Romance Packs DLC

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Surely, she has her problems and you can resolve them there. But then you go to that one scene deep in her mind… She harbors great fear and hatred toward you as well (dat voice change) because she knows you are from that other world who is just remotely controlling a robot. And when she sees how you do it, she more or less breaks down as she understand that it's just a game, you are just pressing buttongs, there isn't even much effort from your side. You can stop whenever you want or redo things until they go your way (there are quite some number of questions you are very unlikely to guess unless you save/load, but you need to answer them to progress the scene).

 

 

 

This is pure ****ing genius 

[zombo]

 

Faerunner, it's because one is simply playing in a fictional world. Another is replacing human intimacy with initmacy with a computer game character. If you don't see the difference, I'm not sure I can make you see it. 

 

So? I still say it's arbitrary to be fine with "playing in a fictional world," interacting with fictional characters in a fictional setting, but then sneering at people for requesting different types of fictional interaction.

 

You wanna talk about "human intimacy"? There's different types of intimacy besides romantic or sexual. Forging just about any type of affection or emotional bond can count as "human intimacy," and just about all video games with written characters (with or without scripted dialogue) incorporate that illusion. When you feel emotionally warmed or charmed when your character does something nice for another character, or another character says/does something nice to your character, that simulates a "human intimacy" bonding experience. Unless the player 100% sees the video game world as 100% nothing but walking constructs 100% of the time, or you're playing your character as a completely indifferent and/or jerkass sociopath, one could probably argue that you're ignoring forging real emotional bonding / interacting with real human beings (or animals) to in favor of fictional characters in a fictional setting.

 

(I myself had grandparents who completely disapproved of playing video games of any kind for any length of time because they felt every second spent interacting with the fictional world in the video game was taking away time I could spend interacting with and creating memories the real world, and every second I spent interacting with fictional characters in the game world was taking away from time I could spend interacting, bonding, and making memories with real people in my real life.)

 

Should we eliminate all illusions of fictional characters being anything but fictional constructs to keep all players from "replacing human intimacy with intimacy with computer characters," even if not in a romantic sense? Remove giving all non-player characters names or personalities or opinions (or even distinct appearances or portraits) so players can't dispel the illusion that they're not real? Should we remove giving all pre-written companions (like Aloth and Eder and Sagani) any names, personalities, quests, or opinions on how to complete quests, so the players will never get the illusion (even for a moment) that they "feel real"? Should we dispel "relationship values" with pre-written companions--doing nice things for them, earning their approval or disapproval, helping them or hindering them with their quests, helping them achieve a happy/bittersweet ending or horrible demise depending on how we feel about them?

 

I still find it arbitrary to be fine with non-romantic bonding with fictional character but then suddenly pulling the "you're replacing real human interaction with fictional character interaction" when it comes to romance.

 

 

 

There's a place for it in games, but when people are asking for it over and over it becomes about the romance and not the game itself. It's becoming  more and more like a merging of Baldur's Gate and Leisure Suit Larry. I think romance should be added value, not the focus of the game or DLC. Romance DLC excludes those who want to play more of the main plot or an extension of that plot. An entire DLC dedicated to romance is Leisure Suit Larry.

 

Meh, I don't see it that way. I see romance as just another game feature, or just another role-playing experience for a role-playing game; one that happens to be popular with players. (Keeping in mind that it's all fictional and all relationships your player character develops with non-player characters are fictional anyway.) If people like that type of game feature and/or role-playing experience, then I think they're well within their rights to request it.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think romance needs to be in every game either, but I'm not going to try to shame people for requesting it if they want it.

 

Again, one is role playing and the other is artificial romance. If you want to try and stretch things out to the most extreme examples, then there's not much I can do to change your mind. If the developers had incorporated it into the game, fine. I would not refuse to buy it were romances in it. They're not a make or break feature. However, if they cram a romance dlc into the game it seems like that would just be Obsidian pandering to its romance fans at the exclusion of many others who would be disinterested. A combat heavy dlc would not be an issue since the game has combat. A story intense dlc would not be an issue since the game has a solid narrative aspect to it. There is no romance in this game. Re-writing dialog all over the game would be asinine and having a dlc with romance while the entire rest of the game has none would be just as asinine. It has no place in PoE. A zombie survivor horror dlc would be just as bad an idea as a romance dlc since the game has neither of those aspects. It makes zero sense.

