The Problem With Relationship Systems in Games

  • 51 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for thatpinguino
thatpinguino

2988

Forum Posts

602

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By thatpinguino  Staff

No Caption Provided

How many years ago was it when dating-sims were believed to be the realm of body-pillow hugging Otaku ? 5? 10? It wasn’t too long ago that the dating-sim genre carried a pretty nasty stigma and very few companies outside of Japan would even produce a game that focused on interpersonal relationships. Fast-forward to today, where few RPGs don’t have some type of dating-sim-esque relationship mechanic. While modern shooters are slathering leveling peanut butter all over their gun chocolate, RPGs are coating their salmon dragons with dating-sim cream cheese (lox and cream cheese is delicious! Try it!). It seems that companies like Atlus and Bioware have figured out that meaningful and memorable character interactions are valuable components of story-driven rpgs, and they have put mechanical weight behind those characters as a result. In RPGs of old, character interactions would either be wholly scripted or largely scripted with a handful of dialog choices peppered in. How these few choices affected the game may not have been readily apparent for hours, or at all. However, the modern convention is to make relationship systems as transparent as possible-- to gamify even basic character interactions. While this makes for more compelling gameplay, I’m worried that modern relationship systems overlook a few facets of actual human relationships in their rush for fun. So I thought I would show a few of those areas for improvement!

Aww Now I can't hang out with Mysterious Fox anymore
Aww Now I can't hang out with Mysterious Fox anymore

1. Relationships with Finite Endpoints Before the End of the Game- One of the biggest problems with modern relationship systems is that it is often possible to “finish” a relationship well before the end of the game in question. In Persona 4 you can max out multiple relationships by the second dungeon; after which, there is no reason to ever spend time with those characters again. Once you reach relationship level 10 with a character in a P4, you never need to spend time with that character again. The main character is officially best-buds forever with whoever that level 10 friend is. Mass Effect also suffers from this problem, especially Mass Effect 2. In ME2 every mission in the game is inevitably followed by Commander Shepard making rounds through the Normandy, talking to the various characters in your party. Every mission holds the promise of new dialog and character development; but, characters will all too often have nothing new to say. Instead, they greet you with a hello and a permanent “investigate” dialog choice that leads to nowhere.

In both of these games, the character development systems do a great job of mediating your relationships with various characters, but the limitations of how the systems work act to highlight each game’s artifice, rather than diminish it. Actual relationships don’t just grow to a climax and then enter a happy holding pattern. In fact, most friendships die from long-term apathy, rather than some single, traumatic event-- starvation rather than murder. Yet, these games treat relationships as linear progressions that have finite end points. Even worse, you can reach a relationship’s end before the end of the game and stay stuck in that best friend/lover limbo for hours. In effect, you are disincentivised from spending additional time with the characters who you are ostensibly supposed to be the closest to, since any time you spend with them is essentially wasted. It seems to me that the fix here is simple: always have at least as many scripted character moments with a character as you have opportunities to hang out with that character.

In the end there's always investigate
In the end there's always investigate

2. Sex as a Reward- At the end of games like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, and Persona 4 there is often one last story moment right before the game’s conclusion where the relationship decisions you have made over the course of the game reach their climax. In every game in the Mass Effect and Dragon Age series, as well as and Persona 4, this moment is highlighted by sex between the main character and their significant other of choice (in the Persona games sex is strongly implied, rather than explicitly shown). This sex as win-condition brand of game design is troubling for a whole host of reasons. For one thing, it treats physical intimacy as the ultimate reward of a relationship, rather than as a step in a long journey. The Mass Effect series makes this especially odd considering that you can have the same significant other for multiple games, yet only display physical affection during one cut scene per game. While human relationships often slowly build over time, the relationships in Mass Effect move in fits and starts if you look at them as one long relationship over 2-3 games. Every game sets Shepard and his/her significant other back to square one before culminating in another sex scene at the end of the game.

Even worse, by setting up this sex as reward situation early on, each of the games in these series have gotten progressively more laissez faire in who and what you can date, at the expense of plausibility and characterization. While the early games in these series had relatively modest romance selections, the sequels upped the ante in full fan-service fashion. Mass Effect expanded from 2 potential romances per gender in the first game to 4 in the second (not to mention the carryover from game to game). As a result, by ME3 you could have dozens of different relationship histories that all follow the same general arc, despite the actual participants in each relationship being wildly different. Dragon Age expanded from 3 romance options per gender in the first game to 5 in the second. Furthermore, in DA2 every romance-able party member also happened to be functionally bisexual. It feels like this decision was made so that every player could make sexy time with whomever they chose. While the bisexual characters in DA1 made bisexuality a part of their characterization, many of the characters in DA2 seem to be bisexual as deference to the whims of the player. In Persona 3, romantic relationships had consequences; if you attempted to juggle two romances at once, you risked both parties finding out and breaking up with you. In Persona 4, you can date every female member of the main cast at once without issue, before choosing one “lucky” lady on Christmas Eve to spend the night with. Ultimately, these clear bits of fan service harm the later games in the series by undermining their believability and by undermining sexuality as a characterization tool.

I never thought I would call her subtle. Well, here we are.
I never thought I would call her subtle. Well, here we are.

The best example from these games of how sex can be used as something greater than a reward is in Jack’s character arc in ME2. If you play as male Shepard, Jack is overtly crass and sexual. She will attempt to seduce Shepard relatively early on in their relationship. If Shepard accepts those advances, the romance will end in a one night stand and Shepard will be left with a distanced relationship with Jack; she will never actually date Shepard if he takes that bait. By making sex with Jack an option early in their time together, the developers were able to convey Jack’s warped view of the role of sex in her life: an emotionally distant source of physical pleasure. By applying this lesson across multiple characters a developer could adjust the trajectory of romantic arcs and create very different feeling relationships. Sexuality is a powerful part of the human experience and locking it in a treasure chest at the end of the game is far from the most compelling or realistic way to deploy it.

