165 réponses à ce sujet

[The Night Haunter]

At  risk of being possibly lynched this is a question i have been curious about for awhile, has anyone ever wanted  Bioware to make a game and instead of all the writing etc they put in to romances, shift it all to main quest etc.


Basically remove romances in favor of a really  well done story, Nothing against  romances i just sometimes i feel they take away from what the story could  be.


 

Play KotOR and tell me that romance takes away from the story

 

The problem isn't romances, the problem is Bioware's efforts to make everything possible optional. Companions? Optional. Romance? Optional. Anything that is optional CANNOT be tied to the main story, and thus it is left flapping out in the wind feeling tacked on and/or completely separate from everything else.

 

KotOR is an example of what happens when you don't have a choice whether to recruit companions or not, they become an integral part of the story (Carth and Bastilla mostly, but Canderous and twilek girl have their moments). 

 

If Bioware stopped making everything imaginable optional and instead forced some things upon you (not romance of course, but companions and some plot decisions) then the narrative would be much more coherent and intriguing.

[Mr.House]

Little of topic but...

 

Bethesda's Head of Marketing, Pete Hines, clarified that you can only romance the human companions. New Fallout 4 details were revealed at a Quakecon-exclusive demo today. Up to 12 companions will be available to join players in the post-apocalyptic RPG. Players will also be able romance those companions, regardless of gender.

Which is a giant step back from the NV companions.

[Mr.House]

Play KotOR and tell me that romance takes away from the story

 

The problem isn't romances, the problem is Bioware's efforts to make everything possible optional. Companions? Optional. Romance? Optional. Anything that is optional CANNOT be tied to the main story, and thus it is left flapping out in the wind feeling tacked on and/or completely separate from everything else.

 

KotOR is an example of what happens when you don't have a choice whether to recruit companions or not, they become an integral part of the story (Carth and Bastilla mostly, but Canderous and twilek girl have their moments). 

 

If Bioware stopped making everything imaginable optional and instead forced some things upon you (not romance of course, but companions and some plot decisions) then the narrative would be much more coherent and intriguing.

And yet I can point to BG2 which shows optional is not bad at all, or even PT:S where companions play a massive role in the story and background, yet all optional and do no damage.

[Panda]

Skyrim level probably

 

So couple werewolf lovers and lot of beggars and miners? ^^;

 

I'm not really fond of what characters were chosen as LI's in Skyrim..

[straykat]

Good, good. FO4 doesn't need some sick ghoul-ish or furry **** to taint things. It's already silly as it is.

[Mr.House]

Good, good. FO4 doesn't need some sick ghoul-ish or furry **** to taint things. It's already silly as it is.

You can have sex with best robot in NV.

 

I'm also pretty sure you can have sex with the ghoul cowgirl too.

[rashie]

And the ending made absolutely no sense.  I played it twice.  I've heard someone fixed it so I downloaded it, but it freezes up on my computer but may try it again someday.  I enjoyed the idea of it and most of the story, but the ending was just too disjointed for my light sided jedi and I've heard it was just about as bad for the dark side.  

 

As much as I disliked ME3's ending, I understood them.  

You can blame Lucasarts for that, that's what happens when a dev cycle is cut short in order to meet a Christmas release. If they'd been given enough time to finish their game, the narrative might not have fallen apart as much towards Malachor V.

[Jeniva]

Why are some people so against romances even being in the game? You can avoid them if you want...so whats the dealio?!

[Mr.House]

Why are some people so against romances even being in the game? You can avoid them if you want...so whats the dealio?!

Because people seem to think romances are the reason Bioware has not made a good main story since JE.

[AutumnWitch]

You know I am probably one of the biggest Bioware romance cheerleaders out there (just look at my profile ) and I adore them in game and the romance in DAO is specifically why I got into video games at all. (Before that I had no interest in video games)

 

But oddly enough if I had to pick a favourite part of DA Games I would pick Awakening and that had no romance. Tho it did have an ending slide that referred to your LI from Origins.  

 

I think romances add a special flavour to BW games that make them unique and stand out from other games so I think a major game like ME:A without one would just not be "right". If that makes any sense.

