The Witcher 3's Sex Scenes Came From 16 Hours of Mo-Cap Data - Update

[SlumlordThanatos]

Witcher is indeed a series with lots of adult themes but the mature depictions? That's alot more hit and miss. they really do a great job with the politics of the era and the ruthlesness behind it and dare i say, it's depictions of discrimination, however when it comes to sex.....ha ha ha yeah funny.

Let's not forget this is the game series where several female characters reward you for saving them with sex, where the "spanky, spanky, very naughty girl you have been Cynthia" scene happens, lesbomancy happens cause you know fetishizing lesbian sexual relationships is absolutely great also the dwarf doing a wink*wink*nudge*nudge was the cherry on top; where the only suggested depiction of sex between two men is used to get a disgust reponse from the players and prop up the depravity of one the minor antagonists (*cough* Deathmold), rape and sexual assault happens every time the story really needs to drive home how dark and gritty it is or to depict an antagonist going beyond the "moral horizon" (Leto, Henselt) and also the fact that Dandelion seems to find lots of bisexual women just ready to have sexual relationships with each other just for his viewing pleasure (they appear during his interchapter monlogues and the ending cutscene). Also let's not forget the wonderful character designs that some female characters got or i'm supposed to gloss over the fact that Vess's military uniform has extremely tight leather pants and a neckline cleavage that would make Samara from ME blush, or that Saskia is wearing a full suit of armor with cleavage, ofc no breastplate, except the undercloth draped over her breasts and a metal corset/lower abdomen metal plate specifically designed to keep her breasts in viewing range.
I'm not gonna even touch some of the female character designs in the first one, those speak for themselves.

The Witcher hasn't done anything that Game of Thrones hasn't done in some form or fashion (except maybe armor designs), and I don't see people complaining about all the sex and incest and tits in that show.

Because The Witcher is more of an interactive medium, does that automatically mean that depictions of sex in a video game are 100x worse than they are on TV? Because I'm having a hard time seeing much of a difference besides the ability to opt out of most of the juicy bits.

 

[Uncle Comrade]

Yeah, that's what everyone's talking about here, whether the Witcher is going too far by having nudity. It can't be people taking issue with CD Projekt thinks having Geralt and Yennefer have sex is the best way to show that he cares for her in the time they have. Nope, no criticism of their apparent lack of writing ability, it's all just American prudishness.

You want to know what I don't get? Why every time someone takes the slightest issue with anything related to sex, regardless of what it actually is, someone has to run in and simply assume that they just have a problem with sex.

Exactly, it's like some sort of backwards taboo where nothing involving sex can ever be wrong, and to question that marks you as a weird deviant.

It's just strawmanning, really. Why bother thinking up a convincing counterargument to somebody, when you can just misinterpret their point as "Eww, sex is icky!" and scold them for their old fashioned views instead?

I have never argued against sex, but that doesn't mean I don't think there's a time and place for it. A happy couple making out on the sofa at home? Good for them! The same happy couple making out while they're sat next to me on the bus? Not so nice.

 

[sageoftruth]

There are other ways of establishing their relationship, or make people interested in the characters. Maybe you can have them do stuff together for a while before him looking for her. It's more important for the player to like the character and want to help a certain character, not that the character they are playing as finds the person important. Heck, for the Persona games, when it came to the party social links, people more likely did it because they were invested in the character already (along with the perks).

I feel that sex being used so haphazardly is not a good thing. Yes, it can show a close relationship, but with how it's been used in media, especially video games, it seems more like pleasure and gratification than anything emotional. Showing is more than telling, but if you just show sex, that's not really doing much. While not the greatest, Shadow of Mordor did an overall good job of showing the relationship of the guy and his family.

I know what you mean. The thing is, Geralt's relationship with Yenneffer is not exactly sweet. It's more of a "I hate you! I hope you die you filthy monster..." (Weeks later) "Oh God! I hope he's not dead!" (Days later) "I'm sorry about everything. I've been a horrible partner. Let's try again." kind of relationship.
Far from an ideal relationship (infamous in fact for the number break-ups and the collateral damage), but pretty hard to portray in the first few moments of a game. Still, it could probably be done throughout the course of the game. Unfortunately, for an open world game like this, that might be difficult. Perhaps making it open world was a mistake. I'm waiting with baited breath.

 

[Alex1508]

In today's episode of What I Learned On The Escapist Forums, we find out why people who doesn't like sex scenes are emotionally repressed prudes who need to just get over themselves!

Seriously though, on the one hand I remember a time before such things were as common as they were now (in all forms of media), and I'm pretty sure we never had trouble telling which characters were and weren't in love, without having to see them going at it.

