12496 réponses à ce sujet

[AresKeith]

So in a game with companion romances, I can't understand the appeal of making two more romances out of NPCs. 

 

Some people just like the idea of having a romance with someone not in your party

[wright1978]

I do hope you get what you want (bisexual Sera I take it?).
 
But then I hope those that want bisexual Cassandra get that option too.
 
AAAAAAAAAAA WHY CAN'T IT BE LIKE DA2??

Indeed why can't it be like da2 is certainly my refrain. Sigh

[Grieving Natashina]

Don't get me wrong, I am almost certain that we will have gay and straight romance options and a gay companion, I'm just saying "the devs have confirmed homosexual LI's" isn't technically true as of yet and could mislead people.

 

Gay = homosexual.  Gay romance = homosexual romance.  They've even said that they aren't going to make the gay and lesbian romances available as bisexual. There will be bisexual(s) and gay people.  Therefore, homosexual LIs will be in the game.  The chances are good that at least one of them is a party member as well.  I take this as more of a sign that while homosexual relationships are confirmed, it doesn't mean that they will be party members.

 

Considering it just said right there that there is going to be homosexual characters, right after they were talking about romance systems, I think that's confirmed.  Also, he said, "wasn't talking numbers yet," and the numbers question isn't a factor in a blog post about romances unless you're talking about romances.  I think it would be silly to assume otherwise.  Besides, after both Allen and David talking at length about reactions from the LGBTQ community in cons over the years, it makes it very easy to believe that they consider not just having a gay party member, but a gay romance to be very important.  

[jlb524]

Some people just like the idea of having a romance with someone not in your party

 

Don't use the romance companion in your party?

[Grieving Natashina]

Some people just like the idea of having a romance with someone not in your party

Why though?  If you do, can you explain it?  I'm not saying that those folks that enjoy NPC romances are wrong, but I am wondering: What is the appeal of them?  I know why some (including myself) are against them, but why would anyone seek NPC romances out?  

 

I'm not saying that to be mean or sarcastic, I genuinely don't understand why someone would want that over a party member.

[Ryzaki]

I think it's the whole having someone to come back to aspect.

 

My only issue is for that to be done well you'd need just as many resources as a companion (hell you'd probably need more) and it would somewhat canonize said romance and I really don't see the devs doing that.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

I just don't think that Mark Darrah and David Gaider would both bring up gay, straight and bi "characters" in two difference discussions specifically about the romance system like this without making it clear that they didn't mean those characters weren't necessarily romances. I can't understand how you could take it any other way, in context, especially the original tweet. To me, it seems like confirmation. Until I get confirmation that it's not what they meant, that's what I'm going to think it meant, because I can't understand how it could be taken differently. 

[AresKeith]

Don't use the romance companion in your party?

 

You'll still be romancing someone in your party (companion party)

 

Why though?  If you do, can you explain it?  I'm not saying that those folks that enjoy NPC romances are wrong, but I am wondering: What is the appeal of them?  I know why some (including myself) are against them, but why would anyone seek NPC romances out?  

 

I'm not saying that to be mean or sarcastic, I genuinely don't understand why someone would want that over a party member.

 

I don't really know how to explain it tbh, only that it can be just as enjoyable as a companion romance if done well

[Grieving Natashina]

I think it's the whole having someone to come back to aspect.

 

My only issue is for that to be done well you'd need just as many resources as a companion (hell you'd probably need more) and it would somewhat canonize said romance and I really don't see the devs doing that.

How would a NPC romance end up cannon? 

 

 

You'll still be romancing someone in your party (companion party)

 

They aren't in my party though.  They are advisers to me and my party.  They don't kill with me, have banter with other companions often, are present (if I choose) at every quest dialogue option.  That isn't a party member to me, that's a side character.

 

I don't really know how to explain it tbh, only that it can be just as enjoyable as a companion romance if done well

 

 

Would anyone be willing to try to explain this, then?  I'm trying to remain open to the idea, but I need some reason why it's appealing at all.

[jlb524]

You'll still be romancing someone in your party (companion party)

 

 

If you never use them, they are never in your party.

 

You can always leave Cassandra at a Keep, let's say she always has super important business to take care of and can't travel with you.  She's always there waiting for you at 'home' with loving cookies she baked for you.  

 

I see there is room for flexibility with these type of romances...you can always take them with you so you can both be BAMFs fighting evil together or you can just leave them so you have someone to 'come home to'.

 

This cannot exist with NPC romance characters though...I can't take them with me...they can't be BAMFs fighting alongside me.  I'll miss out on the feeling of bonding that brings...I miss out on party banter and quest interjections.

