193 réponses à ce sujet

[Plaintiff]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

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.

Well you shouldn't be required to romance a character either, but having the opportunity is nice.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Plaintiff wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

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.

Well you shouldn't be required to romance a character either, but having the opportunity is nice.

That's fair. I'm not particularly fond of romance in games anymore, but I can understand why other people are.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 15 septembre 2012 - 08:41 .

[General User]

Plaintiff wrote...

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.

Ah!  There's the rub then.  While it certainly isn't inevitable by any means, I contend that when you use a creative work (video games included) to try and make a political or social point, there will be a marked tendency for other aspects of the game (in DAII's case that would be characterization) to suffer.  Not for the dreaded "lack of resources" so much as a shift in overall focus.

So for people like me for whom it very much is a question of whether the characters would be more or less shallow as a result, the idea of removing romances entirely is very much worth exploring.

[Plaintiff]

General User wrote...
Ah!  There's the rub then.  While it certainly isn't inevitable by any means, I contend that when you use a creative work (video games included) to try and make a political or social point, there will be a marked tendency for other aspects of the game (in DAII's case that would be characterization) to suffer.  Not for the dreaded "lack of resources" so much as a shift in overall focus.

So for people like me for whom it very much is a question of whether the characters would be more or less shallow as a result, the idea of removing romances entirely is very much worth exploring.

Well, in my ideal world, nobody would have a problem with gay protagonists/characters in action movies/video games. The mere act of inserting a gay character into a work like that ends up being a political or social point almost by default, regardless of creator intention, because people are going to make a fuss about it either way. Anders in DA2 was pretty controversial. A lot of people got ultra-butthurt about him, particularly the specific circumstance where he'll make a pass at a Male Hawke if Hawke doesn't flirt with him first. People said it made them uncomfortable, and on the complete opposite side of the spectrum, LGBT supporters somehow got it into their heads that Bioware was implying that all gay/bisexual men are predatory and/or ****s, because if you express any interest in sex at all, you're apparently a degenerate fiend, I guess. There was a whole internet petition about it and everything

I do also think that character depth needs to be kept into consideration. I play games primarily for story, so character development is important to me, regardless of sexuality.

I think romance aids character depth, or can. If the romance itself is shallow (and so many romances are) then it's not really helping. But I think Bioware does them really well, so that's not a problem for me. The trouble is that it's a delicate balance. Sexuality is a big issue in our world, and it informs so much of our lives, whether we realise it or not. There are so many pitfalls. If the character announces their sexuality but it's never acted on or explored in any way, then you just have tokenism. If the character's entire arc revolves around their sexuality, then that character is shallow and annoying, and also, it comes off as preachy.

Luckily, Bioware has very skilled writers. I don't know if I'd trust any other company to handle it with the same deft hand.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 15 septembre 2012 - 02:07 .

[Sylvanpyxie]

I have no problem with romances in theory. I have a problem with how they are currently being handled in development.

When a character has an optional romance available it's an excellent opportunity for a player to learn more about that character and connect with them on a deeper level. Very mushy, but some people like that. Some romances are more strained or complex than that, and those are less mushy but again, people like it.

Excellent to have, surely. ( Don't call me Shirley )

The problem I personally have is when romance becomes the only aspect of character expansion, and if you don't pursue that romance you learn little to nothing about them. Which is exactly what has been occurring with Bioware characters since Mass Effect, possibly even before that but I don't honestly remember.

A good example of this is the obvious - Mass Effect 2. A game that centered entirely around the crew on the Normandy, it had a large number of companions which were all unique in their own ways. They had their own distinct personalities and brilliant dialogue offered us multiple conversations on varying topics.

The problem is, in Mass Effect 2, with all these brilliant companions and multiple conversations, almost half the dialogue, and half of the character progression, is locked tightly behind a Romance Flag, and I personally do *not* believe that is acceptable.

Sure, there should be dialogue unique to a romanced character. But the majority of dialogue? The majority of character growth and evolution? The majority of progression?! No. Key character content should not be limited to a bloody Romance Flag.

There has to be limits to what is locked behind a Romance Flag. There has to be progression to a character *outside* of romance, there has to be dialogue that is rich and deep enough to allow anybody, not just the romanced players, to watch the characters to grow.

