922 réponses à ce sujet

[jlb524]

Sylvianus wrote...
I only played Mass effect and DAO, i do not play rpgs in general, Skyrim 's romance are too bland, to be appreciated. But no. Well, with the system I like, a woman who is gay and that could be totally a new Morrigan, and I fall in love, obviously, I would feel that, and to be honest it would be nothing for me. I don't see the same thing as you. I could be like, oooh you aren't interested in mens ? I am just curious, say more about that. That's it. Because that's about the character, not my choice.

Well, I've played a lot of BW RPGs and this happens all the time.  It gets old after awhile.  Considering it's difficult to find any decent s/s couple in a game or even outside in other media, it gets even more frustrating.

Sylvianus wrote... 
It seems that we haven't the same thought, we have different perspectives. For me, romance aren't there to be first to satisfy the players, there are there because it adds more to the characters, it adds more to the world and the story. I don't like them because the romance can resolve around my PC, even if it could be already the case. That isn't for that, that I like the romance, I have already my life to apreciate that stuff , If I can't have a character, I don't see it as something negative. that's the way the story is, like in a real world. I play a female in another playthought, and I imagine an adventure, a romance with this character,  still thinking that she is gay, ( yes I won't try to think that she is straight, because she isn't according to the story and I respect that )

Well, it's not necessarily the 'not having the character' that concerns me...it's 'well, everyone else can have the character independent of how they make their PC as long as they are male/female but I can't just cuz...gender!'

Like I said, it comes down to fairness.  If they are going to put the effort into placing a full-fledged romance in the game and then open it up to all kinds of different players except those that play as homosexual PCs and in the end the homosexual PCs get less options and this happens all the freakin time well then...it gets annoying.  Which is why, some one like me will appreciate the DA2 method.

Sylvianus wrote...  
really, it seems that we have not the same kind of thoughts and i begin to understand why it is so difficult to understand each other.... But that doesn't mean that I am not aware what other think. I am well aware, that for you, Li are first options and only that, matters. Believe me, i would love so much to feel that... and actually would be to be just satisfied with anything. I try to change my mind, but... I played this game and that was bad ( to me, to each its opinion )

Like I said, if it there for the next game, I will shut up, and if it as bad as DA2, I will shut up. Because I won't die. It's just something, that I feel I won't like....

To be honest, if the all bi sexual makes sense... We'll see.

Okay, fair enough.

[maxernst]

Sylvianus wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

But again, it's not the 'bi system' but the general 'open system'.  If you have issues with any PC being able to choose any LI, then you'd support a system that would place all kinds of limitations on the PC, right? ....even if your canon or idealized Warden couldn't even romance the person he/she wanted to.  

I don't know, have you ever been denied choice of your LI in a BW game where you were playing your 'ideal' PC?  I have.

It seems that we haven't the same thought, we have different perspectives. For me, romance aren't there to be first to satisfy the players, there are there because it adds more to the characters, it adds more to the world and the story.

But if the romance adds to the characters and adds to the world and story, limiting the romances more means that players have less ability to see other sides of the characters.  People have complained in the Anders romance in DA2 that if you don't romance him as a male, you never hear about a former relationship which some people as key to understanding his behavior. 

On the other hand, one thing I did like about DA2 was being rejected by Aveline.  Even though she was not available as a romance, it was nice that a Hawke who fell for her could at least try to  express his feelings.  DA:O doesn't allow a male character to do that with Alistair, and ME didn't allow a male Shepard to express an interest in ANY male.  (Although Kaidan was apparently supposed to be bi at some point.  And being flat-out rejected for being an elf or being a mage would actually help to support the world and story.

But while it's up to the writers what they want to do, I don't have a problem with characters "suddenly" appearing to be bi who weren't before, simply because that's kind of how it happens in real life.  I've known a number of bisexual people (including one who claims everybody's bisexual), and I think I had known most of them for years before learning that about them.  I don't see it as something that requires an "explanation".  Some people are just bi. 

[Abispa]

EDIT: Nevermind. I am NOT getting on this merry-go-round again on the same night.

Modifié par Abispa, 06 janvier 2012 - 03:19 .

[In Exile]

jlb524 wrote...
So wait...how is one a 'bisexual' character?

Why isn't Fenris or Merrill a bisexual character?

