Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Nay.

 

It's feels way too forced most of the time in games, and I really don't want what is surely going to be a great tale marred by something as unnessecary as this.

I think they got the skills to make it so that the player doesn't feel the need to romance anyone unless they pursue it. Hell, Bioware, who I see as writers not up to par with Obsidian, could do this. Imagine the outrage if the player felt forced to have a gay romance with Cortez. (not that I have a problem with the option, just that there would be outrage).

 

if Obsidian does decide to include them, I trust them to do it in a more subtle, mature and tasteful way than BW has.

Likewise. As I mentioned this before, they do sucessfully show their ability to do this in KotOR 2.

Edited by themanclaw
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, if they do it right

 

The way modern Bioware does it is the wrong way: everyone instantly wants to mount the main character. Pretty much no matter what you say or do you're successful. The romances are just there for wish fulfillment and, in my opinion, can become rather offensive since they turn women, men, gays, straights, what have you into nothing more than sexual objects.

 

I much prefer BG2's style where you have both work for them and they feel natural in the way the NPC's react.

 

Also, the point of a good romance in these type of games should be to further characterize party members as well as the player character. Player characters can be somewhat hard to characterize and a good romance is a tool to be used for that end. If the romance doesn't characterize and/or add to the gameplay in any way however, they should just be left out.

Edited by Calabain
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: why is it that people demand more maturity out of the plotlines (romantic or otherwise) for Project Eternity and in the same breath attack Bioware and its community? That strikes me as a bit immature, especially considering how much Bioware has done to really make different groups of people feel included in their romances and how astute and intelligent some of the posters on the BSN are. Like, Bioware's romances are not perfect (the way sex always seems to be an end goal rather than a natural progression within the romance itself, for example; I was particularly disturbed with how they handled Jack in ME2) but come on now.

 

That said, to the topic at hand: I am all for romances in Project Eternity, and I do not subscribe to the idea that whatever they've already planned is somehow sacred and must remain untouched insofar as romances are concerned. There's this growing fear that character growth and development is actually stunted by the presence of romance and that's simply not the case. That is always a developer flaw. Characters do not become cliches purely because there's a romantic option tacked on to them. Well written characters are well written with or without romance, and the opposite stands true as well.

 

What I DO hope for is, as virtually everyone has brought up, a mature progression of the romance and one that is not necessarily written as a "reward" for the player. Romance should never be treated that way. It should flow naturally, it should make you want to pursue it because you like the other character and not because you feel it will "pay off" in the end. I don't see this as something difficult to accomplish or unreasonable, either; I think that people who face adversity together share a pretty tight bond as it is, and if there is an attraction there it's highly likely that it WILL evolve into a romantic relationship. Obsidian can pull that off, I'm sure of it. And it will make the experience a lot more fulfilling in the end, because it quite clearly adds to the emotional impact.

 

I do also think though that if you go for romance in a game, you shouldn't half-ass it. Go big or go home; I want to see it included but it would be way worse to be disappointed by it than to see it discluded completely, in my opinion. I would also really like for some form of friendship that works in the same way as romance, just obviously without the relationship angle; companions are such an important part of RPGs, especially in one like Project Eternity, and you should be able to experience the full range of emotions and complexities of characters even if you decide you don't want to romance them.

 

And of course, I'm all for equal opportunity. Options for men AND women, options for same sex romance, etc. That much should go without saying.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Nay.

 

It's feels way too forced most of the time in games, and I really don't want what is surely going to be a great tale marred by something as unnessecary as this.

I think they got the skills to make it so that the player doesn't feel the need to romance anyone unless they pursue it. Hell, Bioware, who I see as writers not up to par with Obsidian, could do this. Imagine the outrage if the player felt forced to have a gay romance with Cortez. (not that I have a problem with the option, just that there would be outrage).

 

if Obsidian does decide to include them, I trust them to do it in a more subtle, mature and tasteful way than BW has.

Likewise. As I mentioned this before, they do sucessfully show their ability to do this in KotOR 2.

 

I meant 'forced' in the sense that the romance plots were only put in for the sake of having them, rather than being natural next steps in the characters' relationships with eachother. I didn't mean that I felt they were literally forcing me to take part in them (except Mass Effect 2).

 

Ultimately, I trust Obsidian to deliver top tier story telling regardless of whether or not they decide to include romantic sub-plots.

Edited by albinoloach
Link to post
Share on other sites
Question: why is it that people demand more maturity out of the plotlines (romantic or otherwise) for Project Eternity and in the same breath attack Bioware and its community? That strikes me as a bit immature, especially considering how much Bioware has done to really make different groups of people feel included in their romances...

