Romance in Project Eternity: How Important, How Much

[miasma]

As long as you're not tied down to any one person...

[Merin]

One original aspect that could add flavour to the romance system is the following: a player should be able to romance someone, complete the circle of their relationship (break-up, death in battle) and then romance someone else. As far as I know, that doesn't happen in many video games.

 

While not the player, per se, in Dragon Age 2 Aveline lost a loved one and then moved on to a new love. As much as I was disappointed in that game, Aveline wasn't disappointing to me nor her story.

 

In Dragon Age: Origins you could be romancing two people and have to come to a decision, usually forced, but that didn't have to be until after you had slept with one of them. Unlike Mass Effect 1, where you are forced to a decision before it even gets too serious with either. But Mass Effect, the series, does try to deal with being with one person, that person having moved on and you choosing to either stay true or move on yourself, then in 3 you can reconcile with your old love or stay with your new (I don't think you can pick a third... I only played the game once as that ending all but entirely ruined the series for me, sadly.)

 

Now Alpha Protocol...

 

Alpha Protocol you can sleep with every love interest save Sis (if you consider her a love interest - underage, your call on what that was to you)... and you could sleep with all three (Mina, Scarlet and SIE) in one play through and get an achievement for it. But these relationships weren't what you'd traditionally consider romance - in a nod to the genre of the game story, they were "Bond" romances. Still, I can't think of another game quite like this (maybe The Witcher, but I only played a little of that.)

[Grimlorn]

It's a very interesting result. I actually expected romance to be more on the losing end... but that's what very loud, very repetitious voices can do... they can make the minority seem more numerous than they are.

 

Bit of glass houses there, chief. God help us, they're taking forum polls seriously.

I hear they're not taking them seriously. So no worries.

[Gromnir]

First of all, this is my first comment here and let me just say before anything else: I'm excited beyond any measure about this. If there is even one tiny possibility that I can relive the magic of Bladur's Gate and Planescape Torment in a new video game, I'll cling to that hope like a starving monkey on a banana tree branch.

 

So, romance in RPGs. It HAS to be there. Allow me to explain.

 

Bioware romance -- (Baldur's Gate 2, Mass Effect) = Pretty obvious. It's the kind of romance procedure that we're used to in every Bioware game since the turn of the century. Character meets girl/guy, character builds an enduring relationship throughout the game with girl/guy, maybe does a quest for them, even chose them over some other guy/girl, have sex with them and be happy. I know I made it sound too shallow when it absolutely isn't, especially in BG 2. Besides, it's always been fun.

 

 

see, the thing is, the romances really is that shallow. they is optional. they is tangential. they is necessarily brief. we got no idea why folks like them... but that doesn't change the fact that people do like them. while they seem like a horrible waste o' resources that will, at best, result in a childish and immature romantic side-quest, as long as they remain optional, we will not complain too much.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[nikolokolus]

So 315 votes in and we're still pretty much 50/50 split between like/love and loath/ambivalence, with only about 36% firmly for the inclusion of romance in the game.

 

And most agreeing that cRPGs usually handle these things poorly or clumsily.

 

Does that look about right to the rest of you guys?

Edited September 27, 2012 by nikolokolus

[Merin]

So 315 votes in and we're still pretty much 50/50 split between like/love and loath/ambivalence

 

Like - 52.22% / Dislike - 24.04%

 

With only about 36% firmly for the inclusion of romance in the game.

 

Want - 55% / Don't want - 21.83%

 

Does that look about right to the rest of you guys?

 

Only if you ignore one simple thing -

 

[metiman]

I don't want romances in the game, but if they are in they should be realistic. It should be Charisma based. You should have to actually allocate ability score points toward being physically attractive. Success or failure should have nothing to do with how nice you are to the character you want to romance. Also the scale should not be linear. I'm thinking of a table like the following:

 

charisma score (D&D style stats based on a roll of three 6 sided die)

18: 40% chance of success (at romancing chosen character)

17: 30% chance of success

16: 15% chance of success

15: 5% chance of success

14: 1% chance of success

and anything under 14 means you cannot romance anyone.

 

For unnatural creatures like Fall-from-Grace or Kaelyn the Dove who might have a charisma score of 20 you might have a 75% chance or something like that.

Edited September 27, 2012 by metiman

[Ieo]

Make it a stretch goal at $8M and add 8 months to dev (writing) time, I guess.

[TwinkieGorilla]

Hey guise just a show of hands how many romances you know what I mean? Just lets get a show of hands. Let's do that.

Edited September 27, 2012 by TwinkieGorilla

[TwinkieGorilla]

Liiiiiike....one romance? Normal? Two romances...maybe on ice skates? But seriously I think we just need a show of hands here what to do about romances.

