The "Unofficial" P.E. Relationship/Romance thread

[Gorth]

This is not a dating simulator. If they want romances between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy lonely people who want their player characters to awkwardly flirt for a few minutes and then totally do it. Forcing romances into the game to tick a bioware created expectation box would be a poor choice.

 

If someone's enjoyment is based on the artificial relationship factor, I would strongly recommend any one of a thousand creepy Japanese dating "games".

Hyperbole. Helps people ignoring the message

 

You do know that the Obsidian guys included romance and flirting in crpgs before Bioware did?

[Ruka]

This is not a dating simulator. If they want romances between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy lonely people who want their player characters to awkwardly flirt for a few minutes and then totally do it. Forcing romances into the game to tick a bioware created expectation box would be a poor choice.

 

If someone's enjoyment is based on the artificial relationship factor, I would strongly recommend any one of a thousand creepy Japanese dating "games".

 

This is not a killing simulator. If they want killing between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy murderers who want their player characters to kill people.

 

Just join your countries army.

 

This is how you sound.

[Merin]

It's both ends of the bell curve, really. There are people who insist that romances are the height of "meaningful deep" character development, when that's not true at all (in entertainment and life) and thus demand (no, really, some do) a large proportion of character content be earmarked for only that. Then there are people who cannot stand the inclusion of any lovey-dovey for lack of realism, pandering to (insert audience type), etc.

 

I keep hearing this "a pox on both houses" point made, but it's rare (not never, but rare) that someone advocating romance, even hardcore advocating, comes out with name-calling and dismissing a whole group of people because of what forum they may or may not visit.

 

I'm not looking to finger-point here or anything - just saying that for me in particular, and for many others as they have stated, it's the name-calling, straw man arguments and dismissive grouping that is being seen as offensive. Not advocating for no romance, or thinking romance in games is dumb or always badly done... but the personal attacks on those who even speak up in favor of it maybe not always being bad.

 

Just attack the argument, not the person, right? And this goes both ways - I have seen a few times the pro-romance side calling the anti-side some pretty pejorative things as well and that is equally wrong.

 

Now, I think there has to be a reasonable compromise, but I will admit that actually talking to one of those people in the former group, in person, pissed me off enough that would fall squarely into the latter end of the bell curve. Holy crud. Thank goodness she is not the target audience for this game, but I really could never abide by... that.... (she wanted every companion be romanceable and bi, or at least one be pansexual, and there should be a cheat to skip all combat.... ).

 

While personally I think the equation and "must have" that you describe here is detrimental to any game design, unless inclusivity and romance are the core game design goals, I don't see this any more "bang your head against the wall" extremism than those elsewhere who pulled their pledges because the game could potentially not give XP for kills or because there might be some kind of cool down, level scaling or non-vancian magic.

 

Let's just call any "my way or the highway" stance extreme, and not point at anyone who things romance can be a positive addition to cRPGs as belong to a "group" that you deign to "talk to one of those people from."

 

----

 

And before the slings and arrows come my way, I'll point back that my stance for romance in P.E. is certainly not what most anti-romance people are drawing a line against - at least, that's how I've been reading the (more reasoned and less inflammatory) arguments.

[jarpie]

By adding in romance there is nothing that would have to be sacrificed. There are no development constraints or publisher time frames. They have more than enough time to make this game wonderful. I don't understand the argument that if they added x they'd have to lose y, truth is there is no give/take here. They have the money, the time, and the means to add as much or as little as they want to this game.

 

They have to pay salaries to the dev team and calculate how much they can spend on any given thing, and because they still have pretty damn small budget (just about 3-3,5 million) they probably have to calculate very carefully how much they can spend on writing companions and dialogue.

 

If they have (this is just rough example) say...4 weeks to writen companion, and if they write romance to the companion, it's away from anything else they write to them (such as friendship, their potential quest, their reactions to what's happening etc).

[Loranc]

This is not a dating simulator. If they want romances between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy lonely people who want their player characters to awkwardly flirt for a few minutes and then totally do it. Forcing romances into the game to tick a bioware created expectation box would be a poor choice.

