Will there ever be a built in option to be able to romance any NPC?

+

Would you really like option to be able to just fall in love with any NPC without rejection?


  • Total voters
    45
  • This poll will close: .
I explain why this wouldn't work in many of my other posts in this thread. Please kindly read them. :)

I did and I dont accept them. You have the option to do what you are asking for, but you refuse to take it.

You are asking for something un-reasonable, really. You want to romance a gay women (or just not into you) as a man character? I mean the answer is just to bad, that character is a lesbian, go make a woman character. (or someone they are into)
 
I did and I dont accept them.
Ah okay. So we disagree, okay.

You have the option to do what you are asking for, but you refuse to take it.
Sincerely, please read all my posts in this thread to better understand me and what I am trying to say. I'm very sure that you may have missed a few of my posts where I explain better the problem, but it's no problem, I will gladly wait.

You are asking for something un-reasonable, really. You want to romance a gay women (or just not into you) as a man character? I mean the answer is just to bad, that character is a lesbian, go make a woman character. (or someone they are into)
I don't think it's unreasonable at all to want my V to find a long term realtionship with a special NPC in their heart. I never specifically mentioned who I would be, or who I would want to date. The game is also single player.
 
I'm that person that likes the surprise romance in games. This is where you meet a NPC and through time and interaction they suddenly surprise you with a romance option. I guess it's the opposite of everyone just default liking my character and her motives.
 
Jeez, all the guy wanted was the option, as in optional, as in if you didn't wish to partake of you wouldn't have to but if he and people that felt the same as him wished to they could. Why some of you treat the mere idea of this as an option as taboo is kinda oddly fascinating.
 
Jeez, all the guy wanted was the option, as in optional, as in if you didn't wish to partake of you wouldn't have to but if he and people that felt the same as him wished to they could. Why some of you treat the mere idea of this as an option as taboo is kinda oddly fascinating.
Yeah. An option would be great for anyone who doesn't want to play "realistically". DA2 romances didn't feel hollow or suffer because they were player sexual. Fenris (who was player sexual) and Kaidan (who was straight in the first game then bi in the third lol) are my two fav romances. Granted I haven't played/know many games outside of Bioware that even have romances (console pleb).
 

Keive

Forum regular
Honestly just hope for mods, even with then you'll have awkward lines. Doubt they'll ever make changes in the game officially, so yeah, mods.

But warning, once again, you'll have to deal with clunky lines because Judy, as a lesbian, will never say "my boyfriend" "he/him/his" (in referring to a male partner since she wasn't ever made to have one) and etc.

I understand where some people are coming from, so I understand your arguments, but as this thread keeps going it almost seems like it's no longer about the game, if you get me. Parts of the what is said is getting uncomfortable since it seems to blend in with real life rather than just the game.
 
Jeez, all the guy wanted was the option, as in optional, as in if you didn't wish to partake of you wouldn't have to but if he and people that felt the same as him wished to they could. Why some of you treat the mere idea of this as an option as taboo is kinda oddly fascinating.
it is fascinating, sometimes I feel like I'm going bonkers and ask myself "but I'm so sure, I explained what I meant, surely my 10 explanations were good enough, I know I couldn't possibly explain it better... am I going bonkers? I hope I'm not..."
Haha, you know what I mean? But I know I explained good, but I try my best. But I really appreciate the support and I genuinely really feel good when people just really like "totally get me" and what I mean. It feels really good to be understood in some cases, and it fills me with joy that you really understand what I mean. Sometimes It's a small struggle, where I almost doubt myself, but I learned to not doubt myself because of the people who are there to course-correct me and be like "no no, what you are saying really does make perfect sense!" so thank you for the peace of mind. much respect to everyone, big hugs too, internet hugs I mean, only if you want them, here you go *internet hugs* haha. :ROFLMAO:
Post automatically merged:

Honestly just hope for mods, even with then you'll have awkward lines. Doubt they'll ever make changes in the game officially, so yeah, mods.
Don't get me wrong, I'm excited for mods too, but I don't think this even needs to be a mod. I think it's much more simple than you say. Not saying anything mean by that, just saying.:shrug:

But warning, once again, you'll have to deal with clunky lines because Judy, as a lesbian, will never say "my boyfriend" "he/him/his" (in referring to a male partner since she wasn't ever made to have one) and etc.
Honestly, I don't really need to hear anyone say "my boyfriend", as long as they say all the other lines that they do to show their love and friendship. At a certain point, it sort of goes without saying. I don't expect them to say "he/she/they" or anything, if they just say my name, and there is a smile on their face, and their eyes full of genuine love.