Well there are two not so small observations about modern relationship systems that I came up with. Does anyone else have any other things they would like to see change about these systems? Or perhaps any modern games that avoid the problems I articulated here? Thanks for reading.

Avatar image for professionlol
Professionlol

130

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By Professionlol

I think that relationships in games cant be anything except contrived because of its constructed nature, or rather, it can only be as good or rewarding as the writing is, from a story perspective and not an interactive perspective.

I think it would be somewhat interesting to have a relationship in a game which has a mechanic that affects how intimate or distant the relationship is by how often you check in with the significant other, perhaps giving details on embarrassing or scandalous details on what happened since the last check-in and balancing how truthful or deceptive to spin the tales. That is more or less a simulated portion of a relationship in every day form. the consequences for lying might be a lopsided relationship where it is fulfilling for the player. the consequences for being truthful, of course, based on the players actions might be totally turning off the significant other or entering into an awkward situation where you triggers the s/o's paranoia or suspicions about your faithfulness or trustworthiness. this also seems like something too deep to have as a side mechanic of a game, rather than a game by itself, but if it was the meat of the game, i would find that pretty awful (although it could be the kind of Paper's Please or Cart Life awful)

this actually reminds me of the tech demo/game "facade" where you use pure text to interact with a struggling couple

Avatar image for oldirtybearon
Oldirtybearon

5626

Forum Posts

86

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

It's a good blog, but I'd like to point out a misconception with point number two.

The designers, I believe, do not look at physical intimacy as "sex as reward," they view it as the culmination of prior events. In a typical romance (talking narratively here) tension is built between the two players until there is a release. Sex is often shorthand for that release, as well as a visual cue that these two people have fallen for each other. Not necessarily because sex feels good, but more in the romantic sense; that having sex (or in the romantic case, "making love") is the ultimate show of affection toward another person. We are supposed to believe that these people love each other, and that they are, in the their respective narratives, taking a time out from the shitty world to express their love for each other.

Aside from that, pretty solid blog.

Avatar image for zeik
Zeik

5434

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I always thought it was much more implied in P3 and P4 that you did not have sex. They make everything vague enough that it's very easy for your mind to wander there, but given the actual context of everything that happens it seems very unlikely any relationship actually goes that far. Those games do need more consequences for multiple romantic relationships though. Golden did add that Valentine event though, which didn't have any explicit consequences, but boy do you feel like shit for turning the girls down.

But sex as the ultimate reward for romantic relationships has always been pretty dumb. Especially in games like Dragon Age: Origins where all you had to do was spam gifts to advance your relationships. That game had one of the most shallow representations of relationships I can think of. I was happy to hear that they're specifically trying to fix this problem in Inquisition.

Avatar image for sarumarine
Sarumarine

2588

Forum Posts

28258

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 7

I wanted to start off by saying that yes, lox and cream cheese is delicious! Haha.

But I agree that sex as the endgame is poorly handled. In the context of a videogame there's always some kind of objective or payoff you're working toward. Sex as the payoff for managing relationships makes sense, but it's not like everything ends once you jump in the same bed/cot/sleeping bag. The Jack example is pretty great because of how her character operates. But I wish that the ultimate act of physical intimacy could play the part of continuing the relationship, rather than some finish line at the end of it.

I suppose making it something you have to constantly maintain would be more accurate, but maybe more annoying. While not romance per-se, GTA 4 comes to mind as you have to constantly hang out with your friends or their familiarity level starts dropping or they get frustrated with you. Of course this wasn't helped by the limited activities or voice clips with people calling you up, so maybe a larger volume of writing or stuff to do with characters would help that.

Avatar image for ll_exile_ll
ll_Exile_ll

3382

Forum Posts

25

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Pretty good analysis of Persona, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect, but an examination of a wider variety of examples may have helped as well.

Avatar image for thatpinguino
thatpinguino

2988

Forum Posts

602

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 thatpinguino  Staff

@professionlol: That would be a cool game. And I think you could make it less contrived with some inteligent system design. Like having some stock events that happen after a certain point, but with different dialog each time. Like in P4 if after a certain point hanging out with a girl friend just resulted in going to a movie or dinner with different dialog each time.

@zeik: I thought the "you spent a while with Chie..." implied it. It is all in the ellipses.

@ll_exile_ll: I don't know too many other games with these systems well enough to talk in depth about them. Are their any I should check out?

@sarumarine: Hell yeah lox and cream cheese!I think it would be pretty funny if once you reached a sexual point slowing down or stopping with a partner would cause the relationship to end.

@oldirtybearon: I don't think that the developers intended sex to be a reward. But, in structuring their games in such a way that sex is ALWAYS the final payoff for every romantic relationship I would say that sex is functioning as a reward. Whether the developers intended it or not, I think that is what is happening in practice. You could just adjust when having sex happens or what the final release is and remove the issue.

Avatar image for corevi
Corevi

6796

Forum Posts

391

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#7  Edited By Corevi
@thatpinguino said:

@zeik: I thought the "you spent a while with Chie..." implied it. It is all in the ellipses.

I remember the Chihiro S Link in P3 being obvious in it's implications of sexual relations. But that's a standout and most are either subtle or don't imply any at all.

Avatar image for thatpinguino
thatpinguino

2988

Forum Posts

602

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 thatpinguino  Staff

@corruptedevil: Does P3 end the relationships with a Christmas date like P4? I never actually finished P3.

