Romance VNs/Dating Sims are dubious manipulation games?

[trooper6]

I suppose I'd say don't make a game where "winning the girl/guy" is the point of the game...i.e. don't make a dating sim. Make a game with a great story where romance can happen or not. Also don't make games with a model where the relationships are transactional...or the love interests are objects. Don't make love a game, make it part of a story.

I know you are going to ask for examples to model your next game off of...but I don't think you are going to find many examples. You'll have to think about how to do this on your own!

[Rossfellow]

If you want to remove the "manipulation" aspect, then remove anything like social links, or points you score when you increase their relationship, or even "correct" choices when talking to them. Just make all the choices equally valid and resulting in different situations, and make it possible for the relationship to decrease or increase depending on the progress of the story. Basically, just make it a more organic, novel-like story and less like a video game.

Can you give an example of games like this? It's something I want to look into more and analyze for myself. There's gotta be some games like that with multiple romance interests but I can't think of any off the top of my head except possibly.... Katawa Shojo? In that game the main protagonist makes assumptions about the girl(s) he chases but they immediately call him out on his behavior, or if the player tries to take the sleazeball path, it ruins relationships. But still, Katawa Shojo still strikes me as a manipulation sim...

Far from romantic, but if it hasn't been brought up yet, Telltale Games' The Walking Dead does this very effectively. Your choices directly affect the situation, your relationships and opinions of/from other characters, and all carry different consequences. Not for the light of heart.

[Zetsubou]

I think the better question is, at what point does "romance" become "manipulation"?
If you give your friend a birthday present, and you've learned from previous conversations that they like stuffed animals, then you have an obvious gift choice.
If you give them a stuffed animal, will they think better of you? Is this "manipulation", since you know they will like it and that giving them a gift they like may result in a closer friendship? Or is it simply a kind gesture?
Is it because you want to make them happy, without regard for how they'll see you as a result? Or is trying to make someone happy also considered "manipulation"?

If you want to avoid feeling like you're "manipulating" characters, but you still want to make a dating sim, then IMO you should make choices that have multiple potential outcomes, and for which the character has more than one reason to make said choice.
For example, you play as a delinquent. A stranger is picking on a female classmate of yours. What do you do?

Reasons for intervening:
1. It's the right thing to do
2. You're a delinquent and you'll take any chance to fight
3. You don't want to see your classmate hurt
4. Your classmate might like you as a result

Only #4 could be construed as being "manipulative". The other reasons are all legit.
Would you specifically choose not to help them out of fear that people might see it as an attempt to manipulate the girl's feelings?
Or would you be true to character and act in a manner expected of the delinquent, or of a good samaritan?

But #4 isn't even a sure thing. How might she react?
1. She abhors violence and thus dislikes you as a result
2. She's thankful, but doesn't feel any differently towards you
3. She likes you as a result
Only #3 has the outcome desired from attempted "manipulation".

Moreover, you might be misreading the situation.
Maybe he's the girl's brother? Maybe he's her boyfriend? A friend of hers just mucking around?
You have no grasp of the situation. Your intervention might be welcome, it might not.

So, is this choice still considered "manipulative"?
You're acting true to character, you don't know if what you're doing is right, or what the outcome will be, and you have multiple reasons for taking this choice. There's even a risk attached to not acting.
It's an organic choice brought about by the situation at hand. It isn't a simple "rescue her and she's yours".

Ultimately I wouldn't give this "manipulation" rubbish too much thought. People will always choose to see events differently.
I say holding her hand on the walk home is romantic, you say it's manipulative. I say buying her a birthday present is expected of me, you say I'm manipulating her feelings.
But if you're really worried about it:
-try to make any "point earning" choices organic. Make the choice actually have some impact on the story, not just be about point scoring.
-make choices have more than one potential reason, more than one potential outcome, and/or based on the character you're writing for. re: delinquent example.
-don't always have characters react in the same way. Sure, literary girl might want to go to the library with you today, but will she want to go again tomorrow? She might even be offended that you think that's all she wants to do. Just like that, you have a character you can't manipulate with a simple "keep doing this and she'll like me" formula, as well as a more "human" character.

