Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Is BG3 too sexualized?

I find it hillarious how some people defend the game with "The companions are not too flirty or sex driven, also that they are too flirty and sex driven must be a bug"

This is an unnecessarily dismissive take on the discourse. Saying that others suck at making choices in a choice-driven RPG is something of a cop-out in terms of any argument. You say that anyone who has any complaints (many of them moderately reasoned in these threads) are bad at making choices, delusional in their perceptions, or hypocritical for doing things that they're not doing. I'm not playing a female. Many people on this forum are not playing characters to look at ass. Many people on this forum have had just a fine time making choices in other RPGs that did not lead to these experiences. Many people on this forum have not had these perceptions in other RPGs. This is a very unique problem and you do not want to address the discourse.

It is no argument to attack the minds and perceptions of others rather than making your case.

Have you added absolutely nothing to the discussion? Absolutely!

NEXT!

I've not seen anyone do this. Some people have reported non sequiturs in romance plots, such as Gale accusing a PC of two-timing when they're not in a relationship. That to me has nothing to do with how sexualised the game is, it just sounds to be a bug and the flags getting set incorrectly. Most of the specific examples I've seen are in this mould, and as I've not yet personally experienced the other sort of generally pestering behaviour that people are reporting, I'm not in a position to judge the game based on it.

In fact, at the moment I'd be for more flirty and sex driven companions, as no-one seems to want to sleep with my PC at all any more Withers has just been asking her why she's all alone.

Something in the system has to be bugged or poorly or vaguely implemented. For many, myself included, characters one is trying to romance will not give the time of day, even with completed quests and high approval and choosing the overtly flirtatious dialogue option, while other characters with lower approval, non-flirty dialogue options chosen are coming on like flies to a turd.

I guess it really is romantic alchemy, in that alchemy is entirely pseudoscientific nonsense as opposed to chemistry and doesn't make sense.

In early access, I didn't notice it at all, other than Astarion's flamboyant behavior. ( it was more off putting than anything so I wouldn't use him )

Since the full release, a big yes. Even if its not me and another character, it their comments to each other. Iike I said in another post, it just makes me feel Icky.

And BTW I dont play female characters to look at "Azz"

You make a good point, I've had the exact same conversation. It's very odd, because with Wyll and Gale I've had numerous attempts to start a romance, but Shadowheart and Karlach is completely nothing, and I have a feeling that Act 1 was the only starting point for those romances, which is awful, as those are the only two I was remotely interested in, but didn't really feel that romantic dialogue after killing a couple dozen goblins was appropriate.

On the other hand, the ladies casual clothing being straight out of a vampire night club pushes the balance towards sexualized.

I'll admit that the new casual camp outfits for Lae'zel and Shadowheart made me blink. Easy enough to swap so no biggie (it would be even easier if we could access all companions' inventories in camp), but it did seem a bit of an odd choice! If I'd been given a vote, I'd have opted for something a bit more practical and warm as a default, with the revealing outfits being available to find or buy later.

Not dismissive, but there is truth there. There are some players who don't know how to differentiate the dialogue from an innocent question to one that will lead you to a flirty position.

That's why I said 'Possible' because it is a possibility.

But my bet on this whole issue isn't that the game is too sexualized. But there must be a bug. That is the only explanation, a Logical one why YOU have the companions coming onto your characters and I (and others) aren't seeing it in the game.

Let me tell you how it is going in my game!

I only have 1 Quest to finish and then I'm heading to ACT 2. I spoke to everyone in the camp to advance their personal Stories. (and Quest).

I picked Shadow Heart to romance, and guess what? She told me 'When everyone is sleeping, I'll come for you'.

So far, it hasn't happened and I'm hoping once I'm done with that final Quest...it will trigger.

Meanwhile, Every companion is behaving normally. Nobody and I mean NOBODY (Not even the freaking Vampire) Tried to come on my Character.

The flag made every companion player sexual, which means your gender doesn't matter.

Is every companion trying to come on your dude character? They should do the same with mine.

And that's why I believe it must be a bug. Because it is not happening in my game.

Okay, this is a discussion I can respond to. The question is poorly worded. I think what people have a problem with is that the main way to engage or form relationships with our companions often involves opportunities which guide us to flirtatious or suggestive options that progress; however, one of the few ways to break that flirtatious interaction is to be overtly rude or mean. There's a scene with Astarion and a mirror where he asks what he looks like, and the options are:
1. Attractive facial feature (flirtatious compliment)
2. Attractive facial feature (flirtatious compliment)
3. Playful jab at facial feature (Ambiguous compliment)
4. I see someone who is wasting my time. (Go fuck yourself)

Or Gale and his Weave scene, where you either stare into his eyes in an intimate moment, or break it off entirely because you don't want to be close to him, where he then sadly remarks on how quickly things can be lost.

Then, because you're not roleplaying a callous asshole, suddenly the companions think you're interested. I've had Astarion try to start shit with me multiple times because I haven't told him to fuck off and die.

