1875 réponses à ce sujet

[goofyomnivore]

I truthfully do not care if they're "playersexual". Morrigan could of been lesbian, and Alistar could of been convinced to the Dark Ritual and all would of been the same to me (romance wise). Just like I could see a gay Warden being King Alistair's secret lover or the two running off to be Grey Wardens together. 90% of the dialogue in the romances would of fit for either preference IMO.

[Allan Schumacher]

EA zeroing in their golden poo awards being, essentially, "at the fault of homophobes who disliked ME3s gay romances" (which we all know is entirely false, but doesn't change the fact that they redirected their publicity to the current issue)

EA isn't doing this. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of Peter Moore's statements. It was one of a list of things that Moore said we weren't going to change, because there were people that were literally voting for the company specifically because of that (I remember seeing the links on places like Free Republic where plain as day it was told to vote for EA because they had a recent talk about gay content in video games.

And yes, the constant (and borderline deliberate, at times) misunderstanding of Moore's statements actually pisses me off. I recommend dropping it, since anyone suggesting that we're scapegoating winning the award based on stuff like this is wrong.

[Bootsykk]

THIS is exactly what I was hoping to see. This is a problem with interactions on the planet Earth, set in our reality with the associated contexts that sexual orientation has.


This is why I said "What *does* define their personality is the consequences of having a particular orientation."

Being gay, bisexual, or heterosexual does not make a person more timid, more aggressive, more promiscuous, or anything like that. What DOES affect someone's personality is how they are treated because of a particular sexual orientation, and that is an immensely important distinction.

This is people taking their assumptions about our actual reality, and transcribing them onto how they feel a fictional universe, with fictional norms, mores, and so forth, should behave in order to be "believable." Someone pointing out that 2/3s of the party members being romanceable is not "believable" means that they are taking their real life experiences and imposing them on the game.


You're describing the ridiculous and foolish notions that some unreasonably people have that they can somehow change your sexuality through brute force or whatever. But this is NOT the same thing as a "playersexual" relationship. Each playthrough is completely and utterly independent of all other playthroughs. The only way you can make a distinction that a character's sexuality is different is by taking two disjointed realities and comparing them, while making the assumption that they must be consistent with regards to sexual preferences. Ask yourself why this consistency must be maintained.

This is NOT the same as, for example, Alistair starting out as a clearly defined heterosexual, but because the player character is a man and asking for a gay relationship, that suddenly Alistair decides that he's going to get involved in a homosexual relationship.


Ask yourself why is it that sexual orientation defines one's personality? Is it truly because of the sexual orientation of the character, or is it because of the socialization of what we consider to be acceptable sexual orientations, and the various sociological pressures that affect our personality. Do you think that a gay person hides their sexuality in our reality because that's just a trait of being gay? Or is it a consequence put forth based on how our reality treats gay people? If it's a consequence of our reality, is it possible that the reality of Thedas is different? If not, why not?

I've never seen you around the forums, but man I hope you have some pull with the writing team, because THIS, THIS, THIS.

 

But on that last, bit, no, not really. It's been implied, in several ways, that Thedas is fairly different. Perhaps Orlais is a different country with different beliefs, but for the most part, it's been heavily implied that the same beliefs hold true in Thedas that apply in our world. Women are intended to be with men, but there are outliers, and for the large part, it isn't an issue. However, character reactions to those relationships and the way Leliana and Zevran both tread lightly on the topic suggest that it's not always a welcome thought for everyone that same-sex relationships happen, and I wish that the writing accounted more for this than a crude offhanded comment by your creepy uncle in DA2.

[Allan Schumacher]

What kind of discussion would it be, if only one side of the argument was allowed to speak?

It has nothing to do with "being allowed to speak." You're free to speak about it. Just be honest with yourself that it's actually important to you to voice your opinion on the topic, lest you not bother wasting your time talking about it.

