The Official Romance Thread

[BruceVC]

How many options do you wish until you can call a romance "realistic" ?

 

And do other non-romance situations in roleplaying games have to live up to the same realism standards

that some would like to see in romances?

 

Does realism in romances mean that there must be so many options available that

the amount of programming so many options means too much effort for the developers in the first place?

 

If realism is a reason for or against inclusion of romances should we not check

if we should include or exclude other non-romantic situations from a game based on realism standards?

 

You make a very compelling argument and one that I have tried to raise before but you have articulated it better than I have done in the past

 

In summary "why do we seem to insist that Romance in RPG is held to much higher standard than other types of party interaction, why do we demand Romance realism but we are happy with other unrealistic types of party connections "

 

So for me this is  used by some people to  dismiss Romance entirely, its a justification because they don't want or like Romance. They aren't really concerned with a " realistic " Romance implementation. They just don't want Romance at all

[PrimeJunta]

BTW, @BruceVC -- you still haven't addressed the points you said you would once you have the time:

 

(1) The effect romance subplots have on the rest of the writing (exhibit A: Normandy turned into Love Boat, with it simply being impossible for Shepard to play it as a hardass military commander demanding discipline and adherence to protocol).

 

(2) The objectification inherent in BioWarian romance. It turns your "romance options" into prizes to be won by playing the game right. Exhibits B, C, and D: the romances in Jade Empire, all the Mass Effects, and both Dragon Ages.

 

And to reiterate: I am not opposed to romance if it is central to the storyline (exhibit E: Deionarra in Planescape: Torment).

[Stun]

Just breaking up is not an option? You mean my choice is forgiveness or death?

 

... I'll have the chicken then.

Poorly written Emo caricatures do not "break up". They break down, turn everything into an epic drama, then take others down with them.

Edited August 4, 2014 by Stun

[Doppelschwert]

In summary "why do we seem to insist that Romance in RPG is held to much higher standard than other types of party interaction, why do we demand Romance realism but we are happy with other unrealistic types of party connections "

 

So for me this is  used by some people to  dismiss Romance entirely, its a justification because they don't want or like Romance. They aren't really concerned with a " realistic " Romance implementation. They just don't want Romance at all

 

Care to give some empiric evidence for this claim? I don't think anyone wants party interaction that are on the same level as bioware romance. I'm pretty sure the same standards apply for both, it's just easier to achieve a good party interaction because it is not so dependent on the behavior of the player.

[PrimeJunta]

FWIW I don't like party interaction minigames in any form. I felt that the approval mechanic in MotB cheapened the whole thing, for exmaple. "Safiya approval +6 DING!" was... not good, even if you were angling for the (highly tangible!) mechanical relationship bonuses rather than snu-snu.

 

I would much prefer party interactions to be left purely to the writing, with only "story" consequences (e.g. a disapproving party member quitting the party, betraying you, or dying, depending on your choices). Anything else turns it into a minigame where you're trying to "win" rather than... well, roleplay.

 

The exception to this rule is if the game is set up so that manipulating your party into doing what you want is a core story and gameplay element. KOTOR2 did precisely this, and it worked well there.

[Fluffle]

@PrimeJunta

 

So how do you feel about the reputation mechanism in Pillars of Eternity.

 

You know you will gain a certain reputation. And you can switch on the option that you see what answer in a dialogue raises what kind of reputation for you.

Is that okay? Isn't that a minigame as well? You could only choose certain answers based on what reputation you would like to gain.

 

If you want a benevolent reputation, you just always choose the benevolent option in a dialogue.

 

Of course you can switch off the option so that you don't see what answer raises what reputation.

But if switching off would be okay in this case, wouldn't it be for the romances as well?

Would the romances in MotB be okay if you just did not see the approval in form of those approval points?

Edited August 4, 2014 by Fluffle

[Nonek]

How many options do you wish until you can call a romance "realistic" ?

 

And do other non-romance situations in roleplaying games have to live up to the same realism standards

that some would like to see in romances?

 

Does realism in romances mean that there must be so many options available that

the amount of programming so many options means too much effort for the developers in the first place?

