Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Are we really discussing "which IE game is *more* IE" due to... romances?

 

 

 

Oh Hassat I'm so proud of you, you have finally come to conclusion that we need to rate IE games on there Romance implementations. If we continue to see a concerted effort on your part to support Romance you'll be welcomed to promancers camp. But due to the intransigence of your past views around Romance we will need to continue to see you supporting the importance of Romance or you'll be back in anti-romance camp :wowey:


"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

    I'm genuinely amused at the fact that most people against romances in RPGs tends to refer to them as "primitive", "juvenile", "poorly-written", even "perverted", etc. It's mostly an offspring of the tendency to call any character, story, quest, etc.  "poorly-written" simply because a person doesn't like it. Romance detractors seem to try and make this a question of correctness instead of taste. In other words, if you like romances in RPGs you're basically an idiot.

    The way I see it, it's an effective way to completely divert the subject from its focus. And the focus should be on the difficulty that these people have to deal with a virtual romance at the same time they want pretty much anything else (friendship, rivalry, etc.) to be present. We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations. We usually look down upon action RPGs precisely because they tend to not provide much in that regard. Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them, a position I believe speaks of a too common uncomfortable attitude towards sex and everything that traditionally is seem as coming along with it (prejudice, guilt, etc.).

    I believe the role of romances is severely downplayed by these people. My own experience with BG2 and PS:T tells me the opposite: I still remember my wonder at watching Aerie and Jaheira fighting over my character, something I had never saw in a game, as well as my subsequent decision to make my character choose Aerie much because I couldn't bear for him to get into a relationship with a widow of a dear companion (Khalid). In PS:T, I remember my character agonizing over his final fate, but taking some comfort over the fact that Fall-from-Grace could very well find him in the Nine Hells, no matter how tragic their relationship was due to her nature.

    None of those experiences, which I remember clearly to this day despite having played the games at their release, almost 15 years ago, would be possible in a game without romance. There's no way PoE won't be a poorer game without them in my view, no matter how excellent other areas prove to be. If we intend in the future to regard RPGs as role-playing games instead of exclusively party-based combat simulators (what they mostly end up being), I can't see the gain in parting with the option of romance in a game instead of trying to improve it.

 

Butt-hurt.

 

And the most specious of your arguments is the familiar "no romance = combat simulator" lie.

 

If you seriously think Obsidian's writers won't provide meaningful NPC interaction in this game then what the hell are you doing haunting these forums? There's the BSN, DA:I is out at the same time as this game.

 

Admit it - you just can't handle the truth that there's no sex-with-NPCs. Tragic, really.

 

handle-the-truth.jpg

  • Like 1

sonsofgygax.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Butt-hurt.

 

And the most specious of your arguments is the familiar "no romance = combat simulator" lie.

 

If you seriously think Obsidian's writers won't provide meaningful NPC interaction in this game then what the hell are you doing haunting these forums? There's the BSN, DA:I is out at the same time as this game.

 

Admit it - you just can't handle the truth that there's no sex-with-NPCs. Tragic, really.

 

 

It seems the peak of your ability to argue is to post a Jack Nicholson image and claim you're right. Quite sad, really, because

 

1: I never wrote there would be no meaningful interactions with NPCs; Obsidian is ditching one type of meaningful interaction, incidentally one that many consider relevant.

 

and 2: I never used the argument no romance=combat simulator, I just argued that removing romances does no good to the idea that CRPGs are supposed to be more than combat simulators (it doesn't, unless you somehow believe romancing is a part of combat, a possibility I can't dismiss given you lacking reply).

 

Maybe in your world of Jack Nicholson images what you posted could pass as showing adequate reading comprehension, but it instead suggests you didn't even bother to read my post (maybe because it has more than 140 characters) or you have a serious cognitive disability.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Butt-hurt.

 

And the most specious of your arguments is the familiar "no romance = combat simulator" lie.

