Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 5 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Oct 2020
Sozz Offline OP
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tarlonniel
Originally Posted by Topper
I mean, how high do you have to stack the bodies to get some womens attention.


It's not about the height of the stack, it's about arrangement. I, for instance, prefer many small piles laid out in a snowflake pattern.

And more on topic: the only time playersexuality becomes jarring to me is when an NPC swings one way with the rest of the world, but another way when it comes to the player, and it's never noticed or remarked on. Take Wyll - he's got a sexy female cambion for a mistress/patron, flirts hard with both Lae'zel and Shadowheart, ignores Gale and Astarion, but at the party he (apparently) propositions a male PC exactly like a female one, with no prior indication that he'd be at all interested in a guy. That just looks odd to me.
When a woman tells you to kill you should always ask, "how high?"

But yes in stark contrast to every other companion right now, Wyl has something vaguely sexual built-in, an unhealthy relationship with his not so ex-girlfriend, I would expect this to come up but so far no go.

Sozz #737423 21/11/20 03:32 PM
Joined: Nov 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Sozz
But yes in stark contrast to every other companion right now, Wyl has something vaguely sexual built-in, an unhealthy relationship with his not so ex-girlfriend, I would expect this to come up but so far no go.


Gale has his past relationship with Mystra built in, but he's not as flamboyantly straight as Wyll, plus you get build-up in his pre-party scenes.

Joined: Oct 2020
Sozz Offline OP
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tarlonniel
Originally Posted by Sozz
But yes in stark contrast to every other companion right now, Wyl has something vaguely sexual built-in, an unhealthy relationship with his not so ex-girlfriend, I would expect this to come up but so far no go.


Gale has his past relationship with Mystra built in, but he's not as flamboyantly straight as Wyll, plus you get build-up in his pre-party scenes.
Ha, I'd forgotten about that.
There are enough questions about what it means to 'romance' a god that I'm willing to believe it can be something beyond the concepts involved here.
I'll also except the possibility he's full of it and just lying to us.

Last edited by Sozz; 21/11/20 04:32 PM.
Sozz #737439 21/11/20 04:20 PM
Joined: Jan 2018
W
old hand
Offline
old hand
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Originally Posted by Sozz
Originally Posted by Warlocke
I don’t think it is necessary to lock characters to a specific preference. I don’t see how that would objectively improve the writing. Having characters with a specific preference does allow you to tell specific stories about how that affected their backstory, but that doesn’t need to be part of the story in the first place.

Due to the nature of games there is going to be a finite about of content for each companion’s dialogue and backstory. The writers can fill up that finite space with some other compelling content. The trade off for the lack of specificity is an abundance of player choice, which is preferable for me. Why write separate stories for straight and gay relationships when they can write relationships that satisfy either type?
To me being able to tell specific stories is the improvement I'm talking about, a story about a gay or straight person is going to have more character than a story about a gay and straight character...I mean "all of the above" sexuality. Don't misunderstand me I'm not saying a characters stories should be solely about their sexuality but that being written with one is better than being written with all of them


Sure, ideally for at least a few of the characters their sexuality should be part of their backstory (though in a setting with no orientation based discrimination or bias it probably wouldn’t be as significant a part of their personal history) and in this ideal scenario the game would adjust itself to accommodate this. For example, if I romance Gale as a man I get slightly different interactions than I do as a woman, and his background is slightly adjusted in the dialogue to reflect this. However, this is a fair amount of extra work for Larian with a minimal return, and they can still write compelling story content where the tension and internal conflict is independent of the protagonists gender. This allows them to use their finite resources for something else, and I much rather they do that.

The only thing I want them to do is adjust the way the game introduces potential relationships, which is to say, there should be some dialogue interactions before the party that allows the player to inconspicuously choose whom they are interested in so we don’t get bombarded with requests for sex from every party member all at once. Other than that, I think how they are handling it is fine so far.

No gender locked romances providing for maximal player choice is the way to go. There aren’t a ton of companions. Unless things change just 4 of either gender. For the ladies, one is a
withered old halfling granny who probably smells like wet dog
and the other is a bellicose frog lady. So assuming neither of these are appealing we are left with Shadowheart or Karlach. If Larian arbitrarily make one of these strictly gay and the other straight, then for lots of people there is only one viable option. No thanks. A bit of choice is better than none.

