Jump to content

For people who are NOT apathetic or opposed to romances in games:  

455 members have voted

  1. 1. Are you willing to sacrifice romances as a feature if it drew significant resources from other story features?

  2. 2. Are you willing to sacrifice romances as a feature if it drew significant resources from gameplay design?

  3. 3. Would you still want romance options in the game even if your hypothetical favorite NPC did not end up being available?



Recommended Posts

With 2 I do agree, but with 1 - text-based game seems just as fine to tackle this as a text-based book. The only factor left is how skilled writer is. No?

 

Yes. Which brings us back to number 1.

 

Look, if anybody can do it right it's probably these guys. But do I want time wasted on such nonsense? No. Would I actually ask for it? Hell no. Would I start a thread insisting a cRPG include it? Oh, hell no.

 

Okay, whatever floats your boat. I'm just trying to get to you with this: i feel that you don't really think this topic is unappropriate for video games, them being childish and so. It all gets down to you having other priorities. Which you are obviously fully entitled to have. But that's what makes difference between uncaring and unwanting (does that word even exists? ;) ).

 

 

Trouble is that most of the writers we seem to be getting are Hollywood rejects judged by Tinseltown too poor to be even doing reboots of remakes. And then they try to make everything engaging and cinematic. Thank **** for Obsidian.

 

I agree, and that's why I see Project Eternity as a perfect opportunity. There is a talentend writing squad on board that don't have to give a flying fish about drawing audience with fanservice. They *can* create interesting romance subplots, and I would like them to because it may be the only shot at this ever in the gaming industry.

 

With 2 I do agree, but with 1 - text-based game seems just as fine to tackle this as a text-based book. The only factor left is how skilled writer is. No?

No, in RPGs there are choices. In books you're being told a story. In RPGs you're role playing the character in the story.

In text-based cRPGs the only real differences are some aspects of physical presentation - which is not relevant in case of romances - and that story is branching instead of linear. The latter does not present any additional obstacles with regards to romances than with overall storytelling.

 

You can't make every game story about the romance with the romance being a main theme of the game. [...] It's a dumb, slippery slope where romance is the main theme of the game instead of the role playing elements.

 

I don't really get what you are talking about here. Nobody ever asked for what you're describing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree, and that's why I see Project Eternity as a perfect opportunity. There is a talentend writing squad on board that don't have to give a flying fish about drawing audience with fanservice. They *can* create interesting romance subplots, and I would like them to because it may be the only shot at this ever in the gaming industry.

 

What makes you think Avellone wants to write Biowarian romances? I don't know what his position is on romance/sex minigames, but I certainly don't think it can be assumed that he would want to write the game equivalent of romance novels or melodramatic soap opera stuff.

 

I'd like to think that he would think it is as stupid and frivolous as those of us in the anti-romance faction and if that's the case I wouldn't go expecting some kind of well written romances. They'll probably just get some female staff member or intern to write them up. Surely MCA has more important things to write.

 

As far as romantic sub-plots, this is not something you can ask for. Either love will be an integral (and non-skippable) part of the main story or it won't be. It can't just be shoehorned in. At least not without ruining the rest of the story. I haven't heard anyone in this thread complain about Deionnara in PS:T. That was a genuine part of the central plot. It fit in perfectly and there was no cutscene of TNO doing her from behind while he yanked on her ghostly pony tail or the text equivalent.

Edited by metiman

JoshSawyer: Listening to feedback from the fans has helped us realize that people can be pretty polarized on what they want, even among a group of people ostensibly united by a love of the same games. For us, that means prioritizing options is important. If people don’t like a certain aspect of how skill checks are presented or how combat works, we should give them the ability to turn that off, resources permitting.

.
.
Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as romantic sub-plots, this is not something you can ask for. Either love will be an integral (and non-skippable) part of the main story or it won't be. It can't just be shoehorned in. At least not without ruining the rest of the story. I haven't heard anyone in this thread complain about Deionnara in PS:T. That was a genuine part of the central plot. It fit in perfectly and there was no cutscene of TNO doing her from behind while he yanked on her ghostly pony tail or the text equivalent.

lmao yeah I remember Safiya and Gann ruining MotB, Visas, the Handmaiden, and the Disciple ruining KotOR 2, Mina, Scarlet, Madison and SIE ruining Alpha Protocol, and Fisto ruining Fallout: New Vegas. Please. Go troll somewhere else.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to be able to play my character as that kind of horribly outrageous and outgoing female that makes guys squirm, blush, and run off. Or, alternatively, a staid old maid who can't be having with any of that nonsense.

