7455 réponses à ce sujet

[SirGladiator]

I dont really understand an earlier comment about these topics being a 'warzone', its mostly people supportive and the occasional troll who makes a ton of posts being over the top negative. Certainly comparing it to the Tali threads, I know as someone who has participated in many of them over the years there were QUITE a few negative folks there as well, probably more than show up in these threads, especially the early pro-Tali threads. Science Fiction is not a good place for limited, closed minds . The simple fact is that most people liked the Liara/FemShep romance in ME1, it was almost universally a positive reaction to it, and most people did not like the fact that ME2 didn't have a similar option. Just as people showed their support for the Liara/FemShep romance on the message boards after ME1 came out, so too they're showing their displeasure with such an option not being present in ME2. Just as folks (including myself) after ME1 came out made many comments saying that we wanted a Tali romance in ME2 (and most folks who wanted it wanted it for BOTH Sheps, not just one), now are making our voices heard once again. Its really as simple as that, and near as I can tell just by judging the reactions to the two games' romance options, it seems actually FAR more controversial to leave such an option out than it is to put it in.

[Allison W]

...So, which same-sex romance do you folks want most?

For me I think I'd say Jack. I've had enough of nice girls for a few games; I want a badass.

Modifié par Allison W, 10 mars 2010 - 09:37 .

[sw33ts]

Allison W wrote...

...So, which same-sex romance do you folks want most?

For me I think I'd say Jack. I've had enough of nice girls for a few games; I want a badass.

She's more so a little girl...but yeah probably Jack or Tali...or Jack...or Tali...I actually wouldn't even mind Miranda...frack they're all better then the male choices I had to choose from.

[Wittand25]

For ME2: Jacob or Thane would be both good options, I never saw the romantic appeal of Garrus.

For ME3: Kaidan is the ideal solution here, the shared backstory with Shepard would give the romance a deeper feeling, but another characters like Hendel from the book would also be great. Also the fact that Kaidan is optional and might not even exist in Shepards universe means all those who dont want to have a m/m-option ingame could simply play a Shepard who choose Ashley on Virmire. Ofcourse if Kaidan really becomes the only m/m option in the ME universe, Bioware would need to provide a savegame-editor that is capable to define atleast the major story points when starting ME3 without a custom Shepard for those without one (maybe unlocked as reward for finishing the game once ).

Edit: I dont usually persue f/f romances so other that they should be present for those wanting them I dont have an opinion about who should be available.

Modifié par Wittand25, 10 mars 2010 - 10:08 .

[Fade9wayz]

I'd be perfectly happy with Liara coming back. She has become quite badass from what little we could see of her. If I could chose anyone from ME2 and for fantasy sake... Definitely Miranda or Samara. Jack needs to grow up and pull her head from her (admittedly fine) arse and Tali, well, I can't see her as anything but the ideal little sister. That's my opinion tough.

I have no idea about M/M. Hendel would be a good addition I guess. It would at least keep those who are afraid of retcon at bay, I guess.

Modifié par Fade9wayz, 10 mars 2010 - 10:46 .

[didymos1120]

Mordigan wrote...
While I admit that I myself am unsure as to Bioware's motivations in doing things the way they did, it's not unusual for voice actors to record tons of dialogue, much of which will never be used in the film, game, cartoon or whatever they are working on... 

Yeah, and?  Tons of stuff gets written that never makes it in the book.  Or filmed that doesn't make it in the movie. Or the episode.  Thing is, you don't record/write/film stuff you absolutely know you don't need.  You may be unsure as to whether or not some particular bit will make the cut, and you certainly are aware that something is bound to be left out, but you do it anyway because you don't yet know what's needed and what is not (also, it's not unusual for scenes in just about any medium to be cut, then restored, then cut, then...and so on).  Again: it's pointless to pay for something you know you won't use.  The only case I can think of is when you know you have to recast a role in a movie/TV show, but you film using that person anyway because you're already in production, you're on set, you have a deadline to meet, and you can still get all the other performances so long as you shoot around the miscast actor (who's getting paid at least scale no matter what).  Then you hire the new actor, and only shoot their side of the scenes in question.  And even that sort of situation isn't that common.

