Lord_Mord

I was just astounded that you fight over it for eleven pages. I never claimed to be a brilliant thinker nor did I call or "dictate" you anything. You on the other hand took the time to write a lengthy post just to insult us. You make the impression of a very unpolite and self-centered 10-year-old.

Whatever fits the character. My first playthrough is almost always with a male dwarf wizard as a warmup than I try to make something very differently. For Pillars I created a female character named Pirate Jenny named after a song from the Threepenny Opera. In Pillars 2, as there are romances I try to do a run as an evil gay barbarian. Not shure if the game gives me the opportunity to do that. I for one am male, heterosexual and have no strong sense of gender. In fact I find it ridiculous to make differences. I understand that people are having difficulties "choosing" a sex, but in my opinion nobody has to choose at all. That you have a **** does not mean you have to eat beef and drink beer all day, make sexist comments and be a tough guy. That you like to wear womens cloth does not make you a woman or forces you to pick another gender. And I know what I am talking about. When I was a child/teenager I had long hair. Most people thought I was a girl and lots of them mocked me. It never really bothered me and if I wanted to wear a skirt I would have done so. That does not change the fact that I am male, whatever that is supposed to mean.

The point is to constantly adress her in a way she does not like to be adressed. And let her see the implications. She said, that gender means either having a **** or a vagina and nothing more. That is not true. There are always implications. In this case I chose a more sexist approach to make my point clearer, but even if I didn't Sakai would be viewed differently as a woman. In my opinion she knows that and only plays the naive girl. I don't care. Teasing girls is so much fun.

How about пол? https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%93%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80 In german there isn't a word as far as I know and I have no problems with the concept. I can't get rid of the feeling that you play dumb.

You're a clever little girl, aren't you?

As there really is nothing about it, you won't mind if I adress you in female form and even think of you in female form from now on? Not that it would change my view about you (As there really is nothing about it), but it explains a lot. All that whining and nagging.

I think something neutral like "them" will shurely suffice for everybody. So don't dramatize, that's ridiculous.

I don't have to. Nobody has to. It is just not your concern. Apperently you didn't understand the rest of my post and I don't think it's up to me to explain it to you. It's pointless anyway.

I already knew, but it never fails to astound me.

To that point I was a bit sceptical about that topic, but your annoying and pointless answer convinced me that this option should indeed be there. They don't. The option would just affect the scripted sequences and other stuff that does not require special knowledge from characters in the game. It is easy to implement, makes sense and though everyone can be adressed the way they want to be adressed. It is adding a third option to a variable that is already in use. Is that your concern? Personally I don't give a **** about your opinion and I assume lots of people here think the same way. You can't even defend it, this "opinion". Yet you post here. Isn't that the same thing? No it's worse. It's like going into a vegetarian restaurant, taking a seat at an occupied table and telling someone that you don't like salad. Noone cares! Cry elsewhere. And do it quietly.

Wow! People are willing to fight over incredibly small and unimportant nothings.

I'd like it.

The option is already there: You can play a godlike. The problem is, that the game does not really respond to that choice. And of course, if it would you still would not be adressed as "them" or whatever, as that is not common in the games world. But some kind of reactivity would be appropriate, as the lore clearly states that this is a topic inside the game world. But as far as I understand that reaction would not be very positive. So basically it would be the exact opposite of what the OP wants.

I already treid to communicate that those are examples I'm making up to explain my point of view. This is a hypothetical Eder in a hypothetical game. The lore does not matter in this case.

