12496 réponses à ce sujet

[Will-o'-wisp]

In what way do you think it's important? What is it's major impact on the character and/or the story? Even more than that, why does it make more sense than the types of gating I mentioned in the post you quoted?

Sexuality is a huge part of ones identity and influences self perception as well as the way to present oneself and interact with people. It might not be as important in the DA-Setting as it would be in the real world or settings where sexuality is more of an issue, but as a (unprofessional) writer myself I tend to create characters whose sexuality has an impact on their behaviour and sometimes the story.

If sexuality wasn't important I could ask some of you why you always play homosexual characters or ask myself why I play heterosexual characters most of the time. Why should we do this if sexuality wasn't an important part of these characters to us?

In my eyes sexuality is a more important way of relationship gating than the PCs race or status, because I can see LIs getting around these things if they fall in love with the PCs personality. What does it matter that the Inquisitor is a dwarf if he makes Cassandra happy in every way that a human man could do it? It's not that much more than a height difference afterall. If she was lesbian on the other Hand, that dwarfven inquisitor's personality may be as appealing to her as it possibly could, she would never see him as more than a friend, because she's into other women.

[BubbleDncr]

Explain how that limits them, please.

 

A straight character, a gay character, and a bi character could all have completely different world experiences based on their sexuality that can shape how they interact with people.

 

But there's no reason for all characters to have "ambiguous" pasts with the all bisexual system. That's not what happened with the DA2 system. Only Anders failed to mention his history to both characters and, even then, he talked about having group sex with Isabela, so it's not like he totally hid his sexuality. Isabela, herself, was very clearly bisexual and not at all shy about it.

 

The point I was arguing against was "set sexualities." Bisexual is a set sexuality. I have no problem with bisexual LI's, I just think its more interesting for there to be bi, straight, and gay, than just all bi.

 

All companions being bisexual makes it feel a bit like they're just there for us to romance.

[Jazinto]

So as far as I know, Varric is straight. He could be bi, and it just happened to be that the love of his life is female, but until he comes out as bi, he's so far only shown an inclination towards women.

 

Bianca is an interesting part of his character - probably one of the first things that would come up if someone asked you to describe Varric. If they wanted him to have an ambiguous sexuality...they probably wouldn't have had him name his crossbow after Bianca.

 

It's not required, but it does open up more avenues to develop interesting characters by giving them set sexualities as opposed to keeping everyone ambiguous.

 

Gaider about Anders.

 

 

While some people evidently didn’t like having their perceptions played with, it was indeed just their perception. We wrote the characters the exact same way, all that changed was what you were exposed to. Even, yes, Anders. He did not suddenly become bisexual in DA2 compared to Awakening. I wrote him in Awakening. I remember the conversation when I first saw Anders’ planned appearance in the expansion.

"Huh. He looks a little gay."

"I don’t think you can use that as an adjective."

"I can if I mean homosexual."

"Really? Is it the hair? The earring?"

"I’m not sure, but he pings like an aircraft carrier."

We laughed about it, and while it didn’t really matter for Awakening since there were no romance plots there anyhow it was definitely on my mind when I wrote him. I found it a little odd when people suggested that him commenting on women but not men meant he was straight. Which is fine, perception being what it is, but it certainly wasn’t avoided. It wasn’t like it was anywhere but my head, anyhow. But that’s why I didn’t consider it a big deal when it came up as a possibility for DA2. As far as I was concerned, nothing about that side of him had even been established.

And, yes, authorial intention doesn’t count for much. People perceive what they will, and perhaps we should have gone further to establish that part of those characters more explicitly. I’m just not sure what lengths I’d want to go to just to make some people more comfortable with the idea… because, as I suggested above, I’m not sure all the reasons they’re expressing for that discomfort are actually genuine. Personally, were we given the resources to have enough romances that we could have an even spread of sexualities across the party I’d be more than happy to have those sexualities be explicit… but if the idea otherwise is to restrict those interested in gay romances from having the same number of options as others, then no. Fairness and fun gameplay win out.

