The Official Romance Thread

[Infiltrator_SF]

I am ok with no romance as long as it sets the scene up for future games. Dragon Age: Origins, coming from an already drained Bioware was a game that was fine in many respects but really lacked in this department - you could pick Morrigan up, chat her up a few times and all of a sudden you're already into the weird bra scene. This really kills the the "romance" aspect of the game.

 

I much prefer the hard-time restrictions of conversations and events that can move a romance forward, and think that if we spend a lot of time with someone first (like, the entire PoE game, assuming there will be a sequel) and THEN make a move on them is far more interesting than just going into full romances with characters you've just met.

Edited July 11, 2014 by Infiltrator_SF

[Silent Winter]

 

 

 

But of course as I mentioned there are RPG that don't need Romance as they don't have any party interaction anyway, like IWD

 

Have you tried the IWD NPC-Mod?

Limited in scope (only one possible party, with a couple of class options) - but includes romance (as well as character development for the rest of the party too)

 

 

Sounds good

 

But what about the fact the characters are all custom created, does the Mod add personalities to your party?

 

That's the drawback of the mod - you're stuck with the party that the mod-creators created - so there WILL be a Paladin etc (though you don't have to use ALL the characters in your party so you could have 1 or 2 personally created team members (too few and you lose the point of them all interacting with each other as well as you).  One or 2 characters have optional classes but the Bard still calls himself a bard in dialogue, even if you chose to make him a mage.

The other drawback is an engine-limitation - your PC must be in slot1 - so usually up-front and in need of melee ability.

It's not what I'd personally choose as a party but it's balanced enough to win the game.

 

Overall, it adds a nice bit of party-interaction to the game (though the voice acting and writing varies in quality) - if you like IWD but want more interaction then it's worth a download.

[Darkpriest]

 

but all I'll say is this just goes to show how relevant  Romance is for people.

No. It only shows how relevant romance is for Bioware fans.

 

 

and not even all Bioware fans, just "the vocal real life no romance chance rejects" of that forum.

 

Writing a believable "romance" for a game which spans in time of usually a month or two of in game time is IMO impossible, and usually goes no further than "go bang that freak/person" mentality. Surely you are charmed and fall in love into people who talk to you in total for 20min of text lines... but then again world is a bizarre place full of different personalities... I get a feeling that most people just want to bang pixels, because they are so different than what they can meet in real life and in game there is no chance for rejecting, if you press right buttons, so the pixels will just swoon over you...

 

I am not saying that it is impossible to write a good romance, but I would say it is very resource consuming and in order to make it good, you would probably have to make it in some game where you have a defined playable character and perhaps only one romancable NPC, where the decision about your interactions affect more than just "no bang  / bang- fade to black" in game results. The Witcher would be a good candidate for a believable romance setting, if not for the fact the the main character is not really into that "love" thing.

[Blarghagh]

Thread pruned. This is not the topic for long, drawn out discussions about each other. Do that in PMs. Stay on-topic.

[Valmy]

 

 Sadly no, but we can hope and still discuss Romance so hopefully they will be in PoE 2

 

 

I still wish you would be more open minded about it and not just assume a priori that the party interaction will be a failure and hope that this error will be fixed in PoE 2. 

[Valmy]

 

but all I'll say is this just goes to show how relevant  Romance is for people.

No. It only shows how relevant romance is for Bioware fans.

 

 

Love and sex sells man.  People will always eat it up and it will always be powerful.  That power is disruptive to a fanbase as you have observed and it really is my only issue with the romances in games.  In games some of them I like, some of them I don't, but they are optional cheese and fun.

 

I know some people think the writing is cheesy...but in "romances" IRL people DO say cheesy things.  When there is sexual tension in the air and each person is trying to express their attraction rarely does it come out with the eloquence of Shakespearean sonnets.

 

However it does feel a bit contrived to have those kinds of romances during times of such high stress....so there's that.

Edited July 11, 2014 by Valmy

[Niggey]

Well, there is just the questions what "romance" is for each player. I can understand the hate against the Bioware "romances" because awkward threesomes, orgies and basically characters which have an "screw me" attitude has nothing to do with romance in my opinion. But romance is NOT a dialogue tree which ends with screwing someone. So the argument that promancers are strange because they want to "bang the pixels" is really not appropriate. I could say the same to people who want to have a friendship dialouge tree. In my opinion some flirting which leads to nothing or just some tension between 2 characters is fine, maybe even for people who dont like romances. There could be even intellectual romance. Romance is just so much more than banging pixels. But because like 70% of Game romances are more disgusting, boring and strange I can understand that people dont want to see similar stuff. Its Obsidians choice to be sure its interesting and enjoyable.

