1279 réponses à ce sujet

[foodstuffs]

My point was that he should have at least stood up for himself, if nothing else but a "stfu," or something.  (EDIT:  Even Aerie has more of a backbone than Allistair appears to. )

I've never had Leliana react except at the very moment of poisoning the Ashes, otherwise she's nothing more than a voice in the background.  That's how all the characters are.  They don't speak to you unless spoken to, or some plot directive dictates it.  Most of what they have to say is incocsequential, unless you do the one thing that might make them leave, or you're trying to sleep with them.

In BG, characters thought for themselves, they would join or leave depending on your behavior, your actions had consequences, what you say had consequences.  Characters would leave because of your reputation, or revel in it.  They spoke up, they even acted.  Invite a drow and certain people become vocal about it.  In DA:O they do not, they follow you willy-nilly until that one instance that might cause a reaction simply because the writer said so.  In BG, the characters would make their own choices, in DA:O they followed you on a leash, nearly obeying your every wish.

Modifié par foodstuffs, 25 septembre 2010 - 06:06 .

[Saibh]

foodstuffs wrote...

My point was that he should have at least stood up for himself, if nothing else but a "stfu," or something.  (EDIT:  Even Aerie has more of a backbone than Allistair appears to. )

I've never had Leliana react except at the very moment of poisoning the Ashes, otherwise she's nothing more than a voice in the background.  That's how all the characters are.  They don't speak to you unless spoken to, or some plot directive dictates it.  Most of what they have to say is incocsequential, unless you do the one thing that might make them leave, or you're trying to sleep with them.

In BG, characters thought for themselves, they would join or leave depending on your behavior, your actions had consequences, what you say had consequences.  Characters would leave because of your reputation, or revel in it.  They spoke up, they even acted.  Invite a drow and certain people become vocal about it.  In DA:O they do not, they follow you willy-nilly until that one instance that might cause a reaction simply because the writer said so.  In BG, the characters would make their own choices, in DA:O they followed you on a leash, nearly obeying your every wish.

I think you just liked the characters less or simply misunderstood them. The fact that Alistair doesn't stand up for himself by way of gutting people is entirely in-character for him. I find that the characters of DAO are far more nuanced and realistic than the ones of BG2. In BG2 they seemed more like archetypes, rather than people. If not that, than just damn annoying.

[foodstuffs]

I think you just liked my post less or simply misunderstood it.

[Morroian]

Saibh wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Which will DA2 have?  This remains to be seen.  The only reason it's even a question worth asking is because the means by which that personality was implemented in ME and ME2 (the dialogue wheel and voiced protagonist) are being used in DA2.  Are they being used to the same ends?

WE DON'T KNOW THAT.

And for some reason, BioWare hasn't told us.

You're free to disregard this, since I can't scrounge up the source, but the devs have told us Hawke is less pre-defined than Shepard was.

Given the way the dialogue system is going to shape the personality I think its a fair conclusion to say that Hawke won't be pre-defined or at least they're attempting to make him as undefined as possible.

Monica83 wrote...

Maybe but have a WONDERFULL plot... A deep world full off informations.. Deep dialogues..

I played some of it yesterday just to refresh myself with it, and the dialogue in it is no better than DAO, in fact some of the dialogue is much worse, cliched fantasy style dialogue which showed that game writing in general has become more sophisticated since then. I'm not saying the best dialogue in BG2 isn't the equal of DAO.

foodstuffs wrote...

BG 2 characters felt alive, DA:O characters did not.

<shrug> they felt alive and well rounded to me. And they could leave it just took a lot for them to leave but given the situation it should take a lot for them to leave. IMHO Alistairs leaving was a mistake because he should have been as committed as the Warden.

[Jormundgander]

My Preview is that it's gonna be epic

[Saibh]

foodstuffs wrote...

I think you just liked my post less or simply misunderstood it.

You go ahead and try to prove me wrong then: Alistair does not stand up for himself because it's a part of his character.

Either you didn't understand him. Or you just didn't like him.