[Bootsykk]

EA isn't doing this. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of Peter Moore's statements. It was one of a list of things that Moore said we weren't going to change, because there were people that were literally voting for the company specifically because of that (I remember seeing the links on places like Free Republic where plain as day it was told to vote for EA because they had a recent talk about gay content in video games.

And yes, the constant (and borderline deliberate, at times) misunderstanding of Moore's statements actually pisses me off. I recommend dropping it, since anyone suggesting that we're scapegoating winning the award based on stuff like this is wrong.

I'm afraid I've offended you, but you do have to consider that as a huge issue, especially in the gaming community, the mention of it was very intentional, and that it rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. This isn't a bad thing, and perhaps I worded myself a bit too briefly, but that was the end effect, and it's certainly given a lot of weight to the issue of "what Bioware plans to do next to support LGBTQ". 

That said, to some degrees we might disagree, but I'll let it lie because it's only a part of the cause as to why the topic is popular, rather than what makes it important and interesting to discuss from a writing perspective.

[Allan Schumacher]

I've never seen you around the forums, but man I hope you have some pull with the writing team, because THIS, THIS, THIS.

I don't think the writing team needs any influence from me on this matter. My perspective comes in large part in interacting and talking with a pretty diverse group of people on a subject matter that is frankly, pretty foreign/new to me and the plethora of me tripping all over it when trying to discuss it simply due to inexperience.

But on that last, bit, no, not really. It's been implied, in several ways, that Thedas is fairly different. Perhaps Orlais is a different country with different beliefs, but for the most part, it's been heavily implied that the same beliefs hold true in Thedas that apply in our world. Women are intended to be with men, but there are outliers, and for the large part, it isn't an issue. However, character reactions to those relationships and the way Leliana and Zevran both tread lightly on the topic suggest that it's not always a welcome thought for everyone that same-sex relationships happen, and I wish that the writing accounted more for this than a crude offhanded comment by your creepy uncle in DA2.

It's also important to note that the details of the lore are going to be somewhat more fluid based on our own comfort/familiarity with subject matter that we aren't as familiar exploring. While I'm sure this will agitate some who believe that the first attempt at creating the lore of a game setting (i.e. the first game) can never, in any way be undermined (and fair enough if that's the way they feel), there's going to be situations where we'll look at what we did and conclude that it's not exactly the way we would have liked it.

That some characters express reservation is one thing. But that doesn't mean it's nearly as big of an issue as it is in our reality.

As I said, I initially had issues with DA2's romances being uniformly available, for typically the same reasons that are listed in this thread: that it cheapens the character, its too fan servicey, and so forth. The issue was I couldn't really convince myself that my impressions were actually valid for the game setting. Once I recognized that each playthrough was distinct, I realized that the only way I can see this as a conflict of how a character is behaving is because of my own preconceived (and inapplicable) assumptions as to how it defines a character coupled with a crossover of meta information that is irrelevant across playthroughs. The only way it was inconsistent was if I compared alternative playthroughs. There's nothing inconsistent with how the characters behave based on their sexuality.


Now, that's not to say that undefined sexual orientations is immaculate and the perfect solution. It *does* cause issues with respect to representation (you don't have the Steve Cortez/Samantha Traynor types that represent a particular group, and that people will see and that in Thedas that's okay). It can also undermine bisexual representation because the situation becomes translucent. Are they bisexual? Is their sexuality not defined? How does that work!? But in terms of the internal consistency of a character and how they behave themselves, the only way I can say that "playersexual" is a genuine inconsistency with the character is if I make assumptions that the character should behave differently as a result of their sexual orientation. Those assumptions can come from my own personal experiences in reality, or based on how I believe Thedas is. I'm okay with the idea of sexual orientation not really being an issue in Thedas, and as such have no problems assuming that there's minimal consequences for being a particular sexual orientation aside from "I'm attracted to this type of person."

[mousestalker]

The only way to make the characters realistic is to make them both playersexual and playercentric. Otherwise I would find the game highly unrealistic and fantastical.

