Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Recommended Posts

 

 

Maybe Aloth and Isemyr set soem shedule of who runs the body each day, so the other soul can chill. Aloth seeks bromance, and Isemyr lady love. They leave notes with pointers and letter of complains... that may be a plot of some movie, i forgot the name.

 

Hmm, sounds like you are either speaking of "Your Name", "The Prestige", or "Being John Malkovich"

 

"Your name" that was movie i thought about.

That is also an idea for quest. Maybe somewhere in Fulvano voyage. Travel back in time to change the future. Edgy enought.

Romance: In past reality we meet that perfect girl/boy, but we cant take them to watcher time, so village is safed, but they had lost beloved one. lol

But you can't travel back in time! Even in a world with magic! We can't just ignore basic physics in a fantasy game!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Your name" that was movie i thought about.

 

That is also an idea for quest. Maybe somewhere in Fulvano voyage. Travel back in time to change the future. Edgy enought.

Romance: In past reality we meet that perfect girl/boy, but we cant take them to watcher time, so village is safed, but they had lost beloved one. lol

 

I've always thought a "Time Traveler's Wife" or "Dandelion Girl" style romance could be wonderful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curiousity: Harry Potter-verse

Hermoine or Ginny?

 

In essence: It happens. Watcher should be treated as a protagonist, and not as a "Player choice". In terms of "romantic relationship" imo.

Luna Lovegood.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Curiousity: Harry Potter-verse

Hermoine or Ginny?

 

In essence: It happens. Watcher should be treated as a protagonist, and not as a "Player choice". In terms of "romantic relationship" imo.

Luna Lovegood.

 

Pansy Parkinson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of creating romances and trying to fulfill everyone's needs, just give us a stretch goal with a tool to write dialogues. That way we could download a romance mod that suits our preferences, a custom made NPC, Eder or 3 companions at the same time. 

 

Curiousity: Harry Potter-verse
Hermoine or Ginny?

In essence: It happens. Watcher should be treated as a protagonist, and not as a "Player choice". In terms of "romantic relationship" imo.

 

McGonagall.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know how you feel, but for me, relationships or romance in a game that only exist to pander to the player or for wish fulfillment are unsatisfying.

I thought Dragon Age Inquisition's approach to companion romance was a huge improvement over Dragon Age 2 where all the love interests were conveniently playersexual. Allowing companions to have romantic and sexual preferences and gating players from experiencing every type of relationship with every companion makes them feel more like real people... for better or worse, depending on how the real world treats you I guess.

I'm nervous about getting my hopes up about a romance with Aloth myself. Better to stay cynical and wait and see.

 

 

You're barking up the wrong tree regarding DA2 companions' bisexuality. I'm bisexual in real life but I don't go around telling everyone every waking moment of every day, so seeing people accuse every DA2 LI except Isabela of being "playersexual" just because they don't express interest in every man, woman, and crossdressing dwarf they meet before getting with Hawke gets on my nerves.

 

I actually like that Merrill and Fenris are pretty introverted and don't express interest in anyone until they're in love, but they also happen to be bisexual, much like me; but apparently that's not "realistic" for most people. Because everyone knows that real bisexuals are Slutty McSlutSluts that **** it up with every living person they come across, like Zevran and Isabela, right?

 

I don't see it that way. If you don't romance either of them, Fenris gets into a friends-with-benefits relationship with Isabela even though he can potentially fall for Male Hawke; but since he doesn't express interest in women before getting with Male Hawke in that playthrough, he must only be into men in that playthrough. Merrill makes a comment in party banter that the all-male Qunari troops were "easy on the eyes" even though she can fall for Female Hawke, but if she doesn't gawk at men in a Female Hawke playthrough, that means she must be only into women that playthrough. It's a type of bisexual erasure that I'm frankly not okay with.

 

That said, the "Rivalmance" was pure pandering. This was people complaining, "I want to be an **** to my companions and/or do whatever I want in front of them even if they find it morally abhorrent, but I want them to still want to f*ck me!" Lo and behold, in DA2 you could treat your companions as badly as you want and/or do things they find morally repulsive (turn mages back to the Templars in front of Anders, be cruel to elves and mages in front of elven mage Merrill, aid mages, slavers, and take a slave in front of former magister's slave Fenris), and they still line up to suck your genitals.

 

I guess I'm glad that DAI had some straight and gay romanceable companions alongside the bisexual ones, and I'm HELLA glad they re-introduced "deal-breakers" in DAI.

