996 réponses à ce sujet

[Stegoceras]

JabberJaww wrote...

Stegoceras wrote...

JabberJaww wrote...

I rarely found a dialog choice in DA:O (or any other RPG of that type) any where near what I would want my character to say.

The choices always ranged from the ridiculously angelic, to the ridiculously evil.

So whether or not the main is fully voiced with the dialog wheel, or the actually dialog being chosen.. we are given the choices the game developers want us to have. So you take away the fully voiced Hawke and replace it with a silent Hawke but with the EXACT same dialog lines to choose rather than hear him say them would make the game better?

Brilliant comment, the way I read it you say that you can choose any
line from the range spanning good to evil. Which I think leaves little
out of the picture. Unless you want to say a line that makes no sense
and is not related to the conversation.

Of course it's not your words and occassionaly none of the words describe your feeling but I think what you stated here made no sense at all.

How many choices are you given? It's usually the angelic good one, a snarky comedic one, a nuetral one then the over the top evil response.

The dialog does not determine how I am playing MY character. I know going in I want to play as the hero at first then I will play evil. I venture to say a lot of RPG gamers are structured like that.. if not, well awesome for them, everyone plays differently. So if the dialog rarely describes what I really want to say, why would I care in which way it is said? A wheel or actual written print? I dont. 

I do agree that having the dialog there stops any surprise dialog that was not intended. 

I think you sort of misunderstood, I was commenting on the fact that you say that replies range (as I read as everything in between as well) from good to evil, then what more is there.
It's great that your set on a certain course and that sometimes things are too evil or not evil enough as you think. But I feel that DA2 is not a step forward in this only offering a paltry three options. I'm quite certain many games in the past had many choices ranging between good, evil and the "I don't give a damn".

[JabberJaww]

mrcrusty wrote...

Fair enough. I'm also not a fan of the obvious good/bad/"witty" choices you're given in RPGs, if you even get those three. Out of curiosity, what RPGs have you played over the years?

It's sort of an annoying paradigm that the RPGs with the best options in terms of dialogue aren't always the best in terms of gameplay or combat.

KoTor was my first

After that have played, NWN, NWN2, Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Kotor 2 (of course) tried Two Worlds, Two Worlds 2, Mass Effect 1 & 2, Oblivian a few other ones here and there.. Never dove into Baldurs Gate series though. 

The dialog was interesting, but never made the games great for me, it was other aspects. 

[Siansonea]

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".

[Warrcry13]

I like the voiced Player Character.

[JabberJaww]

Stegoceras wrote...

JabberJaww wrote...

Stegoceras wrote...

JabberJaww wrote...

I rarely found a dialog choice in DA:O (or any other RPG of that type) any where near what I would want my character to say.

The choices always ranged from the ridiculously angelic, to the ridiculously evil.

So whether or not the main is fully voiced with the dialog wheel, or the actually dialog being chosen.. we are given the choices the game developers want us to have. So you take away the fully voiced Hawke and replace it with a silent Hawke but with the EXACT same dialog lines to choose rather than hear him say them would make the game better?

Brilliant comment, the way I read it you say that you can choose any
line from the range spanning good to evil. Which I think leaves little
out of the picture. Unless you want to say a line that makes no sense
and is not related to the conversation.

Of course it's not your words and occassionaly none of the words describe your feeling but I think what you stated here made no sense at all.

How many choices are you given? It's usually the angelic good one, a snarky comedic one, a nuetral one then the over the top evil response.

The dialog does not determine how I am playing MY character. I know going in I want to play as the hero at first then I will play evil. I venture to say a lot of RPG gamers are structured like that.. if not, well awesome for them, everyone plays differently. So if the dialog rarely describes what I really want to say, why would I care in which way it is said? A wheel or actual written print? I dont. 

I do agree that having the dialog there stops any surprise dialog that was not intended. 

I think you sort of misunderstood, I was commenting on the fact that you say that replies range (as I read as everything in between as well) from good to evil, then what more is there.
It's great that your set on a certain course and that sometimes things are too evil or not evil enough as you think. But I feel that DA2 is not a step forward in this only offering a paltry three options. I'm quite certain many games in the past had many choices ranging between good, evil and the "I don't give a damn".

