how I read what you've wrote: So the player character and companion have only been flirting and are not in a relationship and the companion comes to the player character to progress to the supposed next step. Said step is not a relationship nor a date but sex. The player character turn the companion down for a variety of reasons and the companion takes this to mean that they are not interested in a relationship or sex because the player character was not interested in engaging in sex with a person they'd only been flirting with and had not even been on a date with.

 

Is that the correct read? 

[wright1978]

Why not just establishing the option to skip sexual content in the menu. In some games you can turn off extreme gore effects. So why not doing this, the scene skips but still happens and everyone is happy? If some player doesn't want to see it, it's ok, but doing a romance without sex like in DAI leaves more players unsatisfied than actual pleases them. Like I said before, do a non sexual romance only with a good reason behind it (like alien race that can't have sex with humans ect) and don't disguise it as some normal romance arc. That just makes players angry because it belongs to a romance for most of us. :/

Yep no problem if people can skip past the scene if it makes them uncomfortable. That's very different from making the sex itself optional which is like turning off bullets.

[The Real Pearl #2]

Best avatar on the site

When senpai likes another sh1tposter

[wright1978]

I would like my character to have the option to have sex as often as Geralt does in The Witcher. 
 
And I still want to know how the scale itch got aboard the Normandy SR-2. Implications unpleasant.

Well he has it less often in the sequels than the original but I liked some of the referencing of the fact in the tw3.

[Biotic Apostate]

A typical BSN monday.

I don't have high hopes for the rest of the week

[Eleonora]

Why not just establishing the option to skip sexual content in the menu. In some games you can turn off extreme gore effects. So why not doing this, the scene skips but still happens and everyone is happy? If some player doesn't want to see it, it's ok, but doing a romance without sex like in DAI leaves more players unsatisfied than actual pleases them. Like I said before, do a non sexual romance only with a good reason behind it (like alien race that can't have sex with humans ect) and don't disguise it as some normal romance arc. That just makes players angry because it belongs to a romance for most of us. :/

Toggles are a taboo here.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Why not just establishing the option to skip sexual content in the menu. In some games you can turn off extreme gore effects. So why not doing this, the scene skips but still happens and everyone is happy? If some player doesn't want to see it, it's ok, but doing a romance without sex like in DAI leaves more players unsatisfied than actual pleases them. Like I said before, do a non sexual romance only with a good reason behind it (like alien race that can't have sex with humans ect) and don't disguise it as some normal romance arc. That just makes players angry because it belongs to a romance for most of us. :/

That's not the issue. The issue is that not everyone wants sex to be a mandatory part of the romance, so having the scene get skipped but still happen doesn't solve anything thus not everyone is happy. 

I'd like to see the numbers to support your assertions. Solas is a romance in DAI that has it be ambiguous about whether they have sex or not, and he is by far the most popular option. And other than a few naysayers here, I've seen more people love Josephine's romance than loathe it. 

[SolNebula]

I may be misunderstanding what you are saying because this is how I read what you've wrote: So the player character and companion have only been flirting and are not in a relationship and the companion comes to the player character to progress to the supposed next step. Said step is not a relationship nor a date but sex. The player character turn the companion down for a variety of reasons and the companion takes this to mean that they are not interested in a relationship or sex because the player character was not interested in engaging in sex with a person they'd only been flirting with and had not even been on a date with.

 

Is that the correct read? 

 

Not quite because you have to understand the limitations that a romance have in a game, we don't get to date our companions in BW games it is not like we can properly develop a relationship with them therefore the process there is more simplistic. However I do believe my point still stand as being rejected in real life most of the times close the possibility of romantic involvement with a person. Nobody like a rejection.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Not quite because you have to understand the limitations that a romance have in a game, we don't get to date our companions in BW games it is not like we can develop a relationship properly with them therefore the process there is more simplistic. However I do believe my point still stand as being rejected in real life most of the times close the possibility of romantic involvement with a person. Nobody like a rejection.

If they really cared for the person, most people would at least listen to their reasoning for it and respect their decision, and be willing to do things like for example wait a while for them to be ready for that step. Not give an ultimatum. 

[Shechinah]

Relationship without sex. I think I have a lot of them, it's called friendship.

 

A relationship is not categorised only as either friendship or romance but tend to be by how two people are socially and emotionally connected meaning there a variety of relationships.

 

An non-romantic and non-sexual relationship tend to be considered platonic while romantic and sexual relationships tend to be considered non-platonic. An example of the former would a parental relationship between a parent and a child while the latter would be the sexual relationship between two people. The latter would also apply to romantic but non-sexual relationships since it would not be platonic because of the romantic aspect to the relationship.  

