Jump to content

Romance in Project Eternity: How Important, How Much


Romance in Project Eternity  

365 members have voted

  1. 1. What is your feeling on romance in cRPGs?

    • I never enjoy romance in my games - it often makes me enjoy them less.
      29
    • I don't enjoy romance in my games, but it doesn't affect my enjoyment overall.
      12
    • Most of the time I don't enjoy romance in my games, with a few exceptions.
      43
    • Sometimes I enjoy romance in my games, sometimes I don't.
      66
    • Most of the time I enjoy romance in my games, with a few exceptions.
      56
    • I always enjoy romance in my games, but I don't need them for me to enjoy the game overall.
      120
    • I love romance in my games - without romance I usually don't enjoy games.
      22
    • I am indifferent to romance in my games; don't care either way.
      17
  2. 2. How well do you feel romance has been used in cRPGs in the past?

    • It has always been bad. Sometimes really awful.
      34
    • It is usually not very good, with very rare exceptions.
      78
    • It has been more bad than good, but sometimes it was alright.
      50
    • Sometimes it had been bad, sometimes it has been good.
      69
    • It has been more good than bad, but sometimes it was cringe-worthy.
      57
    • It is usually pretty good, with some notable exceptons.
      55
    • It has always been good. Sometimes exceptionally great.
      14
    • I have no opinion on how it's been done before.
      8
  3. 3. Do you want Project Eternity to include any romance in the game?

    • Absolutely not. I really do not want any romance in the game - I personally dislike the addition, period.
      26
    • I would strongly prefer not. I don't think it can add anything, and I worry that the game overall will suffer if it is done poorly.
      23
    • I'd rather it isn't part of the game, but if Obsidian decides to add it I'll adjust.
      27
    • Up to Obsidian entirely... I'll accept their decision either way equally.
      70
    • I'd rather it is part of the game, but if Obsidian decides to not include it I'll adapt.
      80
    • I would strongly prefer it. I think it can add a lot, and I feel the overall game may be less compelling if it is not included.
      80
    • Absolutely. I really want romance in the game - I personally want it, period.
      49
    • I hold no preference.
      10


Recommended Posts

I think romances are usually extremely under developed in RPGs. Sometimes they just feel like player ego-stroking. Or just going for a home run.

 

I would prefer any romance be heavily intertwined in the narrative of the story. For that reason it likely would have to be only a couple of characters as 'options', or even only one character (as was seen in KOTOR1). For a relatively short RPG, I would think romance should not progress very far unless it skips forward in time occasionally.

Perhaps it would be better to have the romance pre-existing in the story, if the writers feel player dialogue leading up to it will feel too forced.

Or perhaps it would be better to have two companions have a romance, and no romance option for the player. At least then it can be controlled and well written, and if so the player will feel invested in helping companions in their relationship.

 

 

Anyway, I ultimately think romances are such an easy source of emotion that its foolish to ignore their potential in a game. Should defiantly have something unless the writers feel they cannot pull it off, or are completely disinterested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty creepy. Well both wanting to see Twinkie in a tshirt and the mouth stuffing :p

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

2-the fact that RPGs have side stories(in the form of quests)isn't a justification for romances either:the main quest and side quests that are thematically relevant to the main one(think New Vegas) should come first.And let's be onest,we know it's really unlikely such relationships will be a main theme.In other words:side quests shouldn't be a justification to randomly throw in whatever storyline you want.

Well,looks like I was right.What's wrong romancers,one might think that you don't have actual arguments and after all there really is not desire for quality features but only the cheap and juvenile desire to pandered to despite insisting not to be the case.

Thematically relevant? Okay.

 

Project Eternity is about the nature of souls, right? How about exploring the idea that souls can interact with and affect each other? Can certain types of souls "harmonize" with other compatible souls, making both stronger or somehow changing them? On the other hand, can souls of such different ethics, like order/chaos and good/evil, coexist, or does prolonged contact and interaction "erode" them? Do souls exist in a vacuum, only to be affected by their vessel, or can they feel the effects of other souls, in cases like magic use and romantic/platonic relationships? Is there even a difference for the soul if the relationship is romantic or platonic? If they are affected by relationships, how quickly do the changes, if any, become noticeable to the character? Along the idea of there being stronger and weaker souls, does a strong soul make a weak soul stronger, or vice versa? Or does the stronger soul start to impose itself on the weaker soul, pressing it into submission? Or do the two souls find an equillibrium?

