228 réponses à ce sujet

[snackrat]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Erm, I'd say, if there's no sex involved (either currently or as an interest for later) then it's not a romance.  It's a friendship.  The sexual component is what makes it a romance.  Ergo, you can't have a romance without a physical component.  So if you're talking about the difference between a romance and other types of relationships (which you do have with your companions), then you are talking about the sexual component.
...

Rather than pick apart individual words in this and strawman it: the problem isn't that it is a present component, but a required component - and not just for the relationship ever (I have said, chaste romances are extremely rare in reality), but to ADVANCE it. This, combined with the PC either saying "yes sex right now" or "no, also let's break up immediately". At least in DA:O (which I am using as a positive example) the Warden can say "not now" or "I'm not ready" or "after the Blight" or similar.

PsychoBlonde wrote...
...So it
sounds like the complaint here is "I want to be able to reject them romantically AND romance them later".  Which is a spectacularly specific request that wouldn't make sense with most characters anyway and would require some fantastical writing contortions that probably wouldn't be worth the effort.

If this is what you are reading, then... wait, this is what you are reading? How? I've said turn down sex. Not turn down romance. Sex =/= romance, otherwise there'd be no such thing as 'courting'. I've said do not make sex an automatic requirement for the romance to become serious (rather than the flirty remark on occasion).

The problem isn't about the sex, at least not on its own. It is about the ultimatum - "sex nao or GTFO". I even mentioned a non-sexual example - Anders asking to move in. The game assumes you want to break it off if you refuse, rather than any of the other reasons I suggested (that said, this one makes sense as an ultimatum as a sign of trust. What doesn't is assuming it is because you are using him and want to dump him). It implies one must put out when asked or the romance isn't real or should be broken off. It's like "if you really loved me you'd do me" without using the words.

Modifié par Karsciyin, 13 décembre 2012 - 07:45 .

[Iakus]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Hypothetically how would the thread feel about a situation where the protagonist and the companion share their feelings for each other followed by a fade to black, with no explicit reference to sex following but among various interpretations you would be free to make as a player.

I'd prefer it.  We can all make our own assumptions of what happened, be it a night of passion or a lively chess match.

Plus, love scenes are always being derided as being to awkward, not edgy enough, poorly animated, or whatever.  This way, we can use our imagination and make the scene as hot as we want.  And Bioware saves some zots.

[Medhia Nox]

@PsychoBlonde: The thing is - people aren't necessarily saying: "NO SEX EVAR."

What they're expressing is - that in the insanely short span of exposure this content gets - three lines of dialogue and then sex seems extremely shallow.

Sometimes I wonder if the sex obsessed have more issues with sex than the people who are willing to sideline it.

Not to mention how laughable the sex scenes are.

====

I'm going to reference Kaidan.

After two games of having no ability to romance him... FINALLY going to out to eat with him, having some dialogue and then having sex felt FAR more like a real relationship to me.

It felt like became his friend first - then it transitioned into something deeper. I feel like I actually have to thank the ME team for forcing that - no matter how irritating it seemed at the time.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 13 décembre 2012 - 07:47 .

[Maria Caliban]

I liked the DA II sex scenes and would like more of the same. That said, I can understand wanting to pull those cinematic zots out and put them somewhere else in the relationship. Chris has indicated that the majority of players don't romance anyone, so it seems a non-trivial amount of effort for something many people won't see.

[NoForgiveness]

oh what if instead of a sex scene you could choose a cuddle scene?(it would of course be better then the little cuddle moment with Merrill where her neck looks funky and Hawke and Merrill are in the underwear even though they just had sex)

[Medhia Nox]

@Maria Caliban: Is that true? Most people don't do the romances? That's very interesting - and unexpected to hear.

[Wulfram]

I think part of the issue with the DA2 romances was that there really weren't many romance related scenes or conversations, and there were the 3 year gaps to contend with. Which meant the options were having sex right at the front of the relationship, or chastity for 7 years. And really the way some of the relationships worked, they'd need to be almost totally rewritten if they were to advance without sex - Merrill's romance dialogue from that point is based on the idea that she's moved in, Fenris' dialogue is rather heavily based on his reaction after - and that's probably a too large chunk of the word budget.

Modifié par Wulfram, 13 décembre 2012 - 07:54 .