 

Having a couple of cute guys around who want to get in your pants is flattering either way tho.

Grand Rhetorist of the Obsidian Order

If you appeal to "realism" about a video game feature, you are wrong. Go back and try again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dragon Age is also really bad and talking about "post-Dragon Age" Bioware is stupid as a consequence.

 

Did I say 'post Dragon Age'? That's not what I meant. I should have said post NWN. Basically everything that Bioware did including Dragon Age: Origins onward seemed like it was coming from a different developer entirely as compared to at least their previous fantasy stuff. After NWN it seems clear that Bioware had lost all interest in the genre itself and just wanted to cash in and do whatever they thought would most appeal to the masses. The old 'embrace and extend', but at some point you cross a line and you lose all of your older customers in order to get your new ones. Most of the current Biowarian kiddies would hate BG2 and NWN.

JoshSawyer: Listening to feedback from the fans has helped us realize that people can be pretty polarized on what they want, even among a group of people ostensibly united by a love of the same games. For us, that means prioritizing options is important. If people don’t like a certain aspect of how skill checks are presented or how combat works, we should give them the ability to turn that off, resources permitting.

.
.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone realizes that there are two very specific points in the Forum Rules that state they do not allow bashing of other developers and publishers, right?

 

You all do know the rules you are breaking with each bash on BioWare?

 

And the hand-tipping - this is less about being anti-romance for some of you and more about being anti-BioWare.

 

Can this forum PLEASE not be about politics / sports, us vs. them mentallity?

 

You can not like BioWare. Cool. This isn't BioWare.

 

Let. It. Go.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as romantic sub-plots, this is not something you can ask for. Either love will be an integral (and non-skippable) part of the main story or it won't be. It can't just be shoehorned in. At least not without ruining the rest of the story. I haven't heard anyone in this thread complain about Deionnara in PS:T. That was a genuine part of the central plot. It fit in perfectly and there was no cutscene of TNO doing her from behind while he yanked on her ghostly pony tail or the text equivalent.

lmao yeah I remember Safiya and Gann ruining MotB, Visas, the Handmaiden, and the Disciple ruining KotOR 2, Mina, Scarlet, Madison and SIE ruining Alpha Protocol, and Fisto ruining Fallout: New Vegas. Please. Go troll somewhere else.

 

WTF are you on about?

JoshSawyer: Listening to feedback from the fans has helped us realize that people can be pretty polarized on what they want, even among a group of people ostensibly united by a love of the same games. For us, that means prioritizing options is important. If people don’t like a certain aspect of how skill checks are presented or how combat works, we should give them the ability to turn that off, resources permitting.

.
.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You all do know the rules you are breaking with each bash on BioWare?

 

And the hand-tipping - this is less about being anti-romance for some of you and more about being anti-BioWare.

No one is bashing Bioware. They're main feature in their games is romances. While Obsidian's strengths are usually towards characters, dialogue and story. Bioware lately is all about the romance and action combat. It's not bashing when it's true or it's your opinion about their games.

 

It's about being anti both since Bioware is always pro-romance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes on all three. I'd love to have romance options, but it's not a must. A deep, compelling story and a detailed world (not even graphics, but story-wise detailed) with its own cosmogony, history and culture is much more valuable.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Knight Drei of the Obsidian Order

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't care about romance that much, it's not a bad feature, as long as it is done right and doesn't feel forced like in the newest type of games. I prefer it to be subtle like in Planescape, or none existent at all, because story is usually better that way anyway. Otherwise it will feel like the story is focused on romances. So, forget about the romance, and just write something good like you did in NV, or go for something like AP and PST.

 

It's good either way, in Avelone we trust, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites

WTF are you on about?

