996 réponses à ce sujet

[RohanD]

Okay here it goes. I think what we have here is the convergence of western and eastern RPG models. Traditionally, western RPGs have included more choices & consequences (C&C) & character customization where the PC's actions affect the world/game while jRPGs have been more on rails to tell a very defined story with a lot of meta customization and intricate game play mechanics. Personally, I think these styles each have their benefits and problems. It all comes back to how the developer handles these models. Bioware seem to be searching for a middle ground between these two, but it is out of sync with what a lot of their core base wants. There is also an argument to be made that we already have many RPGs on rails, consumers like choice. Choice is healthy for any kind of market.

One thing that has to be said as well, is that there are cultural differences between the development teams behind these models which led to their existence in the first place. Culturally, the Japanese level of attention to detail, their insistence on rock solid QA testing (ever seen a bug in a FF game?) and obssession with meta management mean that their RPGs operate on a slightly different level of immersion and engagement when compared to Bioware's. Western devs tend to focus on freedom, openness and choice, which leads to a different kind of immersion and value.

I think, for the most part, each culture is good at what they do, and they shouldn't try to converge too much. Many Japanese companies have tried and failed (although I think FFXII was an amazing game that got the blend JUST right). Perhaps Bioware's drive to work in a more defined story and action based combat was simply from a sales point of view, where they saw SE consistently outselling them by an enormous margin. 

In any case, I feel that this is a mistake. Bioware wants to tell a more defined story in their games, but a lot of what made them who they are and gained them their following was a model diametrically opposed to this approach. It's dangerous territory for them to suddenly go in the other direction. It was acceptable with a non fantasy, new IP like Mass Effect, but not for the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.

I think if Bioware wants to continue to make fantasy role playing games, they should understand that what has made them a successful developer is offering a unique, well crafted western role playing game experience in a market overly saturated with games on rails. Choices, consequences, attribute based options, non combat skills, all of these define what makes western RPGs great. It is key to their style of immersion. Let's be honest, they will never have the intricacy and attention to detail that Japanese developers like SE have. Culturally it is lacking (Obsidian's partnership with them will yield interesting results however). 

Does it cost more to make such games in the modern graphics obssessed environment? Of course it does. But the rewards will be great. SE's following is steadily falling, all their games are getting worse reviews overall these days. They are relying on their back catalogue to stay relevant. There is a huge market share to grab from them in the west, and perhaps even in the east if Bioware does it right.

I believe a voiced PC can be done  well, but doing it and not betraying the values which have been the foundation for Bioware's success in the fantasy role playing genre is going to cost. Lots. Are they willing to try? Only time will tell. 

[Xewaka]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
But what if I want choices and a voiced PC and some non-interactive cutscenes? Like, say, The Witcher?

Then play The Witcher and its sequels.  Clearly those games are already being made.  Your games already exist; you don't need BioWare to make them.
Where are my games?  Where are the games with pausable stat-driven combat and a silent PC?

Try Drakensang. It's excellent.

[Mantaal]

Aradace wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Psython wrote...
 Is it true that justin beiber or britney spears is an improvement over Vivaldi?

Is that even a meaningful question? Different music played for different people looking for different experiences....

EXACTLY!!!!!!


And that´s why RPGs should stay "old-school", as some like to call it.

For those who want voiced PC, little choices, non-interactive cutscenes etc... there is already Hack´n´Slash, Shooters, adventures, action games, RTS........

To use the metaphor here, even a musician's music (the good ones anyway) "evolve" in some manner over time.  If they sounded the exact same way, in every single song, on every single album, then they'd get old and stale real fast.  Which essentially you could say about "RPGs"  "Old School" is how they started out.  Voiceless heroes staring dramatically off into the middle distance.  Pages upon pages of dialog.  Grid inventory systems.  But now they've decided to "evolve" (I say that word tongue in cheek) so to speak by branching out.  Now, theyve decided to add fully voiced protags to the mix.  And guess what? For the most part, it's pretty much accepted and "liked" which means, until it's completely hated and people (as a whole) are tired of seeing it, you wont be seeing to many more RPGs where you have a silent hero.

Depending on your perception of the subject, that could be a sad state of affairs.  As for me, I dont know about you, but my interests dont just expand to the "classics" I like the "new age" stuff too. 

