196 réponses à ce sujet

[Addai]

Dagiz wrote...

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)

And if you like it, just buy it.  Why does every thread have to be people saying they like this or that?

See, it works both ways.  It's called discussion and is what the forum is for.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

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.

But Shepard kept saying the wrong thing, so whatever my choices actually were didn't match what Shepard did to carry them out.

The Rachni works because it invoves choosing an action, not dialogue.

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.

The written dialogue options are just UI elements.  I don't feel bound by UI elements.

In-game action, sure, but not the game's interface.  I might find the UI distracting if it does stupid things or is poorly designed, but it doesn't tell me what's actually happening in the game.  My view of the game world does that.

[Addai]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

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.

And you're entitled to your opinion and to your experience of the game.  I'm assuming that it works both ways.

[Wissenschaft]

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.

You could say the exact same thing about DA:O. The origins really only provided minor differences in the story and you always arrived at the exact same places to advance the story.

Modifié par Wissenschaft, 22 décembre 2010 - 07:15 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

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

I expect that's true of everyone who waited for the game to define his character for him.

[Addai]

Wissenschaft wrote...
You could say the exact same thing about DA:O. The origins really only provided minor differences in the story and you always arrived at the exact same places to advance the story.

The starting material is significantly different, however.  Starting Shepard is always "hardened human military veteran."  With boring, flat VO.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I expect that's true of everyone who waited for the game to define his character for him.

Addai mentioned Shepard's origin in the context of ingame consequences and recognition, though.  And that is what I was responding to.  His background informing on decisions that have no obvious connection to it is a different matter entirely.

[In Exile]

Addai67 wrote...

I'm referring to your dismissive tone.

You say this as if you act any different.

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.

They don't. But why does that have an effect on roleplay? What I am saying is that if you think the mental state of the character is roleplay, that you can change that in ME2. It's not a fixed protagonist game. It's much more predefined than DA:O, but not fixed.

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.

So then the problem is just VO, because the content swap is the same.

[In Exile]

Addai67 wrote...
The starting material is significantly different, however.  Starting Shepard is always "hardened human military veteran."  With boring, flat VO.

That still doesn't matter. I had two mages in DA:O. Both humans. Both Circle mages. Not the same people.

[Wissenschaft]

Addai67 wrote...

Wissenschaft wrote...
You could say the exact same thing about DA:O. The origins really only provided minor differences in the story and you always arrived at the exact same places to advance the story.

The starting material is significantly different, however.  Starting Shepard is always "hardened human military veteran."  With boring, flat VO.

Ah, I enjoyed his VA. But thats the problem with VAs. Someone will like it and others will hate the voice. I'm personally fine either way, silent protaginist or voiced protaginist.

These two techniques in DA look to be the reverse of each other. In DA:O you had different origins but the journey was largely the same. In DA2, you have a set beginning but the journey to becoming champion sounds like it will be determined by you. 

If thats true then DA2 sounds like it will provide more freedom to determine who your Hawke is which is good news.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

So then the problem is just VO.

Combined with the other details of the conversations system that stem from the VO (paraphrase system, cinematic presentation), I'd say yes.  The voice-over is the root of all evil when it comes to roleplaying the PC.

Of course, that's just me.  I can't speak for others.

[Dagiz]

Addai67 wrote...

And if you like it, just buy it.  Why does every thread have to be people saying they like this or that?

See, it works both ways.  It's called discussion and is what the forum is for.

You are absolutely 100% correct. 

I guess what I was trying to get out is that there are indivudals who have consistently stated they do not like the direction the game is going and therefore continually use these forums as  platform to voice their displeasure - which is what they are here for, granted - on every single new topic that comes up.  And that is what I do not understand.

Those of us that do come here and try end up having to sift through pages of meaningless arguements on the merits of the dialogue options that are present and if the repsonse choices actually match up to what an individual sees as being the correct response despite the fact that the game makers have stated this what we are trying to accomplish and this is the direction they are going in, and individuals saying that the game makers are incorrect in their assertation of their vision of the game they are making.  And all I would like to do is read the discussion on how this all works and not read 10 pages of people bickering back and forth.  Of course there I am totally making something up, but if you look at it, that is exactly what happens.

It all boils down to a very large circular arguement, where with each "new" feature or design or development that is introduced in anyone of these previews or video blogs, the same people harp on the game.  Non stop.  All the time.  Every day.  And night.  And on weekends.  And during the holidays. 

