The Case for Romance.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

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

Good. Nice to know you fit my stereotype of older English gentlemen.

[Lephys]

Nonek is one of my favorite characters in the story that is these forums. Just FWIW.

[BruceVC]

Dear Bruce,. It's basic  that  much as to follow. It's even worse do this images, like the armor design one.

 

I a PM, but people too who needed this education.  just the most common offender.

 

Thanks I appreciate the constructive criticism and I'll endeavour to do better

 

How am I doing in response to your post?

Edited February 20, 2014 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

"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).

 

Well so what to your so what which links to his so what which really means I'm saying so what to.....

 

Thanks Amentep....now I'm completely confused

[Ulquiorra]

 

"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).

 

Well so what to your so what which links to his so what which really means I'm saying so what to.....

 

Thanks Amentep....now I'm completely confused

 

 

I didn't evenr respond to this becouse it was unrelevant to what i was saying.

 

I was saying, that all kind of relationships coud be gone badly, not only romances.

 

So What ?

 

We shout cut off all types of relationships becouse they coud been badly designed ? Almost no one argu about "badly besidned friendship, or hate" and there are no one that what to cut the off becouse of it and say "let's not add frienship becouse it CAN be badly designed" ...

 

And he is saying ...

 

"So what to you So what ?!

 

Devs already sad they whoud not adding romance to a game becouse they think that they can't do it right.

 

And they are promising interestig comapnions, im not anti-romancer but i also think that this is not the only way to make interesting game"

 

And i personality don't see any contection to mine post so this is type of a discussion "hey i want good storyline ,, hay and i want a good longsword :P"

Edited February 20, 2014 by Ulquiorra

[AwesomeOcelot]

I'd like to point out I think Josh's comment, and a lot of the people who don't want romance, are specifically referring to the BioWare type romance that the majority of people in this thread calling for romance want. In this specific case, romance has, is, and will always be badly designed because it is fundamentally the wrong way to write dialogue, plot, and characters, it's something Obsidian don't do. The argument is that while Obsidian may be able to have romantic themes and plots in their games, they're not in a position to dedicate enough time to do it well for Pillars of Eternity.

Edited February 20, 2014 by AwesomeOcelot

[Amentep]

 

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.   

 

 

Well arguably the character wouldn't be gay, but bisexual in that case.  But every character being bisexual seems to stretch credulity in this modern day.

 

 

 

"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).

 

Well so what to your so what which links to his so what which really means I'm saying so what to.....

 

Thanks Amentep....now I'm completely confused

 

 

You got me, I just wrote it.

 

 

I didn't evenr respond to this becouse it was unrelevant to what i was saying.

 

I was saying, that all kind of relationships coud be gone badly, not only romances.

 

So What ?

 

We shout cut off all types of relationships becouse they coud been badly designed ? Almost no one argu about "badly besidned friendship, or hate" and there are no one that what to cut the off becouse of it and say "let's not add frienship becouse it CAN be badly designed" ...

 

And he is saying ...

 

"So what to you So what ?!

 

Devs already sad they whoud not adding romance to a game becouse they think that they can't do it right.

 

And they are promising interestig comapnions, im not anti-romancer but i also think that this is not the only way to make interesting game"

 

And i personality don't see any contection to mine post so this is type of a discussion "hey i want good storyline ,, hay and i want a good longsword :P"

 

 

My point is that, yes, any relationship can be written poorly.  Generally speaking I agree with the poster (in this thread or another) who said that usually if the character has a non-romance relationship that is poorly written most people just say "that character was poorly written".

 

Now the developers have said they don't want to do a romance because they don't think - given the factors in the game of time, money, creators involved, whatever - they don't think they can do it justice, but are planning to do other types of character reactivity.

 

Maybe those will be good, maybe they will be bad.  The developers, though, think they can do that to their satisfaction and not romance.  So the fact that romance could be done good or bad is, to my mind, a side issue to what the developers have said as their reasoning. 

 

Since personally I see romance as a specific subset of character interactions within the larger scheme of things, I'm always happy with character reactivity, dialogue, plots, etc when they're done well.  I, personally, do not require that reactivity to include a romance.

