The Official Romance Thread

[Stun]

"There's no such thing as a non-reciprocal romance."

 

"There's no such thing as an unrequited romance."

In a video game there isn't. There can't be.

 

When you need Larping, or some other form of headcanon to create the illusion that romance between the two characters is occurring, then you've already failed. And the promancers will let you know it

Edited March 5, 2015 by Stun

[Gromnir]

 

"There's no such thing as a non-reciprocal romance."

 

"There's no such thing as an unrequited romance."

In a video game there isn't. There can't be.

 

When you need Larping, or some other form of headcanon to create the illusion that romance between the two characters is occurring, then you've already failed. And the promancers will let you know it

 

we are finally back to where we were before you tried to mislead and distract.  congratulations.  unfortunately, you aren't contributing new.  there is no such thing as unrequited romance or non reciprocal romance.  and there is no such thing as unrequited romance or non reciprocal romance  in a crpg because, "there can't be."

 

well golly, how might anybody argue with such a well-formed and enlightened response?

 

*snort*

 

is funny.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Stun]

 

So if we were to come up with a definition, it would necessarily need to be quite broad in order to cover all the different perceptions. Wouldn't you agree?

thats not correct,

 

It's not? Then how do you propose that a game developer even attempt to cater to a crowd that wants Romances when no one is even bothering to determine what this crowd sees as romance in the first place?

[Lephys]

Definitions generally are broad. That's why specificity was invented.

 

"I'm thinking of an animal. I'm thinking of a four-legged animal. I'm thinking of a four-legged animal that barks. I'm thinking of a Golden Retriever."

 

It's not wrong to describe a Golden Retriever as an animal. It's just vague. Just like "romance." Which has kinda been one of the largest issues in any discussion of RPG romances, ever. Person A says the word "romance," and person B says "that's dumb, because (insert one, very specific example of a video game romance here)", then attributes everything from that one example back up the ladder to the over-arching word "romance."

 

And before I get a ludicrous response... I'm simply stating that this has occurred many a time, and is problematic to discussion. I'm not about to get into "who specifically said that and when, and how many times?", because I'm not trying to make some kind of "And therefore, if you've ever said anything against romance, that's been your exact fallacy, MUAHAHAHAHA!" argument.

[Stun]

 

In a video game there isn't. There can't be.

 

When you need Larping, or some other form of headcanon to create the illusion that romance between the two characters is occurring, then you've already failed. And the promancers will let you know it

we are finally back to where we were before you tried to mislead and distract.  congratulations.  unfortunately, you aren't contributing new.  there is no such thing as unrequited romance or non reciprocal romance.  and there is no such thing as unrequited romance or non reciprocal romance  in a crpg because, "there can't be."

 

I explained why. re read the quote pyramid, thanks. It is not romance because nothing is going on between the two characters. (you might as well read a book and claim that one of its characters and you are engaging in a romance.) And in a video game, that is basically Larping/head canon. People do it all the time in RPGs. But that's not game design. It is simply the player pretending that something exists in the game when it doesn't.

 

Here, I'll even give you an example: Skyrim. There's about 35 people you can marry in Skyrim. When you do marry them, they will call you "my love" and they'll move in with you when you buy a house. This is both unreciprocated and unrequited, since the game does not allow you to romance them, or return the affection/feeling in any way.

 

Consequently, not many people on planet earth will ever claim that Skyrim has 35 romances.

Edited March 5, 2015 by Stun

[Lord of Riva]

 

 

So if we were to come up with a definition, it would necessarily need to be quite broad in order to cover all the different perceptions. Wouldn't you agree?

thats not correct,

 

It's not? Then how do you propose that a game developer even attempt to cater to a crowd that wants Romances when no one is even bothering to determine what this crowd sees as romance in the first place?

 

 

The same way developer find new ways for all mechanics, they try new things out. Alternatively they can still use what exists (and maybe improve upon), it seems to be perceived as romance by some, at least the press.

 

But that should become clear with the post i made in my last statement.

 

The same is true for every part of any given game, PoE will have a newly established world, an original story, a whole new system on character development etc.

 

i certainly do not see how "romance" is any different?

[Stun]

it seems to be perceived as romance by some, at least the press.

^I'm trying to identify this.

 

How exactly is romance perceived by the gamers? And isn't it true that if we gather all these perceptions and describe them here we'll get something that looks impossibly broad and useless, like this:

 

Romances in video games can be any type of affectionate communication, or any type of love, professed or otherwise, be it via dialogue or otherwise, requited or not, reciprocated or not, with the player character or not

Edited March 5, 2015 by Stun

[Lord of Riva]

 

it seems to be perceived as romance by some, at least the press.

^I'm trying to identify this.

