>>48506>>48508I don't think you understood my complaint. My complaint is that the only purpose for these romances existing is to deepen the idea of the characters in game being like real people. This was certainly the pitch with BG2.
There shouldn't be porn game mechanics in an RPG. Romance shouldn't exist purely for titillation. And when you do this, when you blatantly reduce romance to a fanservice mechanic, you obliterate any illusion you were trying to create that these characters you have created are something like real people instead of little soulless dolls created purely for the player's amusement.
Also, I'm not trying to do a culture war with this. I'm don't care about the ratio of gay to straight to whatever. What I care about is immersion and the artistic integrity of the RPG. If you're getting ready to be a culture warrior and support the dumb player-sexuality thing because you think not liking player-sexuality is some kind of chud opinion, consider that player-sexuality has also meant that gay characters are actually very, very rare in RPGs now. A romance-able character who is outright gay is downright anomalous.
>>48507>Why? If sexuality is not some integral part of their personal story, then making them playersexual is the best option.No, if sexuality is not some integral part of their personal story, then not having a romance at all is the best option. It should either be a part of their personal story, or it should not exist. None of this porn game fanservice nonsense. Shit like that is precisely what dissipates the whole illusion you were trying to set up to begin with with these personal quests. You might as well go back to the old system of companions having recruitment quests and then saying and doing nothing for the rest of the game after you've recruited them and basically just being an additional unit during combat.