[drake heath]

The companions in Dragon Age 2 weren't really bisexual, or at least not in a realistic sense.

 

They'd have sex with you no matter what, just as long as you chose the heart icon.

 

They're heart-icon-sexual, to the point of being really creepy. The prime example being Merrill the "virgin girl-next-door". The "rival" version of that romance had so many abusive and pedophilic undertones, I'm surprised it got past the rating board.

Edited February 21, 2014 by drake heath

[Ulquiorra]

The companions in Dragon Age 2 weren't really bisexual, or at least not in a realistic sense.

 

They'd have sex with you no matter what, just as long as you chose the heart icon.

 

They're heart-icon-sexual, to the point of being really creepy. The prime example being Merrill the "virgin girl-next-door". The "rival" version of that romance had so many abusive and pedophilic undertones, I'm surprised it got past the rating board.

 

 

Wait a minute, Merril in Dragon age orgins was adult, when Howk was a kiddo running from the "blight". Howk grown up, had romance with char that is 2 times older, and still it has "pedophillic undertones" ?.....

.

[drake heath]

She's awkward, has little to no experience in interacting with people, and basically acts like a child.

 

Yeah, I'd call those pedophilic undertones.

Edited February 23, 2014 by drake heath

[BruceVC]

She's awkward, has little to no experience in interacting with people, and basically acts like a child.

 

Yeah, I'd call those pedophilic undertones.

Lets not be silly now, in  Medieval times women were married off from the age of 13-16 and she was older than that The fact that she is  emotionally immature doesn't change the fact she would have been perfectly acceptable marriage or Romance  material

Edited February 23, 2014 by BruceVC

[drake heath]

I'm saying "undertones".

 

I didn't say it was actually pedophilia.

 

Also DA2 wasn't made in the Middle Ages.

[Ulquiorra]

She's awkward, has little to no experience in interacting with people, and basically acts like a child.

 

Yeah, I'd call those pedophilic undertones.

 

OK ... so being inmature = pedophilic undertones ...

 

If it was normal all off as whoud be virigins, becouse ech 1 time whoud be consider as "pedophilic undertones".

 

pedophilic undertones are like "man age 40 .. has sex with 16 old girl" or, "mature guy has sexual, erotic fantasions about unmature character regardel if she had 15 men already or she was a virgin", other "adult women age 24 is sexualy teasing 15 old boy virgin" ...

 

Being in "sexual inmature" camp is not the same "pedophilisc undertones ... besides she was 2 TIMES MORE OLDER then he was ... so what .. having sex with 40 old virgin is pedophilic undertone ?

 

the same type of logic as huging a guy and a girl in the same time makes you "bisexual" hahaha

 

Besides ... DA2 was in the age inspired by middle age

[tajerio]

 

She's awkward, has little to no experience in interacting with people, and basically acts like a child.

 

Yeah, I'd call those pedophilic undertones.

Lets not be silly now, in  Medieval times women were married off from the age of 13-16 and she was older than that The fact that she is  emotionally immature doesn't change the fact she would have been perfectly acceptable marriage or Romance  material

 

 

"Would have been" is the key phrase there.  No one played DA2 in medieval Europe, and no one will play PoE in medieval Europe either.  It's fine to write a romance that makes players uncomfortable because the object of romance seems immature, fragile, or naive--certainly I always felt this way with Merrill--but to say that everyone should just be cool because that kind of thing was totally all right during the medieval period is nonsense.

[Ulquiorra]

 

 

She's awkward, has little to no experience in interacting with people, and basically acts like a child.

 

Yeah, I'd call those pedophilic undertones.

Lets not be silly now, in  Medieval times women were married off from the age of 13-16 and she was older than that The fact that she is  emotionally immature doesn't change the fact she would have been perfectly acceptable marriage or Romance  material

 

 

"Would have been" is the key phrase there.  No one played DA2 in medieval Europe, and no one will play PoE in medieval Europe either.  It's fine to write a romance that makes players uncomfortable because the object of romance seems immature, fragile, or naive--certainly I always felt this way with Merrill--but to say that everyone should just be cool because that kind of thing was totally all right during the medieval period is nonsense.

