The issue with issues with romance in games.

TL;DR Most games include romance as a feature and not a pillar or theme of their game; so critiquing their romance mechanics is basically just nit-picking. Developers should be free to include romance mechanics in their games and not be shamed for it (unless it's the focus of their game and they drop the ball).

I've seen a few discussions come up recently about how romances are done in games. The critical consensus seems to be that they are done poorly but this discussion has been going on for at least 15 years. But that begs the question as to why things haven't changed and why gamers accept the status quo.

The critical critique of the romance in a CRPG is that they are 'unrealistic' (which should tell most game designers everything they need to know). They tend to lament the collection of 'kindness coins' and the treating of romance as a reward as problematic. The idea you can just say the right words and 'win' at romance as being reminiscent of toxic stereotypes and objectification. Some developers have even taken to calling romance in games contrived. While these are all kind of true; they all persist.

Kindness Coins was a game jam project that came out in 2013. It's a charming game and I appreciate what it does. The only thing that dismays me is the conversation hasn't changed much beyond what it said over 10 years ago.

I think the reason why is something that I like to call (in my head) the 'Hollywood Reality'. It's realistic in the movies, it's simplified and serves the story. Just as in a movie the hero never reloads, in a videogame the hero never has to manage half-spent magazines of ammo.  And the romance is the same way. The protagonist gets the (obligatory) love interest; or in games the player is able to use the systems of the game to romance their favorite romance option.

And that's an important point. They use the systems of the game. The parts of romance that can not be shown through the game are left absent. When a player invests time and chooses romantic interest in their chosen love interest (so that's why they call it that) that is analogous the time and sacrifice it takes to be in a relationship with someone (to think of someone other than yourself).

I think this is where the developer, the critic, and the player all misunderstand each other. The developer wants to create the best game they can; the critic sees the limits in how relationships are implemented; the player has a desire for expression. And this is especially true when the game isn't even about romance. It's usually about some heroic story with warrior wizards and psychic cyborgs and ninjas with rocket launchers. Its not a romance game about romance (or even if it is, its not a game about the complexities of romance. Rom-coms are not a deep analysis of the imbalances in modern relationships; maybe what you are looking for is a prestige film). Basically a CRPG with romance is not a game about the complexities of romance; its a part of a larger game.

A polygon article recently made the same old arguments against romance in games and prominently featured Baldur's Gate 3 as having the same old 'problems'. But as a CRPG romance is not the games focus. Why not platform the prestige games trying to do romance better?

The real problem seems to be a misunderstanding of what the inclusion of romance is for. The critic seems to be asking mass market games to be more like indie 'prestige' games (ie Oscar bait). They are asking for explorations of what a relationship can be. They want representations of differing types of relationships and to examine the intersectionality of romance within broader cultural contexts. They want to see games be different and find a deconstruction of romance that elevates the artform.

But the player isn't any less noble. They are looking for romance as a subplot. Something that deepens their connection to events and can be jeopardized to raise the stakes (or frame other concepts). Its part of the game, not the full game. The romance option they choose (as a-romantic as that sounds) is a part of their expression in the game. And there is an aspect of wish fulfilment but no more so than being a bad-ass cybermancer who doesn't play by the rules. Why shouldn't the protagonist get the love interest?

I'm not advocating that every game with romance should converge on having a playersexual polycule (well, I'm at least not going to admit it). What I want is for players, critics and developers to understand the role of romance in the game they are playing, criticizing, or making. If a game isn't 'capital A About romance' criticizing its romance kind of sounds like you are missing the point or wanting the game to be something it is not. And even if you are adding deep critical commentary on romance... if that is not what the game is about its going to be confusing and probably not get the development time it needs. It's probably going to disappoint the critics who want to see that and annoy the players who don't. To the player it can feel like a rug-pull or a gotcha when the game tests something that the didn't think this was on the table.

If you want to make a game about the romance, about all the confusing complexities of people falling in love; go for it. But also be aware of the type of game you are making; it's prestige. It's more for the voice of critics than the whims of players (and that doesn't mean players wont enjoy it; they just need to know that's what they are getting into). But also be very well aware that you probably are not going to get AAA sales numbers out of a prestige game. You can do whatever you want, just please have realistic sales expectations.

With all of that said, let's have a little more love for the games with romance. Lets critique games for what they are trying to do rather than what they wished they had done. Lets let the prestige games have their moments without denigrating games who include romance as feature instead of a pillar.

Hey, I'm as surprised as you are that I was able to find relevant images of Tiefling devil-ladies for all of  images in this post.