Romance?

[tinysalamander]

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).

 

Part of this problem is also the fact that most often that not there is only 1 right answer. You either say that or the romance don't happen.

[magritte]

But that's just my point.  There may be only one answer that will continue the romance, but whether it's the right answer or not depends on the character, not on the outcome.  Ending the romance may well be the right choice for that character.

Edited July 24, 2015 by magritte

[zombo]

 

Are there any romance in this game?

 Sadly no

 

Obsidian intentionally left this out of the game, it was  a mistake IMO as we both know how Romance adds to the overall entertainment factor

 

But on this forum you will find most people don't like Romance or they feel it somehow demeans the overall value of a game ...yes its also a mistaken view but trust me you won't change peoples minds on this forum..." you can't teach an old dog new tricks " and all that 

 

How is an opinion a mistake? Because you disagree? Poor reason imo.

[zombo]

How about if people want a game with romance go find a game with romance? Stop asking for games without it to have it shoved in via patch or expansion? Maybe I'll go on some Call of Duty forums and ask for romance options.

Edited July 24, 2015 by zombo

[zombo]

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.

Romance in games is fine, but the parade of people who ask for almost every rpg to have romance options in it is exhausting. Not every game needs it. There are now plenty of games that do. Why is it that just because a game is labeled rpg that means it needs romance? That's my problem. If a developer does not want to do it and people want it anyway all they're going to get is a half effort because they're not into it. Take the romance when it exists and stop asking for every game to have it. I'm not necessarily saying you are doing this. Just speaking to those that do.

Edited July 24, 2015 by zombo

[tinysalamander]

But that's just my point.  There may be only one answer that will continue the romance, but whether it's the right answer or not depends on the character, not on the outcome.  Ending the romance may well be the right choice for that character.

 

I'm not quite sure what exactly you are trying to say here.

[magritte]

 

But that's just my point.  There may be only one answer that will continue the romance, but whether it's the right answer or not depends on the character, not on the outcome.  Ending the romance may well be the right choice for that character.

 

I'm not quite sure what exactly you are trying to say here.

 

You said earlier that part of the problem with the romances is that there's only one right answer.  The fact that one answer means that the romance continues and one means that it does not, does not make one answer right and the other wrong.  

[gkathellar]

How about if people want a game with romance go find a game with romance? Stop asking for games without it to have it shoved in via patch or expansion? Maybe I'll go on some Call of Duty forums and ask for romance options.

 

I was sure CoD already had one of those ...

 

Romance in games is fine, but the parade of people who ask for almost every rpg to have romance options in it is exhausting. Not every game needs it. There are now plenty of games that do. Why is it that just because a game is labeled rpg that means it needs romance? That's my problem. If a developer does not want to do it and people want it anyway all they're going to get is a half effort because they're not into it. Take the romance when it exists and stop asking for every game to have it. I'm not necessarily saying you are doing this. Just speaking to those that do.

 

Considering that PoE is very explicitly meant to be in the tradition of games like BG2 and PS:T, which had romantic subplots, I feel like you might be misrepresenting the nature of this discussion just a little bit.

[zombo]

 

How about if people want a game with romance go find a game with romance? Stop asking for games without it to have it shoved in via patch or expansion? Maybe I'll go on some Call of Duty forums and ask for romance options.

 

I was sure CoD already had one of those ...

 

Romance in games is fine, but the parade of people who ask for almost every rpg to have romance options in it is exhausting. Not every game needs it. There are now plenty of games that do. Why is it that just because a game is labeled rpg that means it needs romance? That's my problem. If a developer does not want to do it and people want it anyway all they're going to get is a half effort because they're not into it. Take the romance when it exists and stop asking for every game to have it. I'm not necessarily saying you are doing this. Just speaking to those that do.

 

Considering that PoE is very explicitly meant to be in the tradition of games like BG2 and PS:T, which had romantic subplots, I feel like you might be misrepresenting the nature of this discussion just a little bit.

 

My undeerstanding is Infinity Engine games are the inspiration for this game, and there are more games with that engine that do not have romances. BG1, IWD, and IWD2 each come to mind. Romance was not part of all IE games, and that just further makes my point. It's not somthing to have all the time.

