Reading this thread is a lot like watching two wasted guys trying to punch each other at a bar.

I find it more akin to a bunch of people posting **** on the internet.

 

 

Ah, the fabled asterisk-posters.

When I was growing up, before internet forums, I always heard it pronounced asstrick. 

Asterix and Obelix?

Oh my hero, so far away now
Will I ever see your smile?
Love goes away like night into day
It's just a fading dream...
I'm the darkness, you're the stars
Our love is brighter than the sun.

 

For eternity, for me there can be
Only you, my chosen one.
Must I forget you?
Our solemn promise?
Will autumn take the place of spring?
What shall I do? I'm lost without you.
Speak to me once more...

 

We must part now. My life goes on,
But my heart won't give you up.
Ere I walk away, let me hear you say
I meant as much to you.
So gently, you touched my heart.
I will be forever yours.
Come what may, I won't age a day.
I'll wait for you, always.

 

 

Oh my hero, so far away now

Will I ever see your smile?

Love goes away like night into day

It's just a fading dream...

I'm the darkness, you're the stars

Our love is brighter than the sun.

 

For eternity, for me there can be

Only you, my chosen one.

Must I forget you?

Our solemn promise?

Will autumn take the place of spring?

What shall I do? I'm lost without you.

Speak to me once more...

 

We must part now. My life goes on,

But my heart won't give you up.

Ere I walk away, let me hear you say

I meant as much to you.

So gently, you touched my heart.

I will be forever yours.

Come what may, I won't age a day.

I'll wait for you, always.

 

 

 

 

Those are sweet words    where did you get that from?

^From the failed .jpg, Celes opera points to Final Fantasy 6.

 

Okay..I'm not sure now if that adds or detracts from the Romance case ?

 

 

I believe what we are witnessing here is some new and extremely virulent form of Willful Ignorance.

 

Willful Ignorance is the state and practice of ignoring any sensory input that appears to contradict one’s inner model of reality. At heart, it is almost certainly driven by confirmation bias.  Depending on the nature and strength of an individual’s pre-existing beliefs, willful ignorance can manifest itself in different ways. The practice can entail completely disregarding established facts, evidence and/or reasonable opinions if they fail to meet one’s expectations.  In other slightly more extreme cases, willful ignorance can involve outright refusal to read, hear or study, in any way, anything that does not conform to the person’s worldview.

 

The morally right way to treat such individuals is not to look down upon, ridicule or attack them, but to help them to be able to accept reality again.

 

 

Come back, Bruce, come back!  We miss you here on terra firma.

 

On a side note, have you seen the film Her?  Hormalakh posed the question earlier.

 

 

 

I like clever posts and your post is an accurate and intellectual way of describing certain personalities in this thread. But don't you think some of your fellow anti-romance members may take exception to your characterization of there psyche? When I read Willful Ignorance I see Hiro, but I would prefer if you told him that as he always seems to want to argue with me

I haven't seen that movie, it looks good

 

 

No Bruce. Not always arguing with you. You need to stop being precious. Concerning willful ignorance, you really should look into the mirror.

I just love you guys for NOT having romances. This trend suxs so much to force silly romances into games it´s not cool anymore. So thank you for being honest to yourself for not messing with romances cuz most of the time they are silly and teeny like affairs in the dumbest situations you can imagine...

 

IT was cool in the BG games no doubt but thats it.

 

Not that i dont think you writers couldnt come up with interesting relationships but they bother me most of the time and are realy just that, annoying and not seriously thought out.

 

You also dont want to have a dozens of pages with "i want to romanZE" this dude and that one and why not bla blubber...

No Bruce. The OP's first post has been proven to be biased with it's so called science and not using science for it's against argument.

A) Because the case against romance seems to be doing fine without an in-depth analysis (hence the title "The Case For Romance").

 

B) Why is it that no one on the Against side of the fence can present their own analysis for that side?

 

 

And, for the last time, "romance" and "romances" are two different things. "Romances" will not be in PoE. If you can find me definitive evidence that "romance" will not be in PoE, then that might actually be more of a case to stop talking about it at all.

I can't see the distinction. Does that mean there could be flirtative dialogue, just with absolutely no consummation ... god, high school all over again. 

I'll give you a quick example. Not a great one, but it gets the point across. BG2. You're deep in Fiirkrag's dungeon and the game did a wonderful job building up the tension and the atmosphere. You enter Fiirkrag's lair. You hear the low rumbling..... THEN SUDDENLY, OUT OF THE BLUE, VICONIA SPEAKS UP: Viconia: I'm wondering this. Have you ever entertained the notion of marriage?

 

 

WTF. I'm about to fight a dragon, and the game just destroyed the mood for me. Wait, check that. the ROMANCE just destroyed the mood, as they almost always do.

This is an excellent example of the kind of fallacies that are frequently presented against the sheer aspect of romance.

