Romance?

[BruceVC]

Oh, I'm around all the time, Bruce. I just tend to approve posts more than I make them, but recently I was interested in the modding thread and it got me to posting more again.

 

I don't doubt that some things do creep me out in a natural way. For example, I don't have a problem with homosexuality as an idea, but when I see two men kissing, it does kind of disturb me on some sort of level. Does that make me bigoted? I don't think so. It's an immediate reaction that I don't choose to have. Of course, it's not like I can't get past the reaction and still enjoy the show, like Sense8 or whatnot.

 

However, I don't think that's my reaction to romances in games. After all, I enjoy the odd romantic comedy every now and then. I don't mind romantic elements in action movies. Hell, if anything, I find gratuitous sex scenes more offputting than romance. ...And it's not like I didn't serve overseas in the navy. I don't have any problem with sex. I just think it tends to be unnecessary to progress the story in most cases. We don't tend to see a lot of urination/defecation in movies, and it's even more urgent of a natural act. The reason we don't is that it tends not to progress the central themes of the book, movie, or game.

 

That's how I see it at any rate.

 

On the other hand, I do appreciate the free session. If I ever meet you in real life, I'll buy you a beer (and some great imported cheese) and you can psycho-analyze me. :Cant's crazy grin icon:

 

EDIT: Took my time so I added Bruce's name so as to make this post less confusing.

 Beer sounds lovely...cheese even better

 

I'm not really a shrink so I don't feel like I misread you 

[BruceVC]

Back when I used to write about gaming issues a bit more professionally I wrote up a thing (no lost to the archives of the internet) about gaming romances after Dragon Age 2.

 

The big issue I think with in-game RPG romances often falls into ethics of inclusion versus quantum believability.

 

Or to put it in another way: the devs, when trying to implement romantic options have a player expectation pressure to make them as accessible to all characters of any possible gender/sex orientation, but this can often mean making weirdness with NPCs, especially on a level that tends to erase the theoretical agency of the NPC characters. It's all to easy to make everyone a Shrodinger's Bisexual essentially.

 

Which is immersion breaking in a lot of cases, since theoretically, if you're romancing someone in the real world, they're not a neutral blank slate on their sexual orientation until I run into them with my charming self and convince them that I'm their best romantic interest in the world regardless of whatever sex I may be. When you get the Skyrim situation, where ANYONE is romance-able by ANYONE, then it just turns all the characters into total ciphers (and not the PoE psychic kind). While that path DOES allow for the maximum of player choice in terms of player control, it hurts the characterization quite a bit, in my opinion anyway.

 

This issue is ameliorated in the later Bioware games by having most characters have more romantic agency by not being romantic options depending on the player's sex, so there's a solution to that issue.

 

The other issue that then arrears it's ugly head then becomes about the gamification of romance that inevitably occurs. It always brings some controversy in it too. Because someone always takes offense that all the player has to do is repeat X Action to produce Y result, with Y being romance and/or sex. In the case of literal whoring around this is probably fine - since well, if the player goes to an in-game brothel and pays for sex then well, they usually get what they pay for. But in terms of romance it usually ends up (to use the parlance of our times) "problematic".

 

To avoid that, the devs would need to create a system that seems spontaneous and is otherwise is invisible, even though no matter what, there's going to be some gamification of a romance system behind the scenes. It would have to be based on the player spending a lot of time with an NPC and getting to know them well enough through the time they spend together that romance seems both possible and ideally inevitable with them if you're making conversation (and in PoE's case Disposition) choices that are in tune with their character. It would have to be a subtle thing, and subtlety in games is pretty hard (doable, especially by the fine minds at Obsidian, but hard).

 

Then there are the effects of romance on both character and mechanics. PoE is an especially interesting case if we're talking romance and sex options due to the world events going on in the game, namely the hollowborn.

 

I mean consider a romance scenario where there's a system in place for the PC to romance a couple of their companions as possibilities. If I have, say, a human male PC and I romance say, Pallegina, and we have sex during a camp session or resting at an inn, can she become pregnant?

