1875 réponses à ce sujet

[fchopin]

No durr. So is every single other part of them.
 
Anders' thirst for dick is no more or less important than his love for cats.

I did not see him go for dick in Awakenings.

[Caligula]

I think people confuse playersexual and bisexual.  They are not the same thing and I don't have any evidence that the characters in DA 2 were playersexual.  If Ferris or Merrill had dialogue with female Hawke that stated, "Oh, I am only interested in females.", but then had dialogue with male Hawke that stated, "Oh, I am only interested in males.", that would be playersexual.  I didn't see that.

Hm-m. It is interesting to see people so up in arms about the so called "playersexual" characters in DA2, while "playersexual" is a term coined by fans, not by the game itself or the devs. Meta upon meta, basically. To quote something David Gaider said on the subject:

 

"For those who’ve decided the “playersexual” comment is something I came up with, I’ll just say it’s not. There are a group of DA fans who insist on calling the DA2 romances that, however— hence why I said “whatever you want to call them” and put it in quotes. I don’t agree with the term, but there you have it." (source)

 

Anyway, whatever it's going to be in DA:I has probably already been decided upon. We know that the devs value fairness. I think it's not a stretch to assume that how the romances are going to be handled in terms of having diverse sexualities or not depends entirely on the resources given to this part of the game (four characters with romance arcs or more?). As I said before: we'll see

[AresKeith]

Question: Why does everyone keep bringing up personality when no one has mentioned it with sexual orientation?

[Mockingword]

I did not see him go for dick in Awakenings.

Swing and a miss.

[daveliam]

Yes i know and agree with you but other people don’t agree for some reason.

I don't disagree with this, but I think some people are way overemphasizing the role that sexuality plays in shaping a person's personality.

 

It's probably just like any other aspect of personality and it's role has different importance to different people.  Clearly, your sexuality is a big part of your personality.  Clearly, my sexuality is not.  That's probably where the misunderstanding comes from.  For me, it makes as little sense to tie sexuality so explicitly to a person's personality, but not so much from your perspective.

[Ianamus]

Okay. How does my sexuality affect my view on relationships and such? Can you make a prediction over my sexual preferences based on how I interact with the fanbase?
 

 

A man who is heterosexual may view their relationship with a female friend as a potential future romance or converse with her in a flirtatious way, while if he were homosexual he would likely view it as a strictly platonic friendship. That's what I meant by sexuality affecting how a person views relationships. 

 

Obviously I have no idea what your sexuality is, but that does not mean that it isn't a part of who you are. Changing it would change who you are as a person, just as changing your height, personality or ethnicity would. 

[daveliam]

So the only reason you would think that Anders liked females is because you played Awakening and know he likes girls is that correct?

What would you think if you had not played Awakening?

Irrelevant.  Ignorance is not a valid excuse.  I can't watch a sequel movie and then complain about not fully understanding a character from the first movie if I've never seen it.

[AresKeith]

No durr. So is every single other part of them.

Anders' thirst for dick is no more or less important than his love for cats.

Where did I state it was?

[fchopin]

Irrelevant.  Ignorance is not a valid excuse.  I can't watch a sequel movie and then complain about not fully understanding a character from the first movie if I've never seen it.

So the suggestion of Awakenings that implies that Anders is straight is not important for you when he changes in DA2. I know it does not state implicitly that Anders is not gay but don’t you think it is important for writers to be more consistent?

[mars_central]

 

Fenris and Merrill are a bit tougher because the evidence isn't as a clear.  However, the fact that they both are attracted to male and female PCs and never explicitly state that they are only interested in that gender is enough evidence for me to believe that they are bisexual until I see evidence otherwise.

 

I would say Merrill's sexuality is sort of Schrödinger's Cat, it's neither and both until you open the box and find out. She is straight if Hawke is a guy and romances her or a lesbian if Hawke's a woman romancing her. In other words, her sexuality could be either (or she could be bi), but you don't find out until you ask her. The same with Fenris to some extent, although we know he'll end up with Isabela if neither are romanced, that can be seen as Bioware opening the box for you and prior to that, he too is both straight and gay depending on Hawke's gender and whether Hawke cares to find out. 

