In the quotes I've provided, the names of authors who are mentioned in this and other articles have been replaced with the neutral "Author" so as not to violate forum rules or criticize personalities.
Author writes:
“I feel with the bad ending, it’s very much exactly that one sentence he says to you when you read his mind. “He will always see you as degrading yourself if you continue to be with him… but that’s perhaps what you like.” It’s ultimately reducing your relationship with him back to being a kink/form of gratification. Which is a fine thing to enjoy as a fantasy, but it’s very much admitting that you failed to think of him beyond a sex object, and care about more than that. You’re so attracted to him, you’d also turn yourself into one.
I think it’s perfectly nice to fantasise about that, hell, I wrote the incubus scene where you can essentially make an irreversible sex-pact, and I think that’s sexy. But it isn’t something that I think is a lesson for real life. And I wanted the bad ending to really make you feel ‘I failed to see this video game character beyond my own fantasies. The game was more real than I ever expected it to be.”
Surely many of you know this story. I'm not claiming that it has anything to do with the current sadistic content we have in the game today (I have no factual basis for such claims). But everything in this world has its origins and its backstory (at least that's how it works in the real world). So I would like to remember together with you and try to analyze that, the first "moral lesson" that they decided to teach us back then.
Author writes: “I feel with the bad ending, it’s very much exactly that one sentence he says to you when you read his mind. “He will always see you as degrading yourself if you continue to be with him… but that’s perhaps what you like.” It’s ultimately reducing your relationship with him back to being a kink/form of gratification.” And I also had no way of knowing, going through this scene for the first time, "Why?" Where do these rails come from? Why doesn't Tav have a single line, a single possible reaction to this reading of Astarion's thoughts? Knees - for sure.
No, I like this scene, after all, I conceptualized it as an act of caring and understanding, as an opportunity to elevate Astarion, to give him that pleasure of domination, as an opportunity to "give him everything" (because it wasn't such an easy step for me at first). But Tav can't in any way, shape or form make Astarion know that Tav doesn't "enjoy humiliating themselves," that Tav is only doing it for Astarion. It is impossible to open Astarion's consciousness, as in the second act, to show Astarion how Tav sees him, how beautiful he really is (not only outwardly), that Tav cannot humiliate themselves by staying with him, because he is the best for Tav in this world. In the second act - please, with other companions in various quests - please. Of the lines, only a meaningless, "No," which leads to either the same knees or the breakup of the romance. Ahh, I see, it's to reduce our relationship with him to a kinky one. And "it's very much admitting that you failed to think of him beyond a sex object, and care about more than that." What, how these plot rails can resemble that kind of admission, I'm not a screenwriter, I don't get it, if someone can explain it to me, I'd be sincerely grateful. What it does look a lot like, though, is the equally "railroaded" and poorly scripted (oh, I'm not criticizing anyone, this has long been a common opinion) dialogue scene after the Ascension.
It is in this scene that we are forced to sexually objectify Astarion, and in a rather ridiculous way - by the lack of an alternative. You say, "I want your body." Because all the other lines suck. Maybe some of the "evil" players were only helping Astarion to become a vampire themselves - they'll have an easier time in this scene than the rest of us (but you'll still only think of him as a sexual object, mind you!). A line for a "teacher" with the IQ of a first grader - okay, I give up, I'm a nymphomaniac, better that than this... We pick a "body", say out loud something different, our own, appropriate for the roleplay. We just skip this scene, realizing that yes, it's some weird "railroading" selection of lines, but that's okay, there's no perfection in the world, let's play on.
I'm very grateful to the author that at least their "incubus scene" isn't so ultimative, and that it's an "irreversible sex-pact" I can learn from someone else's video and just get an interesting fight with an unusual brash boss in my game. But the fact that this "entertainment" that objectively just ranks alongside Mizora, brothels and other passable sex content has something to do with a serious and deep romance with Astarion...
[video:youtube][/video]
And of course, the cherry on the cake is the beloved MAKE YOU, the magic grail of the cult of the unascended Astarion!
What can you make a player feel with a scenario of this quality? "I failed to see a good RPG in the third act. It's beyond my understanding of classic RPG games (after patch 6, I think all Ascended Astarion fans can say that). The game was much more railroaded, cardboard and... nasty than I ever expected a game of the year to be."
Well, and of course, "lessons for real life" for adults in an adult game. Which fit wonderfully and very realistically into the overall story and character of Astarion, without breaking the picture at all, so easily and effortlessly...
And on the topic of Astarion's sexual objectification - I can't help but think of one of the hardest videos for me (thanks to youtubers - game testers, I would never have been able to pull that off, purely psychologically, even for a "test") - the scene where Tav drags the unascended Astarion to the brothel with Halsin. I, a "sexual objectifier" and pervert, can't watch that without my fists clenched in anger and a lump in my throat. But it's normal. It's a "healthy relationship." The "teacher" won't give you a low behavior grade for playing like this, enjoy it.
