Romance, Marriage, Pregnancy and having Children.

[CrazyPea]

Just them being overly tender, BruceVC. As for some forum poll dictating Obsidian's design decisions, heh, stuff that.

Either tender or unused to dealing with mentality of some of the people on these forums - your choice Decisions should never be made SOLELY on polls (especially on internet forums), but they can be used by Obsidian as an indication of what their customers want.

Edited July 22, 2013 by CrazyPea

[Malcador]

Wouldn't say it is a mentality, but as you are.

[Morgulon the Wise]

Please just also implement all the bad stuff which comes with relationships: Heartbreaks, party arguing about your/ another members behaviour-->dysfunctionality, open hate between party members, a "****" which doesn't get accepted by anyone in the group, members running away and other relationship stress symptoms.

 

Irony besides, I would really want one or two possibilities of this approach in the game... It would be nice to have something compareable to romances for an evil character...

[Lurky]

Aw come on, I leave this thread for a week and people are strawmanning and flaming each other again? I hoped that the entropy of this thread would increase more slowly.

 

Several posters are right when they said that both sides are guilty of that behavior, but what can I say, I tend to take more personally the preconceptions made by romancers. Especially things like this:

 

The first lot develop their characters by buffing, min/maxing, and levelling up, mostly in glorious battle.  The second lot want to develop their characters by talking to the NPCs, building relationships (both romantic and non-romantic) and perhaps solving problems without the need for resorting to combat.

 

Because I've seen this particular generalization a lot, I wanted to single it out. People understand perfectly that both are valid ways of playing. In fact, many of the complaints against romances are actually coming from the second lot (I definitely come from there). Why? Because romances have this tendency to cannibalize other relationships by draining their focus, harming the freedom to choose how the PC relates to the characters. For people who want to develop their characters by talking to the NPCs and building relationships with them, romances can actually be a detriment.

 

There have been strawmen made by the side of the romance haters too, but damn, some proromancers piss me off because it's like they don't bother reading my posts. Seriously guys, I spend effort explaining the reasons why there is opposition to romances, and they have nothing to do with what you claim. It makes me feel so ignored

 

As for poll results, I'm not sure how reliable they could possibly be. I think they're what Sawyer once called "free ice cream" questions; if people are asked "do you want this extra optional free thing?" they'll usually say yes, no matter what. It's like "Do you want multiplayer in PE?" or "Do you want PE to be made for consoles too?": most people usually answer "sure, why not", but Obsidian isn't going to do those two things because of the impact they have on their resource allocation and game design. Even if most players would like them or be okay with them. The same thing could happen with romances too, and for similar reasons (not doing them justice with their resources, or not being in line with their narrative plans).

Edited July 22, 2013 by Lurky

[Lephys]

I don't know whether to bring out the popcorn or nuke this thread.

Just disperse kernels, THEN fire the nuke. The heat from the blast SHOULD pop the popcorn. 8P

[Bos_hybrid]

Do you have issue with Romance or Romance that provides options outside heterosexual males?

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah sure Bruce that's exactly it.... Or maybe it has more to do with the fact I don't want limited resources spent on 4-8 romances(2 straight male, 2 gay male, 2 straight female, 2 gay female). And before someone chimes in with you aren't asking for that, you are.

 

The point of me constantly emphasizing Set straight male PC, was to show why those games can get away with no female romances and a lack of homosexual ones. The minute you start allowing the player to create the PC, gender and sexuality change the requirements. If only male players get two romance, females are going to rightly ask why they are being excluded, if only heterosexual players characters get romances, homosexual players are going to rightly asking why they are being excluded. It's a resource drain.

 

I will put it this way, I dislike the idea of any romance in P:E.

 

Why can’t we have it all?

 

 

Limited resources is why. There is only so much time and money Obs can put into this game. This isn't a big budget bioware game(which even then still cuts corners), it's a $4 million small budget game.

 

What should have less time spent on it or be cut for romances?

