I'm in more of a middle ground. I don't think playersexuality is inherently a bad thing and think it's a better system for these games than set sexuality romances unless that sexuality is important to their story (Think Dorian Pavus), but I also don't think playersexuality counts as representation, although I'm sure for a lot of LGBT people it's nice to be able to romance the companion they like when playing as the same sex. I think I've gotten used to it so I'm neutral about it.
I remember this article I read years ago about BG3 EA, and find I agree with it in that they could've done more to turn these from playersexuality to actual all coincidently pan characters.
https://gaymingmag.com/2021/03/baldurs-gate-3-really-should-just-make-everyone-bisexual/I will also say I disagree for the most part about the LGBT characters in BG3 being cringe. I thought Aylin and Isobel were adorable. Lakrissa and Alfira have some sort of thing implied and I also think it's handled well even though I quite dislike Alfira. Those gnomes in Grymforge are there and can't really care either way.
The exception is Nocturne, I do think she's written with the subtlety of an elephant in a tea shop. Here's where I think her identity shouldn't be the sole feature of her character. She's The Trans Character Who Is Trans and Transitioned Because She Is Trans, and I find that really clunky. I suppose respectful trans characters aren't common in videogames so you've gotta start somewhere real basic, but damn, is it just the stereotypical stuff all concentrated into a single character. I actually think whatever metaphor you can read into Shadowheart's "deadname" is miles ahead of Nocturne's representation.
