jarpie

I quite clearly remember the Handmaiden stripping down to her frilly lace underpants and using the usual "clothing is a cultural construct" excuse. Have you ever seen african or south-american tribes?

You are missing the point. RPGs are not only about a story, they are also about role-playing, that is about doing what you want to do, behaving the way you want to behave, having priorities you have chosen to have. More like you don't understand that it's a designer to decide what options to role-play you get because a game will obviously have limitations since it has to be finished and then released. And since games are always limited obvious that some content will get in and some other won't. Now,how do we decide wich gets in and wich doesn't? Player demand for fanservice or artistic considerations? It really isn't so hard to understand. Also lol,to quote myself(and from this same page too!!!): The point you were trying to bring up has already been criticized several times in this and others threads,yet you brought it up regardless without bothering to bring up additional arguments to support your stance. Nice try but, again,you'll have to wait to try again.Maybe 5-6 pages should do it. Has anyone here ever worked on an elaborate, narrative-driven RPG? The notion that romances absorb excessive time and effort from the developers is speculative at best. If it takes Avellone to write one companion two-three months at least, I'd say it's pretty damn excessive time and effort. Have YOU ever worked on writing elaborate, narrative-driven RPG?

Indeed, I'm fine with chainmail bikinis for the ladies, if you have equal parts chainmail mankinis for the gents. Is Obsidian known for writing unrealistic female characters and making sexist characters? You could read my posts: and Jumping to conclusions is never a good thing, jarpie. I was just responding to Gyor's comment on Austin Powers in a bikini. Ah my bad... and by the way it's Joukahainen if you took your name from Kalevala.

I love the Gold Box engine and most of SSI's cRPG's! Wizard's Crown is a favorite of mine. I usually list either Pool of Radiance or Pools of Darkness (to represent the entire series) as one of my favorite cRPG's, if not games, of all time. They had a plot in the background, and some of the later entries (specifically thinking of the Savage Frontiers duo) made strides to incorporating story into the gameplay... but the Gold Box games were tactical turn-based combat first, second and third... with the background story adding color to the combats you were having. I'm not knocking them... without that story I'd probably not have replayed the games so many times. A less story-focused game, like Phantasie or Bard's Tale, it is harder to motivate me through the endless random encounters. So SSI does shine a bit brighter than others at it's time. But you can't compare integrated story of Baldur's Gate or PS:T to what counted as "story" back in the Gold Box era. I mean, it took Wasteland to finally REALLY show what story in a cRPG could be. You conviniently ignored Ultima-games, tell me, has any game really tackled on subjects such as becoming paragon of virtue, moral absolutism, corruption of men, racist prejudice and peaceful co-existance since then? Tell me also any another crpg which does not have big bad or main antagonist other than Ultima 4? And what else Ultima-games doesnt have...oh yeah, romances with your companions.

Indeed, I'm fine with chainmail bikinis for the ladies, if you have equal parts chainmail mankinis for the gents. Is Obsidian known for writing unrealistic female characters and making sexist characters?

You are missing the point. RPGs are not only about a story, they are also about role-playing, that is about doing what you want to do, behaving the way you want to behave, having priorities you have chosen to have. If you truly want to roleplay, you should check out RP servers from MMOs or especially from NWN 1 or NWN 2.

Samwise and Frodo at least... I kid, I kid... You kid? You mean it's not an epic saga of two men's love for one another transcending the world they live in and sailing off into the sunset together? They are totally bros of bros! brothers in arms and all. :D

Oh I understand, I just kind of worried the discussion is getting a bit heated and trying to be fair to all sides. Actually there were several good pages in the back of the last thread where some good discussions were going on I thought and too often I think we all get caught up in storming the hill and start going off on the other poster and not just what they're saying. Or something. And to be fair (again, because I can't help myself) one person's reason may not meet the justification threshold of another. That said I haven't seen a sign of the anti-crown being disrespected; I know Monte Carlo got some posts cut but not having seen the content I certainly can't speak to the justification of such actions. What about this: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61676-the-unofficial-pe-relationshipromance-thread/page__st__100?do=findComment&comment=1248851

It's well regarded now?! No, not really

From literary critic Edmund Wilson's review printed in The Nation in 1956. Point is, not everyone thinks Tolkien is "good writing". Just like not everyone thinks video game romance is good writing (to try vainly to approach the topic of the thread). Correct me if I'm wrong but I dont think higher fantasy was exactly very high regarded back in the 1950s.

