Companion same sex marriage and reputation

[TrixxieTriss]

I give up. It's wasted energy. I might as well be trying to tell Star Trek fans that Captain Kirk isn't real.

 

It's sad, isn't it. They just do not understand logic. I don't think you could have made it any plainer or easier for them to follow.

I can only assume that they have some deep seeded feelings against gay people because every argument against doing it has been nonsensical and disproved as rubbish logic.

But you just can't change some people's beliefs because it would require a major shift in their thinking. I've heard all the arguments over the years against being LGBT. I've had debates and discussions with people firmly against it. Some of the completely nonsensical and illogical arguments I have heard would make you wonder if some of those people are insane. Beliefs for most people are so firmly ingrained, that it would be like ripping up a telegraph pole with a piece of dental floss.

 

It was never my intent when I started this thread for it to turn into a discussion on real life gay/lesbian issues. All I wanted was some equality in the form of choice and that is all. If you don't decide to choose X and only choose Y, how does that affect your game play. It doesn't, you aren't sitting at my computer, playing the game through my eyes. You wouldn't even know it's an option unless you followed the rabbit down that hole. Let's face it, I think a lot of this has to do with people's own insecurities about themselves. If the option was there, then they maybe tempted to try it because they are curious. I guess they might just be a little afraid they might like it. Better to not have the temptation. Imagine if it spread, what would we do then.

[Codedrago]

I can only assume that they have some deep seeded feelings against gay people because every argument against doing it has been nonsensical and disproved as rubbish logic.

 

When you only assume the worst of people, you can never see the good of those people.

[Rolodome]

It's sad, isn't it. They just do not understand logic. I don't think you could have made it any plainer or easier for them to follow.

I can only assume that they have some deep seeded feelings against gay people because every argument against doing it has been nonsensical and disproved as rubbish logic.

But you just can't change some people's beliefs because it would require a major shift in their thinking. I've heard all the arguments over the years against being LGBT. I've had debates and discussions with people firmly against it. Some of the completely nonsensical and illogical arguments I have heard would make you wonder if some of those people are insane. Beliefs for most people are so firmly ingrained, that it would be like ripping up a telegraph pole with a piece of dental floss.

 

It was never my intent when I started this thread for it to turn into a discussion on real life gay/lesbian issues. All I wanted was some equality in the form of choice and that is all. If you don't decide to choose X and only choose Y, how does that affect your game play. It doesn't, you aren't sitting at my computer, playing the game through my eyes. You wouldn't even know it's an option unless you followed the rabbit down that hole. Let's face it, I think a lot of this has to do with people's own insecurities about themselves. If the option was there, then they maybe tempted to try it because they are curious. I guess they might just be a little afraid they might like it. Better to not have the temptation. Imagine if it spread, what would we do then.

Yeah, I mean I try to give individuals the benefit of the doubt, regarding their motivations. But whether or not it's motivated by what we both clearly suspect, either way, it's increasingly obvious to me that I'm not making any headway. Some arguments, I have learned, when it comes to fiction and fandom, simply have no end. Fandom is not always rational and there's nothing wrong with that, but it means that sometimes I'm not going to get anywhere.

 

Anyway, on the bright side, the discussion has kept the topic in the spotlight longer, so maybe more chance of being seen/considered as a general request for future content, if nothing else.

 

It is what it is. I'll admit I sometimes argue against changes that other people propose, but I try not to take it too seriously. Sometimes I do anyway though, I'm sure. People and their fictional worlds... they can get really into them.

[Icykill_]

Or this story based issue was moved to the story based section of the form.

 

 

I expect nothing from her, if she doesn't wish to bother trying to find the proof, that's fine. but she shouldn't expect me to take her point seriously without anything to back it up.

 

And the person who needs to provide proof is the one making the assertion as it is impossiable for the one asking for proof cannot disprove or prove a negative. Telling somone to prove you wrong without providing any actualy evidence to be disproven is asinine. If you make a poit and expect it to be taken seriously, evidence is a good way to go about it.

 

 

 

Because the characters did not have that sexuality before hand, and just because you will not see it as a result of not picking the choice to see it does not change that it is out of character. This would be as bad as it was in Dragon Age 2 where some of the character's backstories changed to accomidate their 'player-sexual'. As a writer myself I am absolutly against needlessly changing a character in this manner.

 

And offended by it? Is that really the only conclusion you can reach? Did you actually see ths as the only option for somone to be against this idea, or are you simply assuming offense or hate to simply make it easier? Because if it's the first, I assure you that characters getting funky with the same sex does not offend me in any way.