As opposed to Isabella? Because their sexuality fluctuates based on the gender of the player.

[In Exile]

maxernst wrote...

Of course, that also means that Alistair and Morrigan may always have been bisexual as well.  All we know is that during the time span of the game, they don't express a sexual interest in the same sex that we know of. Hardly conclusive proof of their sexuality. 

I was actually talking about Merril and Fenris, as well as Anders.

[jlb524]

In Exile wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
So wait...how is one a 'bisexual' character?

Why isn't Fenris or Merrill a bisexual character?

As opposed to Isabella? Because their sexuality fluctuates based on the gender of the player. 

It doesn't.

Merrill doesn't express interest in anyone outside of Hawke...how do we know her sexuality and if it's fluctuating?

If you as an individual want to believe that she's straight when you play as a Male Hawke and romance her and then believe that she's a lesbian when you play as a Female Hawke romance then that's fine.

Canonically she is bisexual...she just doesn't go around expressing any interests openly.

I think a 'fluctuating' sexuality would look like this:

Play as Male:  Merrill expresses an attraction to Fenris in addition to Hawke.
Play as Female:  Merrill expresses an attraction to Isabela in addition to Hawke.

Though, she could still be theoretically bisexual in those cases.

Fenris can possibly have a sexual relationship with Isabela in spite of Hawke's gender.

The difference between these characters and Isabela is that with Isabela, you can't get away with interpreting her in-game sexuality as anything but bisexual.  She makes it obvious that she likes males and females.  Within a given playthrough, you don't know what gender Merrill possibly likes unless you romance her and I don't think that necessarily means that she couldn't ever fall for the other sex either.  That doesn't mean that if my Female Hawke who romanced her dies, Merrill couldn't possibly hook up with a male later on....I don't know what she feels about men...but if I wanted to interpret her as a lesbian with what I know then that's possible.

Modifié par jlb524, 06 janvier 2012 - 03:40 .

[maxernst]

In Exile wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
So wait...how is one a 'bisexual' character?

Why isn't Fenris or Merrill a bisexual character?

As opposed to Isabella? Because their sexuality fluctuates based on the gender of the player.

They do?  I must have missed the dialogue where Merrill says to Isabela, "oooh....disgusting...why would you ever sleep with another woman, Isabela?  That's unnatural!" when I was playing my male Hawke.  She never says anything about her feelings for women one way or another--the player is just allowed to assume she's straight because they don't see evidence to the contrary.  But there's nothing that forces you to make the heteronormative assumption. 

[Abispa]

Apparently it's more "realistic" if potential male or female LIs come up to the hero and say, "Wow, I like you hero because you are the opposite gender!" or a female LI says "I like you, but I'd still like you if you were the opposite gender, thereby firmly establishing that I'm 'bi' in the game canon!" This should be stated at the earliest opportunity. Males LIs who are gay and bi should never openly hit on the hero because it ruins immersion and turning them down makes "realistic" RPG fans uncomfortable.

[syllogi]

Abispa wrote...

Apparently it's more "realistic" if potential male or female LIs come up to the hero and say, "Wow, I like you hero because you are the opposite gender!" or a female LI says "I like you, but I'd still like you if you were the opposite gender, thereby firmly establishing that I'm 'bi' in the game canon!" This should be stated at the earliest opportunity. Males LIs who are gay and bi should never openly hit on the hero because it ruins immersion and turning them down makes "realistic" RPG fans uncomfortable.

I know in real life, when I meet new people I like to loudly announce that I have previously dated both men and women, and I may or may not date people of either gender again, depending on several factors.

This makes people comfortable around me, because it's realistic.

[maxernst]

syllogi wrote...

Abispa wrote...

Apparently it's more "realistic" if potential male or female LIs come up to the hero and say, "Wow, I like you hero because you are the opposite gender!" or a female LI says "I like you, but I'd still like you if you were the opposite gender, thereby firmly establishing that I'm 'bi' in the game canon!" This should be stated at the earliest opportunity. Males LIs who are gay and bi should never openly hit on the hero because it ruins immersion and turning them down makes "realistic" RPG fans uncomfortable.

I know in real life, when I meet new people I like to loudly announce that I have previously dated both men and women, and I may or may not date people of either gender again, depending on several factors.

