Sex and Romance Poll

[teknoman2]

all of it... its nice to have options

if i want some wild animalistic sex with no strings attached i should be able to get it as easily as i would have the chance to "pick up the soap". and if i feel romantic i can just beat around the bush for awhile before going for it. not everyone likes the same thing so there should be options for every taste

[Jarmo]

So far I have this:

 

http://forums.obsidi..._120__p__725311

 

Not entirely what I had in mind but still informative.

 

Let me extract some quotes from there:

 

Referring to one of your earlier posts about 'either no romance or more romance in rpg's' (correct me if I'm wrong, but that roughly summarize it?) and that they have been getting worse and worse lately; is the solution really to exclude them entirely?

 

J.E. Sawyer: No.

 

But most of us gamers really only want character depths, great dialogs and if possible, romances that are IN TUNE with the character's personality.

 

J.E. Sawyer: And I am one of those people.

 

I wouldn't go using statements like this to prove Obsidian hates game romances and doesn't want them in games.

Maybe they'll add romances and maybe not, their choice. I'm sure the game will be great either way.

 

 

Edit. But it does sound like the game wont be a steamy pile of greasy fapping material, which is a shame.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Jarmo

[Crosmando]

Useless vanity feature.

 

There are a thousand-and-one more important ways to spend money on an RPG than trivial and unnecessary things like romances. And with a budget (comparatively) so small, it would be shameful to spend a cent on them than on actual RPG elements; quests, dialogue, NPC's, world map, items, spells. Everything is a sacrifice, and no game can be perfect, so any time and money spent on one feature means another features lacks.

 

So do people think there is any element less important in an RPG than romance, because I can't think of any. Even graphics are more important.

[Terror K]

One thing I've wanted to see is a more tragic romance in an RPG too. For example, I thought that in Mass Effect 2 when it was being speculated about Tali being a romance option a really good way to take that would have been the concept that she developers feelings for your Shepard, but due to her being stuck in a suit like that she could never have a physical relationship with them... not even a simple kiss without fear of dying. A little akin to Rogue from X-Men admittedly, but I thought this could have been a really emotional take on a romance, and would have resulted in a rare case in the Mass Effect series of a romance not being "two to three flirts and then pre-final mission shag" like the others.

 

But no... instead they just went with, "I can pump myself full of anti-biotics and we can totally do it right now!" which I saw more as a missed opportunity than anything else.

 

I'm not sure of the specifics with Project Eternity, but I could see something similar being utilized if, for example, one particular romance option was of a race that severely burned or harmed others whenever physical contact was made (or perhaps stole their soul or something, since souls seem to be a key factor in this series). Perhaps one of the Planetouched style races could have this attribute... I don't know. But I always felt it would add an interesting dynamic and would be a romance that would never result in just pointless dialogue followed by a shacking up.

[alphyna]

I want communication and character interaction, mutual influence and strong feelings among the characters, and I actually believe that romance is inevitable if feelings are strong enough.

 

So yeah, I want romance. Not the "I like you, we've had sex, so now we're seeing each other and I'll be the one you meet in your spiritual quest and marry in the end" kind; the "your interpretation of the quote from my sacred text was so brilliant and fresh that I've kissed you, and I don't really know what's it called, but please don't go away" kind.

[aliksy]

If romance is going to be done I expect equally developed options to be available for straight and not-straight people.

 

I think most people's exposure to romance in video games is from Bioware where they're not very well done. Whatever is done here should be better than that (which isn't a very lofty goal).

[Drowsy Emperor]

What I hate about these discussions is that the pro romance people are incredibly pushy about the issue (in particular about the homosexual romances) so much that they spam the developers with requests until they cave in and implement these features over their better judgment and all we get in the end is crap. Like Dragon Age 2 for example.

 

I've seen it on the Bioware forums, and I'm sick of it as its a gross misrepresentation of what most people want. The fact is most people couldn't care less about romances and given the option of choosing either romance or another quest they'd drop the romance without thinking.

 

It took what, one day (?) since the opening of this forum for this whole, very vocal minority to step in and start a flame war over the issue without any knowledge of what the devs are attempting with this game.

 

We get it that all the disgruntled Bioware fans want romance, however this is not about making a new Bioware title but about resurrecting a ten year old gameplay model and goddamn it, romance wasn't integral to it, in fact it was thrown in "just because".