 

 

She saids that But from what I've seen of this thread, this is exactly what she is doing.

 

 

So, like I said. She's asking for the original companions to change their sexuality simply because she wants to screw them instead of the new ones. And we've already pointed out how Bioware messing any more with the romance flags will only serve to break romances even more. With the only other option being that the returning companions are just suddenly bi and we've already delved into whats wrong with changing characters like that as well as the 'well, you would never see it' argument above.

 

 

 

Off to a bad start by outright assuming that I'm straight, then on to say that I wouldn't understand having to accept bullcrap societial norms and not being being normal without being gay. And yes, I would definitly know how it feels, growing up I've been beaten, mentally abused and even had my leg burned for not being normal.

 

 

She's not given any postive alternative neutral options for one character. You act as if you can't let other characters go down easy and that you're punished for trying to persue SSR. You also don't seem to count the option of not persuing a romance with anyone.

 

 

Her complain was that the companion was negativly reacting to her not wanting to romance him, thus apparently 'strong arming' her into conforming into a straight relationship. By this logic the game is strong arming you into commiting vile acts because the resident doucebag of your crew reacts negitivly to you not do doing so.

 

 

I question what is offensive to her to understand better, though in the post I think you're referring to I was pointing out that she seemed to purposly be looking to be offended and jumps to the conclusion that Bioware moved this thread to the story and lore section was becase they didn't want to see it, which is an asinine assumption. There are much better reasons to move it (Like I said before, this is a story based discussion, it belongs here) and if they didn't wish for people to see it, they would of simply deleted it.

 

 

Wow, you really don't get it or understand where she is coming from. I guess you have no empathy towards her feelings.

You have picked apart her posts to suit your own argument against her. The same as you've completely ignored mine.

As other people have tried to explain this too you already and you just can't comprehend, I'll stop trying to. It's like talking to a crazy creationist about evolution.

Edited July 25, 2016 by Icykill_

[Rolodome]

I had an additional thought about this. It comes in two parts.

 

Part 1: Ultimately, what this comes down to is, gamers want to experience the same things that their fellow gamers experience. We are all one community of people who play games.

 

Part 2: If I were a game developer, how do I give each gamer roughly the same experience, while working from limited resources? Enter: "Flirting is not gender-specific" (the chosen method for the main KOTFE romances). This is simple enough to do and solves the problem handily. The romance path itself is exactly the same for each player, regardless of who they are or why they are doing it.

 

In summation/review: We as gamers want to be able to experience what our fellow gamers experience. Our friends, neighbors, and loved ones. We want shared experience. The KOTFE method accomplishes that. It's a model that works and brings people together talking about the same characters, experiencing the same things. Everyone gets included.

[Limariko]

It was never my intent when I started this thread for it to turn into a discussion on real life gay/lesbian issues. All I wanted was some equality in the form of choice and that is all.

 

From my experience in reading the arguments that get posed in these sorts of threads, it doesn't matter what the original poster's intent was as these threads always explode with the differing opinions firmly entrenched in their stance. There will always be people who consider going the playersexual route a cop out. There will always be people who will go ballistic if the defined route as Dragon Age: Inquisition used happens because a character they wanted to romance wasn't given the romance preferences they wanted. There will always be a dragging in of real life LGBT issues because for some, they really connect strongly with the available character romances and comparisons get made. And there will be people who consider the romances as irrelevant fluff not worth getting worked up over, and others who consider them too much trouble for what they're worth and the game would be better off without them.

 

Regardless of what the devs eventually decide, they will always catch flack for whatever decisions they've made.

[TrixxieTriss]

From my experience in reading the arguments that get posed in these sorts of threads, it doesn't matter what the original poster's intent was as these threads always explode with the differing opinions firmly entrenched in their stance. There will always be people who consider going the playersexual route a cop out. There will always be people who will go ballistic if the defined route as Dragon Age: Inquisition used happens because a character they wanted to romance wasn't given the romance preferences they wanted. There will always be a dragging in of real life LGBT issues because for some, they really connect strongly with the available character romances and comparisons get made. And there will be people who consider the romances as irrelevant fluff not worth getting worked up over, and others who consider them too much trouble for what they're worth and the game would be better off without them.

 

Regardless of what the devs eventually decide, they will always catch flack for whatever decisions they've made.

 

Sad, but true

[TrixxieTriss]

I had an additional thought about this. It comes in two parts.

 

Part 1: Ultimately, what this comes down to is, gamers want to experience the same things that their fellow gamers experience. We are all one community of people who play games.