Last edited by Warlocke; 21/11/20 04:23 PM.
Sozz #737440 21/11/20 04:23 PM
Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Universe
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Universe
I personally prefer locked character preference. Making everyone bi only really supports bi. Not all heterosexual's like bi and not all homosexual's like bi. This wouldn't be a problem if we had say 12-20 plus companions. "Cough" Larian "cough". Seems like everyone is fighting for what seems like scraps. The real solution is to have more companions and stick the flirting behind a higher approval lock.

I've played all the Dragon Ages and read some of the books and I think it's a terrible example of romances. They aren't really good. To me it's more like they just isn't anything better.

Larian chose playersexual which is fine and safe, but you can't trailblaze and be safe. Temper expectations and all that. "Look at what is, rather than what can be" is what I recommend.

Joined: Oct 2020
Sozz Offline OP
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Sozz
Originally Posted by gorto
....Yes its not realistic to have all companions be pansexual but...

Originally Posted by zeel
On the flipside, it's just not realistic....But some people don't give a shit about realism in this regard...

Originally Posted by Firesnakearies
I much prefer the slightly credulity-straining conceit...


What's going on here guys? It sounds worryingly like settling

I'm not going to take this as a worthy compromise, expect better story-telling and they'll give it to you.
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Sure, ideally for at least a few of the characters their sexuality should be part of their backstory....For example, if I romance Gale as a man I get slightly different interactions than I do as a woman, ... However, this is a fair amount of extra work for Larian with a minimal return
Don't settle for less on me Warlocke, it's only as minimal as you want it to be.
If they even did this little thing a lot of my criticism of the herosexual relationship would be stymied but so far not even the bare minimum seems to be apparent.

Joined: Sep 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Aishaddai
I personally prefer locked character preference. Making everyone bi only really supports bi. Not all heterosexual's like bi and not all homosexual's like bi.


What am I even reading?


I don't want to fall to bits 'cos of excess existential thought.

Sozz #737454 21/11/20 04:55 PM
Joined: Jan 2018
W
old hand
Offline
old hand
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Originally Posted by Sozz
Originally Posted by Sozz
Originally Posted by gorto
....Yes its not realistic to have all companions be pansexual but...

Originally Posted by zeel
On the flipside, it's just not realistic....But some people don't give a shit about realism in this regard...

Originally Posted by Firesnakearies
I much prefer the slightly credulity-straining conceit...


What's going on here guys? It sounds worryingly like settling

I'm not going to take this as a worthy compromise, expect better story-telling and they'll give it to you.
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Sure, ideally for at least a few of the characters their sexuality should be part of their backstory....For example, if I romance Gale as a man I get slightly different interactions than I do as a woman, ... However, this is a fair amount of extra work for Larian with a minimal return
Don't settle for less on me Warlocke, it's only as minimal as you want it to be.
If they even did this little thing a lot of my criticism of the herosexual relationship would be stymied but so far not even the bare minimum seems to be apparent.



Years of DMing has taught me the intrinsic value of “good enough.” 😂

Joined: Dec 2019
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2019
Originally Posted by Tzelanit
Originally Posted by Nyanko

When you play D&D around a table with your friends, there is barely anything sexual. Our characters don't deal with those kinds of things because there are not the focus of the game.



Wait, your Bards aren't trying to fuck everything that isn't nailed down?

:D:D:D

Topper #737476 21/11/20 06:07 PM
Joined: Nov 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Topper
Originally Posted by Tzelanit
Wait, your Bards aren't trying to fuck everything that isn't nailed down?
:D:D:D


Larian, take note of the proper, omnisexual way to play a bard and give us options accordingly, kthxbye.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
lotta opinions on pixelfucking, and i guess pixelhandholding

Sozz #737482 21/11/20 06:18 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
You come back to the camp after a hard days adventuring to find wyll, gale and astarion making out. Which way rpg gamer man?

Sozz #737483 21/11/20 06:19 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Rugby, UK
Cleric of Innuendo
Offline
Cleric of Innuendo
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Rugby, UK
Let's keep the thread constructive.

Nyloth #737490 21/11/20 06:32 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Sozz Offline OP
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Nyloth
Originally Posted by Verte
Yeah, but that won't happen. Imagine pissed hetero part of Astarion's fanclub if he was only gay. All those pretty drowish girls wasted.


You just wrote this, and I'm already furious.