"V... I love you..."



I understand where some people are coming from, so I understand your arguments, but as this thread keeps going it almost seems like it's no longer about the game, if you get me.
I am only talking about Cyberpunk2077. I don't really know what you mean.

Parts of the what is said is getting uncomfortable since it seems to blend in with real life rather than just the game.
....? I just want the game to give me lots of freedom, as an option.
 
Last edited:

Nefla

Forum regular
Skyrim felt this way too, and I don't want that at all. Nobody is asking for an emotionless mannequin anywhere in this thread. I have retyped and explained what I mean so many times my fingers hurt. Please kindly read all my posts in this thread. :)
I have read every post of yours in this thread and I stick by my statement. What you want to do is:

1) Disable the ability of NPCs to reject you. You were arguing earlier about how you had good intentions and didn't want to romance the NPCs without consent but disabling any answer but "yes" is disabling consent. They're fictional characters so I don't care about that beyond story issues but that's what you're doing.
2) Remove the individuality of the NPCs by overriding all of their preferences. A lesbian falling in love with a man, an anti-authority rebel who's family was killed by corporate goons falling in love with a corpo bootlicker, a pacifist falling in love with a sadist who tortures and murders everyone, etc...none of these make sense and none would believably happen. For these kinds of "romances" to work, you'd have to either remove the individualistic backgrounds and personality traits so they're just kind of a neutral blob who could work with any V or you'd just have the jarring disconnect of a forced "romance" that makes no sense.
3) You say you'd love whatever NPC but you refuse to make the kind of character that NPC would actually fall in love with. That's an unreasonable level of stubbornness and it's on you. You have the ability to romance whatever NPC is available but you choose not to take the steps to be able to do so within the context of the actual story.

You've asked why people care what you do in your own single player game and the answer is that nobody cares. If you were modding your own game, more power to you, IDC. What you're talking about though is having the game built in a way that accommodates your unwillingness to have multiple playthroughs with multiple types of V's. Professional game devs aren't going to do what hobbyist modders do which is to just have the gender flags of your main character flipped to the opposite gender in order to change their sexuality and make them like you. Modding those flags does not create additional correctly gendered dialogue, it doesn't create correct animations for the different body model, it doesn't generate voice acting for your protagonist towards that NPC, and it doesn't change all the mentions of the character's sexuality or preferences in other dialogue. In order to actually get what you want, CDPR would have to do it to professional standards and spend the time and resources to add those lines of dialogue, make those extra animations, record those voiceovers, change the other lines about sexuality and preference, etc...all to appease a tiny minority of people who refuse to just make a new character. Long story short, those changes wouldn't just affect your single player game, they affect everyone and there is only so much time and so many resources to go around. Most of us would want them to go towards something worthwhile that everyone benefits from.
 
I have read every post of yours in this thread and I stick by my statement.
That's fine and good

What you want to do is:
It's perfectly okay that you disagree with me, and I have no problems with that, just like it's perfectly okay for anyone to disagree with anyone, so I am 100% open to disagreeing all day long since very good conversations come out of that process and I tend to learn many valuable things and wisdom, even if I still disagree at the end of the day. I really still enjoy the coversations, and I love speaking my mind and I love it when other people do too.

However, telling me that you know what I want/think/feel/believe, and then saying that I want/think/feel/believe something that I do not actually want/think/feel/believe, and announcing that as a statement or a fact to the entire internet is something I'm honestly really not comfortable about. I respect your opinion anyway, but I couldn't possibly disagree further and I can explain exactly why here:


1) Disable the ability of NPCs to reject you. You were arguing earlier about how you had good intentions and didn't want to romance the NPCs without consent but disabling any answer but "yes" is disabling consent. They're fictional characters so I don't care about that beyond story issues but that's what you're doing.
I believe I was very careful in the specific words I used, and the specific words I did not use when trying to explain my intentions and ideas in this thread, but I learn more every single day. I do not want to disable NPC's ability to reject me, I want to enable NPC's ability to say yes. Currently some NPC's are hard-coded to automatically say "no" no matter what, if V does not fit into a certain category. Technically speaking, NPC's are currently already unable to give consent, because there are situations where they are blocked from being able to say yes, because of a hardcoded parameter. To go even further, I would argue that some NPC's are also hardcoded to always be forced to say yes to some V's who fit certain parameters, meaning that they are probably never able to say "no" to some V characters, just because they match what their code allows them. And all of that is true, even if we are to understand that fact that NPC's are not self-aware AI, so the argument that I want to disable NPC's ability to reject anyone, could be applied to anyone, including the people at CDPR who lovingly crafted and created the NPC's. Are they guilty of forcing some NPC's to always say yes? To always say no? Just because V fits into a set of parameters that make the NPC's like them or dislike them? No, because it's a video game, and a single player game at that. The NPC's were never given the freedom to decide for themselves what their likes and dislikes are. because they are fake people in a video game.
Post automatically merged:

