Romance in Project Eternity: How Important, How Much

[Living One]

and hopefully we can all stay on target and leave the personal attacks at home.

 

---

 

While I am just one more forum member with no power to enforce any rules, I can make a strong plea at the outset...

 

Don't troll. Do not insult others for stating their opinion on romance in games, regardless of what that opinion is, nor for their opinion on games that held romances. Those opinions are clearly their business, and they have a right to it. What we don't have a right to is harassing them about said opinions.

 

And if someone DOES try to insult you for your opinion – please ignore the insults. If you want to try and engage them, feel free, but the best way to keep the thread open and productive is to just not take the bait.

 

just a gentle reminder...

 

If you feel like someone is harassing you or attacking you for simply stating your opinion on the topic, it is probably better to not engage them. If you feel it is particularly egregious, use the report feature. I know it's hard not to respond... but nothing good can come from it.

 

Nothing is gained from commenting on each other's personal lives and levels of maturity.

 

and now back to our regularly scheduled discussion...

But clearly there's a lot to be gained by opening circle-jerking threads where you have to agree with the op and using the "Codexers made me cry" excuse to try to ignore arguments that might make look silly your request for asinine features.

 

Meanwhile pretty much every romancer goes:"i swear the fact that i obsessivly post about romances is not an indication i'm obssessed about this feature!!1!see i even voted that option in the poll number159!1!!"

 

Actually, this is exactly the type of post that Merin is talking about ignoring/reporting. It is one thing to disagree and it is another to specialize in these ad hominem, vitriolic posts. The issue is not people engaging in a dialogue with conflicting opinions, it's using these generalized statements to degrade the poster or devalue his/her contribution. "Nobody should take your opinion seriously since you're just an obsessive Bioware loving, sex-depraved basement dweller!"

 

Something that occurred to me reading this thread: many people have stated they hope that if romance is included, it doesn't follow the Bioware model. To me, this actually goes without saying. Even if one likes the Bioware model (I personally am ambivalent towards it), this is an Obsidian game and I would not want them to squander their creativity by copying Bioware's model for romance progression regardless of the quality of said model. Innovation is key, and I think that in addition to maturity and relevance most people probably want to see something new and uncharted in regards to romance.

It's pretty fun how your post confirms what I wrote word by word.

Also Obsidian/Troika/BIS romances aren't much different from Biowaste's.Another point you guys always try to ignore.

[FlintlockJazz]

You know what I would love? If they made one of the romanceable females really unattractive! And I mean really unattractive, and then make her romance the best one. We always get supermodels as romance options, be different for something more 'real'. Plus I want to see how many are indeed just after eye candy and sex! :D

Edited September 27, 2012 by FlintlockJazz

[FlintlockJazz]

There has been talk of a subduing game mechanic. I like that. Perhaps we could introduce a similar component for romances. For player characters with low charisma who do not have even the slightest hope of romancing one of his/her sexy companions an option to use the intimidation skill or the same technique used to subdue a dragon might be interesting options. The pc might essentially hold the character against their will and force them to engage in various sexual acts and forms of humiliation. Perhaps even letting all the other party members have a go as well. They would obey you not out of loyalty or some sappy puppy love, but out of stark fear for their life. They know you are dangerous. They don't doubt that you would kill them if they attempted to escape and torture them if they are captured. That would seem a lot more interesting than sappy girlish romances.

That, sir, is very very wrong, well done! :D

 

Honestly it puts it in perspective, your typical adventurer is pretty much a sociopath who goes around murdering people for loot, so this is a logical extension...

[metiman]

If there is a surrender mechanism for beaten foes they could also be used in this manner. A sort of one sided unsentimental romance. A slavery system could be combined with running a prostitution ring. Forced prostitution could be a way to raise money. Perhaps you could eventually open a brothel with the prisoner-prostitutes kept in cages and chained spread-eagled to their bed posts to provide customers with 24 hour service. Not just women, but men could also be used in this way. Even children if they are present in the game. I'm picturing giant bird cages for some reason. Eventually you could open such brothels in every major city accumulating great wealth. Your party members would be acutely aware that they could also end up like that if they cross you or annoy you in any way.

 

If you've seen the film deadgirl you'll have a good idea of the sort of thing I'm talking about. (Excellent film BTW).

Edited September 27, 2012 by metiman

[ravenshrike]

It tells you a lot of things when "Bioware romance" becomes terminus technicus.

The problem with the term Bioware romance is that the romances in BGII were bioware romances and were very well done. Except for Aerie. Mainly because I wanted to a take a sledgehammer to her face she was so ****ing annoying. In fairness however, her annoyingness quotient had little to do with the romance. Hell, even some of the modern romances, if you ignore the mannequin sex which is admittedly somewhat difficult, aren't that badly written for a game romance.

