Love is a reward

I’ll try to skip the flowery words and just stick to the key points.

  • Given most COGs are based around character development, the secondary characters are that. Secondary to the story, and time constraints are going to strangle a title.

  • Lets say you do go in depth with each character and justly flesh out their personality, ideals, and preferences. That limits the number of companions, as it would create an unimaginable amount of extra work; when the focus is typically the main character. Unless you are working with a team on a project which doesn’t happen often.

  • Love as a reward? No ones is getting their morals or life advice from a interactive novel; I don’t think we have to worry about these things. Video games as well, I have yet to meet a gamer who went car jacking or joined the mob because of GTA, or joined the military because of CoD. Any correlation between the two is due to the individuals prior inclination toward these acts. It’s like medication and disorders or lung cancer and smoking. You aren’t going to develop the issue by use alone, even if it may increase the odds correlation is not causation.

  • Solution? Honestly, unless you are working with a team on a COG you’re going to have to make decisions on what needs to be done over what is extra.
    ——
    Don’t get me wrong, i’m one of those rare guys who have a flare for the romantic. Though the expectation that it’ll change is highly unlikely, unless the genre gets far more popular and becomes financially incentivising or the technology changes to make writing / coding easier. (A.I. / Bots which aid in programming, grammer/review, or editing to cut down on time.)
    ——
    TL:DR? Lazy? Read it and you’ll find out.

2 Likes

@MockTurtle Fair, enough.

I have to echo @ParrotWatcher and agree that I also often more see it as choosing a mc for the RO than the other way around.

It’s why I like Mason’s romance in Wayhaven but not Ava’s. Mason and that specific MC I paired him with are hilarious. Just as I have a very specific MC, I enjoy with Felix. Nat has more, but that is because Nat is just so nice that she can work with many MC’s and make it an enjoyable read for me. Ava has zero because I’ve just not managed to make it enjoyable to read for me.

@ashestoashes018 No, offense has been taken. If I thought you were rude, I would properly not even discuss it with you. But I do think we shall respect @MockTurtle’s wish and not derail…

1 Like

@MockTurtle yeah, it’s an unfortunate byproduct of talking about romance. People want to be represented, and when youre talking about ways to avoid making a character lose agency / keep a character from feeling like an achievement to be earned, sexuality-, morality-, and preference-locking is going to end up coming up.

That said, I’ll avoid talking about it from here :slight_smile:

I do still maintain that some form of agency should exist. I like the idea brought up that skills and such should have an effect. Reminds me of Pacthesis and such, back when those types of games were popular on deviantart (god, am I showing my age).

That said, I do understand the concern that it can become frustrating to try to romance a character, when you start bringing multiple stats or weird choice requirements in.

3 Likes

I do admit to a weakness for mages doing magic together, myself. Honestly, have to mages together and the whole romance could be one line and I would still love it. :sweat_smile:

Personally, I would like to see more morality locks - if we do have stat lock. Mostly because ethics are often the deal breaker for me in real life.

But better than locks would, of course, be if the RO discussed your actions with you. Of course such discussion are often out of the scope of the games written here. And that’s okay.

6 Likes

It would be interesting to see a hidden variable lock, such as having a similar interest (EG you wouldnt necessarily have “hobby: knitting” listed in stats, but it might be something you do with the RO). I know I did something complex, with “event” locks (5 friendship, 5 romance) for ROs, so I’d like to see something like that, as well.

1 Like

I think a problem with that is that it’s going to increase player frustration if they can’t succeed at the romance unless they have some random skill chosen elsewhere… :sweat_smile: Also, what’s wrong with the RO suggesting it to the MC as a bonding activity, and the MC going along with it even though they’ve never tried it before? :confused:

(A morality lock does certainly make sense, though. :thinking:)

7 Likes

Nothing wrong with it, at all! I just meant hidden as in not on the stats screen, not necessarily secret.

2 Likes

I hope I read your posts right. Sorry if I didn’t

To be honest most games you’re talking about with this in it are mostly action or non-romance related games with romance on the side. (which can go from being “unnecessary to better than the plot itself”) Usually Paid dating or Otome sims don’t do this (I can’t speak on free dating or Otome games because they mostly still do this). I don’t think it’s fair to call it selfish yes maybe in real life this would be considered selfish but these are video games.

