1875 réponses à ce sujet

[CuriousArtemis]

Point being, they're the same character in all other respects regardless of who chooses to romance them (if anyone), and only their gender preference changes depending whether you play as male or female.  

 

I agree with your post 100% and thus I'm totally in favor of playersexual romances. The part I quoted above is the part that so many people just can't seem to accept or grasp. Sexuality is not part of one's personality... I would be the same person if I were romantically interested in women instead of (or in addition to) men. I would still be me. And the same certainly applies to characters.

 

A lot of people point to Steve Cortez. Yes I think it was very important that Steve's spouse was canonically a husband. However, I don't think it's important because it was part of Steve's character (he would be just as well-formed if Robert had been Roberta); it was important because we so rarely (if ever) see a character married to someone of the same gender. It was historically and culturally significant.

[Lady Nuggins]

It doesn't have to be "playersexuality", they could just make all four LI's bisexual.

 

On a related note: why is it that mods that make Isabela white are so scorned and criticized yet mods that make Alistair available to male wardens are usually met with praise? So changing a characters skin colour to match personal preferences is wrong, but changing a characters sexuality to match your preferences is absolutely fine?

 

It's interesting food for thought. Well, I think it is at least. 

 

One of those reinforces the harmful message that only white women are attractive.  Even if it is only "personal preference," it's an idea that is already pushed by mainstream media.  For people who look like Isabella, it probably feels pretty rotten to have a bunch of mods lightening her skin.  There is so little representation of dark-skinned women, and to have one of the few good portrayals of a dark-skinned woman whitewashed by fans?  Yes, I can see why that bothered some people.

 

The other opens up more options for people to have a romance that lines up with their sexual preference.  It doesn't have any effect on real live people who look like Alistair--because there are many other characters who look like Alistair who are represented as straight.

[AresKeith]

Isn't that enough? they have romance stories for you to play along with the game. I really don't see one reason to make gender be the deciding factor.

The only thing I keep seeing is people saying that they want different(exclusive) things for different genders.

with 'playersexual' they still can romance certain people with certain genders... little creepy that people need a restriction to tell them who to like.

 

Most of my playtroughs are female if I ever get around to playing as a guy im romancing a guy probably. the more differences Between genders makes want to play it as a guy less.. its more annoying to me.

 

That wont cut out gender it just wont make matter for what characters you can romance. 

 

Where did you get that bolded part from? Because nobody made that impression. You're right gender shouldn't be the deciding factor, but it should still be a factor imho

 

And isn't making it not matter just about the same as cutting it out

[AresKeith]

Although many players really like the idea of romance, David Gaider and Cameron have said that romance itself is a fanservice and it will never impact the game. At best it adds some dialogues to the game. Taking that in mind it makes a lot of sense to try to satisfy as many fans as possible with playersexual route. 

 

http://www.vg247.com...ge-of-equality/

 

My problem with this is that I feel Bioware shouldn't treat it as fanservice, optional or not it should treated as game content

[brushyourteeth]

By making everyone player-sexual, Bioware has seen that none of the real life sexualities are actually acknowledged. You can headcanon a world where everyone is just like you. I think that's sick.

 

I understand why the company does it, because it makes fans happy. However, they're encouraging the same kind of weird player entitlement that makes fans feel like they can change companions' appearances (or even race) entirely, which I've also always found spooky. It's just a game, and then it also isn't -- expecting others to have a sexuality adaptive to your own in real life would be a horrifying attitude I'm quite shocked to see Bioware encourage (however inadvertently).

 

If you want to experience romantic content with a character that isn't attracted to your gender, play a different gender. Walk a mile in someone else's shoes. Learn to respect another lifestyle, or just be content with being friends.

[razmatazz]

I'm sympathetic to TurretSyndrome's point.  I remember chuckling at one of the banters between Morrigan and Leliana in which Leliana praises Morrigan's appearance and Morrigan takes offense to Leliana checking out her breasts.  We really do miss out on that sort of thing with the 'player-sexual' implimentation.

 

Not really. I could see it happening even if Morrigan could be romanced by female Wardens.

 

Sure, I also could see a straight woman being uncomfortable being leered at by a guy she wasn't into.  But that's beside the point.  If Leliana was playersexual, that kind of banter wouldn't be possible (w/o greater resources) because it would require that part of her character to be decided by something other than a choice made by the player.

 

Beyond that, I'm just disappointed that what I feel should be a significant part that helps flesh out a character is reduced to a gameplay mechanic.  It makes those characters feel incomplete to me, and it does kind of hurt my immersion of the story.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I don't see any downside to herosexual characters. The player gets control over some aspects of many characters. How is sexuality different from class, or skill selection, or combat tactics?

