Relationship/Romance Thread IV

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

1. No of course not. Money, time and energy come from nowhere and you don't have to sacrifice anything to implement anything.

2. Interesting romance? What is that supposed to mean? How a story about getting into someones panties can be called interesting?

3. Anything is better than seeing characters destroyed by lame & immature lines to justify the need of sex in the dungeon before last boss. Or even pressing a wrong number and finding someone's **** in your charters ass, is also an attractive option.

4. HAHAHA.

 

 

1. Strawman. Just because content A is included in a game, content B does not necessarily deteriorate was the point I made. I did not state that zots come from nowhere or that implementation of anything is resource free.

2. Did you mean "How can a story about getting into someone's panties be called interesting?"? Grammatical abortion besides, Romance =/= sex anymore than Friendship =/= fistbump or Rivalry =/= heated debate.

3. Where did you get this from? Sex was not mentioned in my entire post.

4. You still no evidence to support your statements. You haven't even argued against the points I made.

 

1. Google the meaning of statistical significance. Is this the IQ of a romance fan?

2. Nobody can draw conclusions from incomplete data, because it's meaningless.

3. I have a hard time believing that they donated at all, but that's irrelevant as I said that "I HAVE A FEELING".

4. So you need evidence to have feelings?

 

1. I was not arguing that the statistics were significant, I was arguing against your assumptions and conclusion. Were you arguing against a strawman, or is your English just awful?

2.Yet you have. You have also drawn a conclusion from no data. You can't prove that "most of the people have gave up on these threads and topics long ago". Silent Majority arguments fail because they are improvable.

3.That is making a Hypothesis. Do I need to explain what a "Hypothesis" is?

4. If you make a Hypothesis, then yes you do.

 

1. No? Porn hub still has a hentai section IIRC and "The English Patient" or "Titanic" can be downloaded any time. Problem solved.

2. Am I supposed to care why you want **** pixels?

3. Dude, there are hot lines that give counseling for free or you can share your problem with a doctor and he will help you. Church or actually finding a woman/man could also be an alternative. You have to remember that if you spend time in romance thread you will never find one!'

4. I thought I escaped such poster when I left gamespot. Guess not.

 

1. Strawman, again. This does not address your baseless assumption that everyone who wants romance play RPGs as self-inserts.

2. I don't. I don't exist in the game. I don't play a self-insert. Strawman.

3. You really missed the entire point, didn't you? Do you actually know what a self-insert is? Strawman.

4. Incoherent nonsense that has no bearing on the topic.

 

Please tell me that English is not your native language. FFS, take a remedial course or stay the **** away from English forums.

Edited November 24, 2012 by KaineParker

[Sacred_Path]

Do promancers think your statistics should matter in romances? Should your charisma and conversational skills be checked, or should your vile little gnome get some romance shoved in his face just because, as per usual?

 

You can tell I'm bored.

[l3loodangel]

1. Strawman. Just because content A is included in a game, content B does not necessarily deteriorate was the point I made. I did not state that zots come from nowhere or that implementation of anything is resource free.

2. Did you mean "How can a story about getting into someone's panties be called interesting?"? Grammatical abortion besides, Romance =/= sex anymore than Friendship =/= fistbump or Rivalry =/= heated debate.

3. Where did you get this from? Sex was not mentioned in my entire post.

4. You still no evidence to support your statements. You haven't even argued against the points I made.

 

1. Logic. I feel like speaking to not very bright child. Obsidian has a limited budget, time and manpower that will be spent of PE. If you really believe that adding features won't reduce amount, quality or quantity of other features I pity you. Time spent = quality.

2. You fail to dodge check.

3. Romances without sex? Then they are friendship.

4. Going Iron man in debates show stupidity rather than stamina.

 

 

1. I was not arguing that the statistics were significant, I was arguing against your assumptions and conclusion. Were you arguing against a strawman, or is your English just awful?

2.Yet you have. You have also drawn a conclusion from no data. You can't prove that "most of the people have gave up on these threads and topics long ago". Silent Majority arguments fail because they are improvable.

3.That is making a Hypothesis. Do I need to explain what a "Hypothesis" is?

4. If you make a Hypothesis, then yes you do.

 

1. I am not sure what you are arguing at all, or why?

2. I can. Previous polls had more voters, ergo in this poll less people voted. If participation levels fall with passing time it means that participation level is decreasing. DUH?

3. Hypothesis is a scientific term prior to study. I am expressing my gut feeling.

4. ...

 

1. Strawman, again. This does not address your baseless assumption that everyone who wants romance play RPGs as self-inserts.

2. I don't. I don't exist in the game. I don't play a self-insert. Strawman.

3. You really missed the entire point, didn't you? Do you actually know what a self-insert is? Strawman.

4. Incoherent nonsense that has no bearing on the topic.

 

1. I don't care how you play or what disorders you have. I told you that much. If you want to prove that it's not the case go ahead. It's not baseless as many people who want romances say that "romancing someone increases immersion".

2. OK. So you want to see pixels ****ing? Check the sources from my previous post.

3. Seek help. It's not too late.

4. Your posts should have this label.

Edited November 24, 2012 by l3loodangel

[l3loodangel]

Do promancers think your statistics should matter in romances? Should your charisma and conversational skills be checked, or should your vile little gnome get some romance shoved in his face just because, as per usual?

 

You can tell I'm bored.

 

It should.

If the PC has a low constitution the LI should make a public mockery of small ****/testicles.

Lack of agility should also result in mockery, because of inability to deliver.

Edited November 24, 2012 by l3loodangel

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

1. Logic. I feel like speaking to not very bright child.

2. Obsidian has a limited budget, time and manpower that will be spent of PE. If you really believe that adding features won't reduce amount, quality or quantity of other features I pity you. Time spent = quality.

3. You fail to dodge check.

4. Romances without sex? Then they are friendship.

5. Going Iron man in debates show stupidity rather than stamina.

 

1. I feel like eating a cheeseburger. I don't see what you feel like doing has to do with this argument. If you were trying to take a potshot, "I feel like I am speaking to a not very bright child" would have been the proper way to state it.

2. Strawman. You assume that if content X is included that receive the resources that were allocated to content X come from content Y. To use an example relevant to PE, just because the Endless Paths are included in PE, does not mean that if they were not included resources would have instead been allocated to provide new races and classes.

3. You failed to provide a counter argument.

4. Did you mean "Then they are friendships."? If so, then I would state that romances do not always involve sex, and friendships do not always not involve sex(see Platonic Love and Friends with Benefits).

5. If you have no evidence to support your argument just say so. Also "Going Iron Man in a debate shows stupidity rather than stamina" would be the proper way to put it.

 

1. I am not sure what you are arguing at all, or why?

2. I can. Previous polls had more voters, ergo in this poll less people voted. If participation levels fall with passing time it means that participation level is decreasing. DUH?

3. Hypothesis is a scientific term prior to study. I am expressing my gut feeling.

4. ...

 

1. I'm arguing against you making statements without any evidence to back them up, because I am a Fact Nazi.

2. Then provide proof.

3. That is not necessarily the case. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a hypothesis is an assumption. You have made an assumption, therefore you have made a hypothesis.

4. Is that all the evidence you could muster?

 

1. I don't care how you play or what disorders you have. I told you that much. If you want to prove that it's not the case go ahead. It's not baseless as many people who want romances say that "romancing someone increases immersion".

2. OK. So you want to see pixels ****ing? Check the sources from my previous post.

3. Seek help. It's not too late.

4. Your posts should have this label.

 

1. Immersion does not equate to playing a self-insert.

2. No, I do not. I have never stated that I have.

3. I suggest going here before you post again.

4. ^

[Mandragore]

Well this attitude shows that people wanting romances are just not very smart as the only even remotely representative poll was when a question was asked, if you are willing to sacrifice something like gameplay elements, C&C (not with whom to sleep with, although some games like love boat theme in their games), story, interesting relationships (not getting into digital panties) and etc.?

 

That assumes that....

 

1. Having romance means that gameplay, C&C, story, and interesting relationships automatically suffer if romance is included in the game

2. Obsidian is incapable of creating an interesting romance

3. The sacrificed content in question was even being considered to be put in PE

4. Assumption 1 is not provable, Assumption 2 is entirely subjective, and Assumption 3 is not known at the moment. If you're going to make a statement, please use facts instead of assumptions.

 

1. No of course not. Money, time and energy come from nowhere and you don't have to sacrifice anything to implement anything.

2. Interesting romance? What is that supposed to mean? How a story about getting into someones panties can be called interesting?

3. Anything is better than seeing characters destroyed by lame & immature lines to justify the need of sex in the dungeon before last boss. Or even pressing a wrong number and finding someone's **** in your charters ass, is also an attractive option.

4. HAHAHA.

 

Another thing is that this poll is not statistically significant as most of the people have gave up on these threads and topics long time a go. Only representative thing would be a questionnaire sent to PE backers, cause I somehow have a feeling that most of the people who voted yes here are not even backing the project.

 

1. You do realize that you've just made two statements without any evidence to support them up, right? The problem with making assumptions without evidence is that you are incapable of proving them. 2. Also anyone can draw any conclusions they want from the incomplete data. 3. One could postulate that the individuals who do not want romance are an extremely vocal minority, or that they did not donate as much to PE as those who would like to see romance in PE. 4. Of course there is absolutely no evidence to support either of these claims, so they would be talking out their ass, as you are now.

 

1. Google the meaning of statistical significance. Is this the IQ of a romance fan?

2. Nobody can draw conclusions from incomplete data, because it's meaningless.

3. I have a hard time believing that they donated at all, but that's irrelevant as I said that "I HAVE A FEELING".

4. So you need evidence to have feelings?

 

On a side not I would recommend romancing a real woman, with real breasts, vagina, joy and personality. It beats jerking off to digital pixels by huge margin.

 

1. Here you assume that if someone wants romance in a game, they play a self-insert. 2. You do realize that some of us are not under the assumption that the PC is the player, right? 3. I would recommend that you stop assuming the motives of people. 4. It beats making baseless statements that you cannot prove.

 

1. No? Porn hub still has a hentai section IIRC and "The English Patient" or "Titanic" can be downloaded any time. Problem solved.

2. Am I supposed to care why you want **** pixels?

3. Dude, there are hot lines that give counseling for free or you can share your problem with a doctor and he will help you. Church or actually finding a woman/man could also be an alternative. You have to remember that if you spend time in romance thread you will never find one!

4. I thought I escaped such poster when I left gamespot. Guess not.

 

Wow dude, hows the view from that high horse you're riding? Maybe we should remove all the violence from the game, since all us sad nerds really just need to play more contact sports and get counseling.

 

Its a computer game, its supposed to be entertaining. Sex and violence are entertaining, if this game about elves and wizards isn't highbrow enough for you, feel free to go drive your prius to an arthouse movie where you can sit in the back row and sob quietly into your knit cap. Seriously bro, get over yourself.

[jezz555]

 

On a side not I would recommend romancing a real woman, with real breasts, vagina, joy and personality. It beats jerking off to digital pixels by huge margin.

 

On a side not I would recommend fighting a real dragon, with a real sword, getting real loot, real armour and real magic spells. It beats fighting digital pixels by a huge margin.

[Mandragore]

On a side not I would recommend romancing a real woman, with real breasts, vagina, joy and personality. It beats jerking off to digital pixels by huge margin.

 

On a side not I would recommend fighting a real dragon, with a real sword, getting real loot, real armour and real magic spells. It beats fighting digital pixels by a huge margin.

 

Truth. My shameful secret is that I play crpgs because I lack the confidence to slay dragons in real life...

[Malcador]

Wow, you people still going at this ?

[BruceVC]

[

 

On a side not I would recommend romancing a real woman, with real breasts, vagina, joy and personality. It beats jerking off to digital pixels by huge margin.

 

Nah, having sex with my Viconia lookalike blow-up doll is actually better than jerking off to digital pixels, and she says certain words so its like she has a personality. But its a close call. Thanks for the suggestion, I'll keep that in mind.

Edited November 25, 2012 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

Wow dude, hows the view from that high horse you're riding? Maybe we should remove all the violence from the game, since all us sad nerds really just need to play more contact sports and get counseling.

 

Its a computer game, its supposed to be entertaining. Sex and violence are entertaining, if this game about elves and wizards isn't highbrow enough for you, feel free to go drive your prius to an arthouse movie where you can sit in the back row and sob quietly into your knit cap. Seriously bro, get over yourself.

 

Mandragore, as usual you have summarized my view on this topic very eloquently . I second basically everything you have said in this post and others on this topic

Edited November 25, 2012 by BruceVC

[clippedwolf]

Wow. We are all RPG gamers here. All this hostility on one topic.

The game is going to be moddable, right? There is a lot of talent out there. As a last resort someone will make romance mods. With luck (and a lot of work for a few)they might be good quality.

 

 

[Rink]

The game is going to be moddable, right?

 

Afaik there will be no open mod-tools for the public. Probably because they want to make an addon and a next game themselves.

But maybe that changes later if the game has enough popularity and they do not fear our competition (for example if they develop the next game with better graphics and all and want to keep us playing the first game until it comes out ).

 

It really is funny how many here do not see what the pro-romancers mean with romance (hint: it isn't just sex) and keep standing on that point until the bitter end. This topic wouldn't be alive if there weren't so many people that would "love" to see romance in the game. It would be nice, if they made "semi-romances" like in P:T and let the other guys have the possibilty to break the NPCs heart and smash the feelings of the NPC in their face and I am sure both sides in this topic will be happy.

[ijusten]

The game is going to be moddable, right?

 

Afaik there will be no open mod-tools for the public.

 

They promised mod-support in update #16 and compared it to those in NWN2 and F:NV.

[Rink]

Oh I missed that, sorry for the misinformation.

[Valsuelm]

Unless it really benefits the story, I really could do without 'romance' in PE. Aside from learning a little bit more about an NPC I don't think it added anything of substance in either BG2 or DA.

 

I'd like to option to develop a friendship with a character, and learn more about them, but the romance aspect in all the games I've seen it in was quite adolescent.

[BruceVC]

but the romance aspect in all the games I've seen it in was quite adolescent.

 

Its doesnt have to be, thats the point.

Edited November 25, 2012 by BruceVC

[Lurky]

It really is funny how many here do not see what the pro-romancers mean with romance (hint: it isn't just sex) and keep standing on that point until the bitter end. This topic wouldn't be alive if there weren't so many people that would "love" to see romance in the game. It would be nice, if they made "semi-romances" like in P:T and let the other guys have the possibilty to break the NPCs heart and smash the feelings of the NPC in their face and I am sure both sides in this topic will be happy.

 

Honestly, after all the threads talking about it? I doubt there's anything that we missed. I think that many here do indeed know what you mean with romance.

 

And that's the problem, that we know what you mean. We know everything that romances bring to the table, and by everything, I mean the good and the bad. Many of us oppose romances because we think that the bad far outweighs the good (and many people think or haven't found any good in them in the first place, period), and that not including romances will overall make PE a better game.

 

I also want to remind eveyone that yes, Obsidian will try their best to make the game as mod-friendly as possible. They promised so in one of the Kickstarter updates. They will also try to release mod tools for the community if they can, but if it proves to be an unfeasible task, the mod community is good enough that they'll likely make handy guides for us layman people to crack the game and have our shot at making our own content. Obsidian has us covered

 

In fact, now that modding has been mentioned, allow me to say that I think modding is the best solution for the inclusion of romances. I mean, think about it:

1) Romances are not something the writers at Obsidian enjoy doing. However, many of the people who enjoy playing romances enjoy making them, too.

If you believe that the passion creators have for what they do can be felt in their creations, then leaving the romances to the people who care about them means that their passion will be felt in the romances too. This will potentially make them more heartfelt and engaging, which is an especially appropiate thing for romances.

2) Romances are most effective when they are focused on certain preferences. They are not for everyone, and not everyone will find the same thing appealing. Covering all possible preferences in the game is impossible, which means that even if romances were included, some people would still be left out of them and would have to do their own thing anyway (which causes all sorts of envy and petty fighting within the fans, as well as a lot of noise directed to the writers to make themselves heard for the next time). By leaving romances to the people who care about them, the people will make certain that what they do matches their preferences perfectly, maximizing their impact. And nobody will be discriminated; if you want something, you can get it no matter what it is, if you just make it yourself. If you're lucky, maybe you'll find it in the internet, already made for and by people like you!

 

I don't like cutting stuff with the intention of making fans pick it up and complete it. I'm not saying that we should do the work of the writers for them. But in this case, I think that the end result will be better if romances are in the form of mods made by fans. As I said, I think that's what optimizes their potential.

 

And as I said, I think that the bad of including romances in PE outweighs the good. I think PE will overall be a better game if it's not made with that idea in mind. My explanations and other people's explanations for this have been stated at length in this and the previous threads, and I honestly don't feel like repeating myself, so I'll just leave it like that.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Lurky

[Pshaw]

Just wanted to drop back into this topic and say that modding it in isn't really an answer to everyone's problems like some seem to be suggesting. If so then it would be equally reasonable to say that anti-romancers can mod out the romances and add all the bromances and extra side quests for the companions they want. In the end this isn't a replacement for the type of professional work Obsidian can put out and everybody knows it. To be honest I almost never use content related mods in any games I've bought because the quality of the content just isn't on par with the games original content. Usually if I get mods at all they're just balance/bug related.

 

So please don't pretend it's somehow a fair compromise saying that it can be modded in after the fact. If that was the case all obsidian would need to do is release a tool set instead of a game and everybody would be happy because hey, you can make all the content you want.

[jezz555]

Just wanted to drop back into this topic and say that modding it in isn't really an answer to everyone's problems like some seem to be suggesting. If so then it would be equally reasonable to say that anti-romancers can mod out the romances and add all the bromances and extra side quests for the companions they want. In the end this isn't a replacement for the type of professional work Obsidian can put out and everybody knows it. To be honest I almost never use content related mods in any games I've bought because the quality of the content just isn't on par with the games original content. Usually if I get mods at all they're just balance/bug related.

 

So please don't pretend it's somehow a fair compromise saying that it can be modded in after the fact. If that was the case all obsidian would need to do is release a tool set instead of a game and everybody would be happy because hey, you can make all the content you want.

 

Yeah, If we leave romances to modders, we are pretty much assured the sappy and immature romance you all claim to dread. The point of a story related romance/relationship is that it is not, tacked-on and with obsidian writing most likely wont be sappy. A romance mod will be, by definition, tacked on. So it appears yet again the old straw-man that us pro-mancers just want "LOLBOOBZ JUVENILE AND STOOPED!11!!" rears its ugly head. We want good, story-related romance, not some crummy mod that lets you dry-hump your party members or something, that really would be juvenile and stupid.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

While I would like a good story/theme-related/character-driven romance(instead of the **** and ass fanservice some equate all romance to) that isn't exactly what I want in PE. What I want is for romances to be included if they fit the character in question and are executed well. Obsidian has proven they can do this in MotB(their most praised title, IIRC) so I have confidence that they can do romances well if they choose to do them. What I do not want is romance to be slapped on a character to meet some sort of quota(like a certain Canadian studio likes to do) or some other form of half-assed crap.

[Ninjamestari]

So is there some sort of conclusion to this discussion? Has obsidian announced something about romances or are people fighting it out here just for the heck of it?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

So is there some sort of conclusion to this discussion? Has obsidian announced something about romances or are people fighting it out here just for the heck of it?

 

They haven't announced anything about it yet. I don't think that would stop the arguing seeing as how there were threads about turn-based combat popping up even though when PE was announced, it was stated that it would be a RTwP game.

[Lurky]

Just wanted to drop back into this topic and say that modding it in isn't really an answer to everyone's problems like some seem to be suggesting. If so then it would be equally reasonable to say that anti-romancers can mod out the romances and add all the bromances and extra side quests for the companions they want. In the end this isn't a replacement for the type of professional work Obsidian can put out and everybody knows it. To be honest I almost never use content related mods in any games I've bought because the quality of the content just isn't on par with the games original content. Usually if I get mods at all they're just balance/bug related.

 

So please don't pretend it's somehow a fair compromise saying that it can be modded in after the fact. If that was the case all obsidian would need to do is release a tool set instead of a game and everybody would be happy because hey, you can make all the content you want.

 

I'm not saying mods should be a substitution of actual game content. I said so at the end:

 

I don't like cutting stuff with the intention of making fans pick it up and complete it. I'm not saying that we should do the work of the writers for them. But in this case, I think that the end result will be better if romances are in the form of mods made by fans. As I said, I think that's what optimizes their potential.

 

In the end, including romances or not is a design decision (and one the writers should have more or less decided on at this point, I think). The reason why I'd rather not have them is, among other reasons, because of the impact they have on the design of the characters and their implementation. I'm not opposing them because they could be modded in; that's just one rambling of mine where I pointed out some details that could actually benefit fan-made romances compared to writer-made romances. Mods should not make up for game deficiencies, I agree with you. Which also means that mods should not have to cover up for any non-romance interaction deficiencies caused by the inclusion of romances, by the way .

 

And no, I don't think these thres are ever going to stop. I mean, Avellone did position himself on this topic in this interview, and we're still here. I imagine that the devs consider us a lost cause at this point

Edited November 26, 2012 by Lurky

[BruceVC]

And no, I don't think these thres are ever going to stop. I mean, Avellone did position himself on this topic in this interview, and we're still here. I imagine that the devs consider us a lost cause at this point

 

Lurky I appreciate your detailed and informative posts on this topic, I just don't agree with them.

 

I also don't see how the interview you linked proves or disproves that there will be Romance\Sex in PE? For starters George Ziets is going to be part of the team so that adds to the likelihood based on what Chris thinks is acceptable Romance content and then he says "So if I were to implement a romance subplot in Eternity" ,but the decision is not only his. So he doesn't make the final decision on Romance\Sex as far as I know.

 

I am comfortable we will see an implementation of Romance\Sex.

 

I also like using Mods as an additional aspect for the development of Romance\Sex. I used numerous Adult Mods in games like F:NV and they were great. I am not sure how this would work in an isometric game like PE though?

Edited November 26, 2012 by BruceVC