|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
|
For example, if a character is straight, and your character is of the same gender, should they acknowledge the fact that they are straight even though every such character can still ultimately be romanced? Or should there be characters that are unbending in their sexual orientation, as many are in the real world? I think the latter makes much more sense, but would require substantial changes to romance in the gameplay (e.g. this character will never be attracted to you, this character is more easily attracted to you than others).
I personally like the current romance system, where straight, gay, bisexual, race, doesn't make a difference. You can explore that as your character wants without being limited in any way. And it just doesn't makes sense to me to keep romance options unlimited while claiming characters have preconceived sexual orientations. That is, it seems arrogant to be able to "flip" any and every character because our character is just so great. This is where playersexuality as a concept comes in - generally speaking, you aren't 'flipping' people; in individual plays, the world is reconfigured so that, by coincidence, what you want is available, this is the essence of what playersexuality in NPCs is. This means that if you pursue an NPC that is male and has established female partnerships in their backstory, and are generally straight-coded (again, I don't like that that's a thing, at all, but it is, nevertheless, in public media... changing this has to be done by gradual steps, if you want it to stick), with a female character, then in this game, they are heterosexual, and always have been. If, in a different game, you pursue the same character with a male, then they are bisexual to some extent, and always were. (Variations and individual elements of personal backstory non-withstanding of course) As Soul-scar says here - the sudden forced nature of how it's handled in BG3 right now is the main sticking point, and if feels inorganic and forced in most cases. Having more casual character building that can allow the leanings and preferences of the characters to feel more organic and better blended with what we see of their character elsewise would be a good thing... especially if their open sexuality runs at odds with what we already know and have seen - some way to smooth that into something that feels like a natural part of the character would help here. == For the relationship aside, I've only ever been bisexual - I know what it's like to be attracted to or not attracted to individual people, but I've never known what it's like to be turned on or off by a particular sex or gender wholesale, so I cannot comment on that... what I can assert is that a relationship is a complicated interwoven thing where all the aspects of it (including the sexual aspect if there is one) influence the other aspects of it, so, for me at least, there is an intrinsic and utterly unavoidable, undeniable difference in having a relationship with a male, as there is in having a relationship with another female, as again there is in living as I do currently in a poly relationship. One is not better than another - they're just different, with different dynamics, and treating them as having the same dynamics would be recipe for conflict and tension.
I don't think it's fair that most modern societies place different expectations on males and females and their expected preferences and signalling - I recall teenage years where it was just generally 'expected' that females were going to be okay and comfortable with fooling around, teasing and kissing other girls, in a sense of 'fun and party' kind of way... even if they were known to be heterosexual, they were often just expected to be cool with that. The same wasn't so for males... and it sucked for those that weren't comfortable with such things.
Because some people just aren't, and that's okay... it's a normal and healthy difference, in fact. If, in a story-telling world space, you make a world where everyone is unilaterally okay with the concept of sexual intimacy with anyone else completely regardless of race or sex, then you have not added anything to the world - what you have done is removed something. You have deprived your world of on element of personal characterisation because you've made everyone the same, and as much as it would be *easier* in real life if everyone was comfortably bisexual... it wouldn't be a *good* thing in my mind, because people should be allowed to be different and to like different things, and those differences are things we should celebrate, not erase.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Aug 2021
|
[...] straight-coded (again, I don't like that that's a thing, at all, but it is, nevertheless, in public media... changing this has to be done by gradual steps, if you want it to stick) [...] I don't like that kind of coding either. Isn't BG3's current stance a step toward erasing it by teaching players to ask NPCs rather than rely on coded clues and assumptions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I said it countless times and i say it again, even tho it may not be directly related to the topic ... Companions should have sexual prefferences (both gender and race) and react with different way to our proposal (also should not propose themselves, unless we match both their prefferences). Like: Wyll like Woman ... Human, Elf, Drow or Tiefling (I take the liberation to presume that Mizora can act as a proof that he would obviously not have problems with horns and tails ...  ) Reputation enough to romance ... Camp scene: Tav is Female Human ... Tav: Are you coming on to me? > Wyll: I hadn't imagimed myself so subtle. Or to put it in another way: Yes. Tav is Male Human ... Tav: Are you coming on to me? > Wyll: I didnt mean to ... well, on the other hand, why not? Are you interested? Tav is Female Gnome ... Tav: Are you coming on to me? > Wyll: No! I mean, no offence but i didnt mean to ... this never even crossed my mind! > *moment of awkward silence* > Tav: Its okey, im not interested either. / Shame, i hoped we could ... > Wyll: Good, i mean lets drink to that. Friends! / Well, now when you mentioned it ... Something like this.
Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 11/11/21 10:12 AM.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings.  Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Nov 2021
|
Honestly I don't think I care too much about this. I mean.. sure, it could be nice, but I also think it could be nice to see a world where this stuff does not matter at all. Refreshing. It would even be ideal. And I am saying this as a gay man myself. Would be nice if people didn't give a crap about these things at all. You are gay man, which means you cant understand bisexual, pan or something includes more than one gender. Straight people usually has only straight romance experiance, Gay/Lesbian ppl has only one gendered relationships. But when you are not restricted for one gender, you realise that relationships differ and you act different. It's not exclusive to bedroom, you realise there are different patterns. Also about representation, if a straight person can ignore and easily ''not see'' the queerness in game, its not representation. It is an illusion, representation is only meaningful if it helps you irl. Like its about normalizing, its about saying '' we exist, we are here. '' As you choose your "who do you desire" on character creation why not choose sexual preference also? That seems pretty representitive to me. This is bi/pan erasure btw pleaso dont do it. Things i wrote are also an answer if you think this is a proper representation.
Hanging moon in fog
mists will lead where you belong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jul 2021
|
As you choose your "who do you desire" on character creation why not choose sexual preference also? That seems pretty representitive to me. The way you play your character in the game will reflect your character's sexual preference and gender identity more than a strict tick box at the start of the game ever could. All they need to do is implement the romances in a more natural way, progressing over time as a result of Tav's dialogue choices. Give us options to state preferences *in the moment* as the characters evolve, rather than shoehorning your character into a certain sexual role before the game has even begun. Let us flirt with non-romanceable characters on the fly to demonstrate our sexual preferences before they even matter. Representation isn't just "I'm here on the screen" - it's about how meaningful that aspect of the character's identity is portrayed. If it doesn't have nuance and depth, if it doesn't evoke at least some sentiment of that community's real life experiences, then that community isn't being represented at all beyond shallow stereotypes and vague references.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Honestly I don't think I care too much about this. I mean.. sure, it could be nice, but I also think it could be nice to see a world where this stuff does not matter at all. Refreshing. It would even be ideal. And I am saying this as a gay man myself. Would be nice if people didn't give a crap about these things at all. You are gay man, which means you cant understand bisexual, pan or something includes more than one gender. Straight people usually has only straight romance experiance, Gay/Lesbian ppl has only one gendered relationships. But when you are not restricted for one gender, you realise that relationships differ and you act different. It's not exclusive to bedroom, you realise there are different patterns. Also about representation, if a straight person can ignore and easily ''not see'' the queerness in game, its not representation. It is an illusion, representation is only meaningful if it helps you irl. Like its about normalizing, its about saying '' we exist, we are here. '' As you choose your "who do you desire" on character creation why not choose sexual preference also? That seems pretty representitive to me. This is bi/pan erasure btw pleaso dont do it. Things i wrote are also an answer if you think this is a proper representation. You are being deliberately combative toward other people and intolerant towards different sexualities and opinions. You just told a gay man he doesn't/cannot possibly understand bi/pan because he is not them followed by a statement about hetrosexuality in the same sentence. You attempt to shut someone down for "no possible understand because you are not" then make a statement about "something you are not". Mmmm. Work with me here. I said add sexual preference options. Is bi/pan not a sexual preference? Of course it is. What you are asking for is deliberately paradoxical in that it would be impossible to AI code behavior to account for every possible individual human identity to be "represented"......in an individual companion. I am not being difficult just pointing out the reality. If you are the only person capable of understanding and you shut down anyone (bi, straight, gay) you assure cannot possibly understand because they don't fit your ideal, then how prey tell can anyone other than yourself understand? Serious question. There are no right answers to what you are asking. I was willing to discuss and contribute to your feedback but as I do not represent everyone in existance with a unique identity I will leave it there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Nov 2021
|