 

Instead of pointing out the flaw here, I'll simply ask:

 

Would the problem in that example have ceased to exist if Viconia had blurted out some random bit of dialogue -- still completely unbefitting of the situation -- that simply had nothing to do with romance? What if she had said "I wonder if the next tavern we come across will have Elvish wine... it's quite delicious.", for example?

 

A) Because the case against romance seems to be doing fine without an in-depth analysis (hence the title "The Case For Romance").

 

B) Why is it that no one on the Against side of the fence can present their own analysis for that side?

 

 

And, for the last time, "romance" and "romances" are two different things. "Romances" will not be in PoE. If you can find me definitive evidence that "romance" will not be in PoE, then that might actually be more of a case to stop talking about it at all.

 

 

A) Thank you for agreeing that the case against romance seems to be doing fine without an in-depth analysis.

 

B) Considering that you've said in the other romance thread that you don't discriminate and see reasonable arguments on the no romance side of the discussion. What are your reasonable arguments that you would not want to see romances in PoE? What is your own analysis for that side? Why don't you want romances in PoE? What are your against arguments and what points do you agree with on the against side?

 

I'm still waiting Lephys for the points you agree on with the against argument, that you confirmed you agreed with.

Waiting for the internet is like waiting for Godot. Better to go make a sandwich, or even better, a chocolate/peanut butter pop tart. 

A) Thank you for agreeing that the case against romance seems to be doing fine without an in-depth analysis.

You got me. Faulty wording. Allow me to correct my statement:

 

The case against romance seems to be doing fine in popularity without an in-depth analysis. People don't seem to need objective reasons for joining the Againstians.

 

Or, simple answer: It's unnecessary. This thread was started with the idea in mind that many people are against romance simply because they feel there are no objective reasons for its existence. The thread's purpose was merely to convince them that this is not the case.

 

B) Considering that you've said in the other romance thread that you don't discriminate and see reasonable arguments on the no romance side of the discussion. What are your reasonable arguments that you would not want to see romances in PoE? What is your own analysis for that side? Why don't you want romances in PoE? What are your against arguments and what points do you agree with on the against side?

 

I'm still waiting Lephys for the points you agree on with the against argument, that you confirmed you agreed with.

There aren't any points I know of that I agree with on the Against side. Doesn't mean there aren't any good ones. But, I don't know of any. I agree with plenty of points that have been made that suggest specific implementations that should not be used without significant alterations, at the least, but I haven't seen anything that legitimately argues against the decision to incorporate the sheer aspect of romance into an RPG such as PoE's design. There are reasons not to actually be able to put it in, but just because you don't have any bandages doesn't mean a bleeding wound shouldn't be bandaged. It just means that it should be, but cannot be.

Edited March 5, 201411 yr by Lephys

 

You got me. Faulty wording. Allow me to correct my statement:

 

The case against romance seems to be doing fine in popularity without an in-depth analysis. People don't seem to need objective reasons for joining the Againstians.

 

Or, simple answer: It's unnecessary. This thread was started with the idea in mind that many people are against romance simply because they feel there are no objective reasons for its existence. The thread's purpose was merely to convince them that this is not the case. 

 

As far I can see, there's been a lot of threads and in depth analysis of the subject on the against side. It's been going on near 18 months. And funny you mention objective reasons. Maybe try and be objective yourself?

 

 

There aren't any points I know of that I agree with on the Against side. Doesn't mean there aren't any good ones. But, I don't know of any.

 

Hang on. So your post about not discriminating and seeing reasonable people and their positions on both sides of the argument was just a troll. You didn't mean it at all. You do discriminate because now you're saying you don't agree on any points on the against side. Thanks for the confirmation.

Lephys, the against argument has been made again and again. Ad nauseum, in fact.

 

Please save me the five-hundred word explanation about how we don't understand you. I've already read it.

A) Because the case against romance seems to be doing fine without an in-depth analysis (hence the title "The Case For Romance").

The case against romance seems to be doing fine in popularity without an in-depth analysis. People don't seem to need objective reasons for joining the Againstians.

 

If we're taking into account factors that are external to the analysis itself (such as "how well is this case doing on the forum"), then other external factors (such as the fact that player romances won't be implemented, or the fact that the case in favor of romance has plenty of presence on the forums too) are valid reasons for not examining in depth the case for romance.

 

Either you write your analysis taking in mind the current state of romance discussion on both sides, or you don't, and write an in-depth analysis for both sides. That is how you write a neutral analysis on any matter. Otherwise, the analysis is biased, which is what Hiro Protagonist II has been saying all this time. Say what you will about the higher purpose of this thread, but saying that the analysis is biased is a completely true statement.

 

Speaking of the higher purpose of this thread, the OP explicitly said in some replies that he wrote it wanting thoughtful discussion around this topic. He genuinely seemed to think that he was being thorough and neutral in both points. It is valid for people to answer that he wasn't, and for that to be part of the discussion.

