|
|
|
member
|
OP
member
Joined: Mar 2015
|
The important thing is that ^ promotes inclusivity, making games a much more friendly place for those who are often persecuted irl, while still retaining equal opportunity for all. Thank you for stating your goals so honestly. Games, books and movies exist to please and entertain the readers and players, make them ponder difficult questions, scare them or have a good laugh. They don't exist to harass people with politics in their precious free time, run election campaigns or promote any specific religious, ideological or political views. If you do that, people will get annoyed and rightfully so. In the best case, they will simply go to Pathfinder or Witcher and your game will fail. In the worst, they will start to actively oppose and downvote your preferred views, simply because you are invading their precious time off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2021
|
Hey, I am all for player sexuality. And while I really do appreciate that Larian makes our companion come to us instead of "forcing" us to pick romantic options in order to trigger future romances, I really do wish there would be more obvious "friendzone"-options early on. Some dialogues that very obviously are meant for those who do not want to pursue romance with that particular companion - AND PLEASE, LARIAN. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE don't wait until the game has the character standing there in front of you with flowers in hand.
If I had to pull an example, I'd bring DA:O to the discussion. I'll say that I absolutely loved the way one could handle Leliana - she hinted at liking your character physically, and you could just give her some responses that were so obvious friendzoning and her approval rating would move from the romantic flags ("interested" etc) to friend ("warm"), yet there seemed to be no harm done. She seemed happy with it and honestly, she seems a bit ... Spectacular to hide feelings if there were any so I don't believe I got deceived. Nor did I lose any approval rating (quite the opposite, I gained approval). Everybody walks out happily!
... HOWEVER, when it came to Alistair... Oh dear god, it was a fucking disaster. I thought of him as a silly brother so I got kinda weirded out when he started flirting. He started dropping romantic hints and I had no way to turn them down without being mean, so I picked as neutral options as possible - and well... Then there finally was the time when he came there asking for more and neutral options lead to kissing and intense music. I struggled for far longer than I am willing to admit to attempt to find a way to shut the romance down without being a dick - but honestly? It seems like it just wasn't possible. In the end I had to just tell him "yeah no, we're just friends" as he asks if he believes I could ever develop feelings for him (with the saddest puppy eyes I've ever seen in a game), ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS - NOT JUST ONCE (and this MUST have been a bug). I am not sure what went wrong with my play-through, but I just kept getting romance scenes with Alistair through-out the entire night when I was playing and I felt so horribly bad for shutting him down over and over. I agree that Leliana was very well done, especially how you can be a good friend with her or move into something more, but it wasn't this abrupt shift. Even though my DA:O character was involved with Allistair, I was sorely tempted to have her ditch him for Leliana just because I liked her character so much. I think the issues with camping and companion interaction queuing in BG3 make it hard for the game to convey companion interest in stages. I was actually surprised a few days ago by a dialogue with Astarion that I hadn't encountered before where he expresses his interest (without actually propositioning your character) and your character can express interest back or shut it down. Maybe they do have those kinds of conversations planned in for everyone and they're just really easy to miss. However, if they don't, then a couple conversations like that would make things seem a lot less abrupt when you get to the party night. It would also allow your character to let the companion know if they're not interested (or not yet), and that would flag them not make future overtures. However, if they did do it that way, then I think they should still leave it open to pick things up again later (assuming you weren't rude about it). It might be easy to miss certain cues otherwise (or you might just be playing a romantically clueless character).
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Pathfinder Kingmaker made it mostly right. You have some characters that are straight (Valerie, Tristian), some bisexual (Octavia and Regongar). I think there was no one straight homosexual, but maybe I don't remember, since I didn't actively look for it.
The only things I didn't like were:
(1) I couldn't romance Amiri with either sex, because she is some kind of original character
(2) It was far too easy to break up Regongar and Octavia. They basically immediately dump each other for the player. I actually liked the Regongar Octavia relationship, it was based on mutual trauma, which when taken away revealed more about their individual characters, so influencing them to stay together or splitting them apart made sense to me. As for Amiri I would maybe clarify that her not being romanceable is fine, but you not even being able to attempt to romance her is a shortcoming. Talking about the split between availability of relationships based on sexual orientation is one thing, but less common than all of that is characters who will reject your advances in general.
