|
|
Post by gaycaravaggio on May 19, 2017 0:18:20 GMT
 da4 only in 5-6 years?  It seems unlikely that they'd put out two Bioware games in one year, as that could cannibalize sales. Then again, maybe they're so different in genre, gameplay, and whatnot that they feel confident in releasing them the same year. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2017 2:27:00 GMT
Yeah, we had Zevran, Isabella, and even Iron Bull who were all portrayed as promiscuous bisexuals. We finally get Josie in DAI who doesn't fit that stereotype, but then she isn't bothered to have any sexual content at all. It really is quite frustrating. Don't forget about Leliana, who was not portrayed as promiscuous and has a romance arc that includes sex. (I don't know how her romance plays out, as I've never done it.) It's tough because I'm not bisexual so I don't speak from that viewpoint. What do people think would be a positive way of expressing a character as bisexual rather than "available to both PC genders"? As another non-bi person, I'm also interested in this. I think it's unfortunate that the bi characters have been portrayed this way. I also don't like the "I'm only bi for the PC" type if they have an expressed or demonstrated preference for one gender over another. I get that bi people can have a preference, and that's fine, but this isn't real life. I don't especially like the idea of Zevran telling a male PC that he prefers a woman's curves; it's just kind of demoralizing. But even though I can see problems with all of these things, I don't know what the alternative is. How can a bi person express their bisexuality casually without making them seem promiscuous OR making them seem like they are only bi for the PC? Again, this isn't real life, so there are only so many lines of dialogue that will be devoted to the subject. |
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 19, 2017 4:26:19 GMT
Personally, I'm of the view that sexuality does not need to be commented on, it is allowed to just BE. But I know some people here would like to see the games address the issue.
If it MUST be talked about, there's a big gap between "non-sexual" and "promiscuous". The character in question could mention having a few past partners who helped them come to terms with their sexuality. That's really all it would take, and even the most stubborn, deeply-rooted potato would have trouble arguing that someone is "promiscuous" for having two partners.
Although I don't doubt that some people would make a good effort to argue exactly that.
|
|
gayhawke
Grizzled Warrior
Posts: 210 
Likes: 640
|
Post by gayhawke on May 19, 2017 4:30:44 GMT
Personally, I'm of the view that sexuality does not need to be commented on, it is allowed to just BE. But I know some people here would like to see the games address the issue. If it MUST be talked about, there's a big gap between "non-sexual" and "promiscuous". The character in question could mention having a few past partners who helped them come to terms with their sexuality. That's really all it would take, and even the most stubborn, deeply-rooted potato would have trouble arguing that someone is "promiscuous" for having two partners. Although I don't doubt that some people would make a good effort to argue exactly that. I agree that sexuality doesn't need to be commented on most of the time, but with bisexual characters that can sometimes lead to playersexual bullshit from players so I prefer it if the character mentions some of their previous romantic/sexual history even if it's just in passing banter |
|
|
|
Post by gaycaravaggio on May 19, 2017 4:34:03 GMT
Personally, I'm of the view that sexuality does not need to be commented on, it is allowed to just BE. But I know some people here would like to see the games address the issue. If it MUST be talked about, there's a big gap between "non-sexual" and "promiscuous". The character in question could mention having a few past partners who helped them come to terms with their sexuality. That's really all it would take, and even the most stubborn, deeply-rooted potato would have trouble arguing that someone is "promiscuous" for having two partners. Although I don't doubt that some people would make a good effort to argue exactly that. I think one issue with the promiscuous characters is that their sexuality is made into a running gag and, when it comes to a female character like that (Isabela), misogyny ends up coloring how characters interact with that kind of character. |
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 19, 2017 4:44:04 GMT
Personally, I'm of the view that sexuality does not need to be commented on, it is allowed to just BE. But I know some people here would like to see the games address the issue. If it MUST be talked about, there's a big gap between "non-sexual" and "promiscuous". The character in question could mention having a few past partners who helped them come to terms with their sexuality. That's really all it would take, and even the most stubborn, deeply-rooted potato would have trouble arguing that someone is "promiscuous" for having two partners. Although I don't doubt that some people would make a good effort to argue exactly that. I think one issue with the promiscuous characters is that their sexuality is made into a running gag and, when it comes to a female character like that (Isabela), misogyny ends up coloring how characters interact with that kind of character. I actually really liked Isabela (until the comics retroactively dragged her over the moral event horizon and ruined her forever). I like her character, and I like the way her relationship with Aveline develops (even though I hate Aveline, lol). But I can't deny that it reinforces harmful sexist and biphobic stereotypes for sure, and listening to the devs (and some regular posters) defend some of their choices was just painful. "Isabela is too awesome to need pants!" Fuck off with that shit. No matter how much someone sleeps around, they still dress appropriately for hiking up fucking mountains. They did the same thing with Jack in ME2. "She doesn't need CLOTHES, she's got awesome biotic powers to protect her from bullets and shit!" Okay, but she probably gets cold, right? In the freezing vacuum of space? Can we all agree that she might get cold? |
