[The Official Romance Thread]

What about we define what  a romance is before talking about it. I've got the feel people ask for romances, as a game feature and not as a part of some side-stories or character background, yet when it comes to find good examples (or what we'll consider so) of romances, we end up talking about something that has nothing to do with the feature itself but more with good writing overall.
So I'm confused

[The problem of being rich as Croesus present in most RPGs]

Yes it is. It is an insane Diablo like clone. I still don't see though why a professional enchanter charging insane costs wouldn't fit into lore. I also think it fits into the real world.

 

I don't mind obnoxious people charging insane fees on things only them can provide, especially if you gain power in the process.

What I'm saying is that diablo-like games (and diablo II and III) did that for gameplay purposes, to fit the game design. Whether it's coherent with the lore or smthg doesn't really matter in that case, I just don't like these design logics.

That's why I don't see how it'd fit in a game like PoE that doesn't rely on that kind of "farming sessions" (whether they feel forced on not isn't relevant). So if a game like this features people charging a lot for enchantment when you can enchant yourself, it would basically mean your enchanting abilities are useless by the time you meet these people. Or your ability match 'em and they become the useless enchanters. Either way something is out of place.

[The problem of being rich as Croesus present in most RPGs]

You find that the only acceptable system is one where you never run too short on money yet never hoard too much ? That's purely delusional, unless some very automatic game design is featured. I don't mind having too much money at the end of BG as much as I'd HATE a game designed to artificially tax me everynow and then on stupid BS.
 

Like using money to

• manipulate a region's economy
• influence a region's politics
• buy intangible things like respect, secrets, and silence
• frame/incriminate/trick enemies that you don't want to confront directly

 

Beside buying secrets (which both never cost much nor matter much), the rest goes far above the simple balance of the currency system.

I understand that it's obviously more interesting to explore gameplay mechanics instead of basic/overused tweaks. But the point of moneysinks and such is that it's easy to implement, it doesn't alter the gameplay in any other way than giving money hoarding purpose.

Really, the only problem as being filthy rich is being unable to profit. The only problem would be that there's actually no difference in being extremely rich and not being at all.

All we need is magic lore-friendly stuff really. Who cares if there's tons of money left in our pockets again by the end, why would that matter at the end of the game ?

[The Official Romance Thread]

I actually find Sawyer's comments that Chapter 2 is overcrowded with content to be pretty inexplicable, because to me, that is the game.

 

That's exactly what he meant. Though Sawyer is a professionnal gentleman that wouldn't hurt the feelings of anybody by claiming out loud the utter truth of bg2 design.

 

Although totally agree on BG investigation plot. It's the kind of stuff that always hook me (and is why I immediatly liked New Vegas as well, though it's definitely not the same scope of investigation ofc) and the contaminated-iron weapons made the world even more tangible in a way than the sequel. For all the reasons you've already mentioned.

[The problem of being rich as Croesus present in most RPGs]

Strangely enough I found an answer to this problem in an ARPG which I didn't find all that great, Torchlight 2. I was never actually poor in that game, but I could enchant all of my equipment, remove enchantments, and reenchant for massive amounts of money. The enchantments weren't usually all that sizable, but sizable enough to make a small difference at the price of obscene amounts of money. And why not? I didn't have anything better to do with the money. In Oblivion you could waste tons of money on trainers, which also wasn't so bad. Again if you trained intelligently you could get a fairly minor gameplay bonus for massive amounts of money. The problem with most RPGS is they don't offer a really worthwhile way for one to spend their money. I like the idea of paying someone massive amounts for a kind of magic service that is rare and hard to come by. 

 

Isn't Torchlight in a slightly different category though ? I haven't played it but I picture it as one of those endless diablo-like that feature insane costs for high level craft for the sake of kicking the player's butt to go venturing forth again and again in order to collect money to be more powerful to be able to collect more money and my brain is melting.

I don't think such a logic fits a game like PoE. I still believe the best, and most lore-friendly, solution is to feature the same kind of shops/dudes selling some noteworthy, mighty and magical stuff. With the nice item description that goes with it where you actually realize you've been fooled and it's a damn painted wooden stick you just bought for 12000gc.

