BruceVC

But the article clearly states that some players are beyond redemption and will be permanently banned by Riot, so I suppose it depends on the actions of some players

Are you sure? I thought it was always a game. It certainly has its rules and you don't always win. Very true, in fact isn't the great game of love the greatest game of all?

No I didn't realize that, its probably better then because they should be more resilient to a permanent banning. They have loads of time to find other games

I'm not one that believes in tribunal system, if you don't know by now that you aren't suppose to make racist or homophobic comments online I doubt some kind of player based court is really going to change that behaviour. Banning is the right strategy, this type of punitive step will get the message across

That makes sense, I am surprised it took them so long to act against players who make offensive comments.

I have just watched the second episode of The Strain and this show is excellent, so many unknown and exciting developments. I predict this series is going to do very well

No I find that hard to believe, you would really only give a game like PoE one hour?

I don't mean to state the obvious but Serbian volunteers actually fighting for the separatists is not a positive endorsement of Serbia . Sarex what is going on?

Ro.....oh wait I'm not allowed to say that For me I want to play PoE first and then comment on what a good Mod could enhance

And Purina makes dog food that some dogs absolutely love to eat. What's your point? Bioware Promancers don't really count. They'll eagerly gobble up anything from Bioware that even *hints* at NPC e-affection. Call me naïve, but I am operating under the assumption, since we're on the Obsidian forums, that the thread goers here have more... refined tastes in RPGs. <sigh> Do I need to write this in crayon? I. am. not. saying. that RPG Romances can't be done properly because they haven't been done properly in the past. My argument is that RPG Romances cannot be done properly because it is fundamentally impossible to properly implement RPG romances in video games. There are too many inherent limitations in the medium to allow for it. There are too many budget sacrifices that must be made. The fan base is too diverse. etc. Disagree with this if you want. I am fully aware of my own bias and that not everything I'm saying can be attributed to mathematical fact. But don't friggin put words in my mouth Okay I must apologize. I did think you were saying " Romance cannot be done properly in a RPG and evidence of this is Romance implementations in the past " Strange, I'm not sure why I was seeing that, my bad You are actually saying " Romance cannot be done properly in a RPG as it is not possible to implement them properly" And of course I also disagree with this because of the subjective definition of "properly" All I'll say, which you won't agree with", is that of course Romance can be done properly if you think of past examples like BG2, DA or Planescape? Now take those implementations of Romance and just enhance them based on several suggestions in this thread...and what do you get? Romance options that resonate with most but the most unromantic and emotionally impassive fans of RPG. Its a win win

If I wanted to say that, Bruce, I would have. I didn't though, because it doesn't represent my stance. My stance is that there are *reasons* why no one has ever succeeded in properly implementing romances in video games. And those reasons are fundamental, given the medium. They cannot be fixed. And many of those reasons have already been discussed on this thread. But, I will quickly repeat them now for clarification. 1) Because it is impossible to give the player any agency in a video game romance without turning the process into a standardized, predictable mini-game. (hey look! If choose this dialogue option, I will gain approval points with this person and I'm on my to Romance victory! etc.) Romance shouldn't be a 'game'. 2) Because if you don't give the player Agency, then what you have is a forced situation. And forcing the player into a romance is, by definition, an RPG flaw. 3) Because RPG Romances require either sex, or kissing, or hugging, or pronouncements of love. Problem: In a video game, these things make people cringe. I believe the psychological term is "Uncanny Valley". 4) Because if you don't include sex, or kissing, or hugging, or pronouncements of love, then you don't have a Romance. You have a Friendship. And that's not what Promancers are seeking. 5) Because some gamers are straight. Some are gay. Some are lesbian. Some are bisexual. Some are transsexual. Some are male. Some are female. You must represent them all. If you fail to represent them all, the ones who aren't represented will assume you have taken a social stance against their sexual orientation -Or- that you half-assed the implementation of Romances in the game. Which is another way of saying "your romance implementation is flawed". 6) Because successfully doing #5 necessitates significant developer resources be spent. Invariably, this means budgeting must be significantly lessened elsewhere, like on Character leveling dynamics, or combat system depth, or area design, or actual gameplay content outside of these romances. Ie. Stuff that's far more important in an RPG than friggin romances Its funny because when you read this list a person may think " yeah, its obvious that Romance can never be done in a RPG" ....except for the fact that Bioware does Romance in a way that is more than acceptable for its legions of promancer fans So once again your point is just based on your own view and is not the reality of people who enjoy Romance

