992 réponses à ce sujet

[marshalleck]

Maria Caliban wrote...

StormbringerGT wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Do you like the 3 path "RPG" system?

Yes.

I always find myself smiling at the stuff you say! (no not sarcastic)

Interesting. Not sure how a monosyllabic affirmation would make you smile, but it's good to know you like it.

You have exquisite timing. 

[Wyndham711]

I'm still very disappointed about paraphrasing and PC VO. I won't be able to roleplay in DA2 as I could in Origins, and that saddens me. Of cource I may well be able to enjoy DA2 from other standpoints than that of roleplaying - it is indeed my expectation.

If the world is half as enthralling and the characters half as charming as they were in Origins, I'm pretty sure I'll enjoy my stay in the Free Marches. Still, I'd very much like to be able to roleplay.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Jade Empire and Knights of the Old Republic also used a three-path system. They were simply sloppy with it because they acted as though good = diplomatic and evil = aggressive.

This is why I don't think there was a three-path system prior to ME.  In KotOR, yes, the agreesive options were often idiotic, but the supposed "diplomatic" option might have had any number of motivations behind it, and the line could be delivered any number of ways.

I think you could play two completely different characters through KotOR while just choosing the first option all the way through both times.

But in ME (and apparently DA2), choosing the option is apparently the sum total of control the player gets over his character's personality.

[Zachriel]

@Sylvius: Thank you for explaining. I think I understand what you're saying now, and I appreciate your point of view. However, I agree with The-Sapient in that I believe your complaint is a relatively minor one in the scheme of things. Not be able to ascribe emotional or psychological states to Hawke will not negatively impact my enjoyment of the game in the least.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sir Jools wrote...

I'm not sure I get what you mean.

I liked it more when one had to read through all the options (with no hints about alignment apart from the lines themselves) and stop and think "what do I want to say here?". That also resulted in better written-dialogues (PlaneScape Torment, anyone?), as the actual options had to be clear enough to convey the player what the character would say when selecting any given option. I also loved when the "position" of the lines was kind of random, so always cliking the first one would not be guarantee of choosing the "good" option, for instance.

The new system strips any subtlety away from dialogues, "dumbing" it all down to a quick choice between good/bad/stupid, and furthermore clearly pointing out which option is which, so that acshun-loving people can just indulge in an easy clickfest and quickly move on to the next combat bit.

I'm trying to play a detailed character who has specific objectives and probably a unique point of view.  He'll speak with nuance.

Trying to figure out which wheel option produces the response I want requires a ton of thought right now, because the paraphrases don't correspond even to the sentence type of the actual line, and the icons haven't been defined for us (and the icons also constrain what each line can be).  We're basically being asked to solve a puzzle with each dialogue option, unless we're willing to accept the simplistic trichotomy you describe.

[OniRogue]

I do appreciate the "new" system.



While I understand the gripes some people have with it, I am perfectly fine with the outcome.



Roleplaying for me is to take "control" of a character within a world with its own rules and regulations. Even though this takes a bit of control I have over a character away from me, I do prefer it in regards to the progression of the story.

(I am not roleplaying myself here, or I character I created myself but a Grey Warden/Hawke with an existing past and a predetermined way for the future. That is exactly why I love BioWare's games [yes even ME2]. They give me the tools to shape the way to the end of the story in any way I find satisfying. They allow me the insert some of my own personality into the main character. Now they allow me to be certain of what kind of response I am about to give and that its coherent with the way I want the hero to be.

Even if it may sound foolish now, I like that I can seemingly shape the world more than even the main character.)

[Sylvius the Mad]

Zachriel wrote...

@Sylvius: Thank you for explaining. I think I understand what you're saying now, and I appreciate your point of view. However, I agree with The-Sapient in that I believe your complaint is a relatively minor one in the scheme of things. Not be able to ascribe emotional or psychological states to Hawke will not negatively impact my enjoyment of the game in the least.

If I can ask then, why are you playing the game?

I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't be.  I just want to know what it is you get out of these games if you're not engaging in detailed character building.  To me, the character building is the fun part.  The rest of the game is just window-dressing.

[TGFKAMAdmaX]

one last thing...for all people whining that the game is now action orientied. get over it. sreiously. as things evolve they begin to absorb the best aspects of other genres. the only difference between the first and second regarding the combat is that the second is much flashier. it seems for bioware to stay pure they have to have clunky combat...



and other games are doing this as well. look at most shooters today. they usually have a class system implemented to encourage replayability and for players to fulfill certain roles...they are borrowing from rpgs....stop crying and get over it.....it is still an rpg at heart.

