Player sexual companion

[Yosharian]

 

 

 

 

From a forum thread I found:

 

 

 

It's only forced in the sense that, by simply being nice to him, playing as a male Hawke you will be confronted with a dialog wheel response tree consisting only of "Flirt with" or "Completely end any pretense of a relationship" responses (this may be true while playing as a female Hawke as well, but in that case I was actively trying to pick those responses so I might have "pre-empted" it).

 

Or in other words, Anders, alone among the various npcs you can "romance", actually initiates that conversation himself, even if you were not necessarily trying to flirt with him, and forces you to make a decision right away (and not flirting back gets you rivalry points). Isabella might be far more openly flirtatious pretty much all the time, but she doesn't force you to decide to start pursuing a romance with her or shut her down completely in the second bloody proper conversation you have.

 

So yes, I guess I would say that his romance felt forced, because all of a sudden through no desire on my part my male character was being hit on by another dude. With Fenris, the option is there but you have to actually pick it first, if you decide to pursue that it is clearly your decision; with Anders they've coded in a "decide your character is a homosexual/bisexual" or "stay straight/just not into Anders and get rivalry points" conversation gate, which is really kind of stupid - there should absolutely be a way to be nice to the guy without making players playing a male Hawke as a straight male pick the jackass response to stay straight in-game. The way it is now, Bioware seems to equate "being a straight male" with "being a jerk" - as a straight male myself, that kind of offends me.

 

So yeah, it's not so much that the designers pushed Anders onto the player, it's that they force the issue of whether or not your character would even want to consider a relationship with Anders onto the player, and don't give you a nice way to let him down.

 

 

This is how I remember it.  I could have remembered it wrong, but I don't think so.

 

The thing I remember so vividly is that there was no nice way to reject him, and doing so gained 'rivalry points'.  I remembered it as 'loss of friendship points' but now I remember it was rivalry points that are gained. I was quite irritated by that.  And I really didn't like the way the writers portrayed Anders in DA2 either.

 

As for DrowsyEmperor's comment on Bioware, I don't think he was arguing against the inclusion of LGBTQ+ romances exactly, but I may have misunderstood his words.

 

Anders "flirt" deal is generic enough that it didn't strike me as being romantic. I *didn't pick the romance option* and I went on with my game; me and Anders stayed best bros fighting Templars together and it was never an issue. It's virtually impossible not to pick up some rivalry points with everybody, so that didn't bother me. It seemed to me less about my character being a jerk and more about Anders being miffed at getting rejected, which seems perfectly okay to me. Lots of people get a little pissy at being rejected, doesn't mean they can't still be best friends who bond over a mutual hatred of Templars.

 

Almost every character in that game has a dialogue at some point that seems a little iffy--it could be flirtatious it could be not--and that's generally the point where you get the option of clicking the "heart" icon or not doing so. With Anders the difference is that he comes right out about it and you have more "romance" options in the dialogue then "not romance" options, so you have to actually pay attention. The point is it's still just an *option*. You can choose to romance him or you can choose to *not* romance him; the choice is *entirely* up to you. It's not a forced relationship; at no point does the game *make* you be gay. You can be in a homosexual relationship, a straight relationship, or no relationship at all--your characters sexuality is *up to you*.

 

 

What you said was 'romance never came up'.  That's clearly not the case with myself and all the people I quoted: romance does come up, and not only that but it is handled extremely poorly, in that the only option to turn him down is a particularly cold, heartless one, and then he has a hissy fit and gains rivalry points.

 

So romance does come up without any sexual interest being shown by the player.

 

Not saying any more than that, merely that what you said was inaccurate.

 

For the record I agree totally that even this doesn't represent the romance being 'forced down your throat'.

 

I actually think a lot of the hate Anders gets is simply because he is such a whiny bitch.  Zevran is way flirtier than he is but I distinctly remember turning down Zev and him being really cool with it, which contrasts sharply with Anders responds.

 

Even so that only happens if you deliberately foster a relationship with him--you have to get to a certain point of friendship before he'll start that. If you don't talk to him and just use him as a fighting companion, that'll never happen; you also get several options to flirt with him before that starts. It's totally possible to play through the game with Anders as your companion and literally never have romance come up.

