Separator

Relationships in games: How simple math destroys player agency

Christian_profile_pic
Tuesday, April 05, 2011
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Jay Henningsen

I completely agree with Christian. Because developers handle relationships as simple mathematics, I find myself largely ignoring the interactions and just focusing on how to exploit the system. My only interest in befriending other characters boils down to what rewards I can get from them. I think the game industry can do better.

I almost never pursue romance options in role-playing games. At their worst, game romances are sensationalistic and meant to appeal to the 14-year-old boys in the audience. At their best, they’re clichéd, ceremonial, dry, and potentially disturbing. In either case, they say nothing about the human condition -- the sole reason why we connect with stories about relationships at all.

I recently replayed Dragon Age: Origins, and I ran into an identical problem in my second playthrough that I did in my first: an unwanted love triangle.
Dragon Age Morrigan
Basically, by just treating my companions with respect and not acting like a dick to the world at large, I’ve somehow managed to get a few of them to fall in love with me (Lelianna and Zevran in my first playthrough and those two plus Alistair in my second, which I guess makes this one a love square?)
 
One of the big problems for me is that I haven’t pursued any of these relationships; I’ve done no flirting; I’ve made no come-ons. Repeatedly sending signals that just about any adult would pick up on in real life (telling Leliana what a good friend she is; telling Alistair how much I appreciate our friendship) effectively just delays the inevitable; it nudges their approval meters up by a point or two, instead of the 10 or so if I’d said something flirty. 
 
 
Over time, those points add up and none of the context or meaning of my dialogue with these characters makes a difference. They forget the things I’ve actually said and only remember the approval numbers derived from our conversations.
 
By just role playing my avatar as a decent human being, I now have to deal with a whole mess of drama that comes off as arbitrary and immature. Because of reductive math -- a number scale of how much someone likes me -- I’m involved in an annoying situation that brings the pacing of the story to a halt. Even though I’ve spent the entire game saying that Leliana’s religion is bullshit, she doesn’t seem to care, because the numbers still manage to add up in my favor.
 
I’m not convinced that stories about relationships work when left to player agency. And I don’t just mean romantic relationships; I mean relationships with other people, period. Typically, companion characters’ personal politics are black and white, their emotions are extreme, and their lives are completely dependent on the player. They're less like people and more like robots reacting to whatever stimuli the player creates through the choices he or she makes (actually, I guess that’s truly what they are in terms of the programming). They don't even have relationships with each other, much less with the world around them. They're just narrative devices -- foils to help expand the story of your hero.
 
Basically, this all comes down to a storytelling vs. agency issue and the conflict that can arise between the two. What makes for better storytelling might not be what the player wants. And that can be a problem.
A good relationship story, in my Dragon Age case, could have been the triangle of unrequited love I accidentally fostered. God knows, looking back at my earlier youth, I sympathize for every girl I knew who had to delicately balance my crush with our friendship. I didn’t make it easy for them. But, at the very least, those relationships had an arc to them, and we all got stories out of them (some better than others).
 
Unfortunately, the lack of a relationship between party members causes this potential story to break down. Their only interaction with each other is through me, referencing my other relationships. The story lacks conflict.
 
The story of a single, unrequited love could have been interesting. However, that particular story always conveniently ends when I say, “thanks, but not interested.” Allowing for player agency, the player can turn someone down and continue with the game, unburdened by the optional relationship side plot. In this case, the story lacks a proper end or even a middle. The end isn’t so much that my character rejects another character, but more so that I, as the player, say “stop” and the game itself obliges by flipping a switch. The relationship plot goes from on to off without any further exploration.
 
Then there’s the story of any one of these relationships. Unfortunately, they all have to allow for any number of variables based on my choices -- there’s that pesky math. My relationship with Leliana could have been a beautiful tragedy -- something with a lot of potential that falls apart because I can’t accept her religion, of all things. POW! Now that hits on all cylinders; scorned lovers and religion … I dare you to invent juicier conflict.
But of course, the story never plays out that way. Our disagreements gain some negative points but our positive points outweigh those, so … it must be true love, right? After a lengthy talk about “us” and how great “we” are, the virtual avatars get down to the physical act of love, as awkwardly and unsatisfyingly as only masses of pixels can. And afterwards … well, that’s it. That’s the end of the story; the ultimate reward for the relationship side quest: sex. Because, as we all know, a relationship just stays frozen in time once sex gets involved (please note my sarcasm). That’s a lot of ceremony for such a weak payoff.
 