 

If you seriously think Obsidian's writers won't provide meaningful NPC interaction in this game then what the hell are you doing haunting these forums? There's the BSN, DA:I is out at the same time as this game.

 

Admit it - you just can't handle the truth that there's no sex-with-NPCs. Tragic, really.

 

 

It seems the peak of your ability to argue is to post a Jack Nicholson image and claim you're right. Quite sad, really, because

 

1: I never wrote there would be no meaningful interactions with NPCs; Obsidian is ditching one type of meaningful interaction, incidentally one that many consider relevant.

 

and 2: I never used the argument no romance=combat simulator, I just argued that removing romances does no good to the idea that CRPGs are supposed to be more than combat simulators (it doesn't, unless you somehow believe romancing is a part of combat, a possibility I can't dismiss given you lacking reply).

 

Maybe in your world of Jack Nicholson images what you posted could pass as showing adequate reading comprehension, but it instead suggests you didn't even bother to read my post (maybe because it has more than 140 characters) or you have a serious cognitive disability.

 

 

He's right Monte, he didn't say the things you are accusing him of. Did you read his post ? :unsure:


"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read all of it. It was butt-hurt. I especially like the bit at the start, where he lays out his stall:

 

 

 

And the focus should be on the difficulty that these people have to deal with a virtual romance at the same time they want pretty much anything else (friendship, rivalry, etc.) to be present. We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations...Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them, a position I believe speaks of a too common uncomfortable attitude towards sex and everything that traditionally is seem as coming along with it (prejudice, guilt, etc.).

 

This bit is saying those of us ('these people' he says, haughtily) who don't like CRPG romances are the ones with the problem. LOL.

 

Which is why he can't handle the truth.


sonsofgygax.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then he accuses me of having a 'serious cognitive disability.'


sonsofgygax.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is never an or decission in character interaction... like romance or other relationship types or romance or shut up.

 

If there is the developers just fail at the core element of a party based rpg. You should not let them off so easily by saying it is ok for you to cut the part of party interaction you like the least.

 

I rather have 10 areas less in the game than losing any party dialohue no matter if it is a silbling story or a romance or minsc and boo... This is actually what should be budgeted first right with the exploration aspect. It is one of the 2 core mechanics. No justification out there to cut any content in that area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read all of it. It was butt-hurt. I especially like the bit at the start, where he lays out his stall:

 

 

 

And the focus should be on the difficulty that these people have to deal with a virtual romance at the same time they want pretty much anything else (friendship, rivalry, etc.) to be present. We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations...Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them, a position I believe speaks of a too common uncomfortable attitude towards sex and everything that traditionally is seem as coming along with it (prejudice, guilt, etc.).

 

This bit is saying those of us ('these people' he says, haughtily) who don't like CRPG romances are the ones with the problem. LOL.

 

Which is why he can't handle the truth.

 

 

I've never known you to be so sensitive before :blink: and you are firmly in the anti-romance camp so doesn't that make you "these people "

 

And as far as the "don't like CRPG romances are the ones with the problem" ...what about the relevancy of the maxim  " if the cap fits..." and all that ....

 

:p


"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This bit is saying those of us ('these people' he says, haughtily) who don't like CRPG romances are the ones with the problem. LOL.

 

Which is why he can't handle the truth.

While his message could have been conveyed better no that isn't it.  He is saying you argue that we need more relationship types in game to be more "realistic and varied" but then argue that we should exclude one of the most common types of relationships that exist in real life.  The idea that optional romance is detrimental to an RPG has always been and will always be pure nonsense.  The problem, like I have said many times, is not the type of relationships but the fact that they are badly written and the characters are one dimensional.  A badly written one dimensional "buddy" character like Jacob (for male character anyway) from ME2 is no better than one of the badly written one dimensional love interests from Jade Empire.

 

PS: I am only targeting Bioware there because I know if I target anything else no one on this forum other than the people who already agree with me will "get it".  Obsidian has plenty of terrible characters under their belt too.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations. We usually look down upon action RPGs precisely because they tend to not provide much in that regard. Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them

 

Agreed. Great post

Edited by Webslinger
  • Like 2

23u4g7t.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit sad that there won't be any romance because all my favourite RPG have romances. However, I understand if the devloper say that they don't have the time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations. We usually look down upon action RPGs precisely because they tend to not provide much in that regard. Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them

 

Agreed. Great post

 

I don't believe that the current state-of-the-art interaction mechanics allow for improved implementations of relationships. You'd need a strong AI backbone that has creative elements and is able to simulate realistic responses. That would require budget for AI coder plus hiring a good romance writer and possibly additional testers. The developers would need to cut other elements of the game in order to fund that content.

 

Hence, this is not a good idea for the current game. It would be better to try this in an AAA effort.


"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations. We usually look down upon action RPGs precisely because they tend to not provide much in that regard. Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them

 

Agreed. Great post

 

I don't believe that the current state-of-the-art interaction mechanics allow for improved implementations of relationships. You'd need a strong AI backbone that has creative elements and is able to simulate realistic responses. That would require budget for AI coder plus hiring a good romance writer and possibly additional testers. The developers would need to cut other elements of the game in order to fund that content.

 

Hence, this is not a good idea for the current game. It would be better to try this in an AAA effort.

 

 

It seems to me better writing, more dialogue options and avoiding making every character romanceable by either gender would go a long way towards improvement without adding absurd costs related to AI development. Also I believe this kind of game would be the right one to do it, as AAA voiceover has a high cost, making fully voiced high budget games less likely to attempt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read all of it. It was butt-hurt. I especially like the bit at the start, where he lays out his stall:

 

 

 

And the focus should be on the difficulty that these people have to deal with a virtual romance at the same time they want pretty much anything else (friendship, rivalry, etc.) to be present. We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations...Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them, a position I believe speaks of a too common uncomfortable attitude towards sex and everything that traditionally is seem as coming along with it (prejudice, guilt, etc.).

 

This bit is saying those of us ('these people' he says, haughtily) who don't like CRPG romances are the ones with the problem. LOL.

 

Which is why he can't handle the truth.

 

Between your insistence in calling me butt-hurt and posting Jack Nicholson images, you failed to address any of my arguments.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations. We usually look down upon action RPGs precisely because they tend to not provide much in that regard. Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them

 

Agreed. Great post

 

I don't believe that the current state-of-the-art interaction mechanics allow for improved implementations of relationships. You'd need a strong AI backbone that has creative elements and is able to simulate realistic responses. That would require budget for AI coder plus hiring a good romance writer and possibly additional testers. The developers would need to cut other elements of the game in order to fund that content.

 

Hence, this is not a good idea for the current game. It would be better to try this in an AAA effort.

 

 

It seems to me better writing, more dialogue options and avoiding making every character romanceable by either gender would go a long way towards improvement without adding absurd costs related to AI development. Also I believe this kind of game would be the right one to do it, as AAA voiceover has a high cost, making fully voiced high budget games less likely to attempt it.

 

Possibly. Possibly not. But it's always a trade-off, and would still cost some amount of budget to implement.

 

I like to think that a DLC is a better means to implement romance--the players who want the romance option could then pay for it, and the forecast added budget can be used to hire a skilled writer.


"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I read all of it. It was butt-hurt. I especially like the bit at the start, where he lays out his stall:

 

 

 

And the focus should be on the difficulty that these people have to deal with a virtual romance at the same time they want pretty much anything else (friendship, rivalry, etc.) to be present. We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations...Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them, a position I believe speaks of a too common uncomfortable attitude towards sex and everything that traditionally is seem as coming along with it (prejudice, guilt, etc.).

