1279 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sidney wrote...

Give me 2 examples where Shep didn't do what you wanted and I'll help you out.

I'd have to go back and play it again to find those.

I'm not likely to do that.  I'll ask again with ME3.

I do recall a converation with Udina in ME that occurred just after finding Tali where Shepard made claims I didn't even believe were true, though I couldn't now tell you what they were.

I also didn't understand why, with Paragon generally established as the polite option, and Rengade as the rude option, Paragon options made Shepard act like such a dick toward the Illusive Man early in ME2.

The dialog is an input mask but the NPC's react to that dialog as it is written. That's why no matter how you say or want to say X or Y the people you speak to will always repsond properly ONLY to the written dialog.

Sure, but those reactions aren't part of gameplay.  The choice - that's gameplay.

There is no way to save Recliffe in the name of power and selfish interests.

Sure there is.

There's no way to make the NPCs around you understand that's why you're doing it (though I can't imagine why you would want to admit that), but you can't control people's thoughts in the real world either, so I don't see the problem.

You can not create that reality no matter how much you want to pretend you can in your mind. The notion that the printed dialog is less restrictive than the VA dialog is silly. In both cases writers control how your character acts. You are just oblivious to that.

Do the writers control how my character speaks and exactly what he says in Oblivion (keyword dialogue).  In Ultima IV, does my character really just bark out one word at a time?

Of course not.  Because those keywords and parsed text are an abstraction.

Why would you view the full sentence options in DAO differently?

[Riona45]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I also didn't understand why, with Paragon generally established as the polite option, and Rengade as the rude option, Paragon options made Shepard act like such a dick toward the Illusive Man early in ME2.

I probably won't change your mind about this (and that isn't really my intent), but as far as I could tell the Paragon options were never always polite; they often expressed moral outrage as well.  The idea behind the Paragon options with TIM were that you, as a morally upright character, were disgusted at having no choice but to work with him.  I get that you wanted more of a choice in how to react, but I'm just explaining why Paragon's Shepard's tone wasn't so surprising to me.

Modifié par Riona45, 27 septembre 2010 - 07:09 .

[Sidney]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I'm not likely to do that.  I'll ask again with ME3.

I also didn't understand why, with Paragon generally established as the polite option, and Rengade as the rude option, Paragon options made Shepard act like such a dick toward the Illusive Man early in ME2.

There's no way to make the NPCs around you understand that's why you're doing it (though I can't imagine why you would want to admit that), but you can't control people's thoughts in the real world either, so I don't see the problem.

So this issue bothered you so much you can't come up with any examples, good job. Heck I can come up with some from DAO and those things didn't bother me that much.

Paragon isn't "polite" is is the "do the right thing for the right reason" and TIM isn't usually doing either the right thing nor doing it for the right reason.

If I say "F the people I want the help of the Arl" that isn't open to a lot of misinterpretation. As for why, well I'm role playing as a power hungry, self-centered SoB who is the male version of Morrigan so that seems fairly consistent with who I am.

You want to have extra-game dialog to expand upon things in the input masks but now you claim that well, people won't respond to them. I can't control thoughts but I can control how I explain things and I would expect people who seem to show no other particular learning disability to be able to properly respond to clear messages....well I would if I could expect them to respond to anything other than the dialog provided by the writers.

Is your arguyment at this point that you do not care what the reactions of the NPC's are as long as you can pretend whatever you want? If you ask "What day is it" and the NPC says "Yams" do you just write that off as not having mind control?

[Riona45]

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...
Oddly, big ME fans seem to have better luck enjoying DAO than vice versa.  I love both.

You can also put me down as someone who loves both.

[aaniadyen]

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...
I love both.

I'm a big fan of flexibility, personally. Reach is great too, though.

Modifié par aaniadyen, 27 septembre 2010 - 12:23 .

[KillTheLastRomantic]

"Gritty of tone and fluffy of facial hair, he’s an obvious badass in a way Origins’ user-defined specimens could never be. This is Dragon Age as viewed through Mass Effect glasses, and Hawk is your Commander Shepard."

Oh dear.

[Saibh]

Riona45 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I also didn't understand why, with Paragon generally established as the polite option, and Rengade as the rude option, Paragon options made Shepard act like such a dick toward the Illusive Man early in ME2.

I probably won't change your mind about this (and that isn't really my intent), but as far as I could tell the Paragon options were never always polite; they often expressed moral outrage as well.  The idea behind the Paragon options with TIM were that you, as a morally upright character, were disgusted at having no choice but to work with him.  I get that you wanted more of a choice in how to react, but I'm just explaining why Paragon's Shepard's tone wasn't so surprising to me.

Actually, I always found Renegade Shepard's reactions to be out of character. I understand why he'd be willing to work with Cerberus, but Renegade Shep is nothing but a jerkass to everyone for the most inane reasons he can come up with. But when TIM sends you to Freedom's Progress, what is his reaction? "I'll be back before you know it!" all cheerful and polite.