There have definitely been some very good points made in the thread as to why the wheel may not have been the best choice as far as role playing is concerned.. especially since DA:O did not have the option. Mass Effect we know we get a fully voiced Shepard. 

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

JabberJaww wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Fair enough. I'm also not a fan of the obvious good/bad/"witty" choices you're given in RPGs, if you even get those three. Out of curiosity, what RPGs have you played over the years?

It's sort of an annoying paradigm that the RPGs with the best options in terms of dialogue aren't always the best in terms of gameplay or combat.

KoTor was my first

After that have played, NWN, NWN2, Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Kotor 2 (of course) tried Two Worlds, Two Worlds 2, Mass Effect 1 & 2, Oblivian a few other ones here and there.. Never dove into Baldurs Gate series though. 

The dialog was interesting, but never made the games great for me, it was other aspects. 

Try Vampires: The Masquerade - Bloodlines. I'd say try Planescape: Torment, it's probably the best you'll get in an RPG in terms of dialog, writing and story but it's outdated graphically and technically. That may put you off. VtMB is outdated too, but still modern enough to get by. It's built on the Source Engine, like HL 2 and of Valve's games after it.

[Stegoceras]

JabberJaww wrote...

There have definitely been some very good points made in the thread as to why the wheel may not have been the best choice as far as role playing is concerned.. especially since DA:O did not have the option. Mass Effect we know we get a fully voiced Shepard. 

Agreed, I'd say, lines + portagonist voice would be ideal then. Or a vastly improved wheel that would work on DA.

[slimgrin]

mrcrusty wrote...

Out of curiosity, what RPGs have you played over the years?

ME series, DA:O, TW1, Divine Divinity series, Morrowind, Fallout, and Oblivion. Dabbled with a few others like Gothic series.

A fairly paltry list actually. On topic, I'm fine with either a silent or voiced pc. I got used to it in Origins rather quickly.

Modifié par slimgrin, 08 avril 2011 - 03:14 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

slimgrin wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Out of curiosity, what RPGs have you played over the years?

ME series, DA:O, TW1, Divine Divinity series, Morrowind, Fallout, and Oblivion. Dabbled with a few others like Gothic series.

A fairly paltry list actually. On topic, I'm fine with either a silent or voiced pc. I got used to it in Origins rather quickly.

You should try KotOR. Not too old, not buggy, and a good game overall. Made by Bioware of course.

[JabberJaww]

mrcrusty wrote...

JabberJaww wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Fair enough. I'm also not a fan of the obvious good/bad/"witty" choices you're given in RPGs, if you even get those three. Out of curiosity, what RPGs have you played over the years?

It's sort of an annoying paradigm that the RPGs with the best options in terms of dialogue aren't always the best in terms of gameplay or combat.

KoTor was my first

After that have played, NWN, NWN2, Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Kotor 2 (of course) tried Two Worlds, Two Worlds 2, Mass Effect 1 & 2, Oblivian a few other ones here and there.. Never dove into Baldurs Gate series though. 

The dialog was interesting, but never made the games great for me, it was other aspects. 

Try Vampires: The Masquerade - Bloodlines. I'd say try Planescape: Torment, it's probably the best you'll get in an RPG in terms of dialog, writing and story but it's outdated graphically and technically. That may put you off. VtMB is outdated too, but still modern enough to get by. It's built on the Source Engine, like HL 2 and of Valve's games after it.

I actually have Vampires on Direct2Drive... never played too far into it, but enjoyed the little time I spent. Will have to give it another shot. I have heard Planetscape is very good

[JabberJaww]

mrcrusty wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Out of curiosity, what RPGs have you played over the years?

ME series, DA:O, TW1, Divine Divinity series, Morrowind, Fallout, and Oblivion. Dabbled with a few others like Gothic series.

A fairly paltry list actually. On topic, I'm fine with either a silent or voiced pc. I got used to it in Origins rather quickly.