 

If realism is a reason for or against inclusion of romances should we not check

if we should include or exclude other non-romantic situations from a game based on realism standards?

 

Personally I want all content to be deeper, more interactive, nuanced, subtle and well written, which obviously the Ander's romance along with fairly much every other is not. I want realistic and logical responses that feel natural, I do not wish to be sheparded into a situation by the plot when Stevie Wonder facing in the wrong direction could spot what is obviously happening. As can anybody else with a modicum of intellegence.

 

For me it's not about the amount of options available (though I want more than upper, middle and lower right,) but their quality and believability, something which is missing in almost every romance in every game. In Bioware games it simply seems that the writers do not know how humans react or behave, but instead draw on tropes and cliches to flesh out their caricatures, who have no motivation other than to serve the plot. Which is also invariably illogical, incoherent and poorly written.

 

In short make characters who are human, multi-dimensional, self motivated and not merely walking (and rarely talking) plot points. If this is done then realistic views, goals, responses and outlooks will arise naturally rather than what a poorly written plot demands. I'd also like the protagonist to not be the only party whom does the pursuing in a romantic relationship, as this has a creepy, rapey vibe to it when the character forces themselves on an npc who cannot resist because one has "played" the game correctly.

 

If none of the characters find the protagonist attractive that is also fine, or if they are perturbed or disgusted by the main character clumsy and desperate attempts to engage in a "romance" that is fine. Some folk are drawn together in conflict situation, some aren't, and even if they are drawn together it does not have to be a sexual relationship. After all the most in depth, well written and outstanding roleplaying opportunities in Obsidian and Black Isle games have not arisen in romances but the fantastic interactions with friends, enemies, philosophies, items and situations.

 

By their nature new romances, flirting and sexual liaisons are not nuanced or particularly complicated situations, try being married for twenty years and accurately depicting all of the baggage, background and depth of that relationship. Deionarra, Ravel and Kreia come near and should be the guiding light towards which all relationships are steered in my personal opinion.

[PrimeJunta]

@PrimeJunta

 

So how do you feel about the reputation mechanism in Pillars of Eternity.

From what I've heard, I'm loving the bejeezus out of it. It sounds just about perfect.

 

You know you will gain a certain reputation. And you can switch on the option that you see what answer in a dialogue raises what kind of reputation for you.

Is that okay? Isn't that a minigame as well? You could only choose certain answers based on what reputation you would like to gain.

It's not the same at all--because there isn't one "right" reputation to gain. No rewards or penalties are involved. Instead, you have the world reacting to your choices as you go. It adds depth and meaning to your roleplaying.

 

If you want a benevolent reputation, you just always choose the benevolent option in a dialogue.

 

Of course you can switch off the option so that you don't see what answer raises what reputation.

Which I will. As I've said, I much prefer narrative-related mechanics to be under the hood (unlike combat mechanics, where I do want to see the numbers).

 

But if switching off would be okay in this case, wouldn't it be for the romances as well?

Would the romances in MotB be okay if you just did not see the approval in form of those approval points?

Nope, nor the other influence rewards. Not the same.

 

Again: my problem is with the reward aspect. Having people treat you differently if you have a benevolent, rational, passionate, or cruel reputation is not a reward; one is not (generally and systemically) better than the other, only different; sometimes a cruel reputation might help you (intimidating someone into giving information, perhaps); sometimes a benevolent one would. Without the reward, this is qualitatively different from mechancial bonuses or "succeeding" in a romance.

 

Not the same at all.

 

Edit: IMO MotB's party interaction system would have been just fine if they had removed the mechanical rewards (and the extremely awkward romance dialog), and the "DING!" notifications during the dialogs. The characters' attitudes changed subtly as their approval shifted, which was nice. Again, the rewards are the problem.

Edited August 4, 2014 by PrimeJunta

[Panteleimon]

 

Okay I see the point you boys are making, I suppose it depends on what culture you live in. We know for a fact that even in our modern age prearranged marriages and honour killings exist. So for some people the choices in DA 2 may not seem that absurd. And it doesn't mean I support this but people getting killed because of scorned love does happen

 

 

Really? That's your argument?

