476 réponses à ce sujet

[Efvie]

I hope you don't think that I'm trying to invalidate your opinions. They are totally valid. I just disagree and am offering a counterpoint.

 

I understand your counterpoint, but since it‘s just a neverending swamp of counterpoints… I feel like the right choice is the one that excludes the fewest people.

 

…

 

And I think Dorian is a bit of a red herring, but yet he keeps getting brought up: for Dorian, his orientation is formative. He would not be the same character without it.

 

For other characters, nobody can actually say how exactly eliding the orientation destroys a character. Take the revelation about Cullen, for example: is the character ruined now that it is known that he was written as being playersexual or bisexual?

[AEve1]

[...]

For other characters, nobody can actually say how exactly eliding the orientation destroys a character. Take the revelation about Cullen, for example: is the character ruined now that it is known that he was written as being playersexual or bisexual?

Huh, whoa, I had no idea.

 

...I'm just going to pretend that the same thing happened for Cassandra.

[Tookah45]

If anything, I was once again reminded that the main female romanceable character, Cassandra, was meant for straight male gamers only, just like characters like Bastila, Miranda, Ashley, and Morrigan before her, and that isn't a pleasant feeling.

 

And I was again reminded that the main male romanceable character, Cullen, was meant for straight female gamers only. Just like characters like Carth, Jacob, Garrus, and Alistair. What's your point, exactly? Maybe, just maybe, we can use this game to do a kind of roleplay thing, where we pretend to be someone else. Just a hunch, though. 

[finc.loki]

The only PC with access to 6 romances is a bisexual elf, everyone else is restricted to 4 available choices with human female having 5, i don't get the anger about bisexual people having more options since it should be obvious

That is still 3 choices per gender vs 2 for straight.

If it was 4 it would have been on par with 2 female and 2 male choices.

 

My point was actually about people saying it is more realistic when in reality ~10% of the population is homosexual and well let's double that for bisexual (don't know, probably way more females than male). I.E, referring to that nothing is realistic about it whether set sexuality or not. Meaning it is not a totally valid argument.

[finc.loki]

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.

 

And with that in mind, I feel like all character should be open to either sex. It's our story that we're building. If people make a fuss about that, that is their issue, which it really is because they have some kind of trouble accepting a possibility that won't even exist within their game unless they make it exist. That's how narrow minded people are. The fact that some character in a game could be bi is an issue for the. But if they are written well, they will not show this and it will not matter. It will only be relevant when people start talking about it.

Great then you don't need a main story either. You can just use your imagination, right?

 

It is more realistic and immersive if the characters have set identities. If you want to make Dorian Bi, then you ruin Dorian as it's own character, it's a virtual F**K toy for your whim. I know it's a game but, some semblance of character is needed. Try and go out in real life and just tell a guy, you're now gay, blow me or vice versa.

After all this isn't a porno fantasy, but a game with the ADDED bonus of deeper character interaction with romance.

[Grieving Natashina]

Edit: Never mind, both posters are being hostile.  It's fine to disagree, but could you guys be willing to dial down the aggressive tone a notch?  I don't want to see this thread get locked.  There isn't a lot of places to talk why LGBT representation matters in BioWare games, even on the BSN, without most of the threads getting derailed by hostility (from all sides) and locked down.  

 

Try to be cool, please?  

[finc.loki]

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.

That is a contradiction.

If ALL would be available it would be quantity over quality, especially romance story wise meaning no deeper romances. It would be a bland buffet of who do I want to nail. No deeper connection because they are NOT a written character with a set sexual preference or belief etc. A blank slate. 

[Fandango]

For other characters, nobody can actually say how exactly eliding the orientation destroys a character.

I don't accept that at all. Take Sera for example. Sera is gay. She's a fully fledged, wonderfully written, NPC who happens to be gay and she's gay regardless of how some people would like her to be for the purpose of romance. As such, she has a romantic mind of her own and I would hate to see that undermined in favour of having her pander to the play style of those who might like her to be straight for questionable (or indeed daft) reasons.

So no, those people who want nothing more than to have a smorgasbord of romantic bots available to their protagonist, regardless of how they choose to play them, should really think carefully about the social cost of rolling that out!

The cast of Inquisition are who they are and it's brilliant. Let it be.

[DetcelferVisionary]

I don't accept that at all. Take Sera for example. Sera is gay. She's a fully fledged, wonderfully written, NPC who happens to be gay and she's gay regardless of how some people would like her to be for the purpose of romance. As such, she has a romantic mind of her own and I would hate to see that undermined in favour of having her pander to the play style of those who might like her to be straight for questionable reasons.

So no, those people who want nothing more than a smorgasbord of romantic bots available to their protagonist, regardless of how they choose to play them, should really think carefully about the social cost of rolling that out!

The cast of Inquisition are who they are and it's brilliant. Let it be.

 

It is interesting how many people wish to change the story and intellectual property without reflecting they're bashing someones vision who poured their heart and soul into it, while trying to balance so many other issues, complaints and deadlines along the way. What a herculean effort to have managed as much as Bioware has!

