20 réponses à ce sujet

[Faust1979]

 People complain about how the new guy isn't your character because he has a set background. All your characters in the first Dragon age had a set background. Sure you get to somewhat create a personality but you're still playing the type of character Bioware wants you to play. The Warden  doesn't have your voice....it has Bioware's

Modifié par Faust1979, 21 juillet 2010 - 07:05 .

[iTomes]

what most people meant was that the warden had no voice or something at all so you could roleplay him better. the problem many are having is that they fear that the character is as roleplayable as shepard....

[Ravenwoud]

so even if you threaten himn, it rather sounds like a bit loud speaking that isnt agreeing.



and i understand them. in DA:O everything you say matters while in ME2 you sometimes get 2 times the same respons of shepard with 2 different choices.

[Faust1979]

iTomes wrote...

what most people meant was that the warden had no voice or something at all so you could roleplay him better. the problem many are having is that they fear that the character is as roleplayable as shepard....

the shepard character is highly roleplayable though you have several ways to play him and level him or her up.

[errant_knight]

Faust1979 wrote...

 People complain about how the new guy isn't your character because he has a set background. All your characters in the first Dragon age had a set background. Sure you get to somewhat create a personality but you're still playing the type of character Bioware wants you to play. The Warden  doesn't have your voice....it has Bioware's

Not true. The range of dialogue allows you to play a wide variety of characters. The thing is, the language and background in DA are purposefully vague enough for you to fill in the blanks yourself. That's what makes it a roleplaying game, among other qualities that define that. The warden can be a pissy, sarcastic, self aggrandizing a-hole, of a polite do-gooder who is concerned about the well being of the team. It's up to you.

We really have no idea if the will be true or not with DA2, but many are concerned the the dialogue wheel will cause a problem with this in that you won't know what you're going to say, which would take roleplaying away from you. That may not be true, but I still find it an unnecessary interface that puts an extra layer between you and the words your character speaks--at least for the PC. I don't know about consoles, and how difficult the old interface may have been to use there.

Voice acting, there's no getting around it, it puts another 'person' in the room. Some people can get past that, some can't. it's entirely a personal preference.

[Lord_Saulot]

Ravenwoud wrote...

and i understand them. in DA:O everything you say matters while in ME2 you sometimes get 2 times the same respons of shepard with 2 different choices.

You get that in DA:O.  It's not even uncommon.

[Riona45]

Ravenwoud wrote...
in DA:O everything you say matters...

DA:O features the "illusion of choice" just like ME does.  In many cases, you have a few choices of what to say, but then they all lead back to the same line of dialogue spoken by the NPC. 

[iTomes]

Faust1979 wrote...

iTomes wrote...

what most people meant was that the warden had no voice or something at all so you could roleplay him better. the problem many are having is that they fear that the character is as roleplayable as shepard....

the shepard character is highly roleplayable though you have several ways to play him and level him or her up.

thats not what i meant. shepard has got very limited personalitys: hes either a renegade or a paragon. or one thing at the one time and the other thing at the other time, but that doesn't make much gameplay sense because you dont get the good dialoge options. shepard cant be a coward, a racist, a whatever. the warden was much more adaptive in that way. see, roleplaying isn't really about a character like shepard becoming you but you becoming a character you want. for example: in real life im a straight guy with a strange sense of humor, tolerant towards most people and propably what one would call helpfull, but my dragon age character can be a racistic sadistic elven lesbian b*tch, selfish to the ground and destroying everithing that looks like its human, no sense of humor at all or something like this. my shepard usually is me (mostly paragon, a little renegade) or a total paragon or a total renegade. but when im a renegade im just a total **** (imo)...  you see, the difference is that DA1 gave me almost as much characters as my imagination could provide, ME only very less..

[iTomes]

but actually i think bioware will manage it to keep much of my imaginative freedome, much hangs on the voice actor...

[Saibh]

Lord_Saulot wrote...

Ravenwoud wrote...

and i understand them. in DA:O everything you say matters while in ME2 you sometimes get 2 times the same respons of shepard with 2 different choices.

You get that in DA:O.  It's not even uncommon.

Mostly true, but the difference being A) Shepard generally only had three "response" answers, and if people answered the same for two of them, you essentially only had two responses and  Shepard often said the exact same thing in two or three "response" answers, regardless of what the line shortline told you.

