Why does everyone like Astarion?

[Sataareth]

Seriously, most of content is about him and I wonder why

[cookie]

i forgot i was supposed to like everyone i meet . ...

[skullymex]

torr071 a écrit :

Astarion's an SJW dream creation.

Could you elaborate on this please? Is it because he'll sleep with you no matter your gender, or?

[Aria Athena]

Not only do I not particularly like him, but I also hate his voice acting. It sounds like his character is using a fake voice.

[Vixziค็็็็็n]

Aria Athena a écrit :

Not only do I not particularly like him, but I also hate his voice acting. It sounds like his character is using a fake voice.

While I totally get where you're coming from, I personally think his voice acting is fine even if I can see how people think its very 'extra' almost like someone overacting. I think this is purposeful. The problem I have with it, is I hate stereotypes...it's lazy. Whether we're talking about racial or gender, or the whole 'high society' 'aristocracy' mannerisms stereotype assuming you want to argue that this is where it comes from as the only thing missing from his speech is the whole 'darling' ...and actually now that I think on it...he might have actually said it lmao. He even fits the whole vampire stereotype.

Like why couldn't a dwarf have been the vampire, or have Asterion be a cross-dresser, or at the very least not check all the stereotype check boxes...where is the originality..ugh.

[waltc]

I don't care for Asterion, myself. Vampires are hateful, vicious creatures, very unlike the silly smart aleck Asterion. IMO, anyone who would let a vampire drink blood from his neck has to be a complete idiot, imo. Difficult to understand why such silliness was written in to the game--it is ridiculous.

[Jack Hawklight]

waltc a écrit :

I don't care for Asterion, myself. Vampires are hateful, vicious creatures, very unlike the silly smart aleck Asterion. IMO, anyone who would let a vampire drink blood from his neck has to be a complete idiot, imo. Difficult to understand why such silliness was written in to the game--it is ridiculous.

Well, I'm just going to go with a crazy guess here, but because it is a game and Larian thought it would be a fun option for some people to try out to see what happens? I mean there is a few options to deal with how Asterion requires feeding, that is just one of them. Personally, I just made a deal with him to feast on our enemies. Seemed pragmatic.

[Zyenu]

No clue, I don't trust him Vampire = Bad

[Soft Lockpick]

funniesthobo a écrit :

Asterion isn't gay, shadowheart is not a lesbian, I have no idea about gale but he probably is bi, I believe the other two are bi as well? Someone can correct me on that if I'm wrong.

I don't really feel that this game or the dragon ages pushes any homosexual interactions on you. Maybe a character expresses an interest. You just say no, then pursue the romance you actually want to?

All the characters will romance anyone as far as I know.

I can understand that complaint from a writing perspective. Statistically speaking it is unbelievably unlikely that you'd compile a party of nothing but people who swing whatever way happens to be nearest. And in writing limitations help you define a character and make them stand out. Removing the limitations on the romantic front for all your companion NPCs adds to the already flat writing and voice acting. None of the characters we have are stand out memorable characters. And there's a suspension of disbelief issue with having just everyone open to everything.

The flip side of the argument is that one of the most popular mods for the actual BG games was one that removed the romance limitations based on PC race/sex. Because sometimes you just want to play a halfling who gets some attention from a certain suitor despite their hairy feet. The level of limitation in those games bugged some players who favored certain races. But... it did make the characters they interacted with have more personality and definition.

The question is did they do it because of politics or did they do it because of the same reasons people made that mod back in the day. Or did they do it because it was easier than tracking these things and scripting it into the romances to just write them generic, a third option?

Modern environment I can at least see how they'd assume it was political. Because nothing escapes politics nowadays. But I don't think that's the only possible motivation for it. I'd call this one a true "Nobody knows."

[Jack Hawklight]

Soft Lockpick a écrit :

funniesthobo a écrit :

Asterion isn't gay, shadowheart is not a lesbian, I have no idea about gale but he probably is bi, I believe the other two are bi as well? Someone can correct me on that if I'm wrong.

