885 réponses à ce sujet

[Nighteye2]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Nighteye2 wrote...

AngryPants wrote...
I have never presumed the protagonist was virtual "me" even when I was trying to play him as close to "me" as possible.  He was and always will be the writer's character.

Is it still role-playing if you don't make that presumption? What role do you play when the distance between yourself and the game is so big?

The very essence of RPGs is that players identify themselves with a virtual character that they go on an adventure with. A game in which they literally play a role. The genre started at the tabletop, and when computers started emulating tabletop RPGs, that is when the concept of a CRPG was born. By their very definition, CRPGs are computer simulations of tabletop RPGs. Games in which the computer assists players in role-playing a virtual character in a virtual setting. It's not role-playing if it's not your character.

/semantics

Bogus. It's role playing so long as the character replaces you. I say this is done numerically and mechanically. Others will insist that you must have customization. So I'm not going to argue distinction except to say that you are role playing if the character being played is not yourself. (physically, skills, personality, whatever you choose to apply here makes no difference to me for the purpose of the semantics) The important distinction here is that a limitation on what you are able to take and roleplay with is not a limitation on what someone else can take and roleplay with.

But you would have to be able to role-play for it to be an RPG. You have to be the one to play your character, instead of merely giving instructions through which your character is being played for you. Agency is key.

[the_one_54321]

Read your signature. Apply it to what you just said.

[Ulicus]

Yeah, they're worth it. And the Warden /was/ voiced anyway. God... that cocky human male voice drove me insane. That's the last time I judge a voice based on the first sample. "How do you do?" Awesome. Perfectly fit the conception of the character.

Everything else? BLEAJRIAHFUNEGU(AHVAU(HFUIQAHWVU(HFU(AHN IAUFAUICHENIVONLAG.

Modifié par Ulicus, 24 novembre 2010 - 10:58 .

[Ziggeh]

Random curiosity:

For those who play RPGs from the first person (ie: oppose VO for overiding their character concept), how did you treat the combat speech in Origins? The "can't do that yet" one.

Obviously it doesn't affect the way in which you say things, which is the main VO issue, but it does apply a certain amount of characterisation. Do you absorb this, much like the backstory, or ignore it? (I often found myself wondering who was saying it, it tends to drown out after a while, coming back when you're not paying attention)

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 25 novembre 2010 - 01:58 .

[Ryzaki]

^I got a mod to remove it. That or I just ignored it.

[LilKis1]

Ms. Lovely Dovey I see your a X-men fan. Who is your favorite X-men character? Mine is Emma Frost, Rogue, and Gambit! but back on topic I think a voice actor for Hawke is a great idea!

[Sylvius the Mad]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Random curiosity:

For those who play RPGs from the first person (ie: oppose VO for overiding their character concept), how did you treat the combat speech in Origins? The "can't do that yet" one.

First and foremost, I think the PC voice in DAO (or NWN or BG) was a bad idea.

But at least in those games we were permitted to choose from a list rather than just get saddled with one, and we were able to hear the voice before beginning to play which allowed us to adjust our characters to fit should there be no voice that allowed our original concept.

DAO probably did this the best of any BioWare game so far by offering more voice options, but ultimately I think they shouldn't have had one.

[Sidney]

Nighteye2 wrote...

But you would have to be able to role-play for it to be an RPG. You have to be the one to play your character, instead of merely giving instructions through which your character is being played for you. Agency is key.

You only give instructions to your character through which it is played for you. VO or NVO you only have  a set list of things you can say and even those "words" don't much matter because you are really just selecting an input mask/general intent for your character. Your agency is all about the outcome not the delivery. It doesn't matter rather you do select:
1. "Yes, poor peasant I DO value your life enough that I will come with you to save your village from certain doom" from a list of dialog options
 or select:
"Help you" from a radial menu and then get a VO that says "We cannot let your village be overun  by the evil hordes. We'll come and save you and all yeoman farmer friends from sure death"
In the end what you've selected is a the "do a good thing" option and the world and companions reaction to that simple concept and nothing more.

[vallore]

Sidney wrote...