But music keeps thier core elements. If you hear a brand new Rock song you know its a Rock song. If you go to a Hip Hop club you know you are in a Hip Hop club.

Btw there are millions of Peoples still enjoy "old" music like the Beatles, Elvis, Rolling Stones and so on. There are more Oldie Radio Stations then Chart Radios out there.

The music i listen too never gets old for me. But i also open for new Music in the genre i like. But even in Music the same could happen what happend to DA2. Nightwish had a new singer and turned from cool music to mass appealing Pop trash. Thats why i dont like them anymore

Modifié par Mantaal, 09 avril 2011 - 02:57 .

[9999dmg]

I'd prefer a completely silent protagonist, as even the little things the character says in Origins when you pick what voice you want are cringe worth and annoying.

"Can I get you a ladder? SO YOU CAN GET OFF MY BACK!" What you can do is stop breaking immersion by addressing me.

[myztikrice]

I just want to know what my character is saying. I hated the innaccurate paraphrases in Mass Effect and I hate them here. If a dialogue option uses a word like '****' in it I expect to hear ****. When you use words like that it connotes a very specific tone and meaning. Then to hear the actual dialog be completely absent of it is irritating and dumb.

Modifié par myztikrice, 09 avril 2011 - 01:39 .

[CaimDark]

No. I like the voiced protagonists and I like cutscenes. I agree on the wheel though. The wheel itself doesn't bother me, having Hawke say something completely different than what I intended does.

Modifié par CaimDark, 09 avril 2011 - 01:53 .

[Any0day]

Tirigon wrote...

But I think all can agree that DAO exactly as it is now, only with more detailed graphic would be an improvement over DAO now (albeit a rather minor one).

Huh? That's kinda like saying 2+1 is greater than 2. Of course better graphics would improve the overall feel of DAO. I'd personally also like to see something between DAO's combat system and DA2's (discluding the waves of enemies). But they need to reintroduce missing in combat to get rid of the huge boss health inflations.

[GeorgeZip]

I totally disagree with everything the OP said.
Voiced Hawke was an improvement and it was well done.

The dialogue wheel should not include every word of every possible response. What a mess that would be. If anything get rid of the symbols to make it less clear what the "right" response would be.

Getting rid of cinematics, seriously? The only problem I had with them is during the end of act2 and opening of act3. If you don't loot during combat you miss out on cash and potions. And if you screw up the dialogue at the start of act3 you have to refight the Arishok. They could easily fix this by making you walk thru a door before each cinematic starts.

[Mavkiel]

marinerzz wrote...

If you want to fix your reputation after the complete debacle of DA2!

I want to know exactly what I'm telling my character to say, not just a summary (which gives the wrong impression often).

I don't want my PC to have a voice because it will never sound exactly how my character does in my mind and makes the character less my own.

All the non-interactive cinematics destroy immersion because I'm no longer controlling my character.

Fix these problems, i.e. make DA3 like DA:O but without a dumb romance character who only likes you if you're cartoonishly evil like Morrigan was, and you can start making good games again. Don't fix these problems and you will fail sooner rather than later!

Wow, I disagree with just about every point you made. At most I'd like an option to turn off the pc voice. Mainly because I think they suck at picking out good male voices.

[KLUME777]

LyndseyCousland wrote...

I actually prefer the dialogue wheel and the voiced main character. Sure, every now and then you get a 'WTF I didn't mean that' moment but I feel that the pros of the wheel over come the cons.

Pro:
1. Looks neater.
2. Looks cuter!

Con:
1. WTF moments


...actually I thought I had more points. Durrr, I need sleep.
In the end, I think they've done as good as they can without stretching their budget, or whatnot.

Cons:
1.WTF moments
2.Character is not you.
3.Less personal connect with the character
4.Not knowing exactly what your going to say
5.Less choices to say

Pros:
1.Looks....more cute?

[DebatableBubble]

 Voiced actors are great but go back to the list format.

[AlanC9]

Sorry I missed this earlier

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

But what if I want choices and a voiced PC and some non-interactive cutscenes? Like, say, The Witcher?

Then play The Witcher and its sequels.  Clearly those games are already being made.  Your games already exist; you don't need BioWare to make them.

Where are my games?  Where are the games with pausable stat-driven combat and a silent PC?

The problem is that TW isn't a substitute unless you're also happy with twitch combat and a precreated PC.