 

This bit is saying those of us ('these people' he says, haughtily) who don't like CRPG romances are the ones with the problem. LOL.

 

Which is why he can't handle the truth.

 

Between your insistence in calling me butt-hurt and posting Jack Nicholson images, you failed to address any of my arguments.

 

 

I apologize. You win the internet. I have no answer to the colossus that is your force of argument in favour of imaginary sexual relationships with videogame characters.

  • Like 1

sonsofgygax.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is the developers just fail at the core element of a party based rpg. You should not let them off so easily by saying it is ok for you to cut the part of party interaction you like the least.

 

I rather have 10 areas less in the game than losing any party dialohue no matter if it is a silbling story or a romance or minsc and boo... This is actually what should be budgeted first right with the exploration aspect. It is one of the 2 core mechanics. No justification out there to cut any content in that area.

Somneone didn't read the statements of the devs?

 

The reason we give slack for 'cutting party interaction' is because that's not happening. It's just being relocated from "romances" to other (and in many's opinion better and more useful ways) ways to flesh out character interaction.

 

No cutting, no mismanagement, just... what's always been planned, what always would have been.

The core is completely and utterly intact, and as strong as it ever was. Don't get why anyone would assume otherwise.

  • Like 2

^

 

 

I agree that that is such a stupid idiotic pathetic garbage hateful retarded scumbag evil satanic nazi like term ever created. At least top 5.

 

TSLRCM Official Forum || TSLRCM Moddb || My other KOTOR2 mods || TSLRCM (English version) on Steam || [M4-78EP on Steam

Formerly known as BattleWookiee/BattleCookiee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we back to the cutting arguments?

 

We can't know what the devs cut because we do not have access to what they were planning to do. I can't complain that they cut a Kraken battle to implement X, because I don't know if they were planning to implement a Kraken battle in the first place.

  • Like 3

"Take your child murderin' god and shove his him up his own ass."-Volorun

 

"...the vote of a black redhead disabled homosexual transsexual Jew should probably be worth the same as at least a hundred white heterosexual Christians."-Rostere

 

"i can think of many women i would gladly sleep with, but not a single one that i would want as a girlfriend/wife... neither real nor fictional."-teknoman2

 

"I'm all for killing dogs in film." - algroth

 

"Iselmyr is the one who did GOMAD... Aloth is lactose intolerant" -ShadySands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanna romance the Kraken!

 

Edit: The mother of all tentacle porn.

Edited by Nonek
  • Like 3

Quite an experience to live in misery isn't it? That's what it is to be married with children.

I've seen things you people can't even imagine. Pearly Kings glittering on the Elephant and Castle, Morris Men dancing 'til the last light of midsummer. I watched Druid fires burning in the ruins of Stonehenge, and Yorkshiremen gurning for prizes. All these things will be lost in time, like alopecia on a skinhead. Time for tiffin.

 

Tea for the teapot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations. We usually look down upon action RPGs precisely because they tend to not provide much in that regard. Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them

 

Agreed. Great post

 

I don't believe that the current state-of-the-art interaction mechanics allow for improved implementations of relationships. You'd need a strong AI backbone that has creative elements and is able to simulate realistic responses. That would require budget for AI coder plus hiring a good romance writer and possibly additional testers. The developers would need to cut other elements of the game in order to fund that content.

 

Hence, this is not a good idea for the current game. It would be better to try this in an AAA effort.

 

 

 

I was quoting that post in support of what I view as a problem with RPG gaming development, generally. That is, if devs (not necessarily Obsidian . . . for that matter, I'm not even talking about Pillars of Eternity specifically) don't like romance, there tends to be a quick knee-jerk reaction to simply omit it entirely as opposed to attempting to be innovative and move RPGs forward. Romance is a part of roleplaying, and the lack of it does not somehow equate to addition by subtraction.

Budgetary reasons aside and all other things being equal, the lack of a roleplaying option does not make roleplaying games better.