But on the other hand, as others have said, when it's done well it does work as a way of establishing the characters. I think the key is for it to be both relevant and tasteful, not just an excuse to wave some tits about and go "Wow-ee, look how mature and edgy we are guys!"

From the sounds of it, the scene in question is going to be more like the second game's scenes with Triss, which are routinely held up as an example of sex in games done right, so I'd reserve judgement until I know more.

It's so weird. Everyone on this site seems really cool and liberal but whenever sex or nudity is brought up everyone goes all puritan and says how immature and disgusting it is. It's a huge level of outrage and is really weird.

Personally I am fine with sex in my games. The Witcher 2's sex scenes were fine. They were tasteful, or funny, never made me go "ew" or think I was being catered to as a straight guy. They were there to enrich the story. People in relationships have sex, that's a given. Showing the characters pre or post sex or even doing the act shows how comfortable they are with each other. The Witcher is a mature series with a lot of adult themes. If the characters only held each others hands it would be out of place.

Witcher is indeed a series with lots of adult themes but the mature depictions? That's alot more hit and miss. they really do a great job with the politics of the era and the ruthlesness behind it and dare i say, it's depictions of discrimination, however when it comes to sex.....ha ha ha yeah funny.

Let's not forget this is the game series where several female characters reward you for saving them with sex, where the "spanky, spanky, very naughty girl you have been Cynthia" scene happens, lesbomancy happens cause you know fetishizing lesbian sexual relationships is absolutely great also the dwarf doing a wink*wink*nudge*nudge was the cherry on top; where the only suggested depiction of sex between two men is used to get a disgust reponse from the players and prop up the depravity of one the minor antagonists (*cough* Deathmold), rape and sexual assault happens every time the story really needs to drive home how dark and gritty it is or to depict an antagonist going beyond the "moral horizon" (Leto, Henselt) and also the fact that Dandelion seems to find lots of bisexual women just ready to have sexual relationships with each other just for his viewing pleasure (they appear during his interchapter monlogues and the ending cutscene). Also let's not forget the wonderful character designs that some female characters got or i'm supposed to gloss over the fact that Vess's military uniform has extremely tight leather pants and a neckline cleavage that would make Samara from ME blush, or that Saskia is wearing a full suit of armor with cleavage, ofc no breastplate, except the undercloth draped over her breasts and a metal corset/lower abdomen metal plate specifically designed to keep her breasts in viewing range.
I'm not gonna even touch some of the female character designs in the first one, those speak for themselves.

There's using sex for comic relief and then there's using sex for their relationships. The sex scenes for Triss have a different tone from the random whore sex scenes, or the funny ones like the Succubus. They are not all intended for the same effect. Also bear in mind it comes from a European developer based on a European series of books. Easily offended Americans are not the target audience for the game and if you can't handle a bit of nudity then don't complain about it.

I don't see the problem with the character designs at all. The sorcerers are all ladies at court. If you look at fashion in the olden days things like corsets and stuff were present and the fashion of their day. Meanwhile Triss has her body 100% covered since she's out in the field adventuring. Very practical. Ves has to use her womanly talents in subterfuge therefore that's why she is dressed as she is. If we actually saw her reading for a battle she'd probably have full armor on like the rest of the Blue Stripes.

I think you should probably just not go out and look to be offended by this sex stuff and you will probably have a much better time. Lots of us don't find this stuff offensive at all and it enriches the experience. We don't want a bunch of puritans who are scared of naked bodies to ruin a game that is a bit different because they are a little offended.

You make the unfounded assumption that i am american, unfortunately for you i'm way closer to Poland both geographically and culturally than you think.
Secondly i have no problems with sex but the portrayal of sex and sexuality in this series.
Thirdly yes i do have a problem when a big swathe of the important female npc designs having "sexy" shoehorned in, standing in stark counterpart with the more real life inspired designs of the male npcs, especially in a supposedly deep and mature rpg series that crafts its atmosphere and world design in such a painstaking detail. Except when the npc has boobs, then we need to make her look like she came out of medieval version of Playboy. Extra points if she's a sorceress and must use her sexuality and willy ways to manipulate men with her vagina. Even more extra points if she's a bisexual sorceress. Then we can make her into BDSM and have a scene where we watch her spank her lover and giggle. And i gave 2 examples exactly because their visual design is in contrast with their occupations, two military career women who prance around in a cleavage heavy plate armor and Mirandas catsuit "medieval, extra dark, sexual and gritty" version respectively and yes that's Vess's military uniform, i guess Foltest wanted quick acces and something to ogle at.

