yea, but you are starting to understand my point. the advances in tech goes across the line... as for the BG1 sprite, its hard to see what Its wearing, if id guess its some kind of loin cloth, ie just a strap of flapping cloth between front legs, rear could or couldent be entirly open, but lets leave that to the imagination, BG1 had its fair share of scantily dressed or near nude sprites... so what im trying to make everyone understand, Larian have no way tried to make anything more "cartoon porn" all they done is evolving and aplying grafics equally across the board...
Then we have the demon/devil/balroq sprite, wich looks entiry nude to me... but again, wich i said before, its hardto eactly tell, but imagine a balroq in all its nude glory with modern grafics ?... thats alot of pixel penis, just saying !
PS, i should add this, and stress, i dont value things one way or anouther, most of all as some also stated in this thread, If it makes sense alow it to be as it should, even if its disturbing, and in some cases it fits with lore and plot... That said, in one of the dream sequences with the devil, i realy liked the well dressed elegant evil, i think that is just as sexy as anything else, in some cases even more... im just against people trying to censor my DnD world, i want the evil and disturbing as i want the good and elegant...
I get what you're trying to say, but my point is that I do not agree with your point. Just because graphics advance, that is no excuse to suddenly portray things more explicitly.
Take the balor, since we have brought it into this. Did the balrog in LOTR have huge badongadongas? No. But he looked pretty dang real. Monsters like him don't need to be portrayed with genitals even if they are totally nude by nature. Chewbacca the Wookiee was technically naked too, right? Did we need to see his junk? No.
And you're making quite the leap with the succubus too. You're guessing what she's wearing and making assumptions. Maybe she IS wearing a thong, but maybe she isn't. Regardless, that makes no difference. Increase the graphics quality and she's still not naked. She at least has some clothing which makes a HUGE difference for some of BGs audience - myself included. I mean, I don't want to see scantily dressed pixel people period anyway, but I'll put up with them and push through the scene if I have to, but strip them totally naked, and that's a whole different matter.
BUT... Regardless of nudity, this statement is just not true: "Larian have no way tried to make anything more "cartoon porn" all they done is evolving and aplying grafics equally across the board...". The point some of us are trying to make here is that you are taking a big leap here. Increasing graphics in no way suddenly means Larian has to, by default, show characters having sex. It would have actually been easier if they had not depicted those sex scenes at all BECAUSE of the upgrade in graphics.
Back in the BG1 days, it would have been easier to depict people having sex because it was so pixely. Today, they are trying to make everything so realistic and close up that when it glitches even a little it's weird and creepy looking. Even animated kisses look weird.
So upgraded graphics does not suddenly equal "well, guess we gotta show Minthara going down on the MC. We have no choice. Updated graphics demand it.". It is definitely Larian trying to add explicit sex, cartoon porn, deliberately to the game to try to increase sales. It's has nothing to do with applying updated graphics across the board.