 

Should companions have less dialogue for those that don't romance them? (Calibrations)

Should a faction not be developed to the devs original intentions? (Caesar's Legion)

 

According the polls, those that want some sort of romance are in the majority

 

So 73,986 people have voted on those polls?

 

Should we take a poll on multiplayer too?

 

Because I've seen this particular generalization a lot, I wanted to single it out. People understand perfectly that both are valid ways of playing. In fact, many of the complaints against romances are actually coming from the second lot (I definitely come from there). Why? Because romances have this tendency to cannibalize other relationships by draining their focus, harming the freedom to choose how the PC relates to the characters. For people who want to develop their characters by talking to the NPCs and building relationships with them, romances can actually be a detriment.

 

[Elerond]

Because I've seen this particular generalization a lot, I wanted to single it out. People understand perfectly that both are valid ways of playing. In fact, many of the complaints against romances are actually coming from the second lot (I definitely come from there). Why? Because romances have this tendency to cannibalize other relationships by draining their focus, harming the freedom to choose how the PC relates to the characters. For people who want to develop their characters by talking to the NPCs and building relationships with them, romances can actually be a detriment. 

 

Removing romantic interaction options is not any better alternative to overly emphasised romantic dialogue path, because they both remove roleplaying options from player.

 

In my opinion it is important that you have broad number of options when you interact with characters in the game especially with companion characters. And writers should avoid direct conversation paths (where there is friendship, romance, rivarly, neutral, ridicule, hate and etc. options) instead options should be more natural choices that at the end will sum what kind relationship you had with characters. Because then player will most likely roleplay his/her character instead trying to min-max their relationship status with npcs. In my opinion in modern rpgs relationships with npc have changed to be more like minigames where you need to choose right conversation options to get gameplay bonus or reward cut scene that you want, which has caused actual roleplaying devolved to background.

 

So in my opinion we need more natural interaction options with npc and remove conversation "reward" system, because that is what in my opinion has caused relationships in modern rpgs feel as forced thing and that there is dominating dialogue paths (meaning more rewarding) for npcs.

[CrazyPea]

Yes, I did make generalizations about what type of player wants what out of the game, and I am aware that people from both types of play are both for and against romance.  But, I also said there were three types, not two.  And the majority of people want a balance (which, according to the polls, INDICATES the inclusion of romances).

 

On the subject of polls, to repeat a later post: I agree that polls can’t always be taken as red and no decision should be made based SOLELY on polls (especially internet polls).  However, polls should be taken as an INDICATION of customer wants.  But if the polls are true, and the majority of backers DO want romantic options in the game, should Obsidian ignore that?  Maybe that’s a different debate, because it can applied to every aspect of the game. An interesting question though.

 

Limited Resources is one of those arguments that looks reasonable, but when you look deeper it isn’t always as much of an issue as it appears.

 

As someone who has designed a mod that included romance, I can tell you that one easy way is to take out gender restrictions (and dialogue references) on who can romance a particular character – this automatically doubles the amount of people who can romance said character.  If we do this for two characters of each gender that’s equal to eight viable romances.  It’s all about clever writing and using the resources you have in an efficient way.

 

A second point on resources is, where should we use them, then?  Combat?  Combat is well catered for throughout the game and has stretch goal extras.  Non-combat challenges? Like combat these crop up frequently throughout RPGs and again, like combat, some of these have been addressed in the stretch goals with things like the stronghold.  Character interaction?  Um … romance is a type of character interaction. Yes, there are plenty of other types of character interaction, but these are generally catered for by default.  Story? IMHO if a romance is written well it enhances a story.  Now, as others have pointed out, in the past, romances have not been done well. I agree, but, that’s purely subjective; beauty in the eye of the beholder and all that.  But, even so, does that mean they can’t be done well in the future?  Of course it doesn't. Or are you saying that you don’t trust Obsidian in the writing department?  Funnily enough, that’s the one area above all others that I trust them completely.    

Edited July 23, 2013 by CrazyPea

[Cultist]

As someone who has designed a mod that included romance, I can tell you that one easy way is to take out gender restrictions (and dialogue references) on who can romance a particular character – this automatically doubles the amount of people who can romance said character. If we do this for two characters of each gender that’s equal to eight viable romances – all without using much in the way of ‘resources’. It’s all about clever writing and using the resources you have in an efficient way.