First things first, figure out where you stand on romance vs manipulation. At what point do you think a romantic or even just friendly gesture becomes "manipulation"?
And don't avoid "nice" choices just because they could be seen as manipulation. Two characters can talk or walk home together or buy one another birthday presents without ulterior motives.
We don't all share Christine's nihilistic view of romance in dating sims.

[Chocopyro]

There is a concept known as "Ethnocentrism" in which someone evaluates other people, cultures, and in this case, game mediums as according to the standards of their own culture, or perceptive definition of write and wrong. And as a writer, you should NEVER try to infringe your own creative liberties. Much less anyone else's opinions of what is write and wrong. Then you're just falling into a trap of trying to please everybody. What you want is a story that will provide your target audience with what they want, expect, and even surprise them within the realms of what they were playing the game for. You can certainly do so by being socially conscious, but trying to be overly so kinda... Well, are you trying to make a fun game, a good story, or a social statement?

And besides, if this-

“Really, dating sims are inherently about manipulating other people — pick the right dialogue choices based off what you think they expect, learn about their interests so you can give them perfectly tuned gifts, make decisions based off whether you’ll impress them or not — but like to pass it off as being about romance.”

-is what counts as manipulation, Then I guess that makes me a dubious manipulator too, simply for living so deeply in my own mind that It is necessary for me to calculate and weigh where my decisions will take me, based on logic, collective experience, and knowledge about something I've picked up from the past. Huzzah! Simply by slowing a tad bit down and flipping on my turn signal, I am manipulating the actions of the driver behind me on the freeway for my own benefit! (And hopefully theirs as well, since it would be a shame for both of us if he/she rear ends me.) I'll just pass it off as safety.

To me, manipulation is an act of backing someone into a corner where their free will is not assessable, or making a character think that an injected thought is their free will, which certainly isn't an act I could see any of my protagonists participating in with their romantic interests because an aspect of the relationships that I like to develop before love is respect. Now if I had a protagonist who didn't have such a relationship, then oh well. I'm not trying to force my values on that character. I'll just see how it plays out. /shrug

[Googaboga]

I agree with Zetsubou. And in my opinion there is really not much of a case for the manipulation theory. At least when it comes to the characters in the game. Yes, in most of these types of games the player is obviously manipulating things so that it ends they way they are hoping but that is basically unavoidable if you have a game that can go in different ways. Whether it be for romance or not, whether there are consequences or not, you can't make it so the player's choices aren't manipulative unless their choices are entirely meaningless or there is some kind of randomness/luck element to it. Does mean the main character has that manipulation streak? Absolutely not. Say you have some school life game and the player knows that if they join a certain club they'll meet a certain character they want to woo. So they make the MC join that club. But in the game it is presented as the MC joining that club simply because he/she is interesting in the club itself. How is that manipulative of the character? And why should that character have some kind of consequence for wanting to join a certain club? Again all the manipulation comes entirely from the player and does not translate into the MC's actual motives.

But maybe I'm misinterpreting it and they are saying there should be consequences to punish the player for trying to be manipulative?

[papillon]

A couple of things to consider:

As was already said, if you're playing a game in which the goal is to score with someone (intentionally crude choice of words), it is not possible to avoid making it work in a way that can be construed as manipulative, unless it's completely random. But it's all in how you look at it. You don't have to view it as manipulative. Your character might mean every word!

Being a winnable love interest doesn't have to mean that they're identical sex vending machines. Different characters having different tastes, and different relationships turning out differently because of the character involved, is more pushing the idea of treating people as people than it is pushing the idea of "give anyone enough diamonds and he'll bed you". Not all the characters like diamonds. Not all characters will have sex before marriage even if they do like diamonds. Love interests are only interchangeable if you write them that way.

However, if scoring points to 'win' someone makes you uneasy, you can have romance in a game without gamifying the romance. Put the romance on the side. Have the story be mostly about fighting the big bad, while your relationship with your sidekick bubbles along quietly throughout the course of the adventure. Or make the romance a given - start straight up with the idea that this game is not about WHETHER they will get together, but HOW they will get together.