Avatar image for oldirtybearon
Oldirtybearon

5626

Forum Posts

86

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@thatpinguino: Except that's a personal (and pretty cynical) interpretation of events. The first time a couple makes love is a pretty important milestone in the narrative of a romance, and it makes sense, narratively, to feature such a climax before the main plot's climax. You don't see this opinion anywhere but video games, by the way. This idea that sex is being used as a "reward" doesn't apply to films, or books, or comics, or anything else, and yet the same general archetype is applied rather liberally in similar fiction across different mediums. Why is that?

I think the problem here is less that these games (I'm thinking of Mass Effect in particular here) is using "sex as a reward" and more that gamers are applying an intention and meaning to something that isn't there. I'm not a particularly educated individual, and yet I found it incredibly easy to see that all the developers are doing is taking modern romance conventions and grafting them onto an RPG to provide an extra layer of role playing. These are, after all, entirely optional and, as intended, are only pursued by people if they want to pursue them.

To provide a bit of personal context, it certainly wasn't my intention to "romance" anyone in Mass Effect. It just kind of happened. Ashley was a really cool woman, and I liked her personality and generally hanging out with her. I didn't approach it as "sex as reward" (the love scene in ME1 honestly took me by surprise), because I wasn't invested in bumping digital uglies, I was invested in Ashley and (my) Shepard's relationship. That they make love on board the Normandy a few hours before they go on a suicide mission doesn't strike me as "sex as reward", it strikes me as a natural climax to 35-40 hours worth of build up between two characters.

I think all of this comes down to context. If you wanted to say something like, I don't know, Killer is Dead approached sex as a reward, I'd probably agree, but the reward for pursuing the romance paths in Mass Effect (or Dragon Age for that matter) isn't sex, it's the romance itself.

Now, these romances could certainly be implemented better, but I find the sentiment that sex is being used as a reward flawed, if not disingenuous.

Avatar image for thatpinguino
thatpinguino

2988

Forum Posts

602

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By thatpinguino  Staff

@oldirtybearon: I would agree with ME1 and also with DA1, where I see it as a reward structure is when the same pattern is followed for multiple games in the series regardless of the characters involved. It doesn't make sense that Liara would have to wait until the end of ME3 to have some physical intimacy with Shepard if you have kept the relationship going for 3 games. It doesn't make sense that the entire cast of romaceable characters in DA2 are bisexual without further explanation. It doesn't make sense that you can juggle 5 girlfriends and then still pick one for intimate time in P4. Sex is structured as the end point in all of these games romance despite the hours, and in some cases multiple games of context, surrounding the characters in question. I would say ME1 handles its relationships better than the later games in the series. Not to mention how Samara has to explicitly say that she will not date you, since the expectation by that point is that any crew member of the opposite sex is dateable.

Avatar image for zeik
Zeik

5434

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@thatpinguino: Like I said, the game doesn't try too hard to convince you otherwise, but if you look at it beyond the end of the S. Link it seems very unlikely. You generally don't end up in a romance until very late in the S. Link, so by rank 10 your relationship has only barely begun. There's no evidence you've even kissed or made-out, so I doubt you'd jump straight to sex. Maybe if it was Persona: The college years, but high school relationships don't advance that quickly. (If they even get to sex at all.)

Generally the way I look at it is rank 10 is when your relationship becomes an actual romance, and not just a quick fling. I seriously doubt any of those events end with any more than making out. Of course, this still validates your point that you suddenly start completely ignoring them once the relationship actually turns serious. (Charlie obviously has commitment issues.)

Oh, one more thing came to mind, Golden has that ski-lodge scene where you can get lost with one of the girls and it heaviiy implies you've never had any sexy naked time with them.

Avatar image for make_me_mad
Make_Me_Mad

3229

Forum Posts

1007

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 11

@oldirtybearon: I would agree with ME1 and also with DA1, where I see it as a reward structure is when the same pattern is followed for multiple games in the series regardless of the characters involved. It doesn't make sense that Liara would have to wait until the end of ME3 to have some physical intimacy with Shepard if you have kept the relationship going for 3 games. It doesn't make sense that the entire cast of romaceable characters in DA2 are bisexual without further explanation. It doesn't make sense that you can juggle 5 girlfriends and then still pick one for intimate time in P4. Sex is structured as the end point in all of these games romance despite the hours, and in some cases multiple games of context, surrounding the characters in question. I would say ME1 handles its relationships better than the later games in the series. Not to mention how Samara has to explicitly say that she will not date you, since the expectation by that point is that any crew member of the opposite sex is dateable.

Tell that to all the heartbroken people who never got to seal the deal with a Krogan.

Avatar image for oldirtybearon
Oldirtybearon

5626

Forum Posts

86

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@thatpinguino: In regards to the DA2 "everyone is bisexual" thing, that was a very specific criticism of the game from people on the Bioware forums. I think that was poorly implemented specifically because it takes a very important piece of a character (their sexuality) and makes it malleable dependent on the whims of the player. I personally don't like that.

As far as Liara and the general "multiple games having the same structure" chain goes, I don't know if I agree considering the context of Liara's story at the time of ME3, but I agree that there is a bit of a formula to how Bioware in particular writes their romances. This is also the same company that since Baldur's Gate, has essentially written different version of the same base story for their entire library of games. From Baldur's Gate to Mass Effect 3, all of those games at their core borrow liberally (narratively speaking) from the games that came before it. I don't know if it's a quirk, laziness, or if they just like a certain kind of story, but it's something that's inherent to the developer, and not necessarily romance in video games as a whole.

Hell, when I think about it, the perfect counter argument is probably The Witcher 2. The Triss romance in particular was, I think, wonderfully handled. Sex was definitely a part of it, but CD Projekt Red chose to implement it (the romance) in such a way that it can become central to Geralt's motivation. If you're not particularly bothered by the fact that there is a King Slayer running around the world offing heads of state, you can choose to make Geralt's focus during the events of the game on finding Triss. All of your choices in the game, including the dialogue (if not especially the dialogue) can hold Triss's rescue as the primary motivation. Or not. That, I think, was a wonderful way to handle romance while keeping it entirely optional. I wouldn't mind having more games like that; with the idea that your love interest or romance in a game can hook into all of these other elements in surprising ways.