Edited July 11, 2014 by Niggey

[Namutree]

@BruceVC and others -- IMO you're discussing the wrong question. "Should romance be a part of cRPG's" is too general. "Which cRPG's should feature romance" is a better question.

 

IMHO romance does not fit most cRPG's. It did not detract horribly from BG2 or NWN2 OC because it had so little impact; it was just a half-dozen glued-on dialogs per character scattered through the game, which you could easily ignore. OTOH it has made a huge mess of every BioWare game post Jade Empire.

 

Take Mass Effect for example. Because they had to put in scads of romance, they turned the Normandy into a high school summer camp. I've recently been playing ME2 (finally) and it's actually impossible to play Shepard in the most obvious, natural, logical way -- a tough-as-nails warship captain requiring discipline and military etiquette, as in, crew snapping to attention when s/he enters the room, addressing him/her as "sir" or "Commander," and not taking every opportunity to share details about their sex lives/species-specific mating rituals, plus awkwardly-written flirts. (Never even mind overt disrespect. I should've had the option to throw Miranda in the brig for the remainder of the mission--or, hell, space her--over the way she talks back.)

 

That's a direct consequence of romance-centric party interaction writing. The disciplined military atmosphere would not have been conducive to romance, so they didn't write in that atmosphere, even though the damn thing takes place in a war, or a warship, with everybody in uniform. The only role-playing options that writing added were options to romance different crew members. If you're not interested in romancing any of them, you're left in the cold.

 

I would not object to a cRPG where romance was written in from the ground up, i.e. where it was a fundamental plot driver and motivation. PS:T was arguably just this and it was brilliant. I do object--strongly--to shoehorning romance into games where the fundamental plot drivers are something completely different--a curse, defeating the ancient evil that has risen again, finding the McGuffin, destroying the McGuffin or whatever. The Lord of the Rings would not have been improved if Sam and Frodo had declared their undying love for each other while crawling up Mount Doom.

I think it can be okay to add romance even if it's not a plot driver, but it does have to conform to the plot. You are absolutely right about ME2; the lack of discipline on the Normandy was downright silly. I hope Bioware will get it's act together and not allow romances to contradict the plot.

 

I think poe is the kind crpg that a romance would be good for. I think it would be best if they followed the model I established in other threads.

 

poe1: No romances, but a hint of flirting possible.

 

poe2: Romances possible, but not spammed ME2/ME3 style. No more than 4 romances possible. Returning characters start a romance mid game, but new characters start a romance late game.

 

poe3: Import data from poe2 into poe3 in order to continue romances. No new romances in poe3. Existing romances face some kind of conflict, and the player chooses how to resolve it. Decisions made through the games effect the ending of course; that applies to the main plot and the romances.

Edited July 11, 2014 by Namutree

[TMZuk]

 

 

• I don't like Romance because the writing is juvenile and immature.

I hate to point out the obvious but this is an RPG, not a Mills and Boone love story. You can't seriously expect a development company who would have talented writers to somehow inspire you with there interpretation of Romance. If you want something that realistic watch Gone with the Wind or Cold Mountain. Also most people who claim this is the reason they don't like  Romance don't really like it anyway. So I doubt even a well written Romance would have them in the promancer army. So for me this is a spurious  argument and is just an easy way to dismiss Romance

 

 

Finally, and this is something I have never understood. All Romance should be optional. So if its optional why would you object to the implementation of it?

 

 

Mhm. As pro-mancer, this none the less strike me as polar opposite to my own viewpoint.

 

I despise most "romances" in video-games with a vengeance! Especially Bioware excels in make them juvenile, pathetic, contrived and utterly out of context. If it's between that sort of "romance" and nothing at all, then by all means call me an anti-mancer. I even dislike the term, because it place romantic options and dialogue as something apart from the rest of the interaction with NPCs and companions.

 

When it was made known that there'd be no "romance" in PoE, I was disappointed because I had hoped for romance in line with how the overall theme of the game was described: Mature and touching on subjects that publishers might shy away from. I had also hoped that they could integrate these "romances" seamlessly into the game, so that it would simply be part of the interaction with the NPC/Companion, instead of some sort of separate mini-game.

 

If I may hold Dragon Age: Origins up as an example. Most of the so called "romance" in that game, was utterly disconnected from the story being told, and as such it felt artificial and unbelievable. The exception was Morrigan's character arc. It starts out as simple physical attraction with no emotional investment. As the story progresses, she, to her own surprise, realizes that it has become more than that. She struggles against it, not just because of her being unwilling to walk down that path, but because, unknown to the player, she has ambitions that does not allow for her to be caught up in a serious relationship. When she has to make her final choice, her affection for the PC or her own ambition, why, Io and behold, she chose her ambition!