|
|
|
Post by gaycaravaggio on May 19, 2017 4:45:52 GMT
I think one issue with the promiscuous characters is that their sexuality is made into a running gag and, when it comes to a female character like that (Isabela), misogyny ends up coloring how characters interact with that kind of character. I actually really liked Isabela (until the comics retroactively dragged her over the moral event horizon and ruined her forever). I like her character, and I like the way her relationship with Aveline develops (even though I hate Aveline, lol). But I can't deny that it reinforces harmful sexist and biphobic stereotypes for sure, and listening to the devs (and some regular posters) defend some of their choices was just painful. "Isabela is too awesome to need pants!" Fuck off with that shit. No matter how much someone sleeps around, they still dress appropriately for hiking up fucking mountains. They did the same thing with Jack in ME2. "She doesn't need CLOTHES, she's got awesome biotic powers to protect her from bullets and shit!" Okay, but she probably gets cold, right? In the freezing vacuum of space? Can we all agree that she might get cold? They need some more Iron Bull types to balance it out a little, I suppose, though I'd honestly prefer for all the companions to be wearing some reasonable armor. |
|
|
|
Post by algaeabomination on May 19, 2017 4:46:22 GMT
Yeah, we had Zevran, Isabella, and even Iron Bull who were all portrayed as promiscuous bisexuals. We finally get Josie in DAI who doesn't fit that stereotype, but then she isn't bothered to have any sexual content at all. It really is quite frustrating. Don't forget about Leliana, who was not portrayed as promiscuous and has a romance arc that includes sex. (I don't know how her romance plays out, as I've never done it.) It's tough because I'm not bisexual so I don't speak from that viewpoint. What do people think would be a positive way of expressing a character as bisexual rather than "available to both PC genders"? As another non-bi person, I'm also interested in this. I think it's unfortunate that the bi characters have been portrayed this way. I also don't like the "I'm only bi for the PC" type if they have an expressed or demonstrated preference for one gender over another. I get that bi people can have a preference, and that's fine, but this isn't real life. I don't especially like the idea of Zevran telling a male PC that he prefers a woman's curves; it's just kind of demoralizing. But even though I can see problems with all of these things, I don't know what the alternative is. How can a bi person express their bisexuality casually without making them seem promiscuous OR making them seem like they are only bi for the PC? Again, this isn't real life, so there are only so many lines of dialogue that will be devoted to the subject. As a bi person, I'm ... conflicted. I like 'everyone is bi' as a mechanic, because it means all the romance content is available to everyone, so people can play in the way they like. But it also allows writers to ignore actually calling anyone bi *or* gay, and that's not exactly what I'd call representation, either. I like how DA2 had a conversation between male Hawke and Anders about Karl, but it shouldn't have been a gender specific line. Female Hawke being able to have to the same conversation would had made it clear that he was bi. Compared to Fenris, who can say to male Hawke that him being a guy isn't a problem, but there's no similar line for female Hawke, and he never mentions attraction to more than one gender on either path. Fenris being bi is essentially invisible. It's completely possible to play him as gay, or completely straight (this isn't a comment on whether it's an OK thing to do or not, only to point out that it's not a great example of specifically bi rep). That Isabela references men and women in banter with Bethany is something I did appreciate, because it make it's clear that she bi, but there has to be a balance between 'seems promiscuous' and 'never ever talks about it', right?? Characters like Josephine or Leliana could mention not just being attracted to men as a response to something. I'm not sure I want BW to go into preferences. I don't think I do. While it could be done well, it does risk being really alienating for the people you're trying to represent because fuck, yes do I hate that bit with Zev (I have a similar issue with Bull's banter, tbh. Excluding his romance with Dorian, his banter is almost entirely about women) I'd love to be able have the PC bring it up, or mention it. Let me talk about being bi! |
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 19, 2017 4:51:30 GMT
