4203 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

I'm extremely skeptical of "Story reasons" for why characters are interested in who they are

 

 

It'd just be easier to say "I'm into X because, deal with it"

[Bipster]

I believe they said flirting locks you out of other romances pretty early on this time.

 

I thought it was the other way around. That if your Quizzy is in a relationship, then they can't flirt.

[Wulfram]

What's wrong with telling stories about "straight, white men"?  They're pretty common in this part of Thedas

[daveliam]

Because Iron Bull wouldn't have been available to a certain player race, and Bioware once said that options for player races weren't a major concern for them

 

To clarify, what they said was that they races weren't a priority for them because they aren't real and they are focused on "real world" groups.  In this case, gay men would have only been guaranteed one romance (with some getting two).

[AresKeith]

To clarify, what they said was that they races weren't a priority for them because they aren't real and they are focused on "real world" groups.  In this case, gay men would have only been guaranteed one romance (with some getting two).

 

But wouldn't that fall on the players and not the devs. Sure some wouldn't be able to romance him as a Dwarf but that doesn't mean they don't have 2 options 

[LobselVith8]

What's wrong with telling stories about "straight, white men"?  They're pretty common in this part of Thedas

 

People are addressing an interest in seeing more diversity.

[Maria Caliban]

That's certainly a valid criticism of their choices in this particular instance, but not the idea of telling stories with more romances in general.
 
Would it be as dissatisfying with a bisexual Vivienne and Scout Harding?
 
(My point really had nothing to do with Solas or Blackwall as white, straight men - they're extra stories that BW want to explore. That the representation might be problematic isn't really a reason not to support the freedom of the writers, in general, to tell their own stories.)

I like stories with romances. I don't have a problem with them, whether they involve the PC directly, or they're like the Aveline story.

Their freedom isn't being threatened in any way. No more than people saying that they hate the 8 slot limit are impinging the freedoms of the UI designer, artist, and programmer. I mean, yes, I support the ability of people to write the stories they want... but I also support the ability of others to criticize or dislike those stories.

I'm extremely skeptical of "Story reasons" for why characters are interested in who they are


It'd just be easier to say "I'm into X because, deal with it"

They do that for gay and bisexual characters. Except Liara, as her bisexuality could be considered a 'setting reason.'

[Wulfram]

People are addressing an interest in seeing more diversity.

 

The characters are hardly un-diverse, and neither are the romances, if you wish to only focus on them

[Who Knows]

I love when people evoke "free speech" in opposition to criticism. It's only free speech when you agree with it

[daveliam]

But wouldn't that fall on the players and not the devs. Sure some wouldn't be able to romance him as a Dwarf but that doesn't mean they don't have 2 options 

 

I don't take it that way.  I take it as two options regardless of character and then beyond that, they don't care if some races get more than others.  I always took their statement to mean that they wanted to make sure that every player, regardless of the character that they play, gets two options.  And, in some cases, three or four options.

[AresKeith]

I don't take it that way.  I take it as two options regardless of character and then beyond that, they don't care if some races get more than others.  I always took their statement to mean that they wanted to make sure that every player, regardless of the character that they play, gets two options.  And, in some cases, three or four options.

 

I agree, that was their goal

[Maria Caliban]

Prior to Cullen and Solas, all the LI's but Bull were open to all races.

I'm guessing that the original plan was for no race-gating. Then they added Cullen and Solas, which bit into the cinematic budget, and Iron Bull was the last on the pile for the original romances.

[Maria Caliban]

I think we're forgetting that Vivienne has a story reason why she isn't a romance option.

What is that from? It's the first I've heard of it.

What's wrong with telling stories about "straight, white men"?  They're pretty common in this part of Thedas

This is actually part of a much longer conversation. I continue to believe that Dragon Age would be better if, from the very start, they'd made it as racially diverse as they did with the Mass Effect universe.

