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

[l3loodangel]

Because most of that 100K budget is for writing resources (85k in the example given, but the number made up anyway ).

 

Dude that's a budget... Do you even understand how companies work? They can outsource people or they can hire people based on their budget! So telling that it should be used for writing or VO (the most expensive part) makes zero sense.

I know it is made up, though the cost imo should be close to the truth, as VO, animations and etc. are expensive.

[Lurky]

Oh god, not this again.

 

The romance thread with the poll was locked not because there was already another romance thread, but to let people calm down. People were getting argumentative, trying to defend their position without really listening to the others, retreading the same points over and over. Nothing was gained from that discussion, because it was getting nowhere.

 

And the discussion is still getting nowhere. The writers at Obsidian are the people who have to decide on this, not you. And you aren't exactly presenting a good argument for your side if you can't acknowledge even a little validity to the other side's position. Consensus in this topic is clearly impossible, so why don't you try to collect a list of pros and cons for your position without relying on constant confrontations, and let the devs decide? That is going to be far more helpful for them, you know.

 

 

 

 

Hell, I'll even try to contribute something to such lists if you want. Just... spend your energies on something productive, will you? As the tongue-in-cheek saying goes, arguing on the internet is like running at the special olympics: even if you win, you're still retarded.

Edited September 19, 2012 by Lurky

[TwinkieGorilla]

That's where you are loosing me. Chess = tactics = combat. Not a role play.

 

Ok, let me find you then.

 

Classic cRPGs were games, not romance simulators. Those of us who've understood the WL2 and PE Kickstarter campaigns want a game, not a romance simulator. The end.

[Grimlorn]

I mean what are these people compensating for? Lack of love in life? Lack of friends?

The supply of stupid arguments like this seems endless.

Do you play cRPGs to compensate for your lack of killings in real life? Or the lack of looting the houses of strangers?

Yes I am compensating for the lack of adventure in my life and exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life and boldly going where no man has gone before.

 

So if that's true then the pro-romance crowd is compensating for a lack of relationships and romances in their lives. Sounds sad. I feel sorry for you guys.

 

So you would want to start looting every crate you come across in, just so you could trade the items for that one replica sword? But you only use the sword to mindlessly kill bandits and monsters(ooooohhhh MONSTERS!), and not actually have a reason to use it, say protect your loved ones?

 

And don't feel sorry for anyone, or make any assumptions for them. They probably enjoy their lives more than you think.

 

People want romances as part of a whole. There is this thing called immersion and suspension of disbelief. They do not want to just be spawned in a dungeon full of monsters and slaughter their way to the final boss without reason. People like story and characters, dialogue and text, lore and exposition. You seem like you would prefer Oblivion and Skyrim over PS:T or BG.

 

I personally won't have a problem if they are exluded, but when done well in any kind of story, game or otherwise, they can bring some really well done drama or well deserved joy when things go right for the heroes.

I feel sorry for you.

[qloher]

Ok, let me find you then.

 

Classic cRPGs were games, not romance simulators. Those of us who've understood the WL2 and PE Kickstarter campaigns want a game, not a romance simulator. The end.

You logic is invalid, romance simulator is a game genre/sub-genre. Also Planescape and BG2 had romances and are classic.

[MReed]

I am super serious. Hack and slash from my part was an example of a sub-genre that is considered to be an RPG, but is ultimately all about killing things, collecting loot and leveling, not about actual role play. I treat any other sub-genre that may be not as action centered, yet still too killing things centered, the same.

 

Agreed -- and I would consider IWD (1&2), all the Wizardry games, all of the Might & Magic games, and probably Fallout 1 (my memory is a little too fuzzy to be sure) to be "hack & slash" RPGs. And let me be very clear -- I enjoyed these games. However, I enjoyed BG1/2, PS:T, and KOTR1 & 2 more, and the reason that I enjoyed them more is because of the companion interactions rather than, say, improved mechanics.

 

Not as a proper role-playing game.

