Appreciate the response! It's actually really nice to read your thoughts and get a little insight into the process.
I mean, despite those two points of criticism, you still produced a great game with quality writing that's enjoyable to play and share, and it certainly handles Queer representation much better than many others.
The development process being what it is, it's always going to be a case of having to decide what is 'good enough' based on the resources available at the time. It would be unreasonable for anyone to insist on endless rewrites in pursuit of perfection, because it would never be done and there would be no game at all.
Like you said, it's just a matter of taking any lessons forward into later work.
As far as the gay vs non-binary element, that's one reason that some might use 'Queer' as an identifier instead, although in Zirconia's case there's an understandable emphasis on 'not interested in men'. At the end of the day, language is mutable and identity is personal.
(Although someone for whom 'gay' means 'exclusively interested in [x]' rejecting a non-binary person is an excellent opportunity, narratively, to have disappointment at rejection softened by the validation.)
Thanks again for taking the time to reply.