Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

 

But, really, I'm just against limiting the sides to 2.

 

A 2-sided shape is just a line. Toss in a 3rd shape, and you have a triangle. That covers a LOT more area than a line does.

I love triangles, especially the love triangles.if you know what i mean

 

(I simply could not resist)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

But, really, I'm just against limiting the sides to 2.

 

A 2-sided shape is just a line. Toss in a 3rd shape, and you have a triangle. That covers a LOT more area than a line does.

That's a terrible analogy (not to mention a geometric falsehood). A line can stretch infinitely. A triangle can't.

 

In the context of these debates that spring up on this forum, there's never 3 sides. There's only 2 sides. People like you just publically sit on the fence in between and sometimes take thinly veiled pot shots at one of the sides. Oh how I take great pleasure in pushing fence sitters off the fence. tongue.png

 

 

Thats  a big harsh. I have found Lephys to be more concerned with the principle of  reasonable debate and logic. People who don't understand this won't get his posting etiquette

 

Stun, and any others, I want to ask you a relevant question. You have answered this before but this is probably a good time to refresh your response...think about the question before you answer

 

What is your issue anyway with optional Romance arcs in RPG? I know you are passionate and vociferous in what you don't like about Romance but what is your primary reason for not wanting them ?

 

Because the developers only have so much time available, and writing romances that don't feel shallow or tacked-on takes isn't really something you can put together in a day. And as others have pointed out, many people at Obsidian are indifferent or outright contemptuous of the notion of romances in RPGs, so why should they waste time putting in something they don't really want to?

 

Secondly, romance arcs tends hide a great deal of a character's backstory and personality from people who don't want their character to pursue a relationship with that person. In Baldur's Gate, for instance, a player who doesn't pursue a romance with Viconia will learn next to nothing about her.

 

Third, romances tend to attract a certain type of individual...we all know the type...the people who got mad because so-and-so character wasn't romantically available to their character...the people who make posts bringing their knowledge of biochemistry to bear on the question of what Tali's sweat tastes like...the people who post pictures in the "Alistair Gush Thread" of their purple-haired Mary Sue Cousland with Alistair...you get the idea.

 

You know, THESE people:

 

LWob.jpg

 

Thanks for responding, even though you and I may not always agree on Romance I do find your posts interesting, reasonable, non-confrontational and not  antagonistic  

 

So your reasons are pretty standard, its what most people claim to be the reasons they are opposed to Romance. And I do believe you but did you have to think about   them for a  while  ?Or did these spring to mind straight away. You see my experience and observation is the main reason people are opposed to Romance is reason 3...lets be honest the other reasons aren't that significant in the big picture..especially with Romance being optional

 

Which raises another consideration and please hear me out. How real and insidious is reason 3? So on a website like this you have large numbers of people who use to be ardent and committed fans of Bioware. Over the last few years Bioware is not the same development company for some people and great admiration for Bioware has been replaced by anger, judgment and dismissiveness...and because Romance is a valid part of Bioware games now Romance automatically gets a bad rap but people won't say the actual reason because it could be something that resonates on a subconscious level so they say " we don't want weird people like people from BSN coming here "

 

But that really shouldn't be a valid reason if we are being honest, promancers like myself confine our Romance discussions to a few select threads. Why would it bother you if a small group want to discuss something like the sweat of a character, I wouldn't do it but it doesn't bother me that others do it 

 

Finally the worst reason for not liking Romance IMO is  when people say things like " you promancers need to get RL girlfriends " or " you promancers are weird " ....once again these points are utterly irrelevant to why I'm sure the majority of people like Romance

 

Anyway I just wanted to raise other reasons why you guys may not like Romance but not be aware of it :)

"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

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

Not really the whole story, but an amusing sentiment none the less.

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird?

 

Its a game,  isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

  • Like 2

"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

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

^

Problem with diversity is that sometimes people differ so much they wouldn't understand points of each other even if they'd try. This usually happens with for-or-oppose topics, you know, like promancers and anti-promancers. My usual tactics in such case is not get involved or shut up ASAP tongue.png

 

I will take this opportunity to shamelessly self-promote the term I came up with for people who oppose promancers: nomancers.

 

Uh... topic? Line?

The Seven Blunders/Roots of Violence: Wealth without work. Pleasure without conscience. Knowledge without character. Commerce without morality. Science without humanity. Worship without sacrifice. Politics without principle. (Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi)

 

Let's Play the Pools Saga (SSI Gold Box Classics)

Pillows of Enamored Warfare -- The Zen of Nodding

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

Also:

 

NPC friendship is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character befreind you.

