A suggestion for the romances you're considering (if any)

[BruceVC]

I really, really hope this won't become a daily thread.

 

Just for that I'm going to start one of my own tomorrow.

 

Lol, that was quite funny

[KenThomas]

I think NPCs being attracted to your PC regardless of their gender is much more believable than NPCs being attracted to your PC regardless of their personality, and increases player choice without sacrificing the important parts of characterization for the NPC. Because 1) I don't find it at all weird that you've got multiple bi people in a group the size of your average party, and 2) the awesome thing about playersexual NPCs is that you can also decide for yourself if you read any of them as straight or gay rather than bi, and play appropriately.

 

I don't think them being attracted regardless of gender is more realistic. Both personal experience and knowledge from science tells us that people are born with their orientation. It's far more common for people to get involved sexually with someone they dislike due to being attracted. Haven't you heard the multitudes of people who complain "my [x] is such a [y]"? They're romantically involved with someone that as a person they do not like, yet they went that route because they were too attracted to them not to.

 

Also about multiple bi people, again personal experience and science do not agree with you. Have you seen the numbers of people who define themselves as bisexual? Gender bending androgyny is not even close to as common as you seem to think.

 

About playersexual npcs, just "reading" them a certain way and having them turn out to be that way, once again, is unrealistic. Since when is anyone what you want them to be, just because you want them to be it? They've got a lifetime of personal history that has determined who they are up to that moment, completely independant of you.

 

I know I've ripped pretty hard on your post. Oddly enough I don't "hate" it or anything or have any emotional involvement whatsoever, nor do I find it poorly written. I simply disagree with essentially every point you made.

[KenThomas]

If there will be a romance - let it be deep, emotional and let it have meaning. And let npc start it. Someone said that the core of rpg players are straight men

 

Sorry this quote is taken WAY out of context of the rest of your post, but typically women do initiate romance with men in our world. They tend to start up the contact, give off the signals, make suggestions etc that lets the male know what his options are. In that particular circumstance, ie straight male player character, I do think this makes sense.

[kenup]

 

Thing is, videogames have a tendency to be heavy-handed and hamfisted when it comes to "emotional engagement" or "romance" because it's usually done to pander to the sort of people who demand such things. If it happens subtly (New Vegas) or humorously (Fallout 2) it's fine. I'm not worried about Obsidian messing it up on their own. What I'm worried about are the people who seem to need this nonsense in their games having some sort of influence on this game. Keep your BioWare out of my chocolate.

 

In MotB every companion had some connection to the plot, either through the player's curse or the wall or both. Romance or not it's good for companions and your treatment of them to have an effect and be affected by the plot. It shows they are not just swords and magic to assist the player. Kotor 2 as well. And it's obsidian, don't compare them to the fanfiction shooter makers that bioware is!

[BSoda]

I (midly) support romances, but regardless: It is completely silly to segregate people proposing doing something and those opposing it to seperate threads. The whole purpose is to debate the merits / costs of a proposal as each individual sees it so that the developers can amuse themselves determine whether or not to include the featuring being discussed. It would be a very short (and boring) thread if the only people allowed to post were people that were for romances.

Hmm, considering that a majority seems to want these romances I'm not so sure that a "positive comments only" thread would be that short.

[KenThomas]

 

Bestiality has been part of human history for a long time now. And "Good" and "Evil" are social constructs like many other stuff. I could justify anything in a game if I wanted but that's not the point.

 

I'm not sure comparing homosexuality to bestiality is helping your case any.

 

I agree with the rest of your post (which I'm sorry I have not quoted), but I don't think that squelching someone's opinion based on a reference they made helps the overall discussion any.

 

Their post was overall cogent and the part of it that you objected to wasn't an endorsement of the act, merely an illustration of the point they were making.

 

I'd prefer if people didn't have to be super careful about word and example choice for fear of being judged over those rather than the merits of their ideas.

[KenThomas]

Hmm, considering that a majority seems to want these romances I'm not so sure that a "positive comments only" thread would be that short.

 

Length of a thread isn't necessarily a very good determination of quality though right? I'm pretty sure a thread like that would go nowhere and wouldn't have much point aside from just a basic post count show of support. In that case I think a poll would work better.

 

Also, the whole idea of "[x] comments only" threads suggests very severe restrictions on what people are allowed to say. As soon as you start doing that, you are telling people EXACTLY what they're allowed to post, completely ruining the point of forums, a place for people to express their opinions in conversation with each other. I mean are you seriously endorsing forums that would say "you are only allowed to post here if your post expresses [x] opinion"?

