I don't care about this at all. 100% of our Tevinter companions have been queer, too. I don't particularly need a straight Tevinter companion to prove they exist.
I agree. Elves don't exist in real life. There's no importance in having a straight elven love interest. That goes for any other fantasy element Dragon Age has.
I still think both Cass and Vivienne are gonna be race-gated and only available for humans.
Yeah but then that would leave male Qunari Inquisitor players out in the cold.
Yeah but then that would leave male Qunari Inquisitor players out in the cold.
There's stil Josephine... She seems warm enough.
There's stil Josephine... She seems warm enough.
It isn't possible because every player character will have at least 2 options.
There's stil Josephine... She seems warm enough.
Josephine is kind of a consolation prize though... I mean, I know she has fans, but she's not a companion. Ideally there should be at least one companion available to each race/orientation/gender combination... not that Bioware shares my ideals, but that's how I see it.
It isn't possible because every player character will have at least 2 options.
No, I was responding to Chron0id who said Cass and Viv can't be both gender and race gated because straight male Qunaris would have no options. I was pointing out that Josie would be an option. She's already been confirmed as available to all races and genders. Same thing with Iron Bull.
I don't care about this at all. 100% of our Tevinter companions have been queer, too. I don't particularly need a straight Tevinter companion to prove they exist. And I certainly wouldn't want Bioware to revise any piece of their carefully constructed and coherent lore. The Dragon Age setting will fall apart if we ever meet an elf that's solely attracted to members of the opposite gender.
I feel the same about the elf trope. I honestly only see a problem with these tropes if they're shutting people out of certain types of romances. People complained about all the "nice guy" types being straight (Alistair, Sebastian, Cullen) and I understand why that's annoying because it means the relationship is never available to certain people. Most elves have been bisexual, though. There hasn't been as issue on the whole with them being largely unavailable to anyone. In this case, they'd just be denying an option to gay men without replacing it with anything just to prove that their mythical race can be straight, when we've seen straight elves about before. It seems pretty pointless and not really something to cheer, imo.
I agree. Elves don't exist in real life. There's no importance in having a straight elven love interest. That goes for any other fantasy element Dragon Age has.
The fact that Gamlen says "So, you're into elves, huh? I guess I don't have to ask which one of you's the girl." demonstrates that there is actually some real world relevance to it. Elves are seem as effeminate and fairy-like, unlike manly humans (like Alistair, Sebastian, and Cullen) who are straight a good amount of the time.
Josephine is kind of a consolation prize though... I mean, I know she has fans, but she's not a companion. Ideally there should be at least one companion available to each race/orientation/gender combination... not that Bioware shares my ideals, but that's how I see it.
i personally don't see what the big deal is with companion vs advisor. We've been told over and over again that they had the same writing budget. Do you really need them with you all the time? *genuinely curious*
The fact that Gamlen says "So, you're into elves, huh? I guess I don't have to ask which one of you's the girl." demonstrates that there is actually some real world relevance to it. Elves are seem as effeminate and fairy-like, unlike manly humans (like Alistair, Sebastian, and Cullen) who are straight a good amount of the time.
he says the same about anders though.
Advisors are not a consolation prize...*grumbles*
Bad choice of words maybe? If it helps, I would have preferred that Cullen be a companion...
IMO, there's a difference between companions and advisors. Aside from not being able to go on missions, an advisor LI might make you feel pressured to follow their plans (but on the other hand it might cause drama if you reject their ideas too often, which could be interesting).
i personally don't see what the big deal is with companion vs advisor. We've been told over and over again that they had the same writing budget. Do you really need them with you all the time? *genuinely curious*
I think it would add something to the overall experience, yes.
he says the same about anders though.
I've never run into that piece of dialogue, so I'm not sure exactly what he says. Can you quote it?
Most Favorable - Solas / Varric
Solas / Blackwall
Solas / Vivienne
Varric / Blackwall
Varric / Vivienne
Least Favorable - Blackwall / Vivienne
Bad choice of words maybe? If it helps, I would have preferred that Cullen be a companion...
IMO, there's a difference between companions and advisors. Aside from not being able to go on missions, an advisor LI might make you feel pressured to follow their plans (but on the other hand it might cause drama if you reject their ideas too often, which could be interesting).
edit: changed the wording a bit...
And how is that different from a companion? A companion might pressure you to follow their plans in the same way.
Bad choice of words maybe? If it helps, I would have preferred that Cullen be a companion... but there's a difference between companions and advisors. First off, an advisor LI might make you feel pressured to follow their plans (but on the other hand it might cause drama if you reject their ideas too often, which could be interesting).
Companions are just as likely to push for a certain solution over another. There was a case in on of the demos where you had the choice to save the villagers or defend your fortress. Cassandra voted Fortress and Varric voted Villagers. Varric was mad wen the Inquisitor sided with Cassandra.
I've never run into that piece of dialogue, so I'm not sure exactly what he says. Can you quote it?
I'm... not really sure why he says it for Anders? That's weird, especially since Hawke appears to be a mage as well. Maybe it's because he moved in with Hawke, and not the other way around...? But Hawke's the one with the mansion, so... ugh, dammit, Gamlen, you make no sense.
Either way, the implication was still quite clear with Fenris.
I'm... not really sure why he says it for Anders? That's weird, especially since Hawke appears to be a mage as well. Maybe it's because he moved in with Hawke, and not the other way around...? But Hawke's the one with the mansion, so... ugh, dammit, Gamlen, you make no sense.
Either way, the implication was still quite clear with Fenris.
Or maybe Gamlen is just teasing Hawk and he doesn't really refer to Fenris or Anders.
I'm... not really sure why he says it for Anders? That's weird, especially since Hawke appears to be a mage as well. Maybe it's because he moved in with Hawke, and not the other way around...? But Hawke's the one with the mansion, so... ugh, dammit, Gamlen, you make no sense.
Either way, the implication was still quite clear with Fenris.
The implication is still clear: Anders moved in with the rich man with a big house like a wife would in such times.
Or maybe Gamlen is just teasing Hawk and he doesn't really refer to Fenris or Anders.
But he obviously is referring to them...?
The implication is still clear: Anders moved in with the rich man with a big house like a wife would in such times.
True.
and the dev confirmation that the last two are not both race-gated.
Wait, where did they actually said that ?
no, I mean maybe he just want to tease his nephew because he thinks Hawk would refer the mocking words to himself. It would explain why he says the same line in both relationships.
@ CrimsonHead and Bluedrake89 - I don't know what to tell you then. It doesn't seem like the same power dynamic.
Soldiers in the field are your subordinates. Regardless of whether they agree or disagree, it's not their job to give you advice on how to complete a task. The sole purpose of advisors is to give suggestions on how you accomplish your goals. If you disagree with what one of your mages says, they can still be valuable as combatants. If you disagree with an advisor's general philosophy or principles, there is no alternative role that they can fill. Advisors and companions are not the same, so why would their opinions on tactics be weighed equally? If there is a clear distinction between the roles of advisors and companions, I think it's fair to use that as one reason to view potential romances with them in different ways.
That's how I see it, at least... it's not the only reason I don't care for non-companion romances, but w/e... overall, I have a hard time seeing them as being equal to an actual party member.
Retour en haut
