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

[Rahelron]

So, have any of the forum members found each other and experienced true love? or the bad touch?

 

This is what this thread is about, right? (Cyberdating)

 

Let me extrapolate from your words. You are pretty much saying: "If an RPG includes romance stories than it lets the player indulge on hedonistic love fantasies (or, even worse, sex fantasies). This might be good to make horny teenagers buy the game, but since this is a Kickstarter fund project we want something more mature."

 

Let me give you the news: pretty much every story driven game contain some sort of hedonistic gratification for the player. An example? Call of Duty is built around the purpose of making the player feel like a badass, the only one who can save the world. Ok, if we talk about the shooters genre that is pretty obvious, but I can assure you that you can apply the same kind of reasoning for each and every storydriven game, even the most mature. Every western RPG is centered around making the player identify himself with the main character of the story. It's done mostly with customization: you can choose your character's race, its appearence, what he is good at (his class and attributes) and so on. Then you take control of it, it does exactly what you tell him to do. This strengthens the identification even more. You become the character you're playing and that character in some way becomes you.

 

So you end up projecting yourself in a character that is able to take control of his life, overcome the odds and, in the end, reach his goal, whatever it is. This is a great way to give the player gratification, to make him feel good with himself and to increase his self-respect. And the interesting thing is that the game doesn't need to be a power hungry fantasy to exert this effect on the player. Every goal can be good, even becoming a chef in a resturant or helping someone win his struggle agains alcohol.

 

So: you think that romance stories in videogames are childish? Know that RPG games are childish as a whole. And they couldn't be different, because it's enbedded in the relationship between the player and the character he controls. Videogames are interactive experiences and the very core of story-driven interactive experiences is the identification between the player and the character he controls. Developers can try to make this relationship less intimate by forcing the player to control different characters during the course of the playthrough, or by forcing the player to control a party and not just one single character, but this doesn't prevent the ego-stroking gratification effect from happening. In those cases the identification process stops but then the player fstarts feeling like a deus-ex-machina, able to make things right by controlling the actions of a bunch of characters, just like a puppet-master would.

 

Don't blame romances for being an way to give ego-stroking gratification to the player. Blame the RPG genre as a whole.

 

...eh, what?

 

You are doing it wrong, i think. Women appriciate men who are slightly dominant, like taking the lead and showing them that you are really interested. Talking about jungian gratification of the ego might be an interesting ice-breaker but it wouldn't go anywhere on a base level.

 

This thread is still about dating right? I am beginning to be slightly confused by the responses here.

 

Two options:

1- You have completely misunderstood the goal of this thread (and I've seen in your words more than they actually say).

2- You are trying to troll me.

[jarpie]

My point still very much stands that NOT EVERY FILM, BOOK OR GAME HAVE ROMANCES SO WHY SHOULD THIS HAVE.

 

We dont even know what the story will be, and I trust Obsidian's devs enough to let them make game they want, and not to include "Bioawre-romances", my problem is with the crowd who demands that they include romances no matter what.

 

What if they make a story which doesn't support romance at all? should they just throw romances into it just because SOME people demands it even if it doesnt suit the main character?

 

Because this is not a book.

I'm sick of railroaded stories in videogames. If Project Eternity is going to be like that then the developers should warn us. At least I would stop worrying about this game and I'd look somewhere else for a real role playing experience.

Since this is an RPG I want to be in charge of what my character does and feels. I want to be able to decide if a love story fits the character I'm playing or not, exactly like I want to be able to decide if I'm good or bad, chaotic or lawful, altruistic or individualist etc.

 

Let's say that in the beginning of the story my character is happily married. The plt starts and after a painful event my wife gets killed. I want to have the chance to decide if my character finds the strength to move on (and finds another one to love) or keeps mourning his true love forever. This is roleplaying, not some ready-made experience you have to swallow as it is or screw off.

 

You know, I find this hilarious and indicative of this thread: Jarpie actually started off claiming that there are books without romance in because proromancers were saying all good stories had romance in them, now we are at the stage that its reversed and people are arguing that just because some books don't have romance in doesn't mean it can't and that its a game not a book and so shouldn't be compared. This argument truly has come full circle, hilarious really...

 

Let me put an end to this circling around then.

 

CRPGs are not P&P RPGs. They don't have the luxury of a master that can interact with the players in real time and adapt the story taking every action into account. If I'm playing D&D and I say: now my character goes to a tavern and tryes to pick up some chick at the bar. The master can make up something on the spot or tell me: "Just wait until the next session, I'll prepare something". He doesn't need to make me find the love of my life (or even someone to have sex with) at the first try, but as long as I keep up looking for love someway somehow he must make something happen, just like it would happen in real life.

 

As we said CRPGs don't have a master. The developers might try to give the player as much freedom as they can but they obviously can't cover everything. They have to make choices, which have to comply with the available development time. Some examples:

Should the player be able to become a nobleman and rule a country?

Should the player have the chance to play a musical instrument and become a famous bard?

Can we afford to spend time in developing a full blown naval and underwater combat system to let the player explore the oceans?

Do we need a stealth system to let the player be sneaky and avoid combat when he wants to?

Do we need to give the player the chance to play the game as an evil character? (it means at least one more branch for every quest)

Can we afford to spend time writing the senes and the plot of one or more love stories?

 

Obviously each and every feature would enhance player freedom and would add at least one roleplay option. But the developers have a limited amount of time and resources so they have to make choices. Now the question is: what is important and what it's not? To me romances are a great roleplaying tool and are one of the main feature that a true roleplaying adventure should add. They aren't the most time and resource intensive feature to add too. Strongholds, Stealth system, and evil storylines are much more expansive. And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too.

 

The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games.