You should try KotOR. Not too old, not buggy, and a good game overall. Made by Bioware of course.

I wish Kotor would be Windows 7 compatable.. I would still play that game. 

[inkjay]

^^^ I bought KOTOR on Steam and can play it no problem. (On win 7 of course)

mrcrusty wrote...

The dialog options ranging from angelic to puppy eating is really a Bioware writing thing. It's been noticeable to me since KotOR. Other games and other companies don't always suffer from this.

Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines, Neverwinter Nights 2: Mask of the Betrayer and the obvious Planescape: Torment are some examples. More recently (though to a lesser degree than the above), Fallout: New Vegas.

I actually like the VtMB way of handling dialog. It accentuates the tone by changing the color and font of the options your character is given. I particularly like the Malkaivian dialog and how that was handled.

You are really really asking too much of Bioware nowadays. That kind of system worked in KOTOR because the universe lends itself to that kind of binary oppossition. Star Wars movies (the good ones) are always being compared to westerns (not that they are) because they include many of their thematic elements. (The struggle of good vs evil mainly) Everything in the movies works around that concept. Even Obsidian understood this for the sequel, and its regarded the better story by many, albeit and incomplete and buggy game.

The problem with Bioware is that they feel that very system applies to everything under the sun (it's their "thing" now) so they had been using it from then on with very mixed results. This is where other games like the ones you mentioned succeed and DA2 fails. Yes, the conflict against the "evil" darkspawn is as straight as a fantasy universe can be (and even then its not like you have the option of truly being "the bad guy", so you'll always end up the hero) but the very nuances concerning other issues, like the conflict between Templars and Mages or mercenaries and smugglers isn't as clear cut.

Thats why the player feels like the choices within the game are prohibitive of the development of his character, you are forced to take sides, often to similar outcomes, in parts where you might even consider it better to be neutral, and neutrality is frowned upon in this kind of binary universes because it grants no perks. Its not only a stylistic choice either, but it has become one of the many bullet-points required in Bioware's design documents, like having a voiced protagonist, romances, etc etc.

Modifié par inkjay, 08 avril 2011 - 03:22 .

[Tirigon]

Warheadz wrote...

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Is BioWare the George Lucas of video game developers?

Isn't that George Lucas and Steven Spielberg?

And if they keep this going, then yes.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D



Epic!!!!!!!!!

[Phantom13NWN2]

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!

This. I whole heartedly agree with this, the moment you lose control of your character roleplaying dissapears.

[Abispa]

The level designs and face-palm story moments (discovering that the Fade scene took place in the Gallows *shudder*) were the biggest weaknesses in DA2. The voiced characters, dialog wheel and cinematics were the improvements over the first game.

Modifié par Abispa, 08 avril 2011 - 04:40 .

[Tommy6860]

JabberJaww wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

JabberJaww wrote...

Eurypterid wrote...

JabberJaww wrote...

I rarely found a dialog choice in DA:O (or any other RPG of that type) any where near what I would want my character to say.

The choices always ranged from the ridiculously angelic, to the ridiculously evil.

So whether or not the main is fully voiced with the dialog wheel, or the actually dialog being chosen.. we are given the choices the game developers want us to have. So you take away the fully voiced Hawke and replace it with a silent Hawke but with the EXACT same dialog lines to choose rather than hear him say them would make the game better?

You're missing the point the same way F-C is. The problem isn't the fact that you can only choose what the developers write into the game. That's fine. The issue is that with the dialog wheel you don't know what you're choosing. You make a choice and many times you end up going "What? That's not what I understood Hawke would say"

I like the dialog wheel, I get a laugh out of what is said quite a bit. 

I also like the traditional dialog choices. 

My point is whether or not I have to read and choose or simply choose an option on the wheel, I know going in which way I am going to play. Good or evil. So reading the choices or hearing them doesn't change my choice. Its how I want my character to play and who I want to be friends or rivals with. 

I understand that Bioware games don't always cater to much bigger and larger archtypes and pathways, but why limit yourself to the good/evil paradigm?