 

Part 2: If I were a game developer, how do I give each gamer roughly the same experience, while working from limited resources? Enter: "Flirting is not gender-specific" (the chosen method for the main KOTFE romances). This is simple enough to do and solves the problem handily. The romance path itself is exactly the same for each player, regardless of who they are or why they are doing it.

 

In summation/review: We as gamers want to be able to experience what our fellow gamers experience. Our friends, neighbors, and loved ones. We want shared experience. The KOTFE method accomplishes that. It's a model that works and brings people together talking about the same characters, experiencing the same things. Everyone gets included.

 

And that is all I was asking for. But others seem to think this changes and affects their own game play, when it has zero impact on them.

[TrixxieTriss]

Wow, you really don't get it or understand where she is coming from. I guess you have no empathy towards her feelings.

You have picked apart her posts to suit your own argument against her. The same as you've completely ignored mine.

As other people have tried to explain this too you already and you just can't comprehend, I'll stop trying to. It's like talking to a crazy creationist about evolution.

 

Thanks hun for trying. Some people just can't understand another's point of view or try to antagonise to upset them. Its why I put that person on ignore so they can't upset me.

[Icykill_]

Thanks hun for trying. Some people just can't understand another's point of view or try to antagonise to upset them. Its why I put that person on ignore so they can't upset me.

 

I like your new signature 😊. Way to support our community

I hope you don't mind, but I'm going to plagiarise part of it.

[Codedrago]

Wow, you really don't get it or understand where she is coming from. I guess you have no empathy towards her feelings.

I have empathy, but that does't tur off my ability to think when she comes to a discussion form and clearly onyl wants an echo chamber.

 

You have picked apart her posts to suit your own argument against her.

It's called refuiting! I take her post one at a time in hopes proving her wrong or be proved wrong, either adding to my argument or taking it apart.

 

The same as you've completely ignored mine.

Uh, go back a few pages, you can clearly see that I adress your arguement. Whether you think I did a good job or not, I did not ignore it.

 

As other people have tried to explain this too you already and you just can't comprehend, I'll stop trying to. It's like talking to a crazy creationist about evolution.

Hmmm, assuming somone cannot experience what your experienced without comming to the same conclusion. Assuming the worst intentions of someone for simply disagreeing. And relying mostly on trying to get the other arguer to feel bad. Yep, you're right. Talking to you is like debating a crazy creationist about evolution.

[Icykill_]

Thanks hun for trying. Some people just can't understand another's point of view or try to antagonise to upset them. Its why I put that person on ignore so they can't upset me.

 

Yeah, I already used the ignore option. So they can keep posting all the rubbish they want and I won't see it either.

[Eanelinea]

Which means we put fleshing out characters in detail back because everyone has to get the exact companion they want to be romanceable how they want to do it?

 

Do you actually notice that just keeping them "open end" and appeasing to everyone who might want to romance them with any gender/race/faction and by only using flirt option is creating a "token character" to begin with. Rejection belongs as much into a story as failure and success.

 

As I said before, 4.0 and beyond, I don't mind the three characters, Lana, Theron and Koth being bisexual. I dig it, it gives options, ideas for our fanfiction writers, and some depth to the characters. Kaliyo says she isn't as attracted to women as she is men, even though I'm pretty sure she's been with both.

 

Makeb gave us a bisexual female and a homosexual male.

 

I personally want to see some characters who are purely straight, purely lesbian, or purely gay. I don't want all new characters to be bisexual or as some call it gender neutral for us players.

 

For example: While I am ecstatic that Theron can be attracted to my female character or my male character, I wouldn't have minded if I flirted with him on my female character only for him to tell me that I wasn't his type (ie not male). I would have been disappointed, but it would have been a bit more real and there would have been more depth to his character to turn me down for not being what he was into.

 

For me, I like a little bit of realism in my fantasy. I can still escape from real life and be the best sith warrior ever, without every single person I run into being bisexual on the off chance that I might want to boink him/her.

 

So with my point of view, there's no reason for us to have to make our vanilla companions bisexual too when they've already been established as being heterosexual or experimental (Kaliyo). I don't want Quinn to suddenly become bisexual because some person playing a male warrior still wants to romance him.

 

I don't care if companions or npcs are bisexual or gay, but we do NOT need every single companion or npc to have sex with everyone. I want straight, gay, lesbian and bisexual. Not everyone hits for all teams. Just like in real life, not everyone is straight. Not everyone is gay. Not everyone is bisexual.

