Romance and friendship?

[HeedlessHorseman]

I'm afraid your mistaken. Video games are intrinsically ego-stroking for the player, especially RPGs. The whole idea is to identify with a character who does great things.

Is this really that absolute? Roleplaying doesn't intrinsically mean that people roleplay themselves. They roleplay a character with a distinct personality which isn't their own. Where exactly is identifying yourself with the character comes in?

 

For a lot of players, they seriously do play themselves in the game world... or project themselves onto the character. It's not how I see role-playing, but many, many people DO see it this way.

 

I guess that it more or less reverts back to the old stereotype of gamers as people who are not happy with their lives. So they need to escape into a fantasy world to feel any sense of accomplishment.

[Moirnelithe]

^ Dude I'm a hater. I hated all of it. Not you, you strike me as a very nice guy, but jesus I hate CRPG romances.

 

That's ok, I really hate having to play a guy (I'm looking at you PS:T / TW / AP). We all have our battles.

 

That's a good point, games forcing you to play Male characters. Not to mention 'The Witcher 2' opening sex scene, forced romance in your face! I wonder how many people hate/enjoyed that game? Not talking about gameplay or combat, just simply the whole Witcher/Merigold theme.

No words can express the amount of rage I felt when I heard one of few RPGs to finally come out had that in it.

[TheOptimist]

Hmm, pencil me in as being a supporter of romances in RPGs as a general rule. Now, should you have to do them? Absolutely not. Still, you're playing a character in a specific situation, I don't see anything wrong with wanting to see that character enter a relationship with someone. This gets taken to unfortunate extremes by some people, but that's true of anything.

[kabaliero]

However, my opinion on the subj is this:

 

The less we're gonna discuss romances and other npc relationships - the better our experience with them is goin' to be.

[Ieo]

Romance is a huge, central parts of MotB and PS:T. And there are plenty of romancing to be done in AP, James Bond style if you like.

 

I find it odd that Obsidian fans ignore that the majority of Obsidian games have romance as central to storylines. How does MotB's plot make sense, AT ALL, if you take love out of it?

 

I don't know about MotB, but PS:T? Are you out of your mind? Unless you're talking about Deionarra, but that's a very special case and hardly a romance. Granted, I'm looking at the Fall-from-Grace aspect and despise Annah because she was added as obvious metagame fanservice, but the relationship with Grace was hardly central to the plot or anything. Just because YOU desperately want romance and fundamentally believe it is required for a "good" story hardly makes it so--it's subjective.

 

I don't believe stories "benefit" or not by inclusion of romance but rather that such stories are either designed to be such from the outset by virtue of genre application or the plot mechanism is specifically added to hook proponents of said genre--thus romance is not something I see as having additional intrinsic value in a fictional work, but is either the underlying nature of the story itself already or is used for marketing. Either you like the genre and reactive positively to the audience targeting, or you don't care for it (for whatever reasons). That said, literature and interactive binary computer programming cannot be fully equated anyway, IMO, which I discussed in one of the locked romance threads.

 

Wow, talk about timing. I was just discussing my preferred exclusion of romances in PE against a friend who really, really wants it in PE.

(snip)

Here's the thing about character content, as I see it given how characters are written, and why I don't want romances in the game besides very deep relationships only one or two steps shy of an actual "romance."

 

It's an inverse relationship between a deep, rom-secular* character development and pop "romance" content. Sawyer described how a character is always written by one writer to maintain consistency, which totally makes sense. This also means that development is completely linear. If a character's content is treated equal in depth and importance for both romance and rom-secular players, that essentially requires doubling the development (time and cost). Otherwise, there must be a choice--if this character is "romanceable," perhaps only 20% of its written content would be rom-secular; how much content did Jaheira have in BG2 if you didn't play her romance? LIkewise, if you want the depth of, say, Dak'kon, any romance might start after his substantial Zerthimon content, but that could be very, very far into the game.

