Right, I'm dense for using logic and reason and you are obviously very bright for not doing so. Again, you reiterate the point about how it's good because you think it is. You give no reasons for why the romance mechanic should be included or why my critique of them is wrong.
I literally have no idea what you are asking for from him. Like, no idea. What do you expect him to say outside of "I like it for these reasons". There's no empirical, objective proof that it should be included or not.
I literally have no idea what you are asking for from him. Like, no idea. What do you expect him to say outside of "I like it for these reasons". There's no empirical, objective proof that it should be included or not.
Well, then read it again. I don't think I'm capable of making my point any clearer.
Right, and I believe I was fishing for reasons. I like it because I like it because I like it is no more satisfying to me than I know it because I know it.
I gave reasons. Romance stories provide a type of narrative that I can find generally enjoyable and satisfying. So do fantasy and superhero stories. I love stories, and romance content in these games is extra stories inside of stories. It's also usually fueled by emotions and bonds between characters, which I find appealing for specific reasons, sentimental sap that I am. I can provide specific examples. I love how I could watch Kaidan could slowly unfold and open up to Shepard, and I love how I could observe Miranda do the same in the second game. Garrus' dance scene in the citadel DLC charmed me. All of these situations could potentially be tender and revealing about the character. It's a different way to explore a character's personality, which is a big motivation for me. I can keep listing examples of things that I like, but in the end the answer will just amount to my emotional involvement in the story.
I understand that those emotion driven reasons might not be good enough for you, but I'm not trying to convince you to like content, so I'm not going to worry myself to death over not convincing you of some objective value in the stories that I subjectively like.
I literally have no idea what you are asking for from him. Like, no idea. What do you expect him to say outside of "I like it for these reasons". There's no empirical, objective proof that it should be included or not.
What's your favorite color? Red? What the heck is this, you can't just like red because it exists. Have a chart on my desk that logically proves the color red deserves to be liked by the end of the day.
It'd be one thing if Bioware actually tried to make the romance mechanic feel natural, or at the very least try to improve it in some way, but they don't. The entire mechanic is so contrived and unbelievable. Characters will literally fall in love with you just because you picked the heart-shaped icon or gave them enough gifts. Do you not see how ridiculous and silly the whole thing is?
This is why they should focus on a few romances and work on having them evolve over the course of the game and tying them into the story.
For example the only DA:I romances could have been Cass and Solas, they would both be bi so everyone is included 
, and if people think Cass is a ****** or Solas is dishonest, well, deal with it.
These games are not dating sims and there is plenty of other stuff to do in them.
I gave reasons. Romance stories provide a type of narrative that I can find generally enjoyable and satisfying. So do fantasy and superhero stories. I love stories, and romance content in these games is extra stories inside of stories. It's also usually fueled by emotions and bonds between characters, which I find appealing for specific reasons, sentimental sap that I am. I can provide specific examples. I love how I could watch Kaidan could slowly unfold and open up to Shepard, and I love how I could observe Miranda do the same in the second game. Garrus' dance scene in the citadel DLC charmed me. All of these situations could potentially be tender and revealing about the character. It's a different way to explore a character's personality, which is a big motivation for me. I can keep listing examples of things that I like, but in the end the answer will just amount to my emotional involvement in the story.
I understand that those emotion driven reasons might not be good enough for you, but I'm not trying to convince you to like content, so I'm not going to worry myself to death over not convincing you of some objective value in the stories that I subjectively like.
Fair enough. It was probably my fault since I used the word excuses rather than reasons when trying to understand your reply. One more question. Do you find the romance mechanic as it exists now with all of it's flaws to be a hindrance on your enjoyment of them, or are the quality of the writing and different stages of romance irrelevant for you? Will any romance mechanic be satisfactory for you?
Fair enough. It was probably my fault since I used the word excuses rather than reasons when trying to understand your reply. One more question. Do you find the romance mechanic as it exists now with all of it's flaws to be a hindrance on your enjoyment of them, or does the quality of the writing and different stages of romance irrelevant for you?
For my part, I agree with what Lady Art wrote above. My issues with the execution of the romance subplots aren't necessarily with the writing, which I think has gotten better with each game. My main beef are implausible matches and gamey approval/disapproval systems. Since the relationships I pursue aren't implausible for the characters involved (I purposely would not romance Morrigan as a putz, for example), they don't really apply. It involves metagaming, which isn't ideal, and some headcanoning, which I don't really mind. So my real issues with it exist on the periphery, but they don't actively hinder my enjoyment. It would be nice if they could find away to more seamlessly integrate them into the plot across the board. I hope they get there.