 

This, on the other hand, I disagree with -- hack & slash RPGs are, indeed, RPGs (as opposed to, say, Call of Duty). Action RPGs (such as DA2 and ME3) on the other hand, stretch the definition further than I'm really comfortable with. And yes, Visual Novels (and the text only games put out by "Choice Of Games") are also RPGs, even though combat is trivial in these games. in my mind, a game qualifies as an RPG if it meets three criteria:

 

1) The player selects actions -- success or failure of these actions is determined exclusively by "stats" associated with the character, and the player can choose which stats to increase on a periodic basis ("level up")

2) The player feels that the game is telling "his/her" story. Generally, this means that the player can influence events, at least in a minor way, but not always (for example, the Final Fantasy games are definitely RPGs, but the player has zero influence over the storyline).

3) The players interaction with the game is channeled through an avatar that represents a small, "named & numbered", set of beings.

 

Its a rather broad definition, I'll admit, but that's my definition... Chess wouldn't qualify under this definition because there is no level-up mechanic, and the pieces aren't "named" (as individuals, at least) by the game. RTS games wouldn't qualify, because there is no well defined avatar. HOMM games are close to qualifying, but I don't think the story is important enough to meet the #2 criteria.

 

Obviously, this is my definition, and I'm not saying that it is the only definition, nor even that it is better than anyone else's. But when I say "RPG", I'm talking about a game that meets these three criteria. I don't understand why the folks that don't support romances can't offer their own definition of "RPG", however...

[duskwind]

I'm just curious... why is it that you love interests need to all be bi or switch? Are you looking at it from a developer's point of view, where it would be a bit of a pain to have to write a bunch of different romances

 

Oh, totally the developer's point of view. A really good NPC is a huge amount of work to write, not just a bit of a pain. If the game had unlimited development resources, I'd be perfectly happy with a range of companion orientations, but that takes a lot of companions. Say two hetero, two homo, and one bi of each gender, that's ten companions just to give three romancable options for monosexual players. Two more than the highest stretch goal so far, and that's without any non-romancable companions (and requiring all companions to be romancable would be an unreasonable constraint on character design). And I'd rather development effort was spent on making existing companions better (more interactive, deeper backstory) than on increasing their numbers.

 

Sexuality can often be a large part of someone's personality

 

True, but it doesn't have to be, and in a game where the character's personalities are inherently limited, I see no reason why that should be developed at the expense of other aspects of their personality.

 

I feel it could be potentially interesting to see someone play a homosexual PC that tries to hit on a hetero NPC and get rebuffed. Or maybe it could be part of the explored themes somewhere to see how NPCs deal with either accepting or being uncomfortable with the orientations of other party members, if they intend to take the game in a philosophical direction. Although that would probably be too, I don't know... modern a concern, I suppose, for the setting of this game.

 

It's a fantasy world, not a historical; I think it would indeed be interesting to include that sort of thing.

[kenup]

I mean what are these people compensating for? Lack of love in life? Lack of friends?

The supply of stupid arguments like this seems endless.

Do you play cRPGs to compensate for your lack of killings in real life? Or the lack of looting the houses of strangers?

Yes I am compensating for the lack of adventure in my life and exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life and boldly going where no man has gone before.

 

So if that's true then the pro-romance crowd is compensating for a lack of relationships and romances in their lives. Sounds sad. I feel sorry for you guys.

 

So you would want to start looting every crate you come across in, just so you could trade the items for that one replica sword? But you only use the sword to mindlessly kill bandits and monsters(ooooohhhh MONSTERS!), and not actually have a reason to use it, say protect your loved ones?

 

And don't feel sorry for anyone, or make any assumptions for them. They probably enjoy their lives more than you think.

 

People want romances as part of a whole. There is this thing called immersion and suspension of disbelief. They do not want to just be spawned in a dungeon full of monsters and slaughter their way to the final boss without reason. People like story and characters, dialogue and text, lore and exposition. You seem like you would prefer Oblivion and Skyrim over PS:T or BG.

 

I personally won't have a problem if they are exluded, but when done well in any kind of story, game or otherwise, they can bring some really well done drama or well deserved joy when things go right for the heroes.

I feel sorry for you.

 

And you don't have anything to say do you? According to your logic people read books or watch movies that involve romance because they don't have a love life.

 

And I feel sorry for you. Let me guess: Your favorite movie is Transformers 3 right? I'm guessing the star wars prequels are also some of your favorites.

 

You seriously, SERIOUSLY should consider playing super mario galaxy, it's more your cup of tea.

[el pinko grande]

I'm sure it can if you've never been with a woman before. I'm sure it's the closest some of you will ever get to being with a woman.

Spamming insults now when out of arguments, aren't we?