Anyways, back on topic, or at least what it seems to have delved into.  Isn't the whole purpose of roleplay to define who or what you want to happen, happen?  Even if it's not what YOU would do, isn't the purpose to be what YOUR  CHARACTER would do?  I know in ME, I was playing Shepard.  How would my version of Shephard react to certain things?  By picking what ever preset I  had, that assisted in framing how I would play that particular character.  The hardend military type in my version really disliked fighting after seeing soo much bloodshed.  Therefore the actions I picked were done from that perspective.  Was I limited in what I wanted in some of the dialogue options?    Sure I was, but that is because Bioware can not anticipate how I would play a character and all the option that I would need.  To me, it doesn't mean the game is flawed.  

Ninja Edit Now the topic is on VO.  figures.  I admit I like the VO in some cases, but there are times when it does make it feel like it's not my character.  Which for a game like ME and now DA2 is the case.  I am playing my interpretation of what Bioware gives us as Hawke.  But Hawke will sound like how Bioware feels like Hawke should sound like...confusing I readily admit.

Modifié par Dagiz, 22 décembre 2010 - 07:43 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Dagiz wrote...

Was I limited in what I wanted in some of the dialogue options?    Sure I was, but that is because Bioware can not anticipate how I would play a character and all the option that I would need.  To me, it doesn't mean the game is flawed.  

I think the game was flawed in that its design required that BioWare do that very thing.  Because we were forced to have very specific reactions we weren't even shown in advance, they did need to anticipate everything I might want to do.

And as you say, that's impossible.  ME's design was guaranteed to fail.

A game that doesn't require the writers anticipate everythng the player might want to do is a better designed game, and I think DAO was that.

[Sigil_Beguiler123]

For myself what brings me out of the world and character is the lack of seeing my character really interact with the world. I see NPCs have dialogue, complex movements, etc. then there is me just standing there and not actually speaking the words.

For myself, the VO and cinematic approach makes it feel like the choices I make are actually carried out that I am directly involved in the world. It gives more weight to my character and her actions. Plus just in general I found myself caring more about Shepard then I ever did the Warden.

Modifié par Sigil_Beguiler123, 22 décembre 2010 - 07:46 .

[Wissenschaft]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

In Exile wrote...

So then the problem is just VO.

Combined with the other details of the conversations system that stem from the VO (paraphrase system, cinematic presentation), I'd say yes.  The voice-over is the root of all evil when it comes to roleplaying the PC.

Of course, that's just me.  I can't speak for others.

The paraphrase is not a big deal to me, silent PC don't say exactly what I would say anyway so theres hardly any difference in my view.

The fact is that DA2 is a story being told by Varric. The lines Hawke says are basicly what Varric claims hawke said. So its rather fitting we don't see the exact lines we are going to say because in truth its Varric that is coming up with the lines.

Modifié par Wissenschaft, 22 décembre 2010 - 07:47 .

[Dagiz]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Dagiz wrote...

Was I limited in what I wanted in some of the dialogue options?    Sure I was, but that is because Bioware can not anticipate how I would play a character and all the option that I would need.  To me, it doesn't mean the game is flawed.  

I think the game was flawed in that its design required that BioWare do that very thing.  Because we were forced to have very specific reactions we weren't even shown in advance, they did need to anticipate everything I might want to do.

And as you say, that's impossible.  ME's design was guaranteed to fail.

A game that doesn't require the writers anticipate everythng the player might want to do is a better designed game, and I think DAO was that.

In your opinion.   And I  would say to that, really, if it s a game about freedom of choice, I am not so sure you are going to find it in a CRPG.  There is only game that I  have played that I felt like I had total freedom in my choices.  And that was EVE.  

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
But Shepard kept saying the wrong thing, so whatever my choices actually were didn't match what Shepard did to carry them out.

That will always be the difference to us. We just do not see the same thing when it comes to expression.

The Rachni works because it invoves choosing an action, not dialogue.

The others also involved choosing an action.

The written dialogue options are just UI elements.  I don't feel bound by UI elements.

In-game action, sure, but not the game's interface.  I might find the UI distracting if it does stupid things or is poorly designed, but it doesn't tell me what's actually happening in the game.  My view of the game world does that.

The dialogue is the mental state of the character, and the lines are purely representative of that. The written dialogue is word for word what your character says.

[Addai]

Sigil_Beguiler123 wrote...
For myself, the VO and cinematic approach makes it feel like the choices I make are actually carried out that I am directly involved in the world. It gives more weight to my character and her actions. Plus just in general I found myself caring more about Shepard then I ever did the Warden.

That baffles me.  Shepard feels no more like my own character than Garrus (who's probably the only reason I'm playing ME, other than boredom, but I digress).  My game choices influence him, too.

[Addai]

Dagiz wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

And if you like it, just buy it.  Why does every thread have to be people saying they like this or that?

See, it works both ways.  It's called discussion and is what the forum is for.