Kind of going off my top comment, games are difficult to make and code. A lot of gaming companies tend to attempt to focus on the majority which is usually people who like action, shooter or RPG games.(and if they do like the romance it’s usually only for the sex scenes) Romance to them is just an extra little project, which mostly only add a few new lines in scenes anyways.

(I probably wouldn’t use Groundhog day as an example, I haven’t watched the movie in years but I thought he learned his lesson near the end?)

Just like Books and movies, I never really understand where people get the idea that the media affects people ideas of romance. Most people I know just gush about the relationship in ‘media in question’ but never look for that type of romance or end up in that type of relationship.

I admit I agree with you the fact there should more games that have romance incorporated in the plot and not there as a reward(the recent FF does something like this and it’s… uh debatable.) but most of the time that’s not the case. There really isn’t a solution without going the premade route or what some Japanese romance RPGs, dating or Otome sim games do and have a ‘true’ route/ character that the mc canonically end up with.

1 Like

I play evil characters or selfish neutral ones. I hate with big words when games. Set characters not romance for evil characters bad. Normally they do terribly bad. Because that’s not how life or romance work (sadly it would be safer if you cant fall in love for assholes) It should be romance goes person try to change or forget your character then if you do something trully evil or against morality o npc break up or at least have a crisis. that’s super cool.

Many virtual novels or if does a big letters romance fail or morality check … I don’t even say hello yet… How in hell the npc could know if I am evil or not… It has mental reading powers??!

Oh and dont get me started with… You are 21 in math skills sorry no banging due X guy need 23 … Wtf since when maths are needed to flirt in a medieval inn? REALLY

3 Likes

This is a fair point, as well. That’s why I went with events for Ilyaaren. You have to choose to spend time with the RO, and build up the relationship, but there aren’t other requirements.

In CoP:DDiC, there are some requirements, because it’s a dating sim style game, but that’s common (see: 7kpp, Pacthesis, Cheritz’s older games, like Dandelion, etc.)

2 Likes

That is also the biggest concern with morality locks for me. Also that they can end up making the RO feel incredible hypocritical:

“So you are not fine with kissing me, because I kicked a puppy, but you are still going to help me kick any other puppy we meet down the road? Are you against puppy kicking or not?”

I do like the idea of morality conflicts creating crisis point, though. That’s… pretty cool. Might have to steal that idea, if I can fit it in.

Any kind of stat lock also running the risk of the RO seeming incredible petty when you are one number short.

2 Likes

Yeah is suer petty. Due in real life people normally ended with people that complete you Opposite attracts. It would be amusing in real life date show a rpg stat charts saying NOPE THIS SAID YOU HAVE A -2 In endurance. Sorry I am an athlete with +4 we can’t bang…

2 Likes

I think “opposites attract” is quite common, but it really mostly applies to personalities, not interests. So Endurance is a good example but lots of other stats like Charisma or something could be opposites. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

What i mean is many games make needed to romance have exactly same stats that the romance option like a scholar would never romance other thing that a scholar etc. and that is bluntly stupid.I am the nerd type and like the atlete lol. :wink: I understand if charisma is used to search if a flirt is successful or not due is an action that actually requires skill. However gate a romance in base a skill Basically in roleplaying equivalent :

“This is Marissa a scholar; She only romance people with exactly A master degree in maths four minor in history and with a preference for Playing pocker… Still single…”

It could looks like stupid example… But is not is a role playing description based in some If games that requires stuff like a X math skill X cunning and details like playing X games. It is infuriating that requisites is like doing a tax receipt not role playing.

4 Likes

Lol, true :rofl:

1 Like

Morality, personality or even appearance locks (for the more shallow teenage “romances” out there) are all at least better than gender lock. Particularly in games with few romanceable characters to start with.

5 Likes

I must say trying to make complex romances, in my opinion, has been quite the challenge.

Since my game is heavily relationship focused (though not necessarily romantic) I have the liberty of being able to incorporate this in varying ways. But boy, is it a doozy.

Basically the Mc builds a personality, how people perceive them and then their inner perception, and their motivations and what not. There are no right or wrong answers with this because they aren’t pass or fail.