This makes people comfortable around me, because it's realistic.

I suppose it avoids the problem of people requiring an explanation for your inconsistency if they only acquire this information later on.

[syllogi]

maxernst wrote...

inconsistency

I have consistently found both men and women attractive since I was old enough to be aware of such things.

[Plaintiff]

syllogi wrote...

Abispa wrote...

Apparently it's more "realistic" if potential male or female LIs come up to the hero and say, "Wow, I like you hero because you are the opposite gender!" or a female LI says "I like you, but I'd still like you if you were the opposite gender, thereby firmly establishing that I'm 'bi' in the game canon!" This should be stated at the earliest opportunity. Males LIs who are gay and bi should never openly hit on the hero because it ruins immersion and turning them down makes "realistic" RPG fans uncomfortable.

I know in real life, when I meet new people I like to loudly announce that I have previously dated both men and women, and I may or may not date people of either gender again, depending on several factors.

This makes people comfortable around me, because it's realistic.

I have frequently found myself in bed with someone I initially considered repugnant because they presented me with sufficient gifts and indicated through conversation that their moral views were similar to mine, even though their actions directly contradicted such claims.

For the future reference of potentially interesed parties, my preferred gifts fall broadly under the categories of videogames and anachronistic/steampunk fashion. Though it may take longer, the same end results can eventually be obtained with an abundance of cakes. I don't mind if they have dirt or dog saliva on them.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 06 janvier 2012 - 05:17 .

[In Exile]

jlb524 wrote...
Merrill doesn't express interest in anyone outside of Hawke...how do we know her sexuality and if it's fluctuating?

If you as an individual want to believe that she's straight when you play as a Male Hawke and romance her and then believe that she's a lesbian when you play as a Female Hawke romance then that's fine.

You're thinking about it wrong. I'm not approaching this as 'in-game'. I'm approaching this from the meta-game PoV. It's not that Merill (like, say, Isabella) is a character who happens to be bisexual but doesn't speak about her sexual orientation. It's that she was designed to be romanceable by both genders. That's my issue, and I already made that clear to you when we last talked.

I don't have a problem with either highly restrictive romances or 100% permissive romances, so long as these result from how the character was designed and not merely as an auxilliary to provide an extra feature to the player.

The difference between these characters and Isabela is that with Isabela, you can't get away with interpreting her in-game sexuality as anything but bisexual.  She makes it obvious that she likes males and females.  Within a given playthrough, you don't know what gender Merrill possibly likes unless you romance her and I don't think that necessarily means that she couldn't ever fall for the other sex either.  That doesn't mean that if my Female Hawke who romanced her dies, Merrill couldn't possibly hook up with a male later on....I don't know what she feels about men...but if I wanted to interpret her as a lesbian with what I know then that's possible.

It has nothing to do with any playthrough. As I said, my issue is different.

maxernst wrote...
They do?  I must have missed the dialogue
where Merrill says to Isabela, "oooh....disgusting...why would you ever
sleep with another woman, Isabela?  That's unnatural!" when I was
playing my male Hawke.  She never says anything about her feelings for
women one way or another--the player is just allowed to assume
she's straight because they don't see evidence to the contrary.  But
there's nothing that forces you to make the heteronormative assumption. 

I'm not making a heteronormative assumption. You are, because you're assuming, for one, that I happen to think either of these characters have a sexual orientation at all. As I said above: my issue is how they are designed, not what bits they like (implicitly or otherwise).

It's the same problem I have with Carver or Bethany living or dying based exclusive on your class choice. It has nothng to do with the game reality itself, but rather with what the design was behind the decision to create these fluctuating worldstates .

Edit;

Not to mention that you assume that I think that Merril, Anders and Fenris are all "supposed" to be straight. That's very presumptive.

Modifié par In Exile, 06 janvier 2012 - 05:52 .

[jlb524]

In Exile wrote...
You're thinking about it wrong. I'm not approaching this as 'in-game'. I'm approaching this from the meta-game PoV. It's not that Merill (like, say, Isabella) is a character who happens to be bisexual but doesn't speak about her sexual orientation. It's that she was designed to be romanceable by both genders. That's my issue, and I already made that clear to you when we last talked.

I'm not thinking about it wrong, just differently from you.