 

What I want from Aloth is a weird semipolyamorous relationship. C'mon romancing two people in the same body, I can't think of any fiction that has done that. Personally, that would be fascinating...

 

I wouldn't mind the option, but I hope it's not required. I like Iselmyr but don't "love" her (Iselmyr and my Watcher are very similar in temperament, so it'd just feel like my Watcher is dating herself...), though I guess it would be interesting if, in order to date one personality, you have to date the other. Or, if you like one personality but not the other, you have to coordinate time to spend with your desired personality without bothering the other since they share a body...

 

Aww my bad. What if your choice based on how you told him to deal with Iselmyr determines what kind of relationship he can have? For example, if Iselmyr and Aloth are still one, maybe he wouldn't want any kind of romantic relationship. But maybe an Aloth that doesn't have to deal with Iselmyr would be more open to a relationship with the Watcher.

 

Your wild orlan could find love in Serafen  ;) Hopefully, someone give my Death Godlike their time ;( .  His horns are really big though, so that wouldn't be very comfortable during the cuddling sessions. Plus, no getting lost in each other eyes.  :p

 

 

Don't worry about it, I'm just reminiscing about my own bad luck. Aloth being into men or "not non-elves/humans" is something that I was worried about anyway, then I saw your post and had to share.

 

I guess that would be interesting, though also another "Well, of course!" for me since my Watcher encouraged Aloth to keep Iselmyr, not get rid of her. If it turned out he wasn't ready for a relationship because he was too busy juggling body-controlling time with Iselmyr, I'd just have another, "Well, OF COURSE!!" moment, and my wild orlan would be glaring daggers at Iselmyr behind Aloth's back for the whole game.

 

EDIT: I hope your Death Godlike Serafen finds love too. I always said the death godlike have that "Silent Hill" thing going for them, and we all know how sexy a lot of people find them! ^^

Edited by Faerunner
  • Like 5

"Not I, though. Not I," said the hanging dwarf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love that wall of text. Always nice to see another person that gets the whole swipe over thing. Hell, even in the LGT community it gets pretty swept under the rug, with the pressure to take a "side".  Just look at the Korra debacle a few years back, with the internet getting all up in rage (Korrasami FTW).

 

The Rivalmance had this kinda...molesty (?) undertone to it. It was bit like those weird romance films where the girl is totally against the concept till the guy starts making out with them, and then their into it. Would like to see some more of those cut of points like in DAI and BG2 where a wrong decision could lead to the end of that route. Or more routes that could end pretty depressingly, like Bull's in DAI.

 

Ok, if Iselmyr is female, and Aloth is male, does that make them intersex?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Faerunner, one needs to consider that it was Bioware who described companions in DA2 as "playersexual". I don't think it's fair to blame the players for picking up vocabulary the company itself had created. 

 

What concerns Obsidian, so far they had only written characters with predetermined sexualities. Admittedly, those games (F:NV, PoE) did not have romances, but still, I doubt they will suddenly make all their characters "playersexual". It's just not Obsidian's style.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about bisexual erasure in regard to fictional characters of a game designed for mass markets is just a tad pretentious I think. People can be what they want, but these are fictional characters designed for very specific purposes, they're not people. Understanding this distinction helps a lot in keeping identity-politics out of gaming. If you want people to stop treating other people according to external labels and categories, then you should stop giving people labels and putting them in categories.

  • Like 5

The most important step you take in your life is the next one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Faerunner, one needs to consider that it was Bioware who described companions in DA2 as "playersexual". I don't think it's fair to blame the players for picking up vocabulary the company itself had created.

 

Indeed, the fact that during the publicity lead-up to Dragons Age 2 Bioware felt the need to coin this term, which must be different otherwise the term "bisexual" would have sufficed. I love faerunner's interpretation, but they opened the door to this criticism and characters being examined through this lens by saying this is something they do. Which begs the question with every character they release that isn't clearly defined by their romantic history: is this character a private person who is bisexual (as per faerunner) or is this character binary-gendered and flips a switch depending on the player character - which feels rather exploitative. Once the cat was out of the bag, it's hard to take it seriously as something true to a character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did BioWare ever actually say that the DA2 love interests were playersexual? I know that David Gaider said they were bisexual, both in interviews and on his now-deleted Tumblr.

