323 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

You gotta put things in perspective though, The LGBT people are a minority, and those new sexualities are even a smaller minority in the minority. Expecting Bioware to represent them all is a bit much. For the first time in a DA game we have a gay LI and a lesbian LI, this is exciting, this is progress and I applaud Bioware for this. I have no qualms with Bioware possibly representing other lesser known sexualities in our community in future games but for now I'm pretty happy that they are representing the LGB folk as much as they are. They are trying, not many other gaming companies are, give credit where it is due.

 

While Bioware deserves recognition for their efforts, I wouldn't base that praise on a comparison with the rest of the industry. The troglodyte contingent is sufficiently large in the industry that other companies LGBT representation - hell, their representation of women - is just comically bad when it isn't non-existent. 

[Mulsanne Blue]

I like the idea of gating, especially by class. It never made sense to me, as others have stated, that Fenris would be with a blood mage (or any mage for that matter). I also do not mind the race gating so much either in game because of the divide that is present between the races in the game universe.

[Jagrevi]

"No Beard, No Good"

 

Ha.

 

Perhaps romance-gating isn't the best place for it, but if this thread does stir anything in me it's a desire to see at least a token instance of "Beard Reactivity" in one of these titles someday, even if it's just chatter or a throwaway line.

 

Token lines can be some of the most memorable though (re: Going on Tali's Companion mission in ME2 while wearing the Collector's Edition Armor).

[lillee101]

That said, I don't mind the gender gating/ race gating thing. If Bioware wants to write characters that aren't playersexual, then good for them.

 

As long as the character has a good written romance arc, then I /might/ consider romancing them depending if it fits my character's story. My gay Hawke romanced no one in the end because Anders and Fenris romance arcs weren't really that good TBH, and the friendship arc with Zevran fit my f!Surana's relationship with him more than the romance one.

 

I don't mind gating either.  I am a player that tends to play multiple playthrough of a game.  I like to pick a path with my Hero like in Origins my Fem -stoic- honor driven Warden romanced Alistair, hardened him, and in the end became his Queen. with over 12 playthroughs of DAO from male to female, gay to straight and even a celibate Warden.  It was the combincation of my Wardens backstory  and the npc companions own personalities written by Bioware that determined who I romanced. .

I want everyone to have choices that make them happy, because I know that not everyone has the time to play muttiple playthoughs and in most cases folks play the hero like they themselves would react.  I am really glad that there are gay npc/campanions available to romance, and I mean fully gay with a storyline ..like Cortez or Traynor in ME3 and now Dorian is DAI.  What I did not apprieciate was changing Kaiden into a gay option.  It felt contrived to take a traditionally heterosexual character and basically change nothing about the romance but the pronouns. I am not sure why they did that.  Give me diversity, but please make it mean something.

[TheRevanchist]

Talking about Asexuals...in a Romance thread....good grief....I think someone does not understand Asexual.

[Mr.Hmm]

Female Humans/Elves cant handle Iron Bull's manliness

[Super Drone]

Talking about Asexuals...in a Romance thread....good grief....I think someone does not understand Asexual.

 

Ha ha. It looks like someone doesn't.

 

http://www.wikihow.c...-Asexual-People

[TheRevanchist]

Indeed someone does not get it, that person is not me. Because I am not a moron. Trying to argue for things like Asexual LI's is just grasping at straws for an argument, imo. It's White Knighting in the worst way. "We need to include literally every permutation of human sexuality because fairness!" Except ones that are socially not accepted, like pedophiles and incest, and all those dark things that would likely exist in a medieval setting. Despite the fact this game is not about LI's and Romances, and arguments of that type seem to think that the game should be a dating simulator where no one is left out, well, no one except the people who have "wrong" tastes, as mentioned above. To devote vast sums of money to flesh out an optional, overall unimportant feature to cater to every sub-sect of humanity possible, because Political Correctness. Things like that, are why good games end up sucking, because companies try to appeal to everyone. You cannot, and will not ever please everyone. By advocating for such things it proves you have no idea how hard a game is to create, or simply don't care about that, because you think something is unfair. 