 

I'm pretty sure the main demographic for video games is central europe, north-america and australia. I don't know of any culture there where prearranged marriages or honour killings are part of.

 

Also, what's up with the assumption that every party member should be single in the first place?

If you want your realism in a medieval world and not just some 20th century with swords and magic, given the life expectancy, most people are probably married by the time they join your party, especially if they are usually not a full time adventurer.

 

I argue that in most settings it's probably more logical and realistic if your party members are married, so romance makes no sense. Feel free to bring some counterarguments.

 

 

 

Speaking as a young married man, I have to say that the inability to cast yourself as a married person(even if your spouse is never depicted in the game and remains abstract) is a little unfortunate.  Or as a widow/widower if that's more convenient and economical from a writing standpoint.

[BruceVC]

BTW, @BruceVC -- you still haven't addressed the points you said you would once you have the time:

 

(1) The effect romance subplots have on the rest of the writing (exhibit A: Normandy turned into Love Boat, with it simply being impossible for Shepard to play it as a hardass military commander demanding discipline and adherence to protocol).

 

(2) The objectification inherent in BioWarian romance. It turns your "romance options" into prizes to be won by playing the game right. Exhibits B, C, and D: the romances in Jade Empire, all the Mass Effects, and both Dragon Ages.

 

And to reiterate: I am not opposed to romance if it is central to the storyline (exhibit E: Deionarra in Planescape: Torment).

 

I apologize, I thought I did answer these questions

 

1. I can't comment on this point because in my game I did Romance someone so the mood on the Normandy was normal. And I didn't think the writing was impacted negatively by the Romance,  but I'm not an expert on the ME series as I only played each game once and thought they were enjoyable, not fantastic
2. I agree, we can do better around Romance and make them more realistic and believable. Based on suggestions in these types of discussions I  would like Romance to not to be automatic based on silly presents but a concerted effort from the player and also based on the personal struggles you have with a particular Romance partner, like surviving a dangerous dungeon or deadly end boss monster. The Romance arc should grow as the game goes on and there should be a chance of a fail or a break-up. So basically like a RL Romance

And I  also agree Deionarra was a very poignant and believable Romance

[BruceVC]

 

 

Okay I see the point you boys are making, I suppose it depends on what culture you live in. We know for a fact that even in our modern age prearranged marriages and honour killings exist. So for some people the choices in DA 2 may not seem that absurd. And it doesn't mean I support this but people getting killed because of scorned love does happen

 

 

Really? That's your argument?

 

I'm pretty sure the main demographic for video games is central europe, north-america and australia. I don't know of any culture there where prearranged marriages or honour killings are part of.

 

Also, what's up with the assumption that every party member should be single in the first place?

If you want your realism in a medieval world and not just some 20th century with swords and magic, given the life expectancy, most people are probably married by the time they join your party, especially if they are usually not a full time adventurer.

 

I argue that in most settings it's probably more logical and realistic if your party members are married, so romance makes no sense. Feel free to bring some counterarguments.

 

 

 

Speaking as a young married man, I have to say that the inability to cast yourself as a married person(even if your spouse is never depicted in the game and remains abstract) is a little unfortunate.  Or as a widow/widower if that's more convenient and economical from a writing standpoint.

 

 

I don't think this would be applicable because Romance is optional, so I'm battling understand why you would want to be married in a RPG but never  meet your wife or have no interaction with her? If this is a reason to not Romance then the solution should be to just not follow any Romance options?

[BruceVC]

 

In summary "why do we seem to insist that Romance in RPG is held to much higher standard than other types of party interaction, why do we demand Romance realism but we are happy with other unrealistic types of party connections "

 

So for me this is  used by some people to  dismiss Romance entirely, its a justification because they don't want or like Romance. They aren't really concerned with a " realistic " Romance implementation. They just don't want Romance at all

 

Care to give some empiric evidence for this claim? I don't think anyone wants party interaction that are on the same level as bioware romance. I'm pretty sure the same standards apply for both, it's just easier to achieve a good party interaction because it is not so dependent on the behavior of the player.