I'm just saying, if you've never been with a woman before a romance in a game is probably more immersive for someone than someone who has been with a woman. What's wrong with that? Not really insulting. It's like the difference between a boy seeing boobs for the first time and the difference between a man seeing them for the thousandth time.

 

You know what? I could just as easily say that the people who are opposed to romance in games hold that position because they're 30-year old virgins who live in their mother's basement and don't like in-game romances because it reminds them of the pants-****ting terror they experience when they talk to women in real life. I don't make that argument because it would be rude and baseless, but that's essentially what you're doing here. It's dickish. Please stop.

[^Rayne^]

The point of this thread is to discuss Romance options if they're in the game. For those who want to discuss why they shouldn't be in the game at all, go start your own thread. It gets a little old how some individuals hijack a thread and tell us all why there shouldn't be any romances when that isn't even the point of the discussion.

[qloher]

I'm sure it can if you've never been with a woman before. I'm sure it's the closest some of you will ever get to being with a woman.

Spamming insults now when out of arguments, aren't we?

I'm just saying, if you've never been with a woman before a romance in a game is probably more immersive for someone than someone who had been with a woman. What's wrong with that? Not really insulting. It's like the difference between a boy seeing boobs for the first time and the difference between a man seeing them for the thousandth time.

Actually I don't even consider the first part to be insulting. It is not overwhelmingly right hence is not a really good argument, but makes perfect sense in some cases. I mean clearly some "never been with a woman before", nothing wrong with that. Yet the second part is where you've clearly dropped the ball.

[evdk]

The point of this thread is to discuss Romance options if they're in the game. For those who want to discuss why they shouldn't be in the game at all, go start your own thread. It gets a little old how some individuals hijack a thread and tell us all why there shouldn't be any romances when that isn't even the point of the discussion.

We're just trying to prepare you for the inevitable disappointment one post at a time.

[Grimlorn]

I mean what are these people compensating for? Lack of love in life? Lack of friends?

The supply of stupid arguments like this seems endless.

Do you play cRPGs to compensate for your lack of killings in real life? Or the lack of looting the houses of strangers?

Yes I am compensating for the lack of adventure in my life and exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life and boldly going where no man has gone before.

 

So if that's true then the pro-romance crowd is compensating for a lack of relationships and romances in their lives. Sounds sad. I feel sorry for you guys.

 

So you would want to start looting every crate you come across in, just so you could trade the items for that one replica sword? But you only use the sword to mindlessly kill bandits and monsters(ooooohhhh MONSTERS!), and not actually have a reason to use it, say protect your loved ones?

 

And don't feel sorry for anyone, or make any assumptions for them. They probably enjoy their lives more than you think.

 

People want romances as part of a whole. There is this thing called immersion and suspension of disbelief. They do not want to just be spawned in a dungeon full of monsters and slaughter their way to the final boss without reason. People like story and characters, dialogue and text, lore and exposition. You seem like you would prefer Oblivion and Skyrim over PS:T or BG.

 

I personally won't have a problem if they are exluded, but when done well in any kind of story, game or otherwise, they can bring some really well done drama or well deserved joy when things go right for the heroes.

I feel sorry for you.

 

And you don't have anything to say do you? According to your logic people read books or watch movies that involve romance because they don't have a love life.

 

And I feel sorry for you. Let me guess: Your favorite movie is Transformers 3 right? I'm guessing the star wars prequels are also some of your favorites.

 

You seriously, SERIOUSLY should consider playing super mario galaxy, it's more your cup of tea.

hehe, I feel sorry for you.

[Grimlorn]

I'm sure it can if you've never been with a woman before. I'm sure it's the closest some of you will ever get to being with a woman.

Spamming insults now when out of arguments, aren't we?

I'm just saying, if you've never been with a woman before a romance in a game is probably more immersive for someone than someone who had been with a woman. What's wrong with that? Not really insulting. It's like the difference between a boy seeing boobs for the first time and the difference between a man seeing them for the thousandth time.

Actually I don't even consider the first part to be insulting. It is not overwhelmingly right hence is not a really good argument, but makes perfect sense in some cases. I mean clearly some "never been with a woman before", nothing wrong with that. Yet the second part is where you've clearly dropped the ball.

Oh I like to make future predictions. That's all that was.