Look, i have tons of beef with the series from the fanservicey designs to how it portrays sex (there are also good representations such as triss and geralts opening scene) and especially the only 2 LGBT characters: with Phillipa, the game can't stop giggling at the fact she has sex with women and then Deathmold, where the fact he has sex with men is used as a shorthand for his depravity and to incite disgust. The thing the bites the most however for me and puts me off so much is that these are not fictional values presented here, most of them are alive and well and an integral part when it comes to slavic/ eastern european gender roles and sexuality, and take it from someone who lives in that sphere of influence, it sucks. It sucks very much.

Captcha: no time to explain......oh don't worry i had enough time

 

[Fox12]

In today's episode of What I Learned On The Escapist Forums, we find out why people who doesn't like sex scenes are emotionally repressed prudes who need to just get over themselves!

Seriously though, on the one hand I remember a time before such things were as common as they were now (in all forms of media), and I'm pretty sure we never had trouble telling which characters were and weren't in love, without having to see them going at it.

But on the other hand, as others have said, when it's done well it does work as a way of establishing the characters. I think the key is for it to be both relevant and tasteful, not just an excuse to wave some tits about and go "Wow-ee, look how mature and edgy we are guys!"

From the sounds of it, the scene in question is going to be more like the second game's scenes with Triss, which are routinely held up as an example of sex in games done right, so I'd reserve judgement until I know more.

It's so weird. Everyone on this site seems really cool and liberal but whenever sex or nudity is brought up everyone goes all puritan and says how immature and disgusting it is. It's a huge level of outrage and is really weird.

Personally I am fine with sex in my games. The Witcher 2's sex scenes were fine. They were tasteful, or funny, never made me go "ew" or think I was being catered to as a straight guy. They were there to enrich the story. People in relationships have sex, that's a given. Showing the characters pre or post sex or even doing the act shows how comfortable they are with each other.

I don't think it's a puritanical issue, though. I think it's an issue with writing, and not wanting games to pander to sexuality. I mean, I get what you're saying, and I'm fine with a sex scene that adds to the narrative, but I personally did feel like The Witcher 2 was pandering to sexual urges. Here (NSFW):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01ggzBaRG0E

Geralt doesn't even remember who this girl is, even though he saved her. Clearly she isn't important to him, and if he enjoys her company, then it's pretty clear which parts he enjoys. The girl then says that she should "pay him back somehow." Afterwards she has no real baring on the plot whatsoever. It's pretty clear why she's in the game, and it's not for plot reasons. It's not really puritanical to want better writing, is it? They're portrayal of sex is just something I would expect from a 14 year old, or from Michael Bay, and not from a group of adults who make games for adults.

 

[endtherapture]

In today's episode of What I Learned On The Escapist Forums, we find out why people who doesn't like sex scenes are emotionally repressed prudes who need to just get over themselves!

Seriously though, on the one hand I remember a time before such things were as common as they were now (in all forms of media), and I'm pretty sure we never had trouble telling which characters were and weren't in love, without having to see them going at it.

But on the other hand, as others have said, when it's done well it does work as a way of establishing the characters. I think the key is for it to be both relevant and tasteful, not just an excuse to wave some tits about and go "Wow-ee, look how mature and edgy we are guys!"

From the sounds of it, the scene in question is going to be more like the second game's scenes with Triss, which are routinely held up as an example of sex in games done right, so I'd reserve judgement until I know more.

It's so weird. Everyone on this site seems really cool and liberal but whenever sex or nudity is brought up everyone goes all puritan and says how immature and disgusting it is. It's a huge level of outrage and is really weird.

Personally I am fine with sex in my games. The Witcher 2's sex scenes were fine. They were tasteful, or funny, never made me go "ew" or think I was being catered to as a straight guy. They were there to enrich the story. People in relationships have sex, that's a given. Showing the characters pre or post sex or even doing the act shows how comfortable they are with each other.

I don't think it's a puritanical issue, though. I think it's an issue with writing, and not wanting games to pander to sexuality. I mean, I get what you're saying, and I'm fine with a sex scene that adds to the narrative, but I personally did feel like The Witcher 2 was pandering to sexual urges. Here (NSFW):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01ggzBaRG0E

Geralt doesn't even remember who this girl is, even though he saved her. Clearly she isn't important to him, and if he enjoys her company, then it's pretty clear which parts he enjoys. The girl then says that she should "pay him back somehow." Afterwards she has no real baring on the plot whatsoever. It's pretty clear why she's in the game, and it's not for plot reasons. It's not really puritanical to want better writing, is it? They're portrayal of sex is just something I would expect from a 14 year old, or from Michael Bay, and not from a group of adults who make games for adults.

