@Numpty , I also find it irritating that all the BG2 romances treat you as though you were their therapist. "Boo-hoo, I'm wounded and emotionally damaged, fix me." That's a very unattractive quality in real life, and it's very unattractive in a game. Strength and confidence are sexy, weakness and neediness are repulsive.
I do kind of like Anomen, though, because his initial macho, cockiness, and bravado are attractive qualities to me. But I agree that his romance ending is badly written.
BTW,
If you help him kill Saerk, Saerk is not guilty, and Anomen either leaves or fails his knighthood test (you won't know which without memorizing counter-intuitive dialogue responses.) If you get him to wait for the law to solve the case, Saerk is guilty and gets away with the murder of Anomen's sister. You can't win.
@Numpty , I also find it irritating that all the BG2 romances treat you as though you were their therapist. "Boo-hoo, I'm wounded and emotionally damaged, fix me." That's a very unattractive quality in real life, and it's very unattractive in a game. Strength and confidence are sexy, weakness and neediness are repulsive.
I do kind of like Anomen, though, because his initial macho, cockiness, and bravado are attractive qualities to me. But I agree that his romance ending is badly written.
BTW,
If you help him kill Saerk, Saerk is not guilty, and Anomen either leaves or fails his knighthood test (you won't know which without memorizing counter-intuitive dialogue responses.) If you get him to wait for the law to solve the case, Saerk is guilty and gets away with the murder of Anomen's sister. You can't win.
I completely agree. And I quite like Anomen too, even if I did call him cheesy. I just wanted to try things differently this time, and wasn't expecting the game to screw me quite so badly for...
Killing Saerk, because it always seemed like the *right* thing to do. But I'm not gonna do it again if it means losing Anomen.
Oh well, I still refuse to reload! And there's always Aerie if I get desperate for a cleric...
@Numpty , I also find it irritating that all the BG2 romances treat you as though you were their therapist. "Boo-hoo, I'm wounded and emotionally damaged, fix me." That's a very unattractive quality in real life, and it's very unattractive in a game. Strength and confidence are sexy, weakness and neediness are repulsive.
I do kind of like Anomen, though, because his initial macho, cockiness, and bravado are attractive qualities to me. But I agree that his romance ending is badly written.
BTW,
If you help him kill Saerk, Saerk is not guilty, and Anomen either leaves or fails his knighthood test (you won't know which without memorizing counter-intuitive dialogue responses.) If you get him to wait for the law to solve the case, Saerk is guilty and gets away with the murder of Anomen's sister. You can't win.
I kinda like the thing about not being able to win Anomen's romance. To me, it feels more realistic. Yeah you don't win, but you don't always win in life either. I think it also flows really well with the kind of character he is in that he's extremely emotionally damaged and is trying to do the right thing (become a member of the Order of the Radiant Heart) and he's still screwing it up (being a jerk and arrogant). I think the theme of "Tried to do the right thing and it still went wrong" fits his romance well.
I personally don't find Anomen's initial arrogance and machoism attractive. He's not confident to me, he's arrogant. My reaction to that is much more eye rolling than attraction. I end up liking him more when I see his own emotional issues because it lets me see who he actually is as he struggles to let a softer side shine through the shell he's got. He's a turd, but look at his life. That's why he's a turd.
I kind of like Aerie for the same reason. She's open. She's honest. She's upfront about the issues she has and, for me at least, I find that lack of deception attractive. I find emotional honesty attractive. I feel like she wants you to like her for her (hence all the questions about what you think of her) unlike Anomen who wants you to like him for who he wants you to think he is and who he wants to be (hence all of his bragging).
I really like romances as a feature in RPGs. I love when they're there for you to explore if you so choose. They can provide greater depth of character for both the PC and NPC and allow you to experience types of relationships/perspectives you might never have in real life, which is very much in the spirit of RPGs. Of course, not every romance is going to be well written or fit well with the main story, but if you find one you like, it can be very rewarding.
