Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Was BG3 overly sexualized?

I see your point and your not wrong. When we played DnD over the years there was always one person in the group that wanted to be the "evil" character and would kill, literally for the sake of the kill. Most of us played "good" characters. There was violence for sure but it was not so indiscriminate. In BG3 there is a path in the game, with rewards for murdering the Tieflings and the Druids. Not because they are a threat or they have defiled a temple, just killing them for killing them. I wanted to understand so I played that path once and I honestly felt like I had to die a little inside to finish it. I stopped that play through right then and will not do an evil play through again.

As for all the discussion about romance in the game. I am becoming a little sad. The main story of the game is finding a way to cure yourself of an Illithid parasite and then to save others from a possible Illithid invasion. Yet it seems like any content effort being added to the game is for romantic, sexual and general knee jerk emotional material. Would have much rather seen an effort to add more content that was applying directly to the main plot.

I bought this game for a DnD adventure and feel like we are getting sword and sorcery fantasying dating simulator.

Right...cause the only thing separating street fighter and mortal kombat is the violence. So I guesss Tekken, Soul Caliber, Virtua Fighter and more should all be renamed Street Fighter. Because they don't have the over the top violence to separate the two games...


Oh I have no interest nor plans in convincing you. These topics will always go around in circles because we're discussing completely subjective topics based on the biases and interests of a particular person. There is literally no way for me to convince you about BG3's pushing the boundaries just like there's no way you would convince me bg3 antics are immature or that over the top violence is a necessity in gaming. Because our viewpoint on the matter is going to lean towards the biases we have towards a particular topic.

It's along the lines of the recent spider man 2 discussion. There were a few articles out there stating that Miles Morales got short changed in Spider Man 2, due to having significantly less mission time and plot importance than Peter Parker. The people who wanted to play as Miles mostly agreed, saying his story was hampered until Act 3. But those that wanted to play as Peter mostly disagreed, because they stated Peter should be the main spider man and therefore should have the 75/25 split we saw in the game. There is no way each side is going to convince the other their point, because their biases are intrinsically linked to two opposite sides.

The same applies here. Nothing we're discussing here is factual, merely subjective lenses fueled by our biases and viewpoints. It's along the lines of "one mans trash is another mans treasure." You're not going to convince the other that it's trash or treasure.


A debate also doesn't work by using off-handed analogies to give the false impression that your viewpoint is the correct one, but you keep using this tactic. Secondly, I don't "need" to speak for "lots of people." You only need to pull up VODS from the Actors playing BG3 like Jennifer English, Devora Wilde, Neil and more to see the hundreds and thousands that echo my point. But that's entirely on you if you wanna dive into that rabbit hole.

Oh to clarify, I completely understand your concern, especially since this game is based off of a franchise. I entirely understand why you'd feel disappointed with the direction this game took. If you came into the game with a certain set of expectations, and they took a left field turn into an area that you not only did not expect, but have little interest in, that's bound to be off-putting.

It goes back to my spider man point on how miles fan found SM 2 a good game, while Peter fans view it as game of the year (and it's technically nominated for game of the year.) When you have a certain level of expectation, and they blindside you, well there's likely to be problems lol.

So yeah, I'm not trying to convince you or anyone here that the road Larian took towards BG3 is a net positive for everyone, because that's impossible. I'm only here to give the other side a voice.

I didn’t take Halsin in my party, so I can’t comment on that, but on the others: yes, Lae’zel called for sex, and that happened. And Astarion did. And that was it. The emperor asks for more trust and a simple "we should focus on our task" (which is the most plausible answer there, I mean: it’s a mind flayer) gets a "this felt kind of short" comment in the scene while he tells you that you’re right, and that’s that. And you’d have to be crazy to lie with the Incubus instead of just slaying it (well, I switched to the former after re-loading after the latter, because the former seemed like a lot more fun). And who would accept the demoness’ offer where it’s clear that the goal is to compromise your partnership with your companion (and yes, if you try, it ends badly)?

Main characters who did not ask to have sex in my playthrough: Shadowheart, Wyll, Gale, Karlach, Jaheira, Minsc. (though there may be implied sex in some of the initial romance scenes with Shadowheart)

Halsin did, but Halsin feels a lot like fanservice (it’s fun to see fanservice being a male character — usually that’s the women ☺).

I don’t know about Minthara, because I killed her on sight.

And all that said: I love it how BG3 explores sexuality. It brought me the best gaming experience I had in over a decade and it has me totally hooked.

I actually keep a log of the best experience each day, and the romances in BG3 hit that several times. You may find it childish. For me it was core to the enjoyment of the game.

And no, I’m not twelve. At 16 I would have considered that focus on romance as annoying. But that was more than two decades ago and nowadays I enjoy that exploration of different aspects of romance.

