Sorry, had been so long since playing D3 that I thought it was meant the other way. I’m a dork. 
I disagree. I don’t think there’s really a lot of people for whom this would be a dealbreaker. It’s less like “classes are gender-locked” and more like “classes are actual characters” and there are a LOT of games that do it this way. The devs have a reason for it.
9 Likes
I think, in general, having options will probably appease more people, which could give EHG more revenue, and therefore, more time to dedicate to updates and content etc., which, I would dare say, is what most of us are really after.
Personally, I have a head canon of what gender I would like to assign to characters with certain archetypes or playstyles, but gender-locked classes won’t make or break a game for me. Though, I will play the class/gender combinations that jive with my “head canon” most often (I’m a 5e DM, so there are many characters in my brain).
Ignoring the extra development time to implement double the animations, voices, armor design and so on, making the conscious decision to assign each class a gender to give that class more character, or a clearer identity within the world, makes sense and can help to drive the story.
I think D3 actually handled the gender-less class structure pretty well. Though I could create a male wizard, the female wizard was really the embodiment of the class. The same could be said for the male barb, female DH and male crusader, likely due to their close connections to similar gender-locked D2 classes.
5 Likes
This definitely feels like one of those Want-But-Not-Need issues that, if implemented, could probably wait until near-end-development. That said, I Want It, and it will absolutely be a dealbreaker for some. Part of the experience here is power fantasy, and different people fantasize in their own ways. The identity of the player characters here are largely secondary to the broader plot (so far), so it hasn’t been a huge issue for me personally, but I’d still rather be a cool lady when possible.
I’d argue that because the characters are largely secondary, it may actually a little easier to build alternative genders for them? There’s no need to, for example, change any of the base dialogue. The mage can still be an old veteran scholar, the acolyte an outcast renegade, etc etc.
That said, asset creation can be a concern, so if this is something to pursue, I’d recommend starting that pursuit sooner than later, so as to streamline the pipeline. Making assets with the knowledge they’ll need to be modified for different body types in mind could lead to different techniques for making assets, that kind of thing, you know.
5 Likes
Yikes.
I had a chat with someone who raised this as a request in PoE & they said that when they play a game, they view the character as an extension as themselves & therefore feel uncomfortable playing a different gender.
2 Likes
While I personally agree with you, for the subset of gamers where the character gender is a dealbreaker, the character isn’t secondary, it’s a primary concern (which is why it’s a dealbreaker).
Personally, I prefer (hot) female characters, as if I’m going to be staring at an arse for a gaming session, I’d prefer it to be a female arse, but that’s just me & it’s not a dealbreaker for me…
3 Likes
Yes, for many gender determines the class choice. Having the male/female switch is a must
1 Like
“Color Commentary” 
I disagree but it’s mainly because you’re playing a character in a story. When you’re reading Lord of the Rings, would you ask J.R.R. Tolkien to make Legolas a girl? When watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer do you want an alternate series where it’s Blade instead (ignoring the fact that that’d be sick as hell)? I understand in RPGs the want for character customization where you are playing as you, like in the Elder Scrolls, Divinity, Fallout, etc. But in games where you’re playing as a character it makes less sense. The classes in Last Epoch have lore to them, they’re storied characters in the world of the game. The Mage has lines referencing the fact that the Acolyte is his apprentice, and the lore states it’s a “she”.
I may just not understand why it’s a dealbreaker for people or what the big deal is in general. I play the games for the gameplay and the story first, stuff like this never bothers me. If anybody has insight outside of this comment by Llama8, feel free to reply and talk to me about it.
10 Likes
Of course if you really want to go down the rabbit hole a little, why would you only limit it to binary choices? (But I won’t open that can)
1 Like
Oftentimes, when a game has gender-locked classes, there’s an underlying component of sexism and gender-essentialism, like… for example: Knights are big and strong, and Men, as a concept, Are Big and Strong, so knights Must be men, and Cannot be women. You’ll usually see the same principle applied in reverse, wherein healers are Only Women Allowed, and so on. That kind of attitude is unrealistic, outdated, discouraging and oppressive, and typically permeates the entire game. People don’t always want to subject themselves to that.
(The same mindset goes hand-in-hand with making “more refined” races of pale skin and “more bestial” races of darker tones, or making every woman exclusively sexy. For the sufficiently wary, or sufficiently weary, one warning flag may as well serve as all of them.)
…That said, your own argument has a few holes itself. On the one hand, you’re conflating hard-coded stories (e.g. the written word) with the sort of manipulable narrative you can construct in a game. On the other hand, while they may not be from official channels, fiction definitely exists where Legolas is a girl, among other things. Since there’s demand for those kinds of stories, why not ask for official support when we can? And on a third hand shooting off from the second, it’d be sick as hell. You can’t ignore that, it’s actively part of the issue.
You say these characters have lore, and that’s true, and it’s good! Or, it’s good that a world exists in a sufficiently complete form where characters can exist in it, and it’s good that these characters are complete enough to exist within that world. But… is their gender, in-and-of-itself, strictly relevant to their role within the world? Is their identity locked in permanently, when the game is not yet even complete? You seem to be taking a lot of things as absolute, that are maybe a little more mutable than that. And that’s fine! Just, don’t assume all closed doors are locked, y’know? Sometimes you have to knock for opportunity to open up.
