Longknife

This argument works both ways. A heterosexual person can't relate to homosexual notions of love? What are we, a seperate species?

Obsidian is one of those studios.

I just want dead-is-dead to be a realistic playstyle without it being the most frustrating **** ever. New Vegas was fine for this, imo. It was overall easy, but had areas of spike difficulty that kept you on your feet. Personally I get pretty sick of the types of games that give you JUST enough to survive, because usually it makes the first playthrough frustrating, then later you master it and there's just no way you'll die. Plus in my experience, some games that give you "just enough" can actually be somewhat limiting to playstyle choice.

No need to be such a downer, brah. Your character needs to smoke a blunt, for real.

Agree. No sex. No politics. No religion. Come to think of it, no choice in any respect what so ever would be best. I vote Butterfly-simulator! But religion, politics and sex would be pivotal within the game's setting. A character's sexual preferences, however, would not be. Unless the game actively tries to make the concept of different sexualities a pivotal theme throughout the game; which in all honesty would be very odd. No one's saying we should promote any political agendas nor shun them. But the simple fact of the matter is.... Every single one of us lives in a town. Every single one of us has homosexual members in our community. To not include them is quite unrealistic and comes off as hateful. However, to include them and to make their sexuality the central theme of their character is also quite insulting, not to mention potentially annoying for both those who don't give a crap about what a person's sexuality is and for homophobes. A little off-topic, but Morgan Freeman once did an interview about racial discrimination where he said the best way to handle it was to "stop talking about it." I agree with this completely; doubt it ever happens in the US at least (that's 200 year old racism, sadly...), but I think he's right. Sometimes calling attention to something just makes it more heated, because it provokes those that disagree with you and reminds them they disagree with you and that you're different. If you just let it be and live alongside each other, then after a couple years, maybe homophobes realize "wow I've lived next to John for 10 years now and he still hasn't spontaneously sucked my ****, maybe I was wrong. Maybe he's normal just like me." OP mentioned New Vegas, and New Vegas did it right. Have them in game, but don't make a big deal out of it. I don't see how anyone can disagree with this method.

I'mma laugh if when the game's released we see NPCs like Bill Gates and Mitt Romney in game. Gee wonder who the top donors were...

What New Vegas did right with the presentation of gays and lesbians was.....they barely presented them. And I don't mean they weren't there, I just mean Arcade wasn't flaming ****ing gay with a massive lisp as he skipped around talking about shoes. Nor was Veronica a horny nymphomaniac or a butch lesbian with a shaved head and hella muscles. Gay men and lesbians in New Vegas would just say "uhhh btw I'm gay" when you happened to hit on them in conversation, or they'd only reveal this if you had certain perks to make your character homosexual. They weren't defining characteristics, just a sexual orientation that said "hey look, we exist too" and nothing more. Subtlety like this seems to be much appreciated by the LGBT community. Continue the trend, I say.

You right. You are a bigot and you have a derogatory view on gay relationships, how did you word it .."yuck". Tell me something, what would people think if you said " I hope this game doesn't have African American people in it, its so controversial" ? Discrimination is discrimination, and you can try to say its your opinion as if it that makes it right but it doesn't. It's a fantasy game, African Americans are the last thing I would expect. Humans? SPOILER ALERT: Africans are a type of human.

Silvio Berlusconi as a playable character

Dear Jira, Here is a valuable argument: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpdzdhm9ZUk Kind regards, Longknife

I don't see much of a difference if I'm honest. The PC or NPCs, none of them are you. They're all characters you have a hand in guiding their fate to some degree. Although, the idea that one character (the PC) would have such an arbitrary influence over their friends/companions' love life I would find a bit odd. Sure you ask your friends for advice but you make up your own mind. Likewise, I would expect an NPC to maybe talk to the PC about it, producing new story and interaction. But then giving the PC the deciding vote? Way too gamey. Hey don't ask me, I don't want it in at all.

I still say that if ANYTHING, we should compromise this and make it romance amongst our potential companions that you can influence, NOT between the player and NPCs.

