CrazyPea

Oh, look, you just invented Dragon Age 2.Anyway, let's, once again, hear a bit of... You've stated in the past that you don't like romances in games—at least to the extent that they've been done in games thus far. Were you to implement a romance subplot in Project Eternity, what would it involve? Not a big fan of romances. I did four in Alpha Protocol because Chris Parker, our project director, demanded it because he thinks romance apparently is easy, or MAYBE it’s because he wanted to be an **** and give me tons of them to do because I LOVE them so much (although to be honest, I think he felt it was more in keeping with the spy genre to have so many romances, even if I did ask to downscope them). At least I got to do the “hatemance” version of most of them, which makes it a little more palatable. So if I were to implement a romance subplot in Eternity - I wouldn’t. I’d examine interpersonal relationships from another angle and I wouldn’t confine it to love and romance... ...I generally despise writing companion romances (I think unrequited and/or doomed ones are ultimately more dramatic)... **** You have numbers, we have Chris. I hate writing westerns. So what? Yes he is the professional writer/designer, but he still has his own strengths and weaknesses, and, his own set of preferences. Do all Obsidian writers feel the same? Besides, who said the romances can't be doomed? Does every romance have to be 'Happily ever after?' As an aspiring writer, I agree with Chris that when things go wrong, it's much more satisfying to write about. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be romance, quite the reverse, a doomed romance or unrequited love could add to the story quite significantly.

Yes, I did make generalizations about what type of player wants what out of the game, and I am aware that people from both types of play are both for and against romance. But, I also said there were three types, not two. And the majority of people want a balance (which, according to the polls, INDICATES the inclusion of romances). On the subject of polls, to repeat a later post: I agree that polls can’t always be taken as red and no decision should be made based SOLELY on polls (especially internet polls). However, polls should be taken as an INDICATION of customer wants. But if the polls are true, and the majority of backers DO want romantic options in the game, should Obsidian ignore that? Maybe that’s a different debate, because it can applied to every aspect of the game. An interesting question though. Limited Resources is one of those arguments that looks reasonable, but when you look deeper it isn’t always as much of an issue as it appears. As someone who has designed a mod that included romance, I can tell you that one easy way is to take out gender restrictions (and dialogue references) on who can romance a particular character – this automatically doubles the amount of people who can romance said character. If we do this for two characters of each gender that’s equal to eight viable romances. It’s all about clever writing and using the resources you have in an efficient way. A second point on resources is, where should we use them, then? Combat? Combat is well catered for throughout the game and has stretch goal extras. Non-combat challenges? Like combat these crop up frequently throughout RPGs and again, like combat, some of these have been addressed in the stretch goals with things like the stronghold. Character interaction? Um … romance is a type of character interaction. Yes, there are plenty of other types of character interaction, but these are generally catered for by default. Story? IMHO if a romance is written well it enhances a story. Now, as others have pointed out, in the past, romances have not been done well. I agree, but, that’s purely subjective; beauty in the eye of the beholder and all that. But, even so, does that mean they can’t be done well in the future? Of course it doesn't. Or are you saying that you don’t trust Obsidian in the writing department? Funnily enough, that’s the one area above all others that I trust them completely.

Either tender or unused to dealing with mentality of some of the people on these forums - your choice Decisions should never be made SOLELY on polls (especially on internet forums), but they can be used by Obsidian as an indication of what their customers want.

