Romance, Marriage, Pregnancy and having Children.

[BruceVC]

 

Aw, this was going fairly well for a romance thread. I thought we had some understanding going on, guys

A damn shame.

 

I think that making any suppositions about the motives of people who want something different from you is not good at all, and reeks of a strawman. I think that discussing why you want/don't want something in the game is good, but when doing so you should try to analyse what the person actually says instead of launching an attack on what you want them to say. By attacking strawmen and being hypersensitive to everything, you are making these forums closer to the BSN than X>10 regular posters talking about romance ever could on their own.

 

Back on topic: There are three positions in this.

 

1. You want romance because you believe that it is worth the resources to implement and is something that you will likely enjoy

2. You don't want romance because you believe that it is not worth the resources to implement and is not something you will likely enjoy

3. You could live with or without romances in PE

 

I personally take position 3. I trust that Obsidian will make the right call when it comes to what is best for their game, and am sure that all relationships will be well written and integrated into the "story" of either the main plot or companion in question. If there is romance(s) I highly doubt that they will be Bioware-like virtual **** dolls.

 

Does anyone else here trust that Obsidian could deliver with PE, even if something you don't like is included?

 

 

Good post, I would obviously go  for option 1.

 

Also you have asked an important question " Does anyone else here trust that Obsidian could deliver with PE, even if something you don't like is included?"

 

Of course I would hope that everyone see the future of PE in this regard.  There will always be features in the game that people complain about that hopefully shouldn't detract from them financially supporting the PE franchise. I always see an RPG as having to deliver on many levels and the fact that optional Romance\Sex is included should make no difference to other aspects of the game that will offer entertainment

 

Oh and one request from me and I understand it will probably be ignored. Can we stop using the BSN as an analogy around what a fan base hell on earth is.  There are many positives on that website and we can't write off millions of fans due to the fact you disagree with a few hundred hard core fans and there perception of Romance and how they choose to discuss it

[BruceVC]

Aw, this was going fairly well for a romance thread. I thought we had some understanding going on, guys

 

A story without romance is a very dry thing. Sex scenes are unnecessary as anything more than a fade to black. As is children and marriage in anything more than a brief epilogue wrapping up events, unless they are central to the storyline. However is it realistic to ignore the attractive and available person you spend months around? Are you roleplaying a eunuch? As long as it is tasteful and completely optional then romance would only enhance the game.

 

I for one prefer interacting with NPCs than having a party of puppets that have no motivation. That is always an option for those vehemently opposed to relationships, romantic or otherwise. 

 

Besides roleplaying and romance are linked. Sex is integral to life, real or fictional. I at least want the option to allow my character to exist beyond schemes, power, money, exploration and violence. I can understand why a lot of people loathe it; but really it at the very least it shouldn't be overly intrusive or penalize you to merely reply 'I just want to be friends' to a single line of dialogue, right? NPC's still chat and may still offer their personal quests. Just don't expect to understand them, their motivations or their secrets in a way that a lover would. It is only natural.  

 

Also to Bos_hybrid: There are plenty of JRPGs that focus on romance as a primary theme, no need to reach for a VN. In a sense being here makes makes you an RPG otaku. It has no meaning beyond being obsessive about a subject, although there are negative connotations in Japan (because a story involved a one as a murderous stalker when the term was in early use). Outside of Japan there is no negative association. I am an otaku too; of games. 

 

You say you can understand why a lot of people loathe them, but then you proceed to make a bunch of assumptions and equivocations that are, quite frankly, very ignorant. Perhaps you do not understand that well why a lot of people loathe them.

 

It is realistic to ignore the attractive and available person you spend months around. It happens all the damn time in real life because of many reasons, of course it's realistic. What isn't realistic is that the presence of someone attractive and available around you should inevitably lead to something. The reason why it happens so many times in movies and games that want to be movies is precisely because it's unrealistic.

 

Romances can harm a game instead of enhancing it. The arguments for this have already been made, in this thread and in others.