I like that the different characters in the game have different approaches to sex. It makes it realistic. Some characters, like Saskia, won't sleep with you how matter you try. Some, like Triss will only do it within the confines of a relationship. Others, like the elf girl, will do it because some people are just horny and want to have sex. There's an elf girl earlier in the game who promises you sex and then ambushes you with her gang and tries to rob and kill you. It makes for a better world that not everyone has the same attitude to sex. Certainly makes the world feel a lot more real than Biowares famed romances. "Say the right thing, end game is sex". In TW the end game isn't sex, just as real relationships are not.

 

[Fox12]

I like that the different characters in the game have different approaches to sex. It makes it realistic. Some characters, like Saskia, won't sleep with you how matter you try. Some, like Triss will only do it within the confines of a relationship. Others, like the elf girl, will do it because some people are just horny and want to have sex. There's an elf girl earlier in the game who promises you sex and then ambushes you with her gang and tries to rob and kill you. It makes for a better world that not everyone has the same attitude to sex. Certainly makes the world feel a lot more real than Biowares famed romances. "Say the right thing, end game is sex". In TW the end game isn't sex, just as real relationships are not.

Fair enough, but the sex doesn't do much to forward the plot. It doesn't do anything to build up the characters, either. We know that the elf girl is sexually promiscuous. What else do we really know about her? Anything, really? I don't think so. She's really just there for fanservice. I think my issue is that the women are treated as trophies, or rewards, to be collected. Do you remember the infamous sex cards from the first game?

There's using sex for comic relief and then there's using sex for their relationships. The sex scenes for Triss have a different tone from the random whore sex scenes, or the funny ones like the Succubus. They are not all intended for the same effect. Also bear in mind it comes from a European developer based on a European series of books. Easily offended Americans are not the target audience for the game and if you can't handle a bit of nudity then don't complain about it.

This is entirely unfair. The games inclusion of sex is not being criticized, only its poor writing is. And maybe its immature, socially stunted European fanbase.

You see what I did there? It's called a generalization. In this case, a woefully misinformed one on my part. I didn't mean it, but I wanted to highlight how some people come off when they call someone prudish, or an easily offended American. It's a way of dismissing someones opinion, as though it has no worth, without actually arguing. Instead of having a normal conversation with one another, fans of the series ignore what the other person is saying and just claim that they're prudish Americans, even though everyone here has said they're fine with sex in the media as long as it serves a purpose.

The Witcher has decent writing when it comes to political drama. It's its approach to sex that makes some people role their eyes, because its not very nuanced or mature. I love Berserk, which is more graphic in its depictions of sex. But the sex scenes in Berserk tells us more about the characters then simply their outlook on sexuality. They're also organic, and natural, and very very vulnerable. We see Caska's love, and self doubt, and loneliness. We see Guts struggling with PTSD. We see the side of Griffith that uses people, and we see his broken fragment of a mind. Silent Hill 2 did a wonderful job of exploring peoples experience with sexuality, even though the game didn't even feature any sex. I give credit where credit is due, and The Witcher does a lot of things right. I love CD projects relationship with their fans. I like the political aspect of the story. I may even buy The Witcher 3 when it comes out, and enjoy it. But, I believe in offering constructive criticism as well, and one area that I think needs improvement is its portrayal of sex.

 

[Vykrel]

I am the last thing from prudish. If you bothered to actually understand my post, you would realize I was stating that I would rather go watch porn, often very graphic, and very kinky porn than have to endure an awkward mocap humpfest in a videogame. I don't play games for that kind of thing, but if you do, great.

i play games for gameplay and story. sex is a part of life, and it has its place in certain stories. why are you avoiding it specifically because it exists in the story? do you refuse to watch any movie with a sex scene?

and why are you comparing sex scenes to porn anyway? they are not even close to being the same. ive played The Witcher 2, and what you see cant even be described as sex. its just like Mass Effect, but it doesnt shy away from nudity. you see a naked woman for like thirty seconds and then it ends. it isnt awkward at all, and it is mostly optional. with The Witcher 2, we are talking 40+ hours of stellar action RPG gameplay and a great story, and about fifteen seconds of unavoidable nudity at the start of the game. why are you so hellbent on avoiding these types of games for such a trivial reason?

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

i don't get why people object to the sex in these games so much (ALL of which is optional).

Because a lot of gamers are American, and Americans are raised to be ashamed to sex and sexuality. This is why you can have all the blood and violence you want and people will barely bat an eye, but as soon as a woman shows-off too much cleavage on public TV, suddenly it's ALL you freaking hear about for the next several weeks as we debate whether or not the show went too far.