And, of course, a few interesting logical riddles for the players - where the theme of sex is somehow traced during the ritual, why you can help Astarion without even having a romance with him, why you can refuse sex and agree only to become a spawn (the romance is preserved)? And of course, why, even if you leave Astarion a spawn, do you still get "rewarded" with sex? Yes, you won't have a nice cutscene, but in fact, the sex itself between Astarion and Tav will still happen. So the author means that we help Astarion ascended for the sake of watching a cutscene (which is also constantly being cut https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=920385&nt=5&page=1)? The riddle of the sphinx. It's almost impossible to understand for the average player who is not versed in the intricacies of screenwriting.
By the way, does this remind you of anyone, by any chance?
«Adventure through virtual worlds alongside a delusional gamer, an actual emo vampire (who really wishes he wasn’t an emo vampire), a poet from outer space, and a dashing princess in shining armor, among others!»
«Date the Ultimate Video Game Fanservice Vampire»
I don't want to imply anything, I think you can draw your own conclusions.
In the description of the endings, the Author writes:
“But only in the true ending of the game did the player, through being the first person to treat Len like a real person, and not an oversexualised video game sex object, make him realise humanity can be better than he’s ever seen it be, and video games can be a meaningful way to figure things out about yourself.”
Let's take a look at a few more articles published on gaming portals, in which Larian authors reveal to us their vision of romance in the game.
"Author: What is new to us is that we have situations set up as ‘Oh, Shadowheart has gone down a dark path, and now has a really toxic attitude towards intimacy. I actively want to break up with her. And that break up feels good. That break up feels like cathartic character development, rather than a failure.’ Key to showing intimacy is also showing its human failures."
I don't know about Shadowheart, that's for her fans to decide, I'm interested in the trend itself: a "really toxic attitude towards intimacy", and you're supposed to actively want to break up, and... Experience it as "cathartic character development, rather than a failure"! Hmmm... None of us felt Astarion's "toxic attitude", wanted to break up, and...
No, guys, this is a failure. I'm sorry. And the fact that we have to trash the game we gave so many hours of our lives to is not good. I'm not even talking about how "good" it is for the people traumatized by your game.
Ibid:
"Like in previous Larian games, your love interests can be romanced regardless of player identity. Was there a reason for that, and do you feel this freedom helps draw more people to Baldur’s Gate 3’s characters?
Author: The answer is basically embedded in the question – freedom. If in doubt, we default to whatever respects the player’s sense of freedom, agency, sense of roleplay, and fun. We wanted players to be able to engage with these characters, and bond with them how they see fit."
Where is this freedom? Maybe I should buy glasses, I can't see straight? How does this fit with one of Larian's authors' statements about "lessons", with on-rails dialog, and how does it fit with what we're seeing in the game now?
"Author: I hope our game offers others that same feeling for our players of being seen and loved for exactly who they are."
Loved us. Thank you. Just the way we are. Happy Valentine's Day, friends!
"Author: I was hired to be a narrative designer in part because I was writing BG fanfiction when Early Access came out."
“People sometimes say, ‘Oh this game is really horny, because you can start a relationship with the characters straight away. Or you can even spend the night with them straightaway,’” Author says, “We were interested in exploring what it looks like if you can start a relationship with a character toward the beginning of the game, and then see it progress and evolve. We’re asking, how can I stay with this person as they grow and things become different between the two of us?”
The author seems to be quite interested in the topic of relationship breakup in the game ("how can I stay with this person"). Perhaps for someone else it can be an interesting game experience too. If it happens without the use of violence and "authorial arbitrariness". After all, when people play with immersion in the game world, when they give themselves to it emotionally, why should this world collapse?
“Author says it was a challenging decision to show Astarion in early access as a character who is “very light-hearted, very attractive, very playful” for two years, only to reveal when the full game came out that he had a history of sexual trauma and needed to take a step back from having sex with the player. “That was definitely an example of, we’re trying to go closer to the bone and hopefully meaningfully explore something that is quite close to a lot of people’s real-world experiences.”
It doesn't fit with the trauma story and "take a step back from having sex with the player". That's probably where Astarion's changed facial expression when he proposes sex in the first act (suffering face) comes from. Read more about Astarion's altered facial expression: https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=934229#Post934229
“People often write fanfiction that is deeply about conflict, about angst, about actual challenges that are being overcome in a relationship,” Author says. “There are quite a lot of really heartbreaking break-up scenes that happen in Baldur’s Gate 3. That’s the thing that people don’t necessarily consider being an important part of romance.”
"Breaking up is part of romance" sounds about as beautiful as "death is part of life". In terms of philosophy and kitchen talk - curious, certainly. But in fact, the ending, the devastating finale is exactly that, an ending, how can something after which that story doesn't exist be "part of the story"? I'm among those players who don't want a ruined story in the middle of the game. I wonder how many people who play RPGs in general see breakups as an important part of romance?
