Mr Fish
Slippy sloppy, The
Poor writing when it comes to romance is just dreadful, I'd be far more okay with being able to just fuck companions or something. Not romance. No cheesy hack writing that tries to force something in there just cause X game had it. No cheap cop-out excuses to shortcut it into "love". Just "you wanna fuck that super mutant? Okay. We'll let you". I'd respect it one hell of a lot more than bad "romance" writing. A cheap fuck is easier to write and can fit characters a lot easier than something as complex and (preferably) long-paced as romance. All you need is some flirtation sprinkled in here and there to build up some pacing and then just finish it off with the ever so lovely fade to black when you just go "let's fuck" which modders will flesh out upon later. Done.
Not that I think being able to fuck a dog is necessary for a Fallout experience but if we have to be able to stick our thing in companions or have them stick their things in us I'd rather it feel more natural and believable. Romance rarely does, a quick fuck on the other hand isn't that hard to write. Romance is complex, lust isn't terribly complex. I don't get why romance is becoming such a big thing in the first place. Do the developers really think we're so lonely and desperate that we need a waifu where ever we go?
[edit]
Ready for another rant?
Not that I think being able to fuck a dog is necessary for a Fallout experience but if we have to be able to stick our thing in companions or have them stick their things in us I'd rather it feel more natural and believable. Romance rarely does, a quick fuck on the other hand isn't that hard to write. Romance is complex, lust isn't terribly complex. I don't get why romance is becoming such a big thing in the first place. Do the developers really think we're so lonely and desperate that we need a waifu where ever we go?
[edit]
Ready for another rant?
I mean, let's say you sit down and write 10 characters, just 10 different characters that are companions for a hypothetical game. As you write these characters does it feel natural for one of them to have a romance sub-plot? Then go for it. But now you can romance one of your companions. Does that mean every companions should be romancable? Absolutely not. One of the characters joins up with you with a hidden agenda and when this character has achieved his/her goal then (s)he betrays you. One of the companions wants excitement out of their life but if you go through a lot of quests and end up solving them violently then this character becomes increasingly conflicted with what you're doing and will eventually leave and want to return home. One character joins up solely for the pay, you gotta pay him/her, you stop doing that? Then (s)he leaves. Oh and (s)he will claim certain loot for him/herself and if you disagree with it 4 times then (s)he will leave.
Characters should not feel like slaves to the protagonist, they should be their own people with their own agenda and work for their own goals. You're in charge, but if it makes sense within the writing of the character for something you don't want to happen to happen then that should very well happen. And that goes for romance as well. Just cause you want something does not mean it should be available to you just because you're the player.
I really dislike how companions end up in a lot of RPG's, even ones I really enjoy. Where once they join the player it's like they have no impactful agency of their own.
Each character should be written on its own merits and whatever the outcome of that writing is is irrelevant to the rest of the companions written. If it makes sense for one character to have a romantic subplot and it would come naturally from the writer who has a good idea of how to make it work then by all means let that companion be romancable. But the issue I see with all of this is that they are going to first come up with the characters and then try to hamfist in a romantic subplot. And that shit just doesn't work. A writer should be allowed to sit down and come up with a character and then let them work their magic and whatever comes out of it comes out. They should not be told that your robotic servant with a faux AI should be able to whisper sweet things in your ears because it doesn't make any damn sense.
And like I said, it's not just romance that is the problem. It's that companions have to function similarly to one another. One got a personal quest? All got personal quests. One can be romanced? All should be romanced. One can be given a personal gift that fits their character? All should be given gifts. 8 out of 10 of the companions won't leave your side for anything unless you specifically ask them to? Then the other two --which you wrote into a corner where the only logical solution would be for them to leave you if not turn on you-- should not leave you unless you specifically ask them to, best come up with an excuse so that they won't leave!
Fallout New Vegas did it well in this regard. Cass, I think, would've been the only one you could romance. You can sell Arcade into slavery. If you do X or Y then Boone or Arcade or Veronica would leave your party. I think you can even give up Eddie to the BOS IIRC.
So hearing that "we can romance companions", plural, makes me think that Bethesda are not going the FNV approach to this at a all. If they did, then at most 2 companions would be romancable.
Or hell, maybe we're all wrong and they hired a writer with a bleeding heart that can actually write romance well and all companions will make perfect sense to be romancable and not only that but when we go through each romance our black shriveled hearts will melt from the joy and wonder of watching love unfold.
Though it's fucking Bethesda, who allowed you to marry by wearing a necklace in Skyrim. So yeah. Doubtful.
Characters should not feel like slaves to the protagonist, they should be their own people with their own agenda and work for their own goals. You're in charge, but if it makes sense within the writing of the character for something you don't want to happen to happen then that should very well happen. And that goes for romance as well. Just cause you want something does not mean it should be available to you just because you're the player.
I really dislike how companions end up in a lot of RPG's, even ones I really enjoy. Where once they join the player it's like they have no impactful agency of their own.
Each character should be written on its own merits and whatever the outcome of that writing is is irrelevant to the rest of the companions written. If it makes sense for one character to have a romantic subplot and it would come naturally from the writer who has a good idea of how to make it work then by all means let that companion be romancable. But the issue I see with all of this is that they are going to first come up with the characters and then try to hamfist in a romantic subplot. And that shit just doesn't work. A writer should be allowed to sit down and come up with a character and then let them work their magic and whatever comes out of it comes out. They should not be told that your robotic servant with a faux AI should be able to whisper sweet things in your ears because it doesn't make any damn sense.
And like I said, it's not just romance that is the problem. It's that companions have to function similarly to one another. One got a personal quest? All got personal quests. One can be romanced? All should be romanced. One can be given a personal gift that fits their character? All should be given gifts. 8 out of 10 of the companions won't leave your side for anything unless you specifically ask them to? Then the other two --which you wrote into a corner where the only logical solution would be for them to leave you if not turn on you-- should not leave you unless you specifically ask them to, best come up with an excuse so that they won't leave!
Fallout New Vegas did it well in this regard. Cass, I think, would've been the only one you could romance. You can sell Arcade into slavery. If you do X or Y then Boone or Arcade or Veronica would leave your party. I think you can even give up Eddie to the BOS IIRC.
So hearing that "we can romance companions", plural, makes me think that Bethesda are not going the FNV approach to this at a all. If they did, then at most 2 companions would be romancable.
Or hell, maybe we're all wrong and they hired a writer with a bleeding heart that can actually write romance well and all companions will make perfect sense to be romancable and not only that but when we go through each romance our black shriveled hearts will melt from the joy and wonder of watching love unfold.
Though it's fucking Bethesda, who allowed you to marry by wearing a necklace in Skyrim. So yeah. Doubtful.
Last edited:
