Hiro Protagonist II

Planescape Torment.

No, not all games. Looking at a lot of old games, they don't mention you bought a license. Some games even mention you can make a copy of the game for a back up.

And you can't go out with a crippled girl in a wheel chair in a crpg? Even if she was stunningly beautiful? As I said, if my post comes across as something you could do in a rpg, then that's what it will be. Here's an article about a game about dating disabled girls. I've never played it but I thought it was an interesting concept just the same. I'm not intentionally blurring the lines. I'm intentionally talking about rpgs but because we're talking about 'realism' as well then an interesting side effect will happen with your own bias of how you view my posts. It's up to the reader whether you continue talking about rpgs and keep it in that context, or you take it personally and take it as real life and respond as such.

No, look at my post again. I never mentioned IRL. You put that on the end of my post. You've just proved my point. You're own bias has put that on my post and now you see it as IRL. You could have rpgs where an NPC is crippled but still could romance that NPC. eg. a Game of Thrones rpg with Brandon Stark grown up and crippled.

If you're confused by my posting style then I suggest watching the movie The Interview. After you watch it, watch it again with the Writer/Directors commentary on and listen to what he has to say. It will change the whole concept of the movie for you. Basically there is no one interpretation of the movie. It's how your own bias reflects your own views on what the movie is about, and whether the main character is innocent or guilty. Your own biases decide the outcome. Just like my posts. You confuse my posts with, is Hiro talking about real life or a rpg? Well if you take it as I'm talking about an rpg, then that's what it will be for you.

Well we are talking about rpgs in this thread and 'realism' and I've been saying all along that developers are pandering to players fantasies. You said you're all about 'realism' when it comes to romances. How much realism can you have in a crpg? And it seems non-human races like elves and orcs are okay for you to romance but how is that 'realism'? But it's interesting you can't decide if I'm talking about a crpg or real life. Must be hitting close to home. No, Bruce. Wrong country. hahaha. I know different countries are confusing to you but what you're suggesting has nothing to do with Australia. That's a different country you're thinking of altogether. Nice try though. Nothing like someone who tries to make a joke and fails dismally by confusing it with another country.

No idea on orcs and goblins. They could be enemies you face in the game. No one knows for now. Halflings are out and seem to be replaced by Orlans. I'd like to see Halflings added later as they're one of my favourite classes, but it would have to make sense story wise. At least one of the devs doesn't like them which is a shame.

It's not inappropriate or irrelevant. I think I can sum up that you yourself have to be able to connect physically before any emotional involvement and not the other way around. There's no way you could connect emotionally first with an 'unattractive' woman in your eyes and then later feel attracted to that person later through deep and meaningful conversation. At least that's how it comes across. You would avoid that person on looks alone before it even got anywhere. Nothing like superficiality at its finest. Strange that the beauty and the beast concept is just idealistic to you. The message to me is that it's one's heart, rather than one's appearance that matters most. It's also striking that you couldn't romance a cat like person in a game like Skyrim which you've mentioned in the past and yet the TV show with Linda Hamilton has something very similar. She's romancing a cat like man. And during that time when the show was on, it seemed a lot of women were infatuated with Vincent on the show. Your view of 'Beauty and the Beast' and how you couldn't connect with an unattractive women most likely viewing her as the beast and you as the beauty makes me wonder if that unattractive woman actually sees you as the beast. As you've said, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You see what you want to see and you see yourself as 'beautiful' when in fact you could very well be the beast to everyone else.

I've never brought up multi-tentacled aliens Bruce. The non-humans including aliens I have brought up have been humanoid. You know arms, legs, torso, head, etc. No tentacles. So your realism of romantic expectations are to have beautiful sexy females that you're attracted to. Anything you deem unattractive you'll avoid, because you know, 'realism'. LOL. Oh god. that's hilarious. I'm just wondering what you do consider 'unattractive'. Is it more than just what she looks like? eg. Do you see a female that's stunning but in a wheel chair 'unattractive' and therefore avoid the notion of going out with her?

Attraction can be something else other than sexy physical characteristics. The NPC may not be physically attractive to you at first, but over time you develop an attraction for them. This often happens in real life. Who would have though? And No, I'm neither surprised nor disappointed that developers are pandering to players fantasies. But nice to try make out that I was when I wasn't. I'm merely stating the obvious that developers do create unrealistic NPCs with anthropomorphising and sexualising those non-human NPCs to appeal to gamers to romance them. That's the unrealistic part that you think is realistic and based on realism.

Yes they do. Developers do anthropomorphise and sexualise non-human NPCs for romance options. Otherwise players and promancers like Bruce wouldn't romance them if they were ugly. They have to be attractive for players to romance them, hence anthropomorphise and sexualise non-human npcs. You're right in that The existence of humanoid characters, does not shatter realism if developers don't anthropomorphise and sexualise those NPCs. What shatters realism is always having those attractive non-human npcs because the developers are pandering to the players. And I'm not painting everything red. If you bothered to read my posts, I said have a cross section of those races from butt ugly to attractive. It's the same with humans. You should also have attractive and non-attractive humans. Same with non-humans. Having entire non-human race in games anthropomorphised and sexualised seems far from reality as you can get.

No I don't agree with you. I only see that you're arguing for arguing sake and making up stuff as you go along.

