That is offensive on numerous levels.

Because if they give in and show they can be whipped by a vocal minority they might as well prepare for everyone else to get their issue solved the same way, let's not be naive and pretend it's not gonna happen. "WHY SHOULD I WAIT FOR A MOD TO PLAY A FURRY ORIENTATED CHARACTER?" and whatnot. No. I say the perk is enough. The start of the game may not be in conformity to every gay person's situation (some people came out of the closed after years of marriage others were never in it) The point is it does not matter. In the end all it matters is what you do from that point on and as in previous Fallout games you have no reason to believe the gay perks won't be returning.

Some of us find it offensive to give Bethesda a hard time over something as meaningless as Gender . Guess we can all be offended now. /end thread

Why? We are relatively rare in the general population, which makes us unusual. Am I missing something because of the language barrier?

Mainly because you are asking for a 'feature', specific to your demographic, that is pretty much an insignificant percentage of the gaming population. Unless, of course, they aren't going to buy the game because they cannot be gay. Or whatever.... But, I just don't see that happening.

Not my purpose to be offensive, and I am NOT saying that being 'unusual' should be considered a 'bad' thing. Quite the contrary, different can be quite enjoyable, and refreshing. If everyone was the same, the world would be an extremely dull place, and we wouldn't be having this conversation, would we.

I suspect my major malfunction here was the first thread I saw on this was titled something to the affect of "No gender selection in character creation.", or some such, and the OP's whole premise was "I can't play a gay/trans/whathaveyou character, therefore, there is no gender selection." And that is just patently false. Human race has TWO sixes. Male, and Female. You are either one, or the other, (ok, in some VERY rare cases, you can be neither, or both.....) Doesn't matter what your sixual preference is, or, what six you 'identify' as.

No, you are not. You took it in the spirit it was intended. Thank You.

No, no, no, no. You are NOT going to get away with that, unless you are prepared to state why LBGT players are physically prevented from playing a game at all. There is a difference between needing a mouthstick for typing to play a game and playing a character in a game that needs a mouthstick for typing.

Right. So we're asking for something special because we're special?

Exactly.

Pretty much.

Don't look at it as being DENIED something, look at as a role-playing opportunity. You can role-play that you were just role-playing.

Of course we aren't physically prevented, I don't know how I'd even begin to defend that statement. I see the difference you're talking about. I wasn't arguing with you. Just some floating thoughts about inclusiveness in all aspects of the game, from the narrative to controls to marketing. The thing is, some preferences and conditions can be represented and some just won't work in this medium. I occasionally see requests for left-handedness (even here, I think, one thread) and it could probably be easily implemented. Homo- and bisixuality is harder, depends on the story. Transsixuality might actually be quite easy in fantasy settings, old IE games had belts of six change and whatnot. All three could use additional writing, though. Blindness and deafness - not unless the game is designed around them.

All these things are worth discussing. I don't think immediately shooting one down because no one mentioned any others is reasonable.

I can't do my shtick if I look at that way tho.

Nah but for real, since we've arrived at this point let's look at our options. We can not ask to be treated special (or normal for everyone else) reasons for doing this:

1. It discomfits some of the straight folk.

Or we could ask for it, reasons for doing it:

1. We might get what we want.

We can't make Bethesda do what we want, as you are fond of pointing out 3% of the population, we can only make them aware of our desire. Or we could not. But there's not much reason for that. You're also fond of pointing out that adding these things would detract resources from other things but would that be our decision or Bethesda's?

Ok, how many of the Fallout games have you not been able to do your shtick, as you put it? One, if you include Fallout 4.

How many Fallout games have I been able to do this? None, including Fallout 4.

You may or may not be special, but if you are, you ain't all that special. You are at least five for six, I am sitting at zero for six.

I don't know what your schtick is.

No your not. I don't interpret what you're doing that way at all.

The real issue is that while any of the PC in the prior FO games could have been gay without any issue at all, the 'fans' demanded a better story. So Bethesda decided to give us a real story. And what happens? "I can't start out as gay, this can't be my story. You must include me!" Sorry but that's pretty cut and dry to me.

It doesn't matter.

I don't play RPG's to be me. I have the real world for that.

As a cis-gendered, heterosixual, white male, I have this to say...




....


I agree with you. What if I wanted to play as a homosixual couple? Two black women, or two Asian guys? They should've just had us be a man/woman with a child (make it obscure as to whether the child is biological or adopted) and let us go wild with our imagination. Instead I'm being asked to role-play as a heterosixual.

Granted I can still role-play that my homosixual character pretended to be hetero, or married the opposite gender because he/she was bi and met the guy/gal of her dreams, etc. Still, why couldn't they just make it obscure enough in the TUTORIAL so we could use our imagination? It's literally not like they hadn't done that before in their games. Their Talos-Oblivioned mantra is literally, 'Go where you want; Do what you want; Be what you want.' I took this to mean that I can role-play whatever I please, including a gay black lady getting shaggy with Cassidy or Veronica.

@gcubed: "I don't play RPG's to be me. I have the real world for that."

Well said sir.

Some people *want* to play as themselves. Why should they be denied that chance?

Fine, don't call it roleplaying though.

And as I pointed out, if that was my desire, then I would have been denied it in ALL of the games including Fallout 4.

@heroofkvatch99: Ok, what, exactly, is stopping them from playing however they want after exiting the vault? I still stand by the idea that role-playing is meant to step out of my shoes and into someone else's, which is why I gave a nod to gcubed's statement.

And I'm totally for that. Believe me, I plan to play as someone I'm not. Why do you think my avatar once showed a Redguard woman, and now shows a Khajiit? Because I like to play as everything not a white hetero dude. However, some people do prefer to play as themselves and that includes the ability to be gay.

True, we can always pretend to have a reason as to why the homosixual dude/dudette got married and have a kid, my issue is that Bethesda could've made it just a hair bit more obscure. Maybe we're at a party with friends and the female is just a friend of ours walking in on us in the bathroom and decided to give us a hard time for staring at our reflection?

I just like PC obscurity in the tutorial, that's all. I'm going to be playing Sole Survivor knowing that he/she, at one time, had a wife/husband and son. And he/she is probably going to want to go after said wife/husband and son and rebuild his/her life. What if I just wanted to RP a lone type who never commits to relationships?

That's the beauty of roleplay, you can make it as obscure as you'd like. I don't see what the issue is when you pretend the guy on the screen is you but you can't pretend the virtual baby isn't yours. No, I think this isn't about that, in fact I'm starting to suspect this whole thing isn't about being gay from the start. I think it has more to do with acknowledgement and honestly, that's a very poor reason considering that when all is said and done, this is still just a game.

@heroofkvatch99: That's where imagination comes into play my friend, just like you did here regarding a party with friends. I would not have been against the game had they included the option for same-six couples, but they didn't do so as far as I can tell.

What really irritated me about the whole idea of it being included was in another thread where someone stated that they would flatly refuse to purchase the game because of the lack of a gay option. That just blew me away that someone could have such a narrow view about a game.

Post limit, probably time for everyone to take a break.