[LucyZephyr]

Wow, no no no. Do not make it CHA based. If you're gonna do it, do it as a build-off of an already strong friendship. Please for the love of god don't make it about attractiveness. We're talking about a romance arc, not a sex arc. There is a difference.

 

jfc, at this rate I want to change my answer to no romances at all. I just had it in my head that, hey, if anyone had a chance of doing it right, it was this dev team.

[Malcador]

Well, actually, only 119 want it. 107 may or may not want it, they voted as sometimes they enjoy it or most of the time. That sometimes category might as well fall into ambivalence as well., in addition to the 92 that are against it or don't care. Not a very well constructed poll, what with the 107 that might be split evenly.

 

Also using images is hostile and trolling *nod*

Edited September 27, 2012 by Malcador

[nikolokolus]

So 315 votes in and we're still pretty much 50/50 split between like/love and loath/ambivalence

 

Like - 52.22% / Dislike - 24.04%

 

With only about 36% firmly for the inclusion of romance in the game.

 

Want - 55% / Don't want - 21.83%

 

Soft support isn't quite the same as hard support. My take away is that there's a whole lot of people who could go either way or just don't care.

Edited September 27, 2012 by nikolokolus

[kenup]

I don't want romances in the game, but if they are in they should be realistic. It should be Charisma based. You should have to actually allocate ability score points toward being physically attractive. Success or failure should have nothing to do with how nice you are to the character you want to romance. Also the scale should not be linear. I'm thinking of a table like the following:

 

charisma score (D&D style stats based on a roll of three 6 sided die)

18: 40% chance of success (at romancing chosen character)

17: 30% chance of success

16: 15% chance of success

15: 5% chance of success

14: 1% chance of success

and anything under 14 means you cannot romance anyone.

 

For unnatural creatures like Fall-from-Grace or Kaelyn the Dove who might have a charisma score of 20 you might have a 75% chance or something like that.

You do get it that this makes it even more shallow right?

[Shardbearer]

I don't want romances in the game, but if they are in they should be realistic. It should be Charisma based. You should have to actually allocate ability score points toward being physically attractive. Success or failure should have nothing to do with how nice you are to the character you want to romance. Also the scale should not be linear. I'm thinking of a table like the following:

 

charisma score (D&D style stats based on a roll of three 6 sided die)

18: 40% chance of success (at romancing chosen character)

17: 30% chance of success

16: 15% chance of success

15: 5% chance of success

14: 1% chance of success

and anything under 14 means you cannot romance anyone.

 

For unnatural creatures like Fall-from-Grace or Kaelyn the Dove who might have a charisma score of 20 you might have a 75% chance or something like that.

 

On one hand you say you want it to be realistic, then on the other you say it should be based on ability points spent on charisma, and chance... If it's to be done, it needs to fit into the context of the story and the characters, it shouldn't be a mini-game.

[metiman]

It's not about shallow or not shallow. It's about making things at least slightly more realistic and about having to sacrifice other character traits if you want to be attractive. It's ridiculous for a pc with a charisma of say 10 to be romancing anyone. I cannot think of anything about gagging for a virtual shag that is not shallow.

[Shardbearer]

Am I the only one here that doesn't automatically associate romance with shallow attraction and sex? I'd actually prefer sexless romance, sex is usually awkwardly done in videogames. Romance is a way to deepen a connection between characters, the type that does that should NOT be based on shallow criteria.

[Monte Carlo]

I've read this thread: the sly, wheedling infiltration of the promancers, the call to arms by their evil emo-lord Gaider, the manipulation of statistics and fact...

 

This is war. And it must a total one, the enemy expunged with fire and sword.

 

But seriously...

 

I want to address the writing aspect. And I find it strange that the OP, as a writer, thinks that the inclusion of a credible romance aspect of this project isn't a major resource issue.

 

Again, to keep the promancers happy we need at least three romances I suppose (well, to keep them really happy we'd need fifteen, including diaper tent sex including a pack mule). Imagine writing three sets of dialogue through multiple options / scenarios referencing the romance plus third party references (you want the other NPCs to notice, right?) and other content. I've just thought about a normal NPC story arc and it is literally tens of thousands of words. Plus, it has to be scripted.

 

So no. No. No.

[LucyZephyr]

It's not about shallow or not shallow. It's about making things at least slightly more realistic and about having to sacrifice other character traits if you want to be attractive. It's ridiculous for a pc with a charisma of say 10 to be romancing anyone. I cannot think of anything about gagging for a virtual shag that is not shallow.

 

1. It's not about attractiveness, it's about whether the dev team can write a compelling narrative that involves romance. Not sex, not porn, not erotica. Those things have their place, but they are not what is being discussed here.

