Skip to content

Gay/Lesbian romances in "BG:2 EE"

We are all expecting there to be a Baldur's Gate: 2 Enhanced Edition, or whatever you are going to call it lol, but I was wondering if the Gender lock in romances (only straight romances) could be removed for some characters, now I assume it wouldn't be something to major to ask for as there wouldn't be many things to change (or so I am thinking at this point in time) such as changes in the text eg: "he" change to "she", but even if it is a challenge I'm going to assume the BG/Gaming community would respond well to this should you consider, and if you can not because of reasons with no exceptions, then I (and many others) mourn the loss of an enjoyable trait to the game.
«134567

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,675
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • MrScrewedxMrScrewedx Member Posts: 5
    Please specify a little bit for me, why would anyone do that?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,675
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • MrScrewedxMrScrewedx Member Posts: 5
    I read that much but saw the part where it mentioned,

    "2. Altering the dialog of encounterable npc's in the campaign, including minor ones

    -small scale text only changes are possible."

    And latched on to it hoping that this change would be rather subtle, but now I see that it isn't so, lol, I will definitely be checking out the new character's romance options though. :3
  • callimachuscallimachus Member Posts: 86
    Of the 3 new NPCs that have been announced before the release of the EE, only one has a same sex romance option - it is Dorn (the evil half-orc). The other two are straight only. I do not know if the secret NPC (the one added in the 2013 patch) has any romance option at all let alone a same sex one (and in any case that NPC is evil)
  • IecerintIecerint Member Posts: 431
    I'm happy they added this for Dorn. The closest thing to a Gay option before was Nathaniel in BG2, and he's a bit buggy from what I understand.
  • XavioriaXavioria Member Posts: 874
    I could have sworn that Nathaniel's problem was Nathaniel... was it buggy? When I read a few reviews, people said they adored him as a character, but hated him in combat...

    OMG how do I do that blue strip spoiler drop down thingie?
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    @Xavioria
    [ spoiler] [/ spoiler], without the spaces.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • JalilyJalily Member Posts: 4,681
    None of them changed the dialogue though, so it's completely unsatisfying.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,790
    Bhaaldog said:

    I am surprised no one has issued you with a "Contractual Obligations" post yet.

    I aplologize, I have noticed existence of this thread too late :(. You did that part instead of me...

    Dorn is bisexual, so gay romancing him is possible. Personaly I would like Neera to be bisexual, but whatever... I wonder if Overhaul will grant us a lesbian in BG2:EE. Just Saiyan, thought.
  • bill_zagoudisbill_zagoudis Member Posts: 207
    edited March 2013
    political correctness is getting tiresome sometimes...

    from requests for fat jedi!(who are supposed to be living ascetic lives,something between monk and paladin) in swtor to the constant homosexual romance banter in most rpgs, or the shorties/half orc romance debates...if you were a handsome half-elf would you be attracted to a halfling? or can you imagine an Avariel being attracted to a half-orc? she wouldn't even survive the experience...if the answer is yes,how about half-ogre? it's not a matter of skin colour but of an alien physique,elves don't mate with dwarves,period.

    romances are just minor dialogues in the game,why do we HAVE to have every single option possible?
    not that i mind,but it's not like the resources are infinite and that is nowhere near top priority,wouldn't a gameplay improvement(that everyone will enjoy) be preferable to this(that very few will even know it exists)?

    +from the new npcs only neera would make any sense being heterosexual
    Rassad would be odd to say the least, and imagining Dorn being romantic is kinda hard,especially if his object of desire is a male Bhaalspawn(male gnome romancing Dorn! come on admit it that's funny! but BG is supposed to be epic,not comedy...not to mention that,if he ascends the new God of Murder will be a gnome/halfling male that was having sex with a brutal half-orc,that must be kinda hard for his worshippers to face-painfull for him too!)
  • callimachuscallimachus Member Posts: 86
    edited March 2013


    romances are just minor dialogues in the game,why do we HAVE to have every single option possible?
    not that i mind,but it's not like the resources are infinite and that is nowhere near top priority,wouldn't a gameplay improvement(that everyone will enjoy) be preferable to this(that very few will even know it exists)?

    In my eyes (and in the eyes of many other people) a romance option (specifically a gay one) WOULD be a "gameplay improvement" as well as a story improvement. When a romance storyline is well written, well executed, and well integrated into the whole story it enriches the experience, the identification with the character, and thickens the plot.

    Frankly it is the treatment of romance storylines as something different and separate from the plot and story elements that is the peculiar thing, not the other way around.

    That said, I would have preferred Rasaad to have been the male s/s romance option (and I don't see how he would be any odder than any other option), but I would have settled for any non-evil romance partner.

    Frankly, the thing that prompted my to place a pre-order for the game was the revelation that there would be a male same sex romance option. I literally decided to purchase the game on that instant. The reason I have yet to even start my first playthrough in the game is that the only existing m/m romance option is unavailable to me (I do not like playing an evil character).

    Post edited by callimachus on
  • NifftNifft Member Posts: 1,065
    edited March 2013

    if you were a handsome half-elf would you be attracted to a halfling? or can you imagine an Avariel being attracted to a half-orc? she wouldn't even survive the experience...if the answer is yes,how about half-ogre?

    We don't live in a world with Polymorph Self, nor one with Girdles of Masculinity, nor one with half-dragon half-chickens, so there's probably a bunch about D&D dating habits which seems unintuitive.