 

I think at some point it's mentioned that Elves and Humans can't interbreed in PoE, so maybe that doesn't work because she's a Godlike. So maybe instead I have a human female PC and I romance Eder. Can my PC become pregnant then? If I wait 9 months of game time, can I give birth? How does the pregnancy affect my stats in battle? One camp would say there should be no effects because that's problematic, the other camp would say it's unrealistic if there are no mechanical detriments to being a frontline fighter taking hits on my pregnant PC self. Further on, if I give birth, can I die during the birthing process? PoE has a level of magic and tech that seems weird when it comes to pregnancy specifically, and I can't tell if birthing mortality rates would be higher or lower due to it, but the immediate assumption is probably that giving birth is more dangerous in this world than say, in a modern 1st-world country. Then there's the issue of hollowborn. Is my kid going to be hollowborn too? I mean, that's actually kind of cool in a meta way, since it could give me more incentive to try and stop this meta-physical plague haunting the land, but then how does that work, mechanically with all the other systems in the game? And with all of the time passing to allow for the gestation of a pregnancy shouldn't other game events progress while I wait for my kid to be born? I mean, it's not like the bad guys are going to just wait around for me to have my kid, right? - there's a timescale issue here that can be a bit more immersion breaking to consider, and let's not even get into the stuff that's related to just sex in an RPG system featuring character attributes - I really don't think there's a strong FATAL player base here (though I could be wrong on that, who knows?)

 

Ultimately it feels like Obsidian made the right choice to not include Romance in PoE, if only because of all the complications it brings onto every other factor of the game. While I'm one of the folks who thinks romantic subplots can definitely add to an RPG experience, because if nothing else, Romance is often a key fixture of all other fiction out there and RPGs are just another form of fiction (albeit, a highly interactive form), they have to be done so well lest they become huge awkward distractions, and they tend to sow division amongst audiences. It's a much safer bet to simply not include them, in general.

 

That said, if the folks at Obsidian figure out a system for romance they think would work, I'd definitely be down to see how it plays out. I trust them enough that if they felt like they could work through all the myriad issues a PoE romance would bring, they should go for it. Just not at the expense of anything else. I DO think it'd be kind of neat to have a spouse back at the stronghold raising your kid, and that you'd have to hire nannies or something if you wanted to go adventuring with your spouse from then on (or you could both go adventuring and leave the kid on it's own, giving them abandonment issues maybe) and this could be an interesting ending factor and even make the stronghold aspect more interesting (imagine if failing an attack on your stronghold led to enemies killing or kidnapping your child or spouse, that'd certainly make that aspect more involved), but again, it seems like a rather tertiary concern compared to just adding more content and coolness in general.

 You can't help but not like this type of post ..you put so much effort into the point and I respect that 

 

 

But I don't agree with the general sentiment because you are ultimately doing the same thing that critics of Romance do that go the intellectual route. You are judging Romance in RL metrics and thats unfair. The moment someone says " Romance isn't believable " I know they are missing the reason people like Romance 

Honestly tell me one  other thing in a game like DA:I that you judged on "believability  "" ?

[Zekram Bogg]

 

*snip*

 You can't help but not like this type of post ..you put so much effort into the point and I respect that 

 

 

But I don't agree with the general sentiment because you are ultimately doing the same thing that critics of Romance do that go the intellectual route. You are judging Romance in RL metrics and thats unfair. The moment someone says " Romance isn't believable " I know they are missing the reason people like Romance 

Honestly tell me one  other thing in a game like DA:I that you judged on "believability  "" ?

 

Well I haven't played DA:I yet, so I really couldn't say, to be honest.

 

It's not about believability for me though, it's complication with other mechanics and game tone in general.

 

If romances have no effect on anything else in the game, then they feel like insignificant fan-fiction fluff. If they have too strong an effect, then they feel like requirements that lead to people half-heartedly doing them for in-game benefits. If they're too realistic in terms of restrictions and after effects then people who came by for a flight of fantasy get weirded out, and if they're too fantastic and unrestricted then you get people who find them immersion breaking.

 

I'm not saying romance can't be done well in a game, or that it's not especially fitting in a game like PoE. Actually it's the exact opposite. I think the folks at Obsidian are probably one of the few crews of devs I'd trust to do a Romance feature correctly in a game. But that said, the multitude of potential complications such a feature brings with it just leads me to believe that not including the option was a rather rational and safe choice.

 

Like I said, if Obsidian decides they have a way to do this feature properly, I'd be down to see what their take on it would be. I especially think it'd be a good feature to add considering the Stronghold, especially since I think the Stronghold could use a lot of expansion in terms of mechanics in general (and that I'd like to see way more capturable characters so I could still have a fighting character who's a lot less murdery, and lots of interesting King of Dragon Pass kind of decisions that being a newly minted lord would entail), and having a spouse at your house dovetails well into a better stronghold feature.

