305 réponses à ce sujet

[Zanallen]

erynnar wrote...

I have thought about that.  And the conclusion I come to is yes, and no. Yes I would prefer to have "****** off" come out of my Hawke's mouth if I pick that option.  But really, I just can't feel part of the world when I am just playing parts of a game to get to basically pieces of a movie.

I agree with people that the expressions of the Warden could have been a lot better. So I ask people who prefer the VO because of that wooden puppet feeling...would you all have liked the silent protragonist better if you had felt they had expressions to go along with what you picked to say? Would that have helped your immersion?

And Rockpopple gave me a very nice insight into...it's what Hawke thinks in her head and but she filters it before she says it (ie my picking "Hey I'm a mage" when talking to Cullen, which isn't what I said and even if I had he would have ignored it like he ignores my spellcasting).  And having a mouse over that tells you what the paraphrase will lead to would help in that regard.

But in the end, a VO is just someone else I am watching. I am a first person player, not a third person player like in ME (which I love, but I am not Shep. I like watching what Shep gets up to, but I am not her).

Interesting. Well, I guess it all just comes down to a fundamental difference in opinion. I can respect that. Either way could work, honestly. As I have said, both choices have their merits and their faults. It really depends on what the majority of fans prefer and how Bioware wants to handle the issue in future installments.

[AngryFrozenWater]

@Rockpopple: I'll bet that the gamers will even complain about this new innovative and more economic dialogue system. The mini game could be too hard for the CoD fans (who never came), you know. Chances are that for DA4 BW will remove the mime actors. They'll just return to a full text system. That way they can poop out a new DA title every month! Hang on... Phone is ringing. "Ah. Mr Riccitiello. The doctors? Yes, I agree they are useless. Of course I'll accept. Cya, John." *click*

Trying to get back on topic... For me the third person view does little to identify me with the character. It feels like I am controlling the character and not playing the character. I am fine with that, though, because the character doesn't look like me anyway. A thing that I liked about Oblivion was that you could switch from third person view to first person view. In first person view it feels like you see the world and you are in control. That helps me to identify with the character. A voice distracts from that. I could live with that if BW wouldn't give up PC VA. But I sure would like to see a first person view in DA3.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 04 mai 2011 - 07:04 .

[fightright2]

erynnar wrote...

fightright2 wrote...

For me, knowing exactly what my character is saying is important. I find I prefer an RPG without the VO, it allows me to apply my own voice and tone for my own perception and to me that seems more realistic as well as expressive.
It allows me to connect with those that I am engaged in conversation with and thus it allows me to immerse into the world better.
When I hear he VO, I find myself cringing over the tone and add that with the surprise of what actually was stated as opposed to the paraphrase...it just irked me throughout the dialogue that I couldn't get into the feel of the story.

Those were the same problems I had. I couldn't put myself into the world and be Hawke. So I really am not connected as much to the characters or Hawke. And it was so immersion breaking for me. I finally just had to settle for it being a click on movie rather than trying to be in the story.

Not nearly as enjoyable. But then the good Dr.s knew that when they decided not to use it in DAO. There was a very good reason for it.

And I snoozed and lost when Dragoonlordz beat me to it yet again. ROFL!

Did you find yourself frustrated/worried over which option to choose because the last option you chose wasn't at all like it's so-called paraphrase? Time and time again I found that after I chose, my Hawke's replies or questions wasn't true to it's paraphrase and it came out...for lack of a better word...weird.

It left me disappointed and puzzled and really I found myself wishing there were other options.

Other times I found I was only using the "nice" option over and over yet I wanted to maintain being tactful but wanted to ask or say something else instead. Investigate was usually in the serious tone only.
Which could be associated with the nice and tactful tone.

But having to worry over just what exactly is going to come out really took away from the immersion. At least for me.

[erynnar]

Zanallen wrote...

erynnar wrote...

I have thought about that.  And the conclusion I come to is yes, and no. Yes I would prefer to have "****** off" come out of my Hawke's mouth if I pick that option.  But really, I just can't feel part of the world when I am just playing parts of a game to get to basically pieces of a movie.

I agree with people that the expressions of the Warden could have been a lot better. So I ask people who prefer the VO because of that wooden puppet feeling...would you all have liked the silent protragonist better if you had felt they had expressions to go along with what you picked to say? Would that have helped your immersion?

And Rockpopple gave me a very nice insight into...it's what Hawke thinks in her head and but she filters it before she says it (ie my picking "Hey I'm a mage" when talking to Cullen, which isn't what I said and even if I had he would have ignored it like he ignores my spellcasting).  And having a mouse over that tells you what the paraphrase will lead to would help in that regard.

But in the end, a VO is just someone else I am watching. I am a first person player, not a third person player like in ME (which I love, but I am not Shep. I like watching what Shep gets up to, but I am not her).

