Skip to content

Do you enjoy romances in CRPGs?

CloutierCloutier Member Posts: 228
I don't like romances in CRPGs.

Romances tend to favor "real-life" attractiveness at the expense of fantasy flavor. Romanceable characters tend to be human, half-elf, demonic, or something "attractive". Shorties get the short end of the stick. While it may correspond to a gamer's real life "tastes", it leaves a hole. After all, shorty and monster races *do* reproduce and *do* have a sexuality. Do I feel like dating a halfling woman with coarse foot hair? Ugh, no. Designers are stuck with a dilemma: make the fantasy world consistent, and include romances you'd rather not "see"; make romances "attractive", at the expense of consistency.

Romances also tend to cannibalize non-romantic NPC interaction. This is especially true in the context of diversity. While it is perfectly okay to depict diversity in a game, giving every aspect of diversity a fair chance at being represented consumes a great deal of design time. The solution might be not to have any romance at all. Problem solved. Give us more Dak'kons, Yoshimos, Mortes, Jan Jansens, Nordoms, and less Dorns and Neeras.

In summary, romances open political can-o-worms, at the expense of consistency and interesting interactions void of romantic interest. I say let's do away with them, so that we may enjoy more consistency, more NPCs, and spare ourselves the inevitable forum drama.

0,02 $
  1. Do you enjoy romances in CRPGs?81 votes
    1. No
      27.16%
    2. Yes
      49.38%
    3. Perhaps, but...
      23.46%
«13

Comments

  • tbone1tbone1 Member Posts: 1,985
    Not really. I can see how they might add to a game, but most are not well-written and don't particularly enhance my enjoyment. I do give each one a shot, though.
  • BelgarathMTHBelgarathMTH Member Posts: 5,653
    I used to like romances in games, especially when developers started to include gay romances. When I was younger and had a stronger mating drive, I wanted to act out fantasy romance through my games. As I've gotten older, I'm more interested in character building and combat mechanics, with a small dose of working on achievements, perfectly checking off quest lists, and some feeling of my decision-making affecting the history of the world I'm playing in, or the lives of the NPC's in it.

    I now find having party members constantly interjecting with romance dialogues to be a distraction from the things I want to enjoy in the game. As soon as the violins and harps start playing and the corny "Do you like me? - check yes or no" dialogue pops up, I just sigh and roll my eyes, and click through it as quickly as possible.
  • winterswinters Member Posts: 252
    Cloutier said:


    Romances also tend to cannibalize non-romantic NPC interaction. This is especially true in the context of diversity. While it is perfectly okay to depict diversity in a game, giving every aspect of diversity a fair chance at being represented consumes a great deal of design time. The solution might be not to have any romance at all. Problem solved. Give us more Dak'kons, Yoshimos, Mortes, Jan Jansens, Nordoms, and less Dorns and Neeras.

    I am a terrible fanperson of Dorn romance, while not being into such themes almost at all. Why? Dorn is a character who I like, a lot, and romance gives more opportunities for interaction. But at the same time, what you said, romances cannibalize other relationships. I much prefer Dorn dialogue lines from BGEE to those from BG2EE, and in ToB he starts to sound like a caricature of himself (that happens to most characters, RPG Campaign Played Too Long syndrome, from my years-long GM experience).

    It's not that difficult to explain, for me. Video games simplify things, and that's okay, but simplifying interpersonal stuff which is subtle, ephemeral and impossible to rationalise in most cases just *can't* turn out very well.
  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,790
    Cloutier said:

    Give us more (...)Jan Jansens(...)

    No. Just no.

    Personaly, I can enjoy romances in crpgs if characters are interesting and if their romances are implemented well. I do think that in some cases, it is a mixed bag of things. It is good to have a lot of possibilities regarding different tastes and so on, but I would like developers and writers to never forget of real-life proportions. People of homosexual orientation tends to be about ~10% of the population. Not 1/3, not 1/2 or anything along these lines.

    I also enjoy romances, as long as I am not being "ninjamanced". Corwin, I am looking at you, you sly woman.
  • CloutierCloutier Member Posts: 228
    O_Bruce said:



    Personaly, I can enjoy romances in crpgs if characters are interesting and if their romances are implemented well. I do think that in some cases, it is a mixed bag of things. It is good to have a lot of possibilities regarding different tastes and so on, but I would like developers and writers to never forget of real-life proportions. People of homosexual orientation tends to be about ~10% of the population. Not 1/3, not 1/2 or anything along these lines.

