The Case for Romance.

[Ulquiorra]

 

The same as there are no guarantee that other type of relationships whoud be writen good. but still nobody complains

 

And besides "badly desinged romances" are more memorable then good ones ... reaf this thres cerfuly and you see that all people complain about "bio-were cal of duty proromancers, no-lifers, etc. etc ...etc.... scum on the society" but almost no one says  ... hey .. some romances was good ... for example those who fit in storyline ...

 

The argu is about "we dont;t want romance-system like in biowere" ... but lets think a bit qhous any one be glad about "frendship" or "rivality" system ? ... i feel then no one ...

Since the box is open and Schrodenger's cat either exists or doesn't (in this case, doesn't as we get no romances), we've moved from the theoretical realm of "romance" paths vs "friendship" paths vs "rivalry" paths to whether a game with no romances (PoE) would be impreoved by the inclusion of romances.

 

Which simply isn't the case since it could be done poorly and the loss would actually makes for a better game (which is, after all, essentially the reasons the developers decided not to have romances in the game - that they didn't they could do it to their standards).

 

so what ?

 

Romance, friendship, hate, rivality shoud be cout of from the game becouse then can be "badly besingend' ?

 

So what leveling up, and char progresion also becouse "in can be badly" designed ?

 

Sory romance may be a badass in storytaleing ... but obsidian say thay can't... biowere is trying ... so i don't know what is better ... (you will never be master in any subiect if you don't make mistakes) ...

[Amentep]

"So what?" to your "so what?"

 

As someone who argued for romances back when it was a possibility I see no reason to fight for it now that the developers have stated they do not think they could do it - given the limitations currently on the game - to their satisfaction.

 

They're promising to give interesting, reactive companions.  And that's all I've ever wanted (I see romance as a possible way to take a companion under the interesting/reactive criteria but certainly not the only way).

[Auxilius]

 

Imagine if G.R.R.Martin decided Ned Stark should go back because he was totally awesome and it's too bad we don't get to see his manly beard anymore. The story would just be chaos and the plot would become meaningless.

 

 

I might have chosen a different example to make that point.  Probably a good writer, who doesn't think that all the smoke blown up his posterior means that droning on and on endlessly is exactly what he should do.

 

On topic: THERE ARE NO ROMANCES IN THIS GAME.  THIS DISCUSSION SHOULD GO ELSEWHERE.

 

Ah ah. I never read any of his books and I never will because according to the 4 episodes of the TV show I watched, it could be resumed as "politics rape politics sex, politics incest politics". I just went with a famous author everyone knows.

The RPG was fine, even if the "politics" went tedious after a while. I felt like playing Spec Ops: the RPG.

 

Also, dude has rage issues so I wouldn't be surprised if he decided to troll everyone in such a way.

[Lephys]

Bruce is there any computer game character you haven't tried to nail? Is there a Kobold in faraway Nashkel wondering why you don't call any more?

Come onnn... you've gotta admit that that squarish S-shaped block in Tetris was pretty hot... u_u

[Hassat Hunter]

Yes, Kreia was well written, but I don't think she was as good as you remember.

I'm going on a limb here and say you have no idea who you're talking to. "As you remember"... LOL.

 

Simply said; No.

Other characters (even non-romance-able ones) that Bioware has created are just as well rounded. Aveline from DA2, Mordin from ME2, Thane, Garrus, Legion, Anders, Sten, Alistair - or from KOTOR1 Canderous, Jolee Bindo... I can go on.

I admit hating DA2, so it's chars are not known to me that well.

Mordin was pretty funny. So was HK-47. So was Heck. Hell, looks like I remember the funny chars more than the romancable ones. I wonder why...

Thank got BioWare didn't decide to make HK-51 (yay for ignoring OE again) romancable. But also a lot less funny or memorable . And butchered their own HK-47 too.

Thane, Legion and the DA:O crew is pretty, how do I say it, forgettable? Only Garrus was awesome, in ME1 that is. Once they made him romancable in ME2 (just like Tali) his awesome factor took a deep hit.

Need more reasons to hate romance and how it can cheapen a character and it's design/story?