[Quething]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Quething wrote...
DA2's sex scenes with Fenris and Isabela elegantly advanced characterization (so much so that many Isabela fans have complained it's clearly a Friendship scene and doesn't fit the Rival path)...

I wouldn't say that 'many' fans have. It's a complaint I've heard about three times.

Considering how many people are vocal Isabela fans on this forum, three is "many."

And I would agree with Xil on the "poor decision" verdict. Sex is an important part of a romantic relationship, and if it isn't, that very fact is itself important to understanding the relationship. Knowing as a writer that you've provided several options and the player might choose any one of them is fine, because you're still writing from a position where, for any given line, you know exactly what happened that caused that character to react that way. Deciding as a writer that you're just not going to decide what happened... it would be like having Wesley get blighted and then everybody just stares at each other and then POOF, we're in Kirkwall, and leaving the player to decide if they left him to die or he turned into a darkspawn and attacked everybody or Aveline killed him or Flemeth killed him or Hawke killed him or what. It would completely undermine any ability to have a meaningful dialog about it later, and considering how vital Wesley's death is obviously going to be to his wife, that would be a very bad call.

[snackrat]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Maria Caliban: Is that true? Most people don't do the romances? That's very interesting - and unexpected to hear.

Apparently most people also chose a male Cousland in DA:O (probably warrior), and most people didn't finish the game even once. I forget the exact number, but the first was close to 90%, the second definiately a chunk more than half.

This would be skewed by people turning off upload feedback, but I don't know to any significant degree. Perhaps our impressions of the games' player bases are misrepresented by their fan bases, particularly on BSN.

Modifié par Karsciyin, 13 décembre 2012 - 07:57 .

[snackrat]

Quething wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Quething wrote...
DA2's sex scenes with Fenris and Isabela elegantly advanced characterization (so much so that many Isabela fans have complained it's clearly a Friendship scene and doesn't fit the Rival path)...

I wouldn't say that 'many' fans have. It's a complaint I've heard about three times.

Considering how many people are vocal Isabela fans on this forum, three is "many."

And I would agree with Xil on the "poor decision" verdict. Sex is an important part of a romantic relationship, and if it isn't, that very fact is itself important to understanding the relationship. Knowing as a writer that you've provided several options and the player might choose any one of them is fine, because you're still writing from a position where, for any given line, you know exactly what happened that caused that character to react that way. Deciding as a writer that you're just not going to decide what happened... it would be like having Wesley get blighted and then everybody just stares at each other and then POOF, we're in Kirkwall, and leaving the player to decide if they left him to die or he turned into a darkspawn and attacked everybody or Aveline killed him or Flemeth killed him or Hawke killed him or what. It would completely undermine any ability to have a meaningful dialog about it later, and considering how vital Wesley's death is obviously going to be to his wife, that would be a very bad call.

Truth. As far as romance scenes go, I think it makes sense that those that support the scenes would want to continue getting them (quality notwithstanding). Those that do not particularly want them may - well, me anyway - accept the Fade to Black simply because that feels like the closest we'll ever get, and a compromise of sorts is to be expected.

[Iakus]

Karsciyin wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Maria Caliban: Is that true? Most people don't do the romances? That's very interesting - and unexpected to hear.

Apparently most people also chose a male warrior Cousland in DA:O, and most people didn't finish the game even once. I forget the exact number, but the first was close to 90%, the second definiately a chunk more than half.

This would be skewed by people turning off upload feedback, but I don't know to any significant degree. Perhaps our impressions of the games' player bases are misrepresented by their fan bases, particularly on BSN.

One of my four Wardens is a male warrior Cousland  

[hoorayforicecream]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Maria Caliban: Is that true? Most people don't do the romances? That's very interesting - and unexpected to hear.

It is true. If memory serves, in ME2 only ~20% of the players romanced anybody. Of those, ~40% romanced Miranda. Only 2% romanced Jacob.

[Bfler]

hoorayforicecream wrote...


. Of those, ~40% romanced Miranda. Only 2% romanced Jacob.

In case of Jacob 2% seems a bit high, if you consider, that there are hardly any people who use him as squad member.

Modifié par Bfler, 13 décembre 2012 - 08:12 .

[mopotter]

schalafi wrote...

