jarpie

That's what we've been trying to sledge in for those who demands romances - they take resources and time from writing other stuff for companions, like non-romance dialogue and background.

I don't get why every RPG should have romances? Not every film, book or tv-show has them so why should rpgs?

Like in the original BG & P:T? Thats the best way me thinks. Dont wanna burst your bubble, but romances or "adult romantic interations" as i think it was put in the interview are confirmed to be in the game. Also, you underestimate what a romance between characters can do from a storytelling perspective, Dialogue & Inner party "banter" was what made "old-school" RPGs for me. Thats Why BG & FO are my favorite RPGs of all time. But since i have strong feeling that post was kinda troll. lol They were? Care to provide me link to the said interview?

Spot on! *brofist*

I wouldn't call BG2 romances well done but I could live with maybe one romance like in PS:T . And for all those who brings up Alpha Protocol, it's basicly pastiche/homage/spoof on spy-genre and especially James Bond, and imo doesn't compare to the fantasy RPG. It's funny how people probably assumed we didn't agree with our discussion but in the end you living with one romance like PS:T puts us in 100% agreement, and basically that's all I'm asking for as well. I really should learn to sleep better but ever since switching to these 12 hour shifts, it's just killer on my sleeping habits. I didn't like Alpha Protocol one bit... I tried to like it I really did. So I have no idea how the romances/bromances were incorporated into that game. "Romances" in Alpha Protocol were basicly done like in James Bond films, so it's not at all suitable for comparison as some people have brought it up as a game which had romances.

I wouldn't call BG2 romances well done but I could live with maybe one romance like in PS:T . And for all those who brings up Alpha Protocol, it's basicly pastiche/homage/spoof on spy-genre and especially James Bond, and imo doesn't compare to the fantasy RPG.

I dare you to ask from any war veterans if they felt any emotions for their comrades and was it deep as the feelings for their wives/girlfriends/etc.

Because Sawyer agrees as do I with this. Sawyer pretty much stated that he won't add romance unless it's done exceptionally well. So basically... What are you even saying? Romances should take foreseat ahead of "Brothers in Arms"-type of thing because Sawyer says that romances shouldn't be done unless they can be done well? What that has to do anything with Romances vs. Brothers in Arms? I ask again: Why should romances take foreseat ahead of the "Brothers in Arms"-relationships if both can be done well? What makes romanes so goddamn much more important than anything else?

Since you all pro-romance people ignored my question, I'll repost it: I have to ask a question that why romance-relationship would be deeper than what I suggested: A "Brothers in Arms" of type camaraderie without romances? What makes romances more deeper than relationship like that? I've never seen a game where that is really done well, in basicly almost all of the RPGs I've played companions are basicly your lackies, not your equal (or close to that). So why should romances get foreseat instead of that kind of friendship, since it's also almost never done well?

I have to ask a question that why romance-relationship would be deeper than what I suggested: A "Brothers in Arms" of type camaraderie without romances? What makes romances more deeper than relationship like that? I've never seen a game where that is really done well, in basicly almost all of the RPGs I've played companions are basicly your lackies, not your equal (or close to that). So why should romances get foreseat instead of that kind of friendship, since it's also almost never done well?

With such attitude, dear friend, I recommend you to logout from this forum and delete your account. After all, it's their game, and you shouldn't discuss it. Regarding topic. I want romances. But I'm against 'DA' style romances. All NPCs should have prereqs to be romanceable! And they should be hard as stone. No more 'I will love you no matter if you are male or female or elf of dwarf'. I didn't say we shouldn't discuss the game and give ideas but I've seen so many messages in these forums where people are basicly demanding that devs do what they want. By large fans don't know what they want and if they give to everyone's demands the game will be a mess. We can give them ideas, our opionions and feedback, but that should be it. The devs knows much better than any of the fans what the game needs and how it should be done. I don't know why this is so complicated to understand? People generally ask for 2 types of relationships ,straight and gay. Please explain all these other types of relationship combinations I am unaware of that people are demanding. Let's see... straight romances male -> female, female -> male, gay romances male -> male and female -> female so that's four companions out of the eight unless you want two companions both bi-sexual but then people would complain and demand that they want unique romances for all of those possibilities. Okay I see where you get your number from, I agree. We should have ( the first part is always the main character) 2 x Straight relationships: Male - Female and Female - Male 2 x Gay relationships : Male-Male and Female-Female Thats not too hard to implement I hope ? Other games have done it successfully And which games exactly?

With such attitude, dear friend, I recommend you to logout from this forum and delete your account. After all, it's their game, and you shouldn't discuss it. Regarding topic. I want romances. But I'm against 'DA' style romances. All NPCs should have prereqs to be romanceable! And they should be hard as stone. No more 'I will love you no matter if you are male or female or elf of dwarf'. I didn't say we shouldn't discuss the game and give ideas but I've seen so many messages in these forums where people are basicly demanding that devs do what they want. By large fans don't know what they want and if they give to everyone's demands the game will be a mess. We can give them ideas, our opionions and feedback, but that should be it. The devs knows much better than any of the fans what the game needs and how it should be done. I don't know why this is so complicated to understand? People generally ask for 2 types of relationships ,straight and gay. Please explain all these other types of relationship combinations I am unaware of that people are demanding. Let's see... straight romances male -> female, female -> male, gay romances male -> male and female -> female so that's four companions out of the eight unless you want two companions both bi-sexual but then people would complain and demand that they want unique romances for all of those possibilities.

