This discourse was going around twitter today apparently and im curious takes from here.

Which is it for you?

For me i prefer playersexuality. I want to be able to romance any romance option regardless of my charachters gender. I dont want to be stuck with only Arcade Gannon if i want to do m/m

I agree that sexuality can be important to a charachter. But if you wanna do that, seems like the charachter can just not be a romance option.

That said. In RPGs devs can do what they want. You want a charachter to be monosexual and a romance option, have at it. (Unless theyre all straight, then fuck you).

I do kinda hate what The Sims did by adding monosexuality. Felt like such a virtue signal that made the game less fun. All Sims being pansexual was always more fun for me. Especially since i usually play that game as a pansexual slut. Unless i decide my player Sim is mono, but thats on the player’s end.

Monosexual townies in the Sims should at least be optional (is it? Idk havent played Sims 4 since this update).

  • WhyEssEff [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I think it’s honestly better to view it through the lens of it being a game design tool moreso than a philosophical debate. If you want to emphasize player choice and freedom, playersexual. If you want to emphasize characterization and worldbuilding, set sexuality.

    If you’re going to incorporate dating sim components into your game, it’s generally better to lean towards playersexual. Otherwise, you run into a sort of zugzwang where you can
    a) lock romance options to het (e.g. Persona) and alienate queer people, even worse when you don’t have a gender option which also alienates 50% of said hets, or
    b) have set sexuality and allow some queer relationships with certain characters (e.g. Fire Emblem: Three Houses) but have people annoyed about the arbitrariness of it, especially when there are no characters that cannot be romanced in a heterosexual way but limited queer options.

    I think there’s space for set sexuality, especially in linear, narrative-driven RPGs (e.g. Final Fantasy, Undertale, Zelda). Set sexuality really works when you want to emphasize relationships between characters that the protagonist/player character is not party to (e.g. alphys-anxious undyne-owo) Furthermore, set sexuality, when there is a romance mechanic, best works when you establish a boundary between player and character.

    Ultimately, it’s a choice of what you want to grant to the player, as well as the distance between the player and the protagonist. If you want to let the player choose between characters to romance in the game, and that’s an aspect that is a design component within the game, you’re usually better off sticking to playersexual, unless you want to take a hyperrealistic angle to it. If you don’t want to incorporate that aspect into your game, there’s genuinely no need, stick to set sexuality. If you want to establish the protagonist as a character that exists outside of the player embodying them, lean towards set sexuality.

    I honestly am just tired of romance being attached as a weird afterthought to certain RPGs. It’s sterile when it’s not handled with a modicum of care, and it definitely cements the whole unease-inducing ‘escapist power fantasy’ vibe you get in RPGs that take this approach alongside emphasizing openness. If you’re gonna let me date, let me date. If not, why bother?

  • Stoatmilk [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I think this problem exists primarily in the shadow of games historically being written mostly by and for straight men. Games that break this trend, like Baldur’s Gate 3, are right now remarkable for it, but once this is the norm the problems of both choices mostly disappear.

    But while we are stuck in the present with everyone being bi, I wouldn’t mind the characters actually saying “I am bisexual” once in a while.

  • UmbraVivi [he/him, she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I think the first tweet is the kind of argument that sounds good at first but falls apart the more you think about it. Sexuality can be a big part of a character, but it isn’t always. I think making such a sweeping statement is quite ignorant, actually.

  • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    It depends on the goal of the game and the narrative it is trying to portray. It the character in the game is supposed to be a representation of the player in the game world, then it’s only fair for the player to decide their own sexuality. If the character is a set character in the game with their own narrative/backstory, they should have their own sexuality and the player should not be able to change it. This requires competent writing though, which is rare in video games.

    As for the NPCs which the player can romance, again that depends on how in depth and good the writing is. If the writing and lore is shallow, just let the NPCs be bisexual or pansexual and let the player romance who they want. If there is in depth narrative, good writing and worldbuilding with regards to NPCs, they should have a set sexuality that the player must respect.

  • GenderIsOpSec [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Either can be good, I did like how in DA:I you can flirt with Cassandra as a woman and she awkwardly takes you aside after a while to tell you that she is in fact straight (and crushed my heart forever kitty-cri-potato ) the same with Dorian, though he’s the aggressive flirt in that case.

    Then in Mass Effect it just doesnt really even make sense, honestly. Like you’re completely different species, in some cases you cant even kiss properly for fear of allergic reactions and you’re still stuck on some arbitrary gender binary romances? Live a little, goddamn.

  • Concured [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Hot Take maybe; Player-sexuality as the norm is probably inevitable as more of these games tend towards adding mixed and diverse gender options. No developer wants to be the one deciding what combinations of body types, genders, pronouns, voices etc etc falls under ‘available to lesbian romance option’ or ‘available to straight male flirting’.

    That said, my preference is still set sexuality. Especially the more grounded a setting. Judy from Cyberpunk (recency bias am I right) for example likely wouldn’t feel as real a character to me without the history of messy lesbian situation-ships thing she has going on.

