The Official Romance Thread

[Fluffsy]

 

I wonder why some people feel that "romance" is the only viable relationship with game characters. Is friendship or rivalry not a good relationship? Having your companions face their fears and overcome them during critical moment due to loyalty or turn their backs on you because you mistreated them or contradicted their beliefs is far more satisfying than awkward "sex-talk" and fade-to-black sex scenes.

 

Has any developer outside of Bioware even done "dating-sim" RPGs ? Maybe you simply like Bioware game style? If so maybe romantic movies or books could be a good alternative. And if not you can always leave things for imagination. Nothing is set in stone in RPG genre, especially character relationships. You can always make-up your own relationship

I recommend looking up what MCA's preferred takes on writing romances would be. Not all romances need to be Bioware-style.

 

 

I didn't say that they should. I personally am interested in a story and how characters react to events and your choices, but to each their own.

 

Also I mentioned Bioware only because OP said s/he is a fan of their games.

[Lord Wafflebum]

 

 

 

I'm guessing you haven't bothered staying up with the romance debate. BruceVC and I have both argued that romances need to fit into the narrative, otherwise they tend to be overly awkward. Romances would be best to serve as a way to enhance character development, not be a mini-game like Bioware does it where you select the "heart" options to romance and find gifts to give to companions. It's not a good way to do it.

 

We've also advocated that no romances are still better than badly done romances. In the romance thread we discussed at length MCA's take on how he would want to do romances if he had to, and I think his take would be a significant incline. 

 

Read the romance thread before you make generalized and marginalized statements of the promancers.

I'm not a native speaker, but I think "some" doesn't mean "all".

 

I haven't pay attention to the debate in this forum because I have no interest in it, but the OP is clearly one of the "promancers" that see them as some sort of feature from a check list, so I don't think what I said was unfair at all.

 

Because you're attributing the attitudes of a brand new member, who posted the same topic in different subforums within minutes of each other, and who has clearly spent no time reading up on the community stance of potential romances in PoE to all people that support romances. 

 

When you refer to "promancers" you refer to the whole group. You're not the only one who does this. There are those of us that want to continue the PoE theme of mature storytelling into a different take on romances, and there are those that essentially want waifus. Accusatory statements against promancers, even if proceeded with "some," creates an unfair characterization of all. Please be more specific with your criticisms. "Promancers" have a hard enough time getting others to even take the time to consider our arguments seriously without being lumped in with those that want every game to be some sort of sex & seduction simulator.

 

Dude, if I say some promancers I'm clearly reffering to a specific segment inside those people that are pro-romance. I honestly don't see the issue here.

 

Because the people that want virtual girlfriends and the people who want to see a truly narrative enhancing romance (promancers) really tend to be two distinct groups. They just get lumped in with us because they technically fit. I don't think you were making a fair characterization, as you were lumping in what I think Stun dubbed the "promancers" with the three or four people that want bioware romances.

[Lord Wafflebum]

 

 

I wonder why some people feel that "romance" is the only viable relationship with game characters. Is friendship or rivalry not a good relationship? Having your companions face their fears and overcome them during critical moment due to loyalty or turn their backs on you because you mistreated them or contradicted their beliefs is far more satisfying than awkward "sex-talk" and fade-to-black sex scenes.

 

Has any developer outside of Bioware even done "dating-sim" RPGs ? Maybe you simply like Bioware game style? If so maybe romantic movies or books could be a good alternative. And if not you can always leave things for imagination. Nothing is set in stone in RPG genre, especially character relationships. You can always make-up your own relationship

I recommend looking up what MCA's preferred takes on writing romances would be. Not all romances need to be Bioware-style.

 

 

I didn't say that they should. I personally am interested in a story and how characters react to events and your choices, but to each their own.

 

Also I mentioned Bioware only because OP said s/he is a fan of their games.

 

I really wish folks would read what people's stances are on the romances aspects (aka romance thread). I've even conceded romances could be rendered obsolete assuming exceptional character development is done.

[Valmy]

Hi all,

I've been following this game as Obsidian remains the top remaining hope for the RPG genre. 

Like many of you, I'm a Veteran of BG BG2 KOTOR1 and 2, the NWN series, Dragon Age.. 

Hearing about this game got me very excited, and I believe it has to potential to breathe new life into the genre.

However, what these games all had and do have, is also something that apparently Pillars of Eternity lacks: Romanceable Characters, and lack of this is keeping me on the fence of whether or not to buy it. It's an extra motivation to invest emotionally in the game, in its story, having normal companions and potential romantic interest commenting on your travels... having a story that builds around this relationship. It's an investment that sets fantasy games apart from Diablo and co..