 

How exactly is romance perceived by the gamers? And isn't it true that if we gather all these perceptions and describe them here we'll get something that looks like this:

 

Romances in video games can be any type of affectionate communication, or any type of love, professed or otherwise, be it via dialogue or otherwise, requited or not, reciprocated or not, with the player character or not

 

well the thing is, it can be perceived from a lot of standpoints, look at your definition. Romance can be what you describe, but it doesnt have to. it could be some of the things exclusively it could be all of them, it could be something entirely different.

 

quite a few people stated now that the definition of romance does not make their arguments invalid but who am i to say that your definition of romance is wrong ?

(Although i do not see why the sentence starts with "video games" your definition works with every romance... or nearly with any kind of interaction between living things)

[Lephys]

Here, I'll even give you an example: Skyrim. There's about 35 people you can marry in Skyrim. When you do marry them, they will call you "my love" and they'll move in with you when you buy a house. This is both unreciprocated and unrequited, since the game does not allow you to romance them, or return the affection/feeling in any way.

 

Consequently, not many people on planet earth will ever claim that Skyrim has 35 romances.

So, hang on... if you could boink your Skyrim spouse, it'd be romance? Why isn't a brothel romance? What are the criteria for romance? You keep telling us what isn't romance. What is it, then?

 

Don't get me wrong. I'd say the Skyrim marriages aren't very romantic at all. But, I'm not sure you could discount classifying that game content as "romance." What else is it? They aren't political marriages. You're not getting married for any other reason, really, other than "Hey, we're allowing you, the player, to pick one of these fine folk to decide your character wants to marry, for whatever reason."

 

I mean, are the Fable marriages romantic, because you get to hug, kiss, and boink your wife? They even get a like-o-meter. Does a like-o-meter make it a romance, maybe?

[gogocactus]

 

 

The back-pedaling is quite insane in this discussion.

We could pretend that people who start these threads and, more generally, ask for romances or regret their absence in PoE have this loose definition of romance. At the end we all know they don't.

 

I don't get why you reproach Stunt to adjust the definition of the concept to make his point, when adjusting the definition of a romance is exactly what people who support it did during all the discusions about it so far.

 

 

sorry, but that is idiotic. if other folks did the same stoopid thing, it don't somehow make his ridiculous backpedaling any less silly. heck, Gromnir also gave the genesis poster a hard time earlier in this thread. so stun sudden had a brain seizure and started spouting nonsense that not only was utterly irrelevant, but were mimicry o' the idiocy o' the guy he were insulting earlier in this thread? that is the why you feel stun does not deserve recriminations for his nonsense?

 

HA!

 

okie dokie.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Okie dokie

[Darkpriest]

I'm not typing this with angry fingers, DP, but if you have something to say about romances, why not post it? In fact, you're right that folks read short posts more often. Post a sharp short point and give us your thoughts.

 

EDIT: sorry, phone typing

Sure. I can dig it.

 

First decide what's the base for the romance. Is it tied to the basic needs and instincts like desire to have sex and flirt built around it or you want to build up and speak about love in the more profound way.

 

Personally i dont care about romances as long as they dont annoy me with in the face approach like DA2. (Sanders!). It will always be a very poor subsitute if any for the real life reactions. You cant mimic body language, touch, smell etc. so it is already subpar in that regard. To me romance in game is as needed as alcochol... sure i wont mind but I see no use for it for it delivers no taste. A virtual glass of wine will not make you taste the wine.

 

The game however can convey the sense of adventure with the good story and environment build, and can provide a fun gameplay experience. Romance belongs to neither of the two.

[Vasid]

I'm fully 100% against romances in this game.

 

It will take important time away from development, They almost always end up hammy and immersion breaking, and most important of all it's not Obsidian's vision for the game or their characters.

 

If you ask me this sort of request is better suited to passionate modders than developers who have no interest in it.

[Stun]

 

Here, I'll even give you an example: Skyrim. There's about 35 people you can marry in Skyrim. When you do marry them, they will call you "my love" and they'll move in with you when you buy a house. This is both unreciprocated and unrequited, since the game does not allow you to romance them, or return the affection/feeling in any way.

 

Consequently, not many people on planet earth will ever claim that Skyrim has 35 romances.

So, hang on... if you could boink your Skyrim spouse, it'd be romance?

 

Boinking, or love dialogue between the couple, or love discussion between the couple, or some sort of recognizable relationship progression between the two after you're actually married, Or a combination of any of those, or you know, anything more than what the game actually gave us.

 

Seriously. What's the difference between a Spouse and a Housecarl in Skyrim? Answer: absolutely nothing at all. Oh wait, I take that back. Your Housecarl calls you "my thane", while your spouse calls you "my love". And that's it. But If this is what passes as romance in the minds of Promancers, then I'm not sure what they're fussing against PoE for. Do you? Rest *assured* that any type of relationship between an NPC and the player character in PoE will be going a LOT deeper than that, even if they don't include any of those obnoxiously over-rated 4 letter words from the two characters as they talk to each other OR any of the standard relationship mini-games that the BSN eats up.

