29 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaylis DX]

Now I've had a dilemma for the past 3 DA:I games. While the romances are fairly well written, none have really appealed to me more than the type of woman who is strong, capable, fairly serious but has a soft side they will show you once you get to know them. Morrigan, Aveline and Cassandra. Only two of these women are romanceable. They're both heterosexual romances only. That's the first problem. To me, it'd only make sense that the three would be attracted to female PCs. Their allies in arms. The one person they can trust more than any other. Why WOULDN'T they fall for a female PC? The second problem is limiting them to one specific sex to be romanced which is unfortunately just part of an even bigger problem.

 

In Origins it was a pretty even split. Two bisexuals, two hetero sexuals. Understandable. DA2 made all but one romanceable option Bisexual. Even better! Nobody gets left out. DA:I however sadly falls.... flat, in terms of options. Heterosexual females have twice the amount of romance options as homosexuals and even heterosexual males. Now it's nice to see some catering to women for a change but it's HUGE in terms of player freedom to limit people in such a way.

 

For lesbians, we get the immature prankster who is good with a bow and the diplomat we only ever seen when we're NOT doing missions, which is of course a big part of the game. Heterosexual females get the stalwart warrior trying to live up to an ideal, the intellectual mage, the knight guarding our strongholds while dealing with his crippling addiction and the badass warrior spy who could break someone in two and then go partying with them. 3 of those you can take with you compared to the 1 you can take with you as a lesbian.

 

Now I'm not saying that Sera and Josephine aren't good characters or aren't satisfying romances in their own way. They are. It's just annoying getting the short end of the stick each game.

To come back to the point of all this, while there ARE technically a lot of options, there's really only a couple for most. As a suggestion for the future, romances options should fulfill SEXUALITIES and not just romance as a whole.

 

I know they think that making everyone Bisexual isn't the answer and is just unrealistic. I'm not saying that. I'm saying expand in other ways. Let's take the racial attraction idea and instead of making it a limitation, we make it an addition.

 

For example: Blackwall is heterosexual. However, Male elves may romance him. Cassandra is heterosexual but Qunari women are able to romance her as well. Essentially it's the logic of "I'm straight/gay but sh*t happens."

 

We could go even further and apply this to classes as well. Solas eyeing up your male elf mage because of his growing power and ability. Cullen finding comfort in a male warrior templar due to similar struggles. The romance system as it is currently is just falling short of being a truly engaging and organic experience.

 

tl;dr  Instead of limiting romance purely to sexuality, they could make romance options flexible by taking the racial limit idea and turning it into a "racial exception" feature which could be expanded even further by taking class into account.

[daveliam]

I think that this comes back to the "all bisexual LI's" idea, though.  Since that's effectively what you are asking.  I'm personally fine with the all bisexual approach, but I definitely prefer a variety of sexualities.  That being said, I don't have any issues with a few characters who are mostly straight (or gay) but can fall for the opposite gender of their preference under certain circumstances.  I think it could be interesting.

 

I'm not sure if I'm following your logic about why "it'd only make sense" for Cassandra, Morrigan, and Aveline would be attracted to women, though.  Being comrades in arms isn't necessarily enough to spur attraction.  I agree that it would be great to get a character like Cassandra or Aveline (a strong warrior woman) for female PCs.  But the "only make sense" part makes me a little twitchy.  It falls dangerously close to the "it doesn't make sense for this character to be gay/bisexual" argument (just in reverse).  And I hate that argument, so I'm a little gun shy around your statement.

[Lord Surinen]

No. I'm wholeheartedly against it. There are already too many non straight para-romances, and in the DA:I male characters have only one companion available for straight romance. Straight characters should not be damaged to please the agendas.

[Kaylis DX]

I meant from a story telling perspective on the "it only makes sense" bit but yes, it's a bit cold but I'm operating off the mindset of a story teller. "Comrades in arms confiding in each other and growing closer" is a fantastic romance starting point and same gender allows one to more easily sympathize with societal views of their sex and the struggles they face because of it. It's kind of "logic" based but considering that we had far better rep/options in the past game, to limit so many characters so strictly is annoying and counterproductive. Especially if you want the player base to be happy.