But what if the game didn’t have to account for as much player agency? What if there weren’t several options for relationships, but only one or two? And what if the player’s agency, like so much of the genuine role playing that’s so successful in recent BioWare releases, simply boiled down to conversation? 
 
The relationship happens, as a core element of the plot, and your agency is in how you handle it: what you say, how you treat the other person, the effects of your other relationships, the effects of the other character's other relationships, the kind of person you choose to be, and how it affects both you and the other character. What if all the time, energy, and resources that go in to fleshing out a lot of optional side plots went into writing this one story and its very limited number of branches?
 
Again, these ideas don’t just apply to romantic relationships.
I think the most I've gotten out of Dragon Age 2 so far has been my (well, Hawke’s) relationship with my brother, Carver. We’re family and we’re rivals. He looks up to me at the same time he grows jealous of me. He’ll defend both my life and my character to the bitter end but never without a constant voice of doubt in the back of his head. We fight like dogs and stick together like a pack. We both, at least partially, blame each other for our sister’s death. Our strained relationship is a constant source of stress for our beleaguered mother; in fact, most of our fights revolve around her. That’s downright Oedipal.
 
My relationship with Carver is also much more restricted than my relationship with other characters. I'm reacting to him just as much as he's reacting to me, and that's what makes it so convincing. I can't just say something nice and completely turn him around; his attitude is always an issue. My role playing manifests in how I handle our relationship.
 
Ultimately -- and I know this isn’t a popular opinion among the “hardcore” crowd these days -- I think story-based games, particularly RPGs, are going to need to become more linear if they want to tell an emotionally satisfying story. That’s not to say completely linear, like a first-person shooter, but player agency, or actual role playing, is going to need to come down to smaller, but more personal choices. These choices will affect character development and provide the player with an opportunity to more thoroughly explore a game’s themes, rather than just give high-concept plot points that add nerd-coveted “replayability.” 
To get off the RPG track (and, let’s face it, give poor BioWare a break), I think that Heavy Rain is an example of a video game with an open-ended narrative driven by the player’s choices where the optional romance -- and all of the relationships -- work. 
 
The relationship that develops between Shelby and Lauren always ends tragically, regardless of how the player chooses to handle the moments that lead to that tragic conclusion. Nevertheless, the impact of the relationship has greater meaning for me precisely because of how I handled those moments. And it would work just as well for anyone else who might pursue it differently. The majority of the plot is linear and scripted, but the meaning it has on the player is informed by the player’s small, but emotionally relevant choices. 
 
Similarly, even though Madison feels completely superfluous to the overall plot of the game (and even though, in my playthrough, I didn’t have Ethan pursue a relationship with her), I can see how that potential sub-plot could be incredibly satisfying.
Madison isn’t simply reacting to the things Ethan says, or vice-versa; instead, their individual paths cross, they spend time together, and possibly come together (please don’t take that out of context). The relationship feels like it’s actually built on a foundation that continues to develop over the events of the game’s plot, as opposed to flipping a switch because some background math finally tipped the scale to one side. It’s spontaneous but not random -- exactly the way a relationship is.