 

Anders did comment on women in Awakening. I think maybe the point about ambiguity is more about keeping the romances gender-neutral, because both male and female characters get basically the same dialogue.

[wright1978]

But there's no reason for all characters to have "ambiguous" pasts with the all bisexual system. That's not what happened with the DA2 system. Only Anders failed to mention his history to both characters and, even then, he talked about having group sex with Isabela, so it's not like he totally hid his sexuality. Isabela, herself, was very clearly bisexual and not at all shy about it.

 

Indeed. If they want to tell a story of a particular past lover they can indeed do so and have the character end up being open to having a relationship with a character of a different gender than that past lover. I have zero memory of Isabela ignoring her history with Zevran and or Leilana based on the protaganists gender so it seems much more  of an issue with how one writer decided to approach the notion with Anders.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Sexuality is a huge part of ones identity and influences self perception as well as the way to present oneself and interact with people. It might not be as important in the DA-Setting as it would be in the real world or settings where sexuality is more of an issue, but as a (unprofessional) writer myself I tend to create characters whose sexuality has an impact on their behaviour and sometimes the story.

So what about Sten, Shale, Nathaniel, Sigrun, Velanna, Merrill, and Fenris from DA or Mordin, Grunt, Legion, and Zaeed from ME then? Were they somehow inferior in development since their sexualities are never expressed? 

 

 

 

[Farewell]

I don't have anything againts bisexuals. I just see that if every companion is bisexual then it means to me something similar that every companion has blond hair or every companion is human or every companion has green eyes. I just  would like to see different personalities and different people.

[Sylvianus]

Yes, if we have set sexualities, various sexualities is much better than they are all bi. It's not biphobic. It's just more interesting.

[Panda]

To me different sexualities are better than just all bi. People IRL have different sexualities as well and to me it's just better if everyone isn't available for everyone. Of cource gameplay could be nicer for free-for-all system and I know people want to romance certain companions for certain gender but to me it's important to have diversity. Sexuality tends to be quite big part of one's identity and to me it's better to have diversity. Though I hope there isn't race restrains, although that'd make sense it'd make romance too limited unless Bioware makes all companions and advisors romanceable.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

Sexuality is a huge part of ones identity and influences self perception as well as the way to present oneself and interact with people. It might not be as important in the DA-Setting as it would be in the real world or settings where sexuality is more of an issue, but as a (unprofessional) writer myself I tend to create characters whose sexuality has an impact on their behaviour and sometimes the story.

If sexuality wasn't important I could ask some of you why you always play homosexual characters or ask myself why I play heterosexual characters most of the time. Why should we do this if sexuality wasn't an important part of these characters to us?

In my eyes sexuality is a more important way of relationship gating than the PCs race or status, because I can see LIs getting around these things if they fall in love with the PCs personality. What does it matter that the Inquisitor is a dwarf if he makes Cassandra happy in every way that a human man could do it? It's not that much more than a height difference afterall. If she was lesbian on the other Hand, that dwarfven inquisitor's personality may be as appealing to her as it possibly could, she would never see him as more than a friend, because she's into other women.

I play a homosexual male character for aesthetic reasons, like I date men in the real world for aesthetic reasons. It's the same reason, also, that I would never choose a dwarf LI option and why I only play human and elven characters.

 

Sexuality isn't inherent to how you act towards other people. All gay, straight and bisexual people act entirely different. I really don't know in what way you think sexuality has a huge impact on personality. If this were true we'd have a set list of ways that each sexuality is able to act. Clearly we don't. Each sexuality can act any way towards anyone regardless of their sexual preference. I just can't wrap my mind around what people mean when they say this at all and I've yet to have anyone explain it with any sort of example. 

