12857 réponses à ce sujet

[Costin_Razvan]

If most players are not interested in romance, I kind of doubt they will be interested in the universe or its characters. You honestly think most players are going to read the codices? Or care about the genophage? Or care about listening to characters? Or think for 2 seconds before blowing up the base?

I doubt it.

Actually yes. A hell lot more people went Renegade then you would think. Over 30% Renegade, as in mostly Renegade. Consider that there are also a lot of people who don't go full Paragon, and many people who play neutral ( like you and me ). Only 15% of dialogue lines where skipped by players. Almost every single romance in ME2 is bad from a male stanpoint, except Tali, and frankly I do see why people would have a problem with their character screwing an alien.

The forums might give the impression that most people destroyed the damned base without thought, but that's not how it happens. I talked with a lot of people in WoW who loved ME as a series and thought DA:O was ****, from their perspective TIM was awesome.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 13 février 2012 - 05:11 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Actually yes. A hell more people went Renegade then you would think. Over 30% Renegade, as in mostly Renegade. Consider that there are also a lot of people who don't go full Paragon, and many people who play neutral ( like you and me ). Only 15% of dialogue lines where skipped by players. Almost every single romance in ME2 is bad from a male stanpoint, except Tali, and frankly I do see why people would have a problem with their character screwing an alien.

It's not like full renegade is any more intelligent than full paragon. Both are stupid, depending on said choice. Also, some people just like to play what they think is "evil". It's fun (even I admit it, it's fun being a complete retarded @sshole who doesn't suffer any consequences).

In any case, it's besides the point. In Bioware's mind at least, it's clear they think that they need to attract players who like or don't mind high fantasy clichees and big bad evils that are easy to write, in lieu of complex, human and grounded stories.

Not my demographic.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 13 février 2012 - 05:14 .

[Costin_Razvan]

True, but my point was why people play the game. I never once went full renegade or paragon, and while I laughed my ass off at the aggressive Thorton vids I would never play him like that for instance, just not my style.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

True, but my point was why people play the game. I never once went full renegade or paragon, and while I laughed my ass off at the aggressive Thorton vids I would never play him like that for instance, just not my style.

But you are not the average joe player. Of course there are reasons to like ME and DA. I still like Origins, despite its BS (because of people things Loghain, the Architect, Orzammar and issues that were handled with some form of subtelty and nuance).

Anyways, I know I am sounding like an elitist and it's not really relevant to the discussion.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 13 février 2012 - 05:19 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Eh, I hope you aren't taking anything the wrong way, because I do love arguing with you

I do think you are right in that most people don't read the Codex and all that, but I think what draws them into the game is the idea of the Universe, which does seem interesting.

On another subject, and sorry for derailing this. I think you would love to watch a certain TV series called Spartacus: Blood and Sand.

Sure Spartacus is a gorrila but there are some very interesting characters. My favorite atm there is a Syrian, former gladiator who wasn't much of a fighter but he is very cunning and survived despite everyone wanting to murder him. He manipulates the living **** out of everyone as well. 

 

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 13 février 2012 - 05:28 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

You know I do too lol

I am just worried I am going to offend people who read it. And I know I am not being nuanced and that fair in my argument because frankly, the whole deal about the Emperor was not something I expected and I wasn't even expecting anything good!

EDIT: eh, you had me at "Syrian". And a cunning one at that.
My interest is peaked. I'll check it out during the break.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 13 février 2012 - 05:28 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Forget about offending people. We shouldn't sacrifice everything for tolerance. I tried it recently and now I am going to say **** it.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 13 février 2012 - 05:31 .

[Zjarcal]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Well as long as people can keep boning elves Zjarcal does it's all good right. "spits" But yeah let's bone Fenris and Merril. 

How about you leave me out of your stupid arguments?

[Costin_Razvan]

Zjarcal wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Well as long as people can keep boning elves Zjarcal does it's all good right. "spits" But yeah let's bone Fenris and Merril. 

How about you leave me out of your stupid arguments?

Well excuse me if I am ****ing pissed at people like you who praise the bull**** Bioware did with Mark of the ****ing Assassin, and no I don't care how you feel about it. If what Knight said here about SWTOR is horrible then I say that Legacy and MoTA are just as bad as that.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 13 février 2012 - 07:44 .

[HiroVoid]

I still find it hilarious when people think that DLC is a good idea to see how improved it is from the main product simply because the only people who'll buy the DLC are people who already liked the base game for the most part.

[Costin_Razvan]

HiroVoid wrote...