I have no problem with romantically involved players getting bonus content, it's entirely obvious that if an NPC falls in love they're going to behave differently and share more. But Bioware need to stop hiding the bulk of content behind Romance Flags.


Another big problem that I have with Bioware romances at the moment is complete lack of consequences.

In Dragon Age 2, with the friendship and rivalry system, it was always possible to romance someone, regardless of how much you pooped all over their beliefs. It works for some characters, sure, someone like Anders who is effectively clinging to some semblance of normality is going to cling to Hawke regardless, it's a part of his character. He has an obsessive nature in Dragon Age 2, it kind of fits.

The problem becomes evident when you're taking a strong, willful, independent character and ignoring all of their beliefs in order to maintain a romance with them. This is where I personally draw the line. A strong willed human being(or elf, dwarf, qunari) who is completely independent and capable should not be clinging to someone who is so completely against *everything* they believe in.

Friendships and romances with characters should carry some semblance of consequence. There should be a point where the character just stands up and says "You're wrong, this has to stop.". There has to be a breaking point, you can only push someone so far before they turn around and clop you one over the head.

Alistair in Dragon Age Origins would end a romance if you pushed him too far. He would just drop you like a stone, no second chances, no forgiveness. Romance over. Alistair was a bloody push over, trying desperately to deal with the fact that he was falling in love, and even *HE* would get shot of you if you screwed with him.

If a character like Alistair will drop you for going too far then stronger willed characters, who are more independent and stead-fast in their beliefs, should not be putting up with so much aggressive rivalry from someone and still try to get in their knickers.

It's like these strong personalities are just null and void when romance is in involved. It's like they're trying to shoe-horn all that willful energy and independence into a boot that just doesn't fit and all of it is for the sake of romance. These characters are capable and independent, but they're being given alter-egos that are just needy and clingy, forsaking all forms of consequence because Bioware want characters to be unlimited in their romantic availability.

This isn't even limited to romances, just characters in general. There has to be a point where you push an NPC too far and nothing you can do will fix it. Characters shouldn't just conform to the Player Character, their personalities shouldn't automatically U-Turn just because you've chosen to play as an Idiot or a Mage Loving Psychopath...

I mean, characters conforming to how you decide to play, regardless of their beliefs? Why bother giving them personalities at all? It's just all very silly, in my opinion.


Like I said at the start of this incredibly long rant - I have nothing against romances, but they should not be the the only thing that drives character progression and I don't think that characters should be bent or broken so that Bioware can forsake the entire concept of consequence.

There needs to be progression outside of romances and there has to be consequences for any negative actions that Players choose to take. (And that last one is not limited to romances alone)

Sorry, that was a rant, I salute anyone that managed to read all of this. All of this is entirely my opinion, obviously, and I don't expect anyone to agree with it, but i've voiced my concerns to the best of my ability, my apologies for the large number of words in this post.

Modifié par Sylvanpyxie, 15 septembre 2012 - 02:19 .

[Plaintiff]

Sylvanpyxie wrote...
*snip*

I agree that characters should be well-developed without romance, and I also agree that there should be romance-ending consequences to certain actions.

It's funny that you mentioned Anders in the context you did, because it is actually possible for him to definitively end the relationship under a very specific circumstance, even if you have him at full Friendship, and he's the only on in DA2 that does anything like that.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 15 septembre 2012 - 02:37 .

[Renmiri1]

I didn't get the feeling I needed to romance all my crew on ME2. Granted, I talked to them so much even Mordin thought I was flirting with him I must be the only ME player that ever got the Mordin "reject romance" prompt 

Modifié par Renmiri1, 15 septembre 2012 - 04:04 .

[mp911]

keep them in,

[Garrus94]

wsandista wrote...

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

That is like asking if DA3 should be made.  Really though just dont romance anyone if you dont like it.  That is actually one of the benefits of the wheel, ninja romances are gone.

[Raikas]

 

General User wrote...


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..

 
That’s a bit of an oversimplification of DA2’s system - the heart icon could pop up without the character being romanceable (Aveline, that one elf at the Dalish camp) or be superseded by other actions (flirt options for femHawke + Sebastian won’t lead to anything if she’s also flirting with other characters).
 

