Dating simulators, Western RPGs and Shippin'

[Paradoxrifts]

It occurs to me that presently the romantic subplots centered around the create-your-own protagonists that feature in most Western RPGs are basically prepackaged 'Mary Sue' self-insert fiction.

This approach is problematic for many reasons, but I will only go into two in detail. The first is that while there has been a veritable explosion in choice when it comes to gender, sexuality and partner preference when it comes to romantic subplots, one option that never seems to grace the table is depth. In ME3 for instance male Shepard could finally get his gay on with a character named Kaidan who was one of ten possible romantic interests, but ultimately the actual mechanics behind the process have largely stagnated in all Bioware games. The second problem is largely structural and I believe it to be the problem behind the aforementioned stagnation
, and that problem is that in any given romance subplot featuring a create-your-own protagonist there is only ever one fully realised fictional character involved.

The protagonist in these games is only ever a vague approximation of a fictional character. A deliberately half-filled character sheet, which then must be completed not only at the beginning of the game but also throughout with every action that you take.

The solution I propose is to shift the focus of the romantic subplots onto your party companions and/or important NPCs and allow the player to play matchmaker, and ship out certain combinations of characters rather than focusing on getting their virtual avatar laid.

Does anyone else think this is a good idea?

 

[disgruntledgamer]

I fail to see how that's any different. Paragon and Renegade Shepard were pretty define. If they want 2 NPCs to have sexual tension for story sake I'm ok with it, but I have no desire to try and set NPCs up like a 13 year old girl.

Sorry dude but I can't see Role Playing as a celibate monk hosting Love Connection flying with everyone.

 

[Keoul]

Eh no I think it's a bad idea.
You've moved from a partaker of romance into a voyeur, setting it up from afar and watching the results.

And calling every single Western RPG a "prepackaged 'Mary-Sue' self insert fiction" seems a tad harsh. If you've played throughout the trilogy of ME you'd know that wasn't the case, seeing as you don't "pop in" and suddenly save the world in the first and second game there's pretty decent pacing where you slowly reach world saving position.

Seriously I think your "Matchmaker" idea sounds terrible, When I've got a world to save I have no time for being the wingman to my crew mates, I got other shit to deal with.

 

[TheCommanders]

Doesn't Shepard get the chance to play matchmaker (or not) with EDI and Joker?

OT: I would strongly disagree with the assertion that these situations have only one fully realized character, because I would say that each time I play through the ME trilogy, I am very aware of who my Shepard is.

Example:

One of my playthroughs involves a Shepard who in ME1 was extremely duty oriented, shy's away from personal connection, and places an emphasis on getting the job done regardless of the costs. That being said, his death in the beginning of ME2 is a wake up call and he starts to find himself drawn to the person who gave him a second chance at life, Miranda. He sees her living as he was, focused on personal validation through duty and wants to impress on her what a mistake he feels this was, and this dialogue between them is what leads to their romantic involvement. Towards the end of 3 they have both changed substantially, and Shepard is now determined to end the galactic conflict so he can use the opportunity Miranda gave him to live his own life.

My point is just because the Shepard character (or insert the protagonist of any similar game here) is not set in stone doesn't mean they can't have depth. I'd almost go so far as to say I prefer a romance in which not only can I choose who I want my character to be, but I can pick which LI would best compliment that character and construct my own narrative around that. That's why it's essential in games with a protagonist not set in stone that more than one option be available in regard to LI's, and that each of them be substantially different, which I feel in ME, they are.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

The problem with accusing video game protagonists of being Mary Sues is that the game kind of HAS to revolve around them, as they are YOU, and the only way to mitigate that would be to tear focus away from the player, which would make for a profoundly shitty game. So while it's not necessary to make the protagonist ultra-capable or ultra-pure, you are always going be at the center of events, shaping the story.

It's just a conceit of the medium people need to be prepared to put up with.

 

[excalipoor]

And calling every single Western RPG a "prepackaged 'Mary-Sue' self insert fiction" seems a tad harsh. If you've played throughout the trilogy of ME you'd know that wasn't the case, seeing as you don't "pop in" and suddenly save the world in the first and second game there's pretty decent pacing where you slowly reach world saving position.