 

I, myself, in real life am heterosexual. It would be like someone telling me 'oh just TRY being with a woman, you might like it!' No, I wouldn't because I don't find women sexually attractive. So why would we change the vanilla companions when you're basically telling them 'oh just TRY being bisexual, you might like it!' That's how I see it.

[CloudCastle]

I don't really understand the argument that making a companion romanceable by everyone somehow changes the character in a way that is "untrue." Romance-ability is a game mechanic, not a character trait, and what happens with each character in game is entirely separate between players. Theron's personality is no different whether you use game mechanics to get the "gay" version of him, or the "straight" version, for example. (In fact, the dialog is exactly identical.) Making him romanceable by all does not make him bisexual. What happens in my world with Theron has no bearing on the Theron in your world. In my game Theron is heterosexual, always has been, always will be, never thinks about being otherwise. In another player's world Theron could be gay and wouldn't dream of being with a woman if you threw one at him. Both versions of Theron are equally valid, but entirely separate from one another.

 

The ability to romance the 1-50 companions is also a game mechanic, and not a reflection of the character's inherent nature. The only reason I can think of that a person would not accept making one of the original companions "player-sexual" is because they are thinking something along the lines of, "I can't imagine the Corso I know as gay." Or "Doc is too much of a womanizer to ever be gay." I can understand this, because I have an easier time imaging certain characters as gay than others too. However, this does not change the fact that by limiting ALL these characters to a heterosexual orientation, we are limiting player choice - and for very shaky reasons. Can Doc be gay? Sure he can. Maybe his womanizing personality is an act that he uses to protect himself, and once you get him off Balmorra you will find that he's been hiding his true self all along. In fact, this is very similar to what already happens if you romance him in game now.

 

The wonderful thing about this game is that the stories and characters in it are purposefully made to be fluid. Players are meant to come along and bring their own interpretations to the story. Characters are meant to be customized and made personal to YOU. Expanding player choice takes nothing away from the current game, or from current players' experiences. It only adds to it. The more players BW makes happy the better!

 

Unfortunately, this is all theoretical, since it looks like BW has already chosen how to handle the romances with returning companions in KOTFE, and so far their romnanceable options haven't changed. But I see no reason to be against it in theory, and who knows? Maybe they'll expand things in the future.

Edited July 26, 2016 by CloudCastle

[SerraShar]

I don't really understand the argument that making a companion romanceable by everyone somehow changes the character in a way that is "untrue." Romance-ability is a game mechanic, not a character trait, and what happens with each character in game is entirely separate between players. Theron's personality is no different whether you use game mechanics to get the "gay" version of him, or the "straight" version, for example. (In fact, the dialog is exactly the identical.) Making him romanceable by all does not make him bisexual. What happens in my world with Theron has no bearing on the Theron in your world. In my game Theron is heterosexual, always has been, always will be, never thinks about being otherwise. In another player's world Theron could be gay and wouldn't dream of being with a woman if you threw one at him. Both versions of Theron are equally valid, but entirely separate from one another.

 

The ability to romance the 1-50 companions is also a game mechanic, and not a reflection of the character's inherent nature. The only reason I can think of that a person would not accept making one of the original companions "player-sexual" is because they are thinking something along the lines of, "I can't imagine the Corso I know as gay." Or "Doc is too much of a womanizer to ever be gay." I can understand this, because I have an easier time imaging certain characters as gay than others too. However, this does not change the fact that by limiting ALL these characters to a heterosexual orientation, we are limiting player choice - and for very shaky reasons. Can Doc be gay? Sure he can. Maybe his womanizing personality is an act that he uses to protect himself, and once you get him off Balmorra you will find that he's been hiding his true self all along. In fact, this is very similar to what already happens if you romance him in game now.

 

The wonderful thing about this game is that the stories and characters in it are purposefully made to be fluid. Players are meant to come along and bring their own interpretations to the story. Characters are meant to be customized and made personal to YOU. Expanding player choice takes nothing away from the current game, or from current players' experiences. It only adds to it. The more players BW makes happy the better!

 

Unfortunately, this is all theoretical, since it looks like BW has already chosen how to handle the romances with returning companions in KOTFE, and so far their romnanceable options haven't changed. But I see no reason to be against it in theory, and who knows? Maybe they'll expand things in the future.

 

Exactly!

