No romances confirmed

[Tauron]

romance is overrated

[blueitem]

Wow, some of you guys are a bit vitrolic yourselves about your dislike of romance in games, yeah? Personally, so long as the characters have a personality and a presence in the story, I don't have a particular preference as to what their relationship with you is -- although, admittedly, I would like some option for some them to stick around with you or you with them after the game. It did always feel strange that, even in supposedly the most tight-knit groups, most characters would go off their own ways at the end with very little in the way of farewells.

 

However, since I do so enjoy playing the devil's advocate, I would like to try to refute or at least provide some counterpoints to the arguments against romance.

 

1. Unrealistic or not working as a system - This is certainly a valid point that there must be a certain level of abstraction to implement romance into any game. However, if we rely on this argument to disallow romance, we must also disallow most other relationships, as everything will have subleties that can't necessarily be adapted into a game. For example, in Endrosz's section on influence gain on page 11, the example given about why a romantic relationship should break could also be applied to a friendship or a more friendly rivalry, a mercenary relationship if the mercenary has a code of conduct, any relationship with any idealistic character, and so forth. The same would apply to the gifting system and any other relationship system I can think of at the moment.

 

2. Romance on a pillar? - Bioware seemed to get brough up quite a bit in respect to poorly written romances; however, I haven't read any complaints about any other relationships with party members in the game even though they are just as shallow. For as hard as Mass Effect pushes the "Sheppard and Garrus best friend forever" idea, in the first game most of your interaction with him was broken down into "Shepard, I want to do this morally questionable thing. Do you agree? Y/N," and the second game barely had anything with him if you weren't going on his romance path. This raises the implication that some people are putting different standards on romantic relationships than on others, which in turn raises the question of why this happens. The idea that jumps to my mind is that they percieve romantic relationships are more permanent or intrinsically stronger than other relationships, which doesn't seem to even hold up in the games themselves. Going back to the Mass Effect example, you don't need to be romancing Liara or your squadmate for them to be torn up about your supposed death in the beginning of ME2. Although this point does seem to be uneccesarily exarcerbated by the fact that most of the time in games (or movies, or literature, or anything with a limited runtime not focused on romance), when there is a romance subplot, it is usually presented very qucikly as true love as opposed to the myriad of ways a romantic relationship could start out and develop.

 

3. Wish fulfillment - It is hard to argue against that even the best written romance is still wish fulfillment in games where the protagonist's character is defined by the player's choices. However, in the same vein as the differing standards point above, why is this type of wish fulfillment disliked while the multitude of other things that should also qualify get a free pass? At the very least, in a game where you shape the player character so much, all other significant relationships to NPCs (even antagonistic ones) should also fall into the same complaint -- instead of "Wow, I'm in a relationship with this really loving person" it could be "Wow, I'm best friends with this awesome wizard," or "Wow, I just beat this person channeling the power of a god and proved I was stronger/right."

 

Well, that's about it. Sorry guys, I tried to keep that relatively condensed but I wanted to attempt to explain my views a little. And because I feel like this post was maybe getting a bit too...passive-aggressive on calling people out, I'd like to end it with a concilatory note. 

 

Remember how amazing PS:T was? It barely had romances (mild flirts and Deinorra doesn't count because it wasn't really your romance) and it wasn't any worse off for it. So, despite my arguments for romance , I'm absolutely sure an amazing game can be made without it as well.

 

P.S. I keep reading "promancers" as "pyromancers" and becoming confused and excited each time.

[AGX-17]

If ever one could derive base pleasure from video games, it would be the announcement that the pestilence of video game romances would not be sullying PoE.

 

romance is overrated

Depends on how much alcohol is in your bloodstream, honestly. It's not like you'll still taste the vomit in your mouth when you're more concerned with the hangover.

Edited February 16, 2014 by AGX-17

[Monte Carlo]

I've just bought this Dragon-Age add-on...

 

http://www.matchesandmatrimony.com/

[StrangeCat]

why don't you just do romance like in BG2 or Mask of the Betrayer? 

Planescape Torment style romance.

[BruceVC]

Wow, some of you guys are a bit vitrolic yourselves about your dislike of romance in games, yeah? Personally, so long as the characters have a personality and a presence in the story, I don't have a particular preference as to what their relationship with you is -- although, admittedly, I would like some option for some them to stick around with you or you with them after the game. It did always feel strange that, even in supposedly the most tight-knit groups, most characters would go off their own ways at the end with very little in the way of farewells.