Oh, look, you just invented Dragon Age 2.

Anyway, let's, once again, hear a bit of...

You've stated in the past that you don't like romances in games—at least to the extent that they've been done in games thus far. Were you to implement a romance subplot in Project Eternity, what would it involve?

Not a big fan of romances. I did four in Alpha Protocol because Chris Parker, our project director, demanded it because he thinks romance apparently is easy, or MAYBE it’s because he wanted to be an **** and give me tons of them to do because I LOVE them so much (although to be honest, I think he felt it was more in keeping with the spy genre to have so many romances, even if I did ask to downscope them). At least I got to do the “hatemance” version of most of them, which makes it a little more palatable. So if I were to implement a romance subplot in Eternity - I wouldn’t. I’d examine interpersonal relationships from another angle and I wouldn’t confine it to love and romance...

...I generally despise writing companion romances (I think unrequited and/or doomed ones are ultimately more dramatic)...

****

You have numbers, we have Chris.

[CrazyPea]

 

As someone who has designed a mod that included romance, I can tell you that one easy way is to take out gender restrictions (and dialogue references) on who can romance a particular character – this automatically doubles the amount of people who can romance said character. If we do this for two characters of each gender that’s equal to eight viable romances – all without using much in the way of ‘resources’. It’s all about clever writing and using the resources you have in an efficient way.

Oh, look, you just invented Dragon Age 2.

Anyway, let's, once again, hear a bit of...

You've stated in the past that you don't like romances in games—at least to the extent that they've been done in games thus far. Were you to implement a romance subplot in Project Eternity, what would it involve?

Not a big fan of romances. I did four in Alpha Protocol because Chris Parker, our project director, demanded it because he thinks romance apparently is easy, or MAYBE it’s because he wanted to be an **** and give me tons of them to do because I LOVE them so much (although to be honest, I think he felt it was more in keeping with the spy genre to have so many romances, even if I did ask to downscope them). At least I got to do the “hatemance” version of most of them, which makes it a little more palatable. So if I were to implement a romance subplot in Eternity - I wouldn’t. I’d examine interpersonal relationships from another angle and I wouldn’t confine it to love and romance...

...I generally despise writing companion romances (I think unrequited and/or doomed ones are ultimately more dramatic)...

****

You have numbers, we have Chris.

 

I hate writing westerns. So what? Yes he is the professional writer/designer, but he still has his own strengths and weaknesses, and, his own set of preferences. Do all Obsidian writers feel the same? Besides, who said the romances can't be doomed? Does every romance have to be 'Happily ever after?' As an aspiring writer, I agree with Chris that when things go wrong, it's much more satisfying to write about. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be romance, quite the reverse, a doomed romance or unrequited love could add to the story quite significantly.

Edited July 23, 2013 by CrazyPea

[LadyCrimson]

Every time I see that interview quote, I can hear Chris speaking it in my mind. And I chuckle.

 

 

...plus I like that he thinks unrequited/doomed relationships are more dramatic, because (obviously) I also think that way. More dramatic, more interesting, and more potentially resonant than "meet, bicker, misunderstanding, makeup, marry, house, kids." I tend to prefer ambiguous vs. well defined. I don't always want to know how it works out (my imagination can do that for me).

 

...but I'm really not expecting (main chr/companion) romance in P.E. I could be wrong of course, but eh ... even if there's something, I doubt it'd be very comprehensive. Hints and a few bylines maybe.

[KillerClowns]

 

Do you have issue with Romance or Romance that provides options outside heterosexual males?

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah sure Bruce that's exactly it.... Or maybe it has more to do with the fact I don't want limited resources spent on 4-8 romances(2 straight male, 2 gay male, 2 straight female, 2 gay female). And before someone chimes in with you aren't asking for that, you are.