You only give instructions to your character through which it is played for you. VO or NVO you only have  a set list of things you can say and even those "words" don't much matter because you are really just selecting an input mask/general intent for your character. Your agency is all about the outcome not the delivery. It doesn't matter rather you do select:
1. "Yes, poor peasant I DO value your life enough that I will come with you to save your village from certain doom" from a list of dialog options
 or select:
"Help you" from a radial menu and then get a VO that says "We cannot let your village be overun  by the evil hordes. We'll come and save you and all yeoman farmer friends from sure death"
In the end what you've selected is a the "do a good thing" option and the world and companions reaction to that simple concept and nothing more.

As I see it, the importance of dialogue is not only relevant inasmuch as a trigger of a given response. I would say it transcends that. The words themselves may not matter in relation to the game mechanics, but they do matter for many players at other level. It allows them to create an illusion of control and to customize the character to their liking. Therefore, allowing the players room to define how they see their respective characters and allowing them to shape the character’s interaction with the game world, within the confine of the game.

It has a similar role to the facial customization; even more redundant from a perspective of mechanics and the story itself, but how many players don’t prefer to have it to just play a generic looking character provided with the game?
As I see it, the result is, that the more you limit dialogue, the more the illusion of choice and control in the game creates is strained.

This is, I believe, the major problems with VA and the paraphrase: they constrain immensely the player’s illusion of choice and control. To the point that, to some, sometimes the character  no longer feels as the player’s but is just like another npc.

[Doveberry]

I love voices. For me, they add to my immersion. I felt very strange having such a silent character in Dragon Age after playing Mass Effect and getting used to the fantastic voice of Jennifer Hale. I like that my character will now have a chance to surprise me a little. It makes the character seem more alive, and it makes the conversations more exciting. I still control the general direction of the conversation, and the conversation wheel makes me feel as though my character actually has a personality of her own, rather than her being less of a character than her companions.

This isn't only about the voice; having a voiced character adds the possibility of a more cinematic experience. The character moves and speaks and fits in seamlessly in her environment. I certainly find that clicking a line that says "[Punch Him]" is infinitely more satisfying when your character actually does precisely that, and perhaps even delivers an awesome, cheesy one-liner while doing so.

Modifié par Doveberry, 25 novembre 2010 - 03:18 .

[vallore]

Doveberry wrote...

I love voices. For me, they add to my immersion. I felt very strange having such a silent character in Dragon Age after playing Mass Effect and getting used to the fantastic voice of Jennifer Hale.

Indeed.  I felt much the same about her performance, in my case because the style and personality it conveyed suited the way I wanted my Sheppard to be. On the other hand, I found the male VA a game breaker because it didn’t. A good example why I find VA limiting.

I still control the general direction of the conversation, and the conversation wheel makes me feel as though my character actually has a personality of her own, rather than her being less of a character than her companions.

I would point out that, so does the “laundry list,” and the later allows a greater degree of control for the player.

This isn't only about the voice; having a voiced character adds the possibility of a more cinematic experience. The character moves and speaks and fits in seamlessly in her environment. I certainly find that clicking a line that says "[Punch Him]" is infinitely more satisfying when your character actually does precisely that, and perhaps even delivers an awesome, cheesy one-liner while doing so.

Well, I would argue that the punch example doesn't address the wheel problems or virtues as it describes a straightforward action with no level to doubt. It could easy be implemented in the Laundry list also. The problem with the wheel is that we are often left to guess exactly what the character is going to say. The player effectively loses some degree of control with it’s implementation. Now, many people have no problem with it and that is fine, but the problem is real and is still not addressed and, to some, it hinders their enjoyment.

Modifié par vallore, 25 novembre 2010 - 05:09 .

[Nighteye2]

ziggehunderslash wrote...
Random curiosity:

For those who play RPGs from the first person (ie: oppose VO for overiding their character concept), how did you treat the combat speech in Origins? The "can't do that yet" one.

Combat speech? What combat speech?

I guess I filter it out, beyond the confirmation of my action.

