196 réponses à ce sujet

[Addai]

In Exile wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Games with a fixed character have no replay value for me.  Not sure what you are talking about.

You are saying here that having an entirely different character is irrelevant because party composition would make such a character redundant. But you somehow value completely identical content with the only justification being the RP experience. How does an entirely different character not fit under the same umbrella?

This is what I'm confused about. It seems that the reason you dislike a fixed PC ought to be the reason you would think Carver/Beth is important.

Well uh, for one thing, "completely identical content" is your hyperbole about Origins and not reality.

For me, the value in the replays was figuring out who my character was.  A fixed character, once I figure out who they are, it seems disingenuous to replay just to see what might have happened.  I might play and reload and certain parts to see that, but not make a whole new Geralt, Shepard or Hawke.

[In Exile]

Addai67 wrote...

And he always becomes champion of Kirkwall, saves the world etc.  That's pretty fixed.

...Is that different than always becoming a Grey Warden and defeating the Blight? I would have thought it's the VO you'd object to, not the fact the narrative is as on-rails as origins.

[upsettingshorts]

Addai67 wrote...

And he always becomes champion of Kirkwall, saves the world etc.  That's pretty fixed.

And the Grey Warden always shoulders the responsibility of uniting Ferelden to end the Blight.  That's pretty fixed too. 

Edit: I was going to add an edit to bring up the VO, but In Exile covered that.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 décembre 2010 - 05:22 .

[In Exile]

Addai67 wrote...
Well uh, for one thing, "completely identical content" is your hyperbole about Origins and not reality.

I should have said practically identical, then, since after a roughly 30 minute unique piece of content, you have 60 hours of content that are indentical with the exception of maybe 20 minutes of unique content left for your PC based on origin, which out of a 60 hour game amounts to perhaps 1.5% of the total game.

That's pretty identical to me. I'd bet you get as much unique content in DA2 just by varying Hawke's personality.

For me, the value in the replays was figuring out who my character was.  A fixed character, once I figure out who they are, it seems disingenuous to replay just to see what might have happened.  I might play and reload and certain parts to see that, but not make a whole new Geralt, Shepard or Hawke.

But it does. Renegade Shepard is not Paragon Shepard. Geralt is pretty fixed - but even so, you can three distinct philosophical beliefs for Geralt. Hell, much of the game is about Geralt figuring out who he is. And he can be tree different, if highly similar, people at the end of the game.

I'd get a complaint about VO, but saying that the character is the same person independent of the choices you make is wrong, unless you happen to think something else entirely beyond beliefs + reasons + actions that you all pick for that character make a character unique.

[Addai]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

And he always becomes champion of Kirkwall, saves the world etc.  That's pretty fixed.

And the Grey Warden always shoulders the responsibility of uniting Ferelden to end the Blight.  That's pretty fixed too. 

Edit: I was going to add an edit to bring up the VO, but In Exile covered that.

The Grey Warden always ends the Blight, but is not always the same person doing it.  Race, background, and voice might seem like irrelevant choices to you, but are an important part of characterization.  Once those are also fixed, I don't need several replays to see a few differences here and there in how the character arrives at the same place he always arrives.

[In Exile]

Addai67 wrote...
  Race, background, and voice might seem like irrelevant choices to you, but are an important part of characterization.  Once those are also fixed, I don't need several replays to see a few differences here and there in how the character arrives at the same place he always arrives.

That's a limitation on your part. There's a give and take between invent motives and having the game recognize them, which means some level of predefined (i.e. origins) versus some level of creative freedom, and we all have our preference for where that is, but saying it's hard to roleplay Shepard out of a dichotomous box is different than saying Shepard is fixed, which isn't true. 

[upsettingshorts]

Addai67 wrote...

The Grey Warden always ends the Blight, but is not always the same person doing it.

And how do you know there isn't significant variation within the Champion of Kirkwall storyline?

Addai67 wrote...

Race, background, and voice might seem like irrelevant choices to you, but are an important part of characterization. 

I didn't say they weren't important. 

Addai67 wrote...

Once those are also fixed, I don't need several replays to see a few differences here and there in how the character arrives at the same place he always arrives.

However they are primarily aesthetic differences.  If we remove the origin stories as they were self contained anyway and consider the middle bulk of the game - there wasn't a ton of variation either. 

This is purely speculation on my part, but I genuinely expect that the replayability and choice we covet has simply been moved.  In Origins, that choice was in the beginning and to a lesser extent the end.  In DA2, I wouldn't be surprised if it's mostly in the middle and to a lesser extent the end. 

