No romance!

[Epaminondas]

I tend to think that these things are important because we make them so. If someone played the game without knowing or caring whether there was a romance, he or she would most likely be put off by a bad effort. ...Or impressed by a good one. I agree with the folks who don't want a romance and for the reasons they don't want one. ...But demanding a ban on romances because catering to the public for a romance denies creative authority to the design team is the same as demanding inclusion of a romance. What we should demand is that whatever creative juices we've hitherto enjoyed should have free reign to create something equally beloved in the future. That means trusting the design team. Romances aren't bad in and of themselves. They are only as bad as their execution, and that execution based on the bedrock of pleasing every minute faction is what's wrong. Like the fellow said up above, and pardon me but it's far too late and I'm far too tired to look, but making a whole slew of shallow and lame romances in order to appease every taste is simply a waste of time. Making one or two that doesn't impose itself on the player is worthy of the effort.

[Big-Ben]

 

 

As much as it might shatter your entire sense of reality to absorb this fact, not everyone uses Steam as a platform so it isn't a proper metric. Current estimates are 40% regardless of what Valve says.

 

Microsoft owns both State of Decay 2 and Sea of Thieves also, they didn't release either for Windows 7 or 8. Microsoft's studios only support the current OS because that's how they roll.

 

 

It will be, kinda, because Steam is the only announced platform at the time so you're kind of stuck. Your fact may be "correct" but you're SOL on the OS thing unless you plan on playing on PS4 or XB1.

[SonicMage117]

That "fact" isn't correct though and I highly doubt the statistical evaluation is either.

 

Alot of publishers and choosing other platforms such as Battle.Net, Origin, GoG and Epic Games Store and are reaping the consequences, it's never good. See, everyone - including Microsoft is learning that people don't like having multiple launchers, especially when it's one title they want to play it.

 

Most recently, SuperGiant facing the adversity of choosing Epic Games Store ovee Steam, just check their forums and see the fans dropping like flies. Even CDPR making smart decisions by choosing Steam over GoG (which they own?). Microsoft is still putting first party games on Steam, perhaps there are a select few on Windows 10 Store because of a cross-buy option, but that doesn't say much...

 

Ahd then there's always the pc users who dislike Steam, will say "I'll never buy on Steam" on the Steam forums but then mark their profiles private not realizing that people can still see what they play on Steam. The devs and publishers know this

[Chairchucker]

 Even CDPR making smart decisions by choosing Steam over GoG (which they own?).

 

I would've said 'as well as' rather than 'over'. I haven't gotten the impression that they've favoured Steam over GOG.

[cheesealmighty]

 

 

 

 

My bad. I meant it would not support other operating systems like Windows 7.

You mean the 2009 OS that mainstream support ended on January 13, 2015? I am shocked that Obsidian isn't supporting Windows 7.

 

 

Yes, the 2009 one that nearly 40% of the desktop market still uses and has no desire to upgrade. Now that Obsidian is Microsoft they won't support their older OS's. Keep sucking up I'm sure they're just about to make you a mod.

 

Around 30% of Steam gamers use Win 7. Less for gamers in the West, the target market. Less among FPS gamers. Obsidian, Private Division, and Microsoft will have statistics on the market, they won't leave 40% on the table. Microsoft don't decide on OS support they're not publishing. Extended support ends 2020, desire to upgrade is incoming.

 

 

As much as it might shatter your entire sense of reality to absorb this fact, not everyone uses Steam as a platform so it isn't a proper metric. Current estimates are 40% regardless of what Valve says.

 

Microsoft owns both State of Decay 2 and Sea of Thieves also, they didn't release either for Windows 7 or 8. Microsoft's studios only support the current OS because that's how they roll.

 

 

Have you ever heard of statistical sampling? Steam platform offers enough of a sample to provide a view into the whole gaming community. So, %25.

 

And I'd wager a good sum that most of these devices are old systems, unable to run the game in the first place. Since aside from the mad haxxors with some odd ideas about freedom and some just simply stubborn folk, everyone with the technical knowhow already upgraded to Win10. 

 

And finally, they obviously ran some numbers, decided Win7 wouldn't have good return on investment, so they didn't bother. What we think does not matter here. Only the bottom line matters.

[slopesandsam]

 

Here is my three-point explanation of why I don't really like romances (as they've been implement thus far) in RPGs:

 

2. They're unrealistic.  Maybe it's just me, but my real-life experience of romance has never been a situation where I was interested in someone who was indifferent towards me, and I won them over with my words and deeds.  Nor has anyone managed to win me over when I was initially indifferent towards them.  In fact, I've found that the opposite is usually true: people have been immediately interested in me, but I've managed to balls it up by saying or doing the wrong thing, or I've been interested in someone until they said or did something that really turned me off.

