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

[Mrakvampire]

We've already been told it won't be that wonderfully weird. But I certainly would prefer if narratively PE took its lessons from PS:T, yes. Just pretend there was no combat in Torment (but steal the unique spells, those were good).

 

It really explains everything.

[ComMcNeil]

PS:T romances =/= BG2 romances.

In the former the romances were subtle, delicate and tied with the story. They were more hinted at than full-scale sex affairs.

BG2, on the other hand, had the precursor of modern ego-stroking romances. Cheesy, obnoxious and poorly written, not to mention completely separated from the plot. They also made the romanceable characters' dialogues (aside from the romances themselves) non-existant.

 

why isnt there a place for some cheesy stuff as well? I personally dont think the jaheira romance was that obnoxious or poorly written - it may be cheesy that you help her over the loss of her dead husband and fall in love in the process, but I dont think that is a poor idea per se...

[Sylrissa]

Let's get something straight - although I despise CRPG romances, I can live with one or two unobtrusive ones if they can be utterly avoided.

 

What I'm more concerned about is romancers / BSN weenies starting to gather on the forum like a hormone-fuelled horde of emo-locusts.

 

Naturally I can only speak for myself, but I like to hope that most of the people that want to see romance make it into the game, want BG/2, PS:T etc. style romances, and not the BSN kind that has made some people have an aversion to the very idea of romance in a modern RPG.

 

Edit: Personally I don't hate on people who like BSN romances, to each their own and all, I just think obsidian could do better with this game.

PS:T romances =/= BG2 romances.

In the former the romances were subtle, delicate and tied with the story. They were more hinted at than full-scale sex affairs.

BG2, on the other hand, had the precursor of modern ego-stroking romances. Cheesy, obnoxious and poorly written, not to mention completely separated from the plot. They also made the romanceable characters' dialogues (aside from the romances themselves) non-existant.

 

I never said that they were the same, the intention to Monte Carlo was that if romances get in at all, they should be more along the lines of the RPG's of old, rather then more modern games

 

 

a wish fulfillment fantasy, not as a natural extension of a game's narrative themes. I'm against that shallowness.

 

That wish fulfillment fantasy shallowness as you say, is what many games are all about, and not just ones with romance.

[Hoverdog]

Let's get something straight - although I despise CRPG romances, I can live with one or two unobtrusive ones if they can be utterly avoided.

 

What I'm more concerned about is romancers / BSN weenies starting to gather on the forum like a hormone-fuelled horde of emo-locusts.

 

Naturally I can only speak for myself, but I like to hope that most of the people that want to see romance make it into the game, want BG/2, PS:T etc. style romances, and not the BSN kind that has made some people have an aversion to the very idea of romance in a modern RPG.

 

Edit: Personally I don't hate on people who like BSN romances, to each their own and all, I just think obsidian could do better with this game.

PS:T romances =/= BG2 romances.

In the former the romances were subtle, delicate and tied with the story. They were more hinted at than full-scale sex affairs.

BG2, on the other hand, had the precursor of modern ego-stroking romances. Cheesy, obnoxious and poorly written, not to mention completely separated from the plot. They also made the romanceable characters' dialogues (aside from the romances themselves) non-existant.

 

I never said that they were the same, the intention to Monte Carlo was that if romances get in at all, they should be more along the lines of the RPG's of old, rather then more modern games

You missed the point. Romances in BG2 were much more similar to those of ME or DA than to Torment's.

[BruceVC]

I shall clarify.

 

People who want romances in CRPGs: I'll never really understand you, but you don't overly bother me. Welcome, I am sure we will agree on lots of other things and find common ground.

 

Promancers: You are squee-laden obsessives with a creepy level of interest in relationships with virtual characters that defy rational behaviour. You despoil every environment you touch. You write bad fan-fiction. You need to stay on BSN.

 

I hope this clears up my position.

 

I respect and enjoy your opinion on many topics, so yes this does help explain your perspective for me in a way that makes sense and isn't just seem as invective.

[Sylrissa]

I shall clarify.

 

People who want romances in CRPGs: I'll never really understand you, but you don't overly bother me. Welcome, I am sure we will agree on lots of other things and find common ground.

 

Promancers: You are squee-laden obsessives with a creepy level of interest in relationships with virtual characters that defy rational behaviour. You despoil every environment you touch. You write bad fan-fiction. You need to stay on BSN.

 

I hope this clears up my position.

 

Crystal clear, and while I do want romance, and believe it can very much enhance a game.