Then again, Witcher 2 is damn near perfect so what am I saying.

Avatar image for hailinel
Hailinel

25785

Forum Posts

219681

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 28

@thatpinguino said:

@zeik: I thought the "you spent a while with Chie..." implied it. It is all in the ellipses.

I remember the Chihiro S Link in P3 being obvious in it's implications of sexual relations. But that's a standout and most are either subtle or don't imply any at all.

It's also very obvious during the Elizabeth Social Link. Particularly the point it cuts to black after you show her your room.

I actually wrote up some thoughts on the limitations in video game relationships in a recent blog on School Days. Particularly in the way that games rarely apply true negative consequences to poor choices. I brought up the idea of Yukiko in Persona 4 breaking things off with the party entirely if she learned she was being cheated on, which would in turn have major ramifications not just in the gameplay but also in terms of how the story could have played out. But the larger point, that more games should explore the idea of putting the player in unrecoverable bad situations through their own choices and actions, is one that I wish more games could explore, though as was discussed in the thread, rare if ever can be outside of visual novels due to the level of complexity such ideas might introduce.

Avatar image for zeik
Zeik

5434

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@hailinel said:

@corruptedevil said:
@thatpinguino said:

@zeik: I thought the "you spent a while with Chie..." implied it. It is all in the ellipses.

I remember the Chihiro S Link in P3 being obvious in it's implications of sexual relations. But that's a standout and most are either subtle or don't imply any at all.

It's also very obvious during the Elizabeth Social Link. Particularly the point it cuts to black after you show her your room.

Yeah, Elizabeth was the one time I was actually left thinking "He totally just got laid, didn't he..." Which kind of brings up all kinds of moral quandaries regarding that scenario, but whatevs.

Avatar image for make_me_mad
Make_Me_Mad

3229

Forum Posts

1007

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 11

@hailinel: The problem with the hypothetical Yukiko thing is that, well, they're still trying to stop a murderer. Her deciding to let a string of supernatural murders go unchecked because the main character was cheating on her would be kinda... I dunno. That seems too far for any of the characters. Now, if she just, say, lost all of those S. Link benefits, like blocking a fatal hit in battle or curing someone else's status ailments/picking them up off the ground, that'd probably be more appropriate. I just can't see a bad relationship taking someone out of the team due to the seriousness of the job they're trying to do.

I'd be all for Persona 4 punishing the two-timing player more thoroughly (though I thought the Valentines conversations were a nice emotional gut-punch), but I wouldn't want it to go so far as characters out and out deciding that it's not worth putting up with jerks to stop a murderer. I mean, everyone put up with Yosuke long enough to save Inaba/the world.

Avatar image for mortuss_zero
Mortuss_Zero

744

Forum Posts

12

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Am I the only one who just plain can't stomach the idea of cheating on Chie, therefore I don't care that you can? That goes for any of the girls really, Chie just happens to be my favorite. I know no-one involved is real, but I easily empathize with characters, whether book, game or movie. I usually treat VG characters like I'd treat real people. I won't cheat, so it doesn't matter to me that there is a hypothetical piece of garbage who would and can. I don't need there to be some built in punishment in the game that will only affect players that aren't me. Who does? Is it just so you can have an extra reason to feel good about not doing shitty things? I also think it's more implied you make out with them rather than go straight to mattress dancing at the climax of the social link. But that's just me I suppose.
PS: Those valentine conversations are gut-wrenching, I watched them on youtube and they're all the punishment I'd need.

Avatar image for hailinel
Hailinel

25785

Forum Posts

219681

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 28

@hailinel: The problem with the hypothetical Yukiko thing is that, well, they're still trying to stop a murderer. Her deciding to let a string of supernatural murders go unchecked because the main character was cheating on her would be kinda... I dunno. That seems too far for any of the characters. Now, if she just, say, lost all of those S. Link benefits, like blocking a fatal hit in battle or curing someone else's status ailments/picking them up off the ground, that'd probably be more appropriate. I just can't see a bad relationship taking someone out of the team due to the seriousness of the job they're trying to do.

I'd be all for Persona 4 punishing the two-timing player more thoroughly (though I thought the Valentines conversations were a nice emotional gut-punch), but I wouldn't want it to go so far as characters out and out deciding that it's not worth putting up with jerks to stop a murderer. I mean, everyone put up with Yosuke long enough to save Inaba/the world.

You may have a point there, but my Yukiko example was more to illustrate how wide-reaching the ramifications for two-timing could be. It doesn't need to be Persona 4, but could involve other games where two-timing could penalize the player to a great degree.

Avatar image for turambar
Turambar

8283

Forum Posts

114

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#19  Edited By Turambar

@hailinel said:

@make_me_mad said:

@hailinel: The problem with the hypothetical Yukiko thing is that, well, they're still trying to stop a murderer. Her deciding to let a string of supernatural murders go unchecked because the main character was cheating on her would be kinda... I dunno. That seems too far for any of the characters. Now, if she just, say, lost all of those S. Link benefits, like blocking a fatal hit in battle or curing someone else's status ailments/picking them up off the ground, that'd probably be more appropriate. I just can't see a bad relationship taking someone out of the team due to the seriousness of the job they're trying to do.

I'd be all for Persona 4 punishing the two-timing player more thoroughly (though I thought the Valentines conversations were a nice emotional gut-punch), but I wouldn't want it to go so far as characters out and out deciding that it's not worth putting up with jerks to stop a murderer. I mean, everyone put up with Yosuke long enough to save Inaba/the world.

You may have a point there, but my Yukiko example was more to illustrate how wide-reaching the ramifications for two-timing could be. It doesn't need to be Persona 4, but could involve other games where two-timing could penalize the player to a great degree.

