BruceVC

Well actually you are reinforcing my point unintentionally, but I also didn't explain properly. Israel is isolated as far as the Middle East countries are concerned. But part of this support of Israel from the West is exactly because its not an Islamic country. There is an interesting part of history, that most people aren't aware of, that occurred in the 1970's where basically OPEC decided to create an oil embargo against most Western countries, this decision by OPEC could have had the most serious economic consequences for Western countries that they have ever faced because back then there was no real alternative to oil. This link provides a good summary of the dynamics of the situation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis

Really? That's your argument? I'm pretty sure the main demographic for video games is central europe, north-america and australia. I don't know of any culture there where prearranged marriages or honour killings are part of. Also, what's up with the assumption that every party member should be single in the first place? If you want your realism in a medieval world and not just some 20th century with swords and magic, given the life expectancy, most people are probably married by the time they join your party, especially if they are usually not a full time adventurer. I argue that in most settings it's probably more logical and realistic if your party members are married, so romance makes no sense. Feel free to bring some counterarguments. Speaking as a young married man, I have to say that the inability to cast yourself as a married person(even if your spouse is never depicted in the game and remains abstract) is a little unfortunate. Or as a widow/widower if that's more convenient and economical from a writing standpoint. I don't think this would be applicable because Romance is optional, so I'm battling understand why you would want to be married in a RPG but never meet your wife or have no interaction with her? If this is a reason to not Romance then the solution should be to just not follow any Romance options? As Namutree said, I was envisioning a biographical option more than anything else. I find it a little odd that of all the possible relationship statuses(or lack thereof) you have to choose from in games, married is never one. I'd imagine that a large(decent?) portion of the people playing the game are married, so it's an easy thing to relate to. The letter idea is actually a good one if anybody cared to flesh it out to that point. Anybody who's read letters between spouses knows that they can easily be very touching, and it's economical from a resource standpoint. It's much harder to depict two people FALLING in love(and one would necessarily question why you would even try unless that was the central part of the story you're telling) rather than in a constant state. I don't like romances in games(or literature, for that matter) because I don't think they're well written. That isn't to say that the people who have to write them aren't good writers, but that it's really, really hard to do it well in any medium other than film or non-fiction writing. The only romance I've seen in any game that was worth paying attention to was Jaheira in Baldur's Gate 2 and Throne of Bhaal. It was straight faced enough to be pretty believeable. You make some good points around the whole marriage option in a RPG. Its worth considering, the only criticism I would have is Romance in a RPG is normally about interaction with a party member that is part of your adventure and you can see. This makes the Romance person more believable and whole RP experience more real as there is some kind of emotional connection. So why don't we combine the best of both worlds, we have Romance options but also the option to get married? Or is that taking it too far ?

Speaking as a young married man, I have to say that the inability to cast yourself as a married person(even if your spouse is never depicted in the game and remains abstract) is a little unfortunate. Or as a widow/widower if that's more convenient and economical from a writing standpoint. I don't think this would be applicable because Romance is optional, so I'm battling understand why you would want to be married in a RPG but never meet your wife or have no interaction with her? If this is a reason to not Romance then the solution should be to just not follow any Romance options? It , "I've got a wife/husband back home." So basically because someone is miserable in RL with there marriage you want to replicate that same feeling to an RPG experience in a game.....that's cold man.,..thats cold

This post made me laugh, especially the first line Well played

This is actually the truth, there is no Jewish conspiracy. No "Jews controlling the USA", despite what conspiracy theorists will tell you. Yes of course there are Jewish lobbyists who have some influence in the USA like all lobbyist groups but the main reason the West seems to align itself with Israel is really around ideological reasons and the fact that Israel is an ally to the USA and other countries when it comes to the Middle East. Remember there was a time where the Middle East was relatively united and decided to use oil production to influence a certain political agenda. Israel is the bulwark to this type of Middle Eastern alliance, and since oil still controls economies the West has to protect its allies

Yeah I share your sentiment on this matter 100 %, I'll get my RPG Romances from DA:I so its no big deal if PoE doesn't have them. Also Witcher 3 will have Romance

No offense to the BHM fans but to me its just a gimmick. I don't see the point but if it enhances your RPG experience or makes the game more immersive somehow then that's great

Yeah those are true facts, there is a whole section on the tour around Kitcheners pal brigades. The 88 % is an overall statistic

