I still think there's a good chance that BW is a romance and gay. I'll still be disappointed because I'm fairly convinced that beards are the work of Satan, but at least I won't be disappointed IN Bioware. Keep in mind IB was almost race-gated, and would have been if it weren't for Epler. If that was the case, the races that IB was gated against would have only had one option (Dorian), which I feel like is something they would have actively tried to avoid?
But then again, IDK.
First I'm accused by someone of being guided by "straight white privilage", and now you are shoving words I have never said nor implied down my throat.
And there's this "straight privilage" again. Are the only thing that you gay people can do in a discussion is throw various accusations branching from "straight privilage" to downright homophobia at a first sign that someone disagrees with you?
It doesn't. But in Awekening he clearly "prefers" women, while in DA2 he prefers man (in the same way, that DA:O Leliana prefers women).
And it's not implied in ANY way that he might be bisexual. If it was, I wouldn't have a problem with that. It doesn't bother me, that Zevran is hitting on male Hawke in DA2, because that's part of his character.
She doesn't agree with everything that Chantry stands for, but she still believes in the Maker and worships Andraste.
Garrus is not your typical Turian in Mass Effect either - but he does represent Turians nonetheless.
It's obvious you are wrong here.Just admit you're a homophobe and then everyone else can continue on with the thread.
I'm hoping it's Vivienne. I'm hoping bi Vivi is race gated. *crosses fingers*
I also hope Vivienne is the last LI and while not thrilled at the prospect of her being RGated I hope she is RGated to Dwarfs & Qunari probably wont happen but I can hope right. 
But why should Bioware games in particular have to provide said demographic with the same number of choices when they are neither their primary demographic or their largest playerbase, and the feature in question is only an incredibly small aspect of their games?
When I watch shows aimed at a younger audience they often include jokes that are aimed at older viewers, but while I enjoy these I know that the show is still aimed primarily at younger viewers, and have to adjust my expectations accordingly.
It's the same thing with Bioware games. I appreciate the same-gender romance content (and the opposite gender romance content), but also appreciate that these are not the primary focus of the game and that I do not reside within the largest playerbase and audience of the game (straight men, and to a similar extend straight women).
When I want a show that caters to my age I watch a show aimed at my age group, and when I want a game that caters to my desire to experience same-gender romance content I play a game designed around same-gender romance content. Admittedly their aren't anywhere near enough, particularly in the west, but It makes more sense to make up the lack of same gender romance content in games designed for it and targeted to people who want it than to shove all of it into mainstream games where only a fraction of the playerbase are interested in said content.
Bioware has always made it pretty clear to me that they personally consider the LGBT audience an important part of their demographic. I've never seen anything from them to suggest that they don't consider my demographic to be a part of their whole target audience. There's no reason that a game has to be for only straight people, or gay people, or men, or women, or just one specific race. That's not the type of game I'm hoping to see made, myself. A piece of media can market to multiple demographics at once and, often times, you get bleed over in demographics that want to experience more than one option in multiple playthroughs. There's no real reason why Bioware needs to change it's audience to offer options equally to all genders and sexualities. They've never made any statements suggesting that their primary target audience is straight, white, males, or whatever is assumed to be the "majority". In fact, they've made it pretty clear that they actually favor an inclusive approach and that they realize they make mistakes on that at times and try to improve. I'm just hoping they reach a goal that many of their own staff have expressed support for.
There's obviously nothing to suggest Bioware has to offer an equal amount of options to everyone. They clearly could only offer 3-4 straight, white women as LIs, for example. It's not like that would be an uncommon choice for a developer. Bioware has said themselves, though, that it isn't the approach they favor. I don't see a reason to expect Bioware to continue a stance on inequality when their own staff says here on the BSN and in multiple panels that they see themselves as inclusive and value their audience members from many demographics besides just what's considered the majority.
Who defines equality in this discussion here? What does it mean to have equality exactly? Why does equality automatically equate to a 25/25/25/25 split? What is the basis by which this equality is defined as being equal? And do characters get to have a preference here, or is that just something that doesn't matter? Do companions deserve to have characters or preferences at all? What determines a character being allowed a preference, if all preferences by definition do not cater those of opposing preference? Should the player be allowed to express a preference, since that act in it of itself shows a bias to those of other preferences? Is preference by its very nature discriminatory, and if so, why allow it at all?