Plaintiff wrote...
Well, in my ideal world, nobody would have a problem with gay protagonists/characters in action movies/video games. The mere act of inserting a gay character into a work like that ends up being a political or social point almost by default...

 
For what it’s worth, I thought the flirt perks in New Vegas actually made more interesting social points than would have been done with actual romances.
 

Renmiri1 wrote...

I didn't get the feeling I needed to romance all my crew on ME2. Granted, I talked to them so much even Mordin thought I was flirting with him I must be the only ME player that ever got the Mordin "reject romance" prompt 

Heh, I loved that bit!    Honestly though I think the DA games did a better job of not hiding quite so much character behind the romances – ME2 had such limited conversations outside of the romance ones.

[wsandista]

Garrus94 wrote...

wsandista wrote...

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

That is like asking if DA3 should be made.  Really though just dont romance anyone if you dont like it.  That is actually one of the benefits of the wheel, ninja romances are gone.

Ah yes the wheel. Instead  of a companion mistaking kindness for sexual interest, I get to press the "heart" button and get laid, soooo much better. I hated that in DA2 and infinitely prefer the "ninjamance".

Judging by the last three BW games I have played(ME2, DA2, and ME3) DA3 romances will be "press the sex button and start the romance". No challenge, no chance of rejection, just a 'I win" button. If they could pull off romances like they did in DAO, then it would be great, but I'm a but cynical and expecting shallow characters who exist soley for fanservice (like Cullen).

[Get Magna Carter]

I say yes. They are expected and there will be complaints if not present.
Though I would be happy if they made it required more effort from the player to get them

[Wulfram]

You can't say there was any more "challenge" in DA:O romances. You pick the obvious flirt lines, give gifts and you were in luck. Maybe you miss a less obvious flirt line or two, but that was devoid of consequences for the romance you were pursuing.

Actually, the only DA romance I've "failed" was Fenris, since I never got sufficient friendship for the getting back together scene.

[Quyk Sylvyr]

I would be highly disappointed if Bioware did away with romance. Bioware games are the only games I've replayed multiple times, and I do it to see the different romances. Without romances? I'd probably end up buying the games when they eventually went on sale, but I wouldn't pre-order the games. Heck, I probably wouldn't care about the game enough to buy the DLCs.

The romances may sometimes feel hokey and silly, but it is by far my favorite part of the Bioware games. The first kiss scenes with both Fenris and Anders were probably my favorite parts in DA2.

[Welsh Inferno]

wsandista wrote...

Garrus94 wrote...

wsandista wrote...

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

That is like asking if DA3 should be made.  Really though just dont romance anyone if you dont like it.  That is actually one of the benefits of the wheel, ninja romances are gone.

Ah yes the wheel. Instead  of a companion mistaking kindness for sexual interest, I get to press the "heart" button and get laid, soooo much better. I hated that in DA2 and infinitely prefer the "ninjamance".

Judging by the last three BW games I have played(ME2, DA2, and ME3) DA3 romances will be "press the sex button and start the romance". No challenge, no chance of rejection, just a 'I win" button. If they could pull off romances like they did in DAO, then it would be great, but I'm a but cynical and expecting shallow characters who exist soley for fanservice (like Cullen).

As do I. The way it is in Origins is more true to life. More natural. People often mistake general kindness for sexual interest. Having an intsa-win button makes the whole thing pointless. I share your cynicism on romance in future games.

[babymoon]

Quyk Sylvyr wrote...

I would be highly disappointed if Bioware did away with romance. 

Agreed. It's a huge part of Bioware's games, and a large part of the reason why I get so sucked into their characters and games. You're never forced to romance anyone (right?) so I don't see what the big deal is.

[Lord Issa]

I've revised my position on this: I'm pro-romance, but I really do pray for a nice, Alistair-style romance in DA 3, preferably a female NPC this time. I miss normal female romances without mirror obsessions/oversexualization (I do love both chars, but I can't imagine romancing them personally) To be fair, Morrigan was a little crazy too-but she had the voice actor and writing to pull it off...

Modifié par Lord Issa, 16 septembre 2012 - 08:05 .

[Darth Death]

BioWare should implement a STD system, mimicking how they did injuries when players died.