The Official Romance Thread

[Voss]

 For many, once again going by posts I've read here, IWD is the draw. 

A truly frightening thought.

[Cantousent]

haha I *like* IWD, ya wretch!

[Lephys]

@RussM8330,

 

I'm all for romance, but a lack of legit "romance" does not revoke this game's spiritual succession cred.

[Valmy]

To me since this game claims Baldur's gate as one of its spiritual ancestor's and from what I've seen the writer's intense dislike of romance that is what prevent's me from buying this game ever it was on my steam wishlist no longer. Had it not mentioned that would I of bought it? Absolutely...Had the writer's showed even slightly less dislike almost bordering on hatred for romance would I of bought it? Absolutely But combining those two the almost hate for it and the fact they claimed those were spiritual ancestor's to this game show's me that might of just been using that for sales and that to me shows an arrogance that I can not deal with. If you claim baldur's gate as a spiritual ancestor most think Baldur's gate 2 as that was by far the best of the series you play Baldur's gate once the 2nd is where the memories lie it had the better writing,better banter,and yes the romances which both I and many player's loved the story was amazing yes but the interaction's and romance were major component's in how fun it was so without that yet them claiming this as a successor I shall pass on this hopefully many other's do as well and the writer's learn to respect the lineage they attempt to claim for their game and not show such a revulsion in parts of that lineage.

 

Ok the hate romance thing was tongue-in-cheek and not to be taken seriously.  Chris Avellone just jokes around like that.  Don't freak that they are revolted or not showing respect for your game.  It was a joke. 

 

Secondly wait a bit, hear what people say about it, and don't jump to conclusions. It may indeed have romantic content. But it will not have Bioware-style romantic content.

Edited March 19, 2015 by Valmy

[GreyZ]

Imho trying to deliberately avoid romantic content is just as awkward and unnatural as forcing it. Romance is a often an important part of great stories. I can understand though the difficulty of trying to write multiple romance paths for the PC without making it feel contrived.

But romantic encounters between certain npcs should not be too difficult since the PC would have comparatively limited input. It would just help make npcs feel more alive with their own wants/needs/etc. Having a large party like in poe travelling around together for a long time and nobody getting it on feels unlikely.

 

;tldr you put a group of people of mixed genders/sexual orientation into the same room, at some point someone is gonna get drunk and bang

[Cantousent]

Actually, I thought your original point was pretty much clear and concise without a tldr. Anyhow, I would rather see romances between NPCs rather than the PC.

 

EDIT: three letters made all the difference.

[Uomoz]

On topic of romances in vidyagames: I'm not sure why they are always treated differently from the other possible companion interactions, both from the "promancers" and the "anti-romancers" point of view. I usually go for the romance options in videogames (like in the ME series as you can see from my avatar xD), but any other companion interaction is as valuable to me like rivalry, friendship.. As long as they are immersive and fun to have, I don't see why one should be treated differently from the other.

[Tuckey]

Right from character creation you should designate your characters sexual orientation. This would stop a lot of **** happening that players don't want to happen, because it lets the game know how other characters should respond to you. I would prefer developers focus on friendship paths because this hasn't been done right and is the precursor to doing romances right in my opinion. 

 

i.e.

~friendly rivalries

~bromance

~flirtation

 

Get this right first; and for Pete's seek integrate this into the plot so that it has some weight to it.

[BruceVC]

 

To me since this game claims Baldur's gate as one of its spiritual ancestor's and from what I've seen the writer's intense dislike of romance that is what prevent's me from buying this game ever it was on my steam wishlist no longer. Had it not mentioned that would I of bought it? Absolutely...Had the writer's showed even slightly less dislike almost bordering on hatred for romance would I of bought it? Absolutely But combining those two the almost hate for it and the fact they claimed those were spiritual ancestor's to this game show's me that might of just been using that for sales and that to me shows an arrogance that I can not deal with. If you claim baldur's gate as a spiritual ancestor most think Baldur's gate 2 as that was by far the best of the series you play Baldur's gate once the 2nd is where the memories lie it had the better writing,better banter,and yes the romances which both I and many player's loved the story was amazing yes but the interaction's and romance were major component's in how fun it was so without that yet them claiming this as a successor I shall pass on this hopefully many other's do as well and the writer's learn to respect the lineage they attempt to claim for their game and not show such a revulsion in parts of that lineage.

 

Ok the hate romance thing was tongue-in-cheek and not to be taken seriously.  Chris Avellone just jokes around like that.  Don't freak that they are revolted or not showing respect for your game.  It was a joke. 

 

Secondly wait a bit, hear what people say about it, and don't jump to conclusions. It may indeed have romantic content. But it will not have Bioware-style romantic content.

