Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Why on earth would a lack of romance OPTIONS be considered a good thing?

 

It's literally less role playing in your role playing game?

 

The key word is of course optional. Have romanceable characters but not a requirement. If players decide that they don't like any of the options, they're free to friend zone them all. This is making a pretty important role playing decision for everyone.

some people just have a intense hate for rpg romance

as for lack of romance are not good or bad for obsidian now

because they clearly unable and unwilling to put effort into romance

some hope obsidian keep trying

but that may come years latter

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Why on earth would a lack of romance OPTIONS be considered a good thing?

 

 

Its a good thing when

  • The creators aren't interested in implementing it
  • The narrative doesn't support it in a way that isn't contrived
  • The development of romance options would take resources away from creating other interesting role playing opportunities
  • The development wouldn't support the creation of romances within the scope of the project in general
 

I'm sure there are more reasons we could come up with.  Don't get me wrong, I think there is a place for a well implemented and thought out romance or romances in a RPG, but that doesn't mean it has to be present in the game anymore than, say, swords or relationships with your parents.

 

I understand your points, and perhaps my opening post was a bit sharper than it should have been, but here's my take if you don't mind a bit of a rebuttal.

 

Romance is one of the biggest and most important aspects of the human condition. Some might call the search for love and acceptance THE single most important factor in that human condition. 

 

So completely divorcing this aspect of playing a role from a role playing game is essentially removing one of the biggest aspects of playing a character. Love, and the search for it, is one of the biggest motivators out there. Romance done well can add far more to a story than romance done poorly can detract from a story. (IMO of course.)

 

Some of the best video games of all time have featured love as a central component, and I have a hard time listing a bunch of all-time great RPGs that completely ignored this aspect.  A short list of my favorite RPGs of all time:

 

Planescape: Torment - Has romances

Witcher 3 - Has romances

Jade Empire - Has romances

Mass Effect Trilogy - Has romances

Dragon Age: Origins - Has romances

Kotor - Has romances

Kotor 2 - Has romances

Neverwinter Nights 2 - Has romances

Dragon Quest VIII - Has romances...really, really bad ones but they are there.

Star Control 2 - Has romance

Final Fantasy IV - Has romance

Final Fantasy VI - Has romance

Final Fantasy IX - Has romance

Persona 3 - Has romances

Persona 4 - Has romances

Fallout 1+2 - No real romances to speak of tbh.

The Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind - No real romances to speak of.

Chrono Trigger - Has romance, but very little.

 

I do get that romance in video games can be a challenge. I get that they can be poorly written. I get that they can be expensive and time consuming to implement.

 

But the list of all-time great RPGs that ignores this side of the human condition is pretty damn short

 

This is obviously excluding games that fall more into the "action RPG" trope than actual RPGs. I like From Software's games but there's precious little roleplaying even if they are labeled as "Action RPGs" because it has stats and leveling up and stuff. I consider most of them to be all-time great games, but I don't consider them to be RPGs.

What a puff!

nowt

Link to post
Share on other sites
Romance is one of the biggest and most important aspects of the human condition. Some might call the search for love and acceptance THE single most important factor in that human condition.

 

But does this automatically mean that it's a good thing to have in a game?

 

I would argue that many people seek things in games they cannot have in real life. It's escapism after all for many players. Firing guns and killing terrotists in a game might be more appealing to a player who wants to escape and office job for some time than it would for a Navy Seal I guess. So survival specialists actually like survival games? So... if you've had you fair share of romances in real life you might not be that much interested in romances in games compared to people who lack that experience.

 

I know that romances in RPGs were ok for me when I was younger. But I went out to see the world, studied, met some nice ladies, got older, married, procreated... If I look at RPG romances now - they are often so cringeworthy and awkward. And silly, too. The dialogue options - jeez... So I'd prefer if developers put their effort into something else entirely. Like in general - in any game. Except maybe if it's about human relations and focusud on that thing in the first place.    

Edited by Boeroer

Deadfire Community Patch: Nexus Mods

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a difference between a game that contains a love story and a game that has romance options. When tailored into the game such as Final Fantasy VIII it works. When you get accosted with dialogue options to screw each and every squad mate in your team it becomes rediculous.

 

The thing is, romance options in video games are never ever tied into the story. They are a separate system where you usually build up affinity through either dialogue options or a gifting system or whatever and then end up with the option to engage in a relationship. Although some people enjoy this it has absolutely no relevance to the game and story itself. This is what makes it especially weak and sometimes even annoying. Especially if you're bothered in conversation by a person of an indesirable sex.

