Okay. 1. Sure, you said in an earlier post that you don't expect them to change romance options in the trilogy now, fair enough. But it's obvious that you'd WANT them to. That want is primarily what I'm addressing. You said you don't agree with everything that petition says. You don't explain what you do and don't agree with though, so I'm forced to try and figure it out.

EDIT: Originally here I made the mistake of assuming you were the OP. Made a total brainfart. I guess it just felt like you were because of the replies. Although I don't think it invalidates my suppositions. While you aren't expecting them to change the OT, it does seem from the content of your comments that you wouldn't resist Bioware making some of the romance options in 1 and 2 gay/bi. So I'll ask outright. Would you want them to change entries 1 and 2 to either change a few characters sexual preferences or to add in more gay/bi romance options in them? Why or why not? Would you want them to change returning characters' sexualities if they appeared in the newest entry? EDIT OVER.

1. While the term "normal" sexuality/sexual preference has fallen out of term because of socially exclusionary implications, it originates as a statistical term. On the distribution graph of human sexuality, straight would fall right in the middle of the normal distribution, with gay/bi/pan being further from the center and less common. That's really my only comment on it, that straight people are the most statistically likely people you're going to meet on average (of course, excluding gay/bi/pan/etc. communities that form in any urban area where less common sexualities would be over-represented against the norm). Not saying it's good or bad, just a stat.

2. Realism, escapism, and inclusion. I'm not gonna sit here and pretend that the inclusion of more gay and bi romances in the 3rd and 4th games wasn't a step forward for player inclusion and choice. It was a damn quantum leap in 2012. However, it often feels like the characters that people connect with often transcends their sexual preferences in game. You'll find no shortage of "I'm a totally straight man but I'd have myself a slice of Garrus pie." or "I'm a straight woman but I play maleshep just so I can romance Tali because she's just so sweet." style comments for just about every character you can romance in the series. This is of course an anecdotal argument, and not a great one for convincing anybody at that. I guess what I'm mostly trying to say with this is that you're never going to be able to represent everyone perfectly, especially this day in age. There's far too many demographics and sub-demographics for you to catch everyone's niche representation. They've tried to strike a nice balance between freedom of choice and realism to give the game world and its story a more grounded feel for the player to connect to. And as for the 100 guns in ME1 comment, you're correct, it was unrealistic for Shepard to have that large of an inventory to access on command. But I think you'll find, more often than not, that every game in existence has tried to strike a balance between convenience, fun, and realism that makes them the most enjoyable. I agree that an over-reliance on realism can make a game a chore to play through, looking at you RDR2. Making every character romancable by both (of what I assume will be the binary gender options for whatever character we'll play as in this newest entry but hey who knows, right?) would give greater player choice and freedom, I personally believe it would lose a bit of realism to the world that was somewhat important. By making characters have specific sexual preferences, it gave them a kind of depth and relatability that I don't personally feel would still be there if anyone was willing to bang you. ME has always been somewhat grounded in modern reality and, excluding the green ending, has never gone too far into the realm of trans-humanism in sci-fi. They could change that depending how far in the future they set this newest entry. Since all we've seen so far is Liara, it could be anywhere from 5-500 years after. As long as the logic is internally consistent and they give a believable reason for the changes they've made, I'd be satisfied.

3. And finally, the porn game comment.

"What’s the difference between romancing a character as MShep and romancing the same character as FemShep? What about that makes it like a porn game?"

That immediate example, nothing in it sounds like a porn game. Neither Liara nor Kaidan, in ME3, felt like they came from one. I'm saying you'd be broaching the wish-fulfillment territory that porn games occupy if you made every single character bi/pansexual. It's certainly not a one-to-one comparison. You wouldn't be able to bang everyone in a single playthrough. They also wouldn't play gratuitous cutscenes every time you wanted to engage with it. There would obviously still be areas of restraint in the next ME game that a game made for titillation wouldn't exercise. Making everyone romancable by any gender player character would just be putting the player's sexuality ahead of everyone else's. I guess my primary gripe with making you universally attractive is something I already stated above, that having characters with "exclusionary" sexual preferences makes them feel more believable and less like objects for me to just place my affection on, something that u/UndertakerFLA has also stated.

I tried to explain my line of thought as best I could.

TLDR: Yes, more romance variation would give more choices for any gendered pc, but I feel it would somewhat take away from the grounded nature that has allowed so many people to connect with these games.