 

Sex is not integral to life. It's a very good addition to it, but it's possible to go on without it. Especially if you're an adventurer running for your life, and thus you and your party have concerns of higher priority. This does not mean roleplaying an eunuch or an asexual, it means roleplaying someone who can keep it in their pants.

 

Roleplaying and romances are not linked. Romances are just a tiny subset of roleplaying options, but they are not a worthier option or better or deeper or anything like that. If the rest of options are well done, it turns out that most of the player base does not miss romances that much. And if you can't conceive of a game that does provide deep roleplaying options without romance, perhaps it should be you the one who has to broaden horizons, instead of expecting all games to fit this narrow view.

 

Romances should not mean a deeper understanding of NPCs. There are plenty of couples that confide things to their close friends that they wouldn't to their partner, after all. And there are plenty of stories of people in the military that confide to their comrades incredibly personal things that they would not tell to other people, including their lovers. It's just a different kind of relationship. Besides, it's not fair for players who wish to know their companions to deny them that content because they're not attracted to them, when there should logically be a way for them to get that (with a close friendship, for example). The game should not force the players to go through a romance in order to get that.

 

Project Eternity is not a JRPG. Common tropes and themes found there should not be expected here. Also, I'm fairly certain than in the west, otaku means "fan of anything Japanese", not obsessive fan in general. If one is an obsessive fan but not of Japanese games/comics/whatever, then the person in question is not an otaku.

 

And the biggest one of all...

 

Romances do NOT equal interpersonal relationships in general. Having no romances does not mean that NPCs will lack personality or motivations or reactivity. Seriously, this one is so stupid that I shouldn't see it repeated time and time again. And each time I see it, it convinces me a little more than perhaps some game out there should demonstrate this truth by making awesome character interactions that fulfill nicely the emotional wants of a player, but without resorting to romances to fulfill them. Perhaps Project Eternity should be that game, considering everything.

 

I like you Lurky as you always spend time and effort to articulate your point and I appreciate that, I just find myself  sometimes disagreeing with what you say at least around our Romance discussions

 

In response to some of your comments

 

It is realistic to ignore the attractive and available person you spend months around. It happens all the damn time in real life because of many reasons, of course it's realistic. What isn't realistic is that the presence of someone attractive and available around you should inevitably lead to something. The reason why it happens so many times in movies and games that want to be movies is precisely because it's unrealistic.

 

I dispute this. Why would you argue against human nature? If you spend months with someone and face challengers and death on a daily basis and you have an emotional connection and are attracted to each other Romance would naturally develop? For example forget fantasy RPG for a moment and lets discuss RL and relationship dynamics. I have never ever heard of a scenario where 2 people are attracted to each other, want to have a relationship, there are no obstacles to this relationship and don't at least try to develop the Romance. Human beings are gregarious creatures by nature and once again I would argue that Romance is the normal and expected direction people follow if there are no obstacles

 

Romances do NOT equal interpersonal relationships in general. Having no romances does not mean that NPCs will lack personality or motivations or reactivity. Seriously, this one is so stupid that I shouldn't see it repeated time and time again. And each time I see it, it convinces me a little more than perhaps some game out there should demonstrate this truth by making awesome character interactions that fulfill nicely the emotional wants of a player, but without resorting to romances to fulfill them. Perhaps Project Eternity should be that game, considering everything.

 

Of course you don't need Romance to have a party member interact with you on a deep level. But in all my Romances in all the games I played like Morrigan, Viconia and Isabela I did have a softer spot for those characters above other party members. And the reason was obvious, I imagined this physical relationship with them and how that would effect the emotional strength of my bond with them. So in my RPG experience and how I perceived the game and overall experience this did make the relationship  dynamic deeper. Even if it didn't effect my overall game or the primary choices available to me with the exception of a few lines of extra options in the dialogue choices this was important to me and some of the choices I made. I want this choice in PE

 

[Lurky]

This post turned out to be huge, so I'll be addressing individual users' points in separate spoiler tags.
 

 

Any Infinity Engine game, Aurora Engine game [From BioWare (Neverwinter Nights series) -The witcher used this engine], Mass Effect game or Dragon age game with out romace, would not be the same game. Romances are apart of the stories/aspects of the games in some form or another. PE with no romance would just feel wierd and could then be argueed not on par with it's predecessors.