 

I'd be open to the depth and minimal level of "romance" in the relationshp between TNO and Fall-from-Grace, for example, because the majority of content was actually rom-secular and the rest rather subtle, which I think is the best content to cover the vast majority of players. Now, I suppose one writer can handle couple characters' romances, sure, but then I wouldn't expect much rom-secular content for those characters either; and then, would they be limited to only hetero M/F options? There's that too...

 

My main concern is having a stable of companions--PE doesn't have many--with consistently deep and substantial rom-secular content available for all players regardless of any romance options.

 

As I said in other threads, I'm far more interested in the bromance/womance, deep relationships because those are difficult to do well in, well, most entertainment venues. Here's a chance for Obsidian to really shine.

 

 

* "romantically secular" or character content befitting the entire target audience rather than only those interested in romances

 

I would not tolerate any required romance content into the central storyline. If Obsidian is going to implement romances, they should be treated as a true optional addition--it should not require concessions from non-romance companion content.

 

That means, if we're talking about companion depth, then I would want a romance path to either--

 

(1) appear fairly early (as much as I hate that) and end up at 20k words, for example, parallel to equal 20k non-romance content that the romance path does not show, for fairness or

 

(2) appear late after non-romance mature companion content is experienced (16k word), no more than 4k later content with an epilogue.

[Morality Games]

Having just finished MotB not long ago, restarted PS:T (again to try and finish it for once), and also playing SoZ for the first time... not to count the numerous plays of AP and IWD - I can say the only games where romance isn't at all a big part of the game is the ones where you make your parties (SoZ, IWD - and this is assuming a lot since I'm not that far into SoZ.)

 

Romance is a huge, central parts of MotB and PS:T. And there are plenty of romancing to be done in AP, James Bond style if you like.

 

I find it odd that Obsidian fans ignore that the majority of Obsidian games have romance as central to storylines. How does MotB's plot make sense, AT ALL, if you take love out of it?

There is likely a difference in the eyes of developers (and part of the fanbase) between PC romances (as in, in which the PC takes part) and NPC romances. MotB has love as one of it's central themes, but it would lose nothing of Safiya wasn't a romanceable character. This argument doesn't apply to Torment as well, but meh. Also, as Avellone wrote in one of his interviews, romance (and friendship) exist apparently to "ego-stroke" the player, which actually implies a lot of things about the mindsets of people playing RPGs, which I would like to think are simply not true. What is this supposed "ego-stroking" anyway? Attempting to instill the player with the feeling of self-worth because NPCs like him/her? The PC, mind you, not the actual player.

 

I'm afraid your mistaken. Video games are intrinsically ego-stroking for the player, especially RPGs. The whole idea is to identify with a character who does great things.

Is this really that absolute? Roleplaying doesn't intrinsically mean that people roleplay themselves. They roleplay a character with a distinct personality which isn't their own. Where exactly is identifying yourself with the character comes in?

 

Identifying with someone ultimately means appreciating the logic behind their goals and choices. A fictional setting automatically alters our capacity to appreciate certain kinds of logic. Even a Chaotic Neutral Half-Orc who beats farmers senseless and robs them after rescuing them Kobolds because the player finds it amusing is being identified with, not because robbing people you've rescued is a decision you would make in the real world, but because in the logic of a fictional setting it is a choice some aspect of your ego -- your sense of humor for example -- can identify with, that is, appreciate the logic of.

 

Identification isn't necessarily straightforward as becoming a great hero, but it is always a factor where there are goals and choices.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Morality Games

[Undecaf]

**** romances!

 

That's really all I have and care to add to this particular subject anymore.

 

Carry on.

[kenup]

Except you don't identify with the Chaotic Neutral half orc that beats farmers with their own hoe, You just think it's funny. Identification means you understand, but not necessarily accept their personality as good. That is why villains with Freudian(or better ones) Excuses are common. Because otherwise they are just a brick, like shepard, to shoot at.

