271 réponses à ce sujet

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Narreneth wrote...
If you want sarcasm pick the sarcastic option.  Don't roleplay by picking the non-sarcastic response and then painting over it with "well, all my party is just socially inept except for ME"  In a table top game if you add sarcastic inflections to your character, your friends and your DM will pick up on it.

It's my game and I can roleplay my character any way I want. XD

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Sidney wrote...
So really the fact that the game has no responsivness to you is now a good thing. Why bother with responses and just have a "answer button" and then you can imagine a conversation and the NPC can imagine a reponse and it'll all work out because they just had an improper reaction.

Your answer also only works if Leli is a dope, which she's not and as a Bard she should be keenly aware of social cues and language. It might reinfirce your impression of her but that is the wrong impression for the game to give you as to who she actually is.

The NPC repsonse in this case is wrong in repsonse to me and wrong for her based on my intent. It is a total failure because the menu laoowed me to imagine a tone that didn't match what the devs wanted.

So you assume that Leliana can never make a social mistake? That's ridiculous. Seriously, lighten up a little. It's not hard to imagine that Leliana missed a point of sarcasm in a discussion about which she's rather passionate.

[Nozybidaj]

Sidney wrote...

So really the fact that the game has no responsivness to you is now a good thing. Why bother with responses and just have a "answer button" and then you can imagine a conversation and the NPC can imagine a reponse and it'll all work out because they just had an improper reaction.

Your answer also only works if Leli is a dope, which she's not and as a Bard she should be keenly aware of social cues and language. It might reinfirce your impression of her but that is the wrong impression for the game to give you as to who she actually is.

The NPC repsonse in this case is wrong in repsonse to me and wrong for her based on my intent. It is a total failure because the menu laoowed me to imagine a tone that didn't match what the devs wanted.

See you're still missing the point.  Whether I as a person believe Leliana is a dope or not is irrelevant.  What matters is what my character thinks of her.  That's role playing.  Not allowing yourself to see tone and intent outside what the devs wanted is akin to watching a movie.

Anyway, I get the sense you either are just arguing to argue at this point or really just don't get the point being made.  Have fun. :happy:

[Sidney]

Addai67 wrote...

Example 2: Helping Defend Recliffe gets me negative points from Morrigan. She sees it as being helpful but what I want to say is "Sure we'll help save the village if it means the Arl will be free to send his armies to help me and oh BTW give me a huge reward." That's not there so I can't even "mean" what I want o mean.

And you think that would prevent Morrigan from disapproving of your actions anyway?  She had her opinion and you had yours.  Looks like good roleplay to me, not bad.

No, bad roleplay because there's not another option to explain why I'm helping Recliffe - you mised the point that I wasn't provided with my opinion.

Of course Morrigan understands selfish actions with a reward leading to money or power. I don't get that option and I can't give "voice" to my character's desires because the developers who actually control my interactions, not me, didn't give me that particular option.

All dialog options are inherently limited in a CRPG voiced or unvoiced. Your illusion is that you actually have a voice in the game rather than giving voice to others choices.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Sidney wrote...
No, bad roleplay because there's not another option to explain why I'm helping Recliffe - you mised the point that I wasn't provided with my opinion.

Of course Morrigan understands selfish actions with a reward leading to money or power. I don't get that option and I can't give "voice" to my character's desires because the developers who actually control my interactions, not me, didn't give me that particular option.

All dialog options are inherently limited in a CRPG voiced or unvoiced. Your illusion is that you actually have a voice in the game rather than giving voice to others choices.

You're really hung up on very specific moments. There are few occasions in which role-playing your intent is flat-out impossible. There may be some, as this is not a table-top RPG and there are limitations, but it is not anywhere close to being as black and white as you seem to believe.

You seem to be the kind of person I was referring to earlier. :innocent:

[Addai]

Sidney wrote...

Your answer also only works if Leli is a dope, which she's not and as a Bard she should be keenly aware of social cues and language. It might reinfirce your impression of her but that is the wrong impression for the game to give you as to who she actually is.

Leliana is pretty dopey and less than tactful in a number of her dialogues.  She'll tell a Dalish PC that she's pretty psyched they haven't dragged off any women or children, for instance.