Edited July 24, 2015 by zombo

[tinysalamander]

You said earlier that part of the problem with the romances is that there's only one right answer.  The fact that one answer means that the romance continues and one means that it does not, does not make one answer right and the other wrong.

 

 

Err… What I am saying is (unless you really screw up with your words or actions) there shouldn't be dialogs where you absolutely must say something or else. It's not a dialog then, it's a fancy cutscene. Sure, by the end of your journey there might be such a situatuation, where one character needs to actually spell his/her desires so the other character knows it. But just because you haven't said something minor* half a quest ago shouldn't prevent you (from trying).

 

* What is or isn't minor depends on the character in question.

[gkathellar]

 

 

 

 

How about if people want a game with romance go find a game with romance? Stop asking for games without it to have it shoved in via patch or expansion? Maybe I'll go on some Call of Duty forums and ask for romance options.

I was sure CoD already had one of those ...

Romance in games is fine, but the parade of people who ask for almost every rpg to have romance options in it is exhausting. Not every game needs it. There are now plenty of games that do. Why is it that just because a game is labeled rpg that means it needs romance? That's my problem. If a developer does not want to do it and people want it anyway all they're going to get is a half effort because they're not into it. Take the romance when it exists and stop asking for every game to have it. I'm not necessarily saying you are doing this. Just speaking to those that do.

Considering that PoE is very explicitly meant to be in the tradition of games like BG2 and PS:T, which had romantic subplots, I feel like you might be misrepresenting the nature of this discussion just a little bit.

My undeerstanding is Infinity Engine games are the inspiration for this game, and there are more games with that engine that do not have romances. BG1, IWD, and IWD2 each come to mind. Romance was not part of all IE games, and that just further makes my point. It's not somthing to have all the time.

I didn't say it was. I said that discussing romance as an addition to PoE is by no means as unreasonable or far-fetched as a false equivalency to a mass-market FPS makes it seem.

[luzarius]

Ondra's Gift

 

On a serious note, romance options enhance immersion, IMO there should always be at least one of each sex in this kind of RPG.  Then just make them both bi so everyone can enjoy.

Edited July 26, 2015 by luzarius

[boffmoffet]

I would rather they did not spend any time or money on romances. The setting and tone of the game are not exactly conducive to romances. That mechanic takes a lot of time, scripting, and writing and can feel shoehorned in even when the setting is more conducive to romantic love.

 

(possible spoilers ahead regarding character motivations)

 

Besides, who is my male protagonist going to romance? Sagani, married and missing her family. GM, distance and grieving. All of GMs emotions towards the Watcher revolve heavily around the hope that he can relieve her of a burden that has consumed her whole being. Pallegina, passionate to be sure, but driven. Paladins would make a poor choice in love to begin with, they already have a commitment greater than love. In Pallegina case I think her self determination and desire to serve her country and order would further motivate her to not pursue love if only to further prove her worthiness in the eyes of her peers, which she did not always seem confident of. I am sure others related to these stories and personalities in a very different light than I did, but for me to write a romance for any of these woman would undermine their development, compromising character to add a shoehorned romance option for the lonely masses. Some equally skeptical female fan will need to do a male companion assessment!

 

I hope that does not sound overly harsh but these threads have popped up a few times and I wanted my 2 cents in.

[tinysalamander]

Speaking of Pallegina,

depending on her ending she either could leave you because of duty and what's not, or stay with you as she has nowhere to go.

 

[Cantousent]

(possible spoilers ahead regarding character motivations)

 

Besides, who is my male protagonist going to romance? Sagani, married and missing her family. GM, distance and grieving. All of GMs emotions towards the Watcher revolve heavily around the hope that he can relieve her of a burden that has consumed her whole being. Pallegina, passionate to be sure, but driven. Paladins would make a poor choice in love to begin with, they already have a commitment greater than love. In Pallegina case I think her self determination and desire to serve her country and order would further motivate her to not pursue love if only to further prove her worthiness in the eyes of her peers, which she did not always seem confident of. I am sure others related to these stories and personalities in a very different light than I did, but for me to write a romance for any of these woman would undermine their development, compromising character to add a shoehorned romance option for the lonely masses. Some equally skeptical female fan will need to do a male companion assessment!

