Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Aight, sweet. Nonetheless the quest is bound to be of major importance and life and death so same premises apply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

If only you could substantiate that claim, my analogy would be proven terrible. :)

 

My argument isn't that romance DEFINITIVELY works. It's simply that seeing it not-work a bunch of times doesn't mean it can't work, just like seeing a bunch of people incorrectly cook a turkey doesn't mean it's impossible to cook one correctly.

Edited by Lephys

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So unless a writer can come up with a way of removing the sexbot, rapey aspects of romance in games then I don't want it in the games I play (equal parts creep out factor and "immershun" breaking).

 

Little do I care about romances being or not being included in PoE, but your post makes little sense for one reasons: in the end characters are nothing but strings of code translated into pixels. They don't and can't have free will whether it's if...else or random() or whatever. If romances feel "rapey" to you that so should everything you ever do in any game.

 

 

Everything I wrote made sense, read it again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've definitely not read all the topic (it takes too much courage for a french guy like me). But, i would say that to me, the one good point of romance is that they help you being attached to some NPCs in your party. I'm not a promancer (strange word indeed :D), and i'm not even sure to love love... But still... I'm sure i wouldn't have liked Aerie or Viconia this much if it wasn't for them being romanceable. Your learnt about them, you saw deepful interactions that you would never have seen without the romances, and somehow, this party NPCs became even more special to my character, and, to some extend, to me. And the same goes with PS:T NPCs like Annah (i had a blast with it, and i remember i was full to the brim with sorrow at the end. Emotional me :D, but best NPC ever.)

 

There is nothing about fanatism or so here. It's probably to late to implement, but i would have liked some romances too. Nevertheless, this one lack is not enough to make me regret having backed it. Maybe in a PoE 2 ;).

Edited by Abel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only you could substantiate that claim, my analogy would be proven terrible. :)

 

My argument isn't that romance DEFINITIVELY works. It's simply that seeing it not-work a bunch of times doesn't mean it can't work, just like seeing a bunch of people incorrectly cook a turkey doesn't mean it's impossible to cook one correctly.

Repeated failures is indicative of something though, if you've watched cooks trying to cook the mystical turkey and failing, you have to start to wonder if not bothering is a more pragmatic course of action.

 

Might work well over a series of games, then there's more bits and pieces to add into the "relationship" between your virtual lovers to make it seem less hurried and cheap.

  • Like 1

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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

If only you could substantiate that claim, my analogy would be proven terrible. :)

 

My argument isn't that romance DEFINITIVELY works. It's simply that seeing it not-work a bunch of times doesn't mean it can't work, just like seeing a bunch of people incorrectly cook a turkey doesn't mean it's impossible to cook one correctly.

 

 

I do not say it's impossible, but IMO it is highly unlikely...

 

I will give you an example where I think the romance could work:

 

1) a series of games like BG

 

2) defined protagonist with his own background and personality (witcher like)

 

3) Fixed party members (people you know from your past or people somehow related to your past / friends / family or initially presented goal), which have distinct personalities and clearly defined preferences to their goals and behaviors.

 

In this scenario you are all together for a long trip right from the start to the finish for many weeks/months. characters can be written in a believable way, knowing the general direction of the story, and knowing what type of character the main character is based on the path and what directions he might go to.  Based on the future choices and how the people who knew the person before or at the start of the journey might react to developments, you might design reactions and dialogs in a believable matter. Some decisions and experiences might get people closer, others might do exactly opposite. (including death/betrayal/abandoning)

Edited by Darkpriest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Repeated failures is indicative of something though, if you've watched cooks trying to cook the mystical turkey and failing, you have to start to wonder if not bothering is a more pragmatic course of action.

Ahh, but the difference between starting to wonder and just deciding the process is inherently flawed is deductive reasoning. :)

 

I understand that people don't feel it's worth the time to find out how it could work, but that hardly requires deciding it just can't.

 

And, yes, making it more long-term would probably be a start. That's at least one factor that I think worked well withe Tali relationship in the Mass Effect Trilogy. You could get to know her a bunch in the first game, but you couldn't actually "romance" her. But, EVENTUALLY you could. The pace, at least, felt a lot less ridiculous than "Hey, between every mission, we get closer and closer to confessing our undying desire to boink to each other."