 

If selfishness is the key to being miserable, then selflessness must be the key to being happy! I wan't others to experience a relationship that they can enjoy.  Unfortunately, any reader of these forums can tell you that the desires of people on here are vast and varied.  It's the variety in this series and other Bioware games  individual characters that is the spice that keeps things interesting and people coming back for more.  If we band-aid relationships by making them all bisexual, we lose something in the process. Any writer can carbon copy the generic hero...  but a great writer strives to create something no one has seen before.  To leave their mark,  they're going to present us with stuff that will makes us think, laugh, cry and make us feel uncomfortable at times.  Perhaps not all characters, but a few.  If Bioware makes all romance characters bi-sexual ,  we'll be forever trapped in a formula,  too afraid to give voice to the voiceless. 

 

No one who is truly passionate about their cause want's to see their beliefs and orientation marginalized.  I wouldn't wish that on anyone.  However, until we can all agree that not every story can be told in a single game to suit all these unique tastes...  we're going to be stuck here arguing for a long,  long time because someone is going to be left out.  

[Giant ambush beetle]

''Try to appeal to everyone and you'll appeal to no one.''  That phrase should be automatically posted after every two posts-. 

[Fenrisfil]

I am not remotely impressed by the straight male protagonist romantic options. However, despite that (I just find them both to be somewhat dull and duty obsessed). I am seriously considering going gay on my third play through to romance Dorian because at least he's an interesting character! But if I was given the choice I would actually have given Sera a bash even though many hate her, though my personal preference would have been either Viviane or Scout Harding, niether of which can be romanced by anyone.

 

Having said that I still prefer this to how it was done in DA2. While the romance options weren't great if you wanted female companionship (possibly male too, it seems a lot of people wanted to romance Aveline or Varrick, tough luck) they were at least unique, but the way that you could sleep with almost anyone and the way many seem to make the first moves made the whole thing somewhat silly. Indeed it lead to me playing as the irresitable man **** and trying to sleep with as many people as possible (and naturally romancing Isabella because free love and all that).

 

But there was an odd thing with DA2, the only way to get to know any of the romancable characters properly was to romance them and as a result everyone you didn't romance (and could) ended up hollow shells of themselves. I've noted that of the romancable characters people tend to dislike all of them except the one they actually romanced. With that kind of design I guess total bisexuality was required. That is clearly a mistake (because who's going to give DA2 that many play throughs?).

 

I like that in DAI you can get to know characters without romancing them (well, if they don't keep playing the vanishing NPC bug game anyway), and I like that the restriction exist even if it means I'm limited to two characters I struggle to have any enthusiasm to romance. In the end on my first play through I had to go for the sad story of romancing Cassandra while also supporting her for divine. It provided some good emotion. But I guess the truth is the romances should always be optional extra's in the games and not a key component. In DA2 it was a vital part and that made people more upset with the options then they should have been. In DAI I feel I can have a good game without romancing and so the limitations and my disapointment with the selection doesn't seem so important. Indeed I still feel it adds to the "realism" to have those limitations.

 

Truth is I rarely get attached to the romance options. In Bioware games it only ever happened for Morrigan and Tali and over so many games I have to accept that there often won't be anyone that really peaks my interest (or maybe they just forgot to put some nerd bait in this time, lol).

 

Having said all that, I would like to know why males don't get any race specific romance options. I mean Scout Harding is RIGHT THERE and what better encouragement to play a dwarf could there be! Sure, wouldn't have the depth of the female elf's romance with Solas, but It would be something!

[Fenrisfil]

That was longer than expected. Lol. I can ramble sometimes.

[Fenrisfil]

Apparently forgot to finish my first sentance too. Despite that.... I still think the restrictions are a good idea. Is what I meant to say before I started rambling. Doh. Need option to edit posts.

[AEve1]

Would people please stop saying that availability to multiple genders is bland, or robotic, or pornographic, or whatever? It's actually getting to be kind of insulting. People who are attracted to a broader spectrum than you still have personalities and preferences. Please be clearer about what you're actually objecting to - if you think that having no one who prefers some gender is unrealistic, just say so. If you believe that a particular orientation is formative to a person's identity, say that without denigrating other orientations.

[DaemionMoadrin]

The fact that sexual orientation is part of a character and not subject to change at the whims of a player allows the writers to have those characters interact with each other and the world. Even if it only comes down to comments about women (or men) the party encounters. You can't do that if the characters are player-sexual and making all of them bi feels quite unrealistic.

[Biotic_Warlock]

That's what i feared when there were articles about "Bioware's first FULLY GAY" character. But, no.

First one was Steve Cortez, right?
ME3 in case not known.

[DaemionMoadrin]

First one was Steve Cortez, right?
ME3 in case not known.

 

I don't see why we're making a difference between gay and lesbian here... so the first one would be Juhani from KotOR.

Unlike Steve she was a party member, too.

[Biotic_Warlock]

I don't see why we're making a difference between gay and lesbian here... so the first one would be Juhani from KotOR.
Unlike Steve she was a party member, too.