 

However, since I do so enjoy playing the devil's advocate, I would like to try to refute or at least provide some counterpoints to the arguments against romance.

 

1. Unrealistic or not working as a system - This is certainly a valid point that there must be a certain level of abstraction to implement romance into any game. However, if we rely on this argument to disallow romance, we must also disallow most other relationships, as everything will have subleties that can't necessarily be adapted into a game. For example, in Endrosz's section on influence gain on page 11, the example given about why a romantic relationship should break could also be applied to a friendship or a more friendly rivalry, a mercenary relationship if the mercenary has a code of conduct, any relationship with any idealistic character, and so forth. The same would apply to the gifting system and any other relationship system I can think of at the moment.

 

2. Romance on a pillar? - Bioware seemed to get brough up quite a bit in respect to poorly written romances; however, I haven't read any complaints about any other relationships with party members in the game even though they are just as shallow. For as hard as Mass Effect pushes the "Sheppard and Garrus best friend forever" idea, in the first game most of your interaction with him was broken down into "Shepard, I want to do this morally questionable thing. Do you agree? Y/N," and the second game barely had anything with him if you weren't going on his romance path. This raises the implication that some people are putting different standards on romantic relationships than on others, which in turn raises the question of why this happens. The idea that jumps to my mind is that they percieve romantic relationships are more permanent or intrinsically stronger than other relationships, which doesn't seem to even hold up in the games themselves. Going back to the Mass Effect example, you don't need to be romancing Liara or your squadmate for them to be torn up about your supposed death in the beginning of ME2. Although this point does seem to be uneccesarily exarcerbated by the fact that most of the time in games (or movies, or literature, or anything with a limited runtime not focused on romance), when there is a romance subplot, it is usually presented very qucikly as true love as opposed to the myriad of ways a romantic relationship could start out and develop.

 

3. Wish fulfillment - It is hard to argue against that even the best written romance is still wish fulfillment in games where the protagonist's character is defined by the player's choices. However, in the same vein as the differing standards point above, why is this type of wish fulfillment disliked while the multitude of other things that should also qualify get a free pass? At the very least, in a game where you shape the player character so much, all other significant relationships to NPCs (even antagonistic ones) should also fall into the same complaint -- instead of "Wow, I'm in a relationship with this really loving person" it could be "Wow, I'm best friends with this awesome wizard," or "Wow, I just beat this person channeling the power of a god and proved I was stronger/right."

 

Well, that's about it. Sorry guys, I tried to keep that relatively condensed but I wanted to attempt to explain my views a little. And because I feel like this post was maybe getting a bit too...passive-aggressive on calling people out, I'd like to end it with a concilatory note. 

 

Remember how amazing PS:T was? It barely had romances (mild flirts and Deinorra doesn't count because it wasn't really your romance) and it wasn't any worse off for it. So, despite my arguments for romance , I'm absolutely sure an amazing game can be made without it as well.

 

P.S. I keep reading "promancers" as "pyromancers" and becoming confused and excited each time.

 

That's an excellent and erudite post. Very well done

[Leferd]

I've just bought this Dragon-Age add-on...

 

http://www.matchesandmatrimony.com/

Despite being a male hetero hatemancer myself, albeit with an appreciation for the works of Jane Austen -and an affinity to the Napoleonic/Regency period, I can't help but be drawn to this. Edited February 16, 2014 by Leferd

[ronjs666]

Being emotionally involved in a game adds a real world factor.  Finding love in hard times is an eternal story theme.  How can you go through a hard life without finding someone to love?

 

Sex isn't necessary, and the game can be great without romance.  But if I had to chose between to great RPG games, I'd go with romance.

[BruceVC]

Being emotionally involved in a game adds a real world factor.  Finding love in hard times is an eternal story theme.  How can you go through a hard life without finding someone to love?

 

Sex isn't necessary, and the game can be great without romance.  But if I had to chose between to great RPG games, I'd go with romance.

 

You made a very complicated question quite simple and said it in a way that shouldn't offend or confuse anyone but is very true, nice one

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

why don't you just do romance like in BG2 or Mask of the Betrayer? 

Planescape Torment style romance.

In that you can completely ignore them and kill mindflayers?

[Bos_hybrid]

 

Being emotionally involved in a game adds a real world factor.  Finding love in hard times is an eternal story theme.  How can you go through a hard life without finding someone to love?