 

Sure, the people actually attacking Bioware and their fans are immature, but there are many that make a good case as to why Bioware's romances in their more recent games have been pretty awful. For example: just as you said, they make sex the end goal.

 

As to the second part of the above quote, this may take another separate thread to cover and it is a hot topic, but I feel that Bioware is entirely offensive in how they handle various sexual orientations in their games. Its pandering and, as I posted above, reduces these characters to little more than objects defined by their sexuality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As to the second part of the above quote, this may take another separate thread to cover and it is a hot topic, but I feel that Bioware is entirely offensive in how they handle various sexual orientations in their games. Its pandering and, as I posted above, reduces these characters to little more than objects defined by their sexuality.

 

I just can't agree with this at all, I guess. I have never understood the Anders... controversy, I guess. I don't see what people dislike about having the freedom to pursue whom you want, especially when all romanceable characters are objects defined by their sexuality; at least I get to choose which one I want regardless of my sexual orientation? There is nothing more frustrating than finding out that a developer had no desire to implement something so harmless and engaging for a large minority of players.

 

Bioware's community is frightening and immature. Have you seen BSN in the last few years?

 

Lol, I have! A lot of them are very... eager to a fault, sure, but the passion that they display in certain areas leads to things that really fascinate rather than repel me. For all of the whining and the obsessive demands, there's also an Indoctrination Theory to show how deep they can go as well. There are places to go on that forum to have discussions that are as thought provoking and interesting as the ones here, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is called "projecting your fears" and nto paying attention, thus condeming a character beforehand.

 

First of all she (Elaniee or something like that, wasn't it?) had a job to watch over you. She was your guardian. So keepign an eye on you was her job. And doing it from the shadows to not cause problems is purely logical.

 

Secondly, just because she looked at the PC while he was sleeping occasionaly doesn't make it creepy. You have some strange mental image of her spending hours just staring at you like a cannibal.

Newsflash for you - people do it all the time. And they do it out out of love or because someone/something is eandearing.

 

Mothers look at their childern when they sleep.

Lovers often take a minute just looking at their significant other sleeping and feeling glad they are there.

Heck, people can even watch a puppy sleep and go "aaaaaaw...so cute".

 

It ain't creepy. It's only creepy because you choose to see it as that. The problem is you.

 

:wacko:

 

If someone for watches you sleep from outside your window, they have problems. That is not going to a sweet and loving place, that's the type that murders their rivals, breaks in and does nasty things to you.

 

To illustrate Banter at it's best we really need an Australian to show up in this thread.

 

Q: What is the difference between an Englishmen and a Frenchmen.....?

 

A: Frenchmen are easier to understand.

 

Q: Why are British prisons some of the "safest" in the world?

 

A: There's no soap in the showers.

 

You know when an aeroplane has landed from England because the whining noise goes on when the engines have stopped.

 

Damn I could go on and on. But that's enough.

 

Back on topic, nay again.

cylon_basestar_eye.gif
Link to post
Share on other sites
I just can't agree with this at all, I guess. I have never understood the Anders... controversy, I guess. I don't see what people dislike about having the freedom to pursue whom you want, especially when all romanceable characters are objects defined by their sexuality; at least I get to choose which one I want regardless of my sexual orientation? There is nothing more frustrating than finding out that a developer had no desire to implement something so harmless and engaging for a large minority of players.

 

Well, I wasn't talking about Anders specifically. I did have an issue with the fact I couldn't let him down easy and had to lose a bunch of "yay, friendship!" points or whatever. That's less a romance issue though and more an issue with them not giving enough options for Hawke's responses. I had the same issue regarding Merril's quest.

 

I do, however, prefer each character to have their own sexuality. Largely because it just feels more...plausible I guess. Its not really a huge issue for me in the long run though. Again, my biggest issue is just that they turn characters, no matter what their sexuality, into strictly sexual objects in their romances. I find this offensive for both straights and gays, men and women.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As to the second part of the above quote, this may take another separate thread to cover and it is a hot topic, but I feel that Bioware is entirely offensive in how they handle various sexual orientations in their games. Its pandering and, as I posted above, reduces these characters to little more than objects defined by their sexuality.

 

I just can't agree with this at all, I guess. I have never understood the Anders... controversy, I guess. I don't see what people dislike about having the freedom to pursue whom you want, especially when all romanceable characters are objects defined by their sexuality; at least I get to choose which one I want regardless of my sexual orientation? There is nothing more frustrating than finding out that a developer had no desire to implement something so harmless and engaging for a large minority of players.