[JohanKris]

 

Regarding this specifically, I do, to an extent see that you are coming more from a reasonable perspective than a, 'GTFO my game' perspective that a lot of people have, but again, and you did address this, Japanese dating sims don't really click with me, or a lot of people. To me, a deep, complex relationship with another character isn't the time management mini-game that Japanese dating sims are of....

 

Right, I should probably have said "Japanese visual novels", although I don't know if or how many that are translated.

 

Not the flash games or even the classic "true love".

 

Like I mentioned, I see a market opportunity here, pretty much no games like this are made. There is just interactive fiction AFAIK.

[Jasede]

To be fair, there were a few hookers for hire in some Ultima games (5 and 7), some optional sex (7-2, I quote, "YES! YES!!") and of course the infamous fade to black in Ultima 9. Maybe that's what people want? :trollface.jpg:

[lordgizka]

Regarding this specifically, I do, to an extent see that you are coming more from a reasonable perspective than a, 'GTFO my game' perspective that a lot of people have, but again, and you did address this, Japanese dating sims don't really click with me, or a lot of people. To me, a deep, complex relationship with another character isn't the time management mini-game that Japanese dating sims are of....

 

Right, I should probably have said "Japanese visual novels", although I don't know if or how many that are translated.

 

Not the flash games or even the classic "true love".

 

Like I mentioned, I see a market opportunity here, pretty much no games like this are made. There is just interactive fiction AFAIK.

 

Well, during the live stream Feargus and someone else (Avellone?) reacted quite cheerfully to the idea of making a visual novel. I'm pretty sure that *this* storyline focus is not what they had in mind.

[Meshugger]

So, have any of the forum members found each other and experienced true love? or the bad touch?

 

This is what this thread is about, right? (Cyberdating)

 

Let me extrapolate from your words. You are pretty much saying: "If an RPG includes romance stories than it lets the player indulge on hedonistic love fantasies (or, even worse, sex fantasies). This might be good to make horny teenagers buy the game, but since this is a Kickstarter fund project we want something more mature."

 

Let me give you the news: pretty much every story driven game contain some sort of hedonistic gratification for the player. An example? Call of Duty is built around the purpose of making the player feel like a badass, the only one who can save the world. Ok, if we talk about the shooters genre that is pretty obvious, but I can assure you that you can apply the same kind of reasoning for each and every storydriven game, even the most mature. Every western RPG is centered around making the player identify himself with the main character of the story. It's done mostly with customization: you can choose your character's race, its appearence, what he is good at (his class and attributes) and so on. Then you take control of it, it does exactly what you tell him to do. This strengthens the identification even more. You become the character you're playing and that character in some way becomes you.

 

So you end up projecting yourself in a character that is able to take control of his life, overcome the odds and, in the end, reach his goal, whatever it is. This is a great way to give the player gratification, to make him feel good with himself and to increase his self-respect. And the interesting thing is that the game doesn't need to be a power hungry fantasy to exert this effect on the player. Every goal can be good, even becoming a chef in a resturant or helping someone win his struggle agains alcohol.

 

So: you think that romance stories in videogames are childish? Know that RPG games are childish as a whole. And they couldn't be different, because it's enbedded in the relationship between the player and the character he controls. Videogames are interactive experiences and the very core of story-driven interactive experiences is the identification between the player and the character he controls. Developers can try to make this relationship less intimate by forcing the player to control different characters during the course of the playthrough, or by forcing the player to control a party and not just one single character, but this doesn't prevent the ego-stroking gratification effect from happening. In those cases the identification process stops but then the player fstarts feeling like a deus-ex-machina, able to make things right by controlling the actions of a bunch of characters, just like a puppet-master would.

 

Don't blame romances for being an way to give ego-stroking gratification to the player. Blame the RPG genre as a whole.

 

...eh, what?

 

You are doing it wrong, i think. Women appriciate men who are slightly dominant, like taking the lead and showing them that you are really interested. Talking about jungian gratification of the ego might be an interesting ice-breaker but it wouldn't go anywhere on a base level.

 

This thread is still about dating right? I am beginning to be slightly confused by the responses here.

 

Two options:

1- You have completely misunderstood the goal of this thread (and I've seen in your words more than they actually say).

2- You are trying to troll me.

 

...and I've seen in your words more than they actually say

 

That's sound like a great title for a love ballad! You're on the right path

Edited October 19, 2012 by Meshugger

[CrazyPea]

My point still very much stands that NOT EVERY FILM, BOOK OR GAME HAVE ROMANCES SO WHY SHOULD THIS HAVE.

 

We dont even know what the story will be, and I trust Obsidian's devs enough to let them make game they want, and not to include "Bioawre-romances", my problem is with the crowd who demands that they include romances no matter what.

 

What if they make a story which doesn't support romance at all? should they just throw romances into it just because SOME people demands it even if it doesnt suit the main character?

 

Because this is not a book.

I'm sick of railroaded stories in videogames. If Project Eternity is going to be like that then the developers should warn us. At least I would stop worrying about this game and I'd look somewhere else for a real role playing experience.

Since this is an RPG I want to be in charge of what my character does and feels. I want to be able to decide if a love story fits the character I'm playing or not, exactly like I want to be able to decide if I'm good or bad, chaotic or lawful, altruistic or individualist etc.

 

Let's say that in the beginning of the story my character is happily married. The plt starts and after a painful event my wife gets killed. I want to have the chance to decide if my character finds the strength to move on (and finds another one to love) or keeps mourning his true love forever. This is roleplaying, not some ready-made experience you have to swallow as it is or screw off.

 

You know, I find this hilarious and indicative of this thread: Jarpie actually started off claiming that there are books without romance in because proromancers were saying all good stories had romance in them, now we are at the stage that its reversed and people are arguing that just because some books don't have romance in doesn't mean it can't and that its a game not a book and so shouldn't be compared. This argument truly has come full circle, hilarious really...