2) Remove the individuality of the NPCs by overriding all of their preferences.
Honest question, are you implying that if an NPC that was coded to be able to date a certain range of V's or V character types that some players make, are given the ability to date a wider range of V character types, that this will somehow completely erase their entire personality? Because that is what I understand, but I do not claim that it's accurate, that's just what I think you may possibly mean and I ask you to confirm this. If this is the case, If I did understand correctly, I disagree because the entirety of the character and all their actions and clothing style and their habits and ways of communicating and so on and so forth would still exist, and would not cease to exist just because they show love and affection for a V character. The words "I love you" and a hug given to V from the NPC would not undo everything that they are, and if anything would bring the characters closer together. Short version: it's a sweet story.

A lesbian falling in love with a man, an anti-authority rebel who's family was killed by corporate goons falling in love with a corpo bootlicker, a pacifist falling in love with a sadist who tortures and murders everyone, etc...none of these make sense and none would believably happen. For these kinds of "romances" to work, you'd have to either remove the individualistic backgrounds and personality traits so they're just kind of a neutral blob who could work with any V or you'd just have the jarring disconnect of a forced "romance" that makes no sense.
To be quite honest, very very serious when I say this, I have heard much more surprising stories of very unlikely partners falling madly in love with each other, of real people in real life. People who themselves were surprised as they fell in love with each other. People who were otherwise on the surface completely incompatible. Polar opposites, and yet somehow still fell in love. If it can happen in real life in a more boring and normal world, then it can definitely happen in a more wild and unhinged world like Cyberpunk.

3) You say you'd love whatever NPC
When you say that I said that I "would love whatever NPC", I get confused. When and where did I say I would just "love whatever NPC"?

but you refuse to make the kind of character that NPC would actually fall in love with. That's an unreasonable level of stubbornness and it's on you.
Because I am a living human being, I don't think it's necessary to worry about the non-existant feelings of several lines of non-sentient code. I want the game to be fun for me. If I were interacting with a real 100% self-aware living cybernetic-intelligence-life-form, a machine-person, and they could prove to me that they really did think and feel, I would treat them with the same level of care and respect as a human being. But this video game is not made by a top secret government project, or by space-people, so I doubt that Cyberpunk2077 contains any self aware people inside of it.

Also, if you are telling me that I have to make my character a certain way or let me stay blocked from certain NPC's in the game, technically speaking you are asking me to give away my ability to choose, and essentially disregarding my own consent or lack of consent. :think:

You have the ability to romance whatever NPC is available but you choose not to take the steps to be able to do so within the context of the actual story.
I think it would be highly dishonest of myself- to myself, to construct a V character that isn't true-to-me, a V that I made to achieve a goal like being able to date an NPC just because they are hard coded to reject me, rather than a V I lovingly crafted, straight from the depths of my heart. If I did that, I would be able to date the NPC that I really appreciate, but then I would not appreciate myself anymore. The NPC would be true, but then I would be false. But even then, the NPC is always false, by design- unless the NPC is a true sentient self aware machine organism and in Cyberpunk2077, the NPC is not.



You've asked why people care what you do in your own single player game and the answer is that nobody cares.
Well, clearly this isn't the case, because you are here, explaining to me why it should never be an option for anyone to date specific NPC's in their single player game.

If you were modding your own game, more power to you, IDC.
Please tell me, what is the difference between CDPR adding an option in the menu settings that allows players to date any date-able NPC on their second playthough (New Game +) and the modding community adding it in later?

What you're talking about though is having the game built in a way that accommodates your unwillingness to have multiple playthroughs with multiple types of V's.
That is factually untrue. I intend to play multiple playthroughs but I will always craft a V character that is true to me, meaning that I may never be able to date certain NPC's even if I like them very much. Also, Cyberpunk2077 was not made to accomodate unwillingness of any kind. The game was made for fans of the cyberpunk genre. I will leave it to CDPR to define the game further than that. :think:

Professional game devs aren't going to do what hobbyist modders do which is to just have the gender flags of your main character flipped to the opposite gender in order to change their sexuality and make them like you.
So it's that easy? wow. I'm surprised.