 

TL:DR - A romantic relationship and a sexual relationship are not mutually inclusive, a non-platonic relationship can contain both a romantic and sexual but they can also contain only one of the aspects without losing its non-platonic label. Friendship is not the only variant of a platonic relationship. I'd imaging you are likely to have relationships without a sexual aspect to it even if you are unaware of them.  
 

[SolNebula]

If they really cared for the person, most people would at least listen to their reasoning for it and respect their decision, and be willing to do things like for example wait a while for them to be ready for that step. Not give an ultimatum. 

 

In real life nobody gives ultimatums...people generally shrug their shoulders and move on.

[Shechinah]

What's a relationship without sex? Might as well hook up with a castrated dog.........or a nun (who knows?).

 

The human body has physical needs whether they like to admit it or otherwise.

 

The first thought of a romantic relationship with a no sexual component that you can think of is one of  bestiality? I do not believe I am interested in learning of where and of what this reasoning was derived from.  

 

However, a relationhip that can be romantic but without a sexual component could be one in which one of the parties involved has the occupation of a nun and believe in celibacy.

 

The body do have physical needs whether or not the person whose body it is admits to, yes, but said physical needs can and do differ from person to person as indicated by people with a lowered to non-existent sexual drive.
 

[straykat]

 

However, a relationhip that can be romantic but without a sexual component could be one in which one of the parties involved has the occupation of a nun and believe in celibacy.

 

Nuns can't even have a relationship, sex or not. They are married to "God".

 

If you somehow still found yourself hooked up to one, something's gone wrong. Sex is hardly the issue. How you even got to that point is strange enough.

[Shechinah]

Why be in a relationship if you never get the prize?

 

Because sometimes the prize is not the same as percieved by others and sometimes what they define as the prize is something the others are uninterested in or places less of an importance on. What is considered the prize by the former might be sexual intimacy while what is considered the prize by the latter might be emotional intimacy.  
 

[Laughing_Man]

TL:DR - A romantic relationship and a sexual relationship are not mutually inclusive, a non-platonic relationship can contain both a romantic and sexual but they can also contain only one of the aspects without losing its non-platonic label. Friendship is not the only variant of a platonic relationship. I'd imaging you are likely to have relationships without a sexual aspect to it even if you are unaware of them.  
 

 

If a tree falls in the middle of the forest and no one is there to listen, does it still make a noise?

 

If the moon is shining and no one is looking, does it become dark?

 

Can you guess my answer?

 

Irrelevant.

 

The fact that you decided to refer to some friendships as "romantic relationships" may be relevant to you personally, but no one else really cares.

It's just friendship for them. It may one day become something more, but not at the moment. It's definitely not the usual meaning of the term.

[Shechinah]

Ok, I just have one question. Why does this matter?

 

I think I can construct an example that might work: In life, there are sometimes a thing that you want and of which you may find that there is an actual chance that you may attain said thing. Why does this thing matter to you? It can be due to different reasons. Why are you trying to get it? Because you want it and there is an actual chance that you may get it.
 

[Shechinah]

It's funny how asking for a feature, the OP also s lut shaming people who enjoy something wired to them biologically and expected part of any regular relationship.

 

I must very much disagree that a sexual aspect is expected of any regular relationship considering a regular relationship can be as much a familial as it can be non-familial. Perhaps you meant a regular sexual relationship?

 

That said, I do think the opening post should not have resorted to shaming sexual interest in a non-platonic relationship just as I do not think others should have resorted to shaming or mocking people with a romantic-only interest in a non-platonic relationship.   

[Shechinah]

If a tree falls in the middle of the forest and no one is there to listen, does it still make a noise?

 

If the moon is shining and no one is looking, does it become dark?

 

Can you guess my answer?

 

Irrelevant.

 

The fact that you decided to refer to some friendships as "romantic relationships" may be relevant to you personally, but no one else really cares.

It's just friendship for them. It may one day become something more, but not at the moment. It's definitely not the usual meaning of the term.

 

I seemed to have missed a bit of what I intended to write. I'll see if that is the case.

 

Also, I disagree with your answer to the two examples you posed since I believe they are both examples of a thought experiment used in philosophy and are intended to raise questions regarding observation and the knowledge of reality. It is quite an interesting read, in my opinion. I would not consider their answers irrelevant. You may consider the answers to such questions to be irrelevant and others may as well but that would be your opinion and theirs as the other is mine and others'.   

 

To you, they may be a way of exemplifying a lack of caring or a lack of effect on the world and its people while to me, they are a way of exemplifying curious questions that expand into philosophy, science and religion and has been mused for over hundreds of years.