 

Let me put an end to this circling around then.

 

CRPGs are not P&P RPGs. They don't have the luxury of a master that can interact with the players in real time and adapt the story taking every action into account. If I'm playing D&D and I say: now my character goes to a tavern and tryes to pick up some chick at the bar. The master can make up something on the spot or tell me: "Just wait until the next session, I'll prepare something". He doesn't need to make me find the love of my life (or even someone to have sex with) at the first try, but as long as I keep up looking for love someway somehow he must make something happen, just like it would happen in real life.

 

As we said CRPGs don't have a master. The developers might try to give the player as much freedom as they can but they obviously can't cover everything. They have to make choices, which have to comply with the available development time. Some examples:

Should the player be able to become a nobleman and rule a country?

Should the player have the chance to play a musical instrument and become a famous bard?

Can we afford to spend time in developing a full blown naval and underwater combat system to let the player explore the oceans?

Do we need a stealth system to let the player be sneaky and avoid combat when he wants to?

Do we need to give the player the chance to play the game as an evil character? (it means at least one more branch for every quest)

Can we afford to spend time writing the senes and the plot of one or more love stories?

 

Obviously each and every feature would enhance player freedom and would add at least one roleplay option. But the developers have a limited amount of time and resources so they have to make choices. Now the question is: what is important and what it's not? To me romances are a great roleplaying tool and are one of the main feature that a true roleplaying adventure should add. They aren't the most time and resource intensive feature to add too. Strongholds, Stealth system, and evil storylines are much more expansive. And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too.

 

The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games.

 

So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there and then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it.

[Rahelron]

The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games.

 

There are pretty much no novels about evil characters. Why then giving the player the chance to perform an evil playthourgh has become one of the core features of nowadays RPGs?

 

There's no serious fantasy novel which has a love story as its main focus. But novels don't need to be about love to have a romantic subplot inside them. Project eternity doesn't need to focus on love, but it would be great if allowed the player to live a love story (if he wanted to obviously, I'm all for player freedom).

[HereticSaint]

So, have any of the forum members found each other and experienced true love? or the bad touch?

 

This is what this thread is about, right? (Cyberdating)

 

Let me extrapolate from your words. You are pretty much saying: "If an RPG includes romance stories than it lets the player indulge on hedonistic love fantasies (or, even worse, sex fantasies). This might be good to make horny teenagers buy the game, but since this is a Kickstarter fund project we want something more mature."

 

Let me give you the news: pretty much every story driven game contain some sort of hedonistic gratification for the player. An example? Call of Duty is built around the purpose of making the player feel like a badass, the only one who can save the world. Ok, if we talk about the shooters genre that is pretty obvious, but I can assure you that you can apply the same kind of reasoning for each and every storydriven game, even the most mature. Every western RPG is centered around making the player identify himself with the main character of the story. It's done mostly with customization: you can choose your character's race, its appearence, what he is good at (his class and attributes) and so on. Then you take control of it, it does exactly what you tell him to do. This strengthens the identification even more. You become the character you're playing and that character in some way becomes you.

 

So you end up projecting yourself in a character that is able to take control of his life, overcome the odds and, in the end, reach his goal, whatever it is. This is a great way to give the player gratification, to make him feel good with himself and to increase his self-respect. And the interesting thing is that the game doesn't need to be a power hungry fantasy to exert this effect on the player. Every goal can be good, even becoming a chef in a resturant or helping someone win his struggle agains alcohol.

 

So: you think that romance stories in videogames are childish? Know that RPG games are childish as a whole. And they couldn't be different, because it's enbedded in the relationship between the player and the character he controls. Videogames are interactive experiences and the very core of story-driven interactive experiences is the identification between the player and the character he controls. Developers can try to make this relationship less intimate by forcing the player to control different characters during the course of the playthrough, or by forcing the player to control a party and not just one single character, but this doesn't prevent the ego-stroking gratification effect from happening. In those cases the identification process stops but then the player fstarts feeling like a deus-ex-machina, able to make things right by controlling the actions of a bunch of characters, just like a puppet-master would.

 

Don't blame romances for being an way to give ego-stroking gratification to the player. Blame the RPG genre as a whole.

 

...eh, what?

 

You are doing it wrong, i think. Women appriciate men who are slightly dominant, like taking the lead and showing them that you are really interested. Talking about jungian gratification of the ego might be an interesting ice-breaker but it wouldn't go anywhere on a base level.

 

This thread is still about dating right? I am beginning to be slightly confused by the responses here.

 

Two options:

1- You have completely misunderstood the goal of this thread (and I've seen in your words more than they actually say).

2- You are trying to troll me.

 

...and I've seen in your words more than they actually say

 

That's sound like a great title for a love ballad! You're on right path

 

Maybe it's the over serious tone of the thread. Maybe it's sleep deprivation. But now I am laughing hysterically and I have you to thank, thank you sir.

[CrazyPea]

My point still very much stands that NOT EVERY FILM, BOOK OR GAME HAVE ROMANCES SO WHY SHOULD THIS HAVE.

 

We dont even know what the story will be, and I trust Obsidian's devs enough to let them make game they want, and not to include "Bioawre-romances", my problem is with the crowd who demands that they include romances no matter what.

 

What if they make a story which doesn't support romance at all? should they just throw romances into it just because SOME people demands it even if it doesnt suit the main character?

 

Because this is not a book.

I'm sick of railroaded stories in videogames. If Project Eternity is going to be like that then the developers should warn us. At least I would stop worrying about this game and I'd look somewhere else for a real role playing experience.

