201 réponses à ce sujet

[Nukenin]

scyphozoa wrote...

I think it is very telling that DA2 sports 5 romances and yet not nearly enough location assets. I'm tired of hearing the argument "Romances don't take up that many resources so they should be allowed." Well now we have a game that clearly didn't use its resources properly, so how about we start cutting on the content that is superflous, like romances.

Less romances and more unique assets please.

I'd rather have more romances and more unique assets.  I've no insight into how topography and placeables work in the DA engine, but surely reused topography could've been covered up better (instead of a cart or a non-working door, is a stone wall too much to ask?).  At least mask out the unused passages from the map!

But I digress, more romance options and other character/relationship dynamics are always welcome.  It helps support the "role" in "role-playing".

[Kyriani Agrivar]

I don't believe romances are necessary for a good game... but I must admit for me at least, romances, when well done, make a good game great. As others have said a well written romance can really make you feel invested in the story and make the entire game experience more fulfilling.

The two things I believe top the list of human motivations are love and hate. Personally I place love at the top of that list with hate a close second. Love is the epitome, the goal, the very thing that keeps the world going. Without love we wither just like a flower. We all need love in some form or another whether it's familial love, platonic love, or romantic love. In game romances may not create real love but it sparks those centers of experience for us much in the way you might have a daydream about spending the perfect day with the perfect guy/girl. In this way it enriches the game experience.

The game's story wouldn't change too wildly if you removed the romances but I believe you'd lose some of the depth of investment by cutting them out.

[FaeQueenCory]

It's not necessary... but it makes things more fun/immersive from an RP perspective. But if not having a romance in favor of a better plot or better sidequests.... I'd rather them ditch the romance.

[Tigress M]

More years ago than I care to admit, I was introduced to tabletop RPGs. Being in my 20's and no longer a "kid", I wasn't sure I'd find them all that fun. And then I started actually roleplaying my first character. My opinion of RPGs quickly changed when I realized just how much I came to like the other characters. Having that like turn into love between my character and another as we spent weeks gallivanting around the country just made sense. It was a natural progression for people tossed together for whatever reason.

The same holds true in video game RPGs. I'm playing a character, a person, who has thoughts and feelings beyond what the next quest is or how to win the next battle. Being able to explore other aspects of my character's life, including romances and friendships, is wonderful.

Are romances necessary? No. Do they make roleplaying that much more realistic and therefore fun? Absolutely. Would I have purchased DA2 without the option of romances? After experiencing them in Origins and missing them terribly in Awakening, probably not.

[kyles3]

I don't think they're necessary, but if they're in I'm certainly going to check them out, and I appreciate all of them being available to both genders in DA2. Miranda and Tali have great romance storylines in ME2, but having to play DudeShep definitely put a damper on the experience (not a fan of the voice).

[paptschik]

Nukenin wrote...

They'd best hurry about any and all massive retconning necessary to make Sigrun a love interest in DA3.  Pronto!  Hop to it!

Rarely do I agree with something as much as with this.

[Nukenin]

Really strong companion relationships can be a perfectly acceptable substitute for romances, IMHO. Sometimes, as a short fella once told a fellow adventurer, there's "no time for love."

[paptschik]

scyphozoa wrote...

I think it is very telling that DA2 sports 5 romances and yet not nearly enough location assets. I'm tired of hearing the argument "Romances don't take up that many resources so they should be allowed." Well now we have a game that clearly didn't use its resources properly, so how about we start cutting on the content that is superflous, like romances.

Less romances and more unique assets please.

But...a different romance is something that drastically changes parts of the games I care about and enjoy.
A dungeon looking slightly different is something I want, but don't give much of a damn if I don't get it.

[Sjofn]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Are romances "really" that different in current RPGs? Honestly - it's "Push pre-scripted buttons to make Sim... err... Fenris like me - then WooHoo!".

I think that if gaming ever "matures" (loaded term, I'm aware) - that romances will be worthwhile - but right now, I think they're pretty useless.

Do you ... read what is said during romances? That's the whole point of the romances, that's why it is vastly different from the Sims, where they just chatter in Simlish and make out. There's no story arc in the Sims beyond any random fluff you make up in your own head (and I am just not as good a writer as the Bioware people, alas!), and if you really can't see why that's important, you will just never get it and should probably throw up your hands and accept it and move on.

[sangy]

I want more romance options, many many more. I'm very surprised Aveline wasn't one....and disappointed.

[ejoslin]

I just want a few more companion dialogs. Seeing relationships build (both romance and not). Origins was amazing in that respect. Even something somewhere between Origins and DA2 would be good.

Edit: Actually getting to know the companions adds so much to the game for me.  There are plenty of games out there (like, well, most) that companion interaction is not much of a focus.  I'm hoping that the success of DAO leads other game makers to start including more actual relationships, be it friendships or romances (or better, both).

I also appreciate good combat, and varied envirornments and a good story.  In fact, all of these are important to me. I actually hope that it doesn't come down to being able to only have one or two appealing things in a game.

Modifié par ejoslin, 30 mars 2011 - 12:58 .

[paptschik]

sangy wrote...

