But what if: a videogame where the romance options are actually non-deterministic. No matter how many friendship coins you put in, she's maybe just not actually into you. And it's random and baked into each save file.
So many romance quests in games feel like picking out what car you want to take home from the dealership, and it's super gross and not actually very fun.
But what if: a game where if you were too aggressively trying to put Friendship Coins into someone they'd get uncomfortable and try to get you to stop because that's actually super creepy.
@starkatt this is narratively fascinating. I'm reminded of Mass Effect. I agree that the "pick your ME lover" plot-lines are poorly handled, but getting rejected isn't "fun".
This logic applied to other systems generates stress. What if you do everything right, but the galaxy sometimes still gets eaten by reapers at the end, and it's baked into the save? Failure is a miserable (if realistic) experience.
No solutions, only more questions. 🤔
@Longwing There's usually more than one romance option, so getting rejected by one person isn't the same as getting defeated in the main plotline.
@Longwing I can super understand power fantasy but uncritically applying it to relationships still feels kinda not-great to do universally.
@starkatt dial-a-lover isn't the solution (Tangentially, if you're going to let the player "romance" a list of people, why even give that list gender preferences? Shouldn't they all be basically Bi until a player shows interest?).
I'm not saying the current "standard" for these plots is good, just that I don't know how to replace them with something better.
@starkatt @Longwing what i'd probably do is have choices, but make the player be committed to a choice by time-gating the development of that subplot to the development of the main story - and also having it not be obvious from the outset how the object of your affection will react
that way your developing relationship with your amour sort of braids itself with the story of the game and provides another way for the ending to vary, if that makes sense
@typhlosion @starkatt tying these things more closely to the main plot is definitely part of it.
We're seeing the confluence of a bunch of conventions in RPGs which get weird when applied to romance.
Timed quests = bad
Optional subquests = good
Player should be able to "win" a subquest = good
Thus you wind up with these oddly modular "pick who your romance will be with" plot lines that don't slot into the main story. They're divested from the rest of the plot, and as @starkatt put it, it's like you're shopping for a car.
A larger stable of variably interested NPCs might be the solution after all. This play-though, john's straight and Susan's just not that in to you, but you have this really sweet moment with Chris in act 2...
@starkatt I agree. I don't think the games=entertainment automatically excuses this. It's far more complex.
This also intersects with the weird interplay of gaming and difficulty. No one is allowed to mock Dark Souls for being hard, but Gone Home is raked over the coals for not being hard enough. Are setbacks always bad? When are they appropriate? When are you adding useless frustration?
I love FTL, but hate it's arbitrary roguelike gameplay... yet that randomness brings me back.