Sylvanpyxie

Some of the most mature games I've played were Teen rated and they barely broached the topic of romance, let alone sex. There was no excess of violence or gore and a large number of battles could simply be avoided by a diplomatic tongue. The reason I found these games to be infinitely more mature than other titles is because they challenged me in a very adult manner. They gave me scenarios that forced me to question my deepest beliefs and occasionally had me completely U turning and supporting a cause I never believed I would. They required me to puzzle through some of the hardest riddles and word games. They required me to choose between my closest friends, my own well being and the characters outside of my party that I had grown to love. They were fueled by deep, engaging and belief shattering stories. Stories that made me turn not only on my companions, but also on my Gods. Stories that made me question my sense of justice, my morality and my mortality. Stories full of torturous horrors that were neither violent nor gorey, but things that disturbed me to my very core. A mature game, to me personally, is something that can boast a deep, intellectual, emotional and engaging story line. Capable of challenging me intellectually, emotionally and philosophically. I have no doubt that Project Eternity will produce such a game.

But they don't have to be. I posted this earlier, and maybe I didn't get the point across well enough, but romances shouldn't need their own dominant line of dialogue. They shouldn't need never-ending topics like "What's your sexual history?" and "Do you like my shoes?". It's inconsequential nonsense that gives nothing to the relationship between the Player and the NPC. It's just uninspired filler, giving people the illusion of emotional engagement and actually offering nothing to the grander scheme of character design. The greatest, heck the *only* romances that I've ever enjoyed have been seamlessly integrated into the Friendship dialogue that was already available. They didn't have nonsense topics of conversation discussing how many women(or men) my Love Interest had been with in the past or if it annoyed/disgusted my Character, and by Tyr's bloody justice, they didn't need it. The greatest topics of discussion that offer the deeper insight, understanding and emotional connection to an NPC are those available to everyone. Those topics that are the very core of their character. The topics that help us to accept, understand and love the characters that we're traveling with. Things that are so personal, so vital to them that they're admitting vulnerability just by speaking of them. Am I saying that you need to eliminate all Romantic Dialogue? Of course i'm not. I'm saying that it isn't necessary for romances to become this huge dominant force in character interactions. It doesn't need to be the focus of every conversation that you have, because at the end of the day it doesn't matter if a Character has admitted undying love to you when he's discussing the eternal torments that he's endured in the past. It isn't going to make it any easier for him if you laugh it all off with a charming flirtatious distraction. It isn't going to help him if you offer him hugs and kisses. Nothing is going to make him feel any less vulnerable when he's offering you his soul on a plate. Romance shouldn't be this huge, deep, never-ending thing that overbears a character. Flirting should be an option, one of many options through-out the course of character interaction. I'm not saying it has to be inconsequential, i'm not saying it has to be ignored, i'm saying that it doesn't need to be this massive deal that dominants all topics of conversation and all character interaction available to a Player. As I said earlier: Obviously people are going to want romances to register in some manner, and they should - Just like every other relationship available between Player and NPC. Whether it's Rivalry, Friendship or Romance it will require a few of it's own unique dialogues, even a unique topic to discuss what you're both feeling and possibly what should be done, but just because it needs to be recognised does *not* mean it needs to be a dominant force in character interaction. It's fine if you don't agree. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But I don't believe that romances should be any more deep, or expensive, than other forms of Relationship.