 

This is one of the main reasons I keep distinctly advocating "romance" and not "romances" in games. The very idea that "a" romance takes place within the span of a game is already very limiting, incongruently so. There are about a billion other types of relationships in the game that don't all result in some ultimate finality.

 

In fact, who's to say the relationship between your main character and another character has to end "well"? Why does it go from "distant" to "close" to "married," etc.? Plenty of other things work that way. You make friends with someone, you get double-crossed, bad things happen, etc. The two of you don't necessarily just become best bros for the rest of time. However, implementations of romances in games almost always go from 0 to 100, in a directly linear fashion.

 

Anything could be implemented that simply. Anything. And it would suck just as much. I'd love to, for example, be able to have my character fall madly in love with some other character who doesn't seem to be very concerned with such things at all. Maybe she even gets into trouble purely because she gets kidnapped or something by people who are trying to get to me, etc. Or, maybe you express a lot of interest in someone, but your other decisions in the game lead to your separation, etc. Maybe by the time you meet back up, that person's married or otherwise engaged. Stuff like that.

 

If anyone ever bothered to treat it just like another standard human interaction that goes on, instead of some "Oh, lots of other things can be all kinds of interesting, but this MUST BE A LINEAR WISH FULFILLMENT in isolation from the rest of the game!", maybe they'd be better.

  • Like 2

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, maybe you express a lot of interest in someone, but your other decisions in the game lead to your separation, etc. Maybe by the time you meet back up, that person's married or otherwise engaged. Stuff like that.

 

We already know your thought process on this.

 

Hell, if two NPCs are in love with one another, maybe you get the chance to cast an illusion spell to look like some girl's betrothed, again, only to get access to stuff you otherwise wouldn't, and you have to play the part. OMG! YOU'RE ROMANCING! BURN IT! Oh wait, that's actually kind of cool, and has nothing to do with a Bioware dating-sim arc.

Casting an illusion spell on yourself to look like someone else so you can romance that person's betrothed and they have no idea you're taking advantage of them. That's some weird creepy fantasy right there. Okay the creep factor just went off the scale. :x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Casting an illusion spell on yourself to look like someone else so you can romance that person's betrothed and they have no idea you're taking advantage of them. That's some weird creepy fantasy right there. Okay the creep factor just went off the scale. :x

Yeah, I wasn't talking about romancing anyone. I was literally talking about "gaining access to stuff." As in "Oh, sure, sweetie, nothing's out of the ordinary because you're totally my betrothed, so I'm not about to ask questions if you wish to go into your study, or if you need to borrow my key to the treasury."

 

Croikey. I mention using an illusion to get someone to trust you, and the most obvious benefit to your mind is "so you can DO them! 8D!"? o_O

  • Like 1

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Or, maybe you express a lot of interest in someone, but your other decisions in the game lead to your separation, etc. Maybe by the time you meet back up, that person's married or otherwise engaged. Stuff like that.

We already know your thought process on this.

Hell, if two NPCs are in love with one another, maybe you get the chance to cast an illusion spell to look like some girl's betrothed, again, only to get access to stuff you otherwise wouldn't, and you have to play the part. OMG! YOU'RE ROMANCING! BURN IT! Oh wait, that's actually kind of cool, and has nothing to do with a Bioware dating-sim arc.

Casting an illusion spell on yourself to look like someone else so you can romance that person's betrothed and they have no idea you're taking advantage of them. That's some weird creepy fantasy right there. Okay the creep factor just went off the scale. :x

That seems like an excessive level of effort just to score an imaginary point over someone else. Then again, what else is the nature of a romance thread?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I wasn't talking about romancing anyone. I was literally talking about "gaining access to stuff." As in "Oh, sure, sweetie, nothing's out of the ordinary because you're totally my betrothed, so I'm not about to ask questions if you wish to go into your study, or if you need to borrow my key to the treasury."

 

Croikey. I mention using an illusion to get someone to trust you, and the most obvious benefit to your mind is "so you can DO them! 8D!"? o_O

 

Casting an illusion spell is one thing. That's just a spell. eg. BG2 and being turned into Drow. You didn't say that. Although one has to wonder when reading your whole quote, casting an illusion spell to look like a betrothed and act out that romance because you even said, two NPCs are in love with one another, in a romance thread to get access to other things is something else together. 