I actually really liked Isabela (until the comics retroactively dragged her over the moral event horizon and ruined her forever). I like her character, and I like the way her relationship with Aveline develops (even though I hate Aveline, lol). But I can't deny that it reinforces harmful sexist and biphobic stereotypes for sure, and listening to the devs (and some regular posters) defend some of their choices was just painful. "Isabela is too awesome to need pants!" Fuck off with that shit. No matter how much someone sleeps around, they still dress appropriately for hiking up fucking mountains. They did the same thing with Jack in ME2. "She doesn't need CLOTHES, she's got awesome biotic powers to protect her from bullets and shit!" Okay, but she probably gets cold, right? In the freezing vacuum of space? Can we all agree that she might get cold? They need some more Iron Bull types to balance it out a little, I suppose, though I'd honestly prefer for all the companions to be wearing some reasonable armor. I'm not gonna complain about man-titties, lol. I think a good balance would be if it had worked out like DA:I does, where Isabela's iconic outfit that we all... know... had been her "casual" outfit for resting at the Hanged Man/walking around Kirkwall, and she dressed more practically when we took her places. When you think about it, it also doesn't make sense for Anders to wear his fancy feathered coat when he knows he's gonna be knee-deep in mud, or spelunking the deep roads, lol. |
|
|
|
Post by gaycaravaggio on May 19, 2017 4:57:03 GMT
They need some more Iron Bull types to balance it out a little, I suppose, though I'd honestly prefer for all the companions to be wearing some reasonable armor. I'm not gonna complain about man-titties, lol. I think a good balance would be if it had worked out like DA:I does, where Isabela's iconic outfit that we all... know... had been her "casual" outfit for resting at the Hanged Man/walking around Kirkwall, and she dressed more practically when we took her places. When you think about it, it also doesn't make sense for Anders to wear his fancy feathered coat when he knows he's gonna be knee-deep in mud, or spelunking the deep roads, lol. The reason I'm willing to forgive the feather outfit nonsense is because mages have been consistently wearing stuff like that since DA:O. So you can chalk it up to tradition or something. Maybe using bird feathers gives some kind of mana-related advantage for the mage. I don't know. This is science in a weird as shit magical realm. |
|
gayhawke
Grizzled Warrior
Posts: 210
Likes: 640
|
Post by gayhawke on May 19, 2017 5:13:20 GMT
I'm not gonna complain about man-titties, lol. I think a good balance would be if it had worked out like DA:I does, where Isabela's iconic outfit that we all... know... had been her "casual" outfit for resting at the Hanged Man/walking around Kirkwall, and she dressed more practically when we took her places. When you think about it, it also doesn't make sense for Anders to wear his fancy feathered coat when he knows he's gonna be knee-deep in mud, or spelunking the deep roads, lol. The reason I'm willing to forgive the feather outfit nonsense is because mages have been consistently wearing stuff like that since DA:O. So you can chalk it up to tradition or something. Maybe using bird feathers gives some kind of mana-related advantage for the mage. I don't know. This is science in a weird as shit magical realm. n i p p l e r o b e s |
|
|
|
Post by gaycaravaggio on May 19, 2017 5:14:15 GMT
The reason I'm willing to forgive the feather outfit nonsense is because mages have been consistently wearing stuff like that since DA:O. So you can chalk it up to tradition or something. Maybe using bird feathers gives some kind of mana-related advantage for the mage. I don't know. This is science in a weird as shit magical realm. n i p p l e r o b e s  |
|
|
|
Post by gaycaravaggio on May 19, 2017 6:44:02 GMT
You know, it just occurred to me that they'll probably either have as many LIs as DA:I or more, unless they decide to severely decrease the cast size.  On one hand, it's more likely we'll all get what we want in a LI. On the other hand, the less likely our LGBT faves will get the amount of content and attention and fleshing out they deserve. Hopefully, they'll pull through for us. Hopefully. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2017 7:21:19 GMT
You know, it just occurred to me that they'll probably either have as many LIs as DA:I or more, unless they decide to severely decrease the cast size. On one hand, it's more likely we'll all get what we want in a LI. On the other hand, the less likely our LGBT faves will get the amount of content and attention and fleshing out they deserve. Hopefully, they'll pull through for us. Hopefully. DAI was in somewhat of an unique position because there were so many people. The amount of characters can be seen as a resource too, and they also always have characters who are non-romance options. I think it would be fun to continue with an advisor route*, so we can have that same stable of followers, including some who are not LI (as they always have), and then additional advisors. For example, if Maevaris is in the next game, I don't think that either she or Dorian are positioned to be followers because of what their positions as magister and leaders of the Lucerni entail; it just doesn't seem practical to me. So, if Maevaris were to be an advisor, I think that she could