As I've stated in the last two threads, there is a lot that can horribly wrong with the inclusion of romances: Degradation of character. Ranging from questionable character content to all out Out of Character behaviour. Player Entitlement which can lead to a lack of consequences. And my personal flavour of Hell: Romantic dialogue overshadowing the personality of the character. Characters should be who they are, possibly influenced by the things they see around them, but their core foundations should always remain the same. Their entire belief system shouldn't alter simply to accommodate a Player's romantic interest. If there's a Homicidal Maniac in my Party, and i'm playing a Righteous Egotistical Do-Gooder, he should not be trying to get in my pants, he should be trying to repeatedly lop my head off when i'm not looking. Similarly a Righteous Egotistical Do-Gooder trying to get into the pants of a Homicidal Maniac is more than a little game-breaking. Characters can bend to the will of a Player if it's really necessary, but to completely break a character in order to accommodate a Romantic Sub-Plot should never be acceptable. Nor should consequence be removed from character interactions, simply to allow Romantic Sub-Plots to remain open. Consequences are vital to good story telling, every action should have some form of reaction, whether it's something as simple as racial choice or something as radical as murdering an innocent child, there should be some reaction to your choices, no matter how small. Character interactions should never be devoid of consequence, if I have a Do-Gooder in my party and I choose to exploit the hardships of a innocent downtrodden little sewer rat to further my own personal desires then the Do-Gooder should speak out against my actions, he should be preparing to give me the biggest verbal, or physical, smack down of my life. He should become enraged and disgusted by my actions as I constantly disregard the suffering of humanity and exploit the weakness of others to further my own gains. He should not be trying to find the best route into my fetching leather pants... Yet, in an alternate play-through, he could be singing my praises to the greatest Gods. Playing an equally Self-Righteous Do-Gooder, we could be comrades for life, fighting evil and saving the downtrodden from a life of poverty and ruin. Becoming closer in the confines of our friendship, perhaps progressing towards romance as we indulge each other in illusions of grandeur and recite continuous, almost fanatical, preaching at those that dare to walk in the shadow of evil. Consequences are a big part of story-telling, and they should never be excluded from Character Interaction simply to accommodate people's obsession with Romances. If you choose to go against everything that a character believes in, that avenue of romance should be closed to you. Whether it's a far reaching consequence that stretches the entirety of the game, or the most minor reflection of your choices, consequences should affect how NPCs look at you, and how they feel about you. No one should be entitled to a free-pass in the name of "love". I also don't believe romance should be overbearing. This is my particular brand of Hell, and yet so many people expect and *want* huge branching trees of romantic dialogue for them to pursue at their heart's content. I'm sure that's great, for you... I personally don't understand the pointlessness of it. Do you get something from Romantic Dialogue that you wouldn't be able to get from purely Friendship Dialogue? Is Romantic Dialogue somehow more engaging? Deeper in content? See, my personal belief is, Friendship Dialogue opens the character up, it shows me everything I could possibly want to see. It engages me in understanding and adapting my behaviour to the Character in question so that they'll accept me as their trusted friend, or hate my guts for the rest of eternity. Sure, if I really like the character I'd like the option to flirt a little, push a few buttons, test the waters, bait them a little and see if I can get a reaction... But I don't need huge branches of over-arcing Romantic Dialogue to do this, just a few snippets of romance integrated seamlessly into the Friendship Dialogue. Honestly, I don't understand what huge branches of Romantic Sub-Plot actually achieves. Does a conversation about my Potential Love Interest's sexual history really offer me a deep and engaging conversation? Does it give me greater insight and understanding of the character? Call me crazy but I don't think it does, which is why I don't understand the necessity of it. Of course, you're eventually going to want dialogue that addresses the flirting and baiting. You're going to want it to be recognized and addressed accordingly, and that's understandable and acceptable, but it doesn't require huge branches of never-ending, pointless, uninspired Romantic Dialogue to address the building sexual tension of your relationship. And no, it doesn't require the inevitable outcry of a sexual climax either (pardon the pun). A few changes to dialogue, sure, that's necessary if