[Poll] Did it surprise you to learn that all dateable NPCs are not pan/player-sexual?

[akiradice]

Hi, I am new to the forums. First time post, but feel very impassioned about this topic, not to mention that I felt depressed for a day after learning about this fact about Cyberpunk 2077 about 118 hours into my playthrough.

I identify as a trans man in real life, but I have been playing a pretty masc-presenting female V because I preferred the voice actor. Anyway, I took the choice to start a relationship with Judy when given the chance. Cool, I thought!

Then, I had the opportunity to make a move on Panam - who felt comfortable enough with me to put her legs on my lap (if that wasn't a hint idk what is, and I have been a lesbian... lol). She denied my "move" though, and I thought I just didn't make enough choices to "flatter" her early on enough. Oh well, I thought.

I was given the chance to make a move on River, but was not interested, so I figured he was Player-sexual.

But ok - this is the main part I had an issue with. I was on the boat mission with Kerry and our faces get close. I didn't receive a prompt to do anything - Kerry just says to V, "not like that, V", to my huge disappointment. I had no idea why he rejected me because I tried to play on his "good side" in order to ... "get the scene", so to speak.

So my husband looks it up and TEACHES me that Kerry is canon gay (to my surprise, even as a gay person lol), though I had a hunch - I thought the gay fanfic you found was just a fan's "dream". ANYWAY - I went on to learn that not all NPCs are player-sexual and that it depends on one's "body type", not genitalia or anything else, as to which NPCs will be in a relationship with V. I was immensely bummed out, as this game is like 50+ years into the future and we already have Gender X being introduced here in the United States. Especially after playing Balder's Gate 3 recently, I felt very let down at the limited sexuality; why not let the players have access to the scenes? Is the future where some people are robots still really so binary when it comes to sexual orientation?

So I made a male avatar and started a new game (lmao). But I have to know - was anyone else completely duped by the sexual orientation(s) represented in the game? I thought River would at least be Bisexual. Oh well.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Nope, it's the case for many games and for me, it make characters more "real", they have likings and preferences. In my opinion, it feel too "artificial/forced" in BG3. For exemple, I prefer to play as female in general, but in Mass Effect, I play male because my girl Tali prefer male.

 

[Draconifors]

Nope. I knew ahead of time from being around the forums and Discord, and I don't care about "romances" anyway.

It's all the same time to me whether NPCs are "player-sexual" or not, even in cases where I do decide to pursue someone. However, in these cases, if a "player-sexual" NPC has dialogue or something else that clearly indicates they're interested in a specific gender, and I want to romance that NPC, I pick my character's gender accordingly (I haven't played any games where picking gender isn't possible and that has romanceable characters with preferences).

Having preferences makes NPCs more believable and realistic, and gives them more of a personality.

 

[Tarille]

I was somewhat surprised, mostly given the overall trend of recent games to make romances more accessible in addition to my female V interacting with Meredith and Judy (Generally, when video games implement sexual preferences, they're usually always heterosexual)

As far as my preferences go... I'm usually fine with "Playersexual" casts. The whole "It's not very believable" thing doesn't bother me as much as the alternative system where usually it ends up being you can flirt heavily as either gender, but one arbitrarily just doesn't get options after a certain point (While if we're trying to be believable, the entire scenario would be shut down at the first sign of flirting).

Perhaps if things were implemented more believably, where flirting is shut down instantly because of preferences, then limitations would feel better to me... But then again, even playersexuality can be somewhat believable, bicuriosity is a thing that exists and people can find themselves becoming attracted to someone outside of their usual preference as unique exceptions.

 

[northwold]

To be honest I was more impressed by being able to flirt with River and make a move on him and him then turn me down (as a male V). That just felt realistically awkward and true to life. I don't want characters in video games to be my puppets who will bed me on command, but I favour good storytelling in games over player wish fulfilment.

 

[Oksiki]

Nope, not duped or befuddled or anything. I already knew the possible romance options and their sexual orientations before playing. Also I don't see why people in the future would have no clear orientation?

I'm one of the people who appreciates CDPR's decision to not make everyone bi/playersexual, thus creating meaningful representation like Judy. And I'm hoping they'll continue this way unlike Bethesda games or Baldur's Gate 3 or new Dragon Age game because I've always felt that it's artificial and in the worst case, forced and lazy.

 

[devivre]

It usually surprises me more if all characters in a game are open to both genders as this usually seems forced. I don't think the player needs to be able to date everyone during one playthrough. It's more interesting to me if there are limitations.

 

[GrimReaper801]

I'm personally fine with one romanceable option being player-oriented. Or more depending on how many options there are I guess but that number is typically low.

