Longknife

I understand your intentions, but on an internet gaming forum, these sorts of topics unfortunately degenerate very quickly without constant moderating. It's the nature of the medium. Are you saying people on the internet are typically being cruel and inflammatory? Nonsense good sir. I won't have you needlessly tarnishing the good name of the Internites. They are a proud and noble race of objective and respectable philosophers capable of constantly productive and meaningful discussion!

Ummm.... We playing the same game? Legion and BoS both shun it because it's unproductive for society in the sense that both want people to procreate, though Legion isn't too strict about this and supposedly has tons of gay members. (or rather bisexual? I'm betting Caesar doesn't care as long as they knock up a few women) NCR supposedly has some hate towards homosexuality within the front lines that's purely bigoted. Either way though, again, I don't see the need for a thread. New Vegas was very basic about touching on these themes (as it should be imo, both because that wasn't a central theme of the game and because it's stupid and downright insulting to define homosexual characters by their sexuality and nothing more), and I'd imagine PE will be more or less the same: if at all, touching on the theme in a very VERY basic way and then treating the entire issue rather non-chalantly.

For me, the purpose here would be the feeling of the game taking place in some really dark, brutal and harrowing times, instead of just making it look like your average high-fantasy friendly neighbourhood LARP. The exploding bodies in BG/ID just look silly to me, so I'm hoping they'll steer clear of that in PE, but if they draw inspiration from Fallout's beautifully gruesome animations, I'm all for blood and gore. I'm for it if it's realistic, but typically it's over the top. Hence why I said no, because the word "gore" to me typically means violence that's unrealistic as hell. Heads don't typically explode when shot. Slicing off someone's limbs isn't "just that easy." I somehow doubt entrails are so keen on spilling completely out the moment there's a hole in your stomache.

Exactly like New Vegas did it: DON'T handle them. Just have the random character here or there be gay or lesbian, but DON'T call attention to it. Just have the character be a normal quest NPC or vendor or whatever, but then maybe in conversation one day he says "could you hurry? I gotta meet up with my husband at the tavern." Bam. Simple and done. Don't make the guy flamboyantly gay so that his personality revolves around his sexuality. No, just have gay NPCs as a way of saying "hey, they're here too." But don't call attention to it or act like they need a pity party or something. They deserve prescence in the game as well, as much as anyone else, but not as a central theme. And yeah, I don't quite see the point of this thread tbh. I trust Obsidian will do it exactly as they did before.

I addressed this several pages back. OP also suggests that perhaps elves be made asexual, yes? I have a problem with this because a race having no gender would have implications on their culture and on how they function and on everything they do. I somehow doubt Obsidian already planned to make elves asexual, so OP is basically asking for the entire culture of a race to change drastically so that a rather small minority of players can feel at home, even though that same minority would have an easy time feeling at home simply be picking their preferred sexuality and preferred orientation and playing that way, writing up whatever backstory they choose for their transgenderedness (a wizard did it). If Obsidian plans an asexual race, by all means. However, Obsidian often does a wonderful job of making logical cultures. For example the languages of Zion are based on existing languages rather than just completely made up. To switch an existing race to asexual, I would imagine, wouldn't be just that easy for Obsidian as they'd want the culture to fully reflect that, and thus I'd bet they want to rewrite cultural norms etc to suit that. Yes I see that, but again that ties into my above response. I think writing a cultural norm or belief AROUND transgenderism is asking a little much. It's very out of the way, and I'm pretty sure it'd be very out of place, as I doubt Obsidian intends much of the game to be about sexual identity. Though hey, perhaps I'm wrong in this case. It was supposed to touch on the theme of souls, right? The Native American concept actually ties in here...

I really don't understand the appeal. Gore will always be just that: gore. It's gore for the sake of gore. I think I once heard, and I dunno if this is true, but supposedly one of the reasons Fallout is so violent is to reflect the warped 1950's culture, where people are smiling and happy, Ma is cooking apple pie as Little Billy practices for the baseball game and Pa comes home from work to a nice juicy steak, but at the same time we need to kill all communists and watch out for Sputnik. It was paranoid, sick and violent while also being optimistic and pleasant. In that sense, the gore and violence of Fallout, alongside things like, say, the music you might be listening to WHILE dismembering and beheading your enemies, does a wonderful job of reflecting 1950's culture. Again, I dunno if this was the intention or if I heard that from a bogus source, but it it is true, props to Fallout for being the first series I know of to give purpose and meaning to gore. Having said that, I'd rather not have gore unless it has a purpose. Over-the-top violence just for the sake of over-the-top violence because some people get a sick thrill out of seeing that kind of stuff? Sounds like a dumb reason to me...