 

You keep telling us what isn't romance. What is it, then?

Are you trying to be ironic? I'm the only person on this thread who has given a definition of romance. And I've given 2. Mine, and the implied collective definition of the masses, based on examples they've cited. Edited March 5, 2015 by Stun

[Lephys]

This thread isn't really to request or expect romance in the finished PoE. It's more just a discussion of romance in video games (more specifically, RPGs) in general, and how that can potentially affect the possibility of romance-related content in any future iterations of Eternity (expansion, sequel, etc.). In other words if the resources ever are available, what would be some of the best ways to do it? How can we improve on what other games have done? How are romances typically done wrong, and why? Etc.

 

Unfortunately, any thread like this cyclically devolves into (and back out of, for brief periods) petty "victories" and "defeats," because a discussion is totally a war.

[Cantousent]

That's where definitions matter, L jefe.  :huge grin:

 

I read what Darkpriest had to say and Vasis also.  I basically fall into the 'anti-romance' crowd inasmuch as romance means significant content where the PC woos and romances various NPCs.  There will be elements of romance in the game, and there are things that are clearly romantic in a lot of RPGs I've played over the years.  Maybe even most.  ...But I'm just not into fighting over the turf any longer.  Total romance definition war makes me weary.

 

As a quick aside, one of the problems is that romantic story arcs tend to flow differently from the typical adventure arcs.  When it becomes a mini-game and side show, it absolutely creates dissonance with the main adventure thrust of the game.

[Stun]

This thread isn't really to request or expect romance in the finished PoE. It's more just a discussion of romance in video games (more specifically, RPGs) in general, and how that can potentially affect the possibility of romance-related content in any future iterations of Eternity (expansion, sequel, etc.). In other words if the resources ever are available, what would be some of the best ways to do it? How can we improve on what other games have done? How are romances typically done wrong, and why? Etc.

 

Unfortunately, any thread like this cyclically devolves into (and back out of, for brief periods) petty "victories" and "defeats," because a discussion is totally a war.

There you go again, smugly returning to your spectator spot on the fence, after taking a pot-shot at one of the sides. Edited March 6, 2015 by Stun

[Lord of Riva]

Again Stun,

 

your definition of Romance is valid, but it is not what the so called "pro-mancers" are going on about. Your generalisation of romance is a pointless argument, nobody argues that you need to want romances in a certain way, its wholly up to you.

 

but instead of arguing this over 20 pages you could just outright state that you dont want them and thus finish this discussion.

 

How do you think you wil persuade someone to stop liking something they like?

i do not like tomatoes and you wont ever get me to change that, regardless of how much "logical" arguments you bring on the table.

 

Look at the post of Varid,  it has a similar Issue.

First he states that he doesnt want Romances, which is fine.

 

But his argument on why not is a complete fallacy, its not an argument to say "because i do not like it, because i do think it breaks my immersion, because i do believe that something else will get less love in the development" . because even if this explains the reasons for his tastes its only very personal opinion.

 

This topic is about people talking about if and how they can imagine romances in this game (or the next whatever) so it should be enough to show that you do not want to have them and be done wizh it.

shwoing resistance is a good thing, dicussing things is a good thing. Trying to press Logical argument on tastes and preferences is not. This is something we do know in Real-life why does it come up on the internet so often?

Edited March 6, 2015 by Lord of Riva

[Stun]

Again Stun,

 

your definition of Romance is valid, but it is not what the so called "pro-mancers" are going on about.

Oh yes it is. One of my definitions totally encompasses everything the promancers are going on about.

 

Why do you think we've been talking about Ravel for the past 7 friggin pages?

[Lord of Riva]

 

Again Stun,

 

your definition of Romance is valid, but it is not what the so called "pro-mancers" are going on about.

Oh yes it is. One of my definitions totally encompasses everything the promancers are going on about.

 

Why do you think we've been talking about Ravel for the past 7 friggin pages?

 

That, i do not know.

 

i still have problems finding the reason for you argumentation after all.

why not give it a rest now?

i mean if obsidian is looking at this topic they will know your position, its hard to avoid it. So let the guys who are actually interested in the topic the space to discuss, how does that sound?

[Cantousent]

But I did think Vasid had a valid point about modding.  Aren't there romance mods out there for some of these games?  ...And I don't think it's bad for folks to argue for personal preference.  They probably should.  Just don't pretend that it's completely objective and it's all good.  <.<

[Stun]

why not give it a rest now?