 

[Maria Caliban]

Down with playersexuality.

 

If my Inquisitor spends the game slaughtering mages, Vivianne should show no interest in the PC. If the PC flirts with her, that would be an optimal time for her to express her disgust or even hatred for someone who views her kind as less-than-human.

 

But I'm fine with her being interested in both men and women. Having characters and the world react to what I do is superior to them to reacting to my selections during character creation.

[mars_central]

If I understand mulitverse theory correctly, regardless of your sexuality in this universe, there are an infinite number of universes where you're straight and an infinite number where you're gay. There are an infinite number you're not even in. Each Dragon Age play through is like that, one universe in the Dragon Age multiverse, similar but separate from the others.

[Stelae]

Down with playersexuality.

 

If my Inquisitor spends the game slaughtering mages, Vivianne should show no interest in the PC. If the PC flirts with her, that would be an optimal time for her to express her disgust or even hatred for someone who views her kind as less-than-human.

 

But I'm fine with her being interested in both men and women. Having characters and the world react to what I do is superior to them to reacting to my selections during character creation.

That's not so much "down with playersexuality" as "down with rivalmance," IMHO. 

 

Which, frankly, I'm down with. 

[Eveangaline]

I don't really understand what's wrong with just having the maybe 4 people you can romance be bi. Then straight people, gay people, and bi people, all get someone they can romance. And it's not a big deal.

[Ianamus]

You're describing the ridiculous and foolish notions that some unreasonably people have that they can somehow change your sexuality through brute force or whatever. But this is NOT the same thing as a "playersexual" relationship. Each playthrough is completely and utterly independent of all other playthroughs. The only way you can make a distinction that a character's sexuality is different is by taking two disjointed realities and comparing them, while making the assumption that they must be consistent with regards to sexual preferences. Ask yourself why this consistency must be maintained.

This is NOT the same as, for example, Alistair starting out as a clearly defined heterosexual, but because the player character is a man and asking for a gay relationship, that suddenly Alistair decides that he's going to get involved in a homosexual relationship.
 

 

I can honestly see where you are coming from here, but I do not think that the fact that the companions sexuality is fixed to different things at the start of the game and then consistent from then on makes it any better. 

 

The main reason I take issue with this is representation. I've said before that the Dragon Age games lack homosexual characters outside of very minor NPC's, and I have heard the argument before "But x is homosexual if you choose to play a male..." and similar things- and I don't think this is right. People want characters that they can relate to, and Bioware are usually good at this, including characters like Maevaris.

 

But imagine, for a moment, that Maevaris was in Inquisition, and that if you choose to play a mage Maevaris no longer identifies as a woman. She would in playthroughs where you were a rogue or warrior, but not mage. Is she still the fantastic representation of people like her that she is now? I don't think she is anymore, because not everyone is seeing her for who she is.

 

Obviously there is nothing stopping Bioware from including important homosexual characters alongside "playersexual" or bisexual LI's, as either companions or NPC's, but there has not been one yet, and I think that the view of "Oh, well so and so can be x if you choose to play as a y" is not really helping. 

[jncicesp]

 

The main reason I take issue with this though is representation. I've said before that the Dragon Age games lack homosexual characters outside of very minor NPC's, and I have heard the argument before "But x is homosexual if you choose to play a male..." and similar things- and I don't think this is right. People want characters that they can relate to, and Bioware are usually good at this, including characters like Maevaris.

 

 

That more sounds like something that has nothing to do with romance.. Id agree if I saw it like that but sounds more like its up to the non-romanceable characters and companions. romances fill a different player-to-world role.

Or I read that wrong and I sound dumb.

[Ianamus]

That more sounds like something that has nothing to do with romance.. Id agree if I saw it like that but sounds more like its up to the non-romanceable characters and companions. romances fill a different player-to-world role.

Or I read that wrong and I sound dumb.

 

It shouldn't have anything to do with romance, but I feel that it does. 

