476 réponses à ce sujet

[AEve1]

I agree that anyone who uses that same argument about a straight character is equally wrong.  I'll be honest, though.  I haven't seen that very much.  I've seen it a bit about Cassandra, but that's usually framed more as "She gave off bisexual vibes, but then wasn't."  I guess I've seen it a bit with Cullen.  Maybe?  Not sure about that one.  Outside of that, I haven't seen any one say that Blackwall or Solas had no reason to be straight.  If they do, then they are equally as silly as the "this character has no reason to be gay" people. 

I don't know if I agree. It would obviously be ridiculous in real life to ask why someone has a particular orientation, but this isn't real life. It's a game, with human writers who I can guarantee you did not determine sexuality by roulette wheel. I think it's worthwhile to ask why. In Dorian's case, there was clearly a particular story Gaider wanted to tell. In Cullen's case, there weren't the resources to animate scenes for every type of inquisitor, and Cullen had potentially shown a previous attraction to at least one women. In Sera's case, I would speculate that they wanted a lesbian character whose sexuality wasn't a big deal, and they thought it would be more interesting/ironic with an elf since we know from the lore that other groups of elves care a great deal about reproduction.

 

Cassandra and Blackwall don't seem to have obvious reasoning behind their sexualities, so what's wrong with questioning why? Same with Solas, whose limited resources could well have gone into an m/m elf/elf romance instead. If there's no reason, then maybe that's a sign that this question should have been asked at some point. They aren't real people, and there is reasoning behind their sexualities. The issue is whether that reasoning is obvious to the player or not. I personally like to be able to recognize the reasoning, because otherwise it looks like defaulting to stereotypical heteronormativity.

 

Now maybe the reason is just, "we need straight characters too." Fine, makes sense enough if you want a diverse lineup. Doesn't mean it's not worth asking the question.

[Uirebhiril]

I say otherwise. It's my story I'm playing. I change it as it suits me. I am well within my rights to imagine whatever the hell I want, thank you. If I want to make Dorian bi, I will damn well do so. Dorian should be whatever I want him to be. Funny thing is that so many people wanted him bi that clearly this was a screw up on BW's part for not seeing the massive appeal this character would be. Solas isn't so bad because you can play an elf. But having to play a different sex is kind of a bummer.

 

You're playing another character in a set story. You can decide what your character's looks, attitude, and preferences are, but they still exist in a world that was not created by you and which has been bound by the creative liberties of the actual writers of the story. If you want to make Dorian bi, then you are within rights to write fanfiction to do so - but not to demand that the story another wrote bend to what you want beyond the things that your character is allowed to influence. We sort of agree to this by buying a game or book or movie and understanding that no matter what part we feel within it, the story itself is only ever ours in a small way. If we want worlds of our own, then it is on us to create them. In the meantime, we can play in and enjoy the worlds of others and respect that what they created is theirs and only shared with us.

[daveliam]

I personally believe the player should essentially be the dungeon master and have as much control over the game as realistically possible. Thus, entirely outside of gender debates, I believe it should be up to the player to be able to determine who is and who is not romanceable.

I would have thought that this would have been the "SJW-friendly" stance as well, to be honest. Does this current design not say that "gay people and straight people are just too different?"

 

Not really because it also allows for gay/bi erasure completely from the games.  There are, to this day, people who insist that there were no bisexual men in their playthroughs of DA 2 because the characters were playersexual, so therefore they were both straight in their playthroughs.  I'd rather non-hetero men be mandatory in all playthroughs, not have their sexuality up for debate.  And, let's be honest, many of the people who want this option want it so that they can remove m/m flirting specifically.  It just doesn't sit well with me.

 

I don't know if I agree. It would obviously be ridiculous in real life to ask why someone has a particular orientation, but this isn't real life. It's a game, with human writers who I can guarantee you did not determine sexuality by roulette wheel. I think it's worthwhile to ask why. In Dorian's case, there was clearly a particular story Gaider wanted to tell. In Cullen's case, there weren't the resources to animate scenes for every type of inquisitor, and Cullen had potentially shown a previous attraction to at least one women. In Sera's case, I would speculate that they wanted a lesbian character whose sexuality wasn't a big deal, and they thought it would be more interesting/ironic with an elf since we know from the lore that other groups of elves care a great deal about reproduction.

