Killing and Sex in RPGS

[LlamaGod]

Keldryn, I wish you hadn't reminded me of Knights of Xentar. Playing that horrible game is not something I'm proud of.

I never tried the romances in BG or any other games because it just seemed so sad. Like buying a sex doll and then taking it out to dinner.

Now, what if that blow up doll was a blow up doll of your sister?
http://www.imoen.org/#

 

[Drakron]

I never did get around to playing ToB. I believe the romance with Aerie does end at that point in the original game though.

I know, I also remenber there was a argument about having sex or not lead to ending the romance but from what I remenber of the convertation was Aerie just used him to pop her cherry and then dump him on a technicality ... I felt so used.

Then ToB come and I belived it did not matter, there were diferences because Aerie gets knocked up so sex have to be involved.

I didn't play BG2 with a female character, so I have no idea if there was any sex involved in the romance with Anomen.

I belive so because there was a convertation key at rest so its pretty much hints they were having fun, I dont remenber the expecifics.

I played females characters because I had BG1+TotSC and so I could start 2 levels above by importing a character, not to say about those nice stat raising tomes lying around in BG1 that lead to better stats and the characters I had saved were female ones.

 

[Drakron]

Now, what if that blow up doll was a blow up doll of your sister?
http://www.imoen.org/#

Well technicaly half sister ...

 

[Section8]

Anyone else of the belief that courting an RPG character is an admission that you've given up on real girls? :twisted:

I guess as long as you don't take anything too seriously, you're probably not in grave peril. But regardless, if you're going to have an imaginary girlfriend, why not imagine her yourself? She's perfect then. Like my imaginary girlfriend, for instance. I'd introduce her to you guys, but she'd probably leave me for one of you.

Anyway, there are plenty of ways that turn the act of killing things into an enjoyable gaming abstraction, but I've yet to see the same thing done for sex. Not that I've looked. Honestly.

 

[Spazmo]

I can't stand the idea of RPG romances, because when you try that in PnP, the end result is that you're hitting on the DM, which just isn't fun (provided the DM is the greasy nerd type that most good DMs are). Now, you'll tell me it's different in CRPGs, and I'll agree, but I don't see how hitting on your computer is any better.

 

[Drakron]

Well you have people marry their online characters ... sure its odd "hit on the DM" but its simply the matter of knowing were the character starts and were you end.

Family on RPGs are part of character, I played a Lot5r fighter that was married (and was on a loveless marriage) and the DM had no problem with playing "my wife" ... neither would I .

If you are going the "its just a computer" then you fail to be roleplaying and immersed, romance is as part of a RPG as having a dislike of a NPC ... I am sure at some point we had a emotical reply towards a NPC.

Look at Bastila ... her romance on KotOR was immersive and within the storyline as Visas romance was not since it come out of the blue with no build up or hints and was disconnected from the story (if there was actually a story and not a buch of ideas thrown in).

 

[bryce777]

Actually, if you seduce aerie she leaves the party and is gone for good.

 

[FrancoTAU]

Wow, a Knights of Xentar mention. I'm ashamed that i actually played that game for a couple hours. I heard it was just one of many games in the series and the rest weren't translated from Japanese.

 

[kris]

I can't stand the idea of RPG romances, because when you try that in PnP, the end result is that you're hitting on the DM, which just isn't fun (provided the DM is the greasy nerd type that most good DMs are).

I would say his greasiness level isn't as important as whether he is of the same sex as the person you try to hit on.

My opinion as stated before is that sex is good in games as long as it is situationally realistic and consequential.

 

[obediah]

Well you have people marry their online characters ... sure its odd "hit on the DM" but its simply the matter of knowing were the character starts and were you end.

Family on RPGs are part of character, I played a Lot5r fighter that was married (and was on a loveless marriage) and the DM had no problem with playing "my wife" ... neither would I .

I guess you're a better roleplayer than I - if I was romancing an NPC (or PC) it would inevitably end prematurely with something like "I'm like totally banging you all good, then I stick my finger in your ass" - and well before the relationship has progressed that far.

On second thought, the only roleplayers that have an interest in roleplaying romance are LARP drama fags whose costume is at the dry cleaners OR the japanese - they get major chub for that shit.

 

[Sycandre]

Because in the strange US point of view, killing can be justified and the use of violence is accepted as "self defense", or "preventive self defense". On the other side, the source of all life, the sex, is considered as an horrible sin. A US kid can see 50 murders on TV each day and nobody will care. Show him the nip of Janet Jackson during the superbowl (such a nice and kind game!), and you are said to have corrupted this poor child soul.

I would be less shocked by more sex in CRPG, than the current amount of violence and death.

 

[Data4]

Because in the strange US point of view, killing can be justified and the use of violence is accepted as "self defense", or "preventive self defense". On the other side, the source of all life, the sex, is considered as an horrible sin. A US kid can see 50 murders on TV each day and nobody will care. Show him the nip of Janet Jackson during the superbowl (such a nice and kind game!), and you are said to have corrupted this poor child soul.