Modding those flags does not create additional correctly gendered dialogue, it doesn't create correct animations for the different body model, it doesn't generate voice acting for your protagonist towards that NPC, and it doesn't change all the mentions of the character's sexuality or preferences in other dialogue. In order to actually get what you want, CDPR would have to do it to professional standards and spend the time and resources to add those lines of dialogue, make those extra animations, record those voiceovers, change the other lines about sexuality and preference, etc...all to appease a tiny minority of people who refuse to just make a new character. Long story short, those changes wouldn't just affect your single player game, they affect everyone and there is only so much time and so many resources to go around. Most of us would want them to go towards something worthwhile that everyone benefits from.
This is all based on the assumption that V or any characters even say the things that you are saying that they might say. NPC's may possibly never actually say "he" or "she" considering that CDPR removed binary gender from the character customization screen, instead allowing V to select body types without labels attatched to them. It is possible that NPC's may only ever call V, "V" nothing more nothing less. We just don't know, but if I censor myself and don't share my valuable feedback with CDPR months before Cyberpunk2077 releases, then I have done CDPR a great disservice, as well as doing a great disservice to any players who would could have benefited from a small setting option that gives them more in-game freedom.

and it's on you.
What is on me? There are no strings on me! (I love this movie and it's the perfect metaphor for the AI discussion! :) )
 
Last edited:
Hard no on this one for me. To have so much width in romantic options would take away all depth of storytelling within those romances ... or cause a delay until 2045. I'll pass.
 
Hard no on this one for me. To have so much width in romantic options would take away all depth of storytelling within those romances ... or cause a delay until 2045. I'll pass.
There's a strong possibility that there may not require any changes or additions to dialogue at all, no need for any delay, and last but not least, it wouldn't take away any depth for people who choose to enable the setting, and it wouldn't take away any depth for people who choose to not enable the setting.

There is a strong possibility that this is a solid Win/Win for everyone.
 
You should wait for modders to add that IMO, I don't care about such an option, but from CDPR perspective, they try to create a realistic world, so the human interactions have to feel realistic too, it may be frustrating on paper, but I find it actually interesting, like replaying the game and being finally able to open a previously closed door because you made different choices.

Having everything handed to you isn't "immersive" per say, get patient, discover the world and do different playthrough, that's what they plan to do, so I doubt they'd back on that point.
Mostly that romances aren't the main part of that game, it's not a dating sim, it's just a bonus for those that like those kind of stuff.
 
There's a strong possibility that there may not require any changes or additions to dialogue at all, no need for any delay, and last but not least, it wouldn't take away any depth for people who choose to enable the setting, and it wouldn't take away any depth for people who choose to not enable the setting.
They've said forever that story comes first. They aren't going to enable relationships where one would expect there to be narrative that end up just empty shells. A relationship is a big part of a characters life. It can't be just a few stock lines of dialogue repeated over and over. It's antithetical to the type of games CDPR has said they want to make IMO.
 
"Would you really like option to be able to just fall in love with any NPC without rejection?"
Technically, nothing stops you from doing just that; the poll question does not specify being able to romance the NPCs. It's impossible to forcibly stop someone from falling in love. :coolstory:

Nitpicking aside, a hard and definite "no" from me. (Not going to vote though, due to the wording of the "no" option.)
At this point most of what I'll say has probably already been said, but anyway.


Every single romanceable NPC being available to every single version of the player character would make no sense. Obviously, game characters are not real people, but they do have personalities and indeed preferences. If they didn't, they would be boring and just completely unrealistic when it comes to that particular aspect.

In context of the game world, NPCs are individuals just like the player character. Therefore it should not be possible to romance an NPC who, based on their personality and preferences, would never agree to be with the player character, whether it be due to gender, lifepath, or some characteristic. You cannot force a homosexual individual to fall in love with someone of the opposite gender, or a heterosexual to fall in love with someone of their own gender. And since CDPR have stated romanceable NPCs do indeed have sexual orientations/preferences, that's how it's going to be. It adds realism, and makes choices more meaningful while restricting the freedom of choice, which I consider a positive thing especially when the game is an RPG where choices are supposed to matter.

Let's say there is an NPC called Bob, who is straight and has a deep hatred for all things corporate. Automatically an unavailable romance option if V is male or of the Corpo lifepath. While it could be plausible to have a possibility to convince Bob to (partially) let go of his hatred, and romance him with an ex-Corpo V, being able to get him to like men would be too much. Sure, people do sometimes change their orientation, but being able to trigger that at will just because you're the main character... no, just no.