 

As a side note, I didn't even realize it was possible to romance Fenris and I *never* went without him in my party, because he's just a total badass. Just made me sad when I had to kill him at the end. ****ing Templars.

 

 

I foster relationships with all NPCs, even the ones I hate!

[jf8350143]

I found it really funny that people complain about how romance in RPGs was never natural and realistic.

 

Yet when Anders actively try to pursue a romance instead of waiting for the protagonist to make a move, you know like people do in real life, it just becomes "why are you forcing it down my throat?"

 

Seriously, you turn down a person, he isn't happy about it and gain some rivalry point,what's wrong about that? It's not like he just leaves your party forever.

 

I don't like Anders, I almost kill him every time after he bomb the church, but have some NPC activly tries to start a romance every once a while instead of acting completely normal until protagonist does something is a nice change in my book.

Edited March 28, 2018 by jf8350143

[Tattyblue]

I found it really funny that people complain about how romance in RPGs was never natural and realistic.

 

Yet when Anders actively try to pursue a romance instead of waiting for the protagonist to make a move, you know like people do in real life, it just becomes "why are you forcing it down my throat?"

 

Seriously, you turn down a person, he isn't happy about it and gain some rivalry point,what's wrong about that? It's not like he just leaves your party forever.

 

I don't like Anders, I almost kill him every time after he bomb the church, but have some NPC activly tries to start a romance every once a while instead of acting completely normal until protagonist does something is a nice change in my book.

 

 

The problem is you and they absolutely knew the demographics of their game back in that day. To force a homosexual relationship on mostly white, mostly male, mostly straight customers is a really stupid PC thing to do. And DA2 suffered for it.

[SonicMage117]

I was the person who complained about romancing naturalism, realism and respective nature of it and that wasn't at all what I was referring to but I'll bite... I'd say they would leave your party in real life. When rejected, the other person doesn't stay close to the person who pursued them. They move on because the relationship becomes awkward and weird. And the type that actively persues is never rhe type to handle rejection well.

 

I've never really heard of someone sticking around and traveling with someone as so, at least. There comes a point to where persistence becomes begging which becomes creepy, for all of us. Nobody here is going to say "I'd give anything for a hot guy/girl to persue me persistently" unless they're unstable/desperate for that kind of affection - which is unnatural. The love for the stalker type and tolerance for someone who keeps persuing isn't normal, the protagonist in a real life Eora would be saying "Stop it or you're out" or even at an angrier point "I'll cut your tongue out and feed it to the dogs if you keep pestering me" depending on your character's personality.

 

You'd be surprised just how much someone's pestering/deseperation can reveal their other personality traits often leading to paranoia or other red flags and that is not be trusted and this affects friendship. In real life someone who is not trustworthy would not be recommended to the party. Would you have someone in your party who is hopelessly in love with you? Yes. Okay, now how about after you've rejected them for a number of times? It changes things a bit - or at least it would for a smart person. Anders would have time to think on those feelings in real life and maybe plot to kill or sabotage the protagonist out of anger and bitterness.

 

Above all, there is a job to do and in real life Anders would be easily replacable but it's a game with limited people unlike real life so I should probably cut it some slack. This is just my outlook, don't mind me.

 

 

 

 

Edit: So my coment about that didn't have to do anything with the same sex relationship. Maybe I should have clarified it in further detail. Oh well.

Edited March 28, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Stuurminator]

Slight rephrase: Never have I seen a non-dating sim force you into a homosexual relationship. Which, I mean...it's a dating sim, you know *exactly* what you're getting into. Nobody plays a "daddy dating sim" expecting anything but dating dudes, right? Right?

 

For the sake of my faith in humanity I hope I'm right.

 

I thought I'd be playing the underage girl in the army jacket and engaging in ephebophilial relations with much older men, possibly even incestual. Instead it was about gays, gross

[InsaneCommander]

I've never really heard of someone sticking around and traveling with someone as so, at least. There comes a point to where persistence becomes begging which becomes creepy, for all of us. Nobody here is going to say "I'd give anything for a hot guy/girl to persue me persistently" unless they're unstable/desperate for that kind of affection - which is unnatural. The love for the stalker type and tolerance for someone who keeps persuing isn't normal, the protagonist in a real life Eora would be saying "Stop it or you're out" or even at an angrier point "I'll cut your tongue out and feed it to the dogs if you keep pestering me" depending on your character's personality.

