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

[duskwind]

Well, I don't know, maybe it effectively doubles the amount of work needed on an otherwise completely pointless secondary feature?

 

Adding a few gender-determined variables to the conversation tree is virtually no work at all; it's standard procedure for all other dialogues. No structural changes are required at all. It is possible to put in more work to differentiate the relationship based on gender, but not necessary, and even an optimal differentiation would be nowhere near double the work. Just because it's not of interest to you doesn't make it pointless.

 

The "harm" comes in taking away beliavility.

 

It's a fantasy world; there's nothing unbelievable about making bisexuality unremarkable.

[Wintersong]

It's a fantasy world; there's nothing unbelievable about making bisexuality unremarkable.

Forcing the fantasy world to be politically correct certainly harms beliavility. In my point of view, of course. I have no issues with having only gay romances in the game. Or only straight. Or any kind of mix. As long as it's not just for the sake of it and/or marketing.

[MReed]

It's a fantasy world; there's nothing unbelievable about making bisexuality unremarkable.

 

Actually, yes, it is -- in fact, anything and everything that deviats from the way the modern world works is "unbelievable", kind by defination. Each deviation from the standard set by "reality" reminds players that "Hey, this is just a game." This effect can be minimized by providing lore to answer the question of "Why are things like this" and exploring the consequences of this change, but...

 

Is it really a good idea to spend time on explaining why bisexuality is so common that it is the default assumption? And the consequences of this behavior on society would be rather extreme -- the most obvious issue is that half of the couples would be infertile, so childless coupls would be far more common than they are in todays society. The consequences of this would be pretty profound. Some sample questions:

 

* Would these childless couples be happy about this?

* Would they "trade partners" with other homosexual couples for breeding purposes?

* Would the hetrosexual couples have enough children (need ~4 surviving to adulthood) to maintain a stable population?

* Would the hetrosexual couples routinely give up children for adoption to provide children to the homsexual couples?

 

Obviously, a game can ignore all of these issues as DA 2 does, but if you do, then the lack of supporting material will bother some people and you'll get complaints that the game is unrealistic. If you do explore these consequences, you are spending time and resources on something that isn't a part of your core gameplay / plot, and furthermore, you are drawing attention something that is likely to be fairly contriversal (to some of your audiance, at least).

[duskwind]

Actually, yes, it is -- in fact, anything and everything that deviats from the way the modern world works is "unbelievable", kind by defination.

 

We've already got elves and dragons and magic; are bisexuals really going to push suspension of disbelief too far?

 

Is it really a good idea to spend time on explaining why bisexuality is so common that it is the default assumption?

 

No, just take it for granted, the same way gender equality is mostly taken for granted in modern games (female characters have the same stat range as males, nobody raises an eyebrow at a woman leading an army, etc).

 

And the consequences of this behavior on society would be rather extreme -- the most obvious issue is that half of the couples would be infertile

 

Assuming everyone has perfectly equal attraction to both genders. If Kinsey 1-2 was normal, you'd still have mostly straight couples, while same-sex couples wouldn't be unusual or stigmatized.

 

* Would the hetrosexual couples have enough children (need ~4 surviving to adulthood) to maintain a stable population?

* Would the hetrosexual couples routinely give up children for adoption to provide children to the homsexual couples?

 

In a world without birth control? And a high rate of orphans due to monsters eating the parents? Yeah, I don't see too few children as being a problem.

 

Obviously, a game can ignore all of these issues as DA 2 does, but if you do, then the lack of supporting material will bother some people and you'll get complaints that the game is unrealistic. If you do explore these consequences, you are spending time and resources on something that isn't a part of your core gameplay / plot, and furthermore, you are drawing attention something that is likely to be fairly contriversal (to some of your audiance, at least).

 

I think most players who appreciate same-sex options would prefer less than optimally realistic options to no options, and understand that development resources are finite. People who don't want their PC to have same-sex romances don't have to, and there's no reason to pander to bigots who want to deny other people something that costs them nothing and doesn't affect them in any way.

[Longknife]

You guys gotta admit something: the main people that will be buying this game will be straight males, and where I come from, males love some eye candy, there is gotta have some nice cleavage in the game, hookers, hot companions...its all good

 

Yes because all straight males desire to rub one out while playing an RPG, all straight males totally dig artificial romance with packets of AI data and all straight males refuse to buy games if the only female companions are sassy hand-to-hand lesbians, bitchy ginger alcoholics or straight-up mutants.

[Drowsy Emperor]

Can't you gay romance people just go and play Dragon Age 2 again?

 

No?

