zombo

Look at you and your entitlement rant.

Obsidian historically is guilty of very buggy games. PoE has been better than most of its games. I have had some issues, but on the whole not too bad. Acting like this game is horribly overridden with bugs is not right. They have fixed a lot of problems as well.

I was sure CoD already had one of those ... Considering that PoE is very explicitly meant to be in the tradition of games like BG2 and PS:T, which had romantic subplots, I feel like you might be misrepresenting the nature of this discussion just a little bit. My undeerstanding is Infinity Engine games are the inspiration for this game, and there are more games with that engine that do not have romances. BG1, IWD, and IWD2 each come to mind. Romance was not part of all IE games, and that just further makes my point. It's not somthing to have all the time.

Romance in games is fine, but the parade of people who ask for almost every rpg to have romance options in it is exhausting. Not every game needs it. There are now plenty of games that do. Why is it that just because a game is labeled rpg that means it needs romance? That's my problem. If a developer does not want to do it and people want it anyway all they're going to get is a half effort because they're not into it. Take the romance when it exists and stop asking for every game to have it. I'm not necessarily saying you are doing this. Just speaking to those that do.

How about if people want a game with romance go find a game with romance? Stop asking for games without it to have it shoved in via patch or expansion? Maybe I'll go on some Call of Duty forums and ask for romance options.

Sadly no Obsidian intentionally left this out of the game, it was a mistake IMO as we both know how Romance adds to the overall entertainment factor But on this forum you will find most people don't like Romance or they feel it somehow demeans the overall value of a game ...yes its also a mistaken view but trust me you won't change peoples minds on this forum..." you can't teach an old dog new tricks " and all that How is an opinion a mistake? Because you disagree? Poor reason imo.

Sigh. Can't delete...

So? I still say it's arbitrary to be fine with "playing in a fictional world," interacting with fictional characters in a fictional setting, but then sneering at people for requesting different types of fictional interaction. You wanna talk about "human intimacy"? There's different types of intimacy besides romantic or sexual. Forging just about any type of affection or emotional bond can count as "human intimacy," and just about all video games with written characters (with or without scripted dialogue) incorporate that illusion. When you feel emotionally warmed or charmed when your character does something nice for another character, or another character says/does something nice to your character, that simulates a "human intimacy" bonding experience. Unless the player 100% sees the video game world as 100% nothing but walking constructs 100% of the time, or you're playing your character as a completely indifferent and/or jerkass sociopath, one could probably argue that you're ignoring forging real emotional bonding / interacting with real human beings (or animals) to in favor of fictional characters in a fictional setting. (I myself had grandparents who completely disapproved of playing video games of any kind for any length of time because they felt every second spent interacting with the fictional world in the video game was taking away time I could spend interacting with and creating memories the real world, and every second I spent interacting with fictional characters in the game world was taking away from time I could spend interacting, bonding, and making memories with real people in my real life.) Should we eliminate all illusions of fictional characters being anything but fictional constructs to keep all players from "replacing human intimacy with intimacy with computer characters," even if not in a romantic sense? Remove giving all non-player characters names or personalities or opinions (or even distinct appearances or portraits) so players can't dispel the illusion that they're not real? Should we remove giving all pre-written companions (like Aloth and Eder and Sagani) any names, personalities, quests, or opinions on how to complete quests, so the players will never get the illusion (even for a moment) that they "feel real"? Should we dispel "relationship values" with pre-written companions--doing nice things for them, earning their approval or disapproval, helping them or hindering them with their quests, helping them achieve a happy/bittersweet ending or horrible demise depending on how we feel about them? I still find it arbitrary to be fine with non-romantic bonding with fictional character but then suddenly pulling the "you're replacing real human interaction with fictional character interaction" when it comes to romance. Meh, I don't see it that way. I see romance as just another game feature, or just another role-playing experience for a role-playing game; one that happens to be popular with players. (Keeping in mind that it's all fictional and all relationships your player character develops with non-player characters are fictional anyway.) If people like that type of game feature and/or role-playing experience, then I think they're well within their rights to request it. Don't get me wrong, I don't think romance needs to be in every game either, but I'm not going to try to shame people for requesting it if they want it. Again, one is role playing and the other is artificial romance. If you want to try and stretch things out to the most extreme examples, then there's not much I can do to change your mind. If the developers had incorporated it into the game, fine. I would not refuse to buy it were romances in it. They're not a make or break feature. However, if they cram a romance dlc into the game it seems like that would just be Obsidian pandering to its romance fans at the exclusion of many others who would be disinterested. A combat heavy dlc would not be an issue since the game has combat. A story intense dlc would not be an issue since the game has a solid narrative aspect to it. There is no romance in this game. Re-writing dialog all over the game would be asinine and having a dlc with romance while the entire rest of the game has none would be just as asinine. It has no place in PoE. A zombie survivor horror dlc would be just as bad an idea as a romance dlc since the game has neither of those aspects. It makes zero sense.

