360 réponses à ce sujet

[TheRealJayDee]

Naitaka wrote...

But actors DO improvised all the time, well some do anyway. Like in Devil Wears Prada, Emily Blunt improvised many of her lines including that famous quote at the end of the movie. A good director-actor relationship depends on mutual respect and it's a director's job to encourage actors to give their best performance.

True. I'm just not sure if I, the director, want to work with male Hawke, since based on the experiences from the demo he doesn't really give me what I want in terms of perfomance. It wouldn't hurt our director-actor relationship if I could just make him say the damn lines I want to hear.

[AkiKishi]

[quote]Drachjinor wrote...

[quote]In Exile wrote...

What you get is to RP a Grey Warden who use to be a City Elf, or a Circle Mage, or a Casteless dwarf.[/quote]

A Grey Warden Mage who has to return to the Circle s/he was raised in and with full knowledge of what it's like to be under the oppressive gaze of the Chantry and Templars as a Mage. If you play a Warrior Human you don't get that insight, and would possibly side with the Templars as you'd be ignorant to the plight of Mages and the many ways to tell an abomination and apostate from a genuine, free-thinking, true to the Chantry and laws of the Circle-type Mage.

Or you can be a Grey Warden wielding Warden Treaties returning to his dwarven city as a Casteless Dwarf, knowing well how his fellow dwarves feel about the marked Casteless and their place in society, and having a full grasp of what it is to be oppressed and to lack any status at all. It is an interesting position to be in, and an interesting role-play experience.

... DA:2 can't offer anything like this with one human character and a choice of three classes. You get a total of ONE experience, with slight tweaks in decisions you make and replay value sucks a big fat something. Light Side or Dark Side, you decide! The choices are limitless, if two can be considered limitless. But hey you have as many romance options as you got in DA:O so I suppose they're identical, really. Hhmmmlol. Oh and you play the same guy or gal both times! EPIC! There is no character creation here. They stole it away... like some kind of... witch-thieves!

So I think you're wrong in saying you don't lose anything, and about any problems I have being some magically non-scripted inconsequential things that are all part of my imagination. NPC reactions to dwarves are different to Dalish elves, and noble humans. DA:2 reactions to Hawke will be reactions to the most common race in the setting. No surprises on this front. DA:2 is way more restricted than DA:O. I get a deep understanding from the varying origins and races and can role-play to the strengths and weaknesses of individual characters across replays in DA:O. That's a lot of role-playing.

A warrior having never had a discussion about the relationship between the Circle and Chantry might well side with the Templars in a second flat, ignorance guiding his choice. I'd have to use the dialogue as a guide in the game to decide whether or not my warrior is capable of making an informed decision about who he sides with in this situation, and who he is likely to side with if he can't make an informed decision. Rather than using some out of the game non-scripted knowledge about what I already know from my first Mage play-through. Knowledge my warrior character would never have. A Mage would likely sympathise with the Mages. A dwarf wouldn't fear magic so much, but being from a Caste society might choose the thing he understands, which again would be the warrior, straightforward and to-the-point Templars. "Straight to business, all this hokery-pokery magical nonsense should probably be eradicated." DA:2 is nowhere near 'about the same' as DA:O when it comes to these experiences.
[quote]

I remember the horror I felt when I re-played the game as mage and saw what the Templars were like first hand.I played a Human warrior first time out and siding with the Templars seemed like the most natural thing in the world. It's the same if you experience things from the City Elf perspective, everything takes on a much darker overtone.
Each background gives you a very different insight into the world and shapes your characters actions.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 25 février 2011 - 02:37 .

[Natlus]

I liked the voice acting, I just miss the old school approach of a 1st person narrative experience. Know what I mean? You can try all you like to make Hawke look like you, and name him after you but in the end, intuitively in my case, he's Hawke. I would've liked if they would keep the dialogue system + character creation of the first game to keep some variation in the Bioware library of AAA titles. Nevertheless, I really like this Hawke character, more so than Shepard.

