Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback About ugly characters complaints

I've seen complaints on Steam about the female characters looking ugly
But have you seen the male characters?
Most of them are ugly too! with exception of Gale, moderate husband material.

The game doesn't have any attractive male characters comparable to a Leon Kennedy, Cal Kestis, Clive Rosfield, Jacob Custos etc..

What about character creation? 90% of male faces are RIDICULOUS! While female characters have more pretty faces options.

My concern is that Larian will listen to these complaints, improve the female characters to please the whiners, and ignore the male characters.
If they plan to improve the female characters or create new attractive female characters in future DLC, I also want to see attractive male characters!

Balanced fanservice please! ??

I wouldn't listen to the whino on Steam. Dunno if you noticed, but most of those posters have Pedo-Avatars for pete Sake.

Anybody who says the characters in this game are ugly have a skewed sense of what attractive people look like. Except Lae’zel. She’s a toad person. But the rest are all attractive in a grounded, realistic way. It’s good.

Characters like Leon Kennedy and Clive Rosefield are so stylized and idealized that they don’t look like real people, in the same way a Greek statue doesn’t actually look like a real person. Nothing wrong with that look, but these are different artistic approaches.

Actually was kind of hard picking a face for my male drow today on my co-op run.

It's fantasy game, so it's acceptable to have all pretty and handsome people there. This give us more motivation to save and fight for them

I don’t understand the point you are trying to make. I never said it was a problem if all of the characters are attractive. I said they are attractive.

You what?! Okay, if you have more motivation to save the pretty people then I guess that's you. But it's not me, and I hope not the majority. Personally, my preferred fantasy setting has a bit of realism in this respect and isn't filled with characters designed to be eye-candy, at least any more than they already are. I'd actually find that a bit icky and immersion breaking.

Plus of course attractiveness is subjective. I'd disagree with the OP about the male companions and I don't think any of them are ugly. in fact, as a straight woman, I think they're all attractive in their own way, to the extent that's not wholly realistic, but not so unrealistic that it breaks immersion and makes me think that the characters were designed to look pretty rather than interesting.

I'd agree that the head choices for some races are limited, though, and some are admittedly a bit funny-looking, which makes it less likely that we'll find ones that fit our characters, so I wouldn't say no to more heads (both more conventionally attractive and less). But I'd not be in favour of Larian specifically introducing prettier NPCs of any gender.

I sort of feel all the head options have model face? Even Laz is beautiful
I feel anyone throwing trouble about the characters not being 'pretty enough' need some self reflection?

Beauty is in the eye of the behold though, so maybe we need a beholder companion. They hate Illithids so maybe we could find some common ground

How shallow is that? You only want to save pretty people?
I'm sorry, but I'm with Queen on that - I want the game to be realistic and not full of Barbies and Kens. I find most of the npcs, companions included more than pretty, yes, even Lae'zel. I find it almost too much. They even prettied up Karlach with a blemishless face, to make her more pretty, despite her older face looking way more badass.
SO I don't get that complaining.

Since when?

As far as Lae'zel goes she would probably turn her nose up at you.

Gale is hot, wyll is ok (no dad beard ew), Astarion is a hideous twink (I have twink / fem phobia, sue me).

I like my men buff with muscles and facial / body hair.

Err, okay if we're going to overshare about our particular predilections, can we at least try to avoid stereotyping and unnecessarily judgy and controversial language. I know they're fictional characters, but when we don't know the humans behind our avatars, we also have no idea who we might offend by association.

If we are talking the Classical Age, since about 480 BCE. Greek statues are always idealized representations of the human form, expressions of what ancient Greeks considered to be ultimate beauty. But people don’t actually look like that in the same way that people don’t actually look like Square Enix characters, unless they get a lot of plastic surgery, in which case it wouldn’t be attractive, but unsettling.

Now Romans statues and busts did look true to life. Throughout most their history (but not always) they were into verisimilitude.

Here is an example:

Greek sculpture. Stylized. People don’t look like this.


Roman sculpture. Much less idealized, much more representational.


I love me some art history.