Interesting. Well, I guess it all just comes down to a fundamental difference in opinion. I can respect that. Either way could work, honestly. As I have said, both choices have their merits and their faults. It really depends on what the majority of fans prefer and how Bioware wants to handle the issue in future installments.

Exactly! It really does just come down to personal pref. I totally respect others who felt the silent one is not as immersive. I was just wondering if those that felt that way felt that way because they don't like to imagine a voice and personality (which is fine, nothing wrong with that) or is it because the Warden didn't have appropriate expressions. Would expressions make it better for those who disliked the non-voiced version. I think that is worth looking into, if BioWare would.

I don't think the voiced versus non is really as simple as that.  And while the voiced works with ME because it is more of a shooter/cinematic with some RPG elements (more now in ME3, YAY), it doesn't really work, I think, for DA as it was more RPG with action elements. 

And neither did the creators who tried it out and found it broke immersion and people being able to be the Warden. Again for those that couldn't because of the non voice, was it really the no voice aspect or that the Warden had no lifelike expressions? I am very curious about that.

And no, lets not get into the popular pissing match of what is an RPG...again, please.

[erynnar]

fightright2 wrote...

erynnar wrote...

fightright2 wrote...

For me, knowing exactly what my character is saying is important. I find I prefer an RPG without the VO, it allows me to apply my own voice and tone for my own perception and to me that seems more realistic as well as expressive.
It allows me to connect with those that I am engaged in conversation with and thus it allows me to immerse into the world better.
When I hear he VO, I find myself cringing over the tone and add that with the surprise of what actually was stated as opposed to the paraphrase...it just irked me throughout the dialogue that I couldn't get into the feel of the story.

Those were the same problems I had. I couldn't put myself into the world and be Hawke. So I really am not connected as much to the characters or Hawke. And it was so immersion breaking for me. I finally just had to settle for it being a click on movie rather than trying to be in the story.

Not nearly as enjoyable. But then the good Dr.s knew that when they decided not to use it in DAO. There was a very good reason for it.

And I snoozed and lost when Dragoonlordz beat me to it yet again. ROFL!

Did you find yourself frustrated/worried over which option to choose because the last option you chose wasn't at all like it's so-called paraphrase? Time and time again I found that after I chose, my Hawke's replies or questions wasn't true to it's paraphrase and it came out...for lack of a better word...weird.

It left me disappointed and puzzled and really I found myself wishing there were other options.

Other times I found I was only using the "nice" option over and over yet I wanted to maintain being tactful but wanted to ask or say something else instead. Investigate was usually in the serious tone only.
Which could be associated with the nice and tactful tone.

But having to worry over just what exactly is going to come out really took away from the immersion. At least for me.

Yes, same here. I actually worried more over my choices of dialogue, and not in a good way.  It did seem easier to spam the snark button and just say "to hell with it."

[Dragoonlordz]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The term I can best use to describe DA2's RP'ing, is "Role-Watching game". An RWG.

 Love it. A new genre!

[Addai]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

You're not speaking for everyone- that is the point that I really shouldn't have to spell out.

I don't mind some voice effects in combat.  It's not material to a character and you can pretty much tune it out.

If you're trying to make the point that I don't speak for everyone, you should try saying "you don't speak for everyone" instead of saying I'm only speaking for myself.  Cause I'm not.  :D:D  

Voiced protagonists = win, unvoiced = fail.  Other aspects might make up for that fail, but unvoiced still = fail.

It all comes down to personal preference, Smiley.  It's when the devs and the people who prefer this style try to paint it as "innovative," the wave of the future and inherently superior that there's a problem.  This goes right along with the fixed outfits on companions, which is another change made for the sake of being more cinematic.

The irony being that the "innovation" is making all Bioware games exactly the same mealy mass market stuff with just a furniture change.

[erynnar]

Addai67 wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

You're not speaking for everyone- that is the point that I really shouldn't have to spell out.

I don't mind some voice effects in combat.  It's not material to a character and you can pretty much tune it out.

If you're trying to make the point that I don't speak for everyone, you should try saying "you don't speak for everyone" instead of saying I'm only speaking for myself.  Cause I'm not.  :D:D  

Voiced protagonists = win, unvoiced = fail.  Other aspects might make up for that fail, but unvoiced still = fail.

It all comes down to personal preference, Smiley.  It's when the devs and the people who prefer this style try to paint it as "innovative," the wave of the future and inherently superior that there's a problem.  This goes right along with the fixed outfits on companions, which is another change made for the sake of being more cinematic.

The irony being that the "innovation" is making all Bioware games exactly the same mealy mass market stuff with just a furniture change.

