1279 réponses à ce sujet

[Cancermeat]

is this game shaping up to be mass effect with swords?

[Sylvius the Mad]

SirOccam wrote...

What it comes down to is this: the Mass Effect writers had a bad habit of making their paraphrases not match the spoken line very well. The DA2 writers know this. They are not the Mass Effect writers, and I doubt they wish to follow their example. That doesn't mean the concepts of the wheel and the voiced protagonist are not worth using. It was the execution that was flawed.

I will grant that it's entirely possible the DA2 writers will use the wheel expertly and it will not impact gameplay at all.  Given the nature of the beast, that seems unlikely, but this team of writers has surprised me before.  I'm perfectly willing to allow the wheel.

The voiced protagonist, however, is limited to a finite number of deliveries.  This limitation is real, and it isn't going away.

[Bullets McDeath]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

What it comes down to is this: the Mass Effect writers had a bad habit of making their paraphrases not match the spoken line very well. The DA2 writers know this. They are not the Mass Effect writers, and I doubt they wish to follow their example. That doesn't mean the concepts of the wheel and the voiced protagonist are not worth using. It was the execution that was flawed.

I will grant that it's entirely possible the DA2 writers will use the wheel expertly and it will not impact gameplay at all.  Given the nature of the beast, that seems unlikely, but this team of writers has surprised me before.  I'm perfectly willing to allow the wheel.

The voiced protagonist, however, is limited to a finite number of deliveries.  This limitation is real, and it isn't going away.

Yet people want to continue debating it, endlessly. It is what it is. Time to move on, I think.

[SirOccam]

Cancermeat wrote...

is this game shaping up to be mass effect with swords?

No.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

What it comes down to is this: the Mass Effect writers had a bad habit of making their paraphrases not match the spoken line very well. The DA2 writers know this. They are not the Mass Effect writers, and I doubt they wish to follow their example. That doesn't mean the concepts of the wheel and the voiced protagonist are not worth using. It was the execution that was flawed.

I will grant that it's entirely possible the DA2 writers will use the wheel expertly and it will not impact gameplay at all.  Given the nature of the beast, that seems unlikely, but this team of writers has surprised me before.  I'm perfectly willing to allow the wheel.

The voiced protagonist, however, is limited to a finite number of deliveries.  This limitation is real, and it isn't going away.

Taking into consideration the complete let down how conversations were handled and ultimately fleshing out of companions was handled in Awakening, I have some doubts that it won't be anything more than simply adapting ME dialog wheel and voice over system and slapping it into DA. Giving the short development cycle and the "rushed" feel that Awakening left me with

Modifié par CoS Sarah Jinstar, 20 septembre 2010 - 06:56 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

bleh double post.

Modifié par CoS Sarah Jinstar, 20 septembre 2010 - 06:57 .

[axa89]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Taking into consideration the complete let down how conversations were handled and ultimately fleshing out of companions was handled in Awakening, I have some doubts that it won't be anything more than simply adapting ME dialog wheel and voice over system and slapping it into DA. Giving the short development cycle and the "rushed" feel that Awakening left me with

Awakening had a much smaller word budget than da:o. Gaider said that in da2 companions will have quite the same amount of dialogue they had in da:o.

Modifié par axa89, 20 septembre 2010 - 07:15 .

[foodstuffs]

outlaworacle wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

What it comes down to is this: the Mass Effect writers had a bad habit of making their paraphrases not match the spoken line very well. The DA2 writers know this. They are not the Mass Effect writers, and I doubt they wish to follow their example. That doesn't mean the concepts of the wheel and the voiced protagonist are not worth using. It was the execution that was flawed.

I will grant that it's entirely possible the DA2 writers will use the wheel expertly and it will not impact gameplay at all.  Given the nature of the beast, that seems unlikely, but this team of writers has surprised me before.  I'm perfectly willing to allow the wheel.

The voiced protagonist, however, is limited to a finite number of deliveries.  This limitation is real, and it isn't going away.

Yet people want to continue debating it, endlessly. It is what it is. Time to move on, I think.

