Relationship/Romance Thread IV

[Osvir]

Well, looking at Cadegund, Aloth, Forton, Edair and Sagani brings up many questions of "What are their relationships with another?" as well as how do we feel about them? Many seem to want to romance Sagani as an example, could the romantic options be specified onto her as a character, and the rest are simply not interested or interesting option for it.

 

I'm 24 years old soo... I can totally see Edair (30~?) being a bro and mentor, and Forton (40~?) being a bro and spiritual fluff. Cadegund (25+) seems like a strong independent confident straight-backed woman with lots of heart and smiles as an eample, a great mentor and a great sister, a Guardian Mother. Aloth seems genuinely mysterious, but he also looks like he could be a brat (18-20 years old). Sagani feels like she is mysterious but in a rogue-like way, elusive, sneaky and cold because of past life experiences.

 

From my perspective all of them are good characters, save Aloth who is just mysterious.

 

We're talking about how Romances are bad and good that it has to be done good, in P:E's case we have to bring out some actors and examples on what is good Romance/Friendship/Relationship? How do you see or imagine the Companions released being? E.g., how do you feel the Companions are represented? Can you speculate or guess what kind of emotion they have right now in the picture and deduce what kind of personality they could have?

 

Some beautiful art:

Didn't find one with Sagani included so:

 

Who is this chick?

 

EDIT: Who are these people?

Edited November 11, 2012 by Osvir

[Jojobobo]

Thinking about it a bit more, if Obsidian really wanted to play with fire they could allow the character to develop abusive relationships (I'm thinking verbally, not physically) with others or even develop a romantic relationship with someone just to have sex with them and then sack them off. The trouble is people seem to think if these things are options in games then the game itself is advocating it as a lifestyle choice, which it simply is not - people are often mordibly curious (as in interested, but not wishing or desiring to mimic this behaviour) about these choices for exactly the same reasons as people are interested in watching a gory horror film or researching a particularly inhumane historical government. V:tM~B allowed the player to create a ghoul (essentially someone who becomes slavishly enamoured with the PC because the are - in a way - drugging them to feel that way) who you could abuse verbally and kill any time you chose, they also allowed for torture at a few moments in the game (but not with a character you were romantically involved with) so it's not like there is no prior examples of content like this being in a game. It depends how far down the rabit hole of mature themes the dev team want to go. I for one would like them to reach the bottom.

 

EDIT: Just thought I'd mention being abusive should not be without consequences, like a companion eventually getting sick of it and trying to kill the PC.

Edited November 11, 2012 by Jojobobo

[Mandragore]

Reading over these threads I'm still at a loss as to what the issue is here, if the plot calls for romance, then it should have romance.

 

The thing is, I can't think of a single role-playing game were the romance sub-plots were important to the over-all plot.

 

As for sex, its supposed to be a mature game involving human, presumably adult protagonists. No one is saying it should be explicit or graphic, but seeing as sex and sexual attraction are part of human nature, it should at least be present in some form. Personally,I would prefer to play a character with depth, not some sexless, two-dimensional meat robot.

 

What if a character is celibate? Maybe he believes that by denying the flesh and allowing himself to focus on the spiritual, his magic is more powerful.

 

Or maybe, the said character believes in no sex before marriage - and even if you romance them, they'll be no love-making until you tie the knot (which for whatever reason can't happen.

 

Or maybe, just like some people in real life (see: asexuality) they don't experience sexual attraction.

Maybe, like various characters in Song of Ice and Fire, a character is a child protagonist. Personally, I'd love an RPG to have a child party member.

 

There are countless ways a character can be deep, without needing to resort to sex.

 

The examples you're bringing up are pretty out there. I think most of us aren't really interested playing an pre-pubescent asexual christian fundamentalist ascetic.

 

I am aware that romantic sub-plots are usually irrelevant to the main story; what I'm saying is that I would rather have one or two well fleshed out relationships that tie into the main plot and its dialogue and events than a ton of poorly developed, peripheral interactions that are just thrown in to ensure that every preference is being catered to. I think gay/straight options would be fine, not to mention that at this point people probably expect it, but I don't think you need much more than that. I'm not trying to advocate turning the game into some weaboo dating sim, I just think that romance/sexuality should be present in some form.