Care to give some empiric evidence for this claim? I don't think anyone wants party interaction that are on the same level as bioware romance. I'm pretty sure the same standards apply for both, it's just easier to achieve a good party interaction because it is not so dependent on the behavior of the player. Well the evidence is the constant scrutiny from people that don't feel Romance is applicable in a RPG? We constantly hear comments like " if Romance is not done properly then I don't want it all" This becomes very subjective and difficult to gauge "what is proper Romance " But yes we can improve on Bioware Romance, I do obviously like Bioware Romance but you guys have made me realize there are ways to make it more realistic

Really? That's your argument? I'm pretty sure the main demographic for video games is central europe, north-america and australia. I don't know of any culture there where prearranged marriages or honour killings are part of. Also, what's up with the assumption that every party member should be single in the first place? If you want your realism in a medieval world and not just some 20th century with swords and magic, given the life expectancy, most people are probably married by the time they join your party, especially if they are usually not a full time adventurer. I argue that in most settings it's probably more logical and realistic if your party members are married, so romance makes no sense. Feel free to bring some counterarguments. Speaking as a young married man, I have to say that the inability to cast yourself as a married person(even if your spouse is never depicted in the game and remains abstract) is a little unfortunate. Or as a widow/widower if that's more convenient and economical from a writing standpoint. I don't think this would be applicable because Romance is optional, so I'm battling understand why you would want to be married in a RPG but never meet your wife or have no interaction with her? If this is a reason to not Romance then the solution should be to just not follow any Romance options?

I apologize, I thought I did answer these questions I can't comment on this point because in my game I did Romance someone so the mood on the Normandy was normal. And I didn't think the writing was impacted negatively by the Romance, but I'm not an expert on the ME series as I only played each game once and thought they were enjoyable, not fantastic I agree, we can do better around Romance and make them more realistic and believable. Based on suggestions in these types of discussions I would like Romance to not to be automatic based on silly presents but a concerted effort from the player and also based on the personal struggles you have with a particular Romance partner, like surviving a dangerous dungeon or deadly end boss monster. The Romance arc should grow as the game goes on and there should be a chance of a fail or a break-up. So basically like a RL Romance And I also agree Deionarra was a very poignant and believable Romance

Well said, those are very wise words. An interesting statistic that the last part of the tour mentions. In almost all the books about WW1 I have read they talk about WW1 having a devastating impact to the generation of young men who went to fight, in fact it is regularly mentioned that the Great War lead to a "lost generation" But 88% of the men who went to fight came back, the tour specifically mentions from a UK perspective this concept of a " lost generation" is exaggerated. It doesn't diminish the horrors of the war and social changes that the world went through. Just the fact that a whole generation of men were not wiped out, I didn't know that

Okay guys, I have just returned from the Imperial War Museum and the new WW1 exhibition and all I can say is that it is the best tour in a museum I have ever been on in my life . It was evocative, interesting and very well designed. You obviously start at 1914 and progress through a series of rooms till the end at 1918. I have NEVER been so entertained on a historical tour. For people who live in London you have to go, they also had a whole lot of vintage cars outside the museum that you can take pictures of and ask questions about I am in absolute awe of the Imperial War Museum and the effort they put in, my own country can learn so much about how you can display your countries contribution towards important historical events like WW1. Well done London, you have done your veterans of the Great War proud as this is really a remembrance and tribute to them I was talking to one of the staff at the museum and he said a small number of people complained that there "was too much information in the WW1 tour for them to understand " ......WTF.....too much information !!!! You can never have too much information around these types of events. Especially where everything you read is optional Anyway as I said, those that can go...you must go

You make a very compelling argument and one that I have tried to raise before but you have articulated it better than I have done in the past In summary "why do we seem to insist that Romance in RPG is held to much higher standard than other types of party interaction, why do we demand Romance realism but we are happy with other unrealistic types of party connections " So for me this is used by some people to dismiss Romance entirely, its a justification because they don't want or like Romance. They aren't really concerned with a " realistic " Romance implementation. They just don't want Romance at all

It's a computer game. You have 3 options, One option he stays alive, the other two he dies. That's not realism. You wouldn't kill a person in real life or convince someone to commit suicide. Or would you Bruce? Okay I see the point you boys are making, I suppose it depends on what culture you live in. We know for a fact that even in our modern age prearranged marriages and honour killings exist. So for some people the choices in DA 2 may not seem that absurd. And it doesn't mean I support this but people getting killed because of scorned love does happen

http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/08/01/verdun-review-early-access/ Guys in recognition of the fact that today is the beginning of commemorations of WW1 I found this interesting FPS (??) called Verdun, its based around the historical and real battle. I am a huge and avid fan of WW1 but I have no idea if this game is any good. So any opinions from people who have played it will be appreciated ?