 

For example: If you play as a male Hawke then Anders mentions having had a past relationship with Karl. That's great! There is an in-universe reference to a male/male couple. 

 

But if you play as a female Hawke he doesn't say that, and there is now no indication of any male/male relationships in the game, pretty much. 

 

Similarly if there were playersexual LI's my friend could say "Wow, I love Samantha! You don't usually see such prominent and well-developed Lesbian characters!" But for me it could be a case of "Oh... well I played a male character, so she was heterosexual in my playthrough..."

[jncicesp]

It shouldn't have anything to do with romance, but I feel that it does. 

 

For example: If you play as a male Hawke then Anders mentions having had a past relationship with Karl. That's great! There is an in-universe reference to a male/male couple. 

 

But if you play as a female Hawke he doesn't say that, and there is now no indication of any male/male relationships in the game, pretty much. 

 

Similarly if there were playersexual LI's my friend could say "Wow, I love Samantha! You don't usually see such prominent and well-developed Lesbian characters!" But for me it could be a case of "Oh... well I played a male character, so she was heterosexual in my playthrough..." 

Anders really shoulda mentioned that either way. 

 

I think one of the default Warden imports is Dalish and female, Merrill talks about her thought out the game.

I kinda hate to say it cause they arnt romanceable but ill mention Aveline anyway, If her can you feel the love tonight quest was with a female guard instead of a male one would you count that? or does it have to be strictly a romanceable character? 

 

Just get rid of your friend...you'll have new digital ones when DAI comes out who needs real ones.

[fchopin]

If i was to try and make it fair for all i would probably use something like the below.

One female lesbian relationship
One male gay relationship
One female straight relationship
One male straight relationship
One male Bi relationship
One female Bi relationship

If Bioware can do the above it would be great, Bioware can use NPC’s that are not companions which should make it easier for them.
If not then they should do more Bi relationships but not all Bi and no playersexual whatever the reason.

My real preference would be to have less romance options so Bioware can make the romances better with more interaction and more story connections.

[Ianamus]

Anders really shoulda mentioned that either way. 

 

I think one of the default Warden imports is Dalish and female, Merrill talks about her thought out the game.

I kinda hate to say it cause they arnt romanceable but ill mention Aveline anyway, If her can you feel the love tonight quest was with a female guard instead of a male one would you count that? or does it have to be strictly a romanceable character? 

 

Just get rid of your friend...you'll have new digital ones when DAI comes out who needs real ones.

 

Aveline being a Lesbian would have been absolutely fine, and it would have given us a good example of a non-disastrous lesbian relationship outside of the main character, which is also something we have not seen in Dargon Age. 

 

My issue is just that by making the LI's playersexual it could lead to "If you play as a male companion x is homosexual, so we're representing all orientations in our game" but then if you play as a female that companion is straight and there may be no homosexual men in the game, so it has not increased the representation at all, really. 

 

They could make a non-LI companion or a major NPC homosexual, and I hope they do. But they seem to focus solely on the LI's when it comes to stuff like that, outside of very minor NPC's who are never actually stated to be in a relationship in-game. 

[Xilizhra]

Aveline being a Lesbian would have been absolutely fine, and it would have given us a good example of a non-disastrous lesbian relationship outside of the main character, which is also something we have not seen in Dargon Age.

We haven't seen one with the PC either, given how they both vanish.

 

They could make a non-LI companion or a major NPC homosexual, and I hope they do. But they seem to focus solely on the LI's when it comes to stuff like that, outside of very minor NPC's who are never actually stated to be in a relationship in-game.

Which is much, much more of a problem than playersexuality.

[CybAnt1]

I've seen lots of fanon but this one is one of the worst.

 

Also are you out of your mind? How can a STRAIGHT character can be "playersexual?

 

OK let's grasp my point one more time: they do ignore every other aspect of your character, OTHER than gender, or yes reactions to your behavior. (But that's how all Bioware games have worked since BG2, and nobody's arguing that's a bad aspect of how romances are implemented.) 