Absolutely perfect

Popcorn

It seems to me that there are three distinct types of people who enjoy role-playing games and this division goes right the way back to the tabletop. The first lot develop their characters by buffing, min/maxing, and levelling up, mostly in glorious battle. The second lot want to develop their characters by talking to the NPCs, building relationships (both romantic and non-romantic) and perhaps solving problems without the need for resorting to combat. I’ll come to the third type later. The point is NEITHER of these approaches is wrong, just a different playing style and a good RPG (be it tabletop or computer) caters to both – Planescape Torment did, Baldur’s Gate 2 did (these examples are used specifically because they are the IE games which P:E is trying to emulate and build on) as do many other RPGS* Many of the people on this board refuse to accept that BOTH ways are valid ways of playing a RPG; their posts are immature, misogynist, homophobic and quite definitely cyberbullying (this is levelled at both sides of the argument). Quite frankly, there are a lot of people in this topic who should genuinely be ashamed of themselves. The actual rational arguments (which exist for both sides) are lost in the stupidity. Why the moderators haven’t stepped in before now is something I find quite disturbing. I’m not advocating the closing the thread, because that’s just sweeping the issue under the carpet, but something really has to be done about the name calling and the prejudice. Just out of curiosity, what is the average age of posters in this topic, anyway? No, please don’t tell me – I’ll get depressed. I mentioned in my first paragraph that there was a third type of player – these I believe are the majority of RPG gamers – the people want a balance between the two extremes. Unfortunately, we don’t get to hear that much out of them because they rarely get involved in the petty arguments, such as this one. As a (sadly) now middle-aged woman, (engaged before any one suggests a lack of a real life), and (wonderously) an aspiring writer, I enjoy role-playing games – I have since the 80s. I’ve played everything from Advanced Dungeons and Dragons to Skyrim; tabletop and computer. I’ve DM’ed, GM’ed, and refereed. I’ve even designed a Hall of Fame mod for NWN2 which was published (albeit in a German Computer Magazine) – Feel free to check it out, it’s called ‘A Secret in Stone’. Some of my characters have been male, some female; some of my characters were heterosexual, some were homosexual (some were Bi); Some favoured combat, some favoured stealth or magic. Why? Because each of those characters (and the situations that they got into) excited my imagination in one way or another and that’s what I believe is really important; the strongest aspect of any RPG. Should we have romances (of all denominations)? YES Should we have mindless mayhem and tactical combat? DAMN RIGHT Why can’t we have it all? Combat types are well catered for by the stretch goals – remember the 14+ level dungeon (and all those glorious extra combat-orientated character classes)? Shouldn’t those players who want romances get a bite of the cherry too? According the polls, those that want some sort of romance are in the majority, so is it right for Obsidian to ignore their wishes, especially since these are the very people who financed the project? Rant over. I apologise to all those (on both sides of the coin) that have been perfectly polite rational and intelligent in their arguments in this topic.

Um ... sure. .... No ... too easy. I'll let just let you continue to make yourself look foolish, you're doing a great job btw. [covers mouth, trying to conceal smirk] He was just joking CrazyPea. No need to take it seriously Believe me, I'm not I can't, it's hilarious - hence the laughter and the smirking

Um ... sure. .... No ... too easy. I'll let just let you continue to make yourself look foolish, you're doing a great job btw. [covers mouth, trying to conceal smirk]

[shakes head in wonder] Please tell me you are not actually serious - Hyperbolic nonsense from someone who has an immature gif of a boy shaking a sausage. [shakes head again, and walks away, laughing softly to herself]

What a horrible image ... Um, is that aimed at me? If so I suggest you re-read my post. Because as I've said I'm not interested in the whole sex-scene thing. And I'm not a manchild either - I'm female and engaged, and I haven't lived with my parents for 20 (ish) years....

Trying to be be patient lol, but like I say moving very 300 miles away very soon.

I think relationships (on all levels) are a fundamental part of storytelling - stories are about people after all. So I would like definitely like to see romance (including hetro+homosexual relationships) in the game, albeit done gently - no need for sex scenes (ala Bioware). A perfect example of a good NPC relationship, to me, is the Companion Vilja mod for Oblivion and Skyrim - the relationship is well thought out (romance being optional, not manditory) and proceeds slowly over time and is at no time explicit (it isn't as shallow as the vanilla game either, and includes contributions from Discworld author, Sir Terry Pratchett) .

Hi there. Sorry if this has been mentioned recently, but I don't recall the last time that we got an update on the fulfilment site. Have I missed something? Is the site up and running? This is starting to worry me because I've ordered one of the physical tiers and I'm moving next month so I need to change my details (especially since I've paid for extras on top of my original Kickstarter bid).