 

Still... i didn't played DA2 ... but i know she was 2 times older then the guy who in your opininion has "pedophillic undertones" ... are you people sane ?!

 

[anameforobsidian]

Also DA2 wasn't made in the Middle Ages.

This point can't be stressed enough for criticism of faux-medieval works.  The decision to keep questionable elements was made by a person working right now.  Also, why do we insist on certain medieval aspects out of realism, like rape, without including all medieval aspects like rampant spousal abuse?

 

Still... i didn't played DA2 ... but i know she was 2 times older then the guy who in your opininion has "pedophillic undertones" ... are you people sane ?!

I didn't pick up pedophilic undertones, but Merrill displays typical signs of preadolescence, like larger eyes, smaller frame, and vulnerability so it can certainly be read that way.  Also, in-game-age isn't a great determinant of pedophilia.  The Asura from Guild Wars 2 are a perfect example of this:

If anyone wanted to have sex with that (even simulated) I would have no problem calling them a pedophile. 

Edited February 23, 2014 by anameforobsidian

[tajerio]

 

"Would have been" is the key phrase there.  No one played DA2 in medieval Europe, and no one will play PoE in medieval Europe either.  It's fine to write a romance that makes players uncomfortable because the object of romance seems immature, fragile, or naive--certainly I always felt this way with Merrill--but to say that everyone should just be cool because that kind of thing was totally all right during the medieval period is nonsense.

 

Still... i didn't played DA2 ... but i know she was 2 times older then the guy who in your opininion has "pedophillic undertones" ... are you people sane ?!

 

 

 

Hey now, I am not one of the people saying it has pedophilic undertones.  If you must call people's sanity into question, at least aim correctly.

 

That said, I think there is an interesting point here about how characters are presented.  We're told Merrill is much older than Hawke, yes.  But the impression we get from her character throughout the whole game is of an occasionally petulant, usually stunningly naive teenager.  So while it's obviously not pedophilia legally speaking, when my PC romanced Merrill it felt like taking advantage of someone who didn't understand either the world or her place in it very well.  And if a character presentation is done like that--where the vital statistics are at odds with the personality--then that can force the player, through the PC, to think about how they interact with their companions in a more complex and I think ultimately satisfying manner.

 

Merrill is my favorite character in DA2 for this reason--she makes an aware player confront some actual issues about interpersonal relationships.  But a lot of people just say "ooh cute fragile girl romance her" and don't think any more about it. 

[BruceVC]

 

 

She's awkward, has little to no experience in interacting with people, and basically acts like a child.

 

Yeah, I'd call those pedophilic undertones.

Lets not be silly now, in  Medieval times women were married off from the age of 13-16 and she was older than that The fact that she is  emotionally immature doesn't change the fact she would have been perfectly acceptable marriage or Romance  material

 

 

"Would have been" is the key phrase there.  No one played DA2 in medieval Europe, and no one will play PoE in medieval Europe either.  It's fine to write a romance that makes players uncomfortable because the object of romance seems immature, fragile, or naive--certainly I always felt this way with Merrill--but to say that everyone should just be cool because that kind of thing was totally all right during the medieval period is nonsense.

 

 

Tajerio you mustn't misunderstand me. I never Romanced Merrill, I only had eyes for the beautiful Isabella

 

Also I didn't explain my point properly about RPG being set in Medieval ages so once again you guys missed my point ( you need to realize anything I say is true so you need to learn to decipher what I say if its in any way equivocal  )  I meant that fantasy RPG are generally set in a world in the same type of social development that is equivalent to Medieval ages. So in other words superstitions reign, there is very little knowledge of true science and people died very young. And women got married from the ages of 13-16 due to low life expectancy. If you have an issue with that I suggest you build a time machine and go back in time to change how society operated, once you do that I'll gladly agree with you....but until then I simply can't

[tajerio]

 

 

 

She's awkward, has little to no experience in interacting with people, and basically acts like a child.

 

Yeah, I'd call those pedophilic undertones.

