473 réponses à ce sujet

[Dwarva]

Edit: I think we're going to have to agree to disagree with this to be honest. I wrote a much longer post initially but don't really want to get into it.

Modifié par Staarbux, 11 juillet 2012 - 09:13 .

[Carmen_Willow]

Staarbux wrote...

Carmen_Willow wrote...

I can understand why someone who was gay would be upset at being forced to play a female in order to romance Alistair. You pay $60.00 for a game, you'd like to be able to play with whomever you choose.

I wasn't really going to get involved in this debate but I admit I find this opinion rather peculiar.

Alistair was straight. It was part of his personality - it wasn't up for debate (although some shippers might disagree ) and just was part of who he was. He liked women. No one's forcing anyone to romance anyone and if anyone is upset at the writers creating a certain part of his personality that they can't access, I'm not sure that they be expected to write in a way that makes every single player happy.

Would it be different if Velanna had been a LI and only wanted a relationship with elves? I can see that being perfectly plausable because it's part of who she is, just like being straight was part of Alistairs/Morrigan's. I don't think people would be up in arms about that actually...

If we're saying the writers can't create characters with personalities/stories that don't appeal to every single fan we're in a sorry state indeed...

Oh course Alistair is straight!  He's always straight in my world. But he could have been just as interesting as a gay virgin for those who wanted to enjoy being the first love of a same sex partner. It just needed careful dialogue choices. If the writers do a good job, I can envision my LI as I see fit.

Bioware writers proved that they can write the dialogue and characters so that you can play them straight, gay or bi. If it can be done that way, why not write the dialogue choices that way?  In my DA universe, Alistair is straight, and will always be straight because I enjoy being a girl.  But if I were a gay guy, I probably would have still wanted to romance Alistair, and it would have been nice to be able to do it as a gay guy.

My point is that with careful dialogue, the character never has to throw gender preference in your face. You can imagine him/her as you see fit. That's all.

[karushna5]

Alright not sure if someone said this or not, but according to Bioware, they are not Bi, well except Isabela and she was supposed to be. They like Hawke. This has more options for everyone involved. And has a general feel of Hawke can have who they want.

Female Hawke? Anders and Fenris are straight. Isabela is Bi, and Merrill loves women.
Male Hawke Anders and Fenris are Gay, Merrill is straight, and once again Isabela is Bi

More options are always good and I see no way in how Sexuality has anything to do with character development unless you are either scared of a sex or both, hesitant during sex, or over eager like Isabela. The idea it adds something being one and not the other or isn't being true to their character has no merit. All types are gay, all types are straight, all types are bi

[Fox In The Box]

I wonder if those who are so opposed to the all-bi approach would continue to be opposed if Bioware, say, released a patch that would make their preferred romance options exclusively homosexual rather than straight.

[Dwarva]

My preferred romance option in DAO is Alistair. Which does limit me playing as a female if I want to romance him. Does it bother me? Uh, no? Not really. I just accept that if I want to play a male I can't romance him. I also haven't been able to romance Morrigan because I have only played as a male once and chose Leliana. I just accepted it as the writers choice and certainly wasn't opposed to it...

If I want to romance Sebastian I play as a female. *shrugs* I've not noticed as many people questioning why he isn't bi?

karushna5 wrote...

Alright not sure if someone said this
or not, but according to Bioware, they are not Bi, well except Isabela
and she was supposed to be. They like Hawke. This has more options for
everyone involved. And has a general feel of Hawke can have who they
want.
i

This makes a lot of sense to me. It was always my head canon reason for Kaidan 'suddenly' liking maleShep in ME3. He wasn't necessarily bi/gay etc...he just fell in love with Shep and would have done so if he'd been male, female, Krogan, Drell His gender didn't really matter - he just fell in love with the person no matter what. In DA2 they're just all.... Hawkesexual. :innocent:

Modifié par Staarbux, 13 juillet 2012 - 09:59 .

[Fox In The Box]

Staarbux wrote...

My preferred romance option in DAO is Alistair. Which does limit me playing as a female if I want to romance him. Does it bother me? Uh, no? Not really. I just accept that if I want to play a male I can't romance him. I also haven't been able to romance Morrigan because I have only played as a male once and chose Leliana. I just accepted it as the writers choice and certainly wasn't opposed to it...

If I want to romance Sebastian I play as a female. *shrugs* I've not noticed as many people questioning why he isn't bi?

