123 réponses à ce sujet

[Eliastion]

I really do think making everyone bisexual works better from a game perspective.  Then you don't have to deal with situations like Cullen being straight-and he's the best male option in game to me, and many others I'm sure.  Iron Bull is my main romance option by default as Dorian's a power botto...erm I mean yeah I like not having to settle for less options just so people can feel the game is more realistic.  

The idea that everyone has to be bi would be very limiting, though. Whether you like how important that element of character is or not, there are some characters that just have to have certain orientation. You can't make Dorian bi because that would mess up his backstory. Out of the rest, some could be changed relatively easily, but not necessarily others...

The idea that everyone needs to swing both ways would be harmful to NPC building.

And I don't think Bioware would be willing to just change those that can be changed and leave the rest - they want their "inclusive"  publicity, they strive to uphold it (not always in the best way, but that's another matter). Now imagine if Sera was made bi (she could be as it doesn't really matter for the story) but Dorian wouldn't (as that wouldn't make sense with his backstory). I guarantee that some people would consider that to be a message that if you're gay then this fact is your defining characteristic. Sexuality that just happens to be there, on way or the other? Only straight or bi. Bioware cares too much about being labeled as inclusive to willingly give that kind of ammunition to people. They still got quite a lot criticism regarding Dorian being stereotypical (though, frankly, when you listen to some of these criticisms, you start to think that the only character they would accept as being gay would be some testosterone-packed juggernaut, preferably smelly and walking around in rags - any less than that and he's too stereotypical and effeminate).

[prosthetic soul]

DA:I definitely has the most lacking romances by far out of all the Bioware games I have played.  I have a feeling that's due in no small part to Bioware's insistence on trying to pander to EVERYONE and focusing on quantity rather than quality.  I'm not going to sit here and pretend I'm not irked at Bioware's obvious SJW leanings.  Why should female elves get twice as many options as every one else?  And before anyone pulls the

 

"B-but, it's only fair because straight males have had it so easy for the past five games Bioware has made!" 

 

 

Let's take a look at the previous romance options for past Bioware games and let us see this IMBALANCE you speak of.

 

1. KOTOR: Bastila/Carth.  1 option for males, 1 option for females.  Seems pretty balanced to me. 

2. Jade Empire: Everyone was bisexual IIRC.  'Nuff said

3. Mass Effect 1: Liara, Ashley, Kaidan.  1 Bisexual, 1 male, 1 female.  BALANCED

 

So let's fast forward to Dragon Inquisition, to the height of Bioware's obvious pandering to the....*ahem* SJWs.  And we all know how "Balanced" that is.  About as balanced as a sumo wrestler and a child on a seesaw.   So in reality, when people complain about the romance options in this game being sub par or lacking, they are actually quite right.  And that's not mentioning the obvious pacing issues and the Divine nonsense and the complete disparity in emotional impact each romance contains.  There are some romances in this game that are done EXTREMELY well (Blackwall) while others feel utterly hollow and shallow in comparison (Cassandra).  

[andy6915]

2. Jade Empire: Everyone was bisexual IIRC. 'Nuff said

Wrong. Dawn Star is straight only.

[Lee80]

The idea that everyone has to be bi would be very limiting, though. Whether you like how important that element of character is or not, there are some characters that just have to have certain orientation. You can't make Dorian bi because that would mess up his backstory. Out of the rest, some could be changed relatively easily, but not necessarily others...

The idea that everyone needs to swing both ways would be harmful to NPC building.

And I don't think Bioware would be willing to just change those that can be changed and leave the rest - they want their "inclusive"  publicity, they strive to uphold it (not always in the best way, but that's another matter). Now imagine if Sera was made bi (she could be as it doesn't really matter for the story) but Dorian wouldn't (as that wouldn't make sense with his backstory). I guarantee that some people would consider that to be a message that if you're gay then this fact is your defining characteristic. Sexuality that just happens to be there, on way or the other? Only straight or bi. Bioware cares too much about being labeled as inclusive to willingly give that kind of ammunition to people. They still got quite a lot criticism regarding Dorian being stereotypical (though, frankly, when you listen to some of these criticisms, you start to think that the only character they would accept as being gay would be some testosterone-packed juggernaut, preferably smelly and walking around in rags - any less than that and he's too stereotypical and effeminate).

I agree that bisexual Dorian doesn't make sense from the perspective of his character development.  It doesn't however change my stance that forcing the issue of set orientations leads to uneven options-and to be honest I'm far likely to always be tied with (or exactly) the group with the least amount of options. As straight men and women are far more likely to take the lion share of the options every time.  (History proves that)

[daveliam]

<snip>

 

Actually, your facts are pretty off.