Lets not be silly now, in  Medieval times women were married off from the age of 13-16 and she was older than that The fact that she is  emotionally immature doesn't change the fact she would have been perfectly acceptable marriage or Romance  material

 

 

"Would have been" is the key phrase there.  No one played DA2 in medieval Europe, and no one will play PoE in medieval Europe either.  It's fine to write a romance that makes players uncomfortable because the object of romance seems immature, fragile, or naive--certainly I always felt this way with Merrill--but to say that everyone should just be cool because that kind of thing was totally all right during the medieval period is nonsense.

 

 

Also I didn't explain my point properly about RPG being set in Medieval ages so once again you guys missed my point ( you need to realize anything I say is true so you need to learn to decipher what I say if its in any way equivocal  )  I meant that fantasy RPG are generally set in a world in the same type of social development that is equivalent to Medieval ages. So in other words superstitions reign, there is very little knowledge of true science and people died very young. And women got married from the ages of 13-16 due to low life expectancy. If you have an issue with that I suggest you build a time machine and go back in time to change how society operated, once you do that I'll gladly agree with you....but until then I simply can't

 

 

I understand that the world used to work that way--though the early age of marriage was actually much more of an upper-class phenomenon than a society-wide sort of thing.  And to depict that in-game is fine.  But we gamers now have an entirely different cultural context, as do the people who design the games.  So as much as we might want to get into that medieval-esque mindset, it's impossible not to interpret things like romantically engaging with an underage character through our modern lens.  And since designers come from that same cultural context, that's where the weirdness sets in. 

[BruceVC]

s

 

 

 

 

She's awkward, has little to no experience in interacting with people, and basically acts like a child.

 

Yeah, I'd call those pedophilic undertones.

Lets not be silly now, in  Medieval times women were married off from the age of 13-16 and she was older than that The fact that she is  emotionally immature doesn't change the fact she would have been perfectly acceptable marriage or Romance  material

 

 

"Would have been" is the key phrase there.  No one played DA2 in medieval Europe, and no one will play PoE in medieval Europe either.  It's fine to write a romance that makes players uncomfortable because the object of romance seems immature, fragile, or naive--certainly I always felt this way with Merrill--but to say that everyone should just be cool because that kind of thing was totally all right during the medieval period is nonsense.

 

 

Also I didn't explain my point properly about RPG being set in Medieval ages so once again you guys missed my point ( you need to realize anything I say is true so you need to learn to decipher what I say if its in any way equivocal  )  I meant that fantasy RPG are generally set in a world in the same type of social development that is equivalent to Medieval ages. So in other words superstitions reign, there is very little knowledge of true science and people died very young. And women got married from the ages of 13-16 due to low life expectancy. If you have an issue with that I suggest you build a time machine and go back in time to change how society operated, once you do that I'll gladly agree with you....but until then I simply can't

 

 

I understand that the world used to work that way--though the early age of marriage was actually much more of an upper-class phenomenon than a society-wide sort of thing.  And to depict that in-game is fine.  But we gamers now have an entirely different cultural context, as do the people who design the games.  So as much as we might want to get into that medieval-esque mindset, it's impossible not to interpret things like romantically engaging with an underage character through our modern lens.  And since designers come from that same cultural context, that's where the weirdness sets in. 

 

 

That's a valid point and I completely agree. In other words developers are allowed to use artistic interpretation around certain topics as we do have a certain expectation of how things in our modern age should be presented . Another consideration is that I am liberal who takes issues of social justice seriously. So in the Medieval ages women had very few rights and were often mistreated, if they made a game where women were discriminated against in the interests of "Medieval realism" I would have a major problem with that game as I believe sexism is a social problem in many levels of our society and I would believe that type of  portrayal of women would be unacceptable.

 

So you are right and I now get what your were saying about the Merrill

[Monte Carlo]

Jesus, this thread is like extreme anthropology.

[Gideon Laier]

This thread has taken a turn for the worst.

 

And as I read more Q&A's over this game and the subject of companion interaction and romances, I truly feel like I will not play PoE anymore. I've really discovered that story and characters are my number one requirement in RPG's and to hear that Josh won't include romances because they're "too time consuming" or "too difficult to implement correctly" - while straightforward - seems like a cop-out. If they can spend time shooting for Baldur's Gate level of interaction with companions, then going the extra distance and implementing romances shouldn't be a stretch given their ideal foundation of interaction. And if you're bad at writing romances, find someone who is better. 

