Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Could we PLEASE...

I'd love to see a geneticist discuss with a "gender scholar". But anyways, the last paragraph is exactly my point. As long as it has a purpose in the story, it should be there.

As Stabby put it, every art form makes a statement including what you call political ones. Crono marrying Marle at the end of Chrono Trigger glorifies heterosexual relationships according to woke opinion. The current year is a reflection of today's political, financial and entertainment establishment. If you're not a fan of it, the good news for you is that the viral outbreak might just be the black swan event that topples the establishment so things like games, movies etc. may take a drastically different turn once this is all over. As far as Baldur's Gate 3, it will definitely be woke, the question is to what degree. A buddy of mine keeps telling me to check WotC's social media accounts to get a feel for their political affiliation. They're all for inclusiveness apparently so consider yourself forewarned.

>Please, keep politics out of the game?

It's literally impossible, no game is completely apolitcal, it's just that status quo is so ingrained, that political messaging that supports status quo feels "apolitical". So asking for apolitical game is same as asking game that enforces current political norms.

Well, other than the 'The Force is Female' tshirts and various interviews with directors and writers, etc.



The complaints come from how the character is done, not because of whatever minority status, etc, the character has. There have been lots of popular movies with strong female characters, for example, but if all the previews and interviews focus on a strong, independent woman lead and how the film has a feminist message and anybody who doesn't like it is a misogynist, it's probably not going to be a good movie.

As far as Larian's characters, there was approximately one person since D:OS 2 was released who complained about all of the companions being bisexual. It wasn't hamfisted in and announced at every opportunity to virtue signal. As most people realised, if they noticed it at all, that was done because there were not enough companions to cover every combination of romance options otherwise, and no reason to artificially restrict player choices even if that would be more realistic.



I've heard 'professionally offended', as well as 'perpetually offended'.

Conversely, some consider tolerance to be the last virtue of a dying society. Which way the entertainment industry goes next depends on a multitude of factors - the Germans call it Kulturkampf. Being part of it only makes things more exciting.

Yeah there are snowflakes on both sides, you only need to take a look what a fit people threw at taking a knee drama, or a that girl climate change activist, or tracer being lesbian or how they defend trump beyond any reason. For every screeching social justice warrior there are 2 conservatives just as emotional and irrational. It's hilarious people claiming facts > feelings when their whole reasoning is just a ball of emotion.

well ive seen this coming
>geneticists disagree iwth people who use science as an argument
well, that depends entierly on what people.
That theres only two biological genders? yeah im pretty sure that theres not a single scientist who disagrees with this. Simply because evolutionary biology.
Or is it the case of the one scientist who got deplatformed from everything after saying that IQ is heritable?
the horror.

On wokeness and tolerance: im intolerant of beeing told lies and having to go along with them because of social pressure.

This feels like some time travel itno the year of 2013 or something, because i distinctiveely remember having those exact discussions in some manner or another way back then.
Im tired of them. As far as im concerned, its been done to death and my side has won the arguments in the public view.
moslty because the other side cannot stop making themselves look stupid by making bolder and bolder claims in the face of a reality that doesnt reflect them.

Honestly i dont even want to use terms like "SJW" anymoe because it feels cringe to me.

But considering the influence on media and the like, like the recent marvel kerfuffle, i think i have to make a statement here:
Its not about having o not having politics.
its about having particulary annoying topics shoved in your face. Dragon Age Inquisiton and Siege of Dragonspear come to mind

Mind Flayers are the quintessence of totalitarian dictatorship. There you have it: politics! This game is doomed!

Well... unless only minorities' rights are considered "politics" that should be left out of the game - then we may be fine. Phew...

There's a substantial minority that prefers a particular combat mode to the one that's been touted by Larian. Does that make them intolerant?

You know where the pinned topic is. Don't try to bring that subject up here as well, please.

With all due respect, the pinned topic isn't exactly about politics or representation of minorities in video games. It would have come off as off-topic on there too so I am in a bit of a pickle.

That said, the total non-straight population makes up about 4.5% of the US demographics according to Gallup so how is pandering to them more economically sound and feasible than catering to those that polls show are much bigger? Everything costs money, right?

Every scientist should disagree with this because "gender" is a social construct that is handled differently depending on the region (e.g. in western countries it's binary but in some indigenious cultures it's not). What you mean is sex. Sex is biologically determined - while gender is not. Usually they align. Sometimes they do not. The question is not if gender is binary - it is not of course. The question you are trying to answer is if sex is binary. Well that depends on where you draw the line (or lines). Genetically speaking there are more genetical dispositions than XX and XY.