Honestly I don't think I care too much about this. I mean.. sure, it could be nice, but I also think it could be nice to see a world where this stuff does not matter at all. Refreshing. It would even be ideal. And I am saying this as a gay man myself. Would be nice if people didn't give a crap about these things at all. You are gay man, which means you cant understand bisexual, pan or something includes more than one gender. Straight people usually has only straight romance experiance, Gay/Lesbian ppl has only one gendered relationships. But when you are not restricted for one gender, you realise that relationships differ and you act different. It's not exclusive to bedroom, you realise there are different patterns. Also about representation, if a straight person can ignore and easily ''not see'' the queerness in game, its not representation. It is an illusion, representation is only meaningful if it helps you irl. Like its about normalizing, its about saying '' we exist, we are here. '' As you choose your "who do you desire" on character creation why not choose sexual preference also? That seems pretty representitive to me. This is bi/pan erasure btw pleaso dont do it. Things i wrote are also an answer if you think this is a proper representation. You are being deliberately combative toward other people and intolerant towards different sexualities and opinions. You just told a gay man he doesn't/cannot possibly understand bi/pan because he is not them followed by a statement about hetrosexuality in the same sentence. You attempt to shut someone down for "no possible understand because you are not" then make a statement about "something you are not". Mmmm. Work with me here. I said add sexual preference options. Is bi/pan not a sexual preference? Of course it is. What you are asking for is deliberately paradoxical in that it would be impossible to AI code behavior to account for every possible individual human identity to be "represented"......in an individual companion. I am not being difficult just pointing out the reality. If you are the only person capable of understanding and you shut down anyone (bi, straight, gay) you assure cannot possibly understand because they don't fit your ideal, then how prey tell can anyone other than yourself understand? Serious question. There are no right answers to what you are asking. I was willing to discuss and contribute to your feedback but as I do not represent everyone in existance with a unique identity I will leave it there. You cant understand what you dont experiance but you can sympathise . You are mistaking what i am asking, read my original post alone to understand my point. I will put it very simply, MLM, FLF, MLF and other types of relationships exists. A strictly FLM person cannot truely understand the difference of being in a different kind of relationship. That is my point. You can only read, hear or observe. You dont experiance it. And I am not being offensive, my english is not my native language so I am truely sorry if I sound offensive/combative. Also it is very VERY simple when it comes to representation. Now imagine you are having a full rest in game, it is after you trigger your romance. Wyll approaches you and asks '' So you are into man, especially this Gale guy huh? '' and a few lines of dialouges happens. Game recognising your character as queer means a lot to the community. It means you validated, you are welcome. Or maybe an important NPC being in a queer relationship or being Trans,NB. That means a non-queer player has to see that they exist, they are valid. That is what i am asking/trying to achieve.
Hanging moon in fog
mists will lead where you belong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I'm not in favor, just because it is very very much work to reflect all possible interactions that could happen and the ROI on that work would be not really huge. Everybody being playersexual is the best way to handle it and besides that it is enough to have companions make minimal references to any romance plot at all, if any. Best case is after establishing a romance there is just the romance plot between you and your chosen companion. I really dont see too much merit in the others reacting to it too much. This goes for any possible constellation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I'm not in favor, just because it is very very much work to reflect all possible interactions that could happen and the ROI on that work would be not really huge. Disagree ... Its 3 reactions per proposal situation, and litteraly everything else can stay the same.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I said it countless times and i say it again, even tho it may not be directly related to the topic ... Companions should have sexual prefferences (both gender and race) and react with different way to our proposal (also should not propose themselves, unless we match both their prefferences). Like: Wyll like Woman ... Human, Elf, Drow or Tiefling (I take the liberation to presume that Mizora can act as a proof that he would obviously not have problems with horns and tails ... ) Reputation enough to romance ... Camp scene: Tav is Female Human ... Tav: Are you coming on to me? > Wyll: I hadn't imagimed myself so subtle. Or to put it in another way: Yes. Tav is Male Human ... Tav: Are you coming on to me? > Wyll: I didnt mean to ... well, on the other hand, why not? Are you interested? Tav is Female Gnome ... Tav: Are you coming on to me? > Wyll: No! I mean, no offence but i didnt mean to ... this never even crossed my mind! > *moment of awkward silence* > Tav: Its okey, im not interested either. / Shame, i hoped we could ... > Wyll: Good, i mean lets drink to that. Friends! / Well, now when you mentioned it ... Something like this. Indeed. Playersexual companions is boring and kind of lazy writing.