Last edited by Sozz; 17/04/21 10:39 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
|
It's a depressing trend in rpgs. There are same sex romance options, but they are frequently bisexual, at the same time there are heterosexual-exclusive options. So heterosexual characters can romance whoever they want, while same sex options are limited to one or two non-exclusive options (if they exist at all, far from a given esp in older games. I'm sorry, but that's almost exactly reflecting real world demographics. You have something like 70% straight, 20%-30% bisexuals and maybe 1% pure homosexuals. The funny thing is that games like Pathfinder are maybe the the most representative you can possibly get. & if you deviate from that, you start to actually discriminate one or the other group. Treating same sex-relationships and heterosexual-relationships as equal is 'discrimination'. Well that's certainly a take. What exactly would be lost by having Valerie and Tristian as Bi? Nothing. Certainly not anything tantamount to an 'invasion' or 'harassment' like you suggest. You'd still be able to court them with your opposite-sex player characters. I definitely feel like a lot of the backlash against 'playersexual' romance amounts to people being uncomfortable that 'the gays' are 'too visible'. IMO what Larian is doing is more or less the best course of action available. Everyone can go with whichever option they want without feeling like they were arbitrarily denied so-and-so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
|
I definitely feel like a lot of the backlash against 'playersexual' romance amounts to people being uncomfortable that 'the gays' are 'too visible'. True, though I'd argue that this is less so for games with playersexual companions than it is for games with high frequency of specifically bi/homosexual companions (where they have explicitly stated backstory or current in-game dialogue/relationships reinforcing those sexualities). Playersexuality has its own, though significantly overlapping, set of arguments against it. For BG3 in particular, a big offender is probably that all the characters jump you at the same time, which gets lumped together with playersexual companions under the broad "problems with romance in BG3" discussion. Of course, playersexual companions doesn't have to mean that all companions jump you, let alone they jump you at the same time; this is just how it happens in BG3 EA. If companions' attention was spread out more and/or the player had to initiate any romance, I imagine that the complains about romance in BG3 would probably drop significantly. IMO what Larian is doing is more or less the best course of action available. Everyone can go with whichever option they want without feeling like they were arbitrarily denied so-and-so. It is definitely the *safest* course of action, but not necessarily the best. In an optimal-world, games should create believable characters of varying sexualities, of course making sure to not rely on harmful stereotypes. Importantly, and this should easily be possible for a game with ~8 companions plus other "romance" opportunities (e.g., Minthara), there should be enough romance options to allow players of any gender/sexuality to have good options. This was a main problem for CP2077, which had 1 romance option for each combination of man/woman & straight/gay. No one wants to be shoehorned into a single option of anything. Of course, this is hard to do properly and probably requires hiring more writers that can write believable and non-offensive lgbt characters. And implementing it poorly will invite backlash from both sides. Of course, doing so properly & with care will still inevitably anger the players who think that the majority of romance options should be straight. But that's fine. You can't please everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
|
My problem has nothing to do with player sexuality. It is a lack of any kind of build up to the moment. There's no real flirting, teasing, joking, or relationship building. It literally goes from 0 to 60. The most flirting that is done is Gale hitting on Shadowheart when you first meet him which goes against flirting with the main. My first thought was, "Okay. Those two are off limits. They obviously have something building there. Next."
But then, nothing. Then suddenly, "Let's bunk tonight."
I recall KOTOR. Now that was fun. What I liked about it was you had to work at it, banter, etc. It built up to a point in the game when it made sense for the romance to reach the fade to black moment. It wasn't just a bam slam in the moment out of nowhere thing where everyone in your party is like, lets go baby.
I wouldn't mind a character initiating something, if they'd been building towards it already and you were reciprocating. This, however, is not that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
My problem has nothing to do with player sexuality. It is a lack of any kind of build up to the moment. There's no real flirting, teasing, joking, or relationship building. It literally goes from 0 to 60. The most flirting that is done is Gale hitting on Shadowheart when you first meet him which goes against flirting with the main. My first thought was, "Okay. Those two are off limits. They obviously have something building there. Next."
But then, nothing. Then suddenly, "Let's bunk tonight."
I recall KOTOR. Now that was fun. What I liked about it was you had to work at it, banter, etc. It built up to a point in the game when it made sense for the romance to reach the fade to black moment. It wasn't just a bam slam in the moment out of nowhere thing where everyone in your party is like, lets go baby.
I wouldn't mind a character initiating something, if they'd been building towards it already and you were reciprocating. This, however, is not that. I'm tired of talking about it, but... 1. It's EA 2. Astarion have at least 1 flirting scene 3. there are more cut scenes with the possibility of flirting. Larian just didn't added this in game yet. but these scenes are in files. So I believe that flirting is not something we need to worry about.