[Naitaka]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

True. I'm just not sure if I, the director, want to work with male Hawke, since based on the experiences from the demo he doesn't really give me what I want in terms of perfomance. It wouldn't hurt our director-actor relationship if I could just make him say the damn lines I want to hear.

Oh well, at least he's less of an ass compared to commander Shepard.

[Zigzaggy]

Only commander sheppard would have been a great character to play silent and with greater choice of text.



With over two decades of gaming experience I've never came aross anyone that didn't buy a game due to a silent protaganist...the same cannot be said for a Voiced protaganist.



Unless there is massive interest in this iteration ..sadly it will demonstrate very poor judgment.



For the same reasoning we don't see many pink cars !

[Mutantsquirrel]

BomimoDK wrote...

What's this Bollocks about DA:O letting you decide the tone and meaning of the phrase? that's utter bull****. There's a set reply to your set phrase that fits ONE way of laying out the phrase. Sarcasm does not apply when the character you're conversing with replies as if it weren't there no matter how hard YOU say it was. You're essentially making **** up when you're telling us that we had the freedom to decide how the lines were spoken and what was behind it, because we hadn't.

DA:2 is still gonna be ME playing MY role making MY decisions. I decide what Hawke did and Hawke does what i damn well tell her/him. Hawke is me and i am Hawke and you can take any refuting made up nonsense to the nearest stupid house since you're obviously not getting what the devs had in mind with this game. DA2=DA2, the sequel to Dragon Age: Origins. If you argue you're watching Hawke/Shepards tale, then you're gonna have to say that you're not making the decisions and choosing the dialogue which again would be a flat out lie.

I'd love for people to stop making **** up to support their arguments, it makes them look utterly stupid and stupidity should not be encouraged or we'll have a global infection of the mentality that made USA the meddling pissy conservative cesspool that it is today. Ignorant ranting is NOT COOL!

It's fine to dislike the VO, but it's idiotic to use the watch vs play argument since it's just not valid.

Whoa there buddy, who peed in your wheaties this morning?

[Muddlehead]

I'm perfectly happy without character voicing - player or NPC. As long as there's text to read, I'm happy - not everyone has perfect hearing, you know?

So far as I'm concerned, soundtrack / voice acting and suchlike are money down the drain.

The thing I hate most is games (which shall be nameless) that give audio-only cues - you know, someone is creeping up behind you and the music changes. Lovely. There's no need to gratuitously disadvantage those of us with hearing difficulties, is there?

[Spanishcat]

Whilst trying to find another thread, I found this, sooo...



The moment I found out DA2 would voice Hawke, my heart sank a little, and I though 'huh, they're just making Mass Effect: Dragon Age'. Is that fair? Maybe not - but hey, life isn't fair, and if the dev's didn't want that comparison, they should've have compounded the perception with the dialogue wheel, and the inventory/menu radial.



Why is talky-Hawke a bad idea? Or, being more accurate, why don't I prefer a talky-Hawke? In Mass Effect, Shep is never you, nor a fully formed character. He/she is simply a meta-avatar. It's 'your' character when you're in 3rdP, moving around, changing your armour, doing stuff... The moment you interact with a character? It's partly you, but mostly someone else. You become a spectator. Of yourself... yet you're still asked to to associate with yourself, by making decisions.



Y'know those FMV only games of the mid-90's? Well, for all its pretensions, that's just what Mass Effect and DA2 become like; all you do is choose between two or three pre-scripted moments, and sit back and watch. BioWare, that ain't gameplay - I don't know who told you or Hideo Kojima that it is. If you're not giving the player full control, nor the central character a proper idendity, it's just a halfway house.



BioWare and many other companies seem terrified of their own medium. Is the dialogue tree/talking-PC combo a great leap in gaming narrative? NOPE, if anything it's the opposite, it's highly conservative. It's trying to ape cinema. To casual gamers it may seem more 'dramatic' ('ooh! look at the pretty!' etc). Surely the point of gaming is an associative form of interaction and immersion? Why - because it's the one thing unique to gaming. Books can't do it, films can't do it. Games can. So why don't MORE of them try?



