|
Post by Gileadan on Jun 3, 2014 12:34:11 GMT
Here is something that I have literally wondered about for years. Based on threads I have seen on this forum, back on P&T and on BSN, it seems that romances have become a thing of utmost importance in RPGs. Especially on BSN people are blowing a gasket at the thought that certain companions may not be romanceable or may end up having the "wrong" sexual orientation. I used to be a fan of romances myself, but with every BioWare game I played, I felt more ambivalent about them. At this point, I expect to romance no one in Dragon Age: Inquisition. Sure, if there is an NPC that I find totally appealing, I will do that, and enjoy it... but I'm honestly not expecting it. So, what I would like to know: how important are romances to you? Are they really such an important ingredient as the number of threads about them make it seem? Have you ever played a game where you found none of the romanceable companions truly interesting, and if so, did you play without romancing anyone or did you rather pick "the lesser evil", i.e. went with the companion you found the least objectionable? And do you think that every RPG's story is basically better with a romance? As I've stated above, I don't really expect to romance anyone in DA:I, and I didn't really find anyone appealing in DA2. I romanced Isabela once because she was kinda there, but in retrospect, all I got was an extra scene or two and about two dozen extra lines of dialogue, spread over three conversations. Would I have felt that I had missed out on something without that? Probably not. I also believe that some RPG stories are better suited for romances than others. DA2, for example, was extremely well suited for romantic content - you spent years in the same city, had leisure to get to know the people around you, and let's be honest, most of the time there was no feeling of "clear and present danger" that could have possibly thrown a wrench into the works. On the other hand, I'm baffled that some people on BSN were wishing for the option of marriage in DA:I. If the trailers for DA:I are remotely accurate about the plot, then DA:I will have a story that I would consider not suitable for romances. One of urgency, of danger that must be kept in check, of constant effort with hardly a break. And while I've never been in a war, I do know how infantry that's on the move (which is what I expect DA:I will be similar to) feels. We don't think stuff like "Aw, I wonder how it will be to have a family" and such when we're out there. We think "crap, why do I have to dig this trench, the effing ground is frozen!" or "damn, two hours of sleep and ten minutes to the next guard duty". One basically thinks about the next problem at hand, not romance. But the writers and players both sit comfortably in front of their computer when they write the plot or play the game, and probably do not think about how the party of poor bastards camping in some monster-infested forest really feels. Is it always better with romances? What are you looking for in DA:I? I'd love to hear (well, read) your opinions.
|
|
|
Post by Songlian on Jun 3, 2014 14:34:20 GMT
To me, every story is a matter of romance. When people say they enjoy a certain story, what they're actually saying is they care enough for the characters to keep them invested. I dare you to tell me one piece of fiction you enjoyed that had bland characters, unsympathetic characters, characters you couldn't relate to in any way, characters that were completely and utterly ordinary and had no trait you found even remotely interesting. There's no such thing. In order to attract an audience, a story needs to have characters that the audience has fallen in love with.
And here is where the video games have masterfully stepped up and cashed in on this age old concept by creating actual interaction between the player and the characters that he would "romance" in his head anyway, maybe not by banging them in imagination, but sure enough he would keep caring about them, so that he turns the next page, plays the next chapter and so on. So when you're saying that you're not liking romances, it's my belief that what you're actually saying is that you are finding less and less characters in modern fiction that make you care about them. And that, to me, has nothing to do with the presence of the mechanics known as "romances". Give me a character that I can fall in love with, and you don't need to give me a "romance" with him. As for the implied statement that they don't make them as they used to anymore, I'm going to leave you with one of my favorite quotes of all time. It's from The Ministry of Fear, by Graham Green. "Behind the complicated details of the world stand the simplicities: God is good, the grown-up man or woman knows the answer to every question, there is such a thing as truth, and justice is as measured and faultless as a clock. Our heroes are simple: they are brave, they tell the truth, they are good swordsmen and they are never in the long run really defeated. That is why no later books satisfy us like those which were read to us in childhood—for those promised a world of great simplicity of which we knew the rules, but the later books are complicated and contradictory with experience; they are formed out of our own disappointing memories."/tips hat
|
|
Lingz
Gibberling
Posts: 38
|
Post by Lingz on Jun 3, 2014 14:47:54 GMT
For me the romances are like the carrot on a stick to lead me through the game. A long fight sequence becomes much more bearable if I know I'm going to get something sweet and romantic at the end. I also have some trouble with understanding the main story on the first playthrough, so interacting with characters on a smaller scale helps me to keep interest in the game. Still, I usually prefer that the romance is to the side and optional. The best things in Bioware games are usually the characters. Whether they are companions, npcs or villains. See : Thread: What sets characters apart.This is why there are so many character threads floating around. And usually, romance=more content with that character. So that extra scene and two dozen lines of dialog with Isabela might not have meant a lot to you, but those extra scenes gave her fans even more insight into her life and personality. So it might be that many of the BSNs threads requesting romance with a certain character might simply be requests for more content with that character. I mean, if you look back at Baldurs gate, romancing a character could open up a whole quest line! A whole quest with your favorite character is nothing to sneeze at! It actually happened with me in Bound by Flame. The only character who interested me romantically was unavailable, but since his talks had a lot of flirts in them, I decided to skip the two other options and simply head canon my own romance. Not really. While I do enjoy romance in RPGs, it doesn't always fit. Quest for Glory 1, Gothic and Fallout 1 are examples of such games. It can also depend on the writing. For example, Skyrim would not have been a lesser game (for me) if the creators had skipped the romances, since I can't really connect with their characters. Of course, so far, we don't really know much about the game or how it will feel. I know next to nothing about infantry, so when I picture the game I usually think of hanging around the fireplace in the keep, scowling at quest givers who want to send me out on a mission. Still, if there is to be a marriage, I'd rather it happen in the epilogue.
|
|
andarian
Kobold
Computer Scientist and Fiction Writer
Posts: 63
|
Post by andarian on Jun 3, 2014 17:19:40 GMT
Quick remarks for now, with the potential for elaboration later.