[gekiganwing]

Having some distance between the player and the main character can be beneficial. I've never been a woman, but I appreciate stories which convey a girl's point of view. I may not be able to identify with all of the main character girl's concerns, but I want to understand how she thinks.

The MC most certainly doesn't need to be a personality-free blob that only exists in order to fulfill the player's fantasies. Instead, the main character can be an compelling individual. Also, other characters do not need to exist only as fictional love interests. Think about how to portray them as people, rather than blank slates or romance options. Ask yourself if the characters would be just as interesting if they were presented in a prose novel, a comic, a stage play, or a movie.

If you want to remove the "manipulation" aspect, then remove anything like social links, or points you score when you increase their relationship, or even "correct" choices when talking to them. Just make all the choices equally valid and resulting in different situations, and make it possible for the relationship to decrease or increase depending on the progress of the story. Basically, just make it a more organic, novel-like story and less like a video game.

Can you give an example of games like this? It's something I want to look into more and analyze for myself.

Consider Tears 9, 10. It's available in (slightly flawed) English on iOS and Android. Unless I'm completely mistaken...

...there is *nothing* that the main character can do in order to prevent the girl's death. Different choices lead to different scenes. However, all of the endings are bittersweet. Also, even though the opening scene might indicate otherwise, this is definitely not a love triangle story, and I don't think the main theme is romance. I had some complaints with this story... but I thought it succeeded in portraying a hopeless situation which the characters can't overcome.

A Midsummer Day's Resonance is a kinetic novel, and as such, does not include any choices. If I remember right, in the end...

...the two worlds are separated, and the main character will never be able to talk with the sisters again. Then she meets the boy who showed up for a moment in the introduction. If there were choices, would a positive Girls Love ending be possible? If that were an option, would it improve the story in any way? I ask because I'm not sure.

In chapter three of Sweet Fuse, during a dramatic action-suspense scene...

...there is a large explosion. The entire Bloodstained Hospital is destroyed. If the main character does not have enough affection points with one person, she won't be rescued, and the story will end abruptly. It seems to convey a message of "You lose at zero trust," and that the main character needs to be proactive in this tense situation. Since I liked the VN, I'm not inclined to extensively criticize it. I thought Sweet Fuse had a compelling main character, a decent suspense plot, and a good balance of humor and drama. However, if you're creating a VN, and you want to send a different message, then consider the following notions. A) Let the main character befriend everyone and succeed. B) Let all endings be equally interesting and important, no matter which characters get together. C) Even if romance is possible in the story, don't portray non playable characters as potential love interests. Let them be interesting people first.

Most of the the time, I don't think too much about messages and implications in VNs. After all, I liked Tokimeki Memorial Girl's Side. I understood that its main character doesn't convey much personality, that it's more of a stats-and-scheduling game than a story, and that its endings vary depending on the MC's statistics and other characters' love and friendship levels. It was funny and relaxing. And to borrow an old GamePro Magazine term, I thought it had a high fun factor. Sometimes that's enough.

[Mad Harlequin]

But maybe I'm misinterpreting it and they are saying there should be consequences to punish the player for trying to be manipulative?

What's being argued is that we should be honest with ourselves about the fact that this is manipulation. This doesn't apply just to the act of treating characters as vending machines dispensing affection or sex. The way I'm understanding it, "manipulation" is defined here not just in that way, but in the broader sense---the player is able to determine how to influence and control a character's behavior in whichever manner he or she desires. So yes, even something as seemingly innocuous as holding hands with a character is manipulation.

[Googaboga]

I'm still not exactly sure I get what you mean. Is the problem meant to be that the players didn't realize/admit they were being manipulative with their actions in these games and that needed to be addressed?

[Ran08]

I'm not exactly sure if I'm following this correctly but...

I whole-heartedly agree with Zetsubou.

And with everyone else who said pretty much the same thing. I mean, why should we view it as manipulation? If that's the case, then almost every relationship I have with every person is a "manipulative" relationship, because I learn what stuff they like, what actions they don't want, things like those.