And I think it fits the game very well, because this game starts with Characters whose thoughts and memories and even feelings get connected to some degree, so they share an intimate bond. All of them are cut off from their original groups and have no existing bonds, and they are basically forced to travel together for weeks in the wilderness and trust each other. It is pretty likely that they would develop deeper feelings and explore intimate relationships.

The only part that’s less plausible is that they all focus on Tav, but that’s easily explained by being a game where *you* are the main character.

Yeah, though there's a distinction between people who play "Evil" characters and would kill during a campaign and the "Murderhobos" which is a term used to describe people who during a campaign kill literally everyone they can simply because they can.

BG3's "Evil" route tends to err towards the Murderhobo side of things than a proper "Evil" character (Who can often be a very interesting part of a campaign. I know of times when it was devised that the "Evil" character would actually end up being the BBEG at the end of the campaign)

That said, even BG3's "Good" path involves a lot of violence. Murdering the leaders of the Goblin camp to save the Tieflings. Murdering the Inquisitor. Cutting off Nere's head. Murdering wing guy in Last Light Inn (I forget his name). Murdering Ketheric Thorm. Murdering Orpheus' guards. Murdering Orin and Gortash.


Technically, romance IS directly part of the main plot.

Since the initial premise of the game is "Find allies", allies that you then adventure with throughout the entire game. Thus you have a relationship with them. It starts off as a purely "We're in the same situation, may as well work together" but throughout the game grows into friendships and more.

It doesn't necessarily advance the main plot (Besides befriending the Emperor as killing him literally stops campaign), but it's very much part of it.

It's not part of a typical TT DnD experience, because of a multitude of differences between a Tabletop Game and a Video Game such as:

- In a TT game there's a person behind the character, so there's never 100% immersion.
- In a TT game there's other players and it would be cringy af if 2 players spent time having their characters romance each other.
- TT characters are often throwaways. Once the campaign is over, their character's story ceases to exist so there's no point in setting up long lasting plots like relationships (In a video game there's implied permenance to characters. You can presume that after the events of the game, the characters would keep living their life)
- Not all TT characters have deep backstory and characterisation written for them, making it less necessary to devote time to finding out about the character in question.

In essence, TT characters are less people and more vehicles to go through a campaign (Even those that are well written, with deep lore and backgrounds). In a video game, there's more room to make characters be people and do people things like socialise (Thus, video games do often incorporate relationships, because video games are played by people... And people to people things like socialise)

There seems to be some serious overselling of how deep ANY of the relationships are in order to make (rather tortured) points.

Larian : *adds junk jiggle physics*

Nope, not at all pushing sex over a real narrative/character development.

I've had enough of this in my save.

I've seen eyes ripped out, capturers being cut open with scalpels, poor guys being skinned and hung upside down, child murder, pet murder, anything murder, oft in cinematic details. My party has waded through seas of blood, guts and limbs (the latter of which completely interactive and pick-upable, throwable and lulzable because why not).

Granted, I'm yet not been actively pursuing the sexy side of things, e.g. desperately looking for it. But that's kinda the point. Even in the EA I've seen more. I've no doubt that this content is treated in more rather juvenile Larian fashion too if you go looking. But the one "sexy time scene" I saw faded to black immediately, unlike any of the torture pr0n. And I'm over 60 hours into it, middle of Act 3. I've had it. I'm now going to Baldur's Gate's official Temple Of Lust. Saw a neat drow thing there. If this will not suffice, I'm gonna boot up Realms Of Arkania again (or the Twitcher, collecting sexy booby cards).






PS: The Japanese will tone it down, so you may pick that one up. https://www.thegamer.com/baldurs-gate-3-censorship-japan-romance-scenes-violence-torture/

I like the sex scenes when they're about the romance and done respectfully. Without the romance it essentially becomes porn though, which is where the bugbear and brothel scenes land. The beastiality is technically tied to Halsins romance, but it's immature and disturbing. I have no idea why the Emperor tries to screw me when the whole time I've only been mean to him. Nor do I understand why there's an achievement tied to this, forcing completionists to have sex with him.

Companions also need to chill out and let the player take the lead, all the thirsting is annoying and can be overwhelming. Let us have friendships with them, if not romanced and with enough approval. That's something I loved in DA:I where I could actually befriend all of them, play cards and they even ask about how I'm doing and they're not obsessed with getting in my pants. There isn't any of this in BG3 and it's so unrealistic. Like is there really nothing else to do but have sex? Can we not buy a deck of cards at a trader and just hangout? Sit around the campfire and tell stories? Friendships are so disregarded in this game.