[The problem of being rich as Croesus present in most RPGs]

* The sollution doesn't only need to be in how the player *spends* his cash, but also how they *accumulate* that cash.

 

Well obviously the problem resides in accumulating a lot without being able to spend enough on relevant stuff. So mechanically you either make sure the player doesn't accumulate much, or is able to spend important sums.

 

Hence :

 

shops need to sell something that you want to spend money on. Compare KOTOR1 (money = good) to KOTOR2 (money = very useless) for example. Unique items in shops always help.

 

But you somehow call that "goldsinks" ? (Or I don't really get what a goldsink represent to begin with, this is about these very very expensive magical items right ?)

 

Although, potions and bandages as the main good to buy... meeeeh. Though if these are somehow either expensive or limited I guess. Because that obviously doesn't just concern the money situation when it comes to healing items.

[The Official Romance Thread]

 What is worth asking for is good characterisation and quality writing.

 

Indeed.

 

the actual introduction of 'quotas', where there has to be a romanceable woman, a romanceable gay, romanceable lesbian, and a romanceable antropomorphic

 

This shows what romances, as a gimmick, are truly about. I'm starting to understand why we uncounsciously thought of food and buffet while searching for analogies to romances. It's indeed become like a love menu.

[The Official Romance Thread]

What does a buffet truly need ?

 

[Combat in PoE]

I'm basically judging by how much tactics and positioning mattered. It mattered some in DAO

 

If by tactics you mean clicking an ability when the cooldown is up, then DAO is somehow tactical indeed. Mage gameplay is especially tactical.

[The problem of being rich as Croesus present in most RPGs]

There's an even more important question that also include this one, which is the relevance of shops selling goods, armors, weapons, magic stuff etc. A ton of recent rpgs made money damn dispensable simply because the stuff you can buy doesn't reach, at all, the level of efficiency/rarity of the stuff you can found or be rewarded of.
Something I loved about BG or IWD was discovering these dudes who would sell some crazy magic stuff for an impressive cost, making the player even more envious about it and making big amounts of money relevant. Although hate it when shops have randomized stuff to sell, making magic items the most banal thing ever.

 

So I totally agree, but I'd also add the need for making the money not only useful, but also relevant and rewarding the accumulation of big amounts of gold by something else than knowing you'd never run short of it.

 

Though I'm aware that, especially in BG, you'd still be rich as hell at the end of the game, but I'm confident you see what I mean.

[Romance options]

let them hire a writer

 

 

 

[Rest-Spamming: Good or No?]

Cooldowns is the worst thing that could ever happen to a game like this. Dragon Age combat was already soporific because of that.

[Rest-Spamming: Good or No?]

In the IE games, I wasn't rest-spamming because I was shooting for the shortest possible playthrough calculated in in-game time (days and hours).

 

In the PoE BB though, I've caught myself resting before going into dungeons, if needed by means of returning to the village for the better bonuses.

 

I don't understand the logic behind this swift succession of words. You can avoid rest-spamming in a game as long as there is in-game time ? Yet you're telling us you're totally ok to return to the village, spend some real time doing that, in order to get a little bonus ?

[Angry Joe LOVED Pillars Of Eternity]

 

 

 If so, why is it okay for you to enjoy that but not for someone else to enjoy something you don't?

 

 

Who said that ?

I've said multiple times on this very thread I don't mind romances in rpgs.

 

Romances as a game mechanic feels weird. What I don't understand is why people ask for these game mechanics and justify it by talking about its narrative dimension or its optional aspect.

I didn't mean to say that romances, as a part of a story, doesn't add anything to the game. I even wrote otherwise multiple times on this very thread. The romance game mechanic however, which is what people want, seems to be a very weird thing that doesn't fit well in any game that features it.

Again, doesn't the association of the word "romance" and "mechanic" feels weird to begin with ?

 

I like the scenery in a game, but again you're bringing the matter on the artistic level. We're talking of the romance as a game mechanic dude.