    I can hear you here. Typically, developers have the resources to develop 15 NPCs. 15 characters simply isn't enough to cover all tastes without breaking suspension of disbelief.

    If Beamdog gets enough budget to warrant investing into 70 NPCs, then it might be a different story.
  • BaldurspawnBaldurspawn Member Posts: 66
    I WOULD like them in Bioware games (never played other games with romances aside from Final Fantasy, where it is part of the main plot), if they weren't high school niveau at best... In BG2:EE, the only somewhat realistic romances are Jaheira's and Rasaad's. All the others seem either forced (Morrigan of DA:O, Aerie) or just completely unrealistic (Anomen/Viconia -> a strong, independent hero/ine would nearly never fall for someone like that -_- )
  • bob_vengbob_veng Member Posts: 2,308
    no team ftw!
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • ArctodusArctodus Member Posts: 992
    edited February 2017
    There should be a Meh option to answer.

    While I romance a NPC when given the option most of the time, it's more about seeing different content than about the romance per se. I'll probably never romance Dorn or Aerie because I've already seen the content about those two. Otherwise, if romances wouldn't be there, I wouldn't care much.
  • MornmagorMornmagor Member Posts: 1,160
    I rarely pursued romances in RPGs.

    I prefer romances that can happen with an antagonist, where tragedy and angst is involved, usually leaving people heartbroken.

    The idea of joining the battle to save whatever, hand in hand with your cutiepie leaves me indifferent.

    This ain't Jim Beam ._.
  • batoorbatoor Member Posts: 676
    edited February 2017
    I'm not opposed to romances in general, I just don't think they're essential or more important than various other party banters, companion quests, friendship paths and so on.

    There are also some combination of racial love that seem weird to me, perhaps the reason I react to certain interracial romances is because they are so uncommon in fantasy..But I do think you can take it too far. Like having a gnome romance an ogre and then take him into the barn for some naughty xxx for example. Because true love knows no bounds...

  • UnderstandMouseMagicUnderstandMouseMagic Member Posts: 2,147
    If there were no "official" romances in the BG saga, would it be possible to have mod romances?
    Just asking if the mechanics would change.
    I don't know anything about programming, just wondering if what allowed Charname to romance Anomen for example, then allows Charname to play a mod romancing Haer Dalis?
    But without the original built in program, it couldn't be made.

    Seems a bit OTT to suggest that romances should be outlawed when the option is always there to completely ignore them.

    And as for messing up non romance interaction, well in RL that happens doesn't it?
    You have different conversations with different people depending on how you relate to them. You are hardly going to tell your bank manager about your inner insecurities and hopes and dreams.
    What about your Mum?
    Do people really go around telling their Mums the same things they might tell somebody they were looking to get romantically involved with?
  • Lezard_ValethLezard_Valeth Member Posts: 70
    It would really depend on how it's written. Jaheira's romance in BG2? Absolutely not.
  • JumboWheat01JumboWheat01 Member Posts: 1,028
    edited February 2017
    It all depends on how its written.

    And it also depends on if I know I'm getting into it or not. I'd rather not suddenly have one forced upon me because I was playing a good guy and ended up making someone thing I wanted them for kinky fun time.
  • MirandelMirandel Member Posts: 530
    Disagree with every statement.
    Cloutier said:


    Romances tend to favor "real-life" attractiveness at the expense of fantasy flavor. Romanceable characters tend to be human, half-elf, demonic, or something "attractive".

    You obviously never played with female character :) For some reason developers are sure women can take anything and give them all kind of creatures as romancable options.

    But aside of that - what is not realistic about it? Do you in real life prefer someone un-attractive? Asking about romance with someone un-attractive is like asking for heroic fantasy with a weak boring villain. What is the point?
    Cloutier said:


    Romances also tend to cannibalize non-romantic NPC interaction.

    Never did. If anything, they expand the character. They are always - always! - an addition. And not a single time developers confessed that they decided to add romance on a spare time.
    Cloutier said:


    In summary, romances open political can-o-worms

    My bad. It was an obvious trolling and I fell for it.

