Romance and friendship?

[Krikkert]

Have the good folk at Obsidian said anything about whether companions will be romancable or not and if friendships can be formed like in BG2?

 

It sounds to me there will be banter, dialogue and stuff at least.

[Jarmo]

Not much, but there's currently a policy of padlocking romance threads.

The developers know plenty of players want romance and then there's another plenty that absolutely does not.

Guess they're considering the possibilites or something.

 

Opinion ****storm coming up, unless the thread lockers get here first...

[norolim]

Have the good folk at Obsidian said anything about whether companions will be romancable or not and if friendships can be formed like in BG2?

 

It sounds to me there will be banter, dialogue and stuff at least.

Thay didn't say anything definitive on romances in PE. They, however, said something clearly about romance topics on the forum: they will be locked immediately, as they generate unhealthy discussions.

Edited October 15, 2012 by norolim

[Krikkert]

oh, ok. I thought we all liked to be able to pursue romances and friendships :S

[Living One]

oh, ok. I thought we all liked to be able to pursue romances and friendships :S

Thankfully no.

[Jarmo]

oh, ok. I thought we all liked to be able to pursue romances and friendships :S

Thankfully no.

 

All the more for me.

[ArchBeast]

I realy don't understand thouse guy's that don't whan't romances, if you don't simply don't start them.

 

Even if I don't like romances putting them in the game is good becouse people who want them will have them and people than don't whan't romances simply can not starting it and they will not have romnace isin't that logical ?

 

I guess not for everywon

Edited October 15, 2012 by ArchBeast

[Jarmo]

I think

I realy don't understand thouse guy's that don't whan't romances, if you don't simply don't start them.

 

It's because them silly people will want the effort spent elsewhere, the same amount of writing could net a few quests instead.

 

Anyway, I'd hazard a guess we'll hear a bit more of this once the kickstarter is over.

If they come out now and flat out state there'll be no romancing in Eternity, a thousand pledgers will back out (and 10 will increase their pledges).

And if they admit about 20% of game dialogue will be slurpingly good cyber-romancing, there'll be even more backers making u-turns (and a bunch of pledge uppers).

 

Just dont touch the subject with the 10-ft pole before the money is in the bank.

[Living One]

I realy don't understand thouse guy's that don't whan't romances, if you don't simply don't start them.

 

Even if I don't like romances putting them in the game is good becouse people who want them will have them and people than don't whan't romances simply can not starting it and they will not have romnace isin't that logical ?

 

I guess not for everywon

It's because they are a waste of time for the writers.Time they could spend to improve the rest of what they're writing.Wich sounds a p. good thing considering MCA is already busy with PE,WL2 and two novellas for both games.

 

Plus,I personally find the sole thought of even seeing the obvious romance-dialogue option irritating since it's likely going to be the usual cheap ego-stroking stuff(no,don't bring up the argument about Obsidian not being as bad as Bioware at romances:that's still one of the few thing I really don't believe anyone can do right).

[Osvir]

I realy don't understand thouse guy's that don't whan't romances, if you don't simply don't start them.

 

Even if I don't like romances putting them in the game is good becouse people who want them will have them and people than don't whan't romances simply can not starting it and they will not have romnace isin't that logical ?

 

I guess not for everywon

 

I don't mind either. I would love to see romances, but it should be "difficult". Friendship should be most dominant.

 

In Dragon Age: Origins ALL the companions wanted a piece of the action, so I was like "Wtf dude?". Don't make the main character a pimp.

 

In Baldur's Gate (with mods), you can make your party members romance each other! It's great. You should be able to make your party members become enemies too. The inter-personal conflict within the group. After a big main story, you could have banters directly relating to those battles.

 

There could be special banters that arises if one party member hardly does any damage on the boss, a trigger is sent through the code, making another of your Companion start to plot against this other one, or talk behind his back "Man that guy worthless, why are we keeping him around?" etc. etc.

 

Romances shouldn't be at the end of the banter tree (meaning that your companions ALWAYS fall in love with you a la "Oh he's talking so much to me I think I'm in love because he is interacting and taking notice of me kawaaiiiii" wtf? Companion...! Gtfo.

 

So that's that- I wouldn't mind romances at all, just make them interesting, rarer and harder to get.

[Living One]

I think

I realy don't understand thouse guy's that don't whan't romances, if you don't simply don't start them.

 

It's because them silly people will want the effort spent elsewhere, the same amount of writing could net a few quests instead.

