Interview ToEE interview at Sorcerer's Place

[Saint_Proverbius]

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 think I'd compare an attachment to a dog to a romance, frankly. There's a huge difference between Boy and his Dog and Boy meets Girl.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I don't think I'd compare an attachment to a dog to a romance, frankly.

I agree, besides there is a difference between an attachment to a companion you've been to hell and back with and a suddenly developed romantic feeling.

 

[Spazmo]

And frankly, I think Dogmeat was much more interesting that Jaheira in terms of writing, character depth, fun and, well, everything.

 

[Psilon]

Well, yes, Dogmeat didn't complain, even when frying himself in Mariposa.

Aerie: "I wish I still had my wings because then I could have 'Avariel' rather than 'Elf' on my character sheet."
Jaheira: "I wish I could get close to a man without scaring him off or seeing him dissected by a revenge-obsessed wizard."
Viconia: "I wish I didn't have a conscience so I could go back to being the stereotypical Drow of Red Mage's fantasies."
Imoen: "I wish people wouldn't have eight-page debates about my gender preference."
Dogmeat: "Arf."

Gee, which NPC would I prefer?

Oh, and Zetor, I found something more frightening than the Imoen Romance. Damn you, Google!

 

[evilmonkey]

When faced with death we want to spread and thus have sex - "romance".

I'm for the leave the "option" open, if done well, but don't force me or you in it - I stand in the free "option" crew when looking at cRPGs but I do prefer the "polished" - and overworked - games rather then the spares but very open minded.

No I have no quarrels with "romance" in a game, it can help build a world of, it can help break it.

...or leave the narrow path, as long as it still gets good - if else {stay;}

 

[Sabotai]

And frankly, I think Dogmeat was much more interesting that Jaheira in terms of writing, character depth, fun and, well, everything.

Animals... this is pretty scary stuff.

 

[huh]

lol, the conversation's taking a weird turn. comparing Jaheira to Dogmeat... let's straighten it out. the only reason I mentioned Dogmeat... attachement to a dog and a romance have one thing in common, they play on your emotion. they don't serve any other purpose gameplay or otherwise (heh, actually this is a good example of how people put twisted meaning into some pretty clear cut stuff) btw, how did Jaheira get into this? did anyone say she was a well written romance? I never finished BG

 

[Astromarine]

no, I said that I kinda liked (minus voice over) the scene where she discovers Khalid. That's all, the romance afterwards was hamfisted as hell. The point I was arguing was that you can quote to me example after example of hamfisted romances all day long, but I *still* won't give you any legitimacy when extrapolating from that into "hence, all romances should be cut off gaming for good". I can argue that *in this or that particular game* romance worked well or not, but you will not be able to convince me purely on anecdotes that it's unworkable.

BTW; that was a generic "you", not an identifier of any particular person

Astro

 

[huh]

yeah. here's another thing - there are lots of things that suck in crpgs like the same damn cliche battle with the 'end boss in the cave'. don't mean crpgs should flatly refuse to have very powerful antagonists who happen to live in caves if the plot calls for it. or should they? :wink:

 

[Jinxed]

Is there any RPG in which you start off with a spouse? I can't think of any, why is that?

IMO, romances in such games are there for lonely teenagers who personalise themsevles with their character and actually get into the whole romance crap. If a romance thingy is an option, it's not forced, (like SP mentioned an an action movie) it works just fine. Even in BG you could tell everyone off and the dialogs stopped coming in after a while. You don't *have* to get involved, so why complain that the option exists for people that want to romance?

 

[Sammael]

Why complain?

Because the time wasted on romances could have been better used on actual gameplay.