 

If someone's enjoyment is based on the artificial relationship factor, I would strongly recommend any one of a thousand creepy Japanese dating "games".

 

I think you are heavily misinformed about the difference between romance and a dating simulator. If you truly believe that adding romance degenerates a game into being an adolescent vehicle, than it's fair to say that you've never played PS;T or BG2, probably any of the IE engine games and have been playing Mass Effect and Dragon Age. Specially seeing as you referenced bio ware specifically.

 

Also, you probably don't read books. Something that has been around long before you or I have been. One type of book that tends to sell more than others are romance novels, why? Because it's what people enjoy, who reads said books? I can tell you that they wouldn't enjoy a JRPG dating simulation. You're comparing two things that are completely different from one another, based on bad factual information. Which is apparent in your entire comment. Romance has been around a very long time, movies, books, theater, for many a years. I'd expect the same level of romance to be in a video game.

 

'Just because bio ware did it bad doesn't mean that Playboy is going to be writing the script for PE.' So to speak.

[Gecimen]

To those who oppose any kind of romances, know that they sell games and we need the game to sell if we want more games from Obsidian.

So you want the game to do anything in order to sell more? FPS games sell as well, should PE change from it's current goal to become a MW clone?

 

Where did I say "anything"? We funded a cRPG and we are discussing the inclusion of romance. You come up with Modern Warfare clones. If you rather support a FPS than a cRPG with romance, then this is seriously the wrong forum for you.

Where did I say I liked FPS? That's a strawman and it doesn't matter If I do or not. The point is, why should the writer or combat designer etc change their scope just to sell? Your post suggests that romances should be included, simply on the fact that they attract buyers.

 

 

And on an off note, I like how you people call us totalitarians and a lot of other things that might be considered offensive. Yet you use ad hominems and strawman arguments

 

I just saw about 4-5 others called your argument illogical and exaggerated but of couse you won't submit. Througout the thread, I have argued why and what kind of romance should be included or exxcluded in P:E and also added the fact that they sell games and that I want this game to sell, unlike PS:T. You probably know (or at least have the decency to guess) that it's not my "only" argument in this topic but choose to act like it is. There's no point to get into any further discussion with you.

[Kymriana]

Ieo, hun, if I can ignore someone getting in my face about politics(who knows very well where I sit on it and is very openly trying to rile me up) and smile calmly before going 'Actually, I think this. :D' I know that you can handle a girl who likes the things you said. You were so very polite and well spoken in our conversation on time back on the 'thread that was' page 11.

 

But honestly, I'm keen to know what everyone would like to see in the game. I just wish they'd be less hostile to what anyone else wants in the process of sharing opinions about it.

[Loranc]

By adding in romance there is nothing that would have to be sacrificed. There are no development constraints or publisher time frames. They have more than enough time to make this game wonderful. I don't understand the argument that if they added x they'd have to lose y, truth is there is no give/take here. They have the money, the time, and the means to add as much or as little as they want to this game.

 

They have to pay salaries to the dev team and calculate how much they can spend on any given thing, and because they still have pretty damn small budget (just about 3-3,5 million) they probably have to calculate very carefully how much they can spend on writing companions and dialogue.

 

If they have (this is just rough example) say...4 weeks to writen companion, and if they write romance to the companion, it's away from anything else they write to them (such as friendship, their potential quest, their reactions to what's happening etc).

 

I'm telling you that this information is incorrect. It doesn't in any way take away from the other companions, their original budget for the whole game they were going to make was 1.1 million. That's it, therefore anything else that's added is really just 'fan service' for us. But as far as the core of the game goes, nothing is going to be hampered or impaired by adding this.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Loranc

[kenup]

To those who oppose any kind of romances, know that they sell games and we need the game to sell if we want more games from Obsidian.

So you want the game to do anything in order to sell more? FPS games sell as well, should PE change from it's current goal to become a MW clone?

 

I think asking for well written romance dialogues between at least a few characters of different gender is far from anything. Hyperbole is bad.