What. I would have expected a little suspicious. I would expect at least some aggression, which is the defining trait of being Jerkass Shepard.

Modifié par Saibh, 27 septembre 2010 - 04:41 .

[Kyenne]

Oddly enough, despite usually siding with TIM, Renegade Shep is way more pissed off when led into the trap on the Collector ship, whereas Paragon Shep is all "I suppose he had his reasons..." I'm not sure they have entirely coherent personalities, actually.

[AbsolutGrndZer0]

Awesome, it said they are going to have options that let you hit a button to do an action during a cutscene, ala Mass Effect's 2's Paragon/Renegade Actions. That will be awesome

[Wyndham711]

I have friends who love the nature of Mass Effect so much that it really blinds them. They can't dissect the game anymore. The way it makes roleplaying largely impossible, for example, is either a seemingly forced non-issue or completely denied.

The magnitude in which they enjoy the setting, the story, the shooting and the audiovisual package makes them either oblivious or dismissive about the obvious shortcomings of the game in terms of roleplaying.

[Sylvius the Mad]

[quote]Sidney wrote...

So this issue bothered you so much you can't come up with any examples, good job.[/quote]
A good example would be the exact text, and no, I don't have that handy.

It's been many months since I played ME, and I stopped trying to roleplay in ME2 after that paragon/renegade mix-up with TIM (so I no longer cared about the dialogue failures).
[quote]Paragon isn't "polite" is is the "do the right thing for the right reason" and TIM isn't usually doing either the right thing nor doing it for the right reason. [/quote]
But what is "the right reason"?  That was never defined for us.  Nothing about tyhe paragon/renegade dichotomy was ever edfined for us.  Certainly not in a way that was useful.
[quote]

If I say "F the people I want the help of the Arl" that isn't open to a lot of misinterpretation. As for why, well I'm role playing as a power hungry, self-centered SoB who is the male version of Morrigan so that seems fairly consistent with who I am.[/quote]
I can't imagine why you'd want to be so open about not caring about the people, given that the person whose help you do want holds his position specifically to help the people.

Yes, if I adopt a persona that makes no sense within the setting, the game would tend to fall apart.
[quote]You want to have extra-game dialog to expand upon things in the input masks but now you claim that well, people won't respond to them. I can't control thoughts but I can control how I explain things and I would expect people who seem to show no other particular learning disability to be able to properly respond to clear messages....well I would if I could expect them to respond to anything other than the dialog provided by the writers.[/quote]
Why not have those conversations later, off-screen?  I DAO characters often take their companions aside to sort of misunderstandings.  It just doesn't happen on-screen (just like eating and sleeping also don't happen on-screen, but they still occur).
[quote]Is your arguyment at this point that you do not care what the reactions of the NPC's are as long as you can pretend whatever you want? If you ask "What day is it" and the NPC says "Yams" do you just write that off as not having mind control?[/quote]
Yes.
[quote]Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...

Paragon and renegade arereally hard to define. I'm not sure you can define them in a simple, coherent 100% accurate fashion.[/quote]
Then they're not useful as a gameplay mechanic.
[quote]Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...

What I don't get is why you can treat whole written sentences as abstractions but not whole spoken sentences.[/quote]
Maybe I could if I were permitted to choose those sentences to suit the character I was playing.

I very much mope the DA2 writers do a vastly superior job at writing those paraphrased wheel options.  Because ME sucked at it.
[quote]One word answers, sure. It's obvious my character says more than just one word. But a full sentence that completely relays my meaning? Why treat that as an abstraction?[/quote]
Because it might not completely relay your meaning.
[quote]Also, tone doesn't completely eliminate roleplaying though I admit it does hamper it as you can't do whatever you can imagine.  You still generally do have more than one choice.[/quote] 
Again, the problem in ME was more that we didn't know what those choices were.
[quote]Here's an example. My paragade hates batarians with a blind fury. When she comes across that batarian dying of plague in the slums who insults her, her gut reaction is to let him die in a pool of his own blood. However, she also mostly is a good person and tries to do the right then and recognizes on some level that that isn't right. This still isn't sufficient reason to motivate her to help the batarian in this case. The only way for her to do it is to find some way to get her hate to motivate her. Thus she helps him and puts on a show of sympathy, but all the while she is thinking "See. I did the right thing anyway. This proves I am better than this racist pig." All she is interested in doing is proving her own superiority to herself. It comes out a paragon choice but her reasoning is pretty dark. That I get paragon points for it is just a game mechanic I can ignore.[/quote]
And that's great.  That's exactly how I play.  I do what I think the character would do, and I do it for reasons that I think make sense for the character.

As soon as the game decides why I'm doing something, I'm no longer playing the game.  I'm just watching it.
[quote]Saibh wrote...

Actually, I always found Renegade Shepard's reactions to be out of character. I understand why he'd be willing to work with Cerberus, but Renegade Shep is nothing but a jerkass to everyone for the most inane reasons he can come up with. But when TIM sends you to Freedom's Progress, what is his reaction? "I'll be back before you know it!" all cheerful and polite.