 

 

Well the evidence is the constant scrutiny from  people that don't feel Romance is applicable in a RPG? We constantly hear comments like " if Romance is not done properly then I don't want it all"

 

This becomes very subjective and difficult to gauge "what is proper Romance "

 

But yes we can improve on Bioware Romance, I do obviously like Bioware Romance but you guys have made me realize there are ways to make it more realistic

[Fluffle]

@BruceVC

 

same here.

I do like some of the Bioware romances, but I would NOT like to see them in Pillars of Eternity.

So I'd say I do like them but only as long as they stay in Bioware games.

 

Pillars of Eternity would need a far different approach to romances.

 

Personally for me I do not need romances in a game. It can enhance game experience

depending on how it is implemented.

 

And as Dragon Age:Inquisition is coming out anyway this year, we will have soon enough new Bioware romances anyway.

So we don't need them in Pillars of Eternity.

 

Nevertheless we can think about ways of how to make them better so that they could fit into Pillars of Eternity.

[BruceVC]

@BruceVC

 

same here.

I do like some of the Bioware romances, but I would NOT like to see them in Pillars of Eternity.

So I'd say I do like them but only as long as they stay in Bioware games.

 

Pillars of Eternity would need a far different approach to romances.

 

Personally for me I do not need romances in a game. It can enhance game experience

depending on how it is implemented.

 

And as Dragon Age:Inquisition is coming out anyway this year, we will have soon enough new Bioware romances anyway.

So we don't need them in Pillars of Eternity.

 

Nevertheless we can think about ways of how to make them better so that they could fit into Pillars of Eternity.

 

Yeah I share your sentiment on this matter 100 %, I'll get my RPG Romances from DA:I so its no big deal if PoE doesn't have them. Also Witcher 3 will have Romance

[Gfted1]

[Namutree]

BTW, @BruceVC -- you still haven't addressed the points you said you would once you have the time:

 

(1) The effect romance subplots have on the rest of the writing (exhibit A: Normandy turned into Love Boat, with it simply being impossible for Shepard to play it as a hardass military commander demanding discipline and adherence to protocol).

 

(2) The objectification inherent in BioWarian romance. It turns your "romance options" into prizes to be won by playing the game right. Exhibits B, C, and D: the romances in Jade Empire, all the Mass Effects, and both Dragon Ages.

 

And to reiterate: I am not opposed to romance if it is central to the storyline (exhibit E: Deionarra in Planescape: Torment).

I disagree that Jade Empire would fall into the mini-game category. The primary focus in the Jade Empire romances was whether or not you convinced the love interest to remain open-palm, or become closed-fist. Actually getting them to love you was pretty much a given.

[Namutree]

 

 

 

Speaking as a young married man, I have to say that the inability to cast yourself as a married person(even if your spouse is never depicted in the game and remains abstract) is a little unfortunate.  Or as a widow/widower if that's more convenient and economical from a writing standpoint.

 

 

I don't think this would be applicable because Romance is optional, so I'm battling understand why you would want to be married in a RPG but never  meet your wife or have no interaction with her? If this is a reason to not Romance then the solution should be to just not follow any Romance options?

 

It could simply be a biography choice. Early in the game where you are asked about the past you could say, "I've got a wife/husband back home." Then once in a while you could receive a letter at your stronghold from your wife/husband. Heck, that would be pretty neat. I think I might add that via mod. It would certainly be a unique romance mod.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

Speaking as a young married man, I have to say that the inability to cast yourself as a married person(even if your spouse is never depicted in the game and remains abstract) is a little unfortunate.  Or as a widow/widower if that's more convenient and economical from a writing standpoint.

 

 

I don't think this would be applicable because Romance is optional, so I'm battling understand why you would want to be married in a RPG but never  meet your wife or have no interaction with her? If this is a reason to not Romance then the solution should be to just not follow any Romance options?

 

It , "I've got a wife/husband back home."

 

So basically because someone is miserable in RL with there marriage you want to replicate that same feeling to an RPG experience in a game.....that's cold man.,..thats cold

[Panteleimon]

 

 

 

Okay I see the point you boys are making, I suppose it depends on what culture you live in. We know for a fact that even in our modern age prearranged marriages and honour killings exist. So for some people the choices in DA 2 may not seem that absurd. And it doesn't mean I support this but people getting killed because of scorned love does happen

 

 

Really? That's your argument?