While Canderous and Jolee (like the rest of the KOTOR1 crew) had some pretty nice stories, their own personality was kinda, flat, and not really well expended upon. Stories were cool and all, but they didn't really deepen the characters that much, not even Jolee's stories about his wife.

What made Kreia cool was that she spoke about philosophy, yet what I think curbs her character a little is that from the get go she takes on the role of a sage/mentor from the very beginning. That's her role, to speak about philosophy. I think it's more impressive when you have characters that aren't trying to directly and overtly influence you, remain themselves, and still make you think about something you haven't before because of their point of view.

No, I am much more interested in characters who DO try to influence you, turn them to their side, view their point of view, rather than just tell story upon story which basically do nothing but be there. KOTOR1's characters, DA:O 's characters, ME characters, they never made me think, they never really questioned me, or tried to influence me. They just tell their stories.

To me, I can't think there's anything more interesting to a character than them actively trying to interact with the PC in a meaningful way, put their point up and hold strong to it, rather than simply tell their story and otherwise be the PC's little puppet.

[BruceVC]

Am I only person who was really disappointed I didn't get a change to even attempt to Romance Morte?

 

He would really give a new definition to the phrase "to give someone  head" ....

 

Edited February 19, 2014 by BruceVC

[FlintlockJazz]

 

To me, romance was the difference between Icewind Dale and Baldur's Gate. 

It's why I don't remember any of New Vegas' companions.

Yet, why so many people care about and recognize the companions that Bioware has created (Thane, Garrus, Kaiden, Fenris, Alistair, Anders, etc).

Ok, who?

Except of Garrus the green assasin alien possesed by some demon I don't remember any of the above characters.

I do remember Sulik, Cassidy, Marcus, Morte, Dak'kon, Modron, Bishop, Gann, Keldorn, Jan Jansen and other memorable companions.

Also the most recognizable Bioware character, as far as I know from almost every poll there is, is MINSC for some reason.

 

Even Bioware themselves does not understand the love for Minsc, as their attempts to recreate him fail, and will only get harder the more they try to do 'dark' fantasy and move away from the old cheesy fantasy they were actually good at.  I love him, it essentially boils down to his enthusiasm is infectious and he is essentially the light hearted adventurer not taking himself seriously.  His breaking of the fourth wall and cheesy lines is the kind of thing you get in a tabletop RPG session and epitomises cheesy roleplayers. 

 

Am I only person who was really disappointed I didn't get a change to even attempt to Romance Morte?

 

He would really give a new definition to the phrase "to give someone  head" ....

 

*Backhands Bruce*  Bad Bruce, bad!  Very bad pun!  You should be ashamed! 

 

Backhands Bruce does have a nice ring to it though, rhymes...

Edited February 19, 2014 by FlintlockJazz

[NanoPaladin]

THERE ARE NO ROMANCES IN THIS GAME.  THIS DISCUSSION SHOULD GO ELSEWHERE.

 

 

I am pretty sure we all know that. I made the mistake of not throwing this in the general chat forums since it was intended to spark a general debate over the subject, not just for PoE.

[Gideon Laier]

 

Yes, Kreia was well written, but I don't think she was as good as you remember.

I'm going on a limb here and say you have no idea who you're talking to. "As you remember"... LOL.

 

Simply said; No.

Other characters (even non-romance-able ones) that Bioware has created are just as well rounded. Aveline from DA2, Mordin from ME2, Thane, Garrus, Legion, Anders, Sten, Alistair - or from KOTOR1 Canderous, Jolee Bindo... I can go on.

I admit hating DA2, so it's chars are not known to me that well.

Mordin was pretty funny. So was HK-47. So was Heck. Hell, looks like I remember the funny chars more than the romancable ones. I wonder why...

Thank got BioWare didn't decide to make HK-51 (yay for ignoring OE again) romancable. But also a lot less funny or memorable . And butchered their own HK-47 too.

Thane, Legion and the DA:O crew is pretty, how do I say it, forgettable? Only Garrus was awesome, in ME1 that is. Once they made him romancable in ME2 (just like Tali) his awesome factor took a deep hit.