 

You say "resort to sex" as though romance and sexuality are something abnormal or out of the ordinary, to the contrary. Fantasy literature is rife with examples, whether they're as muted and tasteful as Aragorn and Arwen in LotR or as raunchy as, well, pretty much everything in A Song of Ice and Fire.

[anubite]

I think romances are expensive to develop well. You just can't slap one together and call it a day.

 

This is inherently what is wrong with romances. Not everyone wants them. And since they are so time consuming to create, they reduce the possible complexity of a companion's relationship. You're either romancing them, or you're not - this is what it boils down to, usually. And this lack of complexity tends to hurt the game, even if some players rather enjoy romance.

 

You can't just say to non-romancers, "Just don't romance." Because it usually means they're missing a big chunk of dialogue or interactivity as a result. This is usually fine - choices SHOULD often bring us down paths which have exclusive content, otherwise, there's little point to a choice you make, but in the case of romances, they are such deep and expensive choices, that they reduce the number of choices and outcomes that would otherwise exist, that would otherwise appeal to all players of the game.

 

If we can mod this game.

If this game is good.

Then people will make romance mods.

This goes without saying.

Everybody will win if Obsidian just focuses on making a good game and romancers just deal with waiting a few months after release before they can wank off to some elf.

Edited November 11, 2012 by anubite

[Heresiarch]

You can't just say to non-romancers, "Just don't romance." Because it usually means they're missing a big chunk of dialogue or interactivity as a result. This is usually fine - choices SHOULD often bring us down paths which have exclusive content, otherwise, there's little point to a choice you make, but in the case of romances, they are such deep and expensive choices, that they reduce the number of choices and outcomes that would otherwise exist, that would otherwise appeal to all players of the game.

 

If we can mod this game.

If this game is good.

Then people will make romance mods.

This goes without saying.

Everybody will win if Obsidian just focuses on making a good game and romancers just deal with waiting a few months after release before they can wank off to some elf.

I never choose "evil" dialogue options. Mostly because they are stupid, but also I'm just a real nice and charming kinda guy. Bad option are about a third of total content, right?

 

I say we cut it out in favour of something everyone, including me, can enjoy. Exploding helicopters, for instance. And let the modders add the evil paths for enthusiasts.

 

 

Having no romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing an emotionless robot.

[Monte Carlo]

Having no romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing an emotionless robot

 

Conversely, having romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing a squee-laden emo sap.

[kenup]

I never choose "evil" dialogue options. Mostly because they are stupid, but also I'm just a real nice and charming kinda guy. Bad option are about a third of total content, right?

 

I say we cut it out in favour of something everyone, including me, can enjoy. Exploding helicopters, for instance. And let the modders add the evil paths for enthusiasts.

 

 

Having no romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing an emotionless robot.

Where "good" and "evil" choices can define and diversify the character, the plot and the story, romance minigames don't add anything beyond those dialogue sessions and a cutscene or two. They don't serve the plot, other than what goes on in your head, and they are too sappy to not feel artificial.

[Sacred_Path]

I think romances are expensive to develop well. You just can't slap one together and call it a day.

 

Reminds me of that one time where I romanced Arie. I just kept on doing it to see exactly how masochistic I am.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Where "good" and "evil" choices can define and diversify the character, the plot and the story, romance minigames don't add anything beyond those dialogue sessions and a cutscene or two. They don't serve the plot, other than what goes on in your head, and they are too sappy to not feel artificial.

 

How the PC develops relationships with NPCs and what relationships they develop can define and diversify the character as well. Character interaction is just as much part of the story as combat or quest outcomes are.

[Sylvanpyxie]

in the case of romances, they are such deep and expensive choices

But they don't have to be.

 

I posted this earlier, and maybe I didn't get the point across well enough, but romances shouldn't need their own dominant line of dialogue. They shouldn't need never-ending topics like "What's your sexual history?" and "Do you like my shoes?". It's inconsequential nonsense that gives nothing to the relationship between the Player and the NPC. It's just uninspired filler, giving people the illusion of emotional engagement and actually offering nothing to the grander scheme of character design.

 

The greatest, heck the *only* romances that I've ever enjoyed have been seamlessly integrated into the Friendship dialogue that was already available. They didn't have nonsense topics of conversation discussing how many women(or men) my Love Interest had been with in the past or if it annoyed/disgusted my Character, and by Tyr's bloody justice, they didn't need it. The greatest topics of discussion that offer the deeper insight, understanding and emotional connection to an NPC are those available to everyone. Those topics that are the very core of their character. The topics that help us to accept, understand and love the characters that we're traveling with. Things that are so personal, so vital to them that they're admitting vulnerability just by speaking of them.

 

Am I saying that you need to eliminate all Romantic Dialogue? Of course i'm not. I'm saying that it isn't necessary for romances to become this huge dominant force in character interactions. It doesn't need to be the focus of every conversation that you have, because at the end of the day it doesn't matter if a Character has admitted undying love to you when he's discussing the eternal torments that he's endured in the past. It isn't going to make it any easier for him if you laugh it all off with a charming flirtatious distraction. It isn't going to help him if you offer him hugs and kisses. Nothing is going to make him feel any less vulnerable when he's offering you his soul on a plate.

 

Romance shouldn't be this huge, deep, never-ending thing that overbears a character. Flirting should be an option, one of many options through-out the course of character interaction. I'm not saying it has to be inconsequential, i'm not saying it has to be ignored, i'm saying that it doesn't need to be this massive deal that dominants all topics of conversation and all character interaction available to a Player.

 

As I said earlier: Obviously people are going to want romances to register in some manner, and they should - Just like every other relationship available between Player and NPC. Whether it's Rivalry, Friendship or Romance it will require a few of it's own unique dialogues, even a unique topic to discuss what you're both feeling and possibly what should be done, but just because it needs to be recognised does *not* mean it needs to be a dominant force in character interaction.

 

It's fine if you don't agree. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But I don't believe that romances should be any more deep, or expensive, than other forms of Relationship.

Edited November 11, 2012 by Sylvanpyxie

[Heresiarch]

I never choose "evil" dialogue options. Mostly because they are stupid, but also I'm just a real nice and charming kinda guy. Bad option are about a third of total content, right?

 

I say we cut it out in favour of something everyone, including me, can enjoy. Exploding helicopters, for instance. And let the modders add the evil paths for enthusiasts.

 

 

Having no romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing an emotionless robot.

Where "good" and "evil" choices can define and diversify the character, the plot and the story, romance minigames don't add anything beyond those dialogue sessions and a cutscene or two. They don't serve the plot, other than what goes on in your head, and they are too sappy to not feel artificial.

 

If romance is a minigame, you have to hit the dev on the head with something hard, because he is doing it wrong. A romance should be deep and involving, it is about dialogue, but it shouldn't be simply romance-specific dialogue, but influence different part of the game as well. Think Jade Empire, where you could change the outlook of your companion, if you have a deep emotional link with them. If romance is done in the way that has nothing to do with characterising the protagonist it shouldn't even be there. It's a role-play game, not a dating sim.

 

 

 

 

Having no romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing an emotionless robot

Conversely, having romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing a squee-laden emo sap.

Right. If I say, "The sky is blue" you can't just answer with, "Conversely, the sky is ultraviolet". If you state something that contradicts common sense, you have to back it up with arguments. It can't be you have known so many people who never romanced anyone, that you have started to believe that it is the natural way to go.

Edited November 11, 2012 by Heresiarch

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

It's fine if you don't agree. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But I don't believe that romances should be any more deep, or expensive, than other forms of Relationship.

 

I agree with your post quite a bit but wanted to reply to this line in particular.

 

Every relationship should be pretty deep, and it can be reasonably accomplished in PE(since it will not have animated cut-scenes for conversations or voice much of them). I don't want to see any relationship with a character get an outrageous amount of attention compared to other types of relationships. I also don't want to see a type of relationship not be implemented simply because of the perception that it takes huge amounts of resources or because some believe that others will play them in a way that they don't like. On the other hand, I don't want to see a type of relationship included simply because people keep begging for them or to fill a quota.

 

I want to see types of relationships included if the writers feel it would fit the character well, can contribute to the story, and add PC options.

 

 

If romance is done in the way that has nothing to do with characterising the protagonist it shouldn't even be there.

 

 

Absolutely. Every available relationship and dialogue option should be included with the intent to increase the amount of options that the PC has.

Edited November 11, 2012 by KaineParker

[Osvir]

I think this fits into some of the ideas talked about in this thread:

Emotional Impact

 

 

(since it will not have animated cut-scenes for conversations or voice much of them).

 

We could still get so much depth with facial expression, as a supplement to the voice-overs, perhaps even a kissing scene, holding hands, shouting at each other, panicing, laughing etc. etc. 1 still picture says more than 1000 words...?:

Picture One and Picture Two

Edited November 11, 2012 by Osvir

[BasaltineBadger]

I never choose "evil" dialogue options. Mostly because they are stupid, but also I'm just a real nice and charming kinda guy. Bad option are about a third of total content, right?

 

I say we cut it out in favour of something everyone, including me, can enjoy. Exploding helicopters, for instance. And let the modders add the evil paths for enthusiasts.

 

 

Having no romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing an emotionless robot.

Where "good" and "evil" choices can define and diversify the character, the plot and the story, romance minigames don't add anything beyond those dialogue sessions and a cutscene or two. They don't serve the plot, other than what goes on in your head, and they are too sappy to not feel artificial.

 

Romances are as much a minigame as any other quest and piece of dialogue. Because they are just dialogues and quests. The only difference is theme. If we use your logic to cut romances we should also cut most of the subquests because killing Firkraag didn't have anything to do with BG's main plot. Neither did the troubles in Trademeet. The main plot doesn't change if you do them or not. Also romances in MoTB didn't feel sappy so unless you are suggesting Obsidian will hire Gaider to write them this argument is invalid.

Edited November 12, 2012 by BasaltineBadger

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Also romances in MoTB didn't feel sappy so unless you are suggesting Obsidian will hire Gaider to write them this argument is invalid.

 

I agreed with the first part of this statement, then screamed in horror at the thought of Gaider(current work) writing characters in PE.

[BetrayTheWorld]

I say we cut it out in favour of something everyone, including me, can enjoy. And let the modders add the evil paths for enthusiasts.

 

Having no romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing an emotionless robot.

 

So does having no evil/morally ambiguous options. Having no option to do anything bad detracts from the experience of doing something good, in my opinion.

 

And I feel like people are rehashing arguments that my previous post addresses. My previous post takes care of everyone on every side of this argument...bah, I'll just quote myself.

 

I've seen a lot of issues where threads like this turned out poorly, so I likely won't be a regular poster in the thread, but I'll weigh in on the topic at least once.

 

I am of the opinion that romance options should be included in the game. Since this is supposed to be created with mature themes, and sex is a significant part of romantic relationships between adults, sex should probably be a part of that(visual or otherwise). I'd recommend a toggle-able option to turn off any racy scenes, for those who'd rather not have them.

 

That being said, there should be no mechanical benefits to pursuing a romance with someone in the game. This allows the no-romance people to simply not pursue it, and lose nothing except the RP that they say they don't enjoy anyhow. On the other hand, it satisfies the other side who would like a more complete role-playing experience, where relationships and emotions are part of their character's development.

 

Everyone wins in this scenario, and it frees us up to talk about other issues that are more difficult to resolve.

 

There. Now agree with me and stop posting in this thread.

[Heresiarch]

I say we cut it out in favour of something everyone, including me, can enjoy. And let the modders add the evil paths for enthusiasts.

 

Having no romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing an emotionless robot.

 

So does having no evil/morally ambiguous options. Having no option to do anything bad detracts from the experience of doing something good, in my opinion.

 

You might not believe me, but that's exactly my point. When I suggested removing the evil options I was being obviously sarcastic. Or so I thought.

 

But yes, having no romance is exactly like having no moral choices, because it takes away from the experience. Hence, you can't simply leave this stuff to modders. Nude skins is what they are good at, not romance.

[Lurky]

-snip-

 

The problem is, romantic love tends to have a stage at the beginning that is the infatuation phase. And infatuation, by definition, dominates and overbears the behaviour of people. That is a problem for the character, indeed, for the reasons you've eloquently explained before.

 

Infatuation is a problem for character interactions, and the problem is that many people* still associate the romances with this phase. Maybe it's because of media influence and its idealized romances. Maybe it's just that some people want to get the high of infuatuation that romantic love often causes. Either way, there's this expectation a lot of people have that romances have to give this rush of feelings to be true romances, and having romances that don't do that might not be what people want.

 

The only way to avoid this would be to have a romance that skips this stage. It can be done, certainly. You could implement a romance that is so subtle and low-key that could be considered to be still the flirting stage. Or write a character who is jaded enough that infatuation doesn't come to them as easily as when they were young. Or you could write a character with certain traits so significative that they overshadow the weight a romance/friendship relationship with them would have, preventing infatuation. There's several ways to handle this, and they can probably be executed reasonably well, even if many writers struggle with them (the last type of character especially: it doesn't mean that the characters have to be one-note, or that the traits have to be traumatic psychological issues you have to help them overcome!). If the writers can pull it off, maybe Ieo's suggestion can be done properly. This would be the ideal for all people, I think.

 

But then again, I'm not really sure it can be pulled off properly. To have a romance that feels special (let's be honest, that's what many people want), you want it to have a unique impact on the characters. In order to make the romance and non-romance routes fair, you cannot really allow that to happen. How do you achieve both at the same time? I don't know.

 

 

 

*I know that "many people" is vague, but if you want proof, trawl through the old threads. Read some of the suggestions people have made for the romances, and notice how many of them override character behavior, such as asking for jealous confrontations and stuff like that. Notice how many of them describe romances as this moving and beautiful force that deeply affected them and the NPCs, and how deep and immersive it was. The expectations I talk about do exist.

Edited November 12, 2012 by Lurky

[Mandragore]

Saying that romance should be left out because its too big an expense for something that some people don't like is a bad argument. The same thing could be said about just about any aspect of a game. What about violence? Gore effects are expensive after all, and some people are squeamish. Its also operating under the assumption, not just that romance options are expensive, but that they are PROHIBITIVELY expensive and that other aspects of the game will suffer from their inclusion. There is absolutely nothing to base this on.

 

There will always be aspects of any game that don't appeal to certain people. Either you like them, you like the rest of the game enough to ignore them or you hate them so much you don't buy the game. No game can please everyone.

Edited November 12, 2012 by Mandragore

[Pshaw]

Minor point that I've left out in the posts in the previous threads.

 

I find that romances tend to help the replay value of the game for me. Granted this is because I enjoy them and I want to play through them all first hand. If you don't enjoy them I don't expect you to feel the same. That said they're one the only dialogue options you can (usually) only complete 1 of per playthrough. If everything is limited to bro-mance and friendships I can generally knock out all of the dialogue tress in 1 maybe 2 playthroughs to my content. However if I'm still missing out on romance dialogue I will replay and complete romances.

 

Now I don't think romances should be the sole driving force behind replay value of a game. There should be many reasons to replay this game and from the sound of it even without romances there will be. Still having a new romance tree of dialogue to see for the first time with every playthough does add to the value, at least in my case.

Edited November 12, 2012 by Pshaw

[Ralewyn]

Oh, something just occurred to me.

Having someone to come back to was always a motivator for me in these games. Gave a warm fuzzy feeling in most cases. I trust Obsidian's writing staff to be able to write a proper, organic romance that isn't annoying. I'm playing through Planescape: Torment for the first time right now, and though I suppose it's not the mechanically-defined romance we're used to in the modern RPG I'm finding a lot of the interactions with Annah hilarious. Granted, this is partially because since I know it has no mechanical basis I know it's no big deal that she's being catty when I'm talking to Fall-From-Grace or whoever else. This is the same reason Morte is such a fun character, because you can casually give him **** and you don't feel like you screwed up when his influence meter declines. So I guess on that subject more options to casually mess with your party members without repercussion because they can take a damn joke would be appreciated.

 

One thing I'm absolutely against however, in any capacity, is the Bioware Sex Scene. You know the deal--fade in--ass--fade out--fade in--shoulder--fade out. It's quite possibly one of the most awkward and unpleasant things to watch in games today and it needs to stop. Please just fade to black or something. These scenes are not rewarding at all nor are they necessary in any capacity. They're really, really unpleasant. This would be fine if it was just something Bioware did but I saw it a while back in one of the Assassin's Creed and I said "Okay no this is becoming a problem."

[BetrayTheWorld]

I say we cut it out in favour of something everyone, including me, can enjoy. And let the modders add the evil paths for enthusiasts.

 

Having no romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing an emotionless robot.

 

So does having no evil/morally ambiguous options. Having no option to do anything bad detracts from the experience of doing something good, in my opinion.

 

You might not believe me, but that's exactly my point. When I suggested removing the evil options I was being obviously sarcastic. Or so I thought.

 

But yes, having no romance is exactly like having no moral choices, because it takes away from the experience. Hence, you can't simply leave this stuff to modders. Nude skins is what they are good at, not romance.

 

Oh, alright. We're in complete agreement on this topic, then. I admit that the thought that you were being sarcastic -did- cross my mind, but sarcasm is a lost art when it comes to conveying it via text.

 

Unless, of course you...

 

/sarcasm

[BruceVC]

I say we cut it out in favour of something everyone, including me, can enjoy. And let the modders add the evil paths for enthusiasts.

 

Having no romance feels artificial. Unless you're playing an emotionless robot.

 

So does having no evil/morally ambiguous options. Having no option to do anything bad detracts from the experience of doing something good, in my opinion.

 

You might not believe me, but that's exactly my point. When I suggested removing the evil options I was being obviously sarcastic. Or so I thought.

 

But yes, having no romance is exactly like having no moral choices, because it takes away from the experience. Hence, you can't simply leave this stuff to modders. Nude skins is what they are good at, not romance.

 

I like the argument that not having Romance\Sex in the game makes your character feel like an emotionless robot, and we aren't playing a Sci-Fi RPG so what would be a the point of that?

 

Nice one

[Monte Carlo]

But yes, having no romance is exactly like having no moral choices, because it takes away from the experience.

 

 

* sigh * Yes, having no bananas is exactly like having no moral choices, because it takes away from the experience.

 

Re-read your post, forensically, and try to tease out a few micrograms of sense. No? Me neither.

 

Example:

 

OMG. That building is burning. I can only save either (a) the family sleeping upstairs or (b) the prisoner locked in the cellar who's as evil as sin. But, the prisoner has vital information that might allow me to save more lives. But I can only save one...

 

Now, it's not the greatest example. But at least there's a moral choice and there's no romance. Da-daaaa.

 

As for "it takes away from the experience..."

 

Two things: (1) Please figure out the romance ratio of the precursor titles to P:E. 5%? If I'm being generous. (2) The experience? Waaaa! Don't break my immersion!!! Waaaa!!!

 

If you like dating sims then come out and say it, don't dress it up in terms of moral choices and immersion. Feh.

[BruceVC]

But yes, having no romance is exactly like having no moral choices, because it takes away from the experience.

 

 

* sigh * Yes, having no bananas is exactly like having no moral choices, because it takes away from the experience.

 

Re-read your post, forensically, and try to tease out a few micrograms of sense. No? Me neither.

 

Example:

 

OMG. That building is burning. I can only save either (a) the family sleeping upstairs or (b) the prisoner locked in the cellar who's as evil as sin. But, the prisoner has vital information that might allow me to save more lives. But I can only save one...

 

Now, it's not the greatest example. But at least there's a moral choice and there's no romance. Da-daaaa.

 

As for "it takes away from the experience..."

 

Two things: (1) Please figure out the romance ratio of the precursor titles to P:E. 5%? If I'm being generous. (2) The experience? Waaaa! Don't break my immersion!!! Waaaa!!!

 

If you like dating sims then come out and say it, don't dress it up in terms of moral choices and immersion. Feh.

 

But Monte you are missing the obvious correlation with your analogy and Romance\Sex. Allow me to elaborate

 

OMG. That building is burning. I can only save either (a) the family sleeping upstairs or (b) the prisoner locked in the cellar who's as evil as sin. But, the prisoner has vital information that might allow me to save more lives. But I can only save one..."

 

However the prisoner is a hot female Dark Elf in bikini chainmail armour who has promised you sordid sexual fantasies if you free her....

And the family aren't attractive at all...who do you save?

 

So there can be links between Romance\Sex and moral choices?

 

Edited November 12, 2012 by BruceVC