Here's a good starting point: https://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/

Especially look at "Gender and Genetics". There's more than XX and XY. But you could make an argument that those in between are all kind of sick (although they are healthy and can reproduce) and still that everyone that has at least one Y chromosome is male (even if the individual doesn't look like a typical male). But one could also argue that sex isn't sorely determined by those chromosomes but of a whole combination of additional chromosomes - for we know by now that DNA and its effects on our body isn't a very linear thing but very entangled.

So if you define everything with an Y as male and everything that has not as female then sure - it's binary by definition. But tomorrow science could also define that somebody with more X chromosomes than Y chromosomes is female. Or just define another sex in between. It's science. That doesn't mean it's set in stone. Like Pluto isn't a planet anymore. If contemporary definitions that sciencists do were irrefutible you might have a point. Alas, they are not.

That doesn't have anything to do with the struggle of minorities though. In my opinion minorities have every right to be loud in order to get heard. Here in Romania there's a German minority. They are mostly white, old conservative people. But they have their special needs too. Maybe they want to keep German city names as alternative or they wat special German schools so that their language doesn't die out. So they are trying to be loud and get heard. And rightfully so. Doesn't mean Romanians have to be offended. Same as christans in arab countries or queer people... nearly everywhere. Be loud - it's ok.

And if somebody decides to picture your struggles and issues in a video game - I won't get mad. I'll be empathic and think about it. It won't piss me off - I'd rather think if I should change perspective for a second and think about stuff I'm usually not forced to think about. And if there's a game that transports a message that I really can't agree with: Whoa! I don't play it! Galaxy brain genius level decision....

That's a very unobstrusive way to deal with it.

Whining in a forum about "politics" in games and confusing all sorts of terms and bringing up "science" as killer argument when talking about a very complex issue is not.

He is also wrong that there are only 2 sexes.

Here is an excellent article on that: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/

good grief well this is gonna be fun.
"gender is a social construct" yes, one thats based on biological sex.
the societal role of each gender is based on the biological neccesities and evolutionary drives of biological sex.
and even that, is something i only realy take with a grain of salt.
your source talks about some cultures that have "More than two sexes", the reality is that those cultures tend to be dead or irrelevant.
Yes there was a caste among the aztecs that was considered female despite beeing eunuchs, that doesnt constitute a gender role.
Its basically the old human principle of emasculation. Simmilar to what the greeks did, to their enemies that is.
Not to mention that this, at least in the case of the aztecs IIRC, wasnt voluntary.
Saying those cultures had "More genders" elevates this to a good thing. Rather than, in most cases, forced sterilization and cruel mistreatment of children.

"Theres more than XX and XY" Intersex people arent a Sex, they are usually a birth defect.
Humans have two arms and two legs, even if that one girl in india has four arms. an aberration does not have any say on what does and not constitute a gender or sex.
And before anyone gets any ideas. Im not saying this in a deriding fashion.
its just how it is, its a defect. That does not mean these people are defective or inferior in any way. but that the process of them beeing produced had a hang up and ended up with something that is, quite frankly, not exactly fit for purpose and carries many health risks with it.

>the dna isnt linear but entangled

its a double helix, i dont know where youre getting with this, i guess youre getting at that "sex is a spectrum" thing. Well exordinary claims require exordinary evidence my dude.
ive read what your source says on it and, shocker, its exactly what im saying.
the large majority of humans have two gender defining chromosomes and thos with a Y chromosome develop testicles. Oh yeah and then thers aberraitons, mutations, birth defects and a wide range of other things that cane make an individual have a different number or set of chromosoms or expressions of Sex markers other than those that their chromosomes might imply.

The only thing that this proves is that human genetics are error prone. which they are, hence why we tend to get cancer past a certain age.

Saying that these things should be treated as other genders can only come from an ideological standpoint.
Afterall, having other chromosomal arrangements than XX and XY tends to lead to things like not beeing able to reproduce, or IIRC in the case of XYY partial giantism and mental deficits. These are not desireable health benefits, these are detriments to those individuals.