 
I think part of the issue is there's a wide gap between sexual/emotional contact between the PC and some of the NPCs and "romance" as it has been come to be known in later Bioware games.
 
To use the example I gave upthread, I think it would be refreshing to have a romance which is destined to fail.  Maybe there's a male NPC who seems (if you play a man or a woman who he isn't romancing) to be a fine, upstanding person.  But if you get involved, he turns out to be possessive, controlling, and ultimately hits the PC.  Or maybe your "love interest" is merely flightly, or a cheater, or something on that end.  The bottom line is as in real life, some romances shouldn't have happy endings. Hell, the vast majority shouldn't, particularly for adventurers.  

The problem is, a lot of players take "romance" to be a minigame in and of itself these days. I don't mean in the sense that they're romancing for stat bonuses.  I mean insofar as if the romance isn't completed with a "happy ending" (or at least, a parting on fair terms) they feel cheated by the game. They expect the same wish fulfillment from the romance they get from winning the game. When in fact romance is, at most, just one of many subplots, and can easily end up on the rocks.

And thereby lies the problem with making romance a core element.  If featured too much, people expect to have an "interest" they will personally like. And they expect to get emotional charge out of the encounters, and leave with warm fuzzies. Not get their heart ripped apart at the end. IRL, even the most capable of people were often messes in their personal lives. We shouldn't expect any better of our heroic characters.

I agree with this.
 
As it has been said on the first page:

Romance hasn't been confirmed for Project Eternity. It's known that at least two of the game's designers, including the lead designer, strongly dislike traditional romances in CRPGs.
 
There might be something non-traditional, though.

So there are chances that, if romance does end up happening in PE, that it will be unhappy or doomed (and in the middle of his hate for romances in general, Avellone has expressed his preference for that kind of romances). I have to wonder a few things about this, though.

1) Would the players that defend the inclusion of romance be happy with that? Romances as fanservice have become ridiculously popular, so there's chances that either there will be fans loudly revolting at unwinnable romances (they remove our choice!), or that there will be fans ignoring canon and making a mod to "fix" the romance to a happy ending. I'm not sure how I'd feel at that if I were the writer.

 

2) In the case of abusive partners, my concern would not be that players disliked them, but the contrary. The idea that players, either because they're used to the notion that romances are safe content that always ends well, or because they failed to read the signs, actually thought that these are valid and acceptable relationships and rationalized them as tough love or something like that. It's a problem of real abusive relationships, the fact that many people don't realize that they're something they should break out of. It would be interesting to depict them, but I wonder if something should be made about this. I'm not a fan of heavy handed storytelling, but perhaps there should be an exception here?

 

 

 

 

Oh and one request from me and I understand it will probably be ignored. Can we stop using the BSN as an analogy around what a fan base hell on earth is.  There are many positives on that website and we can't write off millions of fans due to the fact you disagree with a few hundred hard core fans and there perception of Romance and how they choose to discuss it

There are good things on the BSN, that much is true (otherwise the place would have imploded a long time ago). The thing is that the negatives tend to overshadow the positives, and they tend to taint the entire experience. And in the BSN, there are a lot of negative elements, so loud and present that they are slowly becoming the norm in many forums of importance. Nobody wants that to become the norm.

As for agreeing with the way a few hundred hardcore fans perceive and choose to discuss romance, well, a quick look to the Mass Effect 3 forum of "character and romance discussion" shows me that the mods chose to shut the entire thing down due to fan fighting, breaking of rules and petty bickering. Perhaps there are good reasons to disagree with them.
 

It is realistic to ignore the attractive and available person you spend months around. It happens all the damn time in real life because of many reasons, of course it's realistic. What isn't realistic is that the presence of someone attractive and available around you should inevitably lead to something. The reason why it happens so many times in movies and games that want to be movies is precisely because it's unrealistic.
 