 

[igorina]

I think optional romances in the game are good idea. They shouldn't follow bioware's way and turn into few ****ty lines ended with an odd sex scene. Romances should change the characters and the story somehow, and should be complex. Also i don't want my character to be able to f*** everything what moves and doesn't run fast enough. 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 - maybe, but many females love to play such games too. As a female i like "love" in the game, beside killing, resolving political problems, and doing quests. It feels natural to me. I like to have all these elements and all of them in best quality. It makes complete fantasy world. So, as long as romance option isn't forced and doesn't "steal important content" but can add a great expierience to players like me, why it is so controversial..

[The Sharmat]

In Bioware's defense, didn't Morrigan's romance actually hugely affect the plot?

[Orogun01]

In Bioware's defense, didn't Morrigan's romance actually hugely affect the plot?

In the same manner that any plot device affects BW's plot...it didn't.

You romance her, you get one extra sentence when she ask you for a child.

You don't romance her, she still ask you for a child.

And the world kept on turning.

 

Seriously if they are doing romances they better do them PS:T style.

[oldmanpaco]

I think what we need to do is keep romances real. And you know what's real? Herpes is real.

 

STDs are the spice of any romantic relationship. Gonorrhea, syphilis, crabs - they all will add depth to any mature relationship.

[Longknife]

Please just no player-NPC romance....

[kenup]

Not making it into a f*ck date simulator would be ideal.

 

Another good thing would be, to not have sex as "Oh, we are going to fight the final boss, let's do it before it's too late!". I really, really hated this in ME.

[Nivenus]

Don't end the romantic relationship's development when you first have sex.

 

I hope that wasn't even what they were planning as far as any potential romantic relationships are concerned..., but I wanted to just go ahead and say this to get it out of the way.

 

I'm not trying to diminish how awesome sex is, or suggesting that all relationships need to have a deep emotional attachment (sometimes it's just bang-buddies, and that's ok) - but I'm tired of video games portraying sex as the final goal when it comes to romance.

 

Make it a stepping stone or a stumbling block, a scandal or a salve, so long as it isn't the finish line.

 

I agree with the central point here. Sex is part of a relationship, it's not the end goal or a trophy to win. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that if there is sex and romance in "Project Eternity" there should both be sexless (or very low on the sex) romances and casual sex as well as the standard fare of sex + romance.

 

It's a fantasy world; there's nothing unbelievable about making bisexuality unremarkable.

Forcing the fantasy world to be politically correct certainly harms beliavility. In my point of view, of course. I have no issues with having only gay romances in the game. Or only straight. Or any kind of mix. As long as it's not just for the sake of it and/or marketing.

 

Here's the thing: I agree with you in principle (that fantasy worlds shouldn't be written so as to automatically fit our modern cultural mores), but that ax swings both ways. After all, bisexuality was practiced widely in Classical Greece, as well as throughout both Imperial China and feudal Japan. While aversion to homosexuality was certainly the norm in many cultures, it was far from a universal attitude in pre-modern cultures.

[dlux]

Please just no player-NPC romance....

If it is in the game and you do not enjoy it - then don't pursue it. Never choose a flirt option and that is it. It is actually that simple.

 

The poll that most players enjoy romance in a game if it is well written. If romance is actually included in the game or not is up to Obsidian.

[rf5111918]

The Viconia romance in BG2 was one of my favorites because if you chose the right options with her, you could actually change her alignment over time in the expansion. That was cool. I don't think I have seen it replicated since.

[CommissarMega]

The Viconia romance in BG2 was one of my favorites because if you chose the right options with her, you could actually change her alignment over time in the expansion. That was cool. I don't think I have seen it replicated since.

 

Aye, that was nice to see- romance not as a way to get a cutscene, but as character development.

 

And for the record, many ancient societies didn't give a damn who you shagged, but it you wanted any respect, you had better have been the dominant party in the relationship. We don't hear much about it from medieval sources because of Judeo-Christian influence, but we can't pretend it wasn't there. Remember, while project Eternity will have wizards and such, it also has massive bombs and firearms. I don't think homo/bisexuality would be very much out of place, neither would I care if I saw it. Seriously, why the hangup? What does it matter who someone sleeps with? This isn't political correctness, mind you- if your neighbour's a dude sleeping with another dude, what does it matter to you?

[MReed]

I think most players who appreciate same-sex options would prefer less than optimally realistic options to no options, and understand that development resources are finite. People who don't want their PC to have same-sex romances don't have to, and there's no reason to pander to bigots who want to deny other people something that costs them nothing and doesn't affect them in any way.