 

Anyway, I'd hazard a guess we'll hear a bit more of this once the kickstarter is over.

If they come out now and flat out state there'll be no romancing in Eternity, a thousand pledgers will back out (and 10 will increase their pledges).

And if they admit about 20% of game dialogue will be slurpingly good cyber-romancing, there'll be even more backers making u-turns (and a bunch of pledge uppers).

 

Just dont touch the subject with the 10-ft pole before the money is in the bank.

 

**** cannot be slurpingly good.

[Living One]

 

 

I don't mind either. I would love to see romances, but it should be "difficult". Friendship should be most dominant.

 

In Dragon Age: Origins ALL the companions wanted a piece of the action, so I was like "Wtf dude?". Don't make the main character a pimp.

 

In Baldur's Gate (with mods), you can make your party members romance each other! It's great. You should be able to make your party members become enemies too. The inter-personal conflict within the group. After a big main story, you could have banters directly relating to those battles.

 

...

There could be special banters that arises if one party member hardly does any damage on the boss, a trigger is sent through the code, making another of your Companion start to plot against this other one, or talk behind his back "Man that guy worthless, why are we keeping him around?" etc. etc.

 

Romances shouldn't be at the end of the banter tree (meaning that your companions ALWAYS fall in love with you a la "Oh he's talking so much to me I think I'm in love because he is interacting and taking notice of me kawaaiiiii" wtf? Companion...! Gtfo.

 

So that's that- I wouldn't mind romances at all, just make them interesting, rarer and harder to get.

Yes!Lots of options!1!!Remove part of the main plot and divert resources even!!!1!

[Frisk]

I really don't care whether a game offers romances or not.

 

I am, however, going to make a prediction or two (or three).

 

#1 There will be posts about romances (for or against) on the forum for the next few years.

 

#2 The developers will get sick and tired of being asked about this subject.

 

#3 Romances will be one of the things some modders will change - and if there is a romance option for a companion, someone will release a mod making him/her/them bisexual (if they are not already) within 6 month's of the game being released.

 

...and then people will complain about that too.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Frisk

[ArchBeast]

It's because they are a waste of time for the writers.Time they could spend to improve the rest of what they're writing

 

I respond only becouse i really don't like that sentence a here why :

 

1. The same thing we can say about Stronghold, new races, new comanions, crafting and enchanting.

 

2. If it is a waste of time writers, desiners should know better than you don't you think ?

 

3. If we think of romances like DA:O romances then yes but if we think of them as storyline related (affecting it) or at lest something done well then NO NO NO !

 

4. If more time whould be spend on quests or dialoges it have 2 sides we can get more quality and the same size or much more quests, dialoges but low qualiti, Stick has two ends

 

5. Doing good ramance options is a great oportunity to learn new skills for writhers, if we silmpy put aside everything that we are not good at then haw the hell can we develop ?

Edited October 15, 2012 by ArchBeast

[Living One]

It's because they are a waste of time for the writers.Time they could spend to improve the rest of what they're writing

 

I respond only becouse i really don't like that sentence a here why :

 

1. The same thing we can say about Stronghold, new races, new comanions, crafting and enchanting.

 

2. If it is a waste of time writers, developers should know better than you don't you think ?

 

3. If we think of romances like DA:O romances then yes but if we think of them as storyline related (affecting it) or at lest something done well then NO NO NO !

 

4. If more time whould be spend on quests or dialoges it have 2 sides we can get more quality and the same size or much more quests, dialoges but low qualiti, Stick has two ends

 

5. Doing good ramance options is a great oportunity to learn new skills for writhers, if we silmpy put aside everything that we are not good at then haw the hell can we develop ?

1.Those are more integral part of the game,not some fapping-related minigame.

 

2.Ofc.But if that's your opinion,why are you making suggestions on their forums?Same goes for everyone:we post in hope they'll read us and evaluate our positions.

 

3.Again,this point is about putting lots of resources into romances to make them right.Wich is impossible/p. unlikely since Obsy has a bad track record with this feature.Just,like you know, the whole industry.

 

4.Not sure what you're trying to say here.

 

5.They can't be done right.And even if they could you'd need to spend a lot of effort into them to do them right.And here they do become a time sink.

[Osvir]

I don't mind either. I would love to see romances, but it should be "difficult". Friendship should be most dominant.

 

In Dragon Age: Origins ALL the companions wanted a piece of the action, so I was like "Wtf dude?". Don't make the main character a pimp.