I would be less shocked by more sex in CRPG, than the current amount of violence and death.

Yeah, but I... oh, wait... you're from France. Nevermind.

-D4

 

[FrancoTAU]

Because in the strange US point of view, killing can be justified and the use of violence is accepted as "self defense", or "preventive self defense". On the other side, the source of all life, the sex, is considered as an horrible sin. A US kid can see 50 murders on TV each day and nobody will care. Show him the nip of Janet Jackson during the superbowl (such a nice and kind game!), and you are said to have corrupted this poor child soul.

I would be less shocked by more sex in CRPG, than the current amount of violence and death.

While this might be true to a certain extent, I think killing shit in a video game is a lot more fun than trying to get a date with some NPC regardless of what country you reside.

 

[obediah]

Besides there is plenty of sex (or at least masturbating) in the real world. Even in the gun-crazy-violence-obsessed U.S. we hardly ever get to kill people, and unlike sex you can only kill yourself once. So maintain balance our recreation has more aspects of violence than sex.

 

[kingcomrade]

Even in the gun-crazy-violence-obsessed U.S. we hardly ever get to kill people

Says you! I've got a notch in my rifle for every nigger-child I've shot trying to steal my bike.

 

[Azael]

I suppose you could somehow make sex interesting in a game, but I don't really see the point of it. It's really something that I prefer doing in real life (as opposed to killing monsters and saving the world) and if the point is sexual stimulation there is a better solution; porn, which also leaves you with two free hands.

Combat and killing stuff allows for a plentitude of tactical options from everything to what kind of equipment to use to what types of moves you perform. While you could translate that to sex as well, I doubt the result would be anything less than something so juvenile that not even Troika would have put it in their games.

 

[obediah]

Even in the gun-crazy-violence-obsessed U.S. we hardly ever get to kill people

Says you! I've got a notch in my rifle for every nigger-child I've shot trying to steal my bike.

yeah, but only because the congoids are too damn dumb to zig-zag.

 

[Human Shield]

Because in the strange US point of view, killing can be justified and the use of violence is accepted as "self defense", or "preventive self defense".

Violence is reactionary. Sex is contractual.

Works of fiction can do reactionary easier then contractual.

Exposure to a fictional reactionary subject makes more sense than fictional contractual subjects.

As in:
A bad guy attacks, you choose to use violence; a reaction.
Sex is contractual and the partner chooses to accept.

If you are attacked or pissed off violence comes pretty naturally, and fictional violence agrees with this. If you want sex and the other partner doesn't this disagrees with fictional sex subject.

One realises on personal choice. One relies on thoughts of other people.

A game with a reactionary subject works better.

 

[RGE]

If you want sex and the other partner doesn't this disagrees with fictional sex subject.

If the developers want their NPC to agree to have sex with the PC, that NPC will agree to have sex with the PC. I'd say that the problem with sex isn't that it's contractual, I'd say it's that it's such an intimate affair that the game would have to have lots of variation. And variation has never been a strong point in games. In a way killing someone is also contractual - they still have to agree to die and not shrug off the PCs feeble attacks and kill the PC instead. You could just as easily make a similar system for sex, where the PC could use Charm, Wealth, Youth and Good Looks to try to get an NPC into bed. Wouldn't have to use more dialogue than common combat taunts/floats. And some NPCs would require special circumstances (instead of magic weapons etc) before they agree to have sex (instead of taking damage from attacks). Instead of fancy death animations you could have bodies writhing in exstacy.

But who'd go for something like that? No, I'm in the camp that thinks that the main reason CRPGs focus on death rather than sex is that we're allowed to have sex but not allowed to kill random encounters in real life. Though it could also be that games allow us to take things as far as they can be taken, and killing your enemies is pretty much as far as you can go. Having sex is all fine and dandy and necessary to contiue your bloodline, but battling the rampaging hordes is usually more significant, since many more bloodlines are affected by that.

And games are for kids, and sex is not. Neither is killing, but for some reason I played with toy guns long before I played with myself. Could be because grown men are shown using guns and violence, but sex is too intimate to show, so kids don't usually get to see it. And maybe it's when it comes to kids that the contractual aspect really comes into play. Kids can point and click and kill well enough, but they're not mature enough to handle sex, and such maturity would be necessary due to the contractual aspect.

Works of fiction can do reactionary easier then contractual.

When writing the stuff about kids above, I realised that it's not so much works of fiction that would have an easier time with reactionary than contractual, but us humans who exist in the real world where we actually have to deal with people who don't agree with us. Thus kids (well, boys) get better at pretend-killing than at pretend-seduction. And where's the fun in playing games that are hard? Don't real life girls already provide that for the poor boys?