I tend to only care about what happens in my one pt, I do admit.  

In Exile wrote... 
I don't have a problem with either highly restrictive romances or 100% permissive romances, so long as these result from how the character was designed and not merely as an auxilliary to provide an extra feature to the player.

Why is that wrong and how did that reflect poorly on my FemHawke/Merrill romance because she wasn't designed as a 'true bisexual' but was simply an auxilliary feature?

At the end of the day, I don't care about the design decision...why should I when it doesn't negatively affect my experience of the romance?  I'm not sure how it could have been better if she was designed to be 'bisexual'.  Am I supposed to like Isabela more b/c she was designed to like females?

Edit:  plus, how can you say that it wasn't the case that Merrill was designed to be bisexual?  If she was also designed to be shy about her interests then that would result in her not expressing them either way.  Isabela was designed to be bisexual and open about her sexuality so we see indications of it.

Modifié par jlb524, 06 janvier 2012 - 06:15 .

[In Exile]

jlb524 wrote...
I'm not thinking about it wrong, just differently from you.

I tend to only care about what happens in my one pt, I do admit.

When I say wrong, I don't mean objectively wrong about your preferences for romance. I mean wrong in the sense that you are not right about what I'm trying to say.

Why is that wrong and how did that reflect poorly on my FemHawke/Merrill romance because she wasn't designed as a 'true bisexual' but was simply an auxilliary feature?

Why do you keep assume that I think every character in DA2 is straight unless stated otherwise?

If you must know, I didn't think about sexual orientation at all. It's not on the radar. I'm just expressing my view on a particular kind of implementation.

At the end of the day, I don't care about the design decision...why should I when it doesn't negatively affect my experience of the romance?  I'm not sure how it could have been better if she was designed to be 'bisexual'.  Am I supposed to like Isabela more b/c she was designed to like females?

It has nothing to do with liking Isabella. Let's re-wr this sentence. Let's say where talking about Bethany Carver. Would you even talking about "liking" the characters? Presumably not. We'd just have a debate about the design. It's not as if you don't know what my issue is. We just recently had a misunderstanding about it.

It's the difference between having a character and having a dating sim, at least to me. I don't think a character should be a, well, playing for the player that's molded in particular ways to appeal to the greatest number of players possible. So, in this case, merely because there is going to be a romance, I don't think that it should be the case that all characters are romanceable, or that all characters should be romanceable by all people, unless it happens that in the course of creating the characters it just so happens that one of them (or all of them) do fit this bill.

Edit:  plus, how can you say that it wasn't the case that Merrill was designed to be bisexual?  If she was also designed to be shy about her interests then that would result in her not expressing them either way.  Isabela was designed to be bisexual and open about her sexuality so we see indications of it.

I don't know how to articulate this better than I have. Let me try using another analogy.

It has nothing to do with how Merril acts, or what she calls herself, because it has nothing to do with Merril in game. It has to do with how Merril was written, and the difference between things that could happen organically (oh, Merril could like Hawke; she'd be interested in a relationship under such and such circumstances) and pandering (oh, the fanbase is clamouring for an elf romance; we happen to have a female elf in this game, well, let's just make this female elf romanceable!) .

[tmp7704]

jlb524 wrote...

People can complain about things that are illogical.  It does happen.

And illogical complaints are best left ignored because otherwise you're then basically arguing with the stupid. So are equally illogical, theoretical analogies which don't pass the test of practical verification.

So please, just drop this angle.

I do get your point and understand that some feel that way but I also get the impression that the issue for some is sexuality and not character integrity.

This is not unlikely. The problem though, the way i see it, is that this possible group with "problem with sexuality" is generalized to be the bulk of people who object to the DA2 system, and those who also speak against this system but doesn't conform to that theoretical stereotype are being marginalized if not plain ignored. That despite lack of any real data that'd allow to really know what the percentages are like.

So, basically, you have people questioning the motives of their own mental construct. And since that construct doesn't actually answer with posts on these forums, it's pretty much exercise in futility.

If you want to fix the system then fix it in other areas and not just go back on the sexuality thing and keep the other ways this system fails miserably as far as 'character integrity' goes.

I'd definitely prefer a full (or at least broad) fix over a partial one. However, if given only choice between partial fix and no fix at all, i'd have to choose the partial fix.