I don't understand this. The word "prude" has shown up far too much for my liking. Where did this stereotype about Americans come from? Because I'm American, and I can personally guarantee that most people I know are pretty liberal with their sexuality (even if they're not liberal anywhere else). I don't live in New York or California either, I live in the middle of the Southern Bible Belt.

In any case, it's a pointless discussion. I have not seen a single person complain about sex being included in The Witcher. I have seen numerous people complain about THE WAY in which it has been portrayed. There is a very important difference there. To repeatedly say that the complaints are due to prudishness is a non answer. Both the games and the books (I've actually read a few) portray sex in a rather silly way. It's there so that the writers can go on about how dark and gritty their work is, and how mature it is. Want to show that two characters are close? Include a sex scene. Want to show that a villain is evil? Have him rape someone (and then have the victim shrug it off, because PTSD is hard). Want to show off how edgy your world is? Include something taboo, like incest (it's in the books). The games may be faithful to the source material, but in this particular instance that's not anything to brag about. The Witcher novels were fairly average, but not great. The second game was slightly better in terms of writing, but still suffered from its adolescent understanding of sex.

Again, I like CD Projects pro-consumer policies, and some of their business decisions. I would just like them a whole lot more if they could update (not remove) some of their outlooks on things like sex and violence.

It's funny you mention your dislike of the word "prude" since at no point in my post did I use the word. Rather, it was someone else responding to my post with the same defensive reflex who first said it. Also, you can save your anecdotal evidence, or else we'll just be sitting here swapping stories about people we allegedly know and never get anywhere. My point still stands though. In general, Americans hate sex and hate being reminded that sex is a thing outside of their comfort zone (ie: a significant other). To make my point, let's set-up a hypothetical situation:

Let's say this article was about how they recorded 16 hours of mocap data for the fight scenes in the game, and as an example they explained how the intro cinematic has Geralt on his way to kill some guy, and in order to bring-about that they have clashed in the past, they show some fight scenes between them as a way to say "these guys don't exactly like each other", and that they wanted to include these scenes to help give the player agency. NO ONE would bat a single eye at this. Some people will post saying that they look forward to seeing the carefully choreographed fights, some people will post talking about how clumsy the cutscenes look regardless of all that effort; it'd just be a normal post with the usual array of commentary.

I can guarantee you that we wouldn't see things like an early poster on this thread bringing-up some arbitrary rule about how movies with a fight scene in the first 5 to 10 minutes are usually not that great, and video games probably aren't any different (and heck, that's a lax rule compared to opinions I've heard about how the instant sex is in any movie, regardless of the context, it's just bad writing). We wouldn't have people decrying their writing saying that "showing two guys fighting is the laziest way to show that they hate each other." It's only when sex is put on the table (not a bad place for it, really) that suddenly everyone starts getting up in arms. And why? Simple. It's just how Americans are raised. Even if they don't consciously realize it, sex makes a lot of Americans extremely uncomfortable when it isn't in its proper place (and some even when it is).

Granted, no one complained about the sex being included in the first place, but that's how it always plays out. No one admits that it's the sex scenes in general that makes them uneasy (probably because they usually aren't consciously aware of it), but instead they deal with their discomfort with a scapegoat like bad writing. For example, you'd never see a phrase like, "Both the games and the books portray violence in a rather silly way. It's there so that the writers can go on about how dark and gritty their work is, and how mature it is." In other words, story writers can use violence in nearly any way that they want and no one will ever call foul about how it was "unnecessary", or "cheap pandering". Meanwhile if two characters so-much as kiss and suddenly people will start going over the story with a fine-tooth comb to start explaining how the story writer was just lazy. Ironically, it's lead to violence commonly being used exactly the way people are afraid of sex being used.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Heck, remember the (frankly, awesome) Wild Hunt Trailer [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0i88t0Kacs] for The Witcher 3? Remember all the controversy that it sparked by being way too violent? Hm... me neither. Yet here we are debating the validity of the game's story writing just because it portrays two characters being intimate within the opening minutes. Meanwhile I'd bet dollars to donuts that the game's depictions of violence are a lot more graphic than its depictions of sex (having not seen the sex scenes, nor much at all beyond that trailer).