    You are trying to talk about your SJW fears and did not even bother to hide the intentions other then throwing word "romance" here and there.
    I have a bad news for you - "inclusion" is here, romance or not. The freshest example: Mizhena is not romansable but is here. Or take Tyranny - it's Obsidian, they do not do romances, yet, there are gey couples there.

    If you so worry about inclusions and SJW - say so. At least it will be honest.
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 5,870
    Depends on the writing quality, mostly. Many western RPGs which feature romances simply fail to portrait suffice character growth, personality, and then some other key factors. They either keep them short, shoehorn them into simple reaction patterns, or do not incorporate them into the main plot sufficely enough. The romance between Deionerra and the Nameless One was a rare job well done, tho.

    As far as romances goes, overall I prefer JRPGs hands down. Star Ocean for instance did them extraordinary well. Same for Ar Nosurge. But that opinion is my own and very likely differ from others.
  • CloutierCloutier Member Posts: 228
    Mirandel said:



    You are trying to talk about your SJW fears and did not even bother to hide the intentions other then throwing word "romance" here and there.
    I have a bad news for you - "inclusion" is here, romance or not. The freshest example: Mizhena is not romansable but is here. Or take Tyranny - it's Obsidian, they do not do romances, yet, there are gey couples there.

    If you so worry about inclusions and SJW - say so. At least it will be honest.

    Were you around when BG2 came out? Bioware was blamed for not including any gay romance, and having only 1 male romance vs 3 female.
  • KuronaKurona Member Posts: 881
    I'm not too fond of them on principle, because when I am in the right mood to enjoy them I go for a visual novel, not a RPG. But I particularly dislike the BioWare template, which is really closer to therapy than romance (usually, at least).
  • EmpyrialEmpyrial Member Posts: 107
    I like them because it allows me to roleplay my character with more depth. If my character is supposed to represent a person then it's not unlikely that my character will fall in love with someone (unless that character is asexual or something along those lines). So for me it gives me a chance to hammer down my character's personality. For instance, if I'm playing a typical good guy, empathetic hero then I wouldn't want to romance Dorn but romancing Aerie is a way to solidify his position as a "good guy" to me. If I'm playing a live-fast-die-young, crushingly self-centered bard, for example, then Dorn might be right for him. Who cares if some people have to die on the way? He's here for fun, not for long as the saying goes. I only romance when it feels right and I like that my characters are able to show a greater level of emotional range.

    As far as the attractiveness thing goes, I think Skyrim sort of did that well by having a diverse number of body types available for marriage. You have the option to marry older people, a drunk, low class labourers like a miner, and conventionally unattractive people. You also have the option of marrying pretty people, a few lizard people, and everything in between. Personally, I ended up marrying a muscular guy who's blind in one eye, has half his face deeply scarred, and the other half tattooed because it fit with the story in my head. Yeah, there were pretty boys available but I chose to go with the story that fit my character better.

    Romances can add depth to my character even if they don't always add depth to the character I'm romancing.
  • MirandelMirandel Member Posts: 530
    Cloutier said:

    Mirandel said:



    You are trying to talk about your SJW fears and did not even bother to hide the intentions other then throwing word "romance" here and there.
    I have a bad news for you - "inclusion" is here, romance or not. The freshest example: Mizhena is not romansable but is here. Or take Tyranny - it's Obsidian, they do not do romances, yet, there are gey couples there.

    If you so worry about inclusions and SJW - say so. At least it will be honest.

    Were you around when BG2 came out? Bioware was blamed for not including any gay romance, and having only 1 male romance vs 3 female.
    And it was when exactly? How many years ago? How many games did BW produced with gay romances and plenty of choices for women since that time?

    And what does it have to do with the fact that you are using word "romances" to talk about completely different matter?
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    This thread is for discussing romances in CRPGs. Let's not derail this thread by delving into an ugly controversy.

    @Mirandel @Cloutier: It would probably be best if you continued this conversation via PM.
  • megamike15megamike15 Member Posts: 2,666
    Mirandel said:

    Cloutier said:

    Mirandel said:



    You are trying to talk about your SJW fears and did not even bother to hide the intentions other then throwing word "romance" here and there.
    I have a bad news for you - "inclusion" is here, romance or not. The freshest example: Mizhena is not romansable but is here. Or take Tyranny - it's Obsidian, they do not do romances, yet, there are gey couples there.