[daveliam]

So the suggestion of Awakenings that implies that Anders is straight is not important for you when he changes in DA2. I know it does not state implicitly that Anders is not gay but don’t you think it is important for writers to be more consistent?

No.  Because Anders never said he was straight.  You're the one who made an assumption based on limited information and then, when the full story emerged in the second game, you're the one who is claiming that he "changed".  He never changed.  The only thing that changed was your knowledge of his sexuality.

 

Look, I also thought that he was straight after playing DA: A.  However, when it was revealed that he was actually bisexual in DA 2, I realized that it was me that was wrong, not the writer or the character. 

 

No one is required to tell you all about their sexuality when they meet you.  Especially since Anders couldn't even be romantic with the Warden Commander.  There's, literally, no reason for the character to have to reveal everything about their sexual preferences with you. 

 

Bottom line, if you choose to assume that someone is straight or gay based on limited information, then you are choosing to be potentially wrong and you shouldn't look to blame other people for your mistake.

[brushyourteeth]

Anyone who says that a person's sexuality is not part of who they are has clearly never been in a situation where someone has tried to convince or coerce them into dating outside their sexual preference.

 

Your sexuality does not define who you are at your core, and neither does your gender. However, it is part of you. This is why we have gay pride events. This is why we have our sexual preference listed on dating sites. There's something squicky and awful about the idea that someone might want to change that part of you -- that another individual wouldn't accept that boundary. That you could be made to feel like a lesser human being because you have a boundary and a preference.

 

But I love my gay friends. Playing as a straight female character, I couldn't romance either Steve or Traynor in ME3. And you know what? I loved them. I loved my gay pals. I even loved that moment with Traynor where it was like "oh this is awkward -- you're not into girls and I just hit on you. But you know what? We're going to bounce back from this and it won't be awkward anymore because I love the person you are, no matter the nature of our sexualities."

 

I will never have that in a Dragon Age game, and it makes me so sad.

 

The player-sexual nature of the DAII romances effectively worked as a gay toggle. I could pretend Merrill wasn't attracted to me if I wanted to. Anders never brought up his relationship with Karl to me, so I could pretend he and Fenris were both completely straight.

 

That really doesn't strike anyone else as being categorically awful? 

 

Better for bisexuality to be common in Thedas. It at least makes me feel like I haven't had to force anyone to be straight in order to be in a relationship with them. And if the spread of resources makes it impossible for some of our romanceable companions to have set sexualities, I at least hope that these sexualities are acknowledged through other characters in the game.

 

I don't want a Thedas where everyone has to be like me in order for the fanbase to accept the game.

[Reever]

I...actually don't really like this. Or no, to be honest, I think it's better for the NPCs to have a determined sexuality and to roll with that. There are many things in games we could have, but we don't, so why necessarily make it so with romances?

 

But as I said above, it's just how I think and I don't believe it would really annoy me/make me hate the game or whatever. It's just that yeah, sometimes you think it'd be cool to be able to do this and that, but well, you can't. And maybe it's better that way, sometimes.

[Mockingword]

So the suggestion of Awakenings that implies that Anders is straight is not important for you when he changes in DA2. I know it does not state implicitly that Anders is not gay but don’t you think it is important for writers to be more consistent?

More consistent than perfectly consistent?

[LPPrince]

I will never have that in a Dragon Age game, and it makes me so sad.

 

I wouldn't jump to that conclusion just yet.

[fchopin]

Bottom line, if you choose to assume that someone is straight or gay based on limited information, then you are choosing to be potentially wrong and you shouldn't look to blame other people for your mistake.

Yes you are correct i should blame myself for believing what the game was implying and not expect writers to be more consistent.

[Xilizhra]

Anyone who says that a person's sexuality is not part of who they are has clearly never been in a situation where someone has tried to convince or coerce them into dating outside their sexual preference.