Originally posted at digitalhippos.com
Madison isn’t simply reacting to the things Ethan says, or vice-versa; instead, their individual paths cross, they spend time together and, eventually, possibly come together (please don’t take that out of context). The relationship feels like it’s actually built on a foundation that continues to develop over the events of the game’s plot, as opposed to flipping a switch because some background math finally tipped the scale to one side. It’s spontaneous but not random, exactly the way love is.I almost never pursue romance options in RPGs. At their worst, game romances are sensationalistic, meant to appeal to the 14-year old boys in the audience. At their best, they’re cliched, ceremonial, dry, and potentially disturbing. In either case, they say nothing about the human condition, the sole reason why we connect with stories about relationships at all.
I recently replayed Dragon Age: Origins and I ran into an identical problem in this, my second play through, that I ran into in my first: an unwanted love triangle.
Basically, by just treating my companions with respect and not acting like a dick to the world at large, I’ve somehow managed to get a few of them to fall in love with me (Lelianna and Zevran in my first play through, plus Alistair in my second, which I guess makes this one a love square?).
One of the big problems for me is that I haven’t pursued any of these relationships; I’ve done no flirting; I’ve made no come-ons. Repeatedly sending signals that just about any adult would pick up on in real life (telling Lelianna what a good friend she is; telling Alistair how much I appreciate our friendship) effectively just delays the inevitable; it nudges their approval meters up by a point or two, instead of the 10 or so if I’d said something flirty. 
Over time, those points add up and none of the context or meaning of my dialogue with these characters makes a difference. They forget the things I’ve actually said and only remember the approval numbers derived from our conversations.
By just role-playing my avatar as a decent human being, I now have to deal with a whole mess of drama that comes off as arbitrary and immature. Because of reductive math -- a number scale of how much someone likes me -- I’m involved in an annoying situation that drags the game down and brings the pacing to a halt. Even though I’ve spent the entire game saying that Lelianna’s religion is bullshit, she doesn’t seem to care, because the numbers still manage to add up in my favor.
I’m not convinced that stories about relationships work when left to player agency. And I don’t just mean romantic relationships; I mean relationships with other people, period. Typically, companion characters’ personal politics are black and white, their emotions are extreme and their lives are completely dependent on the player. They're less like people and more like robots reacting to whatever stimuli the player creates through the choices he/she makes (actually, I guess that’s literally what they are in terms of the programming). They don't even have relationships with each other, much less with the world around them. They're just narrative devices; foils to help expand the story of your hero.
Basically, this all comes down to a storytelling vs. agency issue, and the conflict that can arise between the two. What makes for better storytelling might not be what the player wants. And that can be a problem.
A good relationship story, in my Dragon Age case, could have been the triangle of unrequited love I accidentally fostered. God knows, looking back at my earlier youth, I sympathize for every girl I knew who had to delicately balance my crush with our friendship. I didn’t make it easy for them. But, at the very least, those relationships had an arc to them, and we all got stories out of them (some better than others).
Unfortunately, the lack of a relationship between party members causes this potential story to break down. Their only interaction with each other is through me, referencing my other relationships. The story lacks conflict.
The story of a single, unrequited love could have been interesting. However, that particular story always conveniently ends when I say, “thanks, but not interested.” Allowing for player agency, the player can turn someone down and continue with the game, unburdened by the optional relationship side plot. In this case, the story lacks a proper end or even a middle. The end isn’t so much that my character rejects another character, but moreso that I, as the player, say “stop” and the game itself obliges by flipping a switch. The relationship plot goes from on to off without any further exploration.
Then there’s the story of any one of these relationships. Unfortunately, all have to allow for any number of variables based on my choices. And, of course, there’s that pesky math. My relationship with Lelianna could have been a beautiful tragedy; something with a lot of potential that falls apart because I can’t accept her religion, of all things. POW! Now that hits on all cylinders; scorned lovers and religion … I dare you to invent juicier conflict.
But of course, the story never plays out that way. Our disagreements gain some negative points but our positive points outweigh those, so … it must be true love, right? After a lengthy talk about “us” and how great “we” are, the virtual avatars get down to the physical act of love, as awkwardly and unsatisfyingly as only masses of pixels can. And afterwards … well, that’s it. That’s the end of the story; the ultimate reward for the relationship side quest: sex. Because, as we all know, a relationship just stays frozen in time once sex gets involved (please note my sarcasm). That’s a lot of ceremony for such a weak payoff.
But what if the game didn’t have to account for as much player agency? What if there weren’t several options for relationships, but only one or two? And what if the player’s agency, like so much of the genuine roleplaying that’s so successful in recent BioWare releases, simply boiled down to conversation? 