 

That seems like an excessive level of effort just to score an imaginary point over someone else. Then again, what else is the nature of a romance thread?

 

Very little effort at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh, but the difference between starting to wonder and just deciding the process is inherently flawed is deductive reasoning. :)

Posters on this thread who oppose romances in video games have NOT "just decided" that the process is inherently flawed. We've been seeing the evidence that it is forever. Romances have been in video games since the Leisure Suit Larry days. We've had a quarter of a century to study, analyze, compare, contrast and even ponder on ways they could be done better.

 

But even that doesn't matter because we don't need deductive reasoning. Game developers themselves have admitted that Romances come at significant cost to other, more vital game features, which must be curtailed or even eliminated for budgeting reasons if Romances are to be implemented. And therein lies the inherent flaw, even IF the romance ends up being really good.

Edited by Stun
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But even that doesn't matter because we don't need deductive reasoning.

*roll credits*

 

Casting an illusion spell is one thing. That's just a spell. eg. BG2 and being turned into Drow. You didn't say that. Although one has to wonder when reading your whole quote, casting an illusion spell to look like a betrothed and act out that romance because you even said, two NPCs are in love with one another, in a romance thread to get access to other things is something else together.

I'm sorry it was such a complex idea. I should've made it simpler and clearer so you wouldn't misunderstand. I apologize.

 

Let me try again. Just for you, Hiro, ^_^:

 

You might have to pose as someone for whom someone else holds affection. Thus, in order to not be detected and murdered by guards while you gain access to documents and/or areas and/or information, you'd have to respond in an appropriate fashion, as though you are affectionate in return.

 

That would be "romance," but wouldn't actually be "a romance," because your character isn't actually in a romance with that other character. However, there is romance going on (between that lady and her betrothed dude, whom you're impersonating to gain access to... a castle, a keep, a noble's house, etc.), and you're playing through it. Thus "romance" is in the game, but your character is not simply romancing another character.

 

Any further questions? I'd be happy to answer them.

Edited by Lephys

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But even that doesn't matter because we don't need deductive reasoning.

*roll credits*

 

Pretty much. We've got repeated confessions from the game makers themselves that 1 + 1 = 2.

 

But feel free to continue pondering "what ifs".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sorry it was such a complex idea. I should've made it simpler and clearer so you wouldn't misunderstand. I apologize.

 

Let me try again. Just for you, Hiro, ^_^:

 

You might have to pose as someone for whom someone else holds affection. Thus, in order to not be detected and murdered by guards while you gain access to documents and/or areas and/or information, you'd have to respond in an appropriate fashion, as though you are affectionate in return.

 

That would be "romance," but wouldn't actually be "a romance," because your character isn't actually in a romance with that other character. However, there is romance going on (between that lady and her betrothed dude, whom you're impersonating to gain access to... a castle, a keep, a noble's house, etc.), and you're playing through it. Thus "romance" is in the game, but your character is not simply romancing another character.

 

Any further questions? I'd be happy to answer them.

 

 

You could just cast an illusion spell as a servant or any other possible person like their *gasp* parents. No need to cast an illusion spell as a betrothed and then romance that person to get something. That's just an unnecessary convoluted mess. Also, what you're suggesting is a game of deception. Casts illusion spell on your self, deceive the other party with niceties, get the thing you're after (eg. key to the treasury) and escape. All within a short period of time. That's not romance at all.

 

The things people will come up with to romance someone in a video game. Seriously. I've always wondered why people will come up with some ludicrous scenario to romance someone in a game, but they never ask for the many other types of NPC's interactions that they could explore like human psychology, motivations and ethics.

Edited by Hiro Protagonist II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how many of our personal story's don't have romance in them? Who can honestly say that love hasn't made a major mark on our personal development through life?

How many of our personal stories would make for fantasy RPG's you'd want to play?

 

Mary Sue/Gary Stu protagonists make for terrible fiction. "Just base the main character on you, but give him piercing green eyes and an ancestral weapon." Blech.

Edited by PrimeJunta
  • Like 1

I have a project. It's a tabletop RPG. It's free. It's a work in progress. Find it here: www.brikoleur.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should be honest and look at all the communities of those cRpg made during all those years.

A lot of their mods are about romance or about develloping friendship/relationships (or fixing bugs).

