Romance

[Aramintai]

 

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.

 

But Maneha won't be in PoE2, at least not as a companion. And Pallegina didn't seem to care about her remarks.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Aramintai

[Mikeymoonshine]

 

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!")

 

 

I get that but I don't think that's what people are doing, a lot of things have been said by Gaider and other devs about those three companions. It seems they are canonically bisexual and that's great but that still doesn't change the way they are written in the game. As mentioned before, Anders does not mention his relationship with Karl to a female Hawke, why is is this exactly? 

 

You seem to be accusing an audience of things the creators are guilty of. This is not real life this is fiction, you do actually have to indicate a character's sexuality for it to exist in a fictional world and Bioware obviously went out of their way to avoid doing that a lot of the time. Your point about Willow from Buffy is another example of this blaming the audience. Willow is described several times on the show as being gay after her relationship with Tara begins. There's even an episode where she falls in love with a man because of a love spell and tries to turn him into a woman because she is gay. Now until she started being described this way I was under the assumption that she was bisexual but then it's certainly possible that she is gay too so whatever. Maybe someone has said that she is bi later down the line but that was not how she was presented on the show. 

 

All the LI's in DA2 express interest in the opposite gender. It's not like some of them just don't talk about their interests at all. 

[bonarbill]

 

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.

 

 

Considering PoE world's takes a lot of things from real history, yes.  I hope ropekid sticks with that principle. I stand by what said, so I'm not going to argue about it.

Edited February 20, 2017 by bonarbill

[TheisEjsing]

 

 

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.

 

 

Considering PoE world's takes a lot of things from real history, yes.  I hope ropekid sticks with that principle. I stand by what said, so I'm not going to argue about it.

 

Well, I hope he does that aswell, since I love that setting. And that was my point excatly. Josh takes what he wants from history. Not just what is based in statistics. The likelyhood of you running into like 5? dragons in central Europe in the middle ages was pretty low. That's the creative freedom.

If he wish to add more gays, lakes, or lions than history has to offer, that's his and OE's choice. And it shouldn't be dismissed because it's not statistically sound. It kinda defeats the purpose of a "fantasy" game.

Edited February 20, 2017 by TheisEjsing

[Yria]

 

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

 

She is, she straight out admits it when Kana tries to hit on her. I think her exact words were, "And I always preferred women". 

[Mikeymoonshine]

when you are talking about a small group of people I don't think stats matter. Is it likely that a lot or all of them would be LGBT+? No, but it is completely possible and if it's possible it's realistic.  

 

Fantasy games are full of unlikely things, POE was no different. 

[Aramintai]

 

 

 

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.

 

 

Considering PoE world's takes a lot of things from real history, yes.  I hope ropekid sticks with that principle. I stand by what said, so I'm not going to argue about it.

 

Well, I hope he does that aswell, since I love that setting. And that was my point excatly. Josh takes what he wants from history. Not just what is based in statistics. The likelyhood of you running into like 5? dragons in central Europe in the middle ages was pretty low. That's the creative freedom.

If he wish to add more gays, lakes, or lions than history has to offer, that's his and OE's choice. And it shouldn't be dismissed because it's not statistically sound. It kinda defeats the purpose of a "fantasy" game.

 

Well, statistics of the real world should still apply to any fantasy world - if the majority of people there were gay then they'd all have died out by now . So it's ok to assume that majority of people in a fantasy world should be straight and by that logic inexplicable condensation of LGBT in a party "a la BioWare" should be seen as unrealistic, fantasy world or no.

 

Also, I understand BioWare made everyone playersexual in horrible DA2 to keep the same amount of companions (cuz making them is expensive), but available for any gender, that's just cheap. Let's hope Obisidian cares more about their characters integrity.

