Ce sujet est fermé
Then play as a male one, and miss out one one of the romances. The same thing would happen to me if I didn`t want to play a female character either.
.... That is exactly what I said in my original post. I'm going to miss out. Again. Because every straight male LI is always far more appealing to me than the same sex ones bioware releases.
Quality over quantity . . . I like the idea that each option can have more concentration, layers and depth to if they limit the amount of options each has. The result, I hope, is that each one feels more rich, via the focus given. I suppose we'll see. As someone that likes multiple play-throughs anyways, with different types of character, it will give me - potentially - new options with each new approach.
.... That is exactly what I said in my original post. I'm going to miss out. Again. Because every straight male LI is always far more appealing to me than the same sex ones bioware releases.
I am sure that happens in real life too. It has certainly happened to me. A lady I was interested in turned out to be into girls.
What is "wrong" with the non-straight romance characters, anyway? Just curious.
I don't think the idea behind locking a thread is just to make way for a copy no more than a couple of hours later. But I guess some of us still need to get it out of our system so vent my pretties, vent.
I can see why having a more 'strict' sexual orientation for the NPCs is a good choice for the narrative. I think it makes the characters a bit more believable. Because you can't expect everyone you meet to have EXACTLY the same fetishes/dreams/sexuality as you.
Though, I do keep in mind that this is just a videogame. You should be offered to do whatever you please within the boundaries the game and not personal belief (slight contradiction but you get the gist of it).
But in the end of the day, Who gives a **** about how you play.
I can see why having a more 'strict' sexual orientation for the NPCs is a good choice for the narrative.
I don't see that at all.
The only narrative that matters is the one the player creates through his character's choices and actions. Restrictive companion sexuality offers no benefit there.
What clues? Cass and Regalyan start off in conflict with one another because Cass dislikes Mages and then their friendship develops. Just because there is a male and female lead in a film doesn't mean they will end up together.
I am thinking about real people who wrote that scene and I still just see two friends, with one, Regalyan, perhaps developing feelings based on his blush.
As I said before, I kiss friends on the cheek all the time. It's a sign of friendship.
I was talking about Varric conversation with Cassandra lol
Quality over quantity . . . I like the idea that each option can have more concentration, layers and depth to if they limit the amount of options each has. The result, I hope, is that each one feels more rich, via the focus given. I suppose we'll see. As someone that likes multiple play throughts anyways, with different types of character, it will give me - potentially - new options with each new approach.
I find 'one solid sexual orientation' a very bizarre way of phrasing it.
I'm taking this article to mean it's 2/2/2 though, which is very much fine by me.
But 4-6 herosexual characters would be better, with the same (or lower) development costs.
I don't see that at all.
The only narrative that matters is the one the player creates through his character's choices and actions. Restrictive companion sexuality offers no benefit there.
Subjective opinion: I felt like Hawke was some sexual Mary-Sue in DA2, because of how the romances were handled. It pretty much felt like one more short-cut in the game production, really. Abit like how the cave was handled. It felt like simplified writing, to be honest.
I am sure that happens in real life too. It has certainly happened to me. A lady I was interested in turned out to be into girls.
What is "wrong" with the non-straight romance characters, anyway? Just curious.
I just don't find them appealing. Zevran was essentially a ******, Anders and Fenris were just so over the top and emo, I couldn't put up with their constant bitching. Cortez was simply boring and his whole dead husband arc was weird. Kaidan was the only one who I even had any interest for, but I felt his entire romance with male shepard was forced.
I just feel like Bioware has a habit of making the emotional buzzkillers and whiners the same sex relationships.
2/2/2 sounds perfect. Everyone gets equal options.
2/2/2 sounds perfect. Everyone gets equal options.
I'll judge that for myself when I see what the options are.
I was talking about Varric conversation with Cassandra lol
I don't understand, there is nothing gender specific about that conversation. Varric has that same conversation no matter what gender Hawke is and Cassandra reacts in pretty much the same way.