The relationship happens, as a core element of the plot, and your agency is in how you handle it: what you say; how you treat the other person; the effects of your other relationships; the effects of the romantic interest’s other relationships; the kind of person you choose to be and how it affects both you and your significant other? What if all the time, energy and resources that go in to fleshing out a lot of optional side plots went into writing this one story and its very limited number of branches?
And again, these ideas don’t just apply to romantic relationships.
I think the most I've gotten out of Dragon Age 2 so far has been my (well, Hawke’s) relationship with my brother, Carver. We’re family and we’re rivals. He looks up to me at the same time he grows jealous of me. He’ll defend both my life and my character to the bitter end, but never without a constant voice of doubt in the back of his head. We fight like dogs and stick together like a pack. We both, at least partially, blame each other for our sister’s death. Our strained relationship is a constant source of stress for our beleaguered mother; in fact, most of our fights revolve around her. That’s downright Oedipal.
Ultimately -- and I know this isn’t a popular opinion among the “hardcore” crowd these days -- I think story-based games, particularly RPGs, are going to need to become more linear if they want to tell an emotionally satisfying story. That’s not to say completely linear, like a first-person shooter, but player agency, or actual roleplaying, is going to need to come down to smaller, but more personal choices; choices that affect character development and provide the player with an opportunity to more thoroughly explore a game’s themes, rather than high-concept plot points that add nerd-coveted “replayability.” 
To get off the RPG track (and, let’s face it, give poor BioWare a break), I think Heavy Rain is an example of a video game with an open-ended narrative driven by the player’s choices where the optional romance -- and all of the relationships -- work. 
The relationship that develops between Shelby and Lauren always ends tragically, regardless of how the player chooses to handle the moments that lead to that tragic conclusion. Nevertheless, the impact of the relationship has greater meaning for me precisely because of how I handled those moments. And it would work just as well for anyone else who might pursue it differently. The majority of the plot is linear and scripted, but the meaning it has on the player is informed by the player’s small, but emotionally relevant choices.
Similarly, even though Madison feels completely superfluous to the overall plot of the game, and even though, in my play through of the game, I didn’t have Ethan pursue a relationship with her, I can see how that potential relationship sub-plot could be incredibly satisfying.
Madison isn’t simply reacting to the things Ethan says, or vice-versa; instead, their individual paths cross, they spend time together and, eventually, possibly come together (please don’t take that out of context). The relationship feels like it’s actually built on a foundation that continues to develop over the events of the game’s plot, as opposed to flipping a switch because some background math finally tipped the scale to one side. It’s spontaneous but not random, exactly the way love is.I almost never pursue romance options in RPGs. At their worst, game romances are sensationalistic, meant to appeal to the 14-year old boys in the audience. At their best, they’re cliched, ceremonial, dry, and potentially disturbing. In either case, they say nothing about the human condition, the sole reason why we connect with stories about relationships at all.
I recently replayed Dragon Age: Origins and I ran into an identical problem in this, my second play through, that I ran into in my first: an unwanted love triangle.
Basically, by just treating my companions with respect and not acting like a dick to the world at large, I’ve somehow managed to get a few of them to fall in love with me (Lelianna and Zevran in my first play through, plus Alistair in my second, which I guess makes this one a love square?).
One of the big problems for me is that I haven’t pursued any of these relationships; I’ve done no flirting; I’ve made no come-ons. Repeatedly sending signals that just about any adult would pick up on in real life (telling Lelianna what a good friend she is; telling Alistair how much I appreciate our friendship) effectively just delays the inevitable; it nudges their approval meters up by a point or two, instead of the 10 or so if I’d said something flirty. 
Over time, those points add up and none of the context or meaning of my dialogue with these characters makes a difference. They forget the things I’ve actually said and only remember the approval numbers derived from our conversations.
By just role-playing my avatar as a decent human being, I now have to deal with a whole mess of drama that comes off as arbitrary and immature. Because of reductive math -- a number scale of how much someone likes me -- I’m involved in an annoying situation that drags the game down and brings the pacing to a halt. Even though I’ve spent the entire game saying that Lelianna’s religion is bullshit, she doesn’t seem to care, because the numbers still manage to add up in my favor.
I’m not convinced that stories about relationships work when left to player agency. And I don’t just mean romantic relationships; I mean relationships with other people, period. Typically, companion characters’ personal politics are black and white, their emotions are extreme and their lives are completely dependent on the player. They're less like people and more like robots reacting to whatever stimuli the player creates through the choices he/she makes (actually, I guess that’s literally what they are in terms of the programming). They don't even have relationships with each other, much less with the world around them. They're just narrative devices; foils to help expand the story of your hero.
Basically, this all comes down to a storytelling vs. agency issue, and the conflict that can arise between the two. What makes for better storytelling might not be what the player wants. And that can be a problem.