 

So I'm nominally pro-romance, just not going to push it because I get why it's not in, and personally, there are other features I'd like to see in the game higher on my personal priority list. I'll leave the advocating to the more interested parties like yourself.

[BruceVC]

 

 

*snip*

 You can't help but not like this type of post ..you put so much effort into the point and I respect that 

 

 

But I don't agree with the general sentiment because you are ultimately doing the same thing that critics of Romance do that go the intellectual route. You are judging Romance in RL metrics and thats unfair. The moment someone says " Romance isn't believable " I know they are missing the reason people like Romance 

Honestly tell me one  other thing in a game like DA:I that you judged on "believability  "" ?

 

Well I haven't played DA:I yet, so I really couldn't say, to be honest.

 

It's not about believability for me though, it's complication with other mechanics and game tone in general.

 

If romances have no effect on anything else in the game, then they feel like insignificant fan-fiction fluff. If they have too strong an effect, then they feel like requirements that lead to people half-heartedly doing them for in-game benefits. If they're too realistic in terms of restrictions and after effects then people who came by for a flight of fantasy get weirded out, and if they're too fantastic and unrestricted then you get people who find them immersion breaking.

 

I'm not saying romance can't be done well in a game, or that it's not especially fitting in a game like PoE. Actually it's the exact opposite. I think the folks at Obsidian are probably one of the few crews of devs I'd trust to do a Romance feature correctly in a game. But that said, the multitude of potential complications such a feature brings with it just leads me to believe that not including the option was a rather rational and safe choice.

 

Like I said, if Obsidian decides they have a way to do this feature properly, I'd be down to see what their take on it would be. I especially think it'd be a good feature to add considering the Stronghold, especially since I think the Stronghold could use a lot of expansion in terms of mechanics in general (and that I'd like to see way more capturable characters so I could still have a fighting character who's a lot less murdery, and lots of interesting King of Dragon Pass kind of decisions that being a newly minted lord would entail), and having a spouse at your house dovetails well into a better stronghold feature.

 

So I'm nominally pro-romance, just not going to push it because I get why it's not in, and personally, there are other features I'd like to see in the game higher on my personal priority list. I'll leave the advocating to the more interested parties like yourself.

 

 

So what is interesting is I believe that Obsidian also just don't like Romance and or see them as a distraction from more important features. Also I don't believe they are particularly partial towards  the BSN Romance crowd judging there games on similar criteria to what you mentioned. But of course they don't want to offend people by saying  " we don't like Romance " so they gave a reason that who in there right mind is going to question...they showed humility " we wont have Romance in PoE because we feel we can't do them properly " (yeah right like us Promancers have high standards    ) But end of the day we respect decisions they make they feel are appropriate. For me they are the developers, not me 

 

Let me ask that question about DA:I differently. Don't you enjoy interacting and getting to know your party members? If you do enjoy that in a RPG why is you enjoy it and more importantly why do you do it ?

 

For me I always talk to my party members because it makes our interaction more realistic  and adds to the RP experience of the overall journey . So I get to know them within the game and that increases the sense of  immersion as they become more than just robots I use only in combat...like my party in IWD 

[Gromnir]

am not gonna yet again indulge in this debate save to reiterate our initial oblique point.  crpg "romances" has become, almost by default, the companion side-quests such as has been popularized by bioware.  this redefining o' romance is, in our opinion, unfortunate.  the genesis poster says "romances"  and folks know what he/she is referencing.  not too long ago, relative speaking, we suffered multiple pages o' insanity as we tried to explain to a modern gamer why the ravel relationship with the ps:t protagonist had as much right to be labeled romance as anything we has seen from bioware.  the suggestion that ravel's love for tno qualified as romantic content woulda' been much easier to accept in 1999 than it is today.  crpg romances is, for many, the companion sidequests that has the climax o' the romantic arc being, well, climax.  am believing that accepting such a limited definition of crpg romance is having a tendency to dilute and diminish an otherwise compelling and powerful option for writers and developers.

 

so endeth our efforts to hold back the tide.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Cantousent]

Hey, that Ravel thing was *classic* message board entertainment. ...And what's more, both of you were advocating against romances in games. Good times, man!

 

Just to chime in, I also think of Annah and Falls From Grace as romantic in nature. One is more sexual heat done extremely well. The one is a very mild form of romantic interest that is, as far as I could ever tell, mostly left in the imagination of the player. In terms of actual *heat,* I would say that the Annah dialogue was way the hell hotter than any of the fade to black explicit sex scenes.