 

Cassandra and Blackwall don't seem to have obvious reasoning behind their sexualities, so what's wrong with questioning why? Same with Solas, whose limited resources could well have gone into an m/m elf/elf romance instead. If there's no reason, then maybe that's a sign that this question should have been asked at some point. They aren't real people, and there is reasoning behind their sexualities. The issue is whether that reasoning is obvious to the player or not. I personally like to be able to recognize the reasoning, because otherwise it looks like defaulting to stereotypical heteronormativity.

 

Now maybe the reason is just, "we need straight characters too." Fine, makes sense enough if you want a diverse lineup. Doesn't mean it's not worth asking the question.

 

I get that argument to an extent, but I really think that if it's okay to say, "Well Blackwall had no reason to be straight." then it's also okay to say, "Well Sera had no reason to be a lesbian".  I get that there is definitely a difference in how straight and gay characters have been portrayed historically so there is a difference between "making" a straight character bisexual, versus "making" a gay character bisexual.  I totally understand that.  I just think that a straight character needs no more 'reason' to be straight than a gay character needs a 'reason' to be gay. 

 

Provided that everyone gets a choice (i.e. at least two options), I greatly prefer the variety of sexualities approach that they took in ME 3 and DA: I.  When DA 2 first came out, I loved the fact that four of the five options were bisexual because it meant that finally for the first time I was allowed to have a choice in my LI.  But now that they have demonstrated that they are willing to give us two options and still have a variety of sexualities, I like that better.  Dorian is gay!  That's huge!  It's the first time ever in a Bioware story that there is a openly, unambiguous gay male companion!  And only the second time ever in a AAA Title RPG (Arcade Gannon being the first, that I know of).  It makes me very happy to see that.  I've been waiting almost thirty years (since I first picked up Legend of Zelda for the NES) for this.  I have representation with a gay guy.  I don't have that with a bisexual guy. 

 

I get that my opinions run contrary to many other "SJWs" (I wear that title like a badge of honor, btw). 

[Voragoras]

Yeah my stance is that the romance able companions should be bi-sexual/playersexuality. The non romanceable companions and npc's can then be used if you really want to tell a story that requires a companion to have a fixed or implied fixed sexuality

 

I actually think this is a really good idea, and the best of both worlds. I would also like the total number of romanceable NPCs to be decreased, because I feel like a lot of the romance threads in this game were very thin, in terms of content. People have already mentioned that Josephine's female romance is basically just the male one with the pronouns changed, and I would prefer to have instead spent the time that would've been on her romance on deepening one of the others instead. (I say that having enjoyed Josephine's romance, whilst still recognising that it was quite shallow.)

 

Have a small number of the companions/characters be plot-relevant and romanceable, and have them all be bisexual. Then, you can spend your romance budget on making those as in-depth as possible and change the dialogue - maybe even the quests - to reflect the gender of the character you're romancing them as. Quality over quantity.

 

(Also, sorry for any typos, I have a messed up sleeping schedule atm and had just woken up.)

[SardaukarElite]

In Sera's case, I would speculate that they wanted a lesbian character whose sexuality wasn't a big deal, and they thought it would be more interesting/ironic with an elf since we know from the lore that other groups of elves care a great deal about reproduction.

 

Any elf reproduction irony is lost in the complexity of her stance on elves. There's basically no reason for her liking women in the story other than that's a thing that happens.

 

 

Have a small number of the companions/characters be plot-relevant and romanceable, and have them all be bisexual. Then, you can spend your romance budget on making those as in-depth as possible and change the dialogue - maybe even the quests - to reflect the gender of the character you're romancing them as. Quality over quantity.

 

I normally agree with quality over quantity, but I think with romances you run into problems because they say things about two whole characters. Limited options is limiting the player and writers. I'd be interested in seeing how more lesser romances went, assuming they implied there was more going on.

[Voragoras]

I normally agree with quality over quantity, but I think with romances you run into problems because they say things about two whole characters. Limited options is limiting the player and writers. I'd be interested in seeing how more lesser romances went, assuming they implied there was more going on.

 

That's a good point, yeah, and I see what you mean in that how they respond to romance is also an integral part of who they are. I just lament that there were so many romances in this game that I really wanted to see explored in more depth, only to have them seem rather shallow in terms of what they could've shown. A few others in this thread mentioned bringing up Josephine's family's reaction to breaking off an arranged engagement for someone who could potentially be a female Qunari, or perhaps talking about Sera's past as a lesbian city elf in Denerim.

 

Maybe if the total number of LIs was limited, we could've gotten more of this specificity. But then we'd be sacrificing what little is said about other characters, too... I dunno.

 

BRING OUT THE ROMANCE DLC.