 

Your sexuality does not define who you are at your core, and neither does your gender. However, it is part of you. This is why we have gay pride events. This is why we have our sexual preference listed on dating sites. There's something squicky and awful about the idea that someone might want to change that part of you -- that another individual wouldn't accept that boundary. That you could be made to feel like a lesser human being because you have a boundary and a preference.

 

But I love my gay friends. Playing as a straight female character, I couldn't romance either Steve or Traynor in ME3. And you know what? I loved them. I loved my gay pals. I even loved that moment with Traynor where it was like "oh this is awkward -- you're not into girls and I just hit on you. But you know what? We're going to bounce back from this and it won't be awkward anymore because I love the person you are, no matter the nature of our sexualities."

 

I will never have that in a Dragon Age game, and it makes me so sad.

 

The player-sexual nature of the DAII romances effectively worked as a gay toggle. I could pretend Merrill wasn't attracted to me if I wanted to. Anders never brought up his relationship with Karl to me, so I could pretend he and Fenris were both completely straight.

 

That really doesn't strike anyone else as being categorically awful? 

 

Better for bisexuality to be common in Thedas. It at least makes me feel like I haven't had to force anyone to be straight in order to be in a relationship with them. And if the spread of resources makes it impossible for some of our romanceable companions to have set sexualities, I at least hope that these sexualities are acknowledged through other characters in the game.

 

I don't want a Thedas where everyone has to be like me in order for the fanbase to accept the game.

Forgive me, but I don't see how that makes any sense. You could pretend that Merrill isn't attracted to you, sure... just like you could do so at any time with anyone bisexual who didn't bring up their orientation to you. That has nothing to do with forcing people to change, and in any case, people written as playersexual will not be written as having a set sexuality; by definition, they have nothing to change because they change naturally as part of their character, or events within the universe.

I agree that bisexuality is preferable, however.

[AresKeith]

people written as playersexual will not be written as having a set sexuality; by definition, they have nothing to change because they change naturally as part of their character, or events within the universe.
I agree that bisexuality is preferable, however.

But that shouldn't change just because of how you made your character

[daveliam]

Yes you are correct i should blame myself for believing what the game was implying and not expect writers to be more consistent.

You just don't get it so I'm not going to bother even trying to convince you otherwise.

 

If you genuinely believe that bisexual people absolutely must follow up every statement about attraction to one gender with a qualifier of, "Oh, but I also like the other gender too.", then fine, believe that.

 

Anders expressed interest in both genders in the game series and he is bisexual.  That is completely consistent.  It doesn't get more consistent than that.  YOU are the one who assumed that because he expressed interest in females in DA: A, he has to be straight.  You were wrong and now you are trying to blame that one someone else.

 

The writer has explicitly stated that the character was bisexual from the beginning and, over the course of two games, expressed interest in numerous males and females.  If you choose to think that this is inconsistent, then go with it, but don't look for sympathy when you get annoyed by your own misunderstanding.

[Mockingword]

Anyone who says that a person's sexuality is not part of who they are has clearly never been in a situation where someone has tried to convince or coerce them into dating outside their sexual preference.

 

Your sexuality does not define who you are at your core, and neither does your gender. However, it is part of you. This is why we have gay pride events. This is why we have our sexual preference listed on dating sites. There's something squicky and awful about the idea that someone might want to change that part of you -- that another individual wouldn't accept that boundary. That you could be made to feel like a lesser human being because you have a boundary and a preference.

 

But I love my gay friends. Playing as a straight female character, I couldn't romance either Steve or Traynor in ME3. And you know what? I loved them. I loved my gay pals. I even loved that moment with Traynor where it was like "oh this is awkward -- you're not into girls and I just hit on you. But you know what? We're going to bounce back from this and it won't be awkward anymore because I love the person you are, no matter the nature of our sexualities."

 

I will never have that in a Dragon Age game, and it makes me so sad.

 

The player-sexual nature of the DAII romances effectively worked as a gay toggle. I could pretend Merrill wasn't attracted to me if I wanted to. Anders never brought up his relationship with Karl to me, so I could pretend he and Fenris were both completely straight.

 

That really doesn't strike anyone else as being categorically awful? 