No seriously, I don't understand you. You want to know why he likes the romance feature, but when he does explain, you tell him that he didn't answer you. Even though he did. He explained why he thinks it should be in the game. It's one thing to disagree with him. It's a totally different thing to try to Jedi Mind Trick him that he didn't answer your question when he clearly did.
What kind of 'evidence' are you looking for outside of people's opinion?
He never explained why he thought my critique of the romance mechanic was wrong but still proceeded to say I was wrong anyway. You can't just say someone is wrong without explaining why they are wrong. If you go back to the previous page you will see that I put forth an argument critiquing Bioware's romance model, which was met with him quoting me saying that I was wrong and giving no reasons why, outside of him having an enjoyable experience with it in KOTOR. Which is just a personal experience he had and does nothing to contradict my argument.
I'm serious this time, I literally cannot make it any clearer.
I demand a hot buff soldier in a tight form-fitting military uniform for m/m romance.
Every good movie has a romance. Romance is a must. Preferably something dramatic.
Yeah.... no. Maybe every crappy Hollywood movie has a "romance", something they cram in there so they can check the box for sex appeal or whatever. Nowadays even action movies have a romance subplot, probably in a misguided attempt to appeal to the female demographic or to pander to the macho self image of men. This is not good cinema though and rarely good story telling.
The same is true for BioWare games. Long ago you had to work hard to win your love over, to make them fall in love with you. Bastila needed a long time to warm up to you, to get to understand you... and all that drama fed into the main story. You didn't have to romance her but if you did, then the game offered you some more options for the endgame. BG2 had Aerie and Jaheira, neither of which were falling for you quickly... and you had ample opportunity to screw up either relationship by going too quickly or being insensitive.
These days? You get three conversations right, maybe do a quick side quest and boom! Sex scene!
Don't get me wrong, I like romances... but what we have here often amounts to a booty call. There's not much intimacy or friendship or mutual respect. Looking at you, DA:I.
ME3 had some flaws but it did get the romances mostly right because someone like Tali got to know you better over the course of three games before things became really serious.
I hope BioWare will dial back a bit on romances. None would be too extreme but we don't need a dozen either. They should be important for character development, have an impact on the story and require some effort. Otherwise it would just feel cheap.
Just gonna say my piece here:
Not read too much of this thread partly because I'm tired & am about to go to bed, but still, my thoughts are this: romance options in the game are a great way to build character, to see a different side of the game & cast, as well as to immerse yourself in it a bit more & to those that are saying to remove them, why? Who is forcing you to pursue a character romance? It's an option for the customizeable narrative that bioware has adopted, if you don't want a romance, do go for one.
As for the volume of romance options, I'd like to see no more than 6, m&f straight, gay & bi, just to account for all tastes.
Ok, that's my thoughts on the subject out there, I'm off to bed.
It would appear that I have been deemed "abusive." I'm always learning new things about myself.
This is why they should focus on a few romances and work on having them evolve over the course of the game and tying them into the story.
For example the only DA:I romances could have been Cass and Solas, they would both be bi so everyone is included
These games are not dating sims and there is plenty of other stuff to do in them.
this is my case and point...
headcanon like a mofo...just to appease the LGBT gamers...
Romances is a nasty affair and rarely ever truly satisfies the fan base.
Like the title says...Don't do romances, Bioware. Use that effort that you would put into romance sub plots into some interesting side missions that will affect the campaign in some way.
Remember: Appeasement never works, Bioware. Build the game yall want it to be not how your so-called "fans" want it. Always remember the small minority of gamers that tolerated the endings while a vast majority of gamers filed (like one "fan" filed a FTC complaint) and posted numerous youtube videos just crapping all over Bioware which (I suspect) some of these gamers that are already making demands are most likely those that trashed you before. Appeasement never works.
I am fine with romances. What is wrong with them?
<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
There is a limited word budget assigned to each character. Remove romances and those saved words can go to the developmet of a more indepth character/story or subplot(s).
<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
There is a limited word budget assigned to each character. Remove romances and those saved words can go to the developmet of a more indepth character/story or subplot(s).
I don't really see a basis for this argument. A character that's written to be inaccessible by the player as a love interest might not necessarily have more to say just because the lack of romance-specific dialogue frees up the word budget. Plot relevant dialogue and insight into their own character may be exactly the same with or without the bonus material.
Right, I'm dense for using logic and reason and you are obviously very bright for not doing so. Again, you reiterate the point about how it's good because you think it is. You give no reasons for why the romance mechanic should be included or why my critique of them is wrong.
Actually, I gave you one very simple, very clear reason, that has a lot of implications beyond "it's good because I think it's good." And I gave it to you twice. And somehow you still don't get it.
I'm going to bow out of this. It's become clear to me that I have once again risen to trollbait.