 

 

Games by and large are at some level Mary Sue simulators. People fall in love with you because it's a fantasy and isn't at all realistic. This is also why in a game like Obvlion you can somehow be an Archmage, Arena Champion. Guildmaster of the Fighter's Guild, the head of the Thieves Guild, the hero of Kvatch and Cyrodill and lastly Speaker for the Dark Brotherhood. It's completely and utterly preposterous but it's a thing that CAN happen so I tend to just leave my brain at the door.

 

I don't disagree with you actually but games are well, games and have to be at some level, gamey.

 

 

There might be something to that.  The fantasy of actually being able to do something about the fact that the object of your affections has no real interest in you is probably one that appeals to...a lot of people.  I think it would have appealed to me a lot more when I was younger - but I still also think I would have found it unsatisfying even then, because I wouldn't have able to keep myself from seeing through the fiction to the gamification.

 

(I also always had issues with the RPGs that let you become the big boss badass of every faction the way you describe.  That kind of thing would also kill my immersion, to a degree.  Which is why I have always preferred the types of RPGs Obsidian make, where you have to make hard choices, and certain avenues are locked because of your character build or the factions you've joined, etc.)

[neotemplar]

Hmm, they launched a twitter poll where 42% vote pro, 7% against and 51% say "don't care".

Huge difference with this forum's general mood

I wonder what is the purpose of this poll

 

+1 to those who suggest a thematic flaw. Like you try to romance, get several rejects and get a complex 

A good joke on romance in games and fits the general mood.

[SonicMage117]

Hmm, they launched a twitter poll where 42% vote pro, 7% against and 51% say "don't care".

Huge difference with this forum's general mood

I wonder what is the purpose of this poll

 

+1 to those who suggest a thematic flaw. Like you try to romance, get several rejects and get a complex

A good joke on romance in games and fits the general mood.

It's because members on this forum usually possess the "We speak for everyone" type of mentality, I'm guilty of that as well but once we look to the outside world, reality only proves the opposite.

 

We forget that even though Jrpg is niche compared to other genres like FPS, it's still a hell of alot further along than Crpg's so with that said, Jrpg fans alo typically like visual novels, dating sims and aythihg with romances - it's no surprise really.

 

The thing is alot if those players don't care because they don't care about the writing quality. It's most likely the type of gamer that cares more about the gameplay than the story being 100% well written. It's hard to judge though because we can't pinpoint exactly what they want from the games they want to play.

Edited December 13, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Mannock]

 

 

And there's romances in Planescape: Torment, Jade Empire, etc.

 

I'd argue there's a difference between writing some dialogue options that might lead to a romantic encounter with a couple of the companions vs the full-on dating sim-esque mechanics that seem to have become the norm in RPGs.

 

Jade Empire might be the worst and best implementation of romance ever. Really simple to implement, bring back the good/evil meter and then just a few checks of dialogue in one conversation.

 

Every single new game, people ask for the same ****: romance, multiplayer, crafting, different views, turn-based/VATS... Obsidian are constantly fighting feature creep as it is. This is not the way to design things. People will keep banging these drums in every chat, forum, survey, and audience questions.

 

Someone claimed Dragon Age: Origins was first with romances in a game. Someone gave examples of games with romances which were released prior to Dragon Age: Origins and I just chimed in with more examples.

 

I wasn't giving an opinion of which games had good or bad romances. :shrugs:

[Epaminondas]

Sure folks in this board sometimes present things as if they're talking for a larger group. That doesn't matter. They're just advocating their position. Whatever argument works best for them is perfectly legitimate, but better arguments (or more persuasive which isn't exactly the same) will generally win out over bad ones.

 

I will always advocate for the design team to follow a creative vision. I don't want romances, but I would much rather see a game with romances that were central to the game than a half-assed hackneyed game without them. That's why I always take these threads with a grain of salt. I guess I've changed over the years because I used to be more fervent in my contempt of romances but now I just wait to judge until I see how the game plays.

[Triple - A Foxy Lad]

Sure folks in this board sometimes present things as if they're talking for a larger group. That doesn't matter. They're just advocating their position. Whatever argument works best for them is perfectly legitimate, but better arguments (or more persuasive which isn't exactly the same) will generally win out over bad ones.

