If romances are included

[Exseed]

Every backer has his own opinion about what should be implemented and what not. Romances seem to be quite a demanded feature, so from the "listening to customers" and the game appeal to modern audience perspective it doesn't seem to be a complete waste of resources.

[Dianjabla]

Romances? Sure. But not with every party NPC. And, depending on your character build and actions, maybe not at all.

 

The Jaheira romance was one of the best, I think. She annoyed me in BG, but I kept her around for perverse amusement. That and they were friends of Gorions so it made sense from a role play perspective. I came to actually like her character in BG2 and found the romance almost by accident. It was also hard to achieve (for want of a better word).

[Undecaf]

Please, none of this romance mumbo jumbo. Stuff like that requires a lot of focus to work well, and mostly only works if it is at least a semi-central part of the main story, and rarely even then. And the Bioware method of surrounding oneself with bisexual and sometimes zoophiliac **** buddies whom one then needs to bribe and sweet talk to spread their buttocks is especially awful in its awkwardness.

 

Please do not waste time and money on matters like this that are almost certainly bound to fail horribly.

 

/That's about all I have to say about the subject, please continue...

[Meshugger]

No romance. Just pure, unadulterated feral sex. Where every sick and disturbed fantasy is revelled in until the last fight, where every carnal need and lust is satiated......

 

...whops, wrong forum!

[Malcador]

Do romance in the other direction, you start out attached and have to keep schmoozing your SO else he/she takes half your gear and gold.

[dlux]

And what makes you think that there are not any BG2 fans here?

 

What make you think everyone that likes BG2, likes romances.

 

What makes you think that none of the BG2 fans likes romances?

[Meshugger]

Truth to be told though. The older you get, more intricate or and complicated romances become. Simple teenage infatuation would really hit the wrong nerve if the story is presented to be of an adult nature. Keep it simply as subtle as possible.

[Exseed]

Personally, if they are included, I wouldn't worry about romances being bad, considering Obsidian's quality of writing. It seems to be a deal breaker for quite some people and can be completely optional. Apparently, modern mediums (books, movies, games) made people expect romance if high-fantasy settings.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Exseed

[Bos_hybrid]

Every backer has his own opinion about what should be implemented and what not. Romances seem to be quite a demanded feature,

 

There are 36,000 backers at the moment. Your lucky if there are 20-40 people posting about romances.

 

the game appeal to modern audience perspective it doesn't seem to be a complete waste of resources.

 

The whole point of PE is to be an old school RPGs. Which interests those that liked the old school rpgs.

 

 

And what makes you think that there are not any BG2 fans here?

 

What make you think everyone that likes BG2, likes romances.

 

What makes you think that none of the BG2 fans likes romances?

 

Never said that, you implied people that like BG2, like romances.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Bos_hybrid

[Lady Evenstar]

Listen if this was a $20 mil project, I wouldn't be posting about not wanting them in. But it's not, at most the budget will be.... $3-4mil. So that leaves a very small amount of resources for an RPG. I would just like to see the resources spent elsewhere.

 

Exactly. I've even played and enjoyed my share of CRPG romances, but I don't want the world/adventure to feel "thin" because resources were skimmed off the top to ensure romances. Maybe, if everything looks on target in winter 2014 they could be added, but I would rather other bases be covered first.

[dlux]

Every backer has his own opinion about what should be implemented and what not. Romances seem to be quite a demanded feature,

 

There are 36,000 backers at the moment. Your lucky if there are 20-40 people posting about romances.

 

Hmmm, youu certainly seem to be the only one that _really_ hates romances and prefers having fap-masters in the game.

[Exseed]

 

There are 36,000 backers at the moment. Your lucky if there are 20-40 people posting about romances.

 

Let's throw baseless assumptions at each other. I'm pretty confident 35,999 crave for romances deep inside. I base this fact on...oh wait.

 

The whole point of PE is to be an old school RPG. Which interests those that liked the old school rpg.

 

And old school RPGs didn't have romances, right? See, mate. I'm not for or against romances. I'm indifferent towards them. But people here seem to be either completely for or against them with only some who don't mind well-written and developed optional "emotional attachments" towards a companion.

[Kate_wise]

Every backer has his own opinion about what should be implemented and what not. Romances seem to be quite a demanded feature,

 

There are 36,000 backers at the moment. Your lucky if there are 20-40 people posting about romances.

 

the game appeal to modern audience perspective it doesn't seem to be a complete waste of resources.

 

The whole point of PE is to be an old school RPG. Which interests those that liked the old school rpg.