[Merin]

Why do I even let myself get dragged into these discussions, especially wishing for rational discourse? Every time it boils down to ad hominems, straw men, and eventually image spam...

 

 

Romance is a huge, central parts of MotB and PS:T. And there are plenty of romancing to be done in AP, James Bond style if you like.

 

I find it odd that Obsidian fans ignore that the majority of Obsidian games have romance as central to storylines. How does MotB's plot make sense, AT ALL, if you take love out of it?

 

I don't know about MotB, but PS:T? Are you out of your mind?

 

The entire chain of events of MotB, the reason to defy gods and try to upset the natural order of the planes, starting whole cosmic wars, is the love of two characters. And it weaves all the way until pretty much the end of the game.

 

For PS:T, I'm not far in. I've never gotten far in - this is my fourth attempt to play the game. But from initial flashbacks, to journal messages, to meeting your eternal love who solicits a pledge from you to either save or join her... yeah, I'm out of my mind for seeing this romance as central to the game so far. Again, not far in... but it's a big theme so far, as big as anything (immortality, death, and eternal love I'd say at this point.)

 

But, yes, thanks for saying I'm out of my mind for that interpretation. Out of my mind. Nice.

 

Just because YOU desperately want romance and fundamentally believe it is required for a "good" story hardly makes it so--it's subjective.

 

I don't desperately want romance. Your evidence of this is, what, that I posted in this thread? That I created a poll to fix the fact that I contributed to the closing of the previous romance thread?

I don't fundamentally believe that it is required for a good story either. Where do you see me say that?

 

Straw men.

 

Please, if you are arguing at me - and the all caps "YOU" sure seem to be you addressing me and not people arguing against your tastes in this thread - at least give me the common courtesy of not making up arguments for me that I am not putting forth.

[Malcador]

Well good to see Merin's back on the cross again. Poor soul.

 

**** romances!

 

That's really all I have and care to add to this particular subject anymore.

 

Carry on.

 

Well, I suppose there COULD be prostitutes in the game, no ?

[Undecaf]

Well good to see Merin's back on the cross again. Poor soul.

 

**** romances!

 

That's really all I have and care to add to this particular subject anymore.

 

Carry on.

 

Well, I suppose there COULD be prostitutes in the game, no ?

 

Single serving romances that last the few seconds a "fade to black" lasts? Why not. That's not obtrusive. And if the character (or even the player) was stupid enough to confuse that with romances the "pro" could exploit the characters confusion like how the larvae of some insects eat their hosts from the inside (or, then again, maybe just stick with paid sex).

Edited October 16, 2012 by Undecaf

[Kilroy_Was_Here]

I have always supported romances, but given the nature of this game they should probably be limited in number and kept relatively simple.

 

Given the size/enthusiasm of the fanbase I have no doubt that modders will eventually add in enough romantic content to suit anyone's tastes, and that task will be made easier if there is exisiting code to model off of. (I think that's right... don't know much about programming personally)

Edited October 16, 2012 by Kilroy_Was_Here

[Osvir]

Who is to say that your main character has to romance anyone? What if two of your companions find an attraction for each other, I think that's easier to write as well.

 

Yeah, but not much point to that, people need their PC to experience things to be immersed, or something. Although that would be kind of funny in my view if everyone's hooking up and just leaving the PC by their lonesome.

 

Well I'm talking about a dedicated story, let's say you have 2 female and 3 male companions that have a "group" romance, so to speak. I haven't really explored the idea *shrug*

 

2 are evil/chaotic (in personality) and 2 are good/harmonic (in personality) and 1 is true neutral* (further explanation further down):

 

These would criss-cross and match, 1 chaotic male with 1 good female as an example. There could be jealousy, affecting morale, if the chaotic female (in this case) was in your group left standing by the side. I don't suggest that they would be lovebirds and twitter each other all the time. It would more be in the ways of "Alright these guys are totally hooking up after the credits" type of thing. This is, however, much to demand (this is not a suggestion, just an idea) from the writers so I'll just leave it at that.