[Ryzaki]

How would a NPC romance end up cannon? 

 

I didn't say completely canon. It'd just to me be somewhat canonizing because it'd feel like an expected route to go down. To me anyway for them to be on the same lvl as a companion you'd have had to have lots of interaction, along with a history with them (to even out the whole companion going traveling with you thing) and their development would be mostly related to them (unless you meet their family or something) where's companions can get their characterization in quests and banters and they don't know the player before he/she meets them. 

 

But that's just for me. I don't really buy a NPC romance as quickly as a companion one. At least with the latter I can say the whole fighting together and saving each others lives had them get closer. ME got more leeway with this because the banter was really limited and you ALWAYS went back to the Normandy after a mission. (That and you were in radio contact with the Normandy/Joker most of the time).

[Grieving Natashina]

 

If you never use them, they are never in your party.

 

You can always leave Cassandra at a Keep, let's say she always has super important business to take care of and can't travel with you.  She's always there waiting for you at 'home' with loving cookies she baked for you.  

 

I see there is room for flexibility with these type of romances...you can always take them with you so you can both be BAMFs fighting evil together or you can just leave them so you have someone to 'come home to'.

 

This cannot exist with NPC romance characters though...I can't take them with me...they can't be BAMFs fighting alongside me.  I'll miss out on the feeling of bonding that brings...I miss out on party banter and quest interjections.

That's also why this isn't just about NPC romances, it's about trying to care about the NPC as friends as much as I do my party.  They've talked about relationships being more than romance for this game and I support that.  However, even to be a friend with someone, that flavor that only comes from companion/party interaction seals the deal as to whether or not I give a crap about a character.  

[Grieving Natashina]

I didn't say completely canon. It'd just to me be somewhat canonizing because it'd feel like an expected route to go down. To me anyway for them to be on the same lvl as a companion you'd have had to have lots of interaction, along with a history with them and their development would be mostly related to them (unless you meet their family or something) where's companions can get their characterization in quests and banters and they don't know the player before he/she meets them. 

 

But that's just for me. I don't really buy a NPC romance as quickly as a companion one. At least with the latter I can say the whole fighting together and saving each others lives had them get closer.

Fair enough and I fully agree on your second point.  

[AresKeith]

If you never use them, they are never in your party.

 

You can always leave Cassandra at a Keep, let's say she always has super important business to take care of and can't travel with you.  She's always there waiting for you at 'home' with loving cookies she baked for you.  

 

I see there is room for flexibility with these type of romances...you can always take them with you so you can both be BAMFs fighting evil together or you can just leave them so you have someone to 'come home to'.

 

This cannot exist with NPC romance characters though...I can't take them with me...they can't be BAMFs fighting alongside me.  I'll miss out on the feeling of bonding that brings...I miss out on party banter and quest interjections.

 

For people who like NPC romances, things like the bolded part doesn't matter all that much to them

 

There's also the possibility that NPCs like Cullen could possibly be a temp companion for something

 

Take Kelly, Sam, and Cortez people cared about them as much as the companions

[Grieving Natashina]

 

 

Take Kelly, Sam, and Cortez people cared about them as much as the companions

Okay, please bare in mind that this is someone that has only gone by forum reaction but...

 

I've rarely heard of Kelly or Sam being talked about by ME fans on the Dragon Age forums.  Cortez I'll grant you (other than the whole "why did you make the only gay male romance a NPC" stance.)  I do hear about the various companions (aka party members) from ME a lot more though.  A lot more than I hear about Kelly or Sam.

 

It still doesn't explain the appeal of why that would somehow be as good to a player as a companion romance, and I'm hoping that someone that's a fan of NPC romances can explain this to me.  I know you can't put it into words Keith, but I'm hoping that someone can.

 

For myself, it's really hard for me to have the same level of emotional investment in a NPC versus a party member and all the wonderful flavor text that comes with it.

[Ryzaki]

Fair enough and I fully agree on your second point.  

 

D: mai edit. I need to type quicker but yeah.

 

Maybe BW will pleasantly surprise me with the NPC romances. I don't have my hopes high though. (I fully admit I'd be more willing to give this the benefit of the doubt if we were getting npc romances in addition to 4 all bi).

[jlb524]

For people who like NPC romances, things like the bolded part doesn't matter all that much to them

 

There's also the possibility that NPCs like Cullen could possibly be a temp companion for something

 

Take Kelly, Sam, and Cortez people cared about them as much as the companions

 

I understand they don't care about the bold-faced part.

