193 réponses à ce sujet

[wsandista]

CELL55 wrote...

Why would you want to force others into not enjoying an experience just because you don't like it? The romances are optional, after all.
When NPCs flirt with your character, it's just a part of storytelling; people do flirt in real life after all.
If your character accidentally flirts back against your wishes (ME: Asari Consort, DAO: Zevran, DA2: Meeting Anders), then the problem lies with the dialogue system, which is a problem separate from the romance system.

Oh look anoher guy who can't tell the difference between a question and a demand.

The point of this thread was supposed to see how the BSN felt about including romances in DA3. The point was not to write a manifesto proclaiming my hatred for romance and insisting that it not be included.

If I wanted to demand their removal, I would have titled the thread "REMOVE ROMANCES FROM DA3!"

[CELL55]

wsandista wrote...

CELL55 wrote...

Why would you want to force others into not enjoying an experience just because you don't like it? The romances are optional, after all.
When NPCs flirt with your character, it's just a part of storytelling; people do flirt in real life after all.
If your character accidentally flirts back against your wishes (ME: Asari Consort, DAO: Zevran, DA2: Meeting Anders), then the problem lies with the dialogue system, which is a problem separate from the romance system.

Oh look anoher guy who can't tell the difference between a question and a demand.

The point of this thread was supposed to see how the BSN felt about including romances in DA3. The point was not to write a manifesto proclaiming my hatred for romance and insisting that it not be included.

If I wanted to demand their removal, I would have titled the thread "REMOVE ROMANCES FROM DA3!"

Well forgive me your worshipfulness, my answer is yes, there should be, because I enjoy the additionally roleplaying options that it provides, even if I don't actually pursue the romance.

[Fredward]

Uh, yes? It's like half the reason I play Bioware's games. XD

[hangmans tree]

wsandista wrote...


With the increasing amount of resources romances are taking up, I believe that there are more important things to focus on like:

5. Choice and Consequence

I would gladly see romances go for any one of these things.

After DA2 I would like them to focus on that. That is the worst allegation I had after finishing DA2 at which point my distaste hit rock bottom.

[gonzalez.melissa53]

I have a very strong feeling that DA romancing is here to stay boys and girl. So happy or sad about it... I love it! Now should it take away from a compelling story line, no. Also, it should have depth. DA2 romance options had depth of character rather than the actual relationship. What I mean by that is that for example Fenris was appealing in that he was this tormented and well thought out character in and of himself but the fact that he could be rivalmaced by a mage without any supporting dialog... Blows the mind. I mean why would he do that? At least give us a reason. Did they get along about other things? Could he not resister her wit? looks? kindness??? I think that more chats would help this sort of thing along. I loved the rivalmance but I felt for all the LI's it needed more of and explanation.

Modifié par gonzalez.melissa53, 14 septembre 2012 - 05:56 .

[Renmiri1]

Sylvianus wrote...

Renmiri1, I must admit that sometimes you make me smile, sometimes you give me a headache. Don't know what to do.

Just dance and enjoy all the DA romance 

[Raikas]

 

wsandista wrote...

With the increasing amount of resources romances are taking up, I believe that there are more important things to focus on like:

1. Interesting Characters with greater character development.
2. Foes that are more than trash mobs
3. More quests that don't involve fetching x amount of (insert random item)
4. More and better maps and areas to explore
5. Choice and Consequence

I would gladly see romances go for any one of these things.

I think that (ideally) the romance plots/LI characters ought to be treated as a part of items 1, 3, and 5 rather than a separate item all together.  The more elements that can be integrated into a single plan, the better (which isn't to say that they're essential, just that I don't see why it would be one at the expense of the other).
 
 

Plaintiff wrote...

As for Obsidian, I assume you refer to Fallout: New Vegas? I own it, but haven't yet begun to play. I understand that it's possible to get a perk that allows you to unlock special dialogue options with members of the same sex, but I doubt that anything you do in that game leads to anything that could be considered a 'relationship'. Companions might be more developed than those in Skyrim or Fallout 3, but that's not exactly a high bar to clear.

 
Fair enough, although I’d argue that the different views of the world that New Vegas gives by having the Lady Killer vs. Confirmed Bachelor perks (and the female equivalents, I assume) gives more depth to both the world-building and to the development of the player character than companion relationships would.

[PinkShoes]

I do like the romance but i would like it if it was more real. As it was in DA2 i would rather they just not put it in. But i hope its better in DA3.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Sure, if it's good.

Romance is an extension of how the PC interacts with the world of Dragon Age. It's not by any means mandatory, though by this point I'm getting the impression that if they axed it for DA3 the BSN would explode in nuclear fire XD On the other hand, romance does have a particular emotional punch and ability to sucker the player into the world and its characters; it's a very powerful storytelling tool for the devs, and there's no reason they shouldn't leverage it for DA3.