Realistically, while lesbians and gay men can be included without their sexuality being their central theme, much like it was done in New Vegas, this is a fantasy setting. I somehow doubt there's operations to change one's hormones and appearance to make them more feminine or masculine. I mean let's get real here. Transgender operations haven't been around that long. Asking for transgender representation in a fantasy setting where guns are -just- beginning to be discovered? Very out of place.

I love learning.

For a second there I thought this was another transgender thread...

It makes sense. If a lesbian plays a game and is forced to only flirt with men, it's kinda awkward for them. Same for gay men being told to flirt with women, same for a bisexual who can't hit on their same gender. It's simply the game telling them to be something they're not. Solution is simple. Don't include any kind of romantic relationships. I'd agree, but I also find simple flirting to be natural. While I definitely disagree with those who want romance to be a central theme, I think romance (or rather basic attraction) is simply TOO natural to exclude entirely. It'd be kinda weird. New Vegas for example didn't have any romantic relationships, and yet it provided perks that turned your character gay, lesbian or bisexual, awarding special dialog with certain characters. You were incapable of actually building a relationship, but it let gay men for example actually hit on that gay guy who was complaining about being a bachelor.

It makes sense. If a lesbian plays a game and is forced to only flirt with men, it's kinda awkward for them. Same for gay men being told to flirt with women, same for a bisexual who can't hit on their same gender. It's simply the game telling them to be something they're not. A role playing game telling people they're playing a role other than their own? Oh, the humanity. But it's common for people to want to base a roleplaying character on themselves. I sure as hell make more male characters than female characters (infact I RARELY make female characters) because I can simply relate to a male better. Why? Because I too enjoy the boobies. Same thing here. And even if EVERYONE had an easy time roleplaying as another sexual orientation, I see no reason why the game should say no to those that WANT to play a lesbian or whatever.

It makes sense. If a lesbian plays a game and is forced to only flirt with men, it's kinda awkward for them. Same for gay men being told to flirt with women, same for a bisexual who can't hit on their same gender. It's simply the game telling them to be something they're not. But for transgender people, you can effectively be transgender as long as you can choose your gender and choose your sexual orientation. A special tag that makes sure everyone knows your character used to be the other gender, while I can understand the immersion appeal, doesn't have a PRACTICAL use....Unless of course you're WANTING your character to be discriminated against and hated on for being part of a sub-group that sadly gets a discriminated against and hated on a lot, which....I dunno why you'd want that. This request is basically the same as if someone were to request support for asexuals, AKA, the rare few who feel no sexual attraction to either gender. If an asexual made that request? "Just turn down everyone that hits on you." BAM, problem solved. No need for a special asexual tag when you can turn people down at will. Sexual orientation and the two genders make sense, but anything like being transgender, pansexual vs. bisexual or asexuality? Those can easily be done in a practical sense already....

This is a rather MASSIVE change just for a transgender option. You're asking them to rewrite an entire race to essentially be asexual. This has implications and impacts on it's culture and...well in everything. Listen, I get it: it's nice to be properly represented. I'm disabled myself and I'm not properly represented in video games either. Would it be cool if I could make a disabled character in Fallout that, if his right leg got crippled, he didn't need a Doctor's bag to heal it, but rather some scrap electronics to repair a prosthetic limb? Hell yes. Would it add to character diversity, customization and immersion? Hell yes. Would it hinder anyone else's experience? Absolutely not. But is it at the top of the priority list? No it's not, because it's a very VERY small change and to be honest, I can pretend my character has a prosthetic limb as long as he's not wearing shorts. Will this EVER be at the top of the priority list in a game like this? Not until developers -literally- run out of **** to do. Maybe a game like the Sims would have it someday, but not this. So look, I'm all for equality, but I also think we should be reasonable. Such a change would literally be a label and nothing but. It would have no impact on gameplay, nor would it change anything. You'd just be clicking a "transgender" button instead of male or female, and even THEN the game is going to ask you male to female or female to male. And what then? Then you end up making a character that essentially looks male or female. Unless you're specifically asking for a gender category that supports women with masculine features and vice versa, in which case, again, I think a good character customization system could allow for this. It's -literally- just a label with very limited effects on the game. I get it, and you have every right to ask, but the reality is your request is nothing but a dream. It'll never happen.