Anyway,  point is you have no basis for the "Uh, they just record all the lines, period" notion.  So, why keep bringing it up as though it were plain fact? You can either point to some source as support, or you can't.  If you can't, then, not to put too fine a point on it, knock it off.  Or at least try to make a convincing case for the idea. 

Modifié par didymos1120, 10 mars 2010 - 11:48 .

[SimonTheFrog]

Wow, there was some debate going on.



There's still this one question lingering unanswered: why do people care what options there are in the game if they are not forced to pick them. I mean, especially in this matter.

[The Uncanny]

Collider wrote...

It's science fiction. Not space fantasy.

It's space fantasy. Not science fiction.

Temper_Graniteskul wrote...

You know what's gross? Using armor piercing ammo with the Widow to take some guy's head off. Also, the body horror that was part and parcel of DA:O's 'A Paragon of Her Kind' storyline.

Wow. I'm so glad it isn't just me! That section of DA:O veered a little bit too far towards being misogynistic for me.

[Sable Rhapsody]

SimonTheFrog wrote...

Wow, there was some debate going on.

There's still this one question lingering unanswered: why do people care what options there are in the game if they are not forced to pick them. I mean, especially in this matter.

Well, it also bothers people if there are certain RP options unrelated to romance in the game, even if they're not forced to pick them.  I know people who are uncomfortable playing certain games simply because you CAN do really horrible stuff in them.  Do you have to?  No.  But even entertaining it as a possibility bothers them.  (And please, before anyone flames me, I am NOT implying that same-sex romance is anything horrible.)  

I dunno, maybe they feel tempted or compromised or something   Personally, I do think that the "easy" cop-out solution of just making everyone bisexual and the romances gender-blind is jarringly fail from an immersion perspective.  Sexual identity and orientation are part of an NPC's characterization.  Maybe the possibility of poorly implemented same-sex options also bothers people?

[siccore]

:wub::wub::wub:

[cutthecameras]

sw33ts wrote...

Allison W wrote...

...So, which same-sex romance do you folks want most?

For me I think I'd say Jack. I've had enough of nice girls for a few games; I want a badass.

She's more so a little girl...but yeah probably Jack or Tali...or Jack...or Tali...I actually wouldn't even mind Miranda...frack they're all better then the male choices I had to choose from.

QFT

Is it too late to flip them? I'll trade: the dudes can have my options...Take 'em I don't want them at all.

[The Uncanny]

Allison W wrote...

...So, which same-sex romance do you
folks want most?

Jack: intriguing back story,
great VA performance, sexy look (yes, I'm into the ink and shaved head,
although the nipple strap top is an epic fail) and
those big, sad eyes...

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Maybe
the possibility of poorly implemented same-sex options also bothers
people?

Absolutely. If it is a choice between poorly
implemented s/s LIs and no s/s LIs then I'd choose the latter. I don't
want table scraps, I want a storyline which will add to my enjoyment of
the game by increasing my investment and immersion in the narrative.

However, that doesn't mean that a gender-blind LI has to be a poorly implemented one. If a character is clearly defined as bi then it is not incongruous for much of their LI dialogue to be the same for a man as a woman.

[Jake71887]

cutthecameras wrote...

sw33ts wrote...

Allison W wrote...

...So, which same-sex romance do you folks want most?

For me I think I'd say Jack. I've had enough of nice girls for a few games; I want a badass.

She's more so a little girl...but yeah probably Jack or Tali...or Jack...or Tali...I actually wouldn't even mind Miranda...frack they're all better then the male choices I had to choose from.

QFT

Is it too late to flip them? I'll trade: the dudes can have my options...Take 'em I don't want them at all.

I'd trade the hot chicks for a bird and a frog?

Good deal.... GOOD DEAL! 