Need more reasons to hate romance and how it can cheapen a character and it's design/story?

While Canderous and Jolee (like the rest of the KOTOR1 crew) had some pretty nice stories, their own personality was kinda, flat, and not really well expended upon. Stories were cool and all, but they didn't really deepen the characters that much, not even Jolee's stories about his wife.

What made Kreia cool was that she spoke about philosophy, yet what I think curbs her character a little is that from the get go she takes on the role of a sage/mentor from the very beginning. That's her role, to speak about philosophy. I think it's more impressive when you have characters that aren't trying to directly and overtly influence you, remain themselves, and still make you think about something you haven't before because of their point of view.

No, I am much more interested in characters who DO try to influence you, turn them to their side, view their point of view, rather than just tell story upon story which basically do nothing but be there. KOTOR1's characters, DA:O 's characters, ME characters, they never made me think, they never really questioned me, or tried to influence me. They just tell their stories.

To me, I can't think there's anything more interesting to a character than them actively trying to interact with the PC in a meaningful way, put their point up and hold strong to it, rather than simply tell their story and otherwise be the PC's little puppet.

 

Forgive me, because I'm pretty confused here. You're so anti-Romance that you've completely lost me. Because, what I've taken from here is that anything that deals with romance or emotions cheapens the game and you want your companions to actively try and change you? 

 

I want my companions to have their own personalities, I want them to challenge my views every now and then, but I think I'd be pretty weird if every character had a PhD in Philosophy and constantly waxed nostalgic and actively tried to convert me like one of those door-to-door Jehovah's Witnesses. 

 

And I'm going to politely disagree with you if you think that a character talking about his dead wife makes his character "flat". These are the things that round them out.

 

I get that there are extreme-Bioware haters that froth at the mouth when they hear anything about that company, but if we can put that aside- their games do have some good qualities. Everyone hates DA2, and that's fine, but there were some good parts to it if you look past the bad - namely the characters. You say you don't want companions to become the player's "puppets", that you want them to actively interact with the PC in a meaningful way and hold strong to their points. Well, hear me out, but companions in Dragon Age 2 do this while not being overbearing with Philosophy that wouldn't fit their characters. They maintain their views and actively question your decisions. If they agree with you they would gain Friendship, if they disagreed they'd gain Rivalry - but they wouldn't back down from what they believed and it made for some really interesting interactions, either between you and them or between each other. Even without the optional romances, it was a great system that really fleshed out their personalities. 

 

People on these forums keep bringing up how memorable companions from Baldur's Gate or Planescape are. But I'm asking is how memorable are the characters from New Vegas, KotorII, Alpha Protocol, and Dungeon Siege III. I loved all of those games, but I don't think that their characters are stronger and more developed than they are in Bioware games. Describe Cassidy. Desribe Boone. Describe Arcade. I'm sorry, but I don't think they're that well developed because I can't think of much. Boone is... revenge something? Arcade is nice? Cassidy is brash maybe? But describing Morrigan - cunning, secretive, seductive, conflicted. or Sten - stoic, cold, rational, fierce, alien. I think they're better developed as a whole. I could be wrong, and there are some exceptions, but I do think Bioware makes some distinct companions.

 

Also, Wanting Romance IS NOT advocating that EVERYONE be romanceable and that I want to romance HK-47 too zomg!! I want strong characters and strong character interaction. I want a Baldur's Gate and not an Icewind Dale. I think if you have well rounded characters, with their own personalities, that interact with each other and the main character, then I personally don't think it would be that hard to take it one step further and include optional romances. Because that's all that Romance is, additional character development and interaction - nothing more. In fact, I'd say that you're able to explore deeper emotions and philosophy of the characters you romance. I look at Viconia from BG2 and I think that was one of the best created romances. It was complicated, it was hard, but while you were going through it you discovered so much more of her character than you would if you didn't romance her. You discover the things people only reserve for those they trust or care about. It deepens character interaction. And if a little romance didn't kill Baldur's Gate, it won't kill this.