Even with VNs, haha, not all choices lead to "this character will like you", although it could be a possible route, of course. But it doesn't always mean that it's the main point of making that choice.

The way I'm understanding it, "manipulation" is defined here not just in that way, but in the broader sense---the player is able to determine how to influence and control a character's behavior in whichever manner he or she desires.

Hmm, like Zetsubou said for example, if I learn that my best friend's favorite food is chocolate, does that mean that giving him some chocolate is manipulating him? Or maybe if I learn that he doesn't like going out at night, so we only go out in the mornings, does that mean that I am already manipulating him to get what I want? (Which is probably his affection or something like that, haha.)

I kinda refuse to see it that way, hahaha. Though I think that Mad Harlequin is right and that's what manipulation means in the interview. And most probably in most games too. Haha.

Technically, most games are manipulation, but that doesn't have to be a bad thing, right? If we compare this to real life, then that means that everything we do is just... manipulation, and I think that's a pretty sad way to live. Maybe we just shouldn't think of it that way. Haha.

Feelings, like most other things, can be manipulated. That's true. But "manipulated" is a pretty strong word to describe what really happens. Hahaha. I think they just develop... on their own, with some outside help. Same goes with visual novels and their characters, with their own digital feelings. :3 You don't "manipulate" them, you just allow them to develop feelings for you because of the things you do!

Haha, okay, I'm weird. Lol. ) Anyway... just my two cents. =)

[Mad Harlequin]

And with everyone else who said pretty much the same thing. I mean, why should we view it as manipulation? If that's the case, then almost every relationship I have with every person is a "manipulative" relationship, because I learn what stuff they like, what actions they don't want, things like those.

You're not seeing the forest for the trees. Real-life relationships are not the same because the other party isn't programmed to respond in a specific way to your actions towards them. Unlike characters in visual novels---or in games in general----he or she has the agency to respond to a given action in the way of his or her choosing.

"Obtainable" characters have no choice. They are the receivers of the player's actions, and therefore their behavior reflects what the player does. They may accomplish various things and serve different roles within a story, but that's only because they're written to do so. Unlike real people, they do not exist independently of the player, no matter how complex and well written they are.

[Ran08]

You're not seeing the forest for the trees. Real-life relationships are not the same because the other party isn't programmed to respond in a specific way to your actions towards them. Unlike characters in visual novels---or in games in general----he or she has the agency to respond to a given action in the way of his or her choosing.

I know, haha. Like I said, I think you're right that it's really manipulation when it comes to most games. It's just that, I view "manipulation" as a pretty harsh word to describe what we're really doing in visual novels. We are influencing them in a way, haha, but I personally don't think it's outright manipulation, especially if the story is developed as realistically as possible. Manipulation can also be defined as unfairly influencing something, right? So, maybe if we remove the "unfair" part, we can tone it down a bit. Hahaha. If it doesn't feel like the writer cheated into making everything easier for the player just because of his/her choices, then maybe we can disguise the natural manipulation aspect of games as... not manipulation.

---the player is able to determine how to influence and control a character's behavior in whichever manner he or she desires. So yes, even something as seemingly innocuous as holding hands with a character is manipulation.

Well, yes, technically. Hahaha. I was just comparing it to real life since most works of fiction are derived from real life. Hmm... what if it's like holding someone's hand and they jerk it away from you because they don't like you? Wait, does that count as manipulation? I mean, if it doesn't, then does that mean that the "bad" choices in VNs aren't manipulation?

Argh, haha, I keep repeating the word "manipulation" and now it doesn't even feel like a real word to me. Hahaha.

[Zetsubou]

I think part of the reason for the disagreement here is the multiple meanings of the word "manipulate".
Manipulate can mean to control, to mislead, or to merely influence. Looking through this thread, it seems like most people are willing to agree that VNs are about influence, and sometimes misleading, but not usually control.
Myself included. I object to the notion that dating sims are games of control, but I'll happily concede that they're all about influence. Whether or not you can mislead anyone is up to the writer(s)/programmer(s).