 

The point of me constantly emphasizing Set straight male PC, was to show why those games can get away with no female romances and a lack of homosexual ones. The minute you start allowing the player to create the PC, gender and sexuality change the requirements. If only male players get two romance, females are going to rightly ask why they are being excluded, if only heterosexual players characters get romances, homosexual players are going to rightly asking why they are being excluded. It's a resource drain.

 

I will put it this way, I dislike the idea of any romance in P:E.

 

That's a fair enough point, though you probably should've clarified that before. You still moved the goalposts when offered a counter-argument, though, and besides, there's the standby of four conviniently bisexual characters. As mentioned by CrazyPea, in fact...

 

 

As someone who has designed a mod that included romance, I can tell you that one easy way is to take out gender restrictions (and dialogue references) on who can romance a particular character – this automatically doubles the amount of people who can romance said character. If we do this for two characters of each gender that’s equal to eight viable romances – all without using much in the way of ‘resources’. It’s all about clever writing and using the resources you have in an efficient way.

Oh, look, you just invented Dragon Age 2.

 

"DA2 did it" is not a counter-argument. But that said...

 

Anyway, let's, once again, hear a bit of...

You've stated in the past that you don't like romances in games—at least to the extent that they've been done in games thus far. Were you to implement a romance subplot in Project Eternity, what would it involve?

Not a big fan of romances. I did four in Alpha Protocol because Chris Parker, our project director, demanded it because he thinks romance apparently is easy, or MAYBE it’s because he wanted to be an **** and give me tons of them to do because I LOVE them so much (although to be honest, I think he felt it was more in keeping with the spy genre to have so many romances, even if I did ask to downscope them). At least I got to do the “hatemance” version of most of them, which makes it a little more palatable. So if I were to implement a romance subplot in Eternity - I wouldn’t. I’d examine interpersonal relationships from another angle and I wouldn’t confine it to love and romance...

...I generally despise writing companion romances (I think unrequited and/or doomed ones are ultimately more dramatic)...

****

You have numbers, we have Chris.

 

Every time I see that interview quote, I can hear Chris speaking it in my mind. And I chuckle.

 

 

...plus I like that he thinks unrequited/doomed relationships are more dramatic, because (obviously) I also think that way. More dramatic, more interesting, and more potentially resonant than "meet, bicker, misunderstanding, makeup, marry, house, kids." I tend to prefer ambiguous vs. well defined. I don't always want to know how it works out (my imagination can do that for me).

 

...but I'm really not expecting (main chr/companion) romance in P.E. I could be wrong of course, but eh ... even if there's something, I doubt it'd be very comprehensive. Hints and a few bylines maybe.

Okay, I know when I'm beat. While I guess you could stick me in the fringes of the promancer camp, I won't bitch and whine if it doesn't happen because the guys at Obsidian didn't think it was worth their time. And... yeah, it is looking like that'll be the case. Better for Chris, et al, to stick to their artistic vision then listen to us whiners. If someone else on the writing team thinks otherwise and feels like writnig a romance for some companions would be a good use of their time and creative energies, and they do it well enough to stay up to Obsidian standards, awesome. But if not, life goes on, and let the modders go wild. (God help us all.)

[BruceVC]

 

 

As someone who has designed a mod that included romance, I can tell you that one easy way is to take out gender restrictions (and dialogue references) on who can romance a particular character – this automatically doubles the amount of people who can romance said character. If we do this for two characters of each gender that’s equal to eight viable romances – all without using much in the way of ‘resources’. It’s all about clever writing and using the resources you have in an efficient way.

Oh, look, you just invented Dragon Age 2.

Anyway, let's, once again, hear a bit of...

You've stated in the past that you don't like romances in games—at least to the extent that they've been done in games thus far. Were you to implement a romance subplot in Project Eternity, what would it involve?

Not a big fan of romances. I did four in Alpha Protocol because Chris Parker, our project director, demanded it because he thinks romance apparently is easy, or MAYBE it’s because he wanted to be an **** and give me tons of them to do because I LOVE them so much (although to be honest, I think he felt it was more in keeping with the spy genre to have so many romances, even if I did ask to downscope them). At least I got to do the “hatemance” version of most of them, which makes it a little more palatable. So if I were to implement a romance subplot in Eternity - I wouldn’t. I’d examine interpersonal relationships from another angle and I wouldn’t confine it to love and romance...

