642 réponses à ce sujet

[Mummy22kids]

draken-heart wrote...

you know, if you all do not like the idea of the Developers ADDING two exclusively homosexual NPC romance options, just say you do not.

That's not what people have an issue with.  The issue is that you said that Merril and Anders were Ruined by being s/s options.

[David Gaider]

draken-heart wrote...
you know, if you all do not like the idea of the Developers ADDING two exclusively homosexual NPC romance options, just say you do not.

Sorry, but you're not doing your argument any favors by some of the opinions you're bringing up-- which seems to be your implication that Merrill and Anders were destroyed by the revelation of their bisexuality.

Indeed, you've managed to bring up some of the very arguments I mention here, and thus derail your own topic by being rather offensive.

If all you'd wanted to discuss was the addition of romances which are homosexual-only, then you should have said so and left it at that. My response to this has always been that I would love to... provided there were resources enough for the spread to be fair. If not, then bisexual romances-- whether they are subjectively bisexual or not-- are the way to go.

As for everyone else, please discuss the matter at hand civilly or refrain, lest the thread be closed and some bans handed out for good measure.

[draken-heart]

Battlebloodmage wrote...

Regardless of their roles, the NPC could be S/S or straight, keeping the gays as NPC seem to intentionally discriminatory. Why are you so adamant in making NPCs as gay only anyway?

you could have straight romances as well, I was talking about getting back to the Origins set upjust add extra romances. Could even do this with the all bi route.

[draken-heart]

David Gaider wrote...

draken-heart wrote...
you know, if you all do not like the idea of the Developers ADDING two exclusively homosexual NPC romance options, just say you do not.

Sorry, but you're not doing your argument any favors by some of the opinions you're bringing up-- which seems to be your implication that Merrill and Anders were destroyed by the revelation of their bisexuality.

Indeed, you've managed to bring up some of the very arguments I mention here, and thus derail your own topic by being rather offensive.

If all you'd wanted to discuss was the addition of romances which are homosexual-only, then you should have said so and left it at that. My response to this has always been that I would love to... provided there were resources enough for the spread to be fair. If not, then bisexual romances-- whether they are subjectively bisexual or not-- are the way to go.

As for everyone else, please discuss the matter at hand civilly or refrain, lest the thread be closed and some bans handed out for good measure.

sorry Sir, wont happen again. I even edited OP to remove that implication/statement.

The main issue of the All-bi-ruins character, for me, was that for some characters, it seems to come totally out of the blue that they are bi/PC-sexual.

Modifié par draken-heart, 13 février 2013 - 09:10 .

[Nazomi]

People seemed fine with it in ME2 and 3. I would be surprised if this wasn't available

Modifié par Nazomi, 13 février 2013 - 09:18 .

[Nazomi]

double post

Modifié par Nazomi, 13 février 2013 - 09:10 .

[Sir George Parr]

I remember this has being discussed before and i don't have no problem with DA adding these characters, if Bioware were to do so. In the other thread it was suggested a Master at Arms and a Blacksmith as possible roles for these two if they were to see the light of day in a game.

[Sutekh]

Nazomi wrote...

Sutekh wrote...
Because the PC specifically recruiting heterosexual people would make more sense?

My point was that i don't care if romances in general are only npc only or not included at all. I specifically mention s/s ones to address to topic at hand and what would make more sense considering it would be much more probable is the PC recruiting people who all happen to be be heterosexually inclined.

And mine was the PC would probably not recruit companions based on their sexual orientation, but on skill and common goal. Depends of the PC, of course, since it's a player character.

Also, statistics are irrelevant. We're talking about a game, in an imaginary setting, so not enough data, artistic license, and all that jazz.

[SgtElias]

draken-heart wrote...

you could have straight romances as well, I was talking about getting back to the Origins set upjust add extra romances.

By Origins setup, I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you mean "four characters with a set sexuality."

If so, would you be opposed to having four party romances, two bisexual, and two gay, while having the two NPC romances you suggested be the straight options?

[draken-heart]

SgtElias wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

you could have straight romances as well, I was talking about getting back to the Origins set upjust add extra romances.

By Origins setup, I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you mean "four characters with a set sexuality."

If so, would you be opposed to having four party romances, two bisexual, and two gay, while having the two NPC romances you suggested be the straight options?

perhaps, but it has to be a good reason for the characters that are homosexual being homosexual. The all bi option irked me a little because the Bi/PC-sexuality of Fenris and Merrill appeared to come out of the blue with no explanation.

[SgtElias]

draken-heart wrote...

SgtElias wrote...

By Origins setup, I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you mean "four characters with a set sexuality."

If so, would you be opposed to having four party romances, two bisexual, and two gay, while having the two NPC romances you suggested be the straight options?

perhaps, but it has to be a good reason for the characters that are homosexual being homosexual. The all bi option irked me a little because the Bi/PC-sexuality of Fenris and Merrill appeared to come out of the blue with no explanation.