Why do developers have to anthropomorphise and sexualise non-human NPCs? Does this sound like realism to you?

Okay Lephys. No problem.

I didn't agree on what are acceptable romance options. It was you who admitted that it comes down to looks and having attractive NPCs in your party, which would probably be as far removed from realism as you can get. You mention it's all about realism to you but the 'realism' would be very different to what you'd expect. As I said, game developers anthropomorphise and sexualise non-human NPCs as well as sexualising Human NPCs. This is far from reality and becomes something else, only to pander to the player. But it's good that you mention orcs because here's some examples of 'realistic' orcs. Not sure what types of orcs you would want to romance though.

And what are all raw aspects? Is story telling a raw aspect? And why wouldn't ineffective implementations be a lack of advancement? If companies are implementing bad and ineffective implementations year after year, how is that advancement?

I was also talking about crpgs in general and the same principal applies to PoE. Another race in PoE would be alien to you. We can only guess at the biological nature of the races in Eora. Perhaps Josh can enlighten us with his world building and inform the community if a Human and Orlan have the capacity to mate. Perhaps the Orlans have a different physiology underneath their clothes and humans can't have sex with them. If you're playing a human and you have an Orlan in your party, that Orlan would probably be alien to you in terms of sexual intercourse, if it is even possible. And the Orlan probably wouldn't want a human trying to have sex with them. Romanceable NPCs are usually anthropomorphised and sexualised for the player even if the NPC isn't human. This is very common in crpgs. They always have 'human features' to try and make the player feel attracted to that NPC. That's not realism. If you were to try and make a game more 'realistic', you wouldn't always have the most attractive types of races in your party. That's just pandering to the player. You should have a cross section of those races from butt ugly to attractive. In D&D terms, the picture should reflect the Charisma of the NPC and their interactions in the game world, including the interactions between party members. I'd like to see NPCs reflect a cross section of their races and not the idealised and attractive. You would have a deep friendship with your companions, you would care for them and they would for you. But romancing wouldn't come up. But the friendship is there. Deep and meaningful. There's even TV shows and movies that have this theme with the human and some other race working together.

One of the problems with crpgs and romances, especially with romance with aliens is the anthropomorphism and sexualisation of those aliens. This is not realism at all. We have no idea what an alien would look like. Also, having sex with an alien would likely be just as repulsive for the alien as it is for you, unless you like sick and twisted sex. But then that wouldn't go down well for the promancers if those aliens weren't made to have human characteristics would it? If aliens like the ones below were in your party, would you feel attracted to them, romance them and have sex with them? Because these NPCs could be just as 'realistic' as any other type of NPC you come across in a game.

Is that you David Gaider?

Puzzles like this are a part of every good or great D&D campaign. While I enjoy puzzles in pnp, they don't always translate well to a crpg. I did like the puzzles in BG2 though. Pretty much every puzzle in IWD2 I didn't like.

So you're for the 'lets have sex now as this might be our last day living' type of cliché. lol. And that's all it is. A cliché. No thanks.

Don't confuse the technological advances in computer video games over the last 35 years to a specific part of game development implementation. Just because some implementations have been better doesn't mean all are. While going from games like Doom to Dark Forces and the ability to look up and down have been great improvements in game development, it doesn't mean that all aspects of game development have improved over those years.

You could ask Chris, what are some of the type of projects he'd be willing to take on as Lead Designer if he was asked to do so. Any preferences, eg. Fantasy, sci-fi, horror. Chris' magnum opus is arguably PS:T and does he have a story in him that he'd like to tell that would be as memorable as PS:T? Does he think he can top it?

No he doesn't and your post is just a troll post. How about actually contributing something useful instead of trolling? You make no mention of any points and throw a veiled attack at us for not reading carefully. Yep, a troll post. Nothing else to contribute. Perhaps, you should be the one that needs to read carefully before suggesting it to others.

What purpose was that? To make up hypotheticals that don't make sense? $250K stretch goal for Romances. Lets leave religion out because it's not important to some people despite it being one of the themes in the game. Stretch goals for story concepts is just silly. Yeah, lets have a stretch goal for morality and ethics because for some people it's not important and it's okay to leave it out. Or better yet, lets have a stretch goal of $250K for morality and ethics in the game. It sounds absurd and the backers would be like WTF? What does that mean? How do you measure that? And your infinite amount of money question makes no sense. No one in the real world has infinite money so there's no point coming up with ridiculous hypotheticals. So you would be okay that Obsidian never has a stretch goal for Romance? Great. Thanks for that. No to what you said. Yes to what I said. And I never said it was all about me. Nice try but you failed. You mentioned Romance seems to be the 'poster child' of why people are against it. Well if you have so many threads created on this topic and so many posters against it, the attention will be drawn to it. If you have one thread created by somebody about what they want to see in a game and there's a lot of opposition to it, and that person moves on and nobody else brings it up, that will be forgotten. And no one will remember that thread from 18 months ago. The thread was created by a mod to stop all the romance threads continually being opened which was the case. The mod wanted to keep the poo in one litter tray instead of multiple threads. So nice trying to say it was 'Wahhhh, we're trying to overturn the decision to leave it out of this game' tactic when it wasn't the case. You're arguing against yourself on this one.