I still find it hilarious when people think that DLC is a good idea to see how improved it is from the main product simply because the only people who'll buy the DLC are people who already liked the base game for the most part.

Legacy and MOTA are not improved in any way, they still offer no choice for Hawke, no reasonable antagnist or anything like that. The Duke is even more stupid then Orsino while Corypheus and the so called idea that HE is behind everyone going mad makes me want to punch someone, and yes I've played Legacy and MOTA, multiple times even.

I don't give a damn about the DLC itself or the idea of DLC. I do give a damn when people go and praise it because it makes Bioware think they've done a good job when they haven't in any bloody way.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 13 février 2012 - 07:53 .

[Addai]

HiroVoid wrote...

I still find it hilarious when people think that DLC is a good idea to see how improved it is from the main product simply because the only people who'll buy the DLC are people who already liked the base game for the most part.

The Fallout New Vegas DLC improved my view of the base game quite a bit.  I got a feel for the storytelling style and began to appreciate the importance of the choices you were given and how they bear out, and how much the game rewards deep roleplaying.

As far as ME, I'm sort of with KoP in that I never expected much from the story so I wasn't disappointed.  I play it as a summer action movie type shooter... well, I used to, anyway.

DAO, I've started to think I only liked it because of its inspiration from A Song of Ice and Fire.  They're not going to write that kind of story anymore apparently, even turning Loghain into a clown villain retroactively.  YouTube took the video down, but you guys should look for /v/'s game awards when they get it posted again.  Brutal, and they're too in love with particular games, but sadly true in their criticisms of EA/ Bioware.

[Costin_Razvan]

I've watched those awards just now, and it's all true for the 2011 what they said. I do think they are fairly biased towards Portal 2 but Valve deserves every piece of praise they get.

Biodrones...heh I have to agree with them especially on that.

As for DA:O. I have to admit I lost all interest in the game once I started reading a song of Ice and Fire, which is so very damned well done. Tyrion makes Bhelen looks like ****.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 13 février 2012 - 12:22 .

[Persephone]

Biodrones.....how very original.

So, dissing Bioware and and their games aside, what's new?

Costin, dunno if you give a damn but I'm absolutely in love with your Loghain Tribute. Best one out there IMHO.

And a fave screenie of mine:

Modifié par Persephone, 13 février 2012 - 10:57 .

[Addai]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

I've watched those awards just now, and it's all true for the 2011 what they said. I do think they are fairly biased towards Portal 2 but Valve deserves every piece of praise they get.

Biodrones...heh I have to agree with them especially on that.

As for DA:O. I have to admit I lost all interest in the game once I started reading a song of Ice and Fire, which is so very damned well done. Tyrion makes Bhelen looks like ****.

Tyrion 

Well I know others balk at the term, but there's truth to it.  Even on my video page, someone asked in the comments of one of my DA2 videos why people dis the game so much.  It sounded like a sincere question so I answered with a few things I thought were problems.  Mind you, I am careful on my video page to be neutral- after all, I'm the one who put up a bunch of DA2 videos (most of which I've now taken down since I'm tired of dealing with commenters).  Some other dude then descended on me and railed in obscene terms about how he's sick of hearing criticism of DA2 etc.  Even the mildest criticism is met like they're holding down the Alamo.  I also had to snicker at what /v/ said about the fact that they now can claim you're homophobic and against "social justice" if you criticize the game.  That's DA tumblr in a nutshell, right there.  By "they" I mean not the regular fans of the game, but its more rabid defenders.

Anyway, whatever.  I'm glad for having played Origins since I did get to interact with a lot of cool people including those in this thread.

[Costin_Razvan]

Yeah cause everyone being bisexual with no damned consequence in the world is such a service to homosexuals considering the **** they have to go through in reality, but hey whatever. I stand by my point: Gaider is a retard.

Hell the ME rabid fans generally take criticism against the games much better, as long as your criticism doesn't involve bashing the **** out of their favorite characters. Though of course there are exceptions

Oh and I certainly am glad I played Origin, or else I wouldn't met you, Knight and other people here on this forums.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 13 février 2012 - 06:08 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Persephone wrote...

So, dissing Bioware and and their games aside, what's new?

Oh come on.

You're honestly going to tell me that what they did is fine?
If I can't criticizde this, then I don't know what to criticize.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

Agreed on the "everyone bi" thing. It really does degrade and trivialize sexuality of all kinds. It is not progressive, it's just half-assed lazy writing and game design. While sexuality can be fluid in some people, I've never met a person whose sexuality switches for the sake of one person they are interested in. If Bioware really wanted to do something cutting edge, they would create strictly gay LIs, along with hetero and bi LI's.