I wasn't going to touch this topic because I've seen so many of them descend into flamers, but I have an opinion about romance in rpgs, so I'll put in my 2 cents worth.
1. If you like the romance in the game then play it that way.
2. If you don't like romance in any game, then just ignore it.
3. If you don't like the way the romance is handled in a game then make your own game and do it your way, but don't expect the devs to change their take on romances because of your likes/dislikes. After all it's their game, and ultimately, their decisions.

I agree sort of.  

1) Yes agree
2) yes Agree
3) Sort of agree.  There will never be a perfect game or romance in a game unless i learn to make them myself. I agree with this and I know it will never happen, which is why I've always bought BW games before I've picked up any other one.  In the past they came closest to my vision of a rpg with great characters, dialogue and yes - romance.

However,  if they don't want suggestions, having a board like this is probably not a good idea.  Just make the game and then put up a board to talk about it.  

I hope they are making a game they want to play and any suggestions they take are suggestions they wish they had thought of, not just - ___ number of people made this suggestion so lets do it.  I think that would be a mistake.

One of my biggest hopes is dialogue throughout the game, a friendship path along with a romance path and a romantic sex scene for the LI whether it then goes to a black screen or a great ME1 scene is up to them, though I loved ME1's romance.  

On topic - if they added an option to say I love you, but lets wait till the fight is over and we have the rest of our life together to talk about this,  I wouldn't care. But I'd really like different options for different characters not all for one and one for all choices. <sigh> and I don't expect this.

[mopotter]

schalafi wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@schalafi: As for your #3 - I fully agree that Bioware should make the game they want - but isn't that one function of the boards? To receive opinion and feed back on what their consumers would like to see?

Of course - it's for them to disseminate between what they would like to put in... but if you don't speak your mind - they'll be operating in ignorance.

And creating video games sounds tremendously boring. 

I'm not saying it's wrong to speak your mind about any facet of a game, It's just that you have to be resigned to the fact that your, (and most everyone's) suggestions have been heard over and over for years. I find it amazing that any Bioware developer even comes on the forums to explain things, but that's what I like about these forums, and yes, I do think some suggestions are even adopted.

Then I misunderstood your post and apologize.  

[PsychoBlonde]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@PsychoBlonde: The thing is - people aren't necessarily saying: "NO SEX EVAR."

What they're expressing is - that in the insanely short span of exposure this content gets - three lines of dialogue and then sex seems extremely shallow.

Sometimes I wonder if the sex obsessed have more issues with sex than the people who are willing to sideline it.

Not to mention how laughable the sex scenes are.

I don't disagree that the sex scenes are often silly.  I don't really care if there's an animated scene as long as the conversation/cinematic/whatever is not so vague that you're not left wondering "um, did we have sex or not? Are we a Thing now?"

I don't disagree that I'd like there to be more content.  Are the romances too short?  Sure.  But I'd like more companion interaction across the board.  But, if they only have enough budget for X amount of content, will I still prefer to have romances in the game even if this isn't "enough" for some people to be comfortable developing a romance?  Sure.  The amount of content is generally determined by constraints other than "is this a sufficiently romantic romance", though.  So when you're talking about quantity there, you're not just specifically talking about romances.

The only fundamental distinguishing factor between whether or not a given relationship is a romance is whether or not there's sexual attraction or sex involved.  So the discussion is really kind of bizarre because either you fail at defining romance or you're asking for something IN ADDITION TO romance.  You want romance without sex being the defining part of it?  Well, if you're talking about romance vs. friendship, sex IS the defining part of it.  You want romances with more content so the sex doesn't stand out like a sore thumb?  Now you're requesting more content.  You find the sex scenes appalling?  Now you're asking for different content.  You want to be able to reject someone AND romance them later?  Now you're asking for spectacularly specific different content.

It's impossible to formulate a useful methodology to address this when you're asking for a number of very different things all at once.  Pick which one is the one you actually want instead of trying to package a bunch of semi-related but different things together.

[mopotter]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Hypothetically how would the thread feel about a situation where the protagonist and the companion share their feelings for each other followed by a fade to black, with no explicit reference to sex following but among various interpretations you would be free to make as a player.

 I can live with fade to black, but I really want ME1 romance again, at least for one or two of the LI.   Lights, music, atmosphere, the feeling that the LI and my character do care for one another,    I want some kind of reaction later confirming that LI and my character are in a physical relationship.  One of the favorite parts of ME3 was having Kaidan actually mention he spent the night in Shepards room.    