In Exile wrote...

but saying it's hard to roleplay Shepard out of a dichotomous box is different than saying Shepard is fixed, which isn't true. 

I do that.  By cheating my Paragon/Renegade!  Begone, false dichotomies!

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 décembre 2010 - 05:32 .

[Addai]

In Exile wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
Well uh, for one thing, "completely identical content" is your hyperbole about Origins and not reality.

I should have said practically identical, then, since after a roughly 30 minute unique piece of content, you have 60 hours of content that are indentical with the exception of maybe 20 minutes of unique content left for your PC based on origin, which out of a 60 hour game amounts to perhaps 1.5% of the total game.

That's pretty identical to me. I'd bet you get as much unique content in DA2 just by varying Hawke's personality.

Since I spend the whole game trying to work out how my character's unique background affects the choices she makes, it's 60 hours worth of unique content to me.  My HNF and my Dalish PC both ended the werewolf curse, but their perception of it is very different.

Now I suppose I'll hear some patronizing crap about how it was all only in my head.  Spare me.

But it does. Renegade Shepard is not Paragon Shepard. Geralt is pretty fixed - but even so, you can three distinct philosophical beliefs for Geralt. Hell, much of the game is about Geralt figuring out who he is. And he can be tree different, if highly similar, people at the end of the game.

It doesn't.  Paragon Shepard is dull as a board and I have no desire to play that route.  I only started enjoying ME when I started playing it as a renegade, because to me that is the only way Shepard works.  I'm not going to replay just to see what few minor differences here and there might have cropped up, especially since you always arrive at the same place anyway.

Now it's possible that they may use the same background and same VA and make female Hawke so compelling that I'd want to play two characters (don't really like playing as a male), but... I'm doubtful.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

What precisely about Hawke is fixed? Origin, race, and voice?

The voice is likely to be the only part that causes me any difficulty.  I'm not at all confident Hawke will be able to be meaningfully different from one generated character to the next.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The voice is likely to be the only part that causes me any difficulty.  I'm not at all confident Hawke will be able to be meaningfully different from one generated character to the next.

Possibly.  I expect that - at least as far as Bioware's intents are concerned - it is possible to play at least three, six if you consider sex - fairly different Hawkes (think of the personality traits the game tracks).  However, that is of course limiting in its own way because consistently angry or consistently sarcastic isn't, in of itself, really a character .

[uuuhcantthinkofaname]

Tamyn wrote...

I wish the family's eye colors and hair colors changed with yours, not just their skin. My Hawke is still going to stand out obviously. And what is a "body style"? Will being a warrior or mage cause the sibs to gain or lose muscle mass?

What does eye color or hair color have to do with anything? My big Brother and I have dark hair and dark eyes/olive complection while my twin sister and big sister both have light orange and green eyes/pale complection.

[Addai]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

This is purely speculation on my part, but I genuinely expect that the replayability and choice we covet has simply been moved.  In Origins, that choice was in the beginning and to a lesser extent the end.  In DA2, I wouldn't be surprised if it's mostly in the middle and to a lesser extent the end. 

I'm only speculating too, but I'm putting replayability at just above what it is for ME and TW, which is to say I might play a few partial pt's to see rogue gameplay, or this or that difference, but have one essential run.

Which is one of the reasons why I'm so loath to pay 60 bucks for much less game.  I felt burned by paying 40 bucks for Awakening, but at least there I was interested to see how my various PCs would experience it.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
The voice is likely to be the only part that causes me any difficulty.  I'm not at all confident Hawke will be able to be meaningfully different from one generated character to the next.

Hawke can have three different personalities. That's three different people.

Addai67 wrote...
Since I spend the whole game trying to work
out how my character's unique background affects the choices she makes,
it's 60 hours worth of unique content to me.  My HNF and my Dalish PC
both ended the werewolf curse, but their perception of it is very
different.

Now I suppose I'll hear some patronizing crap about
how it was all only in my head.  Spare me.

Why would I? There is a difference between determining motives and judging PC VO to silent VO.

What you did is what role-play is. Having a baseline concept, and asking yourself, who does this mean I (as the character, not you the person) am?

What I am going to object to is that this is any less possible with a voiced PC with a fixed background.

In BG, you had a fixed background but not voice. Does that give less roleplaying freedom than DA:O? Maybe, maybe not.