Edited September 19, 2012 by KenThomas

[Romiras]

Just make a poll with a lot of options for romances and noromanceforme

[BSoda]

Hmm, considering that a majority seems to want these romances I'm not so sure that a "positive comments only" thread would be that short.

 

Length of a thread isn't necessarily a very good determination of quality though right? I'm pretty sure a thread like that would go nowhere and wouldn't have much point aside from just a basic post count show of support. In that case I think a poll would work better.

True...but than again I wonder how much contributions that paint supporters as unhealthy, social shut-ins or retards add to the "quality" of this thread...

Also, the whole idea of "[x] comments only" threads suggests very severe restrictions on what people are allowed to say. As soon as you start doing that, you are telling people EXACTLY what they're allowed to post, completely ruining the point of forums, a place for people to express their opinions in conversation with each other. I mean are you seriously endorsing forums that would say "you are only allowed to post here if your post expresses [x] opinion"?

Being supportive to a concept doesn't mean you share the exact same opinion on how to best implement it.

[el pinko grande]

It's also dedicated to having discussions and giving feedback on what we don't want. Romances in video games are terrible and are never done well. They aren't needed for a good story. That's just crazy talk.

 

And I'm not sure why we have another one of these threads when one was closed yesterday.

 

Presumably the other thread was closed because we already have this one; it's been open since Friday.

 

As for the rest of it, nobody is saying they're necessary for a story to be good. There's lots of situations where including a romance wouldn't make any sense. There's no romance in Portal because, well, that would be stupid. It wouldn't fit. There's no romance in Battlefield 3, either.

 

If romance isn't appropriate for the story, by all means, exclude it. But most RPGs, IMO, don't fall into that category. And if you say right from the get-go that you're going to exclude romance, you're denying yourself a powerful storytelling tool. Outside the realm of video games, in movies and books and television, most stories have romance. Why? Because it's compelling. It touches on some really primal **** in the human psyche. Deciding you're not going to deal with romance in your story when it would otherwise be appropriate is like tossing half the tools out of your toolbox before you start a building project. It's an unnecessary and silly self-imposed limitation.

[Grimlorn]

It's also dedicated to having discussions and giving feedback on what we don't want. Romances in video games are terrible and are never done well. They aren't needed for a good story. That's just crazy talk.

 

And I'm not sure why we have another one of these threads when one was closed yesterday.

 

Presumably the other thread was closed because we already have this one; it's been open since Friday.

 

As for the rest of it, nobody is saying they're necessary for a story to be good. There's lots of situations where including a romance wouldn't make any sense. There's no romance in Portal because, well, that would be stupid. It wouldn't fit. There's no romance in Battlefield 3, either.

 

If romance isn't appropriate for the story, by all means, exclude it. But most RPGs, IMO, don't fall into that category. And if you say right from the get-go that you're going to exclude romance, you're denying yourself a powerful storytelling tool. Outside the realm of video games, in movies and books and television, most stories have romance. Why? Because it's compelling. It touches on some really primal **** in the human psyche. Deciding you're not going to deal with romance in your story when it would otherwise be appropriate is like tossing half the tools out of your toolbox before you start a building project. It's an unnecessary and silly self-imposed limitation.

It's not appropriate in RPGs. It's never been done well and always feels tacked on. And your point doesn't make sense. The same could be said about making sure to include romances which are crap btw in games. Go play Bioware's games if you like romances. DA3 will be out before Eternity.

[Rose]

I favor romances. My wishes are these (keep in mind they are only wishes, I understand some things could be too complicated and time consuming to include):

 

One, I'd like that the orientation of the LI is their own and doesn't change based on the sex of the PC. Two, I'd like it to be possible for there to be minor disagreements in the developing relationship that don't necessarily break the romance, because really, everyone squabbles. It's not the end of the world. Three, that the romance isn't dependent on the LI bringing it up- I'd like the PC to actually have to do some legwork here and be able to initiate interactions... actually, I'd like that for both friendships and romances... and four, that even if the romance isn't directly tied into the main game and so its major development ends before the game does, there can still be some small player forced or timed interactions to remind the player that their PC did engage in a relationship. Or maybe interactions with non-party NPCs that remind you- some random guy or gal hits on or threatens or what-have-you at the PC and the LI reacts.

 

I'd like it to be possible to have friendship and romance paths, meaning that if a romance is declined, a separate and distinctly developed platonic relationship storyline can occur if you choose to spend time getting to know the NPC. Or maybe a declined romance could spiral into a spiteful, undermining party member who stabs you in the back later in revenge or jealousy of a romance that you DID accept.

