I'm not talking out of my hat here. I had it happen in SWTOR and Dragon Age games. Anyway, i already said in the other tread that I wouldn't mind if the main character is gay until I get full control, but from there on, the story changes.

If we didn't care about Fallout we wouldn't be on an internet forum specifically dedicated to it. I don't want Fallout 4 to be about sixuality either! Which is why I don't want heterosixuality forced on my character and if a spouse and child are necessary to whatever story they have then it should be gender neutral as to be not about sixuality.

They could have used "your brother" or something?

You don't get to tell me where I draw the line. If you don't like it, too bad. The fact is, I repsect your choice and the fair thing would be for you to respect mine. This is a game forum and what I'm talking about is a compromise for both sides. End of story. If you want to push for [censored] then I invite you to go to a liberal forum.

Y'know, I'm really not a fan of the new dialogue system, but if it makes some of these guys accidentally trigger a romance with a gay character... That would just be hilarious.

If a game allows the choice of sixuality then that's fine. For narrative reasons if they are either straight or gay, I don't want the option to switch just for the sake of being PC and appeasing a group of people.

If a game allows the changing of skin colour then sure, make sure we can choose as many as possible. But if for narrative reasons our character is Caucasian or African American then it wouldn't make sense to allow the change. John Marston comes to mind with all of this.

I don't get why people want to separate us into these different groups. We're all the bloody same.

Yes, we are all the same fundamentally. But there are a lot of differences too, same with cars. They all have tyres, engines, windows etc but a Mustang is stronger and faster than any standard Kia. Not saying the Kia is bad, it′s just different. Same with people. No one is of a bad kind, but why should we ignore the differences and call an apple an orange?

Do you see this narrative setup as making the protag exclusively heterosixual?

Right?

No, we're not. We're all human and worthy of respect, but we definitely aren't all the same - and that's a good and beautiful thing.

Watch the player character's sixuality not be acknowledged at all in the game. Because who cares.

It already has been acknowledged tho.

From a narrative perspective yes we are. It doesn't matter what six, sixual orientation, creed or colour we are. A story is a story.

But... That would mean no hokers. What kind of sick, twisted Fallout game doesn't have hokers?

Right, but this is also Bethesda who have a history of relatively blank slate characters like Skyrim/Oblivion and to a lesser extent Fallout 3. They tend to leave background and motivation in the player's hands. The established story is that we're married, but why did we get married? In the case of most developer's the answer would probably be: because you love them and met at a baseball game kissed under the bleachers but from a dev who so very, very frequently hammers home player choice should we not have the option to then, later, establish our own story where we only married Susann because we wanted a 'normal' life?

What you want to make up in the game is up to you. If Bethesda want to tell a story about a heterosixual man and his wife and child, then that's what they are. That's the story they want to tell.

Having the undertone of he got married for society but is actually gay, creates an unnecessary fluff story that makes no difference at all other than to be PC. Unless of course that is the story, which is an interesting one, however if that isn't the story they want to tell, adding the option just makes no sense. Like I said it becomes fluff, or filler, and meanders the story too much.

Adding it for the sake of it, that serves no narrative purpose to drive the story forward, is spectacle and should not be included.

I'm all for choice socyes, but I had to pick the Gone with the Wind quote.

It does make sense though, since it aligns with Bethesda's ethos of respecting and facilitating player choice. In the same vein as adding perks like Lady Killer or Black Widow when you are/were married. Do those imply unfaithfulness? Would they meander the story Bethesda wishes to tell? About a married couple evidently committed enough to each other to have a baby and live together? Woudl it be pandering to the 007 crowd?

The majority of Bethesda's games serve no narrative (main storyline) purpose.

Except this time they decided to voice the protagonist, and give him or her a family. That tells me they have a story to tell. Todd himself said they wanted to create a better story. So for the purpose of this story, it would be fluff.

But not such a set story that things like protagonist six and race is pre-determined. Those aren't fluff. It can be a story about a married couple from the male or female perspective and any racial combination but the fluff line is crossed if the protag happens to be in the relationship cuz s/he needs a beard/conform to societal norms. Wouldn't it be an even tighter story if this was only from the male perspective? Or the female? Or only white? Oh but that isn't the story Beth wanted to tell, so it's okay. But if they do decide to add an [optional] ulterior motive to getting married and settling in blissful, sleepy suburbia that would be fluff. Do I have this right?

Maybe you should acknowledge the fact that Bethesda owes you nothing, in fact they don't owe any of us anything. Not to homosixuals or heterosixuals, furries or necrophiliacs, black or white and so on. They are making a game that they hope many of us will enjoy. But like most things, it's not for everyone. That's the reality of it. If you don't think you are getting what you deserve then you should consider that you don't actually deserve anything aside what the developers think you deserve and if you don't find yourself among those people then I am sorry, but maybe this game isn't for you.

Not to mention this acceptance [censored] that is starting to take form is very much out of place. Understand one thing, I am fine with you getting your way because we all have to enjoy ourselves, yes? But that does not mean I want to participate or witness the way you choose to play. I want you to get a choice to play how you want, but don't try to guilt me into giving up mine with "we are all the same", something that has absolutely no relevance to this discussion unless of course you are trying to start something. Which I suspect you are.

Leave the gay march for the real world and enjoy the other aspects of the game, that's what I plan to do when I encounter something that I dislike and that what you should do BECAUSE WE ARE THE SAME!

Acknowledged.

You can be anything you want after the tutorial. Be gay. Be Oprah. Be a toaster. Codsworth accepts you for who you truly are.

Can I be Codsworth?

In a game where players can create their own characters the option to be openly gay should definitely be there. In fact it should've been there from the start. Sadly, I think that in Fallout 4 this option won't be included.

Seriously........... ?? Another of these threads?

Short awser simply Yes, it should be posible. Even as a non-gay player i feel no group, or sixuality should ever be ignored in a game.