I understand what you are saying and I can see why it makes sense from your perspective. But the fundamental question is "why would a person want sex in an RPG ". This will differ from person to person. For me I am lover of the immersion of RPG. I can spend up to 100 hours playing an RPG. You form an virtual empathetic bond with your character in the game if its good. As someone who use to Dungeon Master in the original D&D pen and paper game I know how seriously people take there characters. We know its not real but its still important that you can define there actions, how they look and what the game allows them to do. So its perfectly logical that you would want your character to have sex with other characters. It adds to the overall experience of immersion. Many fantasy sagas, like the original Conan books, sex was ubiquitous. I love the Conan world so part of me wants to act like him when I play a game that represents his universe Finally you can't use the argument "Sex in the game can't be something that actually appeals to people, its just a pixel resolution with a few programmed responses". I could easily make a counter- aargument " why play a game with magic, monsters and strange quests. Its not even real. What possible reason would you enjoy such nonsense" Of course my last point doesn't apply as people play RPG for a variety of known and personal reasons. And most of us love them as our favorite gaming genres Yes, but we agree on sex. Where people in this thread disagree is on love and romance. And you're talking about your OWN character, not others. I know you can get attached to a character. My avatar is the Courier for a reason. I have this very basic habit of, every RPG I play, I end up trying to make the canon character first thing using subtle hints and implications of the story to make the character. For example with New Vegas I made a Courier that was hella durable and lucky because wtf he's alive somehow, while also being mildly agile and charismatic, because New Vegas has a strong cowboy theme (agility) and the Courier essentially acts as a representative of his faction (which would require decent charisma). Meanwhile I left other stats low, including things like perception because the Courier gets jumped or is unknowingly watched multiple times in his travels. I became very attached to the Courier as a character, simply because what started as a basic concept turned into a very VERY well fleshed out character that was a tough-as-nails, smooth-talking badass who was nearly impossible to kill. The Courier went down as my first canon Dead-is-dead character to not die and I loved every moment of his playthrough. Through that playthrough, did I bang every woman possible? Absolutely. It fit his character type. The canon Courier was a smooth talker; both some of his hilarious dialog options and some of Cass' remarks about "his type" confirmed that for me, so I played the part. But this is basic sex and flirting. Basic sex and flirting can be fun, and you don't need to be attracted to someone to understand the appeal of sex and flirting. FFS you can watch two people having sex or flirting well (as in both are witty) and actually enjoy it. I can roleplay this BECAUSE it's somehow funny to see the Courier and Sarah Weintraub use sexual innuendo in conversation about leather suits. But watching two people be romantic with one another? Watching them feel madly in love with each other, staring longingly into each other's eyes? Very boring, and sometimes downright annoying. And this is exactly how I feel. I don't enjoy roleplaying romance. Sex or flirting? As long as it's not constant, in-your-face and overboard, fine, but don't try to make me have an attachment to another character please....

Futurama says otherwise http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtqGTn7PCBw

Perhaps another compromise both sides might enjoy.... Oftentimes with TV shows etc., people typically enjoy seeing a guy "get the girl" and be matched up, in the belief that they were meant to be or would be good together, and just need to figure it out or work up the courage to talk to each other about it. I don't think anyone would mind if there was romance among COMPANIONS that you could influence and encourage. My complaints are that I feel hella dumb telling an AI package I love her too when I know she's AI and I know she's straight-up programmed to like me at all times. But a romance story among companions could potentially appeal to both sides of this argument, since the romance camp gets their romance and the non-romance camp doesn't have to actively participate in it.

And what do you have to say about other aspects of a game? Can you enjoy anything that is scripted and AI driven? Why game at all? I'm sorry, but this argument can be taken to any aspect of a game, plot, fight, writing... so why gaming altogether instead of having a real life? I thought it was self-explanatory. Perhaps not actually explained, but simply felt. I know love, and I don't feel it when playing video games. Ever. But a sense of accomplishment for winning a competition or defeating an opponent? Pride in myself for figuring out a puzzle or other intellectual problem, or coming up with an effective strategy to handle a problem I've been faced with? Yes, that a video game CAN provide. Maybe in the game I'm managing my party to defeat a goblin army whereas in real life I'm simply working as a manager at a store, but the same sense of pride exists when I manage to defeat the goblin army or raise our overall profit. But love CANNOT be simulated.

Link ? So far I have this: http://forums.obsidi..._120__p__725311 Not entirely what I had in mind but still informative. I very much like his statement here, which also sums up why I dislike Bioware's approach while still hoping for something better: http://forums.obsidi...120#entry725311 He's exactly right. They're "romance victories." Love isn't about "victory," it's about....well love. It's about being with someone you love being with, but video games do nothing but reduce them to petty achievements to unlock. It's not the fault of the video game, but rather it's literally impossible for the video game to actually simulate love. So again, if we can't do it right, let's not do it at all. Basic perversion? Things like sex and prostitutes? Playful flirting with an NPC? I suppose if people still want those, that's an argument to have, as sex is a more basic, carnal desire and flirting can be as fun and funny as it is romantic, but please no attempts at serious love.

