333 réponses à ce sujet

[fchopin]

I think the problem of discussing romances in Dragon Age games is that people do not even agree what we had in DA2.
Some people say they were bisexual some say they were playersexual some say that Anders was gay some people say Anders was straight without mentioning Merrill depending on what gender was selected by player character.

How can we come to an agreement when different people see romances different in DA2?

I am sorry to say this but i call it bad writing when people are mixed up with what they see in DA2 and it is the job of the writers to do a better job.

[Dean_the_Young]

Why should she? Merrill  is hinted to have a crush on Hawke in some banter early game and she does have an interest in the 'dirty' jokes, (And she does express interest in Qunari physice if she is unromanced), but all in all she is a fairly non-sexual character unlike the hyper sexual Isabella.

 

Not all bi people flaunts their sexuality. Some only openly shows their interest in one gender and some a just shy or not very sexual at all and don't show interest in anyone. Heck you don't have to have slept with both genders to be bi sexual - you don't have to have slept with anyone at all. Isabella is a very, very sexual person but that is not a defining trait for bi-sexuality.

 

I think you're missing the point: the argument isn't that Merrill should express sexual preference (Varric doesn't, for example: the myth of Bianca aside, he makes no indications in DA2), but that when she does she only does so in favor of whichever direction Hawke currently is, and never in any other direction. The only way to claim she is bisexual is to metagame the knowledge that Hawke can be a man or a woman... but regardless of which, she's still just interested in Hawke.

 

Hence the 'Hawkesexual', or simply player sexual. If she was simply preference ambiguous and not a romance interest, it would be a different part of her character- but when sexuality is introduced, it is deminated by the player, nothing else.

[Dean_the_Young]

I think the problem of discussing romances in Dragon Age games is that people do not even agree what we had in DA2.
Some people say they were bisexual some say they were playersexual some say that Anders was gay some people say Anders was straight without mentioning Merrill depending on what gender was selected by player character.

How can we come to an agreement when different people see romances different in DA2?

I am sorry to say this but i call it bad writing when people are mixed up with what they see in DA2 and it is the job of the writers to do a better job.

You mean Carl?

 

 

I'd say DA went with a mix. Isabella is established bisexual. Fenris is as well- though the Deneris part is troubling, it was there and he was 'happy', while he'll start a skinship with Isabella later.

 

Merrill and Anders are where the skepticism come in. Anders because the change of his revealed backstory, and Merrill because her only expressed romantic interest is via Hawke.

[fchopin]

I'd say DA went with a mix. Isabella is established bisexual. Fenris is as well- though the Deneris part is troubling, it was there and he was 'happy', while he'll start a skinship with Isabella later.
 
Merrill and Anders are where the skepticism come in. Anders because the change of his revealed backstory, and Merrill because her only expressed romantic interest is via Hawke.

Call it what you will, i call it bad writing and the writers would have changed many things in the game if they could have another chance.

Modifié par fchopin, 11 avril 2014 - 10:55 .

[Mistic]

I tend to prefer set characters with set sexualities, but in the end I'm in favour of well-written relationships. If they are meaningful and interesting, I'll be happy. That said, playersexuality in DA2 could have been better written.

 

And I'm not talking just about romances, mind you. As many others, I think that friendship content should be as meaningful as romance. But of course, friendship isn't as divisive as romance, so people don't talk about it very often. I miss the BFF relationship you could get with Alistair and Morrigan in DA:O.

[Mistic]

What? Oghren was my BFF.

 

He had to. He abandoned his wife to follow you to Vigil's Keep

 

My mentioning Alistair and Morrigan was to give some examples of typical romance options that had also meaningful friendship content. No "I'm in the middle of some calibrations" (don't worry, Garrus; you're still a great buddy).

[Vulpe]

I don't really have a problem with it. Even if I go only after the ladies, I understand that this approach gives everyone the same options, with is a good thing.

 

I also understand the ones that complain about the realism of this approach. After all, in RL we might encounter and fall for people that are of a different sexuality than we, and that sexuality might lead to them not being interested in us because of our gender (I'm making an abstraction from all the other things that might cause a person to develop a crush on someone else like personality, moral code etc) or encounter people that feel attracted to us, but do to our sexuality, It's posible that we'll never interact in a more than platonic way with them. In real life things like this happen. You might be rejected or reject someone because they are not of the gender you feel attracted to.So yes, their complains are somehow justified.

 

Still, this is a video game and this lets the developers to cheat a little and do things that in real life wouldn't be that easy and I think this is a good thing as long as everyone gets an equal amount of opportunities. 

 

Either you give everyone, no matter their sexuality, the same number of options or you go on the 2/2/2 route. No mixing of the two please.

[Master Race]

I don't care what they do as long as they don't have all my companions randomly falling in love with me because i am nice/friendly to them.My characters will all be strictly straight and i don't want my character's best guy friend who i chill with and kill everyone with to all the sudden be like "listen mate i'm dieing to ask you, do you have feelings for me" or something because that would put me off IG and IRL.

 

So in general the romances should be harder to activate. What i mean is you should have to really do lots of flirting yourself first before they actually start talking about feelings with you and if you don't flirt just be friendly at all times.

[Chari]

2/2/2 over playersexuality any day, any moment, any time

i'd rather have a romance where the sexuality of a character is well-written in a way that it feels like a part of a character, rather than playersexuality which feels like a cheaper and easier than most of sim-dating games

[aluanira]

I don't mind either way. I'm female and I play as both male and female (mostly) in game and will romance anyone with either gender. I figure it's easier for Bioware to go with playersexuality and I'm fine with it but I would be equally fine with 2/2/2.

