Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Companion lifestyles

So I don't want to give the wrong impression here, people are different, and we should live and let live so long as they aren't hurting anyone. I am concerned about the life style ambiguity in the companions we've seen to date. There are all types out there, and that is fine, but where are you going to find a group of random strangers that are all orientated the same way outside of a nightclub that caters to that particular lifestyle? The care free way that every companion seems to think that the PC is a valid romantic partner is simply unbelievable. Even if you seek out individual on dating sites that seem like they would be perfect for you, you are bound to be disappointed at least some of the time, but in this game, not only is every member of your party a valid match for you, they aggressively seek to engender a relationship with you. This is extremely shallow, and honestly smacks of an attempt at scoring points with the social justice crowd. Personally, it's off putting, and if this is the way this company is going to write their characters, then this is the last time I'll be purchasing a product from them. People are, by and large, different, they have different beliefs, different orientations, and personalities. Some people are shy, some are outgoing, some are phobic, and others are introverted. So far, and I get that this is still EA, but so far, as far as I'm concerned, in this one particualr aspect the companions are all the same.

Everyone wants the PC? Sounds like escapism.

I wonder where did you get that impression.

Astarion offered you a night of "fun" ... no "romantic partnership" included there. O_o
Lae'zel decided to "reward you with pleaasure" ... no "romantic partnership" included there. O_o
Wyll calls you a good friend, and if you ask him if you are "just friend", he answers "yes" ... once again no "romantic partnership" included there. O_o More like friends with benefits in this case.

Gale and Shadowheart seems a little different, that is true ... but that is hardly every companion.
(Didnt seen Gale myself yet, he is quite slippery fish to catch.)

I imagine they see it as a safeguard to make sure the any player can choose the companion they are most interested in. They've only got so many potential companions to work with, so it's likely a 'necessary evil'. But, yes, on the face of it, it seems rather bizarre and a bit immersion breaking.

I would argue that Larian is trying to score points with the horny crowd more than the social justice crowd. In AAA RPGs, for better or worse, it is now ~expected that players can romance their companions. And making every companion equally romanceable is the easiest (one could say laziest since there are no differences in the romance dialogue for different gender-PCs) way to ensure players can romance every companion.

Agreed that:
- players should have to initiate flirting/romance with at least some of the companions. E.g., Lae'zel and Astarion could come onto you, but the player might need to initiate with Gale/Wyll/SH.
- companions should have preferences, with dialogue that reflects them. E.g., Gale and Wyll are straight-presenting (dialogue and backstory), so a male-PC would have to initiate flirting with them and there'd be lines like: "I've never felt this way about a man before."

I'd be fine with some race/gender restrictions, but this requires sufficient NPCs. At least 8, for 1 straight of each gender, 1 gay of each gender, and 4 bi/playersexual. For example, In DAI I had no problems with Solas only wanting to romance female elves, and the companion ensemble was large enough that players still had a choice of romance options even with some NPCs being straight/gay. Though I do know a person who was very unhappy that Cassandra was straight...

It's a mature game, and the characters are player sexual so that everyone regardless of orientation can romance whichever character they want if they play their cards right.

I'm fine with it honestly.

I wouldn't describe maturity as being given whatever you want just because you want it.

Agree! I like that everyone is included!😊

Primarily, I'm hoping that the devs are fast tracking romance in EA. Dragon Age did romance fairly well (only mildly annoying), the romances were something you had to work towards, not nearly so "In your face" as they are in BG3. I'm not opposed to intercharacter relationship building, it can add something to the game. On the other hand, real people don't act the way the companions are acting. Even the most popular or wealthiest people aren't attractive to everyone. Just because Bill Gates is filthy rich, doesn't mean I"d ever want a romantic relatioship with him. Chris Pine may be dreamy to some, but I'll pass. I've also known plenty of women whom I wouldn't want a relationship with either, attractive, wealthy, or otherwise. I don't go to social events and see everyone clawing at each other trying to score, so why would I want that in a CRPG? If that's what I was looking for, I'd be looking into slice of life games. If you're going to add this kind of dynamic to a game, then the devs should carefully decide what drives the characters they create just like a good writer would. Right now, the characters have the personalities of shallow indie author harem novels. If that's good enough for you, fine. I'll look to other developers personally.

Inclusion is good This feature means we can all play our own game with our own character, instead of having to tailor a character to a love interest.
Trying to play through DA:O with a charater I found unengaging in order to complete a romance was awful and I abandoned that playthrough.

But, I would like some of the Origins to have more by way of build-up before PartyNight. Gales romance is the most fleshed out, Wyll could use something similar.