Sexuality in games is pretty funny to me. In Cyberpunk, the people you meet are people with sexualities. If you're hetero and male, you can't romance certain people because they're not. That's a...
Sexuality in games is pretty funny to me. In Cyberpunk, the people you meet are people with sexualities. If you're hetero and male, you can't romance certain people because they're not. That's a fair play in my book.
In Stardew Valley, everyone is 'playersexual'. You can romance and marry anyone eligible and they go along with it. Except if you don't pair with them they'll go to their default choice. Meaning everyone eligible is potentially bisexual if you're charming (give them enough of their favorite thing) enough. When this update went through, despite the work ape put into all the stories I started to think of the NPCs as NPCs and not as characters anymore, simply because their interactions with me were now more limited by me than 'them'.
Then in the Mass Effect series, my space bro Kaiden decided after watching me hook up with the blue alien for three games that right before the big final mission he had to tell me he was gay for me the whole time. Like, I didn't mind that he was gay, just he knew I was faithful to the Asari - so now he's just a homewrecker.
The video is certainly correct that the Bi option changed video games but some handled it better in my opinion.
The issue I had with Cyberpunk was that, at least playing as a woman and trying to romance Panam, it wasn't until the end of the "track" that you find out she's straight despite the fact that...
The issue I had with Cyberpunk was that, at least playing as a woman and trying to romance Panam, it wasn't until the end of the "track" that you find out she's straight despite the fact that she's been flirty with you the whole time. I think the dialog is the same for male vs female PC basically the whole time until the very end. I wish she had different dialog sooner and I didn't have to look up a guide to figure out what I messed up. I'm fine with her being straight but at least be consistent about it.
Can confirm, and yeah it's utterly grating. Cyberpunk is another game that to me is a good argument for not offering the player so much freedom and not making the player an empty slate. There's...
I think the dialog is the same for male vs female PC basically the whole time until the very end.
Can confirm, and yeah it's utterly grating. Cyberpunk is another game that to me is a good argument for not offering the player so much freedom and not making the player an empty slate. There's plenty cool NPCs, the interactions wth them just whiff because of how soulless they had to be written as they know nothing about my own character.
I'd rather be "the V", as written by the authors and defined by the story they're telling.
I didn't try to romance anyone in Cyberpunk so I didn't get into a situation like this, but I think it's really interesting. Probably somewhat unintentional, if the dialog is actually the same....
I didn't try to romance anyone in Cyberpunk so I didn't get into a situation like this, but I think it's really interesting. Probably somewhat unintentional, if the dialog is actually the same. But I actually like the idea of a character being friendly/perceivable as flirty in a game, but their orientation isn't compatible with your character.
Part of the problem with how "bisexuality has changed video games" is that a lot of characters are simply made to be totally flexible orientation-wise -- so that no paths are closed off to the player, and so that no possibilities are unplayable. No matter who you play as, you can romance who you want. Then you have games like Mass Effect which offer a mix, and there are some characters who are not compatible with you but you're never led to believe otherwise.
It'd be interesting to see characters who a) could possibly deliberately manipulate you in this manner -- for example someone who pretends to be interested in you in order to get attention, gifts, etc - or b) simply don't realize they're leading you on, which could lead to really interesting friction. I get the impression you're not really getting that with Panam mind you, but it would be interesting if you could make a relationship awkward or damage it by expressing interest in someone who you thought was flirting with you but wasn't. But perhaps that is a bit too real for some people's tastes.
Funny you bring up mass effect, because I tried to chat up the cute redhead admin assistant, got as far as having a private game of chess in my room... And turns out she's lesbian and I'm a dude,...
