jakl201 wrote...
O.o I'm not going "Gay sex! Ewww!" Sexual orientation has nothing to do with how I treat an individual.
I don't care how you feel about it. You assumed Vanderloo could have a problem with it. Why?
jakl201 wrote...
I'm not arguing about having a gay/bi character, I'm arguing about tacking it on like it's meaningless. One of the coolest characters in DA:O is Zevran, who was awesome (too bad i was a rogue otherwise I'd have used him more). If they added a character that they meant to make gay/bi, that's cool. Adding it on just to appease a minority is...well, if it was me I'd be kinda insulted. Like getting hurt at work and your company tried to settle the lawsuit by offering you a bag of chips.
I think them tacking on a lot of things is meaningless. But why aren't any of the straight romances ever considered 'tacked on'? It's only ever a gay or bi one that would even be considered as such.
It just seems that if they are included, people become ultra critical of them. They have to 'perfectly make sense' or they are 'tacked on'. A straight romance can make sense or not, no one will question it.
And don't bring up the majority vs. minority thing b/c that is irrelevant to this point.