 

(I mean, I think it was a really bad idea to leave Anders, Fenris and Merrill's sexuality as vague as it was and leave fans to fight about this for the rest of time. Especially since it lead to Anders not telling FemmeHawke about his relationship with Karl. I just don't recall anyone from BioWare ever saying they were playersexual.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't think pointing out that every character in DA2 that could be romanced or even flirted with (apart from Isabela) was written to be straight unless Hawk is the same gender as them translates to  "all bisexual people are sluts". I don't think anyone is saying they needed to be leching after everyone to be truly bisexual, the point is they all only ever express interest in the opposite sex. If you don't romance them they all enter into straight relationships, even Isabela does that. 

 

It was a silly system. I do get that the intentions were just to give more options to players of all sexualities but maybe this is part of the reason why romance plots should not be made for fan service. In the end most of my favourite romance arcs in Bioware games do not match my sexual preference. I like the feature but it's better when it's just written as an optional sub plot and isn't all about catering to fans. 

Edited by Mikeymoonshine
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curiousity: Harry Potter-verse

Hermoine or Ginny?

 

In essence: It happens. Watcher should be treated as a protagonist, and not as a "Player choice". In terms of "romantic relationship" imo.

 

Harry and Ginny makes far more sense. Harry and Hermione were never depicted as anything other than good platonic friends, while Hermione and Ron's mutual attraction was teased heavily for half the book series.

 

I think Ginny's character suits Harry well (her character as depicted from book 4 onwards, that is, when she starts coming into her own as a character). If I have a complaint about their relationship, it's that it started late in the series and felt a little shoehorned as a result. I'd have liked to see some early pangs on the part of Harry for Ginny in Book 5, but I guess he was hung up on Cho at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love that wall of text. Always nice to see another person that gets the whole swipe over thing. Hell, even in the LGT community it gets pretty swept under the rug, with the pressure to take a "side".  Just look at the Korra debacle a few years back, with the internet getting all up in rage (Korrasami FTW).

 

The Rivalmance had this kinda...molesty (?) undertone to it. It was bit like those weird romance films where the girl is totally against the concept till the guy starts making out with them, and then their into it. Would like to see some more of those cut of points like in DAI and BG2 where a wrong decision could lead to the end of that route. Or more routes that could end pretty depressingly, like Bull's in DAI.

 

Ok, if Iselmyr is female, and Aloth is male, does that make them intersex?

 

Sorry, I try to keep my posts short.  :sweat:

 

Oh, the "Rivalmances" were toxic and unhealthy at best, emotional abuse at worst (with Hawke has the emotional abuser), and I'll never hear different.

 

Faerunner, one needs to consider that it was Bioware who described companions in DA2 as "playersexual". I don't think it's fair to blame the players for picking up vocabulary the company itself had created. 

 

What concerns Obsidian, so far they had only written characters with predetermined sexualities. Admittedly, those games (F:NV, PoE) did not have romances, but still, I doubt they will suddenly make all their characters "playersexual". It's just not Obsidian's style.

 

If memory serves, BioWare created the term to tell people that's not what they were doing. People were complaining that all companions romanced you regardless of player gender, thus their sexuality changes to suit the player character, then BioWare coined the term "Playersexual" just to give a name to what people were accusing them of, and saying, "No, that's not what they're doing. They don't change their sexuality in different playthroughs to be straight/gay based on what your Hawke's sex is, they're bisexual." I know that's what David Gaider, the lead Dragon Age writer at the time, did. He was emphatic that the characters were bisexual regardless of Hawke's sex any given playthrough.

 

Talking about bisexual erasure in regard to fictional characters of a game designed for mass markets is just a tad pretentious I think. People can be what they want, but these are fictional characters designed for very specific purposes, they're not people. Understanding this distinction helps a lot in keeping identity-politics out of gaming. If you want people to stop treating other people according to external labels and categories, then you should stop giving people labels and putting them in categories.

 

Considering bisexual erasure is a real reaction by real people to different types of fictional characters (movie, TV show, literature, etc) who show bisexual tendencies but the writers and/or viewers try to erase or delegitimize their bisexuality for one reason or another (like Willow from Buffy: "Oh, she was straight until she met Tara, then she became lesbian." "But, loving different people of different genders is a textbook example of bisexuality, and she still showed some interest in men--Dracula--after being with Tara..." "No, she was straight and then lesbian) I don't think it's pretentious at all.

 

Did BioWare ever actually say that the DA2 love interests were playersexual? I know that David Gaider said they were bisexual, both in interviews and on his now-deleted Tumblr.

 

(I mean, I think it was a really bad idea to leave Anders, Fenris and Merrill's sexuality as vague as it was and leave fans to fight about this for the rest of time. Especially since it lead to Anders not telling FemmeHawke about his relationship with Karl. I just don't recall anyone from BioWare ever saying they were playersexual.)

