Romance and friendship?

[Arkeus]

It's completely untrue. Just play BG2 and you will see that there is no forcing romance on you and there are PLENTY of different characters without romances at all.

For gods sake, they created Minsk, the best RPG character evar.

 

Well, Minsc was in BG1 Dyanheir's 'guard', and he wasn't badly done there, though the BG1 characters had less done on them than the BG2. In BG2, he was the only character without his own quest. What he had was a small character-arc with Aerie (but you need to take her...) as well as being generally awesome.

 

You will note that Minsc being awesome only happens if there is no character arc with Aerie, and that he certainly isn't being broken by introducing a romance arc (after all he could have had one, his woman died so he obviously is ready for pickings like jaheira, right?).

Edited October 17, 2012 by Arkeus

[Shadenuat]

Why should romances take foreseat ahead of the "Brothers in Arms"-relationships if both can be done well?

 

Because love is one of the core emotional things in the world. So if your brothers in arms don't have each other in a butt, it's not deep character development.

[Crusty]

Every ****ing character development must have --romance in it! Or it's not deep!

 

Actually yes, cause love - is one of the core emotional things in this world. Only 'foreveralone' guys don't understand this.

 

There are many forms of love. Love of family, love of country, etc. To shoehorn the concept of love as purely a sexual or romantic gesture, I think, is very sad.

[jarpie]

I dare you to ask from any war veterans if they felt any emotions for their comrades and was it deep as the feelings for their wives/girlfriends/etc.

[Brockololly]

I'd prefer some romances or friendships in the game. I don't care about having the typical recent BioWare style romances of "Talk a couple times, have end of the world sex before final quest/mission" though. Romances, if they're done, should be about having another avenue for the companions and world to be able to react to the player character. If my PC is trying to romance somebody, maybe they'll be into it or maybe they won't. Same with if I'm trying to make friends or enemies with an NPC. All that should do is provide differing avenues of character development for the NPCs based on how my PC is treating them and how the NPCs react to my PC.

 

I just want to see plenty of characters responding differently to the Player Character and to have the ability for the PC to have different types of relationships with the different people in the world- whether that be romance, friendships, rivalry or whatever.

[Heresiarch]

Alpha Protocol did it pretty well. Not to mention that this sort of thing (I wouldn't call it romance, really, not after the table scene with SIE) is espionage classics.

 

In DA II romance was ok, although everyone and their grandma trying to hit on me was freaking me out a bit at the beginning. Still the characters are likable and I can image all of them being popular romace options with some player niche.

 

Sex scenes in Witcher 2 (most of the romance there is implied, not roleplayed) seemed quite tasteful and fitting to me. I don't mind sex scenes as long as they are not too graphical and don't go all IKEA style. It is much better than a stock blackout screen.

 

That mentioned, I think romance should be more about relationships with the character (like it was in BG2 or PST) than actual sex. It should make NPC behave differently, say and do diffenrent things not only in the designated dialogue, but otherwise too. So introducing the sex scene as the only reward for having the romance at all (yeah, talking about Mass Effect here) feels extremely cheap and anticlimactic.

 

Love is about emotions. When it comes to that the neck-biting dialogue with Annah in Planescape: Torment has more weight than all romances from all ME and DA games combined.

[Rahelron]

It seems to me that what the "no romances" party argues is:

 

"Romance ruins characters and makes everyone less interesting".

 

Do you really think so? I agree with you that romance-centered dialogues look pretty much all the same unless the writer is really good, which sometimes happens in book novels, but almost never in videogames. But characters are not necessarly restricted to a single romance story-arc. They can have their personal plot too. It's what happened in DA2 with all the 5 romance-able characters (pretty much the only thing that Bioware did right with that title). Merrill, for example, can be romanced, but at the same time has her personal story involving her clan and the Eluvian mirror.

[Loranc]

Since you all pro-romance people ignored my question, I'll repost it:

 

I have to ask a question that why romance-relationship would be deeper than what I suggested: A "Brothers in Arms" of type camaraderie without romances? What makes romances more deeper than relationship like that?

 

I've never seen a game where that is really done well, in basicly almost all of the RPGs I've played companions are basicly your lackies, not your equal (or close to that).

 

So why should romances get foreseat instead of that kind of friendship, since it's also almost never done well?

 

Because Sawyer agrees as do I with this. Sawyer pretty much stated that he won't add romance unless it's done exceptionally well. So basically...