Faerunner, it's because one is simply playing in a fictional world. Another is replacing human intimacy with initmacy with a computer game character. If you don't see the difference, I'm not sure I can make you see it. There's a place for it in games, but when people are asking for it over and over it becomes about the romance and not the game itself. It's becoming more and more like a merging of Baldur's Gate and Leisure Suit Larry. I think romance should be added value, not the focus of the game or DLC. Romance DLC excludes those who want to play more of the main plot or an extension of that plot. An entire DLC dedicated to romance is Leisure Suit Larry.

I really hate these replies. It's called a ROLE PLAYING game. Meaning, you make believe stuff. Like, for instance, that you are some hero that fights dragons and undead. Or, maybe you pretend you're a gambler that is willing to risk it all, when you've never played a game of cards in your life. So, personally, I don't understand why there AREN'T romance options. If you want to hit on that hot paladin chick with feathers, why shouldn't you be allowed to do that? What if, as crazy as it sounds, you actually ARE attracted to her, based on how she is written, or is voice-acted, or, however you would like to frame it. Maybe, for instance, you are playing as a similar paladin character, and you really dig "how she takes care of business". The fact that they decided not to include romances, baffles me like their decision to not allow one to be a thief (meaning, to pickpocket, or at least try to pickpocket, whoever you would like, or to sneak into people's homes at night, or when they aren't there, to steal from them). It limits and reduces your role-play abilities and opportunities. And, it runs contrary to every single game that they referenced in their "inspired by, spiritual successor of" in the Kickstarter. Every one of those games featured thievery and romance options. And if a game has a romance option in it then I'm fine with it. But all this begging for romance dlc is crazy imo. It amounts to asking for imaginary relationships. If the developers include it fine. Don't go begging for it. Developers like Bioware started doing them and now if they choose not to there are gamers ready to riot over it. That is my real point. It should just be added value if there, but should not be something people clamor for.

Don't care would have been the right option for me as well if it existed when I voted. Should the POE that was released have been more appropriately considered Early Access, rather than marketed as a finished product, based on these comments: "Since the release of the game with have fixed around 1000 bugs with the help of the community." Why were 1000's of bugs in a game that was released as a finished product? "There are many of you, with many different playstyles. It isn't something that we can easily replicate on our side so we will gladly take any help that the community is willing to give us." So why not early access? The description of Early Access suits the released version of Pillars of Eternity perfectly, especially version 1.01: "Early access, alpha funding, or paid-alpha is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can pay for a game in the early stages of development and obtain access to playable but unfinished versions of the game, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue work on the game." "This Early Access game is not complete and may or may not change further. If you are not excited to play this game in its current state, then you should wait to see if the game progresses further in development." "These are games that evolve as you play them, as you give feedback, and as the developers update and add content." Playable but unfinished version of the game: Check (Version 1.01 was not even playable due to some bugs.) Pillars of Eternity is not complete: Check Pillars of Eternity may or may not change further: Check Pillars of Eternity is Evolving as we play: Check Pillars of Eternity developers are getting feedback from the players and updating and adding content: Check. If you (i.e the customer) are not exited to play this game in its current state: Check (for many customers) then you should wait to see if the game progresses further in development. (POE is developing further, with UI tweaks, bug fixes, additional features, balances and so on, except this was not mentioned as a disclaimer for POE, it was marketed as a completed product, which it is not.) So next time, please release the game as early access and spare paying customers like me who do NOT want to get involved in the development of an unfinished product and who simply want to play the game. This poll is solely related to POE, please do not make comparisons to "other" buggy released games to justify the label "Finished product." Simply weigh up the state of completion of POE on its release and consider the amount of changes and fixes brought into the game based on both community feedback and developer input. Also consider whether the game is "Playable but not complete." and if it is subject to "Further development" or not. Thanks. I love when pc gamers criticize bugs. I understand when it's a console game. For the pc? With multiple operating systems, hardware configurations, software conflicts, and a multitude of other problems I didn't mention how can anyone expect a clean game? There will be bugs, and many of them are technically considered bugs, but 99.9% of players never see and are never harmed by them. It's insane how entitled players feel.

Can't we have an RPG without romance requests? They're imaginary people.

Romances used to be a nice part of RPGs, but now people want romances for everything. Is this suddenly a Bioware game?

A lot of ifs for something we don't know the first thing about. Not what it is, not when it is to be. And most of the ifs are bs from the community.