 

B) Why is it that no one on the Against side of the fence can present their own analysis for that side?

I can't speak for everyone, but I guess some causes would be:

- The OP was the one who started this thread and made the analysis. It felt like doing the analytics properly was his job to do, not for other posters to correct him.

- I already did mention a sciency bit againt romance (the fact that the chemicals involved are addictive), and nobody cared or wanted me to elaborate. You didn't, either, as I can see. Of course nobody is going to write an analysis of that if nobody would bother to read it or pay attention to it. People on the against side know very well that it would be a wasted effort. See the discussion about willful ignorance earlier on this post.

- If you want another type of argument against romance, someone on this thread also mentioned this. Literally nobody in favor of romance answered to him. Neither did you. Again, why should anyone bother to write an analysis for the against side, given that complete lack of reaction?

 

"Romances" will not be in PoE. If you can find me definitive evidence that "romance" will not be in PoE, then that might actually be more of a case to stop talking about it at all.

 

Avellone had this to say for romance in general in Eternity. Of course, he's not the only writer involved, but somebody on the team having a view like that makes me think that "romance" won't be very present in PoE. Probably not inexistant, but given what I linked, maybe we shoudl talk about it less, if we wanted to be proportional. We would definitely have to change the discussion anyway, since this is still about player romances.

 

 

I'll give you a quick example. Not a great one, but it gets the point across. BG2. You're deep in Fiirkrag's dungeon and the game did a wonderful job building up the tension and the atmosphere. You enter Fiirkrag's lair. You hear the low rumbling..... THEN SUDDENLY, OUT OF THE BLUE, VICONIA SPEAKS UP: Viconia: I'm wondering this. Have you ever entertained the notion of marriage?

 

 

WTF. I'm about to fight a dragon, and the game just destroyed the mood for me. Wait, check that. the ROMANCE just destroyed the mood, as they almost always do.

This is an excellent example of the kind of fallacies that are frequently presented against the sheer aspect of romance.

 

Instead of pointing out the flaw here, I'll simply ask:

 

Would the problem in that example have ceased to exist if Viconia had blurted out some random bit of dialogue -- still completely unbefitting of the situation -- that simply had nothing to do with romance? What if she had said "I wonder if the next tavern we come across will have Elvish wine... it's quite delicious.", for example?

I would say that the problem wouldn't have ceased to exist, but it would have been diminished. A random comment can be easily ignored, a Serious Discussion About Heartfelt Feelings, not so much. A better example would have been if, instead of asking about marriage right before a bloody battle, Viconia had wanted to discuss the religious beliefs of the last town.

 

Nonetheless, I think that the point is clear: not everybody will find romance discussion appropiate at a given time, and the game has no consistent way to know when that moment is for any given player. Sure, you could make the player initiate the conversation, but then people complain that the NPC has no will of its own and that's unrealistic. So then you'd have to put some serious effort to program NPCs that can judge when certain conversations are okay to have, which is something that even humans have trouble doing. And then people have the gall to say that romances are easy to make?!

 

And before you say "aha, but non-romantic conversations have the same problem!", I disagree. Conversations about a topic related to some place or some concept seem like they'd be far easier to tie to a place and trigger when you're in that place, thus becoming relevant. Conversations about complicated feelings, which would involve time together, context, reputation and other things, would be way harder. And romance especifically is too volatile a topic to screw it up like that.

Edited March 5, 201411 yr by Lurky

The Case against Romance: We're all of us fundamentally unloveable, accept it and move on.

I'm not. I am, literally, a loveable huggable care bear. You'd have to cuff yourself to a heavy object to stop yourself wanting to hurl your arms around me.

Hi Everyone,

 

Pretty polarizing topic...I understand that. 

 

It's interesting that we can fantasize about slaying oversized rodents or toothless bandits with a glowing sword or a fireball but fantasizing about romantic encounters in the same game is "weird" or perhaps a sign of desperation.  That was just an observation not an accusation.

 

Marrying/Dating characters in game or having romantic relationships never really enticed me though observing characters in romantic terms was.  Maybe I'm just a pervert who likes to watch couples but I do believe romantic stories between other characters would add a nice balance to the game.  It seems like it would provide a stark contrast to the murder and mayhem we'll find on our adventure.  Romance between characters also provides the potential for a more sympathetic reaction from the player when one of them dies.

 

In summary:  I do not need another girlfriend, especially a demanding snake eyed virtual one, but I would like to watch a NPC's girlfriend.

 

 

 

 

I'm not. I am, literally, a loveable huggable care bear. You'd have to cuff yourself to a heavy object to stop yourself wanting to hurl your arms around me.

 

Monte is an LI for DA:I, he just doesn't know it yet.

The Case against Romance: We're all of us fundamentally unloveable, accept it and move on.

The Case for Romance is nearly identical: Can't get it anywhere else, so pixel passion has its devotees.