Of course, when you say "stand up for himself" you're not talking about telling Eamon he doesn't want to be king or something. You're saying he doesn't tell Morrigan to shut up. Occasionally, actually, he does. But most of the time, he just delivers back cutting remarks. Occasionally he one-ups her (why, look at Morrigan's nose...), more often she one-ups him. He doesn't stab her in the gut because that's just not a part of his character and that would be rather psycho.

He does bend over backwards and let her walk all over him if he can help it. Morrigan is smarter and more cutting than he is--he doesn't often win in arguments against her but he does try. And, as I said, occasionally he does it right.

[Bryy_Miller]

Saibh wrote...

He does bend over backwards and let her walk all over him if he can help it. 

Well, not if you make the Ultimate Sacrifice, he doesn't! 

[Crappystuff]

SDNcN wrote...
Wynne or an unhardened Leliana does provide a concequence for siding with Kolgrim, they attack the PC or they leave the group. I don't recall any of the companions in BG1/2 influencing the main game or side-quests any more than Origins companions. They just leave due to reputation shifts and have dialogue in some conversations.

Minsc, Khalid and Jaheira in BG1? Imoen, Edwin and Yoshimo in BG2?

[bsbcaer]

Monica83 wrote...

I just look what we have before... and what we have now...
And the new rpg's have a nice graphic a good gameplay.. But most times are short.. And don't have the same deepnes how the past games..

DAO i loved it because its an old style Rpg
But if you tell me.. Mass Effect.. i don't like it its cool and have a nice story but its also linear and don't have a huge ammount of side storyes or choice..

Its more like a sci-fi fictional shooter with a nice story and some rpg elements... but is not a true RPG like Origins is.. or.. Bg saga is..

Monica...did you enjoy the writing of DAO?  If so, I think that you should just trust in the talent and vision of the writers and place your trust in them until you actually see something that lets you shift that trust away.  While we have HEARD a lot of things, we actually haven't seen anything that causes your concerns...

[addiction21]

Saibh wrote...

foodstuffs wrote...

I think you just liked my post less or simply misunderstood it.

You go ahead and try to prove me wrong then: Alistair does not stand up for himself because it's a part of his character.

Either you didn't understand him. Or you just didn't like him.

Of course, when you say "stand up for himself" you're not talking about telling Eamon he doesn't want to be king or something. You're saying he doesn't tell Morrigan to shut up. Occasionally, actually, he does. But most of the time, he just delivers back cutting remarks. Occasionally he one-ups her (why, look at Morrigan's nose...), more often she one-ups him. He doesn't stab her in the gut because that's just not a part of his character and that would be rather psycho.

He does bend over backwards and let her walk all over him if he can help it. Morrigan is smarter and more cutting than he is--he doesn't often win in arguments against her but he does try. And, as I said, occasionally he does it right.

Logic rational and objective thinking. We dont like your type around these parts.

[AlanC9]

Crappystuff wrote...

SDNcN wrote...
Wynne or an unhardened Leliana does provide a concequence for siding with Kolgrim, they attack the PC or they leave the group. I don't recall any of the companions in BG1/2 influencing the main game or side-quests any more than Origins companions. They just leave due to reputation shifts and have dialogue in some conversations.

Minsc, Khalid and Jaheira in BG1? Imoen, Edwin and Yoshimo in BG2?

I don't see it for BG1. Characters have quests they want done, and if they don't do them they'll leave. It just happens that Jaheira and Khalid's quest is on the main quest path; I have no idea why you mentioned Minsc. But you can do pretty much anything and any character will put up with it as long as you don't drive your Reputation score too far the wrong way. Donate a little gold to the temples and you can do all evil quest resolutions with a good party and no problems.

I'll save you the trouble of the obvious response; yes, the DAO gift mechanism is almost as broken as BG's Reputation system.

As for BG2, Yoshimo and Imoen are tied into the main plot, yep. But this is somewhat non-responsive to SDNcN's point since both of them, again, will put up with anything the PC decides to do, even if you don't repair your Reputation from time to time. I'm not quite sure why you brought Edwin up.

Modifié par AlanC9, 26 septembre 2010 - 02:57 .