Also, this is a stupid idea. You suggest making characters represent LGBT community (or represent someone like heterosexual idc), which was enough for me in Bioware games. At this moment, each of us can decide who is who. Representation will ruin everything and only infuriate people, as it did with Jaal from Mass Effect. They made him heterosexual, and as a female player, I think that was unfair to those who wanted an alien boyfriend. But then bioware changed that (cuz ppl cry), and it only made it worse, now two sides were angry. Imagine that someone changes orientation of your favorite character with a patch. And Jaal had these hints in LI quests that his family needed a "continuation of the family". People can be sensitive to this. If they had initially made it bisexual, both sides would have been happy.

Similarly, Dorian in Dragon Age had hints that his family was angry because he couldn't ‘continue the family’, and he's gay LUL. Do you understand? You're not just asking to make a character gay (or other), you're asking for representation. And this is rlyyy bad.

That's why making everyone bisexual (conditionally) is much better. Everyone has their own canon. There is no representation. Enjoy it and don't interfere with others. This is best way.


Hints isn't correct, his father tried to use blood magic to mind-fuck him into heterosexuality (in the context of Jaal that becomes even more interesting).

It's difficult for me to know what kind of tone you're writing in, but I can agree that typically making someone's story about their sexuality isn't great fodder for characterization, BUT I'm not sure Dorian is the best example of this, Dragon Age is Fantasy sure, but a lot of my issues with the story in Inquisition I think stem from a general anachronistic take on many issues, The Chantry is the Western Church The Tevinter Chantry is the Eastern but with closer ties to its pagan roots, neither have any kind of prohibition or weird ideas about sexual relations, that's well and good, but there's another angle that doesn't get the same care and treatment; Dragon Age operates in a Low Fantasy Late Medieval (except Orlais) setting, the dictates of Feudalism are very much in play, Dorian's story isn't just about him not being the son his father wants him to be, he's making decisions for his entire lineage unilaterally, I wish the game had dealt with it more, instead of reducing it to an awkward after school special at some tavern, but I still wouldn't damn it by reducing it to a story about some fop being gay.
People are right to say that pre-Christian Europe was more sexually liberated (though only to a point) but even all those homosexual Greeks had wives, they just didn't see a contradiction between the types of love that could exist between men and between men and women, (and between women? who cares)

Last edited by Sozz; 21/11/20 06:39 PM.
Joined: Mar 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Tarlonniel
Take Wyll - he's got a sexy female cambion for a mistress/patron, flirts hard with both Lae'zel and Shadowheart, ignores Gale and Astarion, but at the party he (apparently) propositions a male PC exactly like a female one, with no prior indication that he'd be at all interested in a guy. That just looks odd to me.


I keep hearing that but I can't reproduce it. I can get Wyll to say he's sorry that I didn't choose him but if I F8 and ask him he says something like he doesn't feel the connection and has a tankard to keep him company.

I can also get to the party where no one is interested in the main character without problem -- in fact I think that will become the bigger problem in future because once I got too efficient on a play-through -- imagining I was really worried that this bomb inside my head would go off -- I found that the I didn't have enough camp interactions for any the romances. Even the easiest to romance -- Astarian suddenly developed standards and Lae'zel told me I had displeased her too often. (even if she was impressed by skills in battle)

I'm receptive to the critique that playersexual allows devs to get away with fewer companions -- (BG had 18 we need 18. period. full stop) -- but I'm with those saying that there isn't a good reason to believe Faerun has these hangups and plenty of reasons to think it doesn't.

Last edited by KillerRabbit; 21/11/20 07:39 PM.
Joined: Nov 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
I keep hearing that but I can't reproduce it. I can get Wyll to say he's sorry that I didn't choose him but if I F8 and ask him he says something like he doesn't feel the connection and has a tankard to keep him company.


Poor Wyll is bugged even worse than Gale. I haven't been able to trigger his party scene and I've only heard of one person in the wide world of the internet who managed it - but they had no idea how.

Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
Even the easiest to romance -- Astarian suddenly developed standards and Lae'zel told me I had displeased her too often.


I've had Astarion turn me down, but only if I asked instead of waiting for him to ask me (or if I said I'd think about it). Lae'zel always offers and I've no idea why. She hates pretty much everything I do. These triggers are very confusing - maybe it can all be blamed on Early Access, but I dunno.

