Interview ToEE interview at Sorcerer's Place

[Saint_Proverbius]

Tags: Temple of Elemental Evil; Tim Cain; Troika Games

<a href="http://www.sorcerers.net/">Sorcerer's Place</a> has posted up a little <a href="http://www.sorcerers.net/Articles/toee_interview3.htm">Q&A session</a> with <b>Mr. Timmy</b> of <a href="http://www.troikagames.com">Troika</a> about the neat looking <A href="http://www.greyhawkgame.com">Temple of Elemental Evil</a> CRPG due out this September. Just for kicks, the part of the thing I didn't like seeing is this:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote><b>Sorcerer's Place:</b> Will there be interactions between party members and any romances?
<br>
<br>
<b>Tim Cain:</b> Yes to both. However, we tried not to go too far with the former (after all, the PC's should be the main focus, not your followers), but we may have gone a little far with the latter. You see, we tried to cover all the bases, you know, multiple solutions and all that.</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Bleh! I still say romances should stay in Japanese console games where they belong.
<br>

 

[Constipated Craprunner]

Really?
I actually found some of the Arcanum ones reasonable.
Raven, dispite the lacking voice over, was an interesting character.
My main problem is the cliches. How about a Alpha female or a gay relationship? Or something Buffyeseque. Quirky and shit.

 

[udarnik]

Bring on the romances! It shows that they have serious ambitions for NPC interaction. Arcanum had a little bit of this (NPC interaction, that is) - you could break Virgil down and turn him to the "dark side", for example, but for the most part there was no reason to talk to your party members. Torment got this exactly right, in my opinion. Your followers didn't mouth off, but there were compelling reasons to talk to them, whether for in game benefits (learning a bit of the Githzerai language or some fire spells) or out of simple curiosity (the ability to be flirtatious or cruel to Anna and Fall-From-Grace).

The thing that stood out to me from this interview, though, is how many skills thieves are losing. Pickpocketing doesn't sound like it will be very useful, there is no setting traps, and no climbing. So what do they bring to the table? Stealth? Rangers and wizards can do that as well. Perhaps they'll go the way of Wizardry 8's rogues who were essentially light fighters.

 

[Sabotai]

Really?
My main problem is the cliches. How about a Alpha female or a gay relationship? Or something Buffyeseque. Quirky and shit.

I actually quite liked the romances. Since everyone at RPGCodex always emphasizes multiple options, it's good to have the option to romance, especially if it allows for some options you otherwise won't get. And if you are not interested, don't buy them flowers or visit some brothel so the romantic interest will back off.

It would be nice to see some non-cliche romances, maybe some love triangles. Or that you run into an ex of yours and depending on your current marital status this ex will help you. I would love to see a NPC join because of a big crush on you. But if you reject him/her the NPC will leave permanently taking with her your prized +2 Sword of Fire and half your gold. Because of the rejection the NPC might join your enemies so you might run into this NPC later and fight him/her. Or that this NPC suffers an alignment shift because of the crush on you (like the girl falling for the criminal and starts helping him being criminal).

Heck, why not get the option of having a marriage? It can include a quest where you have to get enough money to pay for it or a quest for really special cloth (for bride's dress), because your bride is giving you a hard time about it and she wants to feel special. Or maybe a quest to make peace between your mother in law and your own mother or that you have to "convice" your father in law to give his dauther away. And why not a child option (depending on time period of the game). I would laugh my ass of when after beating a dragon my romantic interest announces that she is pregnant or that I suddenly have to find a daycare center for my newborn daughter.

(Ohh, and no, I did not recently marry. I live happily together with my girlfriend and have no intention of getting married in the near future)

 

[Sabotai]

Tim Cain: It was partly the time required to add it (fairly high) and partly the usefulness of using traps against NPC's (fairly low). I'd like to add it to a later game.

Judging from this statement it seems more D&D games using this engine are planned.

 

[Sammael]

OMG! I agree with Saint!

Romances have no place in CRPGs. Hints of romances may be fine (the tension between TNO, Annah, and Fall-from-Grace in Torment), but anything more is just...

 

[Astromarine]

just what? Not realistic? Not fun? or simply awkward?