I don't really feel that this game or the dragon ages pushes any homosexual interactions on you. Maybe a character expresses an interest. You just say no, then pursue the romance you actually want to?

All the characters will romance anyone as far as I know.

I can understand that complaint from a writing perspective. Statistically speaking it is unbelievably unlikely that you'd compile a party of nothing but people who swing whatever way happens to be nearest. And in writing limitations help you define a character and make them stand out. Removing the limitations on the romantic front for all your companion NPCs adds to the already flat writing and voice acting. None of the characters we have are stand out memorable characters. And there's a suspension of disbelief issue with having just everyone open to everything.

The flip side of the argument is that one of the most popular mods for the actual BG games was one that removed the romance limitations based on PC race/sex. Because sometimes you just want to play a halfling who gets some attention from a certain suitor despite their hairy feet. The level of limitation in those games bugged some players who favored certain races. But... it did make the characters they interacted with have more personality and definition.

The question is did they do it because of politics or did they do it because of the same reasons people made that mod back in the day. Or did they do it because it was easier than tracking these things and scripting it into the romances to just write them generic, a third option?

Modern environment I can at least see how they'd assume it was political. Because nothing escapes politics nowadays. But I don't think that's the only possible motivation for it. I'd call this one a true "Nobody knows."

I honestly think it was so that anyone who plays the game could RP the character that they would like. For many people who don't identify as heterosexual having all these options in a game for them is a blessing. The rest of us don't even really have to make a sacrifice or anything. Just someone hits on us who we don't want to, just tell them not to. Done deal. Definitely doesn't hurt anybody. I could see it being partially a business decision by the higher ups, or at least they were glad Larian went in that direction as it brings a whole other market into the game who can have romances the way they choose.

As for the politics, I am not homosexual, but I don't see homosexuality in of itself as being a political issue (even if some make it out to be, which lets be honest, they do). I mean it is just who those people are. I'm not going to make any sort of issue out of people being who they are as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

That is interesting about the BG2 mods though. Makes you think.

I actually like the characters in the game, the way things fluctuate in these forums I can never tell if that is the popular or unpopular opinion. Either way I wouldn't care though lol. I still like the characters and my dog and owlbear cub at camp. Who I managed to feed finally the other day and he now loves me.

Edit: I mostly chose to comment on this because of that one homophobic dude who said one of the male characters made an advance on him in dragon age, so he burned him in a fire. I mean that is clear hate speech in a public forum.

[Soft Lockpick]

funniesthobo a écrit :

Soft Lockpick a écrit :

All the characters will romance anyone as far as I know.

I can understand that complaint from a writing perspective. Statistically speaking it is unbelievably unlikely that you'd compile a party of nothing but people who swing whatever way happens to be nearest. And in writing limitations help you define a character and make them stand out. Removing the limitations on the romantic front for all your companion NPCs adds to the already flat writing and voice acting. None of the characters we have are stand out memorable characters. And there's a suspension of disbelief issue with having just everyone open to everything.

The flip side of the argument is that one of the most popular mods for the actual BG games was one that removed the romance limitations based on PC race/sex. Because sometimes you just want to play a halfling who gets some attention from a certain suitor despite their hairy feet. The level of limitation in those games bugged some players who favored certain races. But... it did make the characters they interacted with have more personality and definition.

The question is did they do it because of politics or did they do it because of the same reasons people made that mod back in the day. Or did they do it because it was easier than tracking these things and scripting it into the romances to just write them generic, a third option?

Modern environment I can at least see how they'd assume it was political. Because nothing escapes politics nowadays. But I don't think that's the only possible motivation for it. I'd call this one a true "Nobody knows."

I honestly think it was so that anyone who plays the game could RP the character that they would like.

Maybe, we just don't know. All I said. In the hyper political climate focused on issues around this stuff it could be easier to program, it could be just not wanting to limit people from romancing whoever they like best, or it could be an active agenda. We can't really say.