[OldVengeance]

I don't really understand the argument that making a companion romanceable by everyone somehow changes the character in a way that is "untrue." Romance-ability is a game mechanic, not a character trait, and what happens with each character in game is entirely separate between players. Theron's personality is no different whether you use game mechanics to get the "gay" version of him, or the "straight" version, for example. (In fact, the dialog is exactly the identical.) Making him romanceable by all does not make him bisexual. What happens in my world with Theron has no bearing on the Theron in your world. In my game Theron is heterosexual, always has been, always will be, never thinks about being otherwise. In another player's world Theron could be gay and wouldn't dream of being with a woman if you threw one at him. Both versions of Theron are equally valid, but entirely separate from one another.

 

The ability to romance the 1-50 companions is also a game mechanic, and not a reflection of the character's inherent nature. The only reason I can think of that a person would not accept making one of the original companions "player-sexual" is because they are thinking something along the lines of, "I can't imagine the Corso I know as gay." Or "Doc is too much of a womanizer to ever be gay." I can understand this, because I have an easier time imaging certain characters as gay than others too. However, this does not change the fact that by limiting ALL these characters to a heterosexual orientation, we are limiting player choice - and for very shaky reasons. Can Doc be gay? Sure he can. Maybe his womanizing personality is an act that he uses to protect himself, and once you get him off Balmorra you will find that he's been hiding his true self all along. In fact, this is very similar to what already happens if you romance him in game now.

 

The wonderful thing about this game is that the stories and characters in it are purposefully made to be fluid. Players are meant to come along and bring their own interpretations to the story. Characters are meant to be customized and made personal to YOU. Expanding player choice takes nothing away from the current game, or from current players' experiences. It only adds to it. The more players BW makes happy the better!

 

Unfortunately, this is all theoretical, since it looks like BW has already chosen how to handle the romances with returning companions in KOTFE, and so far their romnanceable options haven't changed. But I see no reason to be against it in theory, and who knows? Maybe they'll expand things in the future.

 

I completely disagree with this analysis because you sound like you don't believe NPCS are even really actual characters at all, just extensions of the PC. I reject that interpretation of the game. Player choice doesn't necessarily mean deciding the sexual orientation of characters you meet.

 

Full disclosure, in the last couple years, some life experience has taught me not to make as many heteronormative assumptions about people. So, while video game characters are still a little bit of a different animal, it is for that reason I actually wouldn't really have a problem if some of the old companions came back and were also romancable by the same gender.

 

But I've always been against the idea of PC-sexual characters. I don't believe there is a "your Theron" or "my Theron." There is only one version of him that was written into the game's story. And neither he nor Lana are empty vessels for the player's desires.

 

Would you ask a real person if their personality is different if they were gay or straight instead of what they are? If your sexuality is an inherent part of your nature, then it should be so with Theron too.

 

Not learning something about somebody does not make it as if that thing was not true, whether it's their sexuality or force sensitivity. That's basically a large part of why I learned not to make assumptions about people in the first place.

 

Frankly, the suggestion that Lana, Theron and Koth are anything other than bi kind of strikes me as bisexual erasure.

Edited July 27, 2016 by OldVengeance

[stuffystuffs]

OP, I'd like for them to do something but it won't happen. They've added like, one option for same sex female so far, I believe? Yeah, that's probably it then.

 

also...

 

Lastly, if all that is still too hard, can you at least remove the negative reputation we get when we say no to our opposite sex companions advances. I literally had no option with the Warrior companion Doc in a few conversations to choose anything but flirt if I didn't want a big negative. I didn't even have a neutral option as 2 of them say flirt (he really is a dirty perve lol)

 

if there isn't a 'throw Doc out an airlock, screaming for mercy' option in a future story update, I'll be really upset. I'm pretty sure I hate that character more than any other.

[SerraShar]

OP, I'd like for them to do something but it won't happen. They've added like, one option for same sex female so far, I believe? Yeah, that's probably it then.

 

also...

 

 

 

if there isn't a 'throw Doc out an airlock, screaming for mercy' option in a future story update, I'll be really upset. I'm pretty sure I hate that character more than any other.

 

more then Quinn? more then corso? lolol I'm shocked !

 

But damn..ya comment made my day though , so Thanx for that

[TrixxieTriss]

I don't really understand the argument that making a companion romanceable by everyone somehow changes the character in a way that is "untrue." Romance-ability is a game mechanic, not a character trait, and what happens with each character in game is entirely separate between players. Theron's personality is no different whether you use game mechanics to get the "gay" version of him, or the "straight" version, for example. (In fact, the dialog is exactly identical.) Making him romanceable by all does not make him bisexual. What happens in my world with Theron has no bearing on the Theron in your world. In my game Theron is heterosexual, always has been, always will be, never thinks about being otherwise. In another player's world Theron could be gay and wouldn't dream of being with a woman if you threw one at him. Both versions of Theron are equally valid, but entirely separate from one another.

