Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
You can romance everyone no matter what.
Previous game DAI had gender restricted romance but everyone is pansexual now.
Which just comes back to bad writing in my opinion.
Or a member of the HR department standing behind the writer with a roller pin while tapping her foot.
Awful, garbage take. Player-sexual companions are the way. Putting in restrictions based on the PC gender is stupid and unnecessary. It adds nothing and takes away a lot.
You are not very smart huh?
I played a through Dragon Age Inquisition with a female elf so i could romance Solas.
I played played again with a male human so I could romance Dorian.
I replayed again with a female human to romance Sera.
It adds replay value and takes away nothing, Brainiac
I am in between these two takes. DAI and DAO did give characters their own gender preferences and DA2 and DAV did not. On the whole, I like the characters in DAI and DAO more. Part of that is because they have things they do and don’t want in a partner adds to the character. Dorian’s story hinges on him being a gay man. Solas isn’t interested in non-Elven women because it turns out he doesn’t really see non-elves as people. A big part of Morrigan’s plot is basically existing for the purpose of having a child. Their sexualities mean something for the story.
But I don’t think it has anything to do with HR-enforced writing and everything to do with ease of writing. DA2 and this version of DAV were haphazardly assembled and player-sexual companions are easier. It saves time and there’s a segment of DA fandom who ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ love it. It was very successful with BG3 last year too.
My hottest take is that playersexual characters represent ♥♥♥♥♥♥ representation because it reinforces stereotypes that all queer people are horn dogs who sleep with whoever at the first sign of attraction. It’s done better in DAV than BG3 because no one negs you like the wizard if you don’t flirt with them.
With Dorian there are sort of hints about his preferences but Sera blindsided me.
Was originally intending to romance her while playing human male but there was no indication that she didn't swing that way until I already flirted with her many times and she straight out (lol) said nah I like women.
By HR standing behind them I mean it is written in a way not to offend. Mellow. Luke warm. (how dare you rebuke my advances if you know what I am trying to say)
lmao the way people talk about BG3 makes me want to buy it more. It is still a bit too expensive for me. Perhaps I will get lucky during Christmas sale.
That is one thing I liked about DAI. You could still flirt with people who ultimately aren’t going to enter a relationship with you. As a woman flirting with Dorian and Cassandra is actually funny and they react very differently. It’s another reason I say that having diverse sexualities is better than playersexuality. How someone says “No” is a part of their character that makes them feel more real.
Because characters in a story don’t share the same romantic interest. Characters are more interesting when they have traits that diversify them from other characters and some character stories only make sense (like Dorian’s in DAI) if they have specific sexualities.
If people want to complain about things in the game, there are definitely some things to find, the companions being pansexual isn't one of them.
I prefer a thousand times the style of inquistion, the fact that you could still flirt with them even if you couldn't romance them added flavor to the interaction with the characters.
That there isn't a character with as a complex story as Dorian is my complaint. That they all prefer you makes them homogeneous while calling them diverse. This game is certainly better about BG3 because it shows you them hooking up with other people....which is something they did with Dorian and the Iron Bull a decade ago.
I disagree, you could have companions who aren't into you if you're nonbinary. You could have nonbinary companions who prefer only men or nonbinary characters. It just adds another variable. That's pretty true to life. I know nonbinary folks who have all sorts of preferences. I know nonbinary folks who are ace and their preference is "no thank you"
Tragically, Cyberpunk companions aren't player-sexual. For example, you can't romance Panam as female V. It's a stupid restriction that severely limits many players' enjoyment of the game for a reason that isn't at all worth it. You have to mod the game to enable a female V to be able to romance her.
There's nothing specific about Panam that would make her need to not be bisexual. You might say it's more realistic that companions have certain sexual preferences, but that's a terribly stupid argument because there are a lot of ways that you could make the game more realistic that would just detract from player enjoyment for no good reason. For example, it would be more realistic if you had to manage your needs to poop and pee many times throughout each day. But it's way more fun for players that they don't need to have their character poop and pee even though it's way less realistic.