Funny you bring up mass effect, because I tried to chat up the cute redhead admin assistant, got as far as having a private game of chess in my room... And turns out she's lesbian and I'm a dude, dangit lol
Yeah Samantha I guess, I took Mass Effect to mean the entire trilogy (since OP mentioned a thing that happened in ME3), rather than just the first game
Yeah Samantha I guess, I took Mass Effect to mean the entire trilogy (since OP mentioned a thing that happened in ME3), rather than just the first game
Upon reflection, it's a weird mechanic to have to define and discuss. It seems like the natural progression of things that I should be able to make choices about my in-game sexuality without any...
Upon reflection, it's a weird mechanic to have to define and discuss.
It seems like the natural progression of things that I should be able to make choices about my in-game sexuality without any bounds or restrictions. The weight of cultural or religious expections should not come into play and developers and writers should be free to tell the story they wish.
The one thing I will say is, I don't want to be pandered to by people trying to push their own agenda, regardless of what it may be - it's a game and the choices I make don't have a deeper meaning beyond - this is what I want to experience this playthrough.
However, I don't particularly play games to have my values challenged and I believe there are far more fruitful avenues for personal growth.
The one thing I will say is, I don't want to be pandered to by people trying to push their own agenda, regardless of what it may be - it's a game and the choices I make don't have a deeper meaning beyond - this is what I want to experience this playthrough.
In the simplest terms, I don't want people telling me how I should play a game or telling me how I should feel about the sexuality mechanics in a game - whether I should be able to make choices...
In the simplest terms, I don't want people telling me how I should play a game or telling me how I should feel about the sexuality mechanics in a game - whether I should be able to make choices around who I romance or whether to be outraged or pleased with the inclusions or exclusions a game may carry.
All I'm looking for is as much freedom as possible to choose varied playthroughs and not limit the experiences I can be open to while playing games.
I wouldn't really say that games do this, given they are a medium built to tell interactive stories. People do this, by leveraging game content and using it as a platform they can lean on to...
I wouldn't really say that games do this, given they are a medium built to tell interactive stories.
People do this, by leveraging game content and using it as a platform they can lean on to promote their viewpoint.
I use this as an example because the intent is a very good one, to promote the inclusion of LGBTQ characters in games, however the way they approach this is by telling me, as a player that I am not able to immerse myself into a story as much, or I am not getting the complete experience because it might not include for example, same-sex romancing. This takes away from the main message which is, let's expand the experience to all, so that everyone can have something they enjoy - which is the main benefit to introducing sexuality mechanics to a game.
I'm really not getting that take-away from the article. The closest it gets is either or But those carry fundamentally different messages. "Some people require a character with certain traits like...
by telling me, as a player that I am not able to immerse myself into a story as much, or I am not getting the complete experience because it might not include for example, same-sex romancing.
I'm really not getting that take-away from the article. The closest it gets is either
For those people not interested in examining their sense of Self through game play, identification with a character is a prerequisite to immersion in a plot.
or
Certainly the inclusion of countless "types" of people just makes the involvement with the character, the plot and the game more enjoyable for everyone? How dull is it to play the same cardboard cut-out again and again and again?
But those carry fundamentally different messages. "Some people require a character with certain traits like them to feel immersed, and women/gay people have much fewer options" and "a more diverse cast is more colourful/enjoyable for everyone" are how I read them. I don't see them or any meaningful movement saying that a lack of same-sex relationships prevents everyone from being immersed, just that more would help some people be more immersed.
So to clarify, I've originally mentioned that: I've also said: I want my approach to gaming to remain unimpeded by external voices which lobby for or against wider societal issues or who attempt...
So to clarify, I've originally mentioned that:
I should be able to make choices about my in-game sexuality without any bounds or restrictions.
I've also said:
I don't particularly play games to have my values challenged and I believe there are far more fruitful avenues for personal growth.
I want my approach to gaming to remain unimpeded by external voices which lobby for or against wider societal issues or who attempt to dictate how I as a player should feel about added game features or omissions.
A good way to relate this to another dimension of gaming is the pre-order phenomenon, where "hype" influences how users feel about a game before they have been able to experience it first-hand and the expectation placed on the final product ultimately colours the interaction with the material.