I don't think i would care for all relationships to be this vague.  One I could work with, but not all of them.

[Maria Caliban]

PsychoBlonde wrote...
The only fundamental distinguishing factor between whether or not a given relationship is a romance is whether or not there's sexual attraction or sex involved.  So the discussion is really kind of bizarre...

This is about as arbitrary as saying that sex only happens when a dude sticks his happy bit inside a woman's happy bit.

'Romance' means different things to different people. A person could have sex without romance or romance without sex, even if that's not something you can do.

[Sherbet Lemon]

Hmm, I wonder if the three-year skip should be taken into account?  The way I interpeted it (Act 2 affirmation of romance) as not a just physical relationship beginning the relationship, but three years worth of emotional engagement coming to a head.  Granted, that happens mostly off screen, but I think the three year skip allows the player to imagine a sort of repoire growing amongst the companions so that the physical act can be seen as the culmination of three years of "friendship."  Where as in Origins, you don't have the room to imagine that sort of connection, if that makes sense. 

But for those that want the sort of Origins style, I don't disagree or care one way or the other.  I was pretty happy in both games.  

[Medhia Nox]

@Maria Caliban: As is clearly shown when people call two digital characters pressing dialogue options a romance.

@Village Idiot: It "should" be - but I have to say, it's difficult and if it's meant to be conveyed in the story - then the developers might want to try harder. But this is true of the year leaps in general.

[jillabender]

Maria Caliban wrote...

'Romance' means different things to different people. A person could have sex without romance or romance without sex, even if that's not something you can do.

That's an excellent point – after all, there are people who have romantic relationships, but consider themselves asexual.

I admit that, personally, I would find it hard to imagine being in a romantic relationship without sexual attraction being involved, but that's certainly not the case for everyone.

Modifié par jillabender, 14 décembre 2012 - 12:20 .

[Todd23]

Maria Caliban wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...
The only fundamental distinguishing factor between whether or not a given relationship is a romance is whether or not there's sexual attraction or sex involved.  So the discussion is really kind of bizarre...

This is about as arbitrary as saying that sex only happens when a dude sticks his happy bit inside a woman's happy bit.

'Romance' means different things to different people. A person could have sex without romance or romance without sex, even if that's not something you can do.

I think when you romance someone (in the game) you should be doing both by the end of the game.  But I think which one you approach first should be up to you.  I hated how if you slept with Jack in ME2 you couldn't romance her.

[PsychoBlonde]

Maria Caliban wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...
The only fundamental distinguishing factor between whether or not a given relationship is a romance is whether or not there's sexual attraction or sex involved.  So the discussion is really kind of bizarre...

This is about as arbitrary as saying that sex only happens when a dude sticks his happy bit inside a woman's happy bit.

'Romance' means different things to different people. A person could have sex without romance or romance without sex, even if that's not something you can do.

If you "can" have romance without sex or sexual interest, either past, present, or future, then define the difference between romance and friendship.  It's not love--I love my friends, and my romantic partner, and (some of) my family members, and, heck, chocolate.  There is a difference, otherwise we'd use the same word for both of them.  So what is it, if it's not sex?

Either that, or admit that you don't consider the word to have ANY actual meaning, in which case I'm free to define them arbitrarily any way I want and you have no cause to complain.  If you do actually use the word to mean something else, tell me the way in which you DO use it.  If my definition isn't inclusive enough, proffer a better, more inclusive definition.  And if you can't do it, then why complain?

[upsettingshorts]

Emotional intimacy that goes beyond what one allows for with, or considers ideal among, friends.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 13 décembre 2012 - 09:22 .

[Iakus]

PsychoBlonde wrote...


If you "can" have romance without sex or sexual interest, either past, present, or future, then define the difference between romance and friendship.  It's not love--I love my friends, and my romantic partner, and (some of) my family members, and, heck, chocolate.  There is a difference, otherwise we'd use the same word for both of them.  So what is it, if it's not sex?

Either that, or admit that you don't consider the word to have ANY actual meaning, in which case I'm free to define them arbitrarily any way I want and you have no cause to complain.  If you do actually use the word to mean something else, tell me the way in which you DO use it.  If my definition isn't inclusive enough, proffer a better, more inclusive definition.  And if you can't do it, then why complain?

You realize that's a question philosophers and poets have been wrestling with since this newfangled "fire" thing was invented, right?