 

On top of that, if they have to sacrifice small things for them to sell MANY more copies, then the answer is yes. Because I want sequals. Obviously there's a line, but you rather exaggerate.

Not everything has to have a direct sequel, but aside from that,

 

No good writer makes sacrifices for the masses. They write what they want, and those that matter love it.

 

You're part of a mass of naysayers in this case and you ask the P:E writers to sacrifice romance for other things. Then you come and accuse people of the same thing.

What you fail to understand is we're not asking the next Fifa to include romance. What we are asking is a mature cRPG to include romance because mature topics include romance amongst other concepts.

Here is my two cents on this foolishness.

 

1. Romance story arcs are not required in all stories. Moreover, adding a romance story arc does not improve a story or a game. This is not a "feature." It is a plot device.

 

That's a really good argument. Good "romance" arcs are used as plot devices, they are not there for the player to choose between this person and the other. Geralt's relationship with Triss? That's important, it affects the plot and gives opportunities for both characters to develop. While optional, Safiya, Kaylyn Okku/One of Many and WhatsHisName in MotB and the KotOR 2 companions', their relationships, whatever the kind, also serve the plot and character progression. The romance part is optional in MotB and semi-optional in kotOR 2, but the relationship, again whatever that is, is a plot device. Not some sidequest or dialogue minigame.

 

This doesn't happen with Sheppard and the characters in ME. Some make a little character progression, but the Narrative fails to show this affect the plot, or Sheppard. They are just side quests, the relationship with the characters is unimportant to the plot.

 

And by the way, you tell me that "romance" is mature, but you don't present me the why of it. And for that matter, is any romance mature? Is a romance in a kids fairy tale also mature? Is romance the only kind of relationship that shows maturity? You don't tell me the answer to these. All I hear is that you want options, for straight males and gay males, ditto for women. Do you care about mature relationships being part of the narrative, or just satisfying everyone's desires?

 

I just saw about 4-5 others called your argument illogical and exaggerated but of couse you won't submit. Througout the thread, I have argued why and what kind of romance should be included or exxcluded in P:E and also added the fact that they sell games and that I want this game to sell, unlike PS:T. You probably know (or at least have the decency to guess) that it's not my "only" argument in this topic but choose to act like it is. There's no point to get into any further discussion with you.

And that is all you do in the end. Have your own opinions, don't just go with what others tell you.

Instead of giving us a good reason for minigame "romances", and many options on that matter, making the game better. Give me a good example of multi-"romance" options making the story better, that it enhanced the narrative, that all of them affected it in some meaningful way.

Edited October 18, 2012 by kenup

[Snerf]

This is not a dating simulator. If they want romances between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy lonely people who want their player characters to awkwardly flirt for a few minutes and then totally do it. Forcing romances into the game to tick a bioware created expectation box would be a poor choice.

 

If someone's enjoyment is based on the artificial relationship factor, I would strongly recommend any one of a thousand creepy Japanese dating "games".

 

This is not a killing simulator. If they want killing between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy murderers who want their player characters to kill people.

 

Just join your countries army.

 

This is how you sound.

 

Whoa, I don't even know where to begin with this. First of all, as the Obsidian dnd game shows, pirate violence is awesome.

 

Combat is central to Infinity engine crpgs as a method of problem solving. Other methods include dialogue or stealth. Having two of your party members bat eyelashes and sleep together hardly provides a way to advance the plot or solve various issues in the world.

[Loranc]

This is not a dating simulator. If they want romances between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy lonely people who want their player characters to awkwardly flirt for a few minutes and then totally do it. Forcing romances into the game to tick a bioware created expectation box would be a poor choice.

 

If someone's enjoyment is based on the artificial relationship factor, I would strongly recommend any one of a thousand creepy Japanese dating "games".

 

This is not a killing simulator. If they want killing between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy murderers who want their player characters to kill people.

 

Just join your countries army.

 

This is how you sound.

 

Whoa, I don't even know where to begin with this. First of all, as the Obsidian dnd game shows, pirate violence is awesome.