 

I'm pretty sure the main demographic for video games is central europe, north-america and australia. I don't know of any culture there where prearranged marriages or honour killings are part of.

 

Also, what's up with the assumption that every party member should be single in the first place?

If you want your realism in a medieval world and not just some 20th century with swords and magic, given the life expectancy, most people are probably married by the time they join your party, especially if they are usually not a full time adventurer.

 

I argue that in most settings it's probably more logical and realistic if your party members are married, so romance makes no sense. Feel free to bring some counterarguments.

 

 

 

Speaking as a young married man, I have to say that the inability to cast yourself as a married person(even if your spouse is never depicted in the game and remains abstract) is a little unfortunate.  Or as a widow/widower if that's more convenient and economical from a writing standpoint.

 

 

I don't think this would be applicable because Romance is optional, so I'm battling understand why you would want to be married in a RPG but never  meet your wife or have no interaction with her? If this is a reason to not Romance then the solution should be to just not follow any Romance options?

 

 

 

As Namutree said, I was envisioning a biographical option more than anything else.  I find it a little odd that of all the possible relationship statuses(or lack thereof)  you have to choose from in games, married is never one.  I'd imagine that a large(decent?) portion of the people playing the game are married, so it's an easy thing to relate to.

 

The letter idea is actually a good one if anybody cared to flesh it out to that point.  Anybody who's read letters between spouses knows that they can easily be very touching, and it's economical from a resource standpoint.  It's much harder to depict two people FALLING in love(and one would necessarily question why you would even try unless that was the central part of the story you're telling) rather than in a constant state.

 

I don't like romances in games(or literature, for that matter) because I don't think they're well written.  That isn't to say that the people who have to write them aren't good writers, but that it's really, really hard to do it well in any medium other than film or non-fiction writing.  The only romance I've seen in any game that was worth paying attention to was Jaheira in Baldur's Gate 2 and Throne of Bhaal.  It was straight faced enough to be pretty believeable.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

Okay I see the point you boys are making, I suppose it depends on what culture you live in. We know for a fact that even in our modern age prearranged marriages and honour killings exist. So for some people the choices in DA 2 may not seem that absurd. And it doesn't mean I support this but people getting killed because of scorned love does happen

 

 

Really? That's your argument?

 

I'm pretty sure the main demographic for video games is central europe, north-america and australia. I don't know of any culture there where prearranged marriages or honour killings are part of.

 

Also, what's up with the assumption that every party member should be single in the first place?

If you want your realism in a medieval world and not just some 20th century with swords and magic, given the life expectancy, most people are probably married by the time they join your party, especially if they are usually not a full time adventurer.

 

I argue that in most settings it's probably more logical and realistic if your party members are married, so romance makes no sense. Feel free to bring some counterarguments.

 

 

 

Speaking as a young married man, I have to say that the inability to cast yourself as a married person(even if your spouse is never depicted in the game and remains abstract) is a little unfortunate.  Or as a widow/widower if that's more convenient and economical from a writing standpoint.

 

 

I don't think this would be applicable because Romance is optional, so I'm battling understand why you would want to be married in a RPG but never  meet your wife or have no interaction with her? If this is a reason to not Romance then the solution should be to just not follow any Romance options?

 

 

 

As Namutree said, I was envisioning a biographical option more than anything else.  I find it a little odd that of all the possible relationship statuses(or lack thereof)  you have to choose from in games, married is never one.  I'd imagine that a large(decent?) portion of the people playing the game are married, so it's an easy thing to relate to.

 

The letter idea is actually a good one if anybody cared to flesh it out to that point.  Anybody who's read letters between spouses knows that they can easily be very touching, and it's economical from a resource standpoint.  It's much harder to depict two people FALLING in love(and one would necessarily question why you would even try unless that was the central part of the story you're telling) rather than in a constant state.

