I still remember how fucking leftists called a gay guy out for being fake on the BG3 steam forums for not being comfortable with the fact that every male companion was a raging sex pest. No proof obviously, just the fact that he didn't comply with the narrative was enough.
Funnily enough, if i recall correctly there was a patch for exactly that as the companions were too damn horny and wanted to fuck after almost nothing so it got adjusted.
They didn't even code properly whether or not you were in a relationship with a companion already which just goes to show you how rushed the release was. Really basic stuff being completely left out and bugged.
Probably because the "people" who made it don't believe in closed relationships in the first place, and they forgot not everyone thinks like themselves.
Pathfinder: Kingmaker actually goes out of its way to address this with the player in multiple ways. IE, you might end up confronted further down the road if you've been getting deeply serious with multiple characters (not just from a friendship counter, but after making you've been making a number of clear and explicit dialogue choices).
One or two characters, iirc, openly allow for open relationships, but the writing makes it clear that they want to be sure there'[s some open communication going on and that the player's being at least a little mature about it. Other characters though encourage you to make up your mind and make an honest and open decision. In general it was handled pretty damn well, almost right off the bat.
Not that the way Kingmaker handles it is entirely new, a few other RPG's have done this in a somewhat similar way in the past. Even from a basic design and programming standpoint though it sounds like BG3 totally half-assed the way they implemented it. Perhaps in a partially deliberate way.
I wouldn't be so sure that it shows bad coding. Being in a relationship rather than just being in "situationships" and "open relationships" considered morally repressive to Leftists. Marriage and babies enslave women, so it's correct for women to sleep around regardless of "relationship status". Same with gay men: but marriage is a cis-heteronormative patriarchal construct, so it's even more important for gay men to either never get married, or sleep around when they do.
I get that argument, however at the same time I wonder if the woke shit is just a great way to get the SJWs talking about them in a positive light. The pronouns are a great example of this, even a youtuber I initially liked and praised for his content was making the point that adding pronouns was barely any effort and it made them happy.
So instead of making the relationships work as one would expect them to they can just brag about how tolerant they are as a company by allowing open relationships. The reason I think this is the case because unlike in RPGs of old from what I've seen the dialogue options barely seem to react to them. I know allegedly there's some interaction on that if you do try and cheat. However I doubt it's anything as involved as Baldur's Gate 2 where you had companions literally ready to duel to the death over romance options the PC picks.
Holy shit thinking about that makes me miss good writing even more :(
One of the biggest reasons I have against even trying the game is how aggressively annoying and gay looking that one vampire dude is on the cover of the game.
Like, I have multiple friends I trust highly singing its praises, but every time I look at it his flaming smirk is just there to turn me off.
I was ok with him early since it reminded me of Milo but the darling line gets old very fast. Does not help that his story is pathetic. Is clear that the game wants you to sympathize with him but he just seems pathetic and his master just generic white evil guy with cringe dialogue that was better set in he-man then BG. For all the leftists talk about grey morality, why are their villains so cartoonish evil?
I still remember how fucking leftists called a gay guy out for being fake on the BG3 steam forums for not being comfortable with the fact that every male companion was a raging sex pest. No proof obviously, just the fact that he didn't comply with the narrative was enough.
Funnily enough, if i recall correctly there was a patch for exactly that as the companions were too damn horny and wanted to fuck after almost nothing so it got adjusted.
They didn't even code properly whether or not you were in a relationship with a companion already which just goes to show you how rushed the release was. Really basic stuff being completely left out and bugged.
Probably because the "people" who made it don't believe in closed relationships in the first place, and they forgot not everyone thinks like themselves.
Pathfinder: Kingmaker actually goes out of its way to address this with the player in multiple ways. IE, you might end up confronted further down the road if you've been getting deeply serious with multiple characters (not just from a friendship counter, but after making you've been making a number of clear and explicit dialogue choices).
One or two characters, iirc, openly allow for open relationships, but the writing makes it clear that they want to be sure there'[s some open communication going on and that the player's being at least a little mature about it. Other characters though encourage you to make up your mind and make an honest and open decision. In general it was handled pretty damn well, almost right off the bat.
Not that the way Kingmaker handles it is entirely new, a few other RPG's have done this in a somewhat similar way in the past. Even from a basic design and programming standpoint though it sounds like BG3 totally half-assed the way they implemented it. Perhaps in a partially deliberate way.
I wouldn't be so sure that it shows bad coding. Being in a relationship rather than just being in "situationships" and "open relationships" considered morally repressive to Leftists. Marriage and babies enslave women, so it's correct for women to sleep around regardless of "relationship status". Same with gay men: but marriage is a cis-heteronormative patriarchal construct, so it's even more important for gay men to either never get married, or sleep around when they do.
I get that argument, however at the same time I wonder if the woke shit is just a great way to get the SJWs talking about them in a positive light. The pronouns are a great example of this, even a youtuber I initially liked and praised for his content was making the point that adding pronouns was barely any effort and it made them happy.
So instead of making the relationships work as one would expect them to they can just brag about how tolerant they are as a company by allowing open relationships. The reason I think this is the case because unlike in RPGs of old from what I've seen the dialogue options barely seem to react to them. I know allegedly there's some interaction on that if you do try and cheat. However I doubt it's anything as involved as Baldur's Gate 2 where you had companions literally ready to duel to the death over romance options the PC picks.
Holy shit thinking about that makes me miss good writing even more :(
The game already took ages to come out of early access
One of the biggest reasons I have against even trying the game is how aggressively annoying and gay looking that one vampire dude is on the cover of the game.
Like, I have multiple friends I trust highly singing its praises, but every time I look at it his flaming smirk is just there to turn me off.
I was ok with him early since it reminded me of Milo but the darling line gets old very fast. Does not help that his story is pathetic. Is clear that the game wants you to sympathize with him but he just seems pathetic and his master just generic white evil guy with cringe dialogue that was better set in he-man then BG. For all the leftists talk about grey morality, why are their villains so cartoonish evil?