 

I actually wouldn't mind seeing this in the game. My Bleak Walker would throw the stalker in the dungeons, but since we don't have one in the sequel, then the companion would walk the plank.

 

Even people who let the stalker follow them would have to reconsider once they started a romance with another character. It simply wouldn't be ok to have the stalker there, all jealous and sharing the campsite. And if the stalker stays for too long, the "break up" might be complicated.

 

[Elkor_Alish]

The problem is you and they absolutely knew the demographics of their game back in that day. To force a homosexual relationship on mostly white, mostly male, mostly straight customers is a really stupid PC thing to do. And DA2 suffered for it.

This is patently absurd. It is precisely this breed of arrogance which causes discerning people to view intersectionality as distasteful. Homosexuality is not the issue, it is force which is an issue. Art does not judge, it invites judgment. Not through force, but through enticement. Contrarily, it is the nature of force to create resistance. It is for this reason that propaganda, no matter how attractive or well intentioned, can never do more than aspire to artistic expression while utterly failing to realize the transformative power of art.

 

One cannot be beaten into enlightenment.

 

Freddy Mercury was queer, yet he was also masterful, to describe him only in terms of his sexual preferences is insulting. This is true of any individual. Sappho is not significant because of her proclivities but because of her verse. Leonardo da Vinci was arrested along with several other young men at 24 and charged with sodomy, it largely accepted he was in all probability homosexual, yet this neither detracts from nor lends enhancement to his accomplishments. It is utterly immaterial. Judging an individual upon their sexual appetites is as petty and ridiculous as if the criteria were culinary instead. Nor are these example isolated.. Richard the Lionheart, Michelangelo, Donatello, Alexander the Great, Tchaikovsky et cetera et al. And we know of these individuals, and their accomplishments, and their preferences, precisely because of the efforts undertaken by "mostly white, mostly male, mostly straight" individuals.

 

The attraction in RPGs is exploring ideas and constructs. People play in different ways, embracing every extreme from complete pacifism to wholesale slaughter, but when any outcome results in forced resolution which negates their potential for individual agency they always react with hostility. Fallout 2 had gay relationships and gay marriage and suffered little, if at all, for the inclusion. Because it was just something else you could do. Because it was optional, and only fanatics fail to appreciate having options.

 

And fanatics are never worth listening to.

Edited March 28, 2018 by Elkor_Alish

[Yosharian]

I found it really funny that people complain about how romance in RPGs was never natural and realistic.

 

Yet when Anders actively try to pursue a romance instead of waiting for the protagonist to make a move, you know like people do in real life, it just becomes "why are you forcing it down my throat?"

 

Seriously, you turn down a person, he isn't happy about it and gain some rivalry point,what's wrong about that? It's not like he just leaves your party forever.

 

I don't like Anders, I almost kill him every time after he bomb the church, but have some NPC activly tries to start a romance every once a while instead of acting completely normal until protagonist does something is a nice change in my book.

 

> "why are you forcing it down my throat?"

 

I'm trying to find the person that said that but I can't find him

 

 

 

The problem is you and they absolutely knew the demographics of their game back in that day. To force a homosexual relationship on mostly white, mostly male, mostly straight customers is a really stupid PC thing to do. And DA2 suffered for it.

This is patently absurd. It is precisely this breed of arrogance which causes discerning people to view intersectionality as distasteful. Homosexuality is not the issue, it is force which is an issue. Art does not judge, it invites judgment. Not through force, but through enticement. Contrarily, it is the nature of force to create resistance. It is for this reason that propaganda, no matter how attractive or well intentioned, can never do more than aspire to artistic expression while utterly failing to realize the transformative power of art.

 

One cannot be beaten into enlightenment.