Edited by Webslinger

23u4g7t.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanna romance the Kraken!

 

Edit: The mother of all tentacle porn.

 

I always knew there was something off about you.

  • Like 3

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I read all of it. It was butt-hurt. I especially like the bit at the start, where he lays out his stall:

 

 

 

And the focus should be on the difficulty that these people have to deal with a virtual romance at the same time they want pretty much anything else (friendship, rivalry, etc.) to be present. We have been asking all these years for games to emulate in some way aspects of human relations...Still, a vocal minority insists in criticizing romances as detrimental for the CRPG experience, and instead of defending improved implementations of this type of relationship they simply want to get rid of them, a position I believe speaks of a too common uncomfortable attitude towards sex and everything that traditionally is seem as coming along with it (prejudice, guilt, etc.).

 

This bit is saying those of us ('these people' he says, haughtily) who don't like CRPG romances are the ones with the problem. LOL.

 

Which is why he can't handle the truth.

 

Between your insistence in calling me butt-hurt and posting Jack Nicholson images, you failed to address any of my arguments.

 

 

I apologize. You win the internet. I have no answer to the colossus that is your force of argument in favour of imaginary sexual relationships with videogame characters.

 

 

    You could have refrained from posting about it or admitted it in your first reply and spared all of us the time spent reading your gibberish. Honestly, I find it hard to believe that you're 69 years old, as stated in your profile. It's a lot easier to believe that you're probably drunk, also as stated in your profile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm... in the poll if i recall there where abou 3 hundret people FOR romances and 1 hundred aginst, so MOST people want romances 3 peoples want 1 don't. Sill this one person can play the game not engadeing in romance (even i biowere games if i recall). The olny reason, why most people seeing this topic think that "there are more romance haters then pro-romancers" is that the most trolls, and illogical Zealots are on the "romance haters" side. As we see in the first 6 pages of this topic there are more trolling then "conversation".

 

So many of people that woud like to see romance are not wasteing their time with discussion with such persons (and for examle im not talking about you)

 

So calling people that whoud like to see romances "there is something with them" is a bit silly. And even sex in my opinion in not "weird" becouse today games are more like interactiv videos then "mario bros" type of games.

 

The last question "why people are not giving up on this ?" Becouse their where never fighting or "pushing" obsidian to do them. If obsidian sad that thay will not do them then thats okey, but still it doesn't meat that all pro-romancers must "shut-up" becouse some zealots don't like it, this is still a topic even if not "about adding romances" then for "why they cut that out" or "why i think they are doin't wrong" or "why i think that inputing romances whoud make this game better" or as you "why people ar still consern about this" or as some of you people "yeaaahh... proromancers ... DIE" ...

 

Proromancers are not talking to them selfs, Coversation must be done on two sides (there must be more then 1 side of view, and people that are pushing them). And the most funny thing is that the most posts in this thred are made by people that don't want romances (both logical, zealots, trolls, etc) so they are mosty pushing this conversation foreword.. not proromancers ...

First off, was talking about people who are already against the romance and how they view you people and your desire for this feature in the game.

 

And you would think this was a fight, based on this topic being around since the campaign was started last year. People are very ardently for a feature where your avatar gets to work with an algorithm to output the desired romantic text on their screen.


Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I wanna romance the Kraken!

 

Edit: The mother of all tentacle porn.

 

I always knew there was something off about you.

 

One thing i've got to admit, the Kraken is a shellfish lover.

  • Like 4

Quite an experience to live in misery isn't it? That's what it is to be married with children.

I've seen things you people can't even imagine. Pearly Kings glittering on the Elephant and Castle, Morris Men dancing 'til the last light of midsummer. I watched Druid fires burning in the ruins of Stonehenge, and Yorkshiremen gurning for prizes. All these things will be lost in time, like alopecia on a skinhead. Time for tiffin.

 

Tea for the teapot!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...