 

* True Neutral: This could be you, but first let's flirt with the thought that it's a companion. You could affect this one's personality throughout the game, you could provoke him/her to sway from his/her path. If it would be you, the romance would be different depending on actions you take in the game.

 

There would only be one romance present in a game and it would have to fulfill certain "requirements" (specific choices you make in the game that affect their relationship. Per example, if you would do one quest for one before the other, you might not trigger a specific conversation that one of them would have started, e.g., X is looking for a relic, Y is too. When you get to Y's quest location, X contemplate his own search for his dreams. But if you would do X's quest first, X would not contemplate his search because he has the relic in hand, making X and Y never "come closer" as friends, not meaning they should start humping right away. We're talking about well written content here, not an in-game mechanic (e.g., Gifts)):

If X is hooked up with Y, then all of the rest of the vocabulary won't get a romance (unless unlocked by modders ofc).

 

P.S. All of these romances could even be considered friendships, not necessarily romance imo.

 

EDIT: There's going to be some... 100+ NPCs? The chance you are getting these 2 of these compatible companions in your group is rather slim. Even if not all the 100+ NPCs are companions.. And if you find them in your group and you find yourself with two "lovebirds" then it would not just be coincidence, but your own device hooking them together. I think you would have a sugartooth for romance (which might also be the fear here in this thread xD).

Edited October 16, 2012 by Osvir

[ravenshrike]

LOLOLOLOLOLLLLLL

 

In fairness her character was rather consistent with a lonely girl who was raised by a female version of Emperor Palpatine(From the prequel trilogy. Oddly enough he was the one character who was better written in the prequels vs the originals.).

[Shaz]

I want relationships. No: I really, really want relationships. Deep, involved relationships, between my character and others, and between other characters. Why? Because it adds a semblance of reality, and because it adds depth- you have to get to know someone to develop a real relationship with them. Without the depth you just have shallow characters.

 

 

Note: At no point did I say 'romance', I only said 'relationship'. I am pro romance, sure, because that's one possible relationship. I'm just as pro 'really good antagonistic rivalry'. I know the relationships will be there, we'll just have to wait for release to find out what kind of relationships they are.

[Ieo]

I have always supported romances, but given the nature of this game they should probably be limited in number and kept relatively simple.

 

Given the size/enthusiasm of the fanbase I have no doubt that modders will eventually add in enough romantic content to suit anyone's tastes, and that task will be made easier if there is exisiting code to model off of. (I think that's right... don't know much about programming personally)

 

It really does seem more appropriate for modding, and an iso game with no stupid full VO 3D talking heads is going to be far easier to mod for NPC content. Depending on the toolsets the fanbase can create (since there's no word on an official kit) and since Obs is going to leave the content data transparent, I'm sure someone will figure out the necessary triggers. The plus side of leaving any romance content "simple" is that it shouldn't cut into that character's non-romance content too much nor hook into the central plot; but if the companions are going to be around PS:T depth, I doubt romances must exist for someone to figure out dialogue variable use for a particular path, anyway--it's just a road map to particular ends, possibly with math. 0s and 1s.

[Morality Games]

I have always supported romances, but given the nature of this game they should probably be limited in number and kept relatively simple.

 

Given the size/enthusiasm of the fanbase I have no doubt that modders will eventually add in enough romantic content to suit anyone's tastes, and that task will be made easier if there is exisiting code to model off of. (I think that's right... don't know much about programming personally)

 

It really does seem more appropriate for modding, and an iso game with no stupid full VO 3D talking heads is going to be far easier to mod for NPC content. Depending on the toolsets the fanbase can create (since there's no word on an official kit) and since Obs is going to leave the content data transparent, I'm sure someone will figure out the necessary triggers. The plus side of leaving any romance content "simple" is that it shouldn't cut into that character's non-romance content too much nor hook into the central plot; but if the companions are going to be around PS:T depth, I doubt romances must exist for someone to figure out dialogue variable use for a particular path, anyway--it's just a road map to particular ends, possibly with math. 0s and 1s.