That's less of playing a role, it's more like playing a game. I want to complete the game with max good/bad points. It's not a bad thing, but again, why limit yourself to such extremes?

Now, this isn't aimed at any game in particular, but a well written game will not always force the player to act in such a binary manner. It rewards players for crafting a personality and sticking to that personality in making choices consistent with the personality, or even changing personality as the consequences of the choices become apparent. Okay, I can't name any concrete examples, but it's a little dream of mine.



One of the eloquent conflicts that Dragon Age 2 brings up (though poorly executed) was the paradigm of Mage v Templar, where there isn't a clear distinction between good v evil. There is only two sides, both of which have their mix of good, bad and inbetweeners. How do you make the decision which one to side with (again, DA 2 flaw because it doesn't matter)?

The simple good/evil paradigm is irrelevant. These are human organisations with their own motivations and goals. Most of which, are good at the core, but are corrupted by the evil actions that make it possible. How will you decide then?

The answer would be something along the lines of you deciding based upon the choices your character has made since the beginning, combined with the personality you crafted for the character. That's ideally what roleplaying gets you. It's not going to happen with everyone, but if you are immersed in the game, invested in your character and their adventures, then that's how you will look at things.

By adding the wheel, making dialog non specific, making the protagonist voiced, it takes away the choice from the player in three important aspects that help to build that connection with the character. It also means that the character can't be explored with the same depth otherwise, because part of the character is pre-conceived and has a personality of it's own.

This is fine with an interactive story, or an interactive movie, or a JRPG. But for a cRPG? Well, it depends on the execution. If there is enough narrative and roleplaying depth, then it's forgivable. Games like Witcher and PS:T fall under this category. Similarly so the game is so far removed from being a traditional cRPG that it's no longer an issue. The Mass Effect games fall under this category.

As far as I can see however, Dragon Age 2 falls under neither.

I understand the benefits of a readable dialog, but in both readable and voiced I am usually not entirely pleased with the choices. Believe me, I would welcome an RPG where the dialog choices actually made me think and change paths.. that would truly be a GREAT game. I just have not encoutered one. Have had tons of fun playing them through the years. For me the fun comes from the building and specing my char. 

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.

[nicethugbert]

Wulfram wrote...

If anything, I find Hawke less emotional than the warden - in Origins you didn't get the close ups, so you could fill in your own expression for the warden, while in DA2 you can see and hear the lack of reaction.

Yeah, Bioware should have been lazy and let us use our imaginations instead.  Um, no.

[Tirigon]

nicethugbert wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

If anything, I find Hawke less emotional than the warden - in Origins you didn't get the close ups, so you could fill in your own expression for the warden, while in DA2 you can see and hear the lack of reaction.

Yeah, Bioware should have been lazy and let us use our imaginations instead.  Um, no.

Um, yes, they should have. As it is, they showed their inability to create a good character.

[AlanC9]

We didn't get close-ups of the Warden's blank expression in Origins? What game was I playing?

[Byth]

Um, seeing how a lot of RPG's are moving to voiced PC's(well, not Bethesda but I don't see how that would work in they're games) I don't think we'll see it go away any time soon. I mean, even The Witcher 2 has paraphrasing.

Also, neither way of conversation is better than the other. Saying Dialogue Tree's are better because you have to use your imagination doesn't seem like a valid argument(As I easily RP'd as Hawke and The Warden).

[sleepyowlet]

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.

[Tirigon]

sleepyowlet wrote...

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.

QFT.

Can´t really add anything:)

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

ItsToofy wrote...

That's a particularly ignorant thing to say

Yet you can't offer an counter example.  :D:D

[AkiKishi]

Phantom13NWN2 wrote...

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!

This. I whole heartedly agree with this, the moment you lose control of your character roleplaying dissapears.

This is true. However there is a new generation of CRPGs players who define roleplaying simply as being able to make a choice. That makes them a lot easier to please.

[daymz]

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!

I agree (better late than never) about the dialogue wheel/voiced PC.

I loved Morrigan, I was a real sweetheart, nice guy and she still fell for me! That girl had layers!