I don't speak english well, but I try my best. Ty
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Apr 2021
|
It is definitely the *safest* course of action, but not necessarily the best. In an optimal-world, games should create believable characters of varying sexualities, of course making sure to not rely on harmful stereotypes. Importantly, and this should easily be possible for a game with ~8 companions plus other "romance" opportunities (e.g., Minthara), there should be enough romance options to allow players of any gender/sexuality to have good options. This was a main problem for CP2077, which had 1 romance option for each combination of man/woman & straight/gay. No one wants to be shoehorned into a single option of anything. Player-sexuality - while definitely the safest and most fair option - strips LIs of their sexuality (they can not talk about it or anyhow indicate. The good attempt was in DA2, when Anders had a special line for gay Hawk, but this is only one example I can think of). I still do not understand why not take the next step and add sexuality for protagonist? You choose who your character is - gay, bi or straight - and potential LI reacts accordingly. A few lines changed depending on your choice would make the whole romance more believable, the existence of the sexuality will be admitted, and yet you would be able to get anyone you want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
|
Player-sexuality - while definitely the safest and most fair option - strips LIs of their sexuality (they can not talk about it or anyhow indicate. The good attempt was in DA2, when Anders had a special line for gay Hawk, but this is only one example I can think of).
I still do not understand why not take the next step and add sexuality for protagonist? You choose who your character is - gay, bi or straight - and potential LI reacts accordingly. A few lines changed depending on your choice would make the whole romance more believable, the existence of the sexuality will be admitted, and yet you would be able to get anyone you want. I mean, you do already somewhat choose your protagonist's sexuality through your choices of who to romance. There doesn't need to be a specific flag that you choose at character creation. I think a better option would be to add more dialogue options to when companions proposition you if you accept/reject them, including of course a "none of your business why I don't want to sleep with you" option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Hey, I am all for player sexuality. And while I really do appreciate that Larian makes our companion come to us instead of "forcing" us to pick romantic options in order to trigger future romances, I really do wish there would be more obvious "friendzone"-options early on. Some dialogues that very obviously are meant for those who do not want to pursue romance with that particular companion - AND PLEASE, LARIAN. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE don't wait until the game has the character standing there in front of you with flowers in hand.
If I had to pull an example, I'd bring DA:O to the discussion. I'll say that I absolutely loved the way one could handle Leliana - she hinted at liking your character physically, and you could just give her some responses that were so obvious friendzoning and her approval rating would move from the romantic flags ("interested" etc) to friend ("warm"), yet there seemed to be no harm done. She seemed happy with it and honestly, she seems a bit ... Spectacular to hide feelings if there were any so I don't believe I got deceived. Nor did I lose any approval rating (quite the opposite, I gained approval). Everybody walks out happily!
... HOWEVER, when it came to Alistair... Oh dear god, it was a fucking disaster. I thought of him as a silly brother so I got kinda weirded out when he started flirting. He started dropping romantic hints and I had no way to turn them down without being mean, so I picked as neutral options as possible - and well... Then there finally was the time when he came there asking for more and neutral options lead to kissing and intense music. I struggled for far longer than I am willing to admit to attempt to find a way to shut the romance down without being a dick - but honestly? It seems like it just wasn't possible. In the end I had to just tell him "yeah no, we're just friends" as he asks if he believes I could ever develop feelings for him (with the saddest puppy eyes I've ever seen in a game), ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS - NOT JUST ONCE (and this MUST have been a bug). I am not sure what went wrong with my play-through, but I just kept getting romance scenes with Alistair through-out the entire night when I was playing and I felt so horribly bad for shutting him down over and over. I agree that Leliana was very well done, especially how you can be a good friend with her or move into something more, but it wasn't this abrupt shift. Even though my DA:O character was involved with Allistair, I was sorely tempted to have her ditch him for Leliana just because I liked her character so much. I think the issues with camping and companion interaction queuing in BG3 make it hard for the game to convey companion interest in stages. I was actually surprised a few days ago by a dialogue with Astarion that I hadn't encountered before where he expresses his interest (without actually propositioning your character) and your character can express interest back or shut it down. Maybe they do have those kinds of conversations planned in for everyone and they're just really easy to miss. However, if they don't, then a couple conversations like that would make things seem a lot less abrupt when you get to the party night. It would also allow your character to let the companion know if they're not interested (or not yet), and that would flag them not make future overtures. However, if they did do it that way, then I think they should still leave it open to pick things up again later (assuming you weren't rude about it). It might be easy to miss certain cues otherwise (or you might just be playing a romantically clueless character). I very much agree with everything you said. There should be options to at least temporary stop romantic advances, but - if I would have it my way, it wouldn't be permanent. Especially not if Larian is planning to do some big plot twists and/or character development. I mean, imagine this: You turn down edgy Vampire boy Astarion because well... Edge and evil - then he turns out to be a really noble and heroic person... Buuut, your romance with him is forever halted. You turn down the funny and charismatic Gale - and then it turns out that he is aiming to become a god himself and is really quite evil. And you play a Evil character... Bummer. You turn down Shadowheart because she is secretive and emotionally unstable - buuut then she gets her memories back and turns out to be a really caring and sweet Selûne priestess... Well sh!t. You turn down Lae'zel because she is too brutish and seems to only care about physical attractions - but then it turns out that she is this really sweet wifu material... You turn down Wyll because he is too self-absorbed and obsessed with his demon patron - aaand then it turns out that once he is rid of her, he becomes a more humble hero - trying to make the world a better place little by little. Point is, for all we know - these characters could develop to be the polar opposite of what they are now (or at least what we think they are). While I do support being able to at least somewhat halt the incoming "romance"-options, I think it would be really weird if Larian allowed us to burn our bridges permanently when we don't even know them (obviously that could be an option too - but it has to be so obvious that no one would do it by mistake, like you said. Something REALLY mean and/or that leaves no doubt - like being a sworn hermit/nun).
