No more comments about ‘genitalia’? With all respect, isn’t that really a core part of the problem being discussed here? From what I am reading, the designers spent much time making penis and vagina options for certain niche players to slap on body types of their choosing, and not so much on providing modern game breadth of options for body and head types.
Really, given the foregoing, it is actually any wonder the game promotes predatory sexual content over the vast wealth of actual medieval fantasy adventure game content that makes up the bulk of the work and art included in this game?
Since this is a suggestions topic, I humbly suggest that the developers consider providing more truly inclusive options for disabling various types of immersion-breaking sexual and sexual orientation ‘content’ that, apparently, overlays and, in my view (to which I am entitled), diminishes the core game design. I have no problem with alphabet soup players and sexual predators (separate, but not fully overlapping, sub-sets of the player base, mind you) enjoying this type of content, but why force it on those who prefer not to be subjected to the same in a D&D game?
Be truly inclusive. Provide appropriate choices for all. And, no, being forced to turn down unwanted and unwarranted homosexual advances (for example)—or for that matter, any unwarranted sexual advances—while playing an adventure game is NOT being inclusive, just the opposite.
As I said in another post, despite being a fan of both Larian and past Baldur’s Gate titles, I am unlikely to purchase and/or spend time playing this game in its current state. I spoke with a married gay couple who are dear friends of mine concerning the sexual and sexual orientation content of this game—and their reaction was ‘wtf?!?… how stupid!’