 

[Fox12]

snip

Thank you for revealing your ignorance about my country. Never mind that multiple non-American posters have the same issue. It's just our American prudishness spreading through the air. Trust me, Americans don't feel too squeamish about sex. If we do, we have a funny way of showing it ; )

As for prude, its been directly mentioned or implied by multiple people, yourself included. I'm not perturbed by the sex scenes in The Witcher. If I was, then I certainly couldn't have handled Berserk or Game of Thrones (which also handles sex and violence in a rather immature manner from time to time). I'm just sort of laughing at it. It's like a preschooler whamming action figures into each other. *smash* *smash* I'm so mature *smash* *smash*. That goes for violence as well. If you read my other comment, you would see that I mention violence. An action scene that fails to contribute to the plot should be cut. It's the utter lack of self awareness in this "grimdark" fantasy that baffles me, and makes me chuckle and shake my head. But, by all mans, continue to believe that it's my clear discomfort with sexuality that is making me say this.

EDIT: Honestly, I'm fine with sex. Full frontal nudity. Go crazy. My issue was never sex. It was the way it's used and depicted.

 

[Shinkicker444]

A lot of people seem to be missing that they are saying it is the *quickest* way, not that it is the only way or prefered way or anything like that. It's like... removing any of the ambiguity and just going straight to the point, like slapping someone in the face with a trout. Not saying it's right or not, just the way I'm interpreting it.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Heck, remember the (frankly, awesome) Wild Hunt Trailer [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0i88t0Kacs] for The Witcher 3? Remember all the controversy that it sparked by being way too violent? Hm... me neither. Yet here we are debating the validity of the game's story writing just because it portrays two characters being intimate within the opening minutes. Meanwhile I'd bet dollars to donuts that the game's depictions of violence are a lot more graphic than its depictions of sex (having not seen the sex scenes, nor much at all beyond that trailer).

Well that'd be all well and good if anyone was criticizing the graphic depictions of sex in the game, which they aren't, which you'd know if you bothered to acknowledge what people were actually saying instead of pretending everyone's problem is just that there's a sex scene.

You criticize me for supposedly not acknowledging what people are saying while simultaneously not acknowledging that I already responded to that comment in the post right before the one you quoted. Ironic.

Not only is it lazy to resort to "they had sex" as a way to establish a relationship between two characters

Explain to me how it's lazy. Not within the context of The Witcher (since we're obviously talking about more than just this cut scene), but in general.

Oh and not using the word "prude" doesn't mean you weren't talking describing Americans as prudish, you just happened to not use that exact word. "Americans are ashamed of sex" is fairly synonymous with "Americans are prudes."

If you're gonna use quotes, then get the quote right. I said that Americans are raised to be ashamed of sex. Obviously that lesson doesn't take with everyone, and maybe that's been changing in recent years, but in general, Americans raise their kids to be ashamed of the idea of sex.

 

[eberhart]

Let's not forget this is the game series where several female characters reward you for saving them with sex

Which is hardly odd, given how it's one of the few things of value they can offer in that setting by default. Not that different from a drunk hobo and a bottle of rat-piss - he's simply even lower on that social ladder. Alternatively, when we're talking people with a decent position, it's a clever way out of having to offer a reward that actually has a solid value. So... nothing new either, a protagonist that happily gets duped like this is pretty common, which imitates, I daresay, real life.

lesbomancy

Is a fair depiction of how entire subject is judged in that setting. It's a "thing" for a bored sorceress, along with more "kinky" details, both being a part of "the usual cycle" that takes place in artificially prolonged life, significantly detached from societal norms. The first part is a perception, most likely encouraged for similar reason sexuality is used in their position. The latter is what lore says pretty explicitly irrc.

As for "seriousness" - there's no "serious" approach to the subject in that setting, because it's not even being recognized as such in that setting. If you lack any significant power, then it's a private matter that's better left undisclosed for the sake of all parties involved, especially with all internal issues that come along with being what society openly despises. I fail to see any significant clashes with medieval-ish material.

(*cough* Deathmold)

Again, in-line with a depiction. Why do you think so many characters that were defamed by medieval histor... monks have been so similar in bedchamber? Including those, who were accompanied by various forms of Devil. See: "Dandelion" part as well.

rape and sexual assault happens every time the story really needs to drive home how dark and gritty it is

That's your assumption. The idea behind Witcher series (ie. books) is, roughly, to deconstruct "nice" folk tales and place them in a setting that is "enhanced gritty" version of medieval. The one without Roman heritage, a safety net of of pre-medieval custom, a thing that kept a semblance of order in the (usual) absence of law, finally the one without somewhat beneficial influence of the church. There are certain exceptions present, but society at large does not get any benefits those religious enclaves or some rural areas (the ones that are not experiencing an equivalent of 100-years war) have. So while it's far from W40K version of "gritty", it fits source material pretty well. (For the record, I freely admit the author is prone to cherry-picking the worst outcomes. I'd attribute it to, ironically, his badly hidden preaching and moralizing, that, when you read what he wrote, is not so different from an outrage of a proper SJW)

Dandelion

He's a medieval version of Elvis (bonus: without "sex is a sin" medieval attitude that was shared by many of his critics), so yeah, I'm sure it's hard for him to find *anything*.