 

The ability to romance the 1-50 companions is also a game mechanic, and not a reflection of the character's inherent nature. The only reason I can think of that a person would not accept making one of the original companions "player-sexual" is because they are thinking something along the lines of, "I can't imagine the Corso I know as gay." Or "Doc is too much of a womanizer to ever be gay." I can understand this, because I have an easier time imaging certain characters as gay than others too. However, this does not change the fact that by limiting ALL these characters to a heterosexual orientation, we are limiting player choice - and for very shaky reasons. Can Doc be gay? Sure he can. Maybe his womanizing personality is an act that he uses to protect himself, and once you get him off Balmorra you will find that he's been hiding his true self all along. In fact, this is very similar to what already happens if you romance him in game now.

 

The wonderful thing about this game is that the stories and characters in it are purposefully made to be fluid. Players are meant to come along and bring their own interpretations to the story. Characters are meant to be customized and made personal to YOU. Expanding player choice takes nothing away from the current game, or from current players' experiences. It only adds to it. The more players BW makes happy the better!

 

Unfortunately, this is all theoretical, since it looks like BW has already chosen how to handle the romances with returning companions in KOTFE, and so far their romnanceable options haven't changed. But I see no reason to be against it in theory, and who knows? Maybe they'll expand things in the future.

 

Well put.

[TrixxieTriss]

if there isn't a 'throw Doc out an airlock, screaming for mercy' option in a future story update, I'll be really upset. I'm pretty sure I hate that character more than any other.

 

LoL, that would be funny.

[Limariko]

OP, I'd like for them to do something but it won't happen. They've added like, one option for same sex female so far, I believe? Yeah, that's probably it then.

 

also...

 

 

 

if there isn't a 'throw Doc out an airlock, screaming for mercy' option in a future story update, I'll be really upset. I'm pretty sure I hate that character more than any other.

 

I know I'd happily pay money for the chance to chuck Skadge out an airlock moreso than any of the other companions I dislike.

[Jaiddyn]

Personally, I’m sort of in the middle of the two ‘camps’ here. I sort of agree with OldVengeance in terms of I don’t like thinking of the characters as ‘empty vessels’ that the players can just put whatever they want into. I see them as well-written (in many cases at least), complicated, interesting ‘people’ my character interacts with. They have their own stories, dreams, and preferences. I know everyone kind of snorts at the whole ‘choices matter’, but I like that they do. I don’t want Koth being less than the stubborn, idealistic idiot he can be just because I personally might want him to stay in the Alliance even though I did things he hates. I don’t want Quinn not to betray my character because ‘well, I don’t like the betrayal’. There are dozens of other examples. I like them as their own entities with their own stories that intertwine with mine. I don’t want mirrors to reflect my desires, but instead interactions that spur my choices and help my character develop, change, and learn things. To me that’s a lot more enjoyment. That said, I know not everyone feels that way, but it’s my personal opinion. I don’t want “my Theron” or “my Doc”. I want my characters to interact with Theron Shan as he is in the story.

 

On the other hand, I really don’t like that the 1-50 options are “straight only”. I would much rather see variety. I’m not talking about making every companion romanceable to everyone. I’m just meaning I would have preferred to have gay, straight, and bisexual all be options. I know that there’s pretty much zero chance of Bioware going back and changing any of that, but I would love if they would change it in the coming chapters and expansion. What’s the harm in some of the characters that may not have been romanced before ‘coming out’ as gay or straight or bisexual? Or even romanceable ones revealing they’re more open to a same-sex relationship than before? For a lot of them, I don’t really think it would be some huge stretch.

 

Corso Riggs, for example, is extremely devoted to the Smuggler, regardless of gender. There’s even a conversation that both genders get where he says you’re the “best thing that ever happened to me” and he wants to be by your side forever, even protecting your children if he can. Now, that could definitely just be a very strong bromance with a male Smuggler, I understand that, but it leaves an opening for maybe in the five years for him to realize he might be “captain sexual” (to steal the player sexual thing). That this person who he’s been with is someone he loves regardless of their gender.

 

On the current returned companions, I’m 110% fine with Vette and Aric Jorgan for example staying ‘straight’. Why not? There’s no harm in having that. Why can’t they be just as interesting and fun characters just because they’re only interested in the opposite sex when it comes to romance? Just like there's nothing wrong with gay or bisexual, there's nothing wrong with straight.