I dispute this. Why would you argue against human nature? If you spend months with someone and face challengers and death on a daily basis and you have an emotional connection and are attracted to each other Romance would naturally develop? For example forget fantasy RPG for a moment and lets discuss RL and relationship dynamics. I have never ever heard of a scenario where 2 people are attracted to each other, want to have a relationship, there are no obstacles to this relationship and don't at least try to develop the Romance. Human beings are gregarious creatures by nature and once again I would argue that Romance is the normal and expected direction people follow if there are no obstacles

 
I'm not trying to argue against human nature. I'm trying to say that there is so much more to interpersonal relationships than human nature, and it seemed like the original post did not take that into account.

For example, as I argued on previous threads, facing challengers and death on a daily basis can be enough of a deterrent on its own for romance happening. Even if, as you said, there was an emotional connection and mutual attraction, circumstances can be enough for someone to say, "we'll think about that when this is over". And when it's over, people can also say "sorry man, new stuff happened that would put a wedge between us". It sucks, but things similar to those happen all the time in real life. They are realistic, and the original argument implied that they weren't.

Once you add all the preconditions necessary for romance to happen, sure, I agree that romance tends to happen. But things usually don't line up so nicely, and there is no reason why they would in PE. In fact, I'd say that expecting PE to make ways allowing to trivialize any obstacles of adventuring life or of the individual characters is making assumptions about the game. I get where these assumptions come from, but they are assumptions nonetheless, and they aren't always true.
 

Romances do NOT equal interpersonal relationships in general. Having no romances does not mean that NPCs will lack personality or motivations or reactivity. Seriously, this one is so stupid that I shouldn't see it repeated time and time again. And each time I see it, it convinces me a little more than perhaps some game out there should demonstrate this truth by making awesome character interactions that fulfill nicely the emotional wants of a player, but without resorting to romances to fulfill them. Perhaps Project Eternity should be that game, considering everything.
 
Of course you don't need Romance to have a party member interact with you on a deep level. But in all my Romances in all the games I played like Morrigan, Viconia and Isabela I did have a softer spot for those characters above other party members. And the reason was obvious, I imagined this physical relationship with them and how that would effect the emotional strength of my bond with them. So in my RPG experience and how I perceived the game and overall experience this did make the relationship  dynamic deeper. Even if it didn't effect my overall game or the primary choices available to me with the exception of a few lines of extra options in the dialogue choices this was important to me and some of the choices I made. I want this choice in PE.

 
Well, my point was that you don't need romance to have a party member interact with you on a deep level. If you get that, then we're cool. I felt that the original post implied this was not really possible, given the way it assumed that people involved in romances had the deepest understanding of each other of all relationships, or assumed that those opposed to romance were opposed to all party relationships ever.

 

Incidentally, I would agree that romances can be some of the story elements that can make a biggest impact in players (as your experiences with Morrigan, Viconia and Isabela can attest to). But this does not mean that they are deeper, or that they are the most memorable story element that can be used. A betrayal can be just as hard hitting, and a good plot twist even more so. Additionally, too many impacting elements can dillute each other, so if you already have a tumultuous story, adding more to it might not be a good idea.

 

And it's okay to want that choice to be in the game. I'm merely arguing why that could not be the case, and what possible obstacles there are that could cause the game to go the other way.

 

 

 

 

I think that making any suppositions about the motives of people who want something different from you is not good at all, and reeks of a strawman. I think that discussing why you want/don't want something in the game is good, but when doing so you should try to analyse what the person actually says instead of launching an attack on what you want them to say. By attacking strawmen and being hypersensitive to everything, you are making these forums closer to the BSN than X>10 regular posters talking about romance ever could on their own.

 
Fair enough. I will attempt to control that behavior, and to refrain from making assumptions about other people. My apologies for not doing so.
 
I argue, however, that statements like these...
 

A story without romance is a very dry thing.
 
[...]
 
As long as it is tasteful and completely optional then romance would only enhance the game.
 
[...]
 
I for one prefer interacting with NPCs than having a party of puppets that have no motivation. That is always an option for those vehemently opposed to relationships, romantic or otherwise. 
 
[...]
 
Besides roleplaying and romance are linked.
 
[...]
 