[Remmirath]

I don't particularly care if there are asexual romances (despite being, myself, asexual). The characters I play aren't necessarily going to be, and if they are, there's a decent chance they won't be interested in having a romance to begin with. Romances are generally something I only even make use of in a game if I come to the conclusion that it's the only in-character way to go about things, so even if that option was there, there would be a rather high chance of my never using it. So, on the one hand, I actually agree that it should be a rather low priority -- certainly coming in as a lower priority than other orientations, since they tend to care more about that sort of thing. I'd be much happier with more/deeper non-romance NPC interaction. Now, I am of course speaking only for myself, there.

On the other hand, I would appreciate it if there were the option to have your character be asexual and yet have a romance, as opposed to having a romance option who is asexual. All that would require would be some way to turn down the whole sex scene bit without the option equating to "no, I really don't like you". I'd be totally cool with it even if that would ultimately always result in the end of the romance (though it'd be nice if that weren't always the case); it's still, I feel, an important distinction between "I don't like you" and "I'm not interested in that".

Even so, there are so many things that I care more about with regards to roleplaying options and gameplay and all that, both with regards to NPCs and not, that I don't really mind if that slips off the radar (or was never on the radar to begin with) -- it would just be nice.

I did find the complaints that Sebastian didn't count as a romance due to not having a sex scene to be rather annoying, but admit that this does imply a sizeable portion of the fanbase would just get all annoyed if there were more romances without those (I guess most people must really like them).

[efd731]

I've seen a few people saying that specialization LI restriction makes no sense, and really? You can't think of a reason that berserkers assassins reavers Templars necromancers bloodmages would be discriminated against? Anyhow, gate all the things!! As long as they're not super restrictive, it helps set characters apart and make them seem a little "realer".

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I don't particularly care if there are asexual romances (despite being, myself, asexual). The characters I play aren't necessarily going to be, and if they are, there's a decent chance they won't be interested in having a romance to begin with. Romances are generally something I only even make use of in a game if I come to the conclusion that it's the only in-character way to go about things, so even if that option was there, there would be a rather high chance of my never using it. So, on the one hand, I actually agree that it should be a rather low priority -- certainly coming in as a lower priority than other orientations, since they tend to care more about that sort of thing. I'd be much happier with more/deeper non-romance NPC interaction. Now, I am of course speaking only for myself, there.

On the other hand, I would appreciate it if there were the option to have your character be asexual and yet have a romance, as opposed to having a romance option who is asexual. All that would require would be some way to turn down the whole sex scene bit without the option equating to "no, I really don't like you". I'd be totally cool with it even if that would ultimately always result in the end of the romance (though it'd be nice if that weren't always the case); it's still, I feel, an important distinction between "I don't like you" and "I'm not interested in that".

Even so, there are so many things that I care more about with regards to roleplaying options and gameplay and all that, both with regards to NPCs and not, that I don't really mind if that slips off the radar (or was never on the radar to begin with) -- it would just be nice.

I did find the complaints that Sebastian didn't count as a romance due to not having a sex scene to be rather annoying, but admit that this does imply a sizeable portion of the fanbase would just get all annoyed if there were more romances without those (I guess most people must really like them).

 

Well, Gaider did say they may look into having an asexual love interest in future games.

[Finnn62]

I'm fairly good friends with an asexual couple who have a wonderful relationship (and they're both quite openly asexual). Not to start any arguments, just to say that these types of relationships do exist. 

[Lady Nuggins]

Indeed someone does not get it, that person is not me. Because I am not a moron. Trying to argue for things like Asexual LI's is just grasping at straws for an argument, imo. It's White Knighting in the worst way. "We need to include literally every permutation of human sexuality because fairness!" Except ones that are socially not accepted, like pedophiles and incest, and all those dark things that would likely exist in a medieval setting. Despite the fact this game is not about LI's and Romances, and arguments of that type seem to think that the game should be a dating simulator where no one is left out, well, no one except the people who have "wrong" tastes, as mentioned above. To devote vast sums of money to flesh out an optional, overall unimportant feature to cater to every sub-sect of humanity possible, because Political Correctness. Things like that, are why good games end up sucking, because companies try to appeal to everyone. You cannot, and will not ever please everyone. By advocating for such things it proves you have no idea how hard a game is to create, or simply don't care about that, because you think something is unfair. 

 

By that logic, DAI is going to suck big time, because look at how many different people they're appealing to!  There's even lesbians in this game.