 

Freddy Mercury was queer, yet he was also masterful, to describe him only in terms of his sexual preferences is insulting. This is true of any individual. Sappho is not significant because of her proclivities but because of her verse. Leonardo da Vinci was arrested along with several other young men at 24 and charged with sodomy, it largely accepted he was in all probability homosexual, yet this neither detracts from nor lends enhancement to his accomplishments. It is utterly immaterial. Judging an individual upon their sexual appetites is as petty and ridiculous as if the criteria were culinary instead. Nor are these example isolated.. Richard the Lionheart, Michelangelo, Donatello, Alexander the Great, Tchaikovsky et cetera et al. And we know of these individuals, and their accomplishments, and their preferences, precisely because of the efforts undertaken by "mostly white, mostly male, mostly straight" individuals.

 

The attraction in RPGs is exploring ideas and constructs. People play in different ways, embracing every extreme from complete pacifism to wholesale slaughter, but when any outcome results in forced resolution which negates their potential for individual agency they always react with hostility. Fallout 2 had gay relationships and gay marriage and suffered little, if at all, for the inclusion. Because it was just something else you could do. Because it was optional, and only fanatics fail to appreciate having options.

 

And fanatics are never worth listening to.

 

I can't remember hearing any complaints about Zevran, either

Edited March 28, 2018 by Yosharian

[Yosharian]

 

I've never really heard of someone sticking around and traveling with someone as so, at least. There comes a point to where persistence becomes begging which becomes creepy, for all of us. Nobody here is going to say "I'd give anything for a hot guy/girl to persue me persistently" unless they're unstable/desperate for that kind of affection - which is unnatural. The love for the stalker type and tolerance for someone who keeps persuing isn't normal, the protagonist in a real life Eora would be saying "Stop it or you're out" or even at an angrier point "I'll cut your tongue out and feed it to the dogs if you keep pestering me" depending on your character's personality.

 

I actually wouldn't mind seeing this in the game. My Bleak Walker would throw the stalker in the dungeons, but since we don't have one in the sequel, then the companion would walk the plank.

 

Even people who let the stalker follow them would have to reconsider once they started a romance with another character. It simply wouldn't be ok to have the stalker there, all jealous and sharing the campsite. And if the stalker stays for too long, the "break up" might be complicated.

 

 

 

[Mannock]

And you're unaware of the zeal with which Bioware, and a part of their community, pushed the issue - ergo the crusade comment.

In no way was BioWare, with their games, trying to force other game companies to make games in the same fashion as they do.

 

BioWare had a vision of how they wanted to portray romances in their games. Were all these different romance options great? That's a matter of personal opionion but I'm sure these opinions vary as much as there are gamers who played the games. Personally I found some were good and some were bad. Heck, I don't even think BioWare themselves would say all were great.

 

But whatever you think of them, they do not fall into the defenition of what a crusade is.

 

Did they cater to vocal parts of their forum? Perhaps. BioWare is a profit making company, trying to make as much money off their games as possible. Obviously they see romances in their games as a key part of that. You may not like that, but again, what BioWare are doing is not within the definition of a crusade.

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

And you're unaware of the zeal with which Bioware, and a part of their community, pushed the issue - ergo the crusade comment.

In no way was BioWare, with their games, trying to force other game companies to make games in the same fashion as they do.

 

BioWare had a vision of how they wanted to portray romances in their games. Were all these different romance options great? That's a matter of personal opionion but I'm sure these opinions vary as much as there are gamers who played the games. Personally I found some were good and some were bad. Heck, I don't even think BioWare themselves would say all were great.

 

But whatever you think of them, they do not fall into the defenition of what a crusade is.

 

Did they cater to vocal parts of their forum? Perhaps. BioWare is a profit making company, trying to make as much money off their games as possible. Obviously they see romances in their games as a key part of that. You may not like that, but again, what BioWare are doing is not within the definition of a crusade.

 

 

cru·sade

1.

lead or take part in an energetic and organized campaign concerning a social, political, or religious issue.

 

The LGBTQ is a social issue and has been the subject of numerous organized campaigns for its advancement. You could even perceive it as an organized campaign on the whole. If you do that, which I am doing, then Bioware was, in its own small way, a part of that effort. 

 

What's so hard to understand?

Edited March 28, 2018 by Drowsy Emperor

[Mannock]

cru·sade

1.

lead or take part in an energetic and organized campaign concerning a social, political, or religious issue.

