28 réponses à ce sujet

[Faust1979]

 I have seen a lot of people bring up Planescape torment and calling it one of the best roleplaying games ever. But that game had very little customization, you couldn't edit how your character looked and you couldn't change his race yet some people hail that as the greatest thing ever but then I see some people complain that Dragon Age 2 lacks customization.  Why so much complaining over Dragon Age 2 when planescape had much less

[Nekator]

Planescapes strength was the story.. simply as that.

One of DA:0´s strengths was the customization. Now they got rid of it. No wonder people aren´t too happy about that.

Modifié par Nekator, 25 juillet 2010 - 05:21 .

[rock_brm]

well, i didn't like planescape. next theory?

[Arttis]

According to what I read on wiki about that game it was almsot entirely story driven.I suppose people loved the story.

I would not say I love Biowares stories...

The customization = more replay for me.

[Faust1979]

so if the story turns out just as awesome then some of the people that don't like the changes will end up forgiving the game and be sorry they doubted Bioware?

[filetemo]

planescape was like 100 years ago.

[Arttis]

Faust1979 wrote...

so if the story turns out just as awesome then some of the people that don't like the changes will end up forgiving the game and be sorry they doubted Bioware?

If they do play it they will wish it was different so it could be perfect/better for their tastes.I am all for anything that entertains me for a long time.

[Saibh]

Okay, I just said this elsewhere, but...



I don't believe people know enough about the game to swear it off forever with any amount of substance, but at the same time, it is true that DAO gave you the choice between species and Origins. I can see why some people would be upset why they don't have them. I don't think that it detracts from Hawke's character, but they have a right to feel upset.



Comparing one RPG with another isn't very valid. RPG is a very broad genre, one that has its ups and downs. Some people find some versions of RPGs are better than others.



Just because one version was considered great doesn't define all the others. You can have different expectations.

[TheMadCat]

Planescape is regarded as a terrible RPG by anyone who has actually played it and doesn't have their juedgement fogged by time. It has arguably the greatest story ever told in a game, but as a game and as an RPG it is poor at best.

Modifié par TheMadCat, 25 juillet 2010 - 05:56 .

[Grommash94]

I don't mind having one origin, because in the long run it didn't really have a lasting impact in DA imo...

But a lot of people do like to have choices and options, so I suppose that it is reasonable they are upset. I do believe, however, that they should at least give Hawke a chance, and hold out until we get more information.

Modifié par Grommash94, 25 juillet 2010 - 05:56 .

[Magus_42]

It's certainly true that if you like number crunching and tactics, Torment was a poor RPG. If you enjoy playing out a role through a good story, it was terrific.

In my experience, there are good RPGs with fixed characters, and there are bad ones. There are good RPGs with free customization, and there are bad ones. Some people value one more than the other, and that may certainly affect your enjoyment of DA2.

I would also say that name, race, and origin aren't the only ways to customize a character. Perhaps DA2 will add more classes, subclasses, and talents, and make the play experience distinct for each. There's also the choices you make in the game, which, ideally, could make my version of Hawke very different from yours. I don't know if any of this is true, or course. We may get the same three classes with a couple token talents thrown in, and a simplified Mass Effect "good choice/bad choice" dialog system. We'll have to wait and see.

Modifié par Magus_42, 25 juillet 2010 - 06:24 .

[Faust1979]

Kordaris wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...
Why so much complaining over Dragon Age 2 when planescape had much less

Because Dragon Age 1 had more.

did it really have more though? because the origins largely had little to do with what happens in the rest of the game. All you need to do is play the game once then the other 5 origins and then you've played the whole game and don't think I hated origins but that is a small nitpick of mine

[Faust1979]

Kordaris wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...
did it really have more though? because the origins largely had little to do with what happens in the rest of the game.

Yes, the last time I saw they had more.And I played the characted I created through the rest of the game.

how many times have you played it though? because you can play it with two or more sure but all 6 characters end up going through the same quests, after the origins section they all have the same dialogue options. So you really are in effect just playing one character . It would have been so much better had each origin had different dialogue choices throughout the game. That way it made you feel like the characters your are playing are different than each other

[Saibh]

Faust1979 wrote...

Kordaris wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...
did it really have more though? because the origins largely had little to do with what happens in the rest of the game.

Yes, the last time I saw they had more.And I played the characted I created through the rest of the game.

how many times have you played it though? because you can play it with two or more sure but all 6 characters end up going through the same quests, after the origins section they all have the same dialogue options. So you really are in effect just playing one character . It would have been so much better had each origin had different dialogue choices throughout the game. That way it made you feel like the characters your are playing are different than each other

It won't work. He's a troll--we've all said the same things over and over and over again, and he just ignores us when logic is presented.

[Addai]

Faust1979 wrote...

Kordaris wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...
Why so much complaining over Dragon Age 2 when planescape had much less

Because Dragon Age 1 had more.

did it really have more though? because the origins largely had little to do with what happens in the rest of the game. All you need to do is play the game once then the other 5 origins and then you've played the whole game and don't think I hated origins but that is a small nitpick of mine

I think it depends on how much you like to flesh out your character.  A Cousland and a Dalish elf may go through the same ally quests, may even make the same choices in them, but experience the events very differently.