/sigh You know who that idea appeals to? People who want a romance simply for the sake of a romance. Know who it doesn't appeal to? People who want character growth and development amoung the party that can include rivalry, sword-brother/sister, best friends, platonic loves, or straight up lovers. Having a believable evolution of interactions between a diverse group of people who are traveling for great lengths of time together through various situations that binds them together in equally diverse ways. It just is insane to me that people want character interactive growth in every way except romance... because romance is somehow eeeeeeeeeebil. But two people who have wildly different moral stances can learn to despise each other and one eventually betray the PC and/or leave the party is A-OK, right? There is literally no difference between the two when both are written well in the sense that both are showing a growth and changing of feelings between two characters dependent upon the choices that are made throughout the story. When handled by an experienced and creative writer, like the ones we have at the helm here, both are equal. And I really wish people on here would stop going 'if you want that go play this other game and get out' already. It serves no purpose as these people are here to do exactly what these forums were meant for, which is to offer opinions about what they hope to see in the game. No different than 'I don't want any exits in the dungeon' debates. Yeesh. I don't disagree with you, but again, I'm looking at a compromise that can work for both camps. That's the thing... what I have just said IS a compromise in that I have said what people here want: A solid well written story with characters that matter. You can't section off one way people interact, especially when they're with a group of people for a very long time and facing various situations, but say that all of the others are fine. The whole point is that we are all, every single person here, expecting the writers to be up to the task of crafting a powerful engaging story. With realistically understandable characters. I don't want one-dimensional card-board cutouts.... this means I want them to run a realistic gambit of emotions: hate, joy, disgust, envy, revenge, heroism, villainy, love, despair.... It is all there, it all matters. However, a character outside of the party does not have to be one dimentsional, does it? How does spouse feel while player goes off to adventure? Would they up and leave? Get Jealous? Especially if spouse has a rival, who is in the adventuring party. What if they commit suicide from neglect? What if big bad finds out? Would he kill spouse outright or try to convert spouse and use them against the player in someway? would the spouse have an affair with big bad, just to get revenge on the player? All of these are plausible, realistic and if done right can add real emotion and depth. So much more than the 'Hi honey, I'm home. Can you cook me something eat' of SKyrim. Now, I'm not saying I wouldn't prefer your compromise, but I do think you need to have another look at the possiblities of a relationship outside of the party.

/sigh You know who that idea appeals to? People who want a romance simply for the sake of a romance. Know who it doesn't appeal to? People who want character growth and development amoung the party that can include rivalry, sword-brother/sister, best friends, platonic loves, or straight up lovers. Having a believable evolution of interactions between a diverse group of people who are traveling for great lengths of time together through various situations that binds them together in equally diverse ways. It just is insane to me that people want character interactive growth in every way except romance... because romance is somehow eeeeeeeeeebil. But two people who have wildly different moral stances can learn to despise each other and one eventually betray the PC and/or leave the party is A-OK, right? There is literally no difference between the two when both are written well in the sense that both are showing a growth and changing of feelings between two characters dependent upon the choices that are made throughout the story. When handled by an experienced and creative writer, like the ones we have at the helm here, both are equal. And I really wish people on here would stop going 'if you want that go play this other game and get out' already. It serves no purpose as these people are here to do exactly what these forums were meant for, which is to offer opinions about what they hope to see in the game. No different than 'I don't want any exits in the dungeon' debates. Yeesh. I don't disagree with you, but again, I'm looking at a compromise that can work for both camps.

Because this is not a book. I'm sick of railroaded stories in videogames. If Project Eternity is going to be like that then the developers should warn us. At least I would stop worrying about this game and I'd look somewhere else for a real role playing experience. Since this is an RPG I want to be in charge of what my character does and feels. I want to be able to decide if a love story fits the character I'm playing or not, exactly like I want to be able to decide if I'm good or bad, chaotic or lawful, altruistic or individualist etc. Let's say that in the beginning of the story my character is happily married. The plt starts and after a painful event my wife gets killed. I want to have the chance to decide if my character finds the strength to move on (and finds another one to love) or keeps mourning his true love forever. This is roleplaying, not some ready-made experience you have to swallow as it is or screw off. You know, I find this hilarious and indicative of this thread: Jarpie actually started off claiming that there are books without romance in because proromancers were saying all good stories had romance in them, now we are at the stage that its reversed and people are arguing that just because some books don't have romance in doesn't mean it can't and that its a game not a book and so shouldn't be compared. This argument truly has come full circle, hilarious really... Let me put an end to this circling around then. CRPGs are not P&P RPGs. They don't have the luxury of a master that can interact with the players in real time and adapt the story taking every action into account. If I'm playing D&D and I say: now my character goes to a tavern and tryes to pick up some chick at the bar. The master can make up something on the spot or tell me: "Just wait until the next session, I'll prepare something". He doesn't need to make me find the love of my life (or even someone to have sex with) at the first try, but as long as I keep up looking for love someway somehow he must make something happen, just like it would happen in real life. As we said CRPGs don't have a master. The developers might try to give the player as much freedom as they can but they obviously can't cover everything. They have to make choices, which have to comply with the available development time. Some examples: Should the player be able to become a nobleman and rule a country? Should the player have the chance to play a musical instrument and become a famous bard? Can we afford to spend time in developing a full blown naval and underwater combat system to let the player explore the oceans? Do we need a stealth system to let the player be sneaky and avoid combat when he wants to? Do we need to give the player the chance to play the game as an evil character? (it means at least one more branch for every quest) Can we afford to spend time writing the senes and the plot of one or more love stories? Obviously each and every feature would enhance player freedom and would add at least one roleplay option. But the developers have a limited amount of time and resources so they have to make choices. Now the question is: what is important and what it's not? To me romances are a great roleplaying tool and are one of the main feature that a true roleplaying adventure should add. They aren't the most time and resource intensive feature to add too. Strongholds, Stealth system, and evil storylines are much more expansive. And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too. The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games. So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there and then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it. Here's the biggest issue with an out of party romance; If you do an out of party romance, but still want it to have a deep and engaging story you have to do -a lot- more writing than if you have a character in your party. The reason being is the amount of dialogue required to facilitate interacting with a character in a way that you explain what you've been doing, where you went, learn what they were doing, where they went (Unless they are a stick figure, which again, ruins it). Basically, you can't have your love interest be inanimate while you are gone. While there will be more dialogue written for in party romances, you don't have to explain that you fought a mighty dragon and uncovered vast amounts of wealth and legendary artifacts before your friend double crossed you and you had to kill him. Because they were there the whole time, don't have to do that whole 'catching up' dialogue for every quest option that you can return home during. Of course, the in party companion might not -always- be there, but it can be assumed they will be there a lot. That being said, I personally wouldn't mind if a super flushed out romance with someone who isn't in party happened. But almost all the anti-romance people have at one time or another already complained that a romance eats up, 'valuable resources'. I see where you are coming from and agree, but it is a compromise that works for both camps.