Last edited by Peranor; 11/11/21 06:43 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I said it countless times and i say it again, even tho it may not be directly related to the topic ... Companions should have sexual prefferences (both gender and race) and react with different way to our proposal (also should not propose themselves, unless we match both their prefferences). Like: Wyll like Woman ... Human, Elf, Drow or Tiefling (I take the liberation to presume that Mizora can act as a proof that he would obviously not have problems with horns and tails ... ) Reputation enough to romance ... Camp scene: Tav is Female Human ... Tav: Are you coming on to me? > Wyll: I hadn't imagimed myself so subtle. Or to put it in another way: Yes. Tav is Male Human ... Tav: Are you coming on to me? > Wyll: I didnt mean to ... well, on the other hand, why not? Are you interested? Tav is Female Gnome ... Tav: Are you coming on to me? > Wyll: No! I mean, no offence but i didnt mean to ... this never even crossed my mind! > *moment of awkward silence* > Tav: Its okey, im not interested either. / Shame, i hoped we could ... > Wyll: Good, i mean lets drink to that. Friends! / Well, now when you mentioned it ... Something like this. Indeed. Playersexual companions is boring and kind of lazy writing. Well ... the point of my suggestion it keep companions playersexual (they all can get Wyll into the bed) ... While keeping the "approval" rates just the same, so everyone can romance Wyll exactly the same ... But hide it under different reactions, so players have different experience with different characters.  I mean yes ... The fact that no matter if you are Gnome, Half-Orc, Dragonborn, or Elf ... no matter if you are Male or Female ... everyone is totally attracked to you, sexualy ... THAT is lazy writing. Especialy since its sooo damn easy to hide that. But on the other hand i can understand some players frustration ... friend of mine desperately wanted to romance Dorian ... yet she allways play female characters, this was first time in last decade she played male, just for this.
Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 11/11/21 06:49 PM.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2021
|
I guess you could call it lazy writing. I mean, it is. I hate the idea, for instance, that Minthara is willing to engage in relations with a surface elf. She'll even mention how she would've taken the character as a consort in Menzoberranzan, and that's ridiculous. It ignores conflict and setting and atmosphere and depth.
So. I get that it's lazy writing.
