2 réponses à ce sujet

[JasonPogo]

I was crushed by Oghren wanting to sleep with everything but my Warden...  I was destroyed when cute Sigrun showed no interest at all...  And I was insulted that Varric liked his crossbow more then my Hawke...

Please Bioware give us a good Dwarf LI.  I would prefer it where a female Dwarf but I will take anything I can get!  Just more fun to roll play my Dwarf characters going after a Dwarf.  At least for me.

[David Gaider]

WardenWade wrote...
The popularity of characters like Sigrun and Varric, for example, seem to indicate much of the gamership would be very interested in this.

Going by the forums, "much of the gamership" would be interested in romancing a mailbox, if the opportunity presented itself.

According to this fandom, after all, there needs to be justification as to why a character can't be romanced... otherwise they are being unreasonably and even maliciously kept from the fans. So I'm pretty certain that if Varric is romanceable, there will be people overjoyed to hear it... and if he's not, it will be evidence of an anti-dwarf conspiracy by the racist writers.

[David Gaider]

glenboy24 wrote...
However, I think there is a difference between non-romances that make sense (Shale, Wynne, and, yes, even Oghren, the later of which was a character clearly designed to be the bungling drunken sad story sidekick) and non-romances that, honestly, appear to be a writer simply saying "I don't want this character to be a romance," without any real justification as to why not.

We don't need to justify "why not". Romances don't just spring magically into being unless there's a reason to prevent them from doing so-- they require a lot of content. We're only allowed to have so many, and we only want to write so many.

I get why someone might like a character and think how a romance added onto what's already there would be awesome. Suggesting, however, that we need to justify why we "kept them from you"-- for Selfish Writer Reasons, obviously-- particularly when there's far more to creating one in a game than whipping up some extra words, is exactly what I was talking about in my original post.

I honestly expect no reasonableness to be had on this front, if history is any evidence. People want what they want, and will lament when they don't get it. Nothing wrong with that, so long as they don't start suggesting that they're entitled to romance who and what they want in the game, and that we are bad guys for actively turning off the romance switch for characters who, in their minds, should be sex-able. The idea that not every character in the game will or even should be available to them just doesn't compute, apparently.