[efd731]

By that logic, DAI is going to suck big time, because look at how many different people they're appealing to! There's even lesbians in this game.

Uuummmm, to be a complete ass, why would they though? Lgbt people are a ridiculous minority of the general pop, but significant enough for their own content,and honestly, pretty starved for positive content. So it makes sense from a buisness perspective and a not being an A$$hole perspective to give them that. But is there enough of an audience for asexual(and other uber-minorities) to have it be played enough? Like, enough people can go "well I'm a straight/gay guy/gal but let's do something different" but how many people will jump on the asexual romance train? And how will bioware write it? And how many gallons of fan tears will there be when the character is really hot and no one gets to virtually bump uglies with them

Edit: that's what I get for quoting the wrong person.

[Lady Nuggins]

Uuummmm, to be a complete ass, why would they though? Lgbt people are a ridiculous minority of the general pop, but significant enough for their own content,and honestly, pretty starved for positive content. So it makes sense from a buisness perspective and a not being an A$$hole perspective to give them that. But is there enough of an audience for asexual(and other uber-minorities) to have it be played enough? Like, enough people can go "well I'm a straight/gay guy/gal but let's do something different" but how many people will jump on the asexual romance train? And how will bioware write it? And how many gallons of fan tears will there be when the character is really hot and no one gets to virtually bump uglies with them

Edit: that's what I get for quoting the wrong person.

 

I think lots of people enjoy interesting characters that happen to be unlike themselves.  But for the fan tears, I imagine it would be no worse than not getting to romance a character at all.  Also, as far as I know, we couldn't sleep with Sebastian for his romance either.

 

Not saying you don't have a point, but I don't see it as an impossibility. 

[TheRevanchist]

By that logic, DAI is going to suck big time, because look at how many different people they're appealing to!  There's even lesbians in this game.

 

 

For the record, there's a very real -possibility- that DAI WILL in fact, suck. Nothing is set in stone. But I digress, because lesbians, and gay men, are vastly more numerous than Asexual people, enough so that it is worth it to give them something. I don't see too many non Asexual people willing to deal with an Asexual romance, sure there's always some but not enough to justify all the money invested I would suspect. You're talking about a minority within a minority, games do not have limitless resources, and optional, unimportant content like romances, must always take a backseat to the games actual important features. 

[Asdrubael Vect]

elf(especially dalish) romancing humans? hell no

 

dwarf(especially who was not raised as castless and whole life live in Orzammar or Sharok as some noble) romancing qunari? hell no..and there is no common and rare for them to romance humans...some as we know from DAO was romance with elfs but even this is not far from rare as with humans

 

mage romancing templar/seeker(anti-mage person like fenris and those who have all reason to not romance mages or for mages to not romance with those who kill them and serve in order what inprison and kill them)? hell no, this is sick

 

i would not even talk about everyone is bisexual or gays when it not make much sence if we would talk about realism

 

gating is make sense and even if i would not mind and want all have anyone so noone would have problems i understand that we must stop fenris and anders, merril situations when romance with them not make sense at all...give presents not change who you are and what you do  and Li must stay for what they are fight and belief...Vellanna as Merril would never romance humans, Anders with Morrigan would never romance templar zealot and Fenris as Cullen would never romance apostage or blood mage exept you mind controll him..even be friend with them would be merely posible

 

But if we would make gating system for the realism we would need more LI option(companions them would be or not) for the more realism because srly when we have a choice to be one of the 4 races(8 heroes 4 males and 4 females), have 2 damn kingdom and many factions to side with,...this is not Hawke in 1 Kirkwall anymore who have the whole options of Li for any taste of races and mages/nonmages exept dwarves and Qunari

 

you cant give players to romance 2  female andrastian human non-mages...females have male elf, male Qunari and 2 really different humans males and not have only dwarf male, but males nonhumans and mage have nothing exept 2 andrastian human non-mages who is not so really different by their nature and beliefs and created mostly for human and non-mage inquisitor

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Indeed someone does not get it, that person is not me. Because I am not a moron. Trying to argue for things like Asexual LI's is just grasping at straws for an argument, imo. It's White Knighting in the worst way. "We need to include literally every permutation of human sexuality because fairness!" Except ones that are socially not accepted, like pedophiles and incest, and all those dark things that would likely exist in a medieval setting. Despite the fact this game is not about LI's and Romances, and arguments of that type seem to think that the game should be a dating simulator where no one is left out, well, no one except the people who have "wrong" tastes, as mentioned above. To devote vast sums of money to flesh out an optional, overall unimportant feature to cater to every sub-sect of humanity possible, because Political Correctness. Things like that, are why good games end up sucking, because companies try to appeal to everyone. You cannot, and will not ever please everyone. By advocating for such things it proves you have no idea how hard a game is to create, or simply don't care about that, because you think something is unfair. 