 

Sex isn't necessary, and the game can be great without romance.  But if I had to chose between to great RPG games, I'd go with romance.

 

You made a very complicated question quite simple and said it in a way that shouldn't offend or confuse anyone but is very true, nice one

 

 

Let it go people. It is no longer a debate.

 

No matter what is said, no matter what polls are shown, no matter how much you moan, their is no romance in PoE.

[BruceVC]

 

 

Being emotionally involved in a game adds a real world factor.  Finding love in hard times is an eternal story theme.  How can you go through a hard life without finding someone to love?

 

Sex isn't necessary, and the game can be great without romance.  But if I had to chose between to great RPG games, I'd go with romance.

 

You made a very complicated question quite simple and said it in a way that shouldn't offend or confuse anyone but is very true, nice one

 

 

Let it go people. It is no longer a debate.

 

No matter what is said, no matter what polls are shown, no matter how much you moan, their is no romance in PoE.

 

 

 

but..but..."hope springs eternal in the human breast"

[FlintlockJazz]

 

 

 

 

but..but..."hope springs eternal in the human breast"

 

Breasts?  Where??  Best not be in boobplate!

[Monte Carlo]

Promancers have to pick at the scab* It's unrequited love, I guess. Which is, in itself, romantic.

 

 

 

 

 

* I Know. I know.

[ronjs666]

Ok!  Fine!  No romance then.  BUT I demand sweet rolls then in it's place.

[FlintlockJazz]

Ok!  Fine!  No romance then.  BUT I demand sweet rolls then in it's place.

Someone stole your sweetroll?

[NanoPaladin]

 

 

Being emotionally involved in a game adds a real world factor.  Finding love in hard times is an eternal story theme.  How can you go through a hard life without finding someone to love?

 

Sex isn't necessary, and the game can be great without romance.  But if I had to chose between to great RPG games, I'd go with romance.

 

You made a very complicated question quite simple and said it in a way that shouldn't offend or confuse anyone but is very true, nice one

 

 

Let it go people. It is no longer a debate.

 

No matter what is said, no matter what polls are shown, no matter how much you moan, their is no romance in PoE.

 

 

*there...

 

At any rate we are well aware of that fact

 

I think most of this has blown over by now to be honest.

[Lephys]

 

Let it go people. It is no longer a debate.

 

No matter what is said, no matter what polls are shown, no matter how much you moan, their is no romance in PoE.

I don't think whether or not there's romance in PoE was ever up for debate in this thread, seeing as how the title is "No romances confirmed." *shrug*

 

If discussing romance and its effective implementation into video games is beating a dead horse, then what isn't beating a dead horse?

 

I could understand if the thread was entitled "Please let there be romance in PoE" or something. But, last I checked, you didn't have to be arguing for the active inclusion of something just to discuss its potential workings.

[Ulquiorra]

I was thinking about something.

 

Games in 80's where mostyly only games like "click and catch a ball".

 

Games in 90's started to have some "story" in it but still it was more focused on "gameplay" part of the games.

 

in 99/01 the "Story" started to be realy meaningfull (BG, BG2) examples, and some main "Story". 

 

Today games look like animated-videos with possibility to decide how this "video" will end. but still there is a "Story" and i even think that in some point this "Story" element started to be most important and more "emotional" then previos games.

 

This type of evolution brings up 2 subiects that are very close to "romance" it is "Story-taleing" and "athmosphere".

 

The whole idea about romances where also changed becouse of it.

 

Prevously romances were only shown as a "text wall" today "interactiv move with sex-cutscenes".

 

To me the point about romances, homances, hatemances etc in today video games are problematis becouse of bad writhing and trying to make some "system" out of it.

 

But first thing i what to show is storytaling, for example take "Game of Thrones" nobady says it has bad story, it has romance, bromance, homance, rape and high sexual content, and nobady says "Game of thrones" is like softcore porn or "biowere-style" child, why ? becouse it has good story, comlexed world and are waaay batter in story taleing then all bio-were game combined.

 

Of course game of thores is not "romance-cantred" but still chars are acting realistic, we see all kind of relationships.

 

If we copy this content to a vieo-game with AA+ graphics, still will it be bad idea of seeing some form of "romances" and sex scenes (by the way in Game of Thrones we mostly see homance and almost in every episode there is some point of sex-scene) whoud this type of game be bad ?

 

In my opinion not until they will not cutting or "changeing" something to pass a game thru PG12 raiting.