I at least want the option to allow my character to exist beyond schemes, power, money, exploration and violence.
 
[...]
 
Just don't expect to understand them, their motivations or their secrets in a way that a lover would. It is only natural.

PE with no romance would just feel wierd and could then be argueed not on par with it's predecessors.

 
...are, in fact, making assumptions, simplifications and leaps of logic about what makes stories interesting, about what makes for compelling character interactions, about what the people "opposed to relationships" mean, about this game in particular and about other games in general. Which is not the best thing to do, either. And I feel the need to point out where they fail.
 
Why bother? Because wrong assumptions usually make for wrong expectations, and wrong expectations usually lead to disappointments, which can be rather upsetting. I have seen the fallout of fan expectations being let down, and it is not a pretty sight for anyone involved (especially in topics as emotionally charged as romances), so I think it is a good idea to avoid that situation.
 
Perhaps I came too strongly when making my points, and I probably should have cut out certain parts. I apologize for that. But I do not feel that these mistakes invalidate the points I was making, and I think that they can still stand on their own.
 

Does anyone else here trust that Obsidian could deliver with PE, even if something you don't like is included?

 
Funny that you say that, because there is a longish thread on the front forum page right now where some people are indirectly arguing about this.
 
So far, there are one or two things that I'm a little uneasy about, but I still think that the game will satisfy me. I like the overall direction, so I trust that they'll deliver, because the things that I know seem pretty decent to me. It will likely satisfy me even if the developers decide in favor of romances, because some interviews with lead designers mention some of the things that have been asked for in terms of the character interactions that are not romantic. Nonetheless, I think this thread is as much about providing feedback, as it is about bringing newcomers up to date on what has been said, and as I said before, I personally believe that wrong assumptions should be disproven.

 

There is one angle to this question that hasn't been answered, though. Does anyone else here trust that Obsidian could deliver with PE, even if something you like is not included?

 

I said I would be okay with the presence of romances ( I never said that I do not like them though, just that I oppose them for everything they bring to the table). Would romancers trust Obsidian to deliver if romances were not included?

 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Oh Lurky, I wasn't actually commenting about your posts(I'd actually put them down as a model of civil discussion), just the general negativity from both camps that turns a discussion into a mud-slinging contest.

 

I do think your question is fair(and something I'm kicking myself for not posting) and should be discussed. I'm personally fine if something I like isn't included, as long as there is enough quality content to keep me entertained. I'm sure that Obsidian will provide on that front, seeing as every game of their's I've played(everything but DS3) has been packed with great content while lacking things I like(like sea battles with Krakens, a cRPG should really try this sometime).

[TrashMan]

Hm....an idea.

 

Have the option to seduce and bang a woman NPC in some town. Only to when you return later, you find out she's preggers.

Then you can run away or take responsiblity for the spawn of Satan that will result from your thyrst and marry her.

 

Bonus points is there are several womn, and it's random which gets pregnant.

Then you have to live with a woman you knwo nothing about and ma end up hating.

[Amentep]

Hm....an idea.

 

Have the option to seduce and bang a woman NPC in some town. Only to when you return later, you find out she's preggers.

Then you can run away or take responsiblity for the spawn of Satan that will result from your thyrst and marry her.

 

Bonus points is there are several womn, and it's random which gets pregnant.

Then you have to live with a woman you knwo nothing about and ma end up hating.

Weirdly, I think this suggestion actually points out one of the issues people have with romance as an option.

 

At some level there's a tipping point between an interesting PC-NPC relationship and a family simulator. The former could still be a fantasy adventure game, the latter not so much.

[CrazyPea]

I think relationships (on all levels) are a fundamental part of storytelling - stories are about people after all. So I would like definitely like to see romance (including hetro+homosexual relationships) in the game, albeit done gently - no need for sex scenes (ala Bioware). A perfect example  of a good NPC relationship, to me, is the  Companion Vilja mod for Oblivion and Skyrim - the relationship is well thought out (romance being optional, not manditory) and proceeds slowly over time and is at no time explicit (it isn't as shallow as the vanilla game either, and includes contributions from Discworld author, Sir Terry Pratchett) .