 

In Baldur's Gate (with mods), you can make your party members romance each other! It's great. You should be able to make your party members become enemies too. The inter-personal conflict within the group. After a big main story, you could have banters directly relating to those battles.

 

...

There could be special banters that arises if one party member hardly does any damage on the boss, a trigger is sent through the code, making another of your Companion start to plot against this other one, or talk behind his back "Man that guy worthless, why are we keeping him around?" etc. etc.

 

Romances shouldn't be at the end of the banter tree (meaning that your companions ALWAYS fall in love with you a la "Oh he's talking so much to me I think I'm in love because he is interacting and taking notice of me kawaaiiiii" wtf? Companion...! Gtfo.

 

So that's that- I wouldn't mind romances at all, just make them interesting, rarer and harder to get.

Yes!Lots of options!1!!Remove part of the main plot and divert resources even!!!1!

 

Isn't your party part of the main plot though? Isn't the Adventurer's Hall part of the "No romance option, robotic party set up"?

I'd say more personal-party-conflict-intrigue, "**** we just fought a dragon guys" type of thing. Not "Oh that's a nice dragon you got there ". Less of the latter, more of the former.

 

Baldur's Gate does this really well imo (if you switch companions every now and then). EDIT: Deleted some lies xD

 

With a good romantic story, the game can be enhanced. Likewise it can be ruined. Clarification, I'm either with or without *shrug* I'm not dissing it because I'm sure it could find it's way into there I can't think of any good ideas though.

 

If, hypothetically speaking, you wanted romances... how would you want it? What way would be best, for you the player, so that it enhances your experience and not like "Off-topic" (Like Dragon Age, well, except that last thing with Morrigan)

Edited October 15, 2012 by Osvir

[anubite]

I realy don't understand thouse guy's that don't whan't romances, if you don't simply don't start them.

 

Even if I don't like romances putting them in the game is good becouse people who want them will have them and people than don't whan't romances simply can not starting it and they will not have romnace isin't that logical ?

 

I guess not for everywon

 

As much as I like BG2, it's hard to take the game's plot remotely seriously when you engage in almost what amounts to ERP with Viconia if you decide you'd like to help her overcome her bitchy attitude. Romance can make a game fall off a cliff, as noted by most of BioWare's recent releases - which I think where all the romance-backlash is coming from. People don't want a BioWare RPG and all of Obsidian's great work has come from situations where romance took a pretty heavy backseat (though romance was not necessarily devoid from the game).

 

KOTOR2 - Exile can romance a wide array of characters, to interesting effects, but the core story does not change significantly as a result; the Exile also doesn't get a "happy ending"

PS:T - Romance plot core to the story, but also, not a "happy ending"

FO:NV - Never played any of the DLC, but any romance here I believe is extremely shallow and does not impact much of anything

NWN2:MOTB - NWN2's core story was quite possibly one of the worst I've ever encountered - I don't know who was responsible for the single player story or characterization, but I hope it was just a bad day for Obsidian; MOTB however was glorious, the romance in this expansion contrasts starkly with the base game's saturday-morning-cartoon writing

Fallout/Fallout 2 - Any romance or love in these games is put waaaay in the background of the game, very little impact on anything

 

Erm anyway, I could go on, but to put it succinctly: Right now we're in a BioWare vs Obsidian environment. DA2 was needlessly oversexualized. DA:O's core story was needlessly tied into the sexuality of its characters. People care about romance in games because you honestly just "can't" initiate romance with a character, because games have limited content, it's likely you can ONLY romance character X or you can do nothing else of note with them. It's seldom you can cultivate a deep friendship with a character that you can also develop a deep romance. I'd rather we were able to cultivate a deep friendship (or animosity) with all of the characters in the game, rather than be restricted to befriending two or three characters, because you're afraid smiling at that other guy will result in triggering a romance arc.

 

Silly romance also hurts the core story. We need to think of tone here. If you can get your fiendishly ugly dwarf to seduce some arrogant elf, and much of the game's story devolves into this relationship, it'll be hard to enjoy whatever believable story might otherwise be present. I also don't usually enjoy situations that result in "harems" - where the protagonist is surrounded by several voluptuous or beefy females/males adoring them and draping their bodies overtop them. It's really just a mood-killer.