I would much rather approach the content on my own terms and enjoy it for what it is.
The article I linked has some very overt tones of derision to the experience for everyone i.e.
How dull is it to play the same cardboard cut-out again and again and again?
Does that not strike you as dismissive of the game and it's content?
As for making it more accessible/relatable for LGBT communities, developers who do this should be commended.
I am the opposite, I loathe player-freedom characters. I want written, defined, existing characters. Otherwise my own player character always feels like this weird and grating empty void in a...
I am the opposite, I loathe player-freedom characters.
I want written, defined, existing characters. Otherwise my own player character always feels like this weird and grating empty void in a written lore and story. I'd much rather have an Amicia from A Plague Tale than a Dovahkiin from Skyrim, basically.
And sure, I get it. If you don't write the player character, you naturally cannot write it badly. It avoids one pitfall leading to a mediocre game. But I'd rather read a book then, or play a game that doesn't even pretend to have any real writing in the first place.
It's also absolutely possible to write player-freedom characters badly imo. Cyberpunk 2077 lets you make your character trans, but they don't let you discuss it with the other trans character in...
It's also absolutely possible to write player-freedom characters badly imo. Cyberpunk 2077 lets you make your character trans, but they don't let you discuss it with the other trans character in game when her trans-ness comes up. Nor does it get referenced when Johnny Silverhand talks about the experience of being in your body. On top of gender generally being assumed based on your voice choice rather than any aspects of your character's appearance or god-forbid your choices, but I recognize that probably would have been technically more expensive due to added voice lines and stuff.
This is pretty much the same way most of these "blank slate" games do queer characters. It doesn't actually have any effect on even trivial dialogue options, and the game was clearly written with a cishet blank slate in mind. So what you get is a cishet (usually male) experience with a sticker that says "gay" or "trans" on it. This is boring and imo barely counts as representation at all -- people only get excited about it because it's so rare to even have this much reflection of yourself in a game as a queer person.
I want well-written queer characters (both as player characters and NPCs), not cishet blank slates that I can stick a "queer" sticker on.
I think it's a tough sell to focus stories around those kinds of characters in a way that requires monetary investment in voice lines, writing, possibly more detailed character modelling etc...
I think it's a tough sell to focus stories around those kinds of characters in a way that requires monetary investment in voice lines, writing, possibly more detailed character modelling etc (although I think most people were probably fine with the character creator) in a AAA game.
There are plenty of indie games focusing around well-written queer characters these days, more and more by the day. But when only a small portion of the population identifies that way (and admittedly probably moreso in the video game audience for a variety of reasons), it'd be difficult to walk into a boardroom pitching a AAA game and say "hey, let's have it star a queer character." Even in a case like Horizon where they did confirm that Aloy is gay, they REALLY hedged their bets with that one in the first game and didn't make it clear at all because they wanted to test the waters. And having said that, Sony has really leaned into the marketing with that one to say "hey, we have a queer lead character, look at us and how brave we are" (which at the end of the day is still better than nothing, I suppose). Ellie in TLOU was sort of the same story to some extent, although her sexuality really didn't play into the first game at all because of her age. They had an established character people liked, and they were able to take her in that direction because players were already attached and would be less likely to turn up their nose.
I'm definitely willing to acknowledge the market-oriented reasons that more studios don't actually write queer characters. That's a part of reality. The problem I have is this view that allowing...
I'm definitely willing to acknowledge the market-oriented reasons that more studios don't actually write queer characters. That's a part of reality. The problem I have is this view that allowing players to slap on a gender or sexuality that's nothing but superficial is somehow good representation in this day and age. There are definitely plenty of games with well-written queer characters, especially in the indie scene. But that's exactly why this stale barely-even-surface-level representation doesn't do anything for me. It's like sawdust in my rice krispie treat.
To CDPR's credit I've never seen them screaming about how they're doing so much for representation etc. Though I can't say the same of other companies. But then with CDPR they've had problems...