[Jeniva]

Because people seem to think romances are the reason Bioware has not made a good main story since JE.

seriously?
I love all the DA games, and I've replayed and invested probably the most amount of time into Inquisition. 

[Hiemoth]

And yet I can point to BG2 which shows optional is not bad at all, or even PT:S where companions play a massive role in the story and background, yet all optional and do no damage.

 

Almost none of the BG2 characters impact the story or really play any role in it. I can only think of three companions that really have any kind of role in the larger story, as writing them in it would be sheer lunacy due to the optional part.

[Mr.House]

Almost none of the BG2 characters impact the story or really play any role in it. I can only think of three companions that really have any kind of role in the larger story, as writing them in it would be sheer lunacy due to the optional part.

The main story of BG2 was better then all of recent Bioware games, and the bulk of companions where optional. So no optional content does not mean the story will suffer. The story suffers because alot of Bioware writers outside a few are bad writers.

[Hiemoth]

The main story of BG2 was better then all of recent Bioware games, and the bulk of companions where optional. So no optional content does not mean the story will suffer. The story suffers because alot of Bioware writers outside a few are bad writers.

 

Even besides the point that arguing the BG2 story was better than anything Bioware has produced lately is a really subjective statement, I am not quite certain I understand your argument as BG2 would hurt a lot without that optional content. The main story in BG2 is insanely linear and without almost any twists of note. Just leaving the main content there would be pretty much a skeleton of a game.

[Display Name Owner]

My favourite playthrough of ME happened to have no romances, but I still do like having the option. For one thing it allows for another level of variation between playthroughs, but even in one where I don't pursue a romance it does give me the feeling that I've chosen to keep my character single, as opposed to them just being that way by default. Makes the character feel more like my own.

[wright1978]

That is plainly nonsense. In fact, closer to the exact opposite is true.
 
If a writer has nothing meaningful to say about a theme or idea, it should not be significantly present in the story.
 
As for the question, I have certainly enjoyed some of the romances, but I would hope the ME team is smart enough to understand and implement that 'feels' are not a substitute for competent writing, something that seems to have escaped the grasp of the DA team. As it is, the ME team has done a significantly better job with romances, so I'm willing to give them some benefit of the doubt.

Relationships are a fundamental of the human condition, that includes romantic ones. Struggle to see how you can write a good story excluding all forms of emotional relationship between characters.

[zestalyn]

Guh, I'll never understand you folks who want romance banished from Bioware. People have already stated the obvious reasons of why this is either a really bad idea or a moot suggestion (i.e. its apart of Bioware's trademark in character writing, adds further NPC interaction, customization of protagonists' personal story, further immersion, comparatively not resource heavy, etc etc.)

 

All I want to add to this conversation is how I find the romance system adds an extra realism for me. Like most heroes and heroines in general storytelling, our protagonist is assumed to be single. So lets be real. If you're single, you're going to be keeping your eyes open regardless of how busy or stressed your current circumstances render you. It's wholly in our nature to internally react to individuals we find either physically or sentimentally attractive, and whether we choose to act on it will always be in the air.

If we were talking about a video game that occurs strictly in a military space and over a relatively short amount of time, then I can understand why adding romance would be contrived and unnecessary. But Bioware storytelling always involves a larger, more dynamic space of living and longer spans of time stretched between a long series of both high and low intensity (think of all the time spent just traveling) activities that take at the very least several months, if not a whooole lot more. I find it hard to believe that someone who goes through sooo much and meets so many different people over sooo much time would spend all of those months/years having a completely nonexistent sex and/or love life, or all of that time not even flirting with a single soul. If you were strictly a soldier reporting on active duty during all of that, fine, but Bioware protagonists are not written to be in that sort of position, but rather someone calling their own shots and going their own way.

Imagine if DA2 had no romance system. Poor Hawke spent all of those 5+ years on a dry spell. Either that, or 5 years spent on paying prostitutes or fruitless one night stands. Since it's Bioware, we are obviously included in Hawke's immediate social life (via companion interaction), but with no romance system, he/she just somehow completely failed in being romantically involved. Just no lol. That is a character I would find very hard to relate to.

[mopotter]

Because people seem to think romances are the reason Bioware has not made a good main story since JE.