 

BG2:

straight males - 3

straight females - 1

gay males - 0

lesbians - 0

 

NWN (including expansion romances; I think, but I haven't played it):

straight males - 3

straight females - 3

gay males - 0

lesbians - 1

 

KOTOR:

straight males - 1

straight females - 1

gay males - 0

lesbians - 1

 

JE:

straight males - 2

straight females - 1

gay males - 1

lesbians - 1

 

ME:

straight males - 2

straight females - 1

gay males - 0

lesbians - 1

 

DA:O:

straight males - 2

straight females - 2

gay males - 1

lesbians - 1

 

ME2:

straight males - 3

straight females - 3

gay males - 0

lesbians - 0

 

DA2:

straight males - 2

straight females - 3

gay males - 2

lesbians - 2

 

SWTOR:

straight males - 11

straight females - 8

gay males - 0

lesbians - 0

 

ME3 (total options; not per import):

straight males - 6

straight females - 2

gay males - 2

lesbians - 3

 

DA:I:

straight males - 2

straight females - 4

gay males - 2

lesbians - 2

 

So, as you can see, there's never been a game that's actually balanced.  The closest was DA2, in which straight females had one extra DLC option.  And straight guys have had more options than anyone else in 5 out of 11 games with romance.  And they were tied for the most options in 4 out of the remaining 6 games.  In fact, the only games in which straight males haven't had the most or tied for the most options were DA 2 and DA: I.

 

Now, I'm not saying that this means that they should get less.  But I am saying that your "it's been balanced until the SJWs got their hands on it" nonsense is totally incorrect. 

[prosthetic soul]

Damn, could have sworn Dawn Star swung both ways too.  My mistake.  I'll own that. And 5/11 games?  So that means, 6 out of 11 games, they weren't?  Doesn't that mean that the math proves my point?

 

[daveliam]

And 5/11 games?  So that means, 6 out of 11 games, they weren't?  Doesn't that mean that the math proves my point?

 

<gif that shows that you didn't read what I wrote>

 

Only if you choose not to read the rest of what I wrote.........  You know, the part where I clarify that straight guys have had the most or tied for the most in 9 out of 11 games. 

[prosthetic soul]

Only if you choose not to read the rest of what I wrote.........  You know, the part where I clarify that straight guys have had the most or tied for the most in 9 out of 11 games. 

Fine, fine.  You win.  But it still doesn't change the fact that the egregious imbalance is dumb and that the romances themselves are not well written in this game. 

[daveliam]

Fine, fine.  You win.  But it still doesn't change the fact that the egregious imbalance is dumb and that the romances themselves are not well written in this game. 

 

Agreed with the first part.  But that swings both ways (pun intended) for me.  ME3 and SWTOR are equally egregious in their imbalance.

 

Not sure I agree with the second part, but that's subjective.  I found Dorian's romance to be excellent.  Bull's romance to be lame.  And Blackwall's romance to be "meh at best".  But those are the only ones that I played.  Can't speak to the rest. 

[Dai Grepher]

Well, you're not off to a good start, but I agree that there should have been more options.

[Jazpar]

*Text*

 

How many of the gay/lesbian options you written are in fact bisexual? Bisexual does not count as gay.

[daveliam]

How many of the gay/lesbian options you written are in fact bisexual? Bisexual does not count as gay.

 

Sorry, those are options for gay/lesbian PCs (like Zevran and Dorian would both count for "gay male" because gay males can romance them and Zev would also count for "straight female", if that makes sense?).  Most of those LI's have been bisexual. 

 

If you want the LI #'s (versus who can romance them), I ran the numbers once and there have been:

 

20 straight male LI's

24 straight female LI's

6 bisexual male LI's

8 bisexual female LI's

2 gay male LI's

3 lesbian LI's

[nightscrawl]

Sorry, those are options for gay/lesbian PCs (like Zevran and Dorian would both count for "gay male" because gay males can romance them and Zev would also count for "straight female", if that makes sense?).  Most of those LI's have been bisexual. 

 

If you want the LI #'s (versus who can romance them), I ran the numbers once and there have been:

 

20 straight male LI's

24 straight female LI's

6 bisexual male LI's

8 bisexual female LI's

2 gay male LI's

3 lesbian LI's

 

The character's actual orientation does make a difference for some people. In another thread a bit ago a poster who plays straight female PCs specifically said that Alistair was the only DAO romance option for her because Zevran is bi. So, just because the option is there doesn't mean everyone will take it.

 

Then again, we're not required to like any of the LIs, and I do consider it a minor miracle if I'm able to find one (regardless of orientation) that I'm completely insane over. Across all three games Cassandra is the only lady that's been appealing to me, but I haven't yet done her romance as I'd have to tear myself away from Dorian on a male character.

