Why are half the companions trying to get in my pants?

[morhilane]

So reading a few posts, it seems that what I took as Maia hitting on me wasn't Maia hitting one me.

 

I find it hilarious how different those companion dialogues flags behave, lol.

Edited May 17, 2018 by morhilane

[Ryz009]

So reading a few posts, it seems that what I took as Maia hitting on me wasn't Maia hitting one me.

 

I find it hilarious how different those companion dialogues flags behave, lol.

 

Wait which dialogue?

 

I really hate rangers And my 3 ranged slots are usually filled with my PC, Aloth and Xoti.

[morhilane]

 

So reading a few posts, it seems that what I took as Maia hitting on me wasn't Maia hitting one me.

 

I find it hilarious how different those companion dialogues flags behave, lol.

 

Wait which dialogue?

 

I really hate rangers And my 3 ranged slots are usually filled with my PC, Aloth and Xoti.

 

 

It was an awkward question-conversation about captain/subordinate relationship. I picked the "lets keep this professional", but nothing about the whole thing was necessarily "I wannabe more than friend".

[Ryz009]

 

 

So reading a few posts, it seems that what I took as Maia hitting on me wasn't Maia hitting one me.

 

I find it hilarious how different those companion dialogues flags behave, lol.

 

Wait which dialogue?

 

I really hate rangers And my 3 ranged slots are usually filled with my PC, Aloth and Xoti.

 

 

It was an awkward question-conversation about captain/subordinate relationship. I picked the "lets keep this professional", but nothing about the whole thing was necessarily "I wannabe more than friend".

 

 

Ooooh. Reminds me of that Fenris conversation where he's giving you a compliment and you can either shut it down, make it flirty or keep it friendly. I love those awkward convos

[Tamyn]

 

 

It was an awkward question-conversation about captain/subordinate relationship. I picked the "lets keep this professional", but nothing about the whole thing was necessarily "I wannabe more than friend".

 

 

Well, for my girl with Aloth, Maia immediately turned that conversation into a romantic one, saying it was too bad my Watcher was already attached. If you don't cut her off with "let's keep it professional", she keeps hinting in a romantic direction otherwise. She doesn't outright say, "Let's bang," or anything.

[Ryz009]

 

 

 

It was an awkward question-conversation about captain/subordinate relationship. I picked the "lets keep this professional", but nothing about the whole thing was necessarily "I wannabe more than friend".

 

 

Well, for my girl with Aloth, Maia immediately turned that conversation into a romantic one, saying it was too bad my Watcher was already attached. If you don't cut her off with "let's keep it professional", she keeps hinting in a romantic direction otherwise. She doesn't outright say, "Let's bang," or anything.

 

 

Wait so she's just as thirsty as Xoti? Awwww.

[E.RedMark]

the dialogues or flag are bugged...reading peoples reports stuff..I'm pretty sure they are . Cose some stuff never happen in my game at all .

 

Side note: I don't mind Xoti and Maia hit on me..about time too! 

[morhilane]

the dialogues or flag are bugged...reading peoples reports stuff..I'm pretty sure they are . Cose some stuff never happen in my game at all .

 

Side note: I don't mind Xoti and Maia hit on me..about time too! 

 

and next you know they are going to ask you relationship advice: Xoti about Maia and Maia about Xoti.

[Ryz009]

 

the dialogues or flag are bugged...reading peoples reports stuff..I'm pretty sure they are . Cose some stuff never happen in my game at all .

 

Side note: I don't mind Xoti and Maia hit on me..about time too! 

 

and next you know they are going to ask you relationship advice: Xoti about Maia and Maia about Xoti.

 

 

I did get some cute banter with fishboy and Aloth <3

[Parasol_Syndicate]

You know what I'm missing, more than better written companion attractions? 
More varied reactions to them. 

When Xoti hit on me, there's an option to let her down easy, since my overall reaction is one of pity. 
When Maia did, within an hour of meeting her, I accepted, since It was the romance I wanted to try, and an overall sense of "challenge accepted!" 

When Tekahu did, many levels and quests later. theres options to decline, decline emotionally, and accept.  
What's missing is an option to "keep that **** to himself, or you're taking the quick route off the boat!"

 

The fact that mine is a male watcher is immaterial. Obsidian wrote the characters how they did, but they should give us leeway to roleplay with them. 
My aggressive, assertive watcher is going to deal with serenades by a vainglorious sharkman in a spirit of hostility. Or I WOULD, if I were allowed to. 

