Jump to content

Gideon Laier

Members
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Gideon Laier

  1. This thread has taken a turn for the worst. And as I read more Q&A's over this game and the subject of companion interaction and romances, I truly feel like I will not play PoE anymore. I've really discovered that story and characters are my number one requirement in RPG's and to hear that Josh won't include romances because they're "too time consuming" or "too difficult to implement correctly" - while straightforward - seems like a cop-out. If they can spend time shooting for Baldur's Gate level of interaction with companions, then going the extra distance and implementing romances shouldn't be a stretch given their ideal foundation of interaction. And if you're bad at writing romances, find someone who is better. Romances add another layer of deeper connection and intimacy to characters that you have grown to care about. They provide another foil for the protagonist and help highlight the changes and character arc that occur throughout the story. They help show the emotional change in the protagonist that occurs throughout the story as well, providing a glimpse beyond the achievements and well-won battles, to help provide a more three-dimensional character. Without Romance, you lack all of that. Even with basic interactions with companions, you lack a sense growth and development with your character - you lack empathy. Companions just become some other person that you're supposed to care about without caring about them. You're supposed to form bonds with, but not too strongly. They go from intimate friends to passing acquaintances, people that are around you to help you beat battle A or to defeat boss B. Yet, I know that the consensus in this thread has been largely anti-romances and I'll concede defeat. But, I know that I'll leave now having given up on this game. The Case for Romance has been given and ignored.
  2. Obsidian is not 'getting it only half right'. They simply have a different approach to characters than Bioware. You seem to prefer Bioware's approach, which is perfectly fine. Although your praise for the Dragon Age 2 companions being independent and not subservient to the player is pretty amusing considering most of them can be bedded regardless of the player character's gender or sexuality. And you can fill their romance meter by giving them gifts. Please tell me what Obsidian does differently with their companions. Please, tell me how New Vegas companions are better? There is no deep interaction between the player and them. What is Obsidian's approach to characters anyway? That they also follow you almost unconditionally and don't care if you blast an innocent bystander. Oh wait, I guess Boone and Arcade get mad if you join Ceaser. Yes, having each character be open to romance, can be seen as bad. But why can't it also be seen as being able to please it's fan base? Being open to gay or straight relationships is a pretty big thing, in my opinion. And yes, while you can give companions gifts, those gifts actually create scenes with DIALOGUE that determines your influence or affection gain. You could give a companion a gift, then end up insulting them or inspiring them. It allows for more personal role-playing. If Bioware is doing it wrong. Then what is Obsidian doing that is right?
  3. Actually, I think now we're on to something. I agree with you that it is a lot more interesting to have companions that share different views and may disagree with you completely - maybe to the point of not joining you or stabbing you in the back. I loved Alpha Protocol. Thought it was so much better than what reviewers said it was. While flawed it had so much potential, and some dynamics of creating friends from enemies and enemies from friends would be a cool aspect to try in other games as well. Heck, I'll even ease off romance. But I'd rather have complex characters and companion interaction than fleshing out combat. I might just like Bioware characters more, sure. But I also like what Obsidian does. I just am tired of having each developer only get it half right, though. I want Bioware characters with Obsidian dynamics, creativity, and writing. I may be beating the romance drum, but that's just because I think it's an easy extension from the companion to player character interaction that I want (and frankly require) anyway. To further the one thing I liked in Dragon Age 2, you'd have companions that would hate you for saving a mage or other characters that would think less of you for turning down gold, etc. I think that concept, or like what's used in AP with how you treat people and how they respond, are ways to really immerse players in their role.
  4. I'm going on a limb here and say you have no idea who you're talking to. "As you remember"... LOL. Simply said; No. I admit hating DA2, so it's chars are not known to me that well.Mordin was pretty funny. So was HK-47. So was Heck. Hell, looks like I remember the funny chars more than the romancable ones. I wonder why... Thank got BioWare didn't decide to make HK-51 (yay for ignoring OE again) romancable. But also a lot less funny or memorable . And butchered their own HK-47 too. Thane, Legion and the DA:O crew is pretty, how do I say it, forgettable? Only Garrus was awesome, in ME1 that is. Once they made him romancable in ME2 (just like Tali) his awesome factor took a deep hit. Need more reasons to hate romance and how it can cheapen a character and it's design/story? While Canderous and Jolee (like the rest of the KOTOR1 crew) had some pretty nice stories, their own personality was kinda, flat, and not really well expended upon. Stories were cool and all, but they didn't really deepen the characters that much, not even Jolee's stories about his wife. No, I am much more interested in characters who DO try to influence you, turn them to their side, view their point of view, rather than just tell story upon story which basically do nothing but be there. KOTOR1's characters, DA:O 's characters, ME characters, they never made me think, they never really questioned me, or tried to influence me. They just tell their stories.To me, I can't think there's anything more interesting to a character than them actively trying to interact with the PC in a meaningful way, put their point up and hold strong to it, rather than simply tell their story and otherwise be the PC's little puppet. Forgive me, because I'm pretty confused here. You're so anti-Romance that you've completely lost me. Because, what I've taken from here is that anything that deals with romance or emotions cheapens the game and you want your companions to actively try and change you? I want my companions to have their own personalities, I want them to challenge my views every now and then, but I think I'd be pretty weird if every character had a PhD in Philosophy and constantly waxed nostalgic and actively tried to convert me like one of those door-to-door Jehovah's Witnesses. And I'm going to politely disagree with you if you think that a character talking about his dead wife makes his character "flat". These are the things that round them out. I get that there are