Persona 3 did it nicely where the process of two-timing could result in broken S.Links, preventing you from fusing personas of the broken arcana. Though it also has the issue where penalties only occur if you are leveling up two S.Links at once, and once an S.Link is maxed out, such penalties cease to apply.

That said, that mechanic also lead to far more difficulties in juggling S.Links when trying to max them out as efficiently as possible. Persona 4 had the better mechanic where you can choose to not actually engage in a relationship but still deepen the bond where as any relationships past lv 6 in P3 was a serious relationship, iirc.

Avatar image for zeik
Zeik

5434

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20  Edited By Zeik

@mortuss_zero said:

Am I the only one who just plain can't stomach the idea of cheating on Chie, therefore I don't care that you can? That goes for any of the girls really, Chie just happens to be my favorite. I know no-one involved is real, but I easily empathize with characters, whether book, game or movie. I usually treat VG characters like I'd treat real people. I won't cheat, so it doesn't matter to me that there is a hypothetical piece of garbage who would and can. I don't need there to be some built in punishment in the game that will only affect players that aren't me. Who does? Is it just so you can have an extra reason to feel good about not doing shitty things? I also think it's more implied you make out with them rather than go straight to mattress dancing at the climax of the social link. But that's just me I suppose.

PS: Those valentine conversations are gut-wrenching, I watched them on youtube and they're all the punishment I'd need.

I agree to an extent. I actually greatly prefer P4's relationship system to P3 simply for the fact that you get to choose whether you want to be a two-timing jerk, even if there were no actual consequences for doing so, unlike P3. (And yeah, breaking Chie's heart in that valentine's event is worse than any gameplay consequence they could concieve.)

However, I do think it would be much more narratively interesting if there were consequences for doing so. Not having those consequences makes those choices feel like they matter less, which I don't think you want in a good life-sim. Even if you won't see the consequences, the fact that they are there makes it feel a little more real.

Also part of me kind of just wants to see people who do that get screwed over by that choice. More games really should make you regret bad narrative choices.

Avatar image for mortuss_zero
Mortuss_Zero

744

Forum Posts

12

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

@zeik: I understand what you're saying. Admittedly, It'd be pretty cool if games all had clever responses to your actions. I just can't see spending writing and development time on things you (ideally) won't see for the most part. Ideally meaning, ideally you wont cheat on your girlfriend or boyfriend, or do some other shitty thing. I also feel I'd like to see someone who cheated on Chie or one of the other girls screwed in some tangible way, but only a little bit (I'm not immune to schadenfreude).

Avatar image for hailinel
Hailinel

25785

Forum Posts

219681

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 28

@zeik: I understand what you're saying. Admittedly, It'd be pretty cool if games all had clever responses to your actions. I just can't see spending writing and development time on things you (ideally) won't see for the most part. Ideally meaning, ideally you wont cheat on your girlfriend or boyfriend, or do some other shitty thing. I also feel I'd like to see someone who cheated on Chie or one of the other girls screwed in some tangible way, but only a little bit (I'm not immune to schadenfreude).

The ideal path isn't always the most interesting to explore. And if the game presents a choice, then there should be consequences present for choosing poorly or selfishly.

Avatar image for robot21
robot21

23

Forum Posts

1097

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

A slightly different example of a relationship system I thought of is Elena's in Pandora's Tower. The player can build up their relationship level with the usual gifts but even talking to Elena after every mission causes her to brighten up. The most important aspect is the time limit though. If the player spends too much time exploring Elena turns into a partial monster and her trust in the player plummets. The game does a good job of making you feel genuinely awful for screwing up too. If I were being reductionist I could say it's just the Dragon's Age system with an additional annoying time limit but I didn't mind it while playing and found that Elena's well-being was usually on my mind even as I was exploring, killing ugly monsters and other video game things. It gets around the first point at least, as it's a relationship you must constantly cultivate to get the "good" ending.

Avatar image for zeik
Zeik

5434

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By Zeik

@mortuss_zero said:

@zeik: I understand what you're saying. Admittedly, It'd be pretty cool if games all had clever responses to your actions. I just can't see spending writing and development time on things you (ideally) won't see for the most part. Ideally meaning, ideally you wont cheat on your girlfriend or boyfriend, or do some other shitty thing. I also feel I'd like to see someone who cheated on Chie or one of the other girls screwed in some tangible way, but only a little bit (I'm not immune to schadenfreude).

As long as there are no consequences then there are plenty of people that will cheat if given the opportunity, so I don't think it would be a waste at all to implement something like that. Just look at the Endurance Run. Jeff and Vinny were way more into Chie than anyone else, but they still chose to romance all the ladies they could simply because they were given the choice. Some people need those consequences to take that stuff more seriously.

And even if you want to be a two-timing jerk, having to navigate those relationships carefully would still be more interesting than just letting you get away with it for free.

Avatar image for mortuss_zero
Mortuss_Zero

744

Forum Posts

12

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

@zeik: But I think the real question is, would Jeff and Vinny have approached that any differently if there had been consequences? Real, heavy ones? I doubt it; because they chose it simply because it was there, they're not the types who will ever "roleplay" their choices. Punishing them won't change that behavior, and will only serve to frustrate them at best. Frustrating them is perhaps the goal in punishing them in the first place I suppose, but I can't help but think it will serve no one's goals. I'll concede immediately that interesting choices and consequences are the better scenario, but choices will real consequence multiply the cost and time to make a game each time you design one. Perhaps a too clinical approach to the idea of writing in video games, but I can't help being financially minded. It may not be ideal, but it's certainly more efficient to prepare one main "ideal" path, and let you make several not so meaningful choices than it is to design a labyrinth of social interactions that can lead to multiple fail and end states. Even if that sounds pretty cool.