 

But yes it was kind of a crappy thing for me to say but it still shows how easily they could be more inclusive. Even heterosexual males have a measly two options to choose from with only as an active party member. It's a little ridiculous. I mean sure, you had two options in origins and da2 but that was 50% of the romanceable party members whereas now we have 1 romanceable party member if you're a hetero male or homosexual female. Homosexual men have two in the way of Bull and Dorian and hetereo females have THREE. Counting ALL romanceable partners, we're down from 50% to 25%. It's a little silly.

 

Also people like Lord Surinen are complaining about half the romanceable character not being straight when, surprise, half the romance options in origins were also not straight and ALL of the romanceable party members in da2 weren't straight.

 

So yeah, with people like that I can get away with stuff like this.

[Lord Surinen]

Also people like Lord Surinen are complaining about half the romanceable character not being straight when, surprise, half the romance options in origins were also not straight and ALL of the romanceable party members in da2 weren't straight.

 

So yeah, with people like that I can get away with stuff like this.

And? Is it not an imperative of most things to evolve? Sure, Origins were far from perfect, DA:II suffered from great mistakes, including abberrationally ill character development. Not all were non straight, Sebastian remained true; 'The Light of the Maker is my armour'.

[Servo to the bitter end]

Also people like Lord Surinen are complaining about half the romanceable character not being straight when, surprise, half the romance options in origins were also not straight and ALL of the romanceable party members in da2 weren't straight.

 

So yeah, with people like that I can get away with stuff like this.

 

Give lord surinen a minute to get going and you'll need to leave your PC to go take a shower.

[Andraste_Reborn]

No. I'm wholeheartedly against it. There are already too many non straight para-romances, and in the DA:I male characters have only one companion available for straight romance. Straight characters should not be damaged to please the agendas.

 

They get two, Cass and Josie, same as gay male PCs and lesbian PCs.

 

No straight characters are 'damaged' by the existence of characters that aren't straight. DAI actually had more straight love interests than any previous game - Cassandra, Blackwall, Solas and Cullen.

[vertigomez]

The idea of a racial exception freaks me out. Why would Blackwall be attracted only to women, except when it comes to male elves? As far as I know, qunari ladies have the same bits as non-qunari ladies, and the same Inquisitor-personality to boot, so why would Cass be into them but not into other women? Because they're tall and muscular "like men"? Would Blackwall be into male elves because they're hairless and "look like women"? That just gets into straight-up Unfortunate Implications territory for me.

And maybe that's not what you're implying at all, but that's my take.

As for the next game, I'd be happiest with an even split, too. But as long as everybody has options (that is, at least two to choose from) I'm okay with that. I wouldn't want a repeat of DAO, where gay and lesbian Wardens only had one LI.

[vertigomez]

Alright, I reread the post and I think I see what you're getting at. It's more the idea of a bicurious LI, right? Or someone who discovers their sexuality over the course of the story? I could get behind that. Just...not if it was racialized.

[kimgoold]

If all love interests are Bi everyone is happy and catered to because, you are playing a solo game and your choices are yours alone no ones nose is bent out of shape because you choose to romance a character they deemed straight or gay gated. 

[daveliam]

They get two, Cass and Josie, same as gay male PCs and lesbian PCs.

 

No straight characters are 'damaged' by the existence of characters that aren't straight. DAI actually had more straight love interests than any previous game - Cassandra, Blackwall, Solas and Cullen.

 

Not worth it.  This one is truly disturbed.  Better to ignore him (like, put him on your ignore list) so that you don't have to read his blatant prejudicial statements nor his disturbed sexual fantasies about cutting off other suitors' body parts and mailing them to a potential LI in order to force her into a relationship where she is a brood mare.  He needs help.

[Lord Surinen]

They get two, Cass and Josie, same as gay male PCs and lesbian PCs.

 

No straight characters are 'damaged' by the existence of characters that aren't straight. DAI actually had more straight love interests than any previous game - Cassandra, Blackwall, Solas and Cullen.

They get one,only Cassandra is straight..

 

That is not what I meant. I pay no minde to what girls get, there is only one straight male romance.

 

Not worth it.  This one is truly disturbed.  Better to ignore him (like, put him on your ignore list) so that you don't have to read his blatant prejudicial statements nor his disturbed sexual fantasies about cutting off other suitors' body parts and mailing them to a potential LI in order to force her into a relationship where she is a brood mare.  He needs help.

'Disturbed', that is rich coming from you. Well, grattitude, you made me laugh. I see that you lack understanding of splendor coming from arranged marriages, in fact tsk-tsk you are insulting women. Reprehensible.