NPC animosity is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character hate you.

NPC diplomacy and stealth in dialogue checks are bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character trust you.

NPC vioence is bad because it's creepy to take pleasure in hurting and murdering a pretend character.

 

So, the "it's not creepy that I want to murder a series of pixels but it is creepy that you want to kiss them" argument, eh? I generally fall on the side of not wanting romances pushed into an RPG, but let's use reasonable arguments at least. This one makes no sense.

  • Like 2

"Forsooth, methinks you are no ordinary talking chicken!"

-Protagonist, Baldur's Gate

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird?

 

Its a game,  isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

 

Because among all the things that you do steps by steps, mechanically, in a game, the most weird one is indeed developing a romantic relationship between your character and some other one.

I mean the very association of the word "romance" with the word "mechanic" which is all over this thread just... feels very very weird.

 

Though I like romances in stories, I just really don't find it tasteful when it's reduced to a choice between

A) Recomfort

B) Make fun of

C) Don't give a f*ck

"Hmmmm what is the love button ?"

Romances just don't fit well as game mechanics.

 

 

NPC friendship is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character befreind you.

NPC animosity is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character hate you.

NPC diplomacy and stealth in dialogue checks are bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character trust you.

NPC vioence is bad because it's creepy to take pleasure in hurting and murdering a pretend character.

 

 

All of this feels way way less weird than a romantic relationship. Friendship and inimity has never been a game mechanic of any good rpg as far as I know. It's either automatic, part of the narration, or featured in sims-like games. I've never witnessed a dialog which purpose is to determine if the npc adheres or not to your method. It's usually a smooth thing. Unlike romances.

 

If you don't see the difference between convincing a npc to trust you in order to fulfil a mission via a series of speech check and making a lady blush for -no reason- via the same gameplay mechanic, you got a problem.

Edited by CaptainMace

Qu'avez-vous fait de l'honneur de la patrie ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird?

 

Its a game,  isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

 

Because among all the things that you do steps by steps, mechanically, in a game, the most weird one is indeed developing a romantic relationship between your character and some other one.

I mean the very association of the word "romance" with the word "mechanic" which is all over this thread just... feels very very weird.

 

 

NPC friendship is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character befreind you.

NPC animosity is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character hate you.

NPC diplomacy and stealth in dialogue checks are bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character trust you.

NPC vioence is bad because it's creepy to take pleasure in hurting and murdering a pretend character.

 

 

All of this feels way way less weird than a romantic relationship. Friendship has never been a game mechanic of any good rpg as far as I know. It's either automatic, part of the narration, or featured in sims-like games.

 

In most Bioware games you need to do a loyalty mission/give enough gifts/achieve enough friendship points for REAL friendship to be unlocked. The requirements for romance and for friendship are normally pretty much the same, except for romance you pick a couple flirting lines on top of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird?

 

Its a game,  isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

 

Because among all the things that you do steps by steps, mechanically, in a game, the most weird one is indeed developing a romantic relationship between your character and some other one.

I mean the very association of the word "romance" with the word "mechanic" which is all over this thread just... feels very very weird.

 

 

NPC friendship is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character befreind you.

NPC animosity is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character hate you.

NPC diplomacy and stealth in dialogue checks are bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character trust you.

NPC vioence is bad because it's creepy to take pleasure in hurting and murdering a pretend character.

 

 

All of this feels way way less weird than a romantic relationship. Friendship has never been a game mechanic of any good rpg as far as I know. It's either automatic, part of the narration, or featured in sims-like games.

 

In most Bioware games you need to do a loyalty mission/give enough gifts/achieve enough friendship points for REAL friendship to be unlocked. The requirements for romance and for friendship are normally pretty much the same, except for romance you pick a couple flirting lines on top of that.

 

I said good rpgs. Bioware gifts, which they did only once if im not mistaken, is exactly a sims-like game mechanic btw.

 

Although edited before i saw your answer sorry for that :>

Edited by CaptainMace

Qu'avez-vous fait de l'honneur de la patrie ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird?

 

Its a game,  isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

 

Because among all the things that you do steps by steps, mechanically, in a game, the most weird one is indeed developing a romantic relationship between your character and some other one.

I mean the very association of the word "romance" with the word "mechanic" which is all over this thread just... feels very very weird.