...I generally despise writing companion romances (I think unrequited and/or doomed ones are ultimately more dramatic)...

****

You have numbers, we have Chris.

 

I hate writing westerns. So what? Yes he is the professional writer/designer, but he still has his own strengths and weaknesses, and, his own set of preferences. Do all Obsidian writers feel the same? Besides, who said the romances can't be doomed? Does every romance have to be 'Happily ever after?' As an aspiring writer, I agree with Chris that when things go wrong, it's much more satisfying to write about. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be romance, quite the reverse, a doomed romance or unrequited love could add to the story quite significantly.

 

 

 

 

 

Do you have issue with Romance or Romance that provides options outside heterosexual males?

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah sure Bruce that's exactly it.... Or maybe it has more to do with the fact I don't want limited resources spent on 4-8 romances(2 straight male, 2 gay male, 2 straight female, 2 gay female). And before someone chimes in with you aren't asking for that, you are.

 

The point of me constantly emphasizing Set straight male PC, was to show why those games can get away with no female romances and a lack of homosexual ones. The minute you start allowing the player to create the PC, gender and sexuality change the requirements. If only male players get two romance, females are going to rightly ask why they are being excluded, if only heterosexual players characters get romances, homosexual players are going to rightly asking why they are being excluded. It's a resource drain.

 

I will put it this way, I dislike the idea of any romance in P:E.

 

That's a fair enough point, though you probably should've clarified that before. You still moved the goalposts when offered a counter-argument, though, and besides, there's the standby of four conviniently bisexual characters. As mentioned by CrazyPea, in fact...

 

 

As someone who has designed a mod that included romance, I can tell you that one easy way is to take out gender restrictions (and dialogue references) on who can romance a particular character – this automatically doubles the amount of people who can romance said character. If we do this for two characters of each gender that’s equal to eight viable romances – all without using much in the way of ‘resources’. It’s all about clever writing and using the resources you have in an efficient way.

Oh, look, you just invented Dragon Age 2.

 

"DA2 did it" is not a counter-argument. But that said...

 

Anyway, let's, once again, hear a bit of...

You've stated in the past that you don't like romances in games—at least to the extent that they've been done in games thus far. Were you to implement a romance subplot in Project Eternity, what would it involve?

Not a big fan of romances. I did four in Alpha Protocol because Chris Parker, our project director, demanded it because he thinks romance apparently is easy, or MAYBE it’s because he wanted to be an **** and give me tons of them to do because I LOVE them so much (although to be honest, I think he felt it was more in keeping with the spy genre to have so many romances, even if I did ask to downscope them). At least I got to do the “hatemance” version of most of them, which makes it a little more palatable. So if I were to implement a romance subplot in Eternity - I wouldn’t. I’d examine interpersonal relationships from another angle and I wouldn’t confine it to love and romance...

...I generally despise writing companion romances (I think unrequited and/or doomed ones are ultimately more dramatic)...

****

You have numbers, we have Chris.

 

Every time I see that interview quote, I can hear Chris speaking it in my mind. And I chuckle.

 

 

...plus I like that he thinks unrequited/doomed relationships are more dramatic, because (obviously) I also think that way. More dramatic, more interesting, and more potentially resonant than "meet, bicker, misunderstanding, makeup, marry, house, kids." I tend to prefer ambiguous vs. well defined. I don't always want to know how it works out (my imagination can do that for me).

 

...but I'm really not expecting (main chr/companion) romance in P.E. I could be wrong of course, but eh ... even if there's something, I doubt it'd be very comprehensive. Hints and a few bylines maybe.