 

 

Instead I get a flirt option for Serafin whenever I click him by mistake. Just Super. 

Edited May 18, 2018 by Parasol_Syndicate

[The Sharmat]

 

 

Ryz: The word playersexual isn't even in that post, sorry you were triggered so hard by that one time I used it. I clarified later that I was mistaken and in reality everyone but Edér was bisexual. Which I suppose is very slightly better writing. But I still can't imagine it is the way it is for any reason other than power fantasy.

 

 

Yes I'm triggered by people using terms improperly and spewing their uniformed views all over the place that they regurgitated from some other uniformed person. It's extremely tiresome to see that constantly repeated by people who don't even know what they're talking about go on and on about it. That said you did admit you were wrong so thank you for that. That bit wasn't even directed towards you if it was I'd specified you instead of saying people. Cause you can't seriously believe you're the only one using that term on these boards. You have agreed with posts using that term so you know it's not just you.

 

Like what sense would it make for me to say people in general if I meant you in particular?

 

As for power fantasy it's a video game. Power fantasy is part of their bread and butter. If an RPG was to be realistic your PC wouldn't have nearly the amount of influence over how the factions win/lose as they do.

 

Like the bs excuses are so tiresome. You don't like it. That's fine. (General you to make this clear)That doesn't mean it's not immersive or its some extreme outlier in all the other crap that's in the game. Why can't people just say they don't like something and leave it at that? Why all the bs justifications? Like if they had did this with established characters and you're like "that's not how they were before." I'd get it. But they used new characters for a reason.

 

Regarding the OP I also get the aggravation on NPCs hitting on the PC first. But I really haven't experienced that? Even Xoti despite the clear thirst hasn't openly hit on my character in this play-through so I'm wondering if it's a dialogue trigger.

 

No it does make it very nonimmersive for people that don't like power fantasies. Obsidian was supposed to be above this kind of thing but it seems to have given up. It's disappointing. My character would have less power over factions? Good! That would be interesting. Imagine having to navigate between the levers of power in a world where people don't inherently bow to your will, having to make difficult choices for unassured outcomes and never quite getting what you want. Sounds interesting. Much more interesting than another "which faction u want to win/which waifu/husbando u want fam?"

 

I'm using hyperbole here naturally but it's sad that not only do people not seem to want games to try this, but they get mad that people even want a small niche of the market to have this and complain about it. There's plenty of Bioware RPGs out there. Let people with more, dare I say it, adult tastes have one.

[daven]

Ya know, maybe i'm starting to come round to the idea that maybe my character is just like David Beckham or something. The kind of guy who makes women want him, and men want.. to be women.

[Ryz009]

No it does make it very nonimmersive for people that don't like power fantasies. Obsidian was supposed to be above this kind of thing but it seems to have given up. It's disappointing. My character would have less power over factions? Good! That would be interesting. Imagine having to navigate between the levers of power in a world where people don't inherently bow to your will, having to make difficult choices for unassured outcomes and never quite getting what you want. Sounds interesting. Much more interesting than another "which faction u want to win/which waifu/husbando u want fam?"

 

I'm using hyperbole here naturally but it's sad that not only do people not seem to want games to try this, but they get mad that people even want a small niche of the market to have this and complain about it. There's plenty of Bioware RPGs out there. Let people with more, dare I say it, adult tastes have one.

 

 

Much of the game is a power fantasy however is my point. Also Obsidian above this sort of thing? Uh both MOTB and FNV has your character far more influential than they should be. Also where are you getting people bowing to your will in deadfire? Like the only person who does is Eothas with the ending. They're all using you (much like in NV). Like you help a faction win yes but that certainly doesn't mean they'll do what you want them to do. As for waifu/husbando yep you get one of 4 options yes. Most games with optional romances in them tend to give you more than one option.

 

There aren't actually. Like if you want to list rpgs with customizable female protagonists that allow you to romance a male that's not a visual novel? There's really really not a lot. BioWare are one of the few devs that do it to be honest.

 

Also adult tastes?

 

I've seen far more complaining from those who don't want romances in a game about romances than I have people who want romances in games that don't.

Edited May 18, 2018 by Ryz009

[Skazz]

Ya know, maybe i'm starting to come round to the idea that maybe my character is just like David Beckham or something. The kind of guy who makes women want him, and men want.. to be women.