 

Bioware's community is frightening and immature. Have you seen BSN in the last few years?

 

Lol, I have! A lot of them are very... eager to a fault, sure, but the passion that they display in certain areas leads to things that really fascinate rather than repel me. For all of the whining and the obsessive demands, there's also an Indoctrination Theory to show how deep they can go as well. There are places to go on that forum to have discussions that are as thought provoking and interesting as the ones here, IMO.

Indoctrination theory was just pure denial about how Bioware could end ME3 so ****ty and nonsensically. It actually shows how deep their fandom goes to the point where they will make up nonsensical things to justify the crap Bioware gave them. Nothing makes sense, Bioware must have indoctrinated the player. You see this kind of denial and faith in religions. Edited by Grimlorn
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol Grimlorn, disregarding my own feelings on the theory, I don't think that the accuracy of it is what is so incredible but the fact that the series allowed for such an interpretation to begin with and that the fans worked so hard to look at a video game beyond what was presented to them at face value. That is not something that happens very often with games (are there other examples of such a widespread theory for a game?) but you see it a LOT with literature and film and even TV. Not every analysis of The Sopranos' ending can be correct, for example, but the argument over it is what makes it brilliant (and this will make it sound like I'm calling the ME3 ending brilliant so... I'll stop there).

 

I just can't agree with this at all, I guess. I have never understood the Anders... controversy, I guess. I don't see what people dislike about having the freedom to pursue whom you want, especially when all romanceable characters are objects defined by their sexuality; at least I get to choose which one I want regardless of my sexual orientation? There is nothing more frustrating than finding out that a developer had no desire to implement something so harmless and engaging for a large minority of players.

 

Well, I wasn't talking about Anders specifically. I did have an issue with the fact I couldn't let him down easy and had to lose a bunch of "yay, friendship!" points or whatever. That's less a romance issue though and more an issue with them not giving enough options for Hawke's responses. I had the same issue regarding Merril's quest.

 

I do, however, prefer each character to have their own sexuality. Largely because it just feels more...plausible I guess. Its not really a huge issue for me in the long run though. Again, my biggest issue is just that they turn characters, no matter what their sexuality, into strictly sexual objects in their romances. I find this offensive for both straights and gays, men and women.

 

I did somewhat understand that although I never actually encountered it in the game (or I should say, I never encountered it and found it problematic since I've played Dragon Age 2 several times without romancing him). It's a complaint I hear constantly and I dislike that Bioware's response was basically "you can gain the influence points back" since that wasn't really the issue at hand, but what I dislike about the entire thing is how much it blew up and became one of the biggest criticisms ever. Like, they forced me to be mean to Anders/Merill/whomever and I'm so mad about that. =\.

 

And I guess for those of us who believe strictly in the Kinsey scale your second point is not as big a deal ;). Bioware worries too much about the backlash though, and I hope Obsidian tries to avoid that. I want equal opportunity and I will probably voice my disappoint if it's not included, but I do think that having a defining sexuality for each character is good goal albeit one that I don't see as realistic for gay/lesbian options so I won't be too upset if/when it doesn't happen.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I confirm the BSN is very but very immature the girls and boys are very stupid with her and his support oh oh please I want sex with quanri or with elve !! ha ha it's very disapointed !!

 

For I prefer don't saw who is the compagnon for romance before the game is not out, I prefer have a big surprise when the game is out !! I hope you understand with my poor english, but I try to learn english ^^

 

I hope Obsidian create romance quality and don't have the same romance than romance for the BSN FANBASE immature of Bioware Mouarh !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol Grimlorn, disregarding my own feelings on the theory, I don't think that the accuracy of it is what is so incredible but the fact that the series allowed for such an interpretation to begin with and that the fans worked so hard to look at a video game beyond what was presented to them at face value. That is not something that happens very often with games (are there other examples of such a widespread theory for a game?) but you see it a LOT with literature and film and even TV. Not every analysis of The Sopranos' ending can be correct, for example, but the argument over it is what makes it brilliant (and this will make it sound like I'm calling the ME3 ending brilliant so... I'll stop there).