To CDPR's credit I've never seen them screaming about how they're doing so much for representation etc. Though I can't say the same of other companies.
But then with CDPR they've had problems going the other way with some really questionable, borderline transphobic tweets and things of that nature.
Yeah I think CDPR's otherwise clumsy handling of trans stuff (their """edgy""" tweets plus the... less than sensitive use of trans imagery in in-universe ads in cyberpunk) along with the history...
Yeah I think CDPR's otherwise clumsy handling of trans stuff (their """edgy""" tweets plus the... less than sensitive use of trans imagery in in-universe ads in cyberpunk) along with the history of cyberpunk as a genre to (at least sometimes) be a haven for trans people is a big part of what adds to my disappointment regarding their handling of trans player characters.
Representation aside, it also does make the art worse imo. It's kinda weird and out of character for it to never come up in dialogue even as a throwaway line, AND it makes the game seem to be actively avoiding engaging with some interesting cyberpunk themes that really suit their narrative and setting... though to be fair Cyberpunk 2077 does that in many other more egregious ways, since its handling of its story and themes is messy throughout.
Enter Fallout:New Vegas. I can be male or female (I know, there's some work to do there as well), I can take the perk to make that character gay... or I can take both perks and make them bi. Done...
Enter Fallout:New Vegas.
I can be male or female (I know, there's some work to do there as well), I can take the perk to make that character gay... or I can take both perks and make them bi.
In Fallout New Vegas bisexual characters have an advantage because they get +10% damage against opponents of both genders whereas a heterosexual character will only get +10% against the opposite...
In Fallout New Vegas bisexual characters have an advantage because they get +10% damage against opponents of both genders whereas a heterosexual character will only get +10% against the opposite gender.
In vanilla Fallout 3 there are no bisexual perks and more NPCs are male than female. As a result female characters are stronger because they can take the +10% damage to men perk. This isn't a big...
In vanilla Fallout 3 there are no bisexual perks and more NPCs are male than female. As a result female characters are stronger because they can take the +10% damage to men perk.
This isn't a big deal nowadays though because anyone playing Fallout 3 will probably play it via a Tale of Two Wastelands (preferably via The Best of Times ). This uses the Fallout New Vegas engine and brings across the bisexual perks along many, many other upgrades.
I guess it will depend on how you play the game. You can role play, which will limit your options, or just don't care about the narrative and be efficient. It reminds me of some MMOs with factions...
I guess it will depend on how you play the game. You can role play, which will limit your options, or just don't care about the narrative and be efficient. It reminds me of some MMOs with factions at war that never battled because top clans decided all should be at the same side.
There's always the case of players optimizing the fun out of games.
Yeah, but if you are a straight woman, you are the only one who can't hire a prostitute. Always annoyed me. They had a guy for gay guys, and women for both gay women and straight men, but nothing...
Yeah, but if you are a straight woman, you are the only one who can't hire a prostitute. Always annoyed me. They had a guy for gay guys, and women for both gay women and straight men, but nothing if you actually wanted to be a straight women. I attribute it more to the fact they only had one male prostitute and several women. Honestly as a straight women it annoys me in general cause we are the group it seems if they don't have romance companions that will romance anyone (in other words they will only romance gay or straight people) we get left out. And if there is a woman only protagonist, they are either asexual or gay (god forbid guys have to play a character that might want to romance a guy - I'm going to guess there are not many if any gay guy protagonists either).
Alright... I'll shuttup (it's just a pet peeve of mine. I mostly attribute it to them not wanting to make guys have to romance other guys cause they just assume it's guys playing).
I share your peeve and suspect you're spot on about game designers wanting to appeal to men. For years I had to play as a guy and be limited to the story options presented to me from that...