 

I actually agree with this -- I was only arguing against the statement "There wouldn't be any consequences if bi-sexuality was the default sexuality in a society", which I feel is an absurd statement. And note: I'm not saying that the consequences would be catastrophic, either, just that there would be some consequences that have to be dealt with.

 

On the other hand, "There wouldn't be any consequences if society accepted bi-sexuality and [some of / all of] the player's companions are bi-sexual -- specifically, the ones who happen to be romance options" certainly seems reasonable enough.

[Orogun01]

 

I actually agree with this -- I was only arguing against the statement "There wouldn't be any consequences if bi-sexuality was the default sexuality in a society", which I feel is an absurd statement. And note: I'm not saying that the consequences would be catastrophic, either, just that there would be some consequences that have to be dealt with.

Yes because I can already see a fantasy world Fox News reporting on "Homosexuals and how they summon dragons to kidnap your children"

On the other hand, "There wouldn't be any consequences if society accepted bi-sexuality and [some of / all of] the player's companions are bi-sexual -- specifically, the ones who happen to be romance options" certainly seems reasonable enough.

This on the other hand is harmful, just because it breaks immersion by taking what would be a fully developed NPC and turning them into a token. Plus, I really hate it when people are really open about their sexuality. It's just awkward when that adventurer you just met keeps going on about he really likes dwarves.

[Wintersong]

Here's the thing: I agree with you in principle (that fantasy worlds shouldn't be written so as to automatically fit our modern cultural mores), but that ax swings both ways. After all, bisexuality was practiced widely in Classical Greece, as well as throughout both Imperial China and feudal Japan. While aversion to homosexuality was certainly the norm in many cultures, it was far from a universal attitude in pre-modern cultures.

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 want the authors to be free to develop the story as they want (or think it's best) and not dictated by outside people. I'm not saying that they shouldn't listen to the feedback but that they should remain in control. The presence or absence of gay characters is irrelevant to me. For all I care, 100% of the characters could be gay. As long as it makes sense for the story and it's well done, I'll accept what the authors give me. That doesn't mean I cannot be more or less fan of some stuff but that when they are working on the details, they aren't forced to add the "token black man" or similar stuff.

 

Give authors suggestions? Totally cool. Turn those suggestions into (velated) demands? Not cool. Not cool at all. And yeah, that applies to my "suggestions" too.

[mailon]

The Viconia romance in BG2 was one of my favorites because if you chose the right options with her, you could actually change her alignment over time in the expansion. That was cool. I don't think I have seen it replicated since.

 

Indeed, Viconia was one of the best romances i ever played.. And every time i play baldur's gate 2 i keep chosing her as my companion/romance.

Another game with a great and deep romance was a module for NeverWinter Nigths called A Dance with Rogues.

[TwinkieGorilla]

In Bioware's defense, didn't Morrigan's romance actually hugely affect the plot?

In the same manner that any plot device affects BW's plot...it didn't.

You romance her, you get one extra sentence when she ask you for a child.

You don't romance her, she still ask you for a child.

And the world kept on turning.

 

And there's the rub re: Videogame Romances

 

It's frivolous filler meant to satisfy some juvenile urge and that is all. It doesn't help make the game any better or deeper or realisic or IMMERSIVE. It simply makes the lonely person playing the game who says "I want kiss my graphic sprites" the beautiful and overwhelming sensation of companionship that can only be had from a few clumsily-written lines of game-text coupled with tiny graphic icons. Awesome.

 

Edited September 19, 2012 by TwinkieGorilla

[The Sharmat]

The same could be said of any part of a game meant to deliver emotional response, if we're being that vague. Just because a thing has mostly been done poorly in the past doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted. I dare say this kickstarter is a part of that. No modern publisher wants to make this game, or it wouldn't have been necessary to go to crowd funding. Yet...here we are.

 

On the topic of a romance that had nice character development and plot implications in a video game: Safiya in Mask of the Betrayer worked out nicely, I think.

[TwinkieGorilla]

The same could be said of any part of a game meant to deliver emotional response, if we're being that vague.

 

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.

Edited September 19, 2012 by TwinkieGorilla

[Romiras]

I think that in such a deep game there will be different romances available. It can combine an amazon nympho character and stone cold traumatized beauty and passionate insanely jealous lesbian rogue and feeling incredibly guilty gay elf ranger. As long as it is good I don't care.

 

But please, PLEASE, do at least a single "normal" girl which falls in love with crazy main character! I'm really tired of situations normal character - crazy girl. I want to be a bit crazy with girl stopping me from madness, not vise verse!!!!

[The Sharmat]

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.

And they won't. That's why I'm not afraid to hope for it here. They know what they're doing, and they know the difference between their niche and Bioware's, however subtle.