[gonzalez.melissa53]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Sure, if it's good.

Romance is an extension of how the PC interacts with the world of Dragon Age. It's not by any means mandatory, though by this point I'm getting the impression that if they axed it for DA3 the BSN would explode in nuclear fire XD On the other hand, romance does have a particular emotional punch and ability to sucker the player into the world and its characters; it's a very powerful storytelling tool for the devs, and there's no reason they shouldn't leverage it for DA3.

/agree
You said it perfectly. I particularly love the "explode in nuclear fire" bit! Frighteningly true, I'd say!

[Dutchess]

Of course the next game needs romance! The party members and the chance to interact with them made me fall in love with DAO and saved DA2 for me. I find that the romances that I've played often gave further insight into the character, showed a different (often softer) side of them. I enjoyed that very much, and the possible romances are actually an important factor in me replaying the gae.
I think the next game would lose much of my interest if it dropped the romance opportunity.

[PsychoBlonde]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

If it's anything like DA 2, then NO. It's a waste of resources. I completely ignore romance option in DA 2 because I dislike restricted one dimensional interaction. Hmm.. if any companions are anything like DA 2 then I prefer we just go back to Neverwinter Nights' henchmen system. DA 2's companions are as shallow as Neverwinter Nights' henchmen anyway.  

Hey, don't go dissin' Valen.  He was ossum.  And cute.  

I had the opposite experience--I stopped doing the romances in Origins because I didn't like any of them, but I still enjoy romancing Fenris on my DA2 playthroughs.  I'm not sure whether you personally enjoyed the romance options in a given game is a good reason to say that these are shallow but those weren't.  There wasn't a single moment in any of the Origins romances as affecting, for me, as when Fenris admits to you that he doesn't know how to read.

Whether you like a given romance or not is SO much a matter of personal taste that there's just not much to go on.  There are people who liked the Alistair romance because if they played their cards right they could be a pretty princess and Queen of Fereldan.  Personally, I found that entire notion rather disturbing.

I'd like them to continue doing the romances.  Firstly, because it's a signature thing with them and an enjoyable aspect of the writing even if a given romance doesn't appeal to me, personally.  Secondly, because they make such a great effort at inclusivity.  Thirdly, they don't seem to be THAT resource-intensive.  I could go on and on listing reasons.

Also, can we pretty please have a big, serious, kind of alarming guy to romance?  PLEASE?  We've done the snarky unserious hedonist dark-pasted skinny psychotic cat-obsessed ones.  Not saying you can't still have all that but having someone like Valen come round again would be great.

And after that, we can romance Varric.  Cause short fuzzy guys are OSSUM. 

[frostajulie]

Lord Nikon 001 wrote...

The romances and character interaction is the whole reason I play Bioware games. If they reduce it even more, or completely eliminate it, I simply won't buy their products any longer. They can choose to offer us something that no other company offers it's players - social interaction within a storyline that is compelling and interesting - or they can continue to water the concept down untill it's nothing and they're just like everyone else out there. Their choice.

Just like it's my choice to purchase or not.

By the time the thread gets this long I always manage to find someone who said what I am thinking only better so here. Seconded.

[ImperatorMortis]

I'm indifferent, but I'm going to be different, and say no for no real reason.

[Cygnus x1]

It harms nothing, adds consequence to diologue, its fun? its RPG, Its adventure?
There are plenty of games whith out romance and no need worry about how you interact with companions.

DAO has done this very well, why remove it in DA3,especially if gaining affection unlocks skills or contributes to abilities.

And finaly you dont have to romance if you choose not to,But for those who consider it as part of a charactors story, adventure, companion relations and romance is actually fun?

[Cygnus x1]

they could just make dragon age mortal kombat 3.....there ya go
Why not dump the story and just button mash

[TamiBx]

wsandista wrote...

I would personally prefer if it was not included, how do the rest of you feel?

This would never happen. This is Bioware that we are talking about.

No romance in DA is like asking Skyrim to stop being a sand box game.  

[PsychoBlonde]

Cygnus x1 wrote...

they could just make dragon age mortal kombat 3.....there ya go
Why not dump the story and just button mash

And then they can make ANOTHER game which has no combat and is just a dating simulator.

[Rorschachinstein]

My guy has to get the lady.

Modifié par Rorschachinstein, 15 septembre 2012 - 06:07 .

[Fredward]

Rorschachinstein wrote...

My guy has to get the lady.

And sometimes the guy has to get the guy and sometimes the lady needs to get the lady. But I get your point. xp

[General User]

It's an interesting idea to consider. But when romances are done right (like in Origins) I think that they really add something to the game. Replayability not least.