 

Now ~that~ was good writing! Perfectly interwoven in the main story-arc and with the companion having her own goals and the will to stay true to them!

 

I'd hoped to see stuff like that. Pitfalls and opposed ambition, jealousy, unanswered love, etc, etc. But if it's just about choosing the right replies in an otherwise unrelated dialogue-tree and then the PC is home free, then by all means leave it out!

 

And, by the way, where Gone with the Wind might be one of the greatest love-stories ever, Cold Mountain is mediocre at best.

Edited July 11, 2014 by TMZuk

[Namutree]

I agree with many of the posters here that the dating sim style of romance isn't very good for role-playing. I think it would be best if the issue wasn't which choice gets you the girl/guy, but instead focusing on how you want to get him/her.

 

Let's say in poe2 Pallegina returns and can be romanced. If your protagonist has high RES then he can win her over with his strength of personality, or if his RES  is low he can attract her using his MIG; girls love a guy with big muscles. It wouldn't be a mini-game as much as a reflection of your pc's values. I also think that Obsidian should adopt Jade Empire's style of romantic timing. Romantic moments don't just happen anywhere; the time and place need to be appropriate.

[Death Machine Miyagi]

I thought NWN2 romance was shoehorned in and the atop-wall "hey, let's do it." moment was 'WTF where'd that come from?'

 

NWN2 romance was one of the better examples of when a game would have been better off if they had just dropped the idea entirely. Aside from the abruptness and out-of-nowhere aspect of it, Elanee was kind of a creepy stalker and Casavir was a boring mute who had the same repetitive dialogue choices about his first quest line throughout the course of the game. 

 

Mask of the Betrayer was slightly better.

 

 

I especially appreciated that they actually managed to make Safiya's also rather out-of-nowhere declaration of love thematically fit the game. With her as an aspect of the Founder and you as the current recipient of what's left of Akachi's soul, you could point out that you might be just echoing history, with the two of you drawn together due to the souls that inhabit you. This understandably freaks her out, but actually makes for an interesting idea.

 

During my second playthrough of MotB, I played a Cleric of Kelemvor/Doomguide romancing Safiya and choosing to lead the second Betrayer's Crusade. It felt very fitting. 

 

 

[Lephys]

I've got one. It may be one you've heard already or maybe it's not, but it's especially relevant, currently. And it is an example of why my "objection" to romances goes beyond just my specific personal taste.

 

A couple of days ago, Bioware held a DA:I Q&A session and followed it up with the release of 15 minutes of its E3 gameplay footage. It was a major info-dump. It covered almost every aspect of the game, and the gameplay footage focused almost exclusively on Exploration and combat.

 

And what was the result? Romance discussion from the fans. And nothing else. Here we have a highly anticipated RPG and its developers are comprehensively attempting to present its features. In vain. The fan base, apparently, is not interested in the RPG's robust Combat system. Or its exploration. Or even its plot. They only care about the 8 romances that were announced. Something isn't right, here. Dating simulators and RPGs are NOT interchangeable terms.

So... your issue with romance in video games is that a bunch of fans are irrational people? o_O *bewildered*

 

And, to the topic in general, I'll just emphasize yet again that all this "here's why romance is bad, I think: (insert example of a problematic specific implementation of romance)" is very, very similar to saying "Here's why turkeys should not be cooked: (insert a scenario in which a turkey was burned in an oven because it was cooked wrong)."

Edited July 11, 2014 by Lephys

[Silent Winter]

 

Mask of the Betrayer was slightly better.

 

Yeah - I should've said 'NWN2 OC'

MOTB was indeed much better in many aspects of character development.

[Stun]

And, to the topic in general, I'll just emphasize yet again that all this "here's why romance is bad, I think: (insert example of a problematic specific implementation of romance)" is very, very similar to saying "Here's why turkeys should not be cooked: (insert a scenario in which a turkey was burned in an oven because it was cooked wrong)."

Terrible analogy, since unlike cRPG Romances, there are several ways to cook a turkey so that it ends up tasting good.

[AGX-17]

[...]

But I don't think interracial Romance is even an issue anymore?

 

 

But not very character can be Romanced by every person. Some need to be exclusive to a certain group. For example Viconia is the option for a straight male Romance

Interracial? Still a problem for whiteys (and others, this is a two-way street,) in 'murrica. And other countries, too.