 

The reason the Ravel issue was so thorny is because some folks hate the idea of romance so much that they don't want to use the term to describe things they've enjoyed in any game. Romance isn't a dirty word, simply something that hasn't been implemented well to my tastes for the vast majority of games.

[Ink Blot]

Its ironic but you have unintentionally highlighted my point ...for many people they base there dislike of Romance on factors that they normally wouldn't judge other fantasy RPG components on. So we now judge Romance on it being " believable or satisfying " 

 

Have you ever said ..."I don't  like the way this dungeon was designed or how this dragon attacked me, it was unsatisfying " 

 

Anyway I am not fighting with you ...I have heard all these reasons. We can happily agree to disagree

 

Um... no. It seems you completely misunderstand me. I judge other fantasy RPG components on their believabilty. That ties into the whole 'immersion' thing (a horribly overused term, and one I am even loath to use, but it fits here. And please don't confuse this with 'realism'). As for satisfying, that also applies to other RPG elements, especially the story. If that's not satisfying, I may not complete the game - and if I do I certainly won't recommend it. Same with writing - and that covers romances, btw.

 

Have I ever said "I don't  like the way this dungeon was designed or how this dragon attacked me, it was unsatisfying "? Yes, I have. The former, many times. The latter, not exactly in that fashion, but I've complained about the battle with a particular dragon (to adhere to the example) on at least one occasion, stating I found it not fun and very unsatisfying because of the way the encounter was designed as well as the fact that the creature's difficulty relied pretty much solely on an overstuffed health bar.

 

Yes, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, although I'm not sure you're disagreeing with what I'm actually trying to say (and if I'm unclear, I take full responsibility for that and extend my apologies).

[Ink Blot]

Romance isn't a dirty word, simply something that hasn't been implemented well to my tastes for the vast majority of games.

This is much closer to what I'm trying to say (and far more succinct).

[ManifestedISO]

 

post is, we assume, brought to us by internalism more than existentialism.  in any event,  even adhering to a hume kinda notion o' instrumental rationality,  one may critique the dime-store philosopher if there is no consistent utility function that is resultant from their actual choices and behavior. lord knows we do not wanna lay down and play dead for the weberian zweckrationalität.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Okay, great, now I can add completely philosophically underinformed and potentially mentally inadequate to my list of things. I swear, I once wrote a bangin' treatise on pragmatism with high marks. The professor was from Germany.  

 

Can't think of anything to add to the romance discussion, because decorum doesn't exist anymore and I feel it should be both the basis of and the antagonist for a memorable affair. 

[BruceVC]

 

Its ironic but you have unintentionally highlighted my point ...for many people they base there dislike of Romance on factors that they normally wouldn't judge other fantasy RPG components on. So we now judge Romance on it being " believable or satisfying " 

 

Have you ever said ..."I don't  like the way this dungeon was designed or how this dragon attacked me, it was unsatisfying " 

 

Anyway I am not fighting with you ...I have heard all these reasons. We can happily agree to disagree

 

Um... no. It seems you completely misunderstand me. I judge other fantasy RPG components on their believabilty. That ties into the whole 'immersion' thing (a horribly overused term, and one I am even loath to use, but it fits here. And please don't confuse this with 'realism'). As for satisfying, that also applies to other RPG elements, especially the story. If that's not satisfying, I may not complete the game - and if I do I certainly won't recommend it. Same with writing - and that covers romances, btw.

 

Have I ever said "I don't  like the way this dungeon was designed or how this dragon attacked me, it was unsatisfying "? Yes, I have. The former, many times. The latter, not exactly in that fashion, but I've complained about the battle with a particular dragon (to adhere to the example) on at least one occasion, stating I found it not fun and very unsatisfying because of the way the encounter was designed as well as the fact that the creature's difficulty relied pretty much solely on an overstuffed health bar.

 

Yes, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, although I'm not sure you're disagreeing with what I'm actually trying to say (and if I'm unclear, I take full responsibility for that and extend my apologies).

 

Oh.,,,my bad ? I was told you never complain about dragons in RPG...which dragon fight did you find unrealistic 

[Nakia]

The word romance actually dates back to the romantic languages, Italian, Spanish and French.  It was used originally to describe stories written in those language, stories of epic events and epic heroes.  PoE IMO is a romance.  It is a beautiful word and should not be trivialized.  