I usually don't chime in on romance threads but my opinion is that it makes sense that characters are more defined. Some people are straight, some gay/lesbian and some bisexual. I just think it would be weird to have a LI companion act one way with a male romance PC but then act the same way with a female romance PC. Unless "in game" the LI character declare's him/her self bisexual it makes the replays weird. It also breaks continuity with the characters.
Don't shoot but take ME3's James Vega, (I know he's not a LI but think of his "character") he states he doesn't "swing" that way, even if he didn't state that I find that it would break my sense of his character if he was straight with my Femshep but then gay for my Manshep.
On the other hand Izzy is Bi and states it, Fenris it "fits" his character and the interactions that he could be Bi, Anders on the other hand made no sense all of a sudden he was Bi or Gay. As much as people might want it if you think in "character" then not everyone should be able to be a LI to every gender PC.
I'll judge that for myself when I see what the options are.
Well at least you are getting an equal amount of options as everyone else.
I don't understand, there is nothing gender specific about that conversation. Varric has that same conversation no matter what gender Hawke is and Cassandra reacts in pretty much the same way.
No it is not, he says Cassandra has a crush on the male or hero worship on the female. You have to ask yourself why the different dialogs. Why not have a crush on the male and female.
I'll judge that for myself when I see what the options are.
I don't see that at all.
The only narrative that matters is the one the player creates through his character's choices and actions. Restrictive companion sexuality offers no benefit there.
Indeed, if you have an incredibly restrictive view on what "matters" in a narrative. If, however, you don't think a player should be able to "create" a character's sexuality, then set sexualities do serve a purpose, because they mold a character into someone more independent and defined.
No it is not, he says Cassandra has a crush on the male or hero worship on the female. You have to ask yourself why the different dialogs. Why not have a crush on the male and female.
I doubt this will determine Cassandra's sexuality. If they decide she's hetero then the dialogue makes sense, if they decide she's not then it was simply Varric's assumptions about her sexuality. There shouldn't be any discontinuity there.
2/2/2 sounds perfect. Everyone gets equal options.
And what if 2 of them are NPCs? Assuming the most fair scenario, everyone gets only one companion option. Are people really okay with that?
As I mentioned in the other thread, I prefer to have the 2/2/2 split than everybody being playersexual.
Not that I would care a whole lot either way. It's just one of the little things that can help to define the character.
And what if 2 of them are NPCs? Assuming the most fair scenario, everyone gets only one companion option. Are people really okay with that?
All of them would be NPCs, just for the record. Anyone except the inquisitor is an NPC.
But lets say non-followers turn out to be some of the romance options. If all of the straight options are non-followers, I would be fine with it. No complaint from my end.
I usually don't chime in on romance threads but my opinion is that it makes sense that characters are more defined. Some people are straight, some gay/lesbian and some bisexual. I just think it would be weird to have a LI companion act one way with a male romance PC but then act the same way with a female romance PC. Unless "in game" the LI character declare's him/her self bisexual it makes the replays weird. It also breaks continuity with the characters.
Don't shoot but take ME3's James Vega, (I know he's not a LI but think of his "character") he states he doesn't "swing" that way, even if he didn't state that I find that it would break my sense of his character if he was straight with my Femshep but then gay for my Manshep.
On the other hand Izzy is Bi and states it, Fenris it "fits" his character and the interactions that he could be Bi, Anders on the other hand made no sense all of a sudden he was Bi or Gay. As much as people might want it if you think in "character" then not everyone should be able to be a LI to every gender PC.
Last I checked, sexuality has absolutely zero to do with someones character. If you're judging someones character based on their orientation then that's your own failing.
Last I checked, sexuality has absolutely zero to do with someones character. If you're judging someones character based on their orientation then that's your own failing.
Sexuality could have alot of impact on how you interact with other people. If you are sexually interested in them or not, etc.
Retour en haut