Since this is an RPG I want to be in charge of what my character does and feels. I want to be able to decide if a love story fits the character I'm playing or not, exactly like I want to be able to decide if I'm good or bad, chaotic or lawful, altruistic or individualist etc.

 

Let's say that in the beginning of the story my character is happily married. The plt starts and after a painful event my wife gets killed. I want to have the chance to decide if my character finds the strength to move on (and finds another one to love) or keeps mourning his true love forever. This is roleplaying, not some ready-made experience you have to swallow as it is or screw off.

 

You know, I find this hilarious and indicative of this thread: Jarpie actually started off claiming that there are books without romance in because proromancers were saying all good stories had romance in them, now we are at the stage that its reversed and people are arguing that just because some books don't have romance in doesn't mean it can't and that its a game not a book and so shouldn't be compared. This argument truly has come full circle, hilarious really...

 

Let me put an end to this circling around then.

 

CRPGs are not P&P RPGs. They don't have the luxury of a master that can interact with the players in real time and adapt the story taking every action into account. If I'm playing D&D and I say: now my character goes to a tavern and tryes to pick up some chick at the bar. The master can make up something on the spot or tell me: "Just wait until the next session, I'll prepare something". He doesn't need to make me find the love of my life (or even someone to have sex with) at the first try, but as long as I keep up looking for love someway somehow he must make something happen, just like it would happen in real life.

 

As we said CRPGs don't have a master. The developers might try to give the player as much freedom as they can but they obviously can't cover everything. They have to make choices, which have to comply with the available development time. Some examples:

Should the player be able to become a nobleman and rule a country?

Should the player have the chance to play a musical instrument and become a famous bard?

Can we afford to spend time in developing a full blown naval and underwater combat system to let the player explore the oceans?

Do we need a stealth system to let the player be sneaky and avoid combat when he wants to?

Do we need to give the player the chance to play the game as an evil character? (it means at least one more branch for every quest)

Can we afford to spend time writing the senes and the plot of one or more love stories?

 

Obviously each and every feature would enhance player freedom and would add at least one roleplay option. But the developers have a limited amount of time and resources so they have to make choices. Now the question is: what is important and what it's not? To me romances are a great roleplaying tool and are one of the main feature that a true roleplaying adventure should add. They aren't the most time and resource intensive feature to add too. Strongholds, Stealth system, and evil storylines are much more expansive. And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too.

 

The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games.

 

So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there, then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it.

 

Michael Moor****'s Eternal Champion books were definitely not hamstrung by having love stories.

Edited October 19, 2012 by CrazyPea

[jarpie]

The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games.

 

There are pretty much no novels about evil characters. Why then giving the player the chance to perform an evil playthourgh has become one of the core features of nowadays RPGs?

 

There's no serious fantasy novel which has a love story as its main focus. But novels don't need to be about love to have a romantic subplot inside them. Project eternity doesn't need to focus on love, but it would be great if allowed the player to live a love story (if he wanted to obviously, I'm all for player freedom).

 

What about A Song of Ice and Fire? Those have lot of evil characters.

The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games.

 

There are pretty much no novels about evil characters. Why then giving the player the chance to perform an evil playthourgh has become one of the core features of nowadays RPGs?

 

There's no serious fantasy novel which has a love story as its main focus. But novels don't need to be about love to have a romantic subplot inside them. Project eternity doesn't need to focus on love, but it would be great if allowed the player to live a love story (if he wanted to obviously, I'm all for player freedom).

 

Let me quote you: "And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too."

 

So now you're saying there are no fantasy books with romance in major part?

[HereticSaint]

My point still very much stands that NOT EVERY FILM, BOOK OR GAME HAVE ROMANCES SO WHY SHOULD THIS HAVE.

 

We dont even know what the story will be, and I trust Obsidian's devs enough to let them make game they want, and not to include "Bioawre-romances", my problem is with the crowd who demands that they include romances no matter what.

 

What if they make a story which doesn't support romance at all? should they just throw romances into it just because SOME people demands it even if it doesnt suit the main character?

 

Because this is not a book.

I'm sick of railroaded stories in videogames. If Project Eternity is going to be like that then the developers should warn us. At least I would stop worrying about this game and I'd look somewhere else for a real role playing experience.

Since this is an RPG I want to be in charge of what my character does and feels. I want to be able to decide if a love story fits the character I'm playing or not, exactly like I want to be able to decide if I'm good or bad, chaotic or lawful, altruistic or individualist etc.

 

Let's say that in the beginning of the story my character is happily married. The plt starts and after a painful event my wife gets killed. I want to have the chance to decide if my character finds the strength to move on (and finds another one to love) or keeps mourning his true love forever. This is roleplaying, not some ready-made experience you have to swallow as it is or screw off.

 

You know, I find this hilarious and indicative of this thread: Jarpie actually started off claiming that there are books without romance in because proromancers were saying all good stories had romance in them, now we are at the stage that its reversed and people are arguing that just because some books don't have romance in doesn't mean it can't and that its a game not a book and so shouldn't be compared. This argument truly has come full circle, hilarious really...

 

Let me put an end to this circling around then.

 

CRPGs are not P&P RPGs. They don't have the luxury of a master that can interact with the players in real time and adapt the story taking every action into account. If I'm playing D&D and I say: now my character goes to a tavern and tryes to pick up some chick at the bar. The master can make up something on the spot or tell me: "Just wait until the next session, I'll prepare something". He doesn't need to make me find the love of my life (or even someone to have sex with) at the first try, but as long as I keep up looking for love someway somehow he must make something happen, just like it would happen in real life.

 

As we said CRPGs don't have a master. The developers might try to give the player as much freedom as they can but they obviously can't cover everything. They have to make choices, which have to comply with the available development time. Some examples:

Should the player be able to become a nobleman and rule a country?