 

Combat is central to Infinity engine crpgs as a method of problem solving. Other methods include dialogue or stealth. Having two of your party members bat eyelashes and sleep together hardly provides a way to advance the plot or solve various issues in the world.

 

I've never experienced this in an IE game, so i'm really afraid I have no idea what you're talking about. The romance in the other IE crpgs was not forced or thrown upon you, so what exactly are you talking about? If you're still comparing this to Bioware games than i'm afraid you are in the wrong forum.

[Snerf]

This is not a dating simulator. If they want romances between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy lonely people who want their player characters to awkwardly flirt for a few minutes and then totally do it. Forcing romances into the game to tick a bioware created expectation box would be a poor choice.

 

If someone's enjoyment is based on the artificial relationship factor, I would strongly recommend any one of a thousand creepy Japanese dating "games".

Hyperbole. Helps people ignoring the message

 

You do know that the Obsidian guys included romance and flirting in crpgs before Bioware did?

 

Hyperbole is fun! Also, my referencing Bioware as an example of poorly implemented crpg romances does not invalidate the remaining portions of my statement. I could have replaced that with early Obsidian games. While not as egregiously painful, I still felt that they added nothing to the respective games. Fallout NV was done well in that npcs were given depth (including in some cases romantic preferences - Gannon, etc) but the player character didn't walk around trying to play house in the mojave.

[Gecimen]

 

And by the way, you tell me that "romance" is mature, but you don't present me the why of it. And for that matter, is any romance mature? Is a romance in a kids fairy tale also mature? Is romance the only kind of relationship that shows maturity? You don't tell me the answer to these. All I hear is that you want options, for straight males and gay males, ditto for women. Do you care about mature relationships being part of the narrative, or just satisfying everyone's desires?

 

I NEVER said "romance is mature". Please start by learning to read.... pfff...

[Gorth]

While not as egregiously painful, I still felt that they added nothing to the respective games.

 

That is your prerogative. You'll probably find a lot of people around here who really liked Planescape: Torment, not at least because of its characters and their relationship with the Nameless One.

[Loranc]

This is not a dating simulator. If they want romances between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy lonely people who want their player characters to awkwardly flirt for a few minutes and then totally do it. Forcing romances into the game to tick a bioware created expectation box would be a poor choice.

 

If someone's enjoyment is based on the artificial relationship factor, I would strongly recommend any one of a thousand creepy Japanese dating "games".

Hyperbole. Helps people ignoring the message

 

You do know that the Obsidian guys included romance and flirting in crpgs before Bioware did?

 

Hyperbole is fun! Also, my referencing Bioware as an example of poorly implemented crpg romances does not invalidate the remaining portions of my statement. I could have replaced that with early Obsidian games. While not as egregiously painful, I still felt that they added nothing to the respective games. Fallout NV was done well in that npcs were given depth (including in some cases romantic preferences - Gannon, etc) but the player character didn't walk around trying to play house in the mojave.

 

You never tried to play house in the other IE crpgs either.... and their characters were far more in depth than the ones that were in Fallout New Vegas, in fact PS:T had by far some of the best characters and lore ever found in a crpg to date. So once again.... i'm not following.

[Gecimen]

Not all mature fiction include romance at all.

 

I read all kinds of fiction and I must say the ones that can be considered mature 90% of the time includes romance even if it's a only soldier writing a letter to his fiancee. Can you please exemplify which mature fiction doesn't include romance "at all"? Or even better I'll give you 5 opposite examples for each of yours.

[Snerf]

While not as egregiously painful, I still felt that they added nothing to the respective games.

 

That is your prerogative. You'll probably find a lot of people around here who really liked Planescape: Torment, not at least because of its characters and their relationship with the Nameless One.

 

I liked PST as well. I'm simply providing my stance on the thread topic. I've done it without directly insulting individual posters and with a dash of swarthy pirate lust.

[Elerond]

 

Oh, God NO! I hope you are trolling. And spring 2014 is not that much of a development time. Guess what other games had more or less 2 years development cycle...

 

Fallout 2?