Why bother speaking at all, then, if we already "know" our input is pointless?  These boards might as well not even exist.

The RPG market took a turn for the worse a long time ago because the market grew to include people who should never have been included in that market in the first place.  Unfortunately, markets must learn to accommodate accordingly, or they will potentially, and probably, fail accordingly.  Sadly, this means many people will have to suffer the downfall in quality of what was once a great market.  Bio is one of the few companies willing, and more importantly able, to maintain quality, yet still allow for lack-wit-button-mashers to enjoy it.  Again, accommodations must be made to cover the whole, but unfortunately when you try to please everyone you you will always fail at doing so.  There will always be people who do not view a master piece as a master piece.  I, for example, believe that Elvis and The Beatles were not all they were cracked up to be.  Yet, someone previously stated that because I diagree with the majority my opinion is not really an opinion but rather an inconsequential bag of emotional goo.  My head exploded because of that assininity, I'm still trying to piece it back together.

Modifié par foodstuffs, 20 septembre 2010 - 07:24 .

[Amioran]

MDarwin wrote...

You know what, I get the feeling if someone does not "submit" to your supirior mind. You just don't like it, do you?

My parameters for good/bad art and "the written word", are mine. Not yours or anybody elses, thank you.
Franz Kafka war ein Deutscher. Just like I ones was. I still don't like his works.

You can not prove me wrong. Art and literature are a matter of taste/liking. Not everyone likes J.R.R. Tolkien either.
It is up to each individual to define his personal sense/opinion on Art and literature, or in general.  <_<

Not yours or mine.

Listen, I don't really want to enter a discussion of art since this is not the proper thread, but really, someone that thinks that art is only "taste" really understand nothing of art in general. So what's the point of discussing it with you? It would be like discussing chess with someone that neither knows the rules.

You cannot like Kafka (that it is only ONE of the authors mentioned) still that doesn't mean that he created a genre and that he was a great author. Tolkien is crap, really. Tolkien is not art, it is manierism, that it is all another thing. Let's not mix things, want we? Naturally, as I've said, you probably don't have the means to discern if a thing is one way or the other, and some say ignorance is bliss, so let's leave it at that, want we? You can call me superior as you want, truth doesn't change just because you want it.

As a simple suggestion I advice you to start reading a bit more about art in general, maybe you will comprehend after a bit that art is not only "taste", on the contrary, there are many objective aspects that cannot be denied nor ignored. You can well not know them, sure, but this doesn't mean that they don't exist.

Modifié par Amioran, 20 septembre 2010 - 07:29 .

[Amioran]

Sylvius the Mad wrote..

The voiced protagonist, however, is limited to a finite number of deliveries.  This limitation is real, and it isn't going away.

Care to explain what this "supposed" limitation would be for an already CREATED character? I'm curious. I gues you become all mad on movies because the protagonist has a voice. But since I already expect the answer to this, I tell you that interaction has nothing to do with the difference of an already setted character and one that it is being created (as in the case of the warden).

[Bullets McDeath]

foodstuffs wrote...

outlaworacle wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

What it comes down to is this: the Mass Effect writers had a bad habit of making their paraphrases not match the spoken line very well. The DA2 writers know this. They are not the Mass Effect writers, and I doubt they wish to follow their example. That doesn't mean the concepts of the wheel and the voiced protagonist are not worth using. It was the execution that was flawed.

I will grant that it's entirely possible the DA2 writers will use the wheel expertly and it will not impact gameplay at all.  Given the nature of the beast, that seems unlikely, but this team of writers has surprised me before.  I'm perfectly willing to allow the wheel.

The voiced protagonist, however, is limited to a finite number of deliveries.  This limitation is real, and it isn't going away.

Yet people want to continue debating it, endlessly. It is what it is. Time to move on, I think.

Why bother speaking at all, then, if we already "know" our input is pointless?  These boards might as well not even exist.

That's pretty much my question.

