I mean, it certainly wasn't between the lines. […] "I don't think I want you to think of me in terms of sex. I don't know if I want anyone to". In that department at least, it's not subtle and something a player could accidentally stumble into.
I fully admit ignorance on the specifics; still haven’t played the complete game. The specifics are important, here, no doubt. But the way the dialogue was framed in the talk was ‘players who are looking for sex as a reward will get the bad ending and a reminder this isn’t a game.’ So if you say this outcome couldn’t be stumbled into, I believe you, but there’s no denying the intent is to have players take the game’s text seriously here while, I argue, they may need to ignore it elsewhere.
Originally Posted by ArneBab
Do you mean that this spiked horror crawling into my eye socket is metaphorical sexual assault?
Here’s how the metaphore works to me. Tav is kidnapped, restrained and has reproductive DNA forcefully inserted into them.
To be more honest than perhaps I should, I’m not a survivor of sexual assault either, but someone close to me is. Though I’ve never asked for details, I used to wonder about them often and must’ve drawn a subconscious picture not unlike the opening sequence.
It took me a couple years to realize I had made that connection. (Edit: it happened once I came to see the tadpole as sperm with teeth). It explained why I couldn’t bring myself to rest if I could still possibly go on. ”They can’t get away with this. I have to push forward.” Or why I considered Nettie’s poison and Lae’zel’s blade as viable options to hurt those that hurt me. ”Screw ‘em. Whatever it takes.”
I believe I was reacting to deep seated fear, and I believe I wasn’t alone. Larian should’ve been aware of that thematic reading. Worth noting that the dream visitor was far more seductive in early access, and the consensus is they were changed due to feedback they had rapey vibes.
Maybe BG3 does have my reading in mind. It could trigger with enough defiance towards the dream visitor, I don’t know, but I don’t have a lot of trust in a game that lets you sleep with your assaulter. (How did Illithids evolve non-reproductive sexual organs, by the way? Maybe the lore explains it…)
Originally Posted by ArneBab
Do you see a way to get a parasite that would both be similarly horrific and be something you would not see as metaphorical sexual abuse?
Good question! Real parasites find their way into their hosts in a myriad interesting ways, none of which involve kidnapping or physical restraints.
Most parasites are opportunistic (i think-it’s getting late and i aint looking this stuff up) and wait for their prey to get close enough. It’s easier in water; on land you usually need trees or tall grass to drop from. Some will find ways to manipulate their host into perpetuating the cycle, like making it vulnerable to particular predators.
So the Illithid could discretely leave a bunch of larvae in Baldur’s Gate for them to infect by chance, or the Nautiloid could show up and rain a million larvae on the city, or they could use their mind powers to lure prey and have them accept the larvea.
None of these are perfect, but I wouldn’t have Larian change the opening anyway. It’s affecting, if nothing else. If they want to go after these themes in an M rated game, they should go for it!
But they’re not going for it. As the youtube presentation shows, they’re going for sections of fandom. The presentation is about elevating the “tokenistic pandering” of usual romance systems to pandering on a “watershed” level. The way to do that is to engage with fanfiction and the reason to do that is to generate passionate fans.
The romance writing as described could be inserted into any game. If its qualities don’t include “meshes well with the rest of the experience”, I’m not as ready to call BG3 “art” as Larian seem to be.
Last edited by Flooter; 30/05/2401:49 PM. Reason: typo