But if it helps any, i'm under impression BioWare will stick with their DA2 system rather than try to change it in any way, as it just fits their goals of resource conservation better and has nice side-effect of making plenty people happy. What i've been saying in this thread was pretty much just objection to the --mentioned earlier-- generalization that seems to be going on regarding these who oppose the new model, than any attempt to influence the design.

[jlb524]

A dating sim?  Noooo!!!
I get what you are saying in general (more restrictions on romances = good).
I just don't get this:

In Exile wrote...
If the concern is actually character integrity (by which we mean consistency) then part of the answer is this: in DA:O the character was preserved. Leliana was always bi. And so was Zevran. And so is Isabella, at that.

There's is a difference between a character being bisexual, and a character being attractive to the player character independent of gender.

I don't understand what is the difference between, say, Leliana and Merrill from a design standpoint.  I just don't.   You assume the design intent was different but how do you know?

tmp7704 wrote...
And illogical complaints are best left ignored because otherwise you're then basically arguing with the stupid. So are equally illogical, theoretical analogies which don't pass the test of practical verification.

So please, just drop this angle.

Actually...I should probably stop arguing with people about this XD

tmp7704 wrote... 

This is not unlikely. The problem though, the way i see it, is that this possible group with "problem with sexuality" is generalized to be the bulk of people who object to the DA2 system, and those who also speak against this system but doesn't conform to that theoretical stereotype are being marginalized if not plain ignored. That despite lack of any real data that'd allow to really know what the percentages are like.

I don't really want to group people in that category but I don't think I can pretend that it doesn't exist.

tmp7704 wrote...  
I'd definitely prefer a full (or at least broad) fix over a partial one. However, if given only choice between partial fix and no fix at all, i'd have to choose the partial fix.

Ah, okay...but I don't want the partial fix to always just be about gender when there are other areas that could just as easily be fixed...do you understand where I'm coming from at least?  

tmp7704 wrote...   

But if it helps any, i'm under impression BioWare will stick with their DA2 system rather than try to change it in any way, as it just fits their goals of resource conservation better and has nice side-effect of making plenty people happy. What i've been saying in this thread was pretty much just objection to the --mentioned earlier-- generalization that seems to be going on regarding these who oppose the new model, than any attempt to influence the design.

Well, I admit that I tend to unfairly generalize.  But I also appreciate it when people engage in the discussion with me instead of making pretty vapid comments about 'bisexuals ruining everything!!' when they don't even try to back up the comments with reasoning.

I shouldn't generalize, but it's tough when faced with a crap ton of comments like this...which is a human weakness I suppose XD

If I've been difficult, I apologize. 

Modifié par jlb524, 06 janvier 2012 - 08:36 .

[NedPepper]

Ski Mask Wei wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

Ski Mask Wei wrote...

Nope. I don't want it back. I want authentic characters, not lustbots designed to fit each player's preferences. And if you honestly care about character and story/plot integrity you don't want it back.

I had no issues with the story or the plot integrity by having an option to have same sex romances.  Gender doesn't even seem to play into the romance, nor orientation.  The romances, despite gender, are complex and completely character based.  I couldn't disagree with you more.

I was mostly referring to future Bioware games and how I don't want it back but if you liked it I guess it's cool.  Do you want every party member in a Bioware game to be bisexual from now on?  No problem?  What if I want an option for Isabella not to be a slattern?  She was perfect to me aside from that little personality quirk.  Maybe if she was blonde too?  Can I get that changed too Bioware?  You know what?  F#%* that...I want Flemeth instead.  Mr. Laidlaw I need a Flemeth romance in DA3.  I need it.

Do you still think it's okay?  Do you honestly see nothing wrong with the above?   Excluding grammer and spelling of course...  

If Flemeth was CHOSEN as a LI, sure, she should be accesible to both male and female characters.  I'm not saying I want that, nor is that the point.  I think love interests in general, particularly in the Dragon Age world, work fine as hero sexual.  Again, sexual orientation is not established as taboo in this world.  Mages are controversial.  The Qunari.  Relgion.  Two guys hooking up?  Not so much.  It's part of the appeal of Dragon Age.