[StapleNinja]

Lol the article was ok, but I got pissed when the guy siad the rogue was underpowered, and normal was easy :/



Seriously? The rogue was so OP in DAO. Unless youre retarded, if you spec half good, you can get your DPS ridiculously high, I even soloed Gaxkang on nightmare in under a minute

[foodstuffs]

I've made my points, if you wish to ignore them that's your problem, not mine. If the only thing you can focus on from my posts is whether or not Allistair stabs Morrigan, which was not the intent of my posts, that is your problem, not mine.

[Joshd21]

I'd say chap. That is a pretty good review. From all these reports of people playing Dragon Age 2 I'd say it's done they are just touching up the bugs and doing some DLC

[Sylvius the Mad]

Saibh wrote...

You're free to disregard this, since I can't scrounge up the source, but the devs have told us Hawke is less pre-defined than Shepard was.

I know this.  This is the main reason I hold out hope for DA2.

I will test it with my first character.  I have him thoroughly planned.

Background is still set however. It's dictated for you, and there is no changing it. She didn't make a discretion either way.

Yes, but since that background in unknown to the character for much of the game (particularly the beginning, and any background he believes he has) it has zero impect on his personality.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

I'm guessing you have never played Mass effect 1 or 2 before? The whole godamn point of the games is to shape shepards personality. The personality is in no way pre-determined, so i don't see why it would be different for DA2

I've played both games, and the game allowed me effectively zero control over Shepard's personality.

First, each line was voiced, and voiced in a particular way.  This allowed me zero freedom to choose how to say something.

Second, the options on the dialogue wheel often bore no resemblance the the line uttered.  This prevented me even from choosing what was said.

I couldn't choose what Shepard said.  I couldn't chooce how Shepard said it.  Whoever Shepard happened to be was revealed to be slowly, but I had zero input into it.  Literally thousands of times over the course of those two games was I asked for my input only to see it completely disregarded.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Pritos wrote...

I don't know if it is just me but I have always found voiced character to be far more immersive than voiceless ones. At least those with decent voice actors. It represents better it's personality, making it seems much more real than just "use your imagination" thing that we have in DAO.

But that's the problem.  The voice conveys the personality, but we didn't get to choose the voice.  Therefore we also didn't get to choose the personality.

Those of us who think the voice is a bad idea aren't disputing that a voiced character is more cinematic and a more complete person from the point of view of someone watching him.  Our complaint is taht we don't have enough control over who he is.

And if we don't have that control, then we don't care how well acted he is.  He's not our character, so he's now no different from any random NPC in the game.  And we don't typically form deep relationships with every tavern keeper.  Do you?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Riona45 wrote...

Then why all the sturm und drang with regards to Hawke?  Is it solely because Hawke is going to be voiced?

The voice combined with the dialogue wheel, yes.

Not that the shape of the conversation UI matters, but the wheel ensures that we can't see the actual line the PC is going to use.

As implemented in ME, we didn't now what Shepard was going to say (or do), and that line we didn't select was then delivered in a way over which we had no control.

Both of those are entirely different from how dialogue worked in DAO, KotOR, JE, NWN, or BG.

The question I need answered before I can accept the game (and I almost certainly can't answer the question without playing the game) is to what extent I will still be able to determine what Hawke says and how he says it, particularly in those cases where those details are relevant to his personality.  And if I do have control over his personality, then BioWare can't know which details are relevant, so the system would then have to allow that level of free choice on every single dialogue option in the game.

[SirOccam]

Joshd21 wrote...

I'd say chap. That is a pretty good review. From all these reports of people playing Dragon Age 2 I'd say it's done they are just touching up the bugs and doing some DLC

You realize "all these reports" are all based on the same 15 minutes of the game, right? It's all the same demo. Even if a billion people play it, it doesn't mean anything about the rest of the game.

It's only recently become playable all the way though for the devs, but that doesn't mean ready for a player. There's still quite a bit left to be done.

[Sidney]

Saibh wrote...

I think you just liked the characters less or simply misunderstood them. The fact that Alistair doesn't stand up for himself by way of gutting people is entirely in-character for him. I find that the characters of DAO are far more nuanced and realistic than the ones of BG2. In BG2 they seemed more like archetypes, rather than people. If not that, than just damn annoying.

The worst DAO character is Oghren and he's basically a e-baked Korgan. I would say without the psychotic part but Oghren has plenty of that.

You are correct the DAO characters across the board otherwise are better than the BG2 characters.