 

Sometimes romance is especially hard to avoid as well. I remember playing Mass Effect 1 and I went around the ship to talk to my crew members. I just was nice to everyone and when Liara came aboard I saw some options to date her so I was like, ok let's do that. And she said: Yea but you're already dating Kaidan. I'm like: wait whut?? I am? No I'm not. Screw that guy. I don't even like him. I was so glad I got the option to get him to guard the bomb and blow up, which turns into my default choice now whenever I replay the game, just as a statement.

 

In Mass Effect 2 it was even worse, because it was far mroe obvious. Whenever my character talked to Jacob Taylor she always balanced herself on his table in a provocative manner and 3 of the 4 dialogue options would be something like: "Should I take off my pants now or...?". Whenever I now play Mass Effect 2 I never talk to Jacob anymore unless I get to do his personal mission and that's it.

 

Romance options are usually poorly implemented. Check out Final Fantasy X which combined a love story with options and screwed it up. You get the option to choose for Rikku, Yuna and Lulu in several conversation options. This results in the character riding a motorbike or something later in the game with that particular character. But the game still has a love story between Tidus and Yuna. That's just messed up in my oppinion. Either have a meaningful love story (likely with predefined characters) or implement romance and make it part of the story. Even though the romancing in Dragon's Dogma was incredibly flawed (especially in earlier patches where you would automatically romance the person you talked to the most such as the guy that runs the inn) it actually does make it part of the story. I would like to see more of that and not just go through a bunch of dialogue options only to see my characters have fake sex without showing any specific body parts.

 

There's also a lack of gender specific appriciation for your character. I mean a gay person would automatically know I wasn't gay, but in video games NPC's are oblivious to my personality altogether. I am not offended by gay people mind you, but I am not interested in a gay relationship myself. It is the same the other way around. There is no way to express your preference in a game unless you actually get the option to tell the other person to back off. It is so unnatural. Of course in certain cases it would be hard to read, but in some cases it would be very easy to read.

 

Do I think romance in video games adds something to the game itself? No, I don't. If it is implemented well, it can be fun. But it is mostly implemented so poorly that it becomes annoying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding getting the guy from the inn to save at the end in Dragon's Dogma, it was funny the first time though when he just randomly popped up. :lol:  Less funny on any later run through where you're angling for someone specific (before it was fixed). :p

 

In respect to romance being a major aspect of the human condition, this is why I'm pro-romance in games - provided the developers are interested in including it in a thoughtful and well realized way and it fits the scope of the game.  Not every story needs to have romance (or even has the capacity for it within the narrative) though, and I think that extends to video game narratives. 

 

IMO you could control for sexual orientation within character creation allowing you to pick your orientation (although I can't help but feel this may just create different concerns in players to the concerns now expressed). The developer would also have to think through what it means within the context of the game as well (how do people know? should a particularly unperceptive character still be able to try to flirt with you even if they don't match your pick (and how will the people who don't like the flirting opposite of the PC's orientation feel)? Is there a meaning in the greater world to this pick and this ability to perceive what this pick is?). There's also risks of having a particular orientation having less choice and therefore feeling unsatisfying if not done carefully (while debate exists on the quality/usefulness of BGII's romances, I think its fair to say the female PC is a poor choice when one is looking at the romance options without modding the game vs the male PC) and trying to avoid disparity might create vanilla, numbers based romance story arcs (2 for you, 2 for you, 2 for you...) or hiding companion reactivity behind the romance so the only really good npc is the one you romance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding getting the guy from the inn to save at the end in Dragon's Dogma, it was funny the first time though when he just randomly popped up. :lol:  Less funny on any later run through where you're angling for someone specific (before it was fixed). :p

 

In respect to romance being a major aspect of the human condition, this is why I'm pro-romance in games - provided the developers are interested in including it in a thoughtful and well realized way and it fits the scope of the game.  Not every story needs to have romance (or even has the capacity for it within the narrative) though, and I think that extends to video game narratives. 

 

IMO you could control for sexual orientation within character creation allowing you to pick your orientation (although I can't help but feel this may just create different concerns in players to the concerns now expressed). The developer would also have to think through what it means within the context of the game as well (how do people know? should a particularly unperceptive character still be able to try to flirt with you even if they don't match your pick (and how will the people who don't like the flirting opposite of the PC's orientation feel)? Is there a meaning in the greater world to this pick and this ability to perceive what this pick is?). There's also risks of having a particular orientation having less choice and therefore feeling unsatisfying if not done carefully (while debate exists on the quality/usefulness of BGII's romances, I think its fair to say the female PC is a poor choice when one is looking at the romance options without modding the game vs the male PC) and trying to avoid disparity might create vanilla, numbers based romance story arcs (2 for you, 2 for you, 2 for you...) or hiding companion reactivity behind the romance so the only really good npc is the one you romance.

