This was the Leftist tactic for a long time to let them get a foot in the door before they made it mandatory. No one forces you to be gay in Mass Effect, it's just impossible to avoid if you raise your relationship level with the other male characters enough :) No one forces you to look at the Gay Diversity awkwardly inserted into the game, it's just utilized as ammunition by all the most disgusting and narcissistic kinds of people as evidence that they always owned those IPs, and you can't do anything to stop them now :)
No one forces you to be gay in Mass Effect, it's just impossible to avoid if you raise your relationship level with the other male characters enough :)
I remember being accidentally gay in Mass Effect 3 because I was vaguely nice to Kaidan in one conversation and all the sudden we're butt buddies. I guess the lesson here is kill him off in the first game and you won't have to worry about it.
Also, I don't think I have ever played an RPG where the romance leads to anything remotely related to the main story or adds anything to the gameplay.
Most people recognised that in games like Cyberpunk 2077, after you bang the romance option there is literally nothing else left to do and they just stop communicating with you because that's the end of the quest line. I think in later updates they tried adding more options so you could go "hang out", but it really highlighted the fact that it had no reason to be there in the first place, added nothing to the game, and served no purpose other than to push the faggotry agenda and normalising it, so people like SidAlpha could use it as a "gotcha" to say, "Look, all these games had it, it's totally fine guys!"
The Fire Emblem games, before they went super mainstream, had probably the best integration of a romance system you could hope for in an RPG.
If characters spent X amount of turns side by side, their support level grew (with better compatible characters growing faster, like a difference of +25 to +1 when you need 100 points per level). Every character had either 5 total supports per game, with each one getting progressively deeper from introductions in C rank, friends in B, to best friends or romantic in A rank. And with only having 5, you could only romance one per game and get one close friend. Or something less developed like 5 acquaintances. Other games gave you unlimited supports but you had to commit to like a final S rank for romance and could only do one.
Where it integrated, is that if you had support levels with someone, then you would gain stats if they were within X squares of you. Meaning your choices in developing these bonds also had huge ramifications on your character ability and capability, sometimes being the defining element to make a bad character good (like giving plus Hit to someone who wouldn't gain much naturally). And a lot of the times it was between classes who naturally wanted to be near each other, like an archer and an armor knight or two cavaliers who'd always be further ahead than the group, so you could just gain these advantages by playing the game smartly if you didn't want to min/max it.
It would also determine each characters ending, with a large swath of unique endings for basically any characters who could support. In a few cases, with midgame timeskips it would have huge effects on the next generation characters and their stats/capabilities as well.
I think that's the problem with most other RPGs. They want romance to be this big defined thing with epic moments like the inevitable sex scene or whatever. But that just highlights that they had to spend limited time making a limited number of events. Instead of building a small foundation and letting it speak for itself off that.
Now that is interesting, and that is EXACTLY how the romance/relationship building should be done, impacting actual gameplay and improving character stats/bonuses/etc.
I never really gave the Fire Emblem games much attention -- I can't remember, but didn't they start on the Gameboy Advance or DS?
The romance in KCD1 with Theresa was half way decent but it even there it didn't affect the gameplay or story much. But at the same time KCD1 baited you into sex scenes without warning. You try on a shirt with the woman of your benefactor in the same room? You end up cucking your benefactor. Or you get shitfaced with that one priest? You fuck some other woman.
And now if you choose to remain loyal in KCD2 to Theresa you get a letter in which she tells you that she cucked you with one of your friends. And you only get that letter if you choose to remain loyal. If you whore around you don't get it.
Morrigan's romance in DA:O might as well be canonical. The other endings are nowhere near as interesting, and her ending is a bit of a non sequitur if you aren't romancing her.
Also, I don't think I have ever played an RPG where the romance leads to anything remotely related to the main story or adds anything to the gameplay.
Yeah, unless they're done really well or really poorly, they're generally forgettable.
The only good one that comes to mind (and I could be wrong, this was decades ago), was actually early BioWare, interestingly enough. SW:KotOR four or five years before the first Mass Effect, and only a couple years after BG2. Bastila was an interesting character, and her paths can differ greatly depending on player role and choice, and does affect the story line. She was also straight; this is back in the day when such things were allowed.
Most of the other memorable romances were the bad ones. David Cage games spring to mind. *cough cough* Fahrenheit. That level of retardation will haunt you.
Oh yeah, I forgot about Bastilla; that's a good call-out -- if you romanced her and then did the evil ending, she would actually join you, which was kind of cool. Back when choices actually meant something.
...it's sad that romance in GTA of all things is more important than in most RPGs...at least they give you a reason to continue the relationship...
that being said, FFIV had a pretty cute romance between Cecil and Rose that was woven into the story pretty well. it was pretty generic (and with the 16-bit graphics, the kissing scene was more hilarious than heartwarming), but it was handled well...
GTA San Andreas was actually quite noteworthy for that, heck even the sex scenes that were cut at least had mini-games where you actually had to play. But beyond that, you're right, just getting up the max romance with each character unlocked bonuses and buffs in each section of the map. Rockstar actually made it mean something, which is funny because in RPGs they don't make it mean anything.
