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?
They started on the SNES originally, though the first one to make it out of Japan was the second GBA title. The first two games were remade on the DS and 3DS respectively, though they were and still are super barebones.
The support system I described is the one used in the GBA games (6-8), which is also the first games to not be Japan only (7 was the first international game, 1/2 were remade on the DS/3DS later while 3-6 are still fan translation only).
What's amusing is that the relationship system was first setup back in the 4th game all the way back in 1996. With literally every piece of it being hugely impactful on your characters and the story, as you spend most of the time post-timeskip using the children of your original generation's pairings. And it goes in depth with it.
So there isn't an excuse for any RPG game to be lazy about it as it was already figured out by a fucking niche (at the time) SNES series.
Thanks. That really puts into perspective just how horrible and lazy a lot of today's RPGs are, and how agenda-driven they are when it comes to the romance systems, since I cannot think of any recent RPGs that use a similar system as the one you described from the older Fire Emblem games.
Although, I do seem to recall a similar system being in Bahamut Lagoon as you developed the relationships/partnerships between the characters and the dragons, or maybe I'm remembering it wrong. Either way, meaningful relationships in games seems to be a thing of a bygone era.
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.
like i said, final fantasy 4 (sacrelige, i know, using arabic numerals with a final fantasy game, lol) had a pretty cute romance. it didn't really do anything for the gameplay, but it was Rose's reason joining Cecil's party. and Edward had a bit of a tragic romance backstory as well, one that tied into why Tellah's story as well. don't get me started on the comical relationship Yang had with his wife, lol.
I will admit, though, it does seem a lot of modern RPGs only include romance in a superfluous way, though. especially with the ones that are less RPG and more visual novel with a few action scenes tacked on...
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?
They started on the SNES originally, though the first one to make it out of Japan was the second GBA title. The first two games were remade on the DS and 3DS respectively, though they were and still are super barebones.
The support system I described is the one used in the GBA games (6-8), which is also the first games to not be Japan only (7 was the first international game, 1/2 were remade on the DS/3DS later while 3-6 are still fan translation only).
What's amusing is that the relationship system was first setup back in the 4th game all the way back in 1996. With literally every piece of it being hugely impactful on your characters and the story, as you spend most of the time post-timeskip using the children of your original generation's pairings. And it goes in depth with it.
So there isn't an excuse for any RPG game to be lazy about it as it was already figured out by a fucking niche (at the time) SNES series.
Thanks. That really puts into perspective just how horrible and lazy a lot of today's RPGs are, and how agenda-driven they are when it comes to the romance systems, since I cannot think of any recent RPGs that use a similar system as the one you described from the older Fire Emblem games.
Although, I do seem to recall a similar system being in Bahamut Lagoon as you developed the relationships/partnerships between the characters and the dragons, or maybe I'm remembering it wrong. Either way, meaningful relationships in games seems to be a thing of a bygone era.
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.
like i said, final fantasy 4 (sacrelige, i know, using arabic numerals with a final fantasy game, lol) had a pretty cute romance. it didn't really do anything for the gameplay, but it was Rose's reason joining Cecil's party. and Edward had a bit of a tragic romance backstory as well, one that tied into why Tellah's story as well. don't get me started on the comical relationship Yang had with his wife, lol.
I will admit, though, it does seem a lot of modern RPGs only include romance in a superfluous way, though. especially with the ones that are less RPG and more visual novel with a few action scenes tacked on...
Mate that's really going deep into the well of history, but I'm slowly starting to remember those now...
Cecil was the one who went from evil to good right? I remember Kain was my favourite in that game, the badass Dragoon, yeah?
Wasn't Yang the monk or was that Edge?
The more you have described it the more it's starting to come back to me, though.