311 réponses à ce sujet

[Wye]

I don't care. But if I needed to choose, Hawke is my preferred character.

[Athro]

Definitely Hawke.

The Warden could say whatever he liked and people just tended to respond the same way regardless - or I would say something thinking it was light hearted, and NPCs would take it seriously. Ultimately it felt like it didn't really matter how I played the Warden - the response was always the same.

With Hawke, I found that not only characters responded to match how I was playing him, but Hawke tended to react the way I wanted him to react.

I chose in my first playthrough to try and be a balanced middle ground kind of guy, and all the characters noticed and commented on it. They would always try to appeal to Hawke as the neutral party and he would call both templar and mage supporters on their BS.

I felt that i was doing much more roleplaying in DA2 than in DA:O because it really felt like Hawke's personality *meant* something - and in my second playthrough I'm already finding both his responses and the way other relate to him is different and involves different dialogue too.

C.

[Monica83]

Warden for those reason.. more dialogue option... more customization of psyche...and no paraphrase crap ala mass effect....

[SnakeStrike8]

Good question.
Honestly, I have to say my first Grey Warden (Dalish elf) elicited more emotional atachment for me than Hawke, simply because of the Origin story. He let himself get dragged off with his best friend on what should have been a routine jaunt, then lost his friend (and never forgave himself for it), almost lost his life, and then got conscripted into the Wardens to fight a war that didn't concern him, against enemies he didn't care about, for people who hated him. And yet he did it anyway, because that was his duty. He didn't care much about templars or mages, but he had to take sides because it was his duty. The dwarves didn't concern him, but he had to involve himself in their treacherous politics because it was his duty. That feel of the reluctant hero pulled at me from the very start, and it invested me very fully into my Warden, and doubly so when I see in DA 2 how his clan reacted to the stuff he did.
Hawke, by contrast, is also forced to take sides throughout the story, but there's a much less compelling reason for it. There's no story goal other than 'get rich', and if I want to play a character who isn't interested in the struggles of the mages or templars, who really just wants to live his life, I can't, and this time there's no 'The Blight is coming!' justification to force me to care. The family angle is the sole hook of interest for me, but I do have to say that it's done very well.
So in the end, I have to say that I care more for my Warden than I do for Hawke, but I still care for Hawke's family more than him as a person. Which is better?

[Icy Magebane]

Don't know if I already posted in this topic but... the Warden. Playing as Hawke, I mostly feel like I'm just along for the ride.

[Deadmac]

Baldrick67 wrote...
If you need to hear your character speak lines in a RPG to "immerse" yourself in the character you must have little immagination. By reading the actual reply in DAO I was able to fully weigh the response in my mind. In DA2 Hawke doesn't even say what is on the wheel - very confusing.

I agree.

Roleplaying is all about playing a role-
http://en.wikipedia....iki/Roleplaying

Role-playing refers to the changing of one's behaviour to assume a role, either unconsciously to fill a social role, or consciously to act out an adopted role. While the Oxford English Dictionary defines role-playing as "the changing of one's behaviour to fulfill a social role"...

When something takes you out of character (another person's voice), you are no longer playing a particular role in a play. Table-top role-playing completely relies on an individual's imagination, and how a person makes unconscious and conscious choices about how to manipulate the environment.

Modifié par Deadmac, 22 mars 2011 - 02:29 .

[salbine]

Both felt like my character.

[Deadmac]

"Dragon Age: Origins" is a choose your own adventure, and "Dragon Age II" is choose Hawke's adventure. Big difference in concept.

[xandrian29]

I like this thread. This was something I was thinking about on my way home from school last night.

For me, I feel like The Warden was more my own creation in terms of creating the him/her. However, I found myself not really caring about The Warden's personality or how I chose his dialogue as much as I do with Hawke. I think it's because I don't actually hear The Warden say anything. With Hawke, the dialogue seemed to play on my conscience more so than in DAO.

Does that make sense to anyone? I'm not really sure if I am explaining it properly.

[xandrian29]

Deadmac wrote...

"Dragon Age: Origins" is a choose your own adventure, and "Dragon Age II" is choose Hawke's adventure. Big difference in concept.

I disagree that DAO is anymore a "choose your own adventure" than DA2.  You are still bound with the same basic restraints as in DA2.  In both games you can only choose the PC's first name.  Both games allow for the customization of the PC's facial features.  Also, each story starts and stops with the same basic outcome in both cases (i.e. The Warden comes from obscurity, builds an army, defeats archdemon).  Only minor details change depending on the player's decisions.