 

P.S. 'sexual fantasies'? you perceive it as 'sexual'? well, disturbing, indeed.

[Andraste_Reborn]

Not worth it.  This one is truly disturbed.  Better to ignore him (like, put him on your ignore list) so that you don't have to read his blatant prejudicial statements nor his disturbed sexual fantasies about cutting off other suitors' body parts and mailing them to a potential LI in order to force her into a relationship where she is a brood mare.  He needs help.

 

*facepalm*

 

That's what I get for replying without paying attention to the poster's name. (All the 'there aren't enough romances for straight dudes!' posts tend to blur together after a while.) You're right, I don't really want to hear any more stories about cutting off fingers or arranged marriages among the elven master race.

[daveliam]

I meant from a story telling perspective on the "it only makes sense" bit but yes, it's a bit cold but I'm operating off the mindset of a story teller. "Comrades in arms confiding in each other and growing closer" is a fantastic romance starting point and same gender allows one to more easily sympathize with societal views of their sex and the struggles they face because of it. It's kind of "logic" based but considering that we had far better rep/options in the past game, to limit so many characters so strictly is annoying and counterproductive. Especially if you want the player base to be happy.

 

But yes it was kind of a crappy thing for me to say but it still shows how easily they could be more inclusive. Even heterosexual males have a measly two options to choose from with only as an active party member. It's a little ridiculous. I mean sure, you had two options in origins and da2 but that was 50% of the romanceable party members whereas now we have 1 romanceable party member if you're a hetero male or homosexual female. Homosexual men have two in the way of Bull and Dorian and hetereo females have THREE. Counting ALL romanceable partners, we're down from 50% to 25%. It's a little silly.

 

Also people like Lord Surinen are complaining about half the romanceable character not being straight when, surprise, half the romance options in origins were also not straight and ALL of the romanceable party members in da2 weren't straight.

 

So yeah, with people like that I can get away with stuff like this.

 

I support your request for a strong capable female warrior as a f/f option.  You should check out the "Gay Knight In Shining Armor" thread.  You'll find like-minded people there.  We've bandied about several KISA type f/f options in there already.  My personal favorite is a qunari blacksmith woman who takes up her own sword to defend her settlement.  <swoon>

 

Not worth it.  This one is truly disturbed.  Better to ignore him (like, put him on your ignore list) so that you don't have to read his blatant prejudicial statements nor his disturbed sexual fantasies about cutting off other suitors' body parts and mailing them to a potential LI in order to force her into a relationship where she is a brood mare.  He needs help.

 

Exactly!  I rarely use the ignore option (I think I only have about 5-6 people on ignore) and when I do, I usually click the "see the message link" anyway.  But this is one situation where I happily enjoy the blocked message.  <shudders over memories of what he's written in the past>

[SardaukarElite]

So... this isn't the thread to ask for a blonde chevalierette in?

 

I think systemwise Inq was fine. The spread of options is debatable but that enters the realm of taste.

 

 (All the 'there aren't enough romances for straight dudes!' posts tend to blur together after a while.)

 

The drinking doesn't help.

[Serza]

The drinking doesn't help.

 

It does. Usually. When things don't happen.

[SardaukarElite]

It does. Usually. When things don't happen.

 

Oh it helps, just not with remembering which straight dude romance gripe was which.

[Kaylis DX]

The idea of a racial exception freaks me out. 

Fear not. The developers have already made racist love interests in Cullen and Solas. This is simply taking their terrible idea and turning it into something that would include more people for more variety.

[Wolven_Soul]

Now I've had a dilemma for the past 3 DA:I games. While the romances are fairly well written, none have really appealed to me more than the type of woman who is strong, capable, fairly serious but has a soft side they will show you once you get to know them. Morrigan, Aveline and Cassandra. Only two of these women are romanceable. They're both heterosexual romances only. That's the first problem. To me, it'd only make sense that the three would be attracted to female PCs. Their allies in arms. The one person they can trust more than any other. Why WOULDN'T they fall for a female PC? The second problem is limiting them to one specific sex to be romanced which is unfortunately just part of an even bigger problem.