You make some good points and therein lies also the difficulty with effective romantic integration in your game. If you choose to let the player decide what romance he/she will pursue then you dive into the whole gender diversity discussion where you would want every possible option to be pursuable. I find that really annoying because this means that every character is bi-sexual and that makes no sense. Sexual orientation is not a choice, it belongs to the person. And having specific orientation also has certain characteristics in personality, albeit more for some than others. Also, I feel that different sexual orientation as a whole is now forced into any type of medium even if it has no relevance to the type of medium. All of a sudden I need to have a gay person express his feelings to me because the game needs to be catered to gay people as well. Trust me, in my professional carreer that has now lasted for over 22 years I have never ever encountered this and I work with men all the time, including gay men. In a professional environment sexual orientation is not something that is a topic. There should be respect for those people 100%.

 

On the topic of romance being important to our lives, yes of course. That's why 99% of the songs are love song and a lot of movies include any type of romance. I'm not against a love story, I'm against random romance in a video game. So either implement it and do it well and that means you have to put some extra work into it, or don't do it at all. Like I said I rather have a prescripted romance than a random one that is there through dialogue options. Sure, it will probably be a heterosexual one because most people are heterosexual, but at least it is enjoyable.

 

You cannot make everyone happy with these games and some people will always be offended by any type of portrayal. I feel that should not impact a designers choice. I remember watching the show Orphan Black where the character Felix Dawkins is obviously gay (portrayed by Jordan Gavaris who is heterosexual) had some form of backlash from people being offended by the character. I really liked his character because he was a lot of fun to watch. Complaints ranged from "stereotyping" to "he should be played by a gay person". You see movies and games always work on stereotypes or exagerration, but you never hear people complain about the big buff dude that is total bad ass all the time. That's because he doesn't represent a group even though there are many similarities with actual people. With any type of character that has a specific gender issue or sexual orientation seen as minority they feel that anyone displaying that in a movie is a representation. They are wrong to see it that way, but it always happens. And nowadays people feel that these complaints need to be heard and acted upon. It's all downhill from there.

 

I should also note that the games I mentioned like Dragon's Dogma, Mass Effect and such have a very low amount of women playing. This is about 15%. In 2016 it was reported by the "Entertainment Software Association" that 41% of video gamers is female. While that statement is correct it does not specify which type of video game has a certain type of player. More in depth studies show that women mostly play phone puzzle games or simulation games on their phone. This is also reflected by the amount of women playing the above games.

So taking into account what type of players you have I would suggest the development company to focus their efforts on delivering quality for their main demographic over diversity. Now I'm not saying you should ignore the 15% of women that play and you should also not ignore diversity whether it is character diversity or diversity in sexual orientation. I do say that if you venture there you should take extra steps to make it work and not put it in there because "reasons". A lot of the games I played just threw it in there. In that case I rather not have romance at all.

Edited by AeonsLegend
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you played Pillars? Good God the romances are half assed and downright insulting haha. Obs is playing to their strengths.

I have *so* man hours in Pillars 2. And the romances are not nearly as bad as all that. Xoti is awesome and I will romance her every damn time.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Have you played Pillars? Good God the romances are half assed and downright insulting haha. Obs is playing to their strengths.

I have *so* man hours in Pillars 2. And the romances are not nearly as bad as all that. Xoti is awesome and I will romance her every damn time.

 

That's because you secretly enjoy a zealot with 0 intelligence. We're not all like that my friend :p

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Romance is one of the biggest and most important aspects of the human condition. Some might call the search for love and acceptance THE single most important factor in that human condition.

 

But does this automatically mean that it's a good thing to have in a game?

 

I would argue that many people seek things in games they cannot have in real life. It's escapism after all for many players. Firing guns and killing terrotists in a game might be more appealing to a player who wants to escape and office job for some time than it would for a Navy Seal I guess. So survival specialists actually like survival games? So... if you've had you fair share of romances in real life you might not be that much interested in romances in games compared to people who lack that experience.

 

I know that romances in RPGs were ok for me when I was younger. But I went out to see the world, studied, met some nice ladies, got older, married, procreated... If I look at RPG romances now - they are often so cringeworthy and awkward. And silly, too. The dialogue options - jeez... So I'd prefer if developers put their effort into something else entirely. Like in general - in any game. Except maybe if it's about human relations and focusud on that thing in the first place.    

 

 

FWIW, I'm also actually happily married, although without the children. My wife didn't want to have them and it wasn't a deal breaker for me. But, just from my own personal experience (which is obviously anecdotal), I don't think it's necessarily true that just by having had romances in real life it makes seeing them in media (movies, tv, games, books) any less interesting.