you're going to put any form of relationships into the game. Romances, friendships, rivalries, they all need their own unique dialogue sometime. What i'm saying is Romantic Dialogue doesn't need to dominate the board with pointless conversations about sexual history, shoes and what kind of underwear you're wearing. Oh god, that turned out long again didn't it? I just can't seem to keep a post short. Look, I'm not wholly against Romance, I've said in the other threads that there are a few instances in which Character Romance has really hit me quite hard.. But it really is easy to see how difficult it would be to incorporate them seamlessly into the game, and even if they manage that not everyone will happy with the result. I can understand both sides of the argument, yet I just cannot get myself off the fence on this one. It's a constant battle between my romantic heart and the irrational fear of tasteless, uninspired, romantic sub-plots. I can only hope that the Writers handle *all* character relationships with completely impartial professionalism, and try their hardest not to disregard the foundations of their characters in the name of fan service. Uh.. Sorry for the mammoth sized post, again. *Embarrassed*

I'm not saying it's an impossibility. I'm saying that it's unlikely that a romance would evolve from a relationship between characters that clash so brutally in personality. A lack of romance doesn't mean there needs to be no relationship between the two, however, if we stick with the White Knight/Cunning Rogue example, I find it hard to believe that any "loving relationship" would form between two characters when they are constantly undermining each other's most basic beliefs, their core characteristics constantly rivaled by each other and each act reminding themselves that they are from two different ends of the spectrum, selfless and selfish. One or the other could certainly change their beliefs and alter their behaviour accordingly, but why would the White Knight be inclined to do such a thing? Why would a selfless man, set in his beliefs about right and wrong/good and evil who is constantly trying to make the world a better place, be more inclined to change? Simply because he loves a woman that is constantly undermining his beliefs, undoing his work and shafting "lesser citizens"? Love is a selfish emotion, why would a selfless man consider it more important than the good of the world? Why would he give up what he believes in almost devoutly, to be a woman that by all accounts he should despise? More importantly, where would he draw the line? If there is a Barbarian hell bent on destruction, feeding on chaos and death, with her words as equally charming as the Rogue's, is he going to accept her as well? Is he going to change, accept violence and murder, simply because he loves a woman that feasts so readily on the suffering on others? If he's so easily inclined to alter the very core of his character, then perhaps his character shouldn't be defined at all. Perhaps he should simply be a golem that is easily manipulated into whatever a woman wishes it to be. I don't understand why it should be the NPC expected to conform to the Player. Why do we need to be the ones to crush the will of such a strong character? Why do we need the power to play God and undermine the most basic foundations of a character? Making romances easily accessible is quite a slippery slope... one that is likely to end in a spike pit and a very grizzly end. Why can't we be the ones that finally have to conform to the beliefs of others? Would it be so hard to accept the beliefs of a character that you're trying so hard to love?

I posted in the previous thread, front page I think, but it didn't get much attention beyond a few likes, so I figured i'd pop back in to post a few factors on why romances can be a huge downside: One of the biggest negatives is obviously a degradation of character in order to achieve a certain "Love Interest" status. Nothing is more horrific than a completely out of character discussion with a Homicidal Maniac about how you make his pants tight and he wants to make sweet love to you all night long. Some characters are simply not good candidates for "romance" and should never be considered for such. A big problem for me - and easily one of the biggest threats to character integrity, I think - is the fact that "Love Interest Status" can easily overshadow a character. I played Dragon Age Origins recently and at first I was enjoying myself (my Lady Cousland countering the sexism of the douchebags at Highever with her sheer awesomeness was most enjoyable). It began to go downhill for me when I finished my origin story and then encountered the Grey Warden known as Alistair.... Alistair suffers from a clear case of "Obvious Love Interest Please Do Me", at first it wasn't so bad, there was a bit of leering in our first conversation but I figured it'd wither out and stop if I made no advances on him. The problem is it didn't stop. Every other conversation with Alistair ended in subtle nuances to romance, or bright orange neon signs screaming "I AM A