 

"A story is there for the sake of being there"

Really you don't see how a story can bring to the gameplay or the game in general ? You don't see how the story can be an incentive for the exploration and such. What does the romance (AS A GAME MECHANIC) adds to the game, really ?

 

EDIT : Well yeah i'm talking about these romance buttons, gift systems and such since the very beginning ! Guess we weren't sync'd correctly :D

[Angry Joe LOVED Pillars Of Eternity]

 

That's probably because romance and sex are taboo social subjects while violence and murder are normalized in your society (just a guess). You really think you can justify taking pleasure in your pretend character kiiling some other pretend character AND believe that others can't justify a pretend romantic relationship between the pretend character they're playing and some other pretend character? Don't tell me it feels weird to you, I know that already, tell me why the thing that makes you feel weird is actually wrong when it doesn't make everyone feel weird.

 

Do you take pleasure in slaying enemies in rpgs ? I usually do it because it's a way to fulfil the missions. I never said it was about taking pleasure in it, at all, and it's not.

Now what's the point of having the same mechanic applied to develop a romantic relationship that never adds anything to the story, the characters or the fulfilment of tasks and such, I don't know.

I don't mind these kind of things in fire emblem for example, since relationships affect the gameplay via different bonuses and such. I don't see the point of it if it's there for the sake of being there.

 

 

 

 

Bioware are one of the few studios that ever did romance. If you exclude them, because they are not quality enough... well, what games are we even going to talk about? Baldur's Gate? It may be a good game, but in terms of romance and friendship building it was absolutely mediocre, worse than Bioware games even. 

 

 

I didn't mean to say bioware games were all bad or mediocre. But you clearly made a reference to dragon age gift system, and this (and other things) is what makes dragon age a mediocre rpg in my opinion.

 

If friendship and animosity aren't dependent on some player input, then they're simply a constrained part of the story that could be expanded. Games are all about player interactivity with the story, that's the whole point. If you can make a difference in whether an NPC will like or dislike you, then the game is doing something right and if you can't, then you might be watching a movie or reading a book. I'm not saying that every aspect of the story in a game must be interactive, but that's sort of the whole idea behind games.

 

 

Didn't mean otherwise. However friendship/inimity usually triggers automatically depending on the player choices/behaviour. Romances usually are about finding the love button between the things i've mentioned. It's a bit out-of-context and the fact these dialogs could trigger anywhere and anytime during baldur's gate 2 campaign pretty much tells how random and out-of-context these mechanics are.

[Angry Joe LOVED Pillars Of Eternity]

 

 

 

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird?

 

Its a game,  isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

 

Because among all the things that you do steps by steps, mechanically, in a game, the most weird one is indeed developing a romantic relationship between your character and some other one.

I mean the very association of the word "romance" with the word "mechanic" which is all over this thread just... feels very very weird.

 

 

NPC friendship is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character befreind you.

NPC animosity is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character hate you.

NPC diplomacy and stealth in dialogue checks are bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character trust you.

NPC vioence is bad because it's creepy to take pleasure in hurting and murdering a pretend character.

 

 

All of this feels way way less weird than a romantic relationship. Friendship has never been a game mechanic of any good rpg as far as I know. It's either automatic, part of the narration, or featured in sims-like games.

 

In most Bioware games you need to do a loyalty mission/give enough gifts/achieve enough friendship points for REAL friendship to be unlocked. The requirements for romance and for friendship are normally pretty much the same, except for romance you pick a couple flirting lines on top of that.

 

I said good rpgs. Bioware gifts, which they did only once if im not mistaken, is exactly a sims-like game mechanic btw.

 

Although edited before i saw your answer sorry for that :>

[Angry Joe LOVED Pillars Of Eternity]

 

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird?

 

Its a game,  isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

 

Because among all the things that you do steps by steps, mechanically, in a game, the most weird one is indeed developing a romantic relationship between your character and some other one.

I mean the very association of the word "romance" with the word "mechanic" which is all over this thread just... feels very very weird.

 

Though I like romances in stories, I just really don't find it tasteful when it's reduced to a choice between

A) Recomfort

B) Make fun of

C) Don't give a f*ck

"Hmmmm what is the love button ?"

