Romance in Project Eternity: How Important, How Much

[Grimlorn]

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.

I never implied they were morons. I just implied they were in it for the sex and to satisfy an emptiness inside them. I don't think that's unfair to guess from the how fanatical they are about it.

[LucyZephyr]

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.

I never implied they were morons. I just implied they were in it for the sex and to satisfy an emptiness inside them. I don't think that's unfair to guess from the how fanatical they are about it.

 

Oooooor maybe we like stories that tell about the big picture and the small picture, and romance, betrayal, friendship, rejection, the search for contentment, etc-- these are all part of the human condition and they are a part of storytelling.

[TwinkieGorilla]

Is there a malfunctioning time machine in this thread?

[Grimlorn]

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.

I never implied they were morons. I just implied they were in it for the sex and to satisfy an emptiness inside them. I don't think that's unfair to guess from the how fanatical they are about it.

 

Oooooor maybe we like stories that tell about the big picture and the small picture, and romance, betrayal, friendship, rejection, the search for contentment, etc-- these are all part of the human condition and they are a part of storytelling.

There is nothing wrong with the story of it. There's something wrong with the roleplaying of romance. Nothing wrong with friendships, betrayals, etc. A lot of you guys are inflating your argument and adding things to romance.

 

Romance is your character going around trying to start relationships and have sex with your companions and possibly other NPCs. It's not having friendships or companions. It doesn't mean there can't be a story about a husband and wife. It doesn't mean no relationships or stories of love in the game. It means trying to roleplay a relationship in a RPG. I hear there is another genre of gaming for that kind of stuff.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Grimlorn

[lordgizka]

I honestly don't understand why this whole thing even manages to spark such conflict. Honestly, when you pick up a fantasy book, especially high fantasy, and romance is a part of the story (and it routinely is), it's not a problem, is it? Also, in theory, there shouldn't even be any feedback between writers and their audience, simply because that's how it's normally done in every other medium and, you know, that artistic integrity thing.

[Minttunator]

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.

 

I'm thinking at least 5*[number of races], so we'd have:

• straight guy
  
• gay guy
  
• straight girl
  
• lesbian girl
  
• transgendered
  

...of every race. We gotta have different orientations so everyone is represented and a transgendered love interest of every race, lest the romances be immersion breaking. Every race needs to have romance options, of course, they can't all be human (or whatever the default race is) - so we'd also get the furries covered. If the BSN people are cool with interracial, though (they seem to be, I think someone mentioned romancing Garrus in Mass Effect, ugh...), we might not need love interests of every race and we could cut it down to less than 5 years worth of writing, I guess.

[Grimlorn]

I honestly don't understand why this whole thing even manages to spark such conflict.

Because there are several posters who demand it. Like Merin has put almost everyone who doesn't like romances on ignore. He keeps on posting when there is no one to discuss with who has a differing opinion. He's trying to use this poll as justification for Obsidian to put romances into the game.

 

It also sparks conflict because romances have this certain stigma because of Bioware. So people come from Bioware forums asking for them and expecting every game to give them romances just like Bioware's. The thing is this is a limited resources project and not a AAA game that is there to appeal to everyone. So why ask for something that never made RPGs good, if anything has made them worse? The cringe inducing dialogue. The only 2 or 3 conversations before they're madly in love with you, and then the sex at the end of the game where the relationship effectively ends, because that's really all it's about. It's incredibly shallow.

 

Bioware doesn't make good RPGs and I think their focus on romances has something to do with it. So it's natural to stand up against it in favor of old school RPGs that were much better than the ones released today that never focused on romances.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Grimlorn

[evdk]

I honestly don't understand why this whole thing even manages to spark such conflict. Honestly, when you pick up a fantasy book, especially high fantasy, and romance is a part of the story (and it routinely is), it's not a problem, is it? Also, in theory, there shouldn't even be any feedback between writers and their audience, simply because that's how it's normally done in every other medium and, you know, that artistic integrity thing.

There's conflict because Bioware's handling of romances spoiled the fun for everyone and there is now a sizeable contingent of people that react strongly when faced with anything even remotely connected the EA Edmonton. Then there also are the fans the romances sometime attract from the depths of BSN.

Ad feedback & integrity - you are joking, right?

Edited September 27, 2012 by evdk

[LucyZephyr]

 

I'm thinking at least 5*[number of races], so we'd have:

• straight guy
  
• gay guy
  
• straight girl
  
• lesbian girl
  
• transgendered
  

 

Torn between thinking an incidentally trans character would be a really great piece of representation for a group of people who get nothing too often, and not wanting the dudebros anywhere near such a character. I can hear the transphobic slurs already...

[lordgizka]

Ad feedback & integrity - you are joking, right?

So what, the idea the developers should write the story in a way that fits their vision and not pander to people like Bioware do (with their logging exactly how people play and changing the next game according to the results) is simply alien now?

[evdk]

Ad feedback & integrity - you are joking, right?

So what, the idea the developers should write the story in a way that fits their vision and not pander to people like Bioware do (with their logging exactly how people play and changing the next game according to the results) is simply alien now?