 

I’m 110% fine too with having characters like Qyzen Fess, Lord Scourge (sorry, I know a lot of ladies love him but I just never really saw him as someone into romance) and Bowdaar just being “non sexual” companions. Not every single companion needs to be able to be romanced. Just like some people in the world just aren’t really focused on that, there’s no reason companions have to be either. I mean, as much as my Smuggler would probably enjoy a roll in the hay with Gault (I love that damn Devaronian's voice and snark so much), Gault's in love with Hylo. And that's just fine. At least they can be drinking buddies, right?

 

I’m also fine with some of the previously unromanced characters coming back as an option, such as Zenith (one of my favorites, I’ll admit) who might realize after five years that he cares more than he wanted to admit. They could come back as straight, gay, or bisexual and I’d be fine with it, although bisexual would probably be the easiest in the strictest sense for Bioware to do.

 

There are a lot of options and I would love for us to have more, but I also would like the characters to have an organic, natural feel to them, I suppose. I don’t want to lose the essence of what made them great characters and companions by reducing them to just the same option in a different skin. I like that sometimes a romance won’t work, or a person might not be interested, or even more important that a companion might change and evolve over time. Just because my character is a ‘hero’ doesn’t mean everyone needs to be falling head over heels to get into his bed. There should be a lot more to the stories and interactions than just that.

 

TL;DR - I don’t agree with “every companion should be gender neutral and romanceable” but I definitely agree that having more options for gay, straight, and bisexual would be fantastic. Even if they never go back to change 1-50, I’d love for them to progress to adapting some of the remaining returning companions to have some additional options where applicable. Let some of the ‘straight’ ones be bisexual. Let some of the unromanced ones end up being romanceable as either same-sex, bi, or straight. Give us some more options and variety! It’s 2016 and I’m sure most players would love it.

Edited July 27, 2016 by Jaiddyn

[Eanelinea]

Personally, I’m sort of in the middle of the two ‘camps’ here. I sort of agree with OldVengeance in terms of I don’t like thinking of the characters as ‘empty vessels’ that the players can just put whatever they want into. I see them as well-written (in many cases at least), complicated, interesting ‘people’ my character interacts with. They have their own stories, dreams, and preferences. I know everyone kind of snorts at the whole ‘choices matter’, but I like that they do. I don’t want Koth being less than the stubborn, idealistic idiot he can be just because I personally might want him to stay in the Alliance even though I did things he hates. I don’t want Quinn not to betray my character because ‘well, I don’t like the betrayal’. There are dozens of other examples. I like them as their own entities with their own stories that intertwine with mine. I don’t want mirrors to reflect my desires, but instead interactions that spur my choices and help my character develop, change, and learn things. To me that’s a lot more enjoyment. That said, I know not everyone feels that way, but it’s my personal opinion. I don’t want “my Theron” or “my Doc”. I want my characters to interact with Theron Shan as he is in the story.

 

On the other hand, I really don’t like that the 1-50 options are “straight only”. I would much rather see variety. I’m not talking about making every companion romanceable to everyone. I’m just meaning I would have preferred to have gay, straight, and bisexual all be options. I know that there’s pretty much zero chance of Bioware going back and changing any of that, but I would love if they would change it in the coming chapters and expansion. What’s the harm in some of the characters that may not have been romanced before ‘coming out’ as gay or straight or bisexual? Or even romanceable ones revealing they’re more open to a same-sex relationship than before? For a lot of them, I don’t really think it would be some huge stretch.

 

Corso Riggs, for example, is extremely devoted to the Smuggler, regardless of gender. There’s even a conversation that both genders get where he says you’re the “best thing that ever happened to me” and he wants to be by your side forever, even protecting your children if he can. Now, that could definitely just be a very strong bromance with a male Smuggler, I understand that, but it leaves an opening for maybe in the five years for him to realize he might be “captain sexual” (to steal the player sexual thing). That this person who he’s been with is someone he loves regardless of their gender.

 

On the current returned companions, I’m 110% fine with Vette and Aric Jorgan for example staying ‘straight’. Why not? There’s no harm in having that. Why can’t they be just as interesting and fun characters just because they’re only interested in the opposite sex when it comes to romance? Just like there's nothing wrong with gay or bisexual, there's nothing wrong with straight.