[EoniaBansbane]

Why are people so awfully touchy about romance?

 

Romance has nothing to do with sexual pleasure or stuff.

 

Romance is a part of passion that revolves souly around emotional attachement and bounds. It is the higher state of a friendship relation and not a prolounge on lust. Romance in reality can also be born out of conflict. That is not just a fiction one wants to hold up. So claiming that having a romance evolve out of this sort of mess being impossible or unrealistic is just utter BS, in my opinion. Just to give you a very extreme example, my great grandma and great grandpa of my mother's side have both met during the holocaust and fled through World War 2 germany on foot towards the french borders. They hid in the mountains, married in secret and had 3 kids before a french officer mistook them for Nazis and shoot my great grandpa. He realized his mistake and offered them shelter, but my great grandma refused in anger and nearly shot that man, too. After she died, this officers grandson came to us and to their graves to apologize once more for his grandfather's doing. During her live, my grandma was always with spite and anger of the french military and she never remarried or looked for companionship elsewhere. She used to tell stories about her husband to both my grandma, my mother and her siblings. She always burst into tears, but in the end she smiled before she died and said: "Finally I can stop hating that man." This is what romance is. Compassion for another, even in the worst of times and through the most hardest circumstances.

 

Romance is a big part in most creative Roleplay Games as it is in movies and reality. It's part of the human soul's nature and having a game about souls that never tried to tackle this issue through the main protagonist and his/her companions just makes it fall a bit flat. It gives the game more immersion and also more means for the player to care about certain NPC's and companions. No one asks for a marriage or any of that >_>;

 

I on one hand would welcome an expansion or addon for Pillars of Eternity that gives me romance options. It was awfully awkward playing a female elf and having both Eder and Aloth show such compassion to me without them leading to an honest romance plot. It would be nice to have that part of the soul restored and not just left for certain NPC's. How can a world like that exist in which romance and love are tossed aside like an old rag? I think it would've given this world just that little cherry on top of the cake.

Edited July 2, 2015 by EoniaBansbane

[Fardragon]

The same reason kids of my parents' generation used to boo and hiss at the kissy bits in movies. It gets in the way of the action.

[Sannom]

Why are people so awfully touchy about romance?

Because pick-your-favorite romances in Western RPGs have all been bad and didn't add anything interesting to the game.

[NightRevan]

 

Why are people so awfully touchy about romance?

 

Because pick-your-favorite romances in Western RPGs have all been bad and didn't add anything interesting to the game.

I'm probably going to regret jumping back in here, as I feel every discussion I've had in internet forums on this topic has the been the same discussion repeated ad nauseum to the point where you can predict what everyone is going to say from all sides in a neverending groundhog day. I remember kicking myself mentally a little for getting into thus thread last time, but I would say from the very fact of this neverending debate that this is the very point in dispute, since a not unsizable group believe that such romantic arcs have added something to rping, companion and companion interaction, PC and story possibilities and is something they have enjoyed in the mix with other features.

 

And of course there are a sizable number who don't, but as the point in dispute it isn't agreed that all are bad.

 

And with that hopefully I'll escape this debate at last and remember to just get on and enjoy what I enjoy and let people get back to enjoying what they enjoy .

[Oink]

Romances used to be a nice part of RPGs, but now people want romances for everything. Is this suddenly a Bioware game?

 

I personally wouldn't mind it for PoE, especially

to be able to expand upon the Watcher's past with Iovana

, but otherwise I agree completely.

[MalVeauX]

Heya,

 

Being an old soul in Pillars of Eternity, you should be able to walk around and all these souls you reach out to, actually have an option for re-experiencing past relationships so you experience all the crazy, insane, passionate, hateful, etc, moments and go absolutely nuts and then hide from forging relationships for fear of re-experiencing them later once you realize being a nomadic savior with no attachments is the way to go.