LOVE INTEREST". This is something that irreparably damages characters for me, having romance overshadow almost every aspect of a character is an inexcusable crime on the writer's part. A character should not be defined by the fact I'm capable of riding him all night long, and I shouldn't have romantic content shoved down my throat when I did nothing to initiate or encourage a romantic relationship - I wanted to be Alistair's friend, I wanted to understand him, get to know him as a Pixelated Person. I did not want to ride him like a pony long into the night and I do not need the dialogue to check that I haven't changed my mind when it wasn't looking. Sorry, that went a bit ranty didn't it?: Another thing that can easily damage the integrity of a character is when a romantic relationship is available to polar opposites of personality. If i'm playing a Rogue that is equal parts charming, dangerous and utterly lawless/chaotic, I don't expect a White Knight Goody Goody to be falling to the floor, kissing my feet and praising my womanly wiles. Sure, my Rogue is charming, but she would be stomping all over the foundations of the poor man's beliefs. Mr.Goody Goody shouldn't be offering her a full body massage, he should be trying to get the stealing, cheating, backstabbing cowbag to stop being such a... Well.. Cowbag. I shouldn't be able to destroy the very foundations of a character in order to get sweet loving from the White Knight Good Guy, it just shouldn't happen. Yet, when romance is involved, core characteristics of an NPC can easily be broken in order to make the romantic content easily accessible to people who wish to pursue it, this happens more often than anyone would really like to admit, and it's really not acceptable. There should never be an "i win" button to characters, their personalities should never conform to the player in order to avoid "restriction on choices". If you're a douchebag and an NPC knows you're a douchebag, and they hate you for it, you should not be able to click a few "i win" dialogue options and make everything better. Which easily leads us to probably the *biggest* problem with romantic content: Entitlement. Now, i'm not throwing stones or pointing fingers here, so please try to avoid burning me at the stake until I've successfully gotten my point across. I know from personal experience that people can get very invested in in-game romances and I can understand why (I still find myself quite invested in Valen Shadowbreath if i'm being totally honest with you), the problem is all this emotional investment can often lead to resentment if expectations aren't met. There isn't ever going to be a "Love Interest" for everyone, our personal preferences are just too varied and the supply of available characters is obviously quite limited, so someone is always going to feel as though they've gotten the short end of the stick and, from my personal experience, this can lead to quite a bit of vocal outcry from people. I'm not saying that every Pro-Romance person is going to be crying bitter tears and spouting fountains of hatred from their bile filled mouths simply because there was no Dashing Rogue to sweep them off their feet, but from my experience there has always been a rather... vocal minority that feels to need to spew venom because a certain character was not available as a romantic option to them. Now, call me a masochist but I like a bit of rejection, I like my choices to have unforeseen consequences that alter the relationships I have with characters. Whether it's something as simple as a selection of race (Dwarf won't date an Elf) or an essential choice that has far reaching consequences beyond my own personal relationships (Killing a child and losing the respect of many people) I want to feel the weight of those decisions. However, a lot of people that I have spoken with over the years feel as though certain consequences "railroad" them into unforeseen circumstances, when they discover that their heinous acts of violence have caused their significant other to abandon them in disgust, they feel as if the writer's have "cheated" them out of the romantic content that they had chosen to pursue. Entitlement is a really terrible thing, and unfortunately it can often follow romances like a plague. I'm not saying that every Pro-Romance person is a self absorbed tit (I certainly don't think I'm a self absorbed tit anyway...), but it can't really be denied that people feel very passionately about romantic relationships and will often get very aggressive when they feel as though they're in-game preferences are being ignored, or punished. This isn't even addressing the fact that, in a number of previous cases (and not limited to Bioware I might add), there can be very little content available to a specific gender if they refuse to pursue a romance.... There are a lot of reasons that romances can damage not only the integrity of characters, but also the interactions that players have with them. That being said - I'm not entirely against romances either. I pointed out earlier that I still feel invested in Valen Shadowbreath, probably