 

The devs do heavily mentioned the Baldur's Gate series and PS:T when they talk about their plans and vision for the project. Interesting character interactions, including romance, was one of the reasons, in my opinion (and yes, it is only my opinion!), why these were popular.

 

I understand your concern about distribution of resources but for me, I'd say well-written immersive character interaction is something I hope for in this project as it really breathes life into the world you are exploring. Romance is a part of that and can create some interesting situations and increase player-connection to characters. By all means, not every companion should be a romanceable, but having charisma, flirtation and establishing alliances and connections would be a great thing to explore in this project, particularly when connected to the ideas of factions, etc.

 

It's true there are only however many people posting about romances in these forums but please don't use this as a way to back up your argument, because most of the 36,000 backers in general are not here on the forum. I would say you can't really argue that any opinion is more commonly held just because it is expressed here.

 

I also just think it's amazing that there are 36,000 backers so quickly, and that they probably span across a lot of different game preferences but united by the inspiration kindled in the idea of going back to isometric. Hurrah!

[The Sharmat]

I really don't want more than two or three romances in game anyway. Anything more gets ridiculous, uses tons of resources, and starts looking like a harem anime. If some players don't see anything they like, then, well, that's life.

[Bos_hybrid]

Every backer has his own opinion about what should be implemented and what not. Romances seem to be quite a demanded feature,

 

There are 36,000 backers at the moment. Your lucky if there are 20-40 people posting about romances.

 

Hmmm, youu certainly seem to be the only one that _really_ hates romances and prefers having fap-masters in the game.

 

Wrong. Plenty of other have posted they don't want romances. At least read others posts if your going to post.

 

 

There are 36,000 backers at the moment. Your lucky if there are 20-40 people posting about romances.

 

Let's throw baseless assumptions at each other. I'm pretty confident 35,999 crave for romances deep inside. I base this fact on...oh wait.

 

You posted this:

Romances seem to be quite a demanded feature,

 

Which it isn't not, not by a long shot.

 

The whole point of PE is to be an old school RPG. Which interests those that liked the old school rpg.

 

And old school RPGs didn't have romances, right? See, mate. I'm not for or against romances. I'm indifferent towards them. But people here seem to be either completely for or against them with only some who don't mind well-written and developed optional "emotional attachments" towards a companion.

 

They were also small projects too yes. I believe when inflation is accounted for BG2 budget was $7mil, likely twice that of PE. Cuts have to be made somewhere.

 

Also correct me if I wrong but BG2 had 2 male romances and 1 female, and no homosexual romances. That ain't enough for the romancers of today, they want equality(fair enough), so now Obs has to make 2 male pc romances, 2 female romances, and 2 homosexual romances. Because if they don't they are ignoring the female and gay gamers. So what was once 3 now becomes 6.

 

So now not only is PE budget half of BG2, they've got to double the romances. And for those reasons I say ignore them.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Bos_hybrid

[MReed]

I'm for romances, in general, but it isn't a make or break factor for me: "Deep chracter developement" is the part that interests me, and romances are merely one way of doing that (and, perhaps, not the best way, although they are probably the easiest way).

 

if romances are included, I would definately like them to be an integral part of the main plotline (although still optional, of course). BG2 did this when your LI (if you have one) is kidnapped by Bodhi, but that's about the only example that I can think of off hand. Plotlines / dialog such as:

 

* The LI insists on leading the party on a dangerous mission to protect you / so you can rest. The only way for the PC to remain in the party is break off the relationship.

* One or more characters complain about preferential treatment of the LI (time in the party, better equipment) and the PC has to deal with the fallout. Potentially, this could lead to the complaining charcter permemently leaving the party, although that's rather extreme given the small pool of companions -- however, forcing the player to take the character in the party or provide them with better equipment would work well (measured by $$$ value).

* A relative (or former lover) of the LI is part of the critical path -- and they aren't happy about the LI's new relationship. This forecloses some options of dealing with the quest (assuming that the PC wants to maintain the relationship).

 

Obviously, if you don't have a LI, these things would still happen minus the complications. And it is entirely possible that a "friendship" relationship might offer a different set of complications altogether. Either way, it improves replayability and character developement (both of the PCs and the companions), so its all good.

[novander]

Because if they don't they are ignoring the female and gay gamers. So what was once 3 now becomes 6.

Unless you go the "everyone is bisexual" route, in which case you can drop the gay romances and just have two male, two female interests. Personally I don't mind this, but I do understand the people who romance a character in one playthrough and are then annoyed when their sexuality changes in a subsequent one.