[Cultist]

Here, you "otakus" must be familiar with the original version of this picture

[CrazyPea]

Here, you "otakus" must be familiar with the original version of this picture

 

What a horrible image ... Um, is that aimed at me? If so I suggest you re-read my post. Because as I've said I'm not interested in the whole sex-scene thing. And I'm not a manchild either - I'm female and engaged, and I haven't lived with my parents for 20 (ish) years....

Edited July 15, 2013 by CrazyPea

[Hormalakh]

I don't know if anyone has said this, so i'm going to:

 

Romance thread. Romance thread never changes.

[Ulquiorra]

i see kindergarten here.

 

The piont of this conversation is that there are some players that want romances (from poll we know that most of them) and some people that don't. Some of them have their reasons some only trolls. But the most people that are responding are people who don't want them .... weird.

 

In general the point is that most "people that don't want romance" are trolling by useing "biowere inspired" images....

 

But in my opinion this type of actions are simle acts of shallow minds and irracional fear. becouse :

1. obs is makeing game not bio

2. this is not aa+ graphics game so bio-sexscene-based-something-like-romance is imposible.

 

secondly most of you still don't get this... this isint about adding dateing sim intu PE becouse even if this is all about in this level of graphics is imposible.

 

The only reason for romances and relationships is for narrative/wrthing side not visual efectish ... soo you don't see anyting you only read about it.

 

So people that are mostly for eroge or daiting sim will be not interested in those kind of things.

 

The real reason abot adding writhing/ narrativ romances for PE it's becouse it's simply realistic the same as talking, hate, frinship etc.

 

And for me cutting then 100% out is like cutting talking or other things that go beyound sword swinging.

 

If we apply logic from most people that don't want romances but innsted we use hate or talking in general is what we get.

 

 

 

 

1. Adding hate in to the game will brak the imersion of this game so it's better to cutt it down.

 

2. Hate as an emotion was never made 100% perfect so let's cutt it from be, we don't need characters to get angry if they don't do it perfectly.

 

3.Talking is egostroking, if you want to talk talk to your mom, but we made new mage spell that will make you feel powerful.

 

4. You are loner/ forest man and in general you are a loser if you want talking intu a game, becouse if you do then in reality you must be a type of person that have nobody to talk with ... yeaaaah echii hentai looser and egostroker !!!!!

 

5. If some characters arent made 100% perfect from dialog side lets make them complatly mute.

 

6. Hate, frienship and other type of relationships where never perfect so just cut them out and make some good archering mechanics for characters that can't get angry or be frind with someone ....

 

7. This is not talking simulator, so just cut that down and make everybod mute. If you want to talk play talking simulator or talk to you daddy

 

8 Adding hate as a emotion in general will take to much reasorces, and we need that for crafting and strongold.

 

Excuse me but i see this type of logic here but insead of "hate" "emotions" and "talking" we have romance... i hope that someone can see that from a point of view of someone that is not anyromance/relationship natzi those type of sentences at this type of progres (when characters are still not-developted not talking even about storline) sounds endlessly stupid and narrowminded ...

 

Some of those people risemble pokemone game fans that don't want talking main character, bcouse it was never was made in pokemon game series and will break immersion .... sigh...

 

Give me a break ...

[Lephys]

I don't know if anyone has said this, so i'm going to:

 

Romance thread. Romance thread never changes.

I don't want to set the world on fiii-rrrrrrrre. I just want to start a flaaaaaame... in yourrr hea-aarrrrrrrrrt.

 

That's all I have to say to that. u_u

 

*drops the mic*

[Monte Carlo]

This entire thread should be bathed in acid, then bayonetted repeatedly, just to be sure.

[BruceVC]

This entire thread should be bathed in acid, then bayonetted repeatedly, just to be sure.

 

Nah, we enjoy taking about Romance and its relevance in PE

[TrashMan]

I say we perform an Exterminatus.

Edited July 16, 2013 by TrashMan

[centurionofprix]

i see kindergarten here.