the last "romance" I pursued of my own free will and not just to experience more dialogue. Whenever I play Hordes of the Underdark I still find myself drawn to Valen, and it's not because of his romance, but because of his character. I said on the previous thread the number of reasons that I loved Valen Shadowbreath, and still do, but the biggest one of them was the fact that Valen was largely friendship dialogue, with very little inclination to flirtation or romance until the final stretch of the game. If you pursue a romantic relationship with Valen then you will not discover huge branches of romantic dialogue pestering him with questions about what foods he likes, if he thinks you're pretty or what kind of dress he'd like you to wear - You get the opportunity to flirt with him a little when you're discussing "friendship" dialogue. He gets bashful and shrugs it off, then later he begins to express an interest, but it still doesn't dominate the interactions that you have with him. Everything is pushed forward by topics that are neutral dialogue. All your interactions are based on completely open dialogue, available to everyone, and this is what made Valen's relationship truly beautiful to me. I hated Valen when I first met him, he didn't like me, he didn't trust me and he didn't want my help. He pretty much wanted to throw me out on my arse. I hated him for it... Here I was, preparing to sacrifice myself for the sake of everyone and this little git was daring to question me, I wanted to pound him into the dirt, but unfortunately I required a Fighter as I was playing a particularly terrible class. He would occasionally offer me advice on the things we were facing, but he was constantly trying to put me down, made it perfectly clear that he didn't trust me, no matter what I said. The turning point came when Valen admitted that he held a little bit of resentment towards me, I'd swooped in and stolen his mantle, made everything that he worked so hard for look like nothing. Swept all his achievements under the rug with the sheer greatness of my glory. I really felt horrible and I began to look at him in a new light, the beginning of the end of my dignity. Longer than I intended, I apologise. I'll do a nice neat summary for people who don't want to read through inane ramblings: Romance is very much a double edged sword, it can cause the downfall of a character, or it can add a greater emotional investment that can raise it to new heights. I wouldn't have felt as strongly about Valen Shadowbreath if I hadn't fallen so completely in love with his character, but I also know that I wouldn't have fallen in love with his character if he had been heavily dominated by romantic content. I guess I'm on the fence - There's a part of me that feels romances could add something to a character, but another part of me knows that romance can easily decimate all character integrity and dominate all forms of Player->NPC interactions. Regardless of if there are romances in the game or not - I would like to see a wide array of relationships between the Player and the NPCs, ranging from Trusting Friendship to Bitter Rivalries to Free For All Homicidal Intent. Again, I'm sorry for creating such a long post. I'm also sorry if anyone feels offended by anything I've said - It isn't my intention to offend anybody, but I felt the need to express my concerns, as well as my appreciation, for romances.

One of my favourite quests has to be the one from Mask of the Betrayer's "Coven Dreamscape" - The Bard Durler who wants you to play a game of "Hells" with him. Hells is pretty much a guessing game, and it's by one of the most difficult and enjoyable that I've come across. I actually have a save file sitting in that dreamscape, so whenever i'm particularly bored I can just swoop in to play a few rounds. Honestly, Hells is one of the most enjoyable "mini games" that I've ever experienced.

While I often enjoy good game-play, I find I can usually put up with slightly more clunky game-play systems if it means I'm able to enjoy an excellent story. Mask of the Betrayer didn't have particularly smooth combat, and after a certain point my Cleric was just slaughtering things in melee in a matter of moments, so it was hardly challenging. Yet the story was by far one of my most enjoyable gaming experiences in years. I certainly enjoyed it more than games with slightly more refined combat systems, like Mass Effect 2 or, more recently, Kingdoms of Amalur. On the flip side, I wouldn't be such an avid fan of the Fable franchise if the combat hadn't been so greatly improved. I still regard the Fable franchise highly, even if it's not particularly groundbreaking, it certainly has elements in the game-play that, if forged together into a single game, would be an extremely enjoyable experience. Yet, as the franchise has progressed and the story has become less enjoyable, I find myself becoming disappointed by the series. It's a tough one, but I suppose, in this specific genre of gaming, story is more important to me than game-play. Though, in other genres game-play will almost always trump story.