 

That's probably because romance and sex are taboo social subjects while violence and murder are normalized in your society (just a guess). You really think you can justify taking pleasure in your pretend character kiiling some other pretend character AND believe that others can't justify a pretend romantic relationship between the pretend character they're playing and some other pretend character? Don't tell me it feels weird to you, I know that already, tell me why the thing that makes you feel weird is actually wrong when it doesn't make everyone feel weird.

 

 

 

NPC friendship is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character befreind you.

NPC animosity is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character hate you.

NPC diplomacy and stealth in dialogue checks are bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character trust you.

NPC vioence is bad because it's creepy to take pleasure in hurting and murdering a pretend character.

 

 

All of this feels way way less weird than a romantic relationship. Friendship and inimity has never been a game mechanic of any good rpg as far as I know. It's either automatic, part of the narration, or featured in sims-like games.

 

If you don't see the difference between convincing a npc to trust you in order to fulfil a mission via a series of speech check and making a lady blush for -no reason- via the same gameplay mechanic, you got a problem.

 

 

If friendship and animosity aren't dependent on some player input, then they're simply a constrained part of the story that could be expanded. Games are all about player interactivity with the story, that's the whole point. If you can make a difference in whether an NPC will like or dislike you, then the game is doing something right and if you can't, then you might be watching a movie or reading a book. I'm not saying that every aspect of the story in a game must be interactive, but that's sort of the whole idea behind games.

 

So, everything has to be related to the mission and anything that isn't is a problem? Is it okay to enjoy the beautiful scenery in the game, I mean, it isn't required for the mission but I want to make sure you won't think I'm creepy for doing it... What about reading the lore books, those aren't required for the mission, so I read them for "no reason" as you put it, which seems to be some sort of issue. So, no, I don't feel a need to draw a line stating that only things pertaining to the mission are acceptable, and I don't think that that means I "got a problem."

  • Like 1

"Forsooth, methinks you are no ordinary talking chicken!"

-Protagonist, Baldur's Gate

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird?

 

Its a game,  isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

 

Because among all the things that you do steps by steps, mechanically, in a game, the most weird one is indeed developing a romantic relationship between your character and some other one.

I mean the very association of the word "romance" with the word "mechanic" which is all over this thread just... feels very very weird.

 

 

NPC friendship is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character befreind you.

NPC animosity is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character hate you.

NPC diplomacy and stealth in dialogue checks are bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character trust you.

NPC vioence is bad because it's creepy to take pleasure in hurting and murdering a pretend character.

 

 

All of this feels way way less weird than a romantic relationship. Friendship has never been a game mechanic of any good rpg as far as I know. It's either automatic, part of the narration, or featured in sims-like games.

 

In most Bioware games you need to do a loyalty mission/give enough gifts/achieve enough friendship points for REAL friendship to be unlocked. The requirements for romance and for friendship are normally pretty much the same, except for romance you pick a couple flirting lines on top of that.

 

I said good rpgs. Bioware gifts, which they did only once if im not mistaken, is exactly a sims-like game mechanic btw.

 

Although edited before i saw your answer sorry for that :>

 

Bioware are one of the few studios that ever did romance. If you exclude them, because they are not quality enough... well, what games are we even going to talk about? Baldur's Gate? It may be a good game, but in terms of romance and friendship building it was absolutely mediocre, worse than Bioware games even. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird?

 

Its a game,  isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

 

Because among all the things that you do steps by steps, mechanically, in a game, the most weird one is indeed developing a romantic relationship between your character and some other one.

I mean the very association of the word "romance" with the word "mechanic" which is all over this thread just... feels very very weird.

 

 

NPC friendship is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character befreind you.

NPC animosity is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character hate you.

NPC diplomacy and stealth in dialogue checks are bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character trust you.

NPC vioence is bad because it's creepy to take pleasure in hurting and murdering a pretend character.

 

 

All of this feels way way less weird than a romantic relationship. Friendship has never been a game mechanic of any good rpg as far as I know. It's either automatic, part of the narration, or featured in sims-like games.

 

In most Bioware games you need to do a loyalty mission/give enough gifts/achieve enough friendship points for REAL friendship to be unlocked. The requirements for romance and for friendship are normally pretty much the same, except for romance you pick a couple flirting lines on top of that.

 

I said good rpgs. Bioware gifts, which they did only once if im not mistaken, is exactly a sims-like game mechanic btw.

