12496 réponses à ce sujet

[Grieving Natashina]

True, but I wouldn't yet go as far as to say it's been confirmed. Heavily implied, but not outright stated. 

 

I also think they were talking about companions in general as well, not just the romance system

If we were wrong about set sexualities for the romance system, we would have been corrected by now.  The word romance did come up, so I believe that yes, he is talking about the romance system going forward.  He also pointed out simply that those that don't do the romances will have extra content as well.

 

This is the quotes.  Notice that he's starting by addressing DA2's romance system:

 

I understand there are some people who prefer the idea of being able to romance any character who is able to be romanced, with any PC. That may have been a happy by-product of the system in DA2, for them, but that was not its purpose. Its purpose was to allow more than one option for every type of player, no matter who they were. That remains our goal.

 

 

Then he follows it up with this, which is why I think he's talking about the romance system for DA:I :

 

 

As Mark Darrah tweeted earlier today, we have characters that are gay as well as bisexual and straight. I’m not going to discuss numbers or any further details at this point, so you can make of that what you will, but that allows us to tell more types of character stories without having to resort to ambiguity. Those stories exist for players who don’t romance the characters as well, and that’s also important. The rest will come as we discuss this aspect of the game in detail, but I’d hope the Dragon Age’s team’s expressed interest in inclusivity would provide us some benefit of the doubt until that happens.

 

 

 

http://dgaider.tumbl...ng-dai-romances

[jlb524]

I'd be able to play a male elf romancing sera. However it would hardly be fair.

 

Yep, it would also give you flexibility with racial combos.  

 

I don't think there's been a M!Elf/F!Elf romance (where the male is the PC).  Though, there hasn't been any F!Elf/F!Elf possible at all yet.

 

It might not be fair but I guess nothing they do will be fair so...

[Nocte ad Mortem]

It all comes down to how often you speak to that NPC though. 

 

I'd argue that, for example, Joker was as large a part of the Mass Effect games as any of the companions. 

The thing with Joker is that people also feel he's important because you build up a relationship with him over three games. These NPCs are newly introduced, which makes it more difficult to build that sort of report in one game. 

[wright1978]

It all comes down to how often you speak to that NPC though. 
 
I'd argue that, for example, Joker was as large a part of the Mass Effect games as any of the companions.

I'd disagree, joker's only really built affection because he crosses all 3 games. I certainly spent a fraction of the time with him than I did with companions.

[WildOrchid]

I think one will be straight and the other bisexual so both will be Male!Inquis romance options.  It seems they are being set up as a foil to each other with completely different personalities/romance paths.  BW does this a lot with female romances (for the guys) and I doubt they'd stop here.  If Cassandra is too abrasive for you, hey there's a fun roguish elf option!

 

Meh.

[Mes]

It all comes down to how often you speak to that NPC though. 

 

I'd argue that, for example, Joker was as large a part of the Mass Effect games as any of the companions. 

 

Yeah Joker was a pretty huge part but I'm wondering if that's more because he spanned three games. Like if our NPC LIs in Inquisition got the same amount of screen time as Joker I'm not sure I'd be too impressed. I don't know. So much of it comes down to your companions actually being WITH you most of the time. Even though you're not necessarily chatting away on the battlefield at every moment. It's probably psychological.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

If we were wrong about set sexualities for the romance system, we would have been corrected by now.  The word romance did come up, so I believe that yes, he is talking about the romance system going forward.  He also pointed out simply that those that don't do the romances will have extra content as well.

 

This is the quotes.  Notice that he's starting by addressing DA2's romance system:

 

 

Then he follows it up with this, which is why I think he's talking about the romance system for DA:I :

 

 

 

 

http://dgaider.tumbl...ng-dai-romances

The question that Mark Darrah was answering was directly in response to a user asking about Lee's comments on the romance system, too, so it would be difficult to think that he was being ambiguous about characters, generally. I think it makes it seem more like confirmation when you know the context of the original tweet.  

[Ryzaki]

Yeah Joker was a pretty huge part but I'm wondering if that's more because he spanned three games. Like if our NPC LIs in Inquisition got the same amount of screen time as Joker I'm not sure I'd be too impressed. I don't know. So much of it comes down to your companions actually being WITH you most of the time. Even though you're not necessarily chatting away on the battlefield at every moment. It's probably psychological.

 

Yeah I'm much closer to Garrus and Tali than I am Joker despite them being with my Shep the same amount of time.

[karushna5]

If they aren't part of the spectrum, they might end up getting less content than the others

I dont think they should. They never have. Some people preferred Kelly Chambers but she was "extra" and did not have near the same amount of content.