...But these aren't reasons *not* to have any of these characters as a romantic interest. In fact, these issues would add a certain necessary piquancy to the relationship. I actually don't want resources to go to romance in PoE either. I would rather the efforts go into making relationships generally more believable and interesting.

 

The odd relationship between Eder and Aloth (both Aloths) is a great addition without a tremendous amount of effort. It accomplishes much without excessive text. It implies camaraderie and even romance (in a strange sort of way) with a tremendous amount of finesse. I think Fensterwhatever did Eder's character, and he did a great job with a situation far more confusing and convoluted than the ones you describe. Sagani's, homesick, lonely, and missing her family, is *precisely* why a romance with her could be absolutely believable. However, as I said, I would rather more effort be put into fleshing out the PC's relationship with her than take the drastic step and tremendous undertaking of making the relationship 'romantic.'

 

...And this idea that there must be a romance to fit every sexual predilection and romantic inclination cheapens the idea in the first place. Tell you what, I yield. Don't put in a romance to appeal to a heterosexual middle aged white guy. Because if the game has something for everyone, it's to have damned little for anyone.

 

EDIT: forgot the not.

[Guest 4ward]

 

i'm not really sure if the setting is so important whether a romance is possible or not, perhaps the pacing but setting? The chars in those games are travelling together, they've got lots of social contact. And if life treated them badly it's more reason to start something positive with another char to put them out of the misery. The devs have to write lots of dialogue for fleshing out the chars anyways, perhaps at some point when the player has reached a certain stage in the dialogue, it should branch off into 'friendship'-mode and 'romance'-mode and that point should be made clear to the player.

[Nakia]

If a romance is included it should be optional.  In BG SoA I tried very hard to choose friendly but not romantic options and still ended up involved with someone.  The same thing happened in DA:O.  I simply did not feel that the romances were optional.

 

PoE gives me a lot of ways to roleplay.   We have a variety of races each with their own culture, various backgrounds available from slave to aristocrat and then all the classes.  Each choice I make affects who my character is.  The godlike would cause a special problem IMO.  The moon godlike is the most attractive to other kith, probably the fire godlike would be next but the death head and nature godlike I think would need a quirky romantic interest or another godlike.

 

As already said paladins first loyalty should be to their order although this might make for an interesting romance with conflicts.  Priests have or at least should have a love interest already, their deity.  There too some interesting conflicts could be written in.

 

All this would take a goodly amount of time and resources and I agree with  Cantousent would be best used to flesh out the relationship among the party members.  Your party is a team, their lives depend on each other and this does create a bond even between Eder and Durance who are natural enemies.

 

We who do not wish romances included except as an optional DLC or mod have been asked to explain why but I would like to know why romances should be a mandatory item.  To add  interest?  The inter-relationships of the party members would add interest.

 

Edit: I didn't see  4ward's post.   There is a possibility there of course and as long as it is your main character that initiates the dialogue and it is clearly optional that might be the solution.  Maybe.

Edited July 26, 2015 by Nakia

[boffmoffet]

 I would rather the efforts go into making relationships generally more believable and interesting.

The odd relationship between Eder and Aloth (both Aloths) is a great addition without a tremendous amount of effort. It accomplishes much without excessive text. It implies camaraderie and even romance (in a strange sort of way) with a tremendous amount of finesse. I think Fensterwhatever did Eder's character, and he did a great job with a situation far more confusing and convoluted than the ones you describe. Sagani's, homesick, lonely, and missing her family, is *precisely* why a romance with her could be absolutely believable. However, as I said, I would rather more effort be put into fleshing out the PC's relationship with her than take the drastic step and tremendous undertaking of making the relationship 'romantic.'