[Sidney]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I've played both games, and the game allowed me effectively zero control over Shepard's personality.

You confuse personality with vocal tone - and do it over and over and over. My Shep has a very distinct personality based on the choies I make throughout ME2. That voice he speaks that personality with is immaterial. Apparently your Junior Drama Club self is offended by the way the lines are delivered but overall there's not much issue with the voice acting not hitting my intent.

I can't control my voice - I was born with it afterall - all I can control is what my voices says and how it serves my own interests. I can do that same thing with Shep.

Do I wish I had an infinite # of options, yes but that isn't about voiced or not. There isn't an RPG alive where the 4 options you get aren't enough. Frankly I felt a lot more "$%^&#$ where is another dialog option" in DAO than in ME2 and I felt people not getting what I'm saying a lot more in the former than the latter - and here you can insert your little "people misunderstand me all the time" argument.

You can play a role w/o 100% control. Yes, yes you can.  If you can't ask the following people how they did it: Liam Neeson as Oskar Schindler, Peter O'Toole as TE Lawrence, Tom Hulce as Mozart, Don Cheadle as Paul Rusesabagina, Gary Busy as Buddy Holly, Ben Kingsley as Ghandi, Johnny Depp as Ed Wood, Martin Landau as Bela Lugosi and so on. They couldn't control voice, gestures in many cases, wardrobe but they all made those characters their own.

[AlanC9]

[quote]foodstuffs wrote...

I've made my points, if you wish to find them completely unconvincing that's your problem, not mine. [/quote]
[/quote]

Fixed.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sidney wrote...

You confuse personality with vocal tone - and do it over and over and over. My Shep has a very distinct personality based on the choies I make throughout ME2. That voice he speaks that personality with is immaterial. Apparently your Junior Drama Club self is offended by the way the lines are delivered but overall there's not much issue with the voice acting not hitting my intent.

I can't control my voice - I was born with it afterall - all I can control is what my voices says and how it serves my own interests. I can do that same thing with Shep.

But you can't control what you voice says in ME2, nor can you control how it says it.

Are you honestly saying that neither the words nor their delivery is relevant to the speaker's personality?  How then did you define Shepard's personaltiy if not in dialogue?

Do I wish I had an infinite # of options, yes but that isn't about voiced or not. There isn't an RPG alive where the 4 options you get aren't enough. Frankly I felt a lot more "$%^&#$ where is another dialog option" in DAO than in ME2 and I felt people not getting what I'm saying a lot more in the former than the latter - and here you can insert your little "people misunderstand me all the time" argument.

Whether people understand you 9or me) is immaterial.  The question is, did you get to say what you wanted to say?  Did your character ever do something you specifically wanted him to avoid doing?

The latter happened to me fairly early in ME and it completely broke teh game for me.  I was talking to Udina, he asked me a question, and I didn't know the answer.
 
And then Shepard gave him the answer.

You can play a role w/o 100% control. Yes, yes you can.  If you can't ask the following people how they did it: Liam Neeson as Oskar Schindler, Peter O'Toole as TE Lawrence, Tom Hulce as Mozart, Don Cheadle as Paul Rusesabagina, Gary Busy as Buddy Holly, Ben Kingsley as Ghandi, Johnny Depp as Ed Wood, Martin Landau as Bela Lugosi and so on. They couldn't control voice, gestures in many cases, wardrobe but they all made those characters their own.

I know how they did it.  They had the scripts.  they knew what the upcoming line was, and they were given enough background information to know exactly what the character's motivation was at all times.

If ME gave me that much information, I would have no complaints (though I would also wonder why I was bothering to play the game, given that I had no input).

Acting is a performance.  You're judged not on what you do, but on how well you do it.  It's entirely unlike roleplaying in a CPRG.

[Bryy_Miller]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Acting is a performance.  You're judged not on what you do, but on how well you do it.  It's entirely unlike roleplaying in a CPRG.

Now you're just making a semantic argument by adding in "unlike in CRPGs". What is the difference between Acting and Imagination?

[Tsuga C]

Actors are on a completely fixed path. RPGs are supposed to offer a number of choices, preferably ones that have consequences for the storyline and the world in which you are playing.