Pardon my manners, but I'm going to make the assumption that you're female. Perhaps a straight one, even. So, of course Alistair being female-exclusive doesn't bother you. Morrigan being male-exclusive didn't really bother me, either, since I dislike her. But for people who rarely, if ever, see themselves represented in popular media, getting to play as characters they can identify with is extremely important, and they deserve no less options or attention. The only fair remedy to the current "all bi" solution would be to expand the options to six romances and have two exclusively straight, two exclusively gay and two bisexual, but I don't really see the point.

As for Sebastian, I assume because anyone who is interested in same-sex romances with male characters isn't really interested in the guy. He's barely a romance option for lady Hawke, anyway - he seems way more into her sister.

I'm not sure how having arbitrary restrictions forced on the player is preferable to the player putting restrictions on themselves, like they do in almost every other aspect of the interpersonal relationships between the PC and the NPCs. Every time someone says "it doesn't make sense to me that so many humans could be attracted to a dwarf" or "Alistair falling in love with a ruthless blood mage doesn't make sense" or "Morrigan being with a Chantry-loving goody two-shoes doesn't make sense", they are putting restrictions on themselves that do not exist within the game. No matter how unlikely it seems, Alistair can fall for a ruthless blood mage and Morrigan can crush on a boy-Leliana, if the player so desires.

It is also unlikely that one person in an incredibly diverse group of people can manage to develop deep friendships with every single one of them, yet the option remains and no one ever complains about that. All of the characters have set personalities and opinions and relationships with other characters, but the relationship they have with the PC is largely up for the player to decide.

In DA2 they're just all.... Hawkesexual. :innocent:

In DA:O, I could potentially get some very attractive, interesting people all fight for the affection of an abrasive, funky looking fellow who takes his pride in the ability to burp the alphabet. How are they not "Wardensexual" in this situation?

In my DA2 game, one Hawke really only had Isabela and Anders as romance options. Fenris wasn't interested at all, and Merrill had a little crush that was effectively squashed by certain events in Act 2. Another Hawke was blunt and quick to anger and Fenris found him very attractive. Isabela thought he was handsome, but too high maintenance to be with and Merrill didn't like him at all. A third Hawke could probably have gotten with them all because she was a very charming lady. Roleplaying is your friend, is my point basically.

Modifié par Fox In The Box, 13 juillet 2012 - 12:08 .

[Dwarva]

Fox In The Box wrote...

Pardon my manners, but I'm going to make the assumption that you're female. Perhaps a straight one, even. So, of course Alistair being female-exclusive doesn't bother you. Morrigan being male-exclusive didn't really bother me, either, since I dislike her. But for people who rarely, if ever, see themselves represented in popular media, getting to play as characters they can identify with is extremely important, and they deserve no less options or attention. The only fair remedy to the current "all bi" solution would be to expand the options to six romances and have two exclusively straight, two exclusively gay and two bisexual, but I don't really see the point.

You make some very good points. I admit I hadn't considered the fact that people who are rarely represented might be particularly 'appreciative' (thats totally the wrong word but I can't really think of a better one). I think the options that were available in DAO were more accurately representative of culture though, but again, I'm basing this on our culture - not necessarily that of Thedas.

You've given me quite a lot to consider.

Modifié par Staarbux, 13 juillet 2012 - 01:31 .

[Xilizhra]

I fully support the idea of homosexual options in video
games. This is not a homophobic rant against bisexuals or homosexuals.

You know, it's never a good sign when you have to begin with this.

As for the actual content... why does a game need to hold your hand in that manner? If you consider it boring to romance multiple people with one character... don't freakin' do that. The incentive is entirely your own to do so, and DAO's restrictions contributed nothing that you couldn't come up with yourself.

[The Uncanny]

Fox In The Box wrote…

Roleplaying is your friend, is my point basically.

And a very good one it is too. 

Modifié par The Uncanny, 13 juillet 2012 - 02:00 .

[Milan92]

[Cartims]

My companions are not bisexual....THEY ARE ALL GAY....what game are you playing?

[Todd23]

I would like to point out that before DA2's release their was a thread with someone asking for all companions to be bi. Only 2 people didn't protest to his notion. Everyone else were quite adamant with how much they disaproved of the idea. I just find the difference from then to now funny. I propose that all companions for DA3 are bi. But not all romance options. Meaning that their should be gay and straight romance options outside your team.

[eratis]

Ultimately, I think the argument against all companions being able to romanced by either gender would hold more water if their sexuality had an effect on their characterizations or motivations at all. As it stands, same sex attraction is treated so matter of factly in game that it really seems to be no big deal.

Say, if the Chant of Light had a verse about it ("Man was created to be with woman, and woman with man...") then this could profoundly change our interpretation of Anders's character. Now his rage and alienation could stem from both his treatment as a mage and a gay/bi man. But since no one in universe really seems to care who you're sleeping with, being gay does extremely little to color the character themselves.