A good relationship story, in my Dragon Age case, could have been the triangle of unrequited love I accidentally fostered. God knows, looking back at my earlier youth, I sympathize for every girl I knew who had to delicately balance my crush with our friendship. I didn’t make it easy for them. But, at the very least, those relationships had an arc to them, and we all got stories out of them (some better than others).
Unfortunately, the lack of a relationship between party members causes this potential story to break down. Their only interaction with each other is through me, referencing my other relationships. The story lacks conflict.
The story of a single, unrequited love could have been interesting. However, that particular story always conveniently ends when I say, “thanks, but not interested.” Allowing for player agency, the player can turn someone down and continue with the game, unburdened by the optional relationship side plot. In this case, the story lacks a proper end or even a middle. The end isn’t so much that my character rejects another character, but moreso that I, as the player, say “stop” and the game itself obliges by flipping a switch. The relationship plot goes from on to off without any further exploration.
Then there’s the story of any one of these relationships. Unfortunately, all have to allow for any number of variables based on my choices. And, of course, there’s that pesky math. My relationship with Lelianna could have been a beautiful tragedy; something with a lot of potential that falls apart because I can’t accept her religion, of all things. POW! Now that hits on all cylinders; scorned lovers and religion … I dare you to invent juicier conflict.
But of course, the story never plays out that way. Our disagreements gain some negative points but our positive points outweigh those, so … it must be true love, right? After a lengthy talk about “us” and how great “we” are, the virtual avatars get down to the physical act of love, as awkwardly and unsatisfyingly as only masses of pixels can. And afterwards … well, that’s it. That’s the end of the story; the ultimate reward for the relationship side quest: sex. Because, as we all know, a relationship just stays frozen in time once sex gets involved (please note my sarcasm). That’s a lot of ceremony for such a weak payoff.
But what if the game didn’t have to account for as much player agency? What if there weren’t several options for relationships, but only one or two? And what if the player’s agency, like so much of the genuine roleplaying that’s so successful in recent BioWare releases, simply boiled down to conversation? 
The relationship happens, as a core element of the plot, and your agency is in how you handle it: what you say; how you treat the other person; the effects of your other relationships; the effects of the romantic interest’s other relationships; the kind of person you choose to be and how it affects both you and your significant other? What if all the time, energy and resources that go in to fleshing out a lot of optional side plots went into writing this one story and its very limited number of branches?
And again, these ideas don’t just apply to romantic relationships.
I think the most I've gotten out of Dragon Age 2 so far has been my (well, Hawke’s) relationship with my brother, Carver. We’re family and we’re rivals. He looks up to me at the same time he grows jealous of me. He’ll defend both my life and my character to the bitter end, but never without a constant voice of doubt in the back of his head. We fight like dogs and stick together like a pack. We both, at least partially, blame each other for our sister’s death. Our strained relationship is a constant source of stress for our beleaguered mother; in fact, most of our fights revolve around her. That’s downright Oedipal.
Ultimately -- and I know this isn’t a popular opinion among the “hardcore” crowd these days -- I think story-based games, particularly RPGs, are going to need to become more linear if they want to tell an emotionally satisfying story. That’s not to say completely linear, like a first-person shooter, but player agency, or actual roleplaying, is going to need to come down to smaller, but more personal choices; choices that affect character development and provide the player with an opportunity to more thoroughly explore a game’s themes, rather than high-concept plot points that add nerd-coveted “replayability.” 
To get off the RPG track (and, let’s face it, give poor BioWare a break), I think Heavy Rain is an example of a video game with an open-ended narrative driven by the player’s choices where the optional romance -- and all of the relationships -- work. 
The relationship that develops between Shelby and Lauren always ends tragically, regardless of how the player chooses to handle the moments that lead to that tragic conclusion. Nevertheless, the impact of the relationship has greater meaning for me precisely because of how I handled those moments. And it would work just as well for anyone else who might pursue it differently. The majority of the plot is linear and scripted, but the meaning it has on the player is informed by the player’s small, but emotionally relevant choices.
Similarly, even though Madison feels completely superfluous to the overall plot of the game, and even though, in my play through of the game, I didn’t have Ethan pursue a relationship with her, I can see how that potential relationship sub-plot could be incredibly satisfying.
Madison isn’t simply reacting to the things Ethan says, or vice-versa; instead, their individual paths cross, they spend time together and, eventually, possibly come together (please don’t take that out of context). The relationship feels like it’s actually built on a foundation that continues to develop over the events of the game’s plot, as opposed to flipping a switch because some background math finally tipped the scale to one side. It’s spontaneous but not random, exactly the way love is.
 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (14)
Scott_pilgrim_avatar
April 03, 2011