Edit:
On further consideration, based on the narrative that’s unfolded so far, I don’t even think you can assert that these are characters “inside of” a story. That is, each of the classes, from each of their unique and varied backgrounds… all share the same role within the narrative. Sure, they have their own unique dialogue commenting on the situation, but the situation is identical for each of them. If you can already drag-and-drop these characters with their “unique lore” in and out of the story… does their identity matter, to that story? If the story doesn’t care if I’m Legolas, Gimli or Gandalf, why can’t my Legolas be a girl this time?
5 Likes
Hi all,
We understand that having a single character which is male or female per class can be disappointing to players who want other options. We would love to do this but it’s just a matter of resources that our indie studio doesn’t have. Creating another gender option per class would require double the animations, character introductions, voice acting, a large amount of work for equippable armor, etc. which is probably more time consuming and resource intensive than some realize. Im saying this so that you guys understand your desire for this isn’t falling on deaf ears and we’re just not tackling this because we don’t think it’s a good design choice. Maybe in the future we’ll have the means to do this - we would love it as much as you guys.
Thanks for your support.
51 Likes
And when females can be Knights, the armor leaves a lot to be desired in terms of practicality as a defense mechanism. That’s just as annoying. (I don’t mind there being, um, “fantasy” options, but I also want armor that looks like it can save my life, thank you very much.)
Yeah, I’ve hated this in a lot of games where female characters seem to be eternally banished to the back row.
I find myself conflicted with a lot of this. I am a female in real life, and I prefer to play female characters in games. I see an in-game avatar as an extension of myself into that game’s world. It’s a form of escapism where I get to “be the Hero”.
I have no problem playing a game like Graveyard Keeper where the main character is male, because the whole story behind the game is based on a specific person. That doesn’t bother me a bit. It’s like reading a narrative instead of being part of the narrative.
In Diablo 3, I always roll female characters. I like being able to create whatever class I want with the limiting factor being how much fun the class is to play instead of how it looks.
In PoE, I’ve only ever played Witches, Rangers, and Scions. I’ve had build notes for rolling a totem-based Hierophant for 3 or 4 seasons now and I have yet to pull the trigger because I don’t like the idea of playing a male character.
In LE, I’ve only got one character so far, a Necromancer. I’ve been toying with the idea of creating a Sorceror for a while. If playing as a female were an option I’d have one already. I’ll probably still roll one eventually, but it just feels awkward. Escapism is a big part of games for me and it influences my choices in games. (Narrative-style games excluded, as I mentioned above.)
That’s why posts like this are important. The more often it’s asked for, the more it makes its way onto the game development radar, and ideally, the more often it actually gets implemented.
+1 for this as well.
8 Likes
I very much agree. One of the things I hated about Wolcen is how even in full armour, the women characters have high heels. And the armour they put your sister into at the start for her default… And other games too, where the women look ridiculous in skimpy stuff without options to cover up properly.
I, too, for similar reasons prefer to play female characters, but to me, it’s not so much a big deal if I have to play male to get a particular class. As long as there’s some equality in classes. But I would love to see one of these gender-locked games have the barbarian as a kick-ass warrior woman! And I almost never play a healer, partly because I find it boring, partly because as a woman that’s what people expect I’ll play (while I prefer to tank).
Thank you for bringing this point up! So agree.
2 Likes
Thanks for the perspective, it makes sense. Like I said I struggle to wrap my head around it since it’s not a huge issue for me.
3 Likes
D3 does this too with the female Demon Hunter. It immediately makes me assume she’ll die after breaking her ankle ten steps outside the starter area.
I don’t mind heels being a thing but I’d love a transmog that gives me a regular-looking boot. Options are a good thing!
2 Likes
Here are a lot complaints about female characters looking too sexy in fantasy games. I’d like to know the perspective of a female player. Is anybody here or are only men talking here?
What about male characters looking too sexy? Male characters often are very good trained. And I have to admit that when I have the choice and create a customisable character I would take the options to look more like Arnold Schwarzenegger than Dany DeVito. But this is as unrealistic as a Warrior Princess in high heels.
4 Likes
I guess you missed this:
To answer your question, I don’t honestly focus on the attractiveness of characters too much. I don’t think the male Barbarian in D3 is attractive at all, as an example, but I do think he’s a great example of what a male Barbarian would look like, and I think he’s plenty badass.
My main ask other than having both genders as character options in non-narrative-based games is that I’d love to see a little more parity between the genders when it comes to armor models. One specific instance that annoyed the crap out of me was during the Cataclysm expansion in WoW - one of the raid zones had an armor set that I thought would be perfect for my Paladin…only for it to feature a chest armor with a bare midriff when she finally got one to equip. On a male model it looked like a standard chest armor.
I’m not a prude. I’ve got absolutely NO problem with revealing armor (for both genders) in games. I just don’t want it forced on me because I roll a female character 
I’m including high heels in that (looking at you, D3 & Wolcen).
5 Likes
That’s definitely a game pitfall that we will avoid. When we’re designing different armor types for the characters, we are attempting to make them logically. There is a comic strip out there that I love which highlights the issue so well. It’s of a male and female character in an RPG each with very exaggerated gear, full plate for the dude and a chain bikini for the girl. The guy says something like, “ugh, that won’t protect you from anything” and walks away. She takes off the armor set and the whole chest, body, bikini, everything is connected as one armor set and underneath is a normal character with normal clothes on. Just cracks me up as the only way it could make a shred of sense.
Katalaeia, we know that people prefer to play specific genders in many cases and we would love to make that possible for you. One day we might have gender options for our characters. I can say that we’ll do our best to keep the armor that we do have out of the range that the comic I’m referencing is like. It just wouldn’t fit with our overall aesthetic and it’s not the sort of game we’re making.
(I can’t find the comic but it was really over the top)
16 Likes