Not a "rant" per se, although it could be seen as that, specially these days :D
Simply stating where i come from and where i stand now with all this stuff.
As well as how bad it really has become over the last years. You re right here, ppl are rejecting this
stuff and getting called names and attacked by "official" media over and over.
Just as i am tired and sick of it, the vast majority is as well. Guess why i "rant" about said language change.

You know, it's amazing how you can still keep your cool after being dismissed like that again, without your points even being considered.

I don't care about how many bears, boars, dogs, or hamster you can have sex with in the game, and whenever or not it's because of games journalists kinks or just a publicity stunts. (probably the former...)


The thing that worry me since the game was fist announced and playing the early access did nothing for alleviate those worries, is that the game feels more like Original Sin 3 than Baldur's Gate 3.

Larian seems to be able to make one game and one game only and just does some slight variation of it. And I find the same to be true for BGIII too, the same style of dialog, the same style of humor, etc... it feels really like playing a OS game with a D&D skin and not a sequel to the original BG games.

What an irony, considering their pre-OS portfolio.

Agreed. I'm still waiting for Divinity 3 and the conclusion of the story with Damian. Which will probably never happen at this point. I tried DOS 1 shortly and didn't really like it. Dropped it after 10 hours or so. Unfortunately for me, most people love DOS and it sells, so they're just sticking with that formula. Can't really blame them.

Larian Studios should make Neverwinter Nights 3.
Obsidian Entertainment should make Baldur's Gate 3.

I know it's too late, but it would fix most problems.

It is true that those situations exist in the animal kingdom, but I think we humans should ascribe to a better standard, don't you think? Just saying "See, there is this video (actual footage I saw) of a rabbit humping a cat that felt threatened and was moving to attack it, and another of a dog humping this unconscious drunken man" shouldn't automatically validate sex without consent, or sex with a different species. Heck, in the post you reply to Sabin_Stargem implied that necrophilia is okay for humans because a duck did it first, do you really condone that statement?

Those animals act on instinct; we humans supposedly act on our thoughts. We also have a society animals do not have and should consider what is good for the whole of humanity.

Should we just act on instinct and say "screw human society, I'm gonna do whatever gives me pleasure"? Because I think if that way of thinking becomes the norm mankind is doomed to fall.

There is a difference, tho; and that is that games today are much more graphical. A game from when we were teens would reference a brothel in its text, maybe even have a sign in its entrance. In my first playthrough I wouldn't even know what that word means. A few years later I would know it, but not give it much thought. Details were left to our imaginations and I had pretty much no experience to imagine anything too vivid. I would only have that experience when I had maturity enough to not let it influence me in a bad way.
Today however the bear humps the vampire's behind right in front of the player's eyeballs. That's quite graphic for any kid/teen.
(INB4 yes I know it's a romance path that not many players would take. Until next time when it will be a traditional decision route, and when people complain they will point at BG3 and ask why the controversy now when there was gay bear sex in the past)

I'm with rctvb32's opinion. If the devs separate it into a DLC everyone will be happy: Sabin_Stargem will be able to indulge in furry sex, you get your extra options, players that don't want it won't have it. Where is the downside?

What was SargonAelther supposed to do if "it's popular" is the only point you make?

It's still left to your imagination. The scene doesn't actually show anything.

Ok that's less bad than I was led to believe.
Still in the realm of bad taste, but less so.
I think I was conflating that scene with a news article I saw in passing (yesterday, I think) from a big BR news outlet's front page which did have a photo of some famous singer simulating sex onstage with one of his male dancers. Talk about bad taste, both from the singer and the media vehicle.

Anyway, most of what I wrote above still applies.

I agree there's a difference, at least as far as formerly isometric games are concerned.. that said, they've been taking steps towards more mature presentation in terms of violence and everything else too; nowadays these titles are often mature/18+ even without any sex.. and I don't see why romance or sex should be singled out as the one element that isn't allowed to mature in the same manner.

And I still think that a teenager who's in all likelihood old enough to have discovered porn & masturbation for themselves isn't too young to witness a few in-game sex scenes, assuming you're fine with all the graphic violence too.

Unlike narrative focused isometric games, 3D games however have been quite graphic for a long time now.

A distinction without a difference.

If these developers want this type of content, for whatever wacked out reason they profess, it should not be in the core product, only available by those wanting to actively seek it out. This fits right into the narrative of those touting the "it's optional so you can just ignore it" crowd. Separating it out into a DLC is just another way to follow this same concept of making it optional, so if that's your perspective there really shouldn't be any argument against it. That way those opposed to it like the OP and many others can spend their money on the core game that does not contain the objectionable material, and those who do want it can still opt to get it. But that's not what Larian is doing apparently. This is exactly the sentiment multiple posters have expressed which is that it's being forced on everyone. It's a stupid business move in the name of what? Inclusion and diversity for those into gay bear sex? If that sounds stupid, it's because it is.

"A distinction without a difference."

There's no difference between a screen that fades to black and watching the pair engage in intercourse? Why is the game the rated M instead of AO? How many X rated websites are there that just give you an empty screen and let you fill in the blanks?

How is it "being forced on everyone" if it's optional?

"Inclusion and diversity for those into gay bear sex?"

This is pure invention. How many people are arguing the scene should be left in for "inclusion and diversity"? I haven't seen this outside of rants about the scene.

The "vast majority" don't care, look at all the articles about how pre-orders skyrocketed after the presentation. Like most of this culture war BS... on both sides... it's a subset of very loud and angry people online with a stick up their butt.

Sadly there have been a number of posts in this thread basically saying it's ok to be included in the game, even as optional material, because some people want it. You've said literally nothing of substance, you're just defending an indefensible position. This thread shouldn't have to exist because some things should just be off limits, some lines shouldn't be crossed. Many games have content that someone will be offended by. A number of people here have brought up the fact that there are objections to this content, but not other things like gratuitous violence. And they're right, the video game culture, and society in the world at large are far more desensitized to violence then they were even just a few decades ago. So that makes it ok to further the trend? Push the envelope further down the slope into more, seeing if it ever bottoms out? How far should it go? What should be included in BG4 that most people will find vile, but standing on some perceived moral perch a few fingers will wag and say, why the outrage, the last one literally had a bear raping a guy, but it's optional, so what's wrong with you?

There's a small but loud segment of the population who seem to think defending something disgusting like this somehow puts them on the moral high ground. So I suppose we'll agree to disagree.