Nothing like realism in a game. roflmao. I'm not with you, don't you think love and betrayal can cause people to react excessively?

In a way this does happen in Dragon Age 2. In no way do I want to promote the romances of Dragon Age 2 but this one point is included there, where your commitment to Anders is tested at that one time. Anders loves you but at the same time he uses you to further his goals, up to the point where you can unknowingly help him in blowing up the church. You can forgive him for that. You can kill him for that. Or if "rivalmanced" you can convince him to commit suicide. Also the betrayal by Isabella when the Desire Demon seduces her, you can choose to forgive her or not. I obviously forgave her

I hate to seem to be agreeing with Volo on this because he may be trolling but I do see his point around TV series and the possible similarity around games Take the series Lost, for years people loved and were addicted to it but then after the last episode they suddenly didn't like how the saga ended and that became the talking point and a negative. Instead of all the good things in the previous years and it does seem unreasonable But I suppose its not a good analogy to compare games to TV series as in a game you can spend dozens of hours immersing yourself in a particular part of series and if its bad it can really taint your perspective of the entire experience, like DA 2 did for many people ?

You are nitpicking now and you know it, ISIS is as bad as Boko Haram if not more so because they are a more effective military force. They practice and enforce a completely brutal and anachronistic form of Islam that isn't tolerated anywhere in the world by any recognised government, basically the same as Boko Haram. But I will acknowledge that within ISIS there are different objectives and some aren't as extreme as others, for example the Iraqi tribal Sunnis don't have the same goals as the foreign fighters who have joined ISIS

By that logic, any loss of civilian life is always going to generate sympathy, thus every loss is in the interest of the side loosing civilians. And thus every side with high civilian casualities is just playing the propaganda war. But you see this is interesting difference between Israel and Hamas. From what I am seeing there is no doubt that the Israelis do care more about a single Jewish life than what Hamas cares about a single Palestinian life, and I'm not suggesting the death of Jewish child is more important than the death of Palestinian child. But take the prisoner swop around Gilad Shalit, they released over 1000 Palestinian prisoners for his safe return. So the Israelis don't use the death of there citizens for political capital. Now end of the day if Hamas really wanted to prevent civilian casualties they wouldn't be firing rockets from within the confines of Gaza, irrespective of all the political grievances surely Hamas would be thinking " if we do this this there is going to be a retaliation and cost in innocent lives" But this doesn't seem to concern them? For them the political objective is more important than the loss of innocent Palestinians? And I have issue with that type of sacrifice mentality

Battersea Park was awesome, its weird to think about this huge cosmopolitan city like London with millions of people but then you still have these relaxing and important areas of nature like Battersea. I was surprised but pleased to see the number of people exercising, there were literally hundreds of people jogging and cycling. We walked the entire park and went a good distance up the Thames. I also enjoy reading the various plaques around statues and in gardens, London obviously has so much history that you'll walk past a statue and not realize how significant it was, so you need to take your time and check out everything, We then had a very tasty and traditional English roast for lunch at a pub near Battersea, its is truly hard to beat Roast Beef and Yorkshire Pudding with loads of gravy Today is a very important day, its the beginning of several commemorations around WW1 and there are going to be several events in London. We are gong to the Imperial War Museum to partake of what is happening there. So now my trip is going to focus on historical events. I'm really looking forward to seeing the new War Museum

The point, Volourn, is that one of the big concerns has always been that DA:I will feel like just another Console port. Well? here we are, getting some evidence of that already. Volo that is true, this concern has been raised numerous times. I am not going to say it is true yet because obviously I haven't played DA:I yet but this was a criticism raised before about DA:I from others

Wow you are lacking ambition with only those choices, I am hoping for it to be more like DA 2....who is with me !!!!!

Oh no there are still loads of blatant cases of extreme homophobia in Africa, so we still have loads of work to do before we can move onto world hunger. But I appreciate your commitment to another SJ cause