 

Baldurs Gate wasn't great because of romances, it was great because of an epic story in huge world, populated with cool characters. Those are priorities FFS and it would have been just as great without the romances.

And we could say the same about Torment. I don't even need to mention Icewind Dale in this regard.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Drowsy Emperor

[andreisiadi]

The reason some of us are against romances in RPGs, is not that the romances themselves are a deal-breaker, it's that romances are a SYMPTOM.

 

A symptom is not the cause of illness, it's merely a visible effect (usually undesirable in itself).

 

In the year 2012, RPG romances are a symptom of dumbed-down, shallow, boring RPGs.

 

We hate the symptom and try to prevent it because we know it's the sign of the festering disease that has plagued RPGs in the last couple of years.

 

As Dakon (PST) would say: "On this issue there cannot be two skies !"

[Jiraboas]

I know the difference between opinion and fact.

 

Very well :D

 

I know it's my opinion.

 

Yeah, maybe, but you write it like a fact. I also do this sometimes, and I allways apologize if i do this by accident.

 

 

Some opinions are better and more informed than others.

 

Thats a really good point. But how we determine this? I am an developer, programmier, gamer and i am really experienced with games and the theory of game development. But this does not makes me better than you nor your so calles "healthy" opinion makes you better than me.

 

We are gamer. We all are "nuts". But you sad some gamers are more than other. I cant agree with that.

 

But you should take a step back and ask yourself why my opinion upsets you so much.

 

Because you lack to argue right sometimes. You write "romances in RPGs are bad" instead of "I dont think that romances can better an RPG" or "In my opinion all romances in games are bad!" I am upset because you dont differ correctly between fact and opinion. I dont know you. How could I know what you mean, if you dont write it down?

 

Is it because you got so much joy out of your relationships with NPCs in games. Seems kind of unhealthy to me.

 

Yeah, maybe you are right. But i dont think ist "unhealthy". When womens cry if they watching a romantic movie they arent "crazy" as nuts, its NORMAL. And yes i "cry"(not in this way, more mentally) at the ending of ME3. I dont have a problem to tell you this(even if we were face to face, im not such a internet looser). Why do i have to? Its dont embrasse me to talk about my feelings. What do i have to lose? I dont care if you said i am crazy, unhealthy or something.

 

The reason why i loved the story of mass effect was because there were people i want to save. Its not like "okay its the game goal to save the world lets do this!" its more like "there people i really care about! I MUST save them!"

 

And i know many people think and feel the same, minority or majority i dont care...

 

 

kind regards,

 

Jira

Edited September 18, 2012 by Jiraboas

[Longknife]

Ask yourselves this:

 

What is romance?

 

Romance is when two people hit it off. They find each other attractive: physically, mentally, personality-wise etc. They find each other SO attractive that they decide they want to spend all of their time together and enjoy other perks of a relationship (buttsex). You can't stand to be without this person, and you'd likely be willing to throw down your own life if it meant saving theirs. That's romance.

 

 

Can an AI find you physically attractive? No

Can an AI find you mentally attractive? I guess TECHNICALLY yes, but it's a very basic attraction, much like some shallow people might find rich people attractive

Can an AI find your personality attractive? No, because you cannot properly express yourself through RPG options.

 

Can you find an AI physically attractive? Uuhhh...I suppose? I mean I guess even drawings can be appealing, but still that's very basic....

Can you find an AI mentally attractive? No, absolutely not.

Can you find an AI's personality attractive? Not really. If you can there's something friggin' wrong with you. You can like them, their character and their story, but their personality does NOT expand beyond that. They're more an idea rather than an actual personality.

 

Will the AI want to spend all of it's time with you? It doesn't have a choice.

Will YOU want to spend all of your time with it? I certainly ****ing hope not. If yes, see a therapist.

 

 

So why bother? Why pretend? Why implement romance if doing it properly is impossible? Either do it right or don't do it at all.

 

Sex? That wouldn't hurt I suppose. I mean again, in my opinion, a "relationship" you guys are talking about is literally just your "lover's" backstory + sex after you tell her how amazing and right about everything she is. Backstory is fine, and you know what, I guess fap material is fine too. But please, don't try and mix them and present them as a relationship, cause I find that hella awkward, personally.

 

Prostitutes or maybe ONE flirty companion who never moves past flirting with you or drunken romps, fine. But every female companion wanting to get with you? Please god no...