Just because these people are, and neccesarily have to be due to their condition not beeing one that is favored by human reproduction, a minority, doesnt change anyhting. Beeing a Minortiy doesnt give you the right to declare what is and is not. Minority status shouldnt be a desired characteristic.
Its a descriptor and shouldnt be anything more than that.
If i got 6 beans, 4 of which are green and 2 of which are yellow. Saying the yellow beans are a "minority" should not be a descriptor outside of "theres more green beans than yellow ones"

This is exactly what ive been talking about when i say a certain kind of politics.
It is one thing to depict the "struggles" of a minority. it is another thing to depict something as normal or desireable, specifically when it comes to "Minority markers" that are actual health detriments.
And quite frankly, as emphatic as you might think you are, it is questionable when is the time and place to depict the "struggles" of the minorities, and how to depict them.
When i play an epic fantasy game, i do not need to kno what "transsexual" means in Klingom, thanks Dragon age inquisition.
This is not going to make me more emphatic towards the struggles of minorities. its going to diminish my compassion towards them.
And lets face it, the kind of writers that put these "struggles" in, what kinda writers are they realy?
Is this going to happen in a toned down somber fashion?
Or will it be siege of dragonspear? because weve got evidence of the latter, and not a lot of evidence of the former.



sure your minorities can be as loud and as in your face as they want.
And i can be as intolerant of that as i want.
There have been video games ive not bought as a result of blatant virtue signaling.
Which leads to a certain problem that minorities have, in a society based on supply and demand, they have to appeal to the majority to take their problems seriously.
And im telling you, they arent making that happen by beeing annoying.

Oh yeah and a little extra because i find it funny: im part of a religious minority in my country, one that has in the past been violently opressed (no, not the jews), a struggle thats part of my familys (not my) history.
i dont go around demanding special rights either. Because the laws in my country are universal and nobody needs special treatment.
all are equal under the law. as it should be.

This is typical consvervative conversation - ignore science when inconvinient, redefine terms, counter with anecdotes, claim victory. All your argument really is "I have defined gender as binary and everything outside it is abnormality, defect or error". Cool, you defined away all the nuance and real world implications, I guess overly simplistic stuff is your jam. It's like defining "everything I say is right and everyone who disagrees with me is wrong". By definition you would be wrong, but what good does it do?

>The only thing that this proves is that human genetics are error prone.

Error implies intentionality, there is nothing like that in genetics.

>: im part of a religious minority in my country, one that has in the past been violently opressed

Are you still being oppressed? Are you being actively discriminated against in job applications or in other significant ways? Are you in perpetual danger of being assaulted because of your religion? Could someone even identify that you are from said religious group if person didn't know you? If so, I guess doing nothing and bending over is your choice, but it's hardly a virtue. If not - you are not being oppressed in your day to day life, you have no point.

You are factually wrong that depicting minorities in media doesn't change society perception - for example dehumanising propaganda against Tutsi lead to Rwandan genocide and massive positive shift towards gay rights became once the media started showing gays as people.

Also it is more profitable for gaming companies - despite "be woke go broke" meme, movies with inclusive cast have been performing very well, and I suspect that's the major reason we see more minority representation in media.

Oh there we come with the boxes again.
For someone claiming to be tolerant you sure are quick to judge people.

>redefine terms
well, i didnt redefine anyhting, you did. You started defining sex as anything beyond male and female.
That means the burden of proof in that regard is on you.
The sources the other guy posted didnt state that there are any more than two genders.
Its aso funny that I ignore science when i specifically brought up the alterations in chromosomes that appear. If your strawman would be correct, why didnt i just ignore that bit?

And yes.a 5% (and thats a pretty high estamiate of numbers i might at) divergence IS an abnormality by any mathematical method of defining such a thing.
Do a grubbs test or whatever and tell me if its an outlier or not. Pretty sure it is.
Skimming through your source, a hormone plays a role in the development in gonads thats, as thy say, not an on and off switch.
The answer to that riddle is in the sentance, plays a part. the implication here is supposed to be that the involvement of chromosomes and some hormones creates a spectrum of gender. The relaity is that these parts are obviously working together to create a functioning human beeing of a defining gender and that some aberrations can cause things like Intersex people to exist.
which leads us to the next point:

On the definition of an error: thats a matter of debate.
For what we know, the purpose of life appears to be the propergation of information.
One such information packet is the DNA, the DNA appears to have the "intention" of propergating itself. Why? because the DNA appears to build a vessel for itself that propergates itself.

Why is a mutation an error? because if a mutation wasnt an error, there would not be mechanisms within the cell to repair errors in the DNA.