 

brb, im gonna try this out at work.

[bugarup]

Hmm, they launched a twitter poll where 42% vote pro, 7% against and 51% say "don't care".

Huge difference with this forum's general mood

 

 

Eh, makes sense -- people always complain louder against something than for, and folks who don't care about romances don't care to post about them either. 

[Boeroer]

Plus: it's Twitter. There are so many users that will vote for anything even if they don't plan being a part of it in any way.

 

But even here:

I mean have you followed the poll for the Black Isle Bastards in the Deadfire subforum? Votes came in... one year after the Fig campaign ended.

Edited December 14, 2018 by Boeroer

[Epaminondas]

 

Sure folks in this board sometimes present things as if they're talking for a larger group. That doesn't matter. They're just advocating their position. Whatever argument works best for them is perfectly legitimate, but better arguments (or more persuasive which isn't exactly the same) will generally win out over bad ones.

 

brb, im gonna try this out at work.

 

Well... did it work? :huge grin:

[Monte Carlo]

Have spent much time pondering this.

 

Romances, actually, aren't *really* the problem IMO.

 

90% of people who tolerate and / or enjoy romances aren't *really* the problem, either.

 

It's the other 10%. Basically, they are a plague vector who will destroy your game/ community. So Zero Tolerance makes complete sense when you think about it.

[Epaminondas]

It's the other 10%. Basically, they are a plague vector who will destroy your game/ community. So Zero Tolerance makes complete sense when you think about it.

This is basically where I stand. There is no way to implement a romance on a creative level without ending up pandering to ever increasingly marginal interests. At some point, you get what someone mentioned up above, a whole slew of extremely shallow minigames in order to woo npcs.

 

EDIT: I actually think they should have the PC married to someone already and then the minigame can be NPCs trying to seduce you. You have maintain enough willpower (on a scale, of course) or you fall under his/her/its spell and cheat on your partner. Then, when your lovely wife smells the other girl on your person, you can role-play either coming clean and pleading with her to stay with you or making a skill check for lying.

Edited December 13, 2018 by Epaminondas

[SonicMage117]

Who knows, there may be some romance easter eggs.

 

We might just find a secret room where we can romance a hamster named Boo. I reckon there are members here that are into that sort of thing

[Big-Ben]

 

It's the other 10%. Basically, they are a plague vector who will destroy your game/ community. So Zero Tolerance makes complete sense when you think about it.

 

Full agreement here. The oddest part of the fanbase usually is the part that somehow gets exposure. Imagine my horror for instance when I mention I like old school Sonic games and people only ever want to talk about the atrocities that have spawned from the fan art community.

[bugarup]

 

It's the other 10%. Basically, they are a plague vector who will destroy your game/ community. So Zero Tolerance makes complete sense when you think about it.

 

Yeah, lets stop with making RPGs altogether, because 10% of genre's fans are Codex types. 

[Mannock]

Have spent much time pondering this.

 

Romances, actually, aren't *really* the problem IMO.

 

90% of people who tolerate and / or enjoy romances aren't *really* the problem, either.

 

It's the other 10%. Basically, they are a plague vector who will destroy your game/ community. So Zero Tolerance makes complete sense when you think about it.

But that imagined "10%" exist for a number different functions and features for any RPG. So if you're gonna have zero tolerance for all those features, then you'll have no game at all basically.

[Big-Ben]

Let's just ban all video games. Then no on can complain about features because there will be none.

[Wormerine]

Let's just ban all video games. Then no on can complain about features because there will be none.

Or simply ban all players. 

[Chairchucker]

Have spent much time pondering this.

 

Romances, actually, aren't *really* the problem IMO.

 

90% of people who tolerate and / or enjoy romances aren't *really* the problem, either.

 

It's the other 10%. Basically, they are a plague vector who will destroy your game/ community. So Zero Tolerance makes complete sense when you think about it.

 

What is this conclusion based on besides 'this is the viewpoint I want to condemn'?

[Malcador]

 

Have spent much time pondering this.

 

Romances, actually, aren't *really* the problem IMO.

 

90% of people who tolerate and / or enjoy romances aren't *really* the problem, either.

 

It's the other 10%. Basically, they are a plague vector who will destroy your game/ community. So Zero Tolerance makes complete sense when you think about it.

 

What is this conclusion based on besides 'this is the viewpoint I want to condemn'?

 

 

Hey, don't deride the very basis of discussion on this forum. 

[daven]

 

The point's that there int no romance around there.