Comparing all the more minor sexualities to things like pedophilia and incest. Classy. 

[TheRevanchist]

If you want to see it that way, that's your prerogative. MY point, is simply, there will always be discrimination when it comes to sexuality, those are two examples of that. So sitting here, acting like Bioware should go totally out of there way, to cater to literally every permutation of human sexuality, is frankly asking too much, considering Romances are NOT the focus of the game, and never have been.  

[Super Drone]

If you want to see it that way, that's your prerogative. MY point, is simply, there will always be discrimination when it comes to sexuality, those are two examples of that. So sitting here, acting like Bioware should go totally out of there way, to cater to literally every permutation of human sexuality, is frankly asking too much, considering Romances are NOT the focus of the game, and never have been.  

 

That may be true from a perspective of sheer practicality. But not so long ago, this was the argument against LGB romances. And a bit earlier, the argument for "wasting" Romances on straight women (as the majority of players were assumed to be straight men). Why is the line being where it is now good, but the line 10 years ago unnacceptable?

[Lee80]

I really dislike the race gating, and if it is expanded to class gating as well I may just give up on these games.  Restricting the romances for gender/sexuality makes sense (though can be very annoying, since gay males have always gotten the least options)...but the rest sound like a huge annoyance. Enough with the gating. 

[Remmirath]

Uuummmm, to be a complete ass, why would they though? Lgbt people are a ridiculous minority of the general pop, but significant enough for their own content,and honestly, pretty starved for positive content. So it makes sense from a buisness perspective and a not being an A$$hole perspective to give them that. But is there enough of an audience for asexual(and other uber-minorities) to have it be played enough? Like, enough people can go "well I'm a straight/gay guy/gal but let's do something different" but how many people will jump on the asexual romance train? And how will bioware write it? And how many gallons of fan tears will there be when the character is really hot and no one gets to virtually bump uglies with them

The figures that I've most often seen are that LGBT people are something like 10% of the population and asexual people something like 1%... which is still a decently large number of people. To give a comparison to something that is often easier to observe if you don't know people well, the same figure for the number of left-handed people is also 10%.

I don't know how sexual people feel about playing asexual characters, I really don't. I know that I myself like playing characters that are different than me in a wide variety of ways, and that can include their sexuality. I would think that people would be just as likely to take the "let's try something different" angle with regards to an asexual romance as to any other that doesn't match their own orientation, but I could easily be wrong there.
 

For the record, there's a very real -possibility- that DAI WILL in fact, suck. Nothing is set in stone. But I digress, because lesbians, and gay men, are vastly more numerous than Asexual people, enough so that it is worth it to give them something. I don't see too many non Asexual people willing to deal with an Asexual romance, sure there's always some but not enough to justify all the money invested I would suspect. You're talking about a minority within a minority, games do not have limitless resources, and optional, unimportant content like romances, must always take a backseat to the games actual important features.

I definitely agree that romances should take a back seat to most things. Given that there are going to be a large number of them, however, they might as well switch it up from game to game, no?

[TheRevanchist]

You want them to switch it up? then advocate for an ugly ass bastard for a romance option. No one gives a damn that all the LI's are always "hawt" in some way. And I bet if they gave us an ugly one, people would give them crap for it. Discrimination will always be a thing with this subject, no matter how you want to dress it up. 

[Remmirath]

I'd be cool with that. I can't say if other people would or not.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

You want them to switch it up? then advocate for an ugly ass bastard for a romance option. No one gives a damn that all the LI's are always "hawt" in some way. And I bet if they gave us an ugly one, people would give them crap for it. Discrimination will always be a thing with this subject, no matter how you want to dress it up. 

*looks at all the "'insert DAI LI here' is ugly" threads that have been made* 

 

Um, I don't think everyone agrees that all the options are "hawt".