Okay, I know when I'm beat. While I guess you could stick me in the fringes of the promancer camp, I won't bitch and whine if it doesn't happen because the guys at Obsidian didn't think it was worth their time. And... yeah, it is looking like that'll be the case. Better for Chris, et al, to stick to their artistic vision then listen to us whiners. If someone else on the writing team thinks otherwise and feels like writnig a romance for some companions would be a good use of their time and creative energies, and they do it well enough to stay up to Obsidian standards, awesome. But if not, life goes on, and let the modders go wild. (God help us all.)

 

 

Guys that quote from Chris is old and not relevant. As CrazyPea mentioned that's just his preference and doesn't mean there won't be Romance in PE. Until I see an official statement from Obsidian that says "there will be no Romances in PE" I'll continue to fight and champion there implementation in PE

 

@ KillerClowns

 

The fight ain't over by a long shot so don't give up

[BruceVC]

 

Do you have issue with Romance or Romance that provides options outside heterosexual males?

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah sure Bruce that's exactly it.... Or maybe it has more to do with the fact I don't want limited resources spent on 4-8 romances(2 straight male, 2 gay male, 2 straight female, 2 gay female). And before someone chimes in with you aren't asking for that, you are.

 

The point of me constantly emphasizing Set straight male PC, was to show why those games can get away with no female romances and a lack of homosexual ones. The minute you start allowing the player to create the PC, gender and sexuality change the requirements. If only male players get two romance, females are going to rightly ask why they are being excluded, if only heterosexual players characters get romances, homosexual players are going to rightly asking why they are being excluded. It's a resource drain.

 

I will put it this way, I dislike the idea of any romance in P:E.

 

 

 

 

No need to make an emoticon expressing frustration, your objection to Romance wasn't clear so my question was valid

 

The simple answer is you are opposed to any Romance in PE as you feel its a waste of  resources.

 

Simple response and easy to understand, of course I dispute that but I respect your opinion

[LadyCrimson]

I feel like I should restate (since there's some new people in the debate, I think) that I'm neither anti nor pro romance. I'm not big on romance stories in general (film, books, whatever), but now and then there will be one that I do like. When it comes to games, generally speaking, it doesn't even cross my mind. I don't start a story-RPG thinking "I wonder if there will be any romance plots," and if there are none, I don't end the game thinking "I wish there had been romance plots." It just isn't part of my general thought process at all.

 

But if there is one, and it resonated with me personally, I'll go "well that was nice."

 

It's rare that I feel connected to game characters to the point where I want to romance one or play match-maker for some. And when I do feel that connected, often I eventually realize that what it was that attracted me to the chr./situation would make a romance plot (within the game) go against the nature of what appealed to me about that chr. in the first place. That's because of what personally attracts me, of course, but I use it as an example of why I'm fairly ambivalent about romance options in games.

 

That all said, from what I've seen/known in their games, if anyone could make a romance plot resonate for me personally, it'd probably be Obsidian. I still don't expect to see it in P.E., tho.

[BruceVC]

I feel like I should restate (since there's some new people in the debate, I think) that I'm neither anti nor pro romance. I'm not big on romance stories in general (film, books, whatever), but now and then there will be one that I do like. When it comes to games, generally speaking, it doesn't even cross my mind. I don't start a story-RPG thinking "I wonder if there will be any romance plots," and if there are none, I don't end the game thinking "I wish there had been romance plots." It just isn't part of my general thought process at all.

 

But if there is one, and it resonated with me personally, I'll go "well that was nice."

 

It's rare that I feel connected to game characters to the point where I want to romance one or play match-maker for some. And when I do feel that connected, often I eventually realize that what it was that attracted me to the chr./situation would make a romance plot (within the game) go against the nature of what appealed to me about that chr. in the first place. That's because of what personally attracts me, of course, but I use it as an example of why I'm fairly ambivalent about romance options in games.

 

That all said, from what I've seen/known in their games, if anyone could make a romance plot resonate for me personally, it'd probably be Obsidian. I still don't expect to see it in P.E., tho.

 

Would you support a cat familiar that can talk and assist in battles. This feline could also carry some of your equipment

[Gfted1]

What makes you guys say the majority of backers want romance, because ~75 people voted in some forum poll one of you made up? You do realize there are like 73k other backers who never visit this board, right?