[King Dragonlord]

I won't apologize for asking fictional characters to exist to fulfill my whims as a player in escapist fantasy. When did that become a bad thing?

If Bioware isn't down with that, fine. In the future, I'll be buying games that respect my sense if agency first and putting off bioware purchases till later rather than paying full price at launch. (They already have enough strikes from other games). Let them have their artistic integrity, I am under no obligation legally or morally to indulge them.

[Efvie]

Provided that everyone gets a choice (i.e. at least two options), I greatly prefer the variety of sexualities approach that they took in ME 3 and DA: I.  When DA 2 first came out, I loved the fact that four of the five options were bisexual because it meant that finally for the first time I was allowed to have a choice in my LI.  But now that they have demonstrated that they are willing to give us two options and still have a variety of sexualities, I like that better.  Dorian is gay!  That's huge!  It's the first time ever in a Bioware story that there is a openly, unambiguous gay male companion!  And only the second time ever in a AAA Title RPG (Arcade Gannon being the first, that I know of).  It makes me very happy to see that.  I've been waiting almost thirty years (since I first picked up Legend of Zelda for the NES) for this.  I have representation with a gay guy.  I don't have that with a bisexual guy.

 

I agree about representation. I think ideally a well-written fully playersexual romantic cast plus defined non-romanceable NPCs would be the way of the future… but as yet, I feel like it is owed to the LGBTQ community to make a special effort with their representation (as well as underrepresented ethnicities, for that matter) in addition to the playersexual rest.

[Bliss]

Wow. Just wow. First off, at least in the case of Dorian, sexuality actually played a part in his story. So changing it, does in fact change the story. The characters are written a specific way. Some more meaninful than others. Some have more depth. Others get a happy ending. They are not all made equal, because all the characters are very different from each other. We don't question why people have their sexual preferences in real life, why get so bent about it in game? Any writer knows their characters have a life of their own once you get to writing. A fully developed character starts sounding forced and fake when forcing things on them. As a normal person would be. It would be just as offensive to tell a gay person they should be straight as it is to tell a straight person they should be gay. Just to please you.

Would I have liked to romance Dorian? Yes. He's sexy and he knows it. Love it. But I can't. I refuse to play male. I'm not crying a river of tears. I made him my best friend and headcannon has dictated that he's going to be the one my dalish cries to after the battle when Skyhold feels empty without her pajama elf. And the one to hold her back from knocking Sera out.

As for player-sexual characters....while I think all people in this world need to be pansexual to begin with, the reality is that it's just not the case. Bemoan it all you want but it's not going to change. And forcing a mod, just seems.....wrong. Smacks too much of "you would be straight if you met the right man" and gives me the shivers. As for "it's a game, I should get what I want" reasoning....uuuuuhhhhh, wut.

 

Also, the mods are a lot harder to make in this game than in origins. So keep that in mind.

 

But you know....you could try saying thank you to Bioware for trying to show sexual diversity. But that's just me. This all just sounds like a reverse of the guy who ranted during DA2, "oh woe is me, Bioware did not cater to MY needs".

[daveliam]

 

I'm just glad this time around everyone isn't hitting on you and you have to show interest first. I'm really glad that when I/they get turned down they don't instantly hate me(I'm looking at you Anders!)

 

"Instantly hate" = 10 rivalry points that can be made up in a single decision in his next quest. 

[daveliam]

True, except it went downhill from there lol idk if it was a bug or something but dude ended up hating my male hawke like I smacked his mom or something.

 

Could be that Anders is just a giant douche.  I mean, my Hawke romanced him and was mostly pro-mage and he still acted like I smacked his mom half of the time.  He's just a moody jerk, I think.  It's why I actually think that his reaction to being rejected by Hawke is totally appropriate.  He overacts and is a giant melodramatic pill.  It's kind of his thing, I think! 

[Grieving Natashina]

I love how Anders hitting on a male Hawke is still such a huge thing after 3 1/2 years.  

[Grieving Natashina]

Lol yeah that's why me and my wife liked Fenris better, sure he hated my mage at first but ended up wanting to die for my PC. I really liked Anders he was my first romance on my femhawke but you know.....boom....ruined him for me for life lol

I think most of my Hawkes are masochists.  Only explanation I have for choosing Anders as often as I did.    

[daveliam]

Lol yeah that's why me and my wife liked Fenris better, sure he hated my mage at first but ended up wanting to die for my PC. I really liked Anders he was my first romance on my femhawke but you know.....boom....ruined him for me for life lol

 

I like Fenris better than Anders, personally.  Although to be honest, both are pretty 'meh' in general.  I'd say Fenris is like a 3 out of 5 and Anders is like a 2.75 out of 5. 