 

Another bad example of making a character LGBT just because\to make point\to check that checkbox was in Baldur's Gate: Siege of Dragonspear - writers put a side character there with whole big story about her being transsexual...and it didn't bring any value to the story, as this wasn't a companion or her being trans was going to lead somewhere. So, imho, pointless expressions about being a snowflake should not be in the game unless they lead to something.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Aramintai

[TheisEjsing]

So.. The real world aumaua, orlans, and elfs all died out cuz they were gay? I don't mean to offend people on their views on sexuality in games here, that's a thing I can live without. But it's a fantasy game, and the amount of real world resemblance is not a given. It's up to the dev to decide. You can argue all you want about how many gays there are in the world. But don't use the "it's unrealistic" argument. You aren't offended by all the lions roaming around the middle european setting? Have standards.
If you don't want gays or w/e, that's your opinion. But stop with nonsensical use of statistics.

[HooAmEye]

 

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.

 

 

THANK YOU! Jeez, was having an arguement over something similiar irl over something quite similiar (race representation in fantasy, in regards to the Thousand Kingdoms Trilogy). People are all ok with there being all manner of of liches, gods, and alchemy, but as soon as you bring in actual real life issues they get one one's case about being an "Ess-Jay-Double U"

[Aramintai]

 

 

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.

 

 

THANK YOU! Jeez, was having an arguement over something similiar irl over something quite similiar (race representation in fantasy, in regards to the Thousand Kingdoms Trilogy). People are all ok with there being all manner of of liches, gods, and alchemy, but as soon as you bring in actual real life issues they get one one's case about being an "Ess-Jay-Double U"

 

Because levels of suspension of disbelief when it comes to magical creatures and real life issues are completely different. We all know magical creatures do not exist so that level is pretty high, but if some things exist in the real world and are brought up in the fantasy world then that level is much lower because we immediately project our existing real life assumptions on that issue. So yeah, LGBT are not some magical creatures from the book, they exist irl, so naturally people make preconceptions about them based on real life, lowering suspension of disbelief on the matter.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Aramintai

[TheisEjsing]

Because levels of suspension of disbelief when it comes to magical creatures and real life issues are completely different. We all know magical creatures do not exist so that level is pretty high, but if some things exist in the real world and are brought up in the fantasy world then that level is much lower because we immediately project our existing real life assumptions on that issue. So yeah, LGBT are not some magical creatures from the book, they exist irl, so naturally people make preconceptions about them based on real life, lowering suspension of disbelief on the matter.

 

 

Open your mind dude. Leave your preconceptions when dealing with fiction. There are literally millions of examples in fiction about authors tweaking expectations, or manipulating real world phenomena either cuz it enchances their vision of their work, because they feel it's worth exploring, or simply because they want to **** with you. I bet the lions really threw off your immersion too then, right?

[Andraste]

I've always found it weird that people apply the 'BUT REALISM!!!' argument so selectively. I mean, what are the chances that the Watcher would run into one person - and only one person - of each class that wants to join their party in POE1? Or that they just happen to be in the right place at the right time to meet both a guy who belongs to the Leaden Key and a guy that's being chased by them? That seems far more unlikely to me than having a couple of LGBT people in a group.

[Aramintai]

 

Because levels of suspension of disbelief when it comes to magical creatures and real life issues are completely different. We all know magical creatures do not exist so that level is pretty high, but if some things exist in the real world and are brought up in the fantasy world then that level is much lower because we immediately project our existing real life assumptions on that issue. So yeah, LGBT are not some magical creatures from the book, they exist irl, so naturally people make preconceptions about them based on real life, lowering suspension of disbelief on the matter.

 

 

Open your mind dude. Leave your preconceptions when dealing with fiction. There are literally millions of examples in fiction about authors tweaking expectations, or manipulating real world phenomena either cuz it enchances their vision of their work, because they feel it's worth exploring, or simply because they want to **** with you. I bet the lions really threw off your immersion too then, right?

 

I'm sorry but I can't help it when the game is breaking immersion by lowering my suspension of disbelief below zero, like DA2 did with everyone being bisexual, or into protagonist in general. That's not realistic, no matter what fiction this is (unless of course it's some porn fiction) and more often that not makes people see those characters in a less serious, cartoonish light. I'm sure writers want us take companions seriously, so if they really want to make someone LGBT it has to really fit that character's background and story. Making everyone LGBT will never accomplish that and companions will just become a laughing stock like in DA2.