 

I understand what you are saying and I can see why it makes sense from your perspective. But the fundamental question is "why would a person want sex in an RPG ". This will differ from person to person. For me I am lover of the immersion of RPG. I can spend up to 100 hours playing an RPG. You form an virtual empathetic bond with your character in the game if its good. As someone who use to Dungeon Master in the original D&D pen and paper game I know how seriously people take there characters. We know its not real but its still important that you can define there actions, how they look and what the game allows them to do. So its perfectly logical that you would want your character to have sex with other characters. It adds to the overall experience of immersion. Many fantasy sagas, like the original Conan books, sex was ubiquitous. I love the Conan world so part of me wants to act like him when I play a game that represents his universe

 

Finally you can't use the argument "Sex in the game can't be something that actually appeals to people, its just a pixel resolution with a few programmed responses". I could easily make a counter- aargument " why play a game with magic, monsters and strange quests. Its not even real. What possible reason would you enjoy such nonsense"

 

Of course my last point doesn't apply as people play RPG for a variety of known and personal reasons. And most of us love them as our favorite gaming genres

 

Yes, but we agree on sex. Where people in this thread disagree is on love and romance. And you're talking about your OWN character, not others.

 

I know you can get attached to a character. My avatar is the Courier for a reason. I have this very basic habit of, every RPG I play, I end up trying to make the canon character first thing using subtle hints and implications of the story to make the character. For example with New Vegas I made a Courier that was hella durable and lucky because wtf he's alive somehow, while also being mildly agile and charismatic, because New Vegas has a strong cowboy theme (agility) and the Courier essentially acts as a representative of his faction (which would require decent charisma). Meanwhile I left other stats low, including things like perception because the Courier gets jumped or is unknowingly watched multiple times in his travels.

 

I became very attached to the Courier as a character, simply because what started as a basic concept turned into a very VERY well fleshed out character that was a tough-as-nails, smooth-talking badass who was nearly impossible to kill. The Courier went down as my first canon Dead-is-dead character to not die and I loved every moment of his playthrough.

 

Through that playthrough, did I bang every woman possible? Absolutely. It fit his character type. The canon Courier was a smooth talker; both some of his hilarious dialog options and some of Cass' remarks about "his type" confirmed that for me, so I played the part.

 

But this is basic sex and flirting. Basic sex and flirting can be fun, and you don't need to be attracted to someone to understand the appeal of sex and flirting. FFS you can watch two people having sex or flirting well (as in both are witty) and actually enjoy it. I can roleplay this BECAUSE it's somehow funny to see the Courier and Sarah Weintraub use sexual innuendo in conversation about leather suits.

 

But watching two people be romantic with one another? Watching them feel madly in love with each other, staring longingly into each other's eyes? Very boring, and sometimes downright annoying.

 

And this is exactly how I feel. I don't enjoy roleplaying romance. Sex or flirting? As long as it's not constant, in-your-face and overboard, fine, but don't try to make me have an attachment to another character please....

Edited September 18, 2012 by Longknife

[Elerond]

Useless vanity feature.

 

There are a thousand-and-one more important ways to spend money on an RPG than trivial and unnecessary things like romances. And with a budget (comparatively) so small, it would be shameful to spend a cent on them than on actual RPG elements; quests, dialogue, NPC's, world map, items, spells. Everything is a sacrifice, and no game can be perfect, so any time and money spent on one feature means another features lacks.

 

So do people think there is any element less important in an RPG than romance, because I can't think of any. Even graphics are more important.

 

Romance plots usually add something to those three bolded things. And sometimes they pawn new items like baby in your inventario .

 

In BG2 that evil vampire woman can kidnap your romance intress and make her/him to vampire and you will get a quest to find out cure to her/his condition.

Also most of the romance is dialogue between characters. And when you make character as romance intress you must also add that NPC's depth or you only make something awful. Sex scenes or sex dialog is not the important thing in romances even if modern rpgs give such picture, but those rpg element where romance plots add depth.

[Crosmando]

Romances aren't roleplaying though, at least not in the way Bioware does them. That is called simulation, and I doubt any backers wants dating sim minigames in an RPG. What I mean is, if romance is in the story (or a side-story) of PE, as in a character is in love with another character, and it fits into the story seemlessly, sure, it's just part of the story. But allowing the PC to initiate some kind of romance dialog with a companion, is completely silly as it's separate from the actual game.

