Ce sujet est fermé
Liked because Corso was the worst.
I don't generally do fem/fem romances (I need at least one dude in the picture, because I like dudes. If that dude is me, that's fine, I'll be the sexiest dude possible. My dude smugglers are pure love.), but Corso made me rethink that stance. I would've killed for a fem!smuggler + Risha or Akaavi romance (I love them both). But yeah, the no same-sex romance thing in SWTOR was super dumb and easily the most disappointing thing (for me) about how they handled companions.
I won't make my initial Inquisitor with a LI in mind, because I like to just see what happens and seems right for my first blind playthrough. It's how I wound up with Zevran first (my dwarf lady was REBOUNDING off Gorim <sob> and Zevran seemed like he'd be down for that ... and then we wound up in love and it was adorable) (and then really depressing when I died). It's how I wound up with Anders in my first playthrough of DA2 (LUCKY ME). So I feel comfortable going in blind again.
Of course, I'm also one of those people who enjoys when things go horribly wrong their first playthrough and won't reload when they do, because I have a much harder time making myself do those things later to see what happens. Like I was disappointed I did the suicide mission in ME2 "right" my first time through and finished with everyone being just fine.
Anyway, after my first run, I will definitely make inquisitors for specific options. Because I need to see them alllllll.
So, anyways, will any of you be creating your inquisitor with an eye to who the LI of that playthrough will be?
I need Sera to be a F/F romance, because my first Inquisitor will be an elf mage nationalist and elfsexual, and since Solas is a NOPE it will be either Sera or Forever alone.
I think people should focus on the two romance options of their gender of preference that they will have access to, rather than fixating on the one they might not have access to.
I think people should focus on the two romance options of their gender of preference that they will have access to, rather than fixating on the one they might not have access to.
I'm perfectly fine in NOT having Vivienne, gimme Cass and Sera and I'll be happy.
Maybe I'm just cynical, but frankly, for me to consider purchasing Inquisition at this point, the very least I need is assurance that I will get the same number of options I had before. And even then, I'm not going to be super thrilled if the heterosexual audience is given more options.
It's all very well for David to say Bioware isn't backing away from supporting LGB gamers, but if they were, do any of us really expect a member of their staff would admit it? Plus, it's a really vague statement. I have no idea what they think "support" entails.
DA2 was the only game they've made so far that wasn't grossly imbalanced in favour of heterosexuals. They're the only company with any sort of track record at all, and it's still not great.
I think people should focus on the two romance options of their gender of preference that they will have access to, rather than fixating on the one they might not have access to.
Gay and Lesbian gamers don't even know if we will get two romance options of our preferred gender. All we've heard is that they will continue to "support" us, and historically, Bioware's idea of support isn't super awesome. We just don't have anything significant to compare it to.
I think people should focus on the two romance options of their gender of preference that they will have access to, rather than fixating on the one they might not have access to.
I think people should focus on the two romance options of their gender of preference that they will have access to, rather than fixating on the one they might not have access to.
Gay and Lesbian gamers don't even know if we will get two romance options of our preferred gender.
You will, or at least that's what Gaider claimed as the main goal: that every sexuality get at least two options.
This was the finality of the DA2 all-bi romance system, which was misinterpreted as needing an equal number of options.
You will, or at least that's what Gaider claimed as the main goal: that every sexuality get at least two options.
This was the finality of the DA2 all-bi romance system, which was misinterpreted as needing an equal number of options.
Gaider's not the creative director, and his personal goals are not the goals of the Bioware company.
And I'm not going to be happy with two gay male options if straight men have three. I shouldn't have to settle for "better than nothing".
And as some have pointed out, it does seem unlikely that they will give straight men only 1 female companion romance (Cassandra). Not only because it seems like they would give those gamers more choices, but because Cass is definitely not 'traditional'.(I hate even saying that, but after the way Miranda was treated in the ME series...well it doesn't seem an unreasonable fear). I think its amazing Cass is such a hardcore badass and even if I can't romance her do to her alarming similarity to a pathological liar high school gym teacher of mine...erm
...I think shes super cool, and most definitely should be a romance. I just worry that her not ticking a lot of the conventional 'boxes' bodes badly for the overall equitable distribution of companion LIs....
Can you explain why you think Cassandra doesn't tick the traditional romance boxes? Because I'm not sure I get our post here. I understand the "she looks like a gym teacher of mine" trauma, but not exactly how Cassandra is not traditional.
I know you're not saying this, but it's as much a symptom of the subject matter being new to us. Especially in DAO times. (and I'm including female in this case as well, since it was mentioned a bit below).
At the time it didn't cross my mind that I couldn't hit on Alistair if I wanted. Now it does.
To me it was an ever present thought as I wanted to hit on Alistair with my male warden quite badly and the game never allowed it. So I resigned to having him be my best mate who I secretly loved but never acted upon and who I would make king even if he didn't want to.
I guess it's an example of a contrivance that was role-played and integrated into my experience of the game and the story/plot. Worked out well in the end. But I still wouldn't have minded hitting on Alistair! 
Gaider's not the creative director, and his personal goals are not the goals of the Bioware company.
He is the Lead writer and has extensive insight in the romances.
Cassandra looks pretty "traditionally attractive" to me. All the female characters do.
If you want to talk non-traditional, let's take a look at Baldy, or the one that's mostly beard.
Vivienne has appealed to women a lot more than men and I think she is a lesbian
And that leaves Sera as straight
stenno.jpg
Maybe? It seems to tho that girl gamers simply play as both genders unlike boys who prefer to play as a dude.
I was lucky though. Garrus is just perfect for me, and Vega's flirting - even without any resolution - was the sweetiest of little treats
yes, Garrus was still my first choice, and I really love the guy. But I have found myself creating a maleshep because I had run-out of choice. I can't rely only on Garrus for all my girls! 
I don't like girlXgirl, even if I love Traynor, so...choices for femshep are way too limited. all in all, I can end up with two playthrough, maybe three.
maleshep, with all his romances have many more choices, and a good deal of more replay value than his female counterpart.
He is the Lead writer and has extensive insight in the romances.
He's also an employee of the company and has a vested interest in us purchasing his product.
And his recent comments were incredibly vague. I don't like the sound of his ideal romance breakdown anyway, even if that is what is being done.
And his recent comments were incredibly vague. I don't like the sound of his ideal romance breakdown anyway, even if that is what is being done.
He was never vague about the main point: that every sexuality have more than one option.
He was never vague about the main point: that every sexuality have more than one option.
Did he actually confirm that for Inquisition? I thought that just came from his blog that said, theoretically, it was his "ideal".
He was never vague about the main point: that every sexuality have more than one option.
He only ever said that in reference to what he would personally prefer, not what is actually being done.
He's also an employee of the company and has a vested interest in us purchasing his product.
And his recent comments were incredibly vague. I don't like the sound of his ideal romance breakdown anyway, even if that is what is being done.
Wasnt his ideal, the same amount for everybody? With an equal number of sexualities?
Something like that. But once again, we've received no indication that that is actually happening.
And my ideal is all potential LIs being available to player characters, regardless of gender. I have yet to ever hear a good reason for doing it any other way.
Did he actually confirm that for Inquisition? I thought that just came from his blog that said, theoretically, it was his "ideal".
No, it's all forum and blog posts. There's also a video wher he talks about sexism and talks quickly about the history and Bioware romance and comments the DA2 system, I'll try to find it on something else than the godawful Gamasutra video player.
He only ever said that in reference to what he would personally prefer, not what is actually being done.
And what is actually done ? set sexualities, just like he wanted.
Retour en haut