Even just one (or two) hetero choice would be something that most of the players could get on board with, rather than doing a DA:Inquisition.  How about a DLC character or two?

I wish this game a lot of success, but I don't think I could do their effort justice without giving my opinion as an outside observer and potential player. This feature is clearly missing for me.

-gurufabbes

 

Um they said there would be no romances in 2012.  If you have been following this game why is this just becoming an issue now, three years later?  We have already had this discussion many many time.  But I am keeping an open mind about it.  I have no idea what 'no romances' really means and how exactly it will work.

 

And BG had no romance-able NPCs.

 

Like I have said to everybody who has decided no romances means everything is going to be terrible, wait a bit and see what people say about it and give it a chance.  And having just a few hetero choices would be a huge finger to the LGBT community and it would be far better to just have none rather than have Obsidian be known as the homophobic developer. 

Edited March 1, 2015 by Valmy

[Miquel93]

Because the people that want virtual girlfriends and the people who want to see a truly narrative enhancing romance (promancers) really tend to be two distinct groups. They just get lumped in with us because they technically fit. I don't think you were making a fair characterization, as you were lumping in what I think Stun dubbed the "promancers" with the three or four people that want bioware romances.

 

 

So, to be a promancer you have to have a specific set of preferences of how romances should work, so the people who like Bioware romances (very likely the largest segment and most significant of the lot) don't fit in it. Got it. 

 

Things are a lot more complicated than they seemed, aparently. And here I thought that being a promancer only ment to be in favor to the inclusion of romance in RPGs, go figure.

[Lord Wafflebum]

 

Because the people that want virtual girlfriends and the people who want to see a truly narrative enhancing romance (promancers) really tend to be two distinct groups. They just get lumped in with us because they technically fit. I don't think you were making a fair characterization, as you were lumping in what I think Stun dubbed the "promancers" with the three or four people that want bioware romances.

 

 

So, to be a promancer you have to have a specific set of preferences of how romances should work, so the people who like Bioware romances (very likely the largest segment and most significant of the lot) don't fit in it. Got it. 

 

Things are a lot more complicated than they seemed, aparently. And here I thought that being a promancer only ment to be in favor to the inclusion of romance in RPGs, go figure.

 

I guess it depends on who you ask. It's a very contentious subject. I'd recommend avoiding it altogether if you don't actually care, otherwise you can expect me to be butthurt at you more.

[Death Machine Miyagi]

How is it possible that anyone who has been here for more than a few months has anything left to say on this subject? The thread poster has 3 posts, so unless he or she is a sock puppet bringing it up is understandable, but I can't figure out the rest of you folks. 

[Lord Wafflebum]

How is it possible that anyone who has been here for more than a few months has anything left to say on this subject? The thread poster has 3 posts, so unless he or she is a sock puppet bringing it up is understandable, but I can't figure out the rest of you folks. 

About 80% of it for me is just being obnoxious, 15% trying to overcome the negative attitude toward promancers, and 5% is I'm drunk and listen to me.

[Cantousent]

I have to own, I've never understood the actual term 'promancer.'  It doesn't offend me, but it's just weird.  I can get what LW is saying, which is in effect that you shouldn't judge the whole community by the craziest fringe.  Sadly, the fact is every group in existence is partially defined by its fringe elements.  At this point, I think it's tough to call for romances.  There is no way in hell they could put in romances in a game that's allegedly shipping this month without royally pissing off just about everybody on every side.  Figure out a good approach for the next game and give it a shot.  Also, I would rather see one extremely well done homosexual romance involving a transgender character than a bunch of crappy romances with heterosexual characters and one token crappy homosexual romance.  I have no interest in romances in general and I'm not going out of my way to play a transgender one, but I also don't like the vast majority of rap.  That doesn't stop me from appreciating the occasional rap song.  If you're going to do it, make it good.

[Lord Wafflebum]

I have to own, I've never understood the actual term 'promancer.'  It doesn't offend me, but it's just weird.  I can get what LW is saying, which is in effect that you shouldn't judge the whole community by the craziest fringe.  Sadly, the fact is every group in existence is partially defined by its fringe elements.  At this point, I think it's tough to call for romances.  There is no way in hell they could put in romances in a game that's allegedly shipping this month without royally pissing off just about everybody on every side.  Figure out a good approach for the next game and give it a shot.  Also, I would rather see one extremely well done homosexual romance involving a transgender character than a bunch of crappy romances with heterosexual characters and one token crappy homosexual romance.  I have no interest in romances in general and I'm not going out of my way to play a transgender one, but I also don't like the vast majority of rap.  That doesn't stop me from appreciating the occasional rap song.  If you're going to do it, make it good.