 

Granted, I can name RPGs that have done relationships and sexuality well. One might be Persona 4 - notably though, because the ENTIRE GAME's theme is about sexuality. All of the character conflicts are based around the characters realizing they're bisexual/gay, have lost their first love, have gender identity-issues (tomboys wanting to be effeminate), etc. and the game is designed such that these relationships and conflicts matter and impact the core story. DA2 or ME3 are examples of games where sexuality is just a marketing ploy and a result of tastelessness. If you want romance in an RPG, you need to design the game such that it not only makes sense and "feels right" but also connect correctly with the existing themes in the game, and feed into said themes.

[ArchBeast]

1.Those are more integral part of the game,not some fapping-related minigame.

 

And why do you assume that romance is not

 

3.Again,this point is about putting lots of resources into romances to make them right.Wich is impossible/p. unlikely since Obsy has a bad track record with this feature.Just,like you know, the whole industry.

 

Yes but if we dismiss something and don't keep trying, haw the hell we can learn "Haw do it right". If people where not trying doing things they are not good at i think even BG whould never came out.

 

4.Not sure what you're trying to say here.

 

I'm trying to say, that desiners/writhers have late say 500 days for making a game (this is only example) if we assume that at least 80 day they need to do all romances and they sudenly diecide (NO romances) they could

 

1. End game faster.

 

2. Add more stuff

 

3. focus on quality of exinting stuff.

 

In most cases it's lottery whot they whod chose so we can not have romances but tons of ****i quests.

 

5.They can't be done right.And even if they could you'd need to spend a lot of effort into them to do them right.And here they do become a time sink.

 

But i see you don't understand 1 thing. Nobady is loseing time in it. You prapobly think that there are only 10 writhers that are working together. NO. They employ Writherst etc to difrent tasks for example, writher of dialogs, writher of quests, wither of romances. If they say (ok no romances) this people working on romances can lose their job or go to difrent tasks, but if they where employed to romances they propably have more expirience in them then in dialogs or quest so adding extra writher who is good at romances but ****i as dialog writher whould propably don't chage much ... on worst..

[Living One]

I don't mind either. I would love to see romances, but it should be "difficult". Friendship should be most dominant.

 

In Dragon Age: Origins ALL the companions wanted a piece of the action, so I was like "Wtf dude?". Don't make the main character a pimp.

 

In Baldur's Gate (with mods), you can make your party members romance each other! It's great. You should be able to make your party members become enemies too. The inter-personal conflict within the group. After a big main story, you could have banters directly relating to those battles.

 

...

There could be special banters that arises if one party member hardly does any damage on the boss, a trigger is sent through the code, making another of your Companion start to plot against this other one, or talk behind his back "Man that guy worthless, why are we keeping him around?" etc. etc.

 

Romances shouldn't be at the end of the banter tree (meaning that your companions ALWAYS fall in love with you a la "Oh he's talking so much to me I think I'm in love because he is interacting and taking notice of me kawaaiiiii" wtf? Companion...! Gtfo.

 

So that's that- I wouldn't mind romances at all, just make them interesting, rarer and harder to get.

Yes!Lots of options!1!!Remove part of the main plot and divert resources even!!!1!

 

Isn't your party part of the main plot though? Isn't the Adventurer's Hall part of the "No romance option, robotic party set up"?

I'd say more personal-party-conflict-intrigue, "**** we just fought a dragon guys" type of thing. Not "Oh that's a nice dragon you got there ". Less of the latter, more of the former.

No.They confirmed it.

 

Baldur's Gate does this really well imo (if you switch companions every now and then). EDIT: Deleted some lies xD

 

With a good romantic story, the game can be enhanced. Likewise it can be ruined. Clarification, I'm either with or without *shrug* I'm not dissing it because I'm sure it could find it's way into there I can't think of any good ideas though.

What a surprise.

 

If, hypothetically speaking, you wanted romances... how would you want it? What way would be best, for you the player, so that it enhances your experience and not like "Off-topic" (Like Dragon Age, well, except that last thing with Morrigan)

It would't enhance my experience in any case.

[anubite]

Romance is fine so long as it is tasteful. What qualifies as not-tasteful? Anything from BioWare circa KOTOR1 and beyond. Even BG2 was kind of pushing it, though the romance in BG2 was clearly an optional, tacked on affair and all of the party members had sufficient depth without you having to bed them.

 

All of the greatest RPGs I can name off the top of my head do not have romance. They might have sexuality in them (such as the clubs in VTMB), but 'romance' implies a kind of relationship that is inappropriate for most game narratives.

 

In a best-case scenario, romance is an added thing that is optional. It does consume developer time to create, but I'd like to think it's time that would otherwisse be spent nowhere better.