 

I think we can come to the agreement that not all games are fitting to have romance included and if the romance is going to be poorly done and slap together, they would be better off leaving it out all together.

[evdk]

We've already been told it won't be that wonderfully weird. But I certainly would prefer if narratively PE took its lessons from PS:T, yes. Just pretend there was no combat in Torment (but steal the unique spells, those were good).

 

It really explains everything.

Yeas, it's the quantum physics of RPGs.

[Mrakvampire]

No, you're wrong (again).

BG2 had a great, open world, with lots of developed quests, some extremely well-done and tough fights, and one of the best cities in gaming history - but the writing was poor and childish at times. PST was the best game ever in terms of narrative, plot, story and writing, but not combat.

 

It's 100% what I expected. The difference between me and you is that I regard both games as great ones, and you think that 'writing in BG was poor and childish'.

This is major disagreement here between me and you.

[Althernai]

Two possible romances that we nicely subtle and tied to the themes of the games instead of in your face and absolutely unrelated to anything (more like a checklist item done). And Deionarra should count in this discussion, she's essentially walking (well, floating) backstory.

There is no reason they cannot be subtle in Project Eternity. Tying it to the main story is harder -- it only worked in PS:T because they had a fixed protagonist. To be honest, I don't see anything wrong with the BG2 romances. If they can somehow relate them to the main game without fixing the protagonist, I will be very pleased, but it would also work without that.

 

Bioware of BG2 times and Bioware of DA2 times - 2 different companies.

Not to me, honestly. Certainly not by a relevant degree.

Seriously? BG2 is the epitome of the Infinity Engine style, real time with pause games (sure, PS:T had the better story, but I'm counting combat here as well). DA2 is the epitome of everything that has gone wrong since then (designing primarily for consoles, releasing games before they're ready because the publisher said so, etc.). Besides, Bioware of BG2 times was actually Bioware whereas Bioware of DA2 times is just a division of EA.

[Sylrissa]

Let's get something straight - although I despise CRPG romances, I can live with one or two unobtrusive ones if they can be utterly avoided.

 

What I'm more concerned about is romancers / BSN weenies starting to gather on the forum like a hormone-fuelled horde of emo-locusts.

 

Naturally I can only speak for myself, but I like to hope that most of the people that want to see romance make it into the game, want BG/2, PS:T etc. style romances, and not the BSN kind that has made some people have an aversion to the very idea of romance in a modern RPG.

 

Edit: Personally I don't hate on people who like BSN romances, to each their own and all, I just think obsidian could do better with this game.

PS:T romances =/= BG2 romances.

In the former the romances were subtle, delicate and tied with the story. They were more hinted at than full-scale sex affairs.

BG2, on the other hand, had the precursor of modern ego-stroking romances. Cheesy, obnoxious and poorly written, not to mention completely separated from the plot. They also made the romanceable characters' dialogues (aside from the romances themselves) non-existant.

 

I never said that they were the same, the intention to Monte Carlo was that if romances get in at all, they should be more along the lines of the RPG's of old, rather then more modern games

You missed the point. Romances in BG2 were much more similar to those of ME or DA than to Torment's.

 

I see, well we must have very different memories of BG2, as I don't remember it being any where near as terrible as some of the recent romances.

[evdk]

Bioware of BG2 times and Bioware of DA2 times - 2 different companies.

Not to me, honestly. Certainly not by a relevant degree.

Seriously? BG2 is the epitome of the Infinity Engine style, real time with pause games (sure, PS:T had the better story, but I'm counting combat here as well). DA2 is the epitome of everything that has gone wrong since then (designing primarily for consoles, releasing games before they're ready because the publisher said so, etc.). Besides, Bioware of BG2 times was actually Bioware whereas Bioware of DA2 times is just a division of EA.

We were talking about romances and to me the writing in BG2 and DA2 is not really different, it's just in Bio's later games the flaws are more pronounced, but they were always present.

[BruceVC]

Let's get something straight - although I despise CRPG romances, I can live with one or two unobtrusive ones if they can be utterly avoided.

 

What I'm more concerned about is romancers / BSN weenies starting to gather on the forum like a hormone-fuelled horde of emo-locusts.

 

Naturally I can only speak for myself, but I like to hope that most of the people that want to see romance make it into the game, want BG/2, PS:T etc. style romances, and not the BSN kind that has made some people have an aversion to the very idea of romance in a modern RPG.

 

Edit: Personally I don't hate on people who like BSN romances, to each their own and all, I just think obsidian could do better with this game.