I want more romance options, many many more. I'm very surprised Aveline wasn't one....and disappointed.

I felt that way about Varric. And Sigrun in Awakening.
Where's the love for dwarves?

Also, what I'd like more of is the ability to influence other relationships. Play cupid for any companion I don't romance myself.

Lot's of people just love romances. There is a reason why one of the main things in ANY fandom is people coming up with relationships they'd enjoy to see. It's something that gives a lot of joy to a lot of people. It's just fun to play around with romances and it can lead to different companion banter.

[Dark Specie]

They're not necressarilly, strictly speaking, but I've got to say, they've always added an extra, unique spice/flavor to Bioware's games and ever since BG2, romances have been an extra reason for me to buy an RPG wih them in it 

[Rykoth]

Necessary for an RPG to be fun? No.
Necessary in Dragon Age? Absolutely. Part of the draw of Thedas no matter if it's the epic sweeping DAO or the darker personal story of DA2... is the fact its brutal, AND sexy. Part of that includes romances.

What they need to do however is get over the Fox News Incident from ME and make them yanno... sexy (while tasteful.)

[Dasha Dreyson]

Kabraxal wrote...

Quite honestly... if Bioware nixed romances from their games I would not buy them.  Frankly, the characters are the strong point of these games and the interactions that can occur is why I replay these games.  If the romance option with certain characters were not present, such as Leliana or even Merrill, I would have never played Origins or DA2 a second time.  Hell, I might have stopped playing before finishing since the story would lose any emotional appeal to me.  I care about the story because I can care about the characters... and do so differently with each playthrough too.

^ So much this. There is a reason that most movies include romances in them. Also for me, depending on how well the romance portion is written, it can turn an okay story into a truly great story.

[Basher of Glory]

Ok, I understand most of the comments of those, who like romances.

I agree partly, this kind of interaction might add to the game's immersion and might bring us even closer to our characters.

The comparison with the so called romances in SIMS is IMO flawed. The Sims are only driven by their needs (poorly written AI) and it's all about filling up need-bars.

It is certainly something else, if a romance is well written. So, what is "well written"?
(I spare the ever necessary "IMO" by stating, that all of the following is "IMO")

If a romance has consequences such as Shepard's in ME 1, should (s)he have had a liaison with his/her lieutenant, then it is "well written", because it requires hard descisions (although, I never found out what had happened, when she prefered her love-interest).

To make it short:
Romances with some impact in the game's continuity are ok. Romances just for the romance's sake are wasted money.

Opinions?

[Herr Uhl]

Baher of Glory wrote...

Romances with some impact in the game's continuity are ok. Romances just for the romance's sake are wasted money.

Opinions?

Wouldn't this also make any character that isn't essential to the plot (Wynne, Leliana, Zevran, Sten, Shale, Fenris and Isabela) wasted money?

[paptschik]

Baher of Glory wrote...

Ok, I understand most of the comments of those, who like romances.

I agree partly, this kind of interaction might add to the game's immersion and might bring us even closer to our characters.

The comparison with the so called romances in SIMS is IMO flawed. The Sims are only driven by their needs (poorly written AI) and it's all about filling up need-bars.

It is certainly something else, if a romance is well written. So, what is "well written"?
(I spare the ever necessary "IMO" by stating, that all of the following is "IMO")

If a romance has consequences such as Shepard's in ME 1, should (s)he have had a liaison with his/her lieutenant, then it is "well written", because it requires hard descisions (although, I never found out what had happened, when she prefered her love-interest).

To make it short:
Romances with some impact in the game's continuity are ok. Romances just for the romance's sake are wasted money.

Opinions?

Not sure how much I'd agree.

Romances ARE part of the continuity. Always. Even if they do not relate to the bigger story, they do affect continuity every time they exist simply by changing the dialog between your character and the companion you are romancing. Sometimes even the dialog of others. it would be really hard to make a romance that does not have any impact on anything.

I also thing you can see the romances as a quest all of their own and one most people are a lot more interested in than "Will you fetch me this and that thingie from somewhere?"

[ejoslin]

Baher of Glory wrote...

Ok, I understand most of the comments of those, who like romances.

I agree partly, this kind of interaction might add to the game's immersion and might bring us even closer to our characters.

The comparison with the so called romances in SIMS is IMO flawed. The Sims are only driven by their needs (poorly written AI) and it's all about filling up need-bars.

It is certainly something else, if a romance is well written. So, what is "well written"?
(I spare the ever necessary "IMO" by stating, that all of the following is "IMO")

If a romance has consequences such as Shepard's in ME 1, should (s)he have had a liaison with his/her lieutenant, then it is "well written", because it requires hard descisions (although, I never found out what had happened, when she prefered her love-interest).

To make it short:
Romances with some impact in the game's continuity are ok. Romances just for the romance's sake are wasted money.

Opinions?

Hmmm, so you're saying that Alitsair's and Morrigan's romances you're fine with, but Leliana's and Zevran's should be cut?  I don't agree if that's what you're saying.  The romances actually do add something.  The change the character's motivations for one.