Ask yourselves this: What is romance? Romance is when two people hit it off. They find each other attractive: physically, mentally, personality-wise etc. They find each other SO attractive that they decide they want to spend all of their time together and enjoy other perks of a relationship (buttsex). You can't stand to be without this person, and you'd likely be willing to throw down your own life if it meant saving theirs. That's romance. Can an AI find you physically attractive? No Can an AI find you mentally attractive? I guess TECHNICALLY yes, but it's a very basic attraction, much like some shallow people might find rich people attractive Can an AI find your personality attractive? No, because you cannot properly express yourself through RPG options. Can you find an AI physically attractive? Uuhhh...I suppose? I mean I guess even drawings can be appealing, but still that's very basic.... Can you find an AI mentally attractive? No, absolutely not. Can you find an AI's personality attractive? Not really. If you can there's something friggin' wrong with you. You can like them, their character and their story, but their personality does NOT expand beyond that. They're more an idea rather than an actual personality. Will the AI want to spend all of it's time with you? It doesn't have a choice. Will YOU want to spend all of your time with it? I certainly ****ing hope not. If yes, see a therapist. So why bother? Why pretend? Why implement romance if doing it properly is impossible? Either do it right or don't do it at all. Sex? That wouldn't hurt I suppose. I mean again, in my opinion, a "relationship" you guys are talking about is literally just your "lover's" backstory + sex after you tell her how amazing and right about everything she is. Backstory is fine, and you know what, I guess fap material is fine too. But please, don't try and mix them and present them as a relationship, cause I find that hella awkward, personally. Prostitutes or maybe ONE flirty companion who never moves past flirting with you or drunken romps, fine. But every female companion wanting to get with you? Please god no...

I think that's part of the problem. "Relationships" are really nothing more than you learning about the character. You're not hitting it off, you're not bonding, you don't even find each other physically attractive. You're just hearing her backstory, then comes fapping material. The fap material is unneccesary and is a cheap way to add to the experience. I mean let's get real: I learned Boone's backstory too, doesn't mean I should (nor want to) **** him. Maybe some people like the extra flirting etc, but let's be honest: that's cheap. That's a very low form of entertainment. If you want that kind of stuff, seriously just go online and search....well literally anything. We who oppose romance aren't saying we don't want character depth and backstory etc, we're just saying that the sex afterwards is meaningless and stupid, because it's NOT actually sex or a confirmed relationship, thus it's a very empty, forced and fake accomplishment. I can feel accomplished for helping Boone come to terms with his past WITHOUT ****ing him; that part of the equation is unneccesary. Also, yes. Anyone have it? I DO know it's out there, but they're justified in asking for it and it would help make a point, but I can't seem to find it.

Thats a important point. Do you have some kind of interview about this topic? This not that i dont trust you, but i do like read it by my own, just to be sure If the game designers dont like to add romances to their game, i dont want to force them. Maybe the can do it for the fans, but if they dont like it, it dont become the quality it has to have to convince the critics kind regards, Jira Don't have it on me, but you'll find it here in the forums. Sawyer regularly states this here and on his formspring, think someone else posted a link to an old article or link to a post by Avellone saying he hates doing it too. I just remember seeing them, but not where. Given that they were here though, I'm sure someone will see this convo of ours, remember where they are and pull them up.

Because for some of us it's the exact opposite. I for one have trouble expressing or experiencing or pretending such strong emotions in an RPG. It feels like it cheapens a very real and very strong emotion; I don't think it's something that can be properly simulated, at least for me. Thus, when games DO try it, it comes off as cringe-worthy for me, because I can't help but feel like the game wants me to feel emotional in some way (whether horny or attached to the character), but I just DON'T. Then I have my character claiming he is, and it just feels so fake and I feel out of place and it breaks my immersion. Or if a game offers it truly as an option, sadly, in my experience, it's typically beneficial to take the option, or at least gives that impression. So you end up with some elf hitting on you hardcore, and you feel obligated to flirt back, or like you're supposed to and the game expects this from you and will reward you for playing along. If it were to be in game, it should truly be an option with no benefit or downside, or equal benefits and downsides at the very least. But something else we should keep in mind is that neither Sawyer nor Avellone seem wild about this feature, so maybe it wouldn't be wise to force them to spend time and resources on it instead of letting them do something they wanna do.