 

I’m 110% fine too with having characters like Qyzen Fess, Lord Scourge (sorry, I know a lot of ladies love him but I just never really saw him as someone into romance) and Bowdaar just being “non sexual” companions. Not every single companion needs to be able to be romanced. Just like some people in the world just aren’t really focused on that, there’s no reason companions have to be either. I mean, as much as my Smuggler would probably enjoy a roll in the hay with Gault (I love that damn Devaronian's voice and snark so much), Gault's in love with Hylo. And that's just fine. At least they can be drinking buddies, right?

 

I’m also fine with some of the previously unromanced characters coming back as an option, such as Zenith (one of my favorites, I’ll admit) who might realize after five years that he cares more than he wanted to admit. They could come back as straight, gay, or bisexual and I’d be fine with it, although bisexual would probably be the easiest in the strictest sense for Bioware to do.

 

There are a lot of options and I would love for us to have more, but I also would like the characters to have an organic, natural feel to them, I suppose. I don’t want to lose the essence of what made them great characters and companions by reducing them to just the same option in a different skin. I like that sometimes a romance won’t work, or a person might not be interested, or even more important that a companion might change and evolve over time. Just because my character is a ‘hero’ doesn’t mean everyone needs to be falling head over heels to get into his bed. There should be a lot more to the stories and interactions than just that.

 

TL;DR - I don’t agree with “every companion should be gender neutral and romanceable” but I definitely agree that having more options for gay, straight, and bisexual would be fantastic. Even if they never go back to change 1-50, I’d love for them to progress to adapting some of the remaining returning companions to have some additional options where applicable. Let some of the ‘straight’ ones be bisexual. Let some of the unromanced ones end up being romanceable as either same-sex, bi, or straight. Give us some more options and variety! It’s 2016 and I’m sure most players would love it.

 

Same. I don't mind if some came back and you found out they were gay or even bisexual. But I don't want everyone being romanceable. Sorry but that doesn't fly in the real world and it shouldn't in this game. I don't care if it is a game or not. You don't need to be able to have sex with every single npc/companion in the game on the off chance you personally find that person hot.

[Eanelinea]

I completely disagree with this analysis because you sound like you don't believe NPCS are even really actual characters at all, just extensions of the PC. I reject that interpretation of the game. Player choice doesn't necessarily mean deciding the sexual orientation of characters you meet.

 

Full disclosure, in the last couple years, some life experience has taught me not to make as many heteronormative assumptions about people. So, while video game characters are still a little bit of a different animal, it is for that reason I actually wouldn't really have a problem if some of the old companions came back and were also romancable by the same gender.

 

But I've always been against the idea of PC-sexual characters. I don't believe there is a "your Theron" or "my Theron." There is only one version of him that was written into the game's story. And neither he nor Lana are empty vessels for the player's desires.

 

Would you ask a real person if their personality is different if they were gay or straight instead of what they are? If your sexuality is an inherent part of your nature, then it should be so with Theron too.

 

Not learning something about somebody does not make it as if that thing was not true, whether it's their sexuality or force sensitivity. That's basically a large part of why I learned not to make assumptions about people in the first place.

 

Frankly, the suggestion that Lana, Theron and Koth are anything other than bi kind of strikes me as bisexual erasure.

 

I agree with you. In my mind Theron, Lana and Koth are bisexual. They like men and they like women. This isn't 'oh well MY Theron likes women and YOURS likes men.' No, they are BISEXUAL. It's who they are and I'm not changing my opinion because someone disagrees.

 

Same as one reason why I don't want bioware going back through the 1-50 companions and changing them. Leave them be. In Vanilla SWTOR they are heterosexual, it's what we know of them and they are heterosexual.

 

Now, when we run into them again in KOTFE or KOTET and they suddenly show that they were gay, lesbian or bisexual, then that's fine. It's been five years, their character traits have been more fleshed out.

 

If something happens and you find out Corso is actually bisexual when you run into him again, fine, it's added as something he's always been but probably didn't want to admit, or he didn't find you attractive.

 

If we find Zenith is actually gay, just never mentioned or said anything when we get him, again, that's fine.

 

But until Bioware brings it up with flirts or them suddenly grabbing bits of me in reunion hugs or something, I'm going under the assumption that they are heterosexual and won't suddenly change their character traits/personality for the players.

 

I mean, it's the same in real life. If a woman suddenly is REALLY into me, I'm not going to suddenly switch sides just to appease her. It's not who I am.

 

No one is saying 'eew gai' they're saying don't change old content just because you find a companion hot. Maybe that companion just doesn't like you at all.

[SerraShar]

It's funny how your ''Must be like Real Life'' only apply to Romance....while the whole rest of the game is NOTHING like real life .