To be honest, that's exactly what Mass Effect feels like to me. Every single companion of the opposite gender can fall for him (as long as he's a he at least), and the game never shirks from telling the player just how heroic/strong/smart/desirable/consequential they are. The Mass Effect universe literally revolves around Shepard, the player. Mass Effect is so nice to me, I can't help but feel it's about to ask some really questionable favors of me.

However, while I do think romances in games could generally be done much better, I wouldn't trade them for a chance to play matchmaker. It'd be a fun addition though. And while Shepard doesn't really have a hand in it, it's nice to see Tali and Garrus get together if neither is a love interest for the player. Stuff like that I'd like to see more.

 

[Lt._nefarious]

I like the romance sub plots in RPGs, especially Bioware RPGs, I feel more involved in my rew mates life rather than just a blank slate with no emotion other than heroic sorrow. For instance, getting all flirty with Jack in ME2 and being turned down because Jack wasn't into the whole "girl's club" (lesbianism) thing made them both feel more like real people than avatars, for me anyway. Similarly, I enjoyed romancing Merril in DA2 because, well, she's Merril in DA2.

 

[Swyftstar]

Doesn't Shepard get the chance to play matchmaker (or not) with EDI and Joker?

Yeah, I basically told one or both of them (I forget) that it wouldn't work so they'd shut up about it. I think it's a bad idea, I have no desire to and see no possible enjoyment with hooking two npc's up. That could just be me and maybe there is a whole market segment of wannabe virtual matchmakers out there.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Playing matchmaker... why yes that's what I always wanted in my RPGs, they should also start packaging them with broken glass because I might as well chew on some of that to complete the experience.

I understand many feel the need to play tea party or doctor, but I'm in it for the story and adventure which all that romance drama bollocks does not bring.
And honestly dating sims have been doing this for decades, just play those for a change.

 

[Kopikatsu]

The problem with accusing video game protagonists of being Mary Sues is that the game kind of HAS to revolve around them, as they are YOU, and the only way to mitigate that would be to tear focus away from the player, which would make for a profoundly shitty game. So while it's not necessary to make the protagonist ultra-capable or ultra-pure, you are always going be at the center of events, shaping the story.

It's just a conceit of the medium people need to be prepared to put up with.

Actually, that's one of the reasons I fell in love with the Battlefront series. You're a generic soldier, and are explicitly told that you're both worthless and replaceable. In most cases, unless you become a God at the game, you will die multiple times taking an outpost, because your singular life is meaningless. (This kind of breaks once you learn to abuse the enemy AI, because then you can go be a super hero and wipe out the enemy army solo). In every game that lets you customize your character, I try and make them seem as generic as possible to recapture that feeling (For example, in Blink and Max Payne 3, I gave my character basic pants with a holster, body armor, black boots, black gloves, and a mask).

I get that's not a workable setup for most games today, but I wish more would treat the player character as expendable. Like I thought Yahtzee's complaint of how the AI in Warfighter were competent and could handle situations on their own was kind of silly. I get that he would rather do it himself (the whole gameplay aspect), but I like the idea that the entire conflict/universe/whatever doesn't rely 100% on the player character. It makes sense for something like Halo, but something like Operation Flashpoint? Not so much.

 

[Valis7]

I definitely agree that games could do a job of making supporting characters feel more 'alive' and not rely on the main character as the fixture of their life. It just doesn't make for a healthy relationship when the one 'alpha' friend plays messiah with everyone's personal life. But since the point of these video games is to make the player feel big and important, it's just a means to that end, and Mass effect & Dragon Age do a good job of making the player feel important.

And It's not just a Western RPG thing. Persona 3 & 4 (two games I love) are infamous for having uber-popular, Mr. perfect, 'gary-sue' main characters that EVERYONE falls madly in love with. You think Mass Effect is a harem / dating sim? Try those games.

 

[mjcabooseblu]

Man, I'm fine with any approach to romance as long as it's better than your typical jRPG horseshit.

 

[Warachia]

You'd really like the first 2 star ocean games then. Though I disagree on your thoughts with making a protagonist have a relationship with other characters, you don't really explain what you mean when you ask for depth, do you mean how the relationship continues past the start, and I don't see how that "structure" thing you talk about is a problem, it might be a problem if you were forced to have a romance, but you aren't.