[Terror K]

The reason some of us are against romances in RPGs, is not that the romances themselves are a deal-breaker, it's that romances are a SYMPTOM.

 

A symptom is not the cause of illness, it's merely a visible effect (usually undesirable in itself).

 

In the year 2012, RPG romances are a symptom of dumbed-down, shallow, boring RPGs.

 

We hate the symptom and try to prevent it because we know it's the sign of the festering disease that has plagued RPGs in the last couple of years.

 

As Dakon (PST) would say: "On this issue there cannot be two skies !"

 

I honestly don't see this to be honest. Aside from the fact they were in BG2 (which IMO is the best proper CRPG to date), I fail to see how romances dumb down the game in any way. I mean... when it comes down to it they add depth and realism and more personality to the characters they involve, as well as giving the player more options and opportunities to roleplay. And that's not a bad thing, that's a good thing. It's more depth and makes the characters more real and alive.

 

Besides, it's purely optional content and doesn't directly affect the other aspects of the game such as the tactics, combat mechanics, depth of skills and traits, etc. If you were to add romances to any of the classic RPGs that didn't have romances that Project Eternity is trying to harken back to, it wouldn't suddenly dumb them down. If you avoided the content completely and just avoided any flirting dialogue and told any NPCs that tried to flirt with you to go away, then the game would be exactly the same otherwise. Adding romances doesn't suddenly take depth away from the mechanics, dumb down the combat system and tactics, take away character builds and roleplaying freedom, etc. In fact... it adds to the latter of those.

[Longknife]

I still say that if ANYTHING, we should compromise this and make it romance amongst our potential companions that you can influence, NOT between the player and NPCs.

[BruceVC]

 

I understand what you are saying and I can see why it makes sense from your perspective. But the fundamental question is "why would a person want sex in an RPG ". This will differ from person to person. For me I am lover of the immersion of RPG. I can spend up to 100 hours playing an RPG. You form an virtual empathetic bond with your character in the game if its good. As someone who use to Dungeon Master in the original D&D pen and paper game I know how seriously people take there characters. We know its not real but its still important that you can define there actions, how they look and what the game allows them to do. So its perfectly logical that you would want your character to have sex with other characters. It adds to the overall experience of immersion. Many fantasy sagas, like the original Conan books, sex was ubiquitous. I love the Conan world so part of me wants to act like him when I play a game that represents his universe

 

Finally you can't use the argument "Sex in the game can't be something that actually appeals to people, its just a pixel resolution with a few programmed responses". I could easily make a counter- aargument " why play a game with magic, monsters and strange quests. Its not even real. What possible reason would you enjoy such nonsense"

 

Of course my last point doesn't apply as people play RPG for a variety of known and personal reasons. And most of us love them as our favorite gaming genres

 

 

But this is basic sex and flirting. Basic sex and flirting can be fun, and you don't need to be attracted to someone to understand the appeal of sex and flirting. FFS you can watch two people having sex or flirting well (as in both are witty) and actually enjoy it. I can roleplay this BECAUSE it's somehow funny to see the Courier and Sarah Weintraub use sexual innuendo in conversation about leather suits.

 

But watching two people be romantic with one another? Watching them feel madly in love with each other, staring longingly into each other's eyes? Very boring, and sometimes downright annoying.

 

And this is exactly how I feel. I don't enjoy roleplaying romance. Sex or flirting? As long as it's not constant, in-your-face and overboard, fine, but don't try to make me have an attachment to another character please....

 

I see what you are saying and I agree. For me I am only talking about sex with characters in the RPG, like Isabella( DA2) and Viconia (BG2). I don't look for some kind of real romance because its just a game and there aren't real emotional feelings for me. But I do enjoy the roleplaying aspect and I did find both the ladies I mentioned attractive, even though they are just virtual characters

Edited September 18, 2012 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

Ask yourselves this:

 

What is romance?

 

Romance is when two people hit it off. They find each other attractive: physically, mentally, personality-wise etc. They find each other SO attractive that they decide they want to spend all of their time together and enjoy other perks of a relationship (buttsex). You can't stand to be without this person, and you'd likely be willing to throw down your own life if it meant saving theirs. That's romance.

 

 

Can an AI find you physically attractive? No

Can an AI find you mentally attractive? I guess TECHNICALLY yes, but it's a very basic attraction, much like some shallow people might find rich people attractive

Can an AI find your personality attractive? No, because you cannot properly express yourself through RPG options.