The issue is closer to the fact we want to impose the values of our society on Thedas. Being gay in our culture is a huge, loaded issue, bringing with it a lot of baggage, so we project these issues onto this fictional fantasy world.

[Centauri2002]

These threads keep coming up and, whenever I read them, I always find it difficult to pinpoint exactly what the main issue is for people who disapprove of the "all bi" romance options. It seems some people find it too "unrealistic" or that they think the increased number of options is limiting somehow.

Both of these are a little silly from my point of view. What's realistic or not in a fantasy world is completely up to the creators of said world. Impressing real world values onto a created universe just simply for 'realism' is rather against the point of fantasy.

Someone also mentioned that they didn't like how the choices for romances were the same for male and female PCs and that it hurt replay value. I would have thought it'd do the exact opposite. You can play as whatever gender you'd like AND romance whoever you wish. You'd have to play through several times in order to experience all the different romances anyway. And for those of us who only intend on playing through once, it allows us to experience the game in the way we want, without having to worry about limiting ourselves.

More choice is good, right?

That said, I would take issue with a romance if the NPC involved was defined solely by that romance and their sexuality. I would hope that the writers would create a three-dimensional character with their own motivations and past; I would hope that the romance wasn't their sole reason for being in the game.

And, at the end of the day, the romances are only a small portion of the game.

[CuriousArtemis]

Staarbux wrote...

If I want to romance Sebastian I play as a female. *shrugs* I've not noticed as many people questioning why he isn't bi?

I would be all about Sebastian if he actually got jiggy with Hawke  As it is, FemHawke can have his (adorable) chaste buns, haha xD

eratis wrote...

As it stands, same sex attraction is treated so matter of factly in game that it really seems to be no big deal. 

  

I know, and I totally love this.  I imagine an LGBTQ player might be really appreciative of this.  For once his/her simple identity is not a HUGE FRICKIN DEAL.

eratis wrote...

The issue is closer to the fact we want to impose the values of our society on Thedas. Being gay in our culture is a huge, loaded issue, bringing with it a lot of baggage, so we project these issues onto this fictional fantasy world.

 

Agree with your whole post, etc. but wanted to suggest this is kind of a blanket statement because it's only a "huge, loaded issue" for some people and some cultures, not all.

[Todd23]

I would actually like to see some discriminating from a few characters. Like, perhaps in DA3 a Qunari is saying how such people waste time. And you can either join the gay-bashing for his approval, or tell him off.

[Leoroc]

Well for Qunari all sex is a waste of time unless explicitly for procreating. Which is generally how most religions turned against homosexuality, because they go anti sex-for-pleasure. If you really start looking into the various religious views on homosexuality it's the ones that are anti-sex in general that are really against it. Native American religions and ancient Mediterranean religions were very tolerant of it. Would be nice if they had won out over the Abrahamic religions =p

As a bi guy, I had originally been hoping that Sebastian woulda been available as an LI for both genders, but seeing as he wasn't much of one for females either it never really roused any anger. Only Isabela interested me romantically personally but I did all four main ones for completion's sake (2 gay romances, 2 straight). I always enjoy more options over less.

[Feuerwerke]

...Okay, so you don't think characters' sexualities should be their defining traits, but you think they would be "more unique" as monosexual? That makes no sense. Also it sounds to me like you're placing higher value on a romance with a monosexual. Sorry, but this sounds horribly biphobic to me.

[aldien]

centauri2002 wrote...

These threads keep coming up and, whenever I read them, I always find it difficult to pinpoint exactly what the main issue is for people who disapprove of the "all bi" romance options. It seems some people find it too "unrealistic" or that they think the increased number of options is limiting somehow.

Both of these are a little silly from my point of view. What's realistic or not in a fantasy world is completely up to the creators of said world. Impressing real world values onto a created universe just simply for 'realism' is rather against the point of fantasy.

Someone also mentioned that they didn't like how the choices for romances were the same for male and female PCs and that it hurt replay value. I would have thought it'd do the exact opposite. You can play as whatever gender you'd like AND romance whoever you wish. You'd have to play through several times in order to experience all the different romances anyway. And for those of us who only intend on playing through once, it allows us to experience the game in the way we want, without having to worry about limiting ourselves.

More choice is good, right?

That said, I would take issue with a romance if the NPC involved was defined solely by that romance and their sexuality. I would hope that the writers would create a three-dimensional character with their own motivations and past; I would hope that the romance wasn't their sole reason for being in the game.

And, at the end of the day, the romances are only a small portion of the game.

