318

I assume he changed his mind

1 Like
319

Based from the author’s previous posts above, it was a development choice. But best to wait for the author’s official response.

1 Like
320

Who honestly cares what if the mc is female, as long as the stories good I don’t see why it should matter.

4 Likes
321

Per the author (not a direct quote) : playing a male character set in this world would have ended up being almost the exact same story - grow up poor, become a knight, rebuild your family’s legacy.

Playing as a female changes how your character is viewed by the world as well as how she views the world. It also keeps her from ever being able to be a knight, thereby very much changing the player’s experience from one story to the next.

12 Likes
322

it matters a lot, even things like first person and third person can make a huge difference for someone, (i will never buy female locked games, i have played some… i admit… but in the end i can never get inmerse in the game playing as female) playing a game is not the same as watching a movie.
I actually am interested to see how this sell out when its released.

6 Likes
323

It is always interesting to me to see how those who identify as male will refuse to play as a gender-locked female a vast majority of the time, but articles on various gaming websites just expect those who identify as women to just empathize. “Use your imagination! Why do you need to see a strong, female character? There are plenty of heroes out there, like Wonder Woman!”

Also note: I am not directing this thought towards anyone on particular. I just find it interesting - especially because I see a lot more “I won’t be playing this” commentary on female-locked games than male-locked.

15 Likes
324

You’ll see such articles because mainstream non-mobile gaming is overwhelmingly male dominated. Majority played as Alexios in AC: Odyssey, even though Kassandra is canon and developers expected her to be the most picked.

I imagine males dominate playerbase of IFs here as well, but a lot of them are mostly silent, while the few females are hyper active and create skewed view on gender distribution of CoG players. Afaik female ROs dominate a lot of polls and I doubt they do so because of huge amount of lesbian voters, since we have quite a few gays here too, yet they’re unable to even things out.

Personally I don’t care about MC’s gender as long as I don’t have to romance guys. In fact, I tend to play as female most of the time (I’m male), unless my favorite RO is straight.

5 Likes
325

There had been article in the past not long ago , where many female players already said they won’t play male gender locked HG/CoG :slight_smile:

2 Likes
326

personal tastes dont have to mean a woman cant be a warrior or something, thats just some close minded people out there that think like that, i simply dont like and cant immerse playing as female, plainly and simply.

3 Likes
327

Which is fine, but in this setting, a women could not or at least would have a really hard time becoming a warrior.

328

Everyone:

Concerning the gender-lock: The author has asked to close discussion on that topic, please stop discussing it.

In addition, this discussion is becoming a circular argument. To avoid that: if you have already stated your position, please take a short break and allow others to share their perspective too. Please avoid repetitively hammering a single view without adding anything new.

Please reply to posts topically, please do not reply at others personally. Personal comments lead to friction and flaming.

Please remember that we can always agree to disagree.

Finally, if you see disrespectful posts please do not reply to them. Rather please use the report feature and let forum staff de-escalate friction.

21 Likes
329

You know, I am rather interested in how the great House of Aswick managed to fall so far as to be forced to practically throw away the second born of the family to the Church. Each child in a noble family is valuable, they represent a new alliance that can be reached with other families, bound by law and by blood. There is nothing more valuable to the nobility than to produce children, to gain more chances of propagating the family lineage across the nobility. The House of Aswick would have to have fallen on truly bad times to ever consider giving away even one noble child to the Church. Bastards, definitely, but not a new child of the blood.

It would be interesting to find out why the current Lord would give away his daughter to the Church, see what has happened to the family that we, as the players, brought up from the lowest ranks of the nobility to the very top (or, at least, that was my playthrough. :wink: )

I hope that we also find our twin brother again, be able to really connect with that character. It would break my heart if he was a character that only fades in and out of the story, fairly inconsequential to us and to the overall story, or if he becomes cruel and cold towards us to the point that he care nothing for us. I wonder if he might try to rescue us even, try to undo what our father did and take us out of the clutches of the Church, so we could be a family again. Though, remembering the first game, familial attachments wasn’t something at all touched upon, sadly. Maybe in this one, though.