 

Can you find an AI physically attractive? Uuhhh...I suppose? I mean I guess even drawings can be appealing, but still that's very basic....

Can you find an AI mentally attractive? No, absolutely not.

Can you find an AI's personality attractive? Not really. If you can there's something friggin' wrong with you. You can like them, their character and their story, but their personality does NOT expand beyond that. They're more an idea rather than an actual personality.

 

Will the AI want to spend all of it's time with you? It doesn't have a choice.

Will YOU want to spend all of your time with it? I certainly ****ing hope not. If yes, see a therapist.

 

 

So why bother? Why pretend? Why implement romance if doing it properly is impossible? Either do it right or don't do it at all.

 

Sex? That wouldn't hurt I suppose. I mean again, in my opinion, a "relationship" you guys are talking about is literally just your "lover's" backstory + sex after you tell her how amazing and right about everything she is. Backstory is fine, and you know what, I guess fap material is fine too. But please, don't try and mix them and present them as a relationship, cause I find that hella awkward, personally.

 

Prostitutes or maybe ONE flirty companion who never moves past flirting with you or drunken romps, fine. But every female companion wanting to get with you? Please god no...

 

I understand what you are saying and I can see why it makes sense from your perspective. But the fundamental question is "why would a person want sex in an RPG ". This will differ from person to person. For me I am lover of the immersion of RPG. I can spend up to 100 hours playing an RPG. You form an virtual empathetic bond with your character in the game if its good. As someone who use to Dungeon Master in the original D&D pen and paper game I know how seriously people take there characters. We know its not real but its still important that you can define there actions, how they look and what the game allows them to do. So its perfectly logical that you would want your character to have sex with other characters. It adds to the overall experience of immersion. Many fantasy sagas, like the original Conan books, sex was ubiquitous. I love the Conan world so part of me wants to act like him when I play a game that represents his universe

 

Finally you can't use the argument "Sex in the game can't be something that actually appeals to people, its just a pixel resolution with a few programmed responses". I could easily make a counter- aargument " why play a game with magic, monsters and strange quests. Its not even real. What possible reason would you enjoy such nonsense"

 

Of course my last point doesn't apply as people play RPG for a variety of known and personal reasons. And most of us love them as our favorite gaming genres

 

 

But this is basic sex and flirting. Basic sex and flirting can be fun, and you don't need to be attracted to someone to understand the appeal of sex and flirting. FFS you can watch two people having sex or flirting well (as in both are witty) and actually enjoy it. I can roleplay this BECAUSE it's somehow funny to see the Courier and Sarah Weintraub use sexual innuendo in conversation about leather suits.

 

But watching two people be romantic with one another? Watching them feel madly in love with each other, staring longingly into each other's eyes? Very boring, and sometimes downright annoying.

 

And this is exactly how I feel. I don't enjoy roleplaying romance. Sex or flirting? As long as it's not constant, in-your-face and overboard, fine, but don't try to make me have an attachment to another character please....

 

I see what you are saying and I agree. For me I am only talking about sex with characters in the RPG, like Isabella( DA2) and Viconia (BG2). I don't look for some kind of real romance because its just a game and there aren't real emotional feelings for me. But I do enjoy the roleplaying aspect and I did find both the ladies I mentioned attractive, even though they are just virtual characters

[BasaltineBadger]

I liked how MoTB handled romances. Some light flirting + slide about MC + romancable character staying together in the future. Bioware with their "final battle is coming tomorrow and neither of us wants to die as a virgin so..." is far from perfect.

[SanguineAngel]

I still say that if ANYTHING, we should compromise this and make it romance amongst our potential companions that you can influence, NOT between the player and NPCs.

 

I don't see much of a difference if I'm honest. The PC or NPCs, none of them are you. They're all characters you have a hand in guiding their fate to some degree.

 

Although, the idea that one character (the PC) would have such an arbitrary influence over their friends/companions' love life I would find a bit odd. Sure you ask your friends for advice but you make up your own mind. Likewise, I would expect an NPC to maybe talk to the PC about it, producing new story and interaction. But then giving the PC the deciding vote? Way too gamey.

Edited September 18, 2012 by SanguineAngel

[Longknife]

I still say that if ANYTHING, we should compromise this and make it romance amongst our potential companions that you can influence, NOT between the player and NPCs.