 

There. Thematically relevant.

That's just your speculation about how they are going to deal with the souls thing.Also wath you are writing sounds more like a desperate attempt to ham-fist romances in it rather than what Avellone would write(seriously is it even possible to get more cheesy than"love can change souls","can different souls hug each other or are they damaged by it").

Also you skipped the other points.

But,hey,carry on watching romancers getting so desperate to justify this crappy feature while pretending to be so different than GaiderFans is moderatedly amusing.

First of all, I agree with your first point: there is no reason romance has to be in the game, especially if it doesn't fit. As for your third point, you basically said that even if the romance was well written, it would go against point #2, which is redundant and not worth debating.

 

Concerning the second point: Of course it's speculation; we are in the "Speculation and Discussion" Project Eternity forum, are we not? As for my writing, I am no writer, and have no idea what will actually fit with the game. All I presented were ideas where to take a romance plot that would be thematically relevant. If those ideas weren't your cup of tea, that's not my problem.

Squeak!


Link to post
Share on other sites

2-the fact that RPGs have side stories(in the form of quests)isn't a justification for romances either:the main quest and side quests that are thematically relevant to the main one(think New Vegas) should come first.And let's be onest,we know it's really unlikely such relationships will be a main theme.In other words:side quests shouldn't be a justification to randomly throw in whatever storyline you want.

Well,looks like I was right.What's wrong romancers,one might think that you don't have actual arguments and after all there really is not desire for quality features but only the cheap and juvenile desire to pandered to despite insisting not to be the case.

Thematically relevant? Okay.

 

Project Eternity is about the nature of souls, right? How about exploring the idea that souls can interact with and affect each other? Can certain types of souls "harmonize" with other compatible souls, making both stronger or somehow changing them? On the other hand, can souls of such different ethics, like order/chaos and good/evil, coexist, or does prolonged contact and interaction "erode" them? Do souls exist in a vacuum, only to be affected by their vessel, or can they feel the effects of other souls, in cases like magic use and romantic/platonic relationships? Is there even a difference for the soul if the relationship is romantic or platonic? If they are affected by relationships, how quickly do the changes, if any, become noticeable to the character? Along the idea of there being stronger and weaker souls, does a strong soul make a weak soul stronger, or vice versa? Or does the stronger soul start to impose itself on the weaker soul, pressing it into submission? Or do the two souls find an equillibrium?

 

There. Thematically relevant.

That's just your speculation about how they are going to deal with the souls thing.Also wath you are writing sounds more like a desperate attempt to ham-fist romances in it rather than what Avellone would write(seriously is it even possible to get more cheesy than"love can change souls","can different souls hug each other or are they damaged by it").

Also you skipped the other points.

But,hey,carry on watching romancers getting so desperate to justify this crappy feature while pretending to be so different than GaiderFans is moderatedly amusing.

First of all, I agree with your first point: there is no reason romance has to be in the game, especially if it doesn't fit. As for your third point, you basically said that even if the romance was well written, it would go against point #2, which is redundant and not worth debating.

 

Concerning the second point: Of course it's speculation; we are in the "Speculation and Discussion" Project Eternity forum, are we not? As for my writing, I am no writer, and have no idea what will actually fit with the game. All I presented were ideas where to take a romance plot that would be thematically relevant. If those ideas weren't your cup of tea, that's not my problem.

...and you are seriously thinking that Avellone going for romances as one of the main themes of the story is even a remote possibility?

Bah,whatever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Better idea actually. Romance as DLC.

  • Like 2

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

Better idea actually. Romance as DLC.

Even better:the romance is split into several microtrnsactions that'll cost about 129,99 total.And the romance will end with "rocks falls everyone dies",save corrupted and impossibility to import to the sequels.

 

Discuss.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no point of awkward 'romances' in every cRPG. Romances are the domain of Bioware and should also perish with Bioware.

Wouldn't oppose though, if it was similar to Planescape Torment. I mean, close to non- existant.

 

The only cRPG which handled well the in- game relations with the opposite sex, was The Witcher. Because it was clear it's just a lulzy feature and it's all about casual sex. There wasn't a ****- ton of writing comparable to badly written fanfic for emotionally unstable teens and no resources were wasted for this.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Other thoughts on question 4? Do you want it with companions? Background? With your character or not?

