333 réponses à ce sujet

[Nocte ad Mortem]

This topic, as far as I've seen, is usually approached by how it effects the LGB community. I can understand why, but I've been wondering what the (mostly hetero) female perspective is on playersexuality/bisexuality arrangements that allow all characters open vs the 2/2/2 structure divided by sexuality that some have considered.

 

I don't want to come across as presumptuous, but from reading the romance threads, it seems heterosexual/bisexual females tend to be the ones I see most posting about romances. It also seems like it's usually females that get the most attached to the romance possibilities. (See, Cullen) I also see more females supporting the playersexuality/bisexuality dynamic with the 2/2/2 side being more populated with males. (Note, I'm not saying ALWAYS, but MORE OFTEN.) What's also true is that there are generally way less opportunities for women to experience romance in video games as a woman PC. In Mass Effect, for example, men were given a substantially larger amount of love interests than women, especially women wanting a male interest. I know, as a gay male, I get more invested in the romance feature because it's something so rarely offered to my demographic. That leads me to favor the playersexuality/bisexuality route, because it's still somewhat disappointing, when there are only 3 options, to get shut out of possibly the "main" one and relegated to NPC romances, or at least something with much less plot relevance. (Like Cortez in ME)

 

With this in mind, I wonder, do the female posters on the BSN feel it would be more difficult if your favorite LI ended up not being available to you? Is there a similar feeling that, because your demographic is ignored by most other sources, it's harder to not be dissapointed by not getting what seemed like a real opportunity here? For example, if a popular speculated LI (think Solas or Cullen) was the "homosexual" offering, how would you feel about it? 

 

 

My main question about playersexuality vs 2/2/2 stems from my impression that lesser represented groups get very invested in the availability of Bioware romances BECAUSE this feels like one of their only chances to access similar content anywhere, but everyone else can feel free to give their own opinion in any way that relates to the romance feature. I don't want straight guys to feel like their opinion isn't at all welcome in the discussion. Go ahead and tell us how you'd feel about a "main" female romance being homosexual only, for example.

[Nefla]

Either way is fine to me since I play multiple playthroughs of both genders. I will get them all eventually  Though 2-2-2 would be better than 4 bi/playersexual romances(like DA:o and DA2) because 6 is more than 4.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

Either way is fine to me since I play multiple playthroughs of both genders. I will get them all eventually  Though 2-2-2 would be better than 4 bi/playersexual romances because 6 is more than 4.

What about 6 playersexual characters? Then you can romance them 12 ways! 

[Nefla]

What about 6 playersexual characters? Then you can romance them 12 ways! 

Yes!

[fighterchick]

I prefer playersexual/bisexual options rather than having two of each.  Overall, it's just easier.  I don't care if people think it's realistic or not.  I don't know why it bothers people that much.  When I was playing DA 2, when I would romance either Fenris or Anders, it didn't come across to me that they were bisexual or player sexual.  It just seemed like they were interested in Hawke and I figured they were straight.  It doesn't change anything that someone else is another game played them as gay romance interests because that's not in my game.  Same thing if I want to romance them as a male character...in that particular play through, I would just view them as a gay romance option rather than bisexual.  

[Azure]

I like both ideas to be honest. Playersexuality is always nice because then I can romance anyone I want without having to play a male character. The 2/2/2 option is also good because it adds a bit more depth to the characters themselves and still keeps things open for the player character. Hopefully whichever they go with there's varied options for both sexes.

[Vapaa]

I'm actively against 2/2/2 because gender being the only restrictions is ridiculous. You either have LI who have various preferences or no restrictions at all, it's one or the other and not a half-assed middle-ground to protect the insecurities of the dudebros.

[AresKeith]

I'm actively against 2/2/2 because gender being the only restrictions is ridiculous. You either have LI who have various preferences or no restrictions at all, it's one or the other and not a half-assed middle-ground to protect the insecurities of the dudebros.

 

I really wish people wouldn't use statements like that

[Bekkael]

I prefer playersexual like they did in DA2. It just seems easier and more fair that you can romance any character that is available for romance, without having to swap the gender of your PC. I always play as a woman that romances a male, but others prefer a choice.

[Just My Moniker]

Tbh I like the playersexual direction better than the 2/2/2 one. I would, however, like to see the romances play out differently depending on which gender you are. To me that seems like the best of both worlds.

[Vapaa]

I really wish people wouldn't use statements like that

 

Yeah that was a bit unkind, still, I just don't get people so focused on sexuality, nor do I want to, if I'm honest.

[AresKeith]

Yeah that was a bit unkind, still, I just don't get people so focused on sexuality, nor do I want to, if I'm honest.

 

I'm pretty sure lots of people would want more than gender to play a part, but compared to sexuality those have less of a chance than happening

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Tbh I like the playersexual direction better than the 2/2/2 one. I would, however, like to see the romances play out differently depending on which gender you are. To me that seems like the best of both worlds.

I would like this too, though DA2 did do that to a small extent. The dialogue was very different depending on gender.

[Ryzaki]

I'd be pro it as long as we don't lose friendship content because of the romances. (and with the bi companions being important companions while the exclusive romances can be relegated to side characters).

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I'm pretty sure lots of people would want more than gender to play a part, but compared to sexuality those have less of a chance than happening

Why do you think so? I'd like to see more of your in game choices effect your relationship progression. It seems a lot more relevant, to me. 

[Just My Moniker]

I would like this too, though DA2 did do that to a small extent. The dialogue was very different depending on gender.

Yeah kinda forgot about the dialogue being different (i havent played DA2 in a while)

[Spectre Impersonator]

It's better if they're all bi tbh. It grinded my **** when Traynor told me no. I'm not opposed to gay romance at all but I'd like to have more choices not less. I liked Traynor better than that stupid reporter but all I could pick was Allers cause she was bi.

[AresKeith]

Why do you think so? I'd like to see more of your in game choices effect your relationship progression. It seems a lot more relevant, to me. 

 

Because I feel that just as costly if not more by taking into account for in-game choices and how you play your character (i.e Blood Mage)

[mordy_was_here]

I'm more fond of the playersexual route, simply because everyone can be happy. If you can make it work in your headcanon, who am I to judge?

[Snore]

I would prefer 2/2/2 split then playersexual, but it's such a small part of the game for me that I don't mind if the romances were playersexual.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

Because I feel that just as costly if not more by taking into account for in-game choices and how you play your character (i.e Blood Mage)

Well, I'm sure both things would take effort. Relating the romances more to in-game choices just seems like a more useful application of the resources than something that doesn't relate to the plot. Obviously that's just my opinion, though. 

[TK514]

I prefer defined sexuality, but I'm not going to cry myself to sleep over the DA team's stated playersexual policy.

[Maria Caliban]

With this in mind, I wonder, do the female posters on the BSN feel it would be more difficult if your favorite LI ended up not being available to you? Is there a similar feeling that, because your demographic is ignored by most other sources, it's harder to not be dissapointed by not getting what seemed like a real opportunity here? For example, if a popular speculated LI (think Solas or Cullen) was the "homosexual" offering, how would you feel about it?

This question is for straight women only?

[Nocte ad Mortem]

This question is for straight women only?

No, anyone with an opinion can comment on whatever part of the topic they want. 

[Spectre Impersonator]

I'd be pro it as long as we don't lose friendship content because of the romances. (and with the bi companions being important companions while the exclusive romances can be relegated to side characters).

That's how it was in DA2. It was quite easy to be buddies with Fenris and not lovers, despite him being an romance option. Just don't choose the dialogue option.