    If you so worry about inclusions and SJW - say so. At least it will be honest.

    Were you around when BG2 came out? Bioware was blamed for not including any gay romance, and having only 1 male romance vs 3 female.
    And it was when exactly? How many years ago? How many games did BW produced with gay romances and plenty of choices for women since that time?

    And what does it have to do with the fact that you are using word "romances" to talk about completely different matter?
    yeah this became a non issues thanks to not only mods but with the ee romances. heck if you look at all romances available the ones for females out number the ones for males.
  • ArdanisArdanis Member Posts: 1,736
    edited February 2017
    I treat in-game romances as quests, where you essentially figure out proper responses, collect the hearts, unlock cutscenes etc.
    Cloutier said:

    Romances also tend to cannibalize non-romantic NPC interaction.

    I dunno, talking to party members for the sake of talking just grows boring quick, even if they've got interesting backstories. But then again, I don't really play games for the story, there're books for that.
  •  TheArtisan TheArtisan Member Posts: 3,277
    edited February 2017
    Ugh. As the creator of one complete and two in-progress NPC mods with romance... reading some of the stuff here really hurts my heart :'(

    Edit: Okay, you know what, I don't think I should leave it at that. Let me elaborate - I don't necessarily push for romances in every RPG out there. What I want most are bonds. I want companions that I feel truly become close to my character. I hate characters that serve little purpose but to be a personality. It's the reason I've never liked evil characters like Edwin or Korgan because I feel as though, despite the experiences they've been through, their relationship with the PC hasn't changed one bit because they're, well, selfish evil bastards. That's also why Minsc has always gotten a pass for me because even if his humor's worn off over the times he's still a very heartwarming character and a true friend of my many PCs which is why I still enjoy him. There are many ways for companions to develop a bond with the PC and romance is one of them. I'd hate to see it gone.
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 12,235
    It really depends on the quality of the romance really.
  • TarlonnielTarlonniel Member Posts: 13
    Heck yeah. I think romances add depth to characters, including the one I'm in control of. I also find it jarring when a game lets you become best buddies with various NPCs but shuts out any hint of romance. It feels very strange and artificial. Why let my PC love these people in one way and not another? :/
  • DJKajuruDJKajuru Member Posts: 3,300
    All well written interactions are welcome, and I absolutely love all BG2 romances
  • KurumiKurumi Member Posts: 520
    Yes - IF they are done well and include my orientation.
  • NumptyNumpty Member Posts: 5
    You pretty much have to be a creepy fawner if you want to complete a romance in most games. You have to say EXACTLY what they want to hear or else the romance ends. The NPCs get to be cold and mean whenever they want, and they get to bitch and argue with other NPCs whenever they want. But the second you say "Not today, pumpkin... I have a headache." it will end the romance, which means you have to spend the rest of the game in uncomfortable silence. Great.

    Some spoilers maybe...
    I did Anomen's romance again recently. I did everything perfectly. I put up with his stupid stories, his random angry outbursts, and his cheesy affections. And then at the end of his quest I decided to do something different, I decided to help him kill a certain bad guy instead of relying on the law again... And afterwards he pretty much said "I love you. Bye." and walks off, never to be seen again! I didn't think that it was deep or tragic, I just thought it was annoying how I've just lost my best cleric and tank because I made one wrong(?!) choice. And by wrong choice I mean helping Anomen kill an evil murderer...

    Aerie's romance I've never been able to finish. She spends half the game whining, and then eventually turns nasty and starts mocking Khalid. I like Khalid, so I always tell her to shut her cake hole which ends the romance. How does she even know about Khalid? there's no way in hell that Jaheira told her anything.

    Jaheira's always seems to end for me around the Underdark. Not that I miss it, all her chats are pretty much like this: "I enjoy these chats, they give me comfort... Right. That's enough maudlin chatter for one week."

    Never finished Viconia's either. She just treats you like a pathetic worm, and you have to either take it or fail the "romance".

    Hexxat's romance just felt dead and cold. I haven't tried any of the other romances yet.
Sign In or Register to comment.