You are absolutely 100% correct. 

I guess what I was trying to get out is that there are indivudals who have consistently stated they do not like the direction the game is going and therefore continually use these forums as  platform to voice their displeasure - which is what they are here for, granted - on every single new topic that comes up.  And that is what I do not understand.

Those of us that do come here and try end up having to sift through pages of meaningless arguements on the merits of the dialogue options that are present and if the repsonse choices actually match up to what an individual sees as being the correct response despite the fact that the game makers have stated this what we are trying to accomplish and this is the direction they are going in, and individuals saying that the game makers are incorrect in their assertation of their vision of the game they are making.  And all I would like to do is read the discussion on how this all works and not read 10 pages of people bickering back and forth.  Of course there I am totally making something up, but if you look at it, that is exactly what happens.

I can only speak for myself, but I'm here because I want to like the game and am looking for things to like.  Granted, I haven't found much, and I end up complaining a lot.  But it's only "meaningless" because you're not interested in it, just as I am not interested in reading page after page about Varric's chest hair or Fenris' sperm (lyrium spiked for pleasure!).

Naturally the game is what it is and no changes are going to be made at this point, and we're probably fooling ourselves that what we say here has any bearing on future stuff in the franchise, either.  Hope springs eternal, I guess?

P.S. If you really want to cut through the chatter and just get down to the nitty gritty of how things work, click on the BioWare icon below the thread title and you'll only see the dev posts.

Modifié par Addai67, 22 décembre 2010 - 08:08 .

[Hesham Shrifa]

To me I cared about them both, because they were both my characters, and I chose their decisions based on what I would have done if I was in their place, which is what made me emotionally attached to both.

[Sigil_Beguiler123]

Addai67 wrote...

Sigil_Beguiler123 wrote...
For myself, the VO and cinematic approach makes it feel like the choices I make are actually carried out that I am directly involved in the world. It gives more weight to my character and her actions. Plus just in general I found myself caring more about Shepard then I ever did the Warden.

That baffles me.  Shepard feels no more like my own character than Garrus (who's probably the only reason I'm playing ME, other than boredom, but I digress).  My game choices influence him, too.

I think it is for the reasons I said in my post. It is that with the VO, cinematic storytelling and such my Shepard I felt was more part of the world and those around her. When something happened both good and bad it to me had more of an impact because of this increase in interaction. There was just more oomph! to the storytelling thanks to VO and such which in turn made me care more about Shepard.

[In Exile]

Addai67 wrote...
That baffles me.  Shepard feels no more like my own character than Garrus (who's probably the only reason I'm playing ME, other than boredom, but I digress).  My game choices influence him, too.

It has to do with seeing the reaction. The dialogue wheel thread has a good description of the psychological experience of attachment to a video-game character. I simply cannot feel that the character is mine when the character has no voice or reaction, and I can't invent it because I'm constrained by the reality of the game. I would never - if actually given the creative freedom - create a character anything like what Origins allows us. RPGs just cannot support the sort of characters I would create. So I am always stuck with a predefined character, but in one case at least it is the kind of predefined I can feel attach to as a living character in the world.

[Addai]

Sigil_Beguiler123 wrote...
I think it is for the reasons I said in my post. It is that with the VO, cinematic storytelling and such my Shepard I felt was more part of the world and those around her. When something happened both good and bad it to me had more of an impact because of this increase in interaction. There was just more oomph! to the storytelling thanks to VO and such which in turn made me care more about Shepard.

I accept that it's so because people say it is.  Just too bad that BW obviously feels all their games have to be made the same way now, whereas there used to be some differentiation in the franchises.

Of course, I'd be less perturbed if it was Origins' mechanic that won out over ME's. 

[choukou]

ca va

[Sylvius the Mad]

Dagiz wrote...

In your opinion.   And I  would say to that, really, if it s a game about freedom of choice, I am not so sure you are going to find it in a CRPG.  There is only game that I  have played that I felt like I had total freedom in my choices.  And that was EVE. 

This is partly why I think EVE is one of the very best computer games ever made.  In fact, I'm putting it in my top 5.

In Exile wrote...

The dialogue is the mental state of the character, and the lines are purely representative of that. The written dialogue is word for word what your character says.

It's certainly possible to view the dialogue options like that, but it's by no means mandatory.  And viewing them like that would make the game less fun for me, so I don't do it.

Wissenschaft wrote...

The fact is that DA2 is a story being told by Varric. The lines Hawke says are basicly what Varric claims hawke said. So its rather fitting we don't see the exact lines we are going to say because in truth its Varric that is coming up with the lines.

That is a terrific way to look at it.

I think you just saved DA2 for me.