After patch 6, the need to part with the game, unfortunately, became virtually inevitable. I tried to conduct an experiment on myself and overcome my injuries on the principle "what does not kill, makes stronger", and at the same time put myself in the place of a player who had not managed to pass the game to the end by this point. Three days with a "changed Astarion" closer to the finale, not submitting to the author's idea of breakups and continuing to kiss him just like I did normally. The only difference from Andersen's Little Mermaid, where every step is a pain, was that this mermaid could get a little revenge on everyone around her, and BG3's battle system is the one thing I still continued to like. The internal emotional barriers that previously prevented you from gratuitously doing evil and mayhem in the game world (the world seemed alive at first) melted away, and the only thing that gave any pleasure in the story was the finale with the control of the Elder Brain. The depressed state and trouble sleeping in reality are minor side effects of the experiment. The human psyche perceives such a game as real stress. The game purposely harms your health. Do not repeat it at home. To obey the "author's idea" and break off relations with Astarion after Ascension I did not - such an experiment implies too long period of depressive game. I don't get paid for this. And even if I were, I would probably prefer to earn my living in some other, more pleasant way.
“It used to be set up so that the only way that romances could begin was this one night in the party, where you could only pick one character,” Author says, “And then basically, that character would end up being your love interest for the whole rest of the game.”
This locked fans into dating the same character simply due to a few choices made toward the start of the game. As a fan before coming to work at Larian, though, Author wished players could experience love triangles and multiple partners.
So Larian tweaked the system to let players romance some characters at the party while wooing others out in the world. It also adds drama, like characters gossiping about your romances behind your back.”
This is where I got a monogamous pervert's tear... It could have been in the game that instead of all this "joy", there would have been good romances with one companion! And those romances would have been better, because resources would have been spent on deepening your personal story, rather than this realization of "unusual creative intent". And yes, there are no lines for loyal Tavs at all. Not for the companions, nor for Astarion himself. But this slight lack of realism, epitomized by the inability to announce their relationship in the first/second chapters, the inability to adequately announce it to harassers like Halsin and Mizora, this slight disregard for an audience of perverts who sexually objectify their only lover and can't imagine their Tav sleeping with two men at the same time or in parallel, is basically nothing. Until the neglect turns into concrete violence against those who are so amoral that they won't play along with the advanced views of romance held by the lead designer for the companion character and romance quests.
“That extends even to one of the strangest corners of Baldur’s Gate 3 fandom — sex speedruns. The term refers to speedruns where players compete to see who can reach a sex scene fastest, typically with Lae’zel, the game’s most up-for-it companion.
“They're deconstructing the idea of the way romance is presented in the game by abstracting it into something ridiculous,” Author says. “I welcome that. It makes those scenes seem even more ridiculous and that’s just grand to me.”
Abstracting it into something ridiculous. It is. I can't argue with that. Wise teacher, cura te ipsum.
"With how much care Author and Author put into making BG3’s characters feel like real people, it might seem strange that they’re so happy to see players strip the nuance from them in that way. But as they see it, that just means they’ve done a good job of making characters that players feel connected to."
“They're not our characters anymore,” Author says. “They belong to the players. So we're thrilled to see what they do with them. We’re proud of you.”
Oh, I'm sorry, you meant sexy speedrunners.
"The character shows the value of violence and the dark side of humanity, as well as his extraordinary charm and appeal. This balance is extremely important, as a shift to one side or the other would have made Astarion extremely unattractive or too one-dimensional and empty a character. "
And these words belong to a real writer already - Stephen Rooney. His full interview:
Also in this interview, Stephen says that he wants both avenues to be explored and also states that fans should be happy with the ending. Stephen says that he doesn't do any ending to alienate fans because that's just bad for fans. It turns out that the ending of Ascension, which is being changed for Astarion now, is not what the true author originally intended.
The very process of Tav turning into a vampire was pitched and animated as a "bride ritual".
Astarion bites Tav three times and then gives her a drop of his blood. Blood is not needed to turn a spawn, all the vampire has to do is bury the future spawn (they will then have to dig themselves up). Tav also does not experience the torment of conversion that Astarion once experienced, which is completely consistent with the bride's ritual. The bride is not controlled by her creator, and Astarion never once in the entire game attempts to control Tav, whatever Tav does in doing so. That said, the vampire and his bride have a special telepathic connection, they can sense each other's emotions. The bride can also influence her lover. One can notice how Tav somewhat "softens" Astarion, for example, in the epilogue, after Tav's offer to travel together and see the world, Astarion forgets his global takeover plans for Baldur and happily agrees, wanting to "have all the pleasures" that this world has to offer. This was a truly wonderful, perfectly fitting interpretation of the Ascended Astarion romance that fit the story perfectly. Please bring back its depth, beauty, and tenderness to our romance!
I don't know if there's any point in reaching out to the writing team - the previous team is working on a new "about space" project and has nothing to do with Baldur's world turning into hell for Astarion fans. But maybe someone in the marketing department reads Suggestions and Feedback?
Dear Larian marketers! The audience of Ascended Astarion is quite a large number of people. A rough estimate is 30% of those who have an affair with Astarion, there are about 10 million people playing BG3, how many of them have an affair with Astarion - you probably have all these numbers. These are the people who have already paid money for the game, these are your future customers, or these are the people who will never buy your studio's games again. It's up to you to decide. A writer who inflicts sadistic "punishments" on players for "unlearned moral lessons," fights "sexual objectification of character" while agitating for promiscuous sexual activity is not a writer, it's an activist. An activist who uses the game to promote his ideas to the detriment of the players. The author's motives are contrary to the commercial business model of a digital product such as an RPG game. Larian now has the most toxic gaming community in the entire gaming industry (if not in the entire history of the gaming industry). Does this really benefit the company? Perhaps an activist writer could work fine on other romance lines that fit their views. But Astarion's romance line definitely needs another person. Your fans deserve human treatment, not "moral lessons", trauma and bullying.