 

Sawyer: I'll re-state what I wrote before: I want romance to receive either less or more attention in games. Anything worth doing is worth doing well, especially when it's something with so much emotional potential. But I certainly don't want to go the route of harem anime, which is total fantasy indulgence and gross pandering.

 

What are you even saying? Romances should take foreseat ahead of "Brothers in Arms"-type of thing because Sawyer says that romances shouldn't be done unless they can be done well? What that has to do anything with Romances vs. Brothers in Arms?

 

I ask again: Why should romances take foreseat ahead of the "Brothers in Arms"-relationships if both can be done well? What makes romanes so goddamn much more important than anything else?

 

Your main point was why should it happen since it's never done well. And my answer was if romance is added it's going to be done exceptionally well. Basically from what I understand is that you're only against it because it's not done well, so I answered your question by saying that it will be done 'exceptionally' well. Guess I was lazy in not going about explaining more, I'm kind of tired working 24 hours the last 2 days and getting about 4 hours of sleep.

 

Brother in arms is perfectly fine in of itself but I don't understand how romance would push your 'brother in arms' out of the way. I don't think anyone here is saying that they would prefer romance over a camaraderie. In fact most people want both, Not sure why you should have to sacrifice one for the other, if Sawyer adds romance to the game he's not going to cut 'friendship' or 'camaraderie' so to speak.

 

I'm assuming you're suggesting that the camaraderie should be enough for people and that romance isn't needed, asking what makes it so much more important to people. That's a hard one to answer because it's different for each person, for me personally as I've stated several times before want romance to be in the game in the way it was in PST and BG2.

 

It doesn't need to have VO or cut scenes, but romance does have a deeper impact on me than a camaraderie. It's all personal preference and to answer your question specifically would never work as you just stated brother in arms during war times... it's all based on real life experience, interests, hobby's, etc etc. What makes a person like one thing more than another, I have no idea...

[D_F]

I don't think you can really compare your current life with that of a fantasy setting where you are cast into an "epic" quest or story - one would assume that "getting laid" would certainly take second, third or even fourth place in the priority list of the protagonist. What you are describing is a drama RPG of some sorts, and not a fantasy RPG.

 

Characters in fantasy are rarely motivated by love, did you read any books in the setting perhaps ? You will find it's mostly based on heroism of some sort, tales of saving lives and self sacrifice. Some sort of romantic flings are included here and there, but this should really not be anywhere near the spotlights here. Please realize what genre this game is belonging to.

[ReyVagabond]

Personaly im saying that Brother in arms enter in the Deep Friendship tab.

Its as deep as a love as it can be, and i want them both, i want to have Deep friendships and deep Romances because i think those same veterans need a reason to come back from the front a something to keep them motivated and love is one of the most comon reasons, like love for your family.

[Marquess Cornwallis]

Toned-down romance elements may make sense to a certain degree even in an RPG like P:E, provided they're toned down and used sparingly, and I have nothing against that in principle. It's the kind of completely out-of-proportion, shallow, mechanical and exploitative use of romances championed by Bioware and the ecstatic response of a large portion of their audience to that kind of fan service that makes people shudder and refuse the idea completely (and might I add, for a good reason -- give a man inch, he'll take a yard). What I find really kind of hard to understand, though, is why would anyone insist on having such an insane degree of focus on romance in a game like P:E? If that is what you're interested in in your RPGs (as opposed to a standard dating sim), why not ask for a full-on Jane Austen inspired game where the mechanics would supposedly revolve around the theme and could be explored in real depth? Or does anyone actually enjoy the feeble-minded gift-giving minigame in DA:O?

[Kymriana]

I see.... Ieo and I went to bed(or off to wherever) and any kind of mature, respectful conversation regarding a topic that is tied directly into a fully fleshed out diverse and deep world was tossed out the window with insults, 'not in MY game' comments and other-company-bashing.

 

Riiiiiiiiight.

 

NOW I see why the mods kept closing the other threads about romance while I was a lurker.

[lordgizka]

I don't think you can really compare your current life with that of a fantasy setting where you are cast into an "epic" quest or story - one would assume that "getting laid" would certainly take second, third or even fourth place in the priority list of the protagonist. What you are describing is a drama RPG of some sorts, and not a fantasy RPG.

 

Characters in fantasy are rarely motivated by love, did you read any books in the setting perhaps ? You will find it's mostly based on heroism of some sort, tales of saving lives and self sacrifice. Some sort of romantic flings are included here and there, but this should really not be anywhere near the spotlights here. Please realize what genre this game is belonging to.