 

So, in what way does sexuality effect your personality? I get that you think it does. How does it effect your personality? 

[Will-o'-wisp]

So what about Sten, Shale, Nathaniel, Sigrun, Velanna, Merrill, and Fenris from DA or Mordin, Grunt, Legion, and Zaeed from ME then? Were they somehow inferior in development since their sexualities are never expressed?

No, why would that be a problem? I'm not against characters who never tell the player about their sexuality, just against everyone having the same. These characters probably all had their different sexualities that were a part of their personality (meaning that they had a part in shaping them to be the persons they now are), they simply never told the player about them.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

No, why would that be a problem? I'm not against characters who never tell the player about their sexuality, just against everyone having the same. These characters probably all had their different sexualities that were a part of their personality (meaning that they had a part in shaping them to be the persons they now are), they simply never told the player about them.

It is just as probable that their sexuality has no part in shaping their personality.

[LiaraShepard]

If you want to add more realism, you're only allowed to have LI's with specific races, specific looks, specific interests, specific morale senses, specific age... There are so many things in real life that are responsible for love that's it's quite silly to start with gender restrictions. Everything would have to get restricted. I'm really against that kind of selection. I think it'd be easier for me to accept my favorite LI isn't romanceable at all than to see he's romanceable but not for my gender. 

[jtav]

Having a set orientation--whether that orientation is gay, straight, or bisexual--allows for a certain...specificity in writing. Certain romance tropes come off differently in m/f, f/f, or m/m because even if Thedas is a fantasy world, DA is a product of 21st century Western culture. Speaking as a writer, I might feel a little freer to write, say, a brooding tortured assassin falling for a sheltered aristocrat" if I know it's f/f because you'd normally expect it as m/f or maybe m/m with a seme/uke dynamic. And, well, it makes the world feel less like an artificial construct that exists solely for the player's benefit. I dearly want to romance Dorian, but if the devs see him as gay, they should stick to that and not make him bisexual.

[Ianamus]

I don't see why they should put any more artificial restrictions on the companions than they do already. 

 

The writers should be able to write the characters however they want to, however they develop in their minds. They shouldn't have to worry about making sure that at least four of the companions are bisexual, or that a character they want to put a lot of sexuality-specific content into might end up being an LI, and therefore would have to have said content removed to make them either bisexual or ambiguous. 

 

They should just write characters. If that character a templar who was enamored with a mage in their youth, and is subsequently only interested in women because it reminds them of her, good for them. If they are a Tevinter magister who became a scandal after being caught in a relationship with another male magister, because they only liked men and did not agree with taking advantage of slaves, then that's fine.

 

They shouldn't have to look back at the companions and go "No, we can't have that backstory. That character needs to be bisexual or ambiguously bisexual so they can be an LI" or "We can't include that Magister companion, we have an LI spot left to fill and it has to be a bisexual character". 

[stuffystuffs]

 

I wish people would consider, when making the argument that gamers who are interested in same sex romances should just play out heterosexual romances with characters of the "correct" gender, that some of these gamers are told similar things in real life, about compulsory heterosexuality, and having to pretend to be heterosexual in a game that is supposed to be escapism is a depressing prospect.

 

I do love the mixed messages.

 

On one hand, I'm told this is great for someone like me cuz "representation" and "diversity".

 

Then, on the other hand, I am told to stop whining and play a straight character when the romance I wanted to experience isn't available.

[BubbleDncr]

Having a set orientation--whether that orientation is gay, straight, or bisexual--allows for a certain...specificity in writing. Certain romance tropes come off differently in m/f, f/f, or m/m because even if Thedas is a fantasy world, DA is a product of 21st century Western culture. Speaking as a writer, I might feel a little freer to write, say, a brooding tortured assassin falling for a sheltered aristocrat" if I know it's f/f because you'd normally expect it as m/f or maybe m/m with a seme/uke dynamic. And, well, it makes the world feel less like an artificial construct that exists solely for the player's benefit. I dearly want to romance Dorian, but if the devs see him as gay, they should stick to that and not make him bisexual.

