I'm still just over here in gay baby jail not seeing the downside to the "playersexual" model DA2 employed.
In an RPG, the more options available, the better. It doesn't take me out of the story to hear a ton of "you"s and "Hawke"s while I'm playing and I really wish they had stuck with it...
It is SO great to have queer characters in static fiction (books, television, etc.) but in a game I'm specifically playing to be a hundred different heroes (or villains, whatever the options allow), I just want as many options as can possibly be made available.
I am very happy we're having expressly queer characters and love interests with this model but I'm just a big fan of the PS model, I guess.
Options is an interesting perspective. I agree that options are great. Options can mean different things to different people, however. For some, having 4 romance characters is less options than having 6 (if we go with the assumed 2/2/2 - this isn't a confirmation of that btw).
Alternatively, from a production point of view, we can breakdown the options into "cinematic scenes required from a workload perspective." With DA2, there were 8 (one male, one female, for each romanceable character). If we go with 2/2/2, there are again 8 (this is if we ignore player races, which actually shoots this number up to 32!).
Granted this is somewhat of a simplification, because creating a whole new scene rather than repurposing an existing one does create more time. But the 80-20 rule is something that comes into play (80% of the effort required for 20% of the result) I find. In that it's the fine details that take the most effort, and those fine details often incorporate "making the scene work with different player models."
This is something I actually just learned on the project myself! But we'd have to alter how we do the romance content if we wanted to make it more universally available. This might be preferable for some, but I think there'd be plenty of people disappointed with this as well.