 

SPOILER WARNING, DO NO OPEN ATTACHED IMAGE IF YOU WISH TO REMAIN UNSPOILED.

 

 

By the way, there is romance in this game. For example, I was simply laughing too hard not to try this one out when I found him. Image attached to avoid spoilers, do not click the image if you're worried about spoilers, though it's just a NPC in the game.

 

 

Very best,

Edited July 4, 2015 by MalVeauX

[Falkon Swiftblade]

To be honest if they were to do romances, I wholeheartedly would agree with going the dlc route. I would prefer to skip it entirely, or have a dedicated dlc if that's what it's going to be. For me though I have 0 interest in it so I would pass it off completely, but I like the idea of having a way for folks to get it so it's non invasive to my story.

[Fardragon]

The thing is, with "The White March" pretty much everyone who enjoyed PoE will buy it. With a Romance Pack DLC, some people might really love it, but a significant proportion of PoE fans would give it a miss. The economics is obvious.

[LuccA]

 

Again, one is role playing and the other is artificial romance. If you want to try and stretch things out to the most extreme examples, then there's not much I can do to change your mind. If the developers had incorporated it into the game, fine. I would not refuse to buy it were romances in it. They're not a make or break feature. However, if they cram a romance dlc into the game it seems like that would just be Obsidian pandering to its romance fans at the exclusion of many others who would be disinterested. A combat heavy dlc would not be an issue since the game has combat. A story intense dlc would not be an issue since the game has a solid narrative aspect to it. There is no romance in this game. Re-writing dialog all over the game would be asinine and having a dlc with romance while the entire rest of the game has none would be just as asinine. It has no place in PoE. A zombie survivor horror dlc would be just as bad an idea as a romance dlc since the game has neither of those aspects. It makes zero sense.

 

Well, you seem to be very resistent to changing your mind too. Faerunner argued that there is not much difference between 'artificial romance' and roleplaying and showed some really good points actually. From a certain perspective, roleplaying a character trying to conquer a dungeon or killing monsters can sound just as silly as roleplaying someone who's romancing another character (personally, I don't think it is). These were not 'extreme examples', it was just thinking about it with an open mind.

 

Maybe sometimes the lines between roleplay and feelings from the actual player to a certain character can get blurred. I agree that that should be avoidable. I don't understand much of the human's psyche to claim why exactly (if it can jeopardize the development of social interactions in the real world) nor to claim that that was the OP's case. I hope not.

 

I agree with you that there is no place for a romance DLC in PoE, for the points you discussed. But romances can, for instance, be part of adventure stories without seeming over-imposed. If it can add to the story and character's arc, I see no harm in it (if it were to appear in PoE 2 for example). The problem is: integrating a romance to the main story would probably sacrifice some of the player's choices; and giving the player too many choices regarding romance usually takes out it's importance to the story (and it might seem like a pick-your-favorite situation).

 

Yeah, actually, it would most certainly divide crowds. Maybe the devs should avoid it, I don't know... 

[Stratosj]

This is a role-playing game and people actually do fall in love and have sex in the real world ( ).
As a good role-player, I would welcome the ability to develop and express feelings of romantic nature to some degree.
Forcing these out of the game completely just makes the experience incomplete and hence less enjoyable for me.
Looks like hating on romance seems to be the trendy thing to do now.. For me, playing a sociopath seems only fun for so long.

[Fardragon]

The thing that is silly is the idea that "roleplaying a character trying to conquer a dungeon or killing monsters" and "roleplaying someone who's romancing another character " must exist IN THE SAME GAME. It's like saying all games should include both dragons and plasma rifles.

[tinysalamander]

It's like saying all games should include both dragons and plasma rifles.

 

I'm pretty sure Shadowrun can get away with that.

[Fardragon]

 

It's like saying all games should include both dragons and plasma rifles.

 

I'm pretty sure Shadowrun can get away with that.

