Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Vincke & lead writers IGN Interview: a look at weak character writing in BG3

He does that with a female MC too. The whole discussion is strange.

Metaphors are a normal part of literary fiction – and this one is more obvious than most. Do you not read books or something?

I’m at a loss here – it’s a literary ‘device’, standard issue from the dawn of lit fiction. Sometimes you need to ‘dig deep’ to get it, but in this case it’s so obvious it’s like 1 + 1. Boring, even.

What is going on…

You know the way you have to ‘read between the lines’ when ‘parsing’ social cues? Because people don’t just mechanically express literally what they are saying: there’s innuendo behind all the words.

Metaphor in fiction is just the equivalent of that innuendo – that which isn’t expressed bluntly, but expressed instead indirectly…

I can’t believe I’m having to write this lol

900 pages detailing every thought and emotional response of a character in work and leisure - flat, unrealistic character.
Page 901 - the character says 'I am exclusively sexually attracted to men'.
NOW they have a clear sexual orientation, the historically recent and culturally contingent conception from the West - and now they are a three dimensional and realistic character.

See, what's unfortunate is that there is a discussion around topics like 'what does queer-coded mean?' and 'is "x' queer because they can be gay?', but when you focus on this bizarre "gay men hit on me all the time, I'm super built" thing, it just gets really weird, really fast.

When you focus on 1% of what I wrote concerning my physical appearance, that’s when it gets ‘really weird, really fast’.

The other 99% of the words I wrote are where it’s all at mate, but then again you were asking some truly – how shall I politely put it? – ‘puzzling’ questions such as ‘Original post? Original post where? Who are you? Do we know you or something that we'd have prior knowledge of these posts?’

I frankly can’t tell if you’re being insincere, or paranoid, or what is going on with that line of interrogation – but it clearly has nothing to do with the comments I originally posted, nor does it add anything constructive to the discourse.

You’re welcome to quote specific pieces of text from the original post and to call them ‘weird’. Buy ideally you’d expand on that to clarify why that’s the case.

My sixth sense though is saying you have no interest in engaging with the content in a neutral, constructive way – but perhaps you can prove me wrong.

Once upon a time shortly after high school I was at a house party, helping cleaning up after most everybody had left. While doing dishes one of my high school crushes, a drop dead gorgeous Persian girl who I’d always admired from afar but never really spoke to, came up behind me, pulled me into an unoccupied bedroom and started making out with me. After a brief moment of surprise kissing, this was our conversation:

Her: do you want me to go to the car and get a condom?

Me: nope.

Her: … you want to have sex without a condom?

Me: nope.

Her: … are you a virgin?

Me: nope.

Her: you don’t want to have sex?

Me: that is correct.

We hung out and chatted for a bit, that was that. Something about it didn’t feel right, and it turns out my instincts were on point because she actually had a boyfriend she was mad at, and I’m happy I didn’t get myself entangled in their mess.

If 19 year old me could say nope to her, 37 year old me would have no problem saying “no thank you ma’am,” to Scarlet Johansson.

And clearly, women who will just sleep with a guy do exist. I’ve turned a few down in my day.

Human sexual behavior is not as simple as you describe, even if what you are saying is generally true.

Furthermore, appealing to our nature doesn’t mean much, since our brains and our cultures as so advanced, pretty much every natural instinct can be overwritten by acculturation. Suicide-bombers, celibate monks, and plenty of more mundane examples of all sorts override their instincts every day.

Thanks for your thoughts.

I’ve met no women, young or old, who talk or act like the girl in your ‘story’.

I’m entitled to believe you invented all of that: it’s just an opinion.

100% I can say no women on earth act like that: pulling a guy into a room and just gagging for sex, because if they did it would upend the stability of the human race to the point of dooming the entire species. Nature simply would never allow this.

It has programmed men to be hunters, and to take risks with women. It has programmed women to be cautious and judgemental about men, because women control the health of the future gene pool. They simply will not have sex with men just for ‘once off’ pleasure. No woman does this – as in, none.

As for whether you’d turn down Scarlett Johnson if she directly offered you sex – that’s perfectly fine, if equally unbelievable.

Put another way, if I lined up 100 straight men, and told each of them you can have with Scarlett Johnson right now, with no need to talk to her, or even appeal to her – how many would be agreeable to it?

My money would say 100%. But then there could also be the slight anomaly who knocks it down to 99%.

Are you serious? Maybe you should stop trying to speak for all women in this world, considering you are not one. And yeah, this thread is hopefully to get closed down soon. I seldom have read so much sexist and homphobic nonsense.
I clicked on this crapshow, because I thought, it was an honest discussion of the IGN article.
My bad, it's just angry rant, I'm out.

Agree, but I'd really like to hear your (and other people's) opinion about the interview.

For me it's a disappointment, as the writers make it appear that everything I find annoying about the main story (Emperor, railroaded ending, Orpheus, tadpole mechanics) plays more or less out exactly as intended.

Do I become a monster when I can save the world? It's just not as interesting or "powerful" to me as the writer puts it. It seems like a rather silly and forced choice at the end and the story would have allowed for many different outcomes. See the thread on tadpoles and consequences for example.

Edit: I meant the thread on Daisy, the Absolute, and the Emperor

It's just a theory, but I think Larian is trying to cover up for how rushed this game feels by claiming all that.

I mean, this is pretty obvious at this point. Remember the epilogue excuse they gave.