I don't consider this a strength to be honest. I didn't watch them but I certainly saw the links to the hour and half indoctrination theory videos on youtube. That kind of denial comes off as bordering on mental illness, because their fans are so zealous they would create an alternate interpretation of the ending to a video game. Being widespread doesn't really justify it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol Grimlorn, disregarding my own feelings on the theory, I don't think that the accuracy of it is what is so incredible but the fact that the series allowed for such an interpretation to begin with and that the fans worked so hard to look at a video game beyond what was presented to them at face value. That is not something that happens very often with games (are there other examples of such a widespread theory for a game?) but you see it a LOT with literature and film and even TV. Not every analysis of The Sopranos' ending can be correct, for example, but the argument over it is what makes it brilliant (and this will make it sound like I'm calling the ME3 ending brilliant so... I'll stop there).

You know where you can see a lot of that? Reading conspiracy theories. Or TVTropes.

  • Like 3

Say no to popamole!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It kind of does justify it, though. Not the validity of the theory but how impressive/important it is. I shudder to think what you might think of the people who analyze David Lynch films though, since you think it's so delusional and crazy to look a bit deeper into something that you don't think is comprehensible otherwise.

 

ETA: I also think conspiracy theories are impressive, since they require quite a bit of research and thinking for yourself :ermm: . A conspiracy theory can be incorrect or it can actually be true, but that's very rarely what anybody is interested in when it comes to them. Just food for thought. But this is getting way off topic so I'm done talking about it, lol.

Edited by PaganPoetry
Link to post
Share on other sites
indoctrination theory was just pure denial about how Bioware could end ME3 so ****ty and nonsensically. It actually shows how deep their fandom goes to the point where they will make up nonsensical things to justify the crap Bioware gave them. Nothing makes sense, Bioware must have indoctrinated the player. You see this kind of denial and faith in religions.

Now we have something to agree upon! Fanboy/girlisms are the bane of all fiction. 20% of the BSN folks are fanboy/girls of the endings simply because they're written by bioware and will do whatever it takes to defend them, 35% (or so) are fanboy/girl deniers that Bioware could ever have bad writing, 25% are apathetic, and the other 20% actually recognize blatantly poor narrative when it is right in front of our faces. Don't get me wrong, I loved the ME series, but you can't excuse major faults just because you love the company so much.

I mean, think about Bioware's KotOR 1 vs Obsidians KotOR 2.

KotOR 1 (though good) had a 2-dimentional villain and a plot twist.

KotOR 2 actually made you think!

I think that Obsidian knows not to base the game off of a community of customers that is narrow-sighted, easily exploited, and/or insufficiently learned about video games. The Obsidian community has far less fanboys and girls. The community has invested in their project in the hope that they can provide a game that satisfies those things that gamers have been deprived of in recent years from forced multiplayer to shallow narrative to DRM's. This is why I would like to see a romance in PE; because from what I know of their previous works, when left unconstrained in their creativity, I think they could pull it off like no other.

Edited by themanclaw
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the validity of the theory but how impressive/important it is.

I guess I can agree with this. Bioware proved that you could throw out all consistency with the plot/story and create a terrible ending that makes no sense, and their fans will still buy it and defend them. There's a difference between looking a bit deeper at something, which I think is fine, and creating something just as crazy to try and justify your faith in them. Sometimes a turd is just a turd and Bioware isn't infallible. They're crappy writers and ME3 and DA2 have proved it. Edited by Grimlorn
Link to post
Share on other sites
Indoctrination theory was just pure denial about how Bioware could end ME3 so ****ty and nonsensically. It actually shows how deep their fandom goes to the point where they will make up nonsensical things to justify the crap Bioware gave them. Nothing makes sense, Bioware must have indoctrinated the player. You see this kind of denial and faith in religions.

Indoctrination theory was what the available evidence was pointing to. And that was because before the Casey Hudson/Mac Walters abomination that became the actual ending of the game, the little kid and all the evidence pointed to in the indoc videos was created and used in the game for an indoctrination twist, as it were. Which was then scrubbed either because Hudson was unhappy with it, or because somebody in the main EA foodchain was unhappy with and told Hudson to come up with a standard ending. No way to know. However, they then didn't REMOVE any of the indoc stuff from the game. Thus, when people came upon the utter ****e that was the ending they got and noticed all the weird clues, they cobbled together what was there to produce indoc theory.

"You know, there's more to being an evil despot than getting cake whenever you want it"

 

"If that's what you think, you're DOING IT WRONG."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Indoctrination theory was just pure denial about how Bioware could end ME3 so ****ty and nonsensically. It actually shows how deep their fandom goes to the point where they will make up nonsensical things to justify the crap Bioware gave them. Nothing makes sense, Bioware must have indoctrinated the player. You see this kind of denial and faith in religions.