 

The only reason why I usually pick Anders is because I think that the best story is mage Hawke --> friendship romanced Anders --> rival Carver as a Templar.  It's such a good story, even if I kind of hate all three of those guys a little bit.

[Grieving Natashina]

I like Fenris better than Anders, personally.  Although to be honest, both are pretty 'meh' in general.  I'd say Fenris is like a 3 out of 5 and Anders is like a 2.75 out of 5. 

 

The only reason why I usually pick Anders is because I think that the best story is mage Hawke --> friendship romanced Anders --> rival Carver as a Templar.  It's such a good story, even if I kind of hate all three of those guys a little bit.

That sounds a lot like my world state, only I made Carver into a Grey Warden.  I just like his personality better that way, and he really seems to grow up more on that path.  Still, that sounds like fun too.  

[Maverick827]

Not really because it also allows for gay/bi erasure completely from the games.  There are, to this day, people who insist that there were no bisexual men in their playthroughs of DA 2 because the characters were playersexual, so therefore they were both straight in their playthroughs.  I'd rather non-hetero men be mandatory in all playthroughs, not have their sexuality up for debate.  And, let's be honest, many of the people who want this option want it so that they can remove m/m flirting specifically.  It just doesn't sit well with me.

Just becuse some people will abuse the freedom doesn't mean we should remove it entirely.

I'm also not sure how this allows people to remove homosexual content anymore than the game already does. You're already not hit on by anyone by default, let alone from someone of the same sex.

[daveliam]

That sounds a lot like my world state, only I made Carver into a Grey Warden.  I just like his personality better that way, and he really seems to grow up more on that path.  Still, that sounds like fun too.  

 

Yeah, I like Carver the best out of those three (Anders, Hawke, and Carver) and he seems the most well-adjusted and happiest as a Warden.  But the story where Hawke leaves him behind at the last minute for the Deep Roads excursion.  And then he joins the Templars partly out of spite.  And then he turns his back on Meredith because he really does love his brother and want to protect him.  So good! 

[Efvie]

We don't question why people have their sexual preferences in real life, why get so bent about it in game?

 

Because in the game, we cannot go outside the pool provided to us. Romance options should be as open as possible, so as to provide quality over quantity, and to give most players the most freedom to play the way they want to play.

 

I’ll reiterate that I think in some cases orientation or other preference is essential to a character, and the game world is richer for having those characters. In others, it’s inconsequential.

[daveliam]

Just becuse some people will abuse the freedom doesn't mean we should remove it entirely.

I'm also not sure how this allows people to remove homosexual content anymore than the game already does. You're already not hit on by anyone by default, let alone from someone of the same sex.

 

I think it shouldn't be included at all, even if people aren't going to abuse it.  The cons far outweigh the pros in my opinion.

 

To your second point, it's because it actually removes their sexuality.  It turns an LGBT character into one that isn't necessarily LGBT.  It does the same for straight characters too, but there will almost certainly be other straight companions and major NPCs outside of the LI pool.  For LGBT characters, the romance option is the primary place where they show up.  Taking that away and making them "playersexual" means that primary way to explore those stories is now gone.  Imagine that in DA: I.  Outside of the four LGBT LI's, we would only have Krem, Briala, and Celene (and a few minor completely irrelevant and mostly unnamed NPCs).  That's a huge difference. 

[Grieving Natashina]

I think it shouldn't be included at all, even if people aren't going to abuse it.  The cons far outweigh the pros in my opinion.

 

To your second point, it's because it actually removes their sexuality.  It turns an LGBT character into one that isn't necessarily LGBT.  It does the same for straight characters too, but there will almost certainly be other straight companions and major NPCs outside of the LI pool.  For LGBT characters, the romance option is the primary place where they show up.  Taking that away and making them "playersexual" means that primary way to explore those stories is now gone.  Imagine that in DA: I.  Outside of the four LGB LI's, we would only have Krem, Briala, and Celene (and a few minor completely irrelevant and mostly unnamed NPCs).  That's a huge difference. 

Hey Dave...nothing against either of our husbands but...

 

Would you marry me?  Oh, no sex of course.  I just want you for your mind.  

 

_{Seriously, I cannot like your post enough.}

[DetcelferVisionary]

Frankly, I thought it was a shame my entire DA2 squad wasn't in the Chantry when it got vaporized...  besides Varric and Aveline.  *fist bumps Varric*