[Lady Nuggins]

If Leliana was playersexual, that kind of banter wouldn't be possible (w/o greater resources) because it would require that part of her character to be decided by something other than a choice made by the player.

 

I just don't see why that would be the case.  Isabella has similar dialogue with Fenris, even though she can also be romanced as Lady Hawke.  Playersexual doesn't mean they're stripped of their sexuality unless initiated by the player.  They have their own inclinations and preferences, independent of the player character.

[AresKeith]

 

Beyond that, I'm just disappointed that what I feel should be a significant part that helps flesh out a character is reduced to a gameplay mechanic.  It makes those characters feel incomplete to me, and it does kind of hurt my immersion of the story.

 

I agree

 

I don't see any downside to herosexual characters. The player gets control over some aspects of many characters. How is sexuality different from class, or skill selection, or combat tactics?

 

The bolded part is one of my main gripes against it, the player shouldn't be allowed to have control over that. You're basically turning a characters' sexual orientation into a game mechanic and that should already be predefined in the characters 

[Lulupab]

You seem to misunderstand the concept of playersexual.

 

When you create a character the world sets the orientations to be fit for your character. You cannot compare two playthroghs with different gender PC. Also the fact that the LIs use quite a different dialogues with each gender really helps. 

[AresKeith]

You seem to misunderstand the concept of playersexual.

 

When you create a character the world sets the orientations to be fit for your character. You cannot compare two playthroghs with different gender PC. Also the fact that the LIs use quite a different dialogues with each gender really helps. 

 

So in other words the sexual orientation of the potential LIs are what you want to be, like we said

[Lady Nuggins]

 

By making everyone player-sexual, Bioware has seen that none of the real life sexualities are actually acknowledged. You can headcanon a world where everyone is just like you. I think that's sick.

 

I don't see it that way at all.  Almost the opposite, in fact.  I don't want a world where everyone is the same as me.  I want a world where I can play many different kinds of characters with many different sexualities.  A lesbian dwarf, a gay qunari, a pansexual elf. 

[razmatazz]

I don't see any downside to herosexual characters. The player gets control over some aspects of many characters. How is sexuality different from class, or skill selection, or combat tactics?

 

I think, from a story viewpoint, a character's sexuality SHOULD be different.  In DA2, even our companions' classes and specializations are decided to fit their characters.  Everything else is strictly a gameplay mechanic that is reasonably divorced from the story.

 

Edit:  As for the possible downside, TurretSyndrome has already spelled it out in several posts, and it's one that isn't (necessarily) exclusive to straight players.

[Lulupab]

So in other words the sexual orientation of the potential LIs are what you want to be, like we said

 

Not exactly. Like any story when you change something other things are bound to change as well. When you create a female character the world is set in motion from the very beginning, things shaping as you make decisions. There are some events that only happen if you are acting evil, for example if you decide to sell Fenris to slavery. Anders approves of that. However when a story is being written only one outcome will be considered. Did you or did you not sell Fenris to slavery? In a story where you didn't sell Fenris there will be no mention of Anders's approval. There is only one outcome.

 

Its the same with playersexual. Don't compare Male playthroughs with female. Only one of them will be considered when your story is being told as you cannot be both genders. So its not really "playersexual" per se. Its how the world works. What do you think happens if you change the gender of protagonist in a story? Nothing happens? 

[AresKeith]

I don't see it that way at all.  Almost the opposite, in fact.  I don't want a world where everyone is the same as me.  I want a world where I can play many different kinds of characters with many different sexualities.  A lesbian dwarf, a gay qunari, a pansexual elf. 

 

But even with set sexualities there would be nothing stopping you from playing like that

 

Its the same with playersexual. Don't compare Male playthroughs with female. Only one of them will be considered when your story is being told as you cannot be both genders. So its not really "playersexual" per se. Its how the world works. What do you think happens if you change the gender of protagonist in a story? Nothing happens? 

 

Your saying that the LIs sexuality is left up to the player, that's playersexual. And I disagree with it, something like that shouldn't be left to the players it should already be apart of the character

[Lulupab]

But even with set sexualities there would be nothing stopping you from playing like that

 

 

Your saying that the LIs sexuality is left up to the player, that's playersexual. And I disagree with it, something like that shouldn't be left to the players it should already be apart of the character

 

But its the best possible option for something that is a fanservice in core and root. For something that is meant to be fanservice its vital to satisfy all players. if you are complaining the romance should have impact that is another matter and probably out of the hands of people writing a character.

[AresKeith]

But its the best possible option for something that is a fanservice in core and root. For something that is meant to be fanservice its vital to satisfy all players. if you are complaining the romance should have impact that is another matter and probably out of the hands of people writing a character.