 

I don't think they did. I'm pretty sure that was either a term created by players, or it was a term created by BioWare to give a name to what fans were already accusing them of.

 

Yeah, David Gaider, the LEAD WRITER of Dragon Age 1-3, was (and is) emphatic about the companions not being "playersexual." That said, he did admit they were going to have different sexualities for different companions but none of the writers could agree on who and what and whatnot, so just making them all bisexual was a "compromise." He then said they wouldn't do it again (and they haven't to date) because "bisexuality is never a compromise." And that's something I'm cool with.)

 

Yeah I don't think pointing out that every character in DA2 that could be romanced or even flirted with (apart from Isabela) was written to be straight unless Hawk is the same gender as them translates to  "all bisexual people are sluts".

 

The point of my post was that most people accuse all DA2 love interests except Isabela of being "playersexual" because "Fenris, Merrill, and Anders don't express interest in a gender other than Hawke's before getting together with Hawke, so they must only like Hawke's gender that playthrough" However, most of the same people who say this say, "Isabela is the only real bisexual because she clearly expresses interest in men and women before getting with Hawke." The implication being that Isabela is the only "legitimate" bisexual because she announces her bisexuality to everyone (and sleeps around with different genders) before she settles down.

 

Why is it that so many people have this object permanence problem with bisexuality? Where people seem to think it's not "real" until it's observed by them, or it goes away / morphs into "straight/gay" depending on the gender of the person they get with. (A la "you didn't express any bisexual preferences in front of me before you got with her, so you must be straight/lesbian now that you're with her") =/

 

 

 

 

BUT, that's all neither here nor there. I don't personally buy into "DA2 Love Interests are all Player Sexual (except Isabela, because she gets around with both genders)." BUT I also know Obsidian is not going to make any of our companions conveniently bi, nor conveniently romanceable, just to make them sexually available to the player. Nor will they create some quota of orientations (like DAI's "two straights, two bis, two gays, plus Solas and Cullen because EA gave us an extra year"), so, yeah. Whether you think that's a good thing or not depends on the individual. Logically I'm all for it for character fidelity, but since I have some strong feelings about some characters, I know I'll probably have different emotions after the game comes out. ("DAMN IT! I know that's just like this character and it was so well-written I'm glad they did it... but damnit, I'm disappointed!")

Edited by Faerunner

"Not I, though. Not I," said the hanging dwarf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BUT I also know Obsidian is not going to make any of our companions conveniently bi, nor conveniently romanceable, just to make them sexually available to the player. Nor will they create some quota of orientations (like DAI's "two straights, two bis, two gays, plus Solas and Cullen because EA gave us an extra year"), so, yeah.

 

I am glad that will be the case.

 

I have no issues with a bisexual character. But making every character bisexual just to pander is where I draw the line.

 

I get that some people like a certain character and aren't able to romance them to their gender. But that's something you to accept for the sake of story and characterization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering bisexual erasure is a real reaction by real people to different types of fictional characters (movie, TV show, literature, etc) who show bisexual tendencies but the writers and/or viewers try to erase or delegitimize their bisexuality for one reason or another (like Willow from Buffy: "Oh, she was straight until she met Tara, then she became lesbian." "But, loving different people of different genders is a textbook example of bisexuality, and she still showed some interest in men--Dracula--after being with Tara..." "No, she was straight and then lesbian) I don't think it's pretentious at all.

 

Considering the mental gymnastics you go through in order to justify being offended, yes that is quite pretentious. You can't just create imaginary rules that fictional characters have to follow just satisfy your whims. Buffy is a TV show, the characters are fictional. Willow really wasn't a bisexual until the writers decided that it would be an interesting direction to take the character in. No one is trying to delegitimize bisexuality, and I really can't believe people keep falling for that politically motivated narrative. Let's invent a crime, give it a word and then associate our enemies with that. At the end of the day, you need to choose: do you want to be treated as a person, or do you want special treatment because you're a bisexual? You can't have both.

 

All in all, I hope you understand that gaming forums aren't the place for this sort of political discussion, and I hope you'll respect that more in the future. I myself am not going to respond to you on this particular subject anymore to keep from derailing this thread, but if you are truly interested, we can discuss it through private messages.


The most important step you take in your life is the next one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

At the end of the day, you need to choose: do you want to be treated as a person, or do you want special treatment because you're a bisexual? You can't have both.

 

 

Apparently wanting people to not call you something you're not is incompatible with wanting to be treated like a person. Gotcha.

