Okay don't bite my head off, is there problem with just having 4 bisexuals? or does that to send the wrong message to the people who you don't want to send the wrong messages to?
I don't have an issue with it in theory, but in practice I find it makes them seem less real. Having their own preferences and dealbreakers, I find, rounds them out as a character.
so would you be put off if a similar experience of a romance subplot was straight only? Just wondering.
Since you just described something north of 99% of all romance subplots everywhere else, I'd say no.
That's also not the issue.
Okay don't bite my head off, is there problem with just having 4 bisexuals? or does that to send the wrong message to the people who you don't want to send the wrong messages to?
if its four bi options...then you minus well just make them all bi. I mean how big of a team do you expect we will have in this new game? I mean ME1 we had what, 6 characters?
I don't have an issue with it in theory, but in practice I find it makes them seem less real. Having their own preferences and dealbreakers, I find, rounds them out as a character.
Let me add to this because I've seen a counter to that being, "Well, sexuality shouldn't be a deal breaker, it should just be the actions of your character".
To that I say no, sexuality should absolutely be a factor. It should go beyond sexuality though;character traits and actions should prevent relationships from forming with people you interact with in game.
Bioware already takes care of that though. Like Tali jumping off a cliff in ME3 if you let the quarians get wrecked by the upgraded geth.
Alright that example escalated quickly but hey, thats how it was in game! 
Inquisitions set sexualities didnt bother me at all, I still romanced everyone anyway.
Inquisitions set sexualities didnt bother me at all, I still romanced everyone anyway.
I only played one playthrough(long game) and I romanced someone I retroactively regret romancing. I felt like my character would've been the type to not romance anyone, so I'll rectify that in the Keep for later games.
We can play as single characters too.
Let me add to this because I've seen a counter to that being, "Well, sexuality shouldn't be a deal breaker, it should just be the actions of your character".
To that I say no, sexuality should absolutely be a factor. It should go beyond sexuality though;character traits and actions should prevent relationships from forming with people you interact with in game.
Bioware already takes care of that though. Like Tali jumping off a cliff in ME3 if you let the quarians get wrecked by the upgraded geth.
Alright that example escalated quickly but hey, thats how it was in game!
Agreed. Extreme example, but it's true your actions should have consequences and your character shuoldn't be some lothario that everyone swoons over simple because you're the main protagonist.
I want there to be a reason for them to be in love with you.
Since you just described something north of 99% of all romance subplots everywhere else, I'd say no.
That's also not the issue.
how did i describe that? you are putting words in my mouth. My point is that it seems that players want their cake and eat it too. He had a uniquely satisfying experience in his gay romance subplot. All I ask is if a similar experience was straight only, that would be okay with him or would that put him off? or if he would demand that character to be gay/bi, too so they too can experience that similar straight experience.
Yes. One, you lack representation of heterosexual, homosexual, or other sexualities. Two, the only reason for there being just four bisexual options would be so the player could romance whomever they want, which(admittedly in my opinion) takes away from the integrity of the romance arcs. Three, it might lead to people becoming comfortable with bisexuality being the catch all safety net for romance in games and it should absolutely not be the case.
Bisexuality in games is fine but there should be room for other sexualities;that means you won't get to romance whomever you want whenever you want no matter who or what you play, and thats fine too.
Don't see any particular need to have them for representation sakes. To me 4 Bi/playersexual options provides the best way to utilise limited resources and provide the same level of choice to everyone. Don't really see that it has to take away from the integrity of the romance arcs. That's preferable to bloating the options with restrictive gating as far as i'm concerned.
Im currently on my seventh playthrough of eight, four male and four female, and I feel ive really learned a lot from the various experiences. I dont feel like I made any mistakes, my characters romance options still make sense to them, but I did learn to understand characters a little better than i would have otherwise.
Don't see any particular need to have them for representation sakes. To me 4 Bi/playersexual options provides the best way to utilise limited resources and provide the same level of choice to everyone. Don't really see that it has to take away from the integrity of the romance arcs. That's preferable to bloating the options with restrictive gating as far as i'm concerned.
Why is the assumption made that resources spent on romance are so limited that Bioware has to resort to the playersexual option again? They lacked the resources to do what they really wanted to do in DA2 so they resorted to playersexuality. Inquisition didn't have that problem as the resources were there.
I'd like to think Bioware and EA as a whole(not just the Dragon Age team) learned from that and will now try to allow enough resources to not have to implement playersexuality ever again.
Don't see any particular need to have them for representation sakes. To me 4 Bi/playersexual options provides the best way to utilise limited resources and provide the same level of choice to everyone. Don't really see that it has to take away from the integrity of the romance arcs. That's preferable to bloating the options with restrictive gating as far as i'm concerned.
I think the people who rarely see themselves represented in media would disagree with you. To you it may be a silly issue, but to them it means a lot.
"explicitly about more than just representation for gay players", should it be? its 2015 who are we trying to teach here? homosexuality is accepted in the community.