I think 9 out of 10 fantasy books I read last had romance arcs in them. It is one of the surest staples of fantasy literature. That argument was just weird.

[Moirnelithe]

I see.... Ieo and I went to bed(or off to wherever) and any kind of mature, respectful conversation regarding a topic that is tied directly into a fully fleshed out diverse and deep world was tossed out the window with insults, 'not in MY game' comments and other-company-bashing.

 

Riiiiiiiiight.

 

NOW I see why the mods kept closing the other threads about romance while I was a lurker.

It is rather depressing isn't it?

[Takamori]

Eh, seriously I'm a damn hero worried with demons, undeads, bloody murders and w/e the worst of society can throw at me, you think that I will have time to think about romance?

Geez.

[Loranc]

I don't think you can really compare your current life with that of a fantasy setting where you are cast into an "epic" quest or story - one would assume that "getting laid" would certainly take second, third or even fourth place in the priority list of the protagonist. What you are describing is a drama RPG of some sorts, and not a fantasy RPG.

 

Characters in fantasy are rarely motivated by love, did you read any books in the setting perhaps ? You will find it's mostly based on heroism of some sort, tales of saving lives and self sacrifice. Some sort of romantic flings are included here and there, but this should really not be anywhere near the spotlights here. Please realize what genre this game is belonging to.

 

I disagree, I actually think your current life dictates what you do/don't like in any game setting. I think the comparison is quite easily there if not sometimes subtle. And an rpg is really everything, drama, action, thriller, horror, I mean by it's very definition it is 'everything'.

 

 

Purpose (taken from wiki)

 

Main article: Role-playing game theory

Both authors and major publishers of tabletop role-playing games consider them to be a form of interactive and collaborative storytelling.[10][2][11] Events, characters, and narrative structure give a sense of a narrative experience, and the game need not have a strongly-defined storyline.[12]Interactivity is the crucial difference between role-playing games and traditional fiction. Whereas a viewer of a television show is a passive observer, a player in a role-playing game makes choices that affect the story.[13] Such role-playing games extend an older tradition of storytelling gameswhere a small party of friends collaborate to create a story.

 

While simple forms of role-playing exist in traditional children's games of make believe, role-playing games add a level of sophistication and persistence to this basic idea with additions such as game facilitators and rules of interaction. Participants in a role-playing game will generate specific characters and an ongoing plot. A consistent system of rules and a more or less realistic campaign setting in games aids suspension of disbelief. The level of realism in games ranges from just enough internal consistency to set up a believable story or credible challenge up to full-blownsimulations of real-world processes.

 

I for one prefer the full blown vision, but as I said it's all personal preference.

[Rahelron]

Eh, seriously I'm a damn hero worried with demons, undeads, bloody murders and w/e the worst of society can throw at me, you think that I will have time to think about romance?

Geez.

 

You know, even heroes sometimes cry and need a lovely hug.

[vahadar]

A bit of romance is good to enhence characters background. And if romance forces you to make choices later its even better for the drama (the choices in alplha Protocol for example to save or not your friend in the museum).

In Baldur 2, romances were 'quests' itself. If you loved a character they designed, you were playing accordingly to his alignment so to trigger the special dialogs for romance (when not using the all romances patches but that's another story). I think this adds to the feeling you're part of the game. Since you'll not only play this game like any others, but put a bit of your personnality in choosing your path with character interaction (that's the same for "karma" choices in many games).

 

ps : forgive my horrible english ^^

[Kymriana]

It is rather depressing isn't it?

 

Yes, it really kind of is. Especially when I see the factually incorrect comments made to support a 'not in MY game' argument or the flat out 'imma insult you in as many "creative" ways as I can including personally demeaning you with name calling' posts. It's really very depressing and not understanding of how in-depth stories with fully fleshed out characters interact with each other in short and long books of almost every single genre.

[jarpie]

Your main point was why should it happen since it's never done well. And my answer was if romance is added it's going to be done exceptionally well. Basically from what I understand is that you're only against it because it's not done well, so I answered your question by saying that it will be done 'exceptionally' well. Guess I was lazy in not going about explaining more, I'm kind of tired working 24 hours the last 2 days and getting about 4 hours of sleep.

 

Brother in arms is perfectly fine in of itself but I don't understand how romance would push your 'brother in arms' out of the way. I don't think anyone here is saying that they would prefer romance over a camaraderie. In fact most people want both, Not sure why you should have to sacrifice one for the other, if Sawyer adds romance to the game he's not going to cut 'friendship' or 'camaraderie' so to speak.