Hoot hoot, stranger! Fairly new to CRPGs, but I tried my best to provide some feedback regardless! <3 Read it here: My Open Letter to Larian
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2013
|
Player-sexuality - while definitely the safest and most fair option - strips LIs of their sexuality (they can not talk about it or anyhow indicate. The good attempt was in DA2, when Anders had a special line for gay Hawk, but this is only one example I can think of).
I still do not understand why not take the next step and add sexuality for protagonist? You choose who your character is - gay, bi or straight - and potential LI reacts accordingly. A few lines changed depending on your choice would make the whole romance more believable, the existence of the sexuality will be admitted, and yet you would be able to get anyone you want. I mean, you do already somewhat choose your protagonist's sexuality through your choices of who to romance. There doesn't need to be a specific flag that you choose at character creation. I think a better option would be to add more dialogue options to when companions proposition you if you accept/reject them, including of course a "none of your business why I don't want to sleep with you" option. You do, but currently the way you express that is woefully insufficient. Maybe in Astarion's case it can get to the propositioning stage since he's such an incorrigible flirt. Shadowheart too since she's helplessly dimwitted. But the other characters should have sussed out you aren't interested way before then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
|
I mean, you do already somewhat choose your protagonist's sexuality through your choices of who to romance. There doesn't need to be a specific flag that you choose at character creation.
I think a better option would be to add more dialogue options to when companions proposition you if you accept/reject them, including of course a "none of your business why I don't want to sleep with you" option. Agreed. I don't want that who do you dream of crap to have a sexuality flag at all. I still want to pretend it can be anyone important in your life (good or bad) including someone you have no sexual interest in.  I very much agree with everything you said. There should be options to at least temporary stop romantic advances, but - if I would have it my way, it wouldn't be permanent. Especially not if Larian is planning to do some big plot twists and/or character development. As someone who thinks romance in games is completely pointless and unnecessary, I agree with you. I don't mind having to ignore dialogue options multiple times just to not have to have this stuff in my game, most likely it would be something I would never say anyway (like other dialogues in any conversation.) Perhaps there should be dialogue options all the way up to the last act of the game (at which point companion personalities would most likely be finalized) that would allow the player to express interest in someone. I would say even further in but most likely those who like this stuff want time for it to develop a bit?
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Apr 2021
|
I mean, you do already somewhat choose your protagonist's sexuality through your choices of who to romance. There doesn't need to be a specific flag that you choose at character creation.
I think a better option would be to add more dialogue options to when companions proposition you if you accept/reject them, including of course a "none of your business why I don't want to sleep with you" option. What about bi option? I am all for subtlety, but we do choose our gender anyway and adding sexuality in a game, where it matters somewhat, these days should be just a logical next step, no? The option "no romanses" can be added too, so people indifferent or disliking this sort of things can play in peace as well. Do not think it will be implemented any time soon in any game, but one can still hope.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
|
I mean, you do already somewhat choose your protagonist's sexuality through your choices of who to romance. There doesn't need to be a specific flag that you choose at character creation.
I think a better option would be to add more dialogue options to when companions proposition you if you accept/reject them, including of course a "none of your business why I don't want to sleep with you" option. Agreed. I don't want that who do you dream of crap to have a sexuality flag at all. I still want to pretend it can be anyone important in your life (good or bad) including someone you have no sexual interest in. Oh yeah, lol, I totally forgot about the dream interest thing we have to specify at the beginning. Yeah that is more than enough of a "choose your sexuality" options in this game, no need for additional flags that affect your companions. Also, how would your companions even know of your sexuality without getting it through dialogue (flirting, etc)? What about bi option? I am all for subtlety, but we do choose our gender anyway and adding sexuality in a game, where it matters somewhat, these days should be just a logical next step, no? The option "no romanses" can be added too, so people indifferent or disliking this sort of things can play in peace as well.