Great read!

But I think your assessment of Heavy Rain is overly optimistic where Ethan and Madison are concerned. I sort of accidently stumbled into it and suddenly found myself wondering why, with his son missing and on the verge of death, Ethan would stop to even think about kissing Madison--the prompt which leads to their "coming together."

However, the relationship between Shelby and Lauren made a little more sense, and I liked the way it developed.

Christian_profile_pic
April 03, 2011

Thanks, Ben!

Yeah, I was working off of assumption that things work out more convincingly between Ethan and Madison. In the moment where I could have made the choice, it felt like it could have made sense. But it speaks to your point that I rejected her; I couldn't accept that scenario with everything that I (Ethan) was going through at the time.

Avatarheader
April 03, 2011

I agree with you to a point. As you mentioned, if you just drop someone's hopes of having a relationship with you, in real life the desire doesn't simply disappear immediately (not usually anyway), yet in video games a switch makes that possible. On the other hand, though, not everyone wants to have some lovesick stalker in their party constantly staring at them with dewy eyes and reminding them of how good they could be together if they just gave them a chance. More realistic, yes. Better for the narrative, sure. More annoying for someone who wants nothing to do with that character romantically and to just play the game? Damn straight on that too.

Christian_profile_pic
April 03, 2011

Thanks for your comment, Scott. :)

Yeah, that's part of my point: what makes for a better story vs. what the player wants. I'm not advocating for more variables, like if you choose to dump that character. Rather, I'm arguing for the opposite: fewer variables, less choice in the high-level plot.

I'm arguing that other characters shouldn't be reacting to the player as much as the player should be reacting to those characters. If you (the designer) want to write a relationship story, then write a relationship story; let role-playing come in in how my reactions to the plot affect the development of that story. Instead of presenting the "choice" as "yes or no," present it as "yes, but...."

It's the same logic as in Mass Effect. You aren't deciding if Shepherd is good or evil -- he/she is always "good" -- the ends of his/her choices arguably always justify the means, regardless of how you do things. The same thing with relationships: the story happens, period. Where you come in is in how you play through it. Otherwise ... just don't bother, because it will always feel like that doughy-eyed lover annoying me at every turn (or three or four, as in my DA:O case).

Pict0079-web
April 05, 2011

Great article, Christian. I've always had reservations about playing through some of the relationships in games such as this one and Mass Effect. The whole concept of relationship points is awkward, like a stylized version of The Sims. I really hate that type of system, because it really doesn't hold as much meaning as it would have if it was based on a linear storyline.

Take Final Fantasy 13, for instance. I became pretty attached to watching Snow and Serah's relationship unfold in the flashbacks. The whole drama between the unwanted fate of a l'Cie made for some really heartfelt moments. It even played a huge role in Lightning's story as she had to reassess how she ignored her sister's plea for help.

I don't think I can get that kind of emotional intensity from something such as Mass Effect. However, it still sounds interesting, just as a goofy game design gimmick. As long as it doesn't feel like a sci-fi version of The Sims, I think I can live with it.

Christian_profile_pic
April 05, 2011

Thanks, Jonathan!

Yeah, I really like your FF13 example -- I felt the same way. I felt similarly about the relationships between the immortal and mortal characters in Lost Odyssey; Seth and her son (I forget his name) and the inevitability that she will outlive him; Kaim and Sarah, though young and sexy physically, were like the old couple who've been together forever, formed a partnership that makes them able to withstand just about anything, and serve as examples -- as parental figures -- for the other characters; and the way Jensen, who uses humor to disarm everyone around him, could be disarmed by his feelings for tha Stripper Empress (I forget her name, too, but that works). All pretty basic stories that we've seen before, the the way they develop and the themes they touch on hit pretty basic chords in all of us, I would argue.*

*Not that they necessarily resonate for all of us, but they did for me.