 

 

 

There has been talk of a subduing game mechanic. I like that. Perhaps we could introduce a similar component for romances. For player characters with low charisma who do not have even the slightest hope of romancing one of his/her sexy companions an option to use the intimidation skill or the same technique used to subdue a dragon might be interesting options. The pc might essentially hold the character against their will and force them to engage in various sexual acts and forms of humiliation. Perhaps even letting all the other party members have a go as well. They would obey you not out of loyalty or some sappy puppy love, but out of stark fear for their life. They know you are dangerous. They don't doubt that you would kill them if they attempted to escape and torture them if they are captured. That would seem a lot more interesting than sappy girlish romances.

Way to amp up the general creepiness level of this thread, ****.

Maybe he just really likes John Norman and Terry Goodkind novels. Be glad he's not a Jack L. Chalker fan or he'd be wanting half-ungulate retarded prostitutes Edited September 27, 2012 by ravenshrike

[Lorfean]

I kind of just wish Obsidian would tell us whether they are putting them in the game or not, just so we can get a lot of these silly debates out of the way. At least then we'd know either way. If they're in, then cool... it was already part of the game and intended as so.

 

That's cool, but you know as well as I do that when that happens, there'll be a deluge of posts from the same people demanding gay/furry/transgender romance arcs. There's already been a few. I'm not sure that situation would be preferrable to the status quo.

This. I'd prefer Obsidian just stay quiet on the subject.

[evdk]

It tells you a lot of things when "Bioware romance" becomes terminus technicus.

The problem with the term Bioware romance is that the romances in BGII were bioware romances and were very well done. Except for Aerie. Mainly because I wanted to a take a sledgehammer to her face she was so ****ing annoying. In fairness however, her annoyingness quotient had little to do with the romance. Hell, even some of the modern romances, if you ignore the mannequin sex which is admittedly somewhat difficult, aren't that badly written for a game romance.

 

No, the romances in BG2 (which weren't that great anyway) were just romances by Bioware, not "Bioware Romances" (note the capitalization). As for the rest of the post needless to say I disagree very strongly.

Edited September 27, 2012 by evdk

[kenup]

I kind of just wish Obsidian would tell us whether they are putting them in the game or not, just so we can get a lot of these silly debates out of the way. At least then we'd know either way. If they're in, then cool... it was already part of the game and intended as so.

 

That's cool, but you know as well as I do that when that happens, there'll be a deluge of posts from the same people demanding gay/furry/transgender romance arcs. There's already been a few. I'm not sure that situation would be preferrable to the status quo.

This. I'd prefer Obsidian just stay quiet on the subject.

It's going to be fan seeing the "loser's" reaction though!

Edited September 27, 2012 by kenup

[metiman]

I definitely don't think Obsidian should say anything about possible romances until October 17th. Then they can announce how the designers also hate romances and really don't want to write them and how they all laugh at Bioware for turning their games into romance simulators and how that is a cautionary tale for them.

[Minttunator]

If there is a surrender mechanism for beaten foes they could also be used in this manner. A sort of one sided unsentimental romance. A slavery system could be combined with running a prostitution ring. Forced prostitution could be a way to raise money. Perhaps you could eventually open a brothel with the prisoner-prostitutes kept in cages and chained spread-eagled to their bed posts to provide customers with 24 hour service. Not just women, but men could also be used in this way. Even children if they are present in the game. I'm picturing giant bird cages for some reason. Eventually you could open such brothels in every major city accumulating great wealth. Your party members would be acutely aware that they could also end up like that if they cross you or annoy you in any way.

 

The really creepy part is that there are people who'd actually love this sort of stuff (like the aforementioned T. Goodkind fans). Wasn't there some horrible Imoen romance mod for BG2 that allowed the player to beat her up when she started making googly eyes?

[Malcador]

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.

 

So you want boring soap opera type nonsense ? Feh

[Malcador]

If there is a surrender mechanism for beaten foes they could also be used in this manner. A sort of one sided unsentimental romance. A slavery system could be combined with running a prostitution ring. Forced prostitution could be a way to raise money. Perhaps you could eventually open a brothel with the prisoner-prostitutes kept in cages and chained spread-eagled to their bed posts to provide customers with 24 hour service. Not just women, but men could also be used in this way. Even children if they are present in the game. I'm picturing giant bird cages for some reason. Eventually you could open such brothels in every major city accumulating great wealth. Your party members would be acutely aware that they could also end up like that if they cross you or annoy you in any way.

 

If you've seen the film deadgirl you'll have a good idea of the sort of thing I'm talking about. (Excellent film BTW).