Avatar image for mortuss_zero
Mortuss_Zero

744

Forum Posts

12

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

@hailinel: I can't exactly argue with you, I agree that things would be better that way overall. It just sounds expensive, in terms of both cost and development time. Budgets are a real concern for nearly all games, certain AAA behemoths not withstanding. Even games that trade on the idea of "choices matter" tend to... well, circle inward after awhile. They let you veer left for a while, then bring you right back to the main road, with maybe one more or less npc in your party. Every meaningful choice means an increase in cost, and an increase in the amount of game you're making for a fraction of your players. I dunno, I guess I just don't see it as practical in a game that isn't built solely around making these kind of social choices and relationships. Maybe I'm way off base though, I'm no expert, just a guy on a message board.

Avatar image for jesna
Jesna

292

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Evidently I'm in the minority here, but I feel like point 1 is actually a benefit to me as a player. I understand that it breaks the immersion for some people that Persona 4's MC or Shepard can become romantically linked with half the cast, but it allows me to see much more of the game's content in one playthrough. I spent about 90 hours in Persona 4 my first time through, and there are around 7 potential romance options. As much as I love that game there is absolutely no way I was going to play it 7 times in a row to see all of those subplots. You don't even meet the final romance-able character until well into the game, more than enough time to have maxed another S-Link without even being aware she would be an option. I also dislike the idea of punishing players who "cheat" in this way, because often they are just trying to get a more complete game experience.

Something like Dragon Age II's issue of having every party member being bisexual is a little weirder for me. Because it is never explored in the game itself it felt like a huge hole in their character development. DA:O at least attempted to contextualize it's two bisexual characters orientation. That's not to say it didn't have its own romance issues, as I was able to enter a sexual relationship with Morrigan about 15 minutes after meeting her by being a Yes-man in her dialogue trees.

Avatar image for jeust
Jeust

11739

Forum Posts

15085

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 15

Great blog, but you missed out on the game that, to me, has the most realistic and organic relationship system: Alpha Protocol.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for zeik
Zeik

5434

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29  Edited By Zeik

@jesna: I can't really agree with the notion that romancing the characters is the only way to have a "complete game experience", especially in regards to something like P4, where not romancing a character has no impact on whether you can complete an S. Link and reach a "full" relationship. If you choose to romance a character you still miss out on seeing what happens if you stay friends, so either way you're missing out on something. But being in a romance should not be considered a more valid conclusion to those relationships than staying friends. (In P3 I felt like it actively hurt my experience, since some of those romance subplots were kind of lousy.)

I could understand that a little more for something like Mass Effect, where being in a relationship allows more interaction with a character than you get by not romancing them, but you can't really romance more than one character anyway.

@mortuss_zero: I don't think they would have done anything if they didn't know, but if they had some reason to believe it would have negative consequences I bet they would have avoided doing so. To be clear, I don't think it should result in some kind of bad ending or anything, or even anything that would permanently screw up their ability to play the game, but I think it would be perfectly reasonable to have narrative consequences like them breaking up with you or getting pissed off when they find out you're cheating and you have to work to repair the relationship. (Basically like the Broken S. Links in P3, but perhaps a little more in-depth.) If consequences were common in games I bet it would affect many peoples behavior. Some people go the "bad route" because they want to, but I think a lot of people do so simply because they can get away with it.

Avatar image for mortuss_zero
Mortuss_Zero

744

Forum Posts

12

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

@zeik: Fair enough. I agree that if consequences were common, people would be more likely to think about their actions. A situation where you have to repair the situation would be interesting to be sure, though I'm unsure how many people who would go the bad route for kicks would actually engage with it. Overall however, I agree that it would be nice to see more consequences for making bad/shitty choices in video games in general across the board.

Avatar image for jesna
Jesna

292

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@zeik: I still disagree, although I see your point. Even though P4 had options for just staying friends, I would still need to play through the game 7 times to see both sides of each S-link. As it is currently I would only need to play through it twice (which I did). Again, I can see why some people don't like this aspect of romance in games of this variety, but I have to imagine that game developers avoid things like broken S-links because it unnecessarily frustrates players.

Avatar image for daroki
Daroki

772

Forum Posts

45

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

@zeik said:

Golden did add that Valentine event though, which didn't have any explicit consequences, but boy do you feel like shit for turning the girls down.

This. A thousand times this. That Valentine's Day event if you're a lecherous fiend during the game can get rough.

Avatar image for medacris
medacris

738

Forum Posts

5351

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#33  Edited By medacris

One of the reasons I've never played Dragon Age or Mass Effect is the romance system:

  • What if I like everyone in my team equally? I'd feel bad romancing one over the others.
  • If I just opt out of the romance entirely, will I be missing a lot?
  • What if the only one I'm interested in dating isn't an option?

I didn't know Persona had one, too. I feel like the only one who didn't even know the games existed until recently.

Avatar image for hailinel
Hailinel

25785

Forum Posts

219681

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 28

@jesna said:

@zeik: I still disagree, although I see your point. Even though P4 had options for just staying friends, I would still need to play through the game 7 times to see both sides of each S-link. As it is currently I would only need to play through it twice (which I did). Again, I can see why some people don't like this aspect of romance in games of this variety, but I have to imagine that game developers avoid things like broken S-links because it unnecessarily frustrates players.

Not just the completion of each S-Link. There's also the variable events like the Christmas date, and even that can have variations in itself (i.e.: Naoto).

@hailinel: I can't exactly argue with you, I agree that things would be better that way overall. It just sounds expensive, in terms of both cost and development time. Budgets are a real concern for nearly all games, certain AAA behemoths not withstanding. Even games that trade on the idea of "choices matter" tend to... well, circle inward after awhile. They let you veer left for a while, then bring you right back to the main road, with maybe one more or less npc in your party. Every meaningful choice means an increase in cost, and an increase in the amount of game you're making for a fraction of your players. I dunno, I guess I just don't see it as practical in a game that isn't built solely around making these kind of social choices and relationships. Maybe I'm way off base though, I'm no expert, just a guy on a message board.