As with everything, I'll argue implementation with people all they like. But reject the *concepts* themselves, as opposed to the implementations, is a bit daft. Why wouldn't a well-done romance be great for an RPG? I disliked most of the romance thingies in BG2, for example, but I liked the grief Jaheira felt for Khalid. It was a very awkward moment, and pulled off *just fine*.

 

[Sammael]

just what? Not realistic? Not fun? or simply awkward?

I was going to finish the sentence, but I remembered that Tim Cain reads these forums.

As with everything, I'll argue implementation with people all they like. But reject the *concepts* themselves, as opposed to the implementations, is a bit daft.

Because there is no feasable way to fit a realistic romance in a CRPG until we develop a high level of artificial intelligence. Until then, we are stuck with romances that boil down to clicking a bunch of corny replies in a dialogue tree.

but I liked the grief Jaheira felt for Khalid. It was a very awkward moment, and pulled off *just fine*.

Please. That was perhaps the single most forced moment in the whole game. It didn't help that the actress who did VO for Jaheira doesn't know how to (or didn't care to) act. At all. It sounded like a bad soap opera.

 

[Sabotai]

just what? Not realistic? Not fun? or simply awkward?

I was going to finish the sentence, but I remembered that Tim Cain reads these forums.

So? Are you hoping for a job at Troika?

Romances have no place in CRPGs. Hints of romances may be fine

So where does it start to be more than a hint? It all boils down to personal taste. I think there are a lot of possibilities with romance and since romance/love is one of the most fundamental emotions why shouldn't some form of it be implemented in a CRPG.

 

[Astromarine]

Yeah, the voice over spoiled it a bit. But personally, I am *sick and tired* of the big macho hero who is too good to be human and has a range of emotions more limited than the number of Harbinger fans. Repeat after me:

Commander Data should NOT be the hero of all RPGs
Commander Data should NOT be the hero of all RPGs
Commander Data should NOT be the hero of all RPGs

 

[Nagling]

But personally, I am *sick and tired* of the big macho hero who is too good to be human and has a range of emotions more limited than the number of Harbinger fans.

That’s the fun part with Role Playing Games you know, you can actually Role Play different persons, who react different to scenarios that designers create.. You don’t need to have the dialogue option:
I feel your grief.. To actually feel that, if designers do a good job.

And over to romances, ditto Sammael.

 

[Astromarine]

the same could be said, of course, to extend everything under the sun to an RPG. Half Life becomes an RPG, because I can by myself give Gordon Freeman my own motivations, beliefs, and character flaws, and even act the out in some way inside the game. Of course, the game itself has none of this, but hey, if I can imagine it myself it's an RPG, right?

 

[Sabotai]

That’s the fun part with Role Playing Games you know, you can actually Role Play different persons, who react different to scenarios that designers create.. You don’t need to have the dialogue option:
I feel your grief.. To actually feel that, if designers do a good job.

So if a NPC shares his/her grief with you, you prefer the dialogue options:

a) "Shut up bitch we've got adventuring to do",
b) "I don't care"

above

a), b) and c) "I share your grief".

How come more role playing options are better except if the extra is a "romantic" or an empathic option?
Is this the "men are afraid to explore their feelings" avenue we are meandering?

 

[Astromarine]

that'd be my guess. I'm glad there are people around who say "romance is Ghei". They'll remove themselves from the genepool and leave the babes to us

 

[Nagling]

I kind of deserved that reply, didn’t I?
Using BGII as an example:
Nagling the terrible, captured and brought to Amn finds himself in a locked cage. Freed, finds npc, don’t know them, don’t care about them, but brings the along, useful. Jaheria upset about Khalid, Nagling forced to say either:
I feel you pain, options, can we bring him back option or Looks like that person I knew from BGI got killed.

With the dialogue options presented designer force me to play a role that isn’t representative of Nagling the terrible, if instead Jaheria becomes sad upset, without my input I can still go either way..

Did I manage to explain myself a bit better this time?

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Because there is no feasable way to fit a realistic romance in a CRPG until we develop a high level of artificial intelligence. Until then, we are stuck with romances that boil down to clicking a bunch of corny replies in a dialogue tree.