I share your peeve and suspect you're spot on about game designers wanting to appeal to men. For years I had to play as a guy and be limited to the story options presented to me from that perspective because that was just the default option. It's strange in this day of free choice character designed that I'm still often restricted in my options of playing a straight woman. However, I also don't want to complain about something that leads to increased representation for lgbtq+ folks. It's a weird spot to be in
Well there's always Fisto, the Pansexual monarch (or would it be Asexually apathetic instead?). But yes, it is odd since there is a quest that at the bare minimum has you seek out a male escort,...
Well there's always Fisto, the Pansexual monarch (or would it be Asexually apathetic instead?).
But yes, it is odd since there is a quest that at the bare minimum has you seek out a male escort, of which there are two choices.
Developers and writers should be able to tell their stories, but that might limit the freedom players have. At the same time, the lack of option might expand the limits of the player by forcing...
Developers and writers should be able to tell their stories, but that might limit the freedom players have. At the same time, the lack of option might expand the limits of the player by forcing them to play in a way they hadn't thought of or tried before. That's the challenge. It's not solely about values.
It’s a video about sexuality as a gaming mechanic. The same way you might play as a mage or a warrior, you can choose who your character is interested in. Except you don’t realize you have an...
It’s a video about sexuality as a gaming mechanic. The same way you might play as a mage or a warrior, you can choose who your character is interested in. Except you don’t realize you have an option until someone else that played the game in a different way tells you. There’s a focus on bisexual erasure as well.
If the video is too long for you, watch the first twelve minutes and you will get the gist.
Watching this now, it’s hard not to think about social media and how the ecosystem is tailored to make you see exactly what you want. We will always interpret the world though the lens of our personal past experiences, but tech is able to steer us away from anything that challenges our point of view these days. It’s a common practice for big companies to edit their products to comply with the demands of specific cultures or the powers that be.
There are the players and the world. There are well-crafted narratives and player choices. Being able to role play as much as you want is good, and the same can be said of a world that adapts to your decisions. On the other hand, experience something that is beyond or at the edges of my imagination has great value, and a world whose personality changes solely for my benefit is limiting in a way I’ll never be aware.
Sexuality in games is pretty funny to me. In Cyberpunk, the people you meet are people with sexualities. If you're hetero and male, you can't romance certain people because they're not. That's a fair play in my book.
In Stardew Valley, everyone is 'playersexual'. You can romance and marry anyone eligible and they go along with it. Except if you don't pair with them they'll go to their default choice. Meaning everyone eligible is potentially bisexual if you're charming (give them enough of their favorite thing) enough. When this update went through, despite the work ape put into all the stories I started to think of the NPCs as NPCs and not as characters anymore, simply because their interactions with me were now more limited by me than 'them'.
Then in the Mass Effect series, my space bro Kaiden decided after watching me hook up with the blue alien for three games that right before the big final mission he had to tell me he was gay for me the whole time. Like, I didn't mind that he was gay, just he knew I was faithful to the Asari - so now he's just a homewrecker.
The video is certainly correct that the Bi option changed video games but some handled it better in my opinion.
The issue I had with Cyberpunk was that, at least playing as a woman and trying to romance Panam, it wasn't until the end of the "track" that you find out she's straight despite the fact that she's been flirty with you the whole time. I think the dialog is the same for male vs female PC basically the whole time until the very end. I wish she had different dialog sooner and I didn't have to look up a guide to figure out what I messed up. I'm fine with her being straight but at least be consistent about it.
Can confirm, and yeah it's utterly grating. Cyberpunk is another game that to me is a good argument for not offering the player so much freedom and not making the player an empty slate. There's plenty cool NPCs, the interactions wth them just whiff because of how soulless they had to be written as they know nothing about my own character.
I'd rather be "the V", as written by the authors and defined by the story they're telling.
I didn't try to romance anyone in Cyberpunk so I didn't get into a situation like this, but I think it's really interesting. Probably somewhat unintentional, if the dialog is actually the same. But I actually like the idea of a character being friendly/perceivable as flirty in a game, but their orientation isn't compatible with your character.