 

Um... I'm afraid your age is showing, sir.

[daven]

 

Ya know, maybe i'm starting to come round to the idea that maybe my character is just like David Beckham or something. The kind of guy who makes women want him, and men want.. to be women.

 

Um... I'm afraid your age is showing, sir.

 

What dya mean?! AM I that out of touch?

[Lexi]

 

Ya know, maybe i'm starting to come round to the idea that maybe my character is just like David Beckham or something. The kind of guy who makes women want him, and men want.. to be women.

 

Um... I'm afraid your age is showing, sir.

 

 

Have you seen him lately? Guys still hot.

[Skazz]

 

 

Ya know, maybe i'm starting to come round to the idea that maybe my character is just like David Beckham or something. The kind of guy who makes women want him, and men want.. to be women.

 

Um... I'm afraid your age is showing, sir.

 

 

Have you seen him lately? Guys still hot.

 

 

Sure. Still, it's a choice that sounds a little passé.

[Wormerine]

Ya know, maybe i'm starting to come round to the idea that maybe my character is just like David Beckham or something. The kind of guy who makes women want him, and men want.. to be women.

Or Bullet Tooth Tonny

https://youtu.be/1crhwQPKr7w

[Nokturnal Lex]

Someone should mod it so each character has a randomized sexual orientation each time you start a new game. Making it so even if you want to romance a character that character might not be sexually attracted to you, just like real life. Of course if there's going to be Bisexuals, there needs to be Pansexuals and Asexuals, also Eder should have a random chance to be a furry. (The dude really likes animals what can I say)

 

Could even take it a step further and have them be sexually attractive to different races and muscle tone. Taking how much Might your character has into effect.

Edited May 19, 2018 by Nokturnal Lex

[Aridea]

I don't think thats technically possible, since there doesn't seem to be a check for player's gender.

 

So sorry

 

 

 

 

Ya know, maybe i'm starting to come round to the idea that maybe my character is just like David Beckham or something. The kind of guy who makes women want him, and men want.. to be women.

 

Um... I'm afraid your age is showing, sir.

 

What dya mean?! AM I that out of touch?

 

 

Yeah, nowadays it seems its Justin Bieber thats all the rage.

Edited May 19, 2018 by Aridea

[drael6464]

 

Ah, yes. There is nothing I love seeing more in my fantasy games then reflections of reality. Well, except for the magic. And dragons. And sexy talking swords. I mean, those are all fine, but I definitely draw the line at bisexuals. Like, a society thats not hung up on gender? Well, that just is taking things too far. 

I see this tired old argument is very popular with you guys  . I'll humor you once more - sexual relationships are relateable to the real world and people can't help by draw parallels and conclude that a dense congregation of LGBTs in a small group is not normal (and don't go with "LGBT circles attract" theory again, it's still not normal for a lot of people). Nobody can relate truly magical and fantastical stuff you mention to anything in the real world, so it doesn't break anybody's suspense of disbelief when we play or read fantasy, because we just accept it as imagined fiction. But you can't simply make people erase the real world parallels from their minds, so don't act so baffled when they won't treat "everyone is LGBT in this world" as acceptable imaginary fantasy. And, btw, it's not a norm even in the game, at least in some regions - when Xoti talks to the Watcher about Maia you can ask her why does she want her if in Readceras it's a norm only to form couples that provide offspring.

 

And, in any case, it's sad that you're defending this lazy writing, because devs didn't make it just to please LGBTs, they did it because they were lazy to write companions more nuanced in their preferences.

 

 

Yeah thing is, it's not just lazy writing is it?

 

It's a progressive ideology touched game. You've got your black elves and dwarves - where in usual circumstances those would be golden, ashen, or some weird colouring instead. It's not a region thing or a subtype either, it's just mashed in there. You've got your playersexual romance options - and really there is more companions that won't flirt with you, or romance you, than will.  And despite all this high fantasy, you can't put your female wizard or barbarian in a dress or a loin cloth and get decent DR, because hey that might be sexualizing them, and you want them in reasonable, realistic armour. Indeed if you put the watershapers loincloth on a woman, it suddenly transforms into a very modest affair. Pillars 1 had some better light armour outfits, they are basically absent here (I prefer them myself aesthetically for both genders)

 

Then there's the godlike companion who is "transitioning", and also the colonialist narrative.