[daveliam]

The character's actual orientation does make a difference for some people. In another thread a bit ago a poster who plays straight female PCs specifically said that Alistair was the only DAO romance option for her because Zevran is bi. So, just because the option is there doesn't mean everyone will take it.

 

Then again, we're not required to like any of the LIs, and I do consider it a minor miracle if I'm able to find one (regardless of orientation) that I'm completely insane over. Across all three games Cassandra is the only lady that's been appealing to me, but I haven't yet done her romance as I'd have to tear myself away from Dorian on a male character.

 

Yeah, I'm certainly not implying that orientation doesn't matter for some people.  Just saying that they count.  Not saying that everyone will want them, though. 

[rolson00]

on the bright side friendships were far better by the end i really felt like i was part of a close nit family

[nightscrawl]

on the bright side friendships were far better by the end i really felt like i was part of a close nit family

 

I agree here. For me, the DAI party scene has a closer vibe than does the DAO party scene.

[jtav]

I prefer everyone to be available to all PCs outside of special cases like Dorian. BW seems to have the bad habit of repeating the same archetype/orientation combinations. And I don't really like what they tend to think that I want.

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

Wow, did the OP seriously say Sera was available to male PC's?

[YourFunnyUncle]

Agreed with the first part.  But that swings both ways (pun intended) for me.  ME3 and SWTOR are equally egregious in their imbalance.

 

Not sure I agree with the second part, but that's subjective.  I found Dorian's romance to be excellent.  Bull's romance to be lame.  And Blackwall's romance to be "meh at best".  But those are the only ones that I played.  Can't speak to the rest. 

Sera's is absolutely wonderful, but she's "ugly" and "dumb" and "racist" and and "transphobic" and "a sociopath"* so she doesn't count...

 

*These are not my actual opinions. I've heard them all, though.

[nightscrawl]

I prefer everyone to be available to all PCs outside of special cases like Dorian. BW seems to have the bad habit of repeating the same archetype/orientation combinations. And I don't really like what they tend to think that I want.

 

I agree IF there is a small pool of LIs to choose from. In DA2 we only had the four main LI, with Sebastian being an addon who, I think, only partly counts anyway. But with DAI and eight romance options I think that they had a large enough pool that they could have the set orientations. David Gaider did say that that was his preference anyway: if they had the resources available they would do set sexualities, but the DA2 "all bi" option was chosen in the interest of fairness.

 

I was a big advocate of the DA2 style, but I now actually prefer the DAI style. Even though some disagree, I like that we were able to have a character like Dorian where his experiences revolving around that did have an impact on his past, his outlook, and on his interaction in the romance itself.

[berelinde]

The pacing for Blackwall's romance is pretty good. If your Inquisitor is reserved, she can be dignified and proper in her Haven flirting, but if she's a little naughtier... his reaction is actually quite funny, and he definitely appreciates it. There's a little bit of a snag when you first get to Skyhold. If this were DA2 with its three year time jumps between romantic dialogues, it would have been a dealbreaker for me, but the very next conversation (which can occur after the very next Fast Travel) reaffirms their relationship status, so it feels more like natural hesitation than abandonment. Then there's another conversation to lock in the relationship after HLtA (or WEWH, I suppose), and Revelations. There's nothing but a short dialogue after WPHW, but with the way I play, I don't do that one until I'm ready to zoom to Doom, so it doesn't feel like there's missing content.

 

Plus, the ability to kiss the LI helps a lot. Even if there's no long dialogue attached, it's an affirmation. 

 

My Sera romance isn't very far along so I can't say much about it, but I can confirm that the pacing in Josie's romance is the same as Cullen's, so no complaints!

[berelinde]

The character's actual orientation does make a difference for some people. In another thread a bit ago a poster who plays straight female PCs specifically said that Alistair was the only DAO romance option for her because Zevran is bi. So, just because the option is there doesn't mean everyone will take it.

 

Then again, we're not required to like any of the LIs, and I do consider it a minor miracle if I'm able to find one (regardless of orientation) that I'm completely insane over. Across all three games Cassandra is the only lady that's been appealing to me, but I haven't yet done her romance as I'd have to tear myself away from Dorian on a male character.

Yeah, this isn't the first time I've read that some players don't count the bi characters as available to their PC because they're bi. I've also read that some players don't count LIs who aren't the same race as the protagonist or they don't count LIs they dislike for whatever reason. But the understanding was _always_ that if a particular LI's orientation included your protagonist, they would be available to you. At no point were you obligated to accept them... nor was there ever an obligation to create more LIs if the existing ones didn't suit. If love is like a card game, you* don't get to draw from the deck until you get a hand you like.

 

*General "you," not specific "you," in case I phrased it poorly.