 

Although edited before i saw your answer sorry for that :>

 

Bioware are one of the few studios that ever did romance. If you exclude them, because they are not quality enough... well, what games are we even going to talk about? Baldur's Gate? It may be a good game, but in terms of romance and friendship building it was absolutely mediocre, worse than Bioware games even. 

 

 

Baldur's Gate was made by Bioware.

"Forsooth, methinks you are no ordinary talking chicken!"

-Protagonist, Baldur's Gate

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

Romance is bad because its creepy to have a series of correct steps to follow in order to make a pretend lady want to kiss you.

 

You see this just highlights the illogical nature of some of the criticism about Romance, why is it weird?

 

Its a game,  isn't everything about steps you need to complete ? Why single out Romance ?

 

Because among all the things that you do steps by steps, mechanically, in a game, the most weird one is indeed developing a romantic relationship between your character and some other one.

I mean the very association of the word "romance" with the word "mechanic" which is all over this thread just... feels very very weird.

 

 

NPC friendship is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character befreind you.

NPC animosity is bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character hate you.

NPC diplomacy and stealth in dialogue checks are bad because it's creepy to have a series of correct steps in order to make a pretend character trust you.

NPC vioence is bad because it's creepy to take pleasure in hurting and murdering a pretend character.

 

 

All of this feels way way less weird than a romantic relationship. Friendship has never been a game mechanic of any good rpg as far as I know. It's either automatic, part of the narration, or featured in sims-like games.

 

In most Bioware games you need to do a loyalty mission/give enough gifts/achieve enough friendship points for REAL friendship to be unlocked. The requirements for romance and for friendship are normally pretty much the same, except for romance you pick a couple flirting lines on top of that.

 

I said good rpgs. Bioware gifts, which they did only once if im not mistaken, is exactly a sims-like game mechanic btw.

 

Although edited before i saw your answer sorry for that :>

 

Bioware are one of the few studios that ever did romance. If you exclude them, because they are not quality enough... well, what games are we even going to talk about? Baldur's Gate? It may be a good game, but in terms of romance and friendship building it was absolutely mediocre, worse than Bioware games even. 

 

 

Baldur's Gate was made by Bioware.

 

Oh, right, absolutely forgot.  :grin:

 

I'm really having trouble remembering good games with romances in them... Alpha Protocol is a questionable choice and the romances are sort of weak too, Kotor 2 maybe counts, maybe not, I found the romances there to be weird... what else is there? Witcher with it's soft core porn? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's probably because romance and sex are taboo social subjects while violence and murder are normalized in your society (just a guess). You really think you can justify taking pleasure in your pretend character kiiling some other pretend character AND believe that others can't justify a pretend romantic relationship between the pretend character they're playing and some other pretend character? Don't tell me it feels weird to you, I know that already, tell me why the thing that makes you feel weird is actually wrong when it doesn't make everyone feel weird.

 

Do you take pleasure in slaying enemies in rpgs ? I usually do it because it's a way to fulfil the missions. I never said it was about taking pleasure in it, at all, and it's not.

Now what's the point of having the same mechanic applied to develop a romantic relationship that never adds anything to the story, the characters or the fulfilment of tasks and such, I don't know.

I don't mind these kind of things in fire emblem for example, since relationships affect the gameplay via different bonuses and such. I don't see the point of it if it's there for the sake of being there.

 

 

 

 

Bioware are one of the few studios that ever did romance. If you exclude them, because they are not quality enough... well, what games are we even going to talk about? Baldur's Gate? It may be a good game, but in terms of romance and friendship building it was absolutely mediocre, worse than Bioware games even. 

 

 

I didn't mean to say bioware games were all bad or mediocre. But you clearly made a reference to dragon age gift system, and this (and other things) is what makes dragon age a mediocre rpg in my opinion.

 

If friendship and animosity aren't dependent on some player input, then they're simply a constrained part of the story that could be expanded. Games are all about player interactivity with the story, that's the whole point. If you can make a difference in whether an NPC will like or dislike you, then the game is doing something right and if you can't, then you might be watching a movie or reading a book. I'm not saying that every aspect of the story in a game must be interactive, but that's sort of the whole idea behind games.

 

 

Didn't mean otherwise. However friendship/inimity usually triggers automatically depending on the player choices/behaviour. Romances usually are about finding the love button between the things i've mentioned. It's a bit out-of-context and the fact these dialogs could trigger anywhere and anytime during baldur's gate 2 campaign pretty much tells how random and out-of-context these mechanics are.