 

Now fortunately most of this is optional - you can kill the natives if it pleases you, or join the pirates, and you don't have to romance anybody. But unfortunately you can't choose all of it - you'll still get hit on by every player in sight and get visits from randy bisexual crew.

 

I won't argue that it's unrealistic. That's not the issue - the issue is that those themes are all just "jammed in there", in a haphazard and unartful way. You can create great compelling characters who are different races, sexualities and so on. The nativist/colonolist narrative was a little better, but still IDK - it lacked nuance. Where for example were the poor/ex-slave/war fleeing immigrants that typify actual colonists? 

 

I think the biggest issue for me, is that it puts such a modern gaze on what is a violent, brutal, class orientated world with mass deaths and slaves in it - but seen through the eyes of someone who reads the guardian and watches Netflix. 

 

Now it is fantasy. The genre has always been flexible. Female warriors have always been a thing despite being rarer in history. As with female leaders. And all sorts of ahistorical oddities - for the fun of it.  But the way this is done, isn't artful like it can be when you want to tackle those subjects and give them true meaning. It's half-baked, like a lot of progressive influenced media is, and it comes off as  at times, unaware of its audience - disconnected, like someone living in an irony tower. It comes off, as not being for fun - but as a way to satisfy a group that are not the majority audience. 

 

It's a good game, with a decent plot - especially how all the substories interconnect. It's very artfully produced in terms of the graphics, and for the most part ignoring a few odd borks the system improvements are good. I think this game is better than the last one. And I am not one to complain about something someone else spent thousands of hours making - it's their art, and we don't have to buy it. 

 

But if I were to give any advice about this to the developers - I would just say, keep in mind, gamers are not, largely speaking uber progressive. A minority are, and the gaming press is, but most ordinary folks would rather have a saucy or violent tale ala game of thrones. Or a something lighter, like something comedic, or a bit of fluffy heroism. 

 

I am not saying I didn't like the game, or indeed that those elements have no place in fantasy - merely that they could be handled better, both to properly respect the subject material, and to be relateable to a mainstream audience who may not otherwise connect. 

 

Some of my favourite heros are heroines. I've enjoyed a lot of shows with LGBT material. There's some stories that are deeply moving about our cultural differences. It's just not something IMO, you can have a fluffy hand at. It's a set of deep social issues with a lot of angles. 

 

And you could just as easily offend indeed, the people you are trying to please, by stuffing all these things under a unicorn. A world with some much tribal tension, and no racial tension? LGBT but no struggle with social taboo? It's a heady area. 

[CENIC]

 

Everyone is bisexual and sex mad.

 

Why

Only the new companions. And they're not bisexual, they're playersexual. Which is way worse. Xoti shows no interest at all in women unless it's a female watcher that's coming on to her.

She gave my female Watcher a suggestive once over when they first met, and also grabbed her hand for support during her character quest in a way that felt like more than just emotional support iykwim.

 

In the epilogue she even wrote me a letter saying I'll always be in her dreams. What???

 

Can't blame her for being more into Eder than Lady Watcher tbh. I mean, there's really no comparison when you put them side by side...

Edited May 26, 2018 by CENIC

[marimo]

 

 

Ah, yes. There is nothing I love seeing more in my fantasy games then reflections of reality. Well, except for the magic. And dragons. And sexy talking swords. I mean, those are all fine, but I definitely draw the line at bisexuals. Like, a society thats not hung up on gender? Well, that just is taking things too far. 

I see this tired old argument is very popular with you guys  . I'll humor you once more - sexual relationships are relateable to the real world and people can't help by draw parallels and conclude that a dense congregation of LGBTs in a small group is not normal (and don't go with "LGBT circles attract" theory again, it's still not normal for a lot of people). Nobody can relate truly magical and fantastical stuff you mention to anything in the real world, so it doesn't break anybody's suspense of disbelief when we play or read fantasy, because we just accept it as imagined fiction. But you can't simply make people erase the real world parallels from their minds, so don't act so baffled when they won't treat "everyone is LGBT in this world" as acceptable imaginary fantasy. And, btw, it's not a norm even in the game, at least in some regions - when Xoti talks to the Watcher about Maia you can ask her why does she want her if in Readceras it's a norm only to form couples that provide offspring.

 

And, in any case, it's sad that you're defending this lazy writing, because devs didn't make it just to please LGBTs, they did it because they were lazy to write companions more nuanced in their preferences.

 

 

Yeah thing is, it's not just lazy writing is it?