 

The LGBTQ is a social issue and has been the subject of numerous organized campaigns for its advancement. You could even perceive it as an organized campaign on the whole. If you do that, which I am doing, then Bioware was, in its own small way, a part of that effort. 

 

What's so hard to understand?

But we are talking about BioWare. BioWare have never tried organize a campaign to change how other game companies portray romances in their games.

 

So no, BioWare are not crusading, big nor small.

[jf8350143]

Witcher series has ton of LGBT characters, some of them are quite major characters(like Ciri). Does that make CDPR part of the crusade as well?

 

Hell, in PoE 1 there is a lesbian companion, who openly states that she is attracted to woman, does that make Obsidian part of the crusade?

 

Or does it has to be a love interest to the protagonist to count? If that's the case I think Obsidian will be joining the crusade in a little more than a month.

Edited March 28, 2018 by jf8350143

[Fluffle]

"Crusade" or "agenda" are labels. Usually such labels are used so you can disregard something without bothering to explain why.

 

You just have to call any representation of non-white, non-Christian, non-male, non-heterosexual characters an "agenda" and then it is supposed to be clear to everyone that that is something inherently bad. The term "agenda" has got such a negative connotation which is all the more reason for some people to call the above mentioned representation that way.

 

I will not engage further than this post here in this thread, at least not until the game comes out and we know how Obsidian handles the relationships.

We simply don't know at this point. Almost everything is pure speculation on which I don't want to spend my time and energy.

 

I am pretty sure that Obsidian has read the opinions of romances in other games especially the Bioware ones. And I cannot imagine they would do the relationships in Deadfire in a similar way to the Bioware romances.

 

Personally, I do enjoy Bioware romances, in Bioware games. For my taste they would not fit into the world of Pillars of Eternity. For Deadfire I would hope, wish and expect relationships that are far more deeper, personal and meaningful. And when I speak of relationships in Deadfire, I mean many kinds of relationships. I hope the characters will be able to develop meaningful relationships beyond just romantic ones.

Edited March 28, 2018 by Fluffle

[Mannock]

And I cannot imagine they would do the relationships in Deadfire in a similar way to the Bioware romances.

While I agreed with most of your post, I don't however get the quote above. You mean there's a formula to which all romances ever done by BioWare apply? Then what is that formula?

 

Cause I've played most of BioWare's games and I can't say there's a general BioWare formula, if we don't make it a very general one, but by such standards it would be difficult for any developer do a relationship in a game without also touching upon such general characteristics.

 

I'm sure Obsidian will try to stick out and do romances in their own way, and it will be interesting to see how they turn out. I have have faith in Carrie, Kate, et al. But I'm also quite sure there will be parts that are quite similar to the "BioWare romances" (however one choses to define such a thing).

[Drowsy Emperor]

Witcher series has ton of LGBT characters, some of them are quite major characters(like Ciri). Does that make CDPR part of the crusade as well?

 

Hell, in PoE 1 there is a lesbian companion, who openly states that she is attracted to woman, does that make Obsidian part of the crusade?

 

Or does it has to be a love interest to the protagonist to count? If that's the case I think Obsidian will be joining the crusade in a little more than a month.

 

No, because none of them made a big deal out of it. It was just there, like a ton of other content. 

 

Bioware did, and employees of the company did, including Gaider, on the forums. In fact, Gaider was on the record more than most, beating the SJW drum. He was in fact, instrumental in pushing for it, likely because he's gay himself. 

 

I know it's an amazing concept, but people can, in fact, have agendas and people within BW weren't even trying to deny it. 

 

https://www.polygon.com/2014/7/1/5860204/dragon-age-inquisition-bioware-gay-character

https://www.destructoid.com/bioware-lead-writer-talks-gay-romances-lgbt-characters-and-dragon-age-sales-292333.phtml

https://gamerant.com/bioware-same-sex-romance-stance/

Edited March 28, 2018 by Drowsy Emperor

[jf8350143]

 

Witcher series has ton of LGBT characters, some of them are quite major characters(like Ciri). Does that make CDPR part of the crusade as well?

 

Hell, in PoE 1 there is a lesbian companion, who openly states that she is attracted to woman, does that make Obsidian part of the crusade?

 

Or does it has to be a love interest to the protagonist to count? If that's the case I think Obsidian will be joining the crusade in a little more than a month.