Yes. Also let's at first make it have a definitive ending with a moral lesson and a theme, then let's release a DLC that gives it post-ending gameplay and rips the moral lesson a new one, creating a new story that's essentially "wait my bad the bad guy isn't quite dead yet, sorry."

Skyrim had a ridiculously large one that was obviously a buggy console port and was incredibly impractical and required lots of scrolling and clicking to do the most basic of tasks, and Skyrim got game of the year. So obviously we need inane impractical UIs or the game will suck. Really? What's the appeal of this? Multi-monitors always felt like a useless gimmick when I got a DS. If it can be done on one screen, why do it on three?

I like how Vegas did it. General enemies didn't level scale, enemies in DLCs did. This was smart because usually by the time people bought the DLCs, they were higher level and could kill everything in the wastes. Having said that, level scaling only became essential in the DLCs because the DLC meant everyone was reaching level 30+. I think level scaling should be reserved SOLELY for "legendary" enemy types, like Deathclaws with Fallout. It would definitely be odd if you could reach a point of a Fallout game where deathclaws are just a nuisance, and I'm sure PE will have one too. But for the love of god, don't make a friggin bear or a generic bandit level scale.

I cringed. Hard.

Yes.

In some cases, it was simply a matter of taste. For example, I chose the ordinary, fully modded Hunting shotgun over the unique variant (the Dinner Bell) because while the Dinner Bell did hit harder, the fully modded normal hunting shotgun had a larger clip size and less spread (more accurate). Or with ALSID, it had a sick damage output and decent crit rate, but the normal .45 pistol had both a silencer and better ironsights. Omg and Annabelle. That beautiful, homocidal woman. She was far more potent than the normal rocket launcher, but had this wonderful habit of causing explosions so large that they'd kill you too, despite the fact that you're standing 50 feet away from the target. Occassionally there were weapons like Lucky and the Medicine Stick that yes, WERE superior to their normal counterparts (9mm pistol, .357 pistol and Brush Gun) in every way that mattered, BUT these unique variants were still balanced with other unique variants. All unique or fully modded versions of weapons were able to go toe-to-toe with each other simply because they enjoyed different benefits, from damage, damage-per-second, crit damage, crit rate, accuracy, the quality of the ironsights (some guns had poor ironsights, some were scoped), the durability, the repair costs, the ammo variety available to the gun, and the ammo abundance and cost. It's one of the reasons I CANNOT go back and enjoy Fallout 3 like I once could: because no matter your character in FO3, you WILL be wielding Lincoln's Repeater or Alien tech by the end of the game unless you roleplay that your character likes using crappy guns...which isn't very fun to roleplay.

We should nag Feargus until he gives us the number of this publisher. Then call them and offer to play their games and tell our friends how great the games are, cept we get to keep the games and our money. It's an offer they can't refuse.

Sympathetic villains > cartoonishly evil ones.

It's Jim Sterling. What'd you expect? I have no clue who that is. No, but I do hope Feargus' response to the offer was "AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA"

I vote for Keyboard Cat. Sorry Justin.

Yeah, it was a stupid offer that only an idiot would be blinded by. The article posted in this thread, imo, is being a little overdramatic about it. Businesses are businesses. By design, they seek a profit no matter the circumstances (unless a CEO or other worker is willing to make exceptions). This means that yes, sometimes they make really scummy offers knowing full-well that it's a scummy offer. They don't give a damn and do it anyways, because not making the offer entails 0 profit whereas making the offer potentially entails a lot of profit. It's to be expected, and I hardly think it's a severe problem like that article makes it out to be. Nah, it's just god damn hilarious, is what it is.