 

And I'm on the fence that things shouldn't be treated as fanservice, optional or not. And just because it's fanservice doesn't mean they'll ultimately do it as David Gaider once said that if they had the proper resources he would prefer set sexualities

[Rainbow Wyvern]

But even with set sexualities there would be nothing stopping you from playing like that

Sometimes, yes, there is. Example, gay male Shepard in Mass Effect 1 and 2. He had absolutely no options. Had there been 'playersexuality' (I still detest that term), Shepard could have romanced a dude. Only in Mass Effect 3 did Shep have any choices. 

So, 'playersexuality' gets rid of that issue, by letting people romance who they want. I shouldn't be unable to play the character I want to play because there aren't any romance options. 

Yes, romance isn't a big deal but I still would like to romance certain characters with certain protagonists. Straight and lesbian Shepards could in ME1/ME2, but gay dude Sheppy? Nope. 

Until budgets become infinite or at least really huge for these games, or romance becomes more important (which I don't think should happen), playersexuality IMO is the best way to go.

[AresKeith]

Sometimes, yes, there is. Example, gay male Shepard in Mass Effect 1 and 2. He had absolutely no options. Had there been 'playersexuality' (I still detest that term), Shepard could have romanced a dude. Only in Mass Effect 3 did Shep have any choices. 

So, 'playersexuality' gets rid of that issue, by letting people romance who they want. I shouldn't be unable to play the character I want to play because there aren't any romance options. 

Yes, romance isn't a big deal but I still would like to romance certain characters with certain protagonists. Straight and lesbian Shepards could in ME1/ME2, but gay dude Sheppy? Nope. 

Until budgets become infinite or at least really huge for these games, or romance becomes more important (which I don't think should happen), playersexuality IMO is the best way to go.

 

Well for the ME games I would agree with you that there was a lack of choices for other players, but that hasn't been an issue for the DA games other than people not being able to romance the person they really want

 

Sure budget comes into play for this, but that's why I say even optional content should treated as game content regardless

[Xilizhra]

 

By making everyone player-sexual, Bioware has seen that none of the real life sexualities are actually acknowledged. You can headcanon a world where everyone is just like you. I think that's sick.

 

I understand why the company does it, because it makes fans happy. However, they're encouraging the same kind of weird player entitlement that makes fans feel like they can change companions' appearances (or even race) entirely, which I've also always found spooky. It's just a game, and then it also isn't -- expecting others to have a sexuality adaptive to your own in real life would be a horrifying attitude I'm quite shocked to see Bioware encourage (however inadvertently).

 

If you want to experience romantic content with a character that isn't attracted to your gender, play a different gender. Walk a mile in someone else's shoes. Learn to respect another lifestyle, or just be content with being friends.

 

Not in ten thousand years. I have never, nor will I ever, want to play as a male character, and I will not do so just to satisfy arbitrary requirements thrown at us by uncreative developers.

[AresKeith]

Not in ten thousand years. I have never, nor will I ever, want to play as a male character, and I will not do so just to satisfy arbitrary requirements thrown at us by uncreative developers.

 

That bolded part doesn't even make sense because your calling developers uncreative for giving characters a predefined trait that 

 

And it's not like they're forcing you to do so

[Mr.House]

Not in ten thousand years. I have never, nor will I ever, want to play as a male character, and I will not do so just to satisfy arbitrary requirements thrown at us by uncreative developers.

Wait, are you fricken telling me that the only way devs can be creative is if the PC is female? Are you fricken kidding me?

[Xilizhra]

Wait, are you fricken telling me that the only way devs can be creative is if the PC is female? Are you fricken kidding me?

No, and I don't know how you got that from my post.

[WildOrchid]

Sometimes, yes, there is. Example, gay male Shepard in Mass Effect 1 and 2. He had absolutely no options. Had there been 'playersexuality' (I still detest that term), Shepard could have romanced a dude. Only in Mass Effect 3 did Shep have any choices. 

So, 'playersexuality' gets rid of that issue, by letting people romance who they want. I shouldn't be unable to play the character I want to play because there aren't any romance options. 

Yes, romance isn't a big deal but I still would like to romance certain characters with certain protagonists. Straight and lesbian Shepards could in ME1/ME2, but gay dude Sheppy? Nope. 

Until budgets become infinite or at least really huge for these games, or romance becomes more important (which I don't think should happen), playersexuality IMO is the best way to go.

 

Not even straight female Shep nor gay female Shep had it good either. Sure, we had Liara but that's all we had until Sam in ME3.

Still, 2 or one options for gays (or nothing) isn't what i call 'equality' or fair treatment.

Either they slow down the straight male romances (because that's what ME was, a harem for straight males only) or give us some good handful of gay romances too because hey, we need our fun too! OR don't put romances at all, simple.

 

I don't get why in a damn RPG game, the devs should pander to only one gender and sexuality and ignore the others completely.