    • JohnBrownNote [comrade/them, des/pair]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      That said, my preference is still set sexuality. Especially the more grounded a setting. Judy from Cyberpunk (recency bias am I right) for example likely wouldn’t feel as real a character to me without the history of messy lesbian situation-ships thing she has going on.

      she could be bi if the PC is male and still be a lesbian if the PC isn’t and the distinction matters. the world where you picked the other gender in character creation doesn’t exist during the game so i don’t understand why it should affect the narrative (unless the writers are cowards, of course. can’t really say “change a thing” and expect nothing else to ripple from that on the dev side)

  • WithoutFurtherBelay@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    If we’re going to be dunking on playersexual, I do think we have to come to terms with the fact that character creation in general is kind of a trade off for writing quality, and that having a more generic experience is kind of the price you pay for a truly customizable character

    I’m tempted to say it’s kind of a toss up of which is better when the character is customizable. Set sexuality is probably better there when it can be done without too much effort, but playersexual just makes sense and can probably be done well. When the character is preset, of course it should be a set sexuality, because the player character itself is already set. There’s no reason not to plan for it at that point.

  • ashinadash [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    BG3 but every character has a lil bi flag badge hexbear-bi-2

    Surely I’m not the only one who finds “romance” options in games to be profoundly weird, though? I feel like the game-y mechanics do not rub up well against what is meant to be a relationship…

  • Stoneykins [any]@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Now I feel weird because the discussions here are great, in depth, and nuanced, but the way I feel about this is kinda boring and uncomplicated? Am I missing something?

    If I’m playing a customized character that I made, I prefer characters to be playersexual, allowing custom relationships to match my custom character.

    If I’m playing as a written character and experiencing a set story, it is better for all characters to be written well, and have realistic sexualities, as part of the story presented.

    As far as representation goes, I think both can have problems, but neither are inextricably problematic.

  • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Depends on the game. If there’s only a handful of romance options playersexual design allows your character a range of options, but if there’s a wide range of characters to romance having set sexualities allows them to have more detailed personalities and preferences.
    I general though, I prefer neither - I don’t mind the romance in most of the games I’ve played, but don’t usually find it particularly adds anything important.

  • laziestflagellant [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    In a perfect world where more game writers weren’t annoying dipshits who see writing gay or even bi characters as beneath them, romance options with defined sexualities would be no issue.

    In this world I have been burned one too many times playing a game with romance options where the heterosexual romance options are with the characters who are plot relevant and have the most content and the gay and bi options are the side characters who have less content, sometimes explicitly because they’re the ones who can get killed off for fun (THIS IS ABOUT YOU BIOWARE I AM SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT YOU, YOU PIECE OF SHIT HACK FRAUDS FUCK YOU)

    yeah no, just give me playersexual characters every time, even in ths cases where the devs make it clear they were written with straight relationships as the implied default (Stardew Valley…)

      • laziestflagellant [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        It’s more that the NPCs themselves don’t have a lot of mentions of being attracted to people of the same gender, especially compared to the reverse. The game acknowledges your relationship with them (ie you can be a gay/bi awakening in some cases), but not so much when it comes to the NPCs as individuals.

        Like yeah Leah does have acknowledgement, but at the same time the game does that trick where her ex changes gender depending on the player’s gender. …Okay that’s probably because you can punch her ex but I still have mixed feelings about it since I’m not sure there’s acknowledgement that she’s bi if you’re playing a dude, but I might be wrong.

  • booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I don’t like playersexuality, because I prefer my gay and bi characters to actually have experience with (and reference their experiences with) homophobia, which is something that every gay and bi person ive ever met has had in common. A love story between gay characters that has absolutely nothing to do with homophobia is just a straight love story with one of the characters’ genders swapped

      • booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        “its a fantasy world where those prejudices dont exist” just feels like a copout to me. lazy writing. i guess in theory there could be stories written by gay people as escapism about worlds where those prejudices dont exist, but ive never encountered one

        • autismdragon [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Idk i find the idea that bigotry not being the same as it is in the real world is a “cop out” actually limits creators in an unhelpful way. In one of my fantasy worlds, queerphobia exists in some cultures but not others, and functions differently from the real world in the cultures where it does exist. Also related, but racial constructs are completely different. Now obviously the difference here is that ive thought this out rather than just eliminated it to not think about it. But thats for a highly in depth kinetic novel with lots of world building. I think its fine for a story to just not want to deal with that aspect, but still have same gender romance options.

          I also find the “if it doesnt involve suffering its not real queer romance” idea reductive and kind of upsetting as a queer person?

          • booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            I also find the “if it doesnt involve suffering its not real queer romance” idea reductive and kind of upsetting as a queer person?

            if youve never experienced homophobia then you have not shared the experience that, as i said, every single gay and bi person ive ever met has experienced. i dont think its reductive to say that that makes it fundamentally different from a relatable portrayal of a gay relationship

            • autismdragon [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              I wont say that ive never experiances bigotry but i will say that queerness has been much more positive and experiance for me than a negative one. And that im exhausted of queer media (not games, tbf) that focuses on what feels like suffering porn and prefer lighthearted stuff.

              Your preferences arent wrong though. But for me, a queer charachter (and their romances) only feeling queer if they experiance bigotry is very grim. Queerness doesnt have to be suffering. In fact, we are fighting for a world where it isnt.

              Guess im just escapism pilled though.

  • TheDialectic [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    I want a game set in the roman empire with authentic Roman sexuality. Actually I thought about this more, I probably don’t. It would just be intresting to see sexuality organized against the western consensus

  • Infamousblt [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    As a queer polyam person, I want the game to be playersexual, and I want the game to allow me to romance everyone in the same playthrough. Doesn’t matter what character I’m playing let me romance everyone all of the time thank you.