Part of the problem with how "bisexuality has changed video games" is that a lot of characters are simply made to be totally flexible orientation-wise -- so that no paths are closed off to the player, and so that no possibilities are unplayable. No matter who you play as, you can romance who you want. Then you have games like Mass Effect which offer a mix, and there are some characters who are not compatible with you but you're never led to believe otherwise.
It'd be interesting to see characters who a) could possibly deliberately manipulate you in this manner -- for example someone who pretends to be interested in you in order to get attention, gifts, etc - or b) simply don't realize they're leading you on, which could lead to really interesting friction. I get the impression you're not really getting that with Panam mind you, but it would be interesting if you could make a relationship awkward or damage it by expressing interest in someone who you thought was flirting with you but wasn't. But perhaps that is a bit too real for some people's tastes.
Funny you bring up mass effect, because I tried to chat up the cute redhead admin assistant, got as far as having a private game of chess in my room... And turns out she's lesbian and I'm a dude, dangit lol
Kelly? I'm fairly confident she's bi. Are you thinking of Samantha, from ME3? She's certainly gay, and broke my heart.
Yeah Samantha I guess, I took Mass Effect to mean the entire trilogy (since OP mentioned a thing that happened in ME3), rather than just the first game
Upon reflection, it's a weird mechanic to have to define and discuss.
It seems like the natural progression of things that I should be able to make choices about my in-game sexuality without any bounds or restrictions. The weight of cultural or religious expections should not come into play and developers and writers should be free to tell the story they wish.
The one thing I will say is, I don't want to be pandered to by people trying to push their own agenda, regardless of what it may be - it's a game and the choices I make don't have a deeper meaning beyond - this is what I want to experience this playthrough.
However, I don't particularly play games to have my values challenged and I believe there are far more fruitful avenues for personal growth.
What do you mean by this?
In the simplest terms, I don't want people telling me how I should play a game or telling me how I should feel about the sexuality mechanics in a game - whether I should be able to make choices around who I romance or whether to be outraged or pleased with the inclusions or exclusions a game may carry.
All I'm looking for is as much freedom as possible to choose varied playthroughs and not limit the experiences I can be open to while playing games.
I don't think I've personally seen any games doing that. Could you give some examples?
I wouldn't really say that games do this, given they are a medium built to tell interactive stories.
People do this, by leveraging game content and using it as a platform they can lean on to promote their viewpoint.
Here's an oldie but a goodie
I use this as an example because the intent is a very good one, to promote the inclusion of LGBTQ characters in games, however the way they approach this is by telling me, as a player that I am not able to immerse myself into a story as much, or I am not getting the complete experience because it might not include for example, same-sex romancing. This takes away from the main message which is, let's expand the experience to all, so that everyone can have something they enjoy - which is the main benefit to introducing sexuality mechanics to a game.
I'm really not getting that take-away from the article. The closest it gets is either
or
But those carry fundamentally different messages. "Some people require a character with certain traits like them to feel immersed, and women/gay people have much fewer options" and "a more diverse cast is more colourful/enjoyable for everyone" are how I read them. I don't see them or any meaningful movement saying that a lack of same-sex relationships prevents everyone from being immersed, just that more would help some people be more immersed.
So to clarify, I've originally mentioned that:
I've also said:
I want my approach to gaming to remain unimpeded by external voices which lobby for or against wider societal issues or who attempt to dictate how I as a player should feel about added game features or omissions.
A good way to relate this to another dimension of gaming is the pre-order phenomenon, where "hype" influences how users feel about a game before they have been able to experience it first-hand and the expectation placed on the final product ultimately colours the interaction with the material.
I would much rather approach the content on my own terms and enjoy it for what it is.
The article I linked has some very overt tones of derision to the experience for everyone i.e.
Does that not strike you as dismissive of the game and it's content?
As for making it more accessible/relatable for LGBT communities, developers who do this should be commended.
I am the opposite, I loathe player-freedom characters.