I wasn't even really aware that romances existed in CRPGs until a couple of years ago when I started playing BG:EE and met Rasaad. I almost didn't add him to my party, but I decided that I should try something new and have a monk in my party for once. Boy, am I glad I did that, because I accidentally discovered one of the best subplots in the entire saga (at least for me). I expected a dude whose sole purpose was to be a preachy moral compass, but instead, I got a tragic cinnamon roll bff. His story and romance mesh so well with my Bhaalspawn's perspective and are so well done that it really enriched my game experience.
Since then, I've explored romances in other games. I like Carth Onasi in KOTOR and Alistair and Fenris in DA, but sometimes games don't have any romances that appeal to me, like the Mass Effect series or Dragon Age: Inquisition, and that's okay, because I recognize that, much like real life, there isn't always going to be someone you can connect with around. Different people are different.
And then some games just drop the ball and don't make romances that are worth your time, which is a real shame, especially since that seems to breed a lot of hate for the feature as a whole. What I don't understand is how some people make the leap from "I don't personally enjoy romances" to "EW KEEP THAT KIND OF STUFF OUT OF MY GAME; DON'T RUIN MY GAME LIKE THAT" as if the whole game is somehow poisoned by mere inclusion when romances are almost always an optional thing and if you don't like characters coming onto you, you can shut them down fairly quickly. That kind of thinking comes off to me as very "I don't like it, so you shouldn't be allowed to have it", which is just not nice.
TL;DR - Romances can be a lot of fun and surprise you in the best ways, if you're interested in them. If you're not, that's okay too, but please don't begrudge others their enjoyment of the feature.
I tend to enjoy romances in CRPGs because it gives me that extra option to flesh out my character.
For example, my very first BG character was a human berserker, heavily inspired by Conan the barbarian. Anyone who's familiar with the franchise knows that Conan is no stranger to fine wine and finer women, and so, my berserker was the same way. Attempting to romance several characters at the same time was fun, and gave me the opportunity to really give my charname that Conan feel.
I've also played characters who fell hopelessly in love with a single character. In the case of a monk I played, it was Neera (which is still the best romance in the series, imo).
And, of course, I've played characters that have no interest in romance whatsoever. A good example being my current charname- a half-orc shaman. He's just not the kind of guy that cares for romance, or other people in general, so I won't be pursuing any romances with him.
So, overall, I do appreciate a good romance in a CRPG. Not because I like imagining a drunken dwarf doing the dance with no pants with a half-elf lass, but because they give me the option me to expand this character I've created, in ways beyond just how well they swing a sword.
I do, however, agree that there aren't enough romances with the "uglier" races. Again, not because I like fantasizing about dwarf dongs, but because I imagine a proud dwarf character wouldn't mind finding himself a dwarven lady to get jiggy with, rather than some pansy elf.
At the end of the day, it's all about roleplaying for me. If my character is a romantic sort, of course I'd take on a romance quest or two. If not, it's still nice to know the option is there.
I do enjoy romances, and to some extend I expect them, too. (Boy, was I disappointed when I realized there is no romance in PoE.) But it wouldn't have to be a romance, romance is just the icing on the cake. I do need extensive dialogues with the NPCs that travel with my protagonist, though. I can't play hours on hours and all I have is interactions with non-joinable characters, fed-ex quests, collecting items to brew/cook/forge, crawling through dungeons and fighting enemies and monsters. And all with a silent crew. Bah, I feel like starving when I have to do that. PoE wasn't bad, but it has way too little amount of dialogues. Skyrim was unplayable for me (the generic marriage system in there - absolutely ridiculous. Who invents something like that?!)
Personally I care more about the banter than the idea of the Tag'em and Bag'em approach. I mean, it would be good to just get a nice bromance going at some point that didn't end up at sex and then have interaction fall off a cliff because sleeping together is apparently the end point of a relationship. Not that that happens in BG2, but other games with that type of option usually come off as shallow in that regard.
Pillars of Eternity, yes, and I stopped playing after they were silent for over two hours. Can't bear it!