 

I do agree with your points that games are escapism to a very large degree, but not that romances can't be done well. Or that if they can't be done perfectly you shouldn't even try. That logic seems faulty to me because you can apply it to just about anything in a game.

 

For example, at times in RPGs  I've made "moral dilemma" type choices that lead to the game judging the response in a way that I didn't think was correct (or at least in a way I didn't anticipate). Like romance, morals and ethics are a pretty complicated subject and sometimes they can be done in a pretty hamfisted sort of way. At times I've found myself shaking my head trying to imagine what a writer was thinking. But I don't think the logical conclusion to them being done poorly is not to bother trying!

 

My argument is that developers should just try and do romance options better, not to just figure that it can't be done or that it'll just be hard.

 

I can understand how you personally no longer find them interesting. That's fine. But you earlier asked the question on whether or not having them is inherently a good thing to have in a game.

 

To that, I would answer that it depends on the genre. In an RPG, I personally think a glaring lack of romance is fairly immersion breaking. But naturally I can't speak for everyone else's immersion level based on this factor so YMMV.

 

Edit: Sorry for the slow response by the way. Was sick over the last few days. :)

Edited by nocoolnamejim
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Have you played Pillars? Good God the romances are half assed and downright insulting haha. Obs is playing to their strengths.

I have *so* man hours in Pillars 2. And the romances are not nearly as bad as all that. Xoti is awesome and I will romance her every damn time.

 

That's because you secretly enjoy a zealot with 0 intelligence. We're not all like that my friend :p

 

Pfft. She's naive, not stupid. She has four more points of int than Eder. :grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Why on earth would a lack of romance OPTIONS be considered a good thing?

 

Its a good thing when

  • The creators aren't interested in implementing it
  • The narrative doesn't support it in a way that isn't contrived
  • The development of romance options would take resources away from creating other interesting role playing opportunities
  • The development wouldn't support the creation of romances within the scope of the project in general

 

I'm sure there are more reasons we could come up with.  Don't get me wrong, I think there is a place for a well implemented and thought out romance or romances in a RPG, but that doesn't mean it has to be present in the game anymore than, say, swords or relationships with your parents.

 

 

I understand your points, and perhaps my opening post was a bit sharper than it should have been, but here's my take if you don't mind a bit of a rebuttal.

 

Romance is one of the biggest and most important aspects of the human condition. Some might call the search for love and acceptance THE single most important factor in that human condition. 

 

So completely divorcing this aspect of playing a role from a role playing game is essentially removing one of the biggest aspects of playing a character. Love, and the search for it, is one of the biggest motivators out there. Romance done well can add far more to a story than romance done poorly can detract from a story. (IMO of course.)

 

Some of the best video games of all time have featured love as a central component, and I have a hard time listing a bunch of all-time great RPGs that completely ignored this aspect.  A short list of my favorite RPGs of all time:

 

Planescape: Torment - Has romances

Witcher 3 - Has romances

Jade Empire - Has romances

Mass Effect Trilogy - Has romances

Dragon Age: Origins - Has romances

Kotor - Has romances

Kotor 2 - Has romances

Neverwinter Nights 2 - Has romances

Dragon Quest VIII - Has romances...really, really bad ones but they are there.

Star Control 2 - Has romance

Final Fantasy IV - Has romance

Final Fantasy VI - Has romance

Final Fantasy IX - Has romance

Persona 3 - Has romances

Persona 4 - Has romances

Fallout 1+2 - No real romances to speak of tbh.

The Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind - No real romances to speak of.

Chrono Trigger - Has romance, but very little.

 

I do get that romance in video games can be a challenge. I get that they can be poorly written. I get that they can be expensive and time consuming to implement.

 

But the list of all-time great RPGs that ignores this side of the human condition is pretty damn short

 

This is obviously excluding games that fall more into the "action RPG" trope than actual RPGs. I like From Software's games but there's precious little roleplaying even if they are labeled as "Action RPGs" because it has stats and leveling up and stuff. I consider most of them to be all-time great games, but I don't consider them to be RPGs. 

 

 

Excellent points raised, I have also never understood this aversion to optional Romance in RPG, in fact I consider it a lacking design component  if you create an immersive RPG but leave out Romance 

 

In RPG we can generally  create customized characters, use multiple spells, create potions, craft weapons and armor, go on epic quests, interact with people, make moral choices , explore ancients lands ..the list goes on and on with features yet we...dont want Romance, why? Romance is a normal part of human interaction, emotion and defines part of our humanity so to exclude it seems counter productive to role-playing realistic characters who we like to identify with which is the essence of role-playing our own way. 

 

No Romance is the antithesis of an immersive and inclusive " RPG World "   :wub:  

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Why on earth would a lack of romance OPTIONS be considered a good thing?