[Ninjamestari]

There is a distinction between the game narrative and game mechanics. Quite frankly, people are getting sick of this virtue-signaling that forces 'sexual diversity' down their throats. It's the small minority of loudmouths and whiners who started this whole trend by claiming that games are somehow misogynic that perverted this whole conversation to begin with. These people are so dishonest and/or confused that they have managed to find Baldur's Gate to be sexually offensive because it doesn't represent sexual minorities. If you're worried that sexual minorities aren't getting enough attention in fiction then write your own damn stories.

[Aramintai]

There is a distinction between the game narrative and game mechanics. Quite frankly, people are getting sick of this virtue-signaling that forces 'sexual diversity' down their throats. It's the small minority of loudmouths and whiners who started this whole trend by claiming that games are somehow misogynic that perverted this whole conversation to begin with. These people are so dishonest and/or confused that they have managed to find Baldur's Gate to be sexually offensive because it doesn't represent sexual minorities. If you're worried that sexual minorities aren't getting enough attention in fiction then write your own damn stories.

That's what I was thinking as well. I hope writers are not gonna come here for any inspirations like they did on BioWare forums and just write what they see fitting the story.

[TheisEjsing]

I'm sorry but I can't help it when the game is breaking immersion by lowering my suspension of disbelief below zero, like DA2 did with everyone being bisexual, or into protagonist in general. That's not realistic, no matter what fiction this is (unless of course it's some porn fiction) and more often that not makes people see those characters in a less serious, cartoonish light. I'm sure writers want us take companions seriously, so if they really want to make someone LGBT it has to really fit that character's background and story. Making everyone LGBT will never accomplish that and companions will just become a laughing stock like in DA2.

 

 

 

I feel like this a personal issue for you. I was making a case against using statistics inappropriately. Not on this singular issue. I don't remember much about DA: 2. But I do remember that for me, it had way bigger problems than romances, and sexuality. 

[Ninjamestari]

 

I'm sorry but I can't help it when the game is breaking immersion by lowering my suspension of disbelief below zero, like DA2 did with everyone being bisexual, or into protagonist in general. That's not realistic, no matter what fiction this is (unless of course it's some porn fiction) and more often that not makes people see those characters in a less serious, cartoonish light. I'm sure writers want us take companions seriously, so if they really want to make someone LGBT it has to really fit that character's background and story. Making everyone LGBT will never accomplish that and companions will just become a laughing stock like in DA2.

 

 

 

I feel like this a personal issue for you. I was making a case against using statistics inappropriately. Not on this singular issue. I don't remember much about DA: 2. But I do remember that for me, it had way bigger problems than romances, and sexuality. 

 

 

Let's be honest, you were virtue signaling in order to appear to have the moral high ground.

[WotanAnubis]

 so if they really want to make someone LGBT it has to really fit that character's background and story.

 

While I agree that not everybody should be into the Watcher regardless, I wonder what this particular bit actually means. I've seen this argument brought up before, but it's never really made sense to me.

 

I mean, what does a person's background and story have to do with their sexuality?

 

Boone is an NCR sniper with a lot of repressed anger, therefore it fits that he's straight?

 

Arcade was raised by the Enclave and now tries to make the world slightly better through his work with the Followers, therefore it fits that he's gay?

 

OK, Boone might be a bad example here, because a big part of his character motivation is his dead wife. But you could swap Carla with Karel and he'd still be messed up over what happened at Bitter Springs and want to murder the entire Legion for kidnapping his spouse. His being straight doesn't matter for his story - him having had a romantic attachment to someone who is now dead does.

[Andraste]

Man, I wish that Evol Feminists really had the kind of power over games that some people imagine we have. (I'd start by using it to fix the gender imbalance in almost every group of cRPG companions, Pillars of Eternity and Dragon Age included. Then I would make the devs give me a pony.)

[TheisEjsing]

 

 

 

Let's be honest, you were virtue signaling in order to appear to have the moral high ground.

 

Let's be honest. I wasn't. Read the thread context. I have no claim on any moral high ground. 

[Notshauna]

Well, statistics of the real world should still apply to any fantasy world - if the majority of people there were gay then they'd all have died out by now . So it's ok to assume that majority of people in a fantasy world should be straight and by that logic inexplicable condensation of LGBT in a party "a la BioWare" should be seen as unrealistic, fantasy world or no.