If they had just kept it where we have the sex scenes with our chosen romance partner, and left all that other porn stuff and beastiality out, I would have voted no on this poll. Unfortunately, they went overboard in my opinion.

The problem for me was that all the "sexy stuff" was unevenly distributed, with most of the more "romantic stuff" occurring in Act 1 and then just sort of disappearing. By Act 2, pretty much everyone in my party had tried to sleep with me that could sleep with me, and I was sick of it. Now, with over 400 hours played and the end of Act 3 looming, all the sexy is a distant memory. There's two Act 3 sex scenes I can think of, but only one of them really establishes any kind of relationship, and it's a twisted one. I think that maybe the storied, more romantic stuff that happened early on came too hard and fast, leaving only the more insubstantial stuff for Act 3. The companions wouldn't have come off as so thirsty, the Act 3 stuff wouldn't've had to stand alone in the player's mind, and fewer people would've been so bothered by it all.

In the brothel scenes I experienced a woman attracted to Illithid telling a story about feeling empowered. The two others in the Caress made an offer, but Lae’zel made it perfectly clear that she would not share, so I declined. And there was a clothed dancer and music. That was it.

And I also think that the sensual parts are too absent in Act 3. For Lae’zel you actually get some great relationship parts ("Source of my ..." ← rest left out to avoid spoilers, if you played it, you know), but there is no progression in *shared* sensual experiences.

On the other hand, Act 3 is where the established connections hold fast to drive the main plot and shape decisions (and yes, if you allow yourself to get immersed in what those relationships mean for your character, then they are the major driver of decisions), so dialing them down a bit is consistent with the progression of the story.

What an absolutely brainless take.

Lets not let this get personal or heated please...

I don't limit my decision of why I think BG3 is oversexualized to only the game itself but also to the marketing campaign, design, and the customers Larian wanted to attract with it.

Larian heavily pushed sex as primary marketing ploy, it designed the companions to be sex and wish fulfilment first, similar to how Hoyoverse games like Genshin Impact and other waifu collectors are designed, with an actual rpg story being an afterthought in case they have still time (for Halsin and Wyll apparently not).

And it worked and attracted exactly that crowed who, because most of them lack any real rpg experience think BG3 is revolutionary, ignore all the mechanical story problems, the core disciplines of an rpg, BG3 has and spend all their time with romance fanfiction and their number one priority are not mechanical or story problems but getting more kissing scenes. And that despite the actual romance and also scenes in BG3 being low quality as people pointed out.
And Larian is just too happy to keep the sex hype going.

Thank you!

We've been through Game of Thrones and its complete betrayal of GRRM's approach to sex and violence. BG3 is TAME by comparison. Calling it over-sexualised in a society like ours, where in the early 2000s literally any ad and most magazines had nude spreads seems, as you said, a deliberate attempt to start a storm in a teacup, to put it politely.

Your comparison with Kingmaker also seems completely out of the blue - the premise was completely different, there is no sense of urgency which, historically, lowers inhibitions but rather there's stressing kingdom management and need to escape. Let alone in the adventure path which is as open world as a tabletop can be,

GoT had rape, gang-rape, sadism, incest and all sorts of other things from the books. I don't see any 'complete betrayal' of the books. The medium is the message and GoT pushed a few limits for TV.



You are not comparing like with like. Different medium, different message. A point I made several pages back is that the thread title is poorly formulated - 'overly' is too relative and 'sexualised' is too vague.

Seconded. But, also, multiple things can be true at the same time.

I am all for nudity and very much not in favor of censorship of any kind; be it sex, violence and probably most other things that might spring to mind.
Yet, I really don't like the cheap humor stuff of say, buggering bugbears....And I'll gladly call that immature and childish.
Yet, I then go out of my way to talk to *every animal in the entire game* like a child in a pet store.

I think the problem here, personally, is with the thesis. We're asking if BG3 was overly-sexualized, but it's a product. We don't have to invest money in it, we choose to. The product itself can only inherently be "sexy" or "not sexy." Even that is subjective, though. Imo, the real question should be: "Was BG3 overly-sexualized for you?" We can't decide if the product was 'too sexy' for everyone, unless we look at the market reaction to the product. It's really our best and only barometer for if a product was too much of anything. BG3 has sold a minimum of seven million copies, which I would say is a fairly warm reaction to the product as a whole. The final sales figures will likely be in the tens of millions, and to me that is a pretty good sign that BG3 wasn't too much of anything for a majority of the intended market.

But it's okay if you're not part of the majority, or even not part of the intended market. You can disagree subjectively with how the sexiness in BG3 has been received specifically, and you can certainly say if it was subjectively overtly-sexual to you. But I don't think you can argue with those results. What Larian did worked, and it is apparently still banging on all cylinders after three months on the market.

Far too little sex and far too soft