Ce sujet est fermé
He annoys me...button...he annoys me too...button...she did what? ....button... yep that could become lonely very fast for some.
Ferris mentions about serving his master in a special way didnt it? Id have to play and talk to him again but pretty sure he told me he did somethings with him.
Merrill I dont think had any type of relationship with anyone that I know of.
I don't think you can count being raped as part of someone's sexuality. If a straight guy is raped by a guy, I wouldn't call the victim bisexual.
Merrill had nothing. She was the virgin romance option, like Alistair in Origins.
why did I say anything? >.<.....crap....
your right that is definetly not. Apologize on that one as well. I only remembered he was with his master at some point but not much else.
I don't think you can count being raped as part of someone's sexuality. If a straight guy is raped by a guy, I wouldn't call the victim bisexual.
Merrill had nothing. She was the virgin romance option, like Alistair in Origins.
While I think it's safe to say that Fenris was probably sexually involved with Danarius (and possibly Hadriana as well), I'm not sure if that can be attributed to his sexuality. He was a slave and it was more likely a forced sexual relationship. He does end up sleeping with Isabela if neither are romanced, so we know that.
Merrill really didn't give much to go on, but some people have suggested that her line, "They were easy on the eyes" (about the qunari) to indicate that she is attracted to muscular males.
However, the reality is that neither really have a canonically defined sexuality. I tend to think that they are bisexual. It would be really weird to have 7 LI's in the DA games that have defined sexualities and two that are playersexual. I'm just not sure why they would do that.
Pardon me for poking my head in again with nothing real to add but when was it implied that Fenris was raped? I've never heard that before in any of my playthroughs was it mentioned in his romance path? I haven't completed that so maybe that's why I missed it? Again sorry for popping in again with nothing to add but I'm very curious about the Fenris thing, I honestly only thought he was a slave that was used as a body guard.
Ferris mentions about serving his master in a special way didnt it? Id have to play and talk to him again but pretty sure he told me he did somethings with him.
><..... sorry for derailing the thread can we get back on track beforee this turns into a really bad fight and the mods Holy Smite us all?
Sasha Braus oops.....now I feel bad, I hadnt seen or heard his tale in several months, forgot his details there.
No need to apologize. You just didn't remember.
Pardon me for poking my head in again with nothing real to add but when was it implied that Fenris was raped? I've never heard that before in any of my playthroughs was it mentioned in his romance path? I haven't completed that so maybe that's why I missed it? Again sorry for popping in again with nothing to add but I'm very curious about the Fenris thing, I honestly only thought he was a slave that was used as a body guard.
From David Gaider:
- Did you get the sense that Danarius had a really sketchy (*cough* intimate *cough*) relationship with Fenris? Yeah, you weren’t exactly wrong…. :/
Pardon me for poking my head in again with nothing real to add but when was it implied that Fenris was raped? I've never heard that before in any of my playthroughs was it mentioned in his romance path? I haven't completed that so maybe that's why I missed it? Again sorry for popping in again with nothing to add but I'm very curious about the Fenris thing, I honestly only thought he was a slave that was used as a body guard.
"The lad is rather skilled isn't he?" when you meet Danarius in the tavern.
It would be really weird to have 7 LI's in the DA games that have defined sexualities and two that are playersexual. I'm just not sure why they would do that.
Bioware knows their creepy, creepy audience.
Is this the absolute worst suggestion in the world? Imagine if it was implemented in DA2... every party member was bisexual in DA2. Meaning every character was equally open to both sexes for romantic affairs. There is no "neutering" of the character inherently, where they become a sexless eunuch if the toggle was active. Anders would still have his homosexual relationship with Karl, Isabella would still make sexually suggestive comments to every woman that has banter and the world keeps turning... it just would not direct the material at the player directly.
Is "too bad" a good mindset to take on this? Again, it doesn't bother me - I have never wandered into a ninjamance in Bioware games, of any sexuality. Then again, I'm not a huge fan of romance content in general in games. But if you remove the social context of the request and just see it as "hey we can provide this optional feature to people who do want it and give other people who don't want it the option to opt out," how is that so bad of a concept?
Well, I wouldn't call it the worst suggestion in the world, but it's a pretty bad one. I'll try to demonstrate with the most artless example I can think of: How about a toggle button in a game like Mass Effect (so we can abstract away from considerations of lore and whatnot) which, when enabled, makes it the case that characters of African descent who would otherwise hit on you no longer do so. I hope it's pretty obvious that this would be a very bad idea. The moral of the story is that even the act of simply enabling options isn't always innocent; it's sending implicit messages about what kinds of player preferences are legitimate or illegitimate that Bioware may not want to send.
While I think it's safe to say that Fenris was probably sexually involved with Danarius (and possibly Hadriana as well), I'm not sure if that can be attributed to his sexuality. He was a slave and it was more likely a forced sexual relationship. He does end up sleeping with Isabela if neither are romanced, so we know that.