 

The piont of this conversation is that there are some players that want romances (from poll we know that most of them) and some people that don't. Some of them have their reasons some only trolls. But the most people that are responding are people who don't want them .... weird.

 

In general the point is that most "people that don't want romance" are trolling by useing "biowere inspired" images....

 

Or threadstarter Zalpha here referencing Aerie as an example of a good romance. At least to this particular discussion, Biowarian images are relevant.

 

 

But in my opinion this type of actions are simle acts of shallow minds and irracional fear. becouse :

1. obs is makeing game not bio

 

True, but some people (see starter of this thread) want them to make romances in a biowarian style, and simply for the sake of having romances because "most" players want romances, as opposed to romance being included because, and only if, it works as a relevant extension of the story and themes. I don't think anybody would object to the latter case, but it also means that romance isn't necessarily included.

 

 

2. this is not aa+ graphics game so bio-sexscene-based-something-like-romance is imposible.

 

Of course it isn't. See romance novels. See mods for IE games. The horrible, horrible Aerie romance referenced in the original post was also from an IE game without graphical sex scenes.

 

The issue with Bioware romances isn't merely that they supposedly revolve around sex scenes, or whether these are represented graphically, in text or in a fade to black. Or even the bizarre psychiatrist-patient power dynamics. It's that they are included for the sake of having a dating sim aspect to the game, with no relevance to the overall story and with no depth or meaning to justify their inclusion. They're horrible and actively make the characters worse.

 

 

secondly most of you still don't get this... this isint about adding dateing sim intu PE becouse even if this is all about in this level of graphics is imposible.

 

The only reason for romances and relationships is for narrative/wrthing side not visual efectish ... soo you don't see anyting you only read about it.

 

So people that are mostly for eroge or daiting sim will be not interested in those kind of things.

 

Nonsense, people love romance novels and romance mods for IE games precisely for the dating sim aspect. (I do too, sometimes, but I see no inherent reason why this should be included in PE to the exclusion of some other type of content. Perhaps it'll make sense given what Obsidian is trying to do with PE, rather than just for the sake of having a dating sim aspect, in which case I guess they'll put some tasteful romance in there, as they did with MOTB.)

 

I don't think the 10 seconds of creepy plastic dolls writhing against each other in slow-motion are the reason Bioware fans like the romances.

 

 

The real reason abot adding writhing/ narrativ romances for PE it's becouse it's simply realistic the same as talking, hate, frinship etc.

 

And for me cutting then 100% out is like cutting talking or other things that go beyound sword swinging.

 

True, and many of these things are necessarily cut out from RPGs. Say, aging or art or philosophy, all of which, like love, can have absolute significance for human life. The crucial issue is whether this particular story needs to include any of these, and which ones. Insisting out of context that the game should necessarily have aging mechanics or art mechanics or romance mechanics seem to me to be quite the same thing. Obviously PE has no need of art mechanics unless these are relevant to the vision of the game.

 

 

If we apply logic from most people that don't want romances but innsted we use hate or talking in general is what we get.

*snip*

 

This part struck me as simply nonsensical.

Edited July 16, 2013 by centurionofprix

[Ulquiorra]

centurionofprix

 

I think that biowereian romances are good example how to NOT make romances, not becouse they where 100% bad but becouse as an example in DAO.

 

1. Good romance with Morrigan but unfinished (so ant the end romance that starts good ends badly)

 

2. ****ty romance with Leliana the kindergarden queen.

 

3. unmature Alisteir for females at the age of 14 that never had a boyfriend ..

 

4. Zevran romance with is self trolling from biowere side ... the best was a jike made about it "in Zevran the best assasin also i like boys, if you let me use you i will show you my specialization"

 

We have marly 1 accepteble romance (with morrigan) but still unfinished .. and even dlc about her don't help a bit.

 

If Bio instead of 5 romance had focus on 2 (morrigan for males and alistair) for females and cut sex/kissing scenes and put this effort in makeing them more deep (expecially aliseir, and shallowest girl alive leliana, she even biten elanee).