I'm taking two things from this:
1. I guess my female Dalish elf isn't going to be a lesbian after all. Or my male Dalish elf is getting an abrupt gender swap. Actually, that sounds more sensible. (Resisting the urge to update my Chart until after we know who the last LI is.)
2. Assuming Bull really was gated against dwarves until John Epler fixed him, and assuming Vivienne really is the last romance ... there actually might have been a time in development where my straight female dwarf could have got stuck with Cullen 
.
Unless Cullen is gated against dwarves, I guess.
Yeah that makes sense but which one Cassandra or Dorian?
my money is on Cass, I don't see them race gating the first 100% gay male companion romance
But why should Bioware games in particular have to provide said demographic with the same number of choices when they are neither their primary demographic or their largest playerbase, and the feature in question is only an incredibly small aspect of their games?
When I watch shows aimed at a younger audience they often include jokes that are aimed at older viewers, but while I enjoy these I know that the show is still aimed primarily at younger viewers, and have to adjust my expectations accordingly.
It's the same thing with Bioware games. I appreciate the same-gender romance content (and the opposite gender romance content), but also appreciate that these are not the primary focus of the game and that I do not reside within the largest playerbase and audience of the game (straight men, and to a similar extend straight women).
When I want a show that caters to my age I watch a show aimed at my age group, and when I want a game that caters to my desire to experience same-gender romance content I play a game designed around same-gender romance content. Admittedly their aren't anywhere near enough, particularly in the west, but It makes more sense to make up the lack of same gender romance content in games designed for it and targeted to people who want it than to shove all of it into mainstream games where only a fraction of the playerbase are interested in said content.
This post makes no sense.
Vivi will be race-gated. Mark my words.
Who defines equality in this discussion here? What does it mean to have equality exactly? Why does equality automatically equate to a 25/25/25/25 split? What is the basis by which this equality is defined as being equal? And do characters get to have a preference here, or is that just something that doesn't matter? Do companions deserve to have characters or preferences at all? What determines a character being allowed a preference, if all preferences by definition do not cater those of opposing preference? Should the player be allowed to express a preference, since that act in it of itself shows a bias to those of other preferences? Is preference by its very nature discriminatory, and if so, why allow it at all?
Generally speaking, "equals" tends to mean that if you have four schoolkids and four lunchboxes, each of the schoolkids gets a lunchbox. And if one of them gets three lunchboxes, all the others get two more lunchboxes, for a total of 12 lunchboxes.
I suppose I could have had it wrong all these years though.
EDIT: Numbers.......
I couldn't care less about characters' sexuality at this point. It's going to be unfair for one demographic no matter what happens. All we can hope for at this point is that
Now I'm hyped about knowing the last LI.
I think that's why they did this.
I MUST KNOOOOOOOW.
my money is on Cass, I don't see them race gating the first 100% gay male companion romance
You are probably right but you never know they couls shock everyone and make Dorian RGated to Humans only you never know. 
As long as Sera isn't race gated I could care less now, Solas being both race gated and gender gated to just females pretty much makes me thin k she is safe just the fact that surely they won't race gate both elf companions and 2 female only options thats also why I don't think Cullen is race gated either now. I think its either one of the male only ones or the unknown one.
You are probably right but you never know they couls shock everyone and make Dorian RGated to Humans only you never know.
I think I just had an epiphany. They wouldn't wait this long to announce the last two LIs if the last two LIs weren't both race gated. It stands to reason. They're waiting because they know that the race-gated LIs will enrage the most amount of people. So they're biding their time. So I highly doubt they'd announce someone like Cass as a romance option, and then announce later down the line that she's race-gated. That would be totally bait and switch. Not to mention kind of....dumb.
Now I'm hyped about knowing the last LI.
I think that's why they did this.
I MUST KNOOOOOOOW.
One must have patience,the knowledge will be granted at some point.
Generally speaking, "equals" tends to mean that if you have four schoolkids and four lunchboxes, each of the schoolkids gets a lunchbox. And if one of them gets three lunchboxes, all the others get two more lunchboxes, for a total of 12 lunchboxes.
I suppose I could have had it wrong all these years though.
EDIT: Numbers.......
Now I'm hyped about knowing the last LI.
I think that's why they did this.
