Organic characters (Denying intimacy)

[Randomthom]

I'd like to see more discerning NPCs.

 

What I mean by this is that I don't expect there to be a romance option available to my PC if I am an ugly brute with no social skills (unless there is an NPC who likes the strong silent type!)

 

Please please please don't have an everybody-is-bisexual system. By-all-means have a gay/lesbian character, maybe have a bisexual character but please let them have preferences! It might be quite fun to have a married NPC who an evil* & highly charismatic PC could tempt into cheating.

 

*Yes, I know the game doesn't have alignment, doesn't mean the term can't apply.

 

I'd suggest it should be possible for me to create a PC who has no romance options due to race/sex/charisma/intelligence. Some might admire physical strength or one's ability to drink them under the table. Another might have issues with religion and reject any advances made by a Cleric or Paladin. Another might be very wary of arcane spellcasters (Valygar would have suited this in BG2).

 

I'd rather there be some characters created who can't find love among the NPCs for X, Y & Z reasons than for every NPC to be a lovebot (Serenity/Firefly reference ) who will open their legs for anyone.

 

An NPC should have a list of preferences (e.g. min INT, min CHA, non-Dwarf, non-female). Just like a real person has something of a checklist, these characters should too. Just because someone is the centre of important events, it doesn't instantly make them desirable.

[Haerski]

I must say it's kind of irritating how you constantly make claims on what I want from my stories even though I never said anything along those lines. I guess I have to right some wrongs then...
 

Planescape: Torment had a cynical/downer story, but it had a good love story going because it was designed that way, in a way that it was relevant for its themes. If the story or setting had been different, it would have been a different case.
 
Can love not be a good fit in some stories? I gave you some examples earlier. I can expand them if you want.
 
VtM:B is a game where the main character is a recently created vampire in a cutthroat society, manipulated by various factions that don't care about your interests at all while you follow orders and make a place for yourself. Additionally, vampires in this setting are undead predators who struggle to keep their humanity; the very setting says that these vampires cannot experience mortal love. I'm not sure how I can ilustrate the point better without giving spoilers of the story, but as you can imagine, not the best place for love.
 
The setting of Warhammer 40K is even more extreme. The tagline is "in the grim darkness of the far future there is only war. There is no peace amongst the stars, only an eternity of carnage and slaughter, and the laughter of thirsting gods", so you can imagine how the place must be. There is such totalitarian repression and rampant inhumanity that those who haven't renounced sex tend to go to the other extreme and turn to Slaanesh, who, well, just google him.
 
So, in the former example the PC can't feel love, and in the latter all the focus is on murder. Yeah, I'm pretty sure that love doesn't fit some stories.

How could I begin... You didn't seem to get my point at all looking into this segment. But first: From what I have heard from you of Vampire Masquerade they actually have taken love into account as they have stated vampires can't feel love? Am I right? So even in harsh universe as such they have to explain why this force doesn't exist in the story, which IMO is better proof for point you think I'm trying to make here - which I'm not - but aaahh.. lets move on...

As for Warhammer: Agreed. Love doesn't fit in Warhammer 40K. I never claimed so and never will and I don't undesrtand why you still keep bringing it up. If you just didn't understand something I said then I apologize for being unclear. English is not my native language.
 

Now you might think "why would anyone want to play there?" to which I'll give you the answer: humor and good execution. VtMB is a very atmosferic and immersive game, and the dialogue is great and funny, which makes the game quite enjoyable. And WH40K is so extreme that it has a certain campy sort of charm. Nobody takes it too seriously, which lets people enjoy the setting for what it is.

Did you think I use my free-time playing Japanese date simulators? Well, no. I enjoy all kinds of stories with or without love and would very much like to play in both universes, but never had time. Hopefully some day...
 

Regarding your last question, I am aware that love isn't all about sunshine and happiness. But are you honestly telling me that the people who want love and romance to be included in their stories would be happy if it was represented only in the form of soul crushing tragedies? Because that doesn't match my own experience. Most people pushing for the presence of love and romance do so because it's something they enjoy, not because it's something they want to make them miserable.

Maybe I'm not one of those "most people pushing for the precence of love..." then? Because I like to feel something when I play... sadness, happiness, grif, laugh, love, everything goes.
 

You were talking about stories and their believability, in general. You did not talk about their realism or normalcy, which means that the extremes can be included. PE is aiming for both believability and realism, but in general terms they are not synonyms, and the former can exist without the latter. Settings like WoD or W40K and their stories can attest to that.

 

Eh... We are on Project Eternity board and everything I write here should be considered to be in context of PE if I don't say otherwise. If I want to discuss love and romances in games in general I would go to general discussions board, where my approach would be radically different. But as we are here... I was talking about PE, which is - as you confirmed - probably going to be aiming for believability and realism. End of story.
 

Sure, the examples I gave are more extreme than LotR or ASoIaF, but they still meet the criteria: they're well-crafted settings, they have good stories (or the potential for good stories) on them, they are good for roleplaying (even WH40K, which is indeed not focused on characters, still has books for roleplaying), and they're still designed in a way that love doesn't really have much of a place there. You can't say that they don't count just because they're not your thing.
 
I know that PE is not going to be in the style of WoD or WH40K. I'm aware of that. But when I see people making blanket statements saying that love has to exist in a believable story, sometimes it grinds my gears, and I feel the need to speak up. And I'm not apologizing for defending my stance, either. If you feel you can say what counts as a believable story or not, I can feel like interrupting you and correcting your assumptions.
 
And by the way, people like the main characters of the works you said aren't that normal, either. The characters of LotR are various forms of fantastic archetypes, and you'd be hard pressed to find a normal, well-adjusted character in ASoIaF. That's the point. Fictional characters need to have a little more going for them than "normal", because normal people are boring. Settings like WoD/WH40K have substantially less normal in their premise than LotR/ASoIaF, but it's still a matter of degrees; as stories and as settings where stories happen, both styles are valid.

Defining "normal" would require few hundred pages of discussion, but obviously my definition of it is much broader than yours. In very very short I would say normal means for me a character I can easily relate to. Now I put this very simply: If that character meets attractive woman in his travels and doesn't seem to feel in any way interested, it's huge break in believability for me as normal man with normal instincts. I'm still not saying it should end in Bioware style romance, but these feelings have to exist in the world or it is - like I said - going against gravity.
 

Not what I meant. I wasn't talking about love interests in general, I was talking against specific examples.

 
For example, using backgrounds in order to explore themes of love does indeed make assumptions about the player. Depending on what is being assumed, some character concepts will not be viable, just for the sake of story reasons I might not care about. That's the kind of freedom I was talking about. What you can do in the game will always be restricted, you're right about that, but the characters you can make before starting to play, well, that's a different story. My apologies if I wasn't clear in this distinction.

 

It's different, but for me these "fill in your character" tend to be boring and blank and I much prefer more restricted, but full characters even if I can't choose my Geralts hair color or love interests. TW2, which you mentioned in end of this segment (and which I cut out.. sorry:( ) is actually one of my all time favorites.

 

And yes, I defend love in games in general and I'm deifinitively not pushing Bioware PC-NPC romances, even if I'm not against those either. What I said in my first post were purely my own thoughts on subject in context of PE and I'm not actively pushing any of them. In general though it's unbelievably underused subject considering how big possibility it is. For Example Doms wife in Gears of War, (Again very tragic) aforementioned Planescape: Torment etc. Most games still seem to avoid the subject like the plague which is shame. Isn't anyone else tired of playing single alpha males/females?

 

I think it would all depend on how it's done. If they do their job well, it won't feel cheap, because whatever character development happens will feel natural and appropiate. You won't even care that no romance took place in the story.

 
I also want to say, again, that you expectations are rather curious. You think the Obisidian developers could somehow be able to pull off a "universal" background for characters of 11 different classes of 11 different ethnicities of 5 diferent races (plus possible godlike versions of any of them) that can come from any place of the world, and that they'd be able to make it so that this background could fit them all well. But you think that character development and party relationships without romance would seem cheap, that it can't be pulled off believably? How so? Where's your trust in them?

 
To first paragraph: Depends on a story like I said

 

To second: I'm not expecting anything from Obsidian. I'm stating my preferences on subject at hand in context of PE butnowI'mstartingtorepeatmyselfandit'sgettinglate... I trust them so well I have courage to state my opinion here without being afraid I ruin the whole game.

 

This has ended up as a very long post, and I really don't feel like repeating the arguments I said other times, so I'll state my stance and leave it there.
 
I'm not saying that romances should be excluded on principle. I merely object to the line of thinking that says that they should be included on principle because how could they not. The "how could they not" is what I'm answering to. I'm also highly skeptical that player romances could be pulled off in a satisfactory manner for most people, considering how varied both the players and the player character can be, but that's another topic of dicussion.
 
I don't really have a problem with people who want romances because they like them and make them feel good, either. But I've seen too many people in these threads trying to mask what they really want in the way that they feel will get them most support, and that's not helpful for anyone. At least be honest about your intentions.

 

So if I state reasons why I like love as theme in games it's "masking what I really want to get support". WUT? 

 

Actually, I have to confess I really wanted to turn PE into aforementioned date simulator with big breasted anime girls, but now you seem to have ruined my plans.

 

You make too much assumptions by what you have seen other people say and do. What about replying to what I said; not what someone else said, in some other thread?

Edited May 13, 2013 by Haerski

[Auxilius]

I'm a huge supporter of Romance\Sex in RPG's as I've mentioned on numerous occasions

 

I honestly believe they add depth and realism to the interaction you have with your party on an epic journey. I particularly like the concept of needing to do certain quests or make certain dialogue choices  in order to get closer to party members. Recently I played Planescape for the first time and it reminded me of how exciting it is as the game progresses and you get  emotionally closer to Annah, of course the game failed when it didn't allow you to have a "proper" relationship with her. I felt you just touched the surface. So my relationship with Viconia in BG2 was ideal.

 

For me if PE has this great  world, lore and quests but completely leaves out any Romance\Sex then something would be missing from my overall view of the game.

Well, thing is, I started this thread because I felt the relationship the player could have with Annah was actually more compelling.

Video game characters are not real people. When you made them fall in love with you, there is nothing more afterwards. You explored the final intimacy. But leave this possibility out and suddenly, people want to know more, to have more. That's what makes them interesting.

It's probably just me but I think romantic love makes the character shallow. I'm with Avellone on this one. I can only write tragic/unrequited love stories because of this. When it's tragic, the story can continue. When it's romantic, the story ends.

[Ffordesoon]

Love is not merely romance/sex. That's one type of love among many. I love my father, but I'm not asking him to [CENSORED].

 

Likewise, I can want to have sex with someone without being in love with them. For example, I find the actress Elizabeth Banks tremendously attractive and would hop in the sack with her at a moment's notice. I have never met her, so I necessarily can't be in love with her. Maybe she's really mean, or smells awful, or, hell, eats toddlers for breakfast; I don't know, do I? That doesn't change the fact that I lust after her, or my fantasy of her.

 

I feel the same about any number of actresses. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say most people have felt something similar for an actor of either gender at one time or another, and probably more than one. What, you think all those dudes who bought pinups of Pamela Anderson in the 90's did so because they really like photography? No. It's a normal thing to do. Well, as long as you don't go all John Hinckley, anyway.

 

Then there are the people you see at, like, the coffee shop. You don't talk to them, and you're probably never going to talk to them, but, you know, sexy is sexy is sexy. They're going in the mental Rolodex.

 

I say all of this not to come off as a creep (though I have no doubt I have been quite successful at that ), but merely to point out that lust is not love and love is not lust. They can commingle, but they are not one and the same. And romance, though it is love in the sense most often cited, is merely one form of love.

 

Yesterday was Mother's Day here in America, and perhaps elsewhere. I doubt most of the people buying flowers for their mothers were doing so as a means of seduction. But they did buy flowers for their mothers, because they love their mothers. Which is to say, you can love someone without wanting to get them in the sack.

 

While I am absolutely a proponent of romance and sex and love in games, what I hate is the idea of "winning" a relationship, and that's the dominant approach by far in games.

 

This article, despite being one with verbiage in it many of you will no doubt find contentious, is one that lays out the problem with current "romances" quite well. I'd recommend giving it a read, even if the politics in it are alien or repulsive to you.

[Lurky]

Thanks for explaining yourself, Haerski. You're right, I had thrown you into the sack of Bioware fans I had argued with in the past, and I assumed you shared similar views with them on the topic of love and romance. It was unfair of me to do that, and I apologize for it. Old habits die hard, I guess.

 

That said, I want to reassure you of some things.

 

Did you think I use my free-time playing Japanese date simulators? Well, no. I enjoy all kinds of stories with or without love and would very much like to play in both universes, but never had time. Hopefully some day...

 

Even after misjudging you, I never thought that dating sims are the only games you play, or that you wanted PE to become a dating sim. I never thought you were delusional enough to actually want that.

 

With your defense of this topic and your mention of Mass Effect I was indeed reminded of people I had argued with in the past, so what I did think was that you played mostly Bioware games (and mostly the recent games), which aren't dating sims but have dating sims mechanics as a part of the roleplaying experience. Many people with that track record do find these mechanics to be the most enjoyable part of their playthroughs, and are in fact the kind of people who ask in the Bioware forums for bigger focus into this part of the game. It's a bit of a grey area, but in the Bioware forums it's gotten to the point where feedback from fans has become so relentlessly insistent and singleminded that it has become lobbying from romance junkies. A harsh comparison, I know, but the signs are there. And that's where I cross the line.

 

When the Kickstarter launched, many of them extended this behavior to these forums, and some of their descriptions of things they wanted here were pretty much descriptions of mechanics found in full-fledged dating sims. Which is why I said that some people do mask their intentions in order to get what they really want; all the emotional gratification of dating sims, without the stigma that actual dating sims carry.

 

You'd be surprised of just how persistent and insidious at the same time these people can be. Of course, just because a lot of people came here with their misadjusted expectations doesn't mean that everyone who manifests an interest in this topic is addicted to it. In the end, it's all a matter of perspective, and the people I mentioned have little of it, which is why I went on a tangent bringing up other unrelated settings. If you can enjoy stories with or without love equally, then great.

 

Again, I apologize for lumping you with that collective, and I'll make a point of trying to have more perspective myself, too. I still reserve the right to mantain some skepticism for future discussions, though

 

 

 

So, now that this is clear, I'll try to get back on topic. You know, I used to complain a lot back in the day that all discussion about romance used to be only about trying to find arguments for and against their inclusion and trying to win the debate. I used to complain that everything revolved around their worthiness in cRPGs, and that nobody said anything about the nitty gritty of their implementation, which is what can make or break them. And now that this topic tries to examine aspects of their implementation, I had to be the one derailing it. Sorry for that

 

So, my answer for the topic at hand is that I am largely in support of your suggestion, Auxilius. If you make sure that your characters have good arcs and appropiate closure, anything added on top is a bonus, and leaving some parts vague can make their bonus and good memory last more. In fact, Obsidian wants PE to be a franchise, which means that leaving some parts of the characters vague is actually a very good way of giving them room for expansion! It makes players remember the characters more, and it lets the writers use the same characters in later titles, so as long as they don't feel incomplete, what's not to love?

 

And lastly, about your suggestion applied to romances: Out of all the romances I've played, the most effective for me were those that centered on the build up of the relationship. The getting to know each other, opening up, perhaps some sexual tension in the background, and some acknowledgement at the end that is appropiate to the emotional path I've chosen. That is what has left me with the best memories. Giving me a physical scene as reward, explicit or implied, isn't nearly as effective; they're usually awkward, and I don't even get to feel the benefits because I'm not the one having sex there. It's like watching porn; it might feel good, but it pales in comparison to the real thing. At least the emotional build up is something I can relate to.

 

So, I am in support of your suggestion in regards to romantic love, too. It has downsides, though; as I mentioned earlier, some people do not have enough with that, and they can be quite insistent in saying so. But if they want more, they can make it themselves with the power of mods, so why not?

Edited May 14, 2013 by Lurky

[Randomthom]

Lets have a good bromance, non-romantic.

 

Shepherd & Garrus

Andy Dufresne & Red

Han & Luke

Han & Chewie!

 

Bromances can be as memorable as romances and often feel a good deal more real & probably easier to create (because the depth of feeling is never spoken).

[TrashMan]

 

I know some peopel are saying that romances are part of real life. They are. But romances have their time and place.

 

The game will cover a period of several months unless I'm mistaken. Does the PC have to experience romance during those few months? Life is long, there's a lot of things to do and love talks while you're running for your life from Eldritch horrors really feels out of place.

 

Dunno. It can be doen good, it can be done bad, but if there wasn't any I certanly wouldn't feel like the game world was missing something. It's not like love doesn't exist in the world - it's just thath the PC or party NPC's have other things on their mind in that specific time frame.

 

I hear what you are saying but for me Romance\Sex should be part of the overall game design. This becomes very subjective because for some the RPG experience is really about questing, exploring and being able to make certain choices. I understand thats what they want and expect but me I want deeper party interaction

 

 

I think you misunderstand a bit. Game should be designed as a lving, breating world. Which means the subject of love is bound to pop up.

 

Maybe you can come across a lovers quarrel..or help a young man woo the woman of his dreams.

 

But I personally think that it's unnecessary for the PC to be the center focus or romances, like some sex god/godess, and bumping uglies being the final goal.

I noticed how some games end up feeling cheaper because of it... it almost starts feeling like a harem anime. Woo all the girls. Plow their field. Collect cards.

 

You know what would be funny? For the player to have the option to court every single woman in the game. And ALL of them reject him. (and vice-versa for the opposite sex)

 

 

 

 

The setting of Warhammer 40K is even more extreme. The tagline is "in the grim darkness of the far future there is only war. There is no peace amongst the stars, only an eternity of carnage and slaughter, and the laughter of thirsting gods", so you can imagine how the place must be. There is such totalitarian repression and rampant inhumanity that those who haven't renounced sex tend to go to the other extreme and turn to Slaanesh, who, well, just google him.

 

Not to be pedantic, but there are hunderds of trilions of humans in 40K, they die in the millions and more are born each day.

So sex is alive and well in 40K and so is love. It's just in the background, behind the curtains, happening among civilians and people who generally aren't currently fighting against eldtritch horrors and have hte luxury and time to fall in love.

And given SM's are ALWAYS fighting and most of 40K is about them...yeah, not much time or opportuntiy for love, even among more normal soldiers.

Edited May 14, 2013 by TrashMan

[TMZuk]

 

Well, thing is, I started this thread because I felt the relationship the player could have with Annah was actually more compelling.

 

Video game characters are not real people. When you made them fall in love with you, there is nothing more afterwards. You explored the final intimacy. But leave this possibility out and suddenly, people want to know more, to have more. That's what makes them interesting.

It's probably just me but I think romantic love makes the character shallow. I'm with Avellone on this one. I can only write tragic/unrequited love stories because of this. When it's tragic, the story can continue. When it's romantic, the story ends.

 

I must disagree. The story ends because it's romantic? Why is that?

 

The story ~might~ end when you write: "And they lived happily ever after!" Even then, that isn't certain at all.

 

One of the greatest love-stories ever written, IMO, is Gone with the Wind. Here the main character discovers that what she thinks she wants is not what she in fact wants. That doesn't mean the ending is tragic. It means that she finally realizes what she wants, and through that, who she is. Does she then get what she wants? Who can tell? That is any ones guess.

 

Does that mean there's no romance in Gone with the Wind? I should think not! Just because the ending is unresolved, it doesn't mean that it is tragic, either. It's an arc, where the main character and her surrounding goes through changes and learn more about whom they are.

 

 

 

DA:O spoilers:

 

In DA:O, if you play a male Warden, Morrigan beds you with little effort on your behalf. That is just attraction, desire and sex. And, as the player discovers later, perhaps, it is part of a plan. But to her own surprise, she might fall in love with the Warden. But the story won't end "happily ever after" anyway. There's a romantic arc here, but again, there's no tragedy. There's a woman who has a goal which she for selfish or unselfish reasons puts above her newly discovered feelings. And a Player Character who eventually may or may not travel with her through the Looking Glass into the unknown.

 

It's a great romance, because it ambiguous. Perhaps that is the keyword in how to write a great romance.

 

 

But that aside: If in a RPG, the PC come across someone who could be considered attractive, or someone who may be attracted to the PC, then it feels shallow if the game does not recognize this. Of course, if the game recognizes this in a cheesy or juvenile manner, it may change from shallow to toe-cringingly embarassing. Therefore, FO:NV, in spite of otherwise great writing, often felt shallow in that regard. In my opinion.

Edited May 14, 2013 by TMZuk

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

DA:O spoilers:

 

In DA:O, if you play a male Warden, Morrigan beds you with little effort on your behalf. That is just attraction, desire and sex. And, as the player discovers later, perhaps, it is part of a plan. But to her own surprise, she might fall in love with the Warden. But the story won't end "happily ever after" anyway. There's a romantic arc here, but again, there's no tragedy. There's a woman who has a goal which she for selfish or unselfish reasons puts above her newly discovered feelings. And a Player Character who eventually may or may not travel with her through the Looking Glass into the unknown.

 

It's a great romance, because it ambiguous. Perhaps that is the keyword in how to write a great romance.

 

 

 

 

This is exactly what happened to me In DA:O, Morrigan fell in love with me but she had a more important life objective and she left at the end. I found this Romance story very interesting and realistic as something that could happen under the circumstances of DA:O

Edited May 14, 2013 by BruceVC

[moridin84]

I don't think that romances (for this game) should be too complicated. It should not involve stats or gaining affection points. I think the 'relationship' should be built up naturally via story events, choices and dialogue. 

 

The best way to think about how a relationship should work is to look at novels where a main character had multiple possible love interests. Daenerys in A Song of Fire and Ice for example. The overall plot probably wouldn't change depending on who should she picks, but, at the same time, the story would be a little different (being general to avoid spoilers here). Isn't that how it should work in a game?

 

Also, I don't think the game should have a huge number of love interests, one or at most two for each gender. This means you can concentrate on them rather having to spread things out. 

 

And another thing, I'm not really sure how serious the relationships need to be. I thought the Neeska/Elayne/MC love triangle quite fun for example, despite being completely related to anything actually important (and this was before I realized how much of the bickering was due to rivalry after playing through the game as a female character, hah).

Edited May 14, 2013 by moridin84

[Lephys]

Love isn't something that necessarily defines the entire story, or has its own story. It's simply a force with which the characters must deal. Maybe it is embraced, or maybe it is an obstacle. Maybe both.

 

It's no different from daylight, or darkness.

 

"Hey, it's bright out here... we're easily visible, so we'd better stick to the denseness of the forest so that we're not seen."

 

"Hey, it's very dark here. We're going to need to stick close and move carefully."

 

Rogues like it to be dark, and maybe Rangers like it to be light, but to have means of physical concealment not dependent upon light.

 

They're all just factors, and love is yet another factor that affects situations and character decisions and struggles and actions.