78
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by autismdragon@hexbear.net to c/games@hexbear.net

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).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Raebxeh@hexbear.net 1 points 11 months ago

I don’t think it’s inherently lazy, but escapism is directional. It’s escaping from somewhere and it’s escaping to somewhere. Cishet white dudes using video games as escapism and getting upset about “political” characters are trying to escape from a diverse world to one where their supremacist presuppositions are catered to. I think it’s different from a gay artist escaping from a world rampant with homophobia and into a world without it.

this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2023
78 points (100.0% liked)

games

20540 readers
484 users here now

Tabletop, DnD, board games, and minecraft. Also Animal Crossing.

Rules

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS