BruceVC

The cultural problem isn't that we reject romance, but that we have a difficult time accepting romantic wish fulfillment as a valid indulgence. It's a problem of immersion, of becoming sufficiently emotionally invested in a video game character to actually enjoy interacting with him/her romantically. Such immersion is vital to effective romantic roleplaying, but is incredibly hard to achieve when you refuse - eg for cultural reasons - to become emotionally involved with a video game in that way. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about 'Aerie is my eternal waifu I no longer care about 3D people' obsession, but rather a middle ground between it and the 'I play for teh lelz' crowd who's never going to be immersed to begin with. And I'm not asking for as much as you think - because the fact of the matter is, we DO get immersed in games, and we DO derive wish fulfillment from them. Otherwise, you won't see people becoming so emotionally invested in, say, Ellie in The Last of Us, and for that matter a World of Warcraft raid boss drop. Provided that you accept this premise - that emotional investment is critical to the success of a romance - then the rest of this logic is straight forward. The basis of an effective CRPG romance is a character that is endearing to you, and the basis of such a character is an aspect of wish fulfillment that appeals to you. Whether the developer subverts this aspect later - ie for thematic effects - there's no way to avoid it in the beginning, because in order for the player to even be drawn to that character in a romantic way, there has to be a raw attraction, and that attraction isn't cheap, especially not when you're trying to effect it through a computer screen with pixels. It's not enough to simply have a compelling character, because there's no excuse for forcing a romance track just to develop a compelling character. It's also not enough to just have a 'romantic story,' because the narrative fails when there is no investment - it feels empty and cheesy. It's further not enough to just have an attractive model, because that only inspires sexual attraction, which is cheap and fleeting when it's through the computer screen. There has to be a wish fulfillment aspect involved. In fact, there's nothing unique about romance - as people have already said hundreds of times - outside the actual existence of romantic feelings, and it's inspiring those feelings without any hope of sexual fulfillment that is the hardest task for the game designer. Romantic feelings? For a video game character? Madness, but in fact, people fall in love with fictional characters all the time - from books, comic books, films, etc., and in lieu of interaction they write a lot of bad fanfiction. But just from the fact that I cringed while writing this post tells me that there is a deep-seated resistance against this sort of behavior, and that to the degree that the 'mainstream' gaming culture shares in this resistance, video game romances won't flourish. Nah, I have no problem accepting Romance as a valid indulgence. I prefer to see it as a normal way of enhancing your interaction with party members. Its about realism and immersion. I have made my next point so many times but I'll happily make it again. Its completely reasonable and expected that if you are on this epic quest to save the world and everyday may be your last that you would develop a Romantic interest with someone in your party, especially if you are attracted to that person. Think about all the long nights spent around the campfire ruminating and reflecting on the ordeals of the day? In fact I always argue that by not having a Romance arc its unrealistic to how people interact emotionally

My friend you need to have faith....but I just want to let everyone know that this game won't have Romance. I don't want people to get upset later and its perfectly understandable considering the fact that you won't have a party with you

I'd love to hear what Wu meant by this. Yeah, context is always relevant when it comes to these types of comments

Iran represents a much more complicated situation than NK and definitely can't be treated the same way as NK Also there are and have been constant negotiations with NK. But consider the Shia relationship that Iran has with Iraq and its support of terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, plus its influence in Syria. If the USA attacks Iran all these alliances will be directly impacted, for example Hezbollah may become more active, and this will affect the entire region So like it or not we should really consider negotiation with Iran as the only feasible option for sustained peace in the Middle East

Yeah I have been saying this for ages, the relationship between the USA and Israel is still good but its also at a historical low This of course will confuse the various conspiracy theorists on these forums who keep making statements like "the Jews control America " and " American foreign policy is aligned to what Israel wants"....this is patently not true Obama is absolutely following the correct course by going the route of negotiation as far as Iran is concerned. The reality of the USA going the military route is not only highly unlikely but will also further destabilize the region, it would be very irresponsible and counterproductive to really stopping Iran developing a nuclear weapon Netanyahu has overplayed his hand by aligning to Republicans, I don't know the last time any Democrats boycotted a speech by an Israeli Prime Minister but the last thing that Israel should be wanting is fractured support from the USA. They are use to unequivocal support. But even certain ex-Israeli generals were concerned by the way Netanyahu was approaching this speech, they see this as more divisive than helpful http://www.newsmax.com/World/GlobalTalk/israel-netanyahu-congress-generals/2015/03/02/id/627666/

People who are outspoken feminists getting rape and death threats definitely constitutes as an unwelcoming environment for feminists, in my opinion. Self-identified gamergaters in the appropriate *chan sites talking in great detail about bombarding them with those rape and death threats constitutes as GG being responsible for it. (Not in the collective responsibility sense - ie. every gamergater is personally responsible for the actions of those individuals -, but in the sense of "some people who are gamergaters do send those things".) Anyone on the internet with an opinion gets rape and death threats. Or, maybe that was just me. At the very least that's been my experience and has always been my impression of the internet. Nope, no one has ever threatened to rape or kill me on the Internet.... it must just be you guys

Volo its probably not a good idea to jump to conclusions until we see more evidence and the final report ?

Sure, he is popular in Russia buts because Putin controls the narrative within Russia and the media. So Russians see what he wants them to see, I find it amazing that your definition of a popular leader is someone who decides that censorship and propaganda are the way to control political support to ensure his popularity ratings

I'm not sure if this is another accusation of police brutality as the homeless man was trying to grab the officer's gun. I'll wait for the final report before commenting properly

Its just such a strange series of questions to ask people, you need context and more information on what he means by those 3 questions. Of course some " gamers" welcome women, Are violent video games stupid? Impossible to answer because the definition of "stupid " is subjective Are male gamers losers? Impossible to answer or quantify because there are some people who think anyone who plays games is a loser. I don't support generalizations about groups of people and once again the definition of a " loser " is subjective But my issue with that video still remains, he generailzes and blames gaming journalists and SJW for that episode of Law & Order. Its just unsubstantiated diatribe and helps contribute towards this culture of " look what gaming journalists and SJW have done "

I am going to both belittle and ignore that video For the simple the fact that the video is guilty of doing exactly what he accuses others of doing. He basically accuses journalists and SJW of being responsible for that inaccurate episode of Law & Order....WTF. You talk about false stereotypes What have gaming journalists and people who believe in SJ issues got to do with the production of Law & Order? The producers of that show look at real issues of abuse in society that exist and create episodes on those issues. If anything you should contact NBC and **** Wolf if you have some issue with Law & Order But somehow gaming journalists and SJW become the target of vitriol, did he even mention **** Wolf once ? A terrible video that is misplaced in highlighting the issue around who is responsible for the spurious characterization of gamer's in that episode

I am glad someone else noticed this, I thought the Codex article also did an excellent job at giving us more information and confidence in investing in this KS

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird? Its a game, isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

That's a terrible analogy (not to mention a geometric falsehood). A line can stretch infinitely. A triangle can't. In the context of these debates that spring up on this forum, there's never 3 sides. There's only 2 sides. People like you just publically sit on the fence in between and sometimes take thinly veiled pot shots at one of the sides. Oh how I take great pleasure in pushing fence sitters off the fence. Thats a big harsh. I have found Lephys to be more concerned with the principle of reasonable debate and logic. People who don't understand this won't get his posting etiquette Stun, and any others, I want to ask you a relevant question. You have answered this before but this is probably a good time to refresh your response...think about the question before you answer What is your issue anyway with optional Romance arcs in RPG? I know you are passionate and vociferous in what you don't like about Romance but what is your primary reason for not wanting them ? Because the developers only have so much time available, and writing romances that don't feel shallow or tacked-on takes isn't really something you can put together in a day. And as others have pointed out, many people at Obsidian are indifferent or outright contemptuous of the notion of romances in RPGs, so why should they waste time putting in something they don't really want to? Secondly, romance arcs tends hide a great deal of a character's backstory and personality from people who don't want their character to pursue a relationship with that person. In Baldur's Gate, for instance, a player who doesn't pursue a romance with Viconia will learn next to nothing about her. Third, romances tend to attract a certain type of individual...we all know the type...the people who got mad because so-and-so character wasn't romantically available to their character...the people who make posts bringing their knowledge of biochemistry to bear on the question of what Tali's sweat tastes like...the people who post pictures in the "Alistair Gush Thread" of their purple-haired Mary Sue Cousland with Alistair...you get the idea. You know, THESE people: Thanks for responding, even though you and I may not always agree on Romance I do find your posts interesting, reasonable, non-confrontational and not antagonistic So your reasons are pretty standard, its what most people claim to be the reasons they are opposed to Romance. And I do believe you but did you have to think about them for a while ?Or did these spring to mind straight away. You see my experience and observation is the main reason people are opposed to Romance is reason 3...lets be honest the other reasons aren't that significant in the big picture..especially with Romance being optional Which raises another consideration and please hear me out. How real and insidious is reason 3? So on a website like this you have large numbers of people who use to be ardent and committed fans of Bioware. Over the last few years Bioware is not the same development company for some people and great admiration for Bioware has been replaced by anger, judgment and dismissiveness...and because Romance is a valid part of Bioware games now Romance automatically gets a bad rap but people won't say the actual reason because it could be something that resonates on a subconscious level so they say " we don't want weird people like people from BSN coming here " But that really shouldn't be a valid reason if we are being honest, promancers like myself confine our Romance discussions to a few select threads. Why would it bother you if a small group want to discuss something like the sweat of a character, I wouldn't do it but it doesn't bother me that others do it Finally the worst reason for not liking Romance IMO is when people say things like " you promancers need to get RL girlfriends " or " you promancers are weird " ....once again these points are utterly irrelevant to why I'm sure the majority of people like Romance Anyway I just wanted to raise other reasons why you guys may not like Romance but not be aware of it

Apparently he had information that unequivocally revealed Russian interference in Ukraine But what worries me even more is that Putin probably had nothing to do with it but it shows us just how out of control certain groups in Russia are as far as following there own agenda is concerned

Yeah I saw this, its appalling but really just confirms the nature of the political climate in Russia. At least Putin condemned it

No its not about Romance but we are discussing Romance as its relevant to the topic for some reason I have forgotten

That's a terrible analogy (not to mention a geometric falsehood). A line can stretch infinitely. A triangle can't. In the context of these debates that spring up on this forum, there's never 3 sides. There's only 2 sides. People like you just publically sit on the fence in between and sometimes take thinly veiled pot shots at one of the sides. Oh how I take great pleasure in pushing fence sitters off the fence. Thats a big harsh. I have found Lephys to be more concerned with the principle of reasonable debate and logic. People who don't understand this won't get his posting etiquette Stun, and any others, I want to ask you a relevant question. You have answered this before but this is probably a good time to refresh your response...think about the question before you answer What is your issue anyway with optional Romance arcs in RPG? I know you are passionate and vociferous in what you don't like about Romance but what is your primary reason for not wanting them ?

I remember you use to work in the strip. You told us a story once of that attractive lady who always use to walk past your window and the one day she waved at you or something similar Personally I love the Vegas strip, the lights, the revelry and the irrepressible energy....its exactly what you want Vegas to be when you visit....you just don't want to live there I also suffer from horrendous jet lag when I fly to Vegas because you are in the plane for over 20 hours so I am always wake at 4 am or earlier. And I normally head to the strip to kill time and I always meet very interesting characters from all walks of life who are obviously also awake for different reasons

I'm disappointed by this response but not surprised. This forum is full of people who are happy to constantly criticize the West for historical mistakes but aren't prepared to contribute constructively towards issues that we now have to address You have a good knowledge of politics and the Middle East, is it really so hard for you to suggest how the threat of ISIS can be reduced? ....what? Off the top of my head. Iran: 1953 Syria: 1957 Iraq: 1990-1 Afghanistan: 1979-92 I was going to go into some detail with these examples but come on, seriously !? EDIT: I've got some free time tomorrow, maybe I'll write something then. I have never said the West was perfect, like every movement or country mistakes happen. But under Obama American foreign policy has definitely changed, the West now respects the views of the UNSC veto. Of course this creates its own challenges, like the required interventions in Syria but thats on Russia and China for vetoing any military action I can cite many examples but just one point to dispute what both Zora and Rostere have said. They both say American foreign policy is driven by either the Saudis or the Israelis. Both these countries have certain influence in the USA but neither of them determines American interventionism...despite what people assume. We know this because both countries wanted the USA to bomb Iran. And guess what, Obama prudently rejected any military actions. In fact American ( well the Obama administration ) and Israeli relationships are really at a low at the moment. Netanyahu took an unprecedented step and refused to meet with Democrats recently...that is a sign of just how strained the relationship is http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/02/25/1366753/-Netanyahu-refuses-to-meet-with-Democrats-because-he-doesn-t-want-to-appear-partisan#

"The romantic NPC should be picky, it's obvious he/she has high standards. In Planescape: Torment, we made it pretty clear that Annah and Fall-From-Grace didn't express interest in just anyone, and the player was the only one out of thousands that ever piqued their interest." http://forums.obsidian.net/blog/1/entry-79-blog-o-romance/ Sorry Stun, I can empathize with you and how you must be feeling. There are very few things worse during a debate when we say something like " prove it, I don't believe it " and someone actually finds some obscure link or proof that makes our previous opinion wrong...the only consolation I can give you is that happens to all of us

Oh? Can you describe to me the courting process of Annah (or Grace) In PS:T? No wait. Allow me. Annah: You stink. And I've never seen anyone so ugly. TNO: :::Kisses Annah:::: Annah: Are you daft? TNO: Admit it, you liked it! Annah: Get away from me! You're making my demonic blood boil! (literally. Permanent +5% fire resistance) And then.... Nothing. Nothing at all. No courting for the rest of the game. Maybe some thief training though...which she vocally resents. ------ TNO: Hey grace? What are your feelings about me? Grace: Not saying. TNO: Oh come on. Grace. Nope. TNO: Ok then, can I read your diary? Grace: Nope. TNO: nevermind then. Ok, Bruce. This is your definition of Romance/courtship in an RPGs? Really? Then I rest my case. You promancers will stretch the definition of romance so that any non-combat scenario = Romance. Well I have good news for you. PoE will have Romances. In fact, the Beta we've played already has 2 of them. Rejoice! Well the development of a Romance arc can be nuanced and sometimes yes it may be difficult to say " this is Romance " but remember end of the day it really becomes a subjective interpretation in certain games. If you think about one of the core reasons why we play RPG is because we like to RP, this may sound obvious but I think sometimes this is overlooked. So every single one of us will have a different experience when we play RPG around how we react and define certain game components . This experience is obviously on different levels...so for example I read the dialogue with both Annah and Grace as the prelude to Romance. I never knew that " normal Romance" wouldn't happen. But it didn't change the fact that my experience was " Romance based" It would be the same as someone who said he liked Torment because of the depressing and doomed narrative....I didn't see the story completely like this but I can understand why others might have

Thats such a 2001-2003 perspective of Western foreign policy in the Middle East. The West has learnt and evolved since those days. You know this yet you still refuse to recognise it, I find this odd Both Iran and Syria are examples that the days of Western unilateralism as far as intervention is concerned are over, no its all about coalitions and UNSC endorsement. And I support this. Just for record what would you personally do about the rise of ISIS ? Lets say you controlled the military of Western countries....what would your strategy be ? Maybe you would have left the Yazidis to die on that mountain in Iraq because that was the catalyst that started the campaign against ISIS?

Stun I think you are misunderstanding something, Romance in a RPG doesn't have to mean sex. Its the courting process and getting to know the NPC that is important. So in Torment I do consider the dialogue with both Annah and Grace a form of Romance. As mentioned by others there is no doubt there was sexual innuendo and I was really under the impression that the relationship would develop so I had this "Romance mind-set" during my interaction with them Yes Black Isle could have developed both those types of relationships in a more physical way but that didn't happen....but you need to believe me when I say "Torment did have Romance "

Well we know from events like Iraq that occupational strategies just don't work, especially in the Middle East where you have this plethora of sectarian groups and historical tension between Sunni and Shia. So the West would have to back one political movement in Libya and support them politically, militarily and financially until they can govern the country effectively. Then the West can slowly disengage. But the objective needs to be the defeat of Islamic extremism in Libya, like neutralizing ISIS The real consideration around this approach is who is prepared to commit the resources to such a maelstrom of real issues that exist in Libya at the moment. So then the questions become " how relevant is ISIS in Libya to the sustainability of ISIS in Iraq\Syria " and "how important is the defeat of ISIS to the West" ? I would think its easier to just commit ground troops in Iraq and defeat ISIS utterly there and in Syria, then someone else can address ISIS in Libya. I imagine once ISIS is defeated in Iraq this will make their efforts in Libya less impressive or militarily challenging? This should be the last but it will mean a period of time where Western countries are more actively involved in the helping to govern Libya. And this would be temporary But I just don't think most Western countries have an appetite for another intervention in Libya...and frankly I can't blame them The only reason the nations in which ISIS operates are failed states is because of western intervention. The people of most western countries either don't have an appetite for more war, don't have a clue, or choose to be ignorant. The people who run most western countries are all about 'interventions'. Divide, conquer, kill, subjugate, pillage, and consolidate more and more power is what they are about. No Western governments gave countries like Iraq and Libya the chance to govern their own countries and decide their own future. In many ways they messed up, don't blame the West for this And no the West isn't about " Divide, conquer, kill, subjugate, pillage, and consolidate more and more power is what they are about " its about a world where all countries are true Democracies that respect human rights and where all citizens have a good quality of life