They say it's because Thedas is based off medieval Europe, but the setting has always felt like a fantasy mash-up to me. I've seen games and movies that do portray that historical period, and Dragon Age is nothing like it.

[Phate Phoenix]

What is that from? It's the first I've heard of it.

Allan said it:
 

Do we know why Vivi isn't a Li at least ?

It's something that I don't want to spoil since it is a part of her story.  It's something that, when I learned about it, made me go "Okay that makes sense."  At least for me.  I'm sure some will disagree.
 
Note that this doesn't mean someone can't be disappointed because they found her attractive, or that specifically because she's a prominent woman of colour, it sucks to not be able to romance her specifically because our games haven't historically had anyone like her at all.

[pallascedar]

I can't say what their reasoning was. Maybe it was to please a perceived fanbase or maybe it was because there was a story they wanted to tell.

As far as we know, DA:I had a 2/2/2 split, the developers got extra time, and decided to add two new romances, both for straight women. If this was just 'for the fans,' then why not make Blackwall gay? If this was just because they had a story they wanted to tell... yah, the stories they wanted to tell was that of straight, white men. Not bisexual or gay men. Not black women of whatever sexuality.

Lastly, if they had time to add two extra romances, why was Iron Bull being available to all a 'last minute' fix? They added an additional two romances for straight women before they even made sure queer men might have access to more than one LI?

 

One thing to point out is that for all we know there is an awesome story about a proud bisexual Vivienne who just doesn't happen to be interested in the Inquisitor. Further, Solas' story would likely still have been about a straight white man whether or not he had been a romance.

 

But yeah, I'm a little skeptical of the Cullen/Solas being the addition thing. I get that there are scene limits to things, but why add 2 for straight women when you could just as easily, say, add Cullen and make him only available to humans. Or just add Solas for all elves? From my perspective it would have been extraordinarily easy for them to make one of them bisexual, and I think it does say something that they decided that it wasn't important; especially in the light that IB was almost not available for all races. I'm also a little annoyed that another openly bisexual man has been described in ways that fit all the bisexual tropes. I'm also prejudging IB a little bit, but he's pretty regularly compared to James Bond, who is one of my least favorite characters in all of fiction. I'm sure I'll like IB in game, but right now I'm skeptical of him.

 

Oh well.

[Gwydden]

As far as we know, DA:I had a 2/2/2 split, the developers got extra time, and decided to add two new romances, both for straight women. If this was just 'for the fans,' then why not make Blackwall gay? If this was just because they had a story they wanted to tell... yah, the stories they wanted to tell was that of straight, white men. Not bisexual or gay men. Not black women of whatever sexuality.

If they add more romanceable straight females, there is a clear bias in favor of straight men.

 

If they add more romanceable straight males, there is still a clear bias in favor of straight men.

 

Because we have to interpret everything in the most problematic way possible so people can be offended.

 

This is the thing that sits the uneasiest with me. We knew that Cullen, the third (or maybe FOURTH) option for straight women, was an LI BEFORE they fixed Iron Bull so that gay men got their SECOND option for all of the races. That just isn't cool with me. If that timeline was shifted a bit, I'd be cool. But knowing that they had extra dev time and chose to devote it to providing two additional options for straight players when there were still gay players with only option makes me a little squicky. Not sure how I feel about it so I'm choosing to pretend it's not the case because it all worked out (mas o menos) in the end.

Weren't you the one who said an option is an option even if it's race gated? Would you prefer many race gated options, or a few available to all races? That's a very difficult question, but I would say the former is preferable.

 

Not that I don't agree this is problematic. Just being devil's advocate.

[DeityDi]

It's something that I don't want to spoil since it is a part of her story.  It's something that, when I learned about it, made me go "Okay that makes sense."  At least for me.  I'm sure some will disagree.

That's... vague. And kinda ambiguous.

[Wulfram]

This is actually part of a much longer conversation. I continue to believe that Dragon Age would be better if, from the very start, they'd made it as racially diverse as they did with the Mass Effect universe.