Because this is not a book. I'm sick of railroaded stories in videogames. If Project Eternity is going to be like that then the developers should warn us. At least I would stop worrying about this game and I'd look somewhere else for a real role playing experience. Since this is an RPG I want to be in charge of what my character does and feels. I want to be able to decide if a love story fits the character I'm playing or not, exactly like I want to be able to decide if I'm good or bad, chaotic or lawful, altruistic or individualist etc. Let's say that in the beginning of the story my character is happily married. The plt starts and after a painful event my wife gets killed. I want to have the chance to decide if my character finds the strength to move on (and finds another one to love) or keeps mourning his true love forever. This is roleplaying, not some ready-made experience you have to swallow as it is or screw off. You know, I find this hilarious and indicative of this thread: Jarpie actually started off claiming that there are books without romance in because proromancers were saying all good stories had romance in them, now we are at the stage that its reversed and people are arguing that just because some books don't have romance in doesn't mean it can't and that its a game not a book and so shouldn't be compared. This argument truly has come full circle, hilarious really... Let me put an end to this circling around then. CRPGs are not P&P RPGs. They don't have the luxury of a master that can interact with the players in real time and adapt the story taking every action into account. If I'm playing D&D and I say: now my character goes to a tavern and tryes to pick up some chick at the bar. The master can make up something on the spot or tell me: "Just wait until the next session, I'll prepare something". He doesn't need to make me find the love of my life (or even someone to have sex with) at the first try, but as long as I keep up looking for love someway somehow he must make something happen, just like it would happen in real life. As we said CRPGs don't have a master. The developers might try to give the player as much freedom as they can but they obviously can't cover everything. They have to make choices, which have to comply with the available development time. Some examples: Should the player be able to become a nobleman and rule a country? Should the player have the chance to play a musical instrument and become a famous bard? Can we afford to spend time in developing a full blown naval and underwater combat system to let the player explore the oceans? Do we need a stealth system to let the player be sneaky and avoid combat when he wants to? Do we need to give the player the chance to play the game as an evil character? (it means at least one more branch for every quest) Can we afford to spend time writing the senes and the plot of one or more love stories? Obviously each and every feature would enhance player freedom and would add at least one roleplay option. But the developers have a limited amount of time and resources so they have to make choices. Now the question is: what is important and what it's not? To me romances are a great roleplaying tool and are one of the main feature that a true roleplaying adventure should add. They aren't the most time and resource intensive feature to add too. Strongholds, Stealth system, and evil storylines are much more expansive. And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too. The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games. So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there, then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it. Michael Moor****'s Eternal Champion books were definitely not hamstrung by having love stories.

Because this is not a book. I'm sick of railroaded stories in videogames. If Project Eternity is going to be like that then the developers should warn us. At least I would stop worrying about this game and I'd look somewhere else for a real role playing experience. Since this is an RPG I want to be in charge of what my character does and feels. I want to be able to decide if a love story fits the character I'm playing or not, exactly like I want to be able to decide if I'm good or bad, chaotic or lawful, altruistic or individualist etc. Let's say that in the beginning of the story my character is happily married. The plt starts and after a painful event my wife gets killed. I want to have the chance to decide if my character finds the strength to move on (and finds another one to love) or keeps mourning his true love forever. This is roleplaying, not some ready-made experience you have to swallow as it is or screw off. You know, I find this hilarious and indicative of this thread: Jarpie actually started off claiming that there are books without romance in because proromancers were saying all good stories had romance in them, now we are at the stage that its reversed and people are arguing that just because some books don't have romance in doesn't mean it can't and that its a game not a book and so shouldn't be compared. This argument truly has come full circle, hilarious really... Let me put an end to this circling around then. CRPGs are not P&P RPGs. They don't have the luxury of a master that can interact with the players in real time and adapt the story taking every action into account. If I'm playing D&D and I say: now my character goes to a tavern and tryes to pick up some chick at the bar. The master can make up something on the spot or tell me: "Just wait until the next session, I'll prepare something". He doesn't need to make me find the love of my life (or even someone to have sex with) at the first try, but as long as I keep up looking for love someway somehow he must make something happen, just like it would happen in real life. As we said CRPGs don't have a master. The developers might try to give the player as much freedom as they can but they obviously can't cover everything. They have to make choices, which have to comply with the available development time. Some examples: Should the player be able to become a nobleman and rule a country? Should the player have the chance to play a musical instrument and become a famous bard? Can we afford to spend time in developing a full blown naval and underwater combat system to let the player explore the oceans? Do we need a stealth system to let the player be sneaky and avoid combat when he wants to? Do we need to give the player the chance to play the game as an evil character? (it means at least one more branch for every quest) Can we afford to spend time writing the senes and the plot of one or more love stories? Obviously each and every feature would enhance player freedom and would add at least one roleplay option. But the developers have a limited amount of time and resources so they have to make choices. Now the question is: what is important and what it's not? To me romances are a great roleplaying tool and are one of the main feature that a true roleplaying adventure should add. They aren't the most time and resource intensive feature to add too. Strongholds, Stealth system, and evil storylines are much more expansive. And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too. The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games. So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there and then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it.

Now, these are ideas I hope Obsidian listen to. - Except it's been a long time since I've been a horemone driven high school kid lol

Liked everything you said apart from the last paragrapgh. I want a game wih an amazing story, meaningful relationships and characterisation (and yes, some romance) and good solid combat - Mask of the betrayer pretty much sums it up to me.

Why should every game have romances? Does every film or book have romances? would film like The Treasure of Sierra Madre get any better if we would add romances into it? What about 2001: A Space Odyssey (both book and film), and what about The Thing by John Carpenter? Would it make games like Ultima 4-7 any better if companions of Avatar would be romanceable? Would it add anything to the story of Ultima 5 which is about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men (and women)? or Ultima 6 which is about racist prejudices and co-existance, and consequences of what you have done in the previous games? Does your whole life revolve around romantic relationships? if not, why should it in games? There are so many potential stories what are possible in Project Eternity without including romances. Did you read the lines: I'm not saying every relationshi[ in the game has to be romantic. What I am saying is that relationships drive the narrative and that romantic relationships have can drive the the narrative too. You mentioned 3 movies in your post - for those three, I gave you thousands that do include romantic relationships and are better for it - everything from Casablanca, the 39 steps (hitch**** original), to The Empire strikes back (... well,,, apart from the whole brother/sister kiss - ewww), The dark Knight (the dilema of bats chosing between his love and Harvey dent). I could list many more... My point still very much stands that NOT EVERY FILM, BOOK OR GAME HAVE ROMANCES SO WHY SHOULD THIS HAVE. We dont even know what the story will be, and I trust Obsidian's devs enough to let them make game they want, and not to include "Bioawre-romances", my problem is with the crowd who demands that they include romances no matter what. What if they make a story which doesn't support romance at all? should they just throw romances into it just because SOME people demands it even if it doesnt suit the main character? If it makes a more emersive, enjoyable experience, why shouldn't it? This is a role-playing game, emphasis on ROLE. The player 'lives' the life of their character. Life generally contains romance and realtionships, so we want our game character to experience those facets of life. Why should this game in particular? Because is a narrative driven game and narratives are driven by the relationships between people. Yes, not every game/book/movie, etc has romance, but it tends to be the exception rather than the norm, the reason being that romances usually enhance the narrative (see the examples I've already given). And WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING? Because he's been repeating the same argument over and over without it ever being seriously challenged so he therefore correctly assumes you must be deaf. I read your post. You don't want a CRPG - you want a Japanese life sim. This isn't that kind of game. RPGs aren't about "experiencing facets of life". They are and have always been about killing ****, experiencing a cool story, exploring a new world and making numbers go up. They're about making meaningful choices, not petty life-simulation. Lol, No I don't want a Japanese life simulator - I've been playing both pen and paper and computer RPGs for 30 years and while combat has all been central to the mechanics of a game, it's not what it's all about. Planescape Torment, for example, could be completed with very little combat. In the P+P version of Call of Cthulu, the last thing you wanted to do was get in a fight. Combat is an element of the game - a fun one, but it's not the be all and end all. Oh. I see what you did there - my bad