Last edited by Marielle; 09/03/2404:08 PM.
Aeterna Amantes. Lovers forever, until the world falls down.
It is in this scene that we are forced to sexually objectify Astarion, and in a rather ridiculous way - by the lack of an alternative. You say, "I want your body." Because all the other lines suck. Maybe some of the "evil" players were only helping Astarion to become a vampire themselves - they'll have an easier time in this scene than the rest of us (but you'll still only think of him as a sexual object, mind you!). A line for a "teacher" with the IQ of a first grader - okay, I give up, I'm a nymphomaniac, better that than this... We pick a "body", say out loud something different, our own, appropriate for the roleplay. We just skip this scene, realizing that yes, it's some weird "railroading" selection of lines, but that's okay, there's no perfection in the world, let's play on.
100 % agree. Weird answers. This is the worst writing (answers) I've seen in the game and it breaks and broke the roleplay experience. The answers (2 answers Tav being a selfish asshole - and 2 answers being an asshole) force you to let your Tav (neutral/good) behave extremely OOC. There is no positive answer for neutral/good. It seems the writer of these weird answers had either a huge lack of the Romance story or wanted to dictate your Tav beeing a selfish asshole. These OOC answers (especially "I want your body" <-- just read again, "I want your body" and this after act 2 confession scene. I am speechless for this nonsense as someone with complex emotions) are absolutely not worth this great game. As I just wrote in another Thread: An RPG writer should not impose his/her/their own lack of understanding of the story/romance or impose their own opinion/view/feeling like a dictation on the players. Otherwise, it's not enjoyment for the players, only the writer may had their fun.
And as you mentioned, it was already suggested in this Forum, and it is so easy to just change one single answer of Tav to a better one, which is far more in character for (I assume) everyone playing this romance. Still, nothing has happened so far.
Originally Posted by marielle
"The character shows the value of violence and the dark side of humanity, as well as his extraordinary charm and appeal. This balance is extremely important, as a shift to one side or the other would have made Astarion extremely unattractive or too one-dimensional and empty a character. " And these words belong to a real writer already
THIS is how a good RPG writer should think and write to make a game enjoyable for players. Thank you for that quote. The illogical and OOC abuse in the AA kisses are 100 % against this statement and rule for writing good RPGs.
These interviews are really remarkable. I'll keep my thoughts to myself now.
Last edited by Zayir; 09/03/2411:27 PM.
“I would, thank God, watch the universe perish without shedding a tear.”
This isn't okay. What is supposed to be the feedback for the game here? This is just dogpiling on a specific writer, name change or no (which is virtually useless given you're linking their interviews). There already are threads (several of them, in some cases) for the concerns regarding different details about Astarion's romance. You've linked them too. There is no need to make a separate one with the sole purpose of targeting someone.
It's also worth noting that as far as we know, they're responsible for any nods to the "bride ritual", and the AA lines everyone loves, like the references to David Bowie or the Durge line about "sitting naked on his lap" or, well, "Aeterna Amantes". That wasn't Rooney. Who, by the way, also went on to mention a couple times the "author" you're referring to by name to say that they've written major chunks of the Astarion romance. Rooney has done nothing but reaffirm that Astarion is a collaborative effort.
I support it. It always has been and always will be a scandal. And now something unthinkable is happening to narrative and story.
Kisses with a disgruntled, frightened face, only ones in this game, (Druid Bear and Illithid were neutral satisfied faces there, eh?) the player press, in the 6 fanservice patch for February 14. Love Romance Role Play with a dangerous, decadent vampire Astarion.
Here is the psychology of people who choose Ascension. Yes, it was damage, it wasn't before, no one denied the "you're mine"-big Astarion laugh, there was no damage. Most Damage from Tav-victim-face during the kiss, not what Astarion does. Damage from the situation that the one who put it into production and decided Tav-victim was a good idea. Other reasons have to do with the poor disclosure of this quirks in Romance (Ascended Astarion is himself, canonically confirmed) and people's personal reasons, it's already about respectful fanservice. On release, there was a choice of gentler-harder. Now there isn't.
Here are my suggestions and thoughts on how to correct this crazy mess.
Abusive controlling kissing without consent is not possible: - the player presses - Tav with a tadpole comes near - Tav can break up and kill Astarion The rest of my critique of senseless Tav-Victim Narrative Line in another post.
Hi folks, linking articles to interviews given by Larian writers is valid and potentially of interest to folk here whether or not they share the OP’s take. There is no need to hide who has said something when it’s in the public domain, and it’s the content of what is said about them that is relevant.
And on that front, a lot of the discussion here does replicate what has already been said in other threads, and does in some cases skirt uncomfortably close to attacking the writer.