JE had great romances.  Great characters and story.   But then I enjoy DA series and ME series.

[rashie]

The main story of BG2 was better then all of recent Bioware games, and the bulk of companions where optional. So no optional content does not mean the story will suffer. The story suffers because alot of Bioware writers outside a few are bad writers.

Aside from how amazing of a villain Irenicus was (that voice acting is top notch), the real strength of BG2 was more in its optional side content rather than rushing to the asylum, speeding through the underdark and the elven city on its own.

 

BG2 as a game is utterly devoid of almost anything that could be called busywork without a fair bit of storytelling involved, that doesn't rely on the companions for it. Its an 80 hour plus game that doesn't resort to mmo style grinds.

[Seraphael]

Romances aren't some huge resource/creative drain.

 

I think it is significant considering Bioware is very PC and takes pride in being "progressive" with a plethora of romances of all shapes and colours. In Dragon Age Inquisition there were no less than eight romance options. I hope they scale the number of romances back and rather go a little deeper into the ones they choose to implement and allocate the saved resources elsewhere.

[Statichands]

I don't see how romances effect the story. 

[LinksOcarina]

Play KotOR and tell me that romance takes away from the story

 

The problem isn't romances, the problem is Bioware's efforts to make everything possible optional. Companions? Optional. Romance? Optional. Anything that is optional CANNOT be tied to the main story, and thus it is left flapping out in the wind feeling tacked on and/or completely separate from everything else.

 

KotOR is an example of what happens when you don't have a choice whether to recruit companions or not, they become an integral part of the story (Carth and Bastilla mostly, but Canderous and twilek girl have their moments). 

 

If Bioware stopped making everything imaginable optional and instead forced some things upon you (not romance of course, but companions and some plot decisions) then the narrative would be much more coherent and intriguing.

 

Problem is folks wanted it that way.

 

So why should they stop making things optional when the fans wanted the options?

[The Night Haunter]

Problem is folks wanted it that way.

 

So why should they stop making things optional when the fans wanted the options?

If in DAI, instead of having some random all but pointless side quest where you pretty much just walk up to your companions and say 'Hi' and they say 'I'll join you!', you instead had something like Dorian and Cole for every companion. Dorian and Cole had the best recruitments in the game, they were tied into the main plot and gave you a reason to care about them beyond the simple 'Iron Bull looks awesome, lets go Smash!'.

 

You could still have the option to kick the companion out later, but if their initial recruitment was non-optional then they could be tied more into the actual story and provide a better overall experience.

 

Besides I've never heard someone running around saying 'I want to never recruit any companions! RAWR'. I've seen people suggest that it is an interesting option, but look at KotOR's companions and their interaction with the story (or Jade Empire's, or Baldurs Gate 2's) and then look at DAI and it's companions lack of interaction in the story. Tell me which you think is better?

[RatThing]

Story is certainly more important to me. Whether getting rid of romances would help to improve the story I don't know, but I can easily do without them. They indeed kinda went overboard with them.  

[LinksOcarina]

If in DAI, instead of having some random all but pointless side quest where you pretty much just walk up to your companions and say 'Hi' and they say 'I'll join you!', you instead had something like Dorian and Cole for every companion. Dorian and Cole had the best recruitments in the game, they were tied into the main plot and gave you a reason to care about them beyond the simple 'Iron Bull looks awesome, lets go Smash!'.

 

You could still have the option to kick the companion out later, but if their initial recruitment was non-optional then they could be tied more into the actual story and provide a better overall experience.

 

Besides I've never heard someone running around saying 'I want to never recruit any companions! RAWR'. I've seen people suggest that it is an interesting option, but look at KotOR's companions and their interaction with the story (or Jade Empire's, or Baldurs Gate 2's) and then look at DAI and it's companions lack of interaction in the story. Tell me which you think is better?

 

Inquisitions imply because the companions were better written in most cases. In terms of recruitment, it's kind of irrelevant. 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with the premise, I am simply stating that it doesn't matter because people complained about the lack of options.

 

Not to mention there have been companions in Baldurs Gate 2 and Jade Empire which have no bearing to the plot at all as well, but joined you, or were optional in that regard. So it's not unprecedented. Hell, same with Mass Effect 2...