 

Its a good thing when

  • The creators aren't interested in implementing it
  • The narrative doesn't support it in a way that isn't contrived
  • The development of romance options would take resources away from creating other interesting role playing opportunities
  • The development wouldn't support the creation of romances within the scope of the project in general

 

I'm sure there are more reasons we could come up with.  Don't get me wrong, I think there is a place for a well implemented and thought out romance or romances in a RPG, but that doesn't mean it has to be present in the game anymore than, say, swords or relationships with your parents.

 

 

I understand your points, and perhaps my opening post was a bit sharper than it should have been, but here's my take if you don't mind a bit of a rebuttal.

 

Romance is one of the biggest and most important aspects of the human condition. Some might call the search for love and acceptance THE single most important factor in that human condition. 

 

So completely divorcing this aspect of playing a role from a role playing game is essentially removing one of the biggest aspects of playing a character. Love, and the search for it, is one of the biggest motivators out there. Romance done well can add far more to a story than romance done poorly can detract from a story. (IMO of course.)

 

Some of the best video games of all time have featured love as a central component, and I have a hard time listing a bunch of all-time great RPGs that completely ignored this aspect.  A short list of my favorite RPGs of all time:

 

Planescape: Torment - Has romances

Witcher 3 - Has romances

Jade Empire - Has romances

Mass Effect Trilogy - Has romances

Dragon Age: Origins - Has romances

Kotor - Has romances

Kotor 2 - Has romances

Neverwinter Nights 2 - Has romances

Dragon Quest VIII - Has romances...really, really bad ones but they are there.

Star Control 2 - Has romance

Final Fantasy IV - Has romance

Final Fantasy VI - Has romance

Final Fantasy IX - Has romance

Persona 3 - Has romances

Persona 4 - Has romances

Fallout 1+2 - No real romances to speak of tbh.

The Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind - No real romances to speak of.

Chrono Trigger - Has romance, but very little.

 

I do get that romance in video games can be a challenge. I get that they can be poorly written. I get that they can be expensive and time consuming to implement.

 

But the list of all-time great RPGs that ignores this side of the human condition is pretty damn short

 

This is obviously excluding games that fall more into the "action RPG" trope than actual RPGs. I like From Software's games but there's precious little roleplaying even if they are labeled as "Action RPGs" because it has stats and leveling up and stuff. I consider most of them to be all-time great games, but I don't consider them to be RPGs. 

 

 

Excellent points raised, I have also never understood this aversion to optional Romance in RPG, in fact I consider it a lacking design component  if you create an immersive RPG but leave out Romance 

 

In RPG we can generally  create customized characters, use multiple spells, create potions, craft weapons and armor, go on epic quests, interact with people, make moral choices , explore ancients lands ..the list goes on and on with features yet we...dont want Romance, why? Romance is a normal part of human interaction, emotion and defines part of our humanity so to exclude it seems counter productive to role-playing realistic characters who we like to identify with which is the essence of role-playing our own way. 

 

No Romance is the antithesis of an immersive and inclusive " RPG World "   :wub:  

 

Romance or Romancable companions. A lot of RPG's have some sort of romance, but no romancing options. In fact most RPG's that have romance do not have this as an option to choose who to romance. I would wager that about 99% of RPG's do not have romance options.

 

I don't think it is immersive or a design component that should be in the game. Most people that play these games (men) don't really care for romancing because we just want to explore, slay beasts or other and go on an epic adventure. Romance is secondary. Like I said in my previous response I don't mind it being in the game, but if it is half assed like almost every game that incorporates it, then I rather not have it at all. I rather see a well thought out predefined romance than going through a dialogue tree with cringe worthy options to ultimately see some poorly animated sex scene.

 

I mean when I was younger and this was new I was intrigued. Seeing how it has developed over the years it's more in your face and we have to make everyone bisexual otherwise we lose out on options. That's just really making this romance a total bs experience. It's not immersive at all, it's annoying and in most cases out of place.

 

Trust me, romance options in rpg's is a gimmick. The games won't sell any more or be judged any better with romancing options in them.

Edited by AeonsLegend
Link to post
Share on other sites

Star Control 2 - Has romance

Wait, what? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I sure don't remember it, and you're gonna have a hard time convincing me it was important to the game.

 

Hell, to be honest I don't think any of them were particularly important. The Witcher 3 seems like the only one where the romance is at all important to the game, and even then I don't think the game would've lost all that much by cutting it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

Excellent points raised, I have also never understood this aversion to optional Romance in RPG, in fact I consider it a lacking design component  if you create an immersive RPG but leave out Romance 

 

In RPG we can generally  create customized characters, use multiple spells, create potions, craft weapons and armor, go on epic quests, interact with people, make moral choices , explore ancients lands ..the list goes on and on with features yet we...dont want Romance, why? Romance is a normal part of human interaction, emotion and defines part of our humanity so to exclude it seems counter productive to role-playing realistic characters who we like to identify with which is the essence of role-playing our own way. 