 

I think it's fair to want a deep RPG over a dungeon crawler like Icewind Dale and Dungeon Siege. If Obsidian can't give us great companion interaction (even without romance), i'm going to be severely let down.

[Sir Chaox]

 

To me, romance was the difference between Icewind Dale and Baldur's Gate. 

It's why I don't remember any of New Vegas' companions.

Yet, why so many people care about and recognize the companions that Bioware has created (Thane, Garrus, Kaiden, Fenris, Alistair, Anders, etc).

Ok, who?

Except of Garrus the green assasin alien possesed by some demon I don't remember any of the above characters.

I do remember Sulik, Cassidy, Marcus, Morte, Dak'kon, Modron, Bishop, Gann, Keldorn, Jan Jansen and other memorable companions.

Also the most recognizable Bioware character, as far as I know from almost every poll there is, is MINSC for some reason.

 

 

Imagine if Sulik was romanceable.

 

I know where he can stick Grampy Bone next. 

[Sir Chaox]

I want my companions to have their own personalities, I want them to challenge my views every now and then, but I think I'd be pretty weird if every character had a PhD in Philosophy and constantly waxed nostalgic and actively tried to convert me like one of those door-to-door Jehovah's Witnesses. 

 

I think you actually both agree here.

 

I don't think he meant all characters should have a philosophy degree, he was saying each player should have a philosophy they adhere to and may try to influence you or other party members through what they believe. Perhaps some characters should not have concrete beliefs, and the PC or other party members that do can sway their actions and outlook based on the level of influence they hold over them.

 

Because that's what happens in real life all the time.

 

RPGs that only have companions that simply do as they are told and don't have any strong feelings towards what their group is doing is not realistic and should be avoided.

[Hassat Hunter]

I am so anti-romance, I'm not even anti-romance.

In the great spiel however I prefer if there's a choice to be made between romance and other fleshing out content, that should be prefered. It's a simply alotment of assets thing, as I said before...

 

Yes, I prefer that, yeah. Maybe not philosphy. But would the mass-murderer trying to convince you he's right and society is wrong not be more interesting than the mass-murderer just telling stories of his kills...? Instead of your team that's completely trustworthy, you don't exactly know who's really your ally, and perhaps none of them are.

 

I think you just like BW-chars more. I wouldn't be able to tell you anything about those chars though, since I haven't really played Fallout: New Vegas yet. Ask me about Alpha Protocol though or KOTOR2, and I can answer you .

Heck, they even made a tincan like T3-M4 or Remote interesting. Unlike in KOTOR1 where T3 was... 1m screentime and no content at all.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Hassat Hunter

[Doppelschwert]

Yes, I prefer that, yeah. Maybe not philosphy. But would the mass-murderer trying to convince you he's wrong and society is right not be more interesting than the mass-murderer just telling stories of his kills...?

 

 

That was meant to be the other way around, wasn't it?

Edited February 19, 2014 by Doppelschwert

[Hassat Hunter]

Oops... yeah, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense like that...

*edited*

[Pipyui]

 

Yes, I prefer that, yeah. Maybe not philosphy. But would the mass-murderer trying to convince you he's wrong and society is right not be more interesting than the mass-murderer just telling stories of his kills...?

 

That was meant to be the other way around, wasn't it?

 

Oops... yeah, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense like that...

 

Actually, I rather like the first way.

 

"I'm a menace, damnit!  I eviscerate a dude right in the middle of the damned street, throw gold at the nearest guard, and they just let me go?!  They don't even clean up the corpse!  Just let it stink there and stare at it as they pass!  And then it's 'Hey stranger who just watched me pull arteries from that man as one would pull wire from drywall, how's it going?' and these people are just like 'Oh howdy, traveler!  A fine day, `tis; a fine day.'  What the hell?!  I kill people!  I don't even do it for a living - I make enough blasted money from cave-looting - I just do it for fun!  And society just sits back and watches the show, so long as I can pay for it.  Again and again - they enable my murder, damnit!  It's a messed up world we live in, I tell you.  I very messed up world."

[Gideon Laier]

I am so anti-romance, I'm not even anti-romance.