But ok. you could say error sin the DNA are part of the evolutionary process, which they absoluteley are, they are integral to it.
In that case, then im just refering to the use of the term "error" as it is used in "error prone PCR" which is used in accelerated evolution in microorganisms.
Which leads me back to my old post, theres no judgement here, just an observation.

A divergence.
For what we know, it could be that the next evolutionary step in the homo sapiens chan will have three genders. But currently, this doesnt appear to be the case in the vast majority of them and those deviations tend to have medical problems.

We could spin this discusison ad nauseum because what is "normal" and what is "fit for purpose" can only defined by human beeings, simmilary to what does and does not have "significance".
There are no natural metrics for such a thing beyond what does and doesnt propergate its own information.

But thats probably opening a can of worms you dont want to discuss do you now?


>Opression
that was my point.
What was that entire tangent you went on to. I made a point out of beeing a minority meaning nothing at all.
unless your definition of opression is not getting special treatment.


>Media and the rewandan genocide
exactly. Showing them as people.
You know what doesnt help anyone? Beeing annoying.
Why do you think some minorties are more accepted than others? Because they blend and because they are shown as "People".
while those that specifically try to stick out and rub their otherness into peoples faces will only be met with revulsion.

hate me for that statement, but thatd be just shooting the messanger.

>Go woke go broke
the evidence goes both ways if you ask me.
It certainly doenst seem to work with video games (see bioware)
With movies, it seems to be a matter of subject material.
The new star wars movies didnt do great (by their own budget that is), meanwhile the black panther movie did great.
One of them alienated an existing auidence, meanwhile the other catered to a new emerging audience.

i fail to see how this disproves anything ive said.
Or what youve assumed i was going to say.
For what its wroth, its been established in the 90s that Tokenism is insulting, so make of that what you want.

You should listen to your own advice. You can include thigns without beeing intentionally disruptie and people will accept it (unless it goes overboard)
o you can tryto be vocal about it and you will get rejected by your target demographic.
This is getting tiresome.
Ive had this debate already in 2013 and youll not yield. youll go on fighting strawmen and windmills all day long and in the end youll stand in front of a World, fineley constructed from carefull argumentation, that sadly doesnt look like the real world at all.

I think before we go too much further with this, I would like to remind everyone that these are not simply abstract topics we are debating but matters directly affecting the lives of real people, few of whom are attempting to make any point other than trying to get on with their lives in often difficult circumstances. For many of them, things like video games provide some escape from those RL pressures and one could make a case that using a games forum to debate their validity is in rather poor taste.

I will leave this open for now; we encourage discussion but I would ask that everyone please be considerate: what's a matter of opinion and debate for one person can be practically life or death for another.

making an argument is not insulting nor denying anyone validity.
i dont like beeing held hostage with this.
Ill not insult or deride anyone for any characteristic other than their own descisions, yet that doesnt mean i have to accept anything as fact because the opposit would be insulting to someone.

The reality is that the world isnt fair and some of us have it harder than others and this will always be the case.
Extending a helping hand is fine and good, but making demands in the name of unnumbered people that quite frankly cannot all be expected to show up and give ther opinion is not an answer to anything.

Reminds me when people complained that Turok was insulting to native americans.
because damn i too would be insulted if id be portrayed as a Dinosaur slaying futuristic weapons wielding, alien chick banging demigod...
EDIT: the point here is not that a positive portrayal as anyhting cannot be insulting or stereotypical, but that you cannot speak on behalf of a larger group of people and assume offense on their part.

Nobody is "holding you hostage"; it is indeed your decision whether or not you want to accept something but this conversation is at risk of becoming problematic. When it comes to characteristics that other people have no choice over then either be respectful or don't comment at all.

OMG
I don´t think anything useful can come out of this thread.

just 2 comments:
- I am almost surprized that nobody called computer RPGs sexist because you can only select male or female at character creation.
There were even some games were you could not select both of them for all races.

- Wow, nobody called these games racist even though you have races in them.
Well, biologically the term race could actually be true.
A species is defined as a group of lifeforms that can have fertile children together.
Races are different groups of one species that look different, like there are different races of dogs but all of them are still dogs.
In the DnD universe there are half elfs, half orcs, halflings ( whats a ling ) and so on. Just look at the bloodline selection for sorcerers and you can see that everyone has sex with everyone else.
So you could argue that there is only one species of intelligent creatures in the DnD univers and what we call races are indeed different races of this species.

So yeah, my mother was an elf, my grandfather a demon and one of my grand grand mothers was half celestrial and half dragon