I agreed with everything you said and would add:

And, at the end of the day, the romances are only a small portion of the game

Romances should be only a small portion of the game instead of a statement against or fashionable inclusion or exclusion of... well this is when it can become ugly.

Choice = freedom to do whatever the hell makes you feel most groovy. It's a game that's fun when no one is limited by sex, age or race. You start limiting the characters by any of those criteria then expect people to become irritated. It should never matter what is between the legs. Let everyone have fun. Make the characters sexual and let individuals decide what that means. Why does it have to be limited?

Modifié par aldien, 14 juillet 2012 - 03:23 .

[Todd23]

While I understand the freedom of being able to romance anyone, my concern is for the realism. Much like one would complain if in a game you needed a certain key and it got destroyed, but the bloke next to you suddenly pulled an exact replica out of his pocket. Sure it conveniently lets you do what you wanted, but it doesn't make any sense. It was strange enough that the companions in Origins can be attracted to you no matter your race or appearance, but for everyone in Thedas to be bi? Please bioware, don't do it!

[ScorpioJoy]

Romancing is a hype for this old lady, but after romance, the game must go on. Gay or bi-sexual? If that is your thing..... The romance thing is just a bit of interlude within the game. Do you ever think there will be a Dragon Age 3?

[labargegrrrl]

Feuerwerke wrote...

...Okay, so you don't think characters' sexualities should be their defining traits, but you think they would be "more unique" as monosexual? That makes no sense. Also it sounds to me like you're placing higher value on a romance with a monosexual. Sorry, but this sounds horribly biphobic to me.

^this

they just have no idea how they sound, do they? 

[labargegrrrl]

realism? how about rivalmance being the exact opposite of that? the fact that my mageHawke could even FLIRT with Fenris without getting her guts handed to her was unrealistic. THAT had to be the single most unrealistic romance option possible as far as DA2 was concerned. you want unrealistic sexuality, Fenris being MAGEsexual was more of a pacepalm than ANYONE being bi.

character development? how about no matter what you did with Anders, the fact he was more in love with the revolution than he EVER was with a Hawke of either gender (to the point where his romance armor centered around mages instead of Hawke him/herself like everyone else's) as well as the fact that he and Hawke were both clearly conflicted about that fact? was that not enough of a romance drama without dragging sexual identity into it?

don't get me started about the fact that people only bought into Izzy being bi because she was a ****. which seems to be the only implied reason people didn't find it unacceptable in either game. because we all know that bisexuality just really meens you're a ****, so if you're not a ****, you're not believable as bi? and if you are a ****, you aren't believable if you're not?

and with the larger socio-cultural context surrounding the game (i.e. all of us in the real world)...

as annoyed and patently offended as some of you are about not having the characters be as monosexual as you are, and therefore difficult for you to relate to, that's what i see every day in almost every other medium i've ever encountered as a bisexual. sometimes to the point where we barely even get a nod from our friends who cater to the LBGTAQ community. can't we just have this ONE THING without everyone getting their panties in a bunch?

[Xilizhra]

Todd23 wrote...

While I understand the freedom of being able to romance anyone, my concern is for the realism. Much like one would complain if in a game you needed a certain key and it got destroyed, but the bloke next to you suddenly pulled an exact replica out of his pocket. Sure it conveniently lets you do what you wanted, but it doesn't make any sense. It was strange enough that the companions in Origins can be attracted to you no matter your race or appearance, but for everyone in Thedas to be bi? Please bioware, don't do it!

It's a good thing that this has never been shown to be the case, including in DA2, isn't it?

[aldien]

Todd23 wrote...

While I understand the freedom of being able to romance anyone, my concern is for the realism. Much like one would complain if in a game you needed a certain key and it got destroyed, but the bloke next to you suddenly pulled an exact replica out of his pocket. Sure it conveniently lets you do what you wanted, but it doesn't make any sense. It was strange enough that the companions in Origins can be attracted to you no matter your race or appearance, but for everyone in Thedas to be bi? Please bioware, don't do it!

Realism? What exactly is realistic about the DA universe? Every aspect of it is fantastical. Even the sexual aspect is fantastical. I never feel this discussion, which I see pop up time and time again, is actually about the game and its realism. Honestly, if you can accept fire breathing dragons and elves and humans actually being able to produce children, even though they are two different species, oh and people shooting fireballs out of their fingertips, then why is it such a leap for characters to just be sexual?


I always try and look at it like this: On any playthrough I can decide what kind of character I am going to be and who that character would romance. I don't see it as everyone is a romance option all of the time, unless you want them to be and some people do! It just depends on how I am roleplaying it.  If you limit choice then you limit creativity and ultimately it makes the experience stale.

Modifié par aldien, 15 juillet 2012 - 01:19 .