 

As far as the actual romance stories themselves and saying things like "PLEASE DON'T MAKE IT CHEESY" and whatnot... I leave it to the writers. I've got faith in their ability to weave satisfying stories... sometimes cheese can be endearing if done correctly, you know? I just wanted to include what I'd like to experience in the course of the game after having played other ones.

[qloher]

People who are against romance, I believe, deep inside simply do not perceive RPGs as a proper full-fledged form of art, but rather something else, even if they don't fully recognize this position of theirs. Otherwise how can one seriously deny a medium that is supposed to examine human nature in all it's manifestations to properly touch a subject as crucial to sentient beings as love?

[Tale]

People who are against romance, I believe, deep inside simply do not perceive RPGs as a proper full-fledged form of art, but rather something else, even if they don't fully recognize this position of theirs. Otherwise how can one seriously deny a medium that is supposed to examine human nature in all it's manifestations to properly touch a subject as crucial to sentient beings as love?

Because they rarely touch it well. I hate to abuse metaphors (which is a lie, I love to), but it's like looking at macaroni pictures in the middle of an otherwise colorful painting.

 

It's also overdone and given too much attention in the public eye. I doubt you can disagree that a rather large amount of RPGs end up having it in some capacity. And not every RPG needs to be about the same themes as the rest. People would like a game that's different.

[Grimlorn]

I favor romances. My wishes are these (keep in mind they are only wishes, I understand some things could be too complicated and time consuming to include):

 

One, I'd like that the orientation of the LI is their own and doesn't change based on the sex of the PC. Two, I'd like it to be possible for there to be minor disagreements in the developing relationship that don't necessarily break the romance, because really, everyone squabbles. It's not the end of the world. Three, that the romance isn't dependent on the LI bringing it up- I'd like the PC to actually have to do some legwork here and be able to initiate interactions... actually, I'd like that for both friendships and romances... and four, that even if the romance isn't directly tied into the main game and so its major development ends before the game does, there can still be some small player forced or timed interactions to remind the player that their PC did engage in a relationship. Or maybe interactions with non-party NPCs that remind you- some random guy or gal hits on or threatens or what-have-you at the PC and the LI reacts.

 

I'd like it to be possible to have friendship and romance paths, meaning that if a romance is declined, a separate and distinctly developed platonic relationship storyline can occur if you choose to spend time getting to know the NPC. Or maybe a declined romance could spiral into a spiteful, undermining party member who stabs you in the back later in revenge or jealousy of a romance that you DID accept.

 

As far as the actual romance stories themselves and saying things like "PLEASE DON'T MAKE IT CHEESY" and whatnot... I leave it to the writers. I've got faith in their ability to weave satisfying stories... sometimes cheese can be endearing if done correctly, you know? I just wanted to include what I'd like to experience in the course of the game after having played other ones.

So you want a relationship simulator instead of a RPG?

[Grimlorn]

People who are against romance, I believe, deep inside simply do not perceive RPGs as a proper full-fledged form of art, but rather something else, even if they don't fully recognize this position of theirs. Otherwise how can one seriously deny a medium that is supposed to examine human nature in all it's manifestations to properly touch a subject as crucial to sentient beings as love?

Are you serious? So people who don't like romances in video games are unable to perceive art in video games? Nice insult. Maybe you should take a look at a lot of older RPGs. They were never about examining all of human nature in all of its manifestations. Especially romance. They were about adventuring, questing, killing monsters, not roleplaying getting laid. You guys are crazy, glorifying something that boils down to a couple conversations and a sex scene. Oh but that's art right? Edited September 19, 2012 by Grimlorn

[Golgothar]

I would love to see complex romances, and usually non easy ones!

Something like your companion constantly teasing you but never letting you get any, that usually is pretty nice dialog to read. Then eventually your actions in a given story part might lead to continue that romance or not.

 

I do however strongly believe that the romances should be tightly linked with the story and your decisions and not something like if in the first hour of play i give 100 gifts to NPC xx i get laid. Or even like in mass effect if you want to hav ea romance you need to make sure you explore all the conversation options and always check if NPX xx has something to say to you, that leads to a sort of dare i say "romance grind" that has absolutly no fun in it.

 

Golg

Edited September 19, 2012 by Golgothar

[Tale]

Please stick to discussing the topic and not each other. If you must make claims and insinuations about other people, it would be advised to ignore the thread.

[Grimlorn]

For you guys to get these complex relationships where relationships are difficult to build and there are fights with your love interest, you'd have to build the game around the romance and forget about building an actual RPG. Don't you guys realize that when you ask for these "complex" relationships? The game would cease to be a RPG.