I understand the argument that characters shouldn't be molded by player choice completely.  And they're really not.  Fenris, Anders, Isabella, and Merrill all have very distinct, strong personalities, and will like or dislike you based on your role playing decisions.  What I think is liberating is that the only aspect of character they don't care about is SEXUAL ORIENTATION and GENDER.  It doesn't matter if they're gay or straight or bi.  You take away those labels and you simply have a love story that is as complex as any other.

Also, Dragon Age made a decision to define their world in this way.  It gives all gamers a feeling of belonging.  It allows for very creative role playing.  Could simply having a gay character work?  Sure.  As long as the character is MORE THAN JUST THE GAY OPTION.  That could easily backfire if the character is Nathan Lane in like, say, The Bird Cage. The bi thing gives a freedom to the player that becomes completely defined by your role playing experience.  It doesn't detract from the characters, unless you think a static sexuality is neccasary for a good character.  I just don't get this argument....

[tmp7704]

Ryzaki wrote...

And Zev? Odd how he goes "I'm not a cheat." once you hit a certain level but until then sleeping with him and Morrigan at the same time is perfectly okay.

I don't have solid concept of Zevran regarding these matters --as i put the character who was planned to romance him on hold-- but it seems he is (somewhat) similar to Isabela in the sense he makes a distinction between casual sex and sex that happens between people who have deep romantic feelings for each other. Until he falls in love he just thinks you're a good booty call, so to speak, and imagines that's how you view that as well.

Although i have no idea what he may think about the relationship you're having with Morrigan at the same time -- either he thinks that's a fling of yours too, or he figures if you want to have some elf sex on the side, then it's your problem and not his?

[In Exile]

jlb524 wrote...
I don't understand what is the difference between, say, Leliana and Merrill from a design standpoint.  I just don't.   You assume the design intent was different but how do you know?

I only participated in this debate twice. First was before DA2 was released. There, someone suggested there could be a box that picks the sexuality of characters at the start of the game, and then you just roll with that. Or that it was tied to your gender, and suddenly characters go from heterosexual with a one PC to homosexual with a another PC (or vice versa, you get the gist).

I didn't like that idea, for the reasons above, and then I got involved.

I only took issue with DA2's way of doing things when these threads cropped up the first time around and we had a dev. come in and say that there was a deliberate choice made on grounds of resources, and availability and time and so on, to make every romanceable character open to all, in an effort to be inclusive.

My problem, basically, was that as an inclusive issue it doesn't go far enough (I want my gay male lead, damn it! Be progressive someone!) and as a design standpoint I feel that it just waters down romance and the characters.

But I mean all of this should come with a huge grain of salt because I have no idea what it takes to write a character for a video-game or how to make on in the first place, so maybe all my ideas are pie-in-the-sky nonsense and everythign has to start from the POV of what to give the players because otherwise it's impossible.

[jlb524]

In Exile wrote...
I only participated in this debate twice. First was before DA2 was released. There, someone suggested there could be a box that picks the sexuality of characters at the start of the game, and then you just roll with that. Or that it was tied to your gender, and suddenly characters go from heterosexual with a one PC to homosexual with a another PC (or vice versa, you get the gist).

I didn't like that idea, for the reasons above, and then I got involved.

I only took issue with DA2's way of doing things when these threads cropped up the first time around and we had a dev. come in and say that there was a deliberate choice made on grounds of resources, and availability and time and so on, to make every romanceable character open to all, in an effort to be inclusive.

I just don't see that as a bad thing in the context of the current romance model.

If they change it up then I'm fine with gender restrictions.   I don't like it that they only ever added in gender restrictions in what seems to me to be an 'open' hero-sexual model.

In Exile wrote... 
My problem, basically, was that as an inclusive issue it doesn't go far enough (I want my gay male lead, damn it! Be progressive someone!) and as a design standpoint I feel that it just waters down romance and the characters.

But I mean all of this should come with a huge grain of salt because I have no idea what it takes to write a character for a video-game or how to make on in the first place, so maybe all my ideas are pie-in-the-sky nonsense and everythign has to start from the POV of what to give the players because otherwise it's impossible.

Well, I do understand wanting a strictly gay character.

But I think in the context of how these romances work that the 'open to any gender' is actually more progressive.  It's giving homosexual PCs the same freedom of choice that heterosexual PCs have always enjoyed and thus placing them on an equal ground.