 

Sure, you can have both, but you wouldn't want every game to have both.

[tinysalamander]

Sure, you can have both, but you wouldn't want every game to have both.

 

What if I would?

[Faerunner]

The thing that is silly is the idea that "roleplaying a character trying to conquer a dungeon or killing monsters" and "roleplaying someone who's romancing another character " must exist IN THE SAME GAME. It's like saying all games should include both dragons and plasma rifles.

 

Right, because people who go around conquering dungeons and killing monsters are psychologically incapable of falling in love or lust with another person.

[Fardragon]

 

The thing that is silly is the idea that "roleplaying a character trying to conquer a dungeon or killing monsters" and "roleplaying someone who's romancing another character " must exist IN THE SAME GAME. It's like saying all games should include both dragons and plasma rifles.

 

Right, because people who go around conquering dungeons and killing monsters are psychologically incapable of falling in love or lust with another person.

 

No, because not every game has to have what YOU like. It's exactly the same with the multiplayer crowd: "I like multiplayer, therefore I am going to insist that every game should have multiplayer!!". Well, you know what? I like Science Fiction, so from now on, I am going to insist that every game must have spaceships!! It's just pure selfishness!!!

 

The stupid thing is, when it is tagged on, it is never actually any good. Tagged on multiplayer sucks. Tagged on romance sucks. Tagged on spaceships suck (See Ultima 7). If you want a good multiplayer game you have to design a multiplayer game from the start. If you want a good romantic story you have to write a romantic story from the start.

 

There is nothing wrong with romance. If you like it, fine. There is certainly room in the market for more romantic games. But I don't like it personally so I don't want it rammed into EVERY SINGLE GODDAMNED GAME!!!!!

Edited July 4, 2015 by Fardragon

[Uirebhiril]

There is nothing wrong with romance. If you like it, fine. There is certainly room in the market for more romantic games. But I don't like it personally so I don't want it rammed into EVERY SINGLE GODDAMNED GAME!!!!!

 

 

Well, really, it's not that big a deal if it's in there. Those who have no wish to explore that path with a companion need not click on anything remotely marked as a [flirt] and they will never see the content. There's room for both choices in these games, and that makes them more enjoyable to a wider market. Which isn't to say that only sad and lonely people play games for the romance. Some do like the roleplay aspect and do not self-insert, so it does add to the story and helps indiviuals to possibly relate better to the companions. I only have an issue when that's the only way to do so; friendship content should be available to anyone that earns it, and not just those that are sharing a bedroll.

 

But in a game like this, I still hold with it being better for there to be only minor flirting and a promise to consider more when the bulk of the save-the-world adventure is over. Keep anything else to an epilogue slide. We don't need a fade-to-black sexy cutscenes in every game, I do agree.

[gkathellar]

I'm in favor of it, as long as the DLC romance in question is with Visas Marr.

 

... I have a sickness.

Edited July 5, 2015 by gkathellar

[Fardragon]

 

There is nothing wrong with romance. If you like it, fine. There is certainly room in the market for more romantic games. But I don't like it personally so I don't want it rammed into EVERY SINGLE GODDAMNED GAME!!!!!

 

 

Well, really, it's not that big a deal if it's in there. Those who have no wish to explore that path with a companion need not click on anything remotely marked as a [flirt] and they will never see the content. There's room for both choices in these games, and that makes them more enjoyable to a wider market. Which isn't to say that only sad and lonely people play games for the romance. Some do like the roleplay aspect and do not self-insert, so it does add to the story and helps indiviuals to possibly relate better to the companions. I only have an issue when that's the only way to do so; friendship content should be available to anyone that earns it, and not just those that are sharing a bedroll.

 

But in a game like this, I still hold with it being better for there to be only minor flirting and a promise to consider more when the bulk of the save-the-world adventure is over. Keep anything else to an epilogue slide. We don't need a fade-to-black sexy cutscenes in every game, I do agree.

 

And it's not a big deal to include a space combat minigame. If you don't wish to explore that path you can simply avoid any option marked as [buy spaceship].