Same with Sam and Cortez. NPC romances are usually subpar. And I have yet to see anything that proves that wrong.
I am still hoping Cullen is "extra" and the 2/2/2 is intact and then he is extra, just like Kelly.

[Grieving Natashina]

The question that Mark Darrah was answering was directly in response to a user asking about Lee's comments on the romance system, too, so it would be difficult to think that he was being ambiguous about characters, generally. I think it makes it seem more like confirmation when you know the context of the original tweet.  

Yep yep.

[wright1978]

Yep, it would also give you flexibility with racial combos.  
 
I don't think there's been a M!Elf/F!Elf romance (where the male is the PC).  Though, there hasn't been any F!Elf/F!Elf possible at all yet.
 
It might not be fair but I guess nothing they do will be fair so...

My poor male elf in origins with his redhead fetish, had unfulfilled love for shianni and brief fling with gheyna(after which she seemed appalled rather than smitten).

[jlb524]

How is it too early to assume that they will get less screen time than our companions?  Our companions are the ones that we will be fighting with and talking to the most, and certainly.  They aren't limited by any sort of pre0designated plot point if I want to talk to them, though I know that affection is gated by story (makes sense.)

 

By default, the NPC romances will get less screen time.  Am I automatically dismissing the idea that BioWare could somehow make them as meaningful as any companion romance?  No, because I do have faith that they know what they are doing.   They are good writers, so I'm willing to keep an open mind.  

 

On the other hand, it strikes me as very tricky to make a part-time character be as important to the player as any PC romance, unless you're a huge fan of that NPC.

 

Yeah.

 

Companions and NPC characters just aren't the same type of character mechanically.  I don't know how they could be considered equal.

 

Oh great, you gave me an NPC lesbian option and it's my option and she's somehow going to be equal to Cassandra.

 

Yeah, can I take her with me in the party to fight bad guys/gals?  No.

 

Do I get to hear her interjections and opinions on my decisions during quests related dialogue?  No. 

 

Do I get to experience party banter with her and other party members as we travel Thedas?  No.

 

If 'lesbian NPC romance character' could do this she wouldn't be an npc but a companion.

 

So...I don't see how this can be a remotely similar experience.

[Grieving Natashina]

Yeah.

 

Companions and NPC characters just aren't the same type of character mechanically.  I don't know how they could be considered equal.

 

Oh great, you gave me an NPC lesbian option and it's my option and she's somehow going to be equal to Cassandra.

 

Yeah, can I take her with me in the party to fight bad guys/gals?  No.

 

Do I get to hear her interjections and opinions on my decisions during quests related dialogue?  No. 

 

Do I get to experience party banter with her and other party members as we travel Thedas?  No.

 

If 'lesbian NPC romance character' could do this she wouldn't be an npc but a companion.

 

So...I don't see how this can be a remotely similar experience.

I agree, though I must say that different doesn't automatically mean bad.   They've got their work cut out for them, for sure.  

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I agree, though I must say that different doesn't automatically mean bad.   They've got their work cut out for them, for sure.  

The only way I can imagine it doesn't mean "bad" is if you're one of the people that wanted the "partner waiting at home" dynamic. I've seen what seemed to be a minority asking for something like that, but I can't imagine how else it could be good. 

[RynJ]

What if they threw us for a loop and Cullen does turn out to be a companion? That would rearrange everything we've been discussing and I would just start laughing. It hasn't been fully confirmed that he's not, has it?

[Grieving Natashina]

The only way I can imagine it doesn't mean "bad" is if you're one of the people that wanted the "partner waiting at home" dynamic. I've seen what seemed to be a minority asking for something like that, but I can't imagine how else it could be good. 

I'll be honest: Me either, but this company has surprised me more than once.  I'm happy to give them the benefit of the doubt and see what happens.

 

 

What if they threw us for a loop and Cullen does turn out to be a companion? That would rearrange everything we've been discussing and I would just start laughing. It hasn't been fully confirmed that he's not, has it?

Just fan speculation, but the evidence is strong.  The suspicion, going by the trailer, is that the characters shown with weapons are going to be our companions, while those that aren't armed (Cullen, "Scribbles" and Leliana) won't be.  There has been 6 characters with weapons shown, and many fans (including myself) think that means the other 3 are the advisers to the Inquisitor that the devs have been talking about.

[Barquiel]

I didn't really like the NPC romances in ME3, but I think that they are not necessarily bad/inferior. Apart from the ending, Aribeth's romance in NWN was well done for example (at least in my opinion).