 

It's a progressive ideology touched game. You've got your black elves and dwarves - where in usual circumstances those would be golden, ashen, or some weird colouring instead. It's not a region thing or a subtype either, it's just mashed in there. You've got your playersexual romance options - and really there is more companions that won't flirt with you, or romance you, than will.  And despite all this high fantasy, you can't put your female wizard or barbarian in a dress or a loin cloth and get decent DR, because hey that might be sexualizing them, and you want them in reasonable, realistic armour. Indeed if you put the watershapers loincloth on a woman, it suddenly transforms into a very modest affair. Pillars 1 had some better light armour outfits, they are basically absent here (I prefer them myself aesthetically for both genders)

 

Then there's the godlike companion who is "transitioning", and also the colonialist narrative.

 

Now fortunately most of this is optional - you can kill the natives if it pleases you, or join the pirates, and you don't have to romance anybody. But unfortunately you can't choose all of it - you'll still get hit on by every player in sight and get visits from randy bisexual crew.

 

I won't argue that it's unrealistic. That's not the issue - the issue is that those themes are all just "jammed in there", in a haphazard and unartful way. You can create great compelling characters who are different races, sexualities and so on. The nativist/colonolist narrative was a little better, but still IDK - it lacked nuance. Where for example were the poor/ex-slave/war fleeing immigrants that typify actual colonists? 

 

I think the biggest issue for me, is that it puts such a modern gaze on what is a violent, brutal, class orientated world with mass deaths and slaves in it - but seen through the eyes of someone who reads the guardian and watches Netflix. 

 

Now it is fantasy. The genre has always been flexible. Female warriors have always been a thing despite being rarer in history. As with female leaders. And all sorts of ahistorical oddities - for the fun of it.  But the way this is done, isn't artful like it can be when you want to tackle those subjects and give them true meaning. It's half-baked, like a lot of progressive influenced media is, and it comes off as  at times, unaware of its audience - disconnected, like someone living in an irony tower. It comes off, as not being for fun - but as a way to satisfy a group that are not the majority audience. 

 

It's a good game, with a decent plot - especially how all the substories interconnect. It's very artfully produced in terms of the graphics, and for the most part ignoring a few odd borks the system improvements are good. I think this game is better than the last one. And I am not one to complain about something someone else spent thousands of hours making - it's their art, and we don't have to buy it. 

 

But if I were to give any advice about this to the developers - I would just say, keep in mind, gamers are not, largely speaking uber progressive. A minority are, and the gaming press is, but most ordinary folks would rather have a saucy or violent tale ala game of thrones. Or a something lighter, like something comedic, or a bit of fluffy heroism. 

 

I am not saying I didn't like the game, or indeed that those elements have no place in fantasy - merely that they could be handled better, both to properly respect the subject material, and to be relateable to a mainstream audience who may not otherwise connect. 

 

Some of my favourite heros are heroines. I've enjoyed a lot of shows with LGBT material. There's some stories that are deeply moving about our cultural differences. It's just not something IMO, you can have a fluffy hand at. It's a set of deep social issues with a lot of angles. 

 

And you could just as easily offend indeed, the people you are trying to please, by stuffing all these things under a unicorn. A world with some much tribal tension, and no racial tension? LGBT but no struggle with social taboo? It's a heady area. 

 

Well, sometimes people want to see stories that speak to their experiences as a minority, like Dorian's in DA:I, and sometimes they just want to see people like themselves living their lives and kicking ass without a big deal being made of their gender, ethnicity, or sexuality. Both types of representation are good. 

 

Maybe the Deadfire team is making the type of game they want to see more of in the world, and maybe they would like to see a more diverse audience playing their games. Maybe the dev team itself is more diverse than you think. I don't know them personally so I can't say, but it seems like you're making a lot of assumptions about what an "ordinary" person is and who this game is "trying to please". 

 

Also, western fantasy, as in the world of ren faires and D&D, is a thoroughly modern invention that only draws from history but is not, itself, historical. 

Edited May 26, 2018 by marimo

[drael6464]

 

 

 

Ah, yes. There is nothing I love seeing more in my fantasy games then reflections of reality. Well, except for the magic. And dragons. And sexy talking swords. I mean, those are all fine, but I definitely draw the line at bisexuals. Like, a society thats not hung up on gender? Well, that just is taking things too far. 