PS:T romances =/= BG2 romances.

In the former the romances were subtle, delicate and tied with the story. They were more hinted at than full-scale sex affairs.

BG2, on the other hand, had the precursor of modern ego-stroking romances. Cheesy, obnoxious and poorly written, not to mention completely separated from the plot. They also made the romanceable characters' dialogues (aside from the romances themselves) non-existant.

 

I never said that they were the same, the intention to Monte Carlo was that if romances get in at all, they should be more along the lines of the RPG's of old, rather then more modern games

You missed the point. Romances in BG2 were much more similar to those of ME or DA than to Torment's.

 

I see, well we must have very different memories of BG2, as I don't remember it being any where near as terrible as some of the recent romances.

 

I have to be honest I also enjoyed the Romances\Sex in BG2. I courted Viconia, she was smoking hot

 

I have never played Planescape so I can't objectively comment on there implementation of Romances

[ddillon]

Although P:E won't include D&D alignments per se, I'm sure that a fair number of their NPCs will fall into one of the nine traditional alignments. Most of the time I play a good or neutral character, but every now and then I do attempt to play an evil one and am generally disappointed by the lack of intelligent, suitable options. I'd like to put in my request for a more or less Lawful Evil romanceable companion. She can be wicked, but she needs to generally keep her word and be relatively disciplined. Otherwise she'd not be worth the hassle and she'd be likely to cut your throat or sell you out in some manner if you no longer served her purposes.

 

Official Request: a L.E. female L.I., please.

 

Romances aren't necessary imo, but if there are to be romances, then I'd like that, too. There should *not* be an option to "redeem" her.

Edited October 18, 2012 by ddillon

[FlintlockJazz]

Romance develops only that one NPC, stat-based dialogue influences interaction with all charactions, how they react to it and the challenges you are presented with it. It encourages the player to use his stats to define who his character is, not to min max and then ignore it when RPing his character in dialog.

 

You are wrong. Romance doesn't develop only one NPC - it has a potential to develop all NPCs as the interaction between NPCs will change.

And btw. Romance in this situation greatly increases replayability of this game and it increases it more drastically than low-int dialogues.

 

Oh I am wrong am I because you state it as so? Didn't realise we could just declare it as so. YOU are wrong. Stat based dialogue increases replayability and RP by a vastly greater degree, and its one of the reasons people are against VO since it prevents the resctivity of things like stat driven dialogue and they want it back. Removing it in favour of romance defeats the purpose of not having VOs and shows where your priorities lie.

[Jarmo]

Also, largely due to this thread, another question/suggestion popped to my mind.

[Aleron]

--what type of romance plot do you enjoy (tragic, happy ending, marriage/family)?

--are there particular game mechanics that you like to see when romances are included (complex questlines, cutscenes?)?

--what romances or relationship plots from other games did you enjoy that can serve as examples?

--What, even, is romance?

 

Good questions!

 

As for the types mentioned, I enjoy all of them. A game with a well told romance story can be incredibly enjoyable, whether it turns out to be a happy ending or a tragic one. Personally, the only thing I would really like to see is something to show for your choice at the end. If your character goes out of their way to romance and marry a character, that shouldn't just be tossed out the window come the closing of the curtains.

 

As for game mechanics, there definitely should be dialogue and some quests I think. Cut scenes are enjoyable, but the work required to make them might not be worth it (rendering a custom made character and the other, especially if there are multiple NPCs to romance). As mentioned above, something added into the game ending I think to show your choice (whether to romance or not) should have some impact.

 

As for ones I've enjoyed, the ones that come immediately to mind are Bastilla from KotOR and Raven from Arcanum. The later especially I believe a good example since the ending does give mention to what happens to the both of you (even if a bit generic). Likely others as well, but they are currently slipping my mind.

 

The last question is quite subjective based on who you ask and I would require some time and much more sleep then I have currently to answer it completely.

[Althernai]

We were talking about romances and to me the writing in BG2 and DA2 is not really different, it's just in Bio's later games the flaws are more pronounced, but they were always present.

There are few things in this world that are flawless. I thought the BG2 romances were pretty good (except Anomen, but that might be because I'm male). Also, the writing will be different in Project Eternity because different people are writing it. I'd expect it to be more like PS:T and Fallout.

[ComMcNeil]

Romance develops only that one NPC, stat-based dialogue influences interaction with all charactions, how they react to it and the challenges you are presented with it. It encourages the player to use his stats to define who his character is, not to min max and then ignore it when RPing his character in dialog.