When it comes to ro’s, they have their own preferences sexuality wise but also personality wise. So one might prefer someone more friendly and sweet and feel protective over them and have an immediate crush, but more snarky Mc might build kind of a rivalry with them at first that might later turn into an attraction. Basically the ro reacts completely differently depending on the Mc is and each has things that they purely find dealbreakers. They can discuss their outlooks and perspectives and explore them from there, argue or disagree about a choice one made and then grow from it, and then go through there ups and downs and happy and sads and even breakups once they’re together. (It spans years.) So there’s a lot of different ways to build that, but I also didn’t want to make it so that you had to play a specific way to get with a character.

I think the thing is that a lot of games aren’t romance focused, so developing mechanics that are more than just a kind of token system are exhausting a lot of resources that would otherwise go to different aspects of the game. I think it’s just something that is inherent in this media. Everything is a reward, in a way, because it’s all programmed. You do something and then get something, you click this you read that, this means this stat increases which means this, you shoot this you kill that, etc, but how complicated you dress that up as is something very interesting to consider and explore.

I would love games that offer more dynamic systems, but I don’t the inclusion of even tacked on romance is necessarily bad or harmful. I think it, along with games in genral, offer an escape from real and unhappy things into a very generalized, simplistic, but easily digestible version including the nuance of relationships.

5 Likes

I have been struggling with this very same question with my own game, and it certainly is a tough balance. Because at the end of the day, it is a game, and unless you design a super complex AI system you WILL be interacting with a game character that is extremely shallow and limited compared to real, live, human beings. You can’t get around that fact. The only thing you CAN do, at this point of our technological understanding and more relevantly at the scope of a choice of game, is to give the illusion of depth. That is, rely on the players will to loose themselves in the magic circle and apply their suspension of disbelief, and a good writer and/or game designer knows how to get the player to willingly give up their critical faculties in the favor of a more immersive experience. (It also relies HEAVILY on the player though, some people have a much harder time than others to willingly immerse themselves in what is ultimately a fake world)

I see a lot of people giving praise to NPCs with locked-in specific sexualities and preferences, and I am personally not a fan of this system. Not only because it makes players feel cheated and locked into a playing certain type of character, but also because humans are far more complex than that and surprises does happen very regularly, ESPECIALLY with love. The best method I have comeup with is to GIVE the NPCs preferences, but DON’T make these a criteria for a romance. Don’t lock players out of a romance if their characters doesn’t meet the preferences, but change the TONE of the romance. I would love to have a game where a character who identifies as gay falls for a character of the different gender, and then react accordingly with all the emotions that might naturally occur in such a situation. (If there is anything that should potentially lock out eventual romance paths though, I’d say it’s moral choices.) The way I have created the romance mechanic in my game is having certain choices reflect differently on a friend/rival scale with the character, and then have separate romance “points” you stack up after expressing any kind of romantic interest in the character. Romance is initiated solely by your own expressed interest, but the tone can differ dramatically depending on the personality and moral inclinations of your character. It’s nowhere deep enough to make it even remotely reminiscent of real-life relationships, but as we have already established, it CAN’T be.

Then we also have the human limitations of writing a choice script game, we can’t have infinite variations as it just isn’t humanly feasible. I had an old idea where a combo of different stats gave you different unique personalities, but a quick calculation showed me that would require me to write over a hundred different personalites and that just isn’t humanly realistic. This is perhaps the greatest limitation of all to more meaningful relationship interactions, and there isn’t much to be done about it. We have to extend our sympathy and understanding to the writer in regards to how quickly and massively a choice script game could potentially branch. And again, the best option we have is to willfully enter the magic circle and find some worth in the illusion of depth.

6 Likes

You know, am I the only one who would not feel comfortable with an AI who could simulate humans emotions?

If a computer system could simulate being hurt, does it really matter if it is 1 and 0 sending a message that message - it is still hurt.

Part of me think that an AI capable of simulating real life relationships would be unethical to use in story based games since we often put characters through the wringer. Plus it comes to close to actual real life manipulation for me.

It don’t know. It raises ethical question to me. I don’t think I would be comfortable playing a game with romances if I knew the AI was that advanced. It would be too real.

Complete sidetrack I know.

1 Like

Yes, AI definitely creates a whole horde of ethical problems that’s outside the scope of this topic, but that’s another “proof”, if you will, that virtual relationships will always, and perhaps should always, be quite lacking. But it is an interesting discussion nonetheless.

1 Like