[Dai Grepher]

I agree here. For me, the DAI party scene has a closer vibe than does the DAO party scene.

 

Depends how you play it. For mine it was very personal, even though Alistair had left. I still had Anora my fiancée, and then my thought to be dead brother Fergus, and I consider this actual family. Did Dragon Age: Inquisition have any of the Inquisitor's family show up?

 

To compare companions, Wynne was more personable than Cole, which is to be expected I guess.

 

Oghren and Varric were pretty even, but I'd say Oghren was a little more of a comrade in the celebration.

 

The Sten absolutely crushes The Iron Bull in terms of closeness (sans an IB romance of course).

 

Zevran isn't as personable as Sera, I'll admit. They have the same type of conversation, about staying or leaving, though with Sera you only have one option (if your are friends). But Sera is definitely more chummy.

 

I'd say Alistair is more of a comrade than Cassandra in the celebrations, sans a Cassandra romance of course. But Alistair can be romanced too. So I'd say Alistair is more personable here.

 

Vivienne virtually defeats herself, but she can be personable too in a way. I guess I would compare her to Loghain. I suppose she barely beats Loghain in this area.

 

Morrigan and Solas are equally absent.

 

DA:O Leliana is better than DA:I Leliana.

 

If Anora is allowed to stay, I'd say she's more personable than Josephine, who mostly talks about the party. Don't know how they compare in terms of romances though.

 

Shale is more friendly than Cullen I think. Maybe because it's so uncharacteristic for Shale to call the Hero "you" and "friend".

 

But then there are special characters who show up depending on origin. Irving for a mage, Fergus for a noble, etc. Inquisition's party lacks this extra element.

[Andres Hendrix]

Ok, sorry, but did you actually read what I wrote? I ignore the "father killing daughter" argument because it has nothing to do with the topic of virgins being, for evolutionary reasons, more attractive/desirable. And your virginity=health=etc either proves your... ill will or problems with understanding what you read. The fact that I mentioned a couple things that are biologically preferable in potential mate doesn't mean that they all tie in to the virginity. Clear skin and facial symmetry, for example, imply health and good genetic material - so these things are perceived as attractive. Visible defects of the skin, or aforementioned symmetry of face or body, suggest that there's something wrong and the person probably isn't a good material for procreation - so these traits are unattractive.

As for your idea that we've outgrown biology. We didn't. Obviously, we have more tools and better reasoning ability. So what? People don't go and consciously decide that they'll be attracted to someone. They just either find someone, or some trait of theirs, attractive, or don't. It doesn't matter that sex in our society isn't really about procreation most of the time - our perceptions of physical attractiveness are still guided mostly by the same mechanism that seeks optimal mate to have children with.

Also, you completely mix up two things. One is being attracted to something and acknowledging what you are attracted to. The other is acting on this - in a way that harms somebody. Contrary to what you might've conceived in your mind, I'm not supporting the idea that, say, men should rape virgins since they find virginity to be desirable in a woman. But that doesn't mean they should go "cure" themselves from finding it desirable. Rape, as you perhaps are aware, harms someone. Unlike finding something attractive.

And since you so generously delivered your opinion of what I think about "despicable people who are attracted to children", let me correct you a little bit. These people, as you would understand if you gave it a thought, have a serious problem in that it's impossible for them to naturally satisfy their sexual needs in a way that doesn't hurt anybody - the effects of "consensual" intercourse with children are well documented and it's not pretty. Despite that, though, and contrary to what your self-righteousness and (quite natural, don't misunderstand) feeling of disgust tells you... these people are not despicable. They're sick. They have a problem. But as long as they don't harm anyone because of that, they're much less despicable than self-righteous pricks like you. Psychological disorder that makes them feel attracted to children doesn't automatically make them rapists.

 

Rape and infanticide - unlike finding a virgin more desirable than non-virgin - is a pretty harmful thing. Since, you know, being attracted (or not) to something generally doesn't inflict harm. It's the way you act upon your attraction that makes all the difference.

 

 

All that said, I'll refrain from further comments. I believe I made my point clear, there's also a nice comment on the matter of Virginity from Ardent Blossom. I guess that would be enough. And this is not really the place to argue about that anymore. But, if any of you guys feels the need to commen on why I'm wrong and finding virginity desirable is comparable to being an active pedophile - by all means, write about it. Just please excuse my lack of further replies.

Your entire response to me is a straw man, which is unsurprising considering your other posts. I most certainly did not say that we have "outgrown" biology, I said entirely the opposite. As for you defending pedophiles, I’m not going to dignify that with a rebuttal.

[JAZZ_LEG3ND]

Can I just comment on how inaccurate the OP is? Okay, good. It's inaccurate.

I kinda want Varric to respond to all entitlement around here.