:::Looks at your username and avatar.::::

 

Oh! You're not a moderator! Ok...no. How about I not. The thread rules are outlined in the OP. I'm not breaking any of them. So no.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Stun

[Lord of Riva]

But I did think Vasid had a valid point about modding.  Aren't there romance mods out there for some of these games?  ...And I don't think it's bad for folks to argue for personal preference.  They probably should.  Just don't pretend that it's completely objective and it's all good.  <.<

 

well the problem is that if someone opens a topic in a offtopic forum about My little Pony, and them some guys come and hijack the thread with "MLP is BS" all the time then i see that as an issue.

 

This is a Topic about romance, not a discussion about how the english language works.

It does not matter if you disagree to MLP or Romance.

 

i understand that people want to state that they do not want a certain feature in a game and please go ahead and state that. But a little tolerance should be possible right?

its not like these guys harm you in anyway.

 

EDIT: no, you are correct im not a moderator, do i need to be a moderator to ask you something? O.o

 

its sad, that you do think this is necessary though.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Lord of Riva

[Lephys]

Boinking, or love dialogue from the PC, or love discussion, some sort of recognizable relationship progression between the two after you're actually married, or you know, anything more than what the game actually gave us.

 

Seriously. What's the difference between a Spouse and a Housecarl in Skyrim? Answer: absolutely nothing at all. Oh wait, I take that back. Your Housecarl calls you "my thane", while your spouse calls you "my love". And that's it.

Erm... I don't understand. You just emphasized the crap out of dialogue being the key factor, here. And then you pointed out that the only difference between a housecarl and a spouse is that one speaks a different line, indicating love? You're right... how ever are we to know there's love involved?

 

But If this is what passes as romance in the minds of Promancers, then I'm not sure what they're fussing against PoE for.

And the fallacy is perpetuated. This is what passes as romance by the definition of romance, from your own very lips. That doesn't tell us anything. Even just having a 73-hour-long dialogue between two characters, in which your only option to continue the dialogue is "OMG I LOVE U A BUNCH!" over and over again would technically constitute "a romance." What's important is that that would be a terrible romance. And, for what it's worth, I guarantee that even the vast majority of the collective promancer hivemind that you and only you seem to know about (shhhh! It's a secret conspiracy!) would not be satisfied with that. So, whether or not it "passes for romance" in their minds is irrelevant, since it passes for crappy romance.

 

There are two things that matter in the design of something like this:

 

1) What is my aim in this design? I'm the creative developer of this, and thus, if it's completely contradicting my own design desires, then why am I making it at all?

2) Will enough people find this enjoyable, in whatever way, to justify all the time and resources I'm putting into this game? Will it make enough money to be a viable project, etc.?

 

So, the whole reason we're here, talking about romance, is to explore ideas regarding the vague topic of romance, and how they might be useful in the design of a video game that wishes to utilize them in some unspecified capacity. Obviously, individual people are going to specify different capacities, shapes, sizes, etc. of romance.

 

Cross out "romance" and put in anything else, then have a brainstorming session with people about it. Combat. Character customization. You're going to have people saying "I think THIS would be really great!". If it wouldn't work, then you say why. If something is acceptable content for someone else, but not to you, that's the whole purpose of collaborative discussion -- to find out what might work for both of you, if anything.

 

Does that not compute?

[Lephys]

There you go again, smugly returning to your spectator spot on the fence, after taking a pot-shot at one of the sides.

Which side was that? Could you please point out the pot-shot? I merely described the purpose of the thread, as described by the author of the thread. Then, I made the simple observation that many posts throughout the thread, at various points, have slipped off the topic and onto tangential mini-battles. That has occurred, as it not? I didn't aim fault at anyone. I simply described the thread.

[Stun]

its not like these guys harm you in anyway.

Oh, I vehemently disagree with that. Promancers have demonstrated, via their sheer numbers, to be an incredibly harmful force to the entire industry

 

When gaming companies, who used to develop great RPGs with remarkably deep gameplay, complex, dynamic combat mechanics, and unmatched focus on game world details and richness, decide instead, because romances are so popular, to divert massive amounts of both their budget and time away from all this, and put it towards developing the deepest, most all-encompassing Romances that they can make, the result is.... Dragon Age. And Mass Effect, and Witcher 2 And other mundane modern Titles with super deep companion drama and pitifully shallow everything else, then YES, Harm has been done. To the game, to the RPG fan, and to the industry as a whole.

 

Thank GOD Obsidian decided not to fall into that trap. PoE will have no romances, because 100% of the developer time and budget has gone into where it SHOULD go: To making the game a true RPG, instead of an interactive soap opera/dating simulator.

 

Which side was that?

The anti-mancers.

 

When was the last time you decided to Grill BruceVC on his rabid stance with your pointless guess-questions?

Edited March 6, 2015 by Stun