They say it's because Thedas is based off medieval Europe, but the setting has always felt like a fantasy mash-up to me. I've seen games and movies that do portray that historical period, and Dragon Age is nothing like it.

 

Well, I more or less agree with that.  Or at least if it's fantasy Europe, we could not have had oceans where fantasy Asia and fantasy Africa go.

 

But we've got the setting we've got.  And the Inquisition characters still manages to have a decent number of people of colour, I think.

[Gwydden]

That's... vague. And kinda ambiguous.

That's... redundant. And kinda repetitive 

[DeityDi]

Well 'xcuse me, but it's the first time I've seen it. Some of us have a life so yeah, some will also be repetitive.

[drummerchick]

Well 'xcuse me, but it's the first time I've seen it. Some of us have a life so yeah, some will also be repetitive.

I think the joke was "vague" and "ambiguous" are synonymous.  

[daveliam]

If they add more romanceable straight females, there is a clear bias in favor of straight men.

 

If they add more romanceable straight males, there is still a clear bias in favor of straight men.

 

Because we have to interpret everything in the most problematic way possible so people can be offended.

 

Weren't you the one who said an option is an option even if it's race gated? Would you prefer many race gated options, or a few available to all races? That's a very difficult question, but I would say the former is preferable.

 

Not that I don't agree this is problematic. Just being devil's advocate.

 

An option is an option and, in the situation that I was describing, I would never say that IB "didn't count" or that gay men only got one option.  I was pointing out the huge disparity between gay male dwarves/straight female dwarves getting ONE option and straight female elves getting FOUR options.  That's really ridiculous to me.  I'm glad it got fixed, but I'd be way less sympathetic to the Bioware criticism had it worked out like that. 

 

For me, I'd rather have less options provided they are ungated.  I have a fairly narrow scope of characters that I enjoy playing.  I like playing dwarves (and I'm positive I will like playing qunari).  Humans are okay and I have no interest in playing elves.  If there are m/m options, then I only play as gay males.  If not, then I will play as gay males (with no romance, so really just head canon) and lesbians. 

 

So for me, personally I would like to see fewer (ungated) options.  Why?  Because the characters that I enjoy playing are the most likely to get gated off.  Gay males and lesbians get the least amount of options.  And dwarves and qunari get the least amount of options. 

[Gwydden]

An option is an option and, in the situation that I was describing, I would never say that IB "didn't count" or that gay men only got one option.  I was pointing out the huge disparity between gay male dwarves/straight female dwarves getting ONE option and straight female elves getting FOUR options.  That's really ridiculous to me.  I'm glad it got fixed, but I'd be way less sympathetic to the Bioware criticism had it worked out like that. 

 

For me, I'd rather have less options provided they are ungated.  I have a fairly narrow scope of characters that I enjoy playing.  I like playing dwarves (and I'm positive I will like playing qunari).  Humans are okay and I have no interest in playing elves.  If there are m/m options, then I only play as gay males.  If not, then I will play as gay males (with no romance, so really just head canon) and lesbians. 

 

So for me, personally I would like to see fewer (ungated) options.  Why?  Because the characters that I enjoy playing are the most likely to get gated off.  Gay males and lesbians get the least amount of options.  And dwarves and qunari get the least amount of options. 

I see what you're saying. I forgot to take that into account since, for the most part, I'm fairly flexible.

 

Although I agree on the elf thing. How can anyone think they are interesting? 

[Tevinter Rose]

I hope there are more POC LI's in future bioware games.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I thought it was the other way around. That if your Quizzy is in a relationship, then they can't flirt.

I remember seeing a tweet from Patrick Weekes saying you would be locked out of romance dialog after flirting to a certain point with one person, but I honestly don't think I could find the quote now, because it's been months. So, I guess it's kind of on the hearsay level as to how it works right now.