 

But still i thing that many players (even if the game whoud be also great from gameplay perspectiw) whoud not like it becouse of those "3d Sex-scenes".

 

And here we returt to "Atmosphere", in older games "Atmosphere" was mostly build by musics, story, textwall conversations...

Today games can be made to a full "movie-like" level, faces can have mimics, camera can change position, so.. mostly movie-like.

Most of the players are offendet by this becouse they still can't get it that today this type of things, and we have more possibilitis. But still some people cant eat this idea of iteractiv-movie like games.

 

Are those games bad becouse of it ?

 

No, adding AA+ graphics are not the reason why some games are lame, sex-cutsces also are not the reason.

 

Problem is storytaleing, if story is bad then it's bad and will be bad.

If we have story-relevant romance that is pointed to a decision "yes or no" then the story may be done well. But if we have non-story relevant 6 romances / 3 possible threesomes, 2 homances etc, there it isn't possible to make a good story from a "system-based-daiting-sim" romances, i will uderstand even 2/3 romances but not 6-8 like in mass effect 2.

 

Romances, homances, bromances and every type of possible relationship is the "center" of story even if some of you are struggleing about it. For example, why do you must hate "Archevil", why you must save/ destory world ? why you what to save/ destoy a vilidge ?

 

Even Player - Archevil is some form of relation ship "hate, rivality etc". Without it most of the games whoud never function. So in most cases the raltionships are the bricks of any story-line.

 

For example :

 

Player hates his enemy/ enemys, player is travelling becouse he want to find out who killed his parent/parents player likes his companions/are their emloyer(mercs)/ have simmilar goal (enemy of my enemy etc). Player save/destroyes vilidge becouse he likes/ hates them/ or at least what to act good or bad, player character is romancing some girl becouse of deep emotional conection(or isin't).

 

Now a storyline without any relationship :

 

Player fight enemy becouse "his" evil. Player is traveling becouse ... he don't have anything to do, companions are travelling with player becouse... someone telled them to do so, player save/ destoyed vilidge becouse destroying it will give him addictional 1000gold from looting and he needs that to by longswod+3 or not destroying will give him more exp and he want to level up. Player is romancing girl becouse he want to see sex-scenes.

 

Now with type of story taleing is better ?

 

 

Romance isn't a problem.

 

And by the way THERE will be some sort of romance in PoE, but not with player char (for examle farmer and his wife, princes and a guy who want to marry her but parent are not for him) so if those "story-based" romances are acceptle then why PC-based in simillar way isin't ?

 

and before anyone argu with me "where always will me some sort of a "Girl-boy-love" relation in game, so in some point proromancers win at the begining

Edited February 18, 2014 by Ulquiorra

[Bos_hybrid]

 

 

Let it go people. It is no longer a debate.

 

No matter what is said, no matter what polls are shown, no matter how much you moan, their is no romance in PoE.

I don't think whether or not there's romance in PoE was ever up for debate in this thread, seeing as how the title is "No romances confirmed." *shrug*

 

Yet people are still posting about why they think romance should be in PE. Even making spinoff topics with scientific reasons for it.............

 

Or

 

So, despite my arguments for romance

 

 

 

Argument for romance, in the no romances confirmed thread. You know the post you liked.

 

If discussing romance and its effective implementation into video games is beating a dead horse, then what isn't beating a dead horse?

 

You know this is a sub forum specifically for general discussion about PE? The PE that does not have romances...

 

It's like going on DA:I general discussion and creating the topic 'The case for no romances'.(Which would most likely get you banned from BSN)

 

I could understand if the thread was entitled "Please let there be romance in PoE" or something. But, last I checked, you didn't have to be arguing for the active inclusion of something just to discuss its potential workings.

 

Again, if it wasn't in the PE general discussion I might agree, but it is in PE general discussion. And guess what? PE has no romances. And I must ask how many threads have there been here about romance in PE....

 

Therefore:

[Alfiriel]

I still fail to see how the failure of a completly different company in a completly different game with completly different characters can be any kind of justification to lower the content of the game by cuttingfeature that theoretically opens up a lot of group interactions and can be strong rpg element if wrritten right.

 

Especially if we are talking about a completly optional feature you can simply ignore if you do not like it... There is simply no positive aspect from cutting this. It only has the potential to make the game worse if the execution would have been good and no benefit if it would have been bad since it could be just ignored.