But I'll give you another example of where I felt the PC responses let me down- Alistair's hardening line.  From the post-hardening discussion, he clearly understands something different than what you said.  That's a pretty big discrepancy, given how important that interaction is to his character.  In that case, the writers said there had originally been more to the PC line but some ruthless editing cut down the script.  This push to give people snappy responses so they don't have to do a lot of reading and analyzing responses is at fault, IOW.  If the writers had been allowed to craft a complete dialogue choice, there might not have been a problem.

Modifié par Addai67, 16 juillet 2010 - 08:49 .

[Addai]

Sidney wrote...

Of course Morrigan understands selfish actions with a reward leading to money or power. I don't get that option and I can't give "voice" to my character's desires because the developers who actually control my interactions, not me, didn't give me that particular option.

All dialog options are inherently limited in a CRPG voiced or unvoiced. Your illusion is that you actually have a voice in the game rather than giving voice to others choices.

Of course a game can't cover every single possibility or contingency.  But this example is one of something you wished was there and wasn't, rather than of something that happened that was counter to your intent.  Not a very compelling example for your case.

[Sidney]

Nozybidaj wrote...

See you're still missing the point.  Whether I as a person believe Leliana is a dope or not is irrelevant.  What matters is what my character thinks of her.  That's role playing.  Not allowing yourself to see tone and intent outside what the devs wanted is akin to watching a movie.

Anyway, I get the sense you either are just arguing to argue at this point or really just don't get the point being made.  Have fun. :happy:

I get the sense you know you've lost this fight and are now using the "Take the ball and go home" dialog option.
:happy:

[ratzerman]

Sidney wrote...

Nozybidaj wrote...

See you're still missing the point.  Whether I as a person believe Leliana is a dope or not is irrelevant.  What matters is what my character thinks of her.  That's role playing.  Not allowing yourself to see tone and intent outside what the devs wanted is akin to watching a movie.

Anyway, I get the sense you either are just arguing to argue at this point or really just don't get the point being made.  Have fun. :happy:

I get the sense you know you've lost this fight and are now using the "Take the ball and go home" dialog option.
:happy:

Modifié par ratzerman, 16 juillet 2010 - 09:04 .

[Sidney]

Addai67 wrote...
Of course a game can't cover every single possibility or contingency.  But this example is one of something you wished was there and wasn't, rather than of something that happened that was counter to your intent.  Not a very compelling example for your case.

Yes but that is my point. People act like the VO limits their options but all CRPG options are inherently limited. The VO doesn't really change that one whit because for all the ticky-tack about tone the real weakness if that you don't have a broader set of options to explain yes and no. Constraint is a natural part of the format, you can't escape the fact that your voice - and this is using the narrtiave voice meaning what you say and how you say it- isn't ever in any game.

[Narreneth]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Narreneth wrote...

If you're in a university class taking a multiple choice final and choose A over B when B is the correct answer, your intent doesn't matter, nor does assuming the test misinterpreted what you meant.  You got it wrong.  Parameters define the actual possibility. 

You can roleplay with the parameters given in Dragon Age.  If you were to select the option that says "I love shoes" and Leliana goes for it, and that isn't what you meant by it:  pick the one that is sarcastic that doesn't say "I love shoes."  Her reaction will be the same.  The game will treat it the same.  DA:O may be a single player experience, but it is not so open-ended that your intent shapes the world.

Your test is a completely wrong analogy. DAO is an RPG. It allows you to roleplay the game. Yes, there are more limitations than in a tabletop game, but it's still very possible to role play.

You have some kind of hangup and giving every single dialogue line a very defined and one-purpose meaning. I feel sorry for you if you can't use your imagination.

See?  This is the exact kind of talk that doesn't do anyone good and eventually degenerates into insults being thrown back and forth.  There's no reason to assert that me or anyone else is incapable of using our imagination.  There's no reason to assert that you are somehow more creative or intelligent than anyone else.  That is the kind of pretention we don't need brought into discussions.  Are you going to be able to continue having a conversation or should we skip straight to the insults?  I'd much rather have a civilized talk sans the cloaked "I'm smarter, better, and more creative than you" stuff.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Narreneth wrote...
See?  This is the exact kind of talk that doesn't do anyone good and eventually degenerates into insults being thrown back and forth.  There's no reason to assert that me or anyone else is incapable of using our imagination.  There's no reason to assert that you are somehow more creative or intelligent than anyone else.  That is the kind of pretention we don't need brought into discussions.  Are you going to be able to continue having a conversation or should we skip straight to the insults?  I'd much rather have a civilized talk sans the cloaked "I'm smarter, better, and more creative than you" stuff.