We're really up against the zero-sumness of it all here. If Bio doesn't make ME2 or DA2, nobody else will. The same as how if Bethesda doesn't make Skyrim, nobody else will. When different people want different things from a Bio game that aren't different enough to be made by some other company, someone must lose.

Note that my post quoted above was a hypothetical. Personally, I'm neutral on voiced PCs, though I am pro-cinematics.

[Chuvvy]

A non voiced PC isn't inherently better or worse for roleplaying. Sure you can come up with your own voice, I did that myself. And you can have more choices. But guess what? You lose something with it too. The characters don't respond well to you. In DAO you had five options all of which were essentially different ways of saying, "Please continue.", or at least that's how the character you were talking to looked at it. I will admit every once in awhile you could have a good banter with Alistair, but it felt incredibly one sided because one party never opened their mouth. And I prefer the back and fourths with Varric or Isabela, because it sounds like a conversation. Not like one person is telepathic and is projecting their thoughts into the other ones brain.

Modifié par Slidell505, 09 avril 2011 - 04:39 .

[Gatt9]

RohanD wrote...

Okay here it goes. I think what we have here is the convergence of western and eastern RPG models. Traditionally, western RPGs have included more choices & consequences (C&C) & character customization where the PC's actions affect the world/game while jRPGs have been more on rails to tell a very defined story with a lot of meta customization and intricate game play mechanics. Personally, I think these styles each have their benefits and problems. It all comes back to how the developer handles these models. Bioware seem to be searching for a middle ground between these two, but it is out of sync with what a lot of their core base wants. There is also an argument to be made that we already have many RPGs on rails, consumers like choice. Choice is healthy for any kind of market.

One thing that has to be said as well, is that there are cultural differences between the development teams behind these models which led to their existence in the first place. Culturally, the Japanese level of attention to detail, their insistence on rock solid QA testing (ever seen a bug in a FF game?) and obssession with meta management mean that their RPGs operate on a slightly different level of immersion and engagement when compared to Bioware's. Western devs tend to focus on freedom, openness and choice, which leads to a different kind of immersion and value.

Disagree.

There's no convergence,  it's a matter of cutting development costs.  It costs a great deal less to have a game that's a linear path than it does to have a game with divergence.  A game with divergence requires each different path to be plotted,  and a well done one plots many different paths,  essentially a fully connected graph to all points,  with each edge,  cost increases and development time increases. (Think of each choice as a point,  and the edges different paths to the points).

Bioware is doing this because it's cheaper,  and because their intended market isn't a big fan of dialogue or reading,  just awesome-button action.

JRPGs are actually a static line from the 80's,   even they'll admit it,  while interaction has evolved in WRPGs, JRPGs stick with Nintendoesque linear path gameplay,  because that's actually preferred in Japan.  Japan's a big fan of interactive movies,  rather than non-linear gameplay.

Personally,  I'm a fan of early 00's JRPGs,  Final Fantasy 7,  Parasite Eve,  and others on the Psx.  I even found Valkyria Chronicles to be very well done.  But JRPGs are just a linear path and story heavy.  Bioware's latest offerings weren't trying to emulate that,  they were trying to emulate Action Games.  ME2 didn't shift into a shooter to emulate JRPGs,  it was to try and grab Gears of War fans,  DA2 didn't shift to try and emulate JRPGs,  it was to downplay RPG mechanics in favor of fast action.

As far as bugs go,  well,  it's a two-fold thing.  First,  console games are supposed to be relatively bug-free as there's no guarantee of patching them and console manufacturers have a low tolerance for bugs.  Second,  the Japanese have a different attitude towards quality.  They pride themselves on quality products,  and problems equate to failure in Japan,  failure even today equates to low job security,  in many cases failure means you're expected to resign.

This is in contrast to Western studios,  it seems the general line of thinking today is that a game is ready for release when it's bug list appears to be able to be fixed between release to manufacturing and the store shelves.  Meaning,  2 weeks worth of bugs is acceptable for RTM,  as they'll just "Patch it on day 1".  Which rarely seems to work out.  In Western studios,  it's not "Is it done?" it's "Is it close enough to being done?".  It's a way for publishers to shave 2 weeks out of the development cycle.