 

I don't like romances in games(or literature, for that matter) because I don't think they're well written.  That isn't to say that the people who have to write them aren't good writers, but that it's really, really hard to do it well in any medium other than film or non-fiction writing.  The only romance I've seen in any game that was worth paying attention to was Jaheira in Baldur's Gate 2 and Throne of Bhaal.  It was straight faced enough to be pretty believeable.

 

 

You make some good points around the whole marriage option in a RPG. Its  worth considering, the only criticism I would have is Romance in a RPG is normally about interaction with a party member that is part of your adventure and you can see. This makes the Romance person more believable and whole RP experience more real as there is some kind of emotional connection. So why don't we combine the best of both worlds, we have Romance options but also the option to get married? Or is that taking it too far ?

[Endrosz]

At the end of MotB, you married your romance partner if you had one (I think you had to confirm that you really want him/her as a stable partner before the slides started rolling, but it was just a single line) . But otherwise what Namutree suggests is actually a pretty nice idea, I might even join a team to develop such a mod. We could have -- a la King's Bounty -- different spouse personalities:

 

Family Woman: "I heard from Maria that in the Darkverydark Forest, where you were wandering around lately, fampyrs prey upon travelers. Oh dear, I hope it's just a rumor! You shouldn't put yourself in so much danger, darling. Little Peter's birthday is next month, you shouldn't miss that! He's always talking about his big hero daddy who cleaves dragons in half with a single sweep, and the best gift would be seeing you in person."

 

Demanding Wife: "The last time you dragged your worthless hide back home from adventuring you only had 2000 gold and a small pouch of  gems. I CAN'T RUN A PROPER LADY'S HOUSEHOLD WITH THAT LITTLE MONEY! START TAKING ON MORE LUCRATIVE QUESTS OR ELSE!!!!!!!!! "

 

Mad Inventor Husband: "I hope you don't mind that I invested the money you left in the stronghold funds into exploring a very interesting theory of animancy. Due to some unfortunate mishaps, which were totally unexpected and accidental, your favorite dog succumbed to death. She was getting old anyway."

 

The Unfaithful: "I plan to embark on a journey to visit faraway Lisistra. I've heard so many stories of its red-domed temples and lush green parks and exotic citizens that I must see it for myself. You're almost always away on some grand adventure, it's time I had some on my own. Without you, it's so boring and unhealthy here in the cold, dark, dank keep ."

 

Yeah, there's so much uncharted territory in the realm of video game romances.

Edited August 4, 2014 by Endrosz

[Doppelschwert]

I wrote a really long reply, but midway through I realized that I don't feel like arguing with bruce over this stuff for now.

 

In a nutshell, I really like the concept of being married in a game in the first place. I feel like being in a relationship is way more satisfying, meaningful, difficult as well as deeper compared to falling in love, so it's somehow stupid to just implement the latter in games.

 

You should totally make that mod with the letter namutree, I'd like to play that sometime.

[Darkpriest]

 

 

 

 

 

Okay I see the point you boys are making, I suppose it depends on what culture you live in. We know for a fact that even in our modern age prearranged marriages and honour killings exist. So for some people the choices in DA 2 may not seem that absurd. And it doesn't mean I support this but people getting killed because of scorned love does happen

 

 

Really? That's your argument?

 

I'm pretty sure the main demographic for video games is central europe, north-america and australia. I don't know of any culture there where prearranged marriages or honour killings are part of.

 

Also, what's up with the assumption that every party member should be single in the first place?

If you want your realism in a medieval world and not just some 20th century with swords and magic, given the life expectancy, most people are probably married by the time they join your party, especially if they are usually not a full time adventurer.

 

I argue that in most settings it's probably more logical and realistic if your party members are married, so romance makes no sense. Feel free to bring some counterarguments.

 

 

 

Speaking as a young married man, I have to say that the inability to cast yourself as a married person(even if your spouse is never depicted in the game and remains abstract) is a little unfortunate.  Or as a widow/widower if that's more convenient and economical from a writing standpoint.

 

 

I don't think this would be applicable because Romance is optional, so I'm battling understand why you would want to be married in a RPG but never  meet your wife or have no interaction with her? If this is a reason to not Romance then the solution should be to just not follow any Romance options?