Indoctrination theory was what the available evidence was pointing to. And that was because before the Casey Hudson/Mac Walters abomination that became the actual ending of the game, the little kid and all the evidence pointed to in the indoc videos was created and used in the game for an indoctrination twist, as it were. Which was then scrubbed either because Hudson was unhappy with it, or because somebody in the main EA foodchain was unhappy with and told Hudson to come up with a standard ending. No way to know. However, they then didn't REMOVE any of the indoc stuff from the game. Thus, when people came upon the utter ****e that was the ending they got and noticed all the weird clues, they cobbled together what was there to produce indoc theory.

It was probably scrubbed because it made no sense at all. The indoctrination theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny when you watch that ending or think about it for more than 5 seconds. And once the ending is over the game even has a message saying Sheperd is a legend, successful and saved the universe, continue the adventure with DLC. It's an out of game message and shatters any theory of indoctrination.

 

Maybe the indoctrination theory still makes more sense than the current ending of ME3, but it still doesn't make any sense standing on its own. That's why it's pure fanaticism that fans came up with it and still defend and support Bioware.

Edited by Grimlorn
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: why is it that people demand more maturity out of the plotlines (romantic or otherwise) for Project Eternity and in the same breath attack Bioware and its community? That strikes me as a bit immature, especially considering how much Bioware has done to really make different groups of people feel included in their romances and how astute and intelligent some of the posters on the BSN are. Like, Bioware's romances are not perfect (the way sex always seems to be an end goal rather than a natural progression within the romance itself, for example; I was particularly disturbed with how they handled Jack in ME2) but come on now.

Seems to me that you've already answered your own question -- in all of the ME and Dragon Age games, sex is the end goal / reward for pursuing the various romance story-lines, and with each of these games a huge deal was made of these particular "features". First during the games' development, on the forums, with fans debating the subject endlessly, obsessing over the involved characters, their orientation, the balance between male and female options, the available options for players of different sexual orientations, and so on, and then later in the marketing of the games, during interviews, in the summer-blockbuster-movie-like trailers, etc. etc.

 

It made the romances, and their "rewards" in particular, a major focal point of each release, often to the point of so-called "controversy" -- so much so that it over-shadowed other, much more significant plot-lines and features. And I think that is a direct result of many (many) of BW's fans' apparent obsession over this part of their games, and BW's decision to indulge those fans and implement what basically boils down to a very juvenile "pick the right responses to see some T&A". And I think it is perfectly valid to call them and their community out on that, especially when discussing your preferences for a game by a developer who are generally considered to be a lot more elegant and mature in their writing and the way they handle characters and character relationships*. To many people here, the way BioWare has handled romance in their games is the wrong way, and something they never hope to see in an Obsidian title.

 

 

* and by relationships I mean anything from companionship to friendship to uncomfortable temporary allegiance to animosity, etc.

Edited by Lorfean
  • Like 1

Shadow Thief of the Obsidian Order

My Backloggery

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea

 

People have romances, characters hould be able to have romances. Being a PC shouldn't mean automatically being a monk.

You can easily have sex without romances being involved. You can also have romances without sex being involved. I think the latter is where most of Obsidian's past coverage of the subject has gone (with the possible exception of NWN2 with the tacky Elf stalker "romance", which felt completely out of place).

 

While i loved Nwn 2 and mask of the betrayer even more, the romance options were , well.. terrible. Only Gann was decent. Stalker Elf, Self-righteous Paladin and Baldy Bald Wizard not so much... did i mention the wizard was bald? Very frigid too but mostly BALD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for romances in the PE, good relationships always help to strengthen the connection a player feels with a game, and romances are a natural part of that.

 

Besides, on a baser level, sex sells.

  • Like 1

The call of the deep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea

 

People have romances, characters hould be able to have romances. Being a PC shouldn't mean automatically being a monk.

You can easily have sex without romances being involved. You can also have romances without sex being involved. I think the latter is where most of Obsidian's past coverage of the subject has gone (with the possible exception of NWN2 with the tacky Elf stalker "romance", which felt completely out of place).

 

While i loved Nwn 2 and mask of the betrayer even more, the romance options were , well.. terrible. Only Gann was decent. Stalker Elf, Self-righteous Paladin and Baldy Bald Wizard not so much... did i mention the wizard was bald? Very frigid too but mostly BALD.

You failed to see the point of this romance if you stopped at her baldness.

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