To wit, I agree with most of your post, but the argument in this thread shares a common theme with 98% of the threads on this board. It's ****ing about something that's already been decided, as if collective fan ****ing ever changed anything, let alone major elements of a game less than 6 months from release.

[JrayM16]

foodstuffs wrote...

outlaworacle wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

What it comes down to is this: the Mass Effect writers had a bad habit of making their paraphrases not match the spoken line very well. The DA2 writers know this. They are not the Mass Effect writers, and I doubt they wish to follow their example. That doesn't mean the concepts of the wheel and the voiced protagonist are not worth using. It was the execution that was flawed.

I will grant that it's entirely possible the DA2 writers will use the wheel expertly and it will not impact gameplay at all.  Given the nature of the beast, that seems unlikely, but this team of writers has surprised me before.  I'm perfectly willing to allow the wheel.

The voiced protagonist, however, is limited to a finite number of deliveries.  This limitation is real, and it isn't going away.

Yet people want to continue debating it, endlessly. It is what it is. Time to move on, I think.

Why bother speaking at all, then, if we already "know" our input is pointless?  These boards might as well not even exist.

The RPG market took a turn for the worse a long time ago because the market grew to include people who should never have been included in that market in the first place.  Unfortunately, markets must learn to accommodate accordingly, or they will potentially, and probably, fail accordingly.  Sadly, this means many people will have to suffer the downfall in quality of what was once a great market.  Bio is one of the few companies willing, and more importantly able, to maintain quality, yet still allow for lack-wit-button-mashers to enjoy it.  Again, accommodations must be made to cover the whole, but unfortunately when you try to please everyone you you will fail at doing so.  There will always be people who do not view a master piece as a master piece.  I, for example, believe that Elvis and The Beatles were not all they were cracked up to be.  Yet, someone previously stated that because I diagree with the majority my opinion is not really an opinion but rather an inconsequential back of emotional goo.  My head exploded because of that assininity, I'm still trying to piece it back together.

I think you might be mixing up your causations.  Is it because of a changing fanbase that these RPGs changed, or is it(as I would argue) that the fanbase changed because of the change in the RPGs? 

But as to your other point, it's not an easy question to answer.  Does everyone's opinion matter to some degree?  Absolutely.  Unfortunately, people disagree with eachother all the time.  The million dollar question in this DA2/ME2 argument is whether or not those who are in disagreement with BW's new direction represent a sizable and significant portion, or an extremely vocal minority.  And I honestly don't think it's possible to tell.

Even though these forums indicate alot of anger about DA2 and ME2, this forum does not necessarily represent an accurate cross-section of even BW's fanbase, only the really hard-core frequent this forum.  The truth is further muddied by the fact that these fans keep buying BW's games despite their anger and (in many cases) predetermination that they will not like the game, a phenominon that makes it impossible to determine how much of BW's fanbase was actually alienated by ME2. 

[SirOccam]

I, for one, feel that there's still value in the intellectual exercise of debate, even if it never yields practical results.

[foodstuffs]

Amioran wrote...

Listen, I don't really want to enter a discussion of art since this is not the proper thread, but really, someone that thinks that art is only "taste" really understand nothing of art in general. So what's the point of discussing it with you? It would be like discussing chess with someone that neither knows the rules.

You cannot like Kafka (that it is only ONE of the authors mentioned) still that doesn't mean that he created a genre and that he was a great author. Tolkien is crap, really. Tolkien is not art, it is manierism, that it is all another thing. Let's not mix things, want we? Naturally, as I've said, you probably don't have the means to discern if a thing is one way or the other, and some say ignorance is bliss, so let's leave it at that, want we? You can call me superior as you want, truth doesn't change just because you want it.

As a simple suggestion I advice you to start reading a bit more about art in general, maybe you will comprehend after a bit that art is not only "taste", on the contrary, there are many objective aspects that cannot be denied nor ignored. You can well not know them, sure, but this doesn't mean that they don't exist.

Are you trying to fail?