[The-Sapient]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
If I can ask then, why are you playing the game?

I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't be.  I just want to know what it is you get out of these games if you're not engaging in detailed character building.  To me, the character building is the fun part.  The rest of the game is just window-dressing.

It is funny, because I have the same question of you.  You are the one, after all, who claims the game has been ruied for you.   I enjoy Bioware games because they allow me to participate in great story telling.  If I just wanted to build a character, I wouldn't play computer based RPGs at all.  BioWare games are very, very limited as for as character building goes.  You have very few choices, when compared with some other RPGs.  But the stories are really enjoyable.    Not that other aspects of the game are unimportant.  The combat matters.  The ability to advance my characters abilities matters.  But I have never, ever played a game so I could imagine the tone of my small selection of dialog choices.

[Zachriel]

Why do I play the game? Good question. For me, the most important and enjoyable aspect of the game is the story. If a game has a compelling enough story, I will ignore any number of poorly implemented gameplay elements just to see it through to it's conclusion. Whether I get to create my character from the ground up or play as a pregenerated character doesn't really matter to me as long as the quality of the storytelling is good enough. In fact, one of the most complex and eloquently told stories I've ever seen was in the Legacy of Kain series, and you had no choice whatsoever about your characters there. Not even the limited dialogue options we get in Bioware's RPG's.



Is it more immersive to play a character of my own creation? Sure. But in any CRPG, you will be limited. You didn't get to write any of the backgrounds you choose from in DA:O, for example. You could only take the prewritten backgrounds and play them as you saw fit. Even then, there were limits. I wanted my Dalish elf to be a human hater who had nothing but scorn for the city elves. Kind of hard to do when half your party is human, and you aren't really given very many derisive dialogue options when you meet the city elves. So I made the best of it, and instead played him as a fierce warrior who saw the Blight and the darkspawn as the ultimate test of his abilities and a chance to prove his superiority to his human comrades.



That's why I'm not too upset about the wheel and pregenerated Hawke. He may not experience the kind of emotional or psychological growh that I would have imagined, but I can still make a snarky, irreverant SOB and I still get to play out what will surely be another excellently written Bioware story.



Secondary to the story is what I can only describe as the fun factor. How much fun do I have when I play the game? This can be determined by any number of things. The level of difficulty, the gameplay mechanics, the UI, etc. I've even been known to play games with horrible stories or no story at all if they were fun enough. You know, like FPS games or pure hack 'n' slashers like the God of War series.

[Galad22]

StormbringerGT wrote...

Galad22 wrote...

StormbringerGT wrote...

Even starting at Baldirs gate and going to Kotor. Those were still different games and changed a lot. A lot of people who like BG didnt enjoy KOTOR because combat was vastly different between the 2 games. They were already changing the instant they did something different from Baldurs Gate.

Yeah but those two were both still roleplaying games.

Mass effect 2 is not it's action roleplaying game with very little roleplaying.

And now Dragon age seems to be molded into same sort of action roleplaying game. Which I don't personally like.
Why oh why couldn't Dragon age stay roleplaying game and Mass effect stay action roleplaying game.

It would have pleased more people than this.

but its still a Roleplaying game by some peoples standards. It also sounds like you were unhappy how it (ME 2) turned out. Unfortunately, according to sales, again this is where you stand in the minority.

You want the company to see from your point of view but do you see from theirs?

I wasn't unhappy about ME 2 it was different game with different focus, which was fine.

However DA was also different game with different focus and now it has lost it focus for ME focus.

This I don't like why couldn't both exist?

And Dragon age sold better than Mass effect so your point about sales is moot.

[koshiee]

I like the idea of it but I think they kind of failed on the execution. Some of the lines fall really flat and feel completely out of place. Like you can't pick option 1 and then option 2 without your character appearing to be emotionally schizophrenic. And the comedic lines are really not funny mostly just awkward.

Modifié par koshiee, 24 février 2011 - 09:52 .

[Epic777]

Galad22 wrote...

StormbringerGT wrote...

Galad22 wrote...

StormbringerGT wrote...

Even starting at Baldirs gate and going to Kotor. Those were still different games and changed a lot. A lot of people who like BG didnt enjoy KOTOR because combat was vastly different between the 2 games. They were already changing the instant they did something different from Baldurs Gate.