 

I'm certainly not one to blast mods, but between an Obsidian written romance and a fan written romance there is little comparison. Truth is, the most famous mods were applied to the technical aspects of games, not so much the story, unless it was to restore lost content.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Morality Games

[Falelorn]

I enjoy romances in my RPG's and MMORPG's (if done well) and I hope PE has them. I also hope they have Gay and Lesbian romances for those who wish to go that way. I have friends (both Gay and Lesbian) who only came to game because of BioWare's Mass Effect/Dragon Age series, those relationships were simple, but at least it showed the game industry noticed that not everyone in the world is straight...

[Godwin]

I enjoyed the romances in BG and I don't get the people who are so against them, you don't have to do them they are optional.

[Ieo]

I'm certainly not one to blast mods, but between an Obsidian written romance and a fan written romance there is little comparison. Truth is, the most famous mods were applied to the technical aspects of games, not so much the story, unless it was to restore lost content.

 

I seem to remember a decent number of well-known NPC mods with romance for BG2, but it's really been a while since I played anyway (or looked at the modding scene).

 

People who keep saying it's optional don't realize that romance can easily unbalance available companion content for someone who doesn't go down that path; this is much worse when there are only 8 companions to choose from, not the 18 in BG2, for example. If it makes it into the game, I just want it subtle and not overpowering anything, ever--character content or main storyline. If it turns out that a party NPC's content is half-locked behind a romance path, and I end up not choosing that path, and the party NPC ends up being very quiet with little else to say halfway through the game, that's just an awful waste and boring as all hell. I might as well just get a mercenary spot from the Adventurer's Hall. Companions must be equally compelling to both romancers and non-romancers.

 

(I'll still never forgive a friend who exclaimed that all the companions in PE should be pansexual and romances everyone, any sex or race. Really?)

 

 

LOL, maybe I should mod a romance. Coming from someone who studied the sociology of unhealthy relationship and role expectations arising from Western popular media.

[BR4ZIL]

I'm certainly not one to blast mods, but between an Obsidian written romance and a fan written romance there is little comparison. Truth is, the most famous mods were applied to the technical aspects of games, not so much the story, unless it was to restore lost content.

 

I seem to remember a decent number of well-known NPC mods with romance for BG2, but it's really been a while since I played anyway (or looked at the modding scene).

 

People who keep saying it's optional don't realize that romance can easily unbalance available companion content for someone who doesn't go down that path; this is much worse when there are only 8 companions to choose from, not the 18 in BG2, for example. If it makes it into the game, I just want it subtle and not overpowering anything, ever--character content or main storyline. If it turns out that a party NPC's content is half-locked behind a romance path, and I end up not choosing that path, and the party NPC ends up being very quiet with little else to say halfway through the game, that's just an awful waste and boring as all hell. I might as well just get a mercenary spot from the Adventurer's Hall. Companions must be equally compelling to both romancers and non-romancers.

 

(I'll still never forgive a friend who exclaimed that all the companions in PE should be pansexual and romances everyone, any sex or race. Really?)

 

 

LOL, maybe I should mod a romance. Coming from someone who studied the sociology of unhealthy relationship and role expectations arising from Western popular media.

 

BG2 has ALOT (and i mean really, alot) of romance mods, just check Spellhold Studios/Pocket Plane Group or any other infinity engine modding sites, there is even romance mods for some BG1 characters.

 

With that said, i would actually like if would get BG2 styled romances (minus the Aerie one, god, that was awful), i thought Viconia's was written relatevely well (or maybe i just used so many mods its not even her original dialogue). But if we dont get romances, i also alright with that, a nice thing would be a nod to Fallout 2 with a crappy "glue/useless" romance partner you really dont want around.