Is there any way to check if I'm being ignored by someone?

Okay, I can agree with most of that. With at least the minor caveat that most games allow you to easily skip dialog and cut scenes to get right back to fighting. I don't think a "skip combat" button would be bad in certain games (wouldn't many here want a "skip romance" button?) but it would have to be a feature that takes into consideration many factors, and for some games it would be more hassle than it's worth. Let me give you a good example of this, however - Medieval Total War. A combo turn-based and real-time strategy game series. Those games you can choose to just play the big strategy and not the battle tactics. Every time a combat happens you can let the computer resolve it by the click of a button. Another example, part way at least. Dawn of War: Dark Crusade and Dawn of War: Soulstorm. They are RTS's. When enemies attack your territories you control you can have the computer auto-resolve the battle. Now those aren't cRPG's, yes, but the concept can be the same. In reaching a broader audience (and a different section than what overlaps the FPS crowd) role-playing games have attracted players who are more interested in story and dialog than in fighting. You have to acknowledge it, even if you won't "accept" it (though you should accept it.) And with that crowd come people who want the interactive story and the creation of their character but NOT the endless waves of combat encounters. It's a valid viewpoint. A bit different than traditional, perhaps... but game genres evolve over time. cRPG's used to be text-based, build your entire party, dungeon crawls. There didn't used to be recruitable companions, and story didn't use to be a focus. Choice depended on what classes, spells and weapons you chose and that was it. And combat was turn-based. There was resistance to the inclusion of pre-made characters. There was resistance to story-focus, dialog options, and choices in the game for different results. You got real time (with pause option) combat. But most people here love IE games. And almost all those changes are key to IE games. But there are still people who'd prefer turn-based. Dungeon crawling. Making your own party. Less story and more combat and dungeon crawling. And now there are cRPG players who want LESS combat and MORE story. Different strokes. There always have been cRPGs which are story-based and with recruitable companions, such as Ultimas 4-7 and for example also Ambermoon and Amberstar had recruitable companions. Did you ever play Goldbox-games? They were also pretty storydriven so it's not just something what Fallout and IE-games brought.

I don't even understand why there is even discussion like this in Obsidian's forum, are they known for writing poorly done female characters? No, didn't think so. Also, this game is isometric so it's not like we would even see details of the characters.

As I have said before I wouldn't have problem with romances done like in previous Obsidian games or PS:T, I'd prefer game not to have romances at all but if Obsidian decides to put some in, I trust them to do them well and not the Bioware-style, but my problem is with the people who demands/wants romances in even if they wouldn't fit the story and/or characters. Adding romances in game just for the sake of it shouldn't be done, as with anything. As I said in the previous topic there are lot of examples in fiction (yes, even with games) what doesnt have romances at all, and asked why this game specifically should have romances if Obsidian decides to write a game which wouldn't support it well. I wouldn't want romances in because it tends to bring that certain type of people into the forums and start demanding that all companions should be romanceable, and every possible gender-combination put in, and certain style of romances.

You are making things uglier than they are. Writing and text implementation are some of the least time consuming tasks that you have to perform to develop a game. As long as you don't have to do full voice overs and cutscenes adding a romance plot (which doesn't even require specific dungeons or locations like a normal quest) is a piece of cake. Feargus said that it takes Avellone to write a single companion 2-3 months, and since there are 8 companions, and Ziest will probably half of them, it takes them 8-12 months to write them, not to mention the rest of the dialogue which isn't for companions, lore, the story, descriptions etc. and how that exactly wouldn't take lot of time?

There are pretty much no novels about evil characters. Why then giving the player the chance to perform an evil playthourgh has become one of the core features of nowadays RPGs? There's no serious fantasy novel which has a love story as its main focus. But novels don't need to be about love to have a romantic subplot inside them. Project eternity doesn't need to focus on love, but it would be great if allowed the player to live a love story (if he wanted to obviously, I'm all for player freedom). What about A Song of Ice and Fire? Those have lot of evil characters. There are pretty much no novels about evil characters. Why then giving the player the chance to perform an evil playthourgh has become one of the core features of nowadays RPGs? There's no serious fantasy novel which has a love story as its main focus. But novels don't need to be about love to have a romantic subplot inside them. Project eternity doesn't need to focus on love, but it would be great if allowed the player to live a love story (if he wanted to obviously, I'm all for player freedom). Let me quote you: "And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too." So now you're saying there are no fantasy books with romance in major part?