Romances just don't fit well as game mechanics.

 

 

NPC friendship is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character befreind you.

NPC animosity is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character hate you.

NPC diplomacy and stealth in dialogue checks are bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character trust you.

NPC vioence is bad because it's creepy to take pleasure in hurting and murdering a pretend character.

 

 

All of this feels way way less weird than a romantic relationship. Friendship and inimity has never been a game mechanic of any good rpg as far as I know. It's either automatic, part of the narration, or featured in sims-like games. I've never witnessed a dialog which purpose is to determine if the npc adheres or not to your method. It's usually a smooth thing. Unlike romances.

 

If you don't see the difference between convincing a npc to trust you in order to fulfil a mission via a series of speech check and making a lady blush for -no reason- via the same gameplay mechanic, you got a problem.

[Can u explain how death system works? I got confused]

 

Enemy characters have only one health resource and they are dead when that runs out.

 

 

Well enemies using the same system would obviously not make any difference now, would it.

[Similarities between older RPGs and the new ones]

I don't get the point of this topic. It feels like the op just realized that nothing comes out of thin air and that you could reach the ancient times by endlessly rewinding the chains of inspiration. Now I understand that stories inspired by other stories are less (or seem less) original that stories inspired by history events, which feel less original than stories inspired by a day at work or some reminiscence of a dream, but really it's all the same in the process.

Now go, wild soul, and chase down every similarities in the massive world of story-telling. Don't forget your lunch it's gonna take a while.

[Angry Joe LOVED Pillars Of Eternity]

They although react to other characters and events in general.
I think we all agree that a rpg with recruitable companions can only benefit from their reactions to your actions.
That doesn't mean it's about ego-stroking as you present it. it's about giving 'em a bit of believability through the only natural (or it seems natural) way, aka the player's actions.

I fail to see why romances would add anything particular to that aspect. Again, I don't have anything about romances, but they're really dispensable, and as I've said I have yet to see a romance that brings anything to the character concerned, the PC or the world they evolve in.
As Stun said, this seems to be exclusively about ego-stroking indeed. Unlike characters reacting to the player actions, decisions and such, which is about depth and believability. Although non companions react to the player actions and decisions, is that ego-stroking as well ? Is every good rpg out there ego-stroking, and only ego-stroking ?

 

Although they see pc as someone they can travel with, it's nothing particularly cool to know when it concerns a red-dressed wizard that basically use you as a tool. I've seen better ego-stroking.

[Angry Joe LOVED Pillars Of Eternity]

Ego stroking is one main purpose of companion characters, as that will make player feel that his character is important, loved, feared etc

 

 

Strongly Agree

Agree

No Opinion

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

 

Really it's nothing about that. Or Xzar and Montaro, Edwin or Xan make the player feel important and I've failed to see how. I know the first BG didn't put the same depth in its companions background, but they had personality nevertheless.

 

 

[POSSIBLE SPOILERS Modding thread: A simple mod and Console commands]

 

3. Force an NPC

 

Skyrim mods all over again.

[Angry Joe LOVED Pillars Of Eternity]

 

Alien Isolation is the best damn thing that happened to Alien since Alien itself. Yeah I don't like AlienS, sue me !

 

I haven't played Isolation yet but the criticisms I have read about is that you spend too  much time sneaking around and avoiding Aliens than you do killing them, is this is valid ?

 

You can't kill the aliens per say, gameplay-wise the flamethrower is the only way to face the alien, and it only makes it go away. It's indeed a sneaking game overall.

Plus, I don't understand how it's a bad thing unless these people expected a shooter. It's not. It's an alien game

 

Edit : just realized tamerlane already said it all.

[Angry Joe LOVED Pillars Of Eternity]

Alien Isolation is the best damn thing that happened to Alien since Alien itself. Yeah I don't like AlienS, sue me !

[Angry Joe LOVED Pillars Of Eternity]

I suggest you watch his Dragon Age: Inquisition review. It is the only (?) RPG (??????) he has reviewed in the last year so it should give at least some idea of his taste.

 

Fixed.