 

I'm assuming you're suggesting that the camaraderie should be enough for people and that romance isn't needed, asking what makes it so much more important to people. That's a hard one to answer because it's different for each person, for me personally as I've stated several times before want romance to be in the game in the way it was in PST and BG2.

 

It doesn't need to have VO or cut scenes, but romance does have a deeper impact on me than a camaraderie. It's all personal preference and to answer your question specifically would never work as you just stated brother in arms during war times... it's all based on real life experience, interests, hobby's, etc etc. What makes a person like one thing more than another, I have no idea...

 

I wouldn't call BG2 romances well done but I could live with maybe one romance like in PS:T .

 

And for all those who brings up Alpha Protocol, it's basicly pastiche/homage/spoof on spy-genre and especially James Bond, and imo doesn't compare to the fantasy RPG.

[evdk]

I see.... Ieo and I went to bed(or off to wherever) and any kind of mature, respectful conversation regarding a topic that is tied directly into a fully fleshed out diverse and deep world was tossed out the window with insults, 'not in MY game' comments and other-company-bashing.

 

Riiiiiiiiight.

 

NOW I see why the mods kept closing the other threads about romance while I was a lurker.

Thank god you're back to get us back on track then.

EDIT: spelling, goddammit

Edited October 17, 2012 by evdk

[Takamori]

Eh, seriously I'm a damn hero worried with demons, undeads, bloody murders and w/e the worst of society can throw at me, you think that I will have time to think about romance?

Geez.

 

You know, even heroes sometimes cry and need a lovely hug.

 

Well I'm not against the option(Having options in a game is always good), but hope its not throw in my face like certain games, make the hero take the initiative.

 

Person : Oh you are so heroic while you behead those villains!All this blood makes me fall in love for you!

 

Protagonist:

[Ieo]

I want a deep story in the game, not just the plot but the motivation of each character, their story, all need to be deep and real.

If you dont want that you are in luck with the Hall of companions or what ever is called. Create your own companions with no story a la IWD.

 

I'll ignore the rest of your post since I can psychologically pick it apart, but the first statement is something everyone can agree on. However, in the second statement you're skating into the "if you don't want to romance someone, then hire an Adventurer's Hall merc"--maybe you don't realize what you're implying here, but making romance-exlusive companion content is exactly why a good number of players are against having them in the game at all.

 

Every ****ing character development must have --romance in it! Or it's not deep!

 

Actually yes, cause love - is one of the core emotional things in this world. Only 'foreveralone' guys don't understand this.

 

There are many forms of love. Love of family, love of country, etc. To shoehorn the concept of love as purely a sexual or romantic gesture, I think, is very sad.

 

Agreed. :/ Platonic love among the other types isn't given enough screen time in general these days. That's what I'm hoping for instead of all the baggage that comes with mass media requisite "romance."

 

I see.... Ieo and I went to bed(or off to wherever) and any kind of mature, respectful conversation regarding a topic that is tied directly into a fully fleshed out diverse and deep world was tossed out the window with insults, 'not in MY game' comments and other-company-bashing.

 

Riiiiiiiiight.

 

NOW I see why the mods kept closing the other threads about romance while I was a lurker.

 

Yeah, the thread should've been locked after our little conversation.

[Loranc]

It is rather depressing isn't it?

 

Yes, it really kind of is. Especially when I see the factually incorrect comments made to support a 'not in MY game' argument or the flat out 'imma insult you in as many "creative" ways as I can including personally demeaning you with name calling' posts. It's really very depressing and not understanding of how in-depth stories with fully fleshed out characters interact with each other in short and long books of almost every single genre.

 

Not sure what's worse people commenting 'not in my game' or people commenting about people commenting 'not in my game'. If you can't add anything to the discussion why even bother to join it? It feels more like trolling than adding to a conversation about romance and friendship. Do you have any in depth thoughts on the matter?

 

You're going to get the 'not in my game' attitude a lot because these threads are basically asking people's opinions. What else is an opinion than something you do and don't like. So to state the obvious... what did you expect coming into this thread?

[Kymriana]

Loranc, I don't ever expect too much out of online discussions these days, that is very true. However, Ieo and I had a back and forth last night, around page 11 I believe, that was respectful and debated points and why we felt that way or what our concerns were. It was calm, respectful to each other, and expressed our opinions while explaining things to each other. So I was lulled into a moment of 'what a nice thread' for a moment.