Edit:  maybe I shouldn't say 'more' progressive but it is progressive.

Modifié par jlb524, 06 janvier 2012 - 08:50 .

[In Exile]

jlb524 wrote...
I just don't see that as a bad thing in the context of the current romance model.

If they change it up then I'm fine with gender restrictions.   I don't like it that they only ever added in gender restrictions in what seems to me to be an 'open' hero-sexual model.

I don't think it's fair to say that they've only ever added restrictions in a hetero model, unless you count JE to ME1 because Bioware's done nothing but move foward in reducing restrictions. JE had their first S/S romances. There was this really touching (though I'm not sure it's available now) post on the JE boards from a male gamer who talked about on a lark having tried a self-insert which led to him finding the Skye romance.

My issue is the romance model itself, though, so you know me.

In Exile wrote... 
Well, I do understand wanting a strictly gay character.

But I think in the context of how these romances work that the 'open to any gender' is actually more progressive.  It's giving homosexual PCs the same freedom of choice that heterosexual PCs have always enjoyed and thus placing them on an equal ground.

I don't mean that the NPC should be gay. I mean that we should have something like the Bastilla romance, but with a female PC (or the Carth romance with a male PC). I know you're going to say it would have amounted to the same thing if KoTOR just removed the gender restrictions, but I think there's something important about the statement that this character happenst to be gay and it's totally irrelevant to everything about the character.

[Ski Mask Wei]

Abispa wrote...

Russalka wrote...

Ski Mask Wei wrote...

None of the love interests were like that.

They are if you're playing a straight male hero. That, however, isn't pandering to the fans.

Yeah, I know Bioware panders to straight male fans and I still think it's wack.  And after playing ME2 and DA2 I think they're getting worse with pandering in general.  I'd love to here a "Sorry Hawk I only like women." or a "Sorry Shepard I'm in a relationship." come out a character's mouth in a Bioware game (maybe it has, I've missed the BGs and NWs).  I just want fully realized characters that feel like they could actually exist.  I want Bioware to be able write a character like Omar Little and not flip his character on a whim because of player preferences.  I want the story and characters being the top priority.

While I know it'll never truly ever be 100% gone from any media, pandering to demographics and sexing up content can take a chill pill as far I'm concerned.   

[whykikyouwhy]

Ski Mask Wei wrote...

Yeah, I know Bioware panders to straight male fans and I still think it's wack.  And after playing ME2 and DA2 I think they're getting worse with pandering in general.  I'd love to here a "Sorry Hawk I only like women." or a "Sorry Shepard I'm in a relationship." come out a character's mouth in a Bioware game (maybe it has, I've missed the BGs and NWs). 

I think that sort of polite rejection could probably be handled with a "thanks for the compliment, but I'm not interested" without the gender being a part of it. Because that would put the focus of the rejection on gender alone, and as nedpepper has mentioned, gender and sexuality aren't really the focal points of DA romances, and how characters react to them.

You do get rejected, after a fashion, from Aveline. You could have Hawke flirt madly with her, and the Guard Captain doesn't even acknowledge the mention - she's too focused on her own budding romance. And while that isn't a direct statement of rejection, it does fit perfectly with Aveline's character, I think.

 I just want fully realized characters that feel like they could actually exist.  I want Bioware to be able write a character like Omar Little and not flip his character on a whim because of player preferences.  I want the story and characters being the top priority.

While I know it'll never truly ever be 100% gone from any media, pandering to demographics and sexing up content can take a chill pill as far I'm concerned.   

Who was flipped on a whim? That makes the assumption that any changes noticed in existing characters were made in response to player input, and that may not be the case. That character's story arc could have been mapped out some time ago without anyone knowing because we're only getting bits and pieces as the story allows. So while it may seem like pandering or fanservice, or what have you, that shift may have been in the works for some time. It only looks like a 180 degree turn to the player, who is in fact seeing the character from the perspective of 2 different protagonists - the Warden and then Hawke.

With Anders as a prime example - how Anders portrayed himself to the Warden will be different from how he portrays himself, or what he reveals about himself to Hawke. Time has passed, circumstances are different, the Warden & Hawke are two different people, and thus, represent two different levels of trust. Anders in DA2 is Anders/Justice  - a lot has happened to him since DA:A.