I'm not sure what a "good reason" looks like, exactly. Would straight companions have to have a "good reason" for being straight? By "reason," do you mean backstory?

And I disagree about Merrill, but already told you why, so no need to re-hash. But with Fenris, we have nothing from Origins (or any other source?) that would lead anyone to believe that he was . . . any sexuality. He doesn't really address it. Would it have felt less jarring for you if he'd had a line that said, "I've been with men before," or "I like both men and women"?

Modifié par SgtElias, 13 février 2013 - 09:44 .

[wright1978]

SgtElias wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

you could have straight romances as well, I was talking about getting back to the Origins set upjust add extra romances.

By Origins setup, I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you mean "four characters with a set sexuality."

If so, would you be opposed to having four party romances, two bisexual, and two gay, while having the two NPC romances you suggested be the straight options?

Yes i'd be very opposed to the limiting of party romance possiblities for any given sexuality that would dictate. The current Bi(playthrough oriented sexuality) seems to be the best compromise to give necessary level of choice given the resource limitation.

[SgtElias]

wright1978 wrote...

SgtElias wrote...

By Origins setup, I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you mean "four characters with a set sexuality."

If so, would you be opposed to having four party romances, two bisexual, and two gay, while having the two NPC romances you suggested be the straight options?

Yes i'd be very opposed to the limiting of party romance possiblities for any given sexuality that would dictate. The current Bi(playthrough oriented sexuality) seems to be the best compromise to give necessary level of choice given the resource limitation.

Oh, I agree; I love, love, love the bisexual romances. I was so pleased when it was announced for Dragon Age 2 that I jumped up and down.

I was trying to see if I understood the OP correctly in that he wanted to make only same-sex romances be with NPCs, while straight and bi romances were still with companions, an idea I didn't particularly like.

[draken-heart]

SgtElias wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

SgtElias wrote...

By Origins setup, I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you mean "four characters with a set sexuality."

If so, would you be opposed to having four party romances, two bisexual, and two gay, while having the two NPC romances you suggested be the straight options?

perhaps, but it has to be a good reason for the characters that are homosexual being homosexual. The all bi option irked me a little because the Bi/PC-sexuality of Fenris and Merrill appeared to come out of the blue with no explanation.

I'm not sure what a "good reason" looks like, exactly. Would straight companions have to have a "good reason" for being straight? By "reason," do you mean backstory?

And I disagree about Merrill, but already told you why, so no need to re-hash. But with Fenris, we have nothing from Origins (or any other source?) that would lead anyone to believe that he was . . . any sexuality. He doesn't really address it. Would it have felt less jarring for you if he'd had a line that said, "I've been with men before," or "I like both men and women"?

Which is why it came out of the blue.

[Iakus]

SgtElias wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

you could have straight romances as well, I was talking about getting back to the Origins set upjust add extra romances.

By Origins setup, I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you mean "four characters with a set sexuality."

If so, would you be opposed to having four party romances, two bisexual, and two gay, while having the two NPC romances you suggested be the straight options?

Personally, I'd be in favor of 6:  2 m/f, 2 bi, 2 s/s one male and one female each.  Everyone effectively has four choices.

Also, I'm not opposed to having NPC romances of any kind, provided the romance was done well and the character of some importance to the story.  Battle Couples are fine, but so is having someone to come home to. If we're running a keep, I could imagine a romance with a seneschal, or a diplomat, an officer of the guard, a neighboring noble, your spymaster, or something like that.

[SgtElias]

draken-heart wrote...

SgtElias wrote...

I'm not sure what a "good reason" looks like, exactly. Would straight companions have to have a "good reason" for being straight? By "reason," do you mean backstory?

And I disagree about Merrill, but already told you why, so no need to re-hash. But with Fenris, we have nothing from Origins (or any other source?) that would lead anyone to believe that he was . . . any sexuality. He doesn't really address it. Would it have felt less jarring for you if he'd had a line that said, "I've been with men before," or "I like both men and women"?

Which is why it came out of the blue.

So you're saying that, yes, if Fenris had had such a line, it would have felt less jarring to you?

And I'm going to ask you about the "good reason" thing again. By "good reason to be homosexual" do you mean "backstory"? Because I don't really understand why having two straight characters in your party needs no explanation, but having to gay/lesbian characters does.

Modifié par SgtElias, 13 février 2013 - 10:08 .

[Sutekh]

draken-heart wrote...

Which is why it came out of the blue.

No more than Morrigan's or Alistair's heterosexuality. They didn't declare "I prefer the other sex" and yet it doesn't seem to bother you. You seem to have one hell of a double-standard going on.

And, with respect, one doesn't need a "reason" to be what they are, be that gay, bi, straight, loving strawberries or the color purple.