Also, it would not be plausible to be able to convince every NPC to change their views or whatever it may be that is making them unavailable as romance partners.

Then there's the matter of dialogue and especially voice acting. I know I saw several posts about those, so I'll just agree that they very much are something to take into account. And not just the all NPCs having lines for both female and male romance, either, most likely.

Now this may be just me, but an example of a game with imo an excellent romance system: one of the romanceable characters is male, and he is constantly talking about women and clearly indicating he is straight though he never explicitly states it (the game does have "player-sexuality"). If I were to play a male character in that game, I would never romance that NPC even though the game would have zero issue with it, because it would be so clearly out of character for him to fall in love with another man.
Does this limit my freedom of choice? Absolutely, especially since the game has a grand total of two romanceable NPCs (but you can also choose to romance no one). Do I care that it limits my freedom of choice? Not in the least, and nor would I care if the restriction was applied by the game rather than myself.

TL;DR (the post is so long that I don't blame you if you skip to this :p ): "I'm the main character" should not be a superpower that allows bypassing NPC personalities, orientations, and preferences. In my opinion CDPR have made a good choice with NPCs not being "player-sexual".
 
Thought I completely agree with you, I have to ask regarding this example:
he is constantly talking about women and clearly indicating he is straight though he never explicitly states it

What if he closeted homosexual who overcompensates for one reason or another? You never know.
 
Thought I completely agree with you, I have to ask regarding this example:


What if he closeted homosexual who overcompensates for one reason or another? You never know.
I did say the game has "player-sexuality"; I just choose to ignore that.
(And if you knew what a lot of his dialogue (plus his story) is like I bet you wouldn't say that. There is no way it's not genuine.)
 
You should wait for modders to add that IMO, I don't care about such an option, but from CDPR perspective, they try to create a realistic world, so the human interactions have to feel realistic too, it may be frustrating on paper, but I find it actually interesting, like replaying the game and being finally able to open a previously closed door because you made different choices.
As I said before countless countless times, I plan to replay the game multiple times. Choices are one thing, being permanently locked out of some relationships because of the way you make your V character are another thing.

Having everything handed to you isn't "immersive" per say, get patient, discover the world and do different playthrough, that's what they plan to do, so I doubt they'd back on that point.
Mostly that romances aren't the main part of that game, it's not a dating sim, it's just a bonus for those that like those kind of stuff.
Absolutely nowhere in this entire thread did I ever ask anyone or CDPR to have everything handed to me. :facepalm:
Post automatically merged:

They've said forever that story comes first.
I'm with that 100%

They aren't going to enable relationships where one would expect there to be narrative that end up just empty shells.
Where are empty shells coming from?

A relationship is a big part of a characters life. It can't be just a few stock lines of dialogue repeated over and over. It's antithetical to the type of games CDPR has said they want to make IMO.
Trust me, I would never imply that I want such a thing. If you think about it, the dialogue between V and date-able NPC's already exists, and there is a possibility that it may not require any changes in order to implement it. I'm not 100% sure since I don't know the game CDPR does, since it's their baby, but just in case it really does end up being as easy as I think it may possibly be, It's good to mention that there is indeed a certain amount of people with similar concerns and dreams for that option, just as an optional setting, but of course, only if it requires no real loss of time or effort on the part of CDPR. :)
Post automatically merged:

"Would you really like option to be able to just fall in love with any NPC without rejection?"
Technically, nothing stops you from doing just that; the poll question does not specify being able to romance the NPCs. It's impossible to forcibly stop someone from falling in love. :coolstory:

Wait hold on lol, in what context do you speak of? I am getting very confused. People said that some NPC's would actively auto-reject V for not being certain ways. Do you mean just loving them quietly from a distance without any interaction or notice from them? You know that's just stalking right? :ROFLMAO: I want them to love me back! :shrug: (in game story of course, I know they're NPC's of course)

Nitpicking aside, a hard and definite "no" from me. (Not going to vote though, due to the wording of the "no" option.)
At this point most of what I'll say has probably already been said, but anyway.
Every single romanceable NPC being available to every single version of the player character would make no sense. Obviously, game characters are not real people, but they do have personalities and indeed preferences. If they didn't, they would be boring and just completely unrealistic when it comes to that particular aspect.
But falling in love with one person does not necessarily render all of the rest of your preferences and personality moot

In context of the game world, NPCs are individuals just like the player character.
Well technically yes but also technically no, since V has some level of plot armor that makes the game go at least in certain possible directions, making endings possible. Contextually within a story there may be many similarities but there are limits to those similarities, and when the differences outside of the game world as in code NPC compared to flesh and blood human with a soul, the differences are much more vast.

