Roleplay as a gay person in 1950s society, due to societal pressure you married someone your not attracted to keep your job and seem normal to you fellow smalltown morals coworkers, friends, and family. Now that everyone you know died in nuclear fire 200 years ago and the family you once had could very well be dead or long gone, the times have changed, you start out as a new man/woman on their own personal path of freedom in a strange new world.

Plenty of rping potential there, your welcome.

What is done is done. You're married with child. After that, do what thou will with your character

So i shouldn't use race in a conversation about diversity where a game's mechanics directly impact your race because if i do i sound like a SJW? How the hell does that work? And gender is off the table about diversity which I don't specifically remember bringing up except to point out a solution to the PC in a same six couple relationship could have biological link to the baby. I never talked about gender politics or even genders specifically. Again yet another thing you attrubute me saying and i never actually talk about.

So Rust is bad because it makes people play as minorities and Asking for broader representation is bad because you are "pandering to minorities? Wow. Just wow.

I had no idea asking for diversity was wrong because it was wanting a developer to indulge a minority. What is even odder is that we expect developers to indulge us as that is the whole purpose of games but "don't indulge them minortities?" We expect games to gratify and indulge us but somehow if it just panders to the majority it is okay but it is wrong to want it to ALSO gratify and indulge aka pander to a minority? how does that work?

Are you seriously presenting this as the reason to be against diversity in games? its okay to pander to the majority but wrong to pander to a minority given that games are all about gratifying and indulging people? This is your honest position?

I think the game that nuclear-blasts you back to the stone age is good evidence that social progress isn't a straight line.

Too much politics, the real problem is the fact that we are playing as a set person and it will limit Roleplaying dramatically. We'll still have wiggle room but I can't see more then 4 personality styles due to voice dialoge which is the other problem that we have. Trying to put a square in a round hole.

I'm definitely looking forward to Fallout 4, just to see how this turns out, whether it's disasterous or something halfway decent.

I'm not one of those who is upset that we have to play as a parent in a straight relationship in this game, and I agree with you. I just want to point out that I think a funny twist in the Fallout series is that most real world bigotry doesn't seem all that common by the first game. Unfortunately for the world, whatever bigotry we had outgrown was redirected at the various mutated post-Great War.

Of course that's racial bigotry. I have no idea what the pre-war stance on homosixuality was.

I had a good friend back in the '80s who was homosixual and he had been married and had children. Sadly he is gone now, he lost his battle with AIDS. So yes, this kind of thing happens. Being a straight married woman, I don't understand but accept that people are who they are, and do what they can to survive in the world. I think it bodes well of Bethesda that they have been sensitive to the issue in Skyrim. Have a little faith.

It sounds like they chose to tell their story in a certain way and we don't even really know all of the particulars yet. Perhaps the child, if they survive, can be a blank slate? Who knows?

And there are A LOT of people who will find ANYTHING to complain about. When you get out of the vault and everybody is dead you can be what you want to be.

Logically, the presence of the heterosixual couple in the beginning, represents the ability to select between a male or female antagonist from a technical standpoint, and to determine the appearance of the child character (I assume when the child reaches maturity or such).

I'm all for LGBTS equality, but I think for the purpose of the game, we may have to simply svck it up and accept it for what it is...and if we want to start swinging towards other fields...well...Hey, we meet a lot of interesting people in the wasteland...And it's been 200 years since you got any...So who knows...

Maybe you play a hetero spouse, and realize that's just not who you are, or meet that someone special in the depths of irradiated hell.

As Wyatt Earp said to Doc Holiday, "People change, Doc."

That was at the comment. Not the sad picture. Anyway, if I had a guess, I'd assume they were even worse than we are today, given that it took the world's end to get them to move past the 50s, culturally. But who really knows?

Just "role-play" that your character was homosixual, yet married for the sake of social appearance, as many used to do and is still doing today.

Heck, I can't even play Witcher 3 without being force-fed a James Bond Drizzt but that's how their story rolls. You can always not play as I elected to do.

Somebody even said "story is holding back the games", oh dear God.. What about playing a Super-Mutant or a Ghoul? I don't identify myself as a human, I identify myself as a Mutie! Check your human privilege!

It's also a game series that has historically allowed the player to be the protagonist by keeping him/her silent as though the player's voice was his/her voice.