also be a good romance option. It will have been years since her husband's death, but I think that the romance arc can be tastefully done to deal with that. I do NOT think that she has to be shown forgetting about Thorold or disregarding what they had, more that she can have room in her heart for someone else that she wants to be with. The idea of that seems lovely to me, to be honest, and I'd really like to see it in the game. When it comes to this sort of thing, I'm always reminded of Joe Biden and his sad story. For those unaware, his first wife, daughter, and both sons were in a car accident and the wife and daughter died. He was completely devastated. He met his second wife, Jill, three years later. He has spoken about it in public several times, occasionally in Jill's presence, how it affected his life, and how grateful he is to have Jill as his partner who supports him. It has always seemd to me that he still carries his first wife in his heart, but can love Jill as well. Taking that as a model, a story arc like that CAN be done well and respectfully. The question is whether the writing team puts the effort into it. And just as Dorian's romance isn't all about his sexuality, neither does Maevaris's romance have to be about her dead husband, but a component of it. * Yes, I get that people were burned with MEA, but DAI did have a good show of it, and these ARE different teams, with different leads, with different values. Also keep in mind that BOTH of the m/m options in DAI were followers, in addition to the main f/f lesbian option. I think it's important to remember that. |
|
|
|
Post by gaycaravaggio on May 19, 2017 7:48:56 GMT
You know, it just occurred to me that they'll probably either have as many LIs as DA:I or more, unless they decide to severely decrease the cast size. On one hand, it's more likely we'll all get what we want in a LI. On the other hand, the less likely our LGBT faves will get the amount of content and attention and fleshing out they deserve. Hopefully, they'll pull through for us. Hopefully. DAI was in somewhat of an unique position because there were so many people. The amount of characters can be seen as a resource too, and they also always have characters who are non-romance options. I think it would be fun to continue with an advisor route*, so we can have that same stable of followers, including some who are not LI (as they always have), and then additional advisors. For example, if Maevaris is in the next game, I don't think that either she or Dorian are positioned to be followers because of what their positions as magister and leaders of the Lucerni entail; it just doesn't seem practical to me. So, if Maevaris were to be an advisor, I think that she could also be a good romance option. It will have been years since her husband's death, but I think that the romance arc can be tastefully done to deal with that. I do NOT think that she has to be shown forgetting about Thorold or disregarding what they had, more that she can have room in her heart for someone else that she wants to be with. The idea of that seems lovely to me, to be honest, and I'd really like to see it in the game. When it comes to this sort of thing, I'm always reminded of Joe Biden and his sad story. For those unaware, his first wife, daughter, and both sons were in a car accident and the wife and daughter died. He was completely devastated. He met his second wife, Jill, three years later. He has spoken about it in public several times, occasionally in Jill's presence, how it affected his life, and how grateful he is to have Jill as his partner who supports him. It has always seemd to me that he still carries his first wife in his heart, but can love Jill as well. Taking that as a model, a story arc like that CAN be done well and respectfully. The question is whether the writing team puts the effort into it. And just as Dorian's romance isn't all about his sexuality, neither does Maevaris's romance have to be about her dead husband, but a component of it. * Yes, I get that people were burned with MEA, but DAI did have a good show of it, and these ARE different teams, with different leads, with different values. Also keep in mind that BOTH of the m/m options in DAI were followers, in addition to the main f/f lesbian option. I think it's important to remember that. Personally, even with how DA:I did it, I had criticisms. But ME:A's way of handling NPC romances made DA:I's NPC romances look award-worthy. But, in general, as much as I love Maevaris and would love the opportunity to romance her, I really don't think they'll give us a Maevaris romance. Or, if they do, it'd be one of the extra romances that they add on later. In general, I think we should have a smaller cast, to focus on really fleshing out the characters and giving them ALL some kind of plot relevance. So, 2 major advisor NPCs and maybe 6-7 companions and some recurring secondary characters that aren't part of the main cast but are still pretty cool, with everyone getting at least 1 companion option romance-wise. However, Bioware keeps pushing for more and more, so I don't know how likely it is to get a smaller, more focused on cast. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2017 7:55:55 GMT