Therefore it should not be possible to romance an NPC who, based on their personality and preferences, would never agree to be with the player character, whether it be due to gender, lifepath, or some characteristic. You cannot force a homosexual individual to fall in love with someone of the opposite gender, or a heterosexual to fall in love with someone of their own gender. And since CDPR have stated romanceable NPCs do indeed have sexual orientations/preferences, that's how it's going to be. It adds realism, and makes choices more meaningful while restricting the freedom of choice, which I consider a positive thing especially when the game is an RPG where choices are supposed to matter.

And I would never try to force anyone to do anything, or force someone who is homosexual to love someone they don't like or so-on and so forth, that's just simply not a nice thing to do at all. However, the NPC's in the game aren't really real people, and their preferences are in the imagination, making things more flexible. Why? My reasoning is this: if the option was added so that people who did want to date a specific NPC that they really really like, the action of enabling the setting does something very interesting to that individual single persons game. I'm going to get deep here, but I recognize that technically speaking, the moment a player enables that setting, it would be LIKE, not exactly, but LIKE, every date-able NPC were to become BI, sort of like schrodingers cat, except with who they may possibly like or not like. It's like until you date them, you don't really know what they like, but coincidentally, causality, destiny, or some other universe/physics type factor makes it turn out so that in that individual players personal single player game playthrough of Cyberpunk2077, that NPC that they wanted to date, just so happens to be bi, and likes the player back. This is an extremely useful setting because it can allow a player to date a date-able NPC that they were pretty much never going to be able to date, because for some kind of reason that NPC was never going to "like" that players V, for any number of reasons, but that player was going to get stuck, unable to ever date them. This would be really really sad by the way. It would be like living your whole love knowing you love someone, but you can never tell them. I want a way for myself, and other players to get out of that situation and experience it, if they choose to enable the option. (people who don't want this, and never ever want to see it in their game, simply have to just never enable that option. It's like magic, I can not stress this enough. I feel like nobody reads this part. not talking to anyone in specific, but to everyone)

Let's say there is an NPC called Bob, who is straight and has a deep hatred for all things corporate. Automatically an unavailable romance option if V is male or of the Corpo lifepath. While it could be plausible to have a possibility to convince Bob to (partially) let go of his hatred, and romance him with an ex-Corpo V, being able to get him to like men would be too much. Sure, people do sometimes change their orientation, but being able to trigger that at will just because you're the main character... no, just no.
I have head of many much more unlikely love stories of real people in real life before, so it's not that far fetched. Again this is based on a worry that it wont fit, but there is nothing to worry about, since nobody has to enable "date whoever I like option setting" (probably should be called "unlikely love" setting) if they worry about finding unlikely love. I think it's even more sweet and heart warming considering how love was so powerful that it somehow found a way. It could actually make for a very good story, like "bob" for example feels this way about corporates but for some reason they fall for V and it completely turns their world upside down, and they realize that V is in danger because of their love for them, and this makes bob rethink their priorities and rethink their life. They still don't like corporates, but maybe there was something in V that shows them that V may be a corporate, but V is still a good person, making them a very rare breed of corporate or something. Maybe the story even ends in tragedy, like bob dies trying to protect V because bob saw something coming that V didn't, and it's sad but bob learns a life lesson and so does V too, but it's sort of too late but bob does one last thing for V saving them, V holds bob in their arms and they exchange their last words to each other before bob passes on. V is heart broken but filled with a new resolve to right the wrongs of their past and take down the corporates responsible for bobs death. You gotta admit, that's some real story right there, from an unlikely romance or love that V or bob didn't know was possible, and would have laughed at the thought before meeting each other.

Also, it would not be plausible to be able to convince every NPC to change their views or whatever it may be that is making them unavailable as romance partners.
Then there's the matter of dialogue and especially voice acting. I know I saw several posts about those, so I'll just agree that they very much are something to take into account. And not just the all NPCs having lines for both female and male romance, either, most likely.
You mean like multiple overlapping relationships? or uhh, cheating? I don't feel too good about that. I wouldn't betray my partner. I'm not sure I understand.