 

What the hell is wrong with you ?

[Crusty]

There has been talk of a subduing game mechanic. I like that. Perhaps we could introduce a similar component for romances. For player characters with low charisma who do not have even the slightest hope of romancing one of his/her sexy companions an option to use the intimidation skill or the same technique used to subdue a dragon might be interesting options. The pc might essentially hold the character against their will and force them to engage in various sexual acts and forms of humiliation. Perhaps even letting all the other party members have a go as well. They would obey you not out of loyalty or some sappy puppy love, but out of stark fear for their life. They know you are dangerous. They don't doubt that you would kill them if they attempted to escape and torture them if they are captured. That would seem a lot more interesting than sappy girlish romances.

 

That is disturbing to say the least.

[Lorfean]

If there is a surrender mechanism for beaten foes they could also be used in this manner. A sort of one sided unsentimental romance. A slavery system could be combined with running a prostitution ring. Forced prostitution could be a way to raise money. Perhaps you could eventually open a brothel with the prisoner-prostitutes kept in cages and chained spread-eagled to their bed posts to provide customers with 24 hour service.

</snip>

Dude...

[Living One]

There has been talk of a subduing game mechanic. I like that. Perhaps we could introduce a similar component for romances. For player characters with low charisma who do not have even the slightest hope of romancing one of his/her sexy companions an option to use the intimidation skill or the same technique used to subdue a dragon might be interesting options. The pc might essentially hold the character against their will and force them to engage in various sexual acts and forms of humiliation. Perhaps even letting all the other party members have a go as well. They would obey you not out of loyalty or some sappy puppy love, but out of stark fear for their life. They know you are dangerous. They don't doubt that you would kill them if they attempted to escape and torture them if they are captured. That would seem a lot more interesting than sappy girlish romances.

 

That is disturbing to say the least.

yeah really

Edited September 27, 2012 by Living One

[Amentep]

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.

 

For me, it depends. If romances are in the game I want them to fit the characters, story, game and setting. Because of this it is entirely possible the answer would be "0" or "52" depending on what the game would support and work within its confines.

 

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.

 

I see romances as one possible avenue of PC-NPC relationships which could include friendship, platonic love, mutual respect, or enmity.

 

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.

 

To me, "Romance" is your character and an NPC developing a relationship through speech and action that involves romantic feelings and/or commitment toward each other. I do not believe that this needs to end in sex - depending on the structure of the story it might make perfect sense for the two characters to not have sex at all and yet their relationship is still there.

 

Part of the problem many - including myself - have with romances in video games is that they are PC centric to the extreme. The NPC gets sublimated to the PC and the romance only fails if the PC slaughters baby kittens in front of his/her intended. I'm not for that. I think for a romance to work right, the PC should meet some "criteria" established for what the NPC would pursue (or like to be pursued) by. I also think the player should be able to flirt with a "flirty" character who would never actually have a romance (essentially the PC should be able to fail at romance for reasons other than the PCs choice just as bad choices could fail any relationship in the game).

[Lagole Gon]

If there is a surrender mechanism for beaten foes they could also be used in this manner. A sort of one sided unsentimental romance. A slavery system could be combined with running a prostitution ring. Forced prostitution could be a way to raise money. Perhaps you could eventually open a brothel with the prisoner-prostitutes kept in cages and chained spread-eagled to their bed posts to provide customers with 24 hour service. Not just women, but men could also be used in this way. Even children if they are present in the game. I'm picturing giant bird cages for some reason. Eventually you could open such brothels in every major city accumulating great wealth. Your party members would be acutely aware that they could also end up like that if they cross you or annoy you in any way.

 

Reported...

to the interpol, Sanctum Officium and Lithuanian mobsters.

[FlintlockJazz]

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.

 

For me, it depends. If romances are in the game I want them to fit the characters, story, game and setting. Because of this it is entirely possible the answer would be "0" or "52" depending on what the game would support and work within its confines.

 

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.

 

I see romances as one possible avenue of PC-NPC relationships which could include friendship, platonic love, mutual respect, or enmity.

 

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.

 

To me, "Romance" is your character and an NPC developing a relationship through speech and action that involves romantic feelings and/or commitment toward each other. I do not believe that this needs to end in sex - depending on the structure of the story it might make perfect sense for the two characters to not have sex at all and yet their relationship is still there.

 

Part of the problem many - including myself - have with romances in video games is that they are PC centric to the extreme. The NPC gets sublimated to the PC and the romance only fails if the PC slaughters baby kittens in front of his/her intended. I'm not for that. I think for a romance to work right, the PC should meet some "criteria" established for what the NPC would pursue (or like to be pursued) by. I also think the player should be able to flirt with a "flirty" character who would never actually have a romance (essentially the PC should be able to fail at romance for reasons other than the PCs choice just as bad choices could fail any relationship in the game).