In the great spiel however I prefer if there's a choice to be made between romance and other fleshing out content, that should be prefered. It's a simply alotment of assets thing, as I said before...

 

Yes, I prefer that, yeah. Maybe not philosphy. But would the mass-murderer trying to convince you he's right and society is wrong not be more interesting than the mass-murderer just telling stories of his kills...? Instead of your team that's completely trustworthy, you don't exactly know who's really your ally, and perhaps none of them are.

 

I think you just like BW-chars more. I wouldn't be able to tell you anything about those chars though, since I haven't really played Fallout: New Vegas yet. Ask me about Alpha Protocol though or KOTOR2, and I can answer you .

Heck, they even made a tincan like T3-M4 or Remote interesting. Unlike in KOTOR1 where T3 was... 1m screentime and no content at all.

 

Actually, I think now we're on to something. I agree with you that it is a lot more interesting to have companions that share different views and may disagree with you completely - maybe to the point of not joining you or stabbing you in the back. 

 

I loved Alpha Protocol. Thought it was so much better than what reviewers said it was. While flawed it had so much potential, and some dynamics of creating friends from enemies and enemies from friends would be a cool aspect to try in other games as well. 

 

Heck, I'll even ease off romance. But I'd rather have complex characters and companion interaction than fleshing out combat. 

 

I might just like Bioware characters more, sure. But I also like what Obsidian does. I just am tired of having each developer only get it half right, though. I want Bioware characters with Obsidian dynamics, creativity, and writing. I may be beating the romance drum, but that's just because I think it's an easy extension from the companion to player character interaction that I want (and frankly require) anyway.

 

To further the one thing I liked in Dragon Age 2, you'd have companions that would hate you for saving a mage or other characters that would think less of you for turning down gold, etc. I think that concept, or like what's used in AP with how you treat people and how they respond, are ways to really immerse players in their role.

[Quetzalcoatl]

I might just like Bioware characters more, sure. But I also like what Obsidian does. I just am tired of having each developer only get it half right, though.

Obsidian is not 'getting it only half right'. They simply have a different approach to characters than Bioware. You seem to prefer Bioware's approach, which is perfectly fine.           

 

Although your praise for the Dragon Age 2 companions being independent and not subservient to the player is pretty amusing considering most of them can be bedded regardless of the player character's gender or sexuality. And you can fill their romance meter by giving them gifts.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Quetzalcoatl

[Gideon Laier]

 

I might just like Bioware characters more, sure. But I also like what Obsidian does. I just am tired of having each developer only get it half right, though.

Obsidian is not 'getting it only half right'. They simply have a different approach to characters than Bioware. You seem to prefer Bioware's approach, which is perfectly fine.           

 

Although your praise for the Dragon Age 2 companions being independent and not subservient to the player is pretty amusing considering most of them can be bedded regardless of the player character's gender or sexuality. And you can fill their romance meter by giving them gifts.

 

 

Please tell me what Obsidian does differently with their companions. Please, tell me how New Vegas companions are better? There is no deep interaction between the player and them. What is Obsidian's approach to characters anyway? That they also follow you almost unconditionally and don't care if you blast an innocent bystander. Oh wait, I guess Boone and Arcade get mad if you join Ceaser.

 

Yes, having each character be open to romance, can be seen as bad. But why can't it also be seen as being able to please it's fan base? Being open to gay or straight relationships is a pretty big thing, in my opinion.

 

And yes, while you can give companions gifts, those gifts actually create scenes with DIALOGUE that determines your influence or affection gain. You could give a companion a gift, then end up insulting them or inspiring them. It allows for more personal role-playing. 

 

If Bioware is doing it wrong. Then what is Obsidian doing that is right?

[Nonek]

Personally i've never particularly gotten on with the childish simple caricatures that Bioware passes off as characters, they always seem to be there for one simple purpose, blunt and clumsy ego stroking of the protagonist. This is almost always at the expense of their own identity, take the guardswoman from Dragon Age 2, we're told that she is strong by all and sundry, but it is revealed in the game that she is incompetent at her job thus accounting for the bandits every ten feet in Kerkwall, willingly abandons that duty at the commands of the protagonist and cannot perform her most important assignments without the aid of the protagonist. The fact that she is a slave to the main character for years goes without saying, and has absolutely no reasoning or logical explanation behind it, it is just crude pandering. She even has to have her hand held when courting a man, as if she were some blushing virgin maid and not a widow, utterly preposterous.