 

Since PE is going to be mod-able, I would prefer if the game had little/no base romance in it, as I'm sure many deveoted fans will be happy to create romance mods like they did for BG2.

Edited October 15, 2012 by anubite

[Krikkert]

Well, I certainly hope there will be romance-possibilities and friendship-possibilities, and banter and dialogue and arguments and discussions and disagreements with/between my companions. It makes everyhting seem more alive and becomes more immersive. Enough said.

[Elerond]

Chris gave an answer to this in one of his interviews

 

Would we be able to have our character fall in love with other characters in the game? Do we get to choose this or what if the game chose for us? Would it be possible to start a family, such as in the Fable games or Europa 1400 The Guild?

 

There’ll be a variety of mature relationships in the game, and you can choose to interact with them as little or as much as you want.

http://obsoletegamer.com/we-interview-chris-avellone-from-obsidian-entertainment-part-2/

[Osvir]

I don't usually go dissing on people but this attitude....... it is provoking to say the least. As if wanting to cause a firestarter so yet another thread is locked up, that the plan Living One?

 

Anyways, with the party being the main plot, what I mean is that nothing will happen if you stay around, your party is what drives the story forward... featuring the almighty mouse pointer and right pointing and middle finger.

 

What a surprise.

 

To be honest I have several millions of ideas of how to do it but I don't want to put energy in it because I'm lazy and it's a complicated matter that involves post-romances, break ups, jealousy, triangle drama and lots and lots of more like that. Why can't I device a good one though, because I have no idea what the story of P:E is... if I had some clues to it, or had the whole manuscript in hand, it'd be easier to put ideas to it (Because that's what romances are, it's impossible to come up with a good way to put it into the story if you don't know what the story is).

 

For the mechanical parts, if it were ever implemented:

A, Main character is not a pimp, sure he is strong and protective and all that, but everyone doesn't instantly have to go all drooly around him.

 

B, Implement it into the story somehow, have triggers = Cadegund is hit, gets like 1 HP, your main character runs in and kills the enemy she's fighting. Trigger reacts, Cadegund now likes your character more because he saved her. He'd be the knight in shining armor in her eyes, or simply a companion doing his job (depending on their relationship up until now). She might even become pissed off, a la "I had that you bastard!" and you can banter "I'm sure you did...." or whatever.

 

C, Lasting dialogue, don't let your companions fall in love with you early game (okay maybe some could, but not all of them, this is where it starts to get complicated, this depends on the Companion, what personality they've got versus your Main Character choices). Either have certain points in the game that are important to the companions (<-- Only!) or have banters chapter and quest locked. Never have time based banters could burn out quickly, depending on how slow you play you could be finished with the romances between early-and mid-game.

 

D, Have one or two core romances, it'll be easier to insert into the story and it'll give modders some material/template to add in even more. It'll also give Obsidian much more time to think out 1 (or 2) great well thought out deep story-driven interesting romances both mechanically and story-wise/roleplaying-wise, instead of making 200 generic ones.

 

EDIT: E, If a romance is to be good, it needs to be very well written and understandable (making sense), hit us with surprise (right in the heart) and most of all not undermine our intellect, it should be a puzzle something you fight for and try for. Some of the most frustrating moments in DA:O was specifically the several "I wasn't even trying" moments I felt. Never ever in that way again, please.

 

Finally, I feel I want a line at the bottom here: I would love to see some sort of inter-party conflict thing.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Osvir

[JediMB]

A predetermined number of companion characters will be written regardless of whether or not there'll be romance content.

 

In all likelihood, all these companion characters will have multiple "paths" through their personal story arcs.

 

It really can't be rationally argued that having romance paths for certain characters would be a waste of resources, without simultaneously arguing that dynamic companion characters in and of themselves are a waste of resources.

[anubite]

A predetermined number of companion characters will be written regardless of whether or not there'll be romance content.

 

In all likelihood, all these companion characters will have multiple "paths" through their personal story arcs.

 

It really can't be rationally argued that having romance paths for certain characters would be a waste of resources, without simultaneously arguing that dynamic companion characters in and of themselves are a waste of resources.

 

You can't assume such things. This is still a "low budget" game, even if it magically hits 4.0 million dollars tomorrow. You can assume at best 2 paths per companion, maybe three, maybe, but I honestly doubt it with the number of companions being considered.

 

Romance is a dangerous thing and it shouldn't just be assumed to be a given, or that resoruces aren't being "wasted" when it is developed.

 

I say leave it up to the modders after the game is released.