[XX55XX]

I also believe that adding voice acting for the player character aids in giving a game more immersion, but however, I do also agree with those people who say that adding voice acting would make them feel less attached to the characters which they have created.

For example, as much as I love and adore Mass Effect, I simply do not identify with Shepard whatsoever. To me, Shepard was a character that I was given control over, not a character which I have created myself, and certainly not a character that I identify as a personal creation. All of this - thanks to the voice acting that broke my sense of ownership over "my Shepard".

On the other hand, my Warden in Dragon Age - I identify with her a lot, and it is thanks to the lack of voice acting that helps with this sort of immersion - ownership of a personal creation, a sense of one's avatar affecting the world of Thedas. With Mass Effect, Shepard is hardly any personal avatar of mine - he/she is simply another character I have control over.

[Nighteye2]

vallore wrote...

Sidney wrote...
You only give instructions to your character through which it is played for you. VO or NVO you only have  a set list of things you can say and even those "words" don't much matter because you are really just selecting an input mask/general intent for your character. Your agency is all about the outcome not the delivery. It doesn't matter rather you do select:
1. "Yes, poor peasant I DO value your life enough that I will come with you to save your village from certain doom" from a list of dialog options
 or select:
"Help you" from a radial menu and then get a VO that says "We cannot let your village be overun  by the evil hordes. We'll come and save you and all yeoman farmer friends from sure death"
In the end what you've selected is a the "do a good thing" option and the world and companions reaction to that simple concept and nothing more.

As I see it, the importance of dialogue is not only relevant inasmuch as a trigger of a given response. I would say it transcends that. The words themselves may not matter in relation to the game mechanics, but they do matter for many players at other level. It allows them to create an illusion of control and to customize the character to their liking. Therefore, allowing the players room to define how they see their respective characters and allowing them to shape the character’s interaction with the game world, within the confine of the game.

It has a similar role to the facial customization; even more redundant from a perspective of mechanics and the story itself, but how many players don’t prefer to have it to just play a generic looking character provided with the game?
As I see it, the result is, that the more you limit dialogue, the more the illusion of choice and control in the game creates is strained.

This is, I believe, the major problems with VA and the paraphrase: they constrain immensely the player’s illusion of choice and control. To the point that, to some, sometimes the character  no longer feels as the player’s but is just like another npc.

In a nutshell, yes. It may factually be an illusion of choice in many conversations, but that illusion has a lot of value of its own. I want to feel in control of my PC, knowing each and every word my PC is going to say before my PC actually 'says' the words. Knowing every action my PC is going to execute before my PC executes those actions. And having (limited) choice in the words and actions of the PC.

I also like, in some games, how the same choice can be made in different ways, with different words, allowing players to pick a wording closer to their intended character.

[bsbcaer]

XX55XX wrote...

I also believe that adding voice acting for the player character aids in giving a game more immersion, but however, I do also agree with those people who say that adding voice acting would make them feel less attached to the characters which they have created.

For example, as much as I love and adore Mass Effect, I simply do not identify with Shepard whatsoever. To me, Shepard was a character that I was given control over, not a character which I have created myself, and certainly not a character that I identify as a personal creation. All of this - thanks to the voice acting that broke my sense of ownership over "my Shepard".

On the other hand, my Warden in Dragon Age - I identify with her a lot, and it is thanks to the lack of voice acting that helps with this sort of immersion - ownership of a personal creation, a sense of one's avatar affecting the world of Thedas. With Mass Effect, Shepard is hardly any personal avatar of mine - he/she is simply another character I have control over.

I have to ask...how much do you think that the origins of each warden impacted your immersion?  Do you think tht you might have connected more to Shepard had you been able to play part of his/her background (eg. sole survivor) rather than just selecting it from a list?

[Sylvius the Mad]

bsbcaer wrote...

I have to ask...how much do you think that the origins of each warden impacted your immersion?  Do you think tht you might have connected more to Shepard had you been able to play part of his/her background (eg. sole survivor) rather than just selecting it from a list?

My feeling of ownership of Shepard (or lack thereof) was driven entirely by my ability to direct what she did and understand why she was doing it.