You're not wrong, as the more complexity is involved, the more resources have to be spent to see each variable developed. But even so, I would prefer to see developers that offer choice in their games provide choices that are ultimately deeper and more meaningful. Including choices that could ultimately hamper your ability to finish the game, or finish the game with a positive outcome. (And I mean a bad ending that feels earned and deserved, and not just as a result of a simple binary choice at a key point that could be easily undone via loading a save file.)

@turambar said:

@hailinel said:

@make_me_mad said:

@hailinel: The problem with the hypothetical Yukiko thing is that, well, they're still trying to stop a murderer. Her deciding to let a string of supernatural murders go unchecked because the main character was cheating on her would be kinda... I dunno. That seems too far for any of the characters. Now, if she just, say, lost all of those S. Link benefits, like blocking a fatal hit in battle or curing someone else's status ailments/picking them up off the ground, that'd probably be more appropriate. I just can't see a bad relationship taking someone out of the team due to the seriousness of the job they're trying to do.

I'd be all for Persona 4 punishing the two-timing player more thoroughly (though I thought the Valentines conversations were a nice emotional gut-punch), but I wouldn't want it to go so far as characters out and out deciding that it's not worth putting up with jerks to stop a murderer. I mean, everyone put up with Yosuke long enough to save Inaba/the world.

You may have a point there, but my Yukiko example was more to illustrate how wide-reaching the ramifications for two-timing could be. It doesn't need to be Persona 4, but could involve other games where two-timing could penalize the player to a great degree.

Persona 3 did it nicely where the process of two-timing could result in broken S.Links, preventing you from fusing personas of the broken arcana. Though it also has the issue where penalties only occur if you are leveling up two S.Links at once, and once an S.Link is maxed out, such penalties cease to apply.

That said, that mechanic also lead to far more difficulties in juggling S.Links when trying to max them out as efficiently as possible. Persona 4 had the better mechanic where you can choose to not actually engage in a relationship but still deepen the bond where as any relationships past lv 6 in P3 was a serious relationship, iirc.

If Persona 5 has a similar Social Link system, I'm curious to know how they'll handle romantic relationships. Persona 4 did improve the system quite a bit over P3, but I feel as though something more could be done.

Avatar image for zeik
Zeik

5434

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@medacris said:

One of the reasons I've never played Dragon Age or Mass Effect is the romance system:

  • What if I like everyone in my team equally? I'd feel bad romancing one over the others.
  • If I just opt out of the romance entirely, will I be missing a lot?
  • What if the only one I'm interested in dating isn't an option?

I didn't know Persona had one, too. I feel like the only one who didn't even know the games existed until recently.

I don't think those are very good reasons not to play those games altogether. The romance systems aren't nearly important enough to any of those games for it to strongly impact the experience negatively or positively. You could very easily ignore interacting with any of the romance options and not lose out on much at all.

There really aren't very many games that treat player chosen characters romances as significant elements of the game, outside of actual visual novels/dating sims. They're usually just there as an extra layer of role-playing if you choose to engage in it.

Avatar image for tourgen
tourgen

4568

Forum Posts

645

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 11

I don't complain about relationship models in games any more than I complain about murder-as-sport in games. They are both pretty silly. But they are games so whatever. Take delight in their absurdness.

Avatar image for hailinel
Hailinel

25785

Forum Posts

219681

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 28

@zeik said:

@medacris said:

One of the reasons I've never played Dragon Age or Mass Effect is the romance system:

  • What if I like everyone in my team equally? I'd feel bad romancing one over the others.
  • If I just opt out of the romance entirely, will I be missing a lot?
  • What if the only one I'm interested in dating isn't an option?

I didn't know Persona had one, too. I feel like the only one who didn't even know the games existed until recently.

I don't think those are very good reasons not to play those games altogether. The romance systems aren't nearly important enough to any of those games for it to strongly impact the experience negatively or positively. You could very easily ignore interacting with any of the romance options and not lose out on much at all.

There really aren't very many games that treat player chosen characters romances as significant elements of the game, outside of actual visual novels/dating sims. They're usually just there as an extra layer of role-playing if you choose to engage in it.

On my first play-through of Dragon Age: Origins, the entire romance mechanic was lost on me. I had a very hard time getting any of the characters that I could romance to be anything more than slightly interested, but that's more to do with the fact that I wasn't really focused on the romance aspect. Ultimately, it didn't matter to my experience, because ultimately events played out in such a way that it didn't even really matter. (In the end, Alistair became king, my female warden became queen, and I convinced Alistair to sleep with Morrigan so she could work her magic. And this can occur despite the fact that I never engaged in a romantic relationship with either Alistair or Morrigan.) The romantic relationships in Dragon Age are more or less window dressing. They add to the role-playing aspect of the game, but they aren't a requirement to get through it.

Avatar image for deactivated-5e49e9175da37
deactivated-5e49e9175da37

10812

Forum Posts

782

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 14

"Hey Kinzie, you wanna fuck?"

"Let's go."

Avatar image for Levius
Levius

1358

Forum Posts

357

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

I have always though that romance in a lot of games comes down as kinda creepy. In most games the romance section pretty much comes down to selecting who you want out of a harem of characters, constantly chasing the person while trying to tell them what they want to hear, until you have worked on them enough that you are rewarded with a relationship. Very rarely do you see the other person have any agency in the relationship outside of cut scenes, which are usually governed by the player anyway, they rarely buy you gifts in return or even come to speak to you on their own. It just sends a wierd view of relationships: anything and anyone are possible, just choose who you want and keep working at them until you get your reward. I think to get better relationships need to be a two way street, and give the other person a more natural role in the relationship, rather than just a project to be worked at.