 

 

Also, I understand BioWare made everyone playersexual in horrible DA2 to keep the same amount of companions (cuz making them is expensive), but available for any gender, that's just cheap. Let's hope Obisidian cares more about their characters integrity.

 

Another bad example of making a character LGBT just because\to make point\to check that checkbox was in Baldur's Gate: Siege of Dragonspear - writers put a side character there with whole big story about her being transsexual...and it didn't bring any value to the story, as this wasn't a companion or her being trans was going to lead somewhere. So, imho, pointless expressions about being a snowflake should not be in the game unless they lead to something.

 

See there are several significant leaps in logic here that aren't really supported. First of all the idea that since the majority of people aren't gay then they must be straight you're ignoring bisexual people entirely. Just because the various different species continue to exist doesn't mean that most people are straight, they could just as easily be bisexual. Or to take it further on Eora interspecies couplings do not result in offspring, so even though the majority of Humans are attracted to Elves doesn't mean either species is going extinct. Producing children is something that is very important in both the nobility and the serfs, so it's not unheard of people popping out children were for financial needs. Also, the party is by no means representative of the total population of Eora. 

Edited February 20, 2017 by Notshauna

[Aramintai]

 

 so if they really want to make someone LGBT it has to really fit that character's background and story.

 

While I agree that not everybody should be into the Watcher regardless, I wonder what this particular bit actually means. I've seen this argument brought up before, but it's never really made sense to me.

 

I mean, what does a person's background and story have to do with their sexuality?

 

Well, you can argue but a lot of gay people say that their sexuality was developed by their background - with whom and how they lived. So if a character tells something about their past life and lovers in that vein it helps with fleshing out that character as gay. What doesn't help is when it comes out of the blue like some characters in BioWare games - they never even thought of themselves as such but if the almighty protagonist says he\she wants them in same gender relationship they they just eagerly go with it, like puppets.

 

P.S. I liked how a gay character was presented in this upcoming game - Torment: Tides of Numenera. A rogue by the name of Tybir - he's nonchalant about being gay and talks about his past and his lover and that *actually* leads somewhere - later you will be able to meet his past lover and help resolve his personal quest. And it was not about the protagonist at all for a chance. There needs to be more stories like that.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Aramintai

[Ninjamestari]

Man, I wish that Evol Feminists really had the kind of power over games that some people imagine we have. (I'd start by using it to fix the gender imbalance in almost every group of cRPG companions, Pillars of Eternity and Dragon Age included. Then I would make the devs give me a pony.)

 

You're saying 'gender balance' like it's a good thing.

[Andraste]

 

Man, I wish that Evol Feminists really had the kind of power over games that some people imagine we have. (I'd start by using it to fix the gender imbalance in almost every group of cRPG companions, Pillars of Eternity and Dragon Age included. Then I would make the devs give me a pony.)

 

You're saying 'gender balance' like it's a good thing.

 

 

What else would you expect from an Evol Feminist?

[Mikeymoonshine]

There is a distinction between the game narrative and game mechanics. Quite frankly, people are getting sick of this virtue-signaling that forces 'sexual diversity' down their throats. It's the small minority of loudmouths and whiners who started this whole trend by claiming that games are somehow misogynic that perverted this whole conversation to begin with. These people are so dishonest and/or confused that they have managed to find Baldur's Gate to be sexually offensive because it doesn't represent sexual minorities. If you're worried that sexual minorities aren't getting enough attention in fiction then write your own damn stories.

 

This isn't really true, Bioware has been including same sex romance options for years, they have expanded it more and more because that's what a lot of their hardcore fans want. It doesn't really have much to do with the drama of the last few years or what the Sarkeesians of the world think about video games. 

 

Also you just criticising developers for supposedly adding lgbt characters for politics and then in the same paragraph said that people who want that kind of thing should "write their own damn stories" um...that is what the writers at bioware are doing. Like in the end it's their choice and if you don't like it you don't have to buy it and I have always said the same thing to those on the other side who act like there is some big issue that not enough video games are catering to them and their sensibilities.