There's also an idea that is as old as source material - he writes about "his" adventures with Geralt, some of that drivel is even affecting how our witcher is being perceived as. Well, at least among literate, mostly high-born females, who were the usual audience for romance-peddling Dandelions of both worlds, so "outcast mutant scum" is still A-OK for the masses. I assume you noticed how CDPR went for "welp, this is what Dandelion wrote, so it must be true" approach in EE. I won't be surprised if they expand it in W3, given how it's supposed to be the end. If our entire story is what he sings later on, you get to the point where you ask how much is there to "tittilate" the audience of Dandelion, nevermind the audience of CDPR. As for over-the-top evil, being too gritty or "look, he's gay, do you finally get how evil he is?", think Varric's God of Crossbow action sequence.

Extra points if she's a sorceress and must use her sexuality and willy ways to manipulate men with her vagina.

Er... this is one of the things they do, your hyperbole/mockery aside. This is one of the things named characters in games did in the past, what would be the point of pretending otherwise? "Better writing" prize from random Internetian? They have different options than their male counterparts in a society depicted in books and in games, so they are consciously using them, to the point of making it a part of curriculum. The ones that are prone to self-reflection are hardly happy about it. It's shown multiple times in books, irrc you get related and sour convo from blinded Eilhart in W2 as well. The exceptions are "above it", some are engineering the alternative (Loge), but nearly all of them are eager to reap benefits while they can.

As for "these are the only LGBT characters, so it sucks" - there's very little to be said about others in source material in the first place, most likely because they are very private about it for the reasons above (and because it's not Bioware World, engineered to accommodate modern sensibilities first). Both Eilhart and Dethmold are using their position to do whatever they want and they are hardly secretive about it - both are reviled, but hardly because of that alone. You get an episode in a book where a relationship is public only because characters in question can freely murder anyone who disapproves, being lv20 Warrior against lv1 Filthy Peasant. You wouldn't be seeing the same in a different environment.

 

[Super Cyborg]

It's funny you mention your dislike of the word "prude" since at no point in my post did I use the word. Rather, it was someone else responding to my post with the same defensive reflex who first said it. Also, you can save your anecdotal evidence, or else we'll just be sitting here swapping stories about people we allegedly know and never get anywhere. My point still stands though. In general, Americans hate sex and hate being reminded that sex is a thing outside of their comfort zone (ie: a significant other). To make my point, let's set-up a hypothetical situation:

Let's say this article was about how they recorded 16 hours of mocap data for the fight scenes in the game, and as an example they explained how the intro cinematic has Geralt on his way to kill some guy, and in order to bring-about that they have clashed in the past, they show some fight scenes between them as a way to say "these guys don't exactly like each other", and that they wanted to include these scenes to help give the player agency. NO ONE would bat a single eye at this. Some people will post saying that they look forward to seeing the carefully choreographed fights, some people will post talking about how clumsy the cutscenes look regardless of all that effort; it'd just be a normal post with the usual array of commentary.

I can guarantee you that we wouldn't see things like an early poster on this thread bringing-up some arbitrary rule about how movies with a fight scene in the first 5 to 10 minutes are usually not that great, and video games probably aren't any different (and heck, that's a lax rule compared to opinions I've heard about how the instant sex is in any movie, regardless of the context, it's just bad writing). We wouldn't have people decrying their writing saying that "showing two guys fighting is the laziest way to show that they hate each other." It's only when sex is put on the table (not a bad place for it, really) that suddenly everyone starts getting up in arms. And why? Simple. It's just how Americans are raised. Even if they don't consciously realize it, sex makes a lot of Americans extremely uncomfortable when it isn't in its proper place (and some even when it is).

Granted, no one complained about the sex being included in the first place, but that's how it always plays out. No one admits that it's the sex scenes in general that makes them uneasy (probably because they usually aren't consciously aware of it), but instead they deal with their discomfort with a scapegoat like bad writing. For example, you'd never see a phrase like, "Both the games and the books portray violence in a rather silly way. It's there so that the writers can go on about how dark and gritty their work is, and how mature it is." In other words, story writers can use violence in nearly any way that they want and no one will ever call foul about how it was "unnecessary", or "cheap pandering". Meanwhile if two characters so-much as kiss and suddenly people will start going over the story with a fine-tooth comb to start explaining how the story writer was just lazy. Ironically, it's lead to violence commonly being used exactly the way people are afraid of sex being used.