 

Better for bisexuality to be common in Thedas. It at least makes me feel like I haven't had to force anyone to be straight in order to be in a relationship with them. And if the spread of resources makes it impossible for some of our romanceable companions to have set sexualities, I at least hope that these sexualities are acknowledged through other characters in the game.

 

I don't want a Thedas where everyone has to be like me in order for the fanbase to accept the game.

It's not anymore "squicky and awful" than if someone tried to tell you what animals you're allowed to like, or what foods you should be allowed to eat, or what career you should pursue. Trying to boss people around is a douchey thing to do, regardless of the specfic topic.

 

No, I don't think it's "categorically awful" for people to have more freedom in their roleplaying games, and I don't feel particularly bad for heteros who miss out on having imaginary token gay pets.

 

Not that that would even be an issue. You could still easily have characters like Samantha and Steve who express homosexual desires, and just make it so they can't be romanceable by anybody. Then you could still have that flutter of excitement at being rejected by an imaginary friend, and feel like you're super progressive and enlightened for not being butthurt about it.

[fchopin]

More consistent than perfectly consistent?

Perfection is impossible on this world so i would be happy with more consistent.

[Ianamus]

But that shouldn't change just because of how you made your character

 

Exactly. I think a lot of people are not seeing the difference between true fluid sexuality and "playersexuality".

 

Cassandra having always had at least a small amount of attraction to other women but generally preferring men, but then falling head over heels for the female Inquisitor is fluid sexuality. 

 

Varric suddenly having had a romantic relationship with Carver between games if you choose to play a male Inquisitor that is never mentioned or implied if you chose a female Inquisitor is not fluid sexuality, it is just changing him to suit the player. 

[fchopin]

You just don't get it so I'm not going to bother even trying to convince you otherwise.

I can see that we will not agree on this point but that is fine as we all have differences and that is what makes the world more exciting so let’s just agree to disagree.

[brushyourteeth]

Forgive me, but I don't see how that makes any sense. You could pretend that Merrill isn't attracted to you, sure... just like you could do so at any time with anyone bisexual who didn't bring up their orientation to you. That has nothing to do with forcing people to change, and in any case, people written as playersexual will not be written as having a set sexuality; by definition, they have nothing to change because they change naturally as part of their character, or events within the universe.

I agree that bisexuality is preferable, however.

 

Sure. Let me help it make sense. 

 

The writers have explained the companion sexuality system in DAII in such a way that we have all four romanceable characters available to us no matter what. But since some players would rather romance someone who is definitely straight or definitely gay, you essentially get to headcanon your companions' sexuality. I understand that -- it doesn't even have to come from a place of bigotry. Sometimes I'd rather someone I'm attracted to be like "You have boobs, I love that!" than "A penis would be just as great, but sure." It's flattering. It makes you feel secure. Not that you wouldn't love a bi boyfriend or girlfriend just as much, but just, whatever.

 

My first playthrough found me romancing Anders as a straight FemHawke. Anders is flirty, he calls you sweetheart, and if you're meta enough, you know from Awakening that he's quite the lady's man. Then I watch my husband play as a male Hawke, and Anders tells him that Karl was his first male lover.

 

Now I'm conflicted -- not because I have a problem with homosexuality, but because this introduces some new questions about my relationship with Anders. Is he actually gay? Does he prefer men now? Did he always? Is he really attracted to me, or is there a possibility that I was simply attractive as a powerful figure that could protect him from the Templars?

 

I don't want Anders to change in order to romance him. I don't want to think that Hawke was a step backward for him. I want to respect that Anders may be gay. I can't do this if "in some playthroughs he is and in some playthroughs he isn't -- YOU decide."

 

I don't want to decide.

 

I want to respect.

 

I want to experience.

 

I want to love without condition these beautiful characters that the writers should never have had to create with malleable sexualities. No one, in real life, should feel they have the power to change my sexuality so they can have me because they want me. I treat these characters with the same respect. Call me crazy.

 

I get more offended for gay players, because while it means you can romance "all the things," it creates a Thedas where homosexuality doesn't have to even be acknowledged. :/