Default_picture
April 05, 2011

Very interesting piece. I agree about Heavy Rain. I suppose there's two ways of looking at HR's romance--either a) it's unrealistic that Ethan would indulge in such things under the circumstances, or b) Madison comforts Ethan in a time of great stress, and (SPOILER ALERT) due to her dubious motives, eggs on the encounter. I agree more with the latter. One could argue that, absent Madison's desire to "get the story",the "romance" wouldn't have happened.

Christian_profile_pic
April 05, 2011

Oooh -- I like that angle, Jason. Actually makes me want to play that scene again with that in mind.

Hib1
April 05, 2011

Here's a question: if the math was still there but hidden from the player, would it change anything? If we look at DA2, would removing the +X Friendship/rivalry from the player's view but keep them running in the background help player agency?

Christian_profile_pic
April 05, 2011

For me, yeah, I think putting all of that behind the curtain would help a lot. But it'd help with the sort of disconnect that I feel, not so much with telling a better story. Personally, I'd love to see that concept married to L.A. Noire's facial animations. That could be really cool.

The root of the problem is how simple the math is, not as much its transparency. I'll go back to my Leliana example; knowing her character as I do, I have a hard time believing that she'd be able to be with me, knowing how I feel about the relgion to which she devotes herself entirely. But she has no real memory beyond the moment-to-moment. No doubt a big part of it all just comes down to time and waiting for better AI.

But ultimately, I still think that the best way to tell the relationship story -- like the rest of the story -- is to just tell it, and not let the player have complete control over it. Not forever, of course, but in the context of where games are now.

Poland_hetalia
April 05, 2011

Actually, if I remember correctly, one of the things about DA 2 is that relationships DIDN'T just stop after the sex sequence. They continue afterwards.

As far as the "doesn't stop hitting on you" angle, when I played through DA 2, Anders hit on Hawke once, but after a rejection he kept to himself. I chose to follow the romantic arc with Merrill (who also never really hit on Hawke except after the flirt-o-meter was shifted to 11 on his part, which I don't think counts). Aveline never flirted (though I have heard that even if you try to flirt with her, it doesn't work out), and Isabella never stopped flirting with Hawke, but this was despite the fact that she was only barely in the "friends" category (and in Isabella's case, incessant flirting would actually fit with the character).

That being said, I agree that the Carver relationship was interesting, and I was disappointed when it came to an abrupt end (though he was completely useless inside my party, so I didn't complain *TOO* much).

Christian_profile_pic
April 05, 2011

Wish I could comment on DA2 (beyond those two paragraphs), but I won't be able to see anything beyond early Act 2 until a patch hits. :-\

EDIT: Also, my beef with the characters in DA:O isn't that they hit on me; it's that they act like I'm hitting on them, when I'm not.

Me
April 08, 2011

My issue with "relationships" in games is that they just don't matter. The basic experience of playing any game with potential romantic entanglements wouldn't actually change if you sleep with character X or scorn character Y. You're still going to crawl the same dungeons, kill the same bosses, earn the same gear. We might come up with a few isolated examples where relationships open up side quests or proffer up a few pieces of loot, but by and large the game and the roleplaying don't interact with one another.

This is why the LMNO cancellation is kind of tragic. Yes, it would have been a three hour game, but that was intentional to allow for replayability by way of drastically altering the various relationships in the game. It sounded like the relationships would have been PART of the game instead of a distraction from it, if that makes sense.

Default_picture
April 08, 2011

@Dennis
You're looking at it merely from a game mechanics perspective. The same criticism could be lobbed at any number of movie sex scenes--that they're tangential to the plot. But in many cases--Heavy Rain, Mass Effect 1 & 2--they enhance the narrative (an element that many gamers consider peripheral).  

An argument could be made that games have become too plot-heavy. But if a particular title calls for a well-written narrative, then it makes sense to expand said narrative with the range of human experience--and love is a vital component of this. Otherwise, one could plausibly claim that every plot element, including romance, is an unnecessary distraction.

I don't think it should necessarily follow that if X happens (X being "consummating the relationship"), then Y and Z happens. "Relationships", if done correctly, should exist for their own sake, and to enhance the narrative.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.