 

 

This, Valmy is correct

 

Don't take the " dislike of Romance from Obsidian " too seriously

 

IMO the main reason that Obsidian decided not to implement Romance is this is there first independent RPG and the beginning of a new fantasy franchise. They have many other more pertinent  things to consider and design correctly than Romance, things that are actually more relevant to PoE being a successful and stable game

 

But once PoE is launched and the pressure is off about the actual success of the game then Obsidian can look at others things to improve the game, like Romance

 

The best thing you can do  as a promancer is support this game financially and wait to see how sequels of PoE decide to hopefully include Romance which for many of us is always a popular component of an RPG

[Legbiter]

To me since this game claims Baldur's gate as one of its spiritual ancestor's and from what I've seen the writer's intense dislike of romance that is what prevent's me from buying this game ever it was on my steam wishlist no longer. Had it not mentioned that would I of bought it? Absolutely....

 

Allow me to be the first to thank you for your outstanding contribution to the PoE community, again you have my sincere thanks. 

[armorb]

Right from character creation you should designate your characters sexual orientation. This would stop a lot of **** happening that players don't want to happen, because it lets the game know how other characters should respond to you.

 

What, does your character have it stamped on their head? It makes a hell of a lot more sense to let such things sort out organically in the game world...

 

 

On the wider topic: romance is simply a type of relationship. If you want your game to have intense and meaningful relationships between the PC and NPC (and indeed between NPCs), romance makes sense as a spot on the spectrum in many cases...

Edited March 19, 2015 by armorb

[gkathellar]

I just want more Visas Marr. Is that so wrong?

 

(Yes.)

[CaptainMace]

 

On the wider topic: romance is simply a type of relationship.

 

Doesn't seem to be, according to the endless discussions over it.

Although if romance is just a relationship like another, why would a game developper claim his game doesn't feature any ? Does that even make sense ?

Or is romance something else/more than simply a type of relationship and, in the context of crpgs/anygamewithc&c, although happens to be a game mechanic ?

 

Because that's what the devs had in mind when they claimed there would be none in the game, a mechanic.

[Cantousent]

Hell, we can't even agree on the *definition* of romance.  How can we categorize it?

[gkathellar]

Hell, we can't even agree on the *definition* of romance.  How can we categorize it?

 

We can certainly talk about existing frameworks for presenting romantic subplots, though, if only because those frameworks are identifiable. For instance, if one says, "this NPC has a romance track" in the BG2 modding community, everyone will know what you're talking about, because there's a set of conventions involved (themselves set by Bioware and a few very popular mods).

 

If nothing else, we can talk about Romance Subplots In Games by using existing styles as points of comparison. BG2's romances have a particular flavor and each possesses a discrete and clearly defined narrative structure, spread out over real-time hours of gameplay. Other Bioware/Black Isle/Obsidian RPGs, such as PS:T, Jade Empire and both KotOR games, have romances based on exploration of dialogue trees, with progress in the main narrative unlocking new branches and possibly setting deadlines. Dragon Age was very dating sim about the whole thing, with points and a required quest and so on. There are other cases, of course, but these are three "models" of romance subplot that I can think of off the top of my head.

[Cantousent]

I agree that we can discuss it, gk.  We are right now.  Well... we're kind of discussing discussing it, but that's the road to discussion.  I just can't get up the gumption to reiterate my views on this one.  I figure L train still has some fight and I happen to know from the ad nauseam debates most of us have had that his views are close enough to mine that I'm happy to slug it out vicariously through him.  ...But I'm all for discussing just about everything as long we don't get into vendettas or flame wars or whatnot.

[Rahelron]

I'm really an advocate of romances in games, for many reasons:

• They serve as ego-strokes for the player and make him feel appreciated. That is an important aspect, since games are often used as pastime and as a relaxing moment after a though day.
• They add diversity to the relationships you can develop with characters in the game. Ok, romantic relationship just one of the many options that writers have, others being friendships, parental relationships, professional relationships and so on. But they are an option nonetheless and an important one too, since love is one of the most important things in anyone's life.
• Most of the times romantic relationships are the only part of games that doesn't involve violence and conflict. 90% of the time that players spend in RPGs is focused on fighting or preparing to fight (exploring to find new gear, crafting new weapons...). Having the chance to spend some time developing a romantic relationship allows the player to change the pace and do something else for a while, something that's not related to combat by any means. Again: this can be achieved with other mechanics or narrative devices, but I've not seen many alternative solutions that work as well as romances.

That's why a believe romantic relationships are a staple of RPGs. They have to be done right of course, but this is a different topic for a different post..

[Iakus]

I am for romances in games.

 

My view is they are a type of story, just like any other.  And this is a storytelling medium.  Through games we can have adventures, solve mysteries, explore strange lands, and yes, perhaps have a love story as well.

 

Someone in an earlier posdt asked if a romance has to involve sex.  That I do not believe is necessary, though it certainly could be a part of it.  I'd cite Planescape: Torment as an example.  The Nameless One could have a romance with Annah or Falls-From-Grace.  But the relationship never becomes physical.  The romance was more focused on the emotional bond they formed.

[Mirandel]

 

Secondly wait a bit, hear what people say about it, and don't jump to conclusions. It may indeed have romantic content. But it will not have Bioware-style romantic content.