 

You are wrong. Romance doesn't develop only one NPC - it has a potential to develop all NPCs as the interaction between NPCs will change.

And btw. Romance in this situation greatly increases replayability of this game and it increases it more drastically than low-int dialogues.

 

Oh I am wrong am I because you state it as so? Didn't realise we could just declare it as so. YOU are wrong. Stat based dialogue increases replayability and RP by a vastly greater degree, and its one of the reasons people are against VO since it prevents the resctivity of things like stat driven dialogue and they want it back. Removing it in favour of romance defeats the purpose of not having VOs and shows where your priorities lie.

 

I find the VO in the infinity engine games were done pretty good. Only major story dialogues were fully voiced, minor dialogues were only voiced for the first sentence(s) or not at all. It helped give soul to the character, but was not restrictive for the dialogue choices...I find that a pretty good design choice

[evdk]

We were talking about romances and to me the writing in BG2 and DA2 is not really different, it's just in Bio's later games the flaws are more pronounced, but they were always present.

There are few things in this world that are flawless. I thought the BG2 romances were pretty good (except Anomen, but that might be because I'm male). Also, the writing will be different in Project Eternity because different people are writing it. I'd expect it to be more like PS:T and Fallout.

There are also just a few things that are good. The romance part of BG2 was not among their number. And I too have confidence in the writing team abilities.

Edited October 18, 2012 by evdk

[Slime Wizard]

I am not a very complex man. If there's an option for my elf dude to get it on with another elf dude, I'm going to do that.

[FlintlockJazz]

Romance develops only that one NPC, stat-based dialogue influences interaction with all charactions, how they react to it and the challenges you are presented with it. It encourages the player to use his stats to define who his character is, not to min max and then ignore it when RPing his character in dialog.

 

You are wrong. Romance doesn't develop only one NPC - it has a potential to develop all NPCs as the interaction between NPCs will change.

And btw. Romance in this situation greatly increases replayability of this game and it increases it more drastically than low-int dialogues.

 

Oh I am wrong am I because you state it as so? Didn't realise we could just declare it as so. YOU are wrong. Stat based dialogue increases replayability and RP by a vastly greater degree, and its one of the reasons people are against VO since it prevents the resctivity of things like stat driven dialogue and they want it back. Removing it in favour of romance defeats the purpose of not having VOs and shows where your priorities lie.

 

I find the VO in the infinity engine games were done pretty good. Only major story dialogues were fully voiced, minor dialogues were only voiced for the first sentence(s) or not at all. It helped give soul to the character, but was not restrictive for the dialogue choices...I find that a pretty good design choice

 

I'm refering to the fully voiced VO of more recent games. Thanks to every line needing to be voiced dialogue has become more restrictive as every line is at a premium, which is why I amthankful PE is going the IE route.

[Gecimen]

I'm all in for natural romance. With no streamlined outcomes. That is:

 

- No 100s of gifts that fill a relationship bar.

- No relationship bar in the first place. A person can fall in love with someone who he/she hates, given a romantic moment happens.

- Romances should not have preset consequences such as bedding, marriage, children or what not. Player choice + NPC characteristics should decide what happens.

- Romance options shouldn't be limited to Player - companion. Other NPCs should be romancable as well and even companions can fall in love with eachother.

- Bitter relationships such as marrying someone you widowed, rape, becoming a widow etc. should happen as well.

[evdk]

rape

Sorry, but get the **** outta here.

[Rahelron]

I'm all in for natural romance. With no streamlined outcomes. That is:

 

- No 100s of gifts that fill a relationship bar.

- No relationship bar in the first place. A person can fall in love with someone who he/she hates, given a romantic moment happens.

- Romances should not have preset consequences such as bedding, marriage, children or what not. Player choice + NPC characteristics should decide what happens.

- Romance options shouldn't be limited to Player - companion. Other NPCs should be romancable as well and even companions can fall in love with eachother.

- Bitter relationships such as marrying someone you widowed, rape, becoming a widow etc. should happen as well.

 

Let's keep raping out of the picture please.

 

I agree with everything else you said.

[Justinian]

I think a large part of what made recent Bioware romances so tacky was the cinematic approach it took. It was all just a way to reach a climactic "scene". That combined with a lack of dialogue options and subtlety went a long way to turning people against romance in RPGs I believe.

 

I hope Obsidian includes a range of romances in this game and more importantly, they do it justice. After all, character relationships are important in a party based, story driven RPG, and romances are a very significant aspect of that.