 

I don't consider romances to be a major concern. I didn't know they were including them in BG2 when I first played it and loved this sudden extra depth to the world I'd found when randomly chatting with one of my companions, but I don't want them to be something necessary to every game. My favourite characters to talk with in Mass Effect were Mordin and Legion, because they had really interesting and different views on the world to explore. My favourite planescape character was Dak'kon for the same reason. I'd rather rich conversations like this than extra romances, if there's not enough budget for both.

[Exseed]

I understand your concern, Bos_Hybrid. I too don't want to see essential game features sacrificed in favor of romances. But we also don't know how many romances are enough for today, there is no set needed amount, nor can we speculate on the amount of work needed to implement them. For all we know Obsidian were meaning to include them in one form or another from the start.

 

Someone from Obsidian should just say whether romances are surely to be in game, on a stretch goal or never to be implemented. It would stop these threads from appearing.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Exseed

[novander]

I wouldn't suggest them as a stretch goal, they're too polarizing. Might stop some people from donating. But yes, I would like word on whether they want to include them or not.

[Azai]

You know what I think could be a really interesting idea, is if romances are included you could have some kind of influence over them.

 

For example, you could be prompted at the begining of the game to choice a few different 'styles' of romance. Maybe you could decide that a random companion you meet will start to have feelings for the main character and persue you not the other way around. Perhaps you could choose that there would be un returned love between you an a character, or you could even pick that perhaps your character has an arranged marriage or something like that.

 

It could be a different way to handle romances instead of the normal trying to "woo" a companion. On the same note I would love to see companions beyond the main character start to gain feelings for each other, and perhaps you could either encourage or discourage that.

[Exseed]

I wouldn't suggest them as a stretch goal, they're too polarizing. Might stop some people from donating. But yes, I would like word on whether they want to include them or not.

 

I'm pretty sure romances alone won't make a stretch goal. It's gonna be something like "New Quests, Comapnion, Class, etc. and Romances".

[-Zin-]

No romance option like Isabella from DA2 plxz.

 

She was a terrible human being and had a sh*tty personality to boot.

 

There's no reason she sticks by you for years other than that she's bored, and Hawke just sucks at meeting competent people. How exciting.. She caused a riot in Act II. She wasted many years to a group of people and got good men murdered. When you tell her that you expect her to attone for what she did, she becomes shocked and angry. :/ She is all in all, generally inconsistent/unreliable. In ACT I she says she's against slavery. In the third act, she is for it. She also just likes to sleep around with anyone and completely disregard the need of the group she travels with, which is fine, but she doesn't strike me as a person I would have in my life for 10 years, let alone romance. She served best as that random person you can have a foursome with in a brothel, like in dragon age 1. My biggest issue with Isabela is that there isn't that many others girls to romance in DA2. Too much of the game was devoted to this character, so it would be a waste to not recruit her. So I say, don't waste resources giving characters like that a huge role to begin with. Instead, focus on people who you could realistically bond with. However, a woman I thought was excellent who was similar to Isabela but much better, was Sie from Alpha Protocol. That bond could blossom into a 1-time thing, and there were other awesome girls to choose from. Sie was the right amount of free-spirit combined with strong loyalty, fitted into a nice un-permanent timeframe. She was consistent and fun.

 

Now what would I like to see in a real romance option.. are strong written women like Handmaiden and Mira from KOTOR 2, Silk Fox from Jade Empire, and Tali/Kelly from Mass Effect 2. They don't have to be very complex, but give them a cool background that influences their actions/dialouges. Also, you just need to show them that they can count on you, and they will naturally want to return the favor without you having to ask. (Of course, there should be an option to disagree with them, or screw them over)

 

Also, have the options aid the story. And a good romance character shouldn't be a direct reason for why the main story has a problem that needs to be solved, like with Isabela. It just builds resentment in my opinion. Other people can feel differently, of course, but that's my two cents.

[The Sharmat]

In terms of demand: from this forum I get the idea that it's roughly a 50/50 split between those that want them and those that don't. Of course there's no telling what the 35k+ donors want. This forum may not be a good sampling of the consumers as a whole.

 

Has anyone made a poll?

[Shadenuat]

If characters could hate, so they could love, and it's hard to believe every guy/gal in your party does't have chemistry running. However, when I think about how romances are written, I always end up feeling they are basically emotional porn. That they are as controverisal as DM bringing his girlfriend to play.

Well, again, it's not something I am worried about here. I know MCA like loves sex, cause it made him alive, and handles his characters okay in that sense, and JS just does't like to write romances... so I really don't think we'll got buuutufuuul luuuv stories hammered in our throats while there is world to save, yeah?

[The Sharmat]

One could argue that much of the point of fiction, or at least drama in fiction, is emotional porn.