 

 

I quite like the idea of fleshing out interactions among your party members, I often find the scripted interaction between my NPC party members in games such as this to be far more meaningful and enjoyable than interactions with my PC. Development between two NPCs bring the viewpoints and themes of any given world into the narrative in a very informative way. For instance in Dragon Age my interactions with Morrigan and Alastair were fun, but far more enjoyable were their interactions with each other. Such added content seems unlikely for PoE, but I always like to see a premium put on party interaction. It always drove me nuts that in ME2 most, if not all, interactions were between shepard and another crew member directly, with banter amongst crew being minimal. Tanked the whole narrative for me, soured me on mission based content pacing. 

[Guest 4ward]

If a romance is included it should be optional.  In BG SoA I tried very hard to choose friendly but not romantic options and still ended up involved with someone.  The same thing happened in DA:O.  I simply did not feel that the romances were optional.

 

PoE gives me a lot of ways to roleplay.   We have a variety of races each with their own culture, various backgrounds available from slave to aristocrat and then all the classes.  Each choice I make affects who my character is.  The godlike would cause a special problem IMO.  The moon godlike is the most attractive to other kith, probably the fire godlike would be next but the death head and nature godlike I think would need a quirky romantic interest or another godlike.

 

As already said paladins first loyalty should be to their order although this might make for an interesting romance with conflicts.  Priests have or at least should have a love interest already, their deity.  There too some interesting conflicts could be written in.

 

All this would take a goodly amount of time and resources and I agree with  Cantousent would be best used to flesh out the relationship among the party members.  Your party is a team, their lives depend on each other and this does create a bond even between Eder and Durance who are natural enemies.

 

We who do not wish romances included except as an optional DLC or mod have been asked to explain why but I would like to know why romances should be a mandatory item.  To add  interest?  The inter-relationships of the party members would add interest.

 

Edit: I didn't see  4ward's post.   There is a possibility there of course and as long as it is your main character that initiates the dialogue and it is clearly optional that might be the solution.  Maybe.

 

only the initial dialogue was forced, at least that's how i remember it from vanilla BG2. Whether it's optional or not, i don't think it matters that much since all of dialogue is written by someone other than you. If there were more romance options than just Anomen and also written by females then it would have been a better experience for female players i'd think.

 

I understand that you guys also like to bring up other games like DA:O but frankly, i was missing the BG2 experience and not DA with its 'appreciatio-gifto-meter' romancing. (Did you also miss the IE games, remember, that was the slogan) 'Hey Morrigan here's your book' – 'cool thanks, i think we should have a little something-something in my tent over there'. Please, Obsidian, if you're reading this, no more arbitrary systems. It makes things even more predictable and boring. I'll freely admit that i still don't understand the idea behind this engagement system and disengagement attacks, PoE is a game where you have magic spells, magic weapons, abilities which could be engaging abilities, an entire enchanting system, now soulbound weapons so many possibilities to disable enemy units, yet still there's the need for an arbitrary system featuring disengagement attacks, why? Just a thought.. Btw, BG2 did also have romantic interactions between party members if you think of Hear'Dalis for example or Yoshimo trying to flirt with Jaheira or all three women 'competing' for you..

 

Edit: @Nakia, just reread your post, and i understand you mean the dialogue option where it's supposed to branch into romance should be initiated by the player, yeah i guess you're right that could be a better option. Also, in regards to why people would 'demand' romance in a game, i suppose it's because they like flirting. Like when watching a movie, it's not RL of course but some people like flirting chars in a movie. And i guess if someone doesn't like that, then no matter how well written it is or how it's initiated chances are he/she won't like it.

Edited July 27, 2015 by 4ward

[evilcat]

I am all for romances in both ways as long as you can really mess up and got companion so mad it will drop your party, or just crush it to the point "Just focus on the mssion, and when will done i go." )

 

Or... put a romance where tension is growing and growing, but without a bang. Just tension. What would happen next is up to player imagination and some weirdo fanfiction. ;-)

 

Or... put a romance dialogue options, but it will never lead to anything since companion is so bitter and with horrible experience that for all romantic talk will answear "Oh really, do you say that to all chantress?" )

 

Generally romances add immersion, there is proved link betwean life thrating adventures and possibility of love interest so it is totally in place in epic adventure, and if someone dont like it... can skip it. So as long as there is no forcing romances down the throat no harm done.