 

[huh]

...
IMO, romances in such games are there for lonely teenagers who personalise themsevles with their character and actually get into the whole romance crap.
...

now, now, maybe I'm misreading this, but come on do you really believe that rpgs with romance in it are marketed to certain teenage populataion (after they are usually marked 'mature themed')?

if you like sweeping absolutes, most 'normal' people think all video games, especially RPGs, are there for pasty friendless overweight geeks sitting in their parents' basements, who like to pretend they are 8 foot tall supermen beating up on vampires. perhaps to compensate for something. we all know that's not true, right?

more generally - if you don't have a problem pretending to be a gnome bard shooting fireballs at little green blobs on the screen, what's with the romance stigma?

anyway, they've already put in something of this sort in TOEE and that's great

p.s. I can't wait to see arguments against humor, characterization or any other sort of non-combat game component (pre-emptively I *DO* agree that they can be done badly and out of place and often are, just like everything else in a game)

 

[Astromarine]

In an RPG, what the hell *IS* "gameplay"? Combat? Puzzles? Quests? I though the general agreement in here was that an RPG wasn't defined by what you *do* in them, but how well they allow you to live the life of a character in extraordinary circumstances. I would argue that a scene here and there which did *nothing* towards "plot" and "stats" but which allowed you to explore (IF YOU ARE WILLING) new depths of character, finding out more about the person you are supposedly playing as, is as much an integral part of an RPG as attribute or skill scores.

Consider this: To me, your side of this argument is sounding as if you would prefer *much more* a work like the Lord of the Rings if there was less (or even none) relationships between Frodo, Gandalf, Sam, etc. We should excise Rosie off the book, because Sam is a Burly Adventurer, not a sappy character. Arwen? Off with her, the romance between her and Aragorn is just fluff with no contribution at all to the motivations and character of the Burly Adventurer Aragorn. Instead, we should put in more evil plots and traps and stuff for the Burly Party to overcome.
In another example, let's remove the whole homosexuality thing from Magic's Pawn (from Mercedes Lackey) because it's icky and sappy, never mind that it is *completely central* to the story.
Why have Leia and Han kiss in the end? they're *adventuring partners*, they should be nothing else.
Alien 4? Ripley's and the Doctor's sexual desires after being in stressful situations for so long (decades in Rip's case) contribute nothing to the story. More Monsters, I say.

To me, all arguments are the same. Gaming is just a younger medium, but I firmly believe that the first RPG with a serious, non-sappy, interesting romantic/sexual component should not be too far off.

Astro

 

[Jarinor]

Okay, I'm going to throw my lot in with the pro-romance guys...simply because it's an option. Isn't that what we play CRPG's for, the wide range of options that the other genres don't provide? I think romance is as valid an option as any other.

Complaining about the quality of the writing? Maybe we should not have comedy either, because hey, that can be fucked up as well. Never mind that PS:T handled romance pretty well, or Fallout and Arcanum handled comedy well with their humourous dialogues. No, because if it's been done badly once, it can never be done well, can it?

At the end of the day, no game I've played forces you to pursue a romantic component. Judging by the comments on BG and BG2, it also appears that the developers also don't exactly waste their time on them, so there goes that argument.

You also fail to consider that *shock and horror* there might be a game someday, in which romance is a major part of the story. It would be quite feasible for it to be done, and not necessarily cliched (and no, I don't have any examples to give you), and because it's a major part of the story, you can't exactly use the 'it wastes the developers time argument' on it can you? If Tim Cain chooses to make romance part of the game, don't you think he might have a reason for it?

So yes, romance can be hamfisted. So can every other component of a game. Given that the more romantic range of emotions are such a big part of most peoples lives why shouldn't they be in a game? If you don't like it, fine, don't try and have virtual sex and have your virtual character fall in virtual love. But don't decide on behalf of everyone else that the option shouldn't be there because you don't like it.

 

[Zetor]

I'm simply going by my experience with romance in RPGs. Let's take the games with substantial 'romance' parts one by one:
- FF8: The only RPG I know of where the main theme was 'love' [as said by the lead designer, game magazines, etc]. Also the only FF game that literally split the FF fanbase in half after its release. Something that can unhinge even the most devoted FF fanbois has to suck, and indeed it did. The story was a confused mess of teenage angst, even worse than the usual fare, and a plotline that made no sense whatsoever. And the [unskippable, mandatory] cutscenes... man. The "cheap soap opera" analogy is rather apt in this case.
- BG2: Most everyone has commented on this already. Additionally, tying m4d l3wt to romances is just stupid. IMNSHHO. [and if you think BG2 romance model = gud, check out the Imoen / Minsc / etc romances being made... which reminds me. Psilon, you're SO dead. ]
- NWN: Ugh. [<3 <3 <3 Aribteh lollolololo!!11]
- PS:T: Didn't have any problems with it, especially since it wasn't forced on the player. If all games followed this model, I'd be content.
- Arcanum: Didn't get far enough for the romance part to kick in. 'Sides, I played a surly dwarven technologist, not really Raven's type.