 

Morrigan is down for you whether you are dwarf, elf, or human, noble or commoner, templar, etc. Yes, I know people will say "but it's not fair for me to be locked out of romance by my choices in the CC". OK, I agree, but then, what you are saying is "make the characters playersexual, in every aspect OTHER than gender". 

 

Once again, my comment makes sense if you understand that peoples' sexuality and sexual preferences may contain sexual orientation as a key component (straight/gay/bi), but that does not totally define who they are and are not sexually attracted to. A gay person may like only certain members of the same sex. A straight person may like only certain members of the opposite sex. They could even consider your appearance - I mean, be honest, most people do (see thread on desirability of bald people) - and yes they could possibly even implement this by having their scripts check variables in the character creator, but I don't think they would - or should. 

 

BTW, let me add, thanks Allan for once again adding "dev perspective" to the thread. 

[Ianamus]

 

Which is much, much more of a problem than playersexuality.

 

Yes, but as I am trying to stress: I believe that "playersexuality" and/or all-bisexual approaches are partially to blame. At the moment almost all of the s/s content is loaded onto four bisexual characters, who may even be straight depending on what gender you pick, if "playersexuality" is used. 

[Xilizhra]

Yes, but as I am trying to stress: I believe that "playersexuality" and/or all-bisexual approaches are partially to blame. Almost all of the s/s content is loaded onto four bisexual characters who may even be straight depending on what gender you pick, if "playersexuality" is used. 

But they're not; they're separate issues that come from tunnel vision regarding the companions.

[jncicesp]

Aveline being a Lesbian would have been absolutely fine, and it would have given us a good example of a non-disastrous lesbian relationship outside of the main character, which is also something we have not seen in Dargon Age. 

 

My issue is just that by making the LI's playersexual it could lead to "If you play as a male companion x is homosexual, so we're representing all orientations in our game" but then if you play as a female that companion is straight and there may be no homosexual men in the game, so it has not increased the representation at all, really. 

 

They could make a non-LI companion or a major NPC homosexual, and I hope they do. But they seem to focus solely on the LI's when it comes to stuff like that, outside of very minor NPC's who are never actually stated to be in a relationship in-game. 

I was hoping for it to be more awesome than just fine but whatever.

 

Thats true.. it really depends on what you play as and how much you play in order to see things, I agree it doesn't help representation.

 

Id prefer it being on a non-LI just because I selfishly don't like the idea of being able to romance someone Just because they're the lesbian one. Better for representation I guess.

[Ianamus]

But they're not; they're separate issues that come from tunnel vision regarding the companions.

 

Well, the game with fixed sexualities, Dragon Age Origins is the one that also included minor NPC s/s relationships, like Wade and Herren and Branka and Hespith (it was an example of an s/s relationship, however dark it was).

 

Meanwhile the game with 4 bisexual LI's had practically no s/s relationships in NPC's and no homosexual characters.

 

Is this a coincidence? Or did the writers decide they didn't need to include homosexual relationships between NPC's since all LI's were bisexual?

[Lulupab]

If i was to try and make it fair for all i would probably use something like the below.

One female lesbian relationship
One male gay relationship
One female straight relationship
One male straight relationship
One male Bi relationship
One female Bi relationship

If Bioware can do the above it would be great, Bioware can use NPC’s that are not companions which should make it easier for them.
If not then they should do more Bi relationships but not all Bi and no playersexual whatever the reason.

My real preference would be to have less romance options so Bioware can make the romances better with more interaction and more story connections.

 
I think its time you guys had look at the mirror:
 
OMG my immersion is dead, 2 of each orientation in every game. Bioware please its not natural. In real life it never happens, etc etc etc. If you really want to make excuses I guess you can. DA2 had a system that served all, fans were much more satisfied than DAO's system and I really hope they take their lesson. Your logical view has no place in video games. Many, MANY things don't have a logical explanation in video games.