Exactly. It all depends on what Eder sees in Eothas and which aspects are important to him. A gay Eder could either find other aspects important, dispise Eothas at all or maybe have the exact same view as the other Eder. But, and that was my point I think, when it comes to world views, religion, philosophical thinking and stuff, your sexual orientation can influence everything (but does not necessarily have to). Wasn't there a good that was both male and female? Maybe gay Eder likes that idea better than kindness and rebirth. I don't know. In my opinion of course. Im not really trying to make an argument here. This is all speculation. Yes. But as your view of the world changes, so do your stats. If at some point in your life you decide that strength is important, you will throw away the books and lift weights. Small things can affect your whole life. Imagine that: 14 years old gay Eder decides that Eothas is not the right god for him, because he just does not get the whole birth/rebirth concept. He starts to get interested in Berath (looked it up), so maybe his role in the Saints War would be a different one, maybe his parents kick him out, maybe he would have chosen to be a priest... You get the idea. Small changes lead to a butterfly effect. In one live you are strong in the other you are wise. Or even stronger.

I just meant this as an example how his sexual orientation could have influenced his life. It all depends on how Eder views these things.

I meant gay Eder As Eder does not seem to be the guy to pay a hooker for giving him a child, that would leave him with the option to adopt one. Would the god of rebirth still be fitting for Eder if nature/the gods didn't give him a suitable option to reproduce?

If there are no stupid stereotypes involved there is no reason for him to suddenly dislike animals. His favourite dish? I don't know. Maybe if the same thing that makes you homosexual changes your reception of taste, which sounds very unlikely. His god. Now that's interesting. Eder chose the god of rebirth. Would he have chosen a different one, knowing that he will never reproduce? Or would he still have chosen Eothas just because of that fact? Wether or not, the choice itself would be influenced. So that would mean he indeed would be a different person. Would his stats change? Now we reach psychological shoals. I think yes. Homosexual Eder (in reality) would have lived a totally different life with different partners and different milestones. Some of those would have made him wiser, more stubborn, whatever. In a game of course you can just assume that both Eders had the exact same life and all of their partners were the exact same just with a different sex. If one would really want to answer such questions, one would have to do a detailed psychological profile of Eder which allows to say what influenced certain decisions or aspects of his personality. For example: Eder has this thing with his elder brother. Is that because he was a role model for him or because he has a strong bond with his family. If he was his role model, in what regard? Being honest or brave or strong? Being manly? What does manly mean in a world of perfect equality? This conversation is a good example why a player sexual companion would not be very interesting. I could imagine a homosexual companion revolving around all of those questions (The question "how much would change" even reminds me of "what does one life matter"). A player sexual one would have the only benefit of being ****able. No space for exploring the psychological depth of this specific aspect of his/her character as it would have to work for the heterosexual one too.

Somehow this conversation starts to be interesting. I do not think, you are right. I think (I can only guess, as I am not gay and can only take my experience with women into account), that those two Eders would be different, or at least would act different depending on the MCs sex. I really try to act towards women as I would try to act towards men. Meaning, if I work together with a woman as my boss or coworker I'm trying to treat her with the same respect or disrespect as I would treat a man. When it's about hard work, I try not to spare women too much if I think they are able to do it and so on. But: I never have the impression that I am fully sucessful. I do treat women differently, no matter how much I try not to. I think if you see a person as a potential partner you will always do that. So I think the gay Eder will behave differently towards male or female characters than the straight Eder. Unless of course he lives in a vulcan world, were emotions dont interfere with your normal behaviour. And there is more. It is not only about wether the world accepts Eders sexual orientation. It is about how his sexual orientiation is viewed in general. I assume that in our fantasy world gay people are still not 50% of the population, so they are the exception. Noone in our fantasy world sees that as a bad thing. But they still see it as something. Maybe they think Eder is a female soul trapped in a mans body. Or maybe he is viewed as being sexually very adventurous. But whatever the world thinks about him shapes his character in a certain way. If I choose to wear only black cloth, which is a relatively minor decision compared with my sexual orientation people will get a certain image about me. If I wear only bright colors, they will get another one. Depending on that, they will react to me and that will further shape who I am.