Feel the same way, reading that article/interview was pretty much a final nail when it comes to me losing interest in this game as a whole. The devs seem to not be taking their own story or characters seriously. Or as Ehhhh said they are coming with excuses so they can just wave away any criticism of the game having poor writing and not being finished.

The emperor part made me laugh, Sven goes on about the emperor never lying to you, being upfront about his selfishness and survival only to talk about his manipulation in the next sentence. I'm pretty sure the Emperor presenting himself as the Guardian and the whole situation with Stelmane is considered a lie.

And to add another funny thing that Fylimar mentioned in another thread. When asked about their favorite Wyll scene the answer was Mizora sex lol. (they know their audience)

Not to mention how they piss all over Gale, as if the orgy scene with him didn't do that already.

Could be. Definitely didn't sound like they're working on an overhaul though. They also pointed out how the complexity of all the story permutations were hard to handle in the end. So I take it they don't feel inclined to put even more complexity in it.

The general vibe I got is, story wise they're moving on (dlc, bg4, dos3 whatever). And that's a bit sad, because a great story deserves a great ending (takling about the ending not the epilogue, which is fine.)

I think you’re reading far too much into a comment one gay person said about a character. She only said she was more sympathetic towards him because he hid his true identity, which presumably relates a bit to her own personal experiences.

There’s countless stories about people/monsters hiding their true selves. Is John Carpenters the Thing really about homosexuality? What about Invasion of Body Snatches? (it’s actually well known what that’s an allegory for). Countless other stories about aliens hiding on earth, most superheroes, spies stories, undercover police, etc. All tales of people or things hiding their true identity. That doesn’t make them all about being in the closet.

PS. Women throwing themselves at men does happen. Things aren’t nearly as clear cut as the manosphere makes out.

9_9

OP, for all your self-assuredness, you are deeply ignorant to how women work. Women are quite capable of just wanting sex. Natured does not prohibit this. And birth control options allow women to pursue sex for pleasure if they so choose.

Fun fact, during certain periods of the European Middle Ages women were considered to be the more promiscuous gender, just the way men our now.

So much of our sexual behavior comes down to culture and social expectations, not nature.

I agree and want to add, that it made me extremely sad, that teh favourite Wyll scene was the Mizora sex scene. That was unecessary cruel. Wyll doesn't have many scenes, but he has good ones.
I obviously disagree about Halsin - that creep should never have made a companion.
I strongly disagree that Gale is annoying - he is one of the most chill companions to have with you in the party - I call Gale, Wyll and Karlach TEam Chill and SHadow, Lae and Astarion Team Dramaqueen (I like them, but they fuss a lot ).

The whole tadpole mechanic should have more conqequences and no one should become a mindflayer, if Omeluum is alive - that was very rushed imo.

Catfishing isn't dishonest anymore, good to know!

Shame you’re ‘out’, because I genuinely would like to know what is ‘homophobic’ about the post. As obviously Steam mods are equally triggered by the content. I believe I’ve been carefully, almost absurdly, neutral in my comments. Eg – ‘There is nothing abnormal about gayness.’ On what planet is that homophobic?

I don’t speak for women, I speak for my experience with women. Which is that they do not act like straight men or gay men when it comes to flirtation. You think otherwise? Again, it would be productive to hear a reason, otherwise we can never know what you’re trying to say here.


Why? The whole point in opening this thread is that Steam can’t tell me what’s ‘wrong’ and no one here can tell me what’s wrong.

Please point to the exact problematic sentence, and describe the issue, as I cannot see how I can be more neutral.


Does John Carpenter’s ‘The Thing’ try to sexually proposition you, like The Emperor? No? So it’s obviously not the greatest comparison mate.

The interpretation of fiction is not a science with a ‘right’ answer. However, I strongly believe The Emperor’s dialogue and actions suggest he’s a metaphor for gayness. I never said anything about gayness being wrong. What I said is that the handling of the material within BG3 struck me as extremely bad.

As in, there’s no suggestion The Emperor has any sexual interest in the MC up until a deeply weird scene where he randomly has his top off and wants to get it on. This is a man-octopus. To say it’s messed up would be one of the larger understatements I can think of.


There’s a reason promiscuous women are considered a turn off for most men. Shock horror – it implies they can’t be trusted.

You say I don’t know women – in what country do women fling themselves at every man they find attractive?


Yeah, I am in very good shape/health – I work hard at it. And I do stand out from the crowd. Not looking for a gold medal, not looking to boast. But I was out last night and getting the usual ‘attention’ from girls, which is 95% indirect: strong eye contact and coy smiles, or ‘clever’ excuses for body contact as they walk by. There was one older woman – 40s – who sought me out and was aggressively flirting. That’s the exception rather than the rule.

The issue is: no one cares about your take on gender and it has nothing to do with the interview. Thank you for raising attention to it though.

I just wish we had a sub forum "society of brilliance" where these kind of debates can go. (And, please!, let me know when you figured out if raising Gith children in a proper surrounding makes any difference.)

Everyone is entitled to their take on how men and women behave when it comes to romance – I assume that’s what you mean by ‘gender’.

You still haven’t answered my question – what part of the original post is ‘problematic’?

Obviously there must be some very simple, sane explanation, considering how convinced you sound. So I’m just waiting on that to surface, because all I’ve read so far is ‘you’re a homphobe’ and other sticks and stones insults that don’t quite convince that the poster has anything to say.