53 réponses à ce sujet

[miseryunited]

I just took a look at the other romance thread and it seems to have gone off the rails. Hopefully this thread can go a little longer before descending into madness.

 

Let's set a few ground rules.

1. This thread isn't for the discussion of any unrepresented desires you may have. If you are disgruntled at the obvious omission of a Half-Unicorn, BSDM romanceable companion then by all means make your own thread.

 

2.Let's keep the discussion about sexual preference respectful. It would be better to just avoid it if at all possible. We have had the discussion several times already. Everyone deserves to be represented fairly and that goes for both sides of the coin. Saying you want more of one type of romance is not a direct insult or a plea for removal of the other kind so don't get pissy at someone who would like to see more of a certain thing.

 

Ok now that that is out of the way.....

 

To start off I'd like to expand the conversation a bit. I feel like the conversation has been too centered on the sex of companions and/or their sexual preference.

 

One problem is see is a focus on characters that don't really care that much about the Chantry, the Inquisition or support the Circle. For romances that leaves you with Cassandra or either of the two Advisor romances. Personally I feel like the Advisor romances aren't of the same caliber as the Companions. Especially because they can't accompany you. 

 

The class distribution is also an issue which I mentioned in the other thread. Essentially all of the Warriors are simple RI's. One is even Bi which gives you even more options. On the other side only one Rogue is a RI and then only for lesbians. Mages fair slightly better with one for gay males and one for elvish women.

 

I'm thrilled there are options for everyone but I feel like Bioware did a poor job spreading these out. It makes planning parties and play throughs more difficult than it needs to be.

 

 

[In Exile]

I don't get the comment on class. I understand the mage vs. non mage distinction because the mages do have a unique lore role. But rogue vs warrior?

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I'm not sure I see how any of that is a problem. Whether someone is a rogue, or an active supporter of the Chantry shouldn't really be an issue.

 

And the companions aren't really "distributed" according to romantic tastes, anyway. They are the characters that the writers came up with. The writers didn't - and shouldn't - write on the basis of satisfying the individual romantic desires of players. They are fictional characters in a story, so they should be written in a way that makes sense.

[miseryunited]

I don't get the comment on class. I understand the mage vs. non mage distinction because the mages do have a unique lore role. But rogue vs warrior?

 

I would agree that the Mage disparity is larger due to the story ramifications. I mention rogues mainly because its a glaring empty spot more so than actual level of annoyance. I know some people might want a romance a rogue-ish type character and are unable to unless they want to play a lesbian.

[Panda]

I think it would be nice if Bioware would write less humans and more other races as romances. There is very strong bias towards humans when it comes to LI's:

 

DAO: 3 human, 1 elf.

DA2: 3 human, 2 elf.

DAI: 4 human, 2 elf, 1 qunari.

 

It should be also noted that most of companions are humans so there might not be lot of space to move in when making romances that aren't human. Bioware would need to write more non-human companions that would also be open for romance. I wonder why they haven't done it with any of DA games so far though, is it because they don't just have visio for non-human romances, especially dwarf romances or maybe they think players aren't really to accept non-human LI's? At least I have seen some saying qunaris are too alien and dwarfs not attractive enough for them to romance so maybe that's the problem?

 

Personally I'd love to see more different races in romances in the future with DAI series. Especially dwarf romance would be welcomed!

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I would agree that the Mage disparity is larger due to the story ramifications. I mention rogues mainly because its a glaring empty spot more so than actual level of annoyance. I know some people might want a romance a rogue-ish type character and are unable to unless they want to play a lesbian.

 

Didn't you say this thread wasn't supposed to be about sex or sexual preferences, or a lack of romance interests with specific traits people were looking for? 

 

 

1. This thread isn't for the discussion of any unrepresented desires you may have.

 

To start off I'd like to expand the conversation a bit. I feel like the conversation has been too centered on the sex of companions and/or their sexual preference.

 

 

One problem is see is a focus on characters that don't really care that much about the Chantry, the Inquisition or support the Circle. For romances that leaves you with Cassandra or either of the two Advisor romances. Personally I feel like the Advisor romances aren't of the same caliber as the Companions.

 

I'm finding all of this confusing, given that you seem to be asking for romances that have a specific combination of traits that you want.

[In Exile]

I would agree that the Mage disparity is larger due to the story ramifications. I mention rogues mainly because its a glaring empty spot more so than actual level of annoyance. I know some people might want a romance a rogue-ish type character and are unable to unless they want to play a lesbian.