Look at Valve, with Half-Life 2, or even Portal. That's a developer embracing the medium they work in, not shying away from its unique qualities, just to present something that apes another medium.



Shep was never me in ME1 or 2, nor a fully formed character. Origins Warden (who didn't have full freedom, but BioWare brilliantly gave you the next best thing; the basic illusion of freedom), and Gordon Freeman? Without a single vocal utterance, or contrived 'cinematic', they were me in the gameworld, my connection and conduit.



To me, this whole 'cinematic presentation' thing's never been justified. Watching---- sorry, PLAYING a Metal Gear Solid is one thing, where Snake or whoever is never 'you' - it's always a character, and you accept that from the outset (i.e. there are never any pretensions to creating your character).



A role-playing game, however, should try to do what it says on the box. DA2 and Mass Effect are not role-playing games, not even A/RPG's. They're something else - which is fine. But is that something else really better than the potentiality of their own medium? If these game creators want to be film directors, fair nuff. But don't give the player the illusion of indentification by changing their looks and class etc.



Dragon Age 2 looks doomed (in the context of truly progressive game design) to join Mass Effect - between two stools, suffering an identity crisis about its own medium.



FANBOY CAVEAT: I hugely enjoyed DA2's demo on 360 and PC, and with the Sig.Edition already ordered in Jan, I'm a BioWare fan. Neither they nor Valve have every let me down. But I genuinely think 'cinematic presentation' - two words I'm beginning to utterly loathe in gaming - is a white elephant, and the sooner the major, more savvy companies recognise this, the better for all concerned.



One of gamings key USP's; associative immersion and identification. A voiced Hawke goes against this.

[Drachjinor]

BobSmith101 wrote...

I remember the horror I felt when I re-played the game as mage and saw what the Templars were like first hand.I played a Human warrior first time out and siding with the Templars seemed like the most natural thing in the world. It's the same if you experience things from the City Elf perspective, everything takes on a much darker overtone.
Each background gives you a very different insight into the world and shapes your characters actions.

S'cool that. No way you could know any different if your only option was to play a Human Noble every time. You'd make a different decision on a different play-through just to see what it's like, rather than for good reasons 'in character'. I'll play a City Elf next, me thinks. Cheers! :happy:

I'm playing a Casteless Dwarf now, you probs know his sister is a concubine to one of the claimants to the throne, and obviously my character has more at stake in his decision making than my Human Mage did when he picked a side. He chose to uphold the traditions of dwarven society. Feel kinda crappy about having had him do that now. Heh.

I can't even fathom how some people say the origins, and character creation have little impact on replay value. Oo-ah. lol

Modifié par Drachjinor, 02 mars 2011 - 04:04 .

[AkiKishi]

Drachjinor wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

I remember the horror I felt when I re-played the game as mage and saw what the Templars were like first hand.I played a Human warrior first time out and siding with the Templars seemed like the most natural thing in the world. It's the same if you experience things from the City Elf perspective, everything takes on a much darker overtone.
Each background gives you a very different insight into the world and shapes your characters actions.

S'cool that. No way you could know any different if your only option was to play a Human Noble every time. You'd make a different decision on a different play-through just to see what it's like, rather than for good reasons 'in character'. I'll play a City Elf next, me thinks. Cheers! :happy:

I'm playing a Casteless Dwarf now, you probs know his sister is a concubine to one of the claimants to the throne, and obviously my character has more at stake in his decision making than my Human Mage did when he picked a side. He chose to uphold the traditions of dwarven society. Feel kinda crappy about having had him do that now. Heh.

I can't even fathom how some people say the origins, and character creation have little impact on replay value. Oo-ah. lol

Casteless Dwarf and Dwarf Nobel will give you very different insights into how Dwarven society works.

Me either, but it's pretty common to rage on the old game to make the new one look better. That's what makes DA the better RPG for me, each character has it's own inbuilt direction thanks to the origin story.

[wheelyjon]

i love that fact he/she has voice it was my one big failling of the first game i really couldn't connect wholley with my wardan