[Ieo]

The point of this thread is to discuss Romance options if they're in the game. For those who want to discuss why they shouldn't be in the game at all, go start your own thread. It gets a little old how some individuals hijack a thread and tell us all why there shouldn't be any romances when that isn't even the point of the discussion.

 

Yeah, in before the lock....

 

I already added an idea somewhere near the beginning of this thread, but I just checked this out again and shouldn't have been surprised that it's since degenerated since the other one was locked.

[KenThomas]

Serious: I try hard and do my best to write as good as I could. Sorry for failing at this...

 

Don't worry, it's clear English isn't your first language. This isn't going to be the last time someone who disagrees with your opinion decides to attack your grasp of the language instead of dealing with your arguments.

[Grimlorn]

Serious: I try hard and do my best to write as good as I could. Sorry for failing at this...

 

Don't worry, it's clear English isn't your first language. This isn't going to be the last time someone who disagrees with your opinion decides to attack your grasp of the language instead of dealing with your arguments.

Wasn't attacking him, just couldn't understand his point.

[Jaesun]

Is there a KILL THIS THREAD WITH FIRE option?

[Gargantuan]

Romance in games is quite a tricky concept, since one delegates the emotions attached to a certain being through the perspective and experience of another who design the events and dialogues. I personally find it quite creepy to substantiate the emotional state involved in romance through such vicarious manner. One could contend how that would be different from a book or film, but I feel they are realized via established characters acted out by consummate professionals within careful crafted narrative that I merely identify as one removed from involvement at a certain distance.

Edited September 19, 2012 by Gargantuan

[Vin]

I'm sure it can if you've never been with a woman before. I'm sure it's the closest some of you will ever get to being with a woman.

Spamming insults now when out of arguments, aren't we?

I'm just saying, if you've never been with a woman before a romance in a game is probably more immersive for someone than someone who has been with a woman. What's wrong with that? Not really insulting. It's like the difference between a boy seeing boobs for the first time and the difference between a man seeing them for the thousandth time.

 

You know what? I could just as easily say that the people who are opposed to romance in games hold that position because they're 30-year old virgins who live in their mother's basement and don't like in-game romances because it reminds them of the pants-****ting terror they experience when they talk to women in real life. I don't make that argument because it would be rude and baseless, but that's essentially what you're doing here. It's dickish. Please stop.

Well you could say that but you'd look stupid because most, if not all, of us have been with women. That's why we don't need romances in our video games. Can't you see that?

 

So... I don't want romance in my video games because I've been with a woman...

Your post feel slightly contradictory and more than a little ironic.

[kenup]

Is there a KILL THIS THREAD WITH FIRE option?

There is a report button. Just ask the mod who deletes this to cut the data and copy it on a cd, then burn(literally) the disk.

Edited September 19, 2012 by kenup

[Grimlorn]

Is there a KILL THIS THREAD WITH FIRE option?

Yeah this thread is going nowhere and I'm being attacked by all these people who want romances. It's awful.

[MReed]

Is there a KILL THIS THREAD WITH FIRE option?

There is a report button. Just ask the mod who deletes this to cut the data and copy it on a cd, then burn(literally) the disk.

 

Unhappily, I'm afraid that only the ban-hammer will do the job, and I don't think that's an option in this case (realistically, people who donated to PE can't be banned from the forums... ). I'd love to engage in a rational debate with the romance opponents -- I'm certainly willing to be convinced that romances would be bad for the games -- but they don't seem have any arguments beyond "Games in the past have included badly done romances -- therefore, including a romance in a game makes it bad" and "If romance is included in a game, it isn't a RPG but I'm not going to tell you what I think an RPG is, either."

 

Ah well, hopefully Oblivion will step in and settle this debate one way or the other soon.

[evdk]

realistically, people who donated to PE can't be banned from the forums...

I'd say that this is a fairly naive statement which the mods are going to prove wrong quite soon. Plus until the kickstarter is over noone actually donated anything.

[Grimlorn]

Is there a KILL THIS THREAD WITH FIRE option?

There is a report button. Just ask the mod who deletes this to cut the data and copy it on a cd, then burn(literally) the disk.

"Games in the past have included badly done romances -- therefore, including a romance in a game makes it bad" and "If romance is included in a game, it isn't a RPG but I'm not going to tell you what I think an RPG is, either."

You're exaggerating, no one has said any of that.