 

I would be fine with all of the above. I think that maybe an easy way to alleviate some of the people's concerns that have been voiced in this thread would be to keep the companions (or at least most of them) off-limits, so it ensures that they're "interesting" and "unique" or whatever the argument against romancing companions is, and maybe have a few options with random NPCs scattered around. Seeing other characters hooking up is always a great option, too.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There should be an option to just create a poll without allowing any comments for these romance threads

You're right. I feel for all of the poor people who open the thread and see all of the comments against their will.

 

I'm really not seeing what I'm assuming are the bad ones. I know the culprits, and they are on /ignore. It makes reading the thread REALLY easy.

Hey guys if someone has a different opinion than you, just put them on ignore that way we can have the pro romance crowd only seeing posts of people who agree with them. Great discussion guys where we only have people who agree with to talk to no debate. What's the point of this thread then? It's not a debate or discussion it's just a circlejerk for people.
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't completely necessary, but it helps with the immersion I feel.

 

Sometimes I feel an immersion between my legs too. I tend to deal with it in a way more healthy than watching pixels in RPG.

Yeah, because people want romance in their games because they **** to them. Makes sense, that's real mature there. Glad you're capable of having a mature discussion with people you disagree with. :getlost:

 

I think romance belongs in a modern RPG. It adds depth, allows some characters to be something more, and perhaps as a side-note is a sign of this medium maturing.

 

I can't imagine this kind of argument went on when movies were still maturing. Oh, no, you can't have romance between the characters, that's just silly material for kids to **** to! Don't you recognize how silly your argument is?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think jelly donuts belongs in a modern RPG. It adds depth, allows some characters to be something more, and perhaps as a side-note is a sign of this medium maturing.

 

I changed your post for humor and realized it was no more ridiculous than your original statement. Huh.

Edited by TwinkieGorilla
Link to post
Share on other sites

Romance is great... for laughs. I mean, really. The most hilariously awful dialogues in the history of gaming can usually be attributed to this feature. I've never had such a good time with BG2 as the first time, when I was trying to explore this option with Viconia, usually with mixed (read: catastrophically botched) results. So yes, I'm all in for romance, as long as the developers make it sufficiently hard to achieve, and don't take it too seriously. (Ridiculously over-the-top or subtly sarcastic NPC dialogues are also a plus.)

"Lulz is not the highest aspiration of art and mankind, no matter what the Encyclopedia Dramatica says."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, because people want romance in their games because they **** to them. Makes sense, that's real mature there. Glad you're capable of having a mature discussion with people you disagree with. :getlost:

 

I think romance belongs in a modern RPG. It adds depth, allows some characters to be something more, and perhaps as a side-note is a sign of this medium maturing.

 

I can't imagine this kind of argument went on when movies were still maturing. Oh, no, you can't have romance between the characters, that's just silly material for kids to **** to! Don't you recognize how silly your argument is?

 

Well, to be fair, looking at games it's a reasonable expectation that romance = boinking blue alien/busty witch/etc. Romance 'belonging' - I assume you mean it must be present by this - I'm not too agreeable with. More like fluff, to me, ignoring the weirdness that some people get into regarding it. It's not really a sign that the medium is maturing, good stories to the games and well crafted worlds is probably a better sign for this genre at least (games 'maturing' is pretty nebulous and one of those things you find in high minded articles, I think).

 

As for movies, err, not really sure that's the case, and it's different as movies aren't interactive as games are.

Edited by Malcador

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 can't imagine this kind of argument went on when movies were still maturing. Oh, no, you can't have romance between the characters, that's just silly material for kids to **** to! Don't you recognize how silly your argument is?

 

To be fair, exploitation films actually tend towards doing just that - offering elements such as sex, nudity, gore, violence just for the intent of getting people into seats, with the sex/nudity stuff being specifically aimed at arousing people to get their patronage. This presumably isn't different from other media dealing with the same issue (Hentai games being the thing that immediately springs to mind with relationship to video games).

 

The problem with the argument IMO is more rooted in the idea that people who want romance only want it because they're getting their jollies from it. If this was to follow every player who wants an "evil path" through the game must be sociopaths and every player who saves the world in a game must feel like they saved the real world outside or the game. Its really not a one-to-one ratio, IMO.

 

While I support romances (within reason, ie that the game designers want it, plan for it, the setting supports it and the resources are available to do it), I also support character relationships in general. Two straight characters of the same gender should be able to go to the town pub and have beer and a character based interaction that expounds on the character or setting or quest.