Yeah but those two were both still roleplaying games.

Mass effect 2 is not it's action roleplaying game with very little roleplaying.

And now Dragon age seems to be molded into same sort of action roleplaying game. Which I don't personally like.
Why oh why couldn't Dragon age stay roleplaying game and Mass effect stay action roleplaying game.

It would have pleased more people than this.

but its still a Roleplaying game by some peoples standards. It also sounds like you were unhappy how it (ME 2) turned out. Unfortunately, according to sales, again this is where you stand in the minority.

You want the company to see from your point of view but do you see from theirs?

I wasn't unhappy about ME 2 it was different game with different focus, which was fine.

However DA was also different game with different focus and now it has lost it focus for ME focus.

This I don't like why couldn't both exist?

And Dragon age sold better than Mass effect so your point about sales is moot.

As it should have. Why? Dragon age was on four systems; ps3, xbox360, pc and mac. 

[coolide]

Clonedzero wrote...

in all honesty, its not that different from what origins was like. its just not all listed out.

(nice continue option)
(snarky continue dialogue option)
(mean continue dialogue option)
(ask clarifying question dialogue option #1 i.e investigate)
(ask clarifying question dialogue option #2 i.e investigate)
(ask clarifying question dialogue option #3 i.e investigate)
(stab the dude dialogue option)

its just presented in a wheel this time.

Exactly.  The people who don't like it are just being pretentious.

[Mr. Gerbz]

wowpwnslol wrote...

It's worse. Made for ADD kids too lazy to read, so they even added pictures. I hate ME style dialogue "wheel" it screams console oversimplification.

...I have ADD and I'm studying International Law, which requires a LOT of reading.

[Morroian]

Galad22 wrote...

However DA was also different game with different focus and now it has lost it focus for ME focus.

It still has a different focus to ME, despite using some similar mechanics to ME. It has the tactical focus that ME completely lacks, and I'd argue that due to the DAO team it will still have more of an rpg focus, just a distillation to what Bioware consider the essential elements of a Bioware rpg.

[Galad22]

Epic777 wrote...
As it should have. Why? Dragon age was on four systems; ps3, xbox360, pc and mac. 

And what is your point?

Mine was that they are changing DA to be more like it less succesful sibling.

[Galad22]

Morroian wrote...

Galad22 wrote...

However DA was also different game with different focus and now it has lost it focus for ME focus.

It still has a different focus to ME, despite using some similar mechanics to ME. It has the tactical focus that ME completely lacks, and I'd argue that due to the DAO team it will still have more of an rpg focus, just a distillation to what Bioware consider the essential elements of a Bioware rpg.

Well I do hope you are correct.

[Sark]

wowpwnslol wrote...

It's worse. Made for ADD kids too lazy to read, so they even added pictures. I hate ME style dialogue "wheel" it screams console oversimplification.

ADD =/= lazy

[AkiKishi]

The-Sapient wrote...

It is funny, because I have the same question of you.  You are the one, after all, who claims the game has been ruied for you.   I enjoy Bioware games because they allow me to participate in great story telling.  If I just wanted to build a character, I wouldn't play computer based RPGs at all.  BioWare games are very, very limited as for as character building goes.  You have very few choices, when compared with some other RPGs.  But the stories are really enjoyable.    Not that other aspects of the game are unimportant.  The combat matters.  The ability to advance my characters abilities matters.  But I have never, ever played a game so I could imagine the tone of my small selection of dialog choices.

DA2 is very different because it completely removes the character building. You get one character and that's it.

The problem I have with Biowares system DA2/ME is that you get all the negatives, but no positives. Your characters development is non existent. That is the only good reason to have a pregenerated character like they do in JRPGs so they can grow along with the plot.

[Steks25]

Hate it sooo much!



Mass effect, eventually I just stopped reading the options and just went with

"top, middle or bottom" i.e. "good, neutral or evil" based on what character I was playing.



And the pictures? Come on what is this....

[Vicious]

Bioware makes the games THEY want to make.

Take it or leave it.

Modifié par Vicious, 24 février 2011 - 10:09 .

[Maria Caliban]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Wait, the colour matters, too?

They need to document this stuff.

They have them all listed in the manual. I believe they have over 12 icons altogether.

[Galad22]

Vicious wrote...

Bioware makes the games THEY want to make.

Take it or leave it.

They make games they think PEOPLE want. Very different.