[Fardragon]

 

 

Its ironic but you have unintentionally highlighted my point ...for many people they base there dislike of Romance on factors that they normally wouldn't judge other fantasy RPG components on. So we now judge Romance on it being " believable or satisfying " 

 

Have you ever said ..."I don't  like the way this dungeon was designed or how this dragon attacked me, it was unsatisfying " 

 

Anyway I am not fighting with you ...I have heard all these reasons. We can happily agree to disagree

 

Um... no. It seems you completely misunderstand me. I judge other fantasy RPG components on their believabilty. That ties into the whole 'immersion' thing (a horribly overused term, and one I am even loath to use, but it fits here. And please don't confuse this with 'realism'). As for satisfying, that also applies to other RPG elements, especially the story. If that's not satisfying, I may not complete the game - and if I do I certainly won't recommend it. Same with writing - and that covers romances, btw.

 

Have I ever said "I don't  like the way this dungeon was designed or how this dragon attacked me, it was unsatisfying "? Yes, I have. The former, many times. The latter, not exactly in that fashion, but I've complained about the battle with a particular dragon (to adhere to the example) on at least one occasion, stating I found it not fun and very unsatisfying because of the way the encounter was designed as well as the fact that the creature's difficulty relied pretty much solely on an overstuffed health bar.

 

Yes, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, although I'm not sure you're disagreeing with what I'm actually trying to say (and if I'm unclear, I take full responsibility for that and extend my apologies).

 

Oh.,,,my bad ? I was told you never complain about dragons in RPG...which dragon fight did you find unrealistic 

 

If there are dragons in EVERY SINGLE BALDY RPG, then yes, I am going to complain about them.

 

Sometimes it's nice to play an RPG without dragons.

[Guest 4ward]

 

i like how it was done in BG2, especially with Jaheira. Afaik it was a last minute decision back then just a few months before the game release so i guess it doesn't really cut much into development time.

 

So, like with Jaheira in BG2, for me, romances should be like a game in the game, some kind of mini game where you can fail, where reaching the final stage of it would not be easy. When i first launched BG2 i wasn't aware of a possible romance but starting the game in the dungeon i noticed the party banter and was kind of hoping that there was more of it and that more could come out of it. To my surprise when the party left Galen's house Jaheira started another conversation and a romantic music score started to play, that's where i understood there's something going on in this game and i hoped for more of it.

It was an added motivation to carry on exploring. Then to my surprise she didn't talk anymore and i wondered what went wrong, and kind of realized that i probably turned her off in a conversation saying that Gorion's tales pretty much bored me. So, i took an older save saying the right things this time and was slowly starting to get a feel for what to say. But that wasn't all, there was more to it, some guy put a curse on her and i saved her from it. There was kind of a bond developping and once our party rested outside of the city we were attacked by bandits who went after Jaheira, then after that incident further missions developped where she eventually left the party in order to think about things and actually also leaving the group as she felt her presence was endangering to us.

 

So, it was kind of like a maze, choosing the right path, overcoming obstacles in order to reach the center of it. And there was still a chance to get things right if the romance was put on hold as you could buy the magic amulet and gift it to her. But i wasn't led by the designers there was no hand-holding, the romance only progressed when certain conditions were met and often it would require a good amount of game time to pass for the romance to pick up again. So yeah done this way it's added motivation to carry on or replay the game especially if you have failed the romance in your earlier playthrough.

[Elerond]

I mean consider a romance scenario where there's a system in place for the PC to romance a couple of their companions as possibilities. If I have, say, a human male PC and I romance say, Pallegina, and we have sex during a camp session or resting at an inn, can she become pregnant?

 

I think you pick poor choice of example as Pallegina is godlike, who all are infertile  

[BruceVC]

The word romance actually dates back to the romantic languages, Italian, Spanish and French.  It was used originally to describe stories written in those language, stories of epic events and epic heroes.  PoE IMO is a romance.  It is a beautiful word and should not be trivialized.  

To be honest the first time I heard the word Romance was in a Bioware game ....but I'm  South African so what do I know about Romance ? 

[Simna]

Did I start this avalanche? I thought my question was so…innocent. But I get it: no romance in PoE (but it’s a pity).

 

 

i like how it was done in BG2, especially with Jaheira. Afaik it was a last minute decision back then just a few months before the game release so i guess it doesn't really cut much into development time.