And this is why I'm skeptical about this. Sure, variety is the spice of life and all that, but the only game I've played that focused on the romance aspect [FF8] is one of the worst games I've ever had the [dis]pleasure of playing. If [not when, if] someone manages to come up with an RPG that incorporates romantic elements in an intelligent, mature and hopefully optional way, I'll probably check it out, though.


-- Z.

 

[Astromarine]

Hmmm. One other thing about this discussion is that people seem to equate romance with roleplaying conquest. It's not what I'm talking about here. I'll give as an example a game I haven't finished nor even played a lot - Torment. I played this game only until a bit after you get the tiefling in your party (after you do the undead kingdom and the rats). Still, it had one VERY good component that I include in romance and you seem to not include: the part of the escape from the corpse-house that deals with the woman's ghost (excuse the fuzzyness, at work and ages since I played). There was regret, anguish, love, hate. A lot of emotions in a very small piece of dialogue. NOt corny, not overdone, and if the rest of the game deals with that portion more I assume it's equally well done. Talking about romance (at least, from my side) shouldn't mean "PC tries to seduce party member or NPC". At least, not just that.

Another example is Ultima. the Avatar had a few romantic interests, and yes they were nothing special. But, for example, Iolo and Gwenno's relationship was, in my view, extremely well portrayed throughout the series. Here was a couple (an *old* couple by the time IX comes) who were adventurers, were occasionally separated, but always felt the same about each other and stayed together for *hundreds* of years.

I don't know, for some reason this issue seems to provoke some knee-jerkiness, which is strange. So FF8 was bad (I thought we were talking about RPGs ). So what? Torment was good (the romance part si what I mean), so it balances out. There were crappy portrayals of sex and love all over the place, but as I said, gaming as an "grown-up" pastime is a very very recent thing. NOW should be the time to start salivating over the expanded horizons, not block whole chucks of possible subject matter from appearing in the genre because deep down we're still awkward kids.

Astro

 

[Jinxed]

Why complain?

Because the time wasted on romances could have been better used on actual gameplay.

I don't think that they're wasting the significant amount of time that you think they are. If it's just a couple of corny lines in a dialog tree as you stated, how much time do you REALLY think they spend on doing it?

 

[Vault Dweller]

It seems to me that there is some confusion here. So before we deal with the issue of romance let's deal with the definition of it.

First, there is an attachment to a companion that is a result of your own feelings not a result of some dialogue lines that try to immitate your feelings

you can mock it as sentemental touchy feely crap all you want, but remember Dogmeat?

Second, there are moments that have some emotional values and related to a story and character development and definition

the part of the escape from the corpse-house that deals with the woman's ghost...(he means the Mortuary and Deionarra) There was regret, anguish, love, hate. A lot of emotions in a very small piece of dialogue.

I kinda liked (minus voice over) the scene where she discovers Khalid

And third, there is an actual romance when you hit on somebody or somebody hits on you for no reasons whatsoever, but your amusement. It does not carry any weight, it adds nothing, and it does take time that coul be used elsewhere, even if it's a few lines, I'd rather have them added to npcs' definition, their stories, agenda, disagreements, etc.

So, in my opinion, the first two are good, the third is really unnecessary, and more often then not would result in a bad cheesy bg2-style implementation.

 

[Astromarine]

ok, so just so we can agree on a post in it's entirety: the third part of romance that you mentioned, what do you object in it? the fact that it is inconsequential or the fact that *it is there*? For me, I know that it is the former. I can see situations and styles where it would make sense to portray a relationship between two main characters, and there are even some where more explicit representation would be in order (i.e two characters share a room in an Inn, or something of the sort. I'm not arguing for X-rate unless REALLY necessary for context).