Depends on what they were going for. If they were trying to get us engaged with the conflict, make us really invested in the outcome, then it wouldn't really work. This is especially true if it's just a guy who you kill right away. If it is the main villain, and a lot more is built up upon said villain beyond the initial part, then that would be okay.

Sex is different to every person, and depending on the characters it can give a signal of what we should think. I don't know the series at all, so I will skip talking in details about the actual characters, since that would not work well for me. As for the part that the player should be invested, that is where the problem is. If they are shown to have sex, and even show a little bit outside of that their relationship, that doesn't invest me. At most I could say "guess they like each other, cool, but I'm not invested outside the plot dictates me to go after this person". Yes, you can learn to like the character as time goes on, but sex as a means to get people to invest doesn't work. Having heard on this thread that the particular character in question is huge to the plot, and only mentioned a few times before, really makes me question this choice. If they manage to make us want to learn more about her beyond just the sex scene, then that would be great.

Sex and fighting are a bit different when making assumptions. When someone is fighting a person to death, you can make an automatic assumption that they are enemies. When you have a sex scene, it can imply many things. They are lovers, they are friends who pleasure each other, they are having a one night fling, the girl is a prostitute, the sex is happening as a reward, and possibly other things. Seeing them have sex could make me think many of those things, but with how video games and media in general seem to portray it, it's probably not love.

 

[endtherapture]

Sex is different to every person, and depending on the characters it can give a signal of what we should think. I don't know the series at all, so I will skip talking in details about the actual characters, since that would not work well for me. As for the part that the player should be invested, that is where the problem is. If they are shown to have sex, and even show a little bit outside of that their relationship, that doesn't invest me. At most I could say "guess they like each other, cool, but I'm not invested outside the plot dictates me to go after this person". Yes, you can learn to like the character as time goes on, but sex as a means to get people to invest doesn't work. Having heard on this thread that the particular character in question is huge to the plot, and only mentioned a few times before, really makes me question this choice. If they manage to make us want to learn more about her beyond just the sex scene, then that would be great.

Sex and fighting are a bit different when making assumptions. When someone is fighting a person to death, you can make an automatic assumption that they are enemies. When you have a sex scene, it can imply many things. They are lovers, they are friends who pleasure each other, they are having a one night fling, the girl is a prostitute, the sex is happening as a reward, and possibly other things. Seeing them have sex could make me think many of those things, but with how video games and media in general seem to portray it, it's probably not love.

We haven't even SEEN the sex scene.

As a person who has had sex, I know what sex is like in a relationship vs sex with someone you're just doing for sex. You act different, body language is different, way you do certain actions is different based on your relationship with the person. A drunken one night stand is different from an act of deep lovemaking with a long term partner. Different thing you do, deeper connections, the act of lust vs the act of romance. Can't we wait to see the sex scene and the dialogue associated with it before saying "HA what an awful storytelling device".

 

[white_wolf]

...

*Smacks head against desk repeatedly*

I don't really see why this is important, or how they can tout this as a selling point unironically. It just reeks of petulance. "Look at us. We're big boys now." Yes you are CD project. You're. A. Big. Boy.

I actually like this company, but this attitude really irks me. The best way to build an emotional connection is through sex? Only a very poor writer believes this. Up was a children's film, and it sounds more mature then this. I'm not mad, just a little disapointed. Sex has its place in media, but this isn't it.

Pretty much this, I was joking when I said the game keeps getting delayed for lesbomancy sex scenes, ironically thats probably exactly why its been pushed back yet again, of all the things to come out with this "news" is something I think they shouldn't have stated why not focus more on witching missions right now it sounds like the makers really want to keep up with the games other nickname of, " That porn game."

 

[Super Cyborg]

We haven't even SEEN the sex scene.

As a person who has had sex, I know what sex is like in a relationship vs sex with someone you're just doing for sex. You act different, body language is different, way you do certain actions is different based on your relationship with the person. A drunken one night stand is different from an act of deep lovemaking with a long term partner. Different thing you do, deeper connections, the act of lust vs the act of romance. Can't we wait to see the sex scene and the dialogue associated with it before saying "HA what an awful storytelling device".

Yes, we haven't seen the actual scene, so I can't judge it completely. I'm basing it off how the developer talked about it, and how sex scenes have been done before in games. If it turns out to be good, great. For now, I'm just voicing my concerns on how it could go. Also, even if they could convey the romantic type of sex, they need to make the player care for the character.

If they establish the relationship well, as well as make the player connect to the character, then I will gladly say my suspicions were off.