 

In Origins it was a pretty even split. Two bisexuals, two hetero sexuals. Understandable. DA2 made all but one romanceable option Bisexual. Even better! Nobody gets left out. DA:I however sadly falls.... flat, in terms of options. Heterosexual females have twice the amount of romance options as homosexuals and even heterosexual males. Now it's nice to see some catering to women for a change but it's HUGE in terms of player freedom to limit people in such a way.

 

For lesbians, we get the immature prankster who is good with a bow and the diplomat we only ever seen when we're NOT doing missions, which is of course a big part of the game. Heterosexual females get the stalwart warrior trying to live up to an ideal, the intellectual mage, the knight guarding our strongholds while dealing with his crippling addiction and the badass warrior spy who could break someone in two and then go partying with them. 3 of those you can take with you compared to the 1 you can take with you as a lesbian.

 

Now I'm not saying that Sera and Josephine aren't good characters or aren't satisfying romances in their own way. They are. It's just annoying getting the short end of the stick each game.

To come back to the point of all this, while there ARE technically a lot of options, there's really only a couple for most. As a suggestion for the future, romances options should fulfill SEXUALITIES and not just romance as a whole.

 

I know they think that making everyone Bisexual isn't the answer and is just unrealistic. I'm not saying that. I'm saying expand in other ways. Let's take the racial attraction idea and instead of making it a limitation, we make it an addition.

 

For example: Blackwall is heterosexual. However, Male elves may romance him. Cassandra is heterosexual but Qunari women are able to romance her as well. Essentially it's the logic of "I'm straight/gay but sh*t happens."

 

We could go even further and apply this to classes as well. Solas eyeing up your male elf mage because of his growing power and ability. Cullen finding comfort in a male warrior templar due to similar struggles. The romance system as it is currently is just falling short of being a truly engaging and organic experience.

 

tl;dr  Instead of limiting romance purely to sexuality, they could make romance options flexible by taking the racial limit idea and turning it into a "racial exception" feature which could be expanded even further by taking class into account.

 

That's a really cool idea.  I would absolutely make a Qunari female character to romance Cassandra with, especially if they make it significantly different from her romance with a male.  Bring out her conflict in being attracted to another woman, her initial reluctance.  I like it.

[Cyrus Amell]

Dwarves! We need Dwarves!

[Kaylis DX]

That's a really cool idea.  I would absolutely make a Qunari female character to romance Cassandra with, especially if they make it significantly different from her romance with a male.  Bring out her conflict in being attracted to another woman, her initial reluctance.  I like it.

Yesssss yessssss let the lesbian romance with Cassandra flow through you!

 

Seriously, it would have been a FANTASTIC addition to have racial exceptions instead of racial discrimination used.

[SharpWalkers]

The idea of making a character discover their sexuality is a nice one, however in the end that would just make it a bi or gay romance. It would be a story-idea rather than a (for the lack of a better word) gameplay idea. But characters that would romance only males, except for Qunari woman, etc... wut? 

 

"Gee, I know I normally only get with woman, but goshdarnit, if a male elf wants to touch bods, step right in!"

 

It's like saying one's straight in real life, except for Asian guys. Or chimpanzee dudes. It's really just a semantic "glass half full" instead of "glass half empty" look at race-gaited romances, with an (all/mostly) bisexual cast. And I greatly dislike the all bisexual way - it's cheap.

[Kaylis DX]

At least the all bisexual way doesn't exclude or limit people's choices.

[SharpWalkers]

At least the all bisexual way doesn't exclude or limit people's choices.

Sure. Except, or course, if you race-gait it as per your idea. Regardless - doesn't make it less of a cheap cop-out when comes to character writing.

 

Protagonist: "Such a coincidence that everyone we seem to pick is bi, isn't it?"

Companion: "Right?! If Varric wrote this, I'd call him a silly little nug. . . Anyway... so I'm bi, also, and--"

Protagonist: "Shut the door; I'll get the cheese."

[Servo to the bitter end]

All bi seems to be the best way to go to me, although I have no issues with a robust assortment of options as in DAI.

 

What I'd prefer to see are romances that are locked out based on your character and choices. Why would Anders love a pro-templar douche? Why would Morrigan love a putzy pro-chantry dork? Why would Fenris stay with a blood mage?

 

Well, because you selected the right conversation options and you fed them enough presents. It's always been stupid.

 

Let our actions be reflected in our relationships beyond just a meter or an off-hand comment. Let the player get turned down or just straight dumped if s/he does something that flies in the face of all that a given paramour stands for.