But to say that you can't do this at all in DA2 is just wrong. Again, we can argue about a cut-off, and we can argue about the right amount to have a true RPG, but one thing that isn't true is that Hawke or Shepard must be one and only one person.

Hell, the best counter-example I can give you is that in ME1 Shepard can either be a racist or not. That's a hell of a difference.

Addai67 wrote...
It doesn't.  Paragon Shepard is dull as a
board and I have no desire to play that route.  I only started enjoying
ME when I started playing it as a renegade, because to me that is the
only way Shepard works.  I'm not going to replay just to see what few
minor differences here and there might have cropped up, especially since
you always arrive at the same place anyway.

If you think Paragon Shepard is dull, that doesn't mean anything.

It's like me saying I think elves and dwarves suck and mages are unrealistic, so I only played human nobles, therefore DA:O has a fixed protagonist. It's just not a coherent way to think.

There aren't "minor" differences, because in terms of content, you have the same variability as you do in DA:O.

But you have widely different Shepards.

A Renegade Colonist Ruthless Shepard is someone who lost his/her familiy to slavers and threw his/her squad into a meatgrinder to murder Batarian slavers out of nothing more than hatred for what happened. This is a human supremacist Shepard who wants nothing more than a human dominated galaxy.

A Paragon Spacer War Hero Shepard is someone who grew up in a military family admiring his/her parents, and who heroically saved a world during the Skyllian Blitz. This is a consumate hero who always saves the day, who always chooses the hard path, so that everyone can go home happy. This is someone who believers in galactic peace and stability, over and above human interests.

You could not have more different people. Yeah, you can't have a lot of characters, and you can't vary the concept as much as in DA:O, but saying that Shepard is the same person just means you're wrong.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Possibly.  I expect that - at least as far as Bioware's intents are concerned - it is possible to play at least three, six if you consider sex - fairly different Hawkes (think of the personality traits the game tracks).  However, that is of course limiting in its own way because consistently angry or consistently sarcastic isn't, in of itself, really a character.

And even if we accept that those are characters, there's no telling whether the 3-6 characters you describe are characters any one player would enjoy playing.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

And even if we accept that those are characters, there's no telling whether the 3-6 characters you describe are characters any one player would enjoy playing.

That is, as In Exile points out, also true of the origins in DA:O.  A background, in of itself, isn't a character either. 

Like an attitude - the way Hawkes differ - an origin is part of the equation.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 décembre 2010 - 05:45 .

[Addai]

In Exile wrote...

If you think Paragon Shepard is dull, that doesn't mean anything.

It's like me saying I think elves and dwarves suck and mages are unrealistic, so I only played human nobles, therefore DA:O has a fixed protagonist. It's just not a coherent way to think.

This is why I should know better than to even respond to your posts.

[upsettingshorts]

Addai67 wrote...

This is why I should know better than to even respond to your posts.

...what's unreasonable about his counterargument?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That is, as In Exile points out, also true of the origins in DA:O.  A background, in of itself, isn't a character either. 

But DAO also granted a ton of freedom within the origins.  If the DAO mage reports Jowan to Irving, why is he doing it?  In DA2 I fear there would be only one answer.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
But DAO also granted a ton of freedom within the origins.  If the DAO mage reports Jowan to Irving, why is he doing it?  In DA2 I fear there would be only one answer.

Why? If you kill the Rachni, even if Shepard says something like 'I can't let allow you to survive, it's too dangerous'' - there could be lots of reasons Shepard thinks this. Maybe Shepard wants to use SPECTRE status to become a politican later on - saving the Rachni could be politically dangerous. Maybe Shepard is a racist, and thinks the Rachni will threaten human supremacy. Maybe Shepard just thinks they're dangerous to the entire galaxy.

Lots of ways you can play it.

[In Exile]

Addai67 wrote...

In Exile wrote...

If you think Paragon Shepard is dull, that doesn't mean anything.

It's like me saying I think elves and dwarves suck and mages are unrealistic, so I only played human nobles, therefore DA:O has a fixed protagonist. It's just not a coherent way to think.

This is why I should know better than to even respond to your posts.

Huh? I'm not saying I think this (that would be stupid). I'm saying your argument, that Shepard is fxied because you don't like the options, doesn't mean anything. It's like saying DA:O is fixed if you only like and play 1 of 5 origins.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

Why? If you kill the Rachni, even if Shepard says something like 'I can't let allow you to survive, it's too dangerous'' - there could be lots of reasons Shepard thinks this. Maybe Shepard wants to use SPECTRE status to become a politican later on - saving the Rachni could be politically dangerous. Maybe Shepard is a racist, and thinks the Rachni will threaten human supremacy. Maybe Shepard just thinks they're dangerous to the entire galaxy.