<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
There is a limited word budget assigned to each character. Remove romances and those saved words can go to the developmet of a more indepth character/story or subplot(s).
That assumes the word budget is a general resource, rather than divided by subset. The removal of romance might not mean more content; it might just mean no romance content, with the "romance" word budget cut entirely.
I don't really see a basis for this argument. A character that's written to be inaccessible by the player as a love interest might not necessarily have more to say just because the lack of romance-specific dialogue frees up the word budget. Plot relevant dialogue and insight into their own character may be exactly the same with or without the bonus material.
From what I've read from the developers, that sounds about right. The idea that romances somehow impede friendship dialogue is off-base. The writers are very careful to make sure that the dialogue for the romance arcs doesn't trump the dialogue and story for the rest of the companions. They've had a few missteps (like Jack, imho,) but overall they've done a good job of making sure that the romances doesn't hog other content. I also have seen, judging from DG's old blog, that they prioritize the rest of the character first. They write them out and create their personalities, background, story and reasons for being a part of the the team. This includes their sexualities. Then, they look at the character and see if it would make a good romance without taking away from the story and dialogue for the rest of the character.
I mentioned this in another thread, but DG has stressed in the past that BioWare is under zero obligation to write these romances. They aren't forced to do this; there isn't anything in their contracts stating that they must have romances. DG was asked, I think last year at GaymerX, if BioWare was going to always do romances in all of their games. He said that when it comes to opening the "Pandora's Box of Romance Content*," it's not an automatic given that the game will include romance options. It really depended upon the content of the story and how it would flow in the game.
It's also quite telling to me that not all BioWare writers have characters for romance. For example, one of my favorite BioWare writers is Mary Kirby. She wrote, among others, Varric and Vivienne. If you note her character history, she doesn't write player LI arcs. No one has forced her to do so, as it should be. She writes what she wants.
So, not only is the idea that BioWare forces romance is off base, the idea that they completely define any of their characters based on their romance arc is ludicrous.
I have to wonder who would complain the loudest if the BioWare devs removed romances altogether, or if they decided not to include it in the next IP DG is working on. I know I wouldn't care all that much, so long as the friendships and characterization of the companions were solid.
*One of my favorite comments from DG regarding the volatile nature when it comes to fans reactions to the romance arcs.*
This is why they should focus on a few romances and work on having them evolve over the course of the game and tying them into the story.
For example the only DA:I romances could have been Cass and Solas, they would both be bi so everyone is included
Since I had to mod my game to romance Solas this actually would've made me very happy 
At least they'd have to make the LI somewhat normal so s/he would appeal to all players. (whisper: no BDSM)
Since I had to mod my game to romance Solas this actually would've made me very happy
wait bdsm isnt normal.....****
Normally I would disagree with this thread in principal as I'm rather fond of romance story arcs in Bioware games. But as I have already seen several threads pop up complaining about both previous romance options and the potential romance options of a future game (a game which we know almost nothing about and for which no characters have been announced) I'm warming up to the idea of leaving this feature out.
What I'm really hoping for is that they just write the characters as best they can, make them as interesting as they usually do, make them gay/straight/trans/or whatever as it best fits said characters, make them potential LIs or not LIs as it best serves the story, and mostly ignore the cacophony of anger that is inevitably going follow any decision they make with regards to romance.
Romances will continue to be a thing and they will have a nice little checklist to make sure no one gets forgotten.
I identify as an apple. Will Bioware forget me when Romances are announced?
I identify as an apple. Will Bioware forget me when Romances are announced?
The pineapple will most likely be romanceable... if you want. The Banana is off limits though.
Fair enough. It was probably my fault since I used the word excuses rather than reasons when trying to understand your reply. One more question. Do you find the romance mechanic as it exists now with all of it's flaws to be a hindrance on your enjoyment of them, or are the quality of the writing and different stages of romance irrelevant for you? Will any romance mechanic be satisfactory for you?
Well, no, not any mechanic. But here's the tricky part: I don't know exactly what you mean when you say "the romance mechanic as it exists now" or what specifically you consider to be it's flaws. I apologize if you already explained that in this thread, which I haven't read in it's entirety.
I think that there have been differences in the romance mechanic in numerous Bioware games, and I think they've generally improved as Bioware has matured as a company. I don't like every romance arc that Bioware has done, and I think there will be the possibility of improvement for a long time to come.
That said, I'm not as severe about companions only romancing likeminded people as some are. I think people can believe in different things and still care about each other. I think characters doing so can make for some pleasant romantic tension and conflict.
I get that you don't like the way the romances are written, but clearly, I'm inclined judge them somewhat less harshly than you are.
Retour en haut