As ME was designed, Shepard was as inscrutable to me as any NPC.  As such, I didn't feel engaged in the game at all.

[bsbcaer]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

bsbcaer wrote...

I have to ask...how much do you think that the origins of each warden impacted your immersion?  Do you think tht you might have connected more to Shepard had you been able to play part of his/her background (eg. sole survivor) rather than just selecting it from a list?

My feeling of ownership of Shepard (or lack thereof) was driven entirely by my ability to direct what she did and understand why she was doing it.

As ME was designed, Shepard was as inscrutable to me as any NPC.  As such, I didn't feel engaged in the game at all.

Because tone is sometimes hard to guage in an internet posting, Im meaning this in good humour:  Sylvius, the way you post sometimes, it feels like your ultimate RPG PC is to be found on excel spreadsheets

In a more serious response, it seems like you almost liken Shepard in ME to Dirk the Daring in Dragon's Lair or Ace/Dexter in Space Ace...

[upsettingshorts]

My reductionist - and inaccurate - summary of Sylvius ideal experience actually involves him typing away at Microsoft Word. Just as I imagine the one for me is I should just watch a movie. Neither is particularly true, but it does get down to business about to each of us playing CRPGs what party we assume is "in control."

[Sylvius the Mad]

The spreadsheet description is probably more accurate, as I don't particularly want to write prose. Though I do want to know for sure what it is I'm doing (something numbers tend to provide).

Though I'm generally a bigger fan of Access databases than Excel spreadsheets for that sort of thing.

[In Exile]

If an excell spreadsheet is RP for Sylvius, and for Upsettingshorts a movie is RP, for me, acting is the metaphor of choice.

My position is different than, say, what shorts would argue. I think that psychological closeness to your character is absolutely crucial to an RPG. This is what to me demarcates an RPG from other games. I think customizability is an important aspect of this psychological closeness. So far, my position isn't so different from, say, Sylvius. Where we depart is on what best achieves that. To me, roleplay is acting versus any kind of more profound role-adoption. It is a very narrow kind of freedom. So for me, the character I felt most close to was Shepard. Shepard was far more my character than, for example, the Warden (in DA:O) or the Spirit Monk (in JE) or our resident Jedi (in KoTOR). In the way a method actor adopts his or her role, I adopt a role in RP. In the same way an actor might be allowed a narrow lattitude to change the story, this is how I view RP. It is a very bounded process.

[upsettingshorts]

That's a reasonably good description of my approach to the protagonist in CRPGs as well.  The movie metaphor is imperfect because it doesn't reflect that participation and customization within the boundaries of the story.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 25 novembre 2010 - 09:25 .

[In Exile]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That's a reasonably good description of my approach to the protagonist in CRPGs as well.  The movie metaphor is imperfect because it doesn't reflect that participation and customization within the boundaries of the story.

Also, frankly, it gives too much rhetorical ammunition given how unfortunately charged the topic is.  I like acting because, when you think about it, the actor makes the character in a lot of ways.

Say if we had Jennifer Hale instead of Claudia Black as Morrigan - even the same lines wouldn't have led to the same character. There is just that personal spin that an actor can, even when given stage directions, put on a certain character. Or a different example - Will Smith was almost Neo in the Matrix. That would not have been the same character as what Keanu Reeves brought to the table.

[Sylvius the Mad]

double post

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 25 novembre 2010 - 09:45 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

As I understand acting, I don't think Mass Effect allowed it.

To act, you need to have intimate knowledge of your character, and ME didn't offer any.

To act, you need to have some idea what your character is trying to schieve (for internal or external reasons), and ME wouldn't tell you that.

My Mass Effect experience is incompatible with the playstyle you are describing.

[upsettingshorts]

You didn't know Shepard's motivations in say, the Council Chambers in Mass Effect 1 after having heard the exposition by Anderson and Nihlus at the beginning and playing through Eden Prime?

Paragon and Renegade Shepards may have approached each situation differently, but they both in my view had enough to base their "performance" on, given the circumstances. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 25 novembre 2010 - 09:47 .