I know that a number of people feel very strongly about the AA romance path and you are perfectly at liberty to express that, as long as it’s within forum rules. But as I’ve said in other threads about other topics as well, please recognise when you have made your view clear and let’s not let the discussion descend into spamming the forum with the same perspectives from the same posters.
And I hope we can all recognise that however passionately we might feel one thing about events in the game, or what Larian writers have said, there will also be fans and forum members who take a different view and that we should respect that. That does include trying to keep calm and constructive, and recognising that our takes aren’t the only possible or acceptable ones.
I’m going to leave this thread for now despite the duplication, for discussion specifically about the linked interview, but will reconsider if it does turn into a rehash of other threads which already retread much of the same ground, or descends into attacking Larian writers (who are also entitled to their views, even if we disagree with them).
Hope that makes sense!
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
It's important to note though that the discord messages from the first article (and thus, a major part of this thread) are leaked and from a semi-private conversation, I guess it's in the public domain now by virtue of a news website reposting them, but it wasn't meant to be public and is not an interview given by Larian or a thought-out statement.
It's important to note though that the discord messages from the first article (and thus, a major part of this thread) are leaked and from a semi-private conversation, I guess it's in the public domain now by virtue of a news website reposting them, but it wasn't meant to be public and is not an interview given by Larian or a thought-out statement.
Ah, okay I hadn’t appreciated that context. Thank you for that clarification.
In that case, I’d ask people to take extra care when debating this as it seems really unfair to attack someone for something they never meant to be public.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
Hi folks, linking articles to interviews given by Larian writers is valid and potentially of interest to folk here whether or not they share the OP’s take. There is no need to hide who has said something when it’s in the public domain (...)
I’m going to leave this thread for now (...) Hope that makes sense!
Thank you, The Red Queen. I am sure the OP is grateful for this and appreciates it.
Last edited by Zayir; 09/03/2405:25 PM.
“I would, thank God, watch the universe perish without shedding a tear.”
And I hope we can all recognise that however passionately we might feel one thing about events in the game, or what Larian writers have said, there will also be fans and forum members who take a different view and that we should respect that. That does include trying to keep calm and constructive, and recognising that our takes aren’t the only possible or acceptable ones.
Of course. That's what I'd most like to see - mutual respect, constructiveness, and all options having their right to exist. Freedom. Roleplaying freedom, freedom of choice - this is something that has always been the most important part of roleplaying. Freedom for players to make decisions and not be judged for it. I would love for our gaming community to be built on mutual respect and acceptance.
Originally Posted by The Red Queen
I’m going to leave this thread for now despite the duplication, for discussion specifically about the linked interview, but will reconsider if it does turn into a rehash of other threads which already retread much of the same ground, or descends into attacking Larian writers (who are also entitled to their views, even if we disagree with them).
Hope that makes sense!
I sincerely thank you for your understanding! I completely agree with you, I will make every effort to avoid self-repetition, and of course I wholeheartedly condemn any attacks on people with any views. It pains me to read about people who make the same choices in the game as I do being actually attacked and bullied on the internet for doing so. I believe everyone has the right to choose and express any opinion they want without being judged for it. Thank you!
Aeterna Amantes. Lovers forever, until the world falls down.
Just posting here to say how much I agree with you in everything you've said, I can't find a single line or word I don't agree with and I've read your whole post, it's exactly the same way I feel but I think you already knew that as many others here.
I tried picking up the game again but I couldn't get through it, so that's it for me, my all time favorite game is forever lost to me if they won't undo those changes and tbh I don't think they care enough to do. I said a while back that I was afraid that the success and all their awards were getting to their heads and I'm beginning to think I'm right, all they seem to be posting/bragging about lately is about nominations and how much success they now have, they never did that before. They won't care about their fans to change it back, the latest patch confirmed that for me, doing that to Minthara as well proves that they will ruin more and more in this game. On Facebook gaming media sites are even talking about not recognising this game anymore and how it will end up becoming a completely different game in a few months.
I must say, it is truly impressive how Larian is currently recruiting for multiple job openings, yet, upon visiting the official Larian Forums the first thing you see are individuals harassing Larian employees.
Surely many of you know this story. I'm not claiming that it has anything to do with the current sadistic content we have in the game today (I have no factual basis for such claims). But everything in this world has its origins and its backstory (at least that's how it works in the real world). So I would like to remember together with you and try to analyze that, the first "moral lesson" that they decided to teach us back then.
Statement: “I feel with the bad ending, it’s very much exactly that one sentence he says to you when you read his mind. >He will always see you as degrading yourself if you continue to be with him… but that’s perhaps what you like.< It’s ultimately reducing your relationship with him back to being a kink/form of gratification. Which is a fine thing to enjoy as a fantasy, but it’s very much admitting that you failed to think of him beyond a sex object, and care about more than that. You’re so attracted to him, you’d also turn yourself into one."