 

So they can choose not to use the companion romance option in their party.

 

I do care about the bold-faced part and npc romances completely take that away.

[Nocte ad Mortem]

Take Kelly, Sam, and Cortez people cared about them as much as the companions

It's always seemed to me that more people didn't than did. 

[Grieving Natashina]

It's always seemed to me that more people didn't than did. 

That's why my initial reaction to Sam and Kelly was, "Who?"

[AresKeith]

Okay, please bare in mind that this is someone that has only gone by forum reaction but...

 

I've rarely heard of Kelly or Sam being talked about by ME fans on the Dragon Age forums.  Cortez I'll grant you (other than the whole "why did you make the only gay male romance a NPC" stance.)  I do hear about the various companions (aka party members) from ME a lot more though.  A lot more than I hear about Kelly or Sam.

 

It still doesn't explain the appeal of why that would somehow be as good to a player as a companion romance, and I'm hoping that someone that's a fan of NPC romances can explain this to me.  I know you can't put it into words Keith, but I'm hoping that someone can.

 

For myself, it's really hard for me to have the same level of emotional investment in a NPC versus a party member and all the wonderful flavor text that comes with it.

 

I understand they don't care about the bold-faced part.

 

So they can choose not to use the companion romance option in their party.

 

I do care about the bold-faced part and npc romances completely take that away.

 

And I understand that, but this all pretty much goes to the fact that Bioware can't please everyone so some people are gonna have to be disappointed

 

 

It's always seemed to me that more people didn't than did. 

 

Still doesn't change that some people did 

[Ianamus]

 

Gay = homosexual.  Gay romance = homosexual romance.  They've even said that they aren't going to make the gay and lesbian romances available as bisexual. There will be bisexual(s) and gay people.  Therefore, homosexual LIs will be in the game.  The chances are good that at least one of them is a party member as well.  I take this as more of a sign that while homosexual relationships are confirmed, it doesn't mean that they will be party members.

 

Considering it just said right there that there is going to be homosexual characters, right after they were talking about romance systems, I think that's confirmed.  Also, he said, "wasn't talking numbers yet," and the numbers question isn't a factor in a blog post about romances unless you're talking about romances.  I think it would be silly to assume otherwise.  Besides, after both Allen and David talking at length at reactions from the LGBTQ community in cons over the years, it makes it very easy to believe that they consider not just having a gay party member, but a gay romance to be very important.  

 

Again, I have almost no doubt that there will be at this stage, but It's not confirmed until the dev's outright say it is, which they have not. 

 

Also, with regard to the other debate going on: for what it's worth I found Samantha a far more interesting character, remember her more and interacted with her more than James Vega, who I didn't care for at all. Conversely, Steve bored the hell out of me and died because I never spoke to him, but I did really like Samantha. 

 

Obviously I didn't romance either of them, but it shows that NPC's can be far more compelling to people than companions if they like them enough and you speak to them enough. 

[Nocte ad Mortem]

That's why my initial reaction to Sam and Kelly was, "Who?"

I don't honestly think there are many more fans for Cortez than for Sam. I haven't really noticed, if there are. There'd probably be even less if he wasn't one of only two m/m choices in the whole game series. I've always seen a very strong slant towards Kaidan for m/m relationships, though. It doesn't seem like their fanbases are particularly comparable, to me.    

[duckley]

It will be interesting to see the quality (or lack thereof) NCP romances in DAI. I am assuming they will be on the lousy/shallow side, but I do hope I am wrong.

[jlb524]

However, even to be a friend with someone, that flavor that only comes from companion/party interaction seals the deal as to whether or not I give a crap about a character.  

 

 

Oh yeah, I think a lot of the good character development with companions comes from banter with other companions. It's nice to see them interact with someone other than the PC on a personal level (for good or ill).

 

As for the adviser characters, I'm less worried about Leliana or Cullen as they are returning characters and we (the fans) go into the game with an emotional connection to them already.  This 'Scribe Girl' is brand new and it will be harder to build emotional attachment to her as an NPC.

[renfrees]

What's funny to me about that is that I didn't know that straight ladies had a NPC romance until very recently, and I played the crap out of that game.  He was very easy to overlook and even David said that among the ladies he "hit a flat line."  Plus, NPC romances were the only kind available in NWN and SotU.  It wasn't until Hordes that there was a companion to romance.  

 

So in a game with companion romances, I can't understand the appeal of making two more romances out of NPCs. 

Some might want a romance outside of "work", but then advisers are very much involved in our work. Perhaps even more so, than companions.