Lae’zel and Shadowheart can be mean sometimes, and it’s okay to embrace women in video games like them.
Baldurs gate 3 is one of the top games of the year and this article basically expects me to think it’s in spite of the strong female characters?
And that adding more ways to accomplish a goal is somehow a negative thing…
Dumb.
Well to the author’s credit, this isn’t a problem of adding player choices (specifically PC actions). It’s actually the opposite problem: it’s a problem of diminished consequences (specifically, out of character NPC reactions).
More PC actions without consequence doesn’t make for a more engaging experience. If the consequences of any actions all still converge on the same outcome, the game is effectively still linear, with only superficial choice.
Sure, but their complaint is still fairly unfounded because it’s a change that makes sense IMHO. The previous behavior allowed you to ``“knock out” most enemies but that mechanic did… Nothing. It was virtually identical to killing the enemies. I can’t think of any circumstances where knocking someone out actually made an in game difference later in the story compared to killing them, but there could have been some rare ones.
Making it so the mechanic works and there are story consequences to using it isn’t justification for yet another article about “gamers vs women”
Adding to that that laezel will be less abrasive (she’s still definitely not lovey-dovey) to someone who, by the game’s mechanics, she is “thrilled with” and exceptionally approving of… Yeah. Not worthy of this abrasive title
SH is a whiny little child. An evil whiny little child, but still.
Lae’zel, well, that’s a different story.
This is like a reasonable narrative thats been applied to the wrong game. These are just all different audiences. Who is playing BG3 who isnt already okay with powerful women? Edit and in BG3 “powerful” means absolutely detestably evil like hurt durr no I dont like the “powerful” women if BG3.
This article is slop.