I fail to see the distinction other than only being able to choose one race in DA2.

[Darkhour]

The Warden. Fact. There is no room for opinion.

The very storyline of DA2 forces you to do things which defeats the illusion of being your own man. For instance, if you're pro templar you have to help Anders anyway.

[AlanC9]

It's not like DAO was completely free of that sort of thing. You couldn't just walk away from the whole damn Warden business and let somebody else solve the Blight.

Edit: wasn't a problem for me, since I mostly accept RPG plotlines as necessary; I think In Exile was the one who pointed out that considering the way you're recruited it's a bit much to automatically asume that a PC will be loyal to the Wardens. Much more offensive in DAA, of course, but you've got the option of simply not taking that PC into the expansion if he feels that way.

Modifié par AlanC9, 22 mars 2011 - 03:15 .

[xandrian29]

Darkhour wrote...

The Warden. Fact. There is no room for opinion.

The very storyline of DA2 forces you to do things which defeats the illusion of being your own man. For instance, if you're pro templar you have to help Anders anyway.

How is that any different than the same linear formula being used in DAO?  You still had to do all the main plot quests in that game.  Again, the choices one makes during the quests have little to no effect on the overall story.

Plus, stating your opinion as fact, with no room for discussion, makes me not want to ever listen to your point of view.  Ever.  Now, that's a fact.

Modifié par xandrian29, 22 mars 2011 - 03:14 .

[Spoonuser12]

Hawke/VO hands down.

I'm an old school RPG fan, and I'm no stranger to mute main characters. I just feel so much more immersed with the level of real emotion a VO can provide.

[Asenkah]

The Warden. I like Hawke as Hawke, but the Warden was mine or at least felt that way.

As for the wheel, I could live without it definately since I had for years before ME. I was happy w/o it when DA:O came out, so I didn't miss it after having played ME.

I think you can keep the cinimatic approach as long as you place the camera properly and be careful with animations in the scene. I don't believe that you can't have it w/o the wheel, but I'd be fine with a not as cinimatic treatment similar to DA:O moreso that the creepy mannaquins from say a Bethesda title.

[TJSolo]

xandrian29 wrote...

Deadmac wrote...

"Dragon Age: Origins" is a choose your own adventure, and "Dragon Age II" is choose Hawke's adventure. Big difference in concept.

I disagree that DAO is anymore a "choose your own adventure" than DA2.  You are still bound with the same basic restraints as in DA2.  In both games you can only choose the PC's first name.  Both games allow for the customization of the PC's facial features.  Also, each story starts and stops with the same basic outcome in both cases (i.e. The Warden comes from obscurity, builds an army, defeats archdemon).  Only minor details change depending on the player's decisions.

I fail to see the distinction other than only being able to choose one race in DA2.

In concept that is precisely what DA2 is. Hawke's adventure as told by Varric.

[Lethvienne]

Wow, I haven't been to these forums in ages! ^.^

I haven't bought DA2 (and never will), but I did have the opportunity to see it at my sister's house when I was staying with her for a few days. My brother-in-law is a total gaming nerd and he has the game, so I gave it a try. I couldn't stand Hawke, male or female. But I tried, I really did. Just . . . not for me. That character just killed the game for me.

So, I vote for warden, hands down! Warden all the way! =D

[xandrian29]

TJSolo wrote...

xandrian29 wrote...

Deadmac wrote...

"Dragon Age: Origins" is a choose your own adventure, and "Dragon Age II" is choose Hawke's adventure. Big difference in concept.

I disagree that DAO is anymore a "choose your own adventure" than DA2.  You are still bound with the same basic restraints as in DA2.  In both games you can only choose the PC's first name.  Both games allow for the customization of the PC's facial features.  Also, each story starts and stops with the same basic outcome in both cases (i.e. The Warden comes from obscurity, builds an army, defeats archdemon).  Only minor details change depending on the player's decisions.

I fail to see the distinction other than only being able to choose one race in DA2.

In concept that is precisely what DA2 is. Hawke's adventure as told by Varric.

I understand the concept.  My point is, both games are equally limited as to what adventure you as the player are able to take the PC on.  Hawke is the last name of the protagonist in DA2.  The player can still pick the first name.  Now, take the Human Noble  origin for DAO.  The player picks the PC's first name, but the PC still has the last name Cousland.  The PC in DAO is not "you the player."  He is the character you control.  I fail to see any true difference here.

DAO is not a "choose your own adventure" game.  Both games give choices that have little or no impact to the story in the overall outcome.  Warden always kills archdemon.  Hawke always becomes champion.  What does it matter if Varric is recounting the story?  The player still makes the choices available.