For example, I could see, in a "survival horror" kind of RPG, where there is a small party trapped in an ugly, dangerous place and fighting for their lives and sanity for ages. If the plot of the story calls for some respite (for example, an idyllic environment, or merely a safe house where they are allowed to relax for a bit, or a homely environment. Think Rivendell) I could see 2 members of that party spending the night together for warmth and comfort, and establishing a relationship. Some neat things could also happen to it later.

Astro

 

[Vault Dweller]

the third part of romance that you mentioned, what do you object in it? the fact that it is inconsequential or the fact that *it is there*? For me, I know that it is the former.

It's the former of course. I believe that it rarely fits and does not serve any purpose. At least I don't see it that way.

Some neat things could also happen to it (relationship) later.

Well, I think that whatever neat things could happen to a romantic relationship, could as easily happen to a companionship, and probably would be more believable.

 

[evilmonkey]

I don't think that they're wasting the significant amount of time that you think they are. If it's just a couple of corny lines in a dialog tree as you stated, how much time do you REALLY think they spend on doing it?

Ho - and that is something I do not want in a game.

Or I'm really bored with huge games with lack of detail - and even if they got some it lacks any thought. No if they are to add anything that is no Easter eggs they should work it through well. One reason oh the RPG part in BG2 failed.

general stuff

on the harsh side - as for rpg games I don't play rpg games for the combat - so maybe I could see that part go, why should they spend a lot of time coding something that will probably be lacklustre anyway compared to Ikaruga, JA2, BF1942 or the likes of them. Now that would be fine compared to anything else, as it just removes one option - Now doing so still leaves out one option, and I don't want that - besides combat is the easy solution in most cases (odd - if you look past the coding).

A good cRPG should let you explore a character - make it as you want - so there should be options to everything - and there should be more options then the popular ones. Of course you can't [yet-but maybe in a distant future?] more or less play a game freeform. I would even go so far to say that if you can't represent 3 solutions to every problem in a cRPG the problem should be removed - and the game size should be that so at least 3 solutions can be found on each problem and the problems should be no more then the solutions they have time to add.

So if a cRPG developer can make a good romance in a game - shoot, I want it, even if I might not take that path - but I do know that it is there, and I know that if I wanted I could play my character differently.

And I agree with astro on the young medium part.

And I besides that I see no reason for people to do more of the same (besides quality).

 

[udarnik]

Oh, and Zetor, I found something more frightening than the Imoen Romance. Damn you, Google!

Ever notice how many butt references Minsc makes? He's a very anally fixated character. I can already imagine the steaming hot porn scenes in the middle of, say, fighting trolls at Nalia's castle or killing kobolds in the sewers. Open the door to a little bit of romance-novel pandering and you'll find a dark side in some people's psyche that you never wanted to see.

 

[bcr19374]

If memory serves me correctly, there were some interesting uses of romance in Fallout 2. You could get married and then your wife would become one of your NPCs. You can also have sex with one of the Mob boss' wife to get access to their compound. I'd like to see such mature plotlines included in ToEE.

 

[Elwro]

The people on that thread are just horrible. Take this signature of one Sephanti:

And the raven,never flitting, still is sitting,still is sitting
On the pallid bust of pallas just above my chamber door;
And his eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming
And the lamp-light o'er him streaming throws his shadow that lies floating on the floor
shall be lifted - nevermore!
Edgar allen Poe.

The guy wishes perhaps to make an impression that he reads poetry, but he is unable to notice that he missed a half of the last line ("And my soul from out that shadow..."), cannot write the author's name correctly and that Pallas is a name. Geez...

 

[Jed]

The people on that thread are just horrible...The guy wishes perhaps to make an impression that he reads poetry, but he is unable to notice that he missed a half of the last line ("And my soul from out that shadow..."), cannot write the author's name correctly and that Pallas is a name. Geez...

Yes, folks from all over the world whose mother tongues are not English can wield the language more adeptly than the majority our internet drool-spigots.