[Siansonea]

The bottom line is that people don't like change, so all these people who grew up with this very abstract unvoiced pick-from-a-list response paradigm just can't seem to embrace the new system. And it all comes down to that ridiculous concept of "immersion". These people want to "be" in the game themselves. Well, these aren't first-person games, they're THIRD person games. It's not "you" in the game, it never was, and it never will be, no matter how much you recite dialog aloud or silently in your mind (which, by the way, is not the epitome of imagination). Personally I find that whole mindset foreign, I play an RPG to experience the protagonist's story, and influence variables. I do not project myself into the game. For one thing, playing a game as "me" has zero replay value. For two thing, I would be limited in LIs and other choices, if all I did was what *I* would do.

This whole argument reminds me of people's reactions at the end of the silent film era. "Sound is ruining movies! It'll never catch on! It doesn't suit the medium!"

[Siansonea]

Galad22 wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
No, it's not that you are too old. It's that for some reason the newer crop of gamers want all games to have mechanics or options that are relatively the same. That's what baffles me. Why is it that every game has to be relatively the same as every other game???

What baffles me about it even more is when I hear it from the developers, like Mke Laidlaw. He speaks about "preventing stagntaion" and progress in the types of games made, but what he is describing is actually the process by which DA is becoming more like every other game that is released.

Indeed making every game more or less the same is not evolution.

Diversity is good thing in everything, it annoys me that some people can't see that.

And yet the whole purpose of this thread is to go back to the way things used to be. So the whole "let's not make every game the same" argument rings rather hollow, all things considered. That's exactly what the OP is suggesting. They just want the games to all be the same in the way that THEY prefer. If companies want to make micromanagement games for people who want them, hey, more power to them. If they stop making the voiced-protagonist games that I like, I guess I'll have to go back to watching movies and reading books or something. No biggie. We'll see what direction market forces push the industry toward. But if Western games become as rigidly codified as Japanese games, if it all becomes about adhering to a laundry list of "genre conventions", then the industry will not grow, and indeed my interest in games will return from whence it came.

[Blood-Lord Thanatos]

I have absolutely no problem with non-interactive cutscenes, Voiced protagonists, and the Dialogue wheel. If the Developers want to tell a story using specific techniques or details, thats their call. I don't much care about the future of gaming, it will take care of itself, and frankly older videogames were not the paragons some people make them out to be.

[Tommy6860]

Siansonea II wrote...

I love having a voiced protagonist. I think the people who are nerdraging over this need to get with the times and quit harping over the fact that games are evolving. I could never get into Dragon Age Origins because of the silent protagonist, I've always felt that it was peculiar to have a cinematic cutscene where one person is completely silent and you just read what they say. Unnatural, that is. I wouldn't mind multiple voices, but I think the way Dragon Age II handled it was close to perfect.

This has nothing to do with how games are evolving and barring the ad hominem, I can agree with this sentiment to an extent on how a voiced PC can be great, but only if the inflections, physical gestures and expressions fit the expectations; they do little of that in DA2. If you get some kind of depth and immersion from pre-determined responses, that many times, don't even fit the dialogue choice one makes, then that is fine. I don't know anyone who even in the real world, operates with a modicum of sanity with that kind of conversation system.

My female mage had the Diplomatic personality, and she was quite the paragon of sweetness and light. My male mage had the Humorous personality, and he was consistently the rakish ne'er-do-well who ultimately chose to do the right thing (usually). The other female mage I'm currently playing (who is a Blood Mage and pro-Templar, go figure) has the Ruthless personality, and she comes across very differently than the other two I've played. So even though I'm staying in the Mage realm (the other classes just don't interest me so far) I'm having very different character experiences.

Seriously, you actually got that from this game, despite the fact that the outcome of your dialogue choices, being female or male, pro-mage or pro-templar, actually didn't change the outcome of the game??? The fact that you are forced into mini-sidequests that have zero relevance to the disjointed story, may be testament to your dislike for engaging storylines like Origins. Apologies if that sounds condescending, my intention is far from that and and it is easier to read words and take it that way, than it is to talk in person. You may be the type that just cannot get into the depth of epic RPGs, and there's nothing wrong with that, but your descriptions do not fit the bill.

I think this is the direction the industry is moving toward, and it will continue to be refined and improved as technology is refined and improved, but it's still much more of an "immersive" (I hate that word) experience for me to see and hear my character speaking, rather than imagine that the protagonist is some version of "me".