I was mostly talking about "how it's normally done in every other medium" because that's simply not true.

[lordgizka]

Ad feedback & integrity - you are joking, right?

So what, the idea the developers should write the story in a way that fits their vision and not pander to people like Bioware do (with their logging exactly how people play and changing the next game according to the results) is simply alien now?

I was mostly talking about "how it's normally done in every other medium" because that's simply not true.

Ah well, I may have been thinking just about books. Yeah, some video games, movies, serials and the like also pander heavily to their audience. I can also be argued that this kind of approach makes the product objectively worse, so why emulate it?

[evdk]

Well, it seems that donating money via Kickstarter makes some people believe that they are investors or something.

[Shardbearer]

Well, it seems that donating money via Kickstarter makes some people believe that they are investors or something.

 

Yeah, in the end I just hope Obsidian does their thing.

[Merin]

Well, it seems that donating money via Kickstarter makes some people believe that they are investors or something.

 

Yeah, in the end I just hope Obsidian does their thing.

 

Investors? Since when was spending money required to make people feel like their opinion is the only one that matters?

 

People really don't understand Kickstarer.

[evdk]

The bitching and moaning when they decide either way will be glorious. And in case they for some indiscernible reason decide to go with the "every NPCs sexuality is YOU" plan I will join my pitchfork to the lynching mob.

 

EDIT: Merin, is that Comic Sans? Dear god, you are a monster, good sir.

Edited September 27, 2012 by evdk

[Merin]

The bitching and moaning when they decide either way will be glorious. And in case they for some indiscernible reason decide to go with the "every NPCs sexuality is YOU" plan I will join my pitchfork to the lynching mob.

 

I wouldn't stop you...

 

you'll probably be on your way to rescue Chris Avellone from whomever had staged a military-style coup at Obsidian.

[evdk]

Yeah, I'm not seeing it either.

[Grimlorn]

Even if they include them the romance crowd will still complain that they didn't live up to their standards and they would have had them a certain way or preferred to romance someone else or something like that.

[Bos_hybrid]

Also, in theory, there shouldn't even be any feedback between writers and their audience, simply because that's how it's normally done in every other medium and, you know, that artistic integrity thing.

 

So why are you posting in favour of romances? It works both ways.

 

Don't demand romance, and people won't demand no romances. Obs will do whatever they feel is best anyway.

[metiman]

To be fair, we are investors. Well, at least anyone donating more than $50-$65. Those could be considered pre-orders. Anything above that is a genuine investment, but money is not the expected return. Such investors are hoping for a game that would not otherwise be made or a game that would not otherwise be as good. For any one crowdfunding 'investor' to expect to directly dictate game content is absurd of course. Obsidian's promise is simply to make the kind of game they have agreed to make. The kind of game they might have made as Black Isle. A sequel-in-spirit to some of the better IE games. A PS:T meets BG2 meets IWD sort of thing. I hope that Obsidian will make the kind of game that they can genuinely be proud of, a game-as-artistic-creation, a game that the great MCA and Tim Cain, and Josh Sawyer would themselves enjoy playing. Artistic integrity demands nothing less.

[lordgizka]

Also, in theory, there shouldn't even be any feedback between writers and their audience, simply because that's how it's normally done in every other medium and, you know, that artistic integrity thing.

 

So why are you posting in favour of romances? It works both ways.

 

Don't demand romance, and people won't demand no romances. Obs will do whatever they feel is best anyway.

Well, the idea was to make a point that romance is typical in fantasy literature, so lobbying against it specifically is strange. And the obligatory and true "devs should make what they want either way". These two points don't really have to contradict each other.

[Lorfean]

I've occasionally enjoyed romance side-plots in games in the past, but it's not something that's important to me and I wouldn't want Obsidian to spend resources on them if it means sacrificing quality/quantity of other parts of the game.

 

What worries me most is that, should they come in here and announce "yes, we will have romances", some people will start loudly demanding a certain number of options, sexual orientations, etc. be covered and it becomes this endless discussion where a few very vocal people try to force their opinions down everyone else's (including the devs') throat.

[Shardbearer]

I've occasionally enjoyed romance side-plots in games in the past, but it's not something that's important to me and I wouldn't want Obsidian to spend resources on them if it means sacrificing quality/quantity of other parts of the game.

 

What worries me most is that, should they come in here and announce "yes, we will have romances", some people will start loudly demanding a certain number of options, sexual orientations, etc. be covered and it becomes this endless discussion where a few very vocal people try to force their opinions down everyone else's (including the devs') throat.

Honestly, I hope Obsidian makes their decisions regarding whatever kind of character interactions there will be and then doesn't tell anyone what they are. One because either way will just fan flames, and the two, I hate being spoiled.

[kenup]

The bitching and moaning when they decide either way will be glorious. And in case they for some indiscernible reason decide to go with the "every NPCs sexuality is YOU" plan I will join my pitchfork to the lynching mob.

Dude, nothing sane in the world would have been left alive, if Obsidian of all people went with this.

 

I'm gonna be a saaaad(and probably murderous) panda, the day that happens.

Edited September 27, 2012 by kenup