[The Uncanny]

cutthecameras wrote...

Is it too late to flip them? I'll trade: the dudes can have my options...Take 'em I don't want them at all.

This ftw!

[Charsen]

Wittand25 wrote...

For ME2: Jacob or Thane would be both good options, I never saw the romantic appeal of Garrus.

For ME3: Kaidan is the ideal solution here, the shared backstory with Shepard would give the romance a deeper feeling, but another characters like Hendel from the book would also be great. Also the fact that Kaidan is optional and might not even exist in Shepards universe means all those who dont want to have a m/m-option ingame could simply play a Shepard who choose Ashley on Virmire. Ofcourse if Kaidan really becomes the only m/m option in the ME universe, Bioware would need to provide a savegame-editor that is capable to define atleast the major story points when starting ME3 without a custom Shepard for those without one (maybe unlocked as reward for finishing the game once ).

Edit: I dont usually persue f/f romances so other that they should be present for those wanting them I dont have an opinion about who should be available.

Garrus' appeal is his voice and personality, mainly. Also the fact that he is with you from very early in ME1, so he's already a good companion and people become attached. For my renegade, I would easily pick Garrus over the other options if they were all available. 

Maybe they won't need an editor - didn't the conversation in ME2 in the beginning (to test your memory of the events in ME1) affect the outcome of ME1 in xbox?

"Who did you support? Udina/Anderson" & answering Udina when Anderson was correct would change your save.. right? I haven't tried it. But even if it didn't, they could probably rig it to do that.

[Tom Adama]

Allison W wrote...

Tom Adama wrote...

Well secularism is already here, the reason being that monarchies have been abandoned in favor of democratic governments where large volumes of beliefs constantly clash. Secularism also permits freedom of belief and removes higher philosphies from self-governing societal bodies.

And no, people are not born gay or straight, society teaches them what is erotic or desirable. Sexuality is ENTIRELY psychological, there are no brain correlates that yield "straight of gay". Even prisoners with XYY's commit homosexual acts in prisons, how can they be born gay if they are super-male?

Some of us don't bend knee to Christendom.

Also: if sexual orientation is nothing but a result of societal teachings, how did homosexuality come to exist in societies that ferociously suppress it? How did heterosexuality survive, among the vast majority of the population, in cultures that glorified homosexuality over heterosexuality?

Have you considered that being genetically "super-male" has absolutely nothing to do with sexual orientation? Are you saying that someone with an extra male chromosome can't still be subjected to different hormonal inputs in the womb/early childhood? Or are you completely unaware of the role that hormones play in the development and differentiation of the body, including the brain?

And if you're a neuroscientist, how on Earth can you not be aware that the mind itself, right down to the most insignificant, fleeting thought, is physical? Admittedly, I asked you this in my last post.

Ok, this is a common misconception. Have you heard of the Mind-body problem? I'll cover it in a nutshell, the measurable qualities of the MIND are NOT reducible to the brain. When someone thinks, feels, emotes, rationalizes they are experiencing qualitatively; this means that NOBODY other that you knows what you are feeling, they are NOT 3rd party objectivities. The only reason that we as humans are even aware of the mind is because we ourselves experience it. Now, this is not to say that physical processes in the brain dont correlate with psychological ones, only that the brain is responsible for transduction of neurochemical processes into psychological ones.

Think of it this way, my eyes enable me to detect light. They do this by TRANSDUCING EM wavelengths into neurochemical languages which travel to my occipital lobe. The neurons in my brain fire in a ellaborate binary patterns which leads to interpretation... well, what is doing the interpretation? I think of it this way, your computer screen is transducing binary code into light, if you were NOT there to view the screen, the information on the PC is useless.

The brain transduces the mind. Nothing more. When scientists claim that the mind = brain, all they are admitting to is that ACCORDING TO SCIENCE (which is objective, not subjective) the mind is a product of the brain, but by logic the mind CANNOT be the brain. Brain is 3rd party objective, mind is 1st person subjective. An emotion cannot be measured by science, only its physiological correlates can be measured.