Not to sway too far out of the topic of conversation but I feel the David Gaider Twilight thing needs to be clarified a little: David Gaider's words to describe Twilight can largely be condensed into a begrudging admiration of the success it seems to have gotten, and a professional assessment of what exactly causes it's wide-spread appeal. The poor man didn't quite realise that the wide-spread appeal was due to the fact that a large number of readers were idealistic love-struck vampire lovers or just.... Uh... Not quite right. He doesn't really express "like" for the book series, so much as a professional interest. Whatever opinions he has on Twilight, I consider Gaider an alright writer, not one of the best in the industry but, in my opinion, he's one of the best that Bioware currently has. I will never be able to hate the man, he created one of my favourite companions and the only "romance" that I, personally, have ever truly enjoyed from Bioware. Of course, that success was largely before Bioware's "mainstream" appeal. The topic of Gaider's writing abilities is subjective and all my opinion, of course, but the supposed "love" of Twilight is neither subjective, nor is it accurate. Sorry for dancing relatively off-topic.

If I had to ballpark guess? Intelligent, philosophical, proud and adept in Magical Arts. My ballpark guesses are always wrong, however. I'm quite a fan of rather more animalistic races myself, Centaurs, Minotaurs and Tauren are some of my more favourite races in fantasy, but I also like the concept of a more savage, primitive, humanoid appearance, yet still maintaining a certain beauty. A kind of dangerously lithe, graceful and beautiful primitive "hunter" appearance instead of a more brutish, thuggish "orcish" appearance. In regards to the name - It's bizarre, but I really quite like it. I get the feeling that the more I get used to it, the more it will roll effortlessly off my tongue. Dangerously lithe and deceptively primitive in appearance, yet highly intelligent, proud, philosophical and adept in magical arts? Why not.

Obviously I would like, over all, a well balanced selection, so that I will have an extensive use for all Companions on differing play-throughs. Nothing is more annoying than playing a Thief, only to discover there are 20 million and 5 Thief companions available to you and only 1 Healer or Wizard. That being said, I would love to see some concept art of the Godlike, and I certainly hope we receive one as a companion.

I honestly believe a range of interactive relationships with NPCs and Party Companions are relatively essential in an RPG like Project Eternity. Interactions between a Player and NPCs are going to happen, they're an essential part of an Party-Based RPG, and you're obviously going to spend more time with certain NPCs than others. Without deeper interactions and greater relationships between the Player and their Party Characters, the "Companions" would remain nothing but cardboard cut-outs, existing simply to assist the Player in whatever misadventure they've stepped into. I certainly wouldn't have felt as strongly about Shandra, in Neverwinter Nights 2, and her death if I hadn't gotten the chance of build a deeper emotional connection with her - She showed interest and concern for my Character and offered not only her friendship, but her unyielding trust and eventually her life. If she hadn't engaged in such dialogue with me, I would not have even noticed her passing and as a result, that entire plot line would have felt hollow and empty. Deeper interactions, with Party Companions at the very least, make NPCs greater assets, both in terms of story and in terms of the Player's emotional attachment. Whether the relationship in question is begrudging respect, borderline contempt and disdain or never-ending trust and friendship, each relationship has it's place and each relationship is essential in creating an emotional connection between the Player and their Party. I personally love to have a range of relationships available to me - Be it a building conflict of interests that leads to a relatively contemptuous relationship, or an open and honest relationship that leads to a great camaraderie, or even a shady relationship between suspicious fellows with little to no trust and constantly questioned loyalties. Do I believe romance should also play a role among companion relationships? Perhaps, but I'll go into it further into my post. I'm very much an all-rounder in terms of things like this - If it's well written and handled with care and attention I will tend to enjoy it, regardless of the tone that it has. As a Female Player I liked Bishop's relationship and his conclusion in Neverwinter Nights 2, I get into a lot of arguments about the state of his "romantic content", primarily because Bishop's romance was "cut". Regardless of what people think of his romantic state, Bishop undeniably has an interest in a Female Player and flirted