For many people who don't identify as heterosexual having all these options in a game for them is a blessing. The rest of us don't even really have to make a sacrifice or anything.

Well to be fair the complaint wouldn't be that options exist, but that having everyone swing whatever way leads to flat poorly defined character writing. You do gain something when a character has preferences, limits, strong reactions for or against something, in your writing. And that is a real issue with it.

So, example. If Astarion and Laezel didn't care but say Shadow did have a preference only in one direction that feels like a more real world than if everyone is open to everything. Because most people are not open to everything. And it's the vast vast majority that have some lines in the sand.

But I get the "let people do what they want" case and I'm not really arguing against it. I'm just saying it comes at a cost in terms of character definition. I won't pretend having no preferences like that amongst any companions at all feels organic to me. It doesn't. That just isn't how most people are.

Just someone hits on us who we don't want to, just tell them not to. Done deal. Definitely doesn't hurt anybody.

That part I would say is false. Because of what I mentioned above, there is a cost in terms of the feel of the world and character writing. But it may be a cost worth paying or could be made up for in other areas.

As for the politics, I am not homosexual, but I don't see homosexuality in of itself as being a political issue (even if some make it out to be, which lets be honest, they do). I mean it is just who those people are. I'm not going to make any sort of issue out of people being who they are as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

I don't care about what people do or want either on that front. But what you said is a misrepresentation of the other side. I think it's a common false framing on this. I don't think the political issue is the existence of such options or people with those preferences. The politicization comes with the desire to push it into all areas of life when statistically it just doesn't make sense that it'd be so common.

Basically, it is not political that such people exist, or even want to see options for themselves. It is political to have a strong desire to make them overrepresented statistically or give them every option unrealistically. Because at that point isn't about organic writing or character development it's about an underlying agenda.

If you start writing a character and you think up an idea for their backstory, their personality, what lead them down a path and their motivations, their preferences organically it's very different than if you start with "This person will date either group" and have to build a character around it. The first is apolitical and the second politically motivated even if the end result is pretty similar.

I actually like the characters in the game, the way things fluctuate in these forums I can never tell if that is the popular or unpopular opinion. Either way I wouldn't care though lol. I still like the characters and my dog and owlbear cub at camp. Who I managed to feed finally the other day and he now loves me.

I think all the characters have bad writing and VA, they're very caricature in their personality. Not that it's uncommon for D&D, it's just disappointing in a big budget title they couldn't do a better job. They're mediocre at best.

Anyway... as a sort of secondary note, most people think their values aren't political. "I don't think that's political" when it's obviously a common conversation in politics isn't really saying anything other than an inability to understand your value system isn't the only value system. And that's not an endorsement of any value system. Just something about human psychology.

It's kind of like saying "Why don't we just listen to the music I like so we can stop fighting about what to listen to? Everyone likes my music." Yeah, no. They don't. The hubris that your views are the ones that aren't controversial is just hubris.

[Jack Hawklight]

Soft Lockpick a écrit :

funniesthobo a écrit :

I honestly think it was so that anyone who plays the game could RP the character that they would like.

Maybe, we just don't know. All I said. In the hyper political climate focused on issues around this stuff it could be easier to program, it could be just not wanting to limit people from romancing whoever they like best, or it could be an active agenda. We can't really say.

For many people who don't identify as heterosexual having all these options in a game for them is a blessing. The rest of us don't even really have to make a sacrifice or anything.

Well to be fair the complaint wouldn't be that options exist, but that having everyone swing whatever way leads to flat poorly defined character writing. You do gain something when a character has preferences, limits, strong reactions for or against something, in your writing. And that is a real issue with it.

So, example. If Astarion and Laezel didn't care but say Shadow did have a preference only in one direction that feels like a more real world than if everyone is open to everything. Because most people are not open to everything. And it's the vast vast majority that have some lines in the sand.