This is why PSYCHOLOGY is seperate from NEUROSCIENCE. Psych studies minds, neuro studies brains.

Modifié par Tom Adama, 10 mars 2010 - 05:04 .

[Pannamaslo]

Tom Adama wrote...


This is why PSYCHOLOGY is seperate from NEUROSCIENCE. Psych studies minds, neuro studies brains.

As a neuropsychologist I have to disagree...

Mind, and by "mind" I mean cognitive processes and higher emotions  =/= whole brain. But mind = certain brain functions. These functions differ from human to human, becasue every one of us has their own unique set of connections (which what I believe is what you're trying to say, by "no one knows your emotions") that were formed during learning (but are also heavily inlfuenced by genetic make up, fetal developement etc...)

We have more and more knowledge considering how brain influances higher cognitive functions. The future of psychology lies in neurosicence IMO.

EDIT: About homosexuality - the most popular theory states that homosexula male fetuses are exposed to maternal hormones differently, which alters sexuality developement.  One of the proofs is that male homosexulas' pattern of  reaction when injected with estrogen is closer to female reaction than male one. Homosexuality is not learnd, is not induced by a society, most probably it is inborn and not necessarily heritable. There are differences in the brain with people with different orientaion (it is a case of male participants, IDK about lesbians).

I hope it is clear, I am not a native speaker, so it may cause problems, especially in topics where specifity is recquired:whistle:

Modifié par Pannamaslo, 10 mars 2010 - 05:23 .

[DaeJi]

Keep it on Mass Effect.

[Tom Adama]

Pannamaslo wrote...

Tom Adama wrote...


This is why PSYCHOLOGY is seperate from NEUROSCIENCE. Psych studies minds, neuro studies brains.

As a neuropsychologist I have to disagree...

Mind, and by "mind" I mean cognitive processes and higher emotions  =/= whole brain. But mind = certain brain functions. These functions differ from human to human, becasue every one of us has their own unique set of connections (which what I believe is what you're trying to say, by "no one knows your emotions") that were formed during learning (but are also heavily inlfuenced by genetic make up, fetal developement etc...)

We have more and more knowledge considering how brain influances higher cognitive functions. The future of psychology lies in neurosicence IMO.

EDIT: About homosexulaity - the most popular theory states that homosexula male fetuses are exposed to maternal hormones differently, which alters sexuality developement.  One of the proofs is that male homosexulas' pattern of  reaction when injected with estrogen is closer to female reaction than male one. Homosexuality is not learnd, is not induced by a society, most probably it is inborn and not necessarily heritable. There are differences in the brain with people with different orientaion (it is a case of male participants, IDK about lesbians).

I hope it is clear, I am not a native speaker, so it may cause problems, especially in topics where specifity is recquired:whistle:

No I am not saying differences in connections per se. I am saying the qualities of the experiencer (the mind) is inconsistent with the qualities of the brain. How can you state that the mind and brain are reducible to physical states? All the brain does is fire in binary, where is the MEANING in that pattern? When I touch a table, neurochemicals sent by my Pacinian Corpuscles do 1 of 2 things; excite a neuron to depolarize or inhibit a neuron to hyperpolarize. It's not like the physical process measurable by science (depolarization/hyperpolarization) can be equated by the subjective EXPERIENCE of touch.

Yes I agree that the brain is NECESSARY for the expression of minds, but they are not reducible to them.

And with regards to the fetal exposure of hormones leading to homosexuality. There are NO neurological correlates that are tell-tale signs of sexual orientation. Gay men have EXACTLY the same levels of testosterone and estrogen as straight males, the issue of debate is exposure of specific hormones in-utero. But here is the dilemma, hormones we know affect physical development of cells in the body, yet we see no differences in brains for homosexuals vs. straight men. What is being affected in the brain to cause homosexuality if no physiological differences are evident?