 

 

May I ask you why the presence/absence of romances or party banters is a question at that point? So many beta-testers here, yet, even Moderator says "it might be in game". It is almost a release day ano nobody knows for sure if there are any relationships between companions?

[Crosaith]

The lack of romance is really disappointing. Personally, having romance in a game like this increases my immersion and fun.

[Frenzy-kun]

My turn, though I dont participate much.

 

I like romances. For me it's one reason to replay the game. Reading banters and watch how my character and the NPC gets closer and closer feels nice, and I like to check what this other person has to offer. But I can understand there are some people who doesn't care about it. ACtually I think the best is that the interactions between companions is directly related to how they like each other, but some mechanics like that would force the people who dislikes romancing to do something they do not want to.

 

So, I understand the decission, but I think, nothing bad happens if as players we can have the choice. Something pretty natural like in BGS (not like in DA, where the relationship is even shown in the menus),, but some banters here and there, some progression, and even some secondary missions, could be more than enough to satisfy the romance lovers. After all, this is a fantasy rpg, not a sim dating.

[Sable Phoenix]

I admit I was disappointed when I learned that there wouldn't be any romance subplots in Pillars of Eternity.  A well-written romance can add a lot of depth to a character and really increase the emotional investment of the player.  I'm not a game writer, so branching dialogue paths aren't my skillset, but I am a writer, and romantic relationships are no more difficult to write than (or from another perspective, are just as difficult to write as) any other type of interpersonal relationship.

 

I'm curious and confused about the reasoning behind the claim that a romance needs to have some influence on or importance to the plot in order to have a place in an RPG.  The majority of characters that you get in your party are not integral to the plot, either in their story or indeed their very existence.  Lets look at Planescape:Torment as an example.  You had two characters in your party who were important to the development of the plot of the game the entire way through: Morte and Dak'kon.  Ignis had a place in the plot, but only at the end, and he always appeared there regardless of whether you took him in your party the whole game or not.  Anna did influence the plot, but really only to the halfway point -- once you gained Pharod's sphere you could have left her behind without missing too much by way of the main story.  By the nature of the game design and the fact that you might choose not to take them with you, most characters you can gain in your party by their very definition cannot be critical to the plot's advancement.

 

This doesn't make them any less important.  They add significant depth and emotional involvement to the game.  Who doesn't remember helping Dak'kon to know the Circle of Zerthimon (provided your WIS was high enough)?  Was that critical to the advancement of the plot?  Hardly.  Was it important to the experience that was Planescape:Torment?  Absolutely.  You could decide to pursue it or not, but it's there and it gives a significant amount of insight and emotional investment into the character of both Dak'kon and yourself.  In the same way, the romance with Anna had no significant influence on the plot, but it broadened her character and yours and made the experience of the game richer.

 

Whether you're talking about friendships, rivalries, or romances, it's all character development, and at the end of the day, a story is no better than its characters.  There's no reason to care about the story unless we care about the people involved in it.  To that end, romance has as much place in an RPG as any other type of relationship.

[Evinshir]

I'm all for romances. It's a natural part of being a person and all the best stories have some degree of romance in there. That doesn't mean the characters have to have sex, but there needs to be flirtation and attraction accounted for. Most people inevitably form bonds. Especially in high pressure situations.

 

That's one of the things about this game that's puzzled me. Having these characters spending long periods of time together means relationships are going to form. Anything less is unrealistic and does spoil the immersion of the game.

 

Divinity: Original Sin handled it well with allowing the characters to flirt and effectively show their attraction for each other while at the same time admitting that "right now" is probably not the appropriate time to act on those feelings.

 

As someone further up said, romances are about the emotional connection. Not the sex. And I suspect that's why Bioware's games often get romances wrong. They focus too much on the sexual connection.

 

One of the best Bioware romances ended up being the gay romance between Shepard and Kaiden. Because time was spent exploring the emotional connection between the characters, what the events they were facing meant to that relationship and how the relationship helped both of them deal with those events.

 

And that's why romances are important to good storytelling. Because they allow us to see what's going on internally with these characters via an external relationship.

 

It's just natural behaviour.

[sparklecat]

I do not think it is a good idea to assume anything about the main character in a game where you can create your own.  If I was playing a premade character, like in an adventure game or something, then I would not have a problem with there being a set heterosexual or homosexual romance at the heart of the game.

 

If you are making a RPG and you are going to have romances well you are going to at least need to satisfy the big four (heterosexual male, female and homosexual male and female).  IMO.

 

What I find annoying is RPGs where maybe there aren't romances but they still assume my character is straight in little ways; flirty dialogue options available only with the other gender, for instance.  Hoping that won't be the case here (and I'd be pretty surprised if it did come up, really).

[sparklecat]

Actually, I thought your original point was pretty much clear and concise without a tldr. Anyhow, I would rather see romances between NPCs rather than the PC.

 

EDIT: three letters made all the difference.

 

Yeah, my first game of BG2, I had the Haer'dalis and Aerie romance going on in the background, and I ended up way more invested in that than I was in any romances my own characters ever did, really.