But, you know, fanservice and catering to the most common, dullest mental demoninator is how EAware likes to make their cash. it just won't be mine until I see some damned good fan reviews and critques.

[KnightofPhoenix]

To be fair, DA2 was the game that got the most fire, even before it was released, and a lot of it was not really criticism, so it's only natural that its fans overreact. I am talking as one who was insulted by some DA2 fans.

With regards to sexuality. I agree, that making everyone bi is a cheap way out. At the same time, some would say and I think they have a valid point, that if LIs are restricted only based on sexuality but not looks, race, beliefs, actions...etc, then it trivializes the whole concept of romance.

And I agree. Ideally, I'd want all LIs to be picky, especially when it comes to personality, beliefs and actions, while also having specific sexual orientations.

But that's not going to happen. So, while I am not a fan of the system, everyone being bi seems to be the easiest and most convenient way to make most people happy.

[Corker]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

While sexuality can be fluid in some people, I've never met a person whose sexuality switches for the sake of one person they are interested in.

Funnily enough, I just saw an article on exactly this the other day.

From the article:

It’s a phenomenon that Lisa Diamond, a University of Utah psychology professor, has studied extensively. In her 2008 book, “Sexual Fluidity: Understanding Women’s Love and Desire,” she writes that women’s sexuality appears to be much more fluid than men’s, and that this fluidity tends to involve three main characteristics:

– Non-exclusivity in attractions: can find either gender sexually attractive
– Changes in attractions: can suddenly find a man or woman sexually attractive after having been in a long-term relationship with the other
– Attraction to the person, not the gender (emphasis mine)

I wouldn't put a whole  lot of weight on a single study, even one done over a ten year span, but it's interesting nonetheless.

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

I don't put much weight on any studies of this nature. Especially given the tendancies of researchers and professors to inflict their own personal or political bias into such works, and the reliance on surveys and other questionable sampling practices. Very few people are actually that fluid in their sexuality, whether it be men or women. True pansexuals are pretty rare, especially when you consider ingrained social, cultural, and familial factors. And bisexuals, while more common than previously believed, are still not that common that, in a random sampling, you'd end up on a ship or in a room where everyone is bisexual.

I certainly do not agree that women are more fluid or bisexual in their preferences. I more and more wonder how many researchers are incapable of distinguishing between sexuality/attraction and women's usual tendancy to be more emotionally and physically involved with close friends. Many examples in studies of how women are more "bi" I've seen are far off the mark, and were better examples of women's natural tendancy to be more touchy/feely with friends than men are. As well as the meaning of "attraction" in this context, as women tend to be more capable than men of admiring and understanding each other's physical attractiveness.

Sexual attraction is a very different bird. I've known bisexual and lesbian women, and they display sexual attraction to one another in a very different, and definite manner, just as gay guys and straight people do. Like anyone, romance is very definite and distinctive from friendship.

[Addai]

I saw that study, too, and am just as incredulous. Some of it might be put down to the oversexualization of society in general- people take any kind of intimacy or vulnerability to be sex or "sexual tension." Of course this may just be my bias since I'm whatever Kinsey number means "dude or nothing."

All this by the by anyway. I'm more annoyed by the assumption that a mage-templar conflict is sort of a fantasy version of Occupy Kirkwall. As an example someone on tumblr posted some anti-Catholic screed and ended with "boom goes the Chantry." Yeah. I didn't care for the mage-templar stuff before, but that just solidifies my distaste for where the story is going, even if Gaider and Hepler were trying to balance it out by showing moderate templars and divines. Those were just so hamhanded that the whole story kind of flopped in their wake. I was kind of hoping Gaider's novel might rescue my interest, but then I heard it featured Wynne and Leliana. *bleeeeecccchhhh*

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...
 even if Gaider and Hepler were trying to balance it out by showing moderate templars and divines.

To them moderates = inactive imbeciles.

For me, the mage / templar conflict was damaged almost beyond repair. It would take a miracle for them to regain my interest in that conflict, and Thedas in general.