Just wanted to jump in.... Not disagreeing with you, but when we're talking about main themes of the game, like the "moral" of the game that defines much of the story, I think it's good they have a stance with it, no? What I mean is, IF mercy were a main theme and a main topic of the game, I wouldn't want the game to simply say "sometimes mercy is good, sometimes mercy is bad!" No ****, game? Gee thanks. Instead, I'd rather see the game take a stance on the matter, perhaps dare to say that showing mercy is stupid, or that one should always show mercy no matter the cost. OR do a mix of them where 99% of the time, mercy gets you and your party in trouble, perhaps to the point where a party member is willing to ditch you for being repeatedly stupid about this, BUT you are also solely responsible for converting a man to "the good side" who later goes on to help many people. When the game takes a stance on such issues, it's thought provoking whether we agree or disagree. If it said "mercy will get you killed" then that's a very pragmatic view with truths to it that'll ultimately spark debate and thought amongst those who disagree. If it does a mix like what I mentioned above, then it's also thought-provoking and raises the question of "was it worth it" instead. I'd just rather not see them going out of their way to accomidate both sides of each issue equally. Treating both sides of an issue equally just feels incredibly disingenuous.

There's also a failure to see that abortion as a political hot topic isn't because the debate itself is deep and intriguing, but because it's a cheap shot for a bad politician. It gives them a way to say "Now my foreign policy may suck in every way imaginable when compared to my opponent and he probably is 100% superior to me in that regard, and no I don't have any good justification for my moronic plan, BUT MY OPPONENT THINKS THIS ABOUT ABORTION!!!" Bam, just like that you've swayed a decent % of people to vote for you despite obvious shortcomings, simply because abortion is something enough people are passionate enough about that they're willing to base their entire (or at least a large portion of) vote on it. It's not because the topic is actually interesting or super relevant, it's because it's polarizing and it rakes in easy votes. For a video game to do this? That's just asking for Project Eternity to polarize half their audience... These are good ideas, imo. The second one depends heavily on delivery (could be horrible if done wrong) and of course they all depend heavily on delivery, but they provide interesting directions nonetheless. Admittedly though I think I'm coming up with drastically different thoughts from them though. I try to look at things and analyze their basic theme personally though, and while I think I may have different ideas, I think the underlying theme between your ideas and the ideas I get from reading your post, are more or less similar. The first for example, to me, could be more of a general question of love. What does it mean to be a family, what does it mean to care for a family (responsibility of a family), where's the line between family and "family," (one that's blood-related but cares for you poorly, as a generic example) etc etc. The third seems to be about challenging societies notions of right and wrong (using a cultural custom of honorable ransom to deceive and kill an enemy, thus securing an escape and safety for your party), OR justifying them, acknowledging the wisdom in them and respecting their "authority." (showing how a lack of such social norms can lead to chaos and violence, sorta like how Lonesome Road briefly touched on the importance and meaning of "kill no courier") All of those seem interesting to me, regardless of which way you choose to look at them.

WTF no. Can we get real here people? This is a midevil fantasy setting, abortion is nothing but a moral stance and a political hotpoint and I don't really see how it could POSSIBLY belong in such a setting. Either you DO think abortion is wrong or you don't, there's nothing to debate about it. And yknow what, I bet one day we have the technology to determine just how painful abortion is for a fetus or the likelihood that a parent that doesn't even want a child for various reasons (financial, emotional, personal) won't be able to provide a good childhood for said kid in question and then this issue will die out. I doubt it's ever happened that two people have debated the abortion issue and one of them ended up saying "you were right, I was wrong." Controversial =/= mature theme. Mature theme means there's a lot of deep discussion and debate to be had about the topic at hand that could be educational, thought-provoking or change/challenge your very outlook on life. For example New Vegas had a lot to do with philosophy and human nature. This thread seems to think controversial = mature theme, and no that's not the case. I fail to see how abortion would be an interesting theme for an RPG, nor can I see how rape, incest, torture or child abuse would be good themes either. OP had good ideas, save maybe the last one (would like to hear his explanation of how the hell it's a mature theme before disagreeing), but this thread is starting to fill up with ideas that are downright horrible.

Necrophilia