Yet again you state your opinion and yet again you insist that anyone who disagrees is too simplistic to speak.  You've provided no factual bases to your arguments, yet you expect others to.  You can't even state your opinions in such a way that might be considered a clear argument, all you do is insult.  Your posts are trollish at best, asinine at heart.

[Bullets McDeath]

SirOccam wrote...

I, for one, feel that there's still value in the intellectual exercise of debate, even if it never yields practical results.

I agree with you there. But on this topic in particular, it's all just speculation. We don't know how the wheel and player VO will work in execution. Getting emotional and up-in-arms about it really is pointless until we see it in action. If it sucks as bad as some people fear, THEN ****ing about it might give the devs pause for thought before including it in a potential DA3.

[JrayM16]

outlaworacle wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

I, for one, feel that there's still value in the intellectual exercise of debate, even if it never yields practical results.

I agree with you there. But on this topic in particular, it's all just speculation. We don't know how the wheel and player VO will work in execution. Getting emotional and up-in-arms about it really is pointless until we see it in action. If it sucks as bad as some people fear, THEN ****ing about it might give the devs pause for thought before including it in a potential DA3.

Not to say it's on the same level of importance, but it's kind of like debating ideologies or divisive political issues.  No one can be proven right, as much as we hold our opinions to be absolute truths in our mind when both sides have many points.  Sometimes, these kinds of issues are resolved, but people will always hold their opinions and often call the rest of the world crazy and wrong for siding against them.  Again, while not of the same importance, I feel this is an appropriate comparison for this forum.

[SirOccam]

outlaworacle wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

I, for one, feel that there's still value in the intellectual exercise of debate, even if it never yields practical results.

I agree with you there. But on this topic in particular, it's all just speculation. We don't know how the wheel and player VO will work in execution. Getting emotional and up-in-arms about it really is pointless until we see it in action. If it sucks as bad as some people fear, THEN ****ing about it might give the devs pause for thought before including it in a potential DA3.

True. I guess I would say it's worth talking about, but not worth freaking out about.

[soundchaser721]

SirOccam wrote...

I, for one, feel that there's still value in the intellectual exercise of debate, even if it never yields practical results.

.

Thank You. Totally agree with you there.

Modifié par soundchaser721, 20 septembre 2010 - 08:11 .

[foodstuffs]

JrayM16 wrote...

foodstuffs wrote...
The RPG market took a turn for the worse a long time ago because the market grew to include people who should never have been included in that market in the first place.  Unfortunately, markets must learn to accommodate accordingly, or they will potentially, and probably, fail accordingly.  Sadly, this means many people will have to suffer the downfall in quality of what was once a great market.  Bio is one of the few companies willing, and more importantly able, to maintain quality, yet still allow for lack-wit-button-mashers to enjoy it.  Again, accommodations must be made to cover the whole, but unfortunately when you try to please everyone you you will fail at doing so.  There will always be people who do not view a master piece as a master piece.  I, for example, believe that Elvis and The Beatles were not all they were cracked up to be.  Yet, someone previously stated that because I diagree with the majority my opinion is not really an opinion but rather an inconsequential back of emotional goo.  My head exploded because of that assininity, I'm still trying to piece it back together.

I think you might be mixing up your causations.  Is it because of a changing fanbase that these RPGs changed, or is it(as I would argue) that the fanbase changed because of the change in the RPGs? 

But as to your other point, it's not an easy question to answer.  Does everyone's opinion matter to some degree?  Absolutely.  Unfortunately, people disagree with eachother all the time.  The million dollar question in this DA2/ME2 argument is whether or not those who are in disagreement with BW's new direction represent a sizable and significant portion, or an extremely vocal minority.  And I honestly don't think it's possible to tell.

Even though these forums indicate alot of anger about DA2 and ME2, this forum does not necessarily represent an accurate cross-section of even BW's fanbase, only the really hard-core frequent this forum.  The truth is further muddied by the fact that these fans keep buying BW's games despite their anger and (in many cases) predetermination that they will not like the game, a phenominon that makes it impossible to determine how much of BW's fanbase was actually alienated by ME2. 