Lots of ways you can play it.

You happened to choose the one of two choices in ME that I think really works from a roleplaying perspective (the other is whether to save the council, which I didn't used to count because I didn't realise that was actually an option).

But I also think that choice is damaged somewhat by the resulting utterance you quoted.  The player can't know why Shepard said that without some post hoc rationalisation.  Why did Shepard say anything at all there?  Is there a reason why Shepard felt the need to justify his decision to the Rachni?

In Exile wrote...

Huh? I'm not saying I think this (that would be stupid). I'm saying your argument, that Shepard is fxied because you don't like the options, doesn't mean anything. It's like saying DA:O is fixed if you only like and play 1 of 5 origins.

I do think you're right about this, though.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
You happened to choose the one of two choices in ME that I think really works from a roleplaying perspective (the other is whether to save the council, which I didn't used to count because I didn't realise that was actually an option).

There are lots of great choices on Noveria. Take getting a garage pass. You can turn in goods to the Administrator, help Lorik Quin but not get him to testify, help Gianna, turn in Gianna to the Adminstrator... lots of different outcomes.

Another quest is one where you are approached to spy on a Binary Helix employee. You can either spy or not and actually betray the person. Lots of reasons why Shepard would do this. Because he was offended at being treated like a lackey, because he was a human supremacist and wanted to undermine Asari authority; lots of reasons why he might not - for example that Binary Helix appears implicated with Saren and there are good reasons to undermine them.

In ME2, you can even interpret the apparently harsher frothing at the mouth choices that way (except for the AI one with EDI - that's just Shepard going nuts like with the Council).

But I also think that choice is damaged somewhat by the resulting utterance you quoted.  The player can't know why Shepard said that without some post hoc rationalisation.  Why did Shepard say anything at all there?  Is there a reason why Shepard felt the need to justify his decision to the Rachni?

I don't think so. Or rather, I don't think it's any different from any situation where the line of dialogue is not written satisfactorily. But I suppose we will disagree because you don't feel bound by written dialogue as speech.

[Dagiz]

My advice is that if you dislike what you hear about the game so far, don't buy it.  Wait a year, get people's impressions, have the bugs worked out and than go and buy the game.  I am amazed at the the number of people who continually post that they hate what happened to a particular game, whether it's DA, ME, NWN, BG, IWD, uh, or any other franchise type game because it does not fit what they wanted in the game.  Reality is that while you may be a consumer and buying goods from this particular company, the company is going to do what they see and what they feel is in the best interest for this particular license.  And if someone doens't like it, feel free to let them know...but really does it have to be EVERY thread with a preview or of someone saying they like a particular piece of the game?

/rant off (for now)

As far as this preview goes, seeing the previews now from RPG type sites and knowing that what I value in a game is closely aligned to the indivduals that run these sites, I can say I am looking more and more foreward to the release of the game. 

Afterall, it is going to beat reading on Biology, Physics, and Environemntal Science. 

Modifié par Dagiz, 22 décembre 2010 - 06:41 .

[Addai]

In Exile wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

In Exile wrote...

If you think Paragon Shepard is dull, that doesn't mean anything.

It's like me saying I think elves and dwarves suck and mages are unrealistic, so I only played human nobles, therefore DA:O has a fixed protagonist. It's just not a coherent way to think.

This is why I should know better than to even respond to your posts.

Huh? I'm not saying I think this (that would be stupid). I'm saying your argument, that Shepard is fxied because you don't like the options, doesn't mean anything. It's like saying DA:O is fixed if you only like and play 1 of 5 origins.

I'm referring to your dismissive tone.  But it's true, I don't care much about the ME universe and care even less about Shepard so I'm just not going to delve, but by your own reasoning none of the backgrounds offered for Shepard affect the game much.  A few mentions here and there, a meaningless quest thrown in related to the "origin."  Add to that the VO and yes, not a replayable character to me.  What does it matter if you save the council or not?  The game goes on as before with only a few color highlights different here or there.

[upsettingshorts]

Addai67 wrote...
The game goes on as before with only a few color highlights different here or there.

That is how I view DA:O's origins once reaching Ostagar.