I think people defending the choice between Sage and Jill are missing the bigger picture. The game has set up a morality system, Chick vs. Dick. To pursue Jill, you need to do Chick things, aka "good guy" stuff. Sage tends to go more for the Dik or "bad boy" stuff.
The problem isn't making us choose, it's making the choice incongruent with the morality system. Promising to take care of a sick friend and ditching them to go on a date should be a "dick move", but because the date is with Jill this is considered the "good guy" choice. Likewise, telling someone you can't go on a spontaneous outing because a sick friend needs you should be perfectly reasonable, but since this is Sage over Jill, it is considered the "bad boy" path.
Now if the roles were reversed, if we promised to tend to a sick Jill and then had a choice to ditch her and spend time with Sage instead, that would fit with what the game has established. The problem isn't being made to choose -- we're going to have to narrow it down to one (maybe two?) LI's eventually -- it's that this particular choice was poorly constructed and runs counter to the game's own purported moral standards.