[Kymriana]

 

Whoa, I don't even know where to begin with this. First of all, as the Obsidian dnd game shows, pirate violence is awesome.

 

Combat is central to Infinity engine crpgs as a method of problem solving. Other methods include dialogue or stealth. Having two of your party members bat eyelashes and sleep together hardly provides a way to advance the plot or solve various issues in the world.

 

Snerf, I think they were just making an extreme argument to try to illustrate how you sound to anyone who wants even some romance in their title.

 

However, I'm going to go out on a limb and try to explain why some want a level of romance between characters... (though my argument is for in-depth relationships of all types including 'brothers in arms, sword-brothers/sisters, rivals, and lovers(even if it isn't physical, because this isn't a cinematic game and who cares if the text on the screen goes 'and they shared a bedroll'?).)

 

Lets look at Firefly:

Wash and Zoe are married. How they interact with each other tells us a lot about their personalities and character and drives a part of the story. ("Captain, I need you to take the helm. I need this man to tear all my clothes off." "Work, work, work...") Their relationship is not the be-all-end-all of the story. Mal and Inara have that unspoken THING hovering off to the side. Always there. Always tension. They are not lovers, but the hint at romance flavours their characters. Mal and Jayne... they are not rivals, not brothers in arms, they're just business partners.

 

Relationships between party members matter because they DO flavour the story. Would people like the chance for a romance/rivalry/sword-brother(sister) to evolve as people travel together facing death and danger along the way? Why YES, I think a whole LOT of people do. Does this mean that most of them want a Japanese Dating Sim or a clumsy attempt at it that has become popular in other studios? Nope. Some do, maybe. But not everyone. Those that want some depth in relationships are not just wanting to bump uglies... they want to watch characters evolve in how they treat each other... and they want it to be in believable ways, which can and does include romance or rivalry.

 

This, at least, is my take. It's all I really want. Do I want the chance for a character I create to find their soul-mate? Sure. Do I want a sword-brother who I know I can trust no matter what happens to always have my back? HECK yes. Both of those things matter. (And yes, I want a rival... because I feel a good rival can drive and draw the hero to new and better heights when done well.) I don't think anything that I've said I wanted would 'take away' from the game at all.

 

But that's just my take. /shrug

[Loranc]

While not as egregiously painful, I still felt that they added nothing to the respective games.

 

That is your prerogative. You'll probably find a lot of people around here who really liked Planescape: Torment, not at least because of its characters and their relationship with the Nameless One.

 

I liked PST as well. I'm simply providing my stance on the thread topic. I've done it without directly insulting individual posters and with a dash of swarthy pirate lust.

 

It was your first post, there have been 'several' romance thread posts to date. Curious as to why you randomly decided to start posting on this thread and only this thread.

[kenup]

I NEVER said "romance is mature". Please start by learning to read.... pfff...

You didn't? what is this then?

What we are asking is a mature cRPG to include romance because mature topics include romance amongst other concepts.

And you still didn't answer my questions.

Edited October 18, 2012 by kenup

[Ieo]

While personally I think the equation and "must have" that you describe here is detrimental to any game design, unless inclusivity and romance are the core game design goals, I don't see this any more "bang your head against the wall" extremism than those elsewhere who pulled their pledges because the game could potentially not give XP for kills or because there might be some kind of cool down, level scaling or non-vancian magic.

 

And I called those extremists silly too, the lot of them!

 

Ieo, hun, if I can ignore someone getting in my face about politics(who knows very well where I sit on it and is very openly trying to rile me up) and smile calmly before going 'Actually, I think this. :D' I know that you can handle a girl who likes the things you said. You were so very polite and well spoken in our conversation on time back on the 'thread that was' page 11.

 

But honestly, I'm keen to know what everyone would like to see in the game. I just wish they'd be less hostile to what anyone else wants in the process of sharing opinions about it.

 

You're probably much more able to navigate a contentious (of sorts) oral conversation than I can--there's a reason why writing is a good portion of my profession.

 

Honestly, I think the only real "what everyone would like to see" we know from all the locked romance threads is that the gradient covers the entire field. So that's not particularly helpful to Obsidian if they really trawl the forums.