But I get the "let people do what they want" case and I'm not really arguing against it. I'm just saying it comes at a cost in terms of character definition. I won't pretend having no preferences like that amongst any companions at all feels organic to me. It doesn't. That just isn't how most people are.

Just someone hits on us who we don't want to, just tell them not to. Done deal. Definitely doesn't hurt anybody.

That part I would say is false. Because of what I mentioned above, there is a cost in terms of the feel of the world and character writing. But it may be a cost worth paying or could be made up for in other areas.

As for the politics, I am not homosexual, but I don't see homosexuality in of itself as being a political issue (even if some make it out to be, which lets be honest, they do). I mean it is just who those people are. I'm not going to make any sort of issue out of people being who they are as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

I don't care about what people do or want either on that front. But what you said is a misrepresentation of the other side. I think it's a common false framing on this. I don't think the political issue is the existence of such options or people with those preferences. The politicization comes with the desire to push it into all areas of life when statistically it just doesn't make sense that it'd be so common.

Basically, it is not political that such people exist, or even want to see options for themselves. It is political to have a strong desire to make them overrepresented statistically or give them every option unrealistically. Because at that point isn't about organic writing or character development it's about an underlying agenda.

If you start writing a character and you think up an idea for their backstory, their personality, what lead them down a path and their motivations, their preferences organically it's very different than if you start with "This person will date either group" and have to build a character around it. The first is apolitical and the second politically motivated even if the end result is pretty similar.

I actually like the characters in the game, the way things fluctuate in these forums I can never tell if that is the popular or unpopular opinion. Either way I wouldn't care though lol. I still like the characters and my dog and owlbear cub at camp. Who I managed to feed finally the other day and he now loves me.

I think all the characters have bad writing and VA, they're very caricature in their personality. Not that it's uncommon for D&D, it's just disappointing in a big budget title they couldn't do a better job. They're mediocre at best.

Eh, I think this is another agree to disagree situation, not that we are disagreeing on all points. Just before one of us says something that gets us flagged for some out of context thing we say. Anyways. Have a good one sir softlock.

[Soft Lockpick]

I don't really have a strong opinion on what's in the game to disagree too much with you, and I don't really agree with the guy who posted that. I don't think you could characterize the EA as being very political. But I don't like when people dismiss something with "My views aren't political" because it's just not healthy. And I think it's better to put up the strongest version of an argument and discuss that than the weakest version of one. Sure is more interesting if nothing else. But yeah, this is not the place to continue it.

[The Emperor Of Milfgaard]

skullymex a écrit :

not to mention his voice acting, also very sexy

A german comedian once made a joke: "the french always sound like they are out to ♥♥♥♥ you, everything they say just sounds like :" later I am gonna ♥♥♥♥ you on the toilet"" It's quite fitting to EVERYTHING astarion says. And it's annoying as ♥♥♥♥.

[Shadow♥]

Aria Athena a écrit :

Not only do I not particularly like him, but I also hate his voice acting. It sounds like his character is using a fake voice.

see now i think his voice actor is great. i love his voice. the actor nailed the character completely. All the voice actors are great in my opinion.

[War Maiden]

Shadow♥ a écrit :

Aria Athena a écrit :

Not only do I not particularly like him, but I also hate his voice acting. It sounds like his character is using a fake voice.

see now i think his voice actor is great. i love his voice. the actor nailed the character completely. All the voice actors are great in my opinion.

I do not know how many of you know this about VA's. But most VA's have at least 3 voices. They have a high pitch, a medium, and a low. This is useful mostly if they want to expand their horizons to cartoon (Disney) or other voices (Anime) that require more of that type of audibility. However there are plenty of iconic voices, and that's fine too.

There are so many people whom have singular voices, like Jennifer Hale for FemShep, or Ayako Kawasumi whom voices Artoria Pendragon (Saber) in the Fate series and other anime. They do VA for a living, and do a good job. But VA's are not just using a singular voice, they are multi-talented in their voice, and it takes time to craft different voices and octaves.