almost relentlessly. I enjoyed his personality and plot, I found his angry bitterness to be a refreshing change of pace from the endless "White Knights" that I happened across in RPGs, and his inability to open up or admit vulnerability made him compelling. The "conclusion" to the relationship with Bishop finishes with friendly dialogue, not romantic dialogue, and then carries over in Mask of the Betrayer. Both the ending of Neverwinter Nights 2 and Mask of the Betrayer are ultimately tragic, and well suited to Bishop's character. On the flip side, I can also enjoy fulfilling conclusions that don't end in betrayal, abandonment, maiming or death. As shocking as it is, I'm actually going to use a Bioware "romance" as an example of probably one of the better in-game "romances" I've endured. Valen Shadowbreath from Hordes of the Underdark is probably one of the few romances that I've pursued of my own free will, and not just to experience additional dialogue content that was otherwise unavailable. Hordes of the Underdark was one of Bioware's earlier games (Pre EA anyway), and largely ignored by the gaming community for reasons I personally cannot fathom. Valen starts out by making it perfectly plain that he doesn't trust you, or your intentions, or your abilities, he pretty much wants to throw you out on your hide and deal with the Big Evil in his own way, but he begrudgingly agrees to help you because his superiors order him to. As you progress through the game, Valen offers professional advice about the Underdark, it's inhabitants and ways to combat them. If you choose to pursue more conversations with him, you can learn about his past, the hardships he's endured and his feelings/beliefs on a number of topics. Assuming you choose dialogue options that won't enrage him and make him want to crush you into a gooey, messy, red smear on the ground, Valen will eventually build a begrudging respect for you and your abilities, he'll also admit that he kind of resented your appearance and importance. The thing about Valen's relationship that I really like is the fact that a large portion of his dialogue is "Neutral", as it were. The majority of the dialogue is friendship based and not hidden behind a "romance" flag of any kind, and very little of it tends towards flirtatious. Female Player Characters have maybe two or three opportunities to flirt with Valen and none of these led to large dramatic dialogues reserved purely for "romance", so there was very little attention to the "romantic" side of his character, and as a result the "romance" wasn't very prominent. This doesn't seem like a very important thing, but to me it was considered the *most* important thing, because very little of the dialogue tended towards "romantic involvement" I didn't feel like I was being pushed towards a romantic relationship, and that was a huge deal. I didn't like Valen when I first played Hordes of the Underdark, I didn't trust him and I didn't particularly appreciate how he treated me with such great suspicion. His entire character really grated on me and yet, as Valen built a begrudging respect for me, I ended up building the same kind of respect for him and eventually ended up appreciating the friendship he offered me. When his admission of possibly being in love with me came up I was like "When did I start liking you..?". I honestly couldn't figure out when I gone from disliking his very existence to being unable to imagine the game without him. I wouldn't have had this reaction to Valen if the romantic dialogue had been as prominent as it is in more modern RPGs. I played Dragon Age: Origins when it came out, and I found it extremely difficult to view my companions with the same kind of... I don't know... Realism? The first few conversations I had with Alistair in Origins made me see him as nothing but a "Potential Love Interest" and I found it really hard to connect with him as a result, I couldn't appreciate his character because he was dominated so thoroughly by his "romance" that there was little to no characterization to him. As my opinion on Valen Shadowbreath no doubt screams - I don't think huge branching unique dialogues are necessary for every form of relationship in order to make companion relationships deep, complex and enjoyable, especially not in terms of romance. Though I would expect companions, and "staple NPCs", to react accordingly to any actions that you take - If I murder an innocent woman in front of her five innocent children, I would expect a "Paladin" or "White Knight" self-righteous nutter to try and lop my head off for it, or at least express extreme disdain and disgust at my actions and leave if I don't have a reasonable excuse for it. In terms of quests, I don't feel like companions need their own essential quest lines, though they would undoubtedly be welcomed - Companion Quests can offer us insight into the beliefs, experiences and feelings of our companions that we wouldn't otherwise