Now this may be just me, but an example of a game with imo an excellent romance system: one of the romanceable characters is male, and he is constantly talking about women and clearly indicating he is straight though he never explicitly states it (the game does have "player-sexuality"). If I were to play a male character in that game, I would never romance that NPC even though the game would have zero issue with it, because it would be so clearly out of character for him to fall in love with another man.
Does this limit my freedom of choice? Absolutely, especially since the game has a grand total of two romanceable NPCs (but you can also choose to romance no one). Do I care that it limits my freedom of choice? Not in the least, and nor would I care if the restriction was applied by the game rather than myself.
Well actually if I heard a male NPC constantly saying "Hey hey... look at me, LOOK AT ME, hey V... did you know I'm straight? btw Just letting you know just in case. I'm really straight. *points towards shirt* who's straight? Thissss guyyyyyy"
I would actually think "hmmm maybe my friend here is not straight"
I think that has the potential to be a very unlikely love story where V's friend is so insecure about themselves that they are constantly trying to point out how straight they are, when in fact it's just because they are shy and want to cover up the fact that they are not straight. Maybe the story plays out that V finally finds a woman to introduce to their friend and it all goes the wrong way, thus, V discovering that their friend may not actually like women, and then V has a talk with his friend and his friend finally spills the beans and goes "Fine, it's true, it's all true" and then things kind of just go from there and best friends become more, and it just ends up being a beautiful unexpected story, so totally possible right there.

TL;DR (the post is so long that I don't blame you if you skip to this :p ): "I'm the main character" should not be a superpower that allows bypassing NPC personalities, orientations, and preferences. In my opinion CDPR have made a good choice with NPCs not being "player-sexual".
But V has a superpower. They are mind controlled by a human being, which allows them to do amazing things in a world that nobody else can do. The most power a corporate has is to sit in a tall building at their desk and rub their hands together pretending that they are so rich, but really, they're just an NPC. V has the ability to change the world, and see the endings of the game. There is no NPC that can do that. V can also stop time by pausing the game. ZA WARUDO!!!!!! So if V has that superpower, then V can surely make cute puppy dog eyes and get hugs from everybody.
I agree with NPC's having preferences, and I do agree that in SOME ways it really does add a lot to the immersion. I really LIKE this, I DO! I promise I like it, but I don't like the limitations it introduces, which is why I say I want to play cyberpunk2077 the normal way on my first playthrough, and then when I start New Game + I want to enable the "date any date-able NPC setting" after experiencing the game the way it was intended.

It would just be an optioooooonnnnnnnnalll setttiiinnngggg-ahhhhhhh!!!! :eek::ROFLMAO::shrug:
 
Last edited:
Wait hold on lol, in what context do you speak of?
Your wording of the poll question does not ask what you want it to ask.

But falling in love with one person does not necessarily render all of the rest of your preferences and personality moot
You're arguing against a point I never made, and putting words in my mouth.

Well technically yes but also technically no
There is no "technically" or "no" about it. They have been coded in a certain way, yes -- a way that makes them individuals. Them always being the same does not make them not-individuals. That makes no sense.

And I would never try to force anyone to do anything
"Changing a setting" is doing exactly that. If an NPC is coded to be a straight male, your changing a setting to make them gay or bi is forcing them to be something they are not. You cannot have it both ways, like others have already pointed out as well.

that's some real story right there
Yeah. It's a fantasy, and a cliché one at that. Not something that has any place in an RPG set in a dystopian future and that is supposed to be somewhat realistic. "Love can change anything" belongs in romance novels or fanfiction, not in a game like Cyberpunk. Especially when it's the "main character's love changes other characters' very nature" kind of thing like what you're asking for.

You mean like multiple overlapping relationships?
I have no idea how you got that from my post. I said nothing of the sort.

Well actually if I heard a male NPC constantly saying "Hey hey... look at me, LOOK AT ME, hey V... did you know I'm straight? btw Just letting you know just in case. I'm really straight. *points towards shirt* who's straight? Thissss guyyyyyy"
Where did I ever say he acts like that? Nowhere. In fact, I even said he never states he's straight.
You can't just make assumptions and then argue against what you think based on those (in this case, false) assumptions. Or, you can, but it's completely pointless because you're literally arguing against yourself.

But V has a superpower. They are mind controlled by a human being, which allows them to do amazing things in a world that nobody else can do.
And you completely missed my point.
 
Your wording of the poll question does not ask what you want it to ask.
Hmmmm. Maybe I see. Maybe I could have worded it to say "Would you like the option to date any date-able NPC without any worry" or something similar.

You're arguing against a point I never made, and putting words in my mouth.
Wait, where and how exactly?