 

So, like with Jaheira in BG2, for me, romances should be like a game in the game, some kind of mini game where you can fail, where reaching the final stage of it would not be easy. When i first launched BG2 i wasn't aware of a possible romance but starting the game in the dungeon i noticed the party banter and was kind of hoping that there was more of it and that more could come out of it. To my surprise when the party left Galen's house Jaheira started another conversation and a romantic music score started to play, that's where i understood there's something going on in this game and i hoped for more of it.

It was an added motivation to carry on exploring. Then to my surprise she didn't talk anymore and i wondered what went wrong, and kind of realized that i probably turned her off in a conversation saying that Gorion's tales pretty much bored me. So, i took an older save saying the right things this time and was slowly starting to get a feel for what to say. But that wasn't all, there was more to it, some guy put a curse on her and i saved her from it. There was kind of a bond developping and once our party rested outside of the city we were attacked by bandits who went after Jaheira, then after that incident further missions developped where she eventually left the party in order to think about things and actually also leaving the group as she felt her presence was endangering to us.

 

So, it was kind of like a maze, choosing the right path, overcoming obstacles in order to reach the center of it. And there was still a chance to get things right if the romance was put on hold as you could buy the magic amulet and gift it to her. But i wasn't led by the designers there was no hand-holding, the romance only progressed when certain conditions were met and often it would require a good amount of game time to pass for the romance to pick up again. So yeah done this way it's added motivation to carry on or replay the game especially if you have failed the romance in your earlier playthrough.

 

This is exactly what I was hoping for.

 

[BruceVC]

Did I start this avalanche? I thought my question was so…innocent. But I get it: no romance in PoE (but it’s a pity).

 

 No its not as simple as  " no Romance in PoE " ...haven't you been reading your own thread?

 

Its about the real and surreptitious reason for why people say they don't like Romance .....there are things people aren't completely disclosing and its our duty to help them post the reason 

[Amentep]

After you defeat the Tarrasque in the Oasis, your love interest is freed.

 

Just kidding. No romance.

 

6'10" Italian Warlord...is that you?

 

EDIT: The more I think about it, I think it was 6' not a gargantuan 8'

Edited July 23, 2015 by Amentep

[BruceVC]

i like how it was done in BG2, especially with Jaheira. Afaik it was a last minute decision back then just a few months before the game release so i guess it doesn't really cut much into development time.

 

So, like with Jaheira in BG2, for me, romances should be like a game in the game, some kind of mini game where you can fail, where reaching the final stage of it would not be easy. When i first launched BG2 i wasn't aware of a possible romance but starting the game in the dungeon i noticed the party banter and was kind of hoping that there was more of it and that more could come out of it. To my surprise when the party left Galen's house Jaheira started another conversation and a romantic music score started to play, that's where i understood there's something going on in this game and i hoped for more of it.

It was an added motivation to carry on exploring. Then to my surprise she didn't talk anymore and i wondered what went wrong, and kind of realized that i probably turned her off in a conversation saying that Gorion's tales pretty much bored me. So, i took an older save saying the right things this time and was slowly starting to get a feel for what to say. But that wasn't all, there was more to it, some guy put a curse on her and i saved her from it. There was kind of a bond developping and once our party rested outside of the city we were attacked by bandits who went after Jaheira, then after that incident further missions developped where she eventually left the party in order to think about things and actually also leaving the group as she felt her presence was endangering to us.

 

So, it was kind of like a maze, choosing the right path, overcoming obstacles in order to reach the center of it. And there was still a chance to get things right if the romance was put on hold as you could buy the magic amulet and gift it to her. But i wasn't led by the designers there was no hand-holding, the romance only progressed when certain conditions were met and often it would require a good amount of game time to pass for the romance to pick up again. So yeah done this way it's added motivation to carry on or replay the game especially if you have failed the romance in your earlier playthrough.

But you see thats part of the fun of Romance, it has to be a challenge where you need to consider what you say to prospective partners

 

If it was too easy it would lose its exciting unknown appeal ....where you are not sure of the next Romantic dialogue option

 

I also use to give the best equipment to my Romance ladies ...so Viconia and Isabella were always very well equipped. For me I do tend to spoil my girlfriends in RL so this just seems normal    

[Nakia]

When we role Play we do bring our real life experiences and views to the game.  We are probably laying a role that differs from our RL selves but our basic values, likes and dislikes have their influence.  Sometimes we step outside our personalities in order to express a side we usually repress or simply to get rid of stress from our mundane world.  The world we live in is not a simple one.  Science constantly proves this.  This is part of the reason we do have disagreements about role playing games and even in other types of games.  Our realities differ according to our cultures and our life experiences.  