In Pillars 1 you already have the opportunity to play a black, female homosexual if you wanted to. Women in the world of Pillars can (depending on the cultural background in the game) do everything men can. I can remember only one damsel in distress, which was the girl at Dyrford and which is totally valid as there were a lot of men in distress too. There are homosexual persons in the game, and at least one of the companions is. So for a game set in a medieval setting this is a good example of both equality and credibility. The only thing this thread asks for is an option to ****, I meant "romance" your homosexual companion. So please do not act as if we were talking about some sexist 80s sword and sorcery crap. And I dont think that with "embodying an idea" injurai meant this kind of stuff either. I think he meant stuff like Planescape Torment. Does it matter what the nameless ones sex or sexual orientation is? It doesn't, because the game is more than just a flat escapist fantasy.

P.S.: Did anyone play BG with the Breagar Mod installed? I think something like that could be what Josh meant in the relationship video. If I'm correct, it would simply not matter whom Aloth/Pallegina/XY is "into", as it would be more about friendship/companionship and character development. Making him '"romancable" would weaken his character and make him less believable. And it would certainly not be possible to write Breagar as "player sexual" without ruining him totally.

I'm not allowing or disallowing anything. I just said it's pointless and proposed to have a more constructive discussion. This discussion is even more pointless, as there are seven companions. Not all of them are "romancable", the wording "or even love" on Josh Sawyers Whitboard tells me, that it will not be very likely for most of the companions to have a romance. Considering what Obsidian said about relationships, I think it's also very unlikely that they go with a solution like a "player sexual companion", as this a very generic thing. So there is room for just a few romances and simply not possible to satisfy everyone. I even think that the relationship system will work in a different way than previous systems from other games, so the usual concepts will not fit in there. But maybe I'm expecting too much here. So I think, as we don't know **** about what they are building there, discussing it in that way is silly and people getting offended over nothing, before that nothing even happened are definitely silly. Me pointing that out is just obvious, not low. That was the most constructive part of the discussion and it ended up in Bioware-Bashing, without someone even noticing the point you made. Does that sound constructive to you? Then you are a very positive and patient person. If I was to read this, I would do the exact opposite of what people want me to. Like for example a heterosexual, unhappy marriage with an alcoholic, abusive Eder or something.

That's easy. How many party members there are is a creative decision. So it's not up to us and I find the discussions about it as pointless as the discussion here. If that decision affects gameplay, you can complain about that. Bad gameplay is not a creative decision. But it's up to the devs to decide how to solve that problem. Same for stealth. The stealth system hasn't much to do with creativity. Other than the writings of the characters. You could argue, that romances are just another subsystem, but even viewing it that way kills creativity instantly. See it more as a hypertext novel or something. You wouldn't want to interfere with the writing of a novel, wouldn't you? Like telling Mark Twain to not use the word ****, because it offends you? It wouldn't be the same book anymore. Of course are discussions and demands not the same. But statements like: If the game does not have this or that, I feel offended, are just stupid. Pointing out that Lovecraft was a racist **** is totally valid. But demanding that he should not write like that or discussing in a forum how nice it would be if he wouldn't is pointless (Even more since he is dead ). So why don't we concentrate on constructive things? In the case of romances: Instead of telling those people what to do with their creative content, why don't you make proposals on how to implement it. Or better: Don't make proposals. Discuss previous implementations of such a system and what went wrong there. I for one am more interested in how such a thing could be implemented in a way that does not feel like clicking through a lot of dialogue and triggering if-conditions than in the question if Pallegina would **** with me.

I said "normal people". My definition of normal does not include capitalistic whores. I assume Obsidian cares for their creations.

Of course they can do what they want. It's their thing and your expectiations dont matter. You don't have to buy it. Seeing everything as a product is a sickness. Is Game of thrones a product? No, it's a book, it's Martins story and if he had no interest in finishing it, nobody has the right to force him. Do you think if James Joyce had written Ulysses in a way his potential "customers" would have liked, anyone would give a **** about that book today? If you want to see computer games as an art (which a lot of people claim they already are), than you have to trust the ****ing artist and dont interfere with his or her ideas. If you knew how to make a computer game you would do so, wouldn't you? But you dont.