It is perplexing that this statement (if this statement was said by someone or not) exactly mirrors the answers in the romance scene:
1) I want to be a vampire like you (very selfish) 2) I want your body (very selfish+seeing Astarion as a sex object) 4) I am not your pet (negative answer)
Egoism is forced upon the player here, which they most likely never experienced during their playthrough as a neutral or good Tav. The game, despite supposed choices, forces you and your Tav to be very selfish and try to force the player to see Astarion as a sex object, as Marielle mentioned, the other positiv answer is even weirder for a good Tav. Really, no empathetic person and good Tav feels that way. Therefore, this statement above is very insulting and presumptuous to me.
As an empathetic and RPG enthusiastic person, I cannot agree with this strange, shallow and very crude statement (about role-playing players!). The statement that Astarion would only be seen as a sex object by the players leads me to conclude that the thinking here was not empathetic or from the point of view of many players, but rather from a very egoistic, rather unempathetic point of view.
The question is, why does a good or neutral Tav help Astarion with the ritual? Out of selfishness? Hardly likely! In my playthrough, Astarion begged my Tav to help him. It was heartbreaking. My Tav, an empathetic boy who loves Astarion with all his heart, couldn't help but help his lover who begged him twice to help him. Very emotional scene. There was nothing, nothing at all selfish about it. On the contrary. It was and is unconditional love. And that has nothing to do with selfishness or seeing something as a sex object.
Unconditional love can lead to devotion and even self-sacrifice. When we love someone unconditionally, we want to do everything we can to make that person happy, but of course only to the extent that we can bear it ourselves! Naturally. (And there was no abuse, mistreat or similar before patch 6) Unconditional love is without demands and restrictions. It is a deep love that you give freely (!), regardless of what the other person does for you in return. (And Astarion gives you something in return, he gives you love, wealth, power, pleasure and protection)
So when Tav kneels for Astarion, it shows unconditional love and not just a kink, although unconditional love and having a kink are not mutually exclusive, at least if you are empathetic! Narcissists and egoists, for example, may see it differently because they don't feel true love, only self-love and they may not be capable of feeling complex emotions. But for most people, love, sex and passion are inseparable. The statement “He will always see you as degrading yourself if you continue to be with him… but that’s perhaps what you like.” (in fact the original is: But perhaps you wish to degrade yourself and he knows it"<-- there is no "like", there is "wish" and "he knows it") in no way reduces the relationship with Astarion to a kink. Rather the opposite, this shows unconditional love AND empathy for your partner. Tav wants Astarion to be happy, safe, strong, and loved by Tav. Since Act 1, Astarion has a kink for dominating, humiliating (lower beings) and inflicting pain on other individuals, but also in a consensual manner (e.g. priest of loviatar). Tav supports Astarion in living out his little fetishes. Once again, unconditional love. I see absolutely no egoism here, neither from Tav nor from any regular and empathetic player.
"But it is very much an admission that you saw him as nothing more than a sex object and that you care about more than that" This is the height of presumption! Reducing people who choose this route does not show much empathy or knowledge of human nature. A scandal, you might say, if it's true that this is a quote from somewhere working for the studio. I submit that rather someone else has failed to recognize what love and complex emotions are and that the majority of women (also asexual ones) in this route love Astarion's character with their hearts and want to enjoy a fantasy roleplay game with its complex and beautiful stories. If a person made this quote , that person than seems to me to be more or less the only one who sees Astarion as a sex object or wants the player to see Astarion as a sex object compared to players who are playing and feeling this route and RPG.
What's remarkable is that exactly this statement: " (...) you failed to think of him beyond a sex object. You're so attracted to him, you'd also turn yourself into one." now, thanks to the scandalous "Valentine's Day Patch 6 kisses" is being forced on players in a very negative way, very suddenly, illogically and without any connection to the story and the romance (except for the forced “I want your body”). (I am talking about Tav being portrayed in these kisses now as an abused sex object, not Astarion's kink for domination and humiliation). So as if that highly problematic, self-centered statement was now read and somewhere something was saying: Okay, guys, we're going to make Tav Astarion's sex object! Nobody wanted to see Astarion as a sex object, everyone claims they love astarion, too many players are enjoying this route (/game!). No, noone can and noone should love Astarion or play this route! He should only be viewed and seen as a sex object and Tav should be seen selfish and now Tav will be turned into an unhappy sex slave (evil laugher in the background). I find this whole statement, you quoted, extremely strange and highly problematic, very narcissistic and callous. (<--This is my opinion) The fact that this false and presumptuous statement is now apparently being implemented into reality in the game, the player is portrayed OOC as a sex object/slave - unbelievable, what can you say about that. Almost everyone (all I have talked to!) playing this route and loving this character feels really, really mistreated.
Last edited by Zayir; 10/03/2403:49 PM.
“I would, thank God, watch the universe perish without shedding a tear.”
I must say, it is truly impressive how Larian is currently recruiting for multiple job openings, yet, upon visiting the official Larian Forums the first thing you see are individuals harassing Larian employees.
Could you please refrain from coming into an Ascended Astarion thread and subtly spreading rumors that Larian employees are being harassed? You're portraying people in a very bad light. We're also not going to jump into your threads and say something like that. Everyone is allowed to express their opinions and feelings and the moderator will step in if something is not okay. The Moderator has allowed Marielle's Thread.