Personally, I'm of the view that sexuality does not need to be commented on, it is allowed to just BE. But I know some people here would like to see the games address the issue. If it MUST be talked about, there's a big gap between "non-sexual" and "promiscuous". The character in question could mention having a few past partners who helped them come to terms with their sexuality. That's really all it would take, and even the most stubborn, deeply-rooted potato would have trouble arguing that someone is "promiscuous" for having two partners. Although I don't doubt that some people would make a good effort to argue exactly that. Oh, I didn't necessarily mean that the person has to explicitly state they're into whatever gender (or both, or everything). They can certainly do show instead of tell, or even remark about the attractiveness of both sexes. This was also discussed in the BSN romance thread, but I think there is also the issue of character personality to consider, and I think characters should also be allowed to have that as a part of themselves as relates to their sexuality. Let's just take Sera versus Josephine. I think it's perfectly natural to have a character like Sera, who has no compunction whatsoever proclaiming her attraction to women, or of talking about sexual exploits. That is who she is as a person. But I think it's also valid to have a character like Josephine who is the opposite of that because that is who she is as a person. The problem comes in when only the LGB characters are portrayed in this sexually charged manner, while the straight ones are not. |
|
|
|
Post by nocte on May 19, 2017 7:59:17 GMT
I'd rather they stuck to 2/2/2 for the romances, because when they reach beyond that I think content tends to suffer for it. Plus, they just end up adding a bunch of straight romances, tbh. DA:I, three straight guys because they had extra time? Just add more content to the existing romances, imo. Then everyone gets more content and the options stay equally distributed.
As for "promiscuous" LIs, I like them, but I can understand why bisexuals are tired of having that trope saddled on their demographic. I wouldn't mind promiscuous gay men, tbh. Dorian, Gil and Cortez all enjoy sex, but I don't think they're really promiscuous stereotypes, like Zev or Isabela. I think it was a good point earlier that promiscuity often becomes too much of a joke with certain characters, though. With Zev and Iron Bull, to a point, but especially with Isabela, it got a little grating that it was less just a facet of their characters as something to laugh at them about, although more with Iron Bull it did come across as "impressive", while with Isabela it was a bit more negative at times. Having promiscuous characters is one thing, but when the writers of that character and those writing interaction with them take it to a negative place, I think that's a bigger problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2017 12:33:26 GMT
You know, it just occurred to me that they'll probably either have as many LIs as DA:I or more, unless they decide to severely decrease the cast size. On one hand, it's more likely we'll all get what we want in a LI. On the other hand, the less likely our LGBT faves will get the amount of content and attention and fleshing out they deserve. Hopefully, they'll pull through for us. Hopefully. I hope they go back to 6 LIs, with perhaps some light flirts as secondary options. Bio is always saying "more romances than ever before!" but that is usually a radical interpretation of the text. It will probably depend on the framework of DA4: will we be a smaller adventuring band again or will we be part of a large organization? You know, it just occurred to me that they'll probably either have as many LIs as DA:I or more, unless they decide to severely decrease the cast size. On one hand, it's more likely we'll all get what we want in a LI. On the other hand, the less likely our LGBT faves will get the amount of content and attention and fleshing out they deserve. Hopefully, they'll pull through for us. Hopefully. DAI was in somewhat of an unique position because there were so many people. The amount of characters can be seen as a resource too, and they also always have characters who are non-romance options. I think it would be fun to continue with an advisor route*, so we can have that same stable of followers, including some who are not LI (as they always have), and then additional advisors. For example, if Maevaris is in the next game, I don't think that either she or Dorian are positioned to be followers because of what their positions as magister and leaders of the Lucerni entail; it just doesn't seem practical to me. So, if Maevaris were to be an advisor, I think that she could also be a good romance option. It will have been years since her husband's death, but I think that the romance arc can be tastefully done to deal with that. I do NOT think that she has to be shown forgetting about Thorold or disregarding what they had, more that she can have room in her heart for someone else that she wants to be with. The idea of that seems lovely to me, to be honest, and I'd really like to see it in the game. When it comes to this sort of thing, I'm always reminded of Joe Biden and his sad story. For those unaware, his first wife, daughter, and both sons were in a car accident and the wife and daughter died. He was completely devastated. He met his second wife, Jill, three years later. He has spoken about it in public several times, occasionally in Jill's presence, how it affected his life, and how grateful he is to have Jill as his partner who supports him. It has always seemd to me that he still carries his first wife in his