But having all options be player oriented feels extremely forced, unrealistic and makes for less fleshed out characters in my opinion.

 

[SpookyFX]

Nope, it's the case for many games and for me, it make characters more "real", they have likings and preferences. In my opinion, it feel too "artificial/forced" in BG3. For exemple, I prefer to play as female in general, but in Mass Effect, I play male because my girl Tali prefer male.

Bethesda got some accolades for being an early adopter of bisexual characters, but (this is widely accepted speculation amongst even the fans) it was really because they did not want to spend the time/effort to categorize them and make mechanics to manage the preferences in game.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Bethesda got some accolades for being an early adopter of bisexual characters, but (this is widely accepted speculation amongst even the fans) it was really because they did not want to spend the time/effort to categorize them and make mechanics to manage the preferences in game.

I wouldn't crossed my mind to quote Bethesda when talking about romances.. . No romance and Bethesda's romances, the difference is pretty slim.
Sometimes, it could be better to not make romance at all

 

[SpookyFX]

I wouldn't crossed my mind to quote Bethesda when talking about romances.. . No romance and Bethesda's romances, the difference is pretty slim.
Sometimes, it could be better to not make romance at all

So shotgun marriages are not a kind of romance in your opinion?
I means I think I recall at least two where you had to do at least a fetch quest.

 

[koalahugs]

I am massively looking forward to 50 years into the future when everyone finally thinks I'm hot and dating turns into a David Wain sketch:

On a serious note, the only constructive criticism I have is that, in the wider context of the gaming industry in general, there is a tendency to prioritise romances that primarily cater to The Boys, and we see that with Panam being 1st, Judy 2nd, Kerry 3rd, River 4th. In terms of how they fit into the main story, that's blatantly how you'd rank them. But I don't think the answer to that is playersexual romance. I like that each character is distinct, including how they're oriented. I like how you can get rejected. It's realistic, which helps make CP77 more immersive - and immersion is, like, the main selling point of the game I think.

 

[Bartinga2077]

"DID IT SURPRISE YOU TO LEARN THAT ALL DATEABLE NPCS ARE NOT PAN/PLAYER-SEXUAL?"​

Not really. Knew upfront what one could expect. I do was a little dumbfounded and disappointed when nothing happened when you actually dated several of them, all the more after the update to invite them to your homes. After all, there and then was a perfect opportunity for a self-incurred gig.

But take a game like DD2 where all dateable characters are in fact, pansexual, what it eventually leads up to, is absolutely,

Spoiler

nothing.

 

[GrimReaper801]

Everything you said is correct....

But this...

... and we see that with Panam being 1st, Judy 2nd ...

 

[FelineWitcher]

While I think playersexuality worked well in Baldur's Gate 3, I do like the realistic approach of 2077.

 

[S0lstafir]

Of course! Plus, I could never understand why it's always possible to choose only one character for a personal relationship: that same Johnny Silverhand loved four women at the same time, and it didn't stop him from fighting corpo tyranny!

Let there be wide connections in the game, let there be jealousy from the NPCs, let them have duels over the protagonist!

Kids need to be told what will happen in their real family life when they finally grow up and stop playing games!

 

[Darkaiser1313]

No, because the idea of every person in the game thirsting for the PC is unrealistic. I live in the US and according to the data, about 10% of the people here identify as other than hetero. Even if we double that for CP 2077 because, in the future, the wealthy will be even more hedonistic than they are now, that means at most 1 in 5 people will even be interested in the PC. After that, it should come down to the various dialog options.

What I would like to see, more than more pansexual NPCs, are NPCs that are willing to use the PC but not form a relationship with them. The brief scene we can have with Meredith Stout is a good example of this.

 

[terapinrex]

I was hoping every eatable character could be fluid for better immersion. It is the future and cyberpunk is all about free expression and ditching old norms.

 

[Guest 4719259]

But wait a minute, doesn't the current situation convince us that all of the CP's shortcomings can be regulated with appropriate mods? And there are already quite a few different mods made. )
It seemed to me that from now on users are put in the situation "You have a problem, you don't like something? - Go and find the right mod yourself"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speaking strictly on the topic - no, it didn't surprise me. And I think the possible pan-sexuality is unnecessary, and could be detrimental to the game in general. Along with that, the player's gender should probably have been linked to the player's lifepaths and "protagonist's destiny", if I may say so.
Different lifepaths \different genders - dif. psychology - dif. dialogue options for the protagonist - dif. scenarios - dif. outcomes.
In my opinion, the more variety, the more interesting.

 

[FelineWitcher]

No, characters having different preferences feels more real. And I have no problem playing the character required for the romance I like. Then again, I think both Panam and Judy are pretty cool.