It's fine to disagree and I respect your opinion. However, it's not about what I consider 'normal'. As I said, I've been following FR for literally decades, and I expect a new piece of media set in the Forgotten Realms to maintain some level of canonical continuity/internal consistency with the way it has always been portrayed.

As you say, it seems the IP owners are intent on re-imagining the setting. Therefore, it's not being aimed at me, so I'm out and I won't be spending my money on it. But then, it makes me wonder why they are using the Baldur's Gate brand in the first place, if they weren't targeting the game at older gamers who fondly remember the originals?

Definitely agree.

A general thought (not necessarily referring to anyone in this topic) that occurs to me is that the puritanism (to use your term) is a large part of why there is backlash against this sort of content in a franchise that didn't have it previously. Put another way, my view is that more options in RPGs are always a good thing and basically fundamental to the genre itself, so I don't see why RPG fans should be against content like this now being an addition to the game.

I can understand issues with overall tone of a game being changed (though if the content can be avoided, that argument is weakened) but honestly it rings a little hollow in this case too...haven't people been saying for however long this game has been out that it feels more like one of the Divinity Original Sins than it does a Baldur's Gate? I could be wrong on that point, I don't know much about BG3, but now I am interested in it where I wasn't as interested before...

What if a certain amount of 'puritanism' was part of the fictional setting? Again, FR is supposed to be a medieval fantasy setting - does it necessarily have to conform to modern-day PC values? The medieval European culture that much of the setting portrays was likely quite puritanical and conservative in nature (much more so than the modern day).

I fail to see what the issue is either.
One of my favourite D&D characters to play is the pious and uptight goody two-shoes paladin or cleric who will get overcome with almost paralysing shame at the mere sight of the female form and the underlying temptations of the flesh and therefore goes out of his way to avoid contact with women at all costs. Looks like BG3 is giving you a wide range of options and means to make this kind of playthrough with no sexy time whatsoever possible.

Is it because of the mere presence of things like the gay bear sexual encounter that gets the knickers of people into a twist?
As mentioned already, there's always the Ignore option. Make use of that.
And if you really cannot get over it - who knows, there may even be mods that patch out all the "questionable" stuff further down the line, for a less aggressively overt and more traditionally reserved Baldur's Gate experience.

The sexual contents are already part of the Early Access version. They even teased some of it in earlier videos by showing some of the MOCAP actors in their suits. These contents are known for years and suddenly they are problem?

Like in Baldur's Gate II you can ignore the romance stuff in Baldur's Gate III. All what Larian is doing is giving the people a game which they can play as they want. This is not a bad thing.

It is also funny that Pathfinder as an alternative got mentioned:
https://pathfinderkingmaker.fandom.com/wiki/Romance
https://pathfinderwrathoftherighteous.wiki.fextralife.com/Romance+Guide

...

I'm not exactly a DnD expert but aren't these old fantasy games and related materials often decorated with portrayals of scantily clad women.. and engaging in topics such as sex slavery and inter-racial romance (hey I've played BG2 a little!). And don't tell me there are no succubi in DnD.

I haven't seen the video OP mentioned but it doesn't sound like the content is really that new to the genre? It sounds like they're just taking it a step further.

You sold me on 100% "gential customization." Affirmed.

I am not a D&D expert by any means so anyone can feel free to correct me on this point, but my understanding was that the "medieval" setting of FR was not necessarily equivalent to medieval Europe. A cursory lookup of "Forgotten Realms" on wikipedia (bad source I know) said:

"Forgotten Realms is a fantasy world setting, described as a world of strange lands, dangerous creatures, and mighty deities, where magic and supernatural phenomena are quite real. The premise is that, long ago, planet Earth and the world of the Forgotten Realms were more closely connected. As time passed, the inhabitants of Earth had mostly forgotten about the existence of that other world – hence the name Forgotten Realms."

So I don't see anything in this sort of description that implies the values need to match "real life" historical ones may have been or that precludes the type of content in BG3. Probably the best argument is that historically, the adult content has been "unofficial"...but other games have added in "unofficial" content and then it is "official."
I agree with your comment too. That's a good point...the door was arguably open for this type of content already. It could be said to be a logical progression of what was available previously.

I'm happy with the wording that I used. It was sufficiently restrained.

Like I said, unless it's a porn game, there's no reason for an RPG to show genitalia. Giving the option is pointless. Perhaps people lack the imagination these days to pretend. Perhaps people can't cope with not having a toggle switch for something that can't add any value to the game because (in this case) it cannot be shown unless they want to release an X-rated game.

Still, (and this is deliberately not targeted at anyone in particular) I'm pleased to see that my second point is being proved in the responses in this thread.

As far as I'm concerned, it's not that I'm somehow outraged by sexual content or anything like that. It's just that:
a) if a marketing strategy focuses on something I'm not interested in, my interest in the thing being promoted lessens. I think that's pretty straight forward
and
b) it just doesn't fit with what D&D is for me. Just like it's integral to something like to The Witcher, and I'd be the first to cry foul if someone tried to make a "kid friendly" version of that. And of course, others can have a different view, and D&D can to them be all about sex and "affirming your identity" (I've no idea what that even means), I'm just talking about how it impacts my personal interest in the game, not saying I want it cancelled or anything.

...Have you even played BG2? There are plenty of brothels, and the Underdark demonstrates a matriarchal society, that engages in coercive sex. Faerun has plenty of hybrid critters, such as the Bhallspawn rabbits, the dragonblood folks, and so on. The religions are essentially polytheistic, as deities clearly exist in the setting. Magic is a thing. There is a lot here that clearly isn't European in the least.

Further, your "medieval" norms are invalid from a historical standpoint. The cultures around the Mediterranean basin were rather diverse, so I am not even sure what you mean by "medieval". Italy? Spain? Venice? The Moors?

Ignore the feelings of other people at your own peril. Don't act surprised when your words provoke a reaction. Just like, if it's not a dismemberment murder simulator, there's no reason for an RPG to show gibs? Do you get up in arms if people in BG don't just tip over and get lifted off the map like chess pieces or physical tabletop DnD characters? You could just imagine the blood and guts and pretend to scream in pain when you get hit by a fireball... Where did you see bullying or people who can't stand differing opinions? The former should be reported to moderators.

For reference here is a Sex and Romance guide for Baldur's Gate III from 2020:
https://www.eurogamer.net/baldurs-gate-3-romance-companions-npc-7050

And it has been a topic since this Community Update:
https://baldursgate3.game/news/community-update-7-romance-companionship_6

The Panel from Hell Livestream pretty much confirmed what already has been known for a very long time.

I don't really have much of an opinion on this topic without me having tried the game first, but I watched the trailer after reading your post, and I have to say these scenes looked exactly like I imagine romance in CRPGs, based on previous experiences - extremely corny and cringeworthy, like the cover of a cheap romance novel.

Though why should Larian be any better at this than Bioware, their games are fun but certainly not known for their awesome storytelling qualities, heh. And apparently there are quite a few D&D fans who are interested in this stuff (see e.g. roleplay servers for Neverwinter Nights or how many players inexplicably swooned over the Aribeth character). Anyway, in D:OS2 you can have sex with a lizard if you absolutely want to, and it was still a great game. Most people who played it probably never even learnt about this (and I only did so because one of my co-op partners was crazy enough to go that route). As long as I can avoid whatever I'm not interested in and it's not too intrusive ... well, whatever floats other people's boats.