There is some truth in that, as techonolgy is getting better in computing and graphics. But, it also makes it harder and more costly to make games along the lines of Origins. So streamlining games into easier to develop action style games that require little emotional/character interaction is what they are developing, while using graphical elements from other game series for faster implementation. It also has more to do with profits and trends, than it has with the industry moving forward; moving forward, at least in the sense you are conveying anyway. Big corporations like EA take notice to how well the MWs, etal do on consoles, and then the need to sate the shareholders becomes the modus operandi of their business structure when they acquire the indy game developers that do well.

Unfortuately, DA2 didn't appeal to much iof the console crowd as well, as many of those gamers expected the classic epicness of Origins as well, and the apparent backlash from all platformers seems universal.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 09 avril 2011 - 05:37 .

[Merced652]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sorry I missed this earlier

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

But what if I want choices and a voiced PC and some non-interactive cutscenes? Like, say, The Witcher?

Then play The Witcher and its sequels.  Clearly those games are already being made.  Your games already exist; you don't need BioWare to make them.

Where are my games?  Where are the games with pausable stat-driven combat and a silent PC?

The problem is that TW isn't a substitute unless you're also happy with twitch combat and a precreated PC.

Yet bioware is increasingly headed down that road and i haven't once you seen you speak out against it. 

[Tommy6860]

sleepyowlet wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

I love having a voiced protagonist. I think the people who are nerdraging over this need to get with the times and quit harping over the fact that games are evolving. I could never get into Dragon Age Origins because of the silent protagonist, I've always felt that it was peculiar to have a cinematic cutscene where one person is completely silent and you just read what they say. Unnatural, that is. I wouldn't mind multiple voices, but I think the way Dragon Age II handled it was close to perfect. My female mage had the Diplomatic personality, and she was quite the paragon of sweetness and light. My male mage had the Humorous personality, and he was consistently the rakish ne'er-do-well who ultimately chose to do the right thing (usually). The other female mage I'm currently playing (who is a Blood Mage and pro-Templar, go figure) has the Ruthless personality, and she comes across very differently than the other two I've played. So even though I'm staying in the Mage realm (the other classes just don't interest me so far) I'm having very different character experiences. I think this is the direction the industry is moving toward, and it will continue to be refined and improved as technology is refined and improved, but it's still much more of an "immersive" (I hate that word) experience for me to see and hear my character speaking, rather than imagine that the protagonist is some version of "me".

Posts like this make me want to bite into my keyboard.

Nerdraging, are we? Well, I'll try to stay civil, though I'm not sure I'll suceed.
You're on the winning side. Kudos to you. Well, some of us would like to continue using their imaginations when it comes to their PCs, thank you very much. And giving our characters a personality of their own has nothing to do with Mary-Sueing through the game.

So you've got a nice mage, a sarcastic mage and a jerk-mage. Nice. You know, when you'll play the other classes you'll be stuck with those exact personalities again. If that's fine with you, well, fine. For me it isn't. I don't like having a protagonist with the emotional range of a teaspoon who randomly starts trolling people without my say-so, just because I use more humorous responses than others. I'd like to do the role-playing myself, I don't like it when a computer does it for me.

I have about eight different Wardens, and they are all in posession of a very distinct personality. One that I made up and applied. Seven of those eight have spared Loghain - and each of them had a different reason for doing so. My two city-elves have mostly the same built, class and stat-wise, but they are very different. One is a charming trickster, and again, most of that happens inside my head, the other one was a very withdrawn, sometimes angry young woman. Both told Cailan that they killed an Arl's son because he raped their friend, but Lyrill snarled that sentence, whereas Chaeli batted her eyelashes and said it in a sugary-sweet tone. My imagination again. I feel really sorry for people who don't have one, or are too lazy to use theirs.

Just because you don't care about these things and are happy with what you get, you really don't need to look down your nose at those of us who don't share your opinion. It has nothing to do with "going with the times" - something that's new isn't necessarily better, just different.

WOW!

Coming from you, that's about as angry as I have ever seen you post here in these forums. But I agree with you wholeheartedly. Your city elves brought back memories of may favorite developed character and the sadness that was being a "City Elf". Just that one aspect of a my own PC develpment has more depth than the whole game of a sequel to that I thought was Dragon Age: Origins. To add, I have done 14 warden playthroughs as mages, rogues and warriors from each race and story creation. I didn't do dwarves though. I still find great immersion with them.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 09 avril 2011 - 07:12 .

