LAMS3K's arguments remind me that Mass Effect 1 or 2 got some controversy for being able to partake in a lesbian relationship (if i remember correctly), but i wonder if Dragon Age's controversy is not worse for containing male-homosexual relations. The societal double standard of lesbians over gays is well noted. In American Pie 2, for example, watching two girls touch each other (i don't remember them going any further) is sexualized while watching two boys kiss is a joke.
It also reminds me that my critique of choose-your-gender games is that they tend to have dialog generic to both male and female, which is to pretend gender issues don't exist. Like Huckleberry Fin without the N word, or making Scarlet Letter about fashion choices. Of course, gender-neutral dialog isn't that harmful, it's just not progressing anything either. Even if there was/is differences in the male/female dialog, the character doesn't speak to all people of her/his gender, so why not let the player chose personality traits, too? Or, why not go the Starship Titanic (obscure, i know) rout and let the player type anything into the dialog box s/he wants?
But finally, i'm reminded that i no longer like the word "player". It connotatively assumes that the world is a toy and the player should have as much freedom as possible. Choosing your own gender and sexual preference fits this profile because it allows the gamer to play with these elements, without any real consequences. Instead, i think we should call them participants. This is the world the game designer creates to explore whatever s/he wants and a gamer should choose whether or not to participate in that.
I think the whole "choose your own adventure" think works for a game like Dragon Age or Mass Effect, which are very deliberately built around those, but wouldn't add much to the majority of games. Tweaking dialog to be gender-specific would be pretty cool, though.
Would Limbo be enhanced by being able to choose your own gender? Doubtful. Unless a game is trying to focus on a controversial issue, or attempting to go for MAXIMUM IMMERSION, then I see the inclusion of a non-mainstream character as more or less neutral.
To a degree.
I do believe that a character such as Alyx Vance is partly memorable because she's an extremely well portrayed minority character. She's presented as a perfectly believable and reasonable depiction of a woman, one who is not at odds with men around her, but cooperates with them to get things done. No one's arguing over who should be paying the bill for dinner, because holy shit crazy aliens are invading and we need to save humanity. Part of why she works so well is because they don't ham up the controversy, Valve just sort of casually drops her in place and pays her identity no more heed. That in and of itself can be seen as rather progressive, and I view it as "passive commentary" rather than "active commentary".
I don't really know how Valve did it and made it seem so natural, not something forced like there's this token minority character in the game. If I can ever figure that out, it would definitely be cool to have a character like Alyx in a game.
Also, while we're on it, the character designs for Diablo 3 are amazingly tasteful for a grim dark fantasy setting, for both genders.