[Nocte ad Mortem]

What if they threw us for a loop and Cullen does turn out to be a companion? That would rearrange everything we've been discussing and I would just start laughing. It hasn't been fully confirmed that he's not, has it?

They haven't confirmed he's an NPC, but they said there would be 3 advisors and 9 companions. In the trailer shot there are 9 people with weapons and 3 without. Cullen is one without. I really, really doubt he's not an advisor, at this point. Also, because they confirmed balanced classes, which is reinforced in the trailer, and Cassandra/Iron Bull are confirmed companions with warden having been seen in game play as a companion. I just can't see a possibility left that Cullen is a companion.  

[jlb524]

 

My poor male elf in origins with his redhead fetish, had unfulfilled love for shianni and brief fling with gheyna(after which she seemed appalled rather than smitten).

 

I do hope you get what you want (bisexual Sera I take it?).

 

But then I hope those that want bisexual Cassandra get that option too.

 

AAAAAAAAAAA WHY CAN'T IT BE LIKE DA2??

 

What if they threw us for a loop and Cullen does turn out to be a companion? That would rearrange everything we've been discussing and I would just start laughing. 

 

*brain explodes*

[Deviija]

 

I have seen some say that they'd prefer 4 bisexuals like DA2, because then it's fair and no one gets access to a romance that someone else does not.  Except for those that lose their romanceable content....  Imagine we were to make it Cass, Solas, Cullen, and Scribe girl as all bisexual.  To some, this is fairer.  Except for those that really want to romance Sera or DMHG.  Is this really "fairer" simply because we've restricted people from getting content in the interest of being "fair" by effectively isolating "all those that want to romance a character but cannot all have to suffer together."

 

 

I don't think anyone in this thread that is pro-bi LIs has said it'd be unfair if they did not get an LI they wanted in the all-bi LI approach.  Quite the opposite, I think we've all had a consensus that as long as there is no gender-gate for romance, then it would be fair regardless of whom is available as LI.  In this approach, everyone has equal opportunity access to the optional romance content.  That, I think, is the main sticking point.

 

Someone will always be disappointed that a certain character is not romanceable, no matter what romance system is employed.  Even if all the companions were romanceable, there will still be those like from DA:O's days, going, "Man, I wish Bann Teagan was romanceable."  That isn't a problem with the system's fairness, just a problem with limited resources and personal interest and desire.

 

Now on the topic of representation, and how it is important for minorities to see themselves reflected in their media, I have mentioned before that putting set sexualities on other companions *and* major NPCs can facilitate acknowledgement and validation.  Just because these other companions and sundry are unromanceable by the PC doesn't mean they lack an orientation that can be expressed.  For example, even if Cortez wasn't romanceable (when you played FemShep), his content, story, and characterization still went a long way with representation.  For me, anyway.

[Shadow Fox]

Personally I'm expecting 2 bi,1 gay and 1 straight.

 

Given that both DA2 and DAO only had 4 romances each

[Grieving Natashina]

I didn't really like the NPC romances in ME3, but I think that they are not necessarily bad/inferior. Apart from the ending, Aribeth's romance in NWN was well done for example (at least in my opinion).

What's funny to me about that is that I didn't know that straight ladies had a NPC romance until very recently, and I played the crap out of that game.  He was very easy to overlook and even David said that among the ladies he "hit a flat line."  Plus, NPC romances were the only kind available in NWN and SotU.  It wasn't until Hordes that there was a companion to romance.  

 

So in a game with companion romances, I can't understand the appeal of making two more romances out of NPCs. 

[RynJ]

For the record, I'm in the "Cullen is an advisor" camp based on evidence but like I said, you never know!

[Ianamus]

If we were wrong about set sexualities for the romance system, we would have been corrected by now.  The word romance did come up, so I believe that yes, he is talking about the romance system going forward.  He also pointed out simply that those that don't do the romances will have extra content as well.

 

This is the quotes.  Notice that he's starting by addressing DA2's romance system:

 

Then he follows it up with this, which is why I think he's talking about the romance system for DA:I :

 

http://dgaider.tumbl...ng-dai-romances

 

Don't get me wrong, I am almost certain that we will have gay and straight romance options and a gay companion. I'm just saying that "the devs have confirmed homosexual LI's" isn't technically true as of yet and could mislead people.

[Grieving Natashina]

For the record, I'm in the "Cullen is an advisor" camp based on evidence but like I said, you never know!

Yep and that's why I'm trying very hard to keep an open mind about NPC romances.  Advisers do have an important place in many stories, so perhaps they'll surprise me.