Edited September 19, 2012 by Grimlorn

[Lucas]

People who are against romance, I believe, deep inside simply do not perceive RPGs as a proper full-fledged form of art, but rather something else, even if they don't fully recognize this position of theirs. Otherwise how can one seriously deny a medium that is supposed to examine human nature in all it's manifestations to properly touch a subject as crucial to sentient beings as love?

Are you serious? So people who don't like romances in video games are unable to perceive art in video games? Nice insult. Maybe you should take a look at a lot of older RPGs. They were never about examining all of human nature in all of its manifestations. Especially romance. They were about adventuring, questing, killing monsters, not roleplaying getting laid. You guys are crazy, glorifying something that boils down to a couple conversations and a sex scene. Oh but that's art right?

 

Back in 1985, I so wanted to romance one of the members of Bard's Tale's "review board" so I could become a wizard faster

 

Hmm...ok, maybe not.

[l3loodangel]

People who are against romance, I believe, deep inside simply do not perceive RPGs as a proper full-fledged form of art, but rather something else, even if they don't fully recognize this position of theirs. Otherwise how can one seriously deny a medium that is supposed to examine human nature in all it's manifestations to properly touch a subject as crucial to sentient beings as love?

 

This guy has great points about games being art. Start from 5:25 and watch till the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBETU-uOGh8&feature=plcp

Edited September 19, 2012 by l3loodangel

[qloher]

Because they rarely touch it well.

But if something is rarely being done good it doesn't mean the whole idea should be discarded period. Everything starts somewhere. Game industry is how much old really? Imagine if movie industry ditched romance plots altogether after having a couple of first black-white silent movies about love that tanked? That would be insane, wouldn't it?

Also if there is someone who can break the tendency, do the job right and show the world how should it be properly handled, it is Obsidian. And what is a better occasion than a Kickstarter project with no publisher over their shoulders?

[Tale]

Because they rarely touch it well.

But if something is rarely being done good it doesn't mean the whole idea should be discarded period.

I don't support discarding it "period." I'm making no argument that Dragon Age and Mass Effect should stop.

 

Also if there is someone who can break the tendency, do the job right and show the world how should it be properly handled, it is Obsidian. And what is a better occasion than a Kickstarter project with no publisher over their shoulders?

The publisher tends to be the one asking them to include them. I suspect your idea of a well done romance and their idea would conflict. Sawyer himself was saying after NWN2 that if they can't be done well, they shouldn't. All those conditions you state seem like a better argument for avoiding it.

 

That said, I'm about 90% certain they'll be included. Maybe just 1 or 2. And they might not even be traditional. Won't dare guess on that, I was betting against Dwarves and Elves. But I suspect they'll be closer to Neeshka or Annah than Jaheira and Morrigan.

[Labadal]

If an Obsidian employee could promise me there are no romances in this game, I'll pledge $1000. I'm totally serious.

[TwinkieGorilla]

In MotB every companion had some connection to the plot, either through the player's curse or the wall or both. Romance or not it's good for companions and your treatment of them to have an effect and be affected by the plot. It shows they are not just swords and magic to assist the player. Kotor 2 as well. And it's obsidian, don't compare them to the fanfiction shooter makers that bioware is!

 

I'm not talking about removing things which Obsidian did well. I'm talking about not including things which nobody does well.

 

Hmm, considering that a majority seems to want these romances.

 

A majority of who? People flooding this site? Same thing happened to the WL2 forums during their KS campaign. Once people realized they weren't getting another touchy feely BioWare style game they either exclaimed very loudly and pulled their pledges or simply lost interest.

 

As for the rest of it, nobody is saying they're necessary for a story to be good.

 

That's true. They're not.

 

People who are against romance, I believe, deep inside simply do not perceive RPGs as a proper full-fledged form of art, but rather something else, even if they don't fully recognize this position of theirs. Otherwise how can one seriously deny a medium that is supposed to examine human nature in all it's manifestations to properly touch a subject as crucial to sentient beings as love?

 

Are you saying that A) There has been a videogame which has properly touched on this subject and B) that videogames are even a slightly decent medium to handle these topics? See, that's the problem. Love just seems too weighty a concept for these scenarios. It always comes off as trite:

 

PC: I like you want to kiss?

NPC: I want to know you better.

PC: Hey, tell me a story!

NPC: Story.

PC: Now a kiss?

NPC: Ok, I love you now!

 

(right-click = touch butt, left-click = touch crotch)

 

And yet another brilliant examination of humankind's capacity for complex emotional relationships! But hey...benefit of the doubt. PS:T did a pretty good job examining weighty concepts. Thing is...it didn't take itself too seriously and it didn't bog itself down with cheap pandering to people looking for romance (and the little bit of it which was in there felt frivolous and unnecessary).

Edited September 19, 2012 by TwinkieGorilla