This stupid forum ate my very, very long post because I accidentally pressed backspace. So I'm quite peeved. This is the best I could to do recreate the post before I just gave up due to disappointment.
I would say that straight women were not more shafted than both sexes of gay in ME3. They might have had only two viable LIs, but gay men had only two LIs period, and lesbians had... two LIs who had anything done with them, one who fled the Normandy altogether and then got snubbed from the Citadel party (all without any major content), and one random fling.
It wasn't my intention to say that ME3 catered to LGBT gamers better than it did to straight women. It did not. My only intention was to say that in the comparison between straight men and women, straight women had far fewer options. I am worried DA:I will repeat that pattern.
I think the difference is ME catered to straight males while DA cater to a broader demographic, DAO, straight women have the same amount as straight guys, DA2, women have 3 options while males have 2 options. Just because both games are developed by Bioware don't mean that they're being developed by the same exact team. Hopefully, Bioware can develop a game everyone can enjoy.
You're very much right about the difference in franchises. It's more that we only have two other confirmed LIs - Cullen and Cassandra - and it's looking like women will get at least one advisor romance. If the worry abour advisor romances is justified, then we could be looking at an ME3 like situation (particularly since Bioware has said that not all orientations necessarily will get equal content; or at least question our 2/2/2 assumption each time on that basis).
Okay, I get what you are saying and I do agree with you. The problem is, unless they make everything equal, nothing will ever be fair.
It's tricky though. When DAO came out, we had 4 romanceable companions. Straight characters got 2 options and gay characters got one. At the time, I remember being really excited because here is this game that is giving me the option to romance a woman. That was a big deal. As we move forward though, Then DA2 came around and holy crap, I have two women to choose from. Everyone is on equal footing, but most romance options are not distinct in their sexuality.
So, maybe the question is, is giving each companion a set sexuality worth it in the long run? If BW wants to be totally inclusive of all sexualities, is this the best course of action? I can't answer that for this game. If I were to look at past games, I'd say no because it's still comes off as throwing some people scraps and telling them to be happy they got something.
I think it's hard sometimes to not look at turn about a little vindictively. Like I totally understand why a lot of straight males for example are upset. I understand because I have been there. The problem is, a lot of those same males (not all) were the ones telling us to get over it and relax because it's just a game and just a romance and if we want to romance a specific character we can just roll a different pc. So now they are experiencing this for the first time. However, instead of realizing that this is something that other people have been dealing with for years, they see it as BW pandering to the gays etc.
Without giving everyone the same amount and same kind of options all the time, it will never be equal. I just don't know if we can at this point say the game is not inclusive to X when we don't even know who all the LIs are or who they are interested in.
JO, I have to apologize for my brevity here because I did have a long post that tried to match yours. Essentially, I responded in two parts.
First, I wanted to say that I think a game like DA:I needed to happen. Whether or not future games will proceed with set sexualities, we needed a game with lesbian and gay companions, in prominent heroic roles, because this is something that the gaming industry sorely lacks. Before Sera, the only (arguably) lesbian character was Celene. Before Celene, there really wasn't anyone. The only gay men in the game were Wade and Herren, and that wasn't even mentioned in-game. DA:I will be a landmark in the industry for that alone, and I think that counts.
In terms of the vindictiveness discussion (and it's here that a pretty and really lengthy post existed before the backspace incident, and which I just couldn't fully reproduce), I really do get where you're coming from. While male, I'm not straight. I wouldn't say that "bi" fits well, because I've got a pretty complex set of tastes I like outside of women that doesn't quite capture all men but isn't exactly exclusive of them, but at any rate, I'd love a game that actually lets me express my range of desirable sexual partners through a range of characters I could create and imagine. If that happened, I'd totally want to say, tough luck everyone else, it's my turn to have this one game.
But I think that, as someone who deeply cares about diversity, that the actual intellectual basis and fundamental motivation for diversity has to be more than "it's my turn", even if that resonates strongly at the emotional level. Because I understand what it's like to not get want I want, I don't want others to have to go through that. I don't think less content for purely straight gamers is going to teach them anything about what it was like to go through what I went - after all, they're still part of a society that, for the most part, is straight first in ads, etc. All it's going to do is build resentment. And even if it could be possible for people to go through the same stuff, well, I don't think I'd want them to. I feel like to be in Canada in the 21st century. I'd certainly wouldn't be happy if someone said I don't appreciate the present without seeing, say, 1940s Virginia attitudes.