 

It is fairly much the same with all of Bioware's creations, they are barely sketched out archetypes, they evoke feelings of needy childishness, simplistic and disturbing in its clumsy attempts at empowerment. Whereas I will always remember Boone's tragic and shocking story, and the fate that you cannot change for him, merely alleviate in a number of ways through your actions. I have always felt that Obsidian create far more detailed, mature and realistic characters, rather than the Bioware staple of one liner spewing simpletons, whom are to be squee'd over and romanced by the strange people who frequent the BSN.

 

Obviously Dragon Age 2 fairly aggresively ramped up the idiocy of its characters, with the upper, middle and lower right restriction on conversations, the fact that you could not get rid of the morons who followed you around, and yet ironically could not even talk to them even if they were supposed to be your family, but I think it's always been there. This emphasis on soundbites and style rather than substance and self respect, it echoes throughout Bioware's games for me, and though I can fairly much forgive many aspects of a game, such as hideously over elaborate art design and illogical renaissance fayre settings, poorly written and blatantly distasteful characters such as that moronic pirate stripper in Dragon Age 2 I cannot.

 

If you want to make a wise cracking, cynical and veteran character I suggest you look at old Cassidy, a font of information in a changing world, a hardbitten and yet likeable companion who is useful, self motivated and uncompromising even though life has been less than kind to him. It was a pleasure to take a seat beside Rose and chat with her about the old man, and reminded me of how easily he spang off the screen. Really great characterisation. Or look at Arcade Gannon, a man on the run and in hiding, whose life has been hard even for the wasteland and yet he remains, a clever, hopeful and articulate spark of brightness and hope in a grim world. Yet this does not define him, he is also a realist and knows that sometimes the means to achieve an end are messy, though he wishes it were not so, and he is searching for a better way of conducting society than the barbaric way of Caesar or the increasingly fascist NCR.

 

I really cannot compare these great, detailed and conflicted personalities to the simplistic caricatures of Bioware, who lets face it can be summed up with a few buzzwords.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Nonek

[Ulquiorra]

If Bioware is doing it wrong. Then what is Obsidian doing that is right?

 

The biggerst difrence :

1. Obsidian was funding this game from kickstarter becouse propably no-one beside of fans whanted to suport them

2. Biowere is makeing AA+ game with incredibly budged and have no "money problem"

 

The best recomendation so far expecionaly takeing Dragon age 2 dissaster .. (many of their fans turn away from them) and mass effect 3 ending dissaster.

 

And im not biowere fan boy, but im not also blind obsidian zealot that does't sees that.

 

Both of comanies have their UPs and Downs ..

 

For and example Neverwinter Nights 2 oficial was a dissaster also, propably the same level of char wrighting like Leliana but at least she wasn't one dimentional like elanee, khelgar, grobnar, zjievie, quara ... but also we have 2 vwry good writter chars Sand and Ammon Jerro ..

 

Next Example Dragon Age, have leliana and Wynne that where wery "pissing me of" but also one od the best romance arc and char "Morrigan" (but sadly unfinished so they destroyed good begining of it) I don't recall so many dimentional char as Morrigan (unleas someone was only offending her) she was a with, she was a woman, she was cold and sometimes even warm

[Endrosz]

Dear Bruce, please learn to use the 'quote' function properly. You can delete from the quoted message when you write your post, just select with mouse or shift+arrow keys, then press DEL. It's basic netiquette that you only quote as much as necessary. Otherwise you make a mess that is hard to follow. It's even worse when you do this in threads with images, like the armor design one.

 

I could've written a PM, but it's aimed at other people too who needed this education. You're just the most common offender.