Sorry, I'm already engaged

Why should every game have romances? Does every film or book have romances? would film like The Treasure of Sierra Madre get any better if we would add romances into it? What about 2001: A Space Odyssey (both book and film), and what about The Thing by John Carpenter? Would it make games like Ultima 4-7 any better if companions of Avatar would be romanceable? Would it add anything to the story of Ultima 5 which is about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men (and women)? or Ultima 6 which is about racist prejudices and co-existance, and consequences of what you have done in the previous games? Does your whole life revolve around romantic relationships? if not, why should it in games? There are so many potential stories what are possible in Project Eternity without including romances. Did you read the lines: I'm not saying every relationshi[ in the game has to be romantic. What I am saying is that relationships drive the narrative and that romantic relationships have can drive the the narrative too. You mentioned 3 movies in your post - for those three, I gave you thousands that do include romantic relationships and are better for it - everything from Casablanca, the 39 steps (hitch**** original), to The Empire strikes back (... well,,, apart from the whole brother/sister kiss - ewww), The dark Knight (the dilema of bats chosing between his love and Harvey dent). I could list many more... My point still very much stands that NOT EVERY FILM, BOOK OR GAME HAVE ROMANCES SO WHY SHOULD THIS HAVE. We dont even know what the story will be, and I trust Obsidian's devs enough to let them make game they want, and not to include "Bioawre-romances", my problem is with the crowd who demands that they include romances no matter what. What if they make a story which doesn't support romance at all? should they just throw romances into it just because SOME people demands it even if it doesnt suit the main character? If it makes a more emersive, enjoyable experience, why shouldn't it? This is a role-playing game, emphasis on ROLE. The player 'lives' the life of their character. Life generally contains romance and realtionships, so we want our game character to experience those facets of life. Why should this game in particular? Because is a narrative driven game and narratives are driven by the relationships between people. Yes, not every game/book/movie, etc has romance, but it tends to be the exception rather than the norm, the reason being that romances usually enhance the narrative (see the examples I've already given). And WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING?

Some trolls aside, I don't think many people would make the argument that romance options should be straight-only. What people rightfully oppose is the Bioware approach of "spreading the love equally", which leads to romance becoming a minigame with very limited real implications for the game's plot. If it is included at all, romance should serve the plot and not be a game apart from the real game. This is not an issue of entitlement, but an issue of the work's integrity - just like noone's entitled to a gay version of John Milius' Conan the Barbarian, or to an alcohol- and drug-free version of TC Boyle's novels. If that means that some players' demand is not served, then so be it. I don't think it is an issue of entitlement, more of what creates the best experience for an individual player. You used movies as your example - movies are meant to be watched and not played like a computer game - something which is, arguably, a more emersive experience

Why should every game have romances? Does every film or book have romances? would film like The Treasure of Sierra Madre get any better if we would add romances into it? What about 2001: A Space Odyssey (both book and film), and what about The Thing by John Carpenter? Would it make games like Ultima 4-7 any better if companions of Avatar would be romanceable? Would it add anything to the story of Ultima 5 which is about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men (and women)? or Ultima 6 which is about racist prejudices and co-existance, and consequences of what you have done in the previous games? Does your whole life revolve around romantic relationships? if not, why should it in games? There are so many potential stories what are possible in Project Eternity without including romances. Did you read the lines: The examples I gave didn't have anykind romance at all, and all of those are -very- highly regarded as films and/or books. 2001: A Space Odyssey was sixth in the Sight & Sound poll, which is held every ten years for film makers and film critics. My point was that not every RPG should have romances, so why this specific game should? Sorry, you posted a reply when |I was editing mine See the the edited post, lol