[jarpie]

By adding in romance there is nothing that would have to be sacrificed. There are no development constraints or publisher time frames. They have more than enough time to make this game wonderful. I don't understand the argument that if they added x they'd have to lose y, truth is there is no give/take here. They have the money, the time, and the means to add as much or as little as they want to this game.

 

They have to pay salaries to the dev team and calculate how much they can spend on any given thing, and because they still have pretty damn small budget (just about 3-3,5 million) they probably have to calculate very carefully how much they can spend on writing companions and dialogue.

 

If they have (this is just rough example) say...4 weeks to writen companion, and if they write romance to the companion, it's away from anything else they write to them (such as friendship, their potential quest, their reactions to what's happening etc).

 

I'm telling you that this information is incorrect. It doesn't in any way take away from the other companions, their original budget for the whole game they were going to make was 1.1 million. That's it, therefore anything else that's added is really just 'fan service' for us. But as far as the core of the game goes, nothing is going to be hampered or impaired by adding this.

 

The 3-3,5 million for the scope of this game and development time (18 months) is very tight. 13-14 years ago Baldur's Gate 2 cost 5-7 million, and then salaries and expenses were quite a bit smaller than nowdays.

 

18 months for RPG is very short time.

 

The original 1,1 million had just five companions, five classes and three races, now they have 8 companions, 11 classes and 5-7 races, two big cities and 15 level deep dungeon.

 

When you have limited budget, when you put something in you have to take something out.

[Snerf]

This is not a dating simulator. If they want romances between npcs or salty pirates away on the high seas for long months, well that's one thing. But the last thing PE needs is to degenerate into an adolescent vehicle aiming to satisfy lonely people who want their player characters to awkwardly flirt for a few minutes and then totally do it. Forcing romances into the game to tick a bioware created expectation box would be a poor choice.

 

If someone's enjoyment is based on the artificial relationship factor, I would strongly recommend any one of a thousand creepy Japanese dating "games".

Hyperbole. Helps people ignoring the message

 

You do know that the Obsidian guys included romance and flirting in crpgs before Bioware did?

 

Hyperbole is fun! Also, my referencing Bioware as an example of poorly implemented crpg romances does not invalidate the remaining portions of my statement. I could have replaced that with early Obsidian games. While not as egregiously painful, I still felt that they added nothing to the respective games. Fallout NV was done well in that npcs were given depth (including in some cases romantic preferences - Gannon, etc) but the player character didn't walk around trying to play house in the mojave.

 

You never tried to play house in the other IE crpgs either.... and their characters were far more in depth than the ones that were in Fallout New Vegas, in fact PS:T had by far some of the best characters and lore ever found in a crpg to date. So once again.... i'm not following.

 

First of all, assuming that I "don't read books" because I don't read romance novels in just about the strangest leap I've ever seen. My level of literacy or preference of reading is totally irrelevant. Besides, romance novels are pretty much the lowest form of fiction created. 50 shades of gray anyone?

 

A more apt comparison to including romancable party characters would be a "choose your own adventure:romance novel edition." "bite her lip, turn to page 12. Hide in her backyard and watch her sleep, turn to page 20".

 

If Obsidian wants to write npcs that have scripted relationships like New Vegas, more power to them. What I'm arguing is that there is no need to include paper dolls that my player characters can "choose your own adventure" through a creepy courtship process.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Snerf

[Snerf]

While not as egregiously painful, I still felt that they added nothing to the respective games.

 

That is your prerogative. You'll probably find a lot of people around here who really liked Planescape: Torment, not at least because of its characters and their relationship with the Nameless One.

 

I liked PST as well. I'm simply providing my stance on the thread topic. I've done it without directly insulting individual posters and with a dash of swarthy pirate lust.

 

It was your first post, there have been 'several' romance thread posts to date. Curious as to why you randomly decided to start posting on this thread and only this thread.

 

Because my forum registration that I submitted yesterday took forever to get to me. Besides, you have to have a first post somewhere, right?