Note: I underlined the parts which you quoted from meTiaraBlade wrote...
Do you know nothing of roleplay? Sorry to be blunt, but I can't help but ask.
I do, thank you.
Roleplay requires you to immerse yourself into a character and make it your own.
I do by making the character look like I want him/her to, act as I want within the choices given to me, and speak as I want, again within the choices given to me.
A voice over doesn't give us that
In your opinion. You see, my choice is that I WANT my character to have a voice. I want to HEAR those words. I feel more in tune with a character who actually SPEAKS to a world when it speaks to her. That is a greater connection to me than "pick a line and see how the other character reacts."
it's a predetermined voice, not the one you want, not to mention that voice is restrictive in what tone it uses.
Not having a voice is restrictive as well. Having played ME1 and ME2, I never had a problem with the tone my character used: it matched what the dialogue was.
A dialogue wheel doesn't give us that because your responses are preset, to what? Good Bad and neutral?
And DA:O is different? You seem to think so but I never saw much of a difference if the variety of responses in DA vs either ME. In either game, it's, as I noted in another post, more or less postive, neutral, negative, investigate, and sometimes a persuade or intimidate choice.
And even so your dialogue option doesn't even match up to what wil lbe done/said. If I want my chracter to treaten the NPC I want them to say threaten not punch the other person/NPC talking to me.
Again, I don't see this problem in ME1 or ME2 unless you are referring to the Renegade/Paragon interrupts which you should figure out are going to end a conversation and might be a little extreme. I very rarely picked a dialogue choice in ME and was shocked that Shephard said something I wasn't expecting or intending.
I just do not see your arguements carrying any weight, I am sorry. I believe that for some reason you are overally invested in this. Honestly, questioning whether I understand what role-playing is happens to be silly. Whether ME or DA:O, we are creating a character to assume a role that Bioware has defined. In ME, it's Commander Shepherd while in DA:O, it's the Warden. Among the ways we define are looks, powers, skills, and choices. To think that having voice acting somehow undermines ME as a RPG just is bizzare. I think forcing a mission and role on us is more restricting and makes it more role-defining than role-playing compared to the voice not being what you want it to be.
1) So you rather watch two people talk to each other, with you as the omnipotent figure telling one side what to do and seeing how another reacts, how is that immersion?
2) Not having a VO gives a better roleplaying immersion experience, how? It actually let's you put your roleplaying skills to use, immersing yourself into what type of chracter I want to be instead of predetermined dialogue options which tell you, we are not stupid here.
3)The dialogue system in DA:O is better than ME why? Because it gave it to you straight forward, lsiting all possible options, true that some options where 'Investigate' but they were ACTUAL options rather than 'Click Investigate to further explore what dialogue options there is' really is that immersive or objective?
4) Maybe you didn't have a problem with ME's Shepard's tone for various choices, but many others did, we didn't like how Shepard said "No" and started to threaten somebody
Modifié par Anathemic, 10 juillet 2010 - 04:13 .
Retour en haut