[Blackstream]

It's been stated in an interview that there will be a variety mature relationships in this game that we can choose to pursue as much as we want, in response to a question asking about romance.

 

"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."

 

Feargus also commented on it, that if Chris said this was the case, then it's true.

 

http://obsoletegamer...ainment-part-2/

 

Note that 'mature relationships' covers a huge array of relationships that may not be what people typically expect from BG style romances. Theoretically, one relationship could go to marriage and beyond, one relationship could go hard and fast and be a lustful relationship that doesn't go anywhere, and ultimately causes a self destruction as one party wants more than the other can give, one could be a love triange that isn't resolved with a silly 4 answer question where the results are picking #1 and #2 leaves the party, picking #1 and #2 stays in the party, and the reverse of those two, there could be bromances, super friendships... who knows. But this is what I want anyways, so hopefully they stick to this.

 

EDIT:

Another possbility, and one I want even more, are relationships that haven't 'concluded' by the end of the game, including future expansions. They want to continue this game with companions in future PE games, which means the potential for continuing relationships (not my thing as much, but think of how mass effect did it, for example). So a relationship could start off as a friendship, and slowly builds towards something more, but you might not see things really heat up until the second game.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Blackstream

[Ieo]

It's been stated in an interview that there will be a variety mature relationships in this game that we can choose to pursue as much as we want, in response to a question asking about romance.

 

"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."

 

Feargus also commented on it, that if Chris said this was the case, then it's true.

 

http://obsoletegamer...ainment-part-2/

 

Note that 'mature relationships' covers a huge array of relationships that may not be what people typically expect from BG style romances. Theoretically, one relationship could go to marriage and beyond, one relationship could go hard and fast and be a lustful relationship that doesn't go anywhere, and ultimately causes a self destruction as one party wants more than the other can give, one could be a love triange that isn't resolved with a silly 4 answer question where the results are picking #1 and #2 leaves the party, picking #1 and #2 stays in the party, and the reverse of those two, there could be bromances, super friendships... who knows. But this is what I want anyways, so hopefully they stick to this.

 

Yeah, that is open to interpretation. If a "romance path" could be converted fairly to a bromance/womance path, I'd like that. A marriage relationship could be interesting.... and yet I'd probably never want to see that because I observe and discuss marriage problems all the ****ing time, and I'd most likely want to throttle the NPCs to death.

[Blackstream]

I'd honestly feel a little gipped if you couldn't guide a 'romance' down the best friends path instead.

 

Just thinking about all the possiblities really hits home why they were sticking so stubbornly to only having 8 companions, saying how much resources would be going to them.

[Morality Games]

I'm certainly not one to blast mods, but between an Obsidian written romance and a fan written romance there is little comparison. Truth is, the most famous mods were applied to the technical aspects of games, not so much the story, unless it was to restore lost content.

 

I seem to remember a decent number of well-known NPC mods with romance for BG2, but it's really been a while since I played anyway (or looked at the modding scene).

 

People who keep saying it's optional don't realize that romance can easily unbalance available companion content for someone who doesn't go down that path; this is much worse when there are only 8 companions to choose from, not the 18 in BG2, for example. If it makes it into the game, I just want it subtle and not overpowering anything, ever--character content or main storyline. If it turns out that a party NPC's content is half-locked behind a romance path, and I end up not choosing that path, and the party NPC ends up being very quiet with little else to say halfway through the game, that's just an awful waste and boring as all hell. I might as well just get a mercenary spot from the Adventurer's Hall. Companions must be equally compelling to both romancers and non-romancers.

 

(I'll still never forgive a friend who exclaimed that all the companions in PE should be pansexual and romances everyone, any sex or race. Really?)

 

 

LOL, maybe I should mod a romance. Coming from someone who studied the sociology of unhealthy relationship and role expectations arising from Western popular media.

 

My feelings are more open ended. I just want them to win me over in anyway Obsidian can get them to.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Morality Games