 

 

 

As Namutree said, I was envisioning a biographical option more than anything else.  I find it a little odd that of all the possible relationship statuses(or lack thereof)  you have to choose from in games, married is never one.  I'd imagine that a large(decent?) portion of the people playing the game are married, so it's an easy thing to relate to.

 

The letter idea is actually a good one if anybody cared to flesh it out to that point.  Anybody who's read letters between spouses knows that they can easily be very touching, and it's economical from a resource standpoint.  It's much harder to depict two people FALLING in love(and one would necessarily question why you would even try unless that was the central part of the story you're telling) rather than in a constant state.

 

I don't like romances in games(or literature, for that matter) because I don't think they're well written.  That isn't to say that the people who have to write them aren't good writers, but that it's really, really hard to do it well in any medium other than film or non-fiction writing.  The only romance I've seen in any game that was worth paying attention to was Jaheira in Baldur's Gate 2 and Throne of Bhaal.  It was straight faced enough to be pretty believeable.

 

 

You make some good points around the whole marriage option in a RPG. Its  worth considering, the only criticism I would have is Romance in a RPG is normally about interaction with a party member that is part of your adventure and you can see. This makes the Romance person more believable and whole RP experience more real as there is some kind of emotional connection. So why don't we combine the best of both worlds, we have Romance options but also the option to get married? Or is that taking it too far ?

 

 

Not sure if I am misreading the previous poster or you are :D

 

But, my impression was not his desire to get married (good luck to any marriage taken after a month of relationship with 30 sentences said between the couple), but he was asking, why are we not STARTING out as a married person (a background) and try to maintain that relationship or even better, it is even visibly affecting our choices and consequences of various choices. - letters, visits, perhaps even some grander decisions (wealth flows, security, moving out, power grab, etc.). That could be even interesting... but probably also  not something that Bangers are looking for, as this would limit their freedom whom they can sex virtually.

 

I stand by my stance that the Biowarish romances are nothing more than cheap sex bots for people who can't get the courage or have chances of getting interesting partners in real life, because "reasons"... the example of ME and The Normandy Love boat is the most glaring one. By that standards I could say that Bond movies also have romances in them... 

[Lephys]

Next to these i'm afraid that sweet nothings are just that, and i'd prefer the far more in-depth and worthwhile forms of interaction that flesh out the world and characters rather than forcing my attentions on some poor npc. Just my personal opinion as usual however.

Romantic attachments in complete isolation are always going to be just that -- sweet nothings -- and are always going to be worse than all the happenings you've described.

 

Romantic attachments not in isolation, however...

 

That's 99.9% of the problem with romances in games of late. They aren't part of the game. They're just an appendix. They're like... dying your equipment, or achievement hunting. "This really has nothing to do with anything, but we figured some people might enjoy it in complete isolation."

[BruceVC]

 

 

Not sure if I am misreading the previous poster or you are :D

 

But, my impression was not his desire to get married (good luck to any marriage taken after a month of relationship with 30 sentences said between the couple), but he was asking, why are we not STARTING out as a married person (a background) and try to maintain that relationship or even better, it is even visibly affecting our choices and consequences of various choices. - letters, visits, perhaps even some grander decisions (wealth flows, security, moving out, power grab, etc.). That could be even interesting... but probably also  not something that Bangers are looking for, as this would limit their freedom whom they can sex virtually.

 

I stand by my stance that the Biowarish romances are nothing more than cheap sex bots for people who can't get the courage or have chances of getting interesting partners in real life, because "reasons"... the example of ME and The Normandy Love boat is the most glaring one. By that standards I could say that Bond movies also have romances in them... 

 

 

No I understood exactly what he was suggesting but I was trying to find some compromise. I get people don't want Bioware Romance, I get people want more realistic Romance, I get people want Romance that isn't  juvenile but I don't get a suggestion around Romance that doesn't actually involve interacting with someone. And that's ultimately what the marriage Romance suggestion is. This wouldn't  be acceptable for most promancers for reasons I mentioned. Romance involves seeing someone and having dialogue options with them, if you can't do this there is no real connection. It kind of defeats the point of Romance and the immersive side of the Romance interaction don't you think?

Edited August 4, 2014 by BruceVC