    EDIT: Personally I try not to think to hard about the half-dragons.
  • MessiMessi Member Posts: 738
    I thought all the new NPCs were bi? I would certainly love to have gay romance option(s) added if that is not the case.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • IecerintIecerint Member Posts: 431
    edited March 2013
    Xavioria said:

    I could have sworn that Nathaniel's problem was Nathaniel... was it buggy? When I read a few reviews, people said they adored him as a character, but hated him in combat...

    Well, he was pretty useless, too, from what I understand. His CON was just 10, and I don't think his Dex was anything special, either. And he's a KENSAI.

    I never played him, but my recollection is that all of his scripted events had weird pathfinding bugs.

    EDIT: Looks like I had his stats wrong:

    Strength: 16 Dexterity: 17 Constitution: 13
    Intelligence: 11 Wisdom: 9 Charisma: 14
  • IecerintIecerint Member Posts: 431
    Jalily said:

    She was originally meant to be—unlike the other romance options, she uses gender tokens in some of her lovetalks, notably near the end.

    Cool, I never knew. Maybe we'll see this finished in BG2EE.
  • DazzuDazzu Member Posts: 950
    Actually, Nate's Dex is high enough that he would be thief dual viable... problem there is LG alignment.

    Anyways, I remember some thread on GameFAQs called Worst of the Worst had some negatives to say about Nate... can't remember exactly what they were.
  • moody_magemoody_mage Member Posts: 2,054
    Seriously? This again?

    Kill all romances and replace with Improved Friendship/Comrade/Companion packs.
  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    decado said:

    Seriously? This again?

    Kill all romances and replace with Improved Friendship/Comrade/Companion packs.

    Or not. If you don't have any use for romances, more power to you - you're not forced to play them. But the point of optional content is that some players are going to want to experience it, and they should be able to do so.
  • IecerintIecerint Member Posts: 431
    Dazzu said:

    Anyways, I remember some thread on GameFAQs called Worst of the Worst had some negatives to say about Nate... can't remember exactly what they were.

    Really great thread. The OP plays a lot of romance mods and goes on about how terrible they all are, with exceptions for Amber and Kelsey, whom she decided were merely boring.

    With Nate, I think the complaints were related to glitchiness and the (admittedly standard) "romance as therapy" vibe.
  • moody_magemoody_mage Member Posts: 2,054
    shawne said:

    decado said:

    Seriously? This again?

    Kill all romances and replace with Improved Friendship/Comrade/Companion packs.

    Or not. If you don't have any use for romances, more power to you - you're not forced to play them. But the point of optional content is that some players are going to want to experience it, and they should be able to do so.
    Not really. It takes away valuable developmental time and effort to create something which is at best cloying and juvenile.

    Enjoy it if you wish, no problem with that. My preference is for it to be burned with fire until it goes away.
  • PawnSlayerPawnSlayer Member Posts: 295
    decado said:

    shawne said:

    decado said:

    Seriously? This again?

    Kill all romances and replace with Improved Friendship/Comrade/Companion packs.

    Or not. If you don't have any use for romances, more power to you - you're not forced to play them. But the point of optional content is that some players are going to want to experience it, and they should be able to do so.
    Not really. It takes away valuable developmental time and effort to create something which is at best cloying and juvenile.

    Enjoy it if you wish, no problem with that. My preference is for it to be burned with fire until it goes away.
    That's a very inaccurate use of the words "at best" - in reality, at best it provides several hours of fulfilling, satisfying gameplay - and two extremely interesting quests that result in massive amounts of experience and a VERY useful item in the case of the Jaheira romance.

    In your opinion it might be cloying and juvenile, but nobody could reasonably claim that's the most positive interpretation of the romances.
  • moody_magemoody_mage Member Posts: 2,054
    Again that is your opinion which I respect but ultimately disagree with.

    I at no point found the romances engaging or interesting. In fact I found them more than cringeworthy at points. I couldn't care less about the gender specificness either. Gay or straight, I wish that they were all revamped to remove the romance element (I don't really understand why so many games have to revolve around coupling up with an NPC) and were instead replaced with a relationships/friendship style format where emphasis is placed on team-bonding and building across all NPCs instead of focusing on having a romance with a single one.

    I'll never understand the fascination people seem to have with romancing NPCs and how important is is to them that they can do this in their favourite game. If you are that attention starved then go out into the real world and meet real people and start a real romance.
  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    decado said:

    Not really. It takes away valuable developmental time and effort to create something which is at best cloying and juvenile.

    The same could be said for practically any aspect of a game you happen to dislike. "No one uses Faldorn, including her was a waste of resources that could have improved the game further." "Durlag's Tower has nothing to do with the Bhaalspawn storyline, it should have been scrapped in favor of a more plot-relevant bonus dungeon." And so on. Touting your biased opinions as fact doesn't automatically make them true for all players.

    Moreover, you keep insisting that these games "have to revolve around coupling up with an NPC" - I don't know what you're playing, but if we restrict the discussion to BioWare RPGs, romances are optional. You dislike the concept? Don't flirt with your party members! It's that simple. The fact that you begrudge the existence of content that other players find appealing (even if you personally don't) speaks more poorly of you than of them.

    As for friendship/team bonding, these components exist in more modern RPGs like "Mass Effect" and "Dragon Age" (usually expressed through personal side quests). Not only is BG an older series, it's D&D, a template that doesn't typically require that kind of complex internal interrelationships between party members.
This discussion has been closed.