 

But the chances of the PC stumbling across a veritable menagerie of bisexual/pansexuals like in DA2 is silly. Absurd. Mathematically it is exceptionally unlikely. Not quite astronomical as there are billions of stars in billions of galaxies with an unknown number of planets to them, but still. Silly.

Edited July 12, 2014 by AGX-17

[BruceVC]

 

[...]

But I don't think interracial Romance is even an issue anymore?

 

 

But not very character can be Romanced by every person. Some need to be exclusive to a certain group. For example Viconia is the option for a straight male Romance

Interracial? Still a problem for whiteys (and others, this is a two-way street,) in 'murrica. And other countries, too.

 

But the chances of the PC stumbling across a veritable menagerie of bisexual/pansexuals like in DA2 is silly. Absurd. Mathematically it is exceptionally unlikely. Not quite astronomical as there are billions of stars in billions of galaxies with an unknown number of planets to them, but still. Silly.

 

 

Agx were you that type of kid who went out his way to prove that there was no such thing as Father Xmas and then used science to show your fellow pre-schoolers that he couldn't possibly exist?

 

Don't get me wrong I am huge supporter in the facts and intellectual debate but sometimes we like things to be silly or unlikely or just plain fantasy

 

Lets not over-analyse everything ( its funny hearing me tell you this because I get told I do this in RL )

Edited July 12, 2014 by BruceVC

[Stun]

Don't get me wrong I am huge supporter in the facts and intellectual debate but sometimes we like things to be silly or unlikely or just plain fantasy

Lets not give DA2 that much credit. Its "Everyone goes both ways!" thing was not for silliness sake, It wasn't for fantasy's sake either, and the devs weren't trying to be 'socially progressive', or whatever. It was for cost-cutting sake and nothing more. They couldn't afford to write up distinct Gay backgrounds, personalities, flirts and cutscenes, Straight backgrounds, personalities, flirts and cutscenes, and Bisexual Backgrounds, personalities, flirts and cutscenes for any of the 4 romanceable NPCs. Nor could they just do a game without any romances. So they just made everyone Bi without any explanation or any deviation (except for maybe Isabela. They managed to scrounge up a vague and generic explanation for her sexuality). <gag>

 

It was lazy and cheap, like everything else in DA2.

 

But that's just one of the million problems with romances in Video games. They're a huge, expensive undertaking. And unless you're very thorough (which is practically impossible), you risk alienating/offending whole swaths of the fanbase via sheer provocation alone.

Edited July 12, 2014 by Stun

[BruceVC]

 

Don't get me wrong I am huge supporter in the facts and intellectual debate but sometimes we like things to be silly or unlikely or just plain fantasy

Lets not give DA2 that much credit. Its "Everyone goes both ways!" thing was not for silliness sake, It wasn't for fantasy's sake either, and the devs weren't trying to be 'socially progressive', or whatever. It was for cost-cutting sake and nothing more. They couldn't afford to write up distinct Gay backgrounds, personalities, flirts and cutscenes, Straight backgrounds, personalities, flirts and cutscenes, and Bi Backgrounds, personalities, flirts and cutscenes for all 4 romanceable NPCs so they just made everyone Bi without any explanation or any deviation (except for maybe Isabela. They managed to scrounge up an explanation for her sexuality). <gag>

 

It was lazy and cheap, like everything else in DA2.

 

But that's just one of the million problems with romances in Video games. They're a huge, expensive undertaking. And unless you're very thorough (which isn't cheap), you risk alienating/offending whole swaths of the fanbase.

 

 

You make some good points as usual yet I'll raise this again. It seems the people that were most critical of the Romance implementation in DA2 were people who don't like Romance anyway

 

For example I was fine with the Romance in DA2, I dated the beautiful Isabella and I thought her story and motive were interesting and made perfect sense

[Stun]

2 things. First, It'd be more accurate to say that the only people who liked the way Romances were implemented in DA2 were the promancers, and they tend to not be very picky when it comes to romances. Their motto is "any inclusion of a romance in a video game is a good thing", yes? Tell me I'm wrong.

 

Second, Isabela's story and motives are irrespective of her romance. They're part of the game's main plot, and ALL of it will occur regardless of whether you romance her. So no. You can't cite it as proof of anything.

Edited July 12, 2014 by Stun

[BruceVC]

2 things. First, It'd be more accurate to say that the only people who liked the way Romances were implemented in DA2 were the promancers, and they tend to not be very picky when it comes to romances. Their motto is "any inclusion of a romance in a video game is a good thing", yes? Tell me I'm wrong.