Should the player have the chance to play a musical instrument and become a famous bard?

Can we afford to spend time in developing a full blown naval and underwater combat system to let the player explore the oceans?

Do we need a stealth system to let the player be sneaky and avoid combat when he wants to?

Do we need to give the player the chance to play the game as an evil character? (it means at least one more branch for every quest)

Can we afford to spend time writing the senes and the plot of one or more love stories?

 

Obviously each and every feature would enhance player freedom and would add at least one roleplay option. But the developers have a limited amount of time and resources so they have to make choices. Now the question is: what is important and what it's not? To me romances are a great roleplaying tool and are one of the main feature that a true roleplaying adventure should add. They aren't the most time and resource intensive feature to add too. Strongholds, Stealth system, and evil storylines are much more expansive. And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too.

 

The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games.

 

So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there and then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it.

 

Here's the biggest issue with an out of party romance;

 

If you do an out of party romance, but still want it to have a deep and engaging story you have to do -a lot- more writing than if you have a character in your party. The reason being is the amount of dialogue required to facilitate interacting with a character in a way that you explain what you've been doing, where you went, learn what they were doing, where they went (Unless they are a stick figure, which again, ruins it). Basically, you can't have your love interest be inanimate while you are gone.

 

While there will be more dialogue written for in party romances, you don't have to explain that you fought a mighty dragon and uncovered vast amounts of wealth and legendary artifacts before your friend double crossed you and you had to kill him. Because they were there the whole time, don't have to do that whole 'catching up' dialogue for every quest option that you can return home during. Of course, the in party companion might not -always- be there, but it can be assumed they will be there a lot.

 

That being said, I personally wouldn't mind if a super flushed out romance with someone who isn't in party happened. But almost all the anti-romance people have at one time or another already complained that a romance eats up, 'valuable resources'.

[CrazyPea]

My point still very much stands that NOT EVERY FILM, BOOK OR GAME HAVE ROMANCES SO WHY SHOULD THIS HAVE.

 

We dont even know what the story will be, and I trust Obsidian's devs enough to let them make game they want, and not to include "Bioawre-romances", my problem is with the crowd who demands that they include romances no matter what.

 

What if they make a story which doesn't support romance at all? should they just throw romances into it just because SOME people demands it even if it doesnt suit the main character?

 

Because this is not a book.

I'm sick of railroaded stories in videogames. If Project Eternity is going to be like that then the developers should warn us. At least I would stop worrying about this game and I'd look somewhere else for a real role playing experience.

Since this is an RPG I want to be in charge of what my character does and feels. I want to be able to decide if a love story fits the character I'm playing or not, exactly like I want to be able to decide if I'm good or bad, chaotic or lawful, altruistic or individualist etc.

 

Let's say that in the beginning of the story my character is happily married. The plt starts and after a painful event my wife gets killed. I want to have the chance to decide if my character finds the strength to move on (and finds another one to love) or keeps mourning his true love forever. This is roleplaying, not some ready-made experience you have to swallow as it is or screw off.

 

You know, I find this hilarious and indicative of this thread: Jarpie actually started off claiming that there are books without romance in because proromancers were saying all good stories had romance in them, now we are at the stage that its reversed and people are arguing that just because some books don't have romance in doesn't mean it can't and that its a game not a book and so shouldn't be compared. This argument truly has come full circle, hilarious really...

 

Let me put an end to this circling around then.

 

CRPGs are not P&P RPGs. They don't have the luxury of a master that can interact with the players in real time and adapt the story taking every action into account. If I'm playing D&D and I say: now my character goes to a tavern and tryes to pick up some chick at the bar. The master can make up something on the spot or tell me: "Just wait until the next session, I'll prepare something". He doesn't need to make me find the love of my life (or even someone to have sex with) at the first try, but as long as I keep up looking for love someway somehow he must make something happen, just like it would happen in real life.

 

As we said CRPGs don't have a master. The developers might try to give the player as much freedom as they can but they obviously can't cover everything. They have to make choices, which have to comply with the available development time. Some examples:

Should the player be able to become a nobleman and rule a country?

Should the player have the chance to play a musical instrument and become a famous bard?

Can we afford to spend time in developing a full blown naval and underwater combat system to let the player explore the oceans?

Do we need a stealth system to let the player be sneaky and avoid combat when he wants to?

Do we need to give the player the chance to play the game as an evil character? (it means at least one more branch for every quest)

Can we afford to spend time writing the senes and the plot of one or more love stories?

 

Obviously each and every feature would enhance player freedom and would add at least one roleplay option. But the developers have a limited amount of time and resources so they have to make choices. Now the question is: what is important and what it's not? To me romances are a great roleplaying tool and are one of the main feature that a true roleplaying adventure should add. They aren't the most time and resource intensive feature to add too. Strongholds, Stealth system, and evil storylines are much more expansive. And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too.

 

The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games.

 

So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there and then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it.

 

Here's the biggest issue with an out of party romance;

 

If you do an out of party romance, but still want it to have a deep and engaging story you have to do -a lot- more writing than if you have a character in your party. The reason being is the amount of dialogue required to facilitate interacting with a character in a way that you explain what you've been doing, where you went, learn what they were doing, where they went (Unless they are a stick figure, which again, ruins it). Basically, you can't have your love interest be inanimate while you are gone.

 

While there will be more dialogue written for in party romances, you don't have to explain that you fought a mighty dragon and uncovered vast amounts of wealth and legendary artifacts before your friend double crossed you and you had to kill him. Because they were there the whole time, don't have to do that whole 'catching up' dialogue for every quest option that you can return home during. Of course, the in party companion might not -always- be there, but it can be assumed they will be there a lot.