So you are being serious? Just want to make sure before your post gets blown out of the water. Please blow away, I am being serious

You're using hyperbole again? The last time I called you out on a quote you did a 180 and turned around and said it was hyperbole. I take it this is just hyperbole as well or are you being serious? Not at all young grasshopper, you are misunderstanding the definition of hyperbole. Hyperbole is exaggeration, so if anything Stun is guilty of hyperbole when he said "There are only a few features that simply cannot be done flawlessly in a fantasy RPG. Romance is one of them" You cannot say that Romance cannot ever be done properly because in your personal view it hasn't been done properly in the past. Once again this is not based any science or facts and is entirely subjective My point was Stun should rather say " I am not happy with any implementation of Romance in the past" as this is a more reasonable and logical view based on his own personal experience. But my comments have nothing to do with hyperbole

No. There are only a few features that simply cannot be done well in a fantasy RPG. Romance is one of them. Unfortunately its this type of intransigence that is unhelpful to this discussion. You cannot say Romance cannot ever be done well in a RPG because of your own view of past implementations of Romance. Its biased and subjective Rather say something like " I am not happy with any implementation of Romance in the past" You can see the difference? I just want to say that this comment seems like something Lephys would write. I don't mean that to be a compliment or an insult. I'm just saying. I am also pretty confident of Stun's response to this. It'll probably go like this: "Name me one example of a romance in a fantasy rpg that wasn't seriously flawed; you can't. If it could be done well; it would already have been. Even if it could be done well; Obsidian wouldn't be the group to figure it out." Am I right Stun? Is that close to your opinion? Yeah you probably right, lets see his response

I enjoyed the Two Worlds RPG, I liked there take on creating your own spells and potions. I thought the spell creation was something unique. I didn't like there laziness in some of there monsters, for example Ostriches and Baboons that automatically attacked you in the African theme continent which was the first one that you appeared on

No. There are only a few features that simply cannot be done well in a fantasy RPG. Romance is one of them. Unfortunately its this type of intransigence that is unhelpful to this discussion. You cannot say Romance cannot ever be done well in a RPG because of your own view of past implementations of Romance. Its biased and subjective Rather say something like " I am not happy with any implementation of Romance in the past" You can see the difference?

I'm waiting till its been officially announced that the separatists did indeed shoot down the plane before I come back on this thread to discuss this further I find it truly frustrating that despite the evidence and the history of how the separatists have conducted themselves in the past there are still people in this discussion who won't admit that the separatists are responsible Also no offence to anyone but none of us are experts in black boxes. But if the Western international community wants the black boxes there must be a valid reason outside what we have guessed or dismissed. This reason is obviously to add to the consensus that the separatists did indeed shoot down the plane

Well that question has been answered, see the comment above from Namutree

This is a good and accurate post highlighting why Romance enhances the RPG experience. Romance adds to the believability of the interaction with party members and makes them appear more human I am surprised no one commented how insightful your comment was, good one

The black boxes were going to be used to present irrefutable evidence that the separatists shot the plane down. This would have then be used to put pressure on Russia to end the conflict. Without Russian support the separatists military capability is severely reduced and the conflict will end sooner one way or another But the interesting new development is the understandable outrage from the plane being shot down may cause the same result and get Russia to act anyway to really try to end the conflict. And trust me, don't underestimate the EU outrage

Good thing he made it nice and clear in the open I'm really surprised you find this grotesque display of Russian influence funny? Its just reinforces the fact how deeply ingrained the Russians are with the separatists and this is not a good thing as it confirms just how complicated the situation is

