I’m thinking of developing a game that focuses a lot on romance, and how your relationships develop as you get to know the characters. The plan is that you’ll even explore different themes depending on which LI you choose to romance, on top of the overarching themes of the game.
But I also thought it would be interesting to write an aromantic route, in which the focus is getting to know yourself and what your relationship with yourself is like, and how that develops as you explore the story and world around you, which is post-apocalyptic.
So would this be something people are interested in? Would you feel cheated if there was content on exploring yourself that you couldn’t access as well in one of the romantic routes? Keeping in mind that neither the aromantic nor the romantic routes would result in you missing out on story content, and that not choosing a route at all wouldn’t be an option.
Why not have friendship routes instead? Just because you’re aro doesn’t mean you can never get close to people and have intimate emotional relationships.
I think discrimination Knowledge yourself in base of your sex desire… Is not a good idea. I could want romance a character that doesn’t mean I don’t want deep into my character personality and background.
Why not have a friend route anda romantic route? and let people choose and knowledge of yourself be able to access to everyone. That way everyone will have more orless same quantity and quality of content and increase replay value
It seems to me that very few CS authors have decided to take this route. I can only think it is because it would mean an increase in the workload by adding an additional plot-line for each RO npc character.
As it is, without experience it is hard enough to know what time, effort and resources you will be committing.
Romance means different things to different people - trying to target as many people as you can with your game makes sense to me.
I get that aro people also want more games targeted for them but I don’t think romance is the right genre for it. Kinda sounds like including a jedi knight in a historical fiction imo.
Why not I know aro people that wants to have deep relationship with a special person and have deep feelings. All of you are like portraying them as solitary people that doesn’t want have a deep connection with other person.
A romance cog should be about feelings and connection and that’s something an aro could feel. So I see great including them orat least try to. Of course , Aro people here is the one should talk
I’m no expert in the topic actually I seek to learn here.
Anyway what you are talking about is asexual right? Not the same as aromantic? If I get it right asexuals can be interested in romantic relationships without having sex, but aromantic people aren’t interested in the romance thing more like close friends and stuff like that?
Lol, You are right. I discovered here that I am a demi romantic. And There are years that I don’t want to have physical relationship. Still I like playing romantic games and understand them . And even if weren’t the case. One of great things of This companies Hosted and Cog is a gender identity positive to all spectrum. So let people see positively that aro people could have deep connection could open the mind of players who decided try out that path.
I don’t understand why some people are afraid to try play as other genres and attractions. Is a way to empathy and understand better the others.
I’d really like to see this explored in a game, and I would love to have the chance to play these kinds of routes! This has actually been one of the things I’ve been looking for in CS games, and seeing a discussion about it is heartening.
The CS games I’ve seen that have the best character development have been romance-focused and require romancing the character to fully explore their character development, and it’s always been a bit disappointing to have to play these routes without actually wanting to see any romance. Some aromantic routes also seem a bit tacked-on or at the very least have less character development than romantic routes, and I’d love to see this change.
(I might be blending aro routes and aroace routes, since they’re usually not separate in most CS games.)
No, asexual people can be also be aromantic - that doesn’t mean there isn’t interest in a relationship or exploring a relationship.
The Original author is talking about an inner exploration of how we would feel about these relationships and just as there are people all over the place on the gender issue, I think there can be people all over the place on a relationship scale as well.
Which is why I linked the article - it shows that there can be a wide range of people included in any one category that is named.
i’m not familiar with what you mean by aromantic, since it’s not part of my country’s culture but isn’t someone aromantic just someone who isn’t interested in romance ? you can’t really make a romance for someone who doesn’t want romance
Maybe the dating site profile thing for character creation wasn’t the best way to do it for some people, but I meant how it seems to offer romantic routes without the sex part in it and vica-versa (not the “you don’t want sex? Then no romance for you” kinda approach)
It was just a way to asking for personal data in game character and not looking like artificial. You could say you aren’t interested in dating . It is just to help a friend gain some money. And yes game let you have relationships with no interest in intercourse. And have deep meaningful friendships.
I’ll admit it. It just made me more confused. Wasn’t the article about asexuals not aros?
But now that I think about it the source of the problem might be bc I don’t even understand myself all that much. Anyway I think I’ll just leave this to people who understand these stuff better.
You are muddling the issue. While aroaces are indeed relatively common within the aro and ace community please do not confuse the issue by bring in aces and sexless relationships in a discussion specifically about aro and romance, you are confusing and indirectly painting two things as the same even though they are not.
You would not link to an arcticle about gay relationships, when the question was specifically about transgender people, would you?
As for the OP: Friendships routes, friends with benefit routes and and QP-relationships would all be worth looking into.
To be fair, anything that isn’t hetero is, by its very nature, muddled. What I mean is that the same person that defines themselves as gay could also be in a relation with a trans. Generally there is a lot of intersection in the lgbt+ community so keep in mind that touching one thing generally means you will have to brush against several others