Heh, that essentially sums up everything that's been said over the years

[gurufabbes]

First to the mods: Understood. Thanks for directing me here.

 

I am embarassed (I had no clue) but also glad to know that I am not the first person to bring this up.

I originally posted this topic twice, wondering whether the first post was rejected because it was in the wrong section. 

 

Like many of you, I'm a Veteran of BG BG2 KOTOR1 and 2, the NWN series, Dragon Age.. 

Hearing about this game got me very excited, and I believe it has to potential to breathe new life into the genre.

However, what these games all had and do have, is also something that apparently Pillars of Eternity lacks: Romanceable Characters, and lack of this is keeping me on the fence of whether or not to buy it. It's an extra motivation to invest emotionally in the game, in its story, having normal companions and potential romantic interest commenting on your travels... having a story that builds around this relationship. It's an investment that sets fantasy games apart from Diablo and co..

Even just one (or two) hetero choice would be something that most of the players could get on board with, rather than doing a DA:Inquisition. 

 

In short, I know it's easy to criticize, easy to sit on the sidelines and say what "should be" or "should have been" in the game while seemingly ignoring all the great feature that ARE in the game.

 

From what I've seen, this is exactly the kind of game those who grew up with the Infinity engine could hope for, and improved... how improved and polished it is!  The camping features, crafting, scouting, attributes affecting conversation choices to just name a few.

 

But this is entirely what irks me  (95% in my opinion missing this 5%) and pushes me to make a contribution to this wonderful project by adding my voice to those that believe 2-3 romance choices are what this game needs/needed.

 

As it obvious, less than a month from release, the game is completed in its current form and it is a bit late to add. But yet we live in the age of DLC: Good DLC and expansions can add to the game what otherwise was not planned on being inside to give helpful features to those enjoying the game.

 

A DLC adding some romanceable NPCs to the game with good proper solid writing I think would bring returns, and would bring in the extra feature that all of my great RPGs had. The spiritual successor to BG should have its Jaheera, Viconia and Aerie.

 

These are my two cents, and meant in the best possible way. I want this game to be successful either way.

[Valmy]

How is it possible that anyone who has been here for more than a few months has anything left to say on this subject? The thread poster has 3 posts, so unless he or she is a sock puppet bringing it up is understandable, but I can't figure out the rest of you folks. 

 

I enjoy posting the same ideas over and over again.  It is easier than having to think new thoughts.

[apolloooo]

If you're interested in romance, maybe you should consider playing other games instead?

This game for example has proven to be essential for the golden era of romance in video games.

I wonder what bruce thinks about it, by the way.

what the **** XD XD

[gurufabbes]

I response to the other replies to my post, this is what I would say:

 

 We've also advocated that no romances are still better than badly done romances. 

 

"Badly done" is relative. An attempt deserves its due.

For me at least, I'll be honest and think that a good romance is up to 10% of an awesome RPG.  Given that it is relative, and some are quite happy not to have anything to do with romance in the game, let them opt out. Make it optional.

 

I don't quite like spending my time brewing potions and collecting berries, but I wouldn't say that these things should therefore be excluded.

 

 

Romance options are manipulative game mechanics anyways, so I don't see how it'd be any different to just mod it in. "I want this character to fall for my character!" shouldn't matter if you do it in-game or in-mod. No? Because it's practically the same thing.

 

 

 

Of course it could be modded in. But it wouldn't be linked with the story necessarily, and you may end up with an amateurish attempt, worse than what the developers are capable of. 

 

As those have said, it should flow from the story and be believable. There is every reason to believe that the professionals making this game can repeat their exploits of previous games.

 

I just tend to see romances in games as generally puerile sorts of adolescent wish fulfillment.  Anyone who's been is a serious relationship can't take the vast majority of video game romances seriously.

 

 

You could take that view, but why restrict that to romances? All of fantasy RPGs grab the interest of their players (or readers in the case of books) by appealing to their curiosity and imagination. I see RPGs as simply an extension of what we would see in movies or books, and these often include what I'm proposing.

 

I wonder why some people feel that "romance" is the only viable relationship with game characters. Is friendship or rivalry not a good relationship? 

 

 

Of course they are but why restrict it to these? Why not vary?

 

Romance in crpg is like Pandora's Box. Once you open it everyone will start bickering about wanting to bang character A and complaining that character B is not straight/bi/gay etc.

 

 

This is a common argument. One that I don't think holds water amongst those that grew up with BG. 