 

Is it okay to turn a blind eye about this ?

I think not because it's a big part of an long adventure, having bonds with your teamates is important otherwise they will be just bots.

Adding romance is adding more depth to a relationship.

 

 

Quickly flying through some posts in this topic I can't help but notice that some of romance's opposers only consider it to be some sexual side dish when properly done it would (or at least in my mind should) be about love but not in its Hollywoodesque form of flowers, chocolate and sex but ever-growing companionship, caring and deep emotions. Being a pledger I naturally have no idea what the story-setting is but I'm gonna take a wild guess that end of the world is somehow related to it so strengthening your relationships with those close to you in a form or another would be reasonable to expect.

 

After all, don't we all want as immersive game world as possible?

 

PS. Someone with more talent in English could explain my point better. Rather hard to make a speech appealing to emotions with non-native language :D

 

These two posts accurately summarize the case for Romance from people who don't normally participate in this type of discussion.

 

Romance adds to a more immersive and memorable RPG experience with your party members. These posts are what almost all people who want Romance feel and despite all the objections to Romance it doesn't change the logical reason for including them

 

So good posts :thumbsup:


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

 

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

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should be honest and look at all the communities of those cRpg made during all those years.

A lot of their mods are about romance or about develloping friendship/relationships (or fixing bugs).

 

All that proves is a lot of mod makers are lonely weirdos, really.

  • Like 1

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think we should be honest and look at all the communities of those cRpg made during all those years.

A lot of their mods are about romance or about develloping friendship/relationships (or fixing bugs).

 

All that proves is a lot of mod makers are lonely weirdos, really.

 

 

My friend made a mod about a 35 year old who runs away from home and lives in a house with talking chairs (sidenote -- he actually did this).  I think this proves that all modmakers are talking chairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're basing off one, I'm going with his statement that there are numerous romance mods - a lot does not mean all - and therefore they are popular and companies should follow.  Hm, not really mutually exclusive ideas, I suppose - weirdos are a good market to exploit as any. :lol:


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think we should be honest and look at all the communities of those cRpg made during all those years.

A lot of their mods are about romance or about develloping friendship/relationships (or fixing bugs).

 

All that proves is a lot of mod makers are lonely weirdos, really.

 

Actually I think a lot of the mod makers are about extending the game; adding longer/new relationship strands is probably easier than trying to program something new into the game.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think we should be honest and look at all the communities of those cRpg made during all those years.

A lot of their mods are about romance or about develloping friendship/relationships (or fixing bugs).

 

All that proves is a lot of mod makers are lonely weirdos, really.

 

Actually I think a lot of the mod makers are about extending the game; adding longer/new relationship strands is probably easier than trying to program something new into the game.

 

 

Wow Malc, epic fail on your analysis on mod makers. Good post Amentep :thumbsup:


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

 

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

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I think a lot of the mod makers are about extending the game; adding longer/new relationship strands is probably easier than trying to program something new into the game.

Well, that's pretty much all mod makers, in terms of extending the game as well that is what a mod is for. So I guess they are mainly lazy then, not weirdos primarily, to go for the low hanging fruit in terms of features to add rather than tackle something harder.

 

Additonally, these are mods produced not necessarily consumed, so that's not much of an indication that romance is now a popularly required feature for games (the idea that without them, the party NPCs are bots is also worrying - hopefully one realizes they're not real people.) as one can make a mod that's never used. But I suppose that's easily answered by the OP providing a link to the mod sites.

 

Not saying that that isn't true - about it being a popular thing, mind you - Bioware fans are a strong proof otherwise, heh.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I have no clue how you'd prove popularity of romance mods in reality.

 

But I'm not surprised most modders go for the low hanging fruit; seems a natural consequence of desire to mod vs ability to code.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

adding longer/new relationship strands is probably easier than trying to program something new into the game.

I can assure you it's not. A game can have easy-to-use modding tools that allow even a N00b to create new stuff in the game, like textures, meshes (nude bodies), clothing, weapons, and even whole area maps.

 

But no toolset I've ever seen can turn someone into a good writer. And without good writing, what's a modded romance going to look like....besides a giant ugly mass of seemingly deliberate e-graffiti that doesn't add to a game as much as ruin what's already there?

Edited by Stun

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...