Either love will be an integral (and non-skippable) part of the main story or it won't be. It can't just be shoehorned in. At least not without ruining the rest of the story.
Pretty much every Obsidian game has had romance subplots. The idea that it ruins the game has no grounding in reality. If you are a fan of the product that Obsidian produces, you literally, literally cannot believe that romances ruin games, because then the only game of theirs you'd like is, like, Dungeon Siege 3. Edited by Gorth
Removed quote from deleted post
Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree, and that's why I see Project Eternity as a perfect opportunity. There is a talentend writing squad on board that don't have to give a flying fish about drawing audience with fanservice. They *can* create interesting romance subplots, and I would like them to because it may be the only shot at this ever in the gaming industry.

 

What makes you think Avellone wants to write Biowarian romances? I don't know what his position is on romance/sex minigames, but I certainly don't think it can be assumed that he would want to write the game equivalent of romance novels or melodramatic soap opera stuff.

 

I'd like to think that he would think it is as stupid and frivolous as those of us in the anti-romance faction and if that's the case I wouldn't go expecting some kind of well written romances. They'll probably just get some female staff member or intern to write them up. Surely MCA has more important things to write.

 

As far as romantic sub-plots, this is not something you can ask for. Either love will be an integral (and non-skippable) part of the main story or it won't be. It can't just be shoehorned in. At least not without ruining the rest of the story. I haven't heard anyone in this thread complain about Deionnara in PS:T. That was a genuine part of the central plot. It fit in perfectly and there was no cutscene of TNO doing her from behind while he yanked on her ghostly pony tail or the text equivalent.

 

The non-skippable part would be terribly awkward in a game with an open-ended player character. It's one thing for The Nameless One to have a set, past romance, because he's a somewhat defined character with a specific past and gender. But if I'm permitted to choose my character's race, subrace, gender, background, and so on, it becomes much more distracting if the game then mandates my character's sexual orientation (particularly since I'm a woman and any mandatory romance is likely to be with a female character).

 

I'm not saying that every taste needs to be worked into a game, but I think one with player-defined characters should at least let you avoid the romantic content if it seems inappropriate for your character concept. I think there's a middle ground between romances that influence and interact with the plot and those that are mandatory.

Edited by eselle28
Link to post
Share on other sites

JoshSawyer: Listening to feedback from the fans has helped us realize that people can be pretty polarized on what they want, even among a group of people ostensibly united by a love of the same games. For us, that means prioritizing options is important. If people don’t like a certain aspect of how skill checks are presented or how combat works, we should give them the ability to turn that off, resources permitting.

.
.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You all do know the rules you are breaking with each bash on BioWare?

 

And the hand-tipping - this is less about being anti-romance for some of you and more about being anti-BioWare.

No one is bashing Bioware. They're main feature in their games is romances. While Obsidian's strengths are usually towards characters, dialogue and story. Bioware lately is all about the romance and action combat. It's not bashing when it's true or it's your opinion about their games.

 

It's about being anti both since Bioware is always pro-romance.

 

Just in the first 6 pages of this thread, the clear ones (not the ones that just mention BioWare as including romance.)

 

 

There are the dog whistles -

 

Wait, I signed up to the Obsidian board to talk about Project Eternity. How'd I end up at Bioware?

 

Rather, how did BioWare end up here?

 

which, if you didn't understand it being code, is clarified later -

 

Thus why the "go play a Bioware game" "advice" isn't terribly useful even for fans of romance.

 

Perhaps, but I think you and everybody else know precisely what the sentiment means.

 

 

to blatant -

 

In any game that has had them like in Biowares horrible creations they are very much cringe worthy and childish every one of them. If you want Romance go outside and meet people.

 

you could argue that taking them away from bioware's game leaves us hardly anything, but then again, there wasn't anything salvagable in the first place.

 

Its almost never done well. See: any Bioware game ever

 

Maybe not everyone who mentions BioWare as doing romance is bashing, but it's becoming a slur. You cannot hide behind something being "opinion" - as "opinions" can be used to bash, easily. Rarely are facts used to bash.

 

I'm not the biggest fan of BioWare due to their last couple games. This isn't about defending them.

 

It's about not getting the thread shut down. I think it is worth while for the people who like romance to discuss with the people who don't. It's good for the ones who think everyone agrees that romance in games is always done badly get to break outside of their bubble and talk to those who disagree with them.

