Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Same gender relationships clarifications?

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Story and Lore
Same gender relationships clarifications?
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

Rabenschwinge's Avatar


Rabenschwinge
10.04.2012 , 12:06 PM | #2131
Quote: Originally Posted by wainot-keel View Post
Forcing a label to NPCs forheads doesn't make them "deeper" or more "realistic". It's really not needed.
If you have a concept for a given character it does make them deeper to be consequent about it. If a character could be anything it's not a sign of a well made character. You're right when you say that forcing a label onto the characters head does not make them better. Better knowing what sexuallity they actually have, what turns them on and what not, what they desire in mates and let all of this shine through if you poke them the right way would make them better. And also what they expect of the player character and how they see the existing relationship.
Ah, yes. "Reapers."

stuffystuffs's Avatar


stuffystuffs
10.04.2012 , 12:27 PM | #2132
Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
Indeed. I don't think whatever they did with DA2 does not matter at all - or, only as example how you should not do it. Therefore I think your bringing it into the discussion was pointless in the first place. It's irrelevant how romance was handled there.
It is relevant when you say something to the extent that "BW never did romances like this" in defense of your point and they did...in DA2. So, you arguing that they shouldn't do X b/c they never did X is flawed when I can show that they did do X before.

You then went on to say DA2 was bad/wasn't as good as ME or DA:O...I hope you weren't implying that the reason this game was bad was due to the way they did SGRA romance....

Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
You see, the trick is not to give people what they say they want. That's impossible and in many wouldn't turn out as they think they would. So now you can screw Kira. What changes it? Nothing, it's still the same Kira and the game doesn't change besides a few minutes of dialogue. It's not the same as when it becomes part of the process of rising in level and exploring the galaxy. The trick is to give people what they would like.
What?

I would 'like' the same options on my lesbian PC that heterosexual PCs already enjoy. It's quite simple.

I have no idea what you are getting at here.

Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
The primary reason I can imagine why people would be averse to companions that don't belong to a particular class is that people like things for themselves in the first place, not for everyone else. Like it was a property and they don't wish to share it. Like the experience of a companion character becomes more enjoyable the less players are able to share it. I don't think that's the case, though. People would enjoy it or not, regardless who else can do the same.
No, people in this thread are adverse to this idea b/c it's seen as unfair considering heterosexual PCs have a bunch of romance options that are exclusive to their class.

If everyone was sharing romance characters across classes (even heterosexual PCs), then it wouldn't be a problem.

Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
Better knowing what sexuallity they actually have, what turns them on and what not, what they desire in mates and let all of this shine through if you poke them the right way would make them better. And also what they expect of the player character and how they see the existing relationship.
Well, when they start doing this in other areas besides gender then I could agree.

Rabenschwinge's Avatar


Rabenschwinge
10.04.2012 , 12:53 PM | #2133
Quote: Originally Posted by stuffystuffs View Post
It is relevant when you say something to the extent that "BW never did romances like this"
I never said that, explicit or implicit. It's always easy to argue against someone if you make up what they say...
Ah, yes. "Reapers."

stuffystuffs's Avatar


stuffystuffs
10.04.2012 , 01:02 PM | #2134
Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
I never said that, explicit or implicit. It's always easy to argue against someone if you make up what they say...
I said this:

"When you limit the characters to 'gay, straight only' there will be players unhappy that they can't romance character X with their toon b/c of arbitrary gender restrictions...this would include people who do OGRA if they would ever make gay-only characters."

You replied with...

Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
4) That's no different than in other Bioware games.
And then I pointed out that they did do something similar in DA2, which makes your counter-point moot.

Unless I'm not following what you really meant there.

Rabenschwinge's Avatar


Rabenschwinge
10.04.2012 , 01:19 PM | #2135
Quote: Originally Posted by stuffystuffs View Post
I said this:

Unless I'm not following what you really meant there.
"That's no different than in other Bioware games"
Dragon Age II is not one of those games. Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins are. That's not a contradiction.

"That's no different than in other Bioware games." is not the same as "That's no different than in any other Bioware game." If I had meant that, I would have said it.
Ah, yes. "Reapers."

stuffystuffs's Avatar


stuffystuffs
10.04.2012 , 01:32 PM | #2136
Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
"That's no different than in other Bioware games"
Dragon Age II is not one of those games. Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins are. That's not a contradiction.

"That's no different than in other Bioware games." is not the same as "That's no different than in any other Bioware game." If I had meant that, I would have said it.
Then why didn't you say that earlier instead of stating that DA2 sucks and implied that it somehow doesn't count?