Merrill really didn't give much to go on, but some people have suggested that her line, "They were easy on the eyes" (about the qunari) to indicate that she is attracted to muscular males.
However, the reality is that neither really have a canonically defined sexuality. I tend to think that they are bisexual. It would be really weird to have 7 LI's in the DA games that have defined sexualities and two that are playersexual. I'm just not sure why they would do that.
Yeah, you can't count sexual abuse.
If saying something is attractive, I'd say we're all bisexual then. Every woman has called another woman pretty and every man has called another man handsome. 
One could ask just as easily why wouldn't Bioware do that?
@Sasha Braus
and
@Ryzaki
Ah okay thank you for pointing that out to me it never clicked in my head during any of my playthroughs thanks for again pointing it out to me.
Bioware knows their creepy, creepy audience.
That answer doesn't make any sense. If there were already 4 other bisexual LI's in the series, why would they choose to make two playersexual LI's but then not actually do anything to confirm that they are playersexual. For example, Merrill never states that she's straight in a male PC game and gay in a female PC game. So there is no evidence that they are playersexual and there's no precedence for them being playersexual. But there is pecedence for bisexual LI's and these two characters can be romanced by both males and females. It just boggles my mind that people leap to "playersexual" and have no evidence (just a lack of evidence).......
Yeah, you can't count sexual abuse. If saying something is attractive, I'd say we're all bisexual then. Every woman has called another woman pretty and every man has called another man handsome.
That answer doesn't make any sense. If there were already 4 other bisexual LI's in the series, why would they choose to make two playersexual LI's but then not actually do anything to confirm that they are playersexual. For example, Merrill never states that she's straight in a male PC game and gay in a female PC game. So there is no evidence that they are playersexual and there's no precedence for them being playersexual. But there is pecedence for bisexual LI's and these two characters can be romanced by both males and females. It just boggles my mind that people leap to "playersexual" and have no evidence (just a lack of evidence).......
Separation of universes.
We have no knowledge that Fenris for example can be romanced by the gender opposite of our Hawke in our game, thus we have no knowledge that he is anything but what our universe portrays him as. If that is straight, he's straight. If that is gay, he's gay. If that is bi, he's bi.
To use a non-romance example, let's take the Orzammar situation. In it, you can choose Bhelen as King or Harrowmont as King. So in future games, should we accept that both have the capacity to be the King of Orzammar? The answer is no. We only recognize the data that the universe we play in provides, and that is that only one of them is King.
Could say same of
oooh she's pretty. Why did you say that, you want to sleep with her? No, didnt cross my mind.
Switch it around in other directions. Yep my dad looks good for his age.....aw snuzbuckets, that means I'm now incest bisexual.
You have to stop, aTigerslunch.
Separation of universes.
We have no knowledge that Fenris for example can be romanced by the gender opposite of our Hawke in our game, thus we have no knowledge that he is anything but what our universe portrays him as. If that is straight, he's straight. If that is gay, he's gay. If that is bi, he's bi.
To use a non-romance example, let's take the Orzammar situation. In it, you can choose Bhelen as King or Harrowmont as King. So in future games, should we accept that both have the capacity to be the King of Orzammar? The answer is no. We only recognize the data that the universe we play in provides, and that is that only one of them is King.
The difference is that in your example, it's directly because of a choice that you are making in the game. Why would you assume that Merrill is gay in another universe just because she never says, "I'm straight!" It just doesn't make any logical sense.
The difference is that in your example, it's directly because of a choice that you are making in the game. Why would you assume that Merrill is gay in another universe just because she never says, "I'm straight!" It just doesn't make any logical sense.
No. If someone picks up DA2, they have no choice in who is Orzammar's King.
I don't assume she is gay in another universe since I don't assume there are other universes at all. There is just the one I am currently playing.
No. If someone picks up DA2, they have no choice in who is Orzammar's King.
I don't assume she is gay in another universe since I don't assume there are other universes at all. There is just the one I am currently playing.
So then why is she playersexual? She can only be playersexual if you metagame.....right? Which is it? Do you metagame, in which case there are 'other universes' or you don't, in which case she's not playersexual.
You are failing to answer my biggest question, though. Why assume she is playersexual when there is no evidence supporting that? All you have is a lack of evidence for bisexuality (even though there is evidence for bisexuality).
So then why is she playersexual? She can only be playersexual if you metagame.....right? Which is it? Do you metagame, in which case there are 'other universes' or you don't, in which case she's not playersexual.
You are failing to answer my biggest question, though. Why assume she is playersexual when there is no evidence supporting that? All you have is a lack of evidence for bisexuality (even though there is evidence for bisexuality).
I'm saying she is not a defined sexuality, whether heterosexual, bisexual, or homosexual. She is sexually ambiguous. The player can only interpret it, thus technically playersexual because the sexuality is up to the player's imagination.
Retour en haut