I suspect you missed a tiny detail about dialogs structure in PoE - a lot of them are PID. Whenever character has something particular to tell your character - the chat bubble icon on his\her portrait begin to pulse and if you click - you initiate a dialog. And if there is nothing companion wants to tell you right now, you will get countless options to interrogate to talk with said companion about other, not immediate matters.
Funny coincidence - I had a discussion over PIDs with @LavaDelVortel privately a few months ago and was told that many players do not enjoy dialogue being gated behind PID in BG mods and encouraged me to stray away from it in my own writing. I personally have come to agree with him that it's a poor implementation of character development.
It's way too easy to miss and you end up with "may we talk already?" syndrome, checking PIDs every 3 minutes. In PoE there were these icons, yes, and it was a bit better, BUT I still believe most PoE characters were way too silent, and a bit... borring. Mother was my favorite character and she was amazing, but that may be because I really like how Chris Avellone wrote her.
I find PID preferable because they allow you to easily ignore a character you're just taking along for their gameplay value. Unlike the BG style where they blurt their personal issues at you during the most inopportune moments.
@ThacoBell I might not be the brightest candle in the holder but I don't think I would complain about missing NPC dialogues if I'd play with player created NPCs. @Mirandel I know that but it popped up for two of them once. I got every other area one dialogue from maybe one or two of them. And then the PIDs - sorry, but after clicking through the menue (Who are you etc.), they just stayed the same. I did play very slow, though. Went through every bit of wilderness area in stealth mode etc. ... Playing time stretches this way a lot. So, for the 30 or so hours I played, while I went through what feels like 50 dungeons (very beautiful ones, I have to admit) it feels like I only saw 5 dialogues. That's an unhealthy relation. I'm not saying it's the real amount of dialogues I got, but it *felt* that way. And if PoE makes me feel this way, imagine how far I got into other games.
PIDs: these are a nice plus in my opinion. But yes, it does get frustrating if there are no new options, although I can live with that if I can see it directly. What gets on my nerves with PID is if the same questions leading to the same answers can be clicked again... and again... So, while waiting for new dialogue choices not only there aren't any, but I have to re-read things I already know. Not sure if you can understand, but for me that feels like 4th wall breaking, because I see it's disadvantageous coding - the NPC surely wouldn't tell my protagonist the same things over and over again.
Funny coincidence - I had a discussion over PIDs with @LavaDelVortel privately a few months ago and was told that many players do not enjoy dialogue being gated behind PID in BG mods and encouraged me to stray away from it in my own writing. I personally have come to agree with him that it's a poor implementation of character development.
I think it's more of a question of personal preferences (a lot) and implementation (to some degree). Oh, and a habit too (many people do not like changes in general). PID is a convenience. Sure, it's nice when NPCs begin to talk by themselves. But it's only feel natural if they do it in a right time. A sudden romantic talk in the middle of fighting in the sewer kills the atmosphere to me, for example. While PID with indication that particular character has something to say allows you to choose time and place for that talk. Hard to say one way or another. I guess consistency is the key here Or an engine that allows to better distribute banters (in a way that you neither miss them if you walk the "wrong way", nor getting them in the wrong time).
@LavaDelVortel , @jastey - I might be mistaken, but there was something about silencing bug. Like party talked a lot in the city, was quiet in the fields and then active again in last settlement. But in general I do like how it is made in POE, the idea of it. It's not perfect, as @jastey pointed out with repetitive options, but in Tyranny they improved that system a bit and at least you could see why it is as it is - some options allows repetitive actions, like dueling. Guess, that was the reason behind "same lines stay forever in the list.
Yes, the representation of romance as casual small talk while exiting dungeons (action zones) is mostly entertraining. What I think is needed in future romance is quest, maybe for a lunch, optimal gear (shopping spree for nice clothes), and then some nightly quality time in a bar (whatever could happen on the dancefloor!).