[Elanor]

2/2/2 over playersexuality any day, any moment, any time

i'd rather have a romance where the sexuality of a character is well-written in a way that it feels like a part of a character, rather than playersexuality which feels like a cheaper and easier than most of sim-dating games

Exactly my thoughts.

[EmissaryofLies]

I'm adamantly opposed to playersexual, that's without question.

 

Not sure of the appeal. I'm far too conceited irl to have it further reinforced by a video game. 

[katerinafm]

I really can't decide which one I prefer. I like both options. I liked that my male and female Hawkes weren't restricted and could romance anyone they wanted without difficulties, but I also liked ME3's way that had exclusive gay and lesbian romances like Cortez and Traynor. I honestly can't decide what I would prefer for DAI, as both versions could end up giving a lot of options for the player and replayability based on who you want to romance.

 

 

I just want to romance the bearded grey warden dude to be honest >.>.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Please BioWare avoid the "playersexual approach". Please, please, please. Or at the very least, don't have all the romance options practically jump at you the second you say "hi". It was extremely jarring having to fight off all the potential romance options with a stick in DA2... (Bad Anders! BAD!)

 

On a side note... What is up with that "pro-playersexual" approach that quantity is better than quality? Why is the fact that it gives you MORE options, a good thing, when it is shitty options it provides? I mean they practically just exchange gender connotations in the dialogue, and that is the ONLY change between the romance regarding your gender as a PC.

 

Personally I want some more fleshed out romance options, where you can feel the impact of your character much more, than in DA2. Also anything that doesn't objectify the romance options would be nice.

[Xilizhra]

On a side note... What is up with that "pro-playersexual" approach that quantity is better than quality? Why is the fact that it gives you MORE options, a good thing, when it is shitty options it provides? I mean they practically just exchange gender connotations in the dialogue, and that is the ONLY change between the romance regarding your gender as a PC.

Hardly true; for instance, Merrill's romance dialogue changes a fair bit based on gender (as the issue of having human children hardly matters if Hawke is female).

 

Personally, I'm just a bit leery of the 2/2/2 solution, both because that itself seems to be more quantity than quality, and because I fear things like the hetero romances being the most plot-important again, as happened in DAO.

[efd731]

I think sexuality can sometimes be a defining trait in someone's quirks and personality, and playersexuality might limit options in writing unique traits for individuals. But if it's really that much of a problem, I don't care. It's just a game. It doesn't have to be realistic.

if not having a set sexuality to fall back upon is a real hindrance to bioware's writers, maybe it's time for a hiring/firing spree. But wait, it's not, because you say that, but if their sexuality were to become a major facet, all we would hear is the majority of people going "why does all character X's dialogue concern this, and why do I give a ****" and the people character x represents saying "WTF is this?"

[EmperorSahlertz]

Hardly true; for instance, Merrill's romance dialogue changes a fair bit based on gender (as the issue of having human children hardly matters if Hawke is female).

 

Personally, I'm just a bit leery of the 2/2/2 solution, both because that itself seems to be more quantity than quality, and because I fear things like the hetero romances being the most plot-important again, as happened in DAO.

Anders' dialogue also has a few changes I know. But I wasn't trying to be accurate, I was trying to make a point. And the point still stands, there are only very minor changes to the romances based on gender.

 

Also, I don't think the romance with Morrigan was plot important persay, as much as your character's relationship with her overall was. Nevertheless at least one of the romance options in DA:O had SOME plot relevance, whereas in DA2 it had zero influence on the game plot.

[berelinde]

Eventually, I will play every combination of gender/orientation that is available, so it doesn't matter much to me whether they go with the 4-bi model or the 2/2/2 model. Either way, each of my protagonists will have choices. That said, there are two things that I do NOT want.

 

I hated the way they did it in Origins, where straight protagonists had two choices and gay protagonists were limited to one. My lesbian Warden was forever alone.

 

Non-companion romances... are tricky. Yes, non-companion romances can be nice, but there is a lot to be said in favor of bringing your LI along on quests. If the straight options are all followers and the gay options are confined to base/party camp, that would make me resentful.

[Xilizhra]

Anders' dialogue also has a few changes I know. But I wasn't trying to be accurate, I was trying to make a point. And the point still stands, there are only very minor changes to the romances based on gender.

 

Also, I don't think the romance with Morrigan was plot important persay, as much as your character's relationship with her overall was. Nevertheless at least one of the romance options in DA:O had SOME plot relevance, whereas in DA2 it had zero influence on the game plot.

One doesn't really have to have major changes in a romance based on gender. I know several bisexual/pansexual people who don't treat men any noticeably differently than women while in a relationship.

[efd731]

Eventually, I will play every combination of gender/orientation that is available, so it doesn't matter much to me whether they go with the 4-bi model or the 2/2/2 model. Either way, each of my protagonists will have choices. That said, there are two things that I do NOT want.

I hated the way they did it in Origins, where straight protagonists had two choices and gay protagonists were limited to one. My lesbian Warden was forever alone.

Non-companion romances... are tricky. Yes, non-companion romances can be nice, but there is a lot to be said in favor of bringing your LI along on quests. If the straight options are all followers and the gay options are confined to base/party camp, that would make me resentful.

If you're referencing traynor and Steve being unable to leave the Normandy....that's silly. That's not their job, he flies the shuttle(minimal combat training), she handles war room data and functions as a comms officer(iirc) with no combat training. I get that it's nice to have your LI tag along on missions, but it has to make sense within the gameplay as well.

[Milan92]

2/2/2 over playersexuality any day, any moment, any time

i'd rather have a romance where the sexuality of a character is well-written in a way that it feels like a part of a character, rather than playersexuality which feels like a cheaper and easier than most of sim-dating games

 

I'm with this.