Edited by CaptainMace

Qu'avez-vous fait de l'honneur de la patrie ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Oh, right, absolutely forgot.  :grin:


 

I'm really having trouble remembering good games with romances in them... Alpha Protocol is a questionable choice and the romances are sort of weak too, Kotor 2 maybe counts, maybe not, I found the romances there to be weird... what else is there? Witcher with it's soft core porn?"

 

I really don't know of any games that have good romances. I didn't mind the BG2 romances when I first played it and they can be ignored if one is uninterested (which I generally do when I replay it). I haven't played the recent Bioware games, though I've heard that the romances in them are pretty cringeworthy and I really don't like mini-game type influences on personal relationships in games. I did not like the whole gift-giving, etc. mechanics of Dragon Age to increase loyalty or friendship or whatever it was, and I'm pretty sure that the romance was tied to that somehow. I do like when interactivity through dialogue choices make a difference. My thought is that romance should be able to be done well, there's no reason it should be impossible. It's certainly not impossible to write a solid romance into a book or movie, and as personal relationships can and should be able to be influenced by the player in a game, I see no reason why romances shouldn't be able to be done well. If people enjoy them, even if I don't, and they are done well, then there is no reason to specifically exclude them.

"Forsooth, methinks you are no ordinary talking chicken!"

-Protagonist, Baldur's Gate

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

That's probably because romance and sex are taboo social subjects while violence and murder are normalized in your society (just a guess). You really think you can justify taking pleasure in your pretend character kiiling some other pretend character AND believe that others can't justify a pretend romantic relationship between the pretend character they're playing and some other pretend character? Don't tell me it feels weird to you, I know that already, tell me why the thing that makes you feel weird is actually wrong when it doesn't make everyone feel weird.

 

Do you take pleasure in slaying enemies in rpgs ? I usually do it because it's a way to fulfil the missions. I never said it was about taking pleasure in it, at all, and it's not.

Now what's the point of having the same mechanic applied to develop a romantic relationship that never adds anything to the story, the characters or the fulfilment of tasks and such, I don't know.

I don't mind these kind of things in fire emblem for example, since relationships affect the gameplay via different bonuses and such. I don't see the point of it if it's there for the sake of being there.

 

 

A story is "there for the sake of being there." If the romance "never adds anything to the story" for you, then don't bother with it! Romance can be a part of any story and is an important part of a great deal of wonderful stories, so I'm not sure why you think it doesn't add tot he story just because it doesn't show up in your quest log (this is what you're saying, right?).

 

As for taking pleasure in slaying enemies, I'm saying that we inherently take pleasure in the activities in the games we play obviously or we wouldn't play them, I'm not suggesting that we start laughing maniacally or become aroused whenever an enemy's HP reaches 0. I also don't just kill enemies "to fulfill the mission" in RPGs, and everything seems to be centered around that for you. There is more to the story than the character's level progression through quests, that's just a framing mechanism for the story being told. Like I said, there's art and lore and exploration and a whole wealth of other content that isn't just some requirement for completing a mission, and that content is an important part of enjoying games for many players. again, do you enjoy the scenery in the game? If so, why is it okay for you to enjoy that but not for someone else to enjoy something you don't? As for the mechanics being used in romances, I really am only interested in dialogue influencing relationships of any sort with NPCs (as opposed to jarring mini-games and the like), and yes dialogue is a mechanic used for other things I suppose, but I don't see how this could be a problem. Do you only talk to random NPCs to get information vital to your current quest or your overall mission, because I'm often just interested in what they have to say and how they fit into the story. Why is it a problem for you for dialogue or anything else to just be a part of the story that doesn't influence the outcome of some quest or mission?

  • Like 1

"Forsooth, methinks you are no ordinary talking chicken!"

-Protagonist, Baldur's Gate

Link to post
Share on other sites

@CaptainMace I'll also add, after reading through some of your edits, that I agree with the idea that having a "love button" in dialogue is pointless. That approach reduces the complexity and meaning of the whole thing into nothingness. Also, if you are able to romance every single joinable NPC, then that's just strange because it doesn't make sense that every single person you're travelling with would fall in love with you if you said the right things. The possible romances should be rare and should be selective/restrictive, and it should be more about a relationship organically developing than picking the "romance button."

