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).
not really a comment on this particular story because ive never heard of it, but another point on this topic is that “it’s escapism” is not a defense against an accusation of lazy writing. escapism might be the most inherently lazy form of writing ever conceived
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.