extreme-Bioware haters that froth at the mouth when they hear anything about that company, but if we can put that aside- their games do have some good qualities. Everyone hates DA2, and that's fine, but there were some good parts to it if you look past the bad - namely the characters. You say you don't want companions to become the player's "puppets", that you want them to actively interact with the PC in a meaningful way and hold strong to their points. Well, hear me out, but companions in Dragon Age 2 do this while not being overbearing with Philosophy that wouldn't fit their characters. They maintain their views and actively question your decisions. If they agree with you they would gain Friendship, if they disagreed they'd gain Rivalry - but they wouldn't back down from what they believed and it made for some really interesting interactions, either between you and them or between each other. Even without the optional romances, it was a great system that really fleshed out their personalities. People on these forums keep bringing up how memorable companions from Baldur's Gate or Planescape are. But I'm asking is how memorable are the characters from New Vegas, KotorII, Alpha Protocol, and Dungeon Siege III. I loved all of those games, but I don't think that their characters are stronger and more developed than they are in Bioware games. Describe Cassidy. Desribe Boone. Describe Arcade. I'm sorry, but I don't think they're that well developed because I can't think of much. Boone is... revenge something? Arcade is nice? Cassidy is brash maybe? But describing Morrigan - cunning, secretive, seductive, conflicted. or Sten - stoic, cold, rational, fierce, alien. I think they're better developed as a whole. I could be wrong, and there are some exceptions, but I do think Bioware makes some distinct companions. Also, Wanting Romance IS NOT advocating that EVERYONE be romanceable and that I want to romance HK-47 too zomg!! I want strong characters and strong character interaction. I want a Baldur's Gate and not an Icewind Dale. I think if you have well rounded characters, with their own personalities, that interact with each other and the main character, then I personally don't think it would be that hard to take it one step further and include optional romances. Because that's all that Romance is, additional character development and interaction - nothing more. In fact, I'd say that you're able to explore deeper emotions and philosophy of the characters you romance. I look at Viconia from BG2 and I think that was one of the best created romances. It was complicated, it was hard, but while you were going through it you discovered so much more of her character than you would if you didn't romance her. You discover the things people only reserve for those they trust or care about. It deepens character interaction. And if a little romance didn't kill Baldur's Gate, it won't kill this. I think it's fair to want a deep RPG over a dungeon crawler like Icewind Dale and Dungeon Siege. If Obsidian can't give us great companion interaction (even without romance), i'm going to be severely let down.
  5. Oh, for sure. Minsc and Irenicus will always have a place in my heart as one of the greatest creations from gaming. Nothing stops great writing and great characters. However, I don't think that Romance hurt Baldur's Gate. Because I'm still drawn to Viconia and Jaheira because of their romances. Without those I'd probably never use those characters. Looking at CDProjeckt, I think the Witcher 2 was one of the greatest games I've played. I didn't get pissed that Geralt and Triss had a romance. I don't get pissed that Geralt is searching for Yennefer. It actually adds to the game for me. It rounds out his character and makes him relatable. I'll agree and say that it might not be THE BEST way to create memorable characters, but I think that games are better with it than without. Get back to me once BioWare makes a character with depth like Kreia. They can't? Yes, Kreia was well written, but I don't think she was as good as you remember. Other characters (even non-romance-able ones) that Bioware has created are just as well rounded. Aveline from DA2, Mordin from ME2, Thane, Garrus, Legion, Anders, Sten, Alistair - or from KOTOR1 Canderous, Jolee Bindo... I can go on. What made Kreia cool was that she spoke about philosophy, yet what I think curbs her character a little is that from the get go she takes on the role of a sage/mentor from the very beginning. That's her role, to speak about philosophy. I think it's more impressive when you have characters that aren't trying to directly and overtly influence you, remain themselves, and still make you think about something you haven't before because of their point of view.
  6. Hey NanoPaladin, I agree with you. I wish Romances would be included and I'm actually amazed at how many people hate them in these forums. To me, romance was the difference between Icewind Dale and Baldur's Gate. It's why I don't remember any of New Vegas' companions. Yet, why so many people care about and recognize the companions that Bioware has created (Thane, Garrus, Kaiden, Fenris, Alistair, Anders, etc). I think that the best thing that Dragon Age 2 did was perfect the companion system with their Rivalry vs Friendship mechanic. No matter how you played, you influenced your companions and your companions influenced you. But even outside of DA2, the entire Dragon Age and Mass Effect series really made you feel like you were forming bonds with your squad mates. It's what made choosing just 2 or 3 of them so hard! Romance in games isn't this thing for weird people that can't get girlfriends, that's a horrible argument. With a girlfriend I still loved romance in my games and so did my friends that were also in relationships - it's what we talked about the most when we talked about the game. We didn't talk about the combat or the controls. We were playing an RPG, so we talked about the characters and the story. Even outside of RPG's, romance and friendship are a huge driving force in most stories you'll ever find. There's a difference between making it the main point (which i'm not advocating) vs making it something to complement your already awesome story/game. On the other side of the coin, I do understand that Obsidian has had pretty mediocre track-record with its romances (at least when they tried to implement one) in KOTOR2, Alpha Protocol, and NWN2. But, I think that none of their games suffered because of it. I don't think any games do. And I do think that Pillars can greatly benefit from the inclusion of romance. Otherwise, It seems more and more like Bioware will be the only one left carrying the torch when it comes to companion relationships. And Bioware's problem is that they can't quite craft a story as well as Obsidian can. Yet, Obsidian can't create characters quite like Bioware. It seems that, instead of refusing to do romances, why don't you just choose to implement them well and put some effort into them? If you're going to be including companion interaction in any form, even if it's just friendships, then the extra addition of romances isn't hard at all.
×
×
  • Create New...