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

Show
Show

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).

  • JohnBrownNote [comrade/them, des/pair]
    ·
    11 months ago

    . The proper way to address this is to just add more characters with different sexualities

    playersexual is the efficient dev choice. even if money wasn't a consideration, it takes a fuckload of time to make anything so you're not going to make these dragon agey games with a dozen extra missable side characters unless that thing you're doing is core to your concept.

    narratively there's no such thing as playersexual because the diegesis doesn't know the alternate version exists.

    to your last idea i propose anti-playersexual characters that always turn you down.