 

No Romance is the antithesis of an immersive and inclusive " RPG World "   :wub:  

 

, but if it is half assed like almost every game that incorporates it, then I rather not have it at all. I rather see a well thought out predefined romance than going through a dialogue tree with cringe worthy options to ultimately see some poorly animated sex scene.

 

 

You make some good points and I agree with several of them 

 

I respected Bioware immensely for there inclusive Romance options that catered for all sexual orientations but lets say going forward that was too complicated for other development companies or ostensibly too  divisive to include. Then we should just have straight characters with heterosexual Romance options

 

I would be fine with that because even though this sounds selfish I would rather have some Romance arcs than none in the interests of immersion 

 

And also its important to remember that the actual cheesy dialogue lines are just  the foundation of the Romance RPG experience, they  not suppose to really represent a " real Romance "  because any game is going to be limited in its ability to capture the nuances and complexity of RL Romance ( women are complicated you know  ;) and courting them and winning real affection takes time..I endeavor to still get this right  :biggrin:   ) 

 

I use to be a DM in the AD&D 2nd edition world, I have a vivid and complex imagination and I am happy to RP my Romance experience outside what the game provides in the context of dialogue. So for example in BG2 I was very happy with the beautiful Viconia Romance option. That is normally how I always play  most aspects of any RPG, I literally can  see myself and or  the party and have a vicarious connection throughout the game and the RP journey 

Edited by BruceVC

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

And also its important to remember that the actual cheesy dialogue lines are just  the foundation of the Romance RPG experience, they  not suppose to really represent a " real Romance "  because any game is going to be limited in its ability to capture the nuances and complexity of RL Romance ( women are complicated you know  ;) and courting them and winning real affection takes time..I endeavor to still get this right  :biggrin:   ) 

 

And that is sort of the problem I have been having with romance RPGs for a while.

 

There is certainly a place for pulpy fiction, and “everyone wants to bang me” power fantasy. Alpha Maybe OuterWorlds would work with shallow but fun romance options (difficult to judge due to how little of it we have seen). But as in general narratives grow more complex and nuanced, while characters’ relationship capabilities remain in James-Bond fantasy territory then something feels off.

 

RPGs isn’t a real life simulation - romance doesn’t need to be part of every RPG, if it isn’t a needed part of the experience. Attaching shallow romance to companions just doesn’t cut the mustard anymore for me.

 

Why not have an RPG which would explore relationships. Still, I would rather see one complex relationship, over multiple choose-your-fetish choice. Just as adding new weapons for combat, without a mechanical difference isn’t enough, adding many romances without narrative/character depth might sound good from PR standpoint, but isn’t worthwhile investment IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And also its important to remember that the actual cheesy dialogue lines are just  the foundation of the Romance RPG experience, they  not suppose to really represent a " real Romance "  because any game is going to be limited in its ability to capture the nuances and complexity of RL Romance ( women are complicated you know  ;) and courting them and winning real affection takes time..I endeavor to still get this right  :biggrin:   ) 

And that is sort of the problem I have been having with romance RPGs for a while.

 

There is certainly a place for pulpy fiction, and “everyone wants to bang me” power fantasy. Alpha Maybe OuterWorlds would work with shallow but fun romance options (difficult to judge due to how little of it we have seen). But as in general narratives grow more complex and nuanced, while characters’ relationship capabilities remain in James-Bond fantasy territory then something feels off.

 

RPGs isn’t a real life simulation - romance doesn’t need to be part of every RPG, if it isn’t a needed part of the experience. Attaching shallow romance to companions just doesn’t cut the mustard anymore for me.

 

Why not have an RPG which would explore relationships. Still, I would rather see one complex relationship, over multiple choose-your-fetish choice. Just as adding new weapons for combat, without a mechanical difference isn’t enough, adding many romances without narrative/character depth might sound good from PR standpoint, but isn’t worthwhile investment IMO.

 

the feeling that everyone attract to the main character for no reason is a obvious problem

it mostly work in mass effect as long as player doesn't make shepard's face too horrific

but in other rpg romancable npcs should be attract to certain style of character not just because the main character is the main character

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that you never actually have to do anything to win someone over. All you need to do is use jedi mind trick and then you're golden. Romance in these games is a gimmick, it's not rewarding. It doesn't even feel like romance to be honest.