I see this tired old argument is very popular with you guys  . I'll humor you once more - sexual relationships are relateable to the real world and people can't help by draw parallels and conclude that a dense congregation of LGBTs in a small group is not normal (and don't go with "LGBT circles attract" theory again, it's still not normal for a lot of people). Nobody can relate truly magical and fantastical stuff you mention to anything in the real world, so it doesn't break anybody's suspense of disbelief when we play or read fantasy, because we just accept it as imagined fiction. But you can't simply make people erase the real world parallels from their minds, so don't act so baffled when they won't treat "everyone is LGBT in this world" as acceptable imaginary fantasy. And, btw, it's not a norm even in the game, at least in some regions - when Xoti talks to the Watcher about Maia you can ask her why does she want her if in Readceras it's a norm only to form couples that provide offspring.

 

And, in any case, it's sad that you're defending this lazy writing, because devs didn't make it just to please LGBTs, they did it because they were lazy to write companions more nuanced in their preferences.

 

 

Yeah thing is, it's not just lazy writing is it?

 

It's a progressive ideology touched game. You've got your black elves and dwarves - where in usual circumstances those would be golden, ashen, or some weird colouring instead. It's not a region thing or a subtype either, it's just mashed in there. You've got your playersexual romance options - and really there is more companions that won't flirt with you, or romance you, than will.  And despite all this high fantasy, you can't put your female wizard or barbarian in a dress or a loin cloth and get decent DR, because hey that might be sexualizing them, and you want them in reasonable, realistic armour. Indeed if you put the watershapers loincloth on a woman, it suddenly transforms into a very modest affair. Pillars 1 had some better light armour outfits, they are basically absent here (I prefer them myself aesthetically for both genders)

 

Then there's the godlike companion who is "transitioning", and also the colonialist narrative.

 

Now fortunately most of this is optional - you can kill the natives if it pleases you, or join the pirates, and you don't have to romance anybody. But unfortunately you can't choose all of it - you'll still get hit on by every player in sight and get visits from randy bisexual crew.

 

I won't argue that it's unrealistic. That's not the issue - the issue is that those themes are all just "jammed in there", in a haphazard and unartful way. You can create great compelling characters who are different races, sexualities and so on. The nativist/colonolist narrative was a little better, but still IDK - it lacked nuance. Where for example were the poor/ex-slave/war fleeing immigrants that typify actual colonists? 

 

I think the biggest issue for me, is that it puts such a modern gaze on what is a violent, brutal, class orientated world with mass deaths and slaves in it - but seen through the eyes of someone who reads the guardian and watches Netflix. 

 

Now it is fantasy. The genre has always been flexible. Female warriors have always been a thing despite being rarer in history. As with female leaders. And all sorts of ahistorical oddities - for the fun of it.  But the way this is done, isn't artful like it can be when you want to tackle those subjects and give them true meaning. It's half-baked, like a lot of progressive influenced media is, and it comes off as  at times, unaware of its audience - disconnected, like someone living in an irony tower. It comes off, as not being for fun - but as a way to satisfy a group that are not the majority audience. 

 

It's a good game, with a decent plot - especially how all the substories interconnect. It's very artfully produced in terms of the graphics, and for the most part ignoring a few odd borks the system improvements are good. I think this game is better than the last one. And I am not one to complain about something someone else spent thousands of hours making - it's their art, and we don't have to buy it. 

 

But if I were to give any advice about this to the developers - I would just say, keep in mind, gamers are not, largely speaking uber progressive. A minority are, and the gaming press is, but most ordinary folks would rather have a saucy or violent tale ala game of thrones. Or a something lighter, like something comedic, or a bit of fluffy heroism. 

 

I am not saying I didn't like the game, or indeed that those elements have no place in fantasy - merely that they could be handled better, both to properly respect the subject material, and to be relateable to a mainstream audience who may not otherwise connect. 

 

Some of my favourite heros are heroines. I've enjoyed a lot of shows with LGBT material. There's some stories that are deeply moving about our cultural differences. It's just not something IMO, you can have a fluffy hand at. It's a set of deep social issues with a lot of angles. 

 

And you could just as easily offend indeed, the people you are trying to please, by stuffing all these things under a unicorn. A world with some much tribal tension, and no racial tension? LGBT but no struggle with social taboo? It's a heady area. 

 

Well, sometimes people want to see stories that speak to their experiences as a minority, like Dorian's in DA:I, and sometimes they just want to see people like themselves living their lives and kicking ass without a big deal being made of their gender, ethnicity, or sexuality. Both types of representation are good. 