Do not think it will be implemented any time soon in any game, but one can still hope. Why should sexuality be a logical step? If the protagonist's sexuality matters, then it can be shown through dialogue options. If it doesn't matter, then why do we need to specify it? Sexuality is very different from gender, because gender affects your character model whereas sexuality does not. (Honestly, games should probably start offering more options than just male and female, but that's its own can of worms) I don't disagree with a "no romance" flag, for people who are uncomfortable with all/some romances or for people who don't particularly want to play a dating sim. But this is better solved by in-game romances being initiated by the player instead of the companions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Apr 2021
|
Why should sexuality be a logical step? For some people it is part of identity and since we already have several different options for in-game romances, why not include it for protagonist as well? If the protagonist's sexuality matters, then it can be shown through dialogue options. Sure, but this way player would not have to go through the extra dialogs if player does not want to. It simplifies things and clearly indicates what game do you want to play. I don't disagree with a "no romance" flag, for people who are uncomfortable with all/some romances or for people who don't particularly want to play a dating sim. But this is better solved by in-game romances being initiated by the player instead of the companions. Tastes are different - I, for once, prefer more proactive companions. Again, as a compromise (same with player-sexuality) it is fine and can be made in a way, that once you clicked a special dialog options - romance begins and LI is active, but if you played DA2 (DAO too, actually) you should remember how many problems misclicks created. With the flag system misclicks simply would not happen. I do not see any drawbacks with the flags, only simplification and an option for everyone to get a better game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
|
@Amirit
I guess I don't particularly want to assign my protagonist's sexuality at character creation. That seems like too much detail and not necessary given the other means of managing relationships in game. This seems like a better fit for game settings vs an intrinsic trait of my protagonist.
Simplification isn't necessarily the ultimate goal. I would prefer NPCs and my protagonist to have dialogues discussing why relationships would or would not work rather than me just setting a character trait and then skipping all those conversations. The latter seems antithetical to the "roleplaying" part of roleplaying games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Apr 2021
|
This is the point - you are not skipping anything. As of now chances to get a really meaningful dialogues on that particular subject in any game (probably including dating sims, though could not say for sure) are even less than developing a mechanical system. I am talking only about existing trends, where the number of options is already in place, but the system to handle it still did not emerge.
But it sounds as we are discussing something probable. Most likely neither wish will ever be fulfilled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
The problem with player-sexuality is a little deeper than only "to be or not to be ... bi".  Personaly i mind much more that no one seem to care if they lay down with Tall Elf, Hairy Dwarf, Tiny Gnome, Scaly Dragonborn, or Beautifull (:D) Gith. :-/ I would honestly dont mind if Gale would have kink for Elves ... Concidering how half-breeds are spreaded in DnD its quite common among humans ... but dont tell me such person will be attracked by small, hairy, smelly, Dwarf (no matter the sex, they are all small, hairy and smelly) just the same. :-/
Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 19/04/21 01:42 PM.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings.  Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2021
|
The problem with player-sexuality is a little deeper than only "to be or not to be ... bi". Personaly i mind much more that no one seem to care if they lay down with Tall Elf, Hairy Dwarf, Tiny Gnome, Scaly Dragonborn, or Beautifull (:D) Gith. :-/ Kith'rak-senpai noticed me, y'all.  ![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/zRphP6d/Kithrak.jpg)
Last edited by BeeBee; 19/04/21 03:20 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
The problem with player-sexuality is a little deeper than only "to be or not to be ... bi". Personaly i mind much more that no one seem to care if they lay down with Tall Elf, Hairy Dwarf, Tiny Gnome, Scaly Dragonborn, or Beautifull (:D) Gith. :-/ I would honestly dont mind if Gale would have kink for Elves ... Concidering how half-breeds are spreaded in DnD its quite common among humans ... but dont tell me such person will be attracked by small, hairy, smelly, Dwarf (no matter the sex, they are all small, hairy and smelly) just the same. :-/ This! My friend I am very concerned about this. Astarion would never sleep with a dwarf or a halfling. Shadow wouldn't have gone to bed with Git! Both have enough "flags" to show it... And this can be seen even more clearly than someone's tastes as male/female. I mean both looks like they hate this race. It's like Gale say 'I dont sleep with man ugh' AND THEN U BANG HIM. Rude.
I don't speak english well, but I try my best. Ty
|
|
|
|
|