 

That being said, I personally wouldn't mind if a super flushed out romance with someone who isn't in party happened. But almost all the anti-romance people have at one time or another already complained that a romance eats up, 'valuable resources'.

 

I see where you are coming from and agree, but it is a compromise that works for both camps.

[Kymriana]

 

So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there and then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it.

 

/sigh

 

You know who that idea appeals to? People who want a romance simply for the sake of a romance. Know who it doesn't appeal to? People who want character growth and development amoung the party that can include rivalry, sword-brother/sister, best friends, platonic loves, or straight up lovers. Having a believable evolution of interactions between a diverse group of people who are traveling for great lengths of time together through various situations that binds them together in equally diverse ways. It just is insane to me that people want character interactive growth in every way except romance... because romance is somehow eeeeeeeeeebil. But two people who have wildly different moral stances can learn to despise each other and one eventually betray the PC and/or leave the party is A-OK, right? There is literally no difference between the two when both are written well in the sense that both are showing a growth and changing of feelings between two characters dependent upon the choices that are made throughout the story. When handled by an experienced and creative writer, like the ones we have at the helm here, both are equal.

 

And I really wish people on here would stop going 'if you want that go play this other game and get out' already. It serves no purpose as these people are here to do exactly what these forums were meant for, which is to offer opinions about what they hope to see in the game. No different than 'I don't want any exits in the dungeon' debates. Yeesh.

[Rahelron]

The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games.

 

There are pretty much no novels about evil characters. Why then giving the player the chance to perform an evil playthourgh has become one of the core features of nowadays RPGs?

 

There's no serious fantasy novel which has a love story as its main focus. But novels don't need to be about love to have a romantic subplot inside them. Project eternity doesn't need to focus on love, but it would be great if allowed the player to live a love story (if he wanted to obviously, I'm all for player freedom).

 

What about A Song of Ice and Fire? Those have lot of evil characters.

The Hobbit didn't have lovestory as far as I remember, neither did Ultima-games what I mentioned before...what they were about...oh yeah, Ultima 5 was about oppression, moral absolutes and corruption of men...and what was Ultima 6 about...racist prejudices and consequenes of the actions the player has taken in previous games.

 

There are pretty much no novels about evil characters. Why then giving the player the chance to perform an evil playthourgh has become one of the core features of nowadays RPGs?

 

There's no serious fantasy novel which has a love story as its main focus. But novels don't need to be about love to have a romantic subplot inside them. Project eternity doesn't need to focus on love, but it would be great if allowed the player to live a love story (if he wanted to obviously, I'm all for player freedom).

 

Let me quote you: "And let's say that pretty much every fantasy story contains a love story too."

 

So now you're saying there are no fantasy books with romance in major part?

 

Yeah, I do. Most of average fantasy books and movies are about some hero that defeats some bad guy. The love story is something more which is almost always included but is not the main focus of the plot. You could ask: how can a book be about two different things? One of the core characteristics of novels is that they can't feature just one storyline, they must have more than one to be full blown novels and not just tales (or stories, I don't know the technical english term). That's why more than one storyline can coexist in the same book. Obviously the same goes for games, which are even longer than books. I hope this makes my reasoning clearer.

Edited October 19, 2012 by Rahelron

[HereticSaint]

So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there and then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it.

 

/sigh

 

You know who that idea appeals to? People who want a romance simply for the sake of a romance. Know who it doesn't appeal to? People who want character growth and development amoung the party that can include rivalry, sword-brother/sister, best friends, platonic loves, or straight up lovers. Having a believable evolution of interactions between a diverse group of people who are traveling for great lengths of time together through various situations that binds them together in equally diverse ways. It just is insane to me that people want character interactive growth in every way except romance... because romance is somehow eeeeeeeeeebil. But two people who have wildly different moral stances can learn to despise each other and one eventually betray the PC and/or leave the party is A-OK, right? There is literally no difference between the two when both are written well in the sense that both are showing a growth and changing of feelings between two characters dependent upon the choices that are made throughout the story. When handled by an experienced and creative writer, like the ones we have at the helm here, both are equal.

 

And I really wish people on here would stop going 'if you want that go play this other game and get out' already. It serves no purpose as these people are here to do exactly what these forums were meant for, which is to offer opinions about what they hope to see in the game. No different than 'I don't want any exits in the dungeon' debates. Yeesh.

 

Basically how I feel but written more eloquently, thank you for that.

[CrazyPea]

So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there and then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it.

 

/sigh

 

You know who that idea appeals to? People who want a romance simply for the sake of a romance. Know who it doesn't appeal to? People who want character growth and development amoung the party that can include rivalry, sword-brother/sister, best friends, platonic loves, or straight up lovers. Having a believable evolution of interactions between a diverse group of people who are traveling for great lengths of time together through various situations that binds them together in equally diverse ways. It just is insane to me that people want character interactive growth in every way except romance... because romance is somehow eeeeeeeeeebil. But two people who have wildly different moral stances can learn to despise each other and one eventually betray the PC and/or leave the party is A-OK, right? There is literally no difference between the two when both are written well in the sense that both are showing a growth and changing of feelings between two characters dependent upon the choices that are made throughout the story. When handled by an experienced and creative writer, like the ones we have at the helm here, both are equal.

 

And I really wish people on here would stop going 'if you want that go play this other game and get out' already. It serves no purpose as these people are here to do exactly what these forums were meant for, which is to offer opinions about what they hope to see in the game. No different than 'I don't want any exits in the dungeon' debates. Yeesh.

 

I don't disagree with you, but again, I'm looking at a compromise that can work for both camps.