Homosexuals do NOT have homosexual children, that is a fact. It is not genetic. So sexuality is one of 2 things; learned or products of mis-timed hormonal exposure in-utero. If it is the latter, what is being altered? Cuz it isn't neurological in nature. Sexuality is very up in the air right now in neuropsych and neuroscience.

Here is the big counter proof to in-utero hormonal exposure; monozygotic twins where 1 is gay and the other is straight... how do you explain that?

Modifié par Tom Adama, 10 mars 2010 - 05:41 .

[DaeJi]

Tom Adama wrote...


No I am not saying differences in connections per se. I am saying the qualities of the experiencer (the mind) is inconsistent with the qualities of the brain. How can you state that the mind and brain are reducible to physical states? All the brain does is fire in binary, where is the MEANING in that pattern? When I touch a table, neurochemicals sent by my Pacinian Corpuscles do 1 of 2 things; excite a neuron to depolarize or inhibit a neuron to hyperpolarize. It's not like the physical process measurable by science (depolarization/hyperpolarization) can be equated by the subjective EXPERIENCE of touch.

Yes I agree that the brain is NECESSARY for the expression of minds, but they are not reducible to them.

And with regards to the fetal exposure of hormones leading to homosexuality. There are NO neurological correlates that are tell-tale signs of sexual orientation. Gay men have EXACTLY the same levels of testosterone and estrogen as straight males, the issue of debate is exposure of specific hormones in-utero. But here is the dilemma, hormones we know affect physical development of cells in the body, yet we see no differences in brains for homosexuals vs. straight men. What is being affected in the brain to cause homosexuality if no physiological differences are evident?

Homosexuals do NOT have homosexual children, that is a fact. It is not genetic. So sexuality is one of 2 things; learned or products of mis-timed hormonal exposure in-utero. If it is the latter, what is being altered? Cuz it isn't neurological in nature. Sexuality is very up in the air right now in neuropsych and neuroscience.

Mass Effect. Only.

[Fade9wayz]

DaeJi wrote...

Keep it on Mass Effect.

Thank you. While this kind of discussions are very interesting (no, I am not being sarcastic), this is not the subject of this thread.

[SimonTheFrog]

Jake71887 wrote...

cutthecameras wrote...

sw33ts wrote...

Allison W wrote...

...So, which same-sex romance do you folks want most?

For me I think I'd say Jack. I've had enough of nice girls for a few games; I want a badass.

She's more so a little girl...but yeah probably Jack or Tali...or Jack...or Tali...I actually wouldn't even mind Miranda...frack they're all better then the male choices I had to choose from.

QFT

Is it too late to flip them? I'll trade: the dudes can have my options...Take 'em I don't want them at all.

I'd trade the hot chicks for a bird and a frog?

Good deal.... GOOD DEAL! 

Hey, frogs gonna blow your mind...  

[Pannamaslo]

Tom Adama wrote...

Pannamaslo wrote...

Tom Adama wrote...


This is why PSYCHOLOGY is seperate from NEUROSCIENCE. Psych studies minds, neuro studies brains.

As a neuropsychologist I have to disagree...

Mind, and by "mind" I mean cognitive processes and higher emotions  =/= whole brain. But mind = certain brain functions. These functions differ from human to human, becasue every one of us has their own unique set of connections (which what I believe is what you're trying to say, by "no one knows your emotions") that were formed during learning (but are also heavily inlfuenced by genetic make up, fetal developement etc...)

We have more and more knowledge considering how brain influances higher cognitive functions. The future of psychology lies in neurosicence IMO.

EDIT: About homosexulaity - the most popular theory states that homosexula male fetuses are exposed to maternal hormones differently, which alters sexuality developement.  One of the proofs is that male homosexulas' pattern of  reaction when injected with estrogen is closer to female reaction than male one. Homosexuality is not learnd, is not induced by a society, most probably it is inborn and not necessarily heritable. There are differences in the brain with people with different orientaion (it is a case of male participants, IDK about lesbians).