The only ones to control pursuable characters are the writer(s) and programmer(s). In fact, it's their job.
Players, on the other hand, can at best influence the outcome, or the way characters feel. They can't force anyone to do anything. They can only make pre-defined choices that have pre-defined outcomes. Their influence leads to certain outcomes, none of which they actually have any control over. At best they control their own choices, but once again, that doesn't give them control over the outcome.
The player's choice to gift a present will influence the receiver, just as it would in real life, but the player can't control the response they receive any more than they would upon gifting a real person. Only the writer(s) and programmer(s) can change that.

Even if we take a broader approach to the meaning of "control", in which it's considered "controlling" if the player makes decisions in order to reach a specific outcome, then the player would have to already know the outcome of each choice. If they don't know the outcome of a choice, even if it's something seemingly obvious, then they're at best influencing the outcome. You know the saying: you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
And yet, even if they do know the outcome, you'd have to use the term "control" rather broadly; they're merely triggering a pre-defined event based on pre-defined options.

In short, it depends on how you define "manipulation". As long as we keep using a word with multiple meanings, especially a word than can be perceived in such a negative way, there are going to be disagreements.
VNs/Dating sims are no more about "dubious manipulation" than any other kind of video game. Writers and programmers control, players influence within the bounds set by writers/programmers, and characters do and feel whatever programmers and writers allow them to.

[Mad Harlequin]

I know, haha. Like I said, I think you're right that it's really manipulation when it comes to most games. It's just that, I view "manipulation" as a pretty harsh word to describe what we're really doing in visual novels.

It may be harsh, but it's the honest truth. In real life, there are no affection meters to tell us when we've "scored points" with a person. There's no saving or loading, and we don't have the ability to "quit" and "restart" to repeat an interaction if we make mistakes. And we certainly can't have multiple files for each character so that we can pursue everybody as a romantic interest.

Wait, does that count as manipulation? I mean, if it doesn't, then does that mean that the "bad" choices in VNs aren't manipulation?

Every choice is about manipulation. We can generally determine which choices will lead to which outcome, yes? So we, as the players, have all the power to control what other characters do. There are several works out there, including Ristorante Amore and The Stanley Parable, containing pretty significant discussions about what agency means as a character in a game and as a player. If anyone else is interested in the idea of character agency, I recommend Blue Lacuna (an excellent IF with quite a complex NPC) as well.

I object to the notion that dating sims are games of control, but I'll happily concede that they're all about influence. Whether or not you can mislead anyone is up to the writer(s)/programmer(s).

[. . .]

In short, it depends on how you define "manipulation". As long as we keep using a word with multiple meanings, especially a word than can be perceived in such a negative way, there are going to be disagreements.

VNs/Dating sims are no more about "dubious manipulation" than any other kind of video game. Writers and programmers control, players influence within the bounds set by writers/programmers, and characters do and feel whatever programmers and writers allow them to.

A fair concession. I don't think Love was trying to say that only dating sims are at fault here, for what it's worth. They're good examples of what she's talking about, though. And you're right---much of the player's strength of influence comes from the writers and programmers. I think the key point to take away from this discussion, regardless of which "side" we choose (if indeed they even exist), is that there can be no real "romance" when one party is essentially a marionette controlled by the other, and I think we all acknowledge that on some level. Love is just arguing that we should be more open about it.

[Ran08]

@MadHarlequin
*sigh* Yes, I guess reality can be pretty harsh at times. Haha.

@Zetsubou
Ahh, I agree with you again, haha. Only the creators themselves can actually manipulate the game, and that the players can only choose what was already pre-made in the game. I think in the end, it really does depend on how we define manipulation. I myself view it as an unfair influence, so... as long as I don't feel cheated, I don't feel manipulated by a game. Hahaha. Or rather, I don't feel like I'm just simply "manipulating" characters, even though that's what others may feel.

Anyway, with my question though, I meant... what if you thought Character A would like it if you held his hand, but instead he jerks it away? Haha. Then things didn't go exactly the way you planned, and you couldn't have "manipulated" him, if we go by the definition that manipulation is influencing something to "suit your own purpose and advantage." Nothing, just a random question that popped into my mind while answering this. Hahaha.