Even within those limits the outrage is being applied selectively. Many commentators/ politicians are- within the same broadcast/ speech- complaining that the rebels are leaving bodies to rot and moving the bodies too early and destroying evidence, as if it's possible to put a gigantic chiller over a 9km crash site in an active war zone. Plus of course the international experts (not OSCE, who aren't experts) aren't there yet because Kiev is keeping them in Kiev citing safety concerns, so there's simply no choice other than to either leave the bodies to rot or move them- and either option is viewed as an outrage. Can you frame that perspective in a way that can be falsified? For the record my metric is that if Nationalist Ukrainians were nazis then they'd vote for nazis. They overwhelmingly voted against nazis. That's an excellent and valid point and basically is the KO punch in the argument that says " Neo-nazi's are truly ingrained and influential in the new Kiev political structure "

Another interesting question, before I answer do you think any company would make an RPG where the protagonists are all old people? I doubt it, it may sound like ageism but considering the market for games is people who are less than 50 years old most companies wouldn't make a game where they feel there potential market wouldn't identify with the characters So in your example it would be best to not only skip the Romance but also to skip the whole game idea. Its well meaning but I can't see too many people buying in to the idea, but I may be wrong Why would you not be able to identify with old people, just because you are not old? It's probably way easier than to identify with an orc or an elf or some other fantasy race, because its real. Maybe you don't want to identify with someone old, but I don't see why that should be a general thing. Apart from that, I'd play a game like this and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Playing a badass sage with magical powers is probably in my top 10 of means for escapism. I don't claim it isn't a niche, but surely there should be some audience for this. You could even easily construct such a game by extending the gameplay of magicka into a more complex, serious rpg. So I'd still be interested in the answer to my original question - given the game would exist, should there be romance in it? I did mention that in your example around a game that only features old people I don't think it will be that popular from a Romance perspective but I am not going to say it should be left out as some people may want to follow that arc. But I wouldn't

That something it lacks is NOT Romance, however. It was Party member interaction outright. So you're not making any sort of on-topic point here at all. Although I do take issue with the notion that anything in IWD was soulless. IWD is a dungeon crawler, and every feature it had was designed towards that end. Any deviation from that formula would have felt out of place. Just think about it. Your Party enters Kresselack's tomb: Protagonist: Hmm... Nice dungeon Cleric: It's a tomb. I bet there's undead here. Protagonist: You're right. I'll prepare accordingly. Thank you! Cleric: any time <<blushes>>> And don't worry, I won't let anything bad happen to you. Protagonist: I.... I didn't know you cared Cleric: Of course I do! Here look, we're conveniently in front of an ancient but empty coffin... you wanna... Protagonist: I thought you'd never ask ::::fade to black:::: :::vomiting ensues:::: No, Romances wouldn't have worked for Icewind Dale, would they. They would have killed the atmosphere and the entire game would have followed suit. You raise a good point about dialogue like Romance maybe negatively impacting the mood but that's not the issue I have with IWD As a mentioned it was a very good dungeon crawl RPG, I am not saying the game was bad. It was very entertaining, I gave it a much respected 70/100 on the famous "BruceVC gaming rating barometer " But it could have been so much better by enabling proper party interaction which is difficult as you made the whole party from the start, there weren't any pre-set NPC's I missed the fact I didn't get to know anything about my party, where they came from and what motivated them? What were there views on developments on the journey and what did they want from life. And yes it have been great to develop Romance All these types of party interaction could be implemented without impacting the mood. They could be done when you visit towns or in certain places in a dungeon? So I don't see this as a negative in a game like IWD, it would only improve it

Every game has that, it's called Cheat Engine. My favourite way of re-playing a game is with a pimped out cheat character, I wan't to see how much I can break the game. Really, you consider that a cheat option? I just see Very Easy as a way for someone to be entertained in a particular game without too much challenge, I have only ever used Easy mode rarely but when fighting certain end bosses