I consider romances to be very important. Because romance to me is an integral part of what life is about, I have some difficulty understanding why someone would want to read or write fiction that omits it in the first place. If I have a choice between a game or a mod (or a book or a movie) that includes romance vs. one that doesn't, I will give preference to the one that does.
Regarding whether RPGs are always better with romances: that strikes me as the wrong question. Romances need to be done well, just as other elements of story and gameplay do. A good romance plot adds to a good RPG, and a poor one detracts from it. If it's not well done or doesn't integrate well with the story and action, then no, I can't say I see that making it better. Bu that doesn't change my preference for it when it is well done, or for stories with which it can be better integrated.
I definitely don't see the "high pressure action" format described for DA:I as inconsistent with romance. If anything, quite the opposite. The shared danger and experiences help forge strong emotions and camaraderie that I think are often integral to good story or RPG romances.
|
|
|
Post by Aeryn on Jun 4, 2014 3:06:44 GMT
I think for me it's about family, not necessarily blood relatives or marriage and kids, but about a deeper connection to the world other than "generic hero" because that hero actually MATTERS to one or more of the NPCs on a personal level. When we have relatives present in the game (Imoen, Hannah Shepard, Carver/Bethany Hawke, Mommy Hawke, etc.), I like that for the same reason I like romance because it feels real and personal. I guess it's about atmosphere, creating a world and an experience that feels alive. (Within limits, of course. I don't want to have to carry around leaves/paper for wiping my toon's butt, or deal with her monthly visitor and all that...)
Attraction and desire are natural parts of most human lives, often the greatest parts, and it seems unnatural for me to play a character who never falls for someone (or at the very least blows off some steam every now and then). While romance is not necessary for me to enjoy a game, it definitely helps sell the game in the first place and gives me something to look forward to as the story progresses. If it isn't handled well, though, it becomes more of a burden or forgotten side note. Skyrim's dozens of marriage options I would gladly trade for just two or three decently developed BioWare-ish romances. As it stands, I usually get married, but it's not something I look forward to and gleefully repeat multiple times like romancing Garrus or Fenris.
|
|
|
Post by Shades of Night on Jun 4, 2014 11:58:32 GMT
That's an interesting one.
I find that with romances it really depends on the character I'm playing. I've had characters who have gone through games that had romances, yet they didn't fancy any of the options and so ignored them. Then I've had characters in games with no romances and the character has fancied someone so I've headcanoned a romance for them. In the end I guess I just consider romance part of the story, and I like the story. Getting to know the world, characters, and developing my own character with their own take on things along the way.
So while I don't play specifically for the romances I feel that it does pop up naturally in a number of stories whether the game makers put it in there or not. Because you know, people get attracted to other people. I have characters who have gone through romances but I've deliberately made the romance break at some point, because not all romances work out (this is why I would love it if games had impossible romances in them). I think it would be a little odd or take certain types of characters to go through a lot of their lives without experiencing some attraction to others even if they are living a life constantly on the road and in danger.
Certainly what is mentioned about more content is true too. I mean I would be just as happy with long and involved friendships as romances in games (I'm certainly disappointed if all a romance throws in is a couple of extra lines and a scene together). The point is to give your character a connection to the other people in their world, or at least a chance for a connection. Whether they take up that chance or not lets you see more into what makes your own character tick.
So whether the story is better or not with romance depends entirely on the story itself, and most importantly, the character that you're playing in that story (and by that I don't mean what is predefined, I mean what you make up for your character).
As for marriage, I try to look at that in terms of the setting itself, and also, again, what my character thinks about the matter. Generally I dislike marriage being included in game romances though, it's something that I prefer to be left up to my own imagination. That way I also don't feel like my character is forced into it and made to feel like they're not as committed as they could be simply because they didn't want to marry for whatever reason.
|
|
|
Post by deina on Jun 5, 2014 1:21:25 GMT
Andarian basically summed up my thoughts on the subject. For me, romances are an integral part of the plot. In games, I'm looking for an interesting world, well developed characters, interactions, dialogues. That's why I love BGII so much. Killing monsters and fighting enemies, even building strategies - that's not my main interest. I want to feel immersed, to connect with my companions on personal level, to feel that relationships are growing in time. I need to be able to talk to them whenever I like (I miss that part in DA2), to flirt, to tease, basically to feel alive. I want to be a part of a team of people, not just anonymous henchmen. That being said, of course I care how romances and interactions are written. The more complex and out of the box they are, the better. And I hope DAI will give me just that.
|
|
|
Post by notabarbiegirl on Jun 6, 2014 18:04:27 GMT
Your character goes though sometimes literal hell(s) to complete the tasks set before them. Wracking, brain, body and soul, to accomplish the goal. For what should they struggle, wealth tarnishes, as does fame is there no end to this game? What lofty goal or baser need should be at the root of the creed? Why will they risk their soul to part, with out someone to warm the heart?
|
|