I never insulted you. I never said you couldn't use your imagination; I said I feel sorry for you if you can't. That wasn't a definitive statement; it was conditional. It's up to you to provide the proof to sway that condition.

If anyone has been insulted it's myself, what with all your insistence that I'm pretentious.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Sidney wrote...
Yes but that is my point. People act like the VO limits their options but all CRPG options are inherently limited. The VO doesn't really change that one whit because for all the ticky-tack about tone the real weakness if that you don't have a broader set of options to explain yes and no. Constraint is a natural part of the format, you can't escape the fact that your voice - and this is using the narrtiave voice meaning what you say and how you say it- isn't ever in any game.

The VO further limits options. By a lot, really.

That's the issue. The more options that are limited, the less role-play is allowed.

Follow?

[FieryDove]

To the OP:



Excellent post and I agree with most of it. "Even if some of it has been brought up hundreds of times in other threads so some say." If so shouldn't that be a concern in itself that so many have similar feelings? I would say the pre-game hype so far did not do what was intended...or maybe it did, hard to tell Bioware can be tricksy.



Reading other boards than these on the subject it's about the same, many are concerned, many just want ME3 to hurry up instead.

[Sidney]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

You're really hung up on very specific moments. There are few occasions in which role-playing your intent is flat-out impossible. There may be some, as this is not a table-top RPG and there are limitations, but it is not anywhere close to being as black and white as you seem to believe.

No, we actually agree - mostly.

My gripe is that intent fails fails in voiced and non-voiced situations - ME let me down several times as well . It isn't a specific weakness of one or the other. Because you have pre-determined reponses to your actions in ANY CRPG setting the NPC's will never really interact with your "voice" and the failure of your voice to matter makes it meaningless to me in game terms.  It is akin to having choices that also lead nowhere if your choice of voice and dialog also don't matter.

[Yana Montana]

I support OP wholeheartedly.

[Narreneth]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Narreneth wrote...
See?  This is the exact kind of talk that doesn't do anyone good and eventually degenerates into insults being thrown back and forth.  There's no reason to assert that me or anyone else is incapable of using our imagination.  There's no reason to assert that you are somehow more creative or intelligent than anyone else.  That is the kind of pretention we don't need brought into discussions.  Are you going to be able to continue having a conversation or should we skip straight to the insults?  I'd much rather have a civilized talk sans the cloaked "I'm smarter, better, and more creative than you" stuff.

I never insulted you. I never said you couldn't use your imagination; I said I feel sorry for you if you can't. That wasn't a definitive statement; it was conditional. It's up to you to provide the proof to sway that condition.

If anyone has been insulted it's myself, what with all your insistence that I'm pretentious.

It's a conditional statement where you are determining the conditions.

You're insinuating that if I don't think the way you're approaching the game makes sense, I have no imagination.  Again, you and I can completely disagree and have a discussion, but when you make insinuations it isn't going to serve anything but to create contention in what could otherwise just be a discussion between two people with like interests and differing perspectives.

You say you roleplay by imagining the characters mistake what you say.  I say since those characters have set-in-stone personalities, likes and dislikes, etc. your roleplaying isn't so much roleplaying as it is ignoring certain facts to make the game more interesting to you.  It really works the same way in a table top game.  If your character tells my character "I love bubblegum" and you do it in a sarcastic way and I respond with "I'm going to gouge your eyes out" you expect to hear my character respond in a way that is less than favorable.  However, given the same situation if you unintentionally sound sarcastic and I attack you for it you have the opportunity to explain to my character what you meant.  Or to go ahead and fight.  Or to run away.  Or to do a jig whilst I attempt to rob you of your sight.  Ultimately the point is the dynamic of one character understanding and not understanding is already written into the game for you and what I think you're doing is ignoring it.  I would also suspect that you rarely, if ever, actually do that kind of roleplaying.  You probably play the game just like I do.  You find a response that best fits what you want to say and go with it.   Sometimes that option doesn't present itself.  Sometimes there's not even an option you can roleplay out as you describe. 