 

I think that winged elf romance .... was something beetween. I personaly know people that liked it, and hate it even more then biowereones. I think that winged elf romance from bg2 was weakest but still stronger then avarge biowere one (but morrigan was better)

[Cultist]

Perhaps love was to strong a word but I do remember the romance fondly, and I did experience it as a 14 year old boy, so maybe that's why I feel so strongly about it? I don't know, was a cool gaming experience none the less. That is also were I found my love for the Drow race, not only are they incredibly strong, they are very unique in a game setting. Viconia's romance was like a double edge sword, I felt like I was playing with fire every time I spoke with her.

 

(For my Avatar, I re-textured the Anna the Nymph art work from NWN 1 to look like a Drow).

That only proves how horrilbe romances are. Innocent 14 year old boy suffered a trauma that caused him to set female avatars and identify himself as a girl...of a race known for matriarchial society with severe discrimination of male population. That only proves how romances in RPGs could lead to serious consequences and cause self-loathing, misandry and dissociative identity disorder.

[CrazyPea]

 

That only proves how horrilbe romances are. Innocent 14 year old boy suffered a trauma that caused him to set female avatars and identify himself as a girl...of a race known for matriarchial society with severe discrimination of male population. That only proves how romances in RPGs could lead to serious consequences and cause self-loathing, misandry and dissociative identity disorder.

 

 

[shakes head in wonder] Please tell me you are not actually serious - Hyperbolic nonsense from someone who has an immature gif of a boy shaking a sausage. [shakes head again, and walks away, laughing softly to herself]

[Cultist]

[shakes head in wonder] Please tell me you are not actually serious - Hyperbolic nonsense from someone who has an immature gif of a boy shaking a sausage. [shakes head again, and walks away, laughing softly to herself]

That boy is a person of high morals, honour and of noble heritage. Another example of how romance apologists tend to judge people based on a single moment of jest.

Edited July 17, 2013 by Cultist

[exodiark]

I always thought that the joke marriage in Fallout 2 is the best.
Your spouse will always cling to you (can't be dismissed) and she/he WILL and WILL die in the wasteland because she/he is so weak.
Not to mention they are so lovey-dovey to the point of silly.

Other than that, I guess romance is fine, but I don't think most people will appreciate realistic romance because IRL romance is very complicated.
I mean, I don't want to figure out why [virtual female A] is mad at my avatar all the time, even though we're a couple. Is it because of what I said? Is it her period? Is it because she wants to break up? Or other reasons?

Baaaaah.

[CrazyPea]

 

 

That boy is a person of high morals, honour and of noble heritage. Another example of how romance apologists tend to judge people based on a single moment of jest.

 

Um ... sure. .... No ... too easy. I'll let just let you continue to make yourself look foolish, you're doing a great job btw. [covers mouth, trying to conceal smirk]

Edited July 17, 2013 by CrazyPea

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

That boy is a person of high morals, honour and of noble heritage. Another example of how romance apologists tend to judge people based on a single moment of jest.

 

Um ... sure. .... No ... too easy. I'll let just let you continue to make yourself look foolish, you're doing a great job btw. [covers mouth, trying to conceal smirk]

 

 

He was just joking CrazyPea.  No need to take it seriously

[CrazyPea]

 

 

 

 

That boy is a person of high morals, honour and of noble heritage. Another example of how romance apologists tend to judge people based on a single moment of jest.

 

Um ... sure. .... No ... too easy. I'll let just let you continue to make yourself look foolish, you're doing a great job btw. [covers mouth, trying to conceal smirk]

 

 

He was just joking CrazyPea.  No need to take it seriously

Believe me, I'm not I can't, it's hilarious - hence the laughter and the smirking

Edited July 17, 2013 by CrazyPea

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

 

That boy is a person of high morals, honour and of noble heritage. Another example of how romance apologists tend to judge people based on a single moment of jest.

 

Um ... sure. .... No ... too easy. I'll let just let you continue to make yourself look foolish, you're doing a great job btw. [covers mouth, trying to conceal smirk]

 

 

He was just joking CrazyPea.  No need to take it seriously

Believe me, I'm not I can't, it's hilarious - hence the laughter and the smirking

 

 

Yeah, Cultist also makes me laugh