Avatar image for l4wd0g
l4wd0g

2395

Forum Posts

353

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Are you saying sex is a reward for you or the character you're playing?

Avatar image for capum15
Capum15

6019

Forum Posts

411

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

"Hey Kinzie, you wanna fuck?"

*punch*

"Let's go."

Best romance system in any game.

Avatar image for dussck
Dussck

1066

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

It's an interesting read and I agree it's all a bit too shallow to call it a relationship system. Not much of a system most of the time. I would like them to get rid of the whole sex-scene stuff in those games and make the relationship system reward the player in other ways. If one character really likes you by the choices you make in the game then that character could give you some helpful items or something. On the other side, if one character dislikes you he/she might come to a point to leave your fellowship, maybe even taking another character with him/her. Or betray you somehow.
Now that would be so much more interesting then a cutscene with some moans and 2 polygonal figures lying on top of each other.

Avatar image for thatpinguino
thatpinguino

2988

Forum Posts

602

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 thatpinguino  Staff

@capum15: I would say it functions as a reward for the player. The main character is ostensibly in a naturally progressing relationship, despite how unrealistic that progression might be.

@Levius said:

I have always though that romance in a lot of games comes down as kinda creepy. In most games the romance section pretty much comes down to selecting who you want out of a harem of characters, constantly chasing the person while trying to tell them what they want to hear, until you have worked on them enough that you are rewarded with a relationship. Very rarely do you see the other person have any agency in the relationship outside of cut scenes, which are usually governed by the player anyway, they rarely buy you gifts in return or even come to speak to you on their own. It just sends a wierd view of relationships: anything and anyone are possible, just choose who you want and keep working at them until you get your reward. I think to get better relationships need to be a two way street, and give the other person a more natural role in the relationship, rather than just a project to be worked at.

This was going to be my third point, but my blog was getting long. It think that it is really problematic that relationships in games seem to be the product of persistance and brown-nosing. I would love to see a game that acknowledged that constantly talking to someone is not the ideal way to start a relationship with them. Not to mention that sometimes saying something that could hurt, but must be said is better than always telling someone what they want to hear. I wonder if giving the player all the agency in these relationships is a function of these games in question being centered on a blank slate, savior of everything protagonist. In a game with strong wish fulfillment as a central narrative goal it makes sense that the player would choose who and what to date. I would really love to see a game that actually went out of its way to give the npc half of a relationship some agency.

Avatar image for extomar
EXTomar

5047

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44  Edited By EXTomar

This is just a reflection of the existential problem that the real world is much more complex than human made simulations. Basically you can't quantify or define human relationships as "win/loss states" easily nor do humans really look at them that way.

Even writing that, I believe people continue to try to include relationships in games because it is a human thing to do. I just think they need to make it guided instead of free form. Using Mass Effect as an example, instead of prompting the player to pick someone to have a relationship with the game should form the relationship through other parts of the story. Make decisions Miranda favors and she'll grow closer.

Avatar image for thatpinguino
thatpinguino

2988

Forum Posts

602

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 thatpinguino  Staff

@extomar: Not to mention integrating relationship statuses with main story events in a more realistic way. For the most part the relationships you form on the Normandy/ in the DA camp/ in Social links don't bleed into the main story moments. I mean I would think that becoming close friends with your party would be more impactful than it often is. Like Wrex on Virmire, it doesn't make sense that you need paragon/renegade level X to convince him not to leave if you have been befriending him all game. Not to mention if you are romancing Kaiden or Ashley and you choose to leave them on Virmire. But instead the moments are set in stone so that relationship status doesn't get in the way of the scripting.

Avatar image for sui42
Sui42

4

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@extomar said:

This is just a reflection of the existential problem that the real world is much more complex than human made simulations. Basically you can't quantify or define human relationships as "win/loss states" easily nor do humans really look at them that way.

I agree with what you're saying; part of the problem with relationships in games is that they're portrayed on a binary axis, with "ENEMY" at one end and "SUPER BFF" at the other. While it's true that friendships are strengthened over time, most people make snap judgements about each other straight away, based on demeanor, presentation, reputation etc... It would be nice to see more complex relationship systems that react to a variety of player actions - not just their choices in a mostly linear dialogue tree.

Avatar image for thatpinguino
thatpinguino

2988

Forum Posts

602

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 thatpinguino  Staff

@sui42: Yeah those games tend to have three options in dialog with romanaceable characters- Romance, friend, complete jerk. Not exactly a lot of subtlety.

Avatar image for charlie_victor_bravo
charlie_victor_bravo

1746

Forum Posts

4136

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 4

As long as sex scene is interactive, there are no problems.

Avatar image for thatpinguino
thatpinguino

2988

Forum Posts

602

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 thatpinguino  Staff

@dussck: P4 does this with relationships tying to additional combat bonuses and character growth. Also ME2 has the loyalty bonus stuff that unlocks additional skills and outfits.

Avatar image for veektarius
veektarius

6420

Forum Posts

45

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 1

I think that you're probably overstating your case, but I agree with one thing: relationships shouldn't be something you "win" at the end of a game. I don't think the sex is really the issue here, though the sex is portrayed with such half-assed uncertainty that it's always so ineffective that I wish it weren't there. I'm casually replaying ME2 right now and it's legitimately weird how characters are like, "I like you but I'm too busy following you on missions to be in a relationship right now" until the very end of the game. Relationships are more interesting when they start early and contribute throughout the game.

See Trish from the Witcher or Ashley/Kaiden from ME3 as basically the most interesting romances there are in RPGs... it's the history of the relationship once it's started that makes it matter, not the artificial courting stage where you're just doing whatever they want to get in the door.