I've had a 1-2 rogue romances in every bioware game as a dude. We've got Leliana and Zevran in DAO. Isabella in DA2. There's no rogue in DAI but it's like there being no male mage in DAO. I'm just not seeing how the rouge-ness matters.

[miseryunited]

I'm not sure I see how any of that is a problem. Whether someone is a rogue, or an active supporter of the Chantry shouldn't really be an issue.

 

And the companions aren't really "distributed" according to romantic tastes, anyway. They are the characters that the writers came up with. The writers didn't - and shouldn't - write on the basis of satisfying the individual romantic desires of players. They are fictional characters in a story, so they should be written in a way that makes sense.

 

That's making the assumption that those goals are mutually exclusive. You don't think the characters couldn't have been written or distributed any number of ways and not have been equally as engaging? 

 

I'm not saying remove Sera or Solas or make Dorian straight. They could have simply wrote a romance for Vivienne and not Blackwall and it would have made a difference to people.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

*editing

 

My editing got messed up while answering multiple posts, and then I remembered that I'm not supposed to answer threads like this seriously, anymore. Since this post is otherwise blank, as I added the edits to others, I will replace it with this:

 

 

*vanishes*

[miseryunited]

Didn't you say this thread wasn't supposed to be about sex or sexual preferences, or a lack of romance interests with specific traits people were looking for? 

 

I meant as a direct topic and perhaps I wasn't as clear. I only mentioned it there to show a lack of diversity not to complain about the validity of that choice being it game. The statement is there as a fact and not an opinion if that makes sense.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

That's making the assumption that those goals are mutually exclusive. You don't think the characters couldn't have been written or distributed any number of ways and not have been equally as engaging? 

 

I'm not saying remove Sera or Solas or make Dorian straight. They could have simply wrote a romance for Vivienne and not Blackwall and it would have made a difference to people.

 

I don't understand. You're saying that you want to redistribute the romances, because you'd rather romance Vivienne than Blackwall. That's fine, but isn't that exactly what you said this thread wasn't supposed to be about?

[miseryunited]

I've had a 1-2 rogue romances in every bioware game as a dude. We've got Leliana and Zevran in DAO. Isabella in DA2. There's no rogue in DAI but it's like there being no male mage in DAO. I'm just not seeing how the rouge-ness matters.

 

It might not matter to you and that's totally fine. I mentioned it because I'd rather see another Rogue romance than 3 warrior RI's but I don't really expect every one to feel the same about it.

[In Exile]

It might not matter to you and that's totally fine. I mentioned it because I'd rather see another Rogue romance than 3 warrior RI's but I don't really expect every one to feel the same about it.

I'm not trying to dismiss you. I'm saying I don't get why the class matters. What does a rogue offer than a warrior doesn't?

[ThreeF]

One problem is see is a focus on characters that don't really care that much about the Chantry, the Inquisition or support the Circle. For romances that leaves you with Cassandra or either of the two Advisor romances.

 

I'm not sure I understand this sentence. I'm guessing what you mean here but it's not how I saw it in my game.

 

 

Personally I feel like the Advisor romances aren't of the same caliber as the Companions. Especially because they can't accompany you. 

 

Didn't found this to be the case at all. Sure i wouldn't mind more and different kind of interaction, but that generally falls in the line of wanting more.

 

 

I'm guessing (correct me if I'm wrong) you were playing a straight male IQ, didn't want to romance Cassandra because of the religion and found Josephine romance lacking. However this is not true for others who also played characters that don't really care that much about the Chantry, the Inquisition or support the Circle. If I'm not mistaking only Cassandra, Solas, Sera and maybe Backwall (he seems to preach a lot about goodness and how IQ should behave, but maybe that doesn't extends into his romance) have very strong opinions about various matters, the others not so much.

[Panda]

I guess rogue or warrior as class matters if Bioware goes with stereotypes of these clashes: noble knight (Alistair, Cullen, Cassandra, Aveline)  and cunning rogue (Zevran, Isabela, Leliana, Varric). I mean just listing those it seems like there is some stereotypical stuff with classes ^^

 

But other than class's possible impact to personality cause of stereotype in writing, I think class doesn't matter at all.

[Jeffry]

I guess rogue or warrior as class matters if Bioware goes with stereotypes of these clashes: noble knight (Alistair, Cullen, Cassandra, Aveline)  and cunning rogue (Zevran, Isabela, Leliana, Varric). I mean just listing those it seems like there is some stereotypical stuff with classes ^^

 

BioWare's been recycling character types ever since BG And it still works.

[Panda]

BioWare's been recycling character types ever since BG And it still works.

 

Don't fix what isn't broken I guess ^^

[miseryunited]

I'm not trying to dismiss you. I'm saying I don't get why the class matters. What does a rogue offer than a warrior doesn't?