There is no "technically" or "no" about it. They have been coded in a certain way, yes -- a way that makes them individuals. Them always being the same does not make them not-individuals. That makes no sense.
I never said that NPC's are all the same, clearly not because there are many different types of NPC's otherwise everyone would be a clone. I'm not arguing that they aren't individuals, I don't know where you're getting that from. I argued that there are key differences between an NPC and a player. I argue that NPC's are not the same as the player. Individuality isn't what I am arguing for or against, and I'm not trying to prove or disprove it since we are already aware of the facts. code npc compared to flesh blood humans with souls.

"Changing a setting" is doing exactly that. If an NPC is coded to be a straight male, your changing a setting to make them gay or bi is forcing them to be something they are not. You cannot have it both ways, like others have already pointed out as well.
By that very same line of logic, it's another case of "both ways" when CDPR forces the NPC (not saying it's a bad thing) to have preferences one way, and the player wants the NPC to have preferences the other way. Either way, someone, somewhere is forcing the NPC to have a preference, HOWEVER.......

Technically by selecting a setting that allows them into not necessarily changing their preferences, but allowing that NPC to fall in love with V in an unlikely, but possible love situation, their preferences may not necessarily need to change, and I know I brought up the Schrodingers-bi-cat example, but the unlikely love scenario really should be possible, since it would be more unrealistic to not include it as a possibility, even as an option. I totally stand by that as a real life concept that does actually happen as a real event in real life. It may be somewhat rare, but it's more common than what someone may call very rare. It's common enough that people hear stories about it, more than a handful of times in their entire life.


Yeah. It's a fantasy, and a cliché one at that. Not something that has any place in an RPG set in a dystopian future and that is supposed to be somewhat realistic. "Love can change anything" belongs in romance novels or fanfiction, not in a game like Cyberpunk. Especially when it's the "main character's love changes other characters' very nature" kind of thing like what you're asking for.
I am not asking to change the characters very nature.

I have no idea how you got that from my post. I said nothing of the sort.
Fair enough, I also completely failed to understand what you said there then I guess.

Where did I ever say he acts like that? Nowhere. In fact, I even said he never states he's straight.
You can't just make assumptions and then argue against what you think based on those (in this case, false) assumptions. Or, you can, but it's completely pointless because you're literally arguing against yourself.
Okay let me go back and read this again, but please don't assume the worst about me :cry:
Now this may be just me, but an example of a game with imo an excellent romance system: one of the romanceable characters is male, and he is constantly talking about women and clearly indicating he is straight though he never explicitly states it
"he is constantly talking about women and clearly indicating he is straight" "though he never explicitly states it"
Okay my bad I see where misread that, but I did notice this: So we established that he's not always literally stating that he is straight, but I would go as far as to argue that he is constantly making an active effort to imply it. Which is significant, but intentional or unintentional is difficult to say. He could be straight but very enthusiastic about his appreciation for the opposite, but the possibility that it is just a very skilled act at implying, is not impossible. I've seen that in real life before, it's extremely common. (I am absolutely not saying anything bad about anyone who is homosexual, and I was happy to see those individuals work through their thoughts and emotions and actually get to a point where they finally accepted themselves and stopped trying to hide it, so good on them :)(y))

And you completely missed my point.
Which point was that? Please point out a specific area in your post where it was :shrug:
I am trying my best. I promise.
 
Wait, where and how exactly?
By arguing against a point I never made, and putting words in my mouth. I can't put it clearer than that. As for where, read the quote to which I replied with that.

I never said that NPC's are all the same
And I never said you did. Again you're putting words in my mouth.

Either way, someone, somewhere is forcing the NPC to have a preference
Someone needs to create the NPCs, they don't just pop into existence.
CDPR literally creating an NPC to be of a specific orientation and a player changing the NPC's existing orientation are two very different things.

since it would be more unrealistic to not include it as a possibility, even as an option
No, it really wouldn't (and won't) be. It really, really wo(uld)n't.

I am not asking to change the characters very nature.
Yes, you are. You are asking, in an extreme case, for an NPC to change not only their sexual orientation (which is a major part of a person's nature) but also their views on things (the Bob example is only a relatively small change).

So we established that he's not always literally stating that he is straight
He NEVER states that. Never. Not even once. In all his thousands (main character) of lines of dialogue, not a single time.
I already said that twice.

You don't know what NPC or what game I'm talking about, so your assumptions are not based on any knowledge. And, again, I said the game has "player-sexuality" so I don't even see any point in discussing the whole thing.
(That entire paragraph about the NPC was a mere side point, too.)
 
Top Bottom