[Rahelron]

Here's the biggest issue with an out of party romance;

 

If you do an out of party romance, but still want it to have a deep and engaging story you have to do -a lot- more writing than if you have a character in your party. The reason being is the amount of dialogue required to facilitate interacting with a character in a way that you explain what you've been doing, where you went, learn what they were doing, where they went (Unless they are a stick figure, which again, ruins it). Basically, you can't have your love interest be inanimate while you are gone.

 

While there will be more dialogue written for in party romances, you don't have to explain that you fought a mighty dragon and uncovered vast amounts of wealth and legendary artifacts before your friend double crossed you and you had to kill him. Because they were there the whole time, don't have to do that whole 'catching up' dialogue for every quest option that you can return home during. Of course, the in party companion might not -always- be there, but it can be assumed they will be there a lot.

 

That being said, I personally wouldn't mind if a super flushed out romance with someone who isn't in party happened. But almost all the anti-romance people have at one time or another already complained that a romance eats up, 'valuable resources'.

 

You are making things uglier than they are.

Writing and text implementation are some of the least time consuming tasks that you have to perform to develop a game. As long as you don't have to do full voice overs and cutscenes adding a romance plot (which doesn't even require specific dungeons or locations like a normal quest) is a piece of cake.

[Kymriana]

So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there and then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it.

 

/sigh

 

You know who that idea appeals to? People who want a romance simply for the sake of a romance. Know who it doesn't appeal to? People who want character growth and development amoung the party that can include rivalry, sword-brother/sister, best friends, platonic loves, or straight up lovers. Having a believable evolution of interactions between a diverse group of people who are traveling for great lengths of time together through various situations that binds them together in equally diverse ways. It just is insane to me that people want character interactive growth in every way except romance... because romance is somehow eeeeeeeeeebil. But two people who have wildly different moral stances can learn to despise each other and one eventually betray the PC and/or leave the party is A-OK, right? There is literally no difference between the two when both are written well in the sense that both are showing a growth and changing of feelings between two characters dependent upon the choices that are made throughout the story. When handled by an experienced and creative writer, like the ones we have at the helm here, both are equal.

 

And I really wish people on here would stop going 'if you want that go play this other game and get out' already. It serves no purpose as these people are here to do exactly what these forums were meant for, which is to offer opinions about what they hope to see in the game. No different than 'I don't want any exits in the dungeon' debates. Yeesh.

 

I don't disagree with you, but again, I'm looking at a compromise that can work for both camps.

 

That's the thing... what I have just said IS a compromise in that I have said what people here want: A solid well written story with characters that matter. You can't section off one way people interact, especially when they're with a group of people for a very long time and facing various situations, but say that all of the others are fine. The whole point is that we are all, every single person here, expecting the writers to be up to the task of crafting a powerful engaging story. With realistically understandable characters. I don't want one-dimensional card-board cutouts.... this means I want them to run a realistic gambit of emotions: hate, joy, disgust, envy, revenge, heroism, villainy, love, despair.... It is all there, it all matters.

[HereticSaint]

Here's the biggest issue with an out of party romance;

 

If you do an out of party romance, but still want it to have a deep and engaging story you have to do -a lot- more writing than if you have a character in your party. The reason being is the amount of dialogue required to facilitate interacting with a character in a way that you explain what you've been doing, where you went, learn what they were doing, where they went (Unless they are a stick figure, which again, ruins it). Basically, you can't have your love interest be inanimate while you are gone.

 

While there will be more dialogue written for in party romances, you don't have to explain that you fought a mighty dragon and uncovered vast amounts of wealth and legendary artifacts before your friend double crossed you and you had to kill him. Because they were there the whole time, don't have to do that whole 'catching up' dialogue for every quest option that you can return home during. Of course, the in party companion might not -always- be there, but it can be assumed they will be there a lot.

 

That being said, I personally wouldn't mind if a super flushed out romance with someone who isn't in party happened. But almost all the anti-romance people have at one time or another already complained that a romance eats up, 'valuable resources'.

 

You are making things uglier than they are.

Writing and text implementation are some of the least time consuming tasks that you have to perform to develop a game. As long as you don't have to do full voice overs and cutscenes adding a romance plot (which doesn't even require specific dungeons or locations like a normal quest) is a piece of cake.

 

Whether this is true or not, it isn't me you need to convince. There are at least some people from the anti-romance camp who think creating romances, 'takes an unreasonable amount of resources' more or less.

Edited October 19, 2012 by HereticSaint

[jarpie]

Here's the biggest issue with an out of party romance;

 

If you do an out of party romance, but still want it to have a deep and engaging story you have to do -a lot- more writing than if you have a character in your party. The reason being is the amount of dialogue required to facilitate interacting with a character in a way that you explain what you've been doing, where you went, learn what they were doing, where they went (Unless they are a stick figure, which again, ruins it). Basically, you can't have your love interest be inanimate while you are gone.

 

While there will be more dialogue written for in party romances, you don't have to explain that you fought a mighty dragon and uncovered vast amounts of wealth and legendary artifacts before your friend double crossed you and you had to kill him. Because they were there the whole time, don't have to do that whole 'catching up' dialogue for every quest option that you can return home during. Of course, the in party companion might not -always- be there, but it can be assumed they will be there a lot.

 

That being said, I personally wouldn't mind if a super flushed out romance with someone who isn't in party happened. But almost all the anti-romance people have at one time or another already complained that a romance eats up, 'valuable resources'.

 

You are making things uglier than they are.

Writing and text implementation are some of the least time consuming tasks that you have to perform to develop a game. As long as you don't have to do full voice overs and cutscenes adding a romance plot (which doesn't even require specific dungeons or locations like a normal quest) is a piece of cake.