Edited February 20, 2014 by Endrosz

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Personally i've never particularly gotten on with the childish simple caricatures that Bioware passes off as characters, they always seem to be there for one simple purpose, blunt and clumsy ego stroking of the protagonist. This is almost always at the expense of their own identity, take the guardswoman from Dragon Age 2, we're told that she is strong by all and sundry, but it is revealed in the game that she is incompetent at her job thus accounting for the bandits every ten feet in Kerkwall, willingly abandons that duty at the commands of the protagonist and cannot perform her most important assignments without the aid of the protagonist. The fact that she is a slave to the main character for years goes without saying, and has absolutely no reasoning or logical explanation behind it, it is just crude pandering. She even has to have her hand held when courting a man, as if she were some blushing virgin maid and not a widow, utterly preposterous.

 

It is fairly much the same with all of Bioware's creations, they are barely sketched out archetypes, they evoke feelings of needy childishness, simplistic and disturbing in its clumsy attempts at empowerment. Whereas I will always remember Boone's tragic and shocking story, and the fate that you cannot change for him, merely alleviate in a number of ways through your actions. I have always felt that Obsidian create far more detailed, mature and realistic characters, rather than the Bioware staple of one liner spewing simpletons, whom are to be squee'd over and romanced by the strange people who frequent the BSN.

 

Obviously Dragon Age 2 fairly aggresively ramped up the idiocy of its characters, with the upper, middle and lower right restriction on conversations, the fact that you could not get rid of the morons who followed you around, and yet ironically could not even talk to them even if they were supposed to be your family, but I think it's always been there. This emphasis on soundbites and style rather than substance and self respect, it echoes throughout Bioware's games for me, and though I can fairly much forgive many aspects of a game, such as hideously over elaborate art design and illogical renaissance fayre settings, poorly written and blatantly distasteful characters such as that moronic pirate stripper in Dragon Age 2 I cannot.

 

If you want to make a wise cracking, cynical and veteran character I suggest you look at old Cassidy, a font of information in a changing world, a hardbitten and yet likeable companion who is useful, self motivated and uncompromising even though life has been less than kind to him. It was a pleasure to take a seat beside Rose and chat with her about the old man, and reminded me of how easily he spang off the screen. Really great characterisation. Or look at Arcade Gannon, a man on the run and in hiding, whose life has been hard even for the wasteland and yet he remains, a clever, hopeful and articulate spark of brightness and hope in a grim world. Yet this does not define him, he is also a realist and knows that sometimes the means to achieve an end are messy, though he wishes it were not so, and he is searching for a better way of conducting society than the barbaric way of Caesar or the increasingly fascist NCR.

 

I really cannot compare these great, detailed and conflicted personalities to the simplistic caricatures of Bioware, who lets face it can be summed up with a few buzzwords.

Nonek, do you wear a monocle and smoke a pipe when you post?

[tajerio]

Nonek, do you wear a monocle and smoke a pipe when you post?

 

I imagine more of a dual-wielding pipe scenario.  Though I'm not sure where the inevitable Scotch goes.

Edited February 20, 2014 by tajerio

[Nonek]

I partake of spectacles not the old monocle but as for pipe smoking, one is a great admirer of a good rough shag.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Please tell me what Obsidian does differently with their companions. Please, tell me how New Vegas companions are better? There is no deep interaction between the player and them. What is Obsidian's approach to characters anyway? That they also follow you almost unconditionally and don't care if you blast an innocent bystander. Oh wait, I guess Boone and Arcade get mad if you join Ceaser.

You're comparing an open-world RPG where the possibilities are endless (a non-hostile NPC could be a villain for instance) to Bioware's linear railroaded RPG. Besides, I would argue that Dragon Age 2 is much worse in that regard, despite the restrictions on player freedom. You spend most of the game killing mobs of random people around every streetcorner, being a mage doesn't prevent you from romancing a character who wants to kill all mages, etc.       

 

Yes, having each character be open to romance, can be seen as bad. But why can't it also be seen as being able to please it's fan base? Being open to gay or straight relationships is a pretty big thing, in my opinion.

Gay characters = good. Characters whose sexuality fluctuates to always be attracted to the player = horrible.   

 

Edited February 20, 2014 by Quetzalcoatl