see. I think at the very least I would appreciate seeing companions somehow integrated into sub-plots or non-essential quest lines, Mask of the Betrayer did this well with Okku and Gannayev, your companions didn't demand anything from you or send you out on non-essential side missions, they just happened to be connected to areas that you were required to visit anyway, Okku in the Mountains with his Bear Friends and Gannayev in the Sunken City. That being said, it would also be nice to see basic companion interaction on unrelated quests - Nothing bothers me more than companions being silent observers with little to no opinion on the events unfolding around them. If i'm disbanding a slaver ring and come across slaves that are "broken in" and unable to grasp the concept of freedom, I would like to hear the opinions of my companions on how they would like to handle the situation. I'd also like to see the companions interact with each other on occasion, similar to Bishop and Casavir or Sand and Qara, there are bound to be "clashes of personality" and it would be nice to see the results of such conflicts. In terms of cut-scenes - I consider them to be an unnecessary expenditure, at least in terms of Player and Companion relationships. I definitely don't want to see a cut-scene displaying the "romantic climax" (pardon the pun) of a romantic relationship. Now my general opinion on if romance should be included in Project E is a relatively.... Tricky one. There are obvious pros to romance - There can be a deeper emotional connection for players that pursue them and it's a greater impactive plot device that can elicit a huge amount of emotional turmoil in a Player.... Yet, there's obvious cons ranging from the simple matters of quality (or lack of) and larger matters of equality, or lack of choice. The biggest problem I have with romance is the fact it can quite easily becoming overbearing and the only character quality that a Player might see, it happened to me with Alistair in Dragon Age Origins, and this can easily destroy the integrity of a character. Nothing annoys me more than the feeling that a Character exists simply as a "Love Interest" to conquer and it's quite a regular occurrence these days, and not just in Bioware games. Romance can also, quite often, limit the amount of dialogue available to Players who refuse to pursue them - Prime examples of this lie in (but are not limited to) recent Bioware games, primarily the Mass Effect series, Knights of the Old Republic and Dragon Age 2 - and this isn't acceptable, at no point should a Player lose all Companion progression or development simply for refusing to pursue romantic interactions. The Mass Effect series is guilty of this - Subject Zero, Garrus, Miranda Lawson, Kaidan Alenko - nearly all the Party Characters in the Mass Effect series suffer a huge loss of dialogue for people who simply avoid getting romantically involved with them. I refused to romance Kaidan Alenko in Mass Effect and I suffered nearly half the over-all content for his character. Another big problem is the obvious sense of entitlement that can often follow "romances" like a plague - I'm not pointing any fingers here so please don't take it as a personal insult. If one Character is better suited to someone's personality, but they find themselves unable to romance them as a consequence of a specific choice they have made (be it in an in-game choice, or customization choice), only to discover that other people are capable of "romancing" the same Character, they can often feel as though they've been cheated. Now, I'm a huge fan of rejection, for a variety of reasons ranging from Player Customization(Dwarf won't date an Elf) to In-Game consequences(Paladin won't date a homicidal maniac), so I never feel that I should be entitled to a specific relationship with a specific character, but I know from personal experience that people can sometimes feel as though their personal choices have caused the writers to "railroad" them into unforeseen consequences and their options have suffered as a result. Public outcry can be the downfall of character integrity and this is one of my greatest fears, not just for Project Eternity but for RPGs as a whole. I don't know... I know there are times that "romance" can offer a great deal of emotional turmoil to a Player that can be difficult to forget, I certainly won't forget the moment that Valen captured my heart or Gannayev discovered his insane mother in the Sunken City. But I also know that "romances" can do more harm than good if they aren't handled with care, attention and the completely impartial and objective professionalism of the writer. Wow: That was way longer than I intended, my apologies for ranting. I'd like to make it perfectly clear that everything in this post is my opinion, and in no way do I intend to force my opinion on anyone as fact, nor is it my intention to offend anybody on either side of this endless debate.