I want written, defined, existing characters. Otherwise my own player character always feels like this weird and grating empty void in a written lore and story. I'd much rather have an Amicia from A Plague Tale than a Dovahkiin from Skyrim, basically.
And sure, I get it. If you don't write the player character, you naturally cannot write it badly. It avoids one pitfall leading to a mediocre game. But I'd rather read a book then, or play a game that doesn't even pretend to have any real writing in the first place.
It's also absolutely possible to write player-freedom characters badly imo. Cyberpunk 2077 lets you make your character trans, but they don't let you discuss it with the other trans character in game when her trans-ness comes up. Nor does it get referenced when Johnny Silverhand talks about the experience of being in your body. On top of gender generally being assumed based on your voice choice rather than any aspects of your character's appearance or god-forbid your choices, but I recognize that probably would have been technically more expensive due to added voice lines and stuff.
This is pretty much the same way most of these "blank slate" games do queer characters. It doesn't actually have any effect on even trivial dialogue options, and the game was clearly written with a cishet blank slate in mind. So what you get is a cishet (usually male) experience with a sticker that says "gay" or "trans" on it. This is boring and imo barely counts as representation at all -- people only get excited about it because it's so rare to even have this much reflection of yourself in a game as a queer person.
I want well-written queer characters (both as player characters and NPCs), not cishet blank slates that I can stick a "queer" sticker on.
I think it's a tough sell to focus stories around those kinds of characters in a way that requires monetary investment in voice lines, writing, possibly more detailed character modelling etc (although I think most people were probably fine with the character creator) in a AAA game.
There are plenty of indie games focusing around well-written queer characters these days, more and more by the day. But when only a small portion of the population identifies that way (and admittedly probably moreso in the video game audience for a variety of reasons), it'd be difficult to walk into a boardroom pitching a AAA game and say "hey, let's have it star a queer character." Even in a case like Horizon where they did confirm that Aloy is gay, they REALLY hedged their bets with that one in the first game and didn't make it clear at all because they wanted to test the waters. And having said that, Sony has really leaned into the marketing with that one to say "hey, we have a queer lead character, look at us and how brave we are" (which at the end of the day is still better than nothing, I suppose). Ellie in TLOU was sort of the same story to some extent, although her sexuality really didn't play into the first game at all because of her age. They had an established character people liked, and they were able to take her in that direction because players were already attached and would be less likely to turn up their nose.
I'm definitely willing to acknowledge the market-oriented reasons that more studios don't actually write queer characters. That's a part of reality. The problem I have is this view that allowing players to slap on a gender or sexuality that's nothing but superficial is somehow good representation in this day and age. There are definitely plenty of games with well-written queer characters, especially in the indie scene. But that's exactly why this stale barely-even-surface-level representation doesn't do anything for me. It's like sawdust in my rice krispie treat.
To CDPR's credit I've never seen them screaming about how they're doing so much for representation etc. Though I can't say the same of other companies.
But then with CDPR they've had problems going the other way with some really questionable, borderline transphobic tweets and things of that nature.
Yeah I think CDPR's otherwise clumsy handling of trans stuff (their """edgy""" tweets plus the... less than sensitive use of trans imagery in in-universe ads in cyberpunk) along with the history of cyberpunk as a genre to (at least sometimes) be a haven for trans people is a big part of what adds to my disappointment regarding their handling of trans player characters.
Representation aside, it also does make the art worse imo. It's kinda weird and out of character for it to never come up in dialogue even as a throwaway line, AND it makes the game seem to be actively avoiding engaging with some interesting cyberpunk themes that really suit their narrative and setting... though to be fair Cyberpunk 2077 does that in many other more egregious ways, since its handling of its story and themes is messy throughout.
So I assume you don't play many linear/narrative focused games, then?
Enter Fallout:New Vegas.
I can be male or female (I know, there's some work to do there as well), I can take the perk to make that character gay... or I can take both perks and make them bi.