I'm not arguing that it should or shouldn't be. I'm just saying that Bioware has explicitly stated that it isn't, and thus to include the toggle goes against their own stated goals and creative process.
I think the people who rarely see themselves represented in media would disagree with you. To you it may be a silly issue, but to them it means a lot.
Aye. There's a big difference between heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, etc etc and sticking everyone into the bisexuality camp I don't think is gonna leave folks all that happy.
Its great for bisexual folks though who already have a rough time being accepted by society, even the very people who would feel their struggle the most.
how did i describe that? you are putting words in my mouth. My point is that it seems that players want their cake and eat it too. He had a uniquely satisfying experience in his gay romance subplot. All I ask is if a similar experience was straight only, that would be okay with him or would that put him off? or if he would demand that character to be gay/bi, too so they too can experience that similar straight experience.
I've read this over and over, and it still doesn't make any sense to me. Dorian's character resonated with people who have put up with similar issues in real life. If he was straight, it wouldn't make any sense.
I guess I need someone to explain to me what comprises the "straight" experience that isn't already embodied in... most media across most mediums.
I'm just saying that Bioware has explicitly stated that it isn't, and thus to include the toggle goes against their own stated goals and creative process.
So they should stop asap, because Bioware are game developers not school teachers.
Why is the assumption made that resources spent on romance are so limited that Bioware has to resort to the playersexual option again? They lacked the resources to do what they really wanted to do in DA2 so they resorted to playersexuality. Inquisition didn't have that problem as the resources were there.
I'd like to think Bioware and EA as a whole(not just the Dragon Age team) learned from that and will now try to allow enough resources to not have to implement playersexuality ever again.
Inquisition bloated the options, coupled with largely pointless gating and the romances suffered for it. So i hope the lesson they learnt was to abandon the silly gating nonsense and focus better content a smaller number of options available to everyone. If there were extra resources allocated versus DA2 they certainly weren't used to improve the experience.
Aye. There's a big difference between heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, etc etc and sticking everyone into the bisexuality camp I don't think is gonna leave folks all that happy.
Its great for bisexual folks though who already have a rough time being accepted by society, even the very people who would feel their struggle the most.
Putting the LIs into the "all bisexual" camp isn't so hot for me as a bisexual lady. I've seen folks talk about how their Hawke made one of the LIs straight or gay. I know it's in a video game, but I've seen that fallacy come up several times in real life. Including with me personally, when I was outed when I was 15.
"Oh, but if you married a man, you'll be straight. If you married a woman, you'll be gay. You're just confused, honey." Thanks Mom. 
I don't bring up my sexuality these days to her. She hasn't changed her mind and I don't feel like debating with a 60-mumble year old woman about my sexuality. I just know that I'm happily married, but my husband never changed my sexuality. I'm monogamous, but still bisexual.
The idea that a character, or a person, can make a bisexual individual gay or straight sits poorly with me. Monogamy isn't the same thing as being straight, bi or gay. I know that wasn't their intention behind the DA2 system at all. However, sadly, it did leave that impression for a lot of people.
Is it weird that I kinda want a Krogan romance option?
Nope. Would jump.
Sometimes I wish this forum had a homophobic bigot toggle. That would do wonders for my blood pressure.
Putting the LIs into the "all bisexual" camp isn't so hot for me as a bisexual lady. I've seen folks talk about how their Hawke made one of the LIs straight or gay. I know it's in a video game, but I've seen that fallacy come up several times in real life. Including with me personally, when I was outed when I was 15.
"Oh, but if you married a man, you'll be straight. If you married a woman, you'll be gay. You're just confused, honey." Thanks Mom.
The idea that a character, or a person, can make a bisexual individual gay or straight sits poorly with me. Monogamy isn't the same thing as being straight, bi or gay. I know that wasn't their intention behind the DA2 system at all. However, sadly, it did leave that impression for a lot of people.
Oh my god, yes. Thank you for this. Marriage doesn't change your sexual attraction, it just means you've chosen a specific person to spend your life with.
Even if I get married it won't stop me from checking out handsome guys on the street.
I think the people who rarely see themselves represented in media would disagree with you. To you it may be a silly issue, but to them it means a lot.
They may disagree sure. Don't think that should mean their view should necessarily be pandered to anymore than some hetro-sexual person claiming they should get more options should be pandered to.
Is it weird that I kinda want a Krogan romance option?
I don't see how someone wouldn't want one!
We don't know what happened at the end of ME3, we don't know why we go to andromeda, e don't know how the gameplay is going to be and you worry about... romances. Where and when did bioware pick up such a petty audience, and why don't they drop you.
They may disagree sure. Don't think that should mean their view should necessarily be pandered to anymore than some hetro-sexual person claiming they should get more options should be pandered to.
Except that they generally aren't asking for more options. They just want equal options.
What's so awful about asking for 2/2/2?
Retour en haut