 

So I suppose, realistically, what I want is the ability to have an NPC be a well drawn character through multiple types of interactions that are appropriate to both the PC and NPC and one option for the appropriate character/setting/game might be romance but not the only type of interaction the NPC has with my PC and not a required interaction either.

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

It isn't completely necessary, but it helps with the immersion I feel.

 

Sometimes I feel an immersion between my legs too. I tend to deal with it in a way more healthy than watching pixels in RPG.

Yeah, because people want romance in their games because they **** to them. Makes sense, that's real mature there. Glad you're capable of having a mature discussion with people you disagree with. :getlost:

 

I think romance belongs in a modern RPG. It adds depth, allows some characters to be something more, and perhaps as a side-note is a sign of this medium maturing.

 

I can't imagine this kind of argument went on when movies were still maturing. Oh, no, you can't have romance between the characters, that's just silly material for kids to **** to! Don't you recognize how silly your argument is?

This is not a modern RPG,thankfully.

 

Also,you know, when movies were maturing romances weren't the cheap shoehorned fap-service people are asking for. Don't you recognize how silly your argument is?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I don't see how romance can be an indicator of maturity of a medium. Romeo and Juliet was making a point out of how immature it was, at least as much a point as one can make while still catering to popular interest in sex and violence. We've had it in video games almost as long as they had stories. It was in how many old adventure games? Gabriel Knight and Monkey Island immediately come to mind. I have a hard time thinking that it's only now maturing if that's a factor. And I always remember this one crappy action movie I saw, had Cindy Crawford and one of the Baldwins in it, they end up having sex on a moving train. It didn't strike me as one of the more mature action movies, just one going for cheap thrills, I have more respect for Die Hard.

 

Perhaps it can be handled maturely. But I wouldn't pretend romance is automatically mature.

  • Like 2
"Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater."
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I don't see how romance can be an indicator of maturity of a medium. Romeo and Juliet was making a point out of how immature it was, at least as much a point as one can make while still catering to popular interest in sex and violence. We've had it in video games almost as long as they had stories. It was in how many old adventure games? Gabriel Knight and Monkey Island immediately come to mind. I have a hard time thinking that it's only now maturing if that's a factor. And I always remember this one crappy action movie I saw, had Cindy Crawford and one of the Baldwins in it, they end up having sex on a moving train. It didn't strike me as one of the more mature action movies, just one going for cheap thrills, I have more respect for Die Hard.

 

Perhaps it can be handled maturely. But I wouldn't pretend romance is automatically mature.

Well, what I mean is that when games can include it without having a truckload of curmudgeons waving it off as fapping material, the medium has finally matured.

Romance 'belonging' - I assume you mean it must be present by this - I'm not too agreeable with.

No, I didn't mean that it's mandatory when I said I think it belongs. That just means I think it belongs. It wouldn't be out of place. It would improve the game, and no one would be forcing you people to play that bit.

 

I think jelly donuts belongs in a modern RPG. It adds depth, allows some characters to be something more, and perhaps as a side-note is a sign of this medium maturing.

 

I changed your post for humor and realized it was no less ridiculous than your original statement. Huh.

 

I'm going to avoid participating in this discussion, considering the kind of tone you use against people you disagree with. No wonder no one's brought out more of these games, if this is what the fan base is like!

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

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...

Edited by Merin
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, what I mean is that when games can include it without having a truckload of curmudgeons waving it off as fapping material, the medium has finally matured.

Well, we already had that. I think it's been fairly argued that old games did it well. It's the Bioware style that is primarily objected to.

 

The curmudgeons seem to have a, badly presented, worry that it's not going to be well done. That the main implementation would be the poorly done fapping material version. Because that is the version that's in demand. And if Obsidian wanted to implement it in such a way outside the popular demand, they wouldn't need people asking for it.

 

Maybe the logic ends up being "people asking for it"->"must want the fapping material version." I'm not prepared to deny the logic of it, but I'm not prepared to support it.

 

Okay, I'm done talking about other people's arguments. Let me make an argument. There's no maturity on either aisle. You have kid friendly romance on the left and adult friendly titillation on the right. We have WALL-E here (a movie I love, so I'm not being disparaging) and Fair Game over here. Of the two, I'd probably prefer Wall-E but I'm not prone to calling it mature. I'd sooner call Watchmen mature because it had a point about its own artform. And since I've now diverged into comics, Kingdom Come. Or back to games Planescape. Where the romances were so subtle most people don't even care about them. Because they were too busy focusing on what they wanted to say, they didn't get distracted by it.

  • 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
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...