What. I would have expected a little suspicious. I would expect at least some aggression, which is the defining trait of being Jerkass Shepard.[/quote]
I wanted to be all cheerful and polite to TIM.  He was clearly in complete control of the situation, so antagonising him seemed like a dumb thing to do.  So I picked Paragon options, hoping those would be all obsequious like they were when dealing with the council in ME.

Apparently not.
[quote]Wyndham711 wrote...

I have friends who love the nature of Mass Effect so much that it really blinds them. They can't dissect the game anymore. The way it makes roleplaying largely impossible, for example, is either a seemingly forced non-issue or completely denied.

The magnitude in which they enjoy the setting, the story, the shooting and the audiovisual package makes them either oblivious or dismissive about the obvious shortcomings of the game in terms of roleplaying.[/quote]
There are many things ME and ME2 do very well.  The atmosphere in parts of the game is wonderful (the Reaper corpse in ME2, for example).  I also enjoyed the level design for much of ME, particularly all the outdoor combat areas.   But there are things I thought were really dumb (like the final boss monster in ME2 - bosses like that are reason I don't play games like God of War).

The main change that I noticed between ME and ME2 was the level designs, and ME2's levels were far less good.  Most of them were completely linear.  Compare that to the infiltration mission on Virmire in ME where there were three different paths to approach Saren's base, and two different entrances (which placed you inside at different locations).  That was good level design.  It would have been particularly good when combined with ME2's XP system (which I really liked).

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Pretty much play the same way you do Sylvius and I agree. Its the main reason I just couldn't get into ME2 from a role playing perspective because there felt to be very little roleplaying in the game.

[AlanC9]

Wyndham711 wrote...

I have friends who love the nature of Mass Effect so much that it really blinds them. They can't dissect the game anymore. The way it makes roleplaying largely impossible, for example, is either a seemingly forced non-issue or completely denied.
The magnitude in which they enjoy the setting, the story, the shooting and the audiovisual package makes them either oblivious or dismissive about the obvious shortcomings of the game in terms of roleplaying.

IOW, some gamers don't value the particular kind of RPG you value. This is hardly surprising.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

Wyndham711 wrote...

I have friends who love the nature of Mass Effect so much that it really blinds them. They can't dissect the game anymore. The way it makes roleplaying largely impossible, for example, is either a seemingly forced non-issue or completely denied.
The magnitude in which they enjoy the setting, the story, the shooting and the audiovisual package makes them either oblivious or dismissive about the obvious shortcomings of the game in terms of roleplaying.

IOW, some gamers don't value the particular kind of RPG you value. This is hardly surprising.

He didn't say ME2 was a poor RPG.  He said it lacked roleplaying oppotunities.

That's a different thing, as it doesn't rely on any particular definition of RPG (which we know is a contentious issue).

[AlanC9]

I didn't say it was a poor RPG either. Just that it was a different kind of RPG.

[Gvaz]

Here's why you play a human! Because you're actually Morrigan's child!



Also if that's the actual reveal someone needs to jump off a cliff.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...

Shep has certain default characteristics that you just have to account for. 

But you can't account for them because you don't know what they are.

Maybe on a second playthrough you could do that, but the first time through there's no way for the player to know these things.

The system has a high learning curve.

WIthout any adequate documentation it's damn near vertical.

I think the idea behind ME is that the devs want people to go with their "gut" reaction to things.

I am strongly of the opinion that gut reactions are a weakness to be suppressed.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 28 septembre 2010 - 06:38 .

[DPB]

GvazElite wrote...

Here's why you play a human! Because you're actually Morrigan's child!

Also if that's the actual reveal someone needs to jump off a cliff.

Already denied, and it's not possible either, since the timelines don't match up. DA2 starts part way through DAO, when Hawke is an adult.

Modifié par dbankier, 28 septembre 2010 - 06:42 .

[ErichHartmann]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...



I am strongly of the opinion that gut reactions are a weakness to be suppressed.

That tells me you have no natural instincts. I had no problem "reading between the lines" of dialogue and having Shepard follow my path as the player.

[Sylvius the Mad]

ErichHartmann wrote...

That tells me you have no natural instincts. I had no problem "reading between the lines" of dialogue and having Shepard follow my path as the player.

You were guessing, and any success you had was unsustainable luck.

Or, the path you chose was vague or poorly defined.

[Riona45]

Wyndham711 wrote...

I have friends who love the nature of Mass Effect so much that it really blinds them. They can't dissect the game anymore. The way it makes roleplaying largely impossible, for example, is either a seemingly forced non-issue or completely denied.
The magnitude in which they enjoy the setting, the story, the shooting and the audiovisual package makes them either oblivious or dismissive about the obvious shortcomings of the game in terms of roleplaying.

So?  What's your point, that they should stop having fun?