The RPG market had to grow to include a greater audience or risk failing because of monetary reasons.  Anything else would be a consequence of that growth, either directly or indirectly, such as "including people it should not have.".  That is not to say, "It is simply about money," but rather it grew out of necessity for survival.  Unfortunately, "evolution" does not always provide "prettier" traits.  Sometimes we have to deal with things we do not like.  We may have to deal with them, but we do not have to like them. 

But, again, if our opinion has no meaning on these boards, why bother having the boards in the first place?  If we are going to be allowed to speak then we should also be allowed to express opinions to the contrary of what appears to be the new "grown" market.  Bio does indeed allow us to speak our minds, but many do not agree with that permission.  For some reason, people all too often believe their world will explode if they are provided with a contradictory argument, and will thus defend their argument to their death (figuratively or not) even when proven wrong beyond any possibility of doubt. 

I've always held that the few hundred people in the US congress cannot accurately represent the few hundred million people of the US.  That being said, in similar regards, even if the forumites do accurately represent Bio's market, that is only happen-stance.

I think a world where everyone agreed would be boring but then how would I know?  (rhetorical question)

Modifié par foodstuffs, 20 septembre 2010 - 08:39 .

[Morroian]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Taking into consideration the complete let down how conversations were handled and ultimately fleshing out of companions was handled in Awakening, I have some doubts that it won't be anything more than simply adapting ME dialog wheel and voice over system and slapping it into DA. Giving the short development cycle and the "rushed" feel that Awakening left me with

The system in Awakening isn't being used in DA2.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Morroian wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Taking into consideration the complete let down how conversations were handled and ultimately fleshing out of companions was handled in Awakening, I have some doubts that it won't be anything more than simply adapting ME dialog wheel and voice over system and slapping it into DA. Giving the short development cycle and the "rushed" feel that Awakening left me with

The system in Awakening isn't being used in DA2.

I never suggested it was, just as a counter to the whole "Oh DA and ME are seperate teams!" excuse. With how badly it was handled in awakening by the DA team (granted the whole expansion pack reeked of a rush job in the first place) who's to say DA2's implimentation will be any better? Thats all I was getting at.

[Tsuga C]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
With how badly it was handled in awakening by the DA team (granted the whole expansion pack reeked of a rush job in the first place) who's to say DA2's implimentation will be any better? Thats all I was getting at.

I've read several denials since the inception of this new forum/social network from BioWare employees that EA isn't leaning on them regarding what to make, how to make it and such.  I do wonder what happened to cause the release of the less than stellar DLC.  

[Sylvius the Mad]

[quote]SirOccam wrote...

I see what you're driving at, but you can't leave the human player behind completely. As you say, you direct the character in his decision-making (actually I'd argue that YOU make the decisions on his behalf, but it's a fine enough difference and a minor enough point that it's not worth defending right now). Either way, you are involved. So if I make a mistake (like not understanding Anora's point about her disguise), my character is encumbered with that mistake through no willful action on my part. If anything, that's a restriction of player agency, albeit an unconscious one. If I knew the information, I could still choose to say my character didn't hear it, and proceed exactly like before. But without knowing the truth, that those words were spoken, the experience becomes tainted, if you will (that word's probably a bit strong), by the human player's own foibles. And as you say (and I agree with you in general), it shouldn't be about the player, it should be about the character.[/quote]
I'll happily agree with all of that (except the decision-making part, but as you say, that's possibly just a semantic difference).
[quote]Here's where we differ greatly. Things simply not being addressed is one thing, but outright contradicted is something else entirely. Although there is some wiggle room for information coming from another NPC (as they can be lying/mistaken/etc.), if it's clear that that's simply the way the designers have chosen to communicate that information to you (and not, say, a biography screen that comes up and tells you out-of-character), then I would be much more inclined to simply take it at face value.[/quote]
But remember, it cannot be clear that some in-game characte is trying to tell me something, because I don't exist from that character's point of view.