I did like the first game, and I look forward to seeing where this next installment takes us. :slight_smile:

4 Likes
330

I hope our previous M.C’s spirit returns to haunt the unfilial wretch that run our House to the ground! Jokes aside though I’d like to hear how history remembers our previous M.C. like Is it with awe, shame, terror depending on our playthrough

4 Likes
331

I believe that’s the whole idea of the game. Thank you for summarizing it.

1 Like
332

@Goshman should certainly include some interactive choices like in GT2, to ascertain our life in the prequel.

1 Like
333

The only thing I would say here is that having one child go to the church, even if the family is doing well, actually can make sense. Obviously, I’m only speaking generically now, and not necessarily the conditions imposed on the game.

Yes, they lose a possible dynastic family connection, but they gain entry to the religious sphere (yeah, I’m thinking of the de Medici’s here who had people all over). Additionally, coming from the nobility, the child isn’t exactly going to start out at the bottom rung in the church hierarchy (well not unless they did something really dumb).

So the possibility of becoming the equivalent of a cardinal, or even a Pope would be seen as a possible avenue of exploration.

I now have an image where spectral members wage war on each other as each generation blames the previous one for ruining the house.

4 Likes
334

There’s two different branches that then a fork and with an each other. When you become the head of the reform movement. The other one is you stick with the holy mother church and you either become it’s really scary church representative with a really scary title. And the other one you become the holy father and I’m really curious because he flat out said you can become a head of the church even though it looks like it’s been a man only job so I want to see how you can break those gender norms. Also what I find vastly interesting depending what we do here affects the play about genders in the third game. From our discussion I think together he’s making five games in the series. The last when we come becoming a king of Belgium like figure.

335

It will be interesting to see what barriers if any exist for women in the church of this game. In our world the letters written by the apostles Paul and Peter included in the New Testament pretty much locked women out of the priesthood, and still do today in the more orthodox Christian faiths that treat the Bible as the literal word of God. A church tradition is much easier to change when it isn’t backed by doctrine deeply embedded in the faith’s foundation. Even long-standing traditions that aren’t founded on doctrine such as the Roman Catholic Church’s prohibition on married priests would be hard to change, but the church has far more flexibility to change a tradition that doesn’t violate the doctrine underlying the faith of its adherents (and its own legitimacy), should it choose to do so.

2 Likes
336

some branches of the Orthodox Church are bringing back Deaconess. Church in Alexandria is doing it with it missionary work in Africa. Japanese orthodox church Has deaconess but mind you their super small at 30,000. Deaconess is weird because it is ancient church office at fell out of use. Some worried that it’s going to make women priests it not.

I asked orthodox and Catholic priest reason why their male it is because they’re emulating Christ emulate fully need you to be a man because Christ was one.

337

Eh. They’re giving you a simple explanation that’s not rooted in core church doctrine, so much as a later offshoot of it. The biggest impediments are passages in scripture such as:

Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 NIV

and

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. 1 Timothy 2:11-15 NIV

These two passages are the words of the apostle Paul in his first letter to the church in Corinth and in his first letter to his student, the apostle Timothy. Next to Jesus himself, no one figure has had as much influence on Christianity and its practice as the apostle Paul, considered a Saint by nearly all Christians. For those that believe that the Bible is the literal and inerrant word of God, the words in the two passages quoted above become more than just St Paul’s opinion however, they become God’s will.

I’ll note that nothing is recorded of Jesus himself ever speaking on this subject. Jesus was highly protective of women, and he also intervened in support of one of his female disciple’s right to learn along with his male disciples when Jesus was asked to send her back to the kitchen. And if you read Jesus’s words alone, you get the sense that Jesus had an issue with the way men of his time (mis)treated women. Nevertheless the lack of any recorded teaching by Jesus on the subject of women leading or teaching men gave St Paul room to weigh in and set the church’s doctrine himself and that binds more traditional churches to this day.

Yep, the qualifications for deaconship are established in 1 Timothy 3:8-12 and there is a bit of linguistic wiggle room to conclude that when St Paul speaks of women, he is referring to female deacons, aka deaconesses instead of the wives of deacons as most believe. Regardless, given his words only one chapter earlier, it’s fairly clear he doesn’t want them teaching or leading men either way. So administrative functions and teaching children and other women may well be ok as far as St Paul is concerned, but preaching in the pulpit to adult men or leading the church as a whole, both priestly functions, are not.

4 Likes