In DA you had more responses--up to six, and if rarely was more than two of them the same answer (unless you said something deliberately vague like--"Let's go" "Let's kick ass!" "Let's do well" or something that might warrant the same response).

To me, so long as the immediate answer was different, I was okay with the NPC eventually saying the same thing to me.

To answer OP , while I'm completely okay with Hawke, having six different Origins that you can treat vastly differently (some of them even went through some pretty big changes depending on your gender) and having one set one is very different.

Also, keep in mind we know little about the game, and many articles make the mistake of going "and look, they're changing it to be more like BioWare's more successful game, Mass Effect!". The devs have cleared up my immediate concerns with Dragon Effect, so I'm alright with it now, but many people are much more worried--and it's not unreasonable that they are.

[Haexpane]

There are already 100 threads about this

[Sable Rhapsody]

iTomes wrote...

thats not what i meant. shepard has got very limited personalitys: hes either a renegade or a paragon. or one thing at the one time and the other thing at the other time, but that doesn't make much gameplay sense because you dont get the good dialoge options. shepard cant be a coward, a racist, a whatever. the warden was much more adaptive in that way. see, roleplaying isn't really about a character like shepard becoming you but you becoming a character you want. for example: in real life im a straight guy with a strange sense of humor, tolerant towards most people and propably what one would call helpfull, but my dragon age character can be a racistic sadistic elven lesbian b*tch, selfish to the ground and destroying everithing that looks like its human, no sense of humor at all or something like this. my shepard usually is me (mostly paragon, a little renegade) or a total paragon or a total renegade. but when im a renegade im just a total **** (imo)...  you see, the difference is that DA1 gave me almost as much characters as my imagination could provide, ME only very less..

I did just as well with a deep and subtle roleplaying experience in ME as I did in DA.  My Shepard was Paragade, and in personality and mission philosophy a combination of Spock, Dexter, and John Stuart Mill.  She was cool-headed, ruthlessly utilitarian, and had a closet with a fair few skeletons.  Just as complex of a character as my Warden--in fact, probably more so.  It just took about 10% more imagination on my part to read nuances into Jennifer Hale's voice work for Shepard.

Now granted, I tend to obsess about things like character motivation, personality, etc. far more than the normal sane person does.  And no roleplaying game should rely heavily on the player's imagination to make the roleplaying work--I can imagine all I want that I'm playing a 10 foot blue cat person while shooting people in CoD, and that doesn't make CoD a roleplaying game.  But my point is that no matter what the constraints of the game are, it's always possible to make wiggle room with your own imagination, and it really doesn't take a lot of effort even in a more parsed-down RPG like ME.

[Davasar]

The problem with a voice placed in the game is that it is not the voice your imagination sets to your character and the intonations of his response.

The response is given in the tones the voice actor gives it. To many, this break immersion. Using your own imagination as to how YOUR character respondes is the greatest and most fundamental foundation of RPing.

This is why many believe it is Biowares character, and not their own. And they are right.

With the voice actor doing responses rather then your imagination, it is no longer an excersize of the mind, you are just watching what happens (along for the ride, rather then driving if you will).

Modifié par Davasar, 22 juillet 2010 - 04:14 .

[In Exile]

errant_knight wrote...

Not true. The range of dialogue allows you to play a wide variety of characters. The thing is, the language and background in DA are purposefully vague enough for you to fill in the blanks yourself. That's what makes it a roleplaying game, among other qualities that define that. The warden can be a pissy, sarcastic, self aggrandizing a-hole, of a polite do-gooder who is concerned about the well being of the team. It's up to you.

I appreciate that to some people, role-playing is about the mental journey. But that is not so to all people. To some of us (who prefer VO) to us what matters is the reactivity of the world. So many potential imaginary choices are valueless compared to three definite but well-defined and well-scripted moments.

I understand that we can never see eye-to-eye on this, but please appreciate why it is that we feel role-playing is improved by the wheel, and understand that your definition for RP is a subjective one.

We really have no idea if the will be true or not with DA2, but many are concerned the the dialogue wheel will cause a problem with this in that you won't know what you're going to say, which would take roleplaying away from you.

The issue is more complicated than that. Certainly paraphrase has failed in ME. But if you look at why it fails (I've replayed ME precisely to study this) it is bad writing. But it is a special kind of bad writing. The issue is that Shepard has a line writen not for the sake of the line Shepard is saying, but so that the NPC can get the remark that he wants.