 

I still did not see any argument explaining how the game can benefit from this. Neither does an optional romance decrease the quality of interaction with non romanceable chars nor does it limit plot options. All I see is examples for it being executed badly which are totally pointless...

 

For example the last one... you didnt need to go through this scene at all in da2 if you dont want to... so I think it is bs too but i didnt even see it before... because Iignore features I am not interested in insyead of calling for it to be removed to piss of people who like it.. Because thats all that is happening here some people here need to admit that it is about the enjoyment they get from denying others what they want... because again... no benefit from not having it.

 

Sure bad romances are kiddie fodder like that jade empire scene... but the game does that anyway... prelearend cooldown mmo skills and classes instant crafting repair system that doesnt allow your helms to be damaged... leaving out another potential kid pleasing feature could be a strong indication for it being in an area of the game they do not wanna focus on and while i even like some of the other stuff mentioned I really hope the group interaction and dialoge will be one of the parts the most work goes into.

 

Still no proof for that in the news unfortunately... so I have to continue being worried judging by the so far known features. Still believe it to be a great game in the end but maybe not the reinvention of classic IE style rpg I hoped for. Which would make me sad a bit while playing it )

[BruceVC]

I still fail to see how the failure of a completly different company in a completly different game with completly different characters can be any kind of justification to lower the content of the game by cuttingfeature that theoretically opens up a lot of group interactions and can be strong rpg element if wrritten right.

 

Especially if we are talking about a completly optional feature you can simply ignore if you do not like it... There is simply no positive aspect from cutting this. It only has the potential to make the game worse if the execution would have been good and no benefit if it would have been bad since it could be just ignored.

 

I still did not see any argument explaining how the game can benefit from this. Neither does an optional romance decrease the quality of interaction with non romanceable chars nor does it limit plot options. All I see is examples for it being executed badly which are totally pointless...

 

For example the last one... you didnt need to go through this scene at all in da2 if you dont want to... so I think it is bs too but i didnt even see it before... because Iignore features I am not interested in insyead of calling for it to be removed to piss of people who like it.. Because thats all that is happening here some people here need to admit that it is about the enjoyment they get from denying others what they want... because again... no benefit from not having it.

 

Sure bad romances are kiddie fodder like that jade empire scene... but the game does that anyway... prelearend cooldown mmo skills and classes instant crafting repair system that doesnt allow your helms to be damaged... leaving out another potential kid pleasing feature could be a strong indication for it being in an area of the game they do not wanna focus on and while i even like some of the other stuff mentioned I really hope the group interaction and dialoge will be one of the parts the most work goes into.

 

Still no proof for that in the news unfortunately... so I have to continue being worried judging by the so far known features. Still believe it to be a great game in the end but maybe not the reinvention of classic IE style rpg I hoped for. Which would make me sad a bit while playing it )

 

I agree that leaving out Romance will lesson the RPG experience in respects to interaction with your party members and most people see that as well.

 

But the reason Obsidian is not implementing Romance is because they don't have adequate resources to do Romance properly. The point is basically "if you can't do something properly then don't do it at all"

 

And even though it pains me to say so if that is the reality then its better we don't see Romance in PoE

[Hassat Hunter]

Especially if we are talking about a completly optional feature you can simply ignore if you do not like it...

You've read no arguments how it can be good. Let's see if you remember reading this;

Without *optional* romances, they can use the time and lines to make more conversations for those cutscenes for EVERYONE, allowing them more additional time to flesh out characters in a meaningful way.

 

So instead of NPC X having 10 conversations regular, and 5 romance, (s)he now has 15 conversations to flesh out the character. Then looking at a full party, cross-gender, that means around... 30 *optional* conversations that now can be put to meaningful fleshing out conversations for everyone.

 

What's there not like about THAT?

[Monte Carlo]

^ HH this is why this argument depresses me. People weigh in who (a) haven't thought to use the search function and (b) fail to appreciate very basic concepts around creating content.

[anameforobsidian]

I still fail to see how the failure of a completly different company in a completly different game with completly different characters can be any kind of justification to lower the content of the game by cuttingfeature that theoretically opens up a lot of group interactions and can be strong rpg element if wrritten right.

 

If they don't feel like they can do it right and are afraid it will be the exact same failure.  There's a reason no one ever released a virtual boy competitor; sometimes an idea is either bad, too hard to implement, or the people who could make it don't want to.  As for the last one, it's very rare to get good content from someone who does not enjoy the content they are making.

Edited February 18, 2014 by anameforobsidian