[draken-heart]

SgtElias wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

SgtElias wrote...

I'm not sure what a "good reason" looks like, exactly. Would straight companions have to have a "good reason" for being straight? By "reason," do you mean backstory?

And I disagree about Merrill, but already told you why, so no need to re-hash. But with Fenris, we have nothing from Origins (or any other source?) that would lead anyone to believe that he was . . . any sexuality. He doesn't really address it. Would it have felt less jarring for you if he'd had a line that said, "I've been with men before," or "I like both men and women"?

Which is why it came out of the blue.

So you're saying that, yes, if Fenris had had such a line, it would have felt less jarring to you?

And I'm going to ask you about the "good reason" thing again. By "good reason to be homosexual" do you mean "backstory"? Because I don't really understand why having two straight characters in your party needs no explanation, but having to gay/lesbian characters does.

Yes to the backstory, Like Cortez from ME3, mentioning the husband and all. Morrigan does mention having charmed men, effectively stating she was straight, and Zevran and Leliana both mention their attraction to the same gender.

[draken-heart]

Sutekh wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

Which is why it came out of the blue.

No more than Morrigan's or Alistair's heterosexuality. They didn't declare "I prefer the other sex" and yet it doesn't seem to bother you. You seem to have one hell of a double-standard going on.

And, with respect, one doesn't need a "reason" to be what they are, be that gay, bi, straight, loving strawberries or the color purple.

really just saying that there should have been some acknowledgement that they were. No reason needed as to why.

From ME3: Cortez mentioning he had a husband or Samantha stating that she finds EDI's Voice attractive are good examples of acknowledging it without long shpeel about their sexual history.

[wright1978]

iakus wrote...

Personally, I'd be in favor of 6:  2 m/f, 2 bi, 2 s/s one male and one female each.  Everyone effectively has four choices.

Also, I'm not opposed to having NPC romances of any kind, provided the romance was done well and the character of some importance to the story.  Battle Couples are fine, but so is having someone to come home to. If we're running a keep, I could imagine a romance with a seneschal, or a diplomat, an officer of the guard, a neighboring noble, your spymaster, or something like that.

Well i'd have no particular problem with the idea of 6 you have outlined, other than the effect it might have on diluting the content vs the current 4. 2 potential companion romances per sexuality is necessary level of choice imo.  Not keen on NPC romance options though.

[SgtElias]

iakus wrote...

SgtElias wrote...

By Origins setup, I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you mean "four characters with a set sexuality."

If so, would you be opposed to having four party romances, two bisexual, and two gay, while having the two NPC romances you suggested be the straight options?

Personally, I'd be in favor of 6:  2 m/f, 2 bi, 2 s/s one male and one female each.  Everyone effectively has four choices.

I'm certainly not going to argue with that, if Bioware ever wanted to go that route (resources, etc). I always play my first character bisexual, so what you effectively just said to me is, "Hey Elias! Your romances just went from four to six!"

I'm in favor of making things fair. Whether that's removing all romance, making all romances be with NPCs, or representing everyone via the party romances, as long as it's equal, I'll always support it.

[Battlebloodmage]

draken-heart wrote...


perhaps, but it has to be a good reason for the characters that are homosexual being homosexual. The all bi option irked me a little because the Bi/PC-sexuality of Fenris and Merrill appeared to come out of the blue with no explanation.

I don't think people need a reason to be homosexual, just saying. There isn't a need for clarification either since you don't see Alistair or Morrigan declare their hetereosexuality.

Modifié par Battlebloodmage, 13 février 2013 - 10:16 .

[draken-heart]

Battlebloodmage wrote...

draken-heart wrote...


perhaps, but it has to be a good reason for the characters that are homosexual being homosexual. The all bi option irked me a little because the Bi/PC-sexuality of Fenris and Merrill appeared to come out of the blue with no explanation.

I don't think people need a reason to be homosexual, just saying.

Rephrase: Have a good acknowledgement that they are homosexual. That sound better?

Modifié par draken-heart, 13 février 2013 - 10:16 .

[New Display Name]

Personally, I'd be in favor of 6: 2 m/f, 2 bi, 2 s/s one male and one female each. Everyone effectively has four choices.

6 romance options were done in Mass Effect 2 & 3. Do you trust Bioware to do well with that number of love interests?

[Battlebloodmage]

draken-heart wrote...

Battlebloodmage wrote...

draken-heart wrote...


perhaps, but it has to be a good reason for the characters that are homosexual being homosexual. The all bi option irked me a little because the Bi/PC-sexuality of Fenris and Merrill appeared to come out of the blue with no explanation.

I don't think people need a reason to be homosexual, just saying.

Rephrase: Have a good acknowledgement that they are homosexual. That sound better?

I have edited my quote to reflect that.