If that's what you meant then your counter isn't all that strong anyway. So what if they did it like 'X' in some other games and 'Y' in another? They can change how they implement features.

Regardless, they won't implement it the DA2 way as they've stated this before (it still baffles me why people are opposed to this method considering it's totally okay to drastically change the appearance of companions in game )

Anyway, my original point is that no matter how they implement this feature, people will be unhappy b/c they will be left-out...either b/c their toon is lvl 50, or their toon isn't lvl 50, or they wished for a romance with Mako on their female BH, etc. It's a pet peeve of mine to see people state that if the devs do 'X, Y, Z' everyone will be happy!

Nope....never going to happen. I typically read those statements as, "if the devs do X, Y, Z then I will be happy" b/c that's typically more accurate.

wainot-keel's Avatar


wainot-keel
10.04.2012 , 01:48 PM | #2137
Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
"That's no different than in other Bioware games"
Dragon Age II is not one of those games. Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins are. That's not a contradiction.

"That's no different than in other Bioware games." is not the same as "That's no different than in any other Bioware game." If I had meant that, I would have said it.
So ?

Basically, some BW games had few options, other more options, and other, like this one, no options at all (yet)
I'm all for more options for everybody. DA2 did this right. A friend of mine told me that for the first time she could actually choose, without having to play another gender, or using mods.

But, like stuffy says, it's not going to happen here. Unfortunately gender checks will be made ( just that, out of many other things ) to lock out romances. And that'll suck for many people. And will add nothing to the others

Rabenschwinge's Avatar


Rabenschwinge
10.04.2012 , 01:58 PM | #2138
Quote: Originally Posted by wainot-keel View Post
So ?
Limitations, while not inevitable, are to be expected and everyone can live with them, even if they say otherwise.
As you correctly say, the time being there are no gay romance option at all. That's bad. It doesn't necessarily mean there must be no limitations, it means there must be options.
Ah, yes. "Reapers."

Rabenschwinge's Avatar


Rabenschwinge
10.04.2012 , 02:03 PM | #2139
Quote: Originally Posted by stuffystuffs View Post
Then why didn't you say that earlier instead of stating that DA2 sucks and implied that it somehow doesn't count?
And here we go again. I didn't say that it sucks either, in fact I said that it wasn't particularly good, but not bad either. That implies "somewhat good", but less good that the other games I referred to. Only a SIth deals in absolutes (and yes, I realize that this is a contradiction in itself )

That you can find a game in which all romance options work both ways it doesn't mean that it's necessarily a good idea.
Ah, yes. "Reapers."

stuffystuffs's Avatar


stuffystuffs
10.04.2012 , 02:13 PM | #2140
Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
Limitations, while not inevitable, are to be expected and everyone can live with them, even if they say otherwise.
The issue is that everyone doesn't have to live with them in this specific area of the game (people who RP heterosexual PCs have none as far as selecting opposite gender romance options) while others do (homosexual PCs).

How is that cool?

Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
As you correctly say, the time being there are no gay romance option at all. That's bad. It doesn't necessarily mean there must be no limitations, it means there must be options.
With limitations, some will have no options at all.

A male Smuggler may have no options...how is the current system any worse?

And you can't assume that a player will automatically like their arbitrarily assigned "SGRA romance partner" just b/c it's there.

What if they only have one male/one female that's SGRA enabled per faction? (which is possible) What if it's Kaliyo for females on the Imperial side? What if someone's Agent hates her? What if they don't even have an agent and have a BH and SW? Will these people have options?


Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
And here we go again. I didn't say that it sucks either, in fact I said that it wasn't particularly good, but not bad either. That implies "somewhat good", but less good that the other games I referred to. Only a SIth deals in absolutes (and yes, I realize that this is a contradiction in itself )
I guess it depends on how you define "sucked"...I don't see that phrase as meaning 'absolutely terrible'.....for me, "not particularly good" could fit that too.

Besides, that's beyond my point anyway...when I mentioned DA2 you still replied with a negative value judgement on the game which I found odd in that context.

Quote: Originally Posted by Rabenschwinge View Post
That you can find a game in which all romance options work both ways it doesn't mean that it's necessarily a good idea.
I'm not saying it does. I've constantly been stating that this system is independent of how good/bad the game is. You are the one implying otherwise when you made a value judgement on DA2 after I brought it up.

Though, Skyrim did do the same thing and that game is considered to be super good and awesome by most.