Yes but  remember the whole point of Romance in RPG is to actually succeed in the Romance, this may sound obvious but it has nuance 

 

If the Romance could fail, and they can fail, then you cant RP or imagine  that aspect of the RPG  journey. So for example lets say you wanted to join the Dark Brotherhood in Skyrim and you go on these quests that possibly  allow you to do this but then you are denied actually joining the DB your character is simply not part of the DB so on the rest of the journey in the Skyrim world you cannot RP this development 

 

Romance is a small part of the character and party interaction in almost all RPG but it still should exist so we can explore this avenue of immersive party and or follower interaction  :wub:

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the point of the romance can't be to succeed in a game without a pre-generated PC character1.  Romances should be able to fail, and should be able to fail for things outside of the player's choice.  Otherwise it is a pointless narrative device that violates the idea of allowing the player choice and consequences to those choices.  We've talked about the idea that romances can be important in a narrative sense before, but having a romance that doesn't end well can surely be just as narratively interesting? 

 

Additionally you should not have to romance a NPC to have an "immersive party" or "follower interaction" as that is forcing the player to meta-game (romance whether their PC would or not) in order to get an interesting NPC follower and is IMO poor design (and part of the reason, I think, people haven't always appreciated romances in games as it typically has meant exchange an interesting general character for one that is only interesting if you romance them).

 

1I think once you have a pre-generated PC character, you can make the argument that you are RPGing a specific character about which certain aspects of their story can be comfortably designed around the character and not around player choice, like in a lot of JRPGs.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the point of the romance can't be to succeed in a game without a pre-generated PC character1.  Romances should be able to fail, and should be able to fail for things outside of the player's choice.  Otherwise it is a pointless narrative device that violates the idea of allowing the player choice and consequences to those choices.  We've talked about the idea that romances can be important in a narrative sense before, but having a romance that doesn't end well can surely be just as narratively interesting? 

 

Additionally you should not have to romance a NPC to have an "immersive party" or "follower interaction" as that is forcing the player to meta-game (romance whether their PC would or not) in order to get an interesting NPC follower and is IMO poor design (and part of the reason, I think, people haven't always appreciated romances in games as it typically has meant exchange an interesting general character for one that is only interesting if you romance them).

 

1I think once you have a pre-generated PC character, you can make the argument that you are RPGing a specific character about which certain aspects of their story can be comfortably designed around the character and not around player choice, like in a lot of JRPGs.

I was thinking about the first paragraph and you right, in fact it would be contrary to immersion if all Romance  in an RPG couldn't fail. Like other relationships in a game they must be subjected to the same possible outcomes or it would be truly  unbelievable and ruin the excitement of choosing this action or decision when  there was no consequence

 

But the debate around " immersive parties "  will always be subjective, I still believe Romance is part of normal human interaction and should be included. Of course there are other things that define " immersive interaction "  with party members in a RPG and those will always be part of RPG where you interact with followers and party members.

 

Also the Romance arc should be optional, not obligatory, so its not like it is forced on you during the quest 

Edited by BruceVC

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Don't forget that you never actually have to do anything to win someone over. All you need to do is use jedi mind trick and then you're golden. Romance in these games is a gimmick, it's not rewarding. It doesn't even feel like romance to be honest.

Yes but  remember the whole point of Romance in RPG is to actually succeed in the Romance, this may sound obvious but it has nuance 

 

If the Romance could fail, and they can fail, then you cant RP or imagine  that aspect of the RPG  journey. So for example lets say you wanted to join the Dark Brotherhood in Skyrim and you go on these quests that possibly  allow you to do this but then you are denied actually joining the DB your character is simply not part of the DB so on the rest of the journey in the Skyrim world you cannot RP this development 

 

Romance is a small part of the character and party interaction in almost all RPG but it still should exist so we can explore this avenue of immersive party and or follower interaction  :wub:

 

I don't really understand what you're trying to say here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Don't forget that you never actually have to do anything to win someone over. All you need to do is use jedi mind trick and then you're golden. Romance in these games is a gimmick, it's not rewarding. It doesn't even feel like romance to be honest.

Yes but  remember the whole point of Romance in RPG is to actually succeed in the Romance, this may sound obvious but it has nuance 

 

If the Romance could fail, and they can fail, then you cant RP or imagine  that aspect of the RPG  journey. So for example lets say you wanted to join the Dark Brotherhood in Skyrim and you go on these quests that possibly  allow you to do this but then you are denied actually joining the DB your character is simply not part of the DB so on the rest of the journey in the Skyrim world you cannot RP this development 

 

Romance is a small part of the character and party interaction in almost all RPG but it still should exist so we can explore this avenue of immersive party and or follower interaction  :wub:

 

I don't really understand what you're trying to say here.