[Brockololly]

Addai67 wrote...
All this by the by anyway. I'm more annoyed by the assumption that a mage-templar conflict is sort of a fantasy version of Occupy Kirkwall. As an example someone on tumblr posted some anti-Catholic screed and ended with "boom goes the Chantry." Yeah. I didn't care for the mage-templar stuff before, but that just solidifies my distaste for where the story is going, even if Gaider and Hepler were trying to balance it out by showing moderate templars and divines. Those were just so hamhanded that the whole story kind of flopped in their wake. I was kind of hoping Gaider's novel might rescue my interest, but then I heard it featured Wynne and Leliana. *bleeeeecccchhhh*

Yeah, BioWare's version of a morally grey story is the equivalent of putting one foot in a bucket of ice water and another in boiling water and saying overall you're perfectly comfortable.

I'm just completely sick of the whole mage/templar thing at this point. I've been reading Asuner actually (go library!) and its not terrible but it does nothing to make me think BioWare is capable of coming up with a political story or a story that goes beyond Big Bad Monsters with any kind of tact. You just have nuts on either extreme with moderates in the middle twiddling their thumbs because the Plot demands that things go to ****.

I feel I'd be beating a dead horse, but TW2 handles the same premise so much better with characters like Roche, Iorveth, Henselt or so many of the other characters that aren't pure stupid like so many of the DA2 characters. Somebody like Henselt is great because you can view him as a loathsome individual, but you have to admit, as a king, as a ruler, he kind of has his **** together.

Thats where TW gets it right- you have characters that are internally consistent and make the player feel conflicted about them because the writers are able to paint extremes within one character, not like what BioWare does in trying to in making characters one note but varied based on the faction they were associated with. Characters like Iorveth or Roche have good and bad in them thats clear to the player in understandable ways that makes them easy to sympathize with. Most BioWare characters in DA2 end up only showing one facet of their personality, then if they do show another, its "OOOOGABOOGA! I AM NOW A MONSTERRRR!" or "GRRRR I AM NOW INDOCTRINATEDDDD!" 

Its just gets back to that line at the end of The Witcher, when Geralt has the Grandmaster down and only his silver sword. " But that sword is for monsters!" With good writing, a human can be just as horrifying as the worst Archdemon type Big Bad. Instead we get stuff like Orsino and Meredith in DA2 just turning into mindless monsters.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I think if we are going to compare DA2 with a Witcher game, it has to be the first, as they have the same premise. Both deal with the escalation and eruption of a conflict between an oppressed minority and a religious military order.

But of course The Witcher 1 does it right. From the first act till the last, the conflict gradually escalates, from weapon smuggling and small skirmishes, to bank robbery, to hostage taking and finally a full out uprising. With solid characters like Siegfried and Yaevinn, representing their respective factions. Each of them having their good and bad traits, all the while generally being competent at their work and more or less reasonable. Both can engender sympathy and anger towards them (though Yaevinn more so).

We saw and interacted with the Scoia'Tael, as opposed to a mage resistance that we never see. We saw different perspectives within each side (Vivaldi and Zoltan were the more "moderate" nonhumans. Shani and Dandelion were moderate humans, in addition to some random NPCs. Siegfried was in some ways the moderate Knight of the Order, while Toruviel was the moderate from amongst the Scoia'Tael). Factions were not monotonous blocs, but rather more heterogeneous groups, each reacting to the conflict in different ways.

And while the main plot of TW1 was not about that conflict (rather the hunt for Salamandra). It was seamlessly integrated into the plot as it gradually developed. Unlike the more isolated Acts of DA2, specifically the Qunari one that had no bearing on the main plot, except the bad excuse of a "rise to power" that never happened.

At the end, TW1's conflict was ambiguous, as all sides could be understood. All sides and individuals within each side, despite most succumbing to the hatred and fanaticism which grew as the conflict escalated in ways we could see, still remained sympathetic and more or less rational. That's the inherent tragedy of it. "Human" (nonhumans included) characters were trapped in a vicious cycle of their own making.

DA2 instead was based on the incompetence and insanity. Whatever moderates it had were so incompetent and inactive despite their rank that they might as well not have been there. Its extremists, who are abundant, were caricatures instead of characters, which is especially the case in the hilarious ending. And then the biggest insult was made, when whatever tiny semblance of humanity this story still had was stripped when a crap idol was shoved in there, alongside a tear in the veil that conveniently justifies all the bad writing, with swarms of demons drowning the city in a hilarity of cluster****. Ultimately made even more hilarious when apparently all this is possibly due to a darkspawn dreaming.

I feel bad comparing the two to be honest. DA2 is a joke compared to TW1, when it comes to exploring such an issue and showing the conflict erupting.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 14 février 2012 - 11:55 .