“I would, thank God, watch the universe perish without shedding a tear.”
This is the worst writing (answers) I've seen in the game and it breaks and broke the roleplay experience. The answers (2 answers Tav being a selfish asshole - and 2 answers being an asshole) force you to let your Tav (neutral/good) behave extremely OOC. There is no positive answer for neutral/good. It seems the writer of these weird answers had either a huge lack of the Romance story or wanted to dictate your Tav beeing a selfish asshole.
Any player I've discussed this scene with is sure to point this out. Anyone. There isn't a person who likes it. It's very easy to fix this by giving an extra line to the player, and one or two extra lines for Astarion. But... Perhaps, knowing Astarion, it's safe to assume that he should have a particular reaction to this line. A reaction that in no way fits into the "bad Astarion, ew, you can't, don't ascend him, don't you dare, you should want a free relationship like you're told" model. And if you don't want a "free relationship" then you can only be... You've already described exactly who. And yes, another cue for Tav will prevent the "wrong person" from being shown in the way necessary for the purposes of promoting the only correct behavior and choices.
Originally Posted by Zayir
THIS is how a good RPG writer should think and write to make a game enjoyable for players. Thank you for that quote. The illogical and OOC abuse in the AA kisses are 100 % against this statement and rule for writing good RPGs.
Role-playing involves the chance to play a role and realistic reactions from the world to the player's behavior in it. People are different. Ideology (any ideology) tries to lead everyone to one single "right" option (or to some spectrum of "allowed" options). Those who are unwilling to follow the precepts must be broken, "fixed" and shown to be an example to the rest of us. A good RPG = freedom of choice. Freedom of choice is the main enemy of any ideology. At this point in the game, ideology beats RPGs by a resounding score.
Originally Posted by Gunsumber
I tried picking up the game again but I couldn't get through it, so that's it for me, my all time favorite game is forever lost to me if they won't undo those changes and tbh I don't think they care enough to do. I said a while back that I was afraid that the success and all their awards were getting to their heads and I'm beginning to think I'm right, all they seem to be posting/bragging about lately is about nominations and how much success they now have, they never did that before. They won't care about their fans to change it back, the latest patch confirmed that for me, doing that to Minthara as well proves that they will ruin more and more in this game. On Facebook gaming media sites are even talking about not recognising this game anymore and how it will end up becoming a completely different game in a few months.
Picking up the game now is just damaging your own psyche. I did it "out of spite" as an experiment, knew exactly what to expect, but ended up having to buy anti-depressants anyway, just to get out of this state faster and be able to deal with real things in real life. The game is forever lost for many, and not only is this very unfair, but it violates our rights as consumers. That's why I'm trying to appeal at least to those responsible for the commercial success of the project. In the past, I would never have called this magical world a "project". But I don't see anyone showing any consideration for the feelings of the players or for the destruction of the game's story. I just wish that this beautiful game world wasn't permanently mutilated, and that they fix what they did with patch 6. Today - Astarion, tomorrow - Mintara, the day after tomorrow... Either the ideology will destroy the RPG, leaving only its adherents in the game, or the players will somehow manage to influence the course of events and unlock its suffocating grip on the throat of his favorite character (this, of course, is just a faint hope, but it is better to try to do something than to do nothing at all).
Originally Posted by ahania
I must say, it is truly impressive how Larian is currently recruiting for multiple job openings, yet, upon visiting the official Larian Forums the first thing you see are individuals harassing Larian employees.
I'm not harassing anyone. I'm just trying to find out the motives (every action has motives) and that's important. It's important for us, the players, if only to understand what to expect from this game. I just collected a few articles from gaming magazines to better familiarize myself with the author's vision.
Aeterna Amantes. Lovers forever, until the world falls down.
It was an really interesting read, I understand more of your conserns now regarding the writing of Astarion and the future of his story in the game. Thank you for taking the time to post it.
I was about to get into a whole thing arguing that you're wrong about the relationship between ideology and freedom of choice in an RPG, and that's still my opinion but I realized that it would not have been worth it to really get into the muck of that argument. What I will say though is that I don't believe that BG3 was ever a game about playing a role and getting realiztic reactions from the world. I think that Larian's goal with this game was to let the player do all kinds of stuff and see reactions to it, but that actually playing a role, playing a character within the game was never something that mattered to them. The player can do all sorts of things. The player can still ascend astarion. And then they see an outcome of that. But Tav isn't a character, Tav is a vessel for the player to do things and affect the world through. I don't believe that Larian ever really considered Tavs being characters that have agency. We the PLAYER have agency, we can make any choice we like. We have the freedom to do that. And we do that via the shallow puppet that is Tav. When Astarion ascends, to Larian it's not because Tav loved Astarion so much they do this monstrous thing, or because he hungered for power, Tav doesn't have complex motivation. If Astarion gets ascended in anybody's game, it's because the player wanted to see what happens, that I believe is Larian's view. I think that comes through a lot in the way the various devs talk about the game. They talk about it like a sandbox full of stuff that happens. The companions have agency and depth and internal lives, and the game is about seeing those things. Or not seeing them and seeing something else.