 

This.

 

I also would really like to romance Dorian. If he is gay, I will be sad. And I'll end up settling for another LI.

 

And that opens up a completely different relationship for me to have with Dorian and Mr. Rebound, than if all companions are bi. It gives me a more complicated story, more complicated relationships. Normally I always side with my LI...but in this instance, if Mr. Rebound and Dorian are on opposite sides of an issue (a la Anders and Sebastian), who would I support?

 

And who knows, maybe Mr. Rebound is Beardy Warden or Iron Bull...who I otherwise never would have romanced cos he wasn't my type...and he has an amazing romance storyline I never would have experienced if Dorian was available.

[Sylvianus]

I do love the mixed messages.

 

On one hand, I'm told this is great for someone like me cuz "representation" and "diversity".

 

Then, on the other hand, I am told to stop whining and play a straight character when the romance I wanted to experience isn't available.

 

? Yes, gay companions and gay Lis are good for diversity and representation of gay people.

 

Your second point has nothing to do with the first one. everyone is concerned, straight people too. it's about taste here. If you aren't happy because you aren't able to bang anyone, that's another matter; If you like a character that is not attracted to you, then deal with it, as you would in real life. ( I'm talking about everyone )  

[Ryzaki]

In real life we have a hell of a lot more than six people to choose from to date. god I'm tired of the RL argument.

 

I'm fine with sex sexualities if it's 2/2/2 but can we PLEASE drop the RL argument like it's something we should honestly be concerned about in a video game? You think it's better for characterization? Fine. You think it's better for players to have some things restricted based on class, race, gender? Fair enough. But for the love of god don't go "Realism" that has more holes in it than swiss cheese.

[coldwetn0se]

Have a friend that I have known for 29 years (we are both in our 40's). She is bisexual (had a child and shared custodial rights with a woman). I am a straight married woman. We both express much of the same views. We both have a nearly identical sense of humor. We use lots of body language/hand gestures when we talk. We have both been through similar significant events in our lives, and reacted very much alike. Our political views are very attuned. How we emphasize words/meaning/quirks, are also quite the same.

Now, we are NOT the same person. We have had disagreements. We have also had experiences separate (and different) from each other. And while we do have mannerisms that are akin, they are not all the same. Two separate people. Two different sexualities, yet so many similarities.

People toss the idea around that sexuality will "color" so much of how we view the world, or experience it. I suspect, more so, that it colors how "others" view us.

I am more for interesting characters (regardless of sexual preference), and bisexual LI's, to maximize role playing/game playing choices. Sexual preferences can still be expressed in the world we play in.

[Sylvianus]

In real life we have a hell of a lot more than six people to choose from to date. god I'm tired of the RL argument.

 

I'm fine with sex sexualities if it's 2/2/2 but can we PLEASE drop the RL argument like it's something we should honestly be concerned about in a video game?

 

Then stop the drama and RL arguments too. I'm also tired about people involving their issues RL, while everyone will probably get equal options in the game. 

[Ryzaki]

Then stop the drama and RL arguments too. I'm also tired about people involving their issues RL, while everyone will probably get equal options in the game. 

 

Oh do point where I have ever used a RL arguement to. Please. That's not of course pointing out how DA isn't similar to our world.

 

As for everyone getting equal options sadly BW has done the exact opposite for the vast majority of their games. DA2 was the only one where everyone got equal choices. People have plenty of valid reasons to believe since BW decided against the DA2 system choices will once again be unequal. You may not like it but we have plenty of reasons to believe that's exactly not the case.

[stuffystuffs]

? Yes, gay companions and gay Lis are good for diversity and representation of gay people.

 

 

As would be non LIs.