Let the hetero options be the standard selection, and let other choices be modded in.

 

My opinion.

[Diogenes]

For real tho, Hatoful Boyfriend rules you should play it.

[Stun]

Hi all,

I've been following this game as Obsidian remains the top remaining hope for the RPG genre. 

Like many of you, I'm a Veteran of BG BG2 KOTOR1 and 2, the NWN series, Dragon Age.. 

Hearing about this game got me very excited, and I believe it has to potential to breathe new life into the genre.

However, what these games all had and do have, is also something that apparently Pillars of Eternity lacks: Romanceable Characters, and lack of this is keeping me on the fence of whether or not to buy it. It's an extra motivation to invest emotionally in the game, in its story, having normal companions and potential romantic interest commenting on your travels... having a story that builds around this relationship. It's an investment that sets fantasy games apart from Diablo and co..

Even just one (or two) hetero choice would be something that most of the players could get on board with, rather than doing a DA:Inquisition.  How about a DLC character or two?

I wish this game a lot of success, but I don't think I could do their effort justice without giving my opinion as an outside observer and potential player. This feature is clearly missing for me.

-gurufabbes

Romances would ruin PoE.

 

Why do you want PoE to fail?

[etagloc]

The romances are a very small part of those games you mention. I don't see how it can be a deal breaker?!.

hey I vote yes for having romances in this game!, if you don't like it, just ignore them. (everyone's happy)

but the deal from what I understand was that they didn't feel like they could do it right, so they skipped it. 

Id rather have cast of well written cast of none romance-able NPC's, than a shallow half ass written romance.

[etagloc]

 

Romances would ruin PoE.

 

Why do you want PoE to fail?

 

can you explain?

 

Nothing that is done well will ruin anything.

 

[Gromnir]

 

Hi all,

I've been following this game as Obsidian remains the top remaining hope for the RPG genre. 

Like many of you, I'm a Veteran of BG BG2 KOTOR1 and 2, the NWN series, Dragon Age.. 

Hearing about this game got me very excited, and I believe it has to potential to breathe new life into the genre.

However, what these games all had and do have, is also something that apparently Pillars of Eternity lacks: Romanceable Characters, and lack of this is keeping me on the fence of whether or not to buy it. It's an extra motivation to invest emotionally in the game, in its story, having normal companions and potential romantic interest commenting on your travels... having a story that builds around this relationship. It's an investment that sets fantasy games apart from Diablo and co..

Even just one (or two) hetero choice would be something that most of the players could get on board with, rather than doing a DA:Inquisition.  How about a DLC character or two?

I wish this game a lot of success, but I don't think I could do their effort justice without giving my opinion as an outside observer and potential player. This feature is clearly missing for me.

-gurufabbes

 

Um they said there would be no romances in 2012.  If you have been following this game why is this just becoming an issue now, three years later?  We have already had this discussion many many time.  But I am keeping an open mind about it.  I have no idea what 'no romances' really means and how exactly it will work.

 

And BG had no romance-able NPCs.

 

Like I have said to everybody who has decided no romances means everything is going to be terrible, wait a bit and see what people say about it and give it a chance.  And having just a few hetero choices would be a huge finger to the LGBT community and it would be far better to just have none rather than have Obsidian be known as the homophobic developer. 

 

 

...

 

is too many ways we can make tasteless jokes about the LGBT community and whether or not they would be offended or appreciative of a "huge finger."  am gonna back away... slowly.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps 'cause somebody made reference to chrisA notions regarding romance options, we will include one o' the more detailed responses we has seen him give recently on the subject in a print interview.

 

question: You've stated in the past that you don't like romances in games—at least to the extent that they've been done in games thus far. Were you to implement a romance subplot in Project Eternity, what would it involve?

 

response: Not a big fan of romances. I did four in Alpha Protocol because Chris Parker, our project director, demanded it because he thinks romance apparently is easy, or MAYBE it’s because he wanted to be an **** and give me tons of them to do because I LOVE them so much (although to be honest, I think he felt it was more in keeping with the spy genre to have so many romances, even if I did ask to downscope them). At least I got to do the “hatemance” version of most of them, which makes it a little more palatable.

 

Also, the only reason the romance bits in Mask of the Betrayer worked was because George Ziets helped me with them since he was able to describe what love is to me and explain how it works (I almost asked for a PowerPoint presentation). It seems like a messy, complicated process, not unlike a waterbirth. Don’t even get me started on the kissing aspects, which is revolting because people EAT with their mouths. Bleh.