That's not the part that bothers me about it, the AI or the scripting.. It's just the forced silliness of it. It's like the obligatory sex scene in every action flick, it's just plain out of place. You're some guy, trying to get at the core of a problem, trying to solve a situation of paramount importance while trying to survive at the same time. In the context of what's going on around you, romancing just seems absurd.

 

[Astromarine]

Yeah, but you're arguing implementation, not the concept itself. Nagling the Terribly Cuddly is a friend of Jaheira since childhood, according to the story of the game. True, he can be a bastard, but basically both the basdardly response and the sensitive response should be there, to allow both kinds of backgrounds to have equal possibility. Arguing that only the bastardly one and the neutral one *should* be there sounds terribly like teen angst and fears of being considered "unmanly" for even touching a game which has feelings expressed in it:/

 

[Zetor]

That's one of the things that bugs me the most about console 'RPGs', actually. [and it's about their supposed 'strength', ie. the story]

When trying to save the universe [console RPGs have extremely epic stories, after all], personal matters are expected to take the back seat; but nooooo, half of the game has to be composed of angsty "You don't know how I feel *turns around, black cape disappearing into the night*" monologues or interludes reminiscent of bad soap opera episodes. And if the reasoning is "ah, but the protagonists are obviously taken aback by everything they've seen, they're young and impressionable", I only have one thing to say. If a world is relying on a group of teenagers to save it, it'd better start praying, because it's fucked.
There's also something to be said about "trials bringing people together", but eh. I'm not really sure if the LG paladin would be that eager to settle down and start a new life with Viconia after they're done killing evil gods. I know that real-life analogies don't apply here, but I just don't see how a strongly romantic component could enhance a game.
Another comparison: G.R.R.Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" books to Robert Jordan's "I Tug my Braids", er, sorry, "Wheel of Time" books. Jordan's books explore a lot of inner strife, emotional turmoil and ... they are also pretty f@#% boring, for epic fantasy. Martin does touch upon romantic aspects as well and it's there 'between the lines', but he definitely doesn't put it in the spotlight.
Also, I didn't really mind the way romances / interaction were done in PS:T [ie. executed in an intelligent way, also remaining somewhat low-key], but if it's basically forced upon the player, via an annoying character to boot... bleh. It's an RPG, not a dating simulator. YMMV.


-- Z.
ps. Don't make me link the Imoen Romance forums again. :twisted:

 

[Vault Dweller]

Ok, let's talk about the concept itself, it does not belong, just like the other real life things like meeting parents or having a baby. Of course all appropriate responses could be added to dialogue options, but that would be a factor of time and I'd rather have all these extra time spent on dialogues that bring out personalities of NPCs and add to a story.

A party in a RPG is a group of travelling companions that have a common goal, reasons for pursuing that common goals, own agendas, reasons for joing this particular group, reactions to events and actions of the groups, etc. I would like to see all that before I see some romance lines added. Besides, what about MY choice of whom I wanna have a romance with, do I use the same line on every chick in my party, do I have an option to refuse a female NPC 'cause she doesn't look hot enough, can i have a threesome, why not? You see all this romance crap complicates gaming matters unnecessary.

 

[huh]

romances are fine. role-playing elements of a CRPG are built of motivations. emotion is a strong motivation. I don't play console games, so cant' comment on how they do that there.

you can mock it as sentemental touchy feely crap all you want, but remember Dogmeat? why do people remember Dogmeat? did they get attached to a bunch of pixels on the screen? he certainly wasn't very useful in combat. he didn't further the 'heroic' purpose. people often just tried to keep him alive. romance can be like that too. people do remember personalities, not the stats from their games.

I don't see why romance (or even the raunchy stuff) should be singled out as a taboo. if you are playing a 'gotta slay dragons, don't have time for that' kinda guy who's single minded in his purpose you'll have options to reject any romance anyway. and that rejection could be even more satisfying.

the only thing I agree with is that like anything else it has to be done competently by someone with some writing talent. and make sense within a setting. certainly not overdone. but that applies to everything.

but, yeah lots of movies and games do it ( and everything else) in a lame way. the opposite are the action flicks like Matrix that have no emotion whatsoever, wtf was that all about. all I remember is a bunch of fights and helicopter scenes stringed tothether, and some square jaw dude in shades hacking computers. he didn't look like he cared anyway

 

[MF]

If it's done well it may be good, but at least there should be options to ignore the romance, punish the romancer for courting you, kill, ignore, etc.