 

Romances add another layer of deeper connection and intimacy to characters that you have grown to care about. They provide another foil for the protagonist and help highlight the changes and character arc that occur throughout the story. They help show the emotional change in the protagonist that occurs throughout the story as well, providing a glimpse beyond the achievements and well-won battles, to help provide a more three-dimensional character.

 

Without Romance, you lack all of that. Even with basic interactions with companions, you lack a sense growth and development with your character - you lack empathy. Companions just become some other person that you're supposed to care about without caring about them. You're supposed to form bonds with, but not too strongly. They go from intimate friends to passing acquaintances, people that are around you to help you beat battle A or to defeat boss B. 

 

Yet, I know that the consensus in this thread has been largely anti-romances and I'll concede defeat. But, I know that I'll leave now having given up on this game. The Case for Romance has been given and ignored. 

[anameforobsidian]

They provide another foil for the protagonist and help highlight the changes and character arc that occur throughout the story. 

That's not really right use of foil.

They help show the emotional change in the protagonist that occurs throughout the story as well, providing a glimpse beyond the achievements and well-won battles, to help provide a more three-dimensional character.

There are plenty of ways to show emotional development without romance.  Romance neither adds nor subtracts from character depth either.  Twilight has lots of romance, but very little character depth.

Without Romance, you lack all of that. Even with basic interactions with companions, you lack a sense growth and development with your character - you lack empathy. Companions just become some other person that you're supposed to care about without caring about them. You're supposed to form bonds with, but not too strongly. They go from intimate friends to passing acquaintances, people that are around you to help you beat battle A or to defeat boss B. 

So you can only care about people if you sleep with them?  I should tell my best friend that we need to get busy; I don't want to drift apart.  Seriously though, if the only way you can feel a strong bond with a character is to sleep with them, then either the character sucks or the player lacks empathy.

[Terror K]

So you can only care about people if you sleep with them?  I should tell my best friend that we need to get busy; I don't want to drift apart.  Seriously though, if the only way you can feel a strong bond with a character is to sleep with them, then either the character sucks or the player lacks empathy.

 

I think too many people on the anti-romance side seem to think the definition of "romance" is essentially "getting hot and heavy under the sheets" and nothing else, and treat it like that's what everybody on the pro-Romance side wants. A game having romance does not mean the game becoming a Japanese Hentai dating sim. Nor does it mean that every part character has to become bisexual and into you no matter what ala a certain awful BioWare game.

[AGX-17]

She's awkward, has little to no experience in interacting with people, and basically acts like a child.

 

Yeah, I'd call those pedophilic undertones.

Who?

 

You should quote a post if you're responding to it. That said, I went to the great trouble of looking at the previous page and saw a post about Merill from DA2 at the bottom of the page, so I'm giving you the benefit of a doubt and assuming you were referring to that post.

 

In which case I'd respond with the argument that Merill's writing is so ****ty and all over the place that it doesn't matter. Half the time she doesn't understand the most obvious sarcasm and half the time she knows exactly what the subtext of a subtle statement is (to the point of specifically noting a statement being "sarcasm.") There's no consistency whatsoever. She looks like a ****ing navi and sounds like a middle aged welsh woman. There's not much childish about her. Naivety, ignorance, excessive self-confidence and sheer stupidity are not limited to children. Listen to me, I should know, I'm an American.

 

And poor interpersonal skills = children? So over half the members of every internet forum related to anything nerdy are children whose sexual partners are pedophiles now? I'm not even going to touch that "bad with socializing = autism" garbage, by the by.

 

 

 

A game having romance does not mean the game becoming a Japanese Hentai dating sim.

Dating sims are a dead genre that didn't have any adult content to begin with. Most VNs are made in such a way that sex scenes are throwaways that allow the product to be easily ported to consoles/adapted into mainstream televised anime/etc. without anything lost, as hard as that may be for you to believe. e.g. Fate/stay night

Edited February 27, 2014 by AGX-17