Done and dusted.
In Fallout New Vegas bisexual characters have an advantage because they get +10% damage against opponents of both genders whereas a heterosexual character will only get +10% against the opposite gender.
Just like real life.
Ha. I did realise that. It's quite funny.
Narratively it's fine.
Gameplayish? Not so much...
In vanilla Fallout 3 there are no bisexual perks and more NPCs are male than female. As a result female characters are stronger because they can take the +10% damage to men perk.
This isn't a big deal nowadays though because anyone playing Fallout 3 will probably play it via a Tale of Two Wastelands (preferably via The Best of Times ). This uses the Fallout New Vegas engine and brings across the bisexual perks along many, many other upgrades.
You know what? I didn't know that.
I played FO3 once and hated it. Adored New Vegas though, and I know of the mod but never followed it to that level.
I guess it will depend on how you play the game. You can role play, which will limit your options, or just don't care about the narrative and be efficient. It reminds me of some MMOs with factions at war that never battled because top clans decided all should be at the same side.
There's always the case of players optimizing the fun out of games.
Yeah, but if you are a straight woman, you are the only one who can't hire a prostitute. Always annoyed me. They had a guy for gay guys, and women for both gay women and straight men, but nothing if you actually wanted to be a straight women. I attribute it more to the fact they only had one male prostitute and several women. Honestly as a straight women it annoys me in general cause we are the group it seems if they don't have romance companions that will romance anyone (in other words they will only romance gay or straight people) we get left out. And if there is a woman only protagonist, they are either asexual or gay (god forbid guys have to play a character that might want to romance a guy - I'm going to guess there are not many if any gay guy protagonists either).
Alright... I'll shuttup (it's just a pet peeve of mine. I mostly attribute it to them not wanting to make guys have to romance other guys cause they just assume it's guys playing).
I share your peeve and suspect you're spot on about game designers wanting to appeal to men. For years I had to play as a guy and be limited to the story options presented to me from that perspective because that was just the default option. It's strange in this day of free choice character designed that I'm still often restricted in my options of playing a straight woman. However, I also don't want to complain about something that leads to increased representation for lgbtq+ folks. It's a weird spot to be in
Huh. I thought you could hire a sex worker at the Atomic Wrangler regardless of the gender of your character?
Well if you are a gay woman, yes. But not if you are straight cause the one guy only goes for guys.
That's... Such a weird omission.
Wonder if it's as simple as "More guys play it" or if its just a gap!
Well there's always Fisto, the Pansexual monarch (or would it be Asexually apathetic instead?).
But yes, it is odd since there is a quest that at the bare minimum has you seek out a male escort, of which there are two choices.
It'll be a cold day in hell before I lay down cash for a prostitute named Fisto.
Developers and writers should be able to tell their stories, but that might limit the freedom players have. At the same time, the lack of option might expand the limits of the player by forcing them to play in a way they hadn't thought of or tried before. That's the challenge. It's not solely about values.
It’s a video about sexuality as a gaming mechanic. The same way you might play as a mage or a warrior, you can choose who your character is interested in. Except you don’t realize you have an option until someone else that played the game in a different way tells you. There’s a focus on bisexual erasure as well.
If the video is too long for you, watch the first twelve minutes and you will get the gist.
You can read the transcript here: https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=iZGkxUTbDqw
--
Watching this now, it’s hard not to think about social media and how the ecosystem is tailored to make you see exactly what you want. We will always interpret the world though the lens of our personal past experiences, but tech is able to steer us away from anything that challenges our point of view these days. It’s a common practice for big companies to edit their products to comply with the demands of specific cultures or the powers that be.
There are the players and the world. There are well-crafted narratives and player choices. Being able to role play as much as you want is good, and the same can be said of a world that adapts to your decisions. On the other hand, experience something that is beyond or at the edges of my imagination has great value, and a world whose personality changes solely for my benefit is limiting in a way I’ll never be aware.