 

This is a problem I do have with romances: you don't or shouldn't have to have romances in order to have relationships, and yet often I find that's all you get, either bang em or develop very little relationship with them. I find often that I'll do a romance just to be able to interact with a character. So I'd rather friendship tracks are made for all characters rather than romances for some, but thats just one rabbit's opinion...

[TwinkieGorilla]

What the hell is wrong with you ?

 

See? This is what happens. It starts with wanting to kissy kiss your companions and then, well, birdcages.

[Amentep]

This is a problem I do have with romances: you don't or shouldn't have to have romances in order to have relationships, and yet often I find that's all you get, either bang em or develop very little relationship with them. I find often that I'll do a romance just to be able to interact with a character. So I'd rather friendship tracks are made for all characters rather than romances for some, but thats just one rabbit's opinion...

 

I agree; I really want some depth to the characters and how they relate (or not) to the PC or others. I was entertained by BG2's party antics - some of which wasn't PC Centric - (Korgan pursuing Mazzy or Mazzy forcing Valgyar to be her squire for example) and some was (Edwin or Jan's dialogues). But I don't recall any of them having the depth of the romance dialogues (but my memory may be cheating here).

[JediMB]

I had some thoughts I considered getting feedback on in the thread, but after this whole creepy mess in the last two pages I think I'll save them for another day.

 

I'm gonna go somewhere else now.

[SqueakyCat]

If there is a surrender mechanism for beaten foes they could also be used in this manner. A sort of one sided unsentimental romance. A slavery system could be combined with running a prostitution ring. Forced prostitution could be a way to raise money. Perhaps you could eventually open a brothel with the prisoner-prostitutes kept in cages and chained spread-eagled to their bed posts to provide customers with 24 hour service. Not just women, but men could also be used in this way. Even children if they are present in the game. I'm picturing giant bird cages for some reason. Eventually you could open such brothels in every major city accumulating great wealth. Your party members would be acutely aware that they could also end up like that if they cross you or annoy you in any way.

 

If you've seen the film deadgirl you'll have a good idea of the sort of thing I'm talking about. (Excellent film BTW).

 

Well, at least you managed to clear out the thread. Seriously, can you see China yet, or are you still burrowing your way towards earth's core?

[Amentep]

In b4 that evolves into a plea for Naked Lunch centipede reference.

 

I want to romance a mugwump.

 

You want to romance Republican party members who wouldn't support Republican presidential candidate James Blaine in 1884?

 

(I know its a follow-up on the reference to Naked Lunch. Or well maybe the 1960s band, The Mugwumps)

 

I have to say I'm generally against sexual slavery in games (to pull this vaguely back on topic) and wouldn't consider such a thing as part of "romance" options either.

[FlintlockJazz]

This is a problem I do have with romances: you don't or shouldn't have to have romances in order to have relationships, and yet often I find that's all you get, either bang em or develop very little relationship with them. I find often that I'll do a romance just to be able to interact with a character. So I'd rather friendship tracks are made for all characters rather than romances for some, but thats just one rabbit's opinion...

 

I agree; I really want some depth to the characters and how they relate (or not) to the PC or others. I was entertained by BG2's party antics - some of which wasn't PC Centric - (Korgan pursuing Mazzy or Mazzy forcing Valgyar to be her squire for example) and some was (Edwin or Jan's dialogues). But I don't recall any of them having the depth of the romance dialogues (but my memory may be cheating here).

 

Yep I think you're right: there was banter but no actual friendship tracks. And I recall seeing more of the romance tracks than of the banters too. Always thought that you should have been able to ask Minsc for Boo's advice whenever you wanted to too.

[Inyourprime]

If there is a surrender mechanism for beaten foes they could also be used in this manner. A sort of one sided unsentimental romance. A slavery system could be combined with running a prostitution ring. Forced prostitution could be a way to raise money. Perhaps you could eventually open a brothel with the prisoner-prostitutes kept in cages and chained spread-eagled to their bed posts to provide customers with 24 hour service. Not just women, but men could also be used in this way. Even children if they are present in the game. I'm picturing giant bird cages for some reason. Eventually you could open such brothels in every major city accumulating great wealth. Your party members would be acutely aware that they could also end up like that if they cross you or annoy you in any way.

 

If you've seen the film deadgirl you'll have a good idea of the sort of thing I'm talking about. (Excellent film BTW).

 

I don't know if this was a facetious remark or not and I don't care one way or another. But I had to hold back the laughter. I'm at work, damnit.