My mistake, in both sense.
I should have said Steve and Sam
And I didn't play enough of KOTOR to see that: I wasn't that great at the game.

[Efvie]

The fact that sexual orientation is part of a character and not subject to change at the whims of a player allows the writers to have those characters interact with each other and the world. Even if it only comes down to comments about women (or men) the party encounters. You can't do that if the characters are player-sexual and making all of them bi feels quite unrealistic.

 

The writers have chosen not to do that, though, or can you remember any cases where that’s been done? Maybe a character got flustered by a pretty or handsome NPC? I don’t remember.

 

And you most certainly can do that. It’s easily flagged. I’m pretty sure it’d be an easier task to add a few different reactions than it is to write an entire second character.

[DaemionMoadrin]

 

The writers have chosen not to do that, though. And I’m pretty sure it’d be an easier task to add a few different reactions than it is to write an entire second character.

 

No? Sera doesn't comment on other women? Are you sure?

[Efvie]

No? Sera doesn't comment on other women? Are you sure?

 

Oh yes! I also think there was something with Alistair in DA:O come to think of it.

[Felya87]

Sera mention quite a lot her sexuality...the dialogue with Blackwall who is infatuated with Josephine came to mind. Or when she talk about girls with Bull.

[Efvie]

That is a contradiction.

If ALL would be available it would be quantity over quality, especially romance story wise meaning no deeper romances. It would be a bland buffet of who do I want to nail. No deeper connection because they are NOT a written character with a set sexual preference or belief etc. A blank slate. 

 

And I think 4 characters could be far more fully realized than 10. YMMV.

 

I don't accept that at all. Take Sera for example. Sera is gay. She's a fully fledged, wonderfully written, NPC who happens to be gay

 

I’ll stop there. She is.

 

There nuances here, such as LGBTQ needing representation, but underneath it all… it’s the person. The orientation just happens to be.

…

 

Anyway, I guess I’m done with these topics because it’s so heartbreaking to see how tightly people cling to the notion that orientation should be defining. It’s never going to go anywhere, and just makes me sad.

[Voragoras]

The realistic argument falls to the wayside in a game, and a game set where dragons swoop from the sky and a giant hole in the sky connects to a world of demons and physical dreams nonetheless. What you mean to say is "believable", and I'm willing to sacrifice believability in favour of player choice and greater access to narrative plot threads.

 

Besides, if I can believe a man can be corrupted by a disease to the point of ascending godhood and commanding a dragon made of red lyrium, and if I can believe that magical beings walk the Earth, and if I can believe that green gates spit out demons and can only be sealed by a mark on someone's hand, I'm willing to believe 4 bisexuals can exist in the same space at once.

 

In regards to sexuality being an integral part of their characterisations, I disagree. I've never felt like the colour of my skin affected my personality, nor my physical sex, and not who I'm attracted to. They all felt like things I was just coincidentally assigned to me, and sure those labels are descriptive, but in a very superficial way. I understand that my race/sex/sexuality would shape how others would respond to me, but if I were suddenly turned straight one day, all that would change is that I now would seek out males to start a relationship with. If I woke up and found I was West-Asian instead of Slavic, I wouldn't immediately lose my passion for ancient history, or my love of fantasy literature. Both of these switches would change absolutely nothing else about me other than which genitals appeal to me the most and what pigment my skin was.

 

I'd say unless BioWare is willing to explore legitimate conflict and development in character sexuality - Dorian's personal quest aside - gender-locked romances in games will feel like nothing more than an arbitrary restriction. Sera's existence as a lesbian city elf is never explored. Josephine's existence as a bisexual is never explored, even if she abandons an engagement to a respectable family, and even when it's in favour of a female mage Qunari. Cassandra's and Blackwall's and Solas' existences as heterosexuals is never explored. None of these sexualities shape anything about the characters - they only serve as gameplay roadblocks.

 

Sera's flirtatious sexual nature isn't a result of her being a lesbian. Solas' introverted and scholarly personality isn't a result of him being heterosexual. Cassandra's romantic ideals and her righteous drive isn't strictly contained within the realm of heterosexuality, and nor is Cullen's desire to better himself and protect others. You lose nothing about these characters if you open them up to all Inquisitors. Josephine's powerful work ethic and considerate personality isn't due to her being written as a bisexual, and neither was Leliana's piousness and belief in helping people in the best way she can.

 

Dorian and Zevran, for me, are the best arguments for sexuality as characterisation. Though I found Dorian's personal quest lacking for reasons I won't go into here, it was undoubtedly part of what his personal conflict was. Zevran was raised in the Crows and encouraged to be bisexual, so that he could convince a male mark just as easily as a female one. In both of these cases, their sexualities were more than just who they direct genuine flirty comments at.

[DetcelferVisionary]

Books = set outcome

Video games = demand that we get the outcome we want and completely ignore that writers should be able to tell the story they want to tell.

 

People talk about "restrictive" and yet it could be said that this is actually being placed on a writer and his/her characters when they're being told that they have to be written to be bisexual.   

 

This is the problem telling people it's their story in a set narrative outcome.  They truly think...  it's THEIR story.  No,  no it's not.