 

Maybe the Deadfire team is making the type of game they want to see more of in the world, and maybe they would like to see a more diverse audience playing their games. Maybe the dev team itself is more diverse than you think. I don't know them personally so I can't say, but it seems like you're making a lot of assumptions about what an "ordinary" person is and who this game is "trying to please". 

 

Also, western fantasy, as in the world of ren faires and D&D, is a thoroughly modern invention that only draws from history but is not, itself, historical. 

 

 

The first part of this post is fair enough. It doesn't really invalidate these being topics that might rile people up on both sides of the political fence, but it's fair enough, and if that's what they wanted to do, that's fair and well.

 

As I said, I enjoyed the game, and these felt, as a whole (mostly), more as options or side elements than anything central.  

 

I don't think I am off base in assuming who the ordinary person is, or the typical rpg gamer (which is a crowd that is probably more diverse than the mainstream but still has it's demographic averages), but perhaps I am in who the target audience is.  Certainly pillars of eternity isn't for the proper mainstream - it's not an action RPG full of gore, it's a story based tale thats a bit niche.

 

I think probably what's happening here is that because obsidian work with backers, they feel a duty and desire to please them as much as possible, rather than the typical commercial set-up of trying to appeal to a larger demographic. And the crowd that does play rpgs, rather than shooters etc is a tad more diverse than that demographic, and so obsidian wants to please everyone in that group rather than the bulk of them. And likely yes, the coders are reasonably diverse too. So they decided to go in a direction that was influenced by that backer process.

 

It's a bit of a contrast with poe1 though - the animancy plot for example. 

 

As I said, I'm not going to tell anyone how to create, as if they had to listen.

 

I personally thought it could have gone in a more adult type direction, especially for a pirate setting. Kinda safe in some ways. And the main arc, didn't have a character conflict - you had a slight influence on the ending and that's it. You almost could have not been there. The broader plot was well connected to the main one. There was art in there. I loved the game, but there are those complaining about the writing, and I can kind of see why.

 

But I did play the game twice, so it's definately fun, and better in many ways than the first. But perhaps the complaint of some people (and not really me, because I did enjoy the game thoroughly), is it might feel like in trying to cater for everyone that they (whomever they are) weren't catered to. And maybe they are just used to being the focus demographic historically for these sort of games. Which isn't invalid, but it's also up to the creators whom they serve. 

 

I guess, that this isn't really a power fantasy, or hero's journey and more as you suggest, more of an idealistic or optimistic tale. Different groups gets along, gender and sexual equality, the pirates have moral standards, everything has clean moral lines, commerce is evil etc and apart from the cliffhanger, everyone sails off into the sunset.

I did at one point feel like I should empathise with the lizard people for quasi-environmental reasons. Which isn't at all typical for a rpg game. And it has those themes of progressive leaning films of being anti-traditional, and pro 'progress' too. So maybe all that was the intent, deliberate. It certainly was packed with subtle political innuendo, whether than was intentional or just a product of the creative teams bent.  It's certainly the creators right to express what ever ideas they wish, and the audiences right to make what they will of it. 

Edited May 27, 2018 by drael6464

[Aridea]

The first part of this post is fair enough. It doesn't really invalidate these being topics that might rile people up on both sides of the political fence, but it's fair enough, and if that's what they wanted to do, that's fair and well.

 

As I said, I enjoyed the game, and these felt, as a whole (mostly), more as options or side elements than anything central.  

 

I don't think I am off base in assuming who the ordinary person is, or the typical rpg gamer (which is a crowd that is probably more diverse than the mainstream but still has it's demographic averages), but perhaps I am in who the target audience is.  Certainly pillars of eternity isn't for the proper mainstream - it's not an action RPG full of gore, it's a story based tale thats a bit niche. I think probably what's happening here is that because obsidian work with backers, they feel a duty and desire to please them as much as possible, rather than the typical commercial set-up of trying to appeal to a larger demographic. 

 

If your average gamer is what you say it is, then by default your average backer would be similar purely by proportion. 

Unless of course this has nothing to do with "pleasing the backers" and more to do with the direction the independent studio is taking. The first pillars didn't have and never promised such content, it was targeting lovers of Infinity engine games, and yet it beat all stretch goals. I don't see why the situation should be different with the second game, and why it suddenly "caters to a certain demographic".