Modifié par xandrian29, 22 mars 2011 - 04:16 .

[ahpuch]

having no voice to the main character made it more "your" character, just like simplistic drawings are more easily related to. this is not debatable, this is psychology.

[xandrian29]

ahpuch wrote...

having no voice to the main character made it more "your" character, just like simplistic drawings are more easily related to. this is not debatable, this is psychology.

Could you provide the source that says voiceless characters are more 'yours' psychologically?  Also I'd like to point out that, as a soft science," psychology is nothing but debatable.

[ahpuch]

I dont know the term used. adding a voice to your the main character provides it with something seperate, something that is not the player (the voice actors voice). with a character with no voice, the player is required to add in one (usually his own). this is why a lot of successful comics are so simplistic (one can more easily place themselves into a blank figure- like a happy face . who is that? could be anyone

[Lethvienne]

Well, I won't get into the whole 'psychology' thing, but just from my perspective, a silent character feels more 'mine' because then I get to choose what he, or she, sounds like. I can imagine what s/he sounds like when they say something, the pitch of their voice, the attitude, everything is my choice with a silent character.

Also, a silent character allows for more choices in both dialogue in races. It was stated before DA2 ever came out that one of the reasons human was going to be the only playable race was due to the fact that to have VO's for multiple playable races would be too difficult, expensive, et cetera. So they forced the default race of human on players and called it an improvement because now the character could talk.

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me that didn't make the character feel more 'mine'. It made him/her feel less like s/he was mine. I couldn't immerse myself as much as I could with my Warden. They had a voice and I had no say in what they sounded like. The dialogue options also seemed more restricted to me with the VO's; not to mention that half the time, or more, I would select a response and the darn character would say the wrong thing. =(

[TJSolo]

xandrian29 wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

xandrian29 wrote...

Deadmac wrote...

"Dragon Age: Origins" is a choose your own adventure, and "Dragon Age II" is choose Hawke's adventure. Big difference in concept.

I disagree that DAO is anymore a "choose your own adventure" than DA2.  You are still bound with the same basic restraints as in DA2.  In both games you can only choose the PC's first name.  Both games allow for the customization of the PC's facial features.  Also, each story starts and stops with the same basic outcome in both cases (i.e. The Warden comes from obscurity, builds an army, defeats archdemon).  Only minor details change depending on the player's decisions.

I fail to see the distinction other than only being able to choose one race in DA2.

In concept that is precisely what DA2 is. Hawke's adventure as told by Varric.

I understand the concept.  My point is, both games are equally limited as to what adventure you as the player are able to take the PC on.  Hawke is the last name of the protagonist in DA2.  The player can still pick the first name.  Now, take the Human Noble  origin for DAO.  The player picks the PC's first name, but the PC still has the last name Cousland.  The PC in DAO is not "you the player."  He is the character you control.  I fail to see any true difference here.

DAO is not a "choose your own adventure" game.  Both games give choices that have little or no impact to the story in the overall outcome.  Warden always kills archdemon.  Hawke always becomes champion.  What does it matter if Varric is recounting the story?  The player still makes the choices available.

It matters because the statement you quoted used the wording "in concept". Barebones both are games but in concept the way to two stories are told are very different and has an effect on the player's perception.

But anywho, If those are the only factors you want to mention then have fun as I tire of arguing with cherry-pickers on this forum that want to gloss over nuances to make both games seem the the same.

[xandrian29]

The warden certainly was a blank-figure. I felt his dead eye stare actually took away from the immersion.

I always felt making dialogue choices in DAO was difficult. Not because it had these super profound effects on the narrative, but because there was no way to tell what the Warden's voice inflection was supposed to be until the NPCs reacted to it. This also took me out of the game as I would find myself saving before every dialogue encounter just to make sure I could have the characters react the way I wanted them to.

Modifié par xandrian29, 22 mars 2011 - 04:55 .

[TJSolo]

xandrian29 wrote...

The warden certainly had a blank face. I felt his dead eye stare actually took away from the immersion.

I always felt making dialogue choices in DAO was difficult. Not because it had these super profound effects on the narrative, but because there was no way to tell what the Warden's voice inflection was supposed to be until the NPCs reacted to it. This also took me out of the game as I would find myself saving before every dialogue encounter just to make sure I could have the character react the way I wanted him to.

Do you also have trouble reading books and figuring out the tone, inflection of characters there?
How about if I type, "You are talking out of your ass!" Can you figure out the inflection my voice would have if I were to say it?