2. Considering "attractiveness" is an entirely subjective trait, one person's 5 is another person's 10.

3. Charisma shouldn't be a physical thing. It should be about someone's presence and leadership and their ability to garner sympathy. AKA: things that have nothing to do with physical attractiveness.

4. "Gagging for a virtual shag" = lol troll harder

 

Am I the only one here that doesn't automatically associate romance with shallow attraction and sex? I'd actually prefer sexless romance, sex is usually awkwardly done in videogames. Romance is a way to deepen a connection between characters, the type that does that should NOT be based on shallow criteria.

 

Not alone. I would hugely prefer no actual sex scenes.

Edited September 27, 2012 by LucyZephyr

[Gorth]

So 315 votes in and we're still pretty much 50/50 split between like/love and loath/ambivalence, with only about 36% firmly for the inclusion of romance in the game.

 

And most agreeing that cRPGs usually handle these things poorly or clumsily.

 

Does that look about right to the rest of you guys?

I see about 300 votes. Which out of say 47000 current backers is slightly more than 0.6% represented. I.e. it tells not to take poll numbers seriously beside the entertainment value. What you get are the few who care enough to vote for or detest it strongly enough to vote against (and the odd trolls who just like to annoy people).

[Merin]

So 315 votes in and we're still pretty much 50/50 split between like/love and loath/ambivalence

 

Like - 52.22% / Dislike - 24.04%

 

With only about 36% firmly for the inclusion of romance in the game.

 

Want - 55% / Don't want - 21.83%

 

Soft support isn't quite the same as hard support. My take away is that there's a whole lot of people who could go either way or just don't care.

 

"I'd rather it is part of the game, but if Obsidian decides to not include it I'll adapt."

 

That's not exactly soft support - that a vote for it but a clear acknowledgment of being able to enjoy the game without what they want.

 

I can't speak for everyone choosing that option, sure, but when I wrote it to mean support but not necessity. Kind of like "Hardcore, really want, want but can live without."

 

I'm that way with making my own party. I want it... I'll always vote for it... but I can still enjoy the game with recruited companions.

 

---

 

And even accepting your "take away the middles" -

34.79 currently "hard" want and 14.11 "hard" don't want.

 

Still more than double. Still a 20 point spread. Still a landslide in any election.

 

And before you come back and say 34.79 isn't enough, you can't lump the other 65 some percent together - you have to look deeper... hence the so-called "soft" answers.

 

Here's the difference between you and I -

 

if the "soft" don't want was larger and the "soft" do want smaller, I'd concede freely that more don't want than do.

 

Whereas you'll say -

50/50 split between like/love and loath/ambivalence

when it's actually 52/24.

 

There's more than a little attempting to manipulate the numbers on your part there.

 

Look - this is a silly poll, excessively unscientific, and Obsidian certainly isn't going to grab ANY poll from any thread (especially with a sample size of 300 out of nearly 50,000 without some kind of sample controlling) so...

 

why not just say:

1 - You don't want romance, don't like it, oppose it in PE

2 - The numbers, while showing what they show, don't really matter.

 

Those would be accurate statements.

 

"50/50" is factually false.

[Gorth]

Thread pruned a bit. It gets a bit tiresome. If people can't disagree without implying those who disagree are morons or otherwise socially challenged, it might be time for more heavy handed measures. I really don't like that, as there is little love involved.

[TwinkieGorilla]

Sir Meryn Trant, amirite?

[Shardbearer]

 

I want to address the writing aspect. And I find it strange that the OP, as a writer, thinks that the inclusion of a credible romance aspect of this project isn't a major resource issue.

 

Again, to keep the promancers happy we need at least three romances I suppose (well, to keep them really happy we'd need fifteen, including diaper tent sex including a pack mule). Imagine writing three sets of dialogue through multiple options / scenarios referencing the romance plus third party references (you want the other NPCs to notice, right?) and other content. I've just thought about a normal NPC story arc and it is literally tens of thousands of words. Plus, it has to be scripted.

 

So no. No. No.

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but what you are describing is way too much like a romance sim, and well beyond what I imagine a well-done romance option in an rpg should be. IMO it would effect some of your conversations with that particular character and how they view you, but not even get far enough to be a big enough deal for other characters to even care about. Romance would be a vehicle to enhance connections between the main character another character. I don't even think it should progress to changing any actions or decisions, or adding a great deal of scenes to the game. For the same reason I think there should be conversation options increasing your relationship to all your companions, with romance only being a small subset. It all increases characterization.

[Grimlorn]

I don't think the romancing your party members belongs in a RPG. I don't think romance is necessary for a compelling story in a RPG. This isn't a book or movie. It's a RPG. No I don't think there should be emphasis on romance in the world.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Gorth
Quote removed