I hope it is clear, I am not a native speaker, so it may cause problems, especially in topics where specifity is recquired:whistle:

No I am not saying differences in connections per se. I am saying the qualities of the experiencer (the mind) is inconsistent with the qualities of the brain. How can you state that the mind and brain are reducible to physical states? All the brain does is fire in binary, where is the MEANING in that pattern? When I touch a table, neurochemicals sent by my Pacinian Corpuscles do 1 of 2 things; excite a neuron to depolarize or inhibit a neuron to hyperpolarize. It's not like the physical process measurable by science (depolarization/hyperpolarization) can be equated by the subjective EXPERIENCE of touch.

Yes I agree that the brain is NECESSARY for the expression of minds, but they are not reducible to them.

And with regards to the fetal exposure of hormones leading to homosexuality. There are NO neurological correlates that are tell-tale signs of sexual orientation. Gay men have EXACTLY the same levels of testosterone and estrogen as straight males, the issue of debate is exposure of specific hormones in-utero. But here is the dilemma, hormones we know affect physical development of cells in the body, yet we see no differences in brains for homosexuals vs. straight men. What is being affected in the brain to cause homosexuality if no physiological differences are evident?

Homosexuals do NOT have homosexual children, that is a fact. It is not genetic. So sexuality is one of 2 things; learned or products of mis-timed hormonal exposure in-utero. If it is the latter, what is being altered? Cuz it isn't neurological in nature. Sexuality is very up in the air right now in neuropsych and neuroscience.

Here is the big counter proof to in-utero hormonal exposure; monozygotic twins where 1 is gay and the other is straight... how do you explain that?

Wrong...

Nope. Not what research indicates.

www.pnas.org/content/89/15/7199.full.pdf

www.springerlink.com/content/l20386114j163331/

www.springerlink.com/content/g1176x7289822289/

www.sciencedirect.com/science

And these are older studies...So sorry, but no, homosexulaity is not learned. It is connected with hormones during fetal developement and there are differences in some parts of a brain both in animal models and humans.

Mind is one of the functions of the brain, you can't deny it. It is clearly visible, when you look at a case sduties of various neurological deficits and traumas.

Back on ME topic

I was really surprised with lack of same sex romances in ME 2. I was betting it would be Thane. His romance is more spiritual and based on feelings, and I would totally see him attracted to manShep.

Garrus not so much. Maybe the opinion of pimp and ladies man.I don't know, just the feeling.

Kaidan - totally.

Jacob -if the romance would be done the same way as for femSheps: noooooooooooooooooo THE PRIIIIZE
But what I would like the most is the new characer that is exclusively homosexual - making bi just seems cheap unless it's done within character.

To clear things up: I am a straight female but I would be interested in m/m option or f/f option. Good story is a good story and same -sex romances would enrich game experience. It's adding variety.

Modifié par Pannamaslo, 10 mars 2010 - 06:07 .

[JediMB]

lewis1306 wrote...

I'll grant you that  some heterosexual females will be somewhat grossed out by the whole Liara femshep thing or the kelly femshep thing... but i don't think you can compare that to the hetero male response to dudeluv in scale or intesity.

if two girls kiss on TV, a few heterosexual females will roll their eyes.
if two guys kiss on TV, a large percentage of heterosexual guys will actually change the channel.

A female friend of mine stopped playing Dragon Age to ask me about the orientations of the female characters in the game, because she felt like both Leliana and Morrigan were hitting in her character, and it made her very uncomfortable.

Allison W wrote...

...So, which same-sex romance do you
folks want most?

Initially, I thought Jack for FemShep, but after getting to know the character better.... probably Tali. (I Jack, but I don't see her as bisexual, despite her past encounters.)

Thane for MaleShep, definitely. He's the best choice for FemShep, too.

The Uncanny wrote...

It's space fantasy. Not science
fiction.

It's science fantasy! In space!

[colossus50000]

Join us in you are against same sex romances



http://social.biowar...oup/1635/#group