[CrazyPea]

What makes you guys say the majority of backers want romance, because ~75 people voted in some forum poll one of you made up? You do realize there are like 73k other backers who never visit this board, right?

Which is why I have said that polls cannot be relied on in isolation and that they are an INDICATION, nothing more, of what backers want.

Edited July 23, 2013 by CrazyPea

[Bos_hybrid]

That's a fair enough point, though you probably should've clarified that before.

 

Actually I have. In the previous romance threads.

 

 You still moved the goalposts when offered a counter-argument, though, and besides,

 

Actually I haven't, I can't help it when people don't read properly. I've always stated multiple genders and sexualities. Then Pshaw listed a whole bunch of straight male PC games as examples for games like bioware, wrong examples.

 

Limited Resources is one of those arguments that looks reasonable, but when you look deeper it isn’t always as much of an issue as it appears.

 

Of course it is. Resources are always limited, they are even more so in P:E situation.

 

there's the standby of four conviniently bisexual characters. As mentioned by CrazyPea, in fact...

 

As someone who has designed a mod that included romance, I can tell you that one easy way is to take out gender restrictions (and dialogue references) on who can romance a particular character – this automatically doubles the amount of people who can romance said character.  If we do this for two characters of each gender that’s equal to eight viable romances.  It’s all about clever writing and using the resources you have in an efficient way.

 

Blech, player sexual characters. Might as call them blow up dolls. But for horrors sake lets accept that, and move on to the fact that it's still four romances to write. We still have to take resource from somewhere else to get four romances. Where do you pick?

 

Lore?

Non-romance interactions?

Quests?

Factions?

Endings?

[Nonek]

After reading the many viewpoints expressed in the last ten pages i'd like to take the opportunity to change my initial, rather rushed reaction and submit a new one:

 

Hell NO!

 

Thank you.

[CrazyPea]

 

Blech, player sexual characters. Might as call them blow up dolls. But for horrors sake lets accept that, and move on to the fact that it's still four romances to write. We still have to take resource from somewhere else to get four romances. Where do you pick?

 

 

 

 

Speaking of people that don't read properly... 

 

Don't be disgusting; not every romance is about the sex scene - And if you bothered to play the mod in question you would see that there is no sex in the romance and if you don't do the romance the game carries on without it being an issue. Second point: If romances were planned in at the beginning there would be no need to take resources from elsewhere as they would be allocated their own resources from the pot

Edited July 23, 2013 by CrazyPea

[LadyCrimson]

Would you support a cat familiar that can talk and assist in battles. This feline could also carry some of your equipment

I'll take Shrek's Puss N Boots, please.

[CrazyPea]

After reading the many viewpoints expressed in the last ten pages i'd like to take the opportunity to change my initial, rather rushed reaction and submit a new one:

 

Hell NO!

 

Thank you.

*shrugs* well at least it's an informed opinion. One I respectfully disagree with, but each to their own

Edited July 23, 2013 by CrazyPea

[Bos_hybrid]

 

 

Blech, player sexual characters. Might as call them blow up dolls. But for horrors sake lets accept that, and move on to the fact that it's still four romances to write. We still have to take resource from somewhere else to get four romances. Where do you pick?

Speaking of people that don't read properly... 

 

That was my opinion on player sexual characters not your mod. Player sexual characters, are an easy way out. They are there so the PC can do whatever they want with them. Blow up dolls.

 

Don't be disgusting; not every romance is about the sex scene -

 

It's come up before in these threads.

 

Second point: If romances were planned in at the beginning there would be no need to take resources from elsewhere as they would be allocated their own resources from the pot

 

But you and others obviously don't feel they have planned romances from the start. If you and others did, you wouldn't be posting topics, pointing to polls (as clear indication of a majority want) and dismissing devs(less than favourable) thoughts on the matter. You want romances regardless of your 'second point'. So pick an area to take resources from.

[Malcador]

Which is why I have said that polls cannot be relied on in isolation and that they are an INDICATION, nothing more, of what backers want.

Pretty meaningless as an indication, as well.