I personally don't like assuming a pre-defined role and playing it through.  For that kind of storytelling, I'd rather read a book or watch a movie.  DA2 will apparently strive to leave openness and customization, but limit us more than DAO, that's just a given and I don't know why people resist that as if it's not the case.

[B3taMaxxx]

Addai67 wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...

Kordaris wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...
Why so much complaining over Dragon Age 2 when planescape had much less

Because Dragon Age 1 had more.

did it really have more though? because the origins largely had little to do with what happens in the rest of the game. All you need to do is play the game once then the other 5 origins and then you've played the whole game and don't think I hated origins but that is a small nitpick of mine

I think it depends on how much you like to flesh out your character.  A Cousland and a Dalish elf may go through the same ally quests, may even make the same choices in them, but experience the events very differently.

I personally don't like assuming a pre-defined role and playing it through.  For that kind of storytelling, I'd rather read a book or watch a movie.  DA2 will apparently strive to leave openness and customization, but limit us more than DAO, that's just a given and I don't know why people resist that as if it's not the case.

 But what DA: Origins lacked was depth in thier characters, though I still found it amazing they were able to create characters with any amount of depth considering the amount of backgrounds, race and so on.

 Replayability goes down while we get a far more interesting PC.

[KethWolfheart]

I think planescape (which I played) provides an example of a fixed protagonist that works out because he is a blank slate overall.  You get the chance to define who he is, to some degree, by your actions with him.  So it was a fairly good example of an RPG that used a fixed character.  Plus the story was very good.

As another poster  pointed out - there are good fixed RPG's and bad, just as there are good sandbox RPG's and bad ones.

RPG is a very tricky word that has many nuances to many people.  Role-playing a fixed character is one of the more narrow and limited definitions of it.  You are playing a role, but you have much less choice in doing so.  People seem to get confused on this.  Being forced to role play a single role tends to be more restrictive than having more choice.  All the little nuances involved make a big difference for people.  

As for DA2 and Hawke - from what many of the writers have indicated he is closer to Planescape (blank slate you get to fill up) then Shephard, who was a far more limited and fixed protagonist. 

Role playing tends to revolve heavily around choices.  The more choice the better in general.  However there are many types of choices - choice in making the character as well as choices you make as a character.  Which is why a fixed RPG and a sandbox RPG can both work, as long as they give enough choice for a person to feel they can play the role the way they want.

[Faust1979]

I played through as a dalish elf the first time then played the dwarf noble which had a great origin and on my second playthrough i was a bit dissapointed when all the dialogue was the same. The game was well done but the origins could have been implemented better. I liked the dwarf origin going around looking down on people and asking my escort why such and such person was talking to me. All that cool stuff dissapeared after the origin. It felt like he takes to easily to his role and forgets about his plush lifestyle

[Arttis]

Thats because on the surface your no one and all origins become greywardens.

You still meet gorim and get a nice welcome home from quite a few people in orzammar.

[Addai]

B3taMaxxx wrote...

 But what DA: Origins lacked was depth in thier characters, though I still found it amazing they were able to create characters with any amount of depth considering the amount of backgrounds, race and so on.

 Replayability goes down while we get a far more interesting PC.

The player is supposed to add depth to the PC, that's what an RPG is, in my world.  The NPCs in DAO had quite a lot of depth and that's all I could ask for, except it would have been nice to have a few more origin-specific things and also some more of the NPCs reacting to the PC.

Modifié par Addai67, 25 juillet 2010 - 07:33 .

[B3taMaxxx]

Addai67 wrote...
and also some more of the NPCs reacting to the PC.

 I think that would of sealed the debate, had it been the case.

 We must realize that because so much work was done creating unique origins in characters, that we lost alot of "individuality" in one's PC.

 There's cause for strengths to be in both methods. Time, is money, though very few if any gamers understand this concept.

Modifié par B3taMaxxx, 25 juillet 2010 - 07:38 .

[Addai]

B3taMaxxx wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
and also some more of the NPCs reacting to the PC.

 I think that would of sealed the debate, had it been the case.

 We must realize that because so much work was done creating unique origins in characters, that we lost alot of "individuality" in one's PC.

 There's cause for strengths to be in both methods. Time, is money, though very few if any gamers understand this concept.

I would still take being able to add my own individuality over being handed a more limited set of parameters in my character template.  But mainly I'm bummed because I dislike playing humans and have a strong preference for elves.  Others who aren't thus bothered will no doubt reconcile to the new model more easily.

[B3taMaxxx]

Addai67 wrote...

B3taMaxxx wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
and also some more of the NPCs reacting to the PC.

 I think that would of sealed the debate, had it been the case.

 We must realize that because so much work was done creating unique origins in characters, that we lost alot of "individuality" in one's PC.

 There's cause for strengths to be in both methods. Time, is money, though very few if any gamers understand this concept.

I would still take being able to add my own individuality over being handed a more limited set of parameters in my character template.  But mainly I'm bummed because I dislike playing humans and have a strong preference for elves.  Others who aren't thus bothered will no doubt reconcile to the new model more easily.

 I agree, and I to am disappointed by lack of race selection, but at the same time my mind is a whirl with the possibilities of a DA main PC.

 That, and I don't think the Origins in Dragon Age is over.