I had trouble with this on Ilos in Mass Effect.  The squadmates made some remark about taking the Mako into the "creepy underground tomb", and it was apparently inteded to tell me, the player, that I should take the Mako on the trench run.  It turns out if you do the trench run on foot you can break the game and render it unwinnable.

But it never occurred to me to take the line like that because the characters can't possibly be trying to talk to me.  I'm not real.  They're not aware of me.  So I took their lines as I always took their lines - as in-character remarks made to Shepard - and I ignored them.
[quote]Then why can't you reload and play through a dialogue again, if it felt like you acted out-of-character?[/quote]
Because in a game like Mass Effect where I can't see the options, I'd have to reload eight times for every conversation.  It would be game-killing frustration.
[quote]Do you simply always assume that the miscommunication is on the other conversant's end? I suppose you must; it seems like that's what you've been saying all along. Huh. You know, in some ways, it feels like you're more restrictive (on yourself) than I am.[/quote]
In a game like DAO where my character can say whatever I like, I'm not so much assuming miscommunication as just reacting to the reality that I said something in whatever way I said, and the NPC reacted as he did.  I'd say my character, more often than not, assumes the reaction is genuine.  Odd, perhaps, but genuine.  And as I said to Seb, it means that each playthrough produces significantly different NPCs.
[quote]Yes, but within reason, surely. If I decide something is shouted at the top of my character's lungs, but people respond normally...I mean there's only so much you can chalk up to people being unpredictable. Games simply aren't designed to accommodate as much freedom as you seem to want. It'd be great if they were, but you're always going to be limited to some degree.[/quote]
My characters are typically not completely insane.  They're not going to yell unless yelling makes sense to them.  Remember that each behaviour needs to be consistent with the whole of the rest of their behaviour.  If there isn't a good reason to yell, they're not going to yell.
[quote]And this is why we're going to have to agree to disagree. Alistair has the same dialogue every time. You don't have to trigger it all, and of course if you're friendly he'll be more friendly and if you're rude he'll be not so friendly. But it's the same person. He has the same potential every time, and you're always working within the system the developers have designed.[/quote]
Who he is, from my PC's point of view, is based on what he says and why he'd perceived to have said it.  As you  point out, we don't trigger all of his dialogue every time, so all of that dialogue we don't trigger is dialogue that can't influence the opinion of that particular PC.

I know what sort of framework within which we're working, but within the game world tat framework doesn't exist.  Alistair's just a person.

In some playthroughs he comes across as insecure.  In others he comes across as a self-assured jokester.  As far as each PC is concerned, how he comes across is who he is.  And it changes each time I play.
[quote]Anything you add on your own outside of the game has to remain there. This is clearly acceptable for you, but I'm afraid it just isn't for me.[/quote]
I'm not adding anything to Alistair.  I'm just not incorporating aspects of her personality of which my PC is unaware.
[quote]May we never be forced to play the other person's way.[/quote]
Indeed.
[quote]In any case, I definitely understand why you don't like being told the intent. I can only hope you can understand why I think it's the best thing since sliced nug pâté.[/quote]
Given the voice and the wheel, the intent is probabaly going to be quite valuable.  But I still think eliminating both the voice and the intent would be better.
[quote]It greatly increases the sense of immersion I feel, knowing that I will be communicating on a straightforward level with my fellow Free Marchers. What you describe sometimes sounds like an episode of the Twilight Zone or something, where someone is trying to speak with those around him that look and sound like normal people but they can't communicate on the same wavelength.[/quote]
That's how communication works in the real world.  You say what you want to say, and people interpret it as they see fit.  People misinterpret tone and body language all the time.  I'd say they get it wrong more often than they get it right.