A lot of people love both Leliana and Zevran.  They changed Origins for the people who enjoyed romancing them.  Their stories may not be integral to the plot, but they [can] add a lot to the story.

[errant_knight]

It's a matter of immersion, which makes the game far more enjoyable for me. For example, the takes going into the Landsmeet were much higher while romancing Alistair, and I felt more involved with the story as a whole than I did while not playing a romance. It just made the game better. And whichever romance you picked in Origins, your end game decisions had repercussions on those characters.

I can't really compare with the romances in DA2, because I didn't find those characters appealing in the same ways as the Origins ones. I just didn't want to romance them. Part of that was the kind of people they were, part of that was the dialogue system, which I found distancing, and part of that was the way they made every LI available to any PC. It just kind of ruined the whole thing for me. It didn't matter what kind of person I was, they'd still stick around. It didn't matter what gender I was, because Hawke was so awesome they didn't care. They didn't have any real romantic background that came into play, or made a difference, and none of them had strong enough feelings to be uninterested. It just felt way too easy. Thanks, LIs, but no thanks. My Hawke doesn't want to be entirely interchangable with any other Hawke.

That being said, when the romances worked for me, in Origins, they added greatly to my game experience. Here, not so much. And it's easier to look at this and decide that the resources should be spent elsewhere, when there just wasn't enough game. That wasn't the case wigh Origins, where there was plenty of game. I'd say, don't lose the romances, just make a better game, one that includes them without 'steamlining' them like everything else, to their detriment.

Modifié par errant_knight, 30 mars 2011 - 01:52 .

[Dasha Dreyson]

To me, a romance is well written if it helps me to understand the characters on a deeper level. I know there are some movies that the romance does little for because the characters are never shown as vulnerable (or if that vulnerability is exploited, they get over it too quickly). I prefer them when they present some sort of struggle or character growth.

[Oneiropolos]

Baher of Glory wrote...

To make it short:
Romances with some impact in the game's continuity are ok. Romances just for the romance's sake are wasted money.

Opinions?

Completely disagreed. While all romances should have an impact on what happens around you, romance for the sake of having a person next to you particularly in the case of DAII where you've known these people six years, that romance doesn't NEED To have long-reaching effects to be important to the player. In Japan, there's an entire market for females as dating simulations. In the majority of the games, unlike many of the ones marketed to males, they don't involve sex. It's just about exploring the story if you choose to pursue this person instead of that person. They only occasionally have combat or the like to worry about, they're mostly about telling the story. I've played translated ones through several times to see th different stories. I've played all the AC games exactly once because there is no different story. 

The romance options in DA and the character interactions ALWAYS entice me to play the game through several times and see what happens if soandso comes along on this quest instead of that other person. And what happens if you're in a relationship with them and so forth. That is, in a way, romance for romance's sake. But it's why I'll spend many more hours in DAII than I would from my two (one for each save) awakening playthroughs. In one sense, it is game continuity, but usually confined to that single game. In which case any romance if it's even mentioned later is impacting game continuity. 

Honestly...  the romances in DA:O and DAII had MUCH more impact on how the game played out than they did in Mass Effect. I had alot of friends play through ME and ME2 without ever romancing anyone. But those same people who didn't see a point to romancing someone in those games DID in DA:O and DAII. I was happy when ME2 came out and Garrus was a choice... but even romancing him, he spent all his time in the engine room. And it's like the romance button doesn't 'turn on' until right before the life or death situations in the Mass effect games. That didn't feel like love to me, that felt like "Oh god, we're going to die, quick, I don't want to die without hauling someone to bed one last time!" I've always felt DA integrated it much better, even from quick comments from characters, the party banter concerning it, or your love interest -confrming- things before the life or death battle, rather than it just seeming to kick start there. 

[The Angry One]

Baher of Glory wrote...

To make it short:
Romances with some impact in the game's continuity are ok. Romances just for the romance's sake are wasted money.

Opinions?

By this logic, sidequests with no impact on the plot should be removed too.
The fact is, it's a game and an RPG and one great thing about RPGs is that they lend themselves particularily well to diversions.
It doesn't matter if it serves no purpose in the plot. It's fun.

[Vicious]

I would say it's for one simple reason: Bioware made romances popular in Baldur's Gate 2, then every game they released had 'romances.' Now people just expect them, and if Bioware puts out a game without it, expect the masses cry bloody murder.

[Zjarcal]

errant_knight wrote...
It didn't matter what kind of person I was, they'd still stick around. It didn't matter what gender I was, because Hawke was so awesome they didn't care. They didn't have any real romantic background that came into play, or made a difference, and none of them had strong enough feelings to be uninterested. It just felt way too easy. Thanks, LIs, but no thanks. My Hawke doesn't want to be entirely interchangable with any other Hawke.

Any Hawke is interchangeable just like the Warden is interchengable as well. Push the right buttons, and the LIs wil like ANY character. This applies to both Origins and DA2. That you didn't like the characters doesn't mean they don't have any romantic background.

Geez, if Alistair had been BI but his romance with a female was still identical, would that have bothered you so much?

Modifié par Zjarcal, 30 mars 2011 - 05:53 .