Edited by Merin
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had decided to give up posting in romance threads but I just wanted to ask some things from the promancers.

 

So people want romances, but they want them done right(ie not bio style). They also believe they don't cost much in the way of resources so it won't be a burden on development.

 

I say the only way they might be done right, is if a significant amount of time and creativity are put into them by the Obsidian writing team. So when people ask for romances done right, they are asking for a significant amount of resources to be drained from story features. Of this there is no doubt.

 

The only way in which romances don't drain significant resources(but still drains them) is if done the way bio does them. So when someone suggest they want romances and they won't drain significant resources, this is what they really mean.

 

So in my mind there are three choices.

 

1. Romances that are tried to be done right, that drain significant resources.

 

2. Bio style romances, that are throw away. Still drain resources away from other areas, but no to the degree of option 1.

 

3. No romances.

 

So are people fine with option two, given they don't believe romances should take significant resources away from other areas. (Given that's what the poll says, the one I didn't vote on)

  • Like 1
cylon_basestar_eye.gif
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's about not getting the thread shut down. I think it is worth while for the people who like romance to discuss with the people who don't. It's good for the ones who think everyone agrees that romance in games is always done badly get to break outside of their bubble and talk to those who disagree with them.

 

So everyone that's opposite you is in a bubble ? Heh, hits keep coming.

 

At least this keeps in people's minds the idea that with these projects you have to focus.

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had decided to give up posting in romance threads but I just wanted to ask some things from the promancers.

 

So people want romances, but they want them done right(ie not bio style). They also believe they don't cost much in the way of resources so it won't be a burden on development.

 

I say the only way they might be done right, is if a significant amount of time and creativity are put into them by the Obsidian writing team. So when people ask for romances done right, they are asking for a significant amount of resources to be drained from story features. Of this there is no doubt.

Literally any part of the game drains resources from other parts, it's a really childish perspective to say that any feature MUST be something you'll enjoy. If one of the classes is fun for other people but unbearable for you, are you going to bitch about it too? Because designing and balancing a class takes a hell of a lot more time and effort than writing some dialogue.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So people want romances, but they want them done right(ie not bio style). They also believe they don't cost much in the way of resources so it won't be a burden on development.

 

Straw man.

 

Find me the person who says all three of the above. You have some people who want romance in the game who would agree with you that BioWare does it badly. But you don't have anyone saying that romances don't cost resources to write, period, let alone to write well.

 

So in my mind there are three choices.

 

1. Romances that are tried to be done right, that drain significant resources.

 

2. Bio style romances, that are throw away. Still drain resources away from other areas, but no to the degree of option 1.

 

3. No romances.

 

You'd have to define "significant" and what it's being drained from? We can make silly statements like "would you rather have romances or would you rather have first person shooting mechanics?" or "would you rather have romances or would you rather have realistic physics for parkour?" You have to give an either or, this or that, for "draining resources" to mean anything.

 

For example, I would much rather have writing time spent on romances than on discussions on religion. I would also much rather have writing resources spent on romances than on thieving and sneaking mechanics.

 

To say, blanketly, "drain resources" is to put into people's mind that whatever their favorite parts of the game are could be cut for romances. But that's just fear-mongering.

 

And you fall into what I'm about to address again below - the assumption that everyone thinks that BioWare's romances are universally (or even mostly) bad.

 

 

I think it is worth while for the people who like romance to discuss with the people who don't. It's good for the ones who think everyone agrees that romance in games is always done badly get to break outside of their bubble and talk to those who disagree with them.

 

So everyone that's opposite you is in a bubble ? Heh, hits keep coming.

 

Straw man. I never said that those who disagree with me live in a bubble. I said, as bolded above, that those who think "everyone agrees that romance in games is always done badly" are in a bubble... a bubble of talking too frequently with those who agree with them that romances are always done badly.

 

That's not a judgment on their opinion as opposed to mine. That's an objective judgment on every post that states "romances are always done badly" as if there is a general consensus, let alone universal one.

 

By empirical evidence in this thread alone you have many people who list games they felt the romances were good in.

 

Misrepresenting what I say doesn't make you clever. It makes you look confused, as if you don't understand what I'm saying.

Or, barring that, it makes you look petty.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's a philosophical objection to romances from many of the people against them. Even if it is irrationally rooted.