[Tommy6860]

JabberJaww wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

Following your thinking, if you encountered one, then it isn't an RPG, if you really played an RPG, then you didn't truly encounter one. Sound confusing, I am just gong along your train of thought.

So following your thinking; Your idea of an RPG is correct and mine is wrong????

Ok so, an RPG should only be done a certain way without any variations what so ever? Did you write the RPG rules? Shouldn't an RPG be whatever the player chooses, thus being a role? 

I am just going along with your train of thought

No, I didn't say that, you did, as what I originally replied to was cognitive dissonance on your end. I gave an example from my view that just follows yours, you then now post non sequitur.

[AlanC9]

Merced652 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Sorry I missed this earlier

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

But what if I want choices and a voiced PC and some non-interactive cutscenes? Like, say, The Witcher?

Then play The Witcher and its sequels.  Clearly those games are already being made.  Your games already exist; you don't need BioWare to make them.

Where are my games?  Where are the games with pausable stat-driven combat and a silent PC?

The problem is that TW isn't a substitute unless you're also happy with twitch combat and a precreated PC.

Yet bioware is increasingly headed down that road and i haven't once you seen you speak out against it. 

True. I've had no reason to. I liked TW, myself, although I didn't think it was as great as some of its supporters claim. I'm not against twitch combat -- either stat based or twitch is fine with me, though I wouldn't want stat-based to go away completely. And Bio simply hasn't gone to precreated PCs like Geralt yet -- Hawke is hardly any more predefined than my Bhaalspawns were. Obviously, that means that I don't agree with some of the arguments here against a VO protagonist, though as I said I'm neutral on the feature.

The point I was making is that Bio games and CD Projekt games aren't fungible even for someone who likes both styles, so telling someone to go play TW and sequels isn't productive.

[Tommy6860]

Kimaka wrote...


They need to put in some sort of toggle for players to use who do want to know exactly what is going to be said instead of being stuck with picking paraphrases. I wonder if there is a way to mod this in.

How would that work, when the reponses built into trh game are already determined? What I am saying is, that it wouldn't make much difference, outside of changing the script in the game. Even if you could make that choice with the script as it is, the answers still would not meet the expectations of what I thought it "should" be, as opposed wo what I thought it "would" be otherwise.

[sleepyowlet]

Siansonea II wrote...

The bottom line is that people don't like change, so all these people who grew up with this very abstract unvoiced pick-from-a-list response paradigm just can't seem to embrace the new system. And it all comes down to that ridiculous concept of "immersion". These people want to "be" in the game themselves. Well, these aren't first-person games, they're THIRD person games. It's not "you" in the game, it never was, and it never will be, no matter how much you recite dialog aloud or silently in your mind (which, by the way, is not the epitome of imagination). Personally I find that whole mindset foreign, I play an RPG to experience the protagonist's story, and influence variables. I do not project myself into the game. For one thing, playing a game as "me" has zero replay value. For two thing, I would be limited in LIs and other choices, if all I did was what *I* would do.

This whole argument reminds me of people's reactions at the end of the silent film era. "Sound is ruining movies! It'll never catch on! It doesn't suit the medium!"

Ugh. "This ridiculous concept if immersion" is what Role-playing-games are all about. You might want to look up what the phrase means. The perspective you see your character/avatar from has nothing whatsoever to do with this - some people just like seeing where their feet are, or like actually seeing the spiffy new armour their avatar is dressed in.
CRPGs are about emulating a Pen and Paper role-playing session. They encourage the player to become somebody else (role-playing). Of course the medium is limited by it's very nature, but it can still emulate the very essentials - which is making up a character (pesonality and all) and role-playing it. The dialogue-wheel, the count the responses and apply mechanic and, yes, the voiced character take that away from me. I'm no longer playing my own character, I play BioWare's character. This is not role-playing, this is playing an adventure game - which is a completely different animal.
If you don't project yourself into the character (mind you, this has nothing to do with playing as yourself), you are not role-playing. If you don't like projecting yourself into a character, feel what they feel, you might want to play a different kind of game. So please stop insulting and belittling others for actually wanting to role-play in a role-playing-game.