 

I don't see much of a difference if I'm honest. The PC or NPCs, none of them are you. They're all characters you have a hand in guiding their fate to some degree.

 

Although, the idea that one character (the PC) would have such an arbitrary influence over their friends/companions' love life I would find a bit odd. Sure you ask your friends for advice but you make up your own mind. Likewise, I would expect an NPC to maybe talk to the PC about it, producing new story and interaction. But then giving the PC the deciding vote? Way too gamey.

 

Hey don't ask me, I don't want it in at all.

[Crosmando]

Yes but they are just cosmetic, no really changes it just makes the character stay in your party.

 

I stumbled over the "romance" in PST (that kiss with Annah) by mistake, just because I knew that if you keep talking to companions and choose different choices every time, eventually they or I would get some XP out of the conversation. I wasn't "looking for" romance banters, and I didn't particularly care for the romances in BG2 either (found BG1 better because it didn't have them). Didn't see how romancing a 2D sprite was very meaningful, I just wanted to take my party on adventures, explore, kill stuff, talk to NPC's.

 

I don't see what the need for "extra features" like this is, it doesn't add anything to the core gameplay experience, it's just something maybe developers could add if they finish the game 100%, polished and bug-free, and they have money left over (something a fan-funded low-budget RPG is definetely not going to have).

[dlux]

Romances aren't roleplaying though, at least not in the way Bioware does them. That is called simulation, and I doubt any backers wants dating sim minigames in an RPG.

Well, in a cRPG the entire world (all visuals for example) are simulated. In a cRPG you are seeing the simulation of a world that the designers have created for you.

 

So, technically, anybody that plays a cRPG is actually not _truly_ roleplaying.

 

But anyway, I personally DO consider romances to be rolepaying, seeing that you are interacting with your world and making choices.

Edited September 18, 2012 by dlux

[Jarmo]

What I hate about these discussions is that the pro romance people are incredibly pushy about the issue (in particular about the homosexual romances) so much that they spam the developers with requests until they cave in and implement these features over their better judgment and all we get in the end is crap. Like Dragon Age 2 for example.

 

I seem to see two sides to this. And wouldn't say one side is totally free of opinion pushing.

 

I've seen it on the Bioware forums, and I'm sick of it as its a gross misrepresentation of what most people want. The fact is most people couldn't care less about romances and given the option of choosing either romance or another quest they'd drop the romance without thinking.

 

I'd call that an opinion, and deliberately uneducated one at that. Despite seeing the majority of expressed opinions and poll results say one thing, you still go and say your opinion is the opinion of majority.

 

My gut feeling, and it's only that (even if backed by more posts and poll results), says most people would choose in game romance rather than one more questline (of similar length).

 

 

 

 

It took what, one day (?) since the opening of this forum for this whole, very vocal minority to step in and start a flame war over the issue without any knowledge of what the devs are attempting with this game.

 

While the anti-romance majority stayed quiet because they had no knowledge of what the devs are attempting with this game either?

The "flame war" is fought by one side, and one side only?

 

 

Baldurs Gate wasn't great because of romances, it was great because of an epic story in huge world, populated with cool characters. Those are priorities FFS and it would have been just as great without the romances.

 

No. A big part of the greatness of Baldurs gate was because of the companions. Compared to other games done before, the companions felt real, they had a mind of their own, they had feelings and opinions, they also loved (although not the player at that point). It became immediate obvious the gamers liked and connected with this. The companions were vastly expanded in BG2, being able to romance them being a part of this.

 

 

I'm willing to say, most people would have not liked BG2 as much if there had been no romance subplots, but it had had another dungeon to explore instead.

 

Now, 10 yrs later, the kind of character depth in BG series is no longer unique, if not commonplace either and hardly ever surpassed.

I'd say it'd be a high time, but that's my opinion and this might not be the game to do it.

[andreisiadi]

I truly hope Obsidian has enough dignity not to cater to a bunch of datesim-loving-smoking-cigarettes.

[SirthOsiris]

What if it was tied to gameplay? Like some stat increases, abilities, actions?

[Jiraboas]

I still say that if ANYTHING, we should compromise this and make it romance amongst our potential companions that you can influence, NOT between the player and NPCs.

 

"In a compromiss everyone get what he want, but no one is happy with it"

 

kind regards,

 

Jira

Edited September 18, 2012 by Jiraboas