',

Sorry, let me explain another way. You said basically that Romance feels cliched and false in a RPG as its very easy to Romance someone 

 

I was saying Romance in a RPG is designed to be easy on purpose, you are suppose to succeed in Romance because like other RPG components they provide a challenge but the end goal should be for the player to succeed 

 

So in other words if RPG made Romance dialogue and actions overly complicated  it may defeat the point of encouraging Romance ...it was just a thought, Im not sure how relevant it is because I dont see how a game designer could "  make Romance arcs overly complicated "   :biggrin:

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Don't forget that you never actually have to do anything to win someone over. All you need to do is use jedi mind trick and then you're golden. Romance in these games is a gimmick, it's not rewarding. It doesn't even feel like romance to be honest.

Yes but  remember the whole point of Romance in RPG is to actually succeed in the Romance, this may sound obvious but it has nuance 

 

If the Romance could fail, and they can fail, then you cant RP or imagine  that aspect of the RPG  journey. So for example lets say you wanted to join the Dark Brotherhood in Skyrim and you go on these quests that possibly  allow you to do this but then you are denied actually joining the DB your character is simply not part of the DB so on the rest of the journey in the Skyrim world you cannot RP this development 

 

Romance is a small part of the character and party interaction in almost all RPG but it still should exist so we can explore this avenue of immersive party and or follower interaction  :wub:

 

I don't really understand what you're trying to say here.

',

Sorry, let me explain another way. You said basically that Romance feels cliched and false in a RPG as its very easy to Romance someone 

 

I was saying Romance in a RPG is designed to be easy on purpose, you are suppose to succeed in Romance because like other RPG components they provide a challenge but the end goal should be for the player to succeed 

 

So in other words if RPG made Romance dialogue and actions overly complicated  it may defeat the point of encouraging Romance ...it was just a thought, Im not sure how relevant it is because I dont see how a game designer could "  make Romance arcs overly complicated "   :biggrin:

 

Ok I see. Thanks for the explanation. The thing is romance isn't complicated in real life. The reason I'm not digging the romance options in RPG's is because there is a specific dialogue line, usually with colors or heart indication that makes it so you romance someone. Hence the jedi mindtrick reference I made. 

 

And why shouldn't you be able to fail at romancing? Millions of people fail at that stuff every year. The thing that is lacking in a game is actually being "in love". You can't role play that, that's absurd. It'd be very likely that a team member would leave or you'd tell a team member to leave when the love isn't reciprocated. Can't have that **** bother anyone when you're trying to save the world/universe. In fact being in love will probably have you make dumb decisions during important events as well. Fail at combat and so forth. And even íf the love is reciprocated, having your loved one near you in dangerous situations will probably have you make dumb decisions as well.

 

Everything about romance in video games is so unrealistic that perhaps it is even better to have it be a gimmick.

 

Everyone swoons at Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet in Pride and Prejudice, but that isn't because Elizabeth chose a specific dialogue option and then they lived happily ever after. No the whole romance stumbles, fails, seems not to exist and then still.... there it is. That stuff isn't possible when people roleplay. You can make a much much more powerful romance with predfined characters. One of my favorite romantic part in a story is the one in Cowboy Bebop. For those who haven't seen it, it's not a happy ending. I'm not saying every love story should be like that, but it's another example of something that probably wouldn't work in a game without predefined characters unless a lot of time is spent on actually giving your character a personality. Like for instance Commander Shepard. Characters that have no voice such as in Outer worlds or Pillars of Eterinity (for the sake of immersion as some people say) also have no personality. So real love stories can't exist imo.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Don't forget that you never actually have to do anything to win someone over. All you need to do is use jedi mind trick and then you're golden. Romance in these games is a gimmick, it's not rewarding. It doesn't even feel like romance to be honest.

Yes but  remember the whole point of Romance in RPG is to actually succeed in the Romance, this may sound obvious but it has nuance 

 

If the Romance could fail, and they can fail, then you cant RP or imagine  that aspect of the RPG  journey. So for example lets say you wanted to join the Dark Brotherhood in Skyrim and you go on these quests that possibly  allow you to do this but then you are denied actually joining the DB your character is simply not part of the DB so on the rest of the journey in the Skyrim world you cannot RP this development 

 

Romance is a small part of the character and party interaction in almost all RPG but it still should exist so we can explore this avenue of immersive party and or follower interaction  :wub:

 

But you could RP somebody who failed to join the DB and now has a vendetta against them for not recognizing your greatness. Or any of a million other things related to failing to join the DB. In a romance, you could roleplay unrequited love, or that you hate them because of rejection, or a million other things.

 

RP isn't limited by failure to achieve a goal.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...