Joined: Oct 2020
Sozz Offline OP
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
Originally Posted by Tarlonniel
Take Wyll - he's got a sexy female cambion for a mistress/patron, flirts hard with both Lae'zel and Shadowheart, ignores Gale and Astarion, but at the party he (apparently) propositions a male PC exactly like a female one, with no prior indication that he'd be at all interested in a guy. That just looks odd to me.
I keep hearing that but I can't reproduce it. I can get Wyll to say he's sorry that I didn't choose him but if I F8 and ask him he says something like he doesn't feel the connection and has a tankard to keep him company.

I can also get to the party where no one is interested in the main character without problem -- in fact I think that will become the bigger problem in future because once I got too efficient on a play-through -- imagining I was really worried that this bomb inside my head would go off -- I found that the I didn't have enough camp interactions for any the romances. Even the easiest to romance -- Astarian suddenly developed standards and Lae'zel told me I had displeased her too often. (even if she was impressed by skills in battle)

I'm receptive to the critique that playersexual allows devs to get away with fewer companions -- (BG had 18 we need 18. period. full stop) -- but I'm with those saying that there isn't a good reason to believe Faerun has these hangups and plenty of reasons to think it doesn't.
I haven't seen the Wyl romance myself (not for lack of trying) and I've seen elsewhere that it (and a great many other triggers and flags) are borked, so keep that in mind, I've also noticed that depending on dialogue choice, Astarion will give you the line about having standards (rich), or be down for a nocturnal tussle, I'm not sure if that's a bug or an interesting facet of his character.
Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
but I'm with those saying that there isn't a good reason to believe Faerun has these hangups and plenty of reasons to think it doesn't.
I think what I'm seeing is two issues, my problem with everyone being playersexual isn't necessarily about whatever cultural hang-ups there might be in the Forgotten Realms it's about a person's sexuality being present at all. As opposed to carefully "not applicable" for reasons that have nothing to do with the world and everything to do artificially making everyone 'available' to the player.

Last edited by Sozz; 21/11/20 08:07 PM.
Nyanko #737563 21/11/20 08:52 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Nyanko
Originally Posted by Divine Star
Can't say that I agree. For example in DAI, some of the romances were gender and race locked and I just ended up using mods just so I could experience romances with them.

I'd like to have a game where my character could be with anyone. I'm also a person that doesn't believe your sexuality defines who you are as a person. Being locked from possibilities in games isn't fun to me (such as gender-locked classes and ect). Larian seems interested in giving their players freedom which is shocking to me that a lot of players actually seem more interested in taking away. Please continue to give us freedom, Larian.


But it doesn't make it realistic or interesting. Because in real life, you cannot force a homosexual into having a heterosexual relationship. BG3 is not a sex simulator. And as such, I would prefer it to be more realistic in terms of interactions with companions than just a minecraft sex game in which you can even choose your positions in bed.

If companions are so malleable in their sexual orientations, it makes them bland and boring in my opinion. Because it doesn't tell anything about them apart from the fact they are like sex dolls, being only here to please the main character.


Right, reality. If anyone wanted reality they would exit the video game, log off of their computer and walk outside. Romance also doesn't equal sex. You're the one who added sex into the equation. I'm referring to the possibility of being able to date and romance who I wish. Sex in the game is entirely optional and perhaps, depending on how much Larian allows, you may even have a relationship with a character without having sex with them. Not once in my post did I mention having sex, but your entire post is fixated on it. Why?

Also, good for you in having your opinion. Mine isn't changing.

Joined: Dec 2019
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2019
Originally Posted by Tarlonniel
Originally Posted by Topper
I mean, how high do you have to stack the bodies to get some womens attention.


It's not about the height of the stack, it's about arrangement. I, for instance, prefer many small piles laid out in a snowflake pattern.

And more on topic: the only time playersexuality becomes jarring to me is when an NPC swings one way with the rest of the world, but another way when it comes to the player, and it's never noticed or remarked on. Take Wyll - he's got a sexy female cambion for a mistress/patron, flirts hard with both Lae'zel and Shadowheart, ignores Gale and Astarion, but at the party he (apparently) propositions a male PC exactly like a female one, with no prior indication that he'd be at all interested in a guy. That just looks odd to me.


Yeah..... I thought about that "arrangement" but was worried it might be misinterpreted.

Sozz #737574 21/11/20 09:14 PM
Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Universe
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Universe
@Atlus I disagree. That leads to a digression though so I'll leave it at that. Things seem to be getting away from the game a bit much for my taste. I thought this was a character vs sex doll debate lol.

Page 5 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5