 

Romance is an emotional state and we do need to relate to it.  I could accept having my Ork in Skyrim marry because orks are not humans and in fact just barely humanoid.   My imagination allowed me to accept his marrying another ork but would not allow his marrying that gorgeous Nord woman.  It might have permitted me to accept his marrying another male but not a human woman.

 

Romance needs to be acceptable to the individual or be so well written that we can accept it.  If the romance makes us feel uncomfortable we are not going to like it, we will be unable to accept it.  Thus the arguments arise.

[Cantousent]

I don't understand why you're questioning motives, Bruce. On the other hand, I think I've seen other folks question yours, so I guess it might be a little bit of what went around coming around sort of thing.

 

For myself, I will completely say that I find the vast majority of romances cringe worthy. When you say they make me uncomfortable, I guess maybe in a way. Not in a 'he denies his emotions' or 'lacks self-awareness' sort of way. That's not just wrong, it's silly. ...But it's not the very idea of romances that bugs me. It's the idea of taking something so complex and boiling it down to simple utility. I've been married damned near 20 years now. I met my wife when I was 13. I gave up every dream I had of higher education, including a post-graduate education in Classical Studies at UCLA for which I didn't even have to pay. I didn't take the LSAT because my wife had a career and that was more important than pursuing my particular dreams. (and on top of that, my appendix burst literally two days before the test and she got it into her head it was fate. <.<) Now, *I'm* cringe-worthy. Talking about this stuff will make about a quarter of the people on this board uncomfortable and a solid half smirk and make fun of me. This isn't even some idle statement. There are people on this board who know me in real life. So, when I say that I find it hard to get into the sorts of trivial romances I tend to see in computer games, take me at my word my friend. I really mean it. I'm probably one of the most emo people on this board. For that reason, the best romance in any game is one with a ghost. Deionarra to be precise.

 

Still, no hard feelings. I'm still good for both the beer and the cheese! You'll have to bring the couch, however. :Cant's big beefy grin icon:

[BruceVC]

I don't understand why you're questioning motives, Bruce. On the other hand, I think I've seen other folks question yours, so I guess it might be a little bit of what went around coming around sort of thing.

 

For myself, I will completely say that I find the vast majority of romances cringe worthy. When you say they make me uncomfortable, I guess maybe in a way. Not in a 'he denies his emotions' or 'lacks self-awareness' sort of way. That's not just wrong, it's silly. ...But it's not the very idea of romances that bugs me. It's the idea of taking something so complex and boiling it down to simple utility. I've been married damned near 20 years now. I met my wife when I was 13. I gave up every dream I had of higher education, including a post-graduate education in Classical Studies at UCLA for which I didn't even have to pay. I didn't take the LSAT because my wife had a career and that was more important than pursuing my particular dreams. (and on top of that, my appendix burst literally two days before the test and she got it into her head it was fate. <.<) Now, *I'm* cringe-worthy. Talking about this stuff will make about a quarter of the people on this board uncomfortable and a solid half smirk and make fun of me. This isn't even some idle statement. There are people on this board who know me in real life. So, when I say that I find it hard to get into the sorts of trivial romances I tend to see in computer games, take me at my word my friend. I really mean it. I'm probably one of the most emo people on this board. For that reason, the best romance in any game is one with a ghost. Deionarra to be precise.

 

Still, no hard feelings. I'm still good for both the beer and the cheese! You'll have to bring the couch, however. :Cant's big beefy grin icon:

 

Yes of course no hard feelings,I do like Romance but I was just joking with the Op because he really thinks the discussion should end because his question was answered? To be honest  this debate has evolved to a point when I couldn't even remember the original question    And thats normal with these forums ...we don't restrict our views to " stinking topic criteria " ...we always evolve the debate with our prodigious  intellects...now back to the point about my worrying attraction to pixel generated female characters 

[BruceVC]

When we role Play we do bring our real life experiences and views to the game.  We are probably laying a role that differs from our RL selves but our basic values, likes and dislikes have their influence.  Sometimes we step outside our personalities in order to express a side we usually repress or simply to get rid of stress from our mundane world.  The world we live in is not a simple one.  Science constantly proves this.  This is part of the reason we do have disagreements about role playing games and even in other types of games.  Our realities differ according to our cultures and our life experiences.  