I MUST KNOOOOOOOW.
I agree I gotta know quick grab some torches and pitch forks and I will grab the cookies we march. 
Never change, BSN/BF. Arguing over characters you hardly even know, and why they should or should not cater to your whims. The whims of characters you haven't even played yet enough to create. Stay as gold as sunshine.
I swear, "There's not enough gay romance."
"There's not enough straight romance."
"What about the womyn romance."
"That character needs to be romanced."
"BioWare hates me for not letting me bang this person."
Remember when this game used to be about that giant hole in the sky? When did it become about the hole in your pants and why that was the absolute showing of how much BioWare cared about you as a customer? I like romance, enough, but I certainly don't judge BioWare's opinion of my demographic off of that.
Who defines equality in this discussion here? What does it mean to have equality exactly? Why does equality automatically equate to a 25/25/25/25 split? What is the basis by which this equality is defined as being equal? And do characters get to have a preference here, or is that just something that doesn't matter? Do companions deserve to have characters or preferences at all? What determines a character being allowed a preference, if all preferences by definition do not cater those of opposing preference? Should the player be allowed to express a preference, since that act in it of itself shows a bias to those of other preferences? Is preference by its very nature discriminatory, and if so, why allow it at all?
I think some of the grumpiness definitely has to do with history. With the exception of DA2 where equality existed by necessity of number (and if you think about Seb, the numbers actually weren't equal), there hasn't been any game ever (with the exception of some niche LGBT games) where there were an equal number of romantic interests for straight and gay characters. If, say, in some other Bioware game there had been an extra LI for gay males then I think people would be a lot less disappointed, but that game doesn't exist.
Again, I think we're reacting prematurely here, we don't know who the last LI is, but I think true equality is an admirable goal. I personally would consider it more important to have equal options for straight and gay players than to "stay true to a character's sexuality". I should mention that I think equality is less important when the two demographics are gynosexuals (straight men and gay women) and androsexuals (gay men and straight women), because I don't think characters should be designed for the purposes of romance, and I think it's totally reasonable for them to say "Well, there were only 3 men we wanted to write romances for, but we wanted to write romances for 4 women".
One must have patience,the knowledge will be granted at some point.
But patience is hard.
I think I just had an epiphany. They wouldn't wait this long to announce the last two LIs if the last two LIs weren't both race gated. It stands to reason. They're waiting because they know that the race-gated LIs will enrage the most amount of people. So they're biding their time. So I highly doubt they'd announce someone like Cass as a romance option, and then announce later down the line that she's race-gated. That would be totally bait and switch. Not to mention kind of....dumb.
Many right now would throw that tweet at you that Gaider posted but luckily I am one of those people who thinks what he said was pure PR talk, plus when he said what he did he said "funny how people say *I* said last 2 are the race gated ones, funny since thats not true" this isn't word for word but its the gist of it, to me he was just saying he never said that so its untrue, but like you I said days ago in another thread that the last two being race gated would make sense why they are taking so long
I agree I gotta know quick grab some torches and pitch forks and I will grab the cookies we march.
Yeesss.
Make sure you grab some double chocolate chip for me 
I think I just had an epiphany. They wouldn't wait this long to announce the last two LIs if the last two LIs weren't both race gated. It stands to reason. They're waiting because they know that the race-gated LIs will enrage the most amount of people. So they're biding their time. So I highly doubt they'd announce someone like Cass as a romance option, and then announce later down the line that she's race-gated. That would be totally bait and switch. Not to mention kind of....dumb.
Nah they do the bait and switch alot. THey announced Cullen and Cass first then announced their sexualities after Sera and Dorian.
One must have patience,the knowledge will be granted at some point.
But but...*hastily bites fingernails* I wanna know if I can get my lovely amazonian lady to romance a dude shorter than her T_T tis all I ask.
Many right now would throw that tweet at you that Gaider posted but luckily I am one of those people who thinks what he said was pure PR talk, plus when he said what he did he said "funny how people say *I* said last 2 are the race gated ones, funny since thats not true" this isn't word for word but its the gist of it, to me he was just saying he never said that so its untrue, but like you I said days ago in another thread that the last two being race gated would make sense why they are taking so long
Yes, I know of that tweet, and I don't buy what he said for a nanosecond.
Retour en haut