I liked the Raven romance in Arcanum, but only to a certain extent. I especially liked the option of saying "we have a job to do" the first time and outright killing her the second time 'romance dialogue' initiated on my evil character on the second run.

 

[Jed]

I'll weigh in as romances, pro. If they're well done and add to the game rather than subtract. Beyond that, there's a million nuances as to why I might find a romance in one game successful, and utterly ridiculous in another game. I didn't mind the BG romances, but I think they were superfulous "choices" in a game that was not built on making choices, which is to say, in a game with less linearity and more chance to "develop" a character, more options are better. As has been said, there's always the option to say no.

 

[Sabotai]

A lot depends on the definition of romance in CRPGs. Do thing like love, attraction, charm, sex, lust, flirting fall under this definition? I think romance is probably a mix of these elements.

A party in a RPG is a group of travelling companions that have a common goal, reasons for pursuing that common goals, own agendas, reasons for joing this particular group, reactions to events and actions of the groups, etc. I would like to see all that before I see some romance lines added.

I fail to see why these cannot be combined without becoming complicated. One example, which I mentioned above, a NPC decides to join you because she has a crush on you. Or maybe she is after your money and fakes attraction. And when she has achieved her goal or when you treat her badly she leaves you.

Besides, what about MY choice of whom I wanna have a romance with, do I use the same line on every chick in my party, do I have an option to refuse a female NPC 'cause she doesn't look hot enough, can i have a threesome, why not? You see all this romance crap complicates gaming matters unnecessary.

I remember several threads at RPGCodex applauding the way female protagonists could use sex to solve certain problems in Arcanum. Why not have such an option with men, like charming women or impressing them with their wealth/strengh/stamina...

I think most people in this thread think about Romances the way they were implemented in BG2. They basically had no consequences and they were a lot of hollow talk. I'm suggesting a way to incorporate love/romance in the game world with consequences. If I wanted to play a rogue, with high Charisma why can't I be a ladies man, chatting them up and charming them, trying to get information for my personal gain? About their husbands secret vault and rob the place empty. Or about her secret lover and then extort her with this information. Or what about romancing (maybe marrying) a rich, influential woman. The game could allow for a lot of benefits with such an alliance, but in an instant all here enemies would become your enemies as well. Her family could be seen as a faction like in PS:T.

I don't need a 'romance' option every other conversation, but it would be nice to have a few quests which involved romance or use romance as a solution to problematic situations.

 

[Nagling]

Yeah, but you're arguing implementation, not the concept itself. Nagling the Terribly Cuddly is a friend of Jaheira since childhood, according to the story of the game. True, he can be a bastard, but basically both the basdardly response and the sensitive response should be there, to allow both kinds of backgrounds to have equal possibility. Arguing that only the bastardly one and the neutral one *should* be there sounds terribly like teen angst and fears of being considered "unmanly" for even touching a game which has feelings expressed in it:/

Implementation is sort of deal in my case, so it is only natural that I do argue that. Lets put this really simple: I so far, have not seen a case when the dialogue options do in fact allow you to Role Play a wide selections of feeling, because of this I do find it more satisfying to allow the designer to create scenarios, scenes, that can be felt without limiting my Role with a few options in dialogue.
Although not a Role Playing game in my opinion, but an adventure Game do create this in this particular scene: Quest for Glory V and the choice between Erana and Kathrina, a great emotional scene in my “teenangstie afraid to be unmanly in public” opinion. Did I need the dialogue option here? No.

And as a side note, no I didn’t argue two options only.

 

[ecliptic]

Because there is no feasable way to fit a realistic romance in a CRPG until we develop a high level of artificial intelligence. Until then, we are stuck with romances that boil down to clicking a bunch of corny replies in a dialogue tree.

Couldn't one use that same argument for the abolishment of all tree-based dialogue?