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.

Bravo, great posting.

I actually have roleplayed in NWN server for 3-4 years and it was helluva lot of fun coming up different kind of characters with different kind of personalities and backgrounds. It's a whole different experience than playing a set character written by a professional writer but not superior per se.

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. If you truly want to roleplay a role, you should look into RP servers in MMOs or for example, in Neverwinter Nights which has lot of such a servers where you can actually roleplay the character you want and have created. The main character in singleplayer games is still character created by the writers and not a character you have created. If writer doesn't want it to have romances, there the game wont have them.

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? Very few (no one) is saying that this game -has- to have romances to be good. They are saying stop going, 'It must not have romances to be good'. So to reiterate, we (meaning the people of similar opinion to me, which isn't necessarily everyone but quite a few if not most of the people who enjoy romance options) are saying stop stonewalling it and leave it for the developers to decide. If they have well written, homosexual romances only, great! If they focus on an epic bromance instead, great! If they make me have sex with a dragonand produce half dragon, half man, half awesome hybrids, great! But stop saying they have to not have it. I think I've been pretty open that I don't think they have to have it, and I really mean it, but I think they should use their judgement. (And if I've said otherwise it's likely been me responding to just as extreme comments with the opposite opinion, which I apologize for). Why people keep bringing it up then and opening topics with "Plz include romances!", and not leave the topic alone? CrazyPea's first posting to this thread was clearly written with the mindset that Project Eternity has romances by-default even though devs haven't said will it or wont it.

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?

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?

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.

You are mixing issues. No one is arguing for or against character recruitment and the analogy you make is deeply flawed. 1) My argument is such: Games with romancable NPCs typically must have more than one romancable npcs to react to player sex choice and sexual reference choice (the one exception to this is games where they make the PC for you - like Torment). This leads to a significant perspective shift into how the player then views the party. The player soon makes a mental note of npcs as "sexable" and "nonsexable." This has little to do with people crying over why you couldn't recruit Drizzt. 2) If anything, NPC availability is reflective of developer intent to accomodate PC creation. In other words, devs tend to make enough npcs of varying classes to accomodate player's of any class. If romances are included, then the same philosophy leads to the issue described above. Umm, I don't quite know what you are saying there. But, Cain said thats how he wants low int to work EXTENSIVELY so... Give me a real argument and I might. Actually, no. Building friendships and rivalries is NOT the same as trying to find your next hot date. One could argue that one would NEED to build trust between party members to triumph. One cannot argue that you must attempt to bed every female in your party in order to defeat the dragon in the next room. You say I'm mixing issues, I'm not. You just can't understand what I'm trying to say, I'll put it in much -simpler- terms for you: The playerbase who enjoys Cowtipping and at least wants it as a potential option to pursue is large enough that it is a worthwhile time and monetary investment. Saying, 'you can't the absolute perfect cow for everyone' is not a valid reason to not have Cowtipping. Here's an anology for you, I'll reiterate this, it's like saying that companions shouldn't be in the game because not everyone is going to enjoy the companions that are in there. I'm doing what's called, 'drawing a parellel' in this example. You also, again, clearly don't understand the friendship example. The point I was making, was again, that everyone may not like the Cowtipping presented to them, that doesn't all of a sudden mean you cut out the feature. It's unfortunate that I have to be so redundant but you are doing the exact same thing.. so there you go. With same arguments one could easily claim that they should add Cowtipping to the game. Like I said earlier, not every fiction has to have romances. No, not really. cow tipping isn't something that can be used to complement or develop a compelling story (if you disagree, please site me this mighty novel or game that has a focus on cow tipping). Not every fiction has to have romance, but that doesn't mean that there's a reason to explcitely leave it out, either. If you want to disagree with that, then expect me to try and gather counter points to refute it. This isn't a, 'you get to say what you want that's anti-romance while I sit here quietly thread'. It's meant to be, at least in part a debate of the value and the potential incorperation of romance. What about..necrophilia then? Apparently Wikipedia has a list ready: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necrophilia_in_popular_culture and we can use exactly the same arguments you have. At least what gets me and probably some others up in arms is that some of the "pro-romance" crowd thinks that romances should be in every RPG by-default which is probably because they do not have imagination to imagine game without one, as they are so used to having romances. You can't deny the fact that if Obsidian would come out and say, yes there will be romances, there would be that certain obsessive crowd swallowing the forum with demands that every possible gender combination should presented, oh and every possible race.