 

 

 

Your second point has nothing to do with the first one. everyone is concerned, straight people too. it's about taste here. If you aren't happy because you aren't able to bang anyone, that's another matter; If you like a character that is not attracted to you, then deal with it, as you would in real life. ( I'm talking about everyone )  

 

Yes, it always gets simplified to this argument.  I just want to bang anyone.  It's all about banging.

 

I also highly doubt that straight guys (at least) have to worry about getting the short end of the stick in this new system.   They will get the 2 female companion LIs as usual.

[Will-o'-wisp]

I play a homosexual male character for aesthetic reasons, like I date men in the real world for aesthetic reasons. It's the same reason, also, that I would never choose a dwarf LI option and why I only play human and elven characters.
 
Sexuality isn't inherent to how you act towards other people. All gay, straight and bisexual people act entirely different. I really don't know in what way you think sexuality has a huge impact on personality. If this were true we'd have a set list of ways that each sexuality is able to act. Clearly we don't. Each sexuality can act any way towards anyone regardless of their sexual preference. I just can't wrap my mind around what people mean when they say this at all and I've yet to have anyone explain it with any sort of example. 
 
So, in what way does sexuality effect your personality? I get that you think it does. How does it effect your personality?

I don't think that gay people behave like this and straight people behave like that, I'm talking about individual persons here.

Probably rather simple Example:
A Girl is straight and makes friends with several other Girls at School. They become bffs, Support each other, she can always rely on their help and will identify with her Group while looking down upon others who are different from them, because she can't relate to their problems much and is influenced by her friends a lot. She doesn't have much confidence when she's on her own and will tend to rely on other people instead of taking responsibility herself and rather back down than disagreeing with someone. She has a pretty good time at School and is happy most of the time.

The same Girl is gay in a parallel universe. She makes friends with several other Girls at School and falls in love with one of them over time and the others find out about it. People at her School are making fun of her because of it, her friend is grossed out and doesn't wnat to talk with her for a while and even her other friends now behave different towards her. She is embarassed and hurt, turns away from her group, becomes more of a loner and eventhough some of her friends and other people at her school are still on good terms with her, she will be more cautious who to trust from now on. Because she is sometimes harassed for her sexuality and being different, she identifies strongly with other minorities, doesn't let herself be influenced by the opinions of others as easily and will eventally become someone who fights for others and can stand up for herself and stand on her own if she has to, eventhough she doen't always have it easy.

In both parallel universes the Girl might be good at School, love singing and painting, have a good relationship with her family and eventually get the Job she always dreamed to have, but depending on the universe she will behave very different in certain situations.

Sorry if the example is dumb in some way and I needed super long to write this, but right now it's pretty late where I live . ^^'

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Your second point has nothing to do with the first one. everyone is concerned, straight people too. it's about taste here. If you aren't happy because you aren't able to bang anyone, that's another matter; If you like a character that is not attracted to you, then deal with it, as you would in real life. ( I'm talking about everyone )  

Yes, because we all play video games in order to do what we do in real life. 

[SurelyForth]

? Yes, gay companions and gay Lis are good for diversity and representation of gay people.

 

Your second point has nothing to do with the first one. everyone is concerned, straight people too. it's about taste here. If you aren't happy because you aren't able to bang anyone, that's another matter; If you like a character that is not attracted to you, then deal with it, as you would in real life. ( I'm talking about everyone )  

 

But this isn't real life. It's a game you pay for  that is in no way strictly bound to the conventions of real life. It's a game that is long, that requires a lot of time to play in addition to the money, and it sucks a great deal if you can only play it once and you have to be someone you don't want to be, someone who removes a great deal of the escapist joy of these types of games, or forfeit certain aspects of the game that you would probably really enjoy due to content gating that could be eliminated without loss, or perhaps mitigated with other methods of characterization (because they totally exist, and for some reason, most players seem to not be bothered if those traits get tossed aside for the purpose of making NPCs faithful lackeys of the MC).