Except it's also not. From the writer's perspective, I get it. What are they supposed to do? It's a hot-button issue. While I love storytelling that allows for conflict and immersion, it's easier to just say all the characters are playersexual and avoid any arguments that might otherwise arise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Except it's also not. From the writer's perspective, I get it. What are they supposed to do? It's a hot-button issue. While I love storytelling that allows for conflict and immersion, it's easier to just say all the characters are playersexual and avoid any arguments that might otherwise arise. Take Race tag under concideration and write at least one more line that would be fiting other options? I mean in case of Minthara it dont even seem so hard ... She would say to Drow that she would take her as consort to Menzoberranzan. She would say to everyone else that she would keep her close for rest of her days. The message is practicaly the same, but it dont conflict any specific.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
SereneNight
Unregistered
|
|
SereneNight
Unregistered
|
Minthara has some pretty strong bigotry towards surface elves as evidenced by the dialog, much as Wyll has towards goblins who he nicknames gobos. It would require a lot of storytelling to make such relationships flow naturally, if at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Nov 2020
|
Game recognising your character as queer means a lot to the community. It means you validated, you are welcome. Or maybe an important NPC being in a queer relationship or being Trans,NB. That means a non-queer player has to see that they exist, they are valid. That is what i am asking/trying to achieve. The game is already welcoming to every sexuality because you can pursue whatever kind of sexual encounter/relationship you wish. I don't really see why there should be the added validation of the game acknowledging your sexual orientation...it's just stating the obvious. Personally I'm not a fan of the 'anything goes' sexuality of BG3 because it doesn't feel immersive; the concept of a gnome seducing a drow just seems ridiculous but maybe that's just me. I understand the rationale behind it but I don't agree with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Nov 2015
|
As a heterosexual female I personally prefer companions with a set sexuality, but it does reduce choice of partners, and inevitably leads to complaints that the character a player wants to romance is unavailable to the character they want to play. I think it's realistic to expect to encounter characters/couples of varying sexuality in the course of the game, not so much to expect the romances explicitly to represent every possible player preference of both partner and sexuality--in a game in which the romances are a feature, not the focus of the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
As a heterosexual female I personally prefer companions with a set sexuality, but it does reduce choice of partners, and inevitably leads to complaints that the character a player wants to romance is unavailable to the character they want to play. I think it's realistic to expect to encounter characters/couples of varying sexuality in the course of the game, not so much to expect the romances explicitly to represent every possible player preference of both partner and sexuality--in a game in which the romances are a feature, not the focus of the game. Believe it or not, but i actualy hate to present myself like this. But this is actualy yet another problem my suggestion solves ... People are able to romance anyone ... so nobody can complain about unaviable character. And companions have set sexuality, that feels more natural.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I would like some dialogue reflecting this sort of thing, even in the case of herosexuality. It can add to their depth and offer some nice commentary as well.
Wyll is, like myself, definitely hetero-presenting. For me it's just that I've never met a guy i wanted to be with, even though i find some guys attractive. So me being bi/pan is virtually indistinguishable from me being hetero. So if i ended hitting it off with a guy, I'd let him know that. It would make sense to me if Wyll acknowledged it too (if he doesn't already, i haven't romanced him, but as an example).
Don't you just hate it when people with dumb opinions have nice avatars?
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2021
|
I'm a male hetero and I've been playing female characters for half of my life now, I don't usually insist on romancing all / any character but I like the fact that if one character seems nice, I can try it. I say "character" as a habit but their personality must be really awesome for me to like them despite being a male.
now, what I understood from the setting was that in a world where there are dwarves, elfs, lizard and cat people, with a vast variety of skin color, the notion of same sex relationship or not was just a non-issue.
maybe it is just wishful thinking since I have been wishing for our society to move past these considerations for years, representing the full spectrum of orientations as normal in any fictional world we create or help create is something we can do to try and push the change but I get that in the meantime, this might indeed feel like missed opportunity.
to put things on perspective, when d&d started, female characters could only go as far as 15 in strength. now, tasha's cauldron of everything is suggesting to drop the racial stereotypes too. we don't need to bring what we don't like to our made up worlds.
as for the playersexual thing, yeah, it would definitely not hurt to have a baseline preference from the followers and them requiring a bit more "work" in order to convince them to see us as a romance target, with potentially an initial rejection and then the character coming back after some time passed...
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Nov 2021
|
I understand the different player viewpoints here, but I think all of the various wishlists here amount to a lot of work for developers for something that is a pretty low priority for the game.
I personally find myself not caring about romance dialogue options and a few related cutscenes, but more about about the richness of what I can do in the world. Do the developers really want to spend the time and money to create custom sexual preferences between each character and every permutation of race and sex with accompanied voice-acted dialogue just so the relationship dialogue options feel a bit more organic? I would much rather they spend that time to create a more in-depth crafting system, more things to do in the camp, etc.
We've seen a lot of different perspectives on what would be the ideal way to handle sexual preferences, but its just too subjective so no matter how they changed it many people would probably be unhappy with the change. So from the developer perspective, there's just too many things that are better uses of their time and would make a larger percentage of players happy.
|
|
|
|
|