[erynnar]

Tommy6860 wrote...

sleepyowlet wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

I love having a voiced protagonist. I think the people who are nerdraging over this need to get with the times and quit harping over the fact that games are evolving. I could never get into Dragon Age Origins because of the silent protagonist, I've always felt that it was peculiar to have a cinematic cutscene where one person is completely silent and you just read what they say. Unnatural, that is. I wouldn't mind multiple voices, but I think the way Dragon Age II handled it was close to perfect. My female mage had the Diplomatic personality, and she was quite the paragon of sweetness and light. My male mage had the Humorous personality, and he was consistently the rakish ne'er-do-well who ultimately chose to do the right thing (usually). The other female mage I'm currently playing (who is a Blood Mage and pro-Templar, go figure) has the Ruthless personality, and she comes across very differently than the other two I've played. So even though I'm staying in the Mage realm (the other classes just don't interest me so far) I'm having very different character experiences. I think this is the direction the industry is moving toward, and it will continue to be refined and improved as technology is refined and improved, but it's still much more of an "immersive" (I hate that word) experience for me to see and hear my character speaking, rather than imagine that the protagonist is some version of "me".

Posts like this make me want to bite into my keyboard.

Nerdraging, are we? Well, I'll try to stay civil, though I'm not sure I'll suceed.
You're on the winning side. Kudos to you. Well, some of us would like to continue using their imaginations when it comes to their PCs, thank you very much. And giving our characters a personality of their own has nothing to do with Mary-Sueing through the game.

So you've got a nice mage, a sarcastic mage and a jerk-mage. Nice. You know, when you'll play the other classes you'll be stuck with those exact personalities again. If that's fine with you, well, fine. For me it isn't. I don't like having a protagonist with the emotional range of a teaspoon who randomly starts trolling people without my say-so, just because I use more humorous responses than others. I'd like to do the role-playing myself, I don't like it when a computer does it for me.

I have about eight different Wardens, and they are all in posession of a very distinct personality. One that I made up and applied. Seven of those eight have spared Loghain - and each of them had a different reason for doing so. My two city-elves have mostly the same built, class and stat-wise, but they are very different. One is a charming trickster, and again, most of that happens inside my head, the other one was a very withdrawn, sometimes angry young woman. Both told Cailan that they killed an Arl's son because he raped their friend, but Lyrill snarled that sentence, whereas Chaeli batted her eyelashes and said it in a sugary-sweet tone. My imagination again. I feel really sorry for people who don't have one, or are too lazy to use theirs.

Just because you don't care about these things and are happy with what you get, you really don't need to look down your nose at those of us who don't share your opinion. It has nothing to do with "going with the times" - something that's new isn't necessarily better, just different.

WOW!

Coming from you, that's about as angry as I have ever seen
you post here in these forums. But I agree with you wholeheartedly. Your city elves brought back memories of
may favorite developed character and the sadness that was bheing a "City
Elf". Just that one aspect of a my own PC develpment has more depth than
the whole game of a sequel to that I thought was Dragon Age; Origins. To add, I have dome 14 warden playthroughs as mages, rogues and warriors from each race and story creation. I didn't do dwarves though. I still find great immersion with them.

I agree with sleepyowlet (I think stupid quote codes).  I despise the convo wheel with the passion of a thousand suns. It doesn't go with the fantasy style of the game, only three choices for convo (unless you get the stupid heart, for ****'s sake like I am some fourteen year old girl),  Half the time I didn't know what my character was going to say...SURPRISE!  And if I have to put up with the wheel of stupid...at least give me the blue and red mouse button options like in ME so I can stab someone in the eye and stop their convo.

And dammit, get the ME out of my DA. I didn't want an exact copy of DAO, nor did I want ME in DA drag.

Preferably I would love to see the wheel of stupid annilated and consigned to oblivion until such time as the technology changes to make the best of both worlds. Me, I prefer to read books than watch movies. I use my imagination, because I have one. I prefer to use that imagination to voice my own protagonists they all have their own personalities. And I too feel sorry for those with no imaginations or the laziness and constant need for hand holding and movies so that one isn't needed because it's just "too" hard to do so.

But apparently imagination loses to "show me."  yippee! <_<

One other thing, the voice of my Hawke now goes with the face I created. As such I can't make another one as they would not be Hawke.  So replay for me gets shot out the window. Another bonus of making up how they sound in my head.

Oh, and despite the snark, I hope I managed to keep my "nerdrage" to a slow boil.

Modifié par erynnar, 09 avril 2011 - 06:41 .