[Uirebhiril]

 

And it's not a big deal to include a space combat minigame. If you don't wish to explore that path you can simply avoid any option marked as [buy spaceship].

 

You know what, I'd be fine with a space combat minigame. I mean, come on! Starships!

 

But using that to make a point is a bit of a stretch. It wouldn't be a thematic fit with the universe, whereas relationships with others would be. It's part of the human condition and would just be another option to select from. Much like how people can choose to see (or not) decapitations and spurting blood based on a setting. Or how you can choose to not recruit a particular companion if you really can't stomach them. They're there, but not forced. It's all a choice, and more choice in an RPG is always good.

 

It is kind of too bad that specialized interaction between PC and NPC in games requires a relationship type of setting. Bantering and flirting, even if not seriously, would be fun to do in some situations even if it is never intended to become a romance. If Obsidian wants to develop more of the friendship aspect and wants to avoid all romance as has been said, that might be something to consider.

[gkathellar]

 

 

There is nothing wrong with romance. If you like it, fine. There is certainly room in the market for more romantic games. But I don't like it personally so I don't want it rammed into EVERY SINGLE GODDAMNED GAME!!!!!

 

 

Well, really, it's not that big a deal if it's in there. Those who have no wish to explore that path with a companion need not click on anything remotely marked as a [flirt] and they will never see the content. There's room for both choices in these games, and that makes them more enjoyable to a wider market. Which isn't to say that only sad and lonely people play games for the romance. Some do like the roleplay aspect and do not self-insert, so it does add to the story and helps indiviuals to possibly relate better to the companions. I only have an issue when that's the only way to do so; friendship content should be available to anyone that earns it, and not just those that are sharing a bedroll.

 

But in a game like this, I still hold with it being better for there to be only minor flirting and a promise to consider more when the bulk of the save-the-world adventure is over. Keep anything else to an epilogue slide. We don't need a fade-to-black sexy cutscenes in every game, I do agree.

 

And it's not a big deal to include a space combat minigame. If you don't wish to explore that path you can simply avoid any option marked as [buy spaceship].

 

 

One is genre-appropriate and one isn't.

 

Your syllogism is faulty, yo.

[Fardragon]

 

 

 

There is nothing wrong with romance. If you like it, fine. There is certainly room in the market for more romantic games. But I don't like it personally so I don't want it rammed into EVERY SINGLE GODDAMNED GAME!!!!!

 

 

Well, really, it's not that big a deal if it's in there. Those who have no wish to explore that path with a companion need not click on anything remotely marked as a [flirt] and they will never see the content. There's room for both choices in these games, and that makes them more enjoyable to a wider market. Which isn't to say that only sad and lonely people play games for the romance. Some do like the roleplay aspect and do not self-insert, so it does add to the story and helps indiviuals to possibly relate better to the companions. I only have an issue when that's the only way to do so; friendship content should be available to anyone that earns it, and not just those that are sharing a bedroll.

 

But in a game like this, I still hold with it being better for there to be only minor flirting and a promise to consider more when the bulk of the save-the-world adventure is over. Keep anything else to an epilogue slide. We don't need a fade-to-black sexy cutscenes in every game, I do agree.

 

And it's not a big deal to include a space combat minigame. If you don't wish to explore that path you can simply avoid any option marked as [buy spaceship].

 

 

One is genre-appropriate and one isn't.

 

Your syllogism is faulty, yo.

 

Rubbish! How do we know Eora isn't one system away from Tatooine? It's quite obvious that "souls" are really midichlorians.

 

 

Last time I was in a bookshop "Romance" was a separate genre, but "Science Fiction and Fantasy" was all together on one shelf.

Edited July 5, 2015 by Fardragon

[Uirebhiril]

 

Last time I was in a bookshop "Romance" was a separate genre, but "Science Fiction and Fantasy" was all together on one shelf.

 

 

Man, both Aragorn and Han Solo are going to be really disappointed to hear that romance had no place in their story...   

 

(I'd still like the space ships.)