Though in fairness, after DA2's ridiculous "I don't care about anything else, you clicked the 'heart' icon so I love you forever" system, I can see how one might have a negative outlook for romances in general in future Dragon Age games.  But they have done it right in the past.

Bottomline: future DA romances should be complex but ancillary.

Modifié par General User, 15 septembre 2012 - 06:30 .

[General User]

Plaintiff wrote...

Hervoyl wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...


None of those things are unique to Bioware. Gay romances, however, are. Bioware is literally the only game company, at least in the West, that offers players the opportunity to develop a homosexual relationship in the game.

What about Obsidian/ Bethesda?

I think you meant to quote me, there.

What about them? I wouldn't call anything in Skyrim a "relationship" by any stretch of the imagination. The entire population of Skyrim has less life in it than a single DA2 party member. You might as well say that one can develop a relationship with a cardboard cutout, or a blow-up doll. There's no real interaction to be had, the NPC you marry never diverts from their four-five lines of pre-written dialogue, their character is never expanded, there is nothing new to learn about them.

As for Obsidian, I assume you refer to Fallout: New Vegas? I own it, but haven't yet begun to play. I understand that it's possible to get a perk that allows you to unlock special dialogue options with members of the same sex, but I doubt that anything you do in that game leads to anything that could be considered a 'relationship'. Companions might be more developed than those in Skyrim or Fallout 3, but that's not exactly a high bar to clear.

In terms of romance, the vanilla New Vegas doesn't really go too far beyond some casual flirting and a few (or more than a few, depending on how you play)  one night stands and/or hookers (though the 'Willow' add-on changes that... and how!).  That being said, I found the companions and many other characters in New Vegas to be rich and compelling. 

Granted that's more a tribute to the creative team behind New Vegas than any direct effect from not having the option for a romance with any of them, but still, it's a case-in-point for how a game can have a fine set of companions and other main characters without any of them being really "romancable".

Modifié par General User, 15 septembre 2012 - 07:03 .

[Dominus]

I would personally prefer if it was not included, how do the rest of you feel?

I feel that regardless of my opinion, that's one aspect of Dragon Age that isn't going to be thrown in the trash bin. I rarely enjoy romances of either DA or ME, but I don't see it dissapearing.

[Plaintiff]

General User wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Hervoyl wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...


None of those things are unique to Bioware. Gay romances, however, are. Bioware is literally the only game company, at least in the West, that offers players the opportunity to develop a homosexual relationship in the game.

What about Obsidian/ Bethesda?

I think you meant to quote me, there.

What about them? I wouldn't call anything in Skyrim a "relationship" by any stretch of the imagination. The entire population of Skyrim has less life in it than a single DA2 party member. You might as well say that one can develop a relationship with a cardboard cutout, or a blow-up doll. There's no real interaction to be had, the NPC you marry never diverts from their four-five lines of pre-written dialogue, their character is never expanded, there is nothing new to learn about them.

As for Obsidian, I assume you refer to Fallout: New Vegas? I own it, but haven't yet begun to play. I understand that it's possible to get a perk that allows you to unlock special dialogue options with members of the same sex, but I doubt that anything you do in that game leads to anything that could be considered a 'relationship'. Companions might be more developed than those in Skyrim or Fallout 3, but that's not exactly a high bar to clear.

In terms of romance, the vanilla New Vegas doesn't really go too far beyond some casual flirting and a few (or more than a few, depending on how you play)  one night stands and/or hookers (though the 'Willow' add-on changes that... and how!).  That being said, I found the companions and many other characters in New Vegas to be rich and compelling. 

Granted that's more a tribute to the creative team behind New Vegas than any direct effect from not having the option for a romance with any of them, but still, it's a case-in-point for how a game can have a fine set of companions and other main characters without any of them being really "romancable".

I play on console, so if 'Willow' is a mod and not standard DLC, I think I'll have to miss out.

I know romance isn't necessary for character development, very few games have it, after all. My objection to the removal of romance is not a question of whether the characters would be more or less shallow as a result. Sexuality and romance are dimensions of character, but I do not require that a game explore every single facet of a character's life.

My motivation for including varied romances in future Bioware games is because I want to see better representation of sexual minorities in all media, and better representation of same-sex relationships is implicit in that. Having a gay character means nothing if their sexuality is never explored or acted on.

If there were a lot of other companies doing what Bioware does, or something similar, then I wouldn't care so much, but there aren't.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

I loved the NPC's in New Vegas. They were a huge improvement over Fallout 3 thanks to Obsidian. There was never any 'romance' in Fallout 3 or New Vegas. The games weren't about that and more importantly, did not need it.

Origins is very similar even if it does allow romance. You don't have to romance anyone and you still get a lot of dialogue and feel satisfied with the characters. Romance doesn't feel 'required' to unlock a character's true potential or extra dialogue, unlike like the Mass Effect games.