I like them, just like I like any additional dialogue and character interactions that add "roleplayability" (did I just invent this word or was it already a thing?).
"Sure, it's nice when NPCs begin to talk by themselves. But it's only feel natural if they do it in a right time. A sudden romantic talk in the middle of fighting in the sewer kills the atmosphere to me, for example."
But you can roleplay that as the NPC being a bit of a dick (Anomen, I'm looking at you).
And who hasn't been amused, at least in a childish way, when fully buffed up, just about to talk to Firkrag, and then you get "I love you Charname". I think it makes the NPC seem more "alive", that's what people do although in less extreme circumstances. Say the right things at the wrong times, or the wrong things at the right times, especially in relationships.
"Sure, it's nice when NPCs begin to talk by themselves. But it's only feel natural if they do it in a right time. A sudden romantic talk in the middle of fighting in the sewer kills the atmosphere to me, for example."
But you can roleplay that as the NPC being a bit of a dick (Anomen, I'm looking at you).
And who hasn't been amused, at least in a childish way, when fully buffed up, just about to talk to Firkrag, and then you get "I love you Charname". I think it makes the NPC seem more "alive", that's what people do although in less extreme circumstances. Say the right things at the wrong times, or the wrong things at the right times, especially in relationships.
Haha, yes, I adore this. I kept journals some time ago that addressed mostly this. Imagine an npc hitting on your character directly after you finish a fight you barely stood any chance winning, but you did! Especially when your charname saved the day by casting some cleverly timed spell, everybody's on 5 HP, their ammo sticks from the walls and you feel badassery simply EMANATING from the computer screen. Hells yeah.
Comments
I do kind of like Anomen, though, because his initial macho, cockiness, and bravado are attractive qualities to me. But I agree that his romance ending is badly written.
BTW,
Oh well, I still refuse to reload! And there's always Aerie if I get desperate for a cleric...
I personally don't find Anomen's initial arrogance and machoism attractive. He's not confident to me, he's arrogant. My reaction to that is much more eye rolling than attraction. I end up liking him more when I see his own emotional issues because it lets me see who he actually is as he struggles to let a softer side shine through the shell he's got. He's a turd, but look at his life. That's why he's a turd.
I kind of like Aerie for the same reason. She's open. She's honest. She's upfront about the issues she has and, for me at least, I find that lack of deception attractive. I find emotional honesty attractive. I feel like she wants you to like her for her (hence all the questions about what you think of her) unlike Anomen who wants you to like him for who he wants you to think he is and who he wants to be (hence all of his bragging).
I wasn't even really aware that romances existed in CRPGs until a couple of years ago when I started playing BG:EE and met Rasaad. I almost didn't add him to my party, but I decided that I should try something new and have a monk in my party for once. Boy, am I glad I did that, because I accidentally discovered one of the best subplots in the entire saga (at least for me). I expected a dude whose sole purpose was to be a preachy moral compass, but instead, I got a tragic cinnamon roll bff. His story and romance mesh so well with my Bhaalspawn's perspective and are so well done that it really enriched my game experience.
Since then, I've explored romances in other games. I like Carth Onasi in KOTOR and Alistair and Fenris in DA, but sometimes games don't have any romances that appeal to me, like the Mass Effect series or Dragon Age: Inquisition, and that's okay, because I recognize that, much like real life, there isn't always going to be someone you can connect with around. Different people are different.
And then some games just drop the ball and don't make romances that are worth your time, which is a real shame, especially since that seems to breed a lot of hate for the feature as a whole. What I don't understand is how some people make the leap from "I don't personally enjoy romances" to "EW KEEP THAT KIND OF STUFF OUT OF MY GAME; DON'T RUIN MY GAME LIKE THAT" as if the whole game is somehow poisoned by mere inclusion when romances are almost always an optional thing and if you don't like characters coming onto you, you can shut them down fairly quickly. That kind of thinking comes off to me as very "I don't like it, so you shouldn't be allowed to have it", which is just not nice.