This happens because "communication" isn't a thing.  Communication is the amalgam of two entirely disconneted events.  You speaking and the other person interpreting.  The speaker has no control over the interpretation, and the listener cannot read the speaker's mind.
[quote]I simply can't wrap my head around this. How could a script have any semblance of direction without including intent? How could you possibly account for the infinite number of ways people can come up with for their character to mean something? I understand you could come at it just from the reaction side, but then how do you know what lines to give the player at all?[/quote]
You would need to write the reactions assuming some interpretation of the lines, yes, but not all characters would need to interpret the same line the same way.
[quote]Let's say two characters are meeting for the first time. I would think a reasonable choice of options would be like this:

1. Hello, my name is ________. What's yours?
2. Yes? Did you want something?
3. Hi there, what a pleasure it is to meet you.
4. Hey there, hot stuff.
5. This had better be worth my time, worm.

How can you include 4 without intending it to sound flirty? Or 3 without intending it to sound friendly. The only one that sounds neutral, in my opinion, is 1. So if you started with that, then what motivates you to add the others? Can't the player just make #1 sound impatient or friendly or flirty or hostile?[/quote]
#2 could be solicitous or impatient or bored (among others).
#3 could be solicitous or sarcastic (among others).
#4 could be sardonic or flirty or deadpan (among others).
#5 is just a bad line.
[quote]But you can't possibly plan for everything.[/quote]
You can plan for everything that matters, and decide explicitly that nothing else does.  So yes, you could have decided that the character's food preferences were irrelevant; perhaps you don't care to roleplay about food.
[quote]If, for example, my character sits down at a table and is given a choice of food, I will then decide what he likes and dislikes based on what's there. If I decide he likes potatoes, he will reach for the potatoes. I don't see a problem with this.[/quote]
Not as long as you keep track fof that preference so you don't contradict it later.
[quote]It's funny you should mention consistency though, because I want my character to be consistent with the universe in which he lives. That, to me, is much more important than planning out all these mundane details then never ever retconning myself. Indeed, I sort of need to play through the game a bit so I know what palette I am painting with, so to speak.

If I knew nothing of Thedas, I could choose beforehand that my character is a dragon, for example, but if it is totally contradicted by the game then I think the game wins. It's their world...I just play in it. If it came up short and didn't perform in a way that was satisfying to me as a player, then I'd find another world that did, or make up my own. That's the fun of trying out different RPGs...they all have their own idiosyncracies and details, and using some of those as limitations isn't a bad thing, in my opinion. It makes it more interesting. To return to the art analogy, I'd rather paint my character on a backdrop than have every game be a blank canvas. Otherwise one RPG is as good as the next.[/quote]
That backdrop counts for a lot.  As UI said, I don't want to create a setting.  I want to create a character.

That said, I had a great discussion on the old BioBoards about playing KotOR as if the PC were a squidy-alien in disguise and I argued that it was a perfectly reasonable character concept for the game (and ultimately even validated by KotOR's plot).
[quote]The game needs me because I make the decisions. It doesn't run by itself. I control the protagonist. My (and your) input IS special, it's just that there are bounds on what that input is. And that's not a bad thing.[/quote]
If my input is limited to those inputs anticipated by the designers, then my input isn't special.  Any other person could credibly reproduce my input.

[Pritos]

^^Big post is big.

[Sidney]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
So now the dialogue has been completely divorced from player input.  The player now has no control over the dialogue.

The dialogue itself may be just as deep and interesting as before, but it has ceased to be an element of gameplay, and thus it can no longer have any meaningful (or deep) relationship to the player's character.

You've never had control of dialog. That's a lie you've been living and can't seem to escape. You select dialog from a horrible constrained list at all times no matter the input mode. In 99% of all RPG dialog you have picked you've never picked a line of dialog that was "you" - there's some sort of "Yes" or "No" options that you might have thought of but that's it. You can mis-read dialog all over the place - I misread the saving Redcliffe in DAO, I misread "I love shoes" when dealing with Leliana. It'll happen no matter the input mechanism.

Your voice doesn't exist. In the text only version your character "speaks" like Hemmingway with autism in single sentences and I doubt you speak that way to anyone you meet. Do this, seriously, speak your lines of dialog outloud playing DAO. Just literally read what they say and you'll never defend the text only lines again. You sound stupid because no one speaks the way they write dialog because that dialog is nothing more than an input mask for a dialog tree,