 

Speaking for myself only, trying to plan a party with Warrior PC and not have a two Warrior party limits my options. I really like having my love interest in the party with my PC.  In this case, a rogue option would be preferable over a warrior. 

 

I don't want this to get blown out of proportion. I'm not up in arms that everything isn't exactly equal. It's simply feedback and a point of discussion on smoothing out what i see as some rough edges of the game.

[miseryunited]

I'm not sure I understand this sentence. I'm guessing what you mean here but it's not how I saw it in my game.

 

 

Didn't found this to be the case at all. Sure i wouldn't mind more and different kind of interaction, but that generally falls in the line of wanting more.

 

 

I'm guessing (correct me if I'm wrong) you were playing a straight male IQ, didn't want to romance Cassandra because of the religion and found Josephine romance lacking. However this is not true for others who also played characters that don't really care that much about the Chantry, the Inquisition or support the Circle. If I'm not mistaking only Cassandra, Solas, Sera and maybe Backwall (he seems to preach a lot about goodness and how IQ should behave, but maybe that doesn't extends into his romance) have very strong opinions about various matters, the others not so much.

 

I was about to play a female War in support or the Chantry and found my options for like minded partners limited as I had romanced Cullen in a previous playthough and Cassandra was unavailable to me. 

[ThreeF]

The class distribution is also an issue which I mentioned in the other thread. Essentially all of the Warriors are simple RI's. One is even Bi which gives you even more options. On the other side only one Rogue is a RI and then only for lesbians. Mages fair slightly better with one for gay males and one for elvish women.

 

I'm thrilled there are options for everyone but I feel like Bioware did a poor job spreading these out. It makes planning parties and play throughs more difficult than it needs to be.

 

Also.... i think you don't take into account that characters are written for the story not their romances. So if certain class fits the story and the character better then that character will be that class.

 

This thread confuses me.

[ThreeF]

I was about to play a female War in support or the Chantry and found my options for like minded partners limited as I had romanced Cullen in a previous playthough and Cassandra was unavailable to me. 

Try Blackwall? I'm avoiding him because he kind of creeps me out with all his pedestal talk, but while he is probably not religious he is very moral. Cullen might be a believer but i have no problem romancing him with my "i don't know" mage.

[papercut_ninja]

Let's set a few ground rules.

1. This thread isn't for the discussion of any unrepresented desires you may have. If you are disgruntled at the obvious omission of a Half-Unicorn, BSDM romanceable companion then by all means make your own thread.

 

Dang it...

 

Anyway,,,distribution to me seems like a very paste-it way to go about the romance aspects of the game. Romances are complicated to write, because romantic interaction is much more complicated and subtle than the formal, professional or hostile interactions that dominate the written dialogue. I think it is important to make the characters first and develop their role within the story and then possibly consider if you could write a romantic intrigue around them; rather than deciding, right we need a male elf gay romantic relationship - let's invent a character.

 

I would prefer if there was only one well written romantic intrigue that maybe didn't fit my character, than ten poor ones that might fit my character...

[In Exile]

Speaking for myself only, trying to plan a party with Warrior PC and not have a two Warrior party limits my options. I really like having my love interest in the party with my PC. In this case, a rogue option would be preferable over a warrior.

I don't want this to get blown out of proportion. I'm not up in arms that everything isn't exactly equal. It's simply feedback and a point of discussion on smoothing out what i see as some rough edges of the game.

Right I get it. Fair enough. I had the same issue with fitting in all the mages as a mage PC.

[miseryunited]

Dang it...

 

Anyway,,,distribution to me seems like a very paste-it way to go about the romance aspects of the game. Romances are complicated to write, because romantic interaction is much more complicated and subtle than the formal, professional or hostile interactions that dominate the written dialogue. I think it is important to make the characters first and develop their role within the story and then possibly consider if you could write a romantic intrigue around them; rather than deciding, right we need a male elf gay romantic relationship - let's invent a character.

 

I would prefer if there was only one well written romantic intrigue that maybe didn't fit my character, than ten poor ones that might fit my character...

 

I would rather have one good one than multiple crappy ones as well but that isn't really the situation. Bioware is more than capable of writing any of these characters stories and romances any number of ways. That's what professional writers do. People need to drop the idea that there is a single right and wrong way to do things and the way things shook out was the best possible solution.
 

[ThreeF]

Your priorities are not the same with those of the writers, also what you propose will require a ridiculous amount of characters to include every class and sexual orientation (minimum 12 if not 15) and that's not counting personalities.