In DA, the game does this very often. What you say can be completely irrelevant to what the NPC says which is why you get more perceived choice.

In a game with VO, there needs to be some logical connection between that the PC says and what the NPC responds with, beacuse in our conversations we typically respond to what the other person is saying in a certain way. Because writers seem unwilling to foreground the PC and background the NPCs, they end up forcing Shepad to say lines so they can get their NPCs to throw in that specific line the wanted.

Basically, the problem is that the writers seem to write characters (and they do this in DA too!) as reactive to the NPCs, as opposed to the NPCs as reactive to the PC. If what the PC said drove what the NPC said, you would quickly see problems with the wheel diminish.

ME2 improved dramatically on the accuracy of the paraphrase.

More to the point, to us, it is intent which drives roleplay over expression. It does not matter how specifically my character said something (because seriously, the lines for a silent VO are the best choice of a bad lot for most of my PCs) but rather the intent behind that was said.

Perhaps other people think silent VO dialogue is actually representative of how they would say things. I don't know. But for me, I never get to pick how my character would truly say something. But now, with VO, my character is alive and part of the world instead of a wooden doll.

[Metalunatic]

*facepalm*

[In Exile]

Davasar wrote...

The problem with a voice placed in the game is that it is not the voice your imagination sets to your character and the intonations of his response.

The response is given in the tones the voice actor gives it. To many, this break immersion. Using your own imagination as to how YOUR character respondes is the greatest and most fundamental foundation of RPing.

I can't give things tone. Seriously. When I read, I read as a narrator. I recognize tone on an intellectual level (ah, it says Jim was angry, so Jim must have said that in an angry way) but that's it (I never "hear" Jim say something angrily, and I hear the same voice for Jack and James and Ashley as I do for Jim).

Maybe I'm just ultra-special like this, but silent VO never gave me a character voice. It was just my movie trailer narrator voice.

[Guns3]

If there's any complaint that's justified is that Bioware is terrible at facial hair and needs to step it up. Especially since the main character has a beard.

[Davasar]

In Exile wrote...

Davasar wrote...

The problem with a voice placed in the game is that it is not the voice your imagination sets to your character and the intonations of his response.

The response is given in the tones the voice actor gives it. To many, this break immersion. Using your own imagination as to how YOUR character respondes is the greatest and most fundamental foundation of RPing.

I can't give things tone. Seriously. When I read, I read as a narrator. I recognize tone on an intellectual level (ah, it says Jim was angry, so Jim must have said that in an angry way) but that's it (I never "hear" Jim say something angrily, and I hear the same voice for Jack and James and Ashley as I do for Jim).

Maybe I'm just ultra-special like this, but silent VO never gave me a character voice. It was just my movie trailer narrator voice.

Some people just lack imagination I suppose.  It can't be helped I guess.

[Riona45]

Davasar wrote...

Some people just lack imagination I suppose.

Because they don't roleplay the same way you do?

Besides, it's not like you wrote the dialogue--in the end, you're just picking what someone else wrote for you.  Even if roleplaying your way is more imaginative, I don't think it would be by that much.

[Valente11]

Davasar wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Davasar wrote...

The problem with a voice placed in the game is that it is not the voice your imagination sets to your character and the intonations of his response.

The response is given in the tones the voice actor gives it. To many, this break immersion. Using your own imagination as to how YOUR character respondes is the greatest and most fundamental foundation of RPing.

I can't give things tone. Seriously. When I read, I read as a narrator. I recognize tone on an intellectual level (ah, it says Jim was angry, so Jim must have said that in an angry way) but that's it (I never "hear" Jim say something angrily, and I hear the same voice for Jack and James and Ashley as I do for Jim).

Maybe I'm just ultra-special like this, but silent VO never gave me a character voice. It was just my movie trailer narrator voice.

Some people just lack imagination I suppose.  It can't be helped I guess.

ironically, I would say it is also you that lacks imagination, in the sense that my immersion is not so easily broken by trivial things as yours. If anything is to be learned from roleplaying and, more importantly, imagination, it's that there are no rules. I had no problem roleplaying my shepard, just like I had no problem roleplaying any protagonist in any rpg, seeing as the burden of roleplay falls on me and not the game.

[javierabegazo]

Many threads discussing this already