Gender locked classes don't belong in 2023 let alone 2024

"

MissAnnTropist wrote:

Typical sectarian: "its a troll"

I am not a troll I am voicing a complaint about something I wish they changed in the game.

Why is your profile set to private?

off topic. (or may be GGG support will del this soon)

I think i saw this topic before in this forum. So, same guy?

Here. Let me do it instead then, since I'm a decade-old account with an investigatable history.

Gender locked classes don't belong in a 2023 ARPG.

There is no "story of the character". The character's individuality extends only so far as their voicelines - Jonathan said so himself in the dev Q&A. "The only threee things your character cannot change or steal from another character is their position on the starting tree, their base physical model, and their voicelines." Grinding Gear may believe there's a deep lore reason for the Sorceress to be a woman, or the Mercenary to be a man, but that doesn't make it true.

I have a marked preference towards playing female characters. It is, in fact, important to me in a way many cisgender people (and fuck, some LGBT+/trans people) might not realize. It doesn't feel great for me to play a Dudebroguyman when I have the chance to do otherwise. Obviously I've done so, you can see them on my character list, but that doesn't mean I don't prefer Witch, Ranger or Scion builds where they exist. And in PoE2 they're eliminating the Scion and leaving me exactly two options for 'new' character - the Huntress or the Sorceress. I'm extremely fortunate in that I prefer spellcasters or nimble, Dexy skirmishers, but someone in my position who preferred brutal, heavy melee combat would be 100% SOL.

Call me a woke troll or whatever else all you like. Doesn't invalidate the opinion. Yes, programming a second gender option for their new game would take double the expensive voicework and add a lot of animation overhead. Suck it up, buttercup - when all of your primary competitors are doing it, you start losing your excuse. Path of Exile is touted as the game that lets you build anything your mind desires. But if your mind desires a female Karui fire witch, or a male necromantic undead-molesting warlock? Well just too bloody bad, because Tukohama says men have to be BUFF WARRIOR TYPES and women have to be DAINTY SPELLFLINGERS.

To Beyond with that shit.

"

Glorfndel01 wrote:

[Removed by Support]

Not really. And you know it. People like to pretend the issue is a nothingburger. Maybe it is for them. Doesn't mean it's a nothingburger for everyone else.

EDIT: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand we're in Feedback and Suggestions where threads go to die. Awesome. Ignored once again. Thanks, Grinding Gear.

send them the money to do it, and i am sure they ll find someone to do it lol. apprenttly, in 2023 money doesnt exist anymore. also send me 1 million dollar plz

"

1453R wrote:

position on the starting tree, their base physical model, and their voicelines." Grinding Gear may believe there's a deep lore reason for the Sorceress to be a woman, or the Mercenary to be a man, but that doesn't make it true.

In fact, that is EXACTLY what makes it true. They are the authors, and what THEY believe the class to be, and what they designed it to be, is exactly what it SHOULD be. You are basically saying that an author who chooses to write a book about a male protagonist doesn't make it true that the protagonist is male: uh...yes. Yes it does.

Batman/Bruce Wayne is male because...the writers made him male. Harry Potter is a straight male because...JK Rowling decided he should be. The witch in PoE is female because the devs decided that is what she would be. She simply ISN'T male, no matter what YOU BELIEVE her to be.

It is not your own personal hangups that make this true: it is the actual designers and creative minds behind the character. It doesn't even need any gender-specific storyline: it was CREATED to be a female, so it is a female.

There is no law of design that forces game designers to create equal gendering in their characters, just like there is no law that says there should be two versions of every book: one normal and one gender-swapped to appease people like you. If the character designs really affect you THAT much, then don't play. Just as you would skip a book where you don't like the main character.

dont really mind different genders since i play ssf anyway
ill never see it.

but if i had to choose a side , would just stick to the age and genders our characters have been given.

ultimately its a fantasy where we play through the lives of them like someone said before


as a inquisitor spammer
i like being a holy old man.

one day i will be old but most certianly not "holy" in the western Aramaic sense.

but it still feels like good to play

"

jsuslak313 wrote:

"

1453R wrote:

position on the starting tree, their base physical model, and their voicelines." Grinding Gear may believe there's a deep lore reason for the Sorceress to be a woman, or the Mercenary to be a man, but that doesn't make it true.

In fact, that is EXACTLY what makes it true. They are the authors, and what THEY believe the class to be, and what they designed it to be, is exactly what it SHOULD be. You are basically saying that an author who chooses to write a book about a male protagonist doesn't make it true that the protagonist is male: uh...yes. Yes it does.

Uh, do you want to re-read what you're quoting?

What's being discussed as 'true or not true' isn't "whether the protagonist is a particular. It's whether there's a "deep lore reason" for them to be that gender. Nobody's arguing that the witch is male if you believe they're male.

Disagree Gus the quote is fine, there is automatically a deep lore reason they are a specific gender because of the reason they mentioned - they wrote it, the lore that is, and the characters so it is true they have a lore reason to be that.

This would be simpler if they had used names instead of titles for the ascendancies but names doesn't work, people want to play the Witch they don't want to play Sandra.

Nor is the tale about some generic witch it is about THE witch if anything there is a deep lore reason you don't know their name (except delirium guy he says he knows who Sandra is)

This is different to Diablo where you are simply a representative of a group.

It is a narrative choice, and one I think should be OK to be respected. I think often the gender locked choice is made from a budgetary/time constraint platform but I genuinely think GGG chose to make them locked again to do a similar construct to PoE1. Again you aren't really playing a Monk, you are playing Bartholomew who happens to be a Monk.

And sadly when it comes down to it they will say what 1453R wants to say to them, Suck it up buttercup. There are still plenty of RPGs that lock genders and it will continue for the same reasons I stated above - we are fortunate however that when we are playing a faceless hero or a group representative progress has been made and we can generally play what we want now.

"

Draegnarrr wrote:

Disagree Gus the quote is fine, there is automatically a deep lore reason they are a specific gender because of the reason they mentioned - they wrote it, the lore that is, and the characters so it is true they have a lore reason to be that.

Sure, but I was responding to what jsuslak said in response to the quote, not to what you're saying here.

Anyway, we're approaching triviality here. Everything in the game is the way it is because GGG made it that way. And yet, there's a feedback and suggestions forum specifically for people to suggest it be different. If "it exists" is sufficient justification for things to exist without question, then we may as well delete this forum.

I don't mind that you disagree - that's the point, this is all subjective. Nobody has to think there's any vital reason the Ranger has to be a woman and the Duelist a man. Literally everything about their story would work just as well if those weren't true - that's what's meant by the lack of a deep reason for them to be that gender.