 

So if I were to implement a romance subplot in Eternity - I wouldn’t. I’d examine interpersonal relationships from another angle and I wouldn’t confine it to love and romance. Maybe I’d explore it after a “loving” relationship crashed and burned, and one or both was killed in the aftermath enough for them to see if it had really been worth it spending the last few years of their physical existence chained to each other in a dance of human misery and/or a plateau of soul-killing compromise. Or maybe I’d explore a veteran’s love affair with his craft of murder and allowing souls to be freed to travel beyond their bleeding shell, or a Cipher’s obsession with plucking the emotions of deep-rooted souls to try and see what makes people attracted to each other beyond their baser instincts and discovers love... specifically, his love of manipulating others. You could build an entire dungeon and quest where he devotes himself to replicating facsimiles of love, reducer a Higher Love to a baser thing and using NPCs he encounters as puppets for his experimentations, turning something supposedly beautiful into something filthy, mechanical, but surrounded by blank-eyed soul-twisted drones echoing all the hollow Disney-like platitudes and fairy tale existence where everyone lives happily ever after.

Edited March 2, 2015 by Gromnir

[Failion]

someone needs to make a easy mod where u can romance the companions by having them quiz you on their bra size, underwear color, etc. After you find these items in odd places like giant camps and kobold dens. Then u get sexy fan art pics. There you go romance players satisfied. 

[Cantousent]

Good God, Avellone's answer was absolutely painful.  Sure, it was funny, but now I keep thinking of the passage:  "...see if it had really been worth it spending the last few years of their physical existence chained to each other in a dance of human misery and/or a plateau of soul-killing compromise."  I just celebrated my 19th anniversary a couple of weeks ago.  Thanks for harshing my buzz, ya jaded bastard!  For the record, there's no soul-killing compromise.  There's implacable resistance.  Get it straight.

[Voss]

I have to own, I've never understood the actual term 'promancer.'  It doesn't offend me, but it's just weird.  I can get what LW is saying, which is in effect that you shouldn't judge the whole community by the craziest fringe.  Sadly, the fact is every group in existence is partially defined by its fringe elements.  At this point, I think it's tough to call for romances.  There is no way in hell they could put in romances in a game that's allegedly shipping this month without royally pissing off just about everybody on every side.  Figure out a good approach for the next game and give it a shot.  Also, I would rather see one extremely well done homosexual romance involving a transgender character than a bunch of crappy romances with heterosexual characters and one token crappy homosexual romance.  I have no interest in romances in general and I'm not going out of my way to play a transgender one, but I also don't like the vast majority of rap.  That doesn't stop me from appreciating the occasional rap song.  If you're going to do it, make it good.

 

 

The crazy fringe is completely appropriate to judge by, as those are the people who insist on making noise at every opportunity.  Moderates just get on with their lives, and aren't particularly pro or con anything.

 

For a game like this (a dungeoncrawler where one stabs large numbers of monsters in the face and steals their stuff), there isn't a good place to jam in romance, especially in terms of the current  'cRPG genre', where romance = harassing someone until they give in and a bad cutscene ensues where a pixelated butt gets touched. Usually before the 'climatic battle,' if Bioware is in any way involved.

 

 

On another note, I found his answer painful for other reasons.  My relationships are successive trainwrecks of failure, and my viewpoint of romance isn't that twisted.

I'm hoping its sarcasm, otherwise it's legitimate padded celled territory.

 

@Stun-

Ruin is a little far.

Completely pointless self indulgence seems more par for the course.  

Edited March 2, 2015 by Voss

[Gromnir]

 I just celebrated my 19th anniversary a couple of weeks ago. 

congratulations... or condolences?  from your post, am not certain which is the more appropriate response. regardless, we hope you enjoy/endure another 19 years of soul-killing compromise and/or implacable resistance.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[PieSnatcher]

While I think I'm technically in the promancer camp, I wouldn't like BG2 any less if it wasn't in there. If anyone truly misses the days of the IE games, I hope they support this game because I want them to keep on comin'

 

Besides, who plays those games for the romances? All they were to me was (sometimes poorly written) flavor to the overall story.

[Cantousent]

Thanks Grom.

 

I dunno, Voss.  I took the reply to be more or less tongue in cheek, although he may very well hate doing game romances.  PS:T didn't have a conventional kissy faced romance and I don't think anyone could have accused it of ending happily ever after.

 

Hey, instead of a 'romance,' how about having a child who ends up joining the other side and fighting against you.  That could be fun, making the PC's kid end up being one of the boss encounters.  Sounds a little cruel, but why not?  ...Or remake PS:T where The Nameless One falls in love with The Transcendent One?  That would also have the side benefit of counting as a same sex romance.