Hard agree – mostly because I just don’t see the point of this? From a coding perspective, it is incredibly easy to have nicely selectable options for setting this, or at least no more difficult than making hard-coded sets. If you’re implementing gender variations, I think the “select at beginning/select as you meet/randomize” suite of options is best.
I also find it very unbalanced in an uncomfortable way. Like, if this were a book/tv show/movie, I would spot the questionable gender dynamics of an all-x team or a harem/reverse-harem team a mile away, but in IF it’s fine because they’re all romantically available? I guess? It’s fine if that’s what you want, but it’s really not my cup of tea and I don’t want to compromise mine/my character’s gender or sexuality to avoid it - just give me the immersion breaking option. (I bring up gender, because some games peg those hard-coded RO genders to gender…for some reason.)
Addition: also, frankly, I think this approach re: sexuality misses out on more nuanced gender dynamics between characters and platonic relationships that could be really interesting to explore. Like how can the relationship between a male gay MC and a female “RO” be different if you two are close, best friends, super important to each other, but not romantically attracted but everyone expects you to be? Or one-sided attraction? Or weighing a romantic relationship vs. a platonic one, because in IF let’s be honest there’s an unchallenged relationship hierarchy. Obviously these won’t fit most stories and aren’t everyone’s choice, but I think stories with these aspects are worth telling and developing, and we can’t get there by pegging RO gender and MC sexuality as packages.