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).
I just meant that as in a way to tell a queer story without interfering with player choice. Like isnt Parvati in the Outer Worlds queer without being a romance option? And highly lauded for it?
Why should we be restricted to telling queer stories in that fashion though? Your post just comes off as entitled.
I'm going to need a bigger eye roll emoji.
I don’t think they’re saying that player choice is an immutable Unbreakable Law, just that in games that want it to be prioritized that what they’re suggesting is a good option. I could be wrong though.
No need for the agression. What WithoutFutherBelay said is correct. Its a suggestion for a certain type of design. Not trying to restrict devs. You wanna make Arcade Gannon, make Arcade Gannon.
Player choice in game that emphasize player choice is not entitled.