 

Second, Isabela's story and motives are irrespective of her romance. They're part of the game's main plot, and ALL of it will occur regardless of whether you romance her. So no. You can't cite it as proof of anything.

 

So for me the persons story and Romance are inextricably linked and relevant. I only Romance people that I can identify with and that's persons story is part of the identification process

 

So once again this may not be relevant to you but the fact that Isabella had an interesting story was a factor in my Romance endeavors with her.

 

And as for Promancers not being picky, maybe. I don't have any complaints about any of the Romance arcs I was in involved in through the various RPG I have played like ME, BG2 or DA. So you may be right, promancers are easy to please...or we could just be less critical?

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

[...]

But I don't think interracial Romance is even an issue anymore?

 

 

But not very character can be Romanced by every person. Some need to be exclusive to a certain group. For example Viconia is the option for a straight male Romance

But the chances of the PC stumbling across a veritable menagerie of bisexual/pansexuals like in DA2 is silly. Absurd. Mathematically it is exceptionally unlikely. Not quite astronomical as there are billions of stars in billions of galaxies with an unknown number of planets to them, but still. Silly.

 

 

Well, that problem is easily solved by making bisexuality the norm in your setting.

[Stun]

So for me the persons story and Romance are inextricably linked and relevant.

You act as if this is a matter of opinion. It isn't. Isabela's story is NOT part of the romance. Period. It happens exactly the same way (same dialogue choices and everything) regardless of whether your Hawke is romancing her. So unless you see those fade-to-black, underwear-humping scenes as a major reason why you like Romances, you cannot logically claim that you wouldn't have enjoyed an Isabela friendship just as much as an Isabela romance, Since those silly scenes are the ONLY difference between the two.

 

And this is PROOF of what people have been telling you in all these romance threads and what you've always brushed off as "unconvincing": Romances rarely ever add the character depth to NPCs that you think they do. Therefore, whether they're worth the added development costs and game integrity risks becomes the most important question.

Edited July 12, 2014 by Stun

[BruceVC]

 

So for me the persons story and Romance are inextricably linked and relevant.

You act as if this is a matter of opinion. It isn't. Isabela's story is NOT part of the romance. Period. It happens exactly the same way (same dialogue choices and everything) regardless of whether your Hawke is romancing her. So unless you see those fade-to-black, underwear-humping scenes as a major reason why you like Romances, you cannot logically claim that you wouldn't have enjoyed an Isabela friendship just as much as an Isabela romance, Since those silly scenes are the ONLY difference between the two.

 

And this is PROOF of what people have been telling you in all these romance threads and what you've always brushed off as "unconvincing": Romances rarely ever add the character depth to NPCs that you think they do. Therefore, whether they're worth the added development costs and game integrity risks becomes the most important question.

 

 

I'm not explaining my point properly, I'll try again

 

You said initially that the stories and characters in DA2 were badly written and it was rushed job. So firstly I reject that, I enjoyed the narrative and the various characters. The things I didn't like were the reused dungeons...but the narrative was fine

 

Now around Isabella I was highlighting the fact that her story was one of the reasons I Romanced her. I enjoyed her story. In every RPG I play I also imagine the adventures and journeys of my party. I RP there trials and Romance is part of that. So because that is how I play an RPG the story of  the various characters directly adds to the depth of the overall experience and for me Romance is part of the experience I expect

 

Its irrelevant if you followed her story but didn't Romance her, that's not the point I'm making

 

So there is no proof of anything, I am still unconvinced that leaving out Romance in the case of Isabella would have made the interaction with her as memorable. Because the Romance arc was part of the overall gaming experience

 

I hope this clears this up

[Stun]

I'll repeat myself. The only difference between an Isabela Friendship and an Isabela Romance is the 15-second dry humping scene at the Hawke estate.

 

So is it fair to say that the only reason you liked the Isabela Romance was because the game lets you f*ck her?

[BruceVC]

I'll repeat myself. The only difference between an Isabela Friendship and an Isabela Romance is the 15-second dry humping scene at the Hawke estate.

 

So is it fair to say that the only reason you liked the Isabela Romance was because the game lets you f*ck her?

 

No not at all, it was the development of the Romance I enjoyed which is part of my overall RP experience. So for example even though she betrayed me with the Desire Demon I forgave her and continued to court her

 

You say that there was no difference between being her friend or trying to Romance her with dialogue options, I wasn't aware of that because most of my conversations with her were with the intention of developing Romance. Now lets say you are right about the dialog making no difference that would still be irrelevant to me  because my RP experience was always about the fact the conversations were about Romance ( well not all of them but the more personals ones where she asked me to do her favours )