 

Romance is an emotional state and we do need to relate to it.  I could accept having my Ork in Skyrim marry because orks are not humans and in fact just barely humanoid.   My imagination allowed me to accept his marrying another ork but would not allow his marrying that gorgeous Nord woman.  It might have permitted me to accept his marrying another male but not a human woman.

 

Romance needs to be acceptable to the individual or be so well written that we can accept it.  If the romance makes us feel uncomfortable we are not going to like it, we will be unable to accept it.  Thus the arguments arise.

Very valid points and yes I do RP in game in similar ways to how I am in RL

 

So I never play an evil character and always think about my options in a SJ context where applicable. For example in Witcher 2 when I found out the king raped that women I killed him despite the political consequences ...as in RL I am very opposed to violence against women 

 

But I basically agree with everything you said ....good points girlfriend 

[magritte]

 

 

If it was too easy it would lose its exciting unknown appeal ....where you are not sure of the next Romantic dialogue option

 

I also use to give the best equipment to my Romance ladies ...so Viconia and Isabella were always very well equipped. For me I do tend to spoil my girlfriends in RL so this just seems normal    

 

 

Actually, the gaming aspect of it may be what turns people off romances and makes people say they're poorly written.  If you're choosing the dialogue options based on what you think will further the romance rather than what you think your character sincerely feels, you're breaking character to pursue a romance (unless you're playing a manipulative creep).  I think a lot of people have a completionist approach to roleplaying games so they feel like they have to explore the romantic options, but if you have to twist your character in order to squeeze through the hoops, it's going to feel forced.

 

Personally, I enjoy the romances but I only pursue them if they feel right.  I remember my second BG2 character was a female paladin which meant (inevitably) that Anomen was all over her...whcih made sense for his character.  But she found him obnoxious, so I spent the whole game avoiding the romance.  On the other hand, in DA:O, my character was charmed by Alistair, and I never felt like I had to choose a line of dialogue that didn't fit the situation.  In DA2, my character flirted a little with Isabella but the line to keep it going didn't work for my character, so it didn't go anywhere (and she ditched me at the end of Act 2).  I also tried to flirt with Avelline and got shot down, but I felt the dialogue played out quite naturally. 

[gkathellar]

 

 

 

If it was too easy it would lose its exciting unknown appeal ....where you are not sure of the next Romantic dialogue option

 

I also use to give the best equipment to my Romance ladies ...so Viconia and Isabella were always very well equipped. For me I do tend to spoil my girlfriends in RL so this just seems normal    

 

 

Actually, the gaming aspect of it may be what turns people off romances and makes people say they're poorly written.  If you're choosing the dialogue options based on what you think will further the romance rather than what you think your character sincerely feels, you're breaking character to pursue a romance (unless you're playing a manipulative creep).  I think a lot of people have a completionist approach to roleplaying games so they feel like they have to explore the romantic options, but if you have to twist your character in order to squeeze through the hoops, it's going to feel forced.

 

Personally, I enjoy the romances but I only pursue them if they feel right.  I remember my second BG2 character was a female paladin which meant (inevitably) that Anomen was all over her...whcih made sense for his character.  But she found him obnoxious, so I spent the whole game avoiding the romance.  On the other hand, in DA:O, my character was charmed by Alistair, and I never felt like I had to choose a line of dialogue that didn't fit the situation.  In DA2, my character flirted a little with Isabella but the line to keep it going didn't work for my character, so it didn't go anywhere (and she ditched me at the end of Act 2).  I also tried to flirt with Avelline and got shot down, but I felt the dialogue played out quite naturally. 

 

This is well put. Unfortunately, romances often feel like something that have to be completed - which can make them into something of a gamist chore, rather than a roleplaying opportunities. It's especially bad when games tie Achievements to them - that's really about as cynical as you can get.

 

Avelline is an interesting case here, since that's the only possible outcome of her flirting track. Ultimately, she just isn't interested in Hawke, which is ... stunningly mature for a Bioware romance, to be honest. Kinda reminds me of Mira from KotOR 2 ("no offense but you're like super old kthxbye").

 

Did I start this avalanche? I thought my question was so…innocent. But I get it: no romance in PoE (but it’s a pity).

 

IN EORA, THERE ARE NO INNOCENTS, ONLY DEGREES OF GUILT RAAAAH