So much for that, right?

This is the real issue here.

The Witcher 3 =/= Fallout. People play both games for different reasons. I love The Witcher. I love Geralt, but sometimes I want to make my own character. I'm ok with having a basic backstory, like growing up in a vault and even having a dad (like in Fallout 3), but forcing me to be married with a kid and a military man is a bit too much. There's a time and a place for pre-set characters. This isn't a Bioware game, and it doesn't need to be.

No, Fallout wasn't always about blank slate characters.

Vault Dweller wasn't a blank slate.

Chosen one wasn't a blank slate.

LW wasn't a blank slate.

Only the courier was.

Fallout 1 and 2 had "predetermined" characters so by this definition both games weren't true RPGs too?

Even the Courier wasn't. The only difference here is that his backstory is revealed towards the end instead of the beginning. We don't know the Courier's family, but we know they've lived in NCR for a good while. They've been a Courier for years, and even accidentally built and blew up a thriving community. Courier's got backstory out the wazoo.

The difference was that all of those were vague or not nearly as defined in the same way the current one is.

Yeah but now some people come here saying things about having a set protagonist not being true to Fallout while it isn't true.

The biggest problem seems to be the SJW wave with the diversity, representation, privilege talk that doesn't belong in this forum imo. They want to destroy the whole lore of the pre-war society being based on 50s aesthetics and values so they can play a gay character. Isn't that too extreme?

@http://www.gamesas.com/user/851310-synthoras/

What exactly is so defined in FO4's protagonist? Only that (s)he is married and has a kid. There are a million ways to roleplay with this character.

As people above just noted, Fallout never had a truly blank character. I didn't like playing a numbnut tribal who was being treated as a hillbilly by everyone in FO2 but that was how the story rolled. This isn't TES with a truly blank character, Fallout leads always had an origin and backstory. Tough luck if you don't like it, roleplay in a way that suits you.

Oh I agree. Was just mentioning that to reinforce your point, really.

I don't know what a SJW is, but I am all for diversity in gaming. Hell, I've felt like lately, many games have been really good about this. Seen a lot of good ethnic minority characters cropping up, and women as well. Not a lot of gay protagonists outside of Bioware that I can think of, but I've seen some strong gay NPCs instead.

That said, if Bethesda has a story to tell, then I would prefer that they tell it without altering it to cater to every audience. If their story revolves around a married person with a kid, awesome. Last time it was a teenager who had scientist parents, a high school greaser bully, and a BB gun. I don't mind. Parents can make for compelling protagonists.

what? we do not know that much about this character, except that he/she is/was married with a child and is a veteran (of what?). The difference here is that simply put, the character was married. Fallout 1 is a vault dweller, while 2 was a tribal character.

You can create backstories for every character, AS LONG as you abide by what you were given. As long and the Vault Dweller remains a vault dweller, the Chosen One lived in Aroyyo (or whatever the name was) and was the descendant of the Vault Dweller. The LW was pretty much a pre-defined character except for minor details that were not important enough to put in, as you PLAYED through the backstory. And as long the Courier was the Courier, the backstory could be anything.

That's what I'm afraid of...that the game companies will cave and give the SJWs veto power over what kind of story and characters are allowed to be in games. If that happens creativity will be out the window and gaming will pretty much be dead except for CoD type shooters where you'll get to kill the Reich Wing antagonist du jour.

You questioned the very possibility that someone could engage in a loveless relationship....plenty of people have done just that for a variety of reasons, from reasons of survival to political and social advantage. I tried to put it delicately but you either don't get it, or are being deliberately obtuse about it, so I shall spell it out for you. Women do not need to be aroused to participate in heterosixual intercourse...men do. That makes it easier for women to have six with someone they are not interested in because all they need to do is feign enthusiasm and respond appropriately to what happens. Men can do that too, of course, but it does take more effort to get....ready. Especially if women aren't their cup of tea to begin with.

No we shouldn't sacrafice story just because a select few want to change such a minor aspect of the game. Please stop whining about it, it's pointless.

The relationship itself is the character generator. It wouldn't make sense to have a same six relationship because when you change gender you change the person standing in front of the mirror.

Beyond the beginning, I doubt the relationship will have any meaningful input on the way you play or the choices you make in the game.