This was the Leftist tactic for a long time to let them get a foot in the door before they made it mandatory. No one forces you to be gay in Mass Effect, it's just impossible to avoid if you raise your relationship level with the other male characters enough :) No one forces you to look at the Gay Diversity awkwardly inserted into the game, it's just utilized as ammunition by all the most disgusting and narcissistic kinds of people as evidence that they always owned those IPs, and you can't do anything to stop them now :)
I remember being accidentally gay in Mass Effect 3 because I was vaguely nice to Kaidan in one conversation and all the sudden we're butt buddies. I guess the lesson here is kill him off in the first game and you won't have to worry about it.
Just more proof that Ashley was always the GOAT. I killed Kaiden without hesitation.
One of the reasons why I generally dislike romance options in RPGs. Often if not most of the time they're terribly written.
Also, I don't think I have ever played an RPG where the romance leads to anything remotely related to the main story or adds anything to the gameplay.
Most people recognised that in games like Cyberpunk 2077, after you bang the romance option there is literally nothing else left to do and they just stop communicating with you because that's the end of the quest line. I think in later updates they tried adding more options so you could go "hang out", but it really highlighted the fact that it had no reason to be there in the first place, added nothing to the game, and served no purpose other than to push the faggotry agenda and normalising it, so people like SidAlpha could use it as a "gotcha" to say, "Look, all these games had it, it's totally fine guys!"
The Fire Emblem games, before they went super mainstream, had probably the best integration of a romance system you could hope for in an RPG.
If characters spent X amount of turns side by side, their support level grew (with better compatible characters growing faster, like a difference of +25 to +1 when you need 100 points per level). Every character had either 5 total supports per game, with each one getting progressively deeper from introductions in C rank, friends in B, to best friends or romantic in A rank. And with only having 5, you could only romance one per game and get one close friend. Or something less developed like 5 acquaintances. Other games gave you unlimited supports but you had to commit to like a final S rank for romance and could only do one.
Where it integrated, is that if you had support levels with someone, then you would gain stats if they were within X squares of you. Meaning your choices in developing these bonds also had huge ramifications on your character ability and capability, sometimes being the defining element to make a bad character good (like giving plus Hit to someone who wouldn't gain much naturally). And a lot of the times it was between classes who naturally wanted to be near each other, like an archer and an armor knight or two cavaliers who'd always be further ahead than the group, so you could just gain these advantages by playing the game smartly if you didn't want to min/max it.
It would also determine each characters ending, with a large swath of unique endings for basically any characters who could support. In a few cases, with midgame timeskips it would have huge effects on the next generation characters and their stats/capabilities as well.
I think that's the problem with most other RPGs. They want romance to be this big defined thing with epic moments like the inevitable sex scene or whatever. But that just highlights that they had to spend limited time making a limited number of events. Instead of building a small foundation and letting it speak for itself off that.
Now that is interesting, and that is EXACTLY how the romance/relationship building should be done, impacting actual gameplay and improving character stats/bonuses/etc.
I never really gave the Fire Emblem games much attention -- I can't remember, but didn't they start on the Gameboy Advance or DS?
The romance in KCD1 with Theresa was half way decent but it even there it didn't affect the gameplay or story much. But at the same time KCD1 baited you into sex scenes without warning. You try on a shirt with the woman of your benefactor in the same room? You end up cucking your benefactor. Or you get shitfaced with that one priest? You fuck some other woman.
And now if you choose to remain loyal in KCD2 to Theresa you get a letter in which she tells you that she cucked you with one of your friends. And you only get that letter if you choose to remain loyal. If you whore around you don't get it.
Morrigan's romance in DA:O might as well be canonical. The other endings are nowhere near as interesting, and her ending is a bit of a non sequitur if you aren't romancing her.
Yeah, unless they're done really well or really poorly, they're generally forgettable.
The only good one that comes to mind (and I could be wrong, this was decades ago), was actually early BioWare, interestingly enough. SW:KotOR four or five years before the first Mass Effect, and only a couple years after BG2. Bastila was an interesting character, and her paths can differ greatly depending on player role and choice, and does affect the story line. She was also straight; this is back in the day when such things were allowed.
Most of the other memorable romances were the bad ones. David Cage games spring to mind. *cough cough* Fahrenheit. That level of retardation will haunt you.
Oh yeah, I forgot about Bastilla; that's a good call-out -- if you romanced her and then did the evil ending, she would actually join you, which was kind of cool. Back when choices actually meant something.
...it's sad that romance in GTA of all things is more important than in most RPGs...at least they give you a reason to continue the relationship...
that being said, FFIV had a pretty cute romance between Cecil and Rose that was woven into the story pretty well. it was pretty generic (and with the 16-bit graphics, the kissing scene was more hilarious than heartwarming), but it was handled well...
GTA San Andreas was actually quite noteworthy for that, heck even the sex scenes that were cut at least had mini-games where you actually had to play. But beyond that, you're right, just getting up the max romance with each character unlocked bonuses and buffs in each section of the map. Rockstar actually made it mean something, which is funny because in RPGs they don't make it mean anything.