 

I don't think there's the same, or at least it's not as widespread, for classes people don't like. I don't think there's a contingent that thinks Clerics are part of the reason RPGs have declined in recent years.

  • Like 1
"Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater."
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's a philosophical objection to romances from many of the people against them. Even if it is irrationally rooted.

 

I don't think there's the same, or at least it's not as widespread, for classes people don't like. I don't think there's a contingent that thinks Clerics are part of the reason RPGs have declined in recent years.

 

Right.

 

But I think the point was the hard, repeated mantras of "romances drain resources that are better spent elsewhere" and "romances aren't done right."

 

You could just as easily say that resources would be better spent on making male human fighters the only available option for PC's as, with ample metrics showing this to be true, like 75% of players choose to play male human fighters in RPGs. Why waste the resources on the 25% when you can make the experience for the 75% so much better?

 

Or rogues in particular? There are plenty of people out there who think sneaking and stealing mechanics are rarely done well, and with bashing locks or knock spells, what really is the point of a rogue? Couldn't you just limit to mage and fighter and let them handle the odd stuff that rogues would do?

 

There's also a good contingent of players who don't like the option to play "evil" being allowed. When is this implemented well? Rarely, many would say. Any kind of tracking of alignment and many would argue that the game loses a lot for these karma systems. Why not just do away with evil acts, since the majority of players (again) play good guys?

 

---

 

To be clear, I'm not advocating the above. But they are as valid arguments as the anti-romance ones.

 

There is the underlying root for much of the anti-romance, however. And it's the sentiment that those who want romance in the game are looking for virtual sex simulators, and are people who cannot get a date IRL. Or just that there's something icky and wrong with "role-playing" romance, especially in a video game.

 

If you took that away, the argument about "wasted resources" and "poorly implemented" would suddenly fall down to a level of being equal to any other gaming aspect that people like or don't like.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Straw man. I never said that those who disagree with me live in a bubble. I said, as bolded above, that those who think "everyone agrees that romance in games is always done badly" are in a bubble... a bubble of talking too frequently with those who agree with them that romances are always done badly.

 

That's not a judgment on their opinion as opposed to mine. That's an objective judgment on every post that states "romances are always done badly" as if there is a general consensus, let alone universal one.

 

By empirical evidence in this thread alone you have many people who list games they felt the romances were good in.

 

Misrepresenting what I say doesn't make you clever. It makes you look confused, as if you don't understand what I'm saying.

Or, barring that, it makes you look petty.

 

More hits, heh. Given what you've posted, using a term like bubble for others is nice backhanded jab. In any event, I'm not seeing Bioware bashing (not sure why you care if there is, moderator's job) people just using it as a reference for shoddy 'romance' in games. It is pretty hard to write a decent one, I'd imagine, and given the nature of this project - seems like a burn of too much effort on a tiny piece.

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to post
Share on other sites

In any event, I'm not seeing Bioware bashing (not sure why you care if there is, moderator's job) people just using it as a reference for shoddy 'romance' in games.

 

The same reason I keep objecting elsewhere when people use the word "Obsidian" to mean "buggy beyond all playability."

 

Because it's a slur against the company. Saying "badly written, pandering romances, like BioWare" is the same as saying, "unplayable buggy crapware, like Obsidian."

 

If you think the later is not a dig or bash on Obsidian, well, we really have different definitions of the term.

 

And, for the record, saying someone lives in a bubble isn't insulting that person. If you are surrounded by people who agree with you on something, you are in a bubble of agreement on that thing. It means you don't have dissenting voices around you. It's not a personal flaw, it's the situation of your environment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me for going off topic but, not really, both of those are opinions based on some experience. If you've played Obsidian games and find them buggy and if they are well then not a slur to tell the truth. Likewise with Bioware's romances, if you found them to be garbage then you should be able to call it that. It's not akin to calling the developers muppets or something. Noble to stick up for corporate brands though!

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to post
Share on other sites

Romances done by BW drain resources, because of their formulaic sidequests to develop relationships.

Romances done by Obsidian are integrated into the story and have an impact on decision making.

 

So far I've been ok with they way Obs treats romances in their games.

  • Like 3
I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...