An example of this is when Lady Isolde is raving and insulting and just completely ****y with your Warden during the Connor situation.  No matter what you do she tends to be hysterical.  I know I'm not the only one that was just dying for this to be a situation where I could let my Warden lose his temper.  At the very least to tell her to "shut the **** up" in so many words.  Not only did that opportunity not present itself, but there was nothing there to even be able to warp into meaning that.  I wanted nothing more than to exact some kind of anguish on her.  I wanted to see her reaction to the anguish I inflicted.  Now yes, you could say you just went to kill Connor to get back at her but that isn't really what I wanted to go for.  So what I ended up choosing to do was just continue being the decent guy I usually play and proceeded to solve the problem through Lyrium and entering the Fade.

Now I know this is a limitation and we've already established that these things happen but the point that I am getting at in a round about way is that with a VO and the conversation wheel what we are getting is going to be virtually the same as what we already have.  You still get to roleplay in the sense that you react to situations in a way that you want to react to them.  You still have set parameters that you have to operate within AND if your imagination is really as active and all-encompassing as you say, if an option you like isn't there you can always just imagine that your character hates the idea but goes along with it and is simply trying to get past the situation (much like you would if your boss was being an **** at work) and on to better things.  

I don't think the VO limits you as a player any more or any less than the system we already have.

That's my point.

[Narreneth]

ratzerman wrote...

Sidney wrote...

Nozybidaj wrote...

See you're still missing the point.  Whether I as a person believe Leliana is a dope or not is irrelevant.  What matters is what my character thinks of her.  That's role playing.  Not allowing yourself to see tone and intent outside what the devs wanted is akin to watching a movie.

Anyway, I get the sense you either are just arguing to argue at this point or really just don't get the point being made.  Have fun. :happy:

I get the sense you know you've lost this fight and are now using the "Take the ball and go home" dialog option.
:happy:

You leave Worf out of this, sir.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Narreneth wrote...

 Ultimately the point is the dynamic of one character understanding and not understanding is already written into the game for you and what I think you're doing is ignoring it.

I'm not ignoring it at all. I'm role-playing it and making the reply part of my role play via imagination.

I don't think the VO limits you as a player any more or any less than the system we already have.

That's my point.

And I disagree, and I used specific examples as to why. As I said, those "specific" cases you bring up are far fewer than the cases in which role-played intent still work.

[Fraevar]

Yana Montana wrote...

I support OP wholeheartedly.

Quite. And each subsequent post by people trying to run them off as whiny or such just reinforces my support.

[Narreneth]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Narreneth wrote...

 Ultimately the point is the dynamic of one character understanding and not understanding is already written into the game for you and what I think you're doing is ignoring it.

I'm not ignoring it at all. I'm role-playing it and making the reply part of my role play via imagination.

I don't think the VO limits you as a player any more or any less than the system we already have.

That's my point.

And I disagree, and I used specific examples as to why. As I said, those "specific" cases you bring up are far fewer than the cases in which role-played intent still work.

They happen a lot more frequently than just once or twice.  And apart from the places where it's impossible there are many where it's such a stretch to do so it may as well be impossible.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Narreneth wrote...

They happen a lot more frequently than just once or twice.  And apart from the places where it's impossible there are many where it's such a stretch to do so it may as well be impossible.

I played through DAO numerous times, with quite a few different personalities and I really didn't run into any trouble role-playing what I wanted to role play.

Maybe that's because I didn't have lofty expectations of wanting to b*tch slap all the characters who annoyed my character, or the like.

Modifié par Mystranna Kelteel, 16 juillet 2010 - 09:39 .

[MerinTB]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Alrite, let's play:
Decipher the Double-talk!!

Keep up the good work, Mystranna Kelteel.

And remember to securly fasten your flameproof slicker.

[the_one_54321]

Delerius_Jedi wrote...
And each subsequent post by people trying to run them off as whiny or such just reinforces my support.

And what about the folks that took a different approach while not adding their John Han**** to her list of supporting signatures?