 

This is how things should work with developing comaraderie with the NPCs in your party: your reactions to the things they share with you helps to define your character and your character's relationship with them. Will you tell your fighter to keep his thoughts to himself when he tries to tell you about his past? This will show that your character prefers people to be more reserved and will influence your future interactions with your fighter. This same type of thing should be able to be done with romances I would think.

"Forsooth, methinks you are no ordinary talking chicken!"

-Protagonist, Baldur's Gate

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 If so, why is it okay for you to enjoy that but not for someone else to enjoy something you don't?

 

 

Who said that ?

I've said multiple times on this very thread I don't mind romances in rpgs.

 

Romances as a game mechanic feels weird. What I don't understand is why people ask for these game mechanics and justify it by talking about its narrative dimension or its optional aspect.

I didn't mean to say that romances, as a part of a story, doesn't add anything to the game. I even wrote otherwise multiple times on this very thread. The romance game mechanic however, which is what people want, seems to be a very weird thing that doesn't fit well in any game that features it.

Again, doesn't the association of the word "romance" and "mechanic" feels weird to begin with ?

 

I like the scenery in a game, but again you're bringing the matter on the artistic level. We're talking of the romance as a game mechanic dude.

 

"A story is there for the sake of being there"

Really you don't see how a story can bring to the gameplay or the game in general ? You don't see how the story can be an incentive for the exploration and such. What does the romance (AS A GAME MECHANIC) adds to the game, really ?

 

EDIT : Well yeah i'm talking about these romance buttons, gift systems and such since the very beginning ! Guess we weren't sync'd correctly :D

Edited by CaptainMace

Qu'avez-vous fait de l'honneur de la patrie ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Who said that ?

I've said multiple times on this very thread I don't mind romances in rpgs.

 

Romances as a game mechanic feels weird. What I don't understand is why people ask for these game mechanics and justify it by talking about its narrative dimension or its optional aspect.

I didn't mean to say that romances, as a part of a story, doesn't add anything to the game. I even wrote otherwise multiple times on this very thread. The romance game mechanic however, which is what people want, seems to be a very weird thing that doesn't fit well in any game that features it.

Again, doesn't the association of the word "romance" and "mechanic" feels weird to begin with ?

 

I like the scenery in a game, but again you're bringing the matter on the artistic level. We're talking of the romance as a game mechanic dude.

 

"A story is there for the sake of being there"

Really you don't see how a story can bring to the gameplay or the game in general ? You don't see how the story can be an incentive for the exploration and such. What does the romance (AS A GAME MECHANIC) adds to the game, really ?

 

EDIT : Well yeah i'm talking about these romance buttons, gift systems and such since the very beginning ! Guess we weren't sync'd correctly :D

 

 

Yeah, it looks like we pretty much agree. I didn't read your earlier comments in the thread before replying, just what you said in response to me specifically.

"Forsooth, methinks you are no ordinary talking chicken!"

-Protagonist, Baldur's Gate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stun, and any others, I want to ask you a relevant question. You have answered this before but this is probably a good time to refresh your response...think about the question before you answer

 

What is your issue anyway with optional Romance arcs in RPG? I know you are passionate and vociferous in what you don't like about Romance but what is your primary reason for not wanting them ?

Hmm.... Let me answer that question with an analogy.

 

I love pizza. Really. I'm a big pizza fan. But I hate anchovies on my pizza. It's a dumb idea. They're a mismatch. Taste-wise, they overpower all the other ingredients they're mixed with. Now, you could respond by saying: That's fine, Stun, Anchovies are optional. Just order your pizza without it and everyone's happy. Right?

 

Yeah, Now lets suppose I'm at my favorite pizza restaurant and all I smell is that vile, fishy odor of anchovies.....from the kitchen....from the people at the table next to mine. And then..... the waiter comes to my table and hands me a menu, and I notice that they've doubled the price of everything. So I ask him: "Why did you just double the price of everything?" And he says: "well see, We're in the anchovy business now. Anchovies are expensive to import, and time-consuming for our chefs to prepare, so we're passing those costs on to our customers. If you don't like it, I'd suggest you go find a pizza place that doesn't serve anchovies."

 

So... I do. I find a pizza place a few blocks away. As I enter, I see BruceVC and Lephys there with laptops and projectors, giving "logical" presentations, begging the restaurant's owner, assuring him of the profitability of incorporating Anchovies as a mandatory topping on all pizza-related dishes.

 

At that point, I decide to eat lunch at the Mexican restaurant next door.

Edited by Stun
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...