Gray Ghost, you have an interesting point of view, and in many ways it does correspond to what we see in the game. If you think about it, in a good RPG, Tav is also an empty dummy and puppet. Initially. But we, the players, fill them up, through our choice of lines and actions. When the world reacts to this - the dummy comes to life. If the game doesn't give players the opportunity to roleplay, then it would be much better to create a character with his own character in advance (like Geralt in The Witcher), give the player the opportunity to play only for him and make some choices in the story - where to go, whose side to take, etc., but all within the framework of the already defined character. Then the story would make sense. Otherwise, it's nonsense. Tavs without complex motivation, who just "poke" at everything in the "sandbox", just to see what happens... I associate it with a goat game ("Goat Simulator"), when you run around as a goat, interact "for fun" with the environment, and see what happens (sorry if this comparison is too crude). Sometimes you get absurd interactions, like you think a crane is going to lift the goat, but instead it tosses it up and the goat flies far away. So the goat-Tav helps Astarion, thinks there will be love, but Astarion instead... And Tav flies far away too. Or rather, not Tav, but the players themselves are flying far away from this game. The difference is that it's funny with the goat, but not so much with the "game of the year" in the RPG genre.
I don't see any contradiction in my point of view (imposing "morality" and some ideology in the game) and yours, they can perfectly combine with each other, and, in general, perfectly combine. A dummy without free will pokes the wrong place where a "good dummy" should poke and gets a "moral lesson" about where a dummy should not go. Poke somewhere else, dummy, see if there is a cookie there.
Aeterna Amantes. Lovers forever, until the world falls down.
I think your comparison to goat simulator is a good one to illustrate what I'm saying. I love a good rpg with a blank slate. My go-to example is Pillars of Eternity. You start as a blank slate there, but in those games the Watcher can be a dynamic character within the plot if you put some effort in and meet the game where it's at. I've made multiple characters in those games and given them personal character arcs that span both games. But in BG3 Tav never really gets to be dynamic, even if youput the effort in.
As for where our points of view diverge, I think it's down to your reaction to the supposed ideology in the game. The way I see it, some degree of ideology is inevitable in a story, because stories follow an internal logic set down by the writer. I don't see it as the game punishing us for not adhering to morality. To me the writer simply presented a story with a number of branches and each branch leads somewhere. I don't think, even based on the info you quoted, that the writer wanted us to necessarily not go the ascended romance route. It's just that to him the writer, he envisioned an outcome for that route and seeing that is a valid way to play the game. Do I think what he said was presumptuous of how players would think and behave? Yeah, I'd say so. But he's a human limited by his personal scope. He clearly never imagined that players would see ascending Astarion as a righteous act of genuine love. I don't know that I would have either. And if he was coming at the story from the perspective of Tav not being a factor as a character and this story unfolding specifically for the benefit of the player watching, with Astarion as the main character and the focus, then I think it makes sense why he'd produce this final result. If this were always the outcome from the beginning, I'd say that it's perfectly logical. Astarion's story is about abuse, perpetuating it or stopping it. He's shown to have a lot of negative instincts and selfish drives, so of course if you feed those instincts you're going to get a character who's selfish and abusive. That seems like entirely the way this story would naturally unfold to me.It's not punishment, it's cause and effect. To me a more egregious example of them trying to present some kind of morality or object lesson is if you give the githyanki egg to the society of brilliance. Apparently it hatches and the baby githyanki wants and is able to kill them all. Just because.
I was about to get into a whole thing arguing that you're wrong about the relationship between ideology and freedom of choice in an RPG, and that's still my opinion but I realized that it would not have been worth it to really get into the muck of that argument. What I will say though is that I don't believe that BG3 was ever a game about playing a role and getting realiztic reactions from the world. I think that Larian's goal with this game was to let the player do all kinds of stuff and see reactions to it, but that actually playing a role, playing a character within the game was never something that mattered to them. The player can do all sorts of things. The player can still ascend astarion. And then they see an outcome of that. But Tav isn't a character, Tav is a vessel for the player to do things and affect the world through. I don't believe that Larian ever really considered Tavs being characters that have agency. We the PLAYER have agency, we can make any choice we like. We have the freedom to do that. And we do that via the shallow puppet that is Tav. When Astarion ascends, to Larian it's not because Tav loved Astarion so much they do this monstrous thing, or because he hungered for power, Tav doesn't have complex motivation. If Astarion gets ascended in anybody's game, it's because the player wanted to see what happens, that I believe is Larian's view. I think that comes through a lot in the way the various devs talk about the game. They talk about it like a sandbox full of stuff that happens. The companions have agency and depth and internal lives, and the game is about seeing those things. Or not seeing them and seeing something else.
If this was the case, then why did they suddenly decide to do that nearly 8 months after release? The game isn't in early access anymore. His ascension story wasn't like that at all before patch 6, so no, I don't think you're right, I think it's a different writer or perhaps someone at Larian got upset (jealous) of all the attention Neil got for the character and the award he won.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/y1rg1Ll.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/w6YutKu.png)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/b9SErgF.jpg)