This is exactly what I meant with wasting resources, if they say "Yes, there will be romances" then there's gonna be people demanding romances for every possible combination and it takes away the time from writing other content for the said companions. The devs said that there will be mature relationships in the game and that doesn't necessarely (and probably not) mean romances and sex, but instead of somekind of friendships and adversaries. I actually would like to get friendly-relationships into the game, but I wouldn't want them to be solving "daddy" or other personal issues of the companions, those are so overly done and so tedious, instead I'd love to have greatly written "Brothers in Arms"-type of relationships instead of the before mentioned melodramatic "Oh woe is me" stuff. But all that said, this is THEIR game so we should NOT make demands and argue them endlessly with the same exact arguments which we've seen so many times before. I have enough trust in Avellone, Ziets and other writing team to write this game as they want.

This is what I wrote in earlier topic, as I am lazy I'm just gonna copypaste it: As I said before: "Like Monte Carlo said, the problem with romances is that writing a single NPC Companion takes couple months, and if you do one romance (for example if you play male-character and have romanceable female companion), then people would demand romances for female -> male, male -> male, female -> female and that's basicly six months of writing and takes basicly four companions, and even if you dont romance the said characters their interactions/dialogue/etc will be limited because writing time and resources were spend on writing romances of what only a portion would play. The budget for this game will be limited already so Obsidian has to look and think where they put it and get as much as possible out of it. IMHO it's better to concentrate on maybe on a bit fewer things than to spread too thin." So in short; if say like they have certain amount of time and words per companion set, they would be wasting probably half if not more of those words for romance which less players would actually play, instead of having all the resourced words and time for non-romantic relationship. We're not talking just about one companion but four out of seven. All players could enjoy the friendship-like content but romance-content could be enjoyed only those who likes them and IMHO it would waste of already limited resources.

Obsidian now has the chance to deconstruct the tropes and conventions of CRPGs and do something new which is rooted into the traditional rpgs (IE in this case). I would applaud the goal oriented XP and it would actually make all the possible ways to solve quests and goals equal instead of "I'm gonna just kill 'em all because I get the most exp out of that".

I just love the exp and stamina & health systems. It's about time someone makes something different than "your garden variety" exp system where you can just go out and grind the exp, also this actually can make all possible solutions equal in terms of getting exp...no more sneaking around completing the goal and then killing everyone.

Grimdark has very much tendency for being ridiculous, game can be darker without being stupidly melodramatic or over the top. Bleak and dark games has been overly done to the death, I'm so tired of them that I won't even glance at them because I already know how they will be. I like game which has balanced tone and mood, with darker moments and then a bit lighter moments as well for the balance. One shouldn't mix up game being serious and dark together. Someone in here said that grimdark was in the 90s but I have to disagree, grimdark started to appear in the latter part of the 2000s.

I don't think they should add something like that since if they change something with the patch then it would be basicly obsolete.

As some already has said in here: The licensing fees for console games are very high, especially for the budget what PE will have. That is just one of the many reasons why we dont want console version. There are other limitations in consoles than just the controllers - the memory. Both XBox 360 and PS3 has only 512MB memory which is pretty ridiculously small. I'd be very surprised if the next XBox and PS would have more than 1GB.

Obvious troll is obvious...also...

This. OP is missing the point. They've said right from the start that the game is being designed so that companions are completely optional, and players can choose to play with only one character if they want. With that in mind, I fail to see how giving people the option to create their own party members changes anything. Hillarious that your lack of ability to think on a statement makes me stupid. We are talking about a game that's not yet made. I'm telling you that whatever (in this case the party) is fully customizable it will suffer from uniqueness in the end. Check out IWD series. Your party is fully player made and no PC or event adresses you directly. In simple terms, the story isn't about you. * Yes you can dismiss Morte in PS:T even as a part of the story. But almost noone plays that way because people love Morte, his quotes and the side quests that evolve around him. Yet even with just nameless one, the story is 80% about the PC and 20% about the rest of the world, and I personally like that kind of cRPGs. You don't have to agree and don't be afraid this stretch goal wont be removed just because I said so. It's just that I'm hoping that any possible future stretch goals aren't in the same direction. * I couldn't care less about even older games such as EotB series and what not, and that's certainly what I didn't pay for ($2.5M for new EotB? lol.). Another example is Wasteland where the game doesn't involve NPC companions. Yes it's older than FO series but honestly it isn't 10% the game FO 1, 2 and NV each are. Could I make myself clear? Did you read any of the replies or are you incapable to comprehend what you read? Creating your own party is COMPLETELY OPTIONAL and THE GAME IS STILL WRITTEN FOR JUST ONE MAIN CHARACTER.

What I think Infinitron is saying that modern games are lacking the sense of good old jolly adventuring because the games tend to be so centered around the cities.

That's bull****. Why? Seriously why? Do you need some kind of war with them. What do you care if they reuse the Obsidian design ESPECIALLY WHEN OBSIDIAN ITSELF SUPPORTS THE PROJECT. What is wrong with you people? I don't get it, either. When PE came out there were plenty of "they need to give more information" geniuses and "this was poorly started" intellectuals. As if there's some guidebook on how to do it, how much information must be shared, what constitutes... you know what... people just want to whine and complain. People want something to mock. People like to attack something to feel better about what they like or themselves. It's silly and pointless. I just hope brainiacs like these people don't actually affect the rest of us who like the project and want to see it succeed. The problem with "An Old-School RPG by Brenda Brathwait and Tom Hall!" is that they have basicly zero info on what kind of old-school rpg it will be other than turn-based. Obsidian's Kickstarter at least had it's gonna be A) fantasy, B) isometric, C) real-time with pause and what they are going to do with it (mature etc) and the map. There are gazillion plus one different "old-school rpgs". Edit: I mean gazillion different kind of rpgs from the olden days.

Inspired...I'll say, they practically blatantly copy & pasted the PE Kickstarter. Not pledging before they give out more info.

I dont want this or any future title on Project Eternity-setting to be on consoles, they are scourge of the RPGs.