this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025
196 points (96.7% liked)
Games
33918 readers
901 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It runs so much better than the first KC:D. Good job, Warhorse Studios.
By the by, someone playing the game for an additional 19 hours after giving it a thumbs down on Steam for woke DEI speaks to its quality.
I'm asexual, not aromantic, but thinking about this from an aromantic perspective I completely get wanting more close platonic relationships that don't turn romantic. That would actually be inclusive, a lot of people try to put romance everywhere, and I get it! It's fun to do! But aromantic people like to have representation too, and options to be friends but not romantic helps them feel represented.
Too bad this guy's "checkbox insert" means it's probably (I might be wrong) an "omg gay people exist in my game, gross" complaint and not a "hey platonic relationships are important too, don't make every significant relationship romantic" for all the aros (or even non-aromantic people who think friendship is important as well as romance) out there.
I’m like, borderline aro(?) and yeah having the option to proceed down a meaningful friendship path with my favorite characters/have them move in (shoutout to Krobus in SDV) is awesome when provided.
I can also see the “empty tokenism” as in, players deserve more fleshed out queer relationships instead of rainbow stickers being half-heartedly slapped on existing characters but yeah unfortunately the reviewer is probably a pearl clutching “woke DEI other-buzzword bad” type.