heart, but can love Jill as well. Taking that as a model, a story arc like that CAN be done well and respectfully. The question is whether the writing team puts the effort into it. And just as Dorian's romance isn't all about his sexuality, neither does Maevaris's romance have to be about her dead husband, but a component of it. * Yes, I get that people were burned with MEA, but DAI did have a good show of it, and these ARE different teams, with different leads, with different values. Also keep in mind that BOTH of the m/m options in DAI were followers, in addition to the main f/f lesbian option. I think it's important to remember that. I would really be surprised if Maevaris is a romance option. I don't think the consumer base is ready for a transgendered romance option, TBH. And even if the writing team is all for it, they would have to fight for it like Sheryl did for Vetra, and I think this is a case where Bioware/EA leadership would veto it no matter how hard the writers fought. It's too risky and MEA shows that EA thinks straight male players are terrified of anything non heteronormative. I'd rather they stuck to 2/2/2 for the romances, because when they reach beyond that I think content tends to suffer for it. Plus, they just end up adding a bunch of straight romances, tbh. DA:I, three straight guys because they had extra time? Just add more content to the existing romances, imo. Then everyone gets more content and the options stay equally distributed. As for "promiscuous" LIs, I like them, but I can understand why bisexuals are tired of having that trope saddled on their demographic. I wouldn't mind promiscuous gay men, tbh. Dorian, Gil and Cortez all enjoy sex, but I don't think they're really promiscuous stereotypes, like Zev or Isabela. I think it was a good point earlier that promiscuity often becomes too much of a joke with certain characters, though. With Zev and Iron Bull, to a point, but especially with Isabela, it got a little grating that it was less just a facet of their characters as something to laugh at them about, although more with Iron Bull it did come across as "impressive", while with Isabela it was a bit more negative at times. Having promiscuous characters is one thing, but when the writers of that character and those writing interaction with them take it to a negative place, I think that's a bigger problem. Yeah I was a little uncomfortable at how nasty some of the "friendly" banter between Aveline and Isabela could be at times. I think it's one of those times where author intention didn't come across, or I'm just too sensitive and wouldn't like my friends being that intentionally direct in their teasing. But I do still really enjoy Isabela's banter with Merrill about how she doesn't care what names people call her, they don't know her, only Isbalea knows herself. That was pretty cool. Even if buried under a lot of harsher content. |
|
|
|
Post by phantomrachie on May 19, 2017 12:46:02 GMT
I honestly think that Dragon Age games have mostly done bisexual characters well, (apart from leaning a little bit too heavily on the promiscuous bisexual stereotype)
They all tend to talk about people they find attractive or sexual experiences they have had that tell the player they are bisexual even if the player is romancing them as a person of the opposite sex. Which is really important for me.
Bi Erasure is a problem in our media and entertainment and I think it's important that bisexual LIs are seen as bisexual in game and not bisexual because a player looked up a Wiki to see who the romance options were.
BioWare are not perfect in their portrayal of these characters, they still tend to rely too heavily on tropes or stereotypes or are so afraid of being seen as using stereotypes that they seem to be actively refusing to make short-haired warrior women gay or bisexual. That being said I do think they have done the right thing and to make it obvious in game when characters are bisexual, even if they run the risk of making players uncomfortable.
|
|
|
|
Post by pessimistpanda on May 19, 2017 12:54:25 GMT
I always interpreted Aveline and Isabela as really disliking (or even hating each other) early on. Or at the very least Aveline for sure hates Isabela. I never thought they were meant to be teasing each other in those early interactions. I see their relationship as gradually evolving from enmity to mutual respect and then friendship. Isabela takes Aveline's abuse with good humour, and responds wittily, while also making good arguments about sexuality and self-image that eventually win Aveline over. Not being a woman, maybe my interpretation is way off, but to me their dynamic reads as Isabela helping Aveline to unlearn her internalised misogyny and discover/accept herself as a sexual being. And in the process, they both let their guard down and you see their softer sides. There's a really nice banter in Act 3 (one of my favourites in the whole game), where Aveline is upset because Isabela didn't come to her dinner party, and Isabela basically responds by saying she doesn't feel like she fits in with Aveline's life. Sure, it sounds mean on the surface, but to me it sounds like Aveline is (in a joking way), affirming their friendship and telling Isabela that she is welcome in her home and around her future children (if any). I dunno, I think that's nice. But I also think Alistair and Morrigan totally want to bone each other, and almost nobody agrees with me.  |
|
Much love right back at ya!