 

Feargus said that it takes Avellone to write a single companion 2-3 months, and since there are 8 companions, and Ziest will probably half of them, it takes them 8-12 months to write them, not to mention the rest of the dialogue which isn't for companions, lore, the story, descriptions etc. and how that exactly wouldn't take lot of time?

[Ieo]

That's the thing... what I have just said IS a compromise in that I have said what people here want: A solid well written story with characters that matter. You can't section off one way people interact, especially when they're with a group of people for a very long time and facing various situations, but say that all of the others are fine. The whole point is that we are all, every single person here, expecting the writers to be up to the task of crafting a powerful engaging story. With realistically understandable characters. I don't want one-dimensional card-board cutouts.... this means I want them to run a realistic gambit of emotions: hate, joy, disgust, envy, revenge, heroism, villainy, love, despair.... It is all there, it all matters.

 

It does, which is why my proposed mechanical solution for perfectly parallel and exclusive "Y" paths covers everything.

 

Main branch: get-to-know-you

Left branch: romance

Right branch: bromance

 

Huzzah! No one ever gets more content than the other and both paths are equally deep, meaningful, and immersive.

 

Wait, this thing is still going, huh. ... I'll go eat breakfast now.

[HereticSaint]

That's the thing... what I have just said IS a compromise in that I have said what people here want: A solid well written story with characters that matter. You can't section off one way people interact, especially when they're with a group of people for a very long time and facing various situations, but say that all of the others are fine. The whole point is that we are all, every single person here, expecting the writers to be up to the task of crafting a powerful engaging story. With realistically understandable characters. I don't want one-dimensional card-board cutouts.... this means I want them to run a realistic gambit of emotions: hate, joy, disgust, envy, revenge, heroism, villainy, love, despair.... It is all there, it all matters.

 

It does, which is why my proposed mechanical solution for perfectly parallel and exclusive "Y" paths covers everything.

 

Main branch: get-to-know-you

Left branch: romance

Right branch: bromance

 

Huzzah! No one ever gets more content than the other and both paths are equally deep, meaningful, and immersive.

 

Wait, this thing is still going, huh. ... I'll go eat breakfast now.

 

I have absolutely no issue with this. Some people think this is somehow impossible with the amount of resources and time they have though.

[CrazyPea]

So what? There are plenty of other games and books that did feature a love story or romance option and they are great too. If option is there and then it's your choice whether to go down that route. But you don't have to if you don't want to. I really do like Shevek's ideas in post #588, as that seems the best compromise between both camps - a romance that occurs outside of the party, one that is possibly already in existance at the beginning of the game - IF YOU select it.

 

/sigh

 

You know who that idea appeals to? People who want a romance simply for the sake of a romance. Know who it doesn't appeal to? People who want character growth and development amoung the party that can include rivalry, sword-brother/sister, best friends, platonic loves, or straight up lovers. Having a believable evolution of interactions between a diverse group of people who are traveling for great lengths of time together through various situations that binds them together in equally diverse ways. It just is insane to me that people want character interactive growth in every way except romance... because romance is somehow eeeeeeeeeebil. But two people who have wildly different moral stances can learn to despise each other and one eventually betray the PC and/or leave the party is A-OK, right? There is literally no difference between the two when both are written well in the sense that both are showing a growth and changing of feelings between two characters dependent upon the choices that are made throughout the story. When handled by an experienced and creative writer, like the ones we have at the helm here, both are equal.

 

And I really wish people on here would stop going 'if you want that go play this other game and get out' already. It serves no purpose as these people are here to do exactly what these forums were meant for, which is to offer opinions about what they hope to see in the game. No different than 'I don't want any exits in the dungeon' debates. Yeesh.

 

I don't disagree with you, but again, I'm looking at a compromise that can work for both camps.

 

That's the thing... what I have just said IS a compromise in that I have said what people here want: A solid well written story with characters that matter. You can't section off one way people interact, especially when they're with a group of people for a very long time and facing various situations, but say that all of the others are fine. The whole point is that we are all, every single person here, expecting the writers to be up to the task of crafting a powerful engaging story. With realistically understandable characters. I don't want one-dimensional card-board cutouts.... this means I want them to run a realistic gambit of emotions: hate, joy, disgust, envy, revenge, heroism, villainy, love, despair.... It is all there, it all matters.

 

However, a character outside of the party does not have to be one dimentsional, does it? How does spouse feel while player goes off to adventure? Would they up and leave? Get Jealous? Especially if spouse has a rival, who is in the adventuring party. What if they commit suicide from neglect? What if big bad finds out? Would he kill spouse outright or try to convert spouse and use them against the player in someway? would the spouse have an affair with big bad, just to get revenge on the player? All of these are plausible, realistic and if done right can add real emotion and depth. So much more than the 'Hi honey, I'm home. Can you cook me something eat' of SKyrim.

 

Now, I'm not saying I wouldn't prefer your compromise, but I do think you need to have another look at the possiblities of a relationship outside of the party.

Edited October 19, 2012 by CrazyPea

[Ieo]

It does, which is why my proposed mechanical solution for perfectly parallel and exclusive "Y" paths covers everything.

 

Main branch: get-to-know-you

Left branch: romance

Right branch: bromance

 

Huzzah! No one ever gets more content than the other and both paths are equally deep, meaningful, and immersive.

 

Wait, this thing is still going, huh. ... I'll go eat breakfast now.

 

I have absolutely no issue with this. Some people think this is somehow impossible with the amount of resources and time they have though.

 

There is definitely a resource limitation (the 2-3 months per companion bit), which is why fully parallel paths probably aren't possible.

 

If we're looking at a "Y" implementation, then that means the main trunk of content at the bottom there should take up the majority of a companion's writing--like over 70% or whatever--and either of the later branches less since the work would be doubled at that particular point.