TL;DR - Romances can be a lot of fun and surprise you in the best ways, if you're interested in them. If you're not, that's okay too, but please don't begrudge others their enjoyment of the feature.
For example, my very first BG character was a human berserker, heavily inspired by Conan the barbarian. Anyone who's familiar with the franchise knows that Conan is no stranger to fine wine and finer women, and so, my berserker was the same way. Attempting to romance several characters at the same time was fun, and gave me the opportunity to really give my charname that Conan feel.
I've also played characters who fell hopelessly in love with a single character. In the case of a monk I played, it was Neera (which is still the best romance in the series, imo).
And, of course, I've played characters that have no interest in romance whatsoever. A good example being my current charname- a half-orc shaman. He's just not the kind of guy that cares for romance, or other people in general, so I won't be pursuing any romances with him.
So, overall, I do appreciate a good romance in a CRPG. Not because I like imagining a drunken dwarf doing the dance with no pants with a half-elf lass, but because they give me the option me to expand this character I've created, in ways beyond just how well they swing a sword.
I do, however, agree that there aren't enough romances with the "uglier" races. Again, not because I like fantasizing about dwarf dongs, but because I imagine a proud dwarf character wouldn't mind finding himself a dwarven lady to get jiggy with, rather than some pansy elf.
At the end of the day, it's all about roleplaying for me. If my character is a romantic sort, of course I'd take on a romance quest or two. If not, it's still nice to know the option is there.
to interrogateto talk with said companion about other, not immediate matters.Funny coincidence - I had a discussion over PIDs with @LavaDelVortel privately a few months ago and was told that many players do not enjoy dialogue being gated behind PID in BG mods and encouraged me to stray away from it in my own writing. I personally have come to agree with him that it's a poor implementation of character development.
@Mirandel I know that but it popped up for two of them once. I got every other area one dialogue from maybe one or two of them. And then the PIDs - sorry, but after clicking through the menue (Who are you etc.), they just stayed the same.
I did play very slow, though. Went through every bit of wilderness area in stealth mode etc. ... Playing time stretches this way a lot. So, for the 30 or so hours I played, while I went through what feels like 50 dungeons (very beautiful ones, I have to admit) it feels like I only saw 5 dialogues. That's an unhealthy relation. I'm not saying it's the real amount of dialogues I got, but it *felt* that way. And if PoE makes me feel this way, imagine how far I got into other games.
PIDs: these are a nice plus in my opinion. But yes, it does get frustrating if there are no new options, although I can live with that if I can see it directly. What gets on my nerves with PID is if the same questions leading to the same answers can be clicked again... and again... So, while waiting for new dialogue choices not only there aren't any, but I have to re-read things I already know. Not sure if you can understand, but for me that feels like 4th wall breaking, because I see it's disadvantageous coding - the NPC surely wouldn't tell my protagonist the same things over and over again.
Hard to say one way or another. I guess consistency is the key here
@LavaDelVortel , @jastey - I might be mistaken, but there was something about silencing bug. Like party talked a lot in the city, was quiet in the fields and then active again in last settlement.
But in general I do like how it is made in POE, the idea of it. It's not perfect, as @jastey pointed out with repetitive options, but in Tyranny they improved that system a bit and at least you could see why it is as it is - some options allows repetitive actions, like dueling. Guess, that was the reason behind "same lines stay forever in the list.
"Sure, it's nice when NPCs begin to talk by themselves. But it's only feel natural if they do it in a right time. A sudden romantic talk in the middle of fighting in the sewer kills the atmosphere to me, for example."
But you can roleplay that as the NPC being a bit of a dick (Anomen, I'm looking at you).
And who hasn't been amused, at least in a childish way, when fully buffed up, just about to talk to Firkrag, and then you get "I love you Charname".
I think it makes the NPC seem more "alive", that's what people do although in less extreme circumstances. Say the right things at the wrong times, or the wrong things at the right times, especially in relationships.
I would much rather be able to walk into any town and score with the bar maid as long as I made the right dialog choices.