 

No, because none of them made a big deal out of it. It was just there, like a ton of other content. 

 

Bioware did, and employees of the company did, including Gaider, on the forums. In fact, Gaider was on the record more than most, beating the SJW drum. He was in fact, instrumental in pushing for it, likely because he's gay himself. 

 

I know it's an amazing concept, but people can, in fact, have agendas and people within BW weren't even trying to deny it. 

 

https://www.polygon.com/2014/7/1/5860204/dragon-age-inquisition-bioware-gay-character

https://www.destructoid.com/bioware-lead-writer-talks-gay-romances-lgbt-characters-and-dragon-age-sales-292333.phtml

https://gamerant.com/bioware-same-sex-romance-stance/

 

I'm gonna quote Mannock here:"But we are talking about BioWare. BioWare have never tried organize a campaign to change how other game companies portray romances in their games.

 

So no, BioWare are not crusading, big nor small. "

 

Homosexual characters have more presentation in Bioware's game and that's what makes people talk about them. So people asked them about it a lot, and they tend to talked about it a lot. It's a simply way of marketing. Besides there is nothing wrong with having more diversity in the game, so why would they try to avoid this topic?

 

They never tries to label the people who didn't like their games as sexist or racist, unlike some other company *cough* Disney *cough*.

[draego]

welp this aught to get interesting. the talking sword 

[rjshae]

welp this aught to get interesting. the talking sword 

 

I wonder what the requirements are for the sonic bonus?

[evilcat]

welp this aught to get interesting. the talking sword 

It is not the romance we wanted but the one we deserved.

 

As for Bioware and "every ship is already in" is part of the brand, and it is somehow funny in own way.

So sad Bioware soul was corrupted by EA masters.

[InsaneCommander]

welp this aught to get interesting. the talking sword 

 

I wonder how she will react to the watcher actions. Unlike the companions, the talking sword can't leave if you do something she doesn't like.

[OrKToS]

welp this aught to get interesting. the talking sword 

I hope it's two handed sword. wanna wear her myself.

[Ryz009]

Dear lord people still going on about that forced Anders flirt? My god some people have the thinnest of skins. He hit on you, you can shut him down. Jesus christ at some people acting like an unwanted advance that's easily shut down is the end of the universe. (And the only way to even get hit on is to pick the diplomatic super nice supportive guy options twice in the conversation. Pick any thing else and he doesn't even hit on you).

 

"But I get five rivalry points!" that you can make up in the very next conversation. Oh noes. (especially hilarious given Anders is one of the easiest companions to max out friendship on. Give me a break).

Edited April 30, 2018 by Ryz009

[molotov.]

Dear lord people still going on about that forced Anders flirt? My god some people have the thinnest of skins. He hit on you, you can shut him down. Jesus christ at some people acting like an unwanted advance that's easily shut down is the end of the universe. (And the only way to even get hit on is to pick the diplomatic super nice supportive guy options twice in the conversation. Pick any thing else and he doesn't even hit on you).

 

"But I get five rivalry points!" that you can make up in the very next conversation. Oh noes. (especially hilarious given Anders is one of the easiest companions to max out friendship on. Give me a break).

I think that they are all scared, the idea of a guy hitting on you is scary if you still have doubts of who you are and what you like, lack of confidence.

Edited May 1, 2018 by molotov.

[Yosharian]

 

Dear lord people still going on about that forced Anders flirt? My god some people have the thinnest of skins. He hit on you, you can shut him down. Jesus christ at some people acting like an unwanted advance that's easily shut down is the end of the universe. (And the only way to even get hit on is to pick the diplomatic super nice supportive guy options twice in the conversation. Pick any thing else and he doesn't even hit on you).

 

"But I get five rivalry points!" that you can make up in the very next conversation. Oh noes. (especially hilarious given Anders is one of the easiest companions to max out friendship on. Give me a break).

I think that they are all scared, the idea of a guy hitting on you is scarying if you still have doubts of who you are and what you like, lack of confidence.

I disliked that moment with Anders and I have had guys literally beg me to have sex with them and it didn't bother me, so no, it isn't that.

 

It's very easy to dismiss criticism as 'oh they're just bigots'.