In DOS2, you can share a drink with Ifan without him thinking there's something going on between the two of you.

The most likely answer is bugs, but people are uncomfortable with the movement toward the suggestive. And that's not even mentioning a particular surprise romance that comes in the late game that I've heard about which is just... terminally horny. But since you are in Act 1, I'll refrain from elaborating.

"I'm only in Act 1, but I can promise you, you people in Act 3 are wrong, the game isn't like what you're saying"

*shakes head*

I've never played a female character in any crpg, and I'm a straight man.

I disagree with the wording, but hold to the sentiment.
The suddenness of it and how forced it comes on you, it doesn't work.
In the EA having all the companions go into heat because it's the end of EA party? sure it's to promise the real game will have BG2 style romances but with modern cinematic sex scenes, why not. But then the real game does the same, meaning no romance arc, it's just now is the time the game says sex happen, choose a companion or none? it's weird and the select sex option for free prize mentality leads to situations like the minthara thread not being about her lack of companion quests, but the creepiest 'we demand more sex scenes' culture, sure as anything to chase off large sections of the people playing the game from ever taking part in forum community. For all the promises, they are no romance systems or storylines in this game, not the way BG2 or any bioware games have had. No building relationship over time, no maintaining it, there is a binary choice at the party and then a different set of banter depending on that choice. Would saying the game is too sexual solve that? no it'd just censor it.

I do like that if at the party you turn your companions down they never bring it up again, this is a good move and one other games have missed.

I would like clarification on if Minthara is recruitable without choosing the bed her option as the fear of missing out on recruiting her is the only reason I did that. Sex and sexuality are good, but gate characters behind it is weird and the wiki/reddit seem to suggest you gotta.

Also the sex scenes are just sort of clunky and awkward, none of the DA:I hilarity with clipping and cheesiness. If you're going to put important exposition during sex scenes atleast make them fun to people who find porn dead boring

The other thing is tying nudity to the, old man's fantasy sexual aspects of the game. The censorship option is good, but two different would be better as nudity isn't sexual and there should be something between US puritanism and old mans fantasy.

I also slightly worry that it will gain a reputation as an adult/porn game that will mean, while the game would be an amazing intro to D&D and CRPG's for a new generation, it will be restricted to us oldies merely because the sexual stuff keeps getting articles and headlines, so will parents allow their teens/tweens to play it?

Anyway so I'm voting no, because this poll to me reads as the puritanical end

Also as people are apparently counting statistics, woman player here.

So it's a basically a yes, cause your post reads like a yes, but you voted no because you interpret the poll as puritan?

Allow me to add some reasons behind the contention that BG3 might be too sexualized:

1. The PC can engage in sexual relationships with any companion regardless of sex, which means the companions are all bisexual, which breaks immersion because it doesn't nearly reflect the reality of common sexual predisposition (the fictional setting doesn't change that). 1 in 5 non-straight options should be more than sufficient to be reflective of society.

2. The PC can engage in sexual relationships with any companion regardless of race, which is odd considering I don't see Shadowheart ever romancing a gith, or Lae'zel romancing anyone -but- a gith.

3. I realize we live in a culture where people already decide to smash or pass within the first 10 seconds of meeting anyone, but we don't tend to see the actual realization of that behaviour as dignified. Which means that if every companion comes across as someone who would have a profile on Grindr, it gets pretty hard to take those companions seriously and they're the companions you have to rely on to ... whatever the ultimate objective is in this game (I haven't gone passed Act 1 yet).

Don't think any of the above points are indicative of a puritan bias.

I'll add this to the OP for the sake of elaboration.

DMs!
Would love to know how all of this is handled in P&P D&D ?
Do you have a special deck of cards with all kinds of sexual positions to pick from?

Larian should of focused way more on FRIENDSHIPS than sexualized romances. But we all know which sells more and provides more views.

No. This is a fantasy setting. I don't care about "realism". Romance paths need to be better labelled, overworked in a definitive edition to offer more friendship paths and the bugs chased out of the attic. But, ultimately? No. I don't like this equivalence drawn between "sexualisation" and sexual harrassment -- these are are separate problems one may have with the game. Sexualise away. Don't give me bugged companions that whine too much.

Some people say it's poor wording, but I don't believe this is an accident. Your examples completely turn me off the poll. I neither have a problem with a lack of racism nor homophobia, let alone the knowledge that some people fuck.

The game right now feels like Larian took the RPGhorrorstories reddit as a guideline instead of a cautionary tale.

Its filled with sex pests.

Look I agree that the game is overly horny, but I think this is a tad hyperbolic man. The game at its core is still amazing; it’s just flawed.

I'm quite surprised by the complaints. I'm currently somewhere in act 3, the relationships to my companions are "very good" or "exceptionally good" and there is only one companion who regularely talkes about intimicy. The others seem to have become genuine friends.

Don't shatter the trojan horse around this dude's actual talking points. Do you want to know what comes out for sure? I don't. I think I'm going to log off before the Steam invasion