  • Like 1

"Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you make any more dishonest assessment about what I just said? No one here has called her something she's not.


The most important step you take in your life is the next one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope all the companions are into my Watcher because I'm not so good with the roleplaying and my suspension of disbelief isn't strong enough to imagine a world where everyone doesn't want me

  • Like 5

Free games updated 3/6/19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So... do we want to discuss what romances everyone is looking forward to? Or hoping that they will be implemented?

 

I agree that Eder is probably a given, because EVERYONE loves Eder.

 

I'm hoping for Aloth, because I roleplayed my elf rogue Watcher having a soft spot for him in Pillars 1. It would be interesting to see how Islmyr affects a potential romance plot... my Watcher told Aloth to harmonize with her, but that means they would be having a threeway...

 

Lol, my Watcher is also a rogue elf and I too have high hopes for Eder and Aloth being romanceable and available for female Watchers. And I'm sure something hilarious will come where Iselmyr is concerned, too bad I told Aloth he doesn't need her to be strong. Perhaps she'll still be around to lesser extent.

As for who's gonna be LGBT I honestly can't say, aside from some joke remarks in PoE1, none of the characters really expressed themselves in that vein (or about anything). Maybe Pallegina? She has a guy's mentality, being risen as a brother of the Order. But I'm not sure why LGBT is a must have, in these SJW days if there won't be any in the game it would actually be refreshing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope all the companions are into my Watcher because I'm not so good with the roleplaying and my suspension of disbelief isn't strong enough to imagine a world where everyone doesn't want me

Only Slavoj Zizek will be. Feel the love.

 

efef71cf2b3f90548bea0c948e62a79d.jpeg


“By striving to do the impossible, man has always achieved what is possible. Those who have cautiously done no more than they believed possible have never taken a single step forward.” ― Mikhail Bakunin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So... do we want to discuss what romances everyone is looking forward to? Or hoping that they will be implemented?

 

I agree that Eder is probably a given, because EVERYONE loves Eder.

 

I'm hoping for Aloth, because I roleplayed my elf rogue Watcher having a soft spot for him in Pillars 1. It would be interesting to see how Islmyr affects a potential romance plot... my Watcher told Aloth to harmonize with her, but that means they would be having a threeway...

 

Lol, my Watcher is also a rogue elf and I too have high hopes for Eder and Aloth being romanceable and available for female Watchers. And I'm sure something hilarious will come where Iselmyr is concerned, too bad I told Aloth he doesn't need her to be strong. Perhaps she'll still be around to lesser extent.

As for who's gonna be LGBT I honestly can't say, aside from some joke remarks in PoE1, none of the characters really expressed themselves in that vein (or about anything). Maybe Pallegina? She has a guy's mentality, being risen as a brother of the Order. But I'm not sure why LGBT is a must have, in these SJW days if there won't be any in the game it would actually be refreshing.

 

 

I think Maneha hits on Pallegina and the female watcher, so I guess she's gay.

 

IMO, if they have to add gay romances, then keep them to 1 or 2 people (one male and one female).  It seems more realistic than making over half the party gay since the majority of the people in the world are not gay.

Edited by bonarbill
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, if they have to add gay romances, then keep them to 1 or 2 people (one male and one female).  It seems more realistic than making over half the party gay since the majority of the people in the world are not gay.

 

Not that I give a damn about the sexual orientation of people in general as long as they play nice, but I do give a damn about statistical arguments. So I ask you this. In a fictional world with magic, dragons, and lion companions. Do you really find it prudent to use statistics of the real world to justify a position, limiting the creative freedom of OE to make the game as they see fit?  I think it's rubbish.

Edited by TheisEjsing
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you make any more dishonest assessment about what I just said?

 

Faerunner: "It annoys me when bisexual people (and fictional characters) who don't announce every waking moment of their lives that they fancy both men and women are straitjacketed into 'gay' or 'straight' even when information to the contrary is readily available."

You: "You're just looking to be offended! Keep your filthy identity politics out of gaming! If you want people to acknowledge your status as a bisexual, you must be wanting special treatment!" (literal quotes from your post)

 

All this histrionics over somebody basically saying "dude stop calling someone gay when they're not". Because this request is apparently perfectly reasonable when the person in question is straight, but becomes "identity politics" to be fought at all costs if they happen to be bisexual.

 

 

No one here has called her something she's not.

Also, apparently you seem to be having difficulties with the grammatical construct called "impersonal you". That is okay. Many people struggle with mastering the nuances of English. Let me offer some help.

  • Like 1

"Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...