Yeah, I think that is one of the things that annoys me the most. The "this is so innovative" and "the future of games because it's so new and edgy and an improvement."  Which it isn't. It isn't innovative, it isn't new, and it isn't an improvement just a difference in preference.

[fightright2]

erynnar wrote...

fightright2 wrote...

erynnar wrote...

fightright2 wrote...

For me, knowing exactly what my character is saying is important. I find I prefer an RPG without the VO, it allows me to apply my own voice and tone for my own perception and to me that seems more realistic as well as expressive.
It allows me to connect with those that I am engaged in conversation with and thus it allows me to immerse into the world better.
When I hear he VO, I find myself cringing over the tone and add that with the surprise of what actually was stated as opposed to the paraphrase...it just irked me throughout the dialogue that I couldn't get into the feel of the story.

Those were the same problems I had. I couldn't put myself into the world and be Hawke. So I really am not connected as much to the characters or Hawke. And it was so immersion breaking for me. I finally just had to settle for it being a click on movie rather than trying to be in the story.

Not nearly as enjoyable. But then the good Dr.s knew that when they decided not to use it in DAO. There was a very good reason for it.

And I snoozed and lost when Dragoonlordz beat me to it yet again. ROFL!

Did you find yourself frustrated/worried over which option to choose because the last option you chose wasn't at all like it's so-called paraphrase? Time and time again I found that after I chose, my Hawke's replies or questions wasn't true to it's paraphrase and it came out...for lack of a better word...weird.

It left me disappointed and puzzled and really I found myself wishing there were other options.

Other times I found I was only using the "nice" option over and over yet I wanted to maintain being tactful but wanted to ask or say something else instead. Investigate was usually in the serious tone only.
Which could be associated with the nice and tactful tone.

But having to worry over just what exactly is going to come out really took away from the immersion. At least for me.

Yes, same here. I actually worried more over my choices of dialogue, and not in a good way.  It did seem easier to spam the snark button and just say "to hell with it."

Mhm, that's what I ended up doing.
Funny thing is that while I was playing DA2, my hub was playing Fallout New Vegas next to me and he states,"Talking shouldn't be that much trouble".
I agree.
Looking at his options over, I found myself slipping into his character more easily, and yet it was his game.

[fightright2]

For me, I miss eye to eye contact in first person.
Now if Fenris had sworn in Tevinter directly at me.

[erynnar]

fightright2 wrote...

erynnar wrote...

fightright2 wrote...

erynnar wrote...

fightright2 wrote...

For
me, knowing exactly what my character is saying is important. I find I
prefer an RPG without the VO, it allows me to apply my own voice and
tone for my own perception and to me that seems more realistic as well
as expressive.
It allows me to connect with those that I am engaged
in conversation with and thus it allows me to immerse into the world
better.
When I hear he VO, I find myself cringing over the tone and
add that with the surprise of what actually was stated as opposed to the
paraphrase...it just irked me throughout the dialogue that I couldn't
get into the feel of the story.

Those were the same
problems I had. I couldn't put myself into the world and be Hawke. So I
really am not connected as much to the characters or Hawke. And it was
so immersion breaking for me. I finally just had to settle for it being a
click on movie rather than trying to be in the story.

Not
nearly as enjoyable. But then the good Dr.s knew that when they decided
not to use it in DAO. There was a very good reason for it.

And I snoozed and lost when Dragoonlordz beat me to it yet again. ROFL!

Did
you find yourself frustrated/worried over which option to choose
because the last option you chose wasn't at all like it's so-called
paraphrase? Time and time again I found that after I chose, my Hawke's
replies or questions wasn't true to it's paraphrase and it came
out...for lack of a better word...weird.

It left me disappointed and puzzled and really I found myself wishing there were other options.

Other
times I found I was only using the "nice" option over and over yet I
wanted to maintain being tactful but wanted to ask or say something else instead. Investigate was usually in the serious tone only.
Which could be associated with the nice and tactful tone.

But having to worry over just what exactly is going to come out really took away from the immersion. At least for me.

Yes,
same here. I actually worried more over my choices of dialogue, and not
in a good way.  It did seem easier to spam the snark button and just
say "to hell with it."

Mhm, that's what I ended up doing.
Funny
thing is that while I was playing DA2, my hub was playing Fallout New
Vegas next to me and he states,"Talking shouldn't be that much trouble".
I agree.
Looking at his options over, I found myself slipping into his character more easily, and yet it was his game.

I can see that happening. Talking to people was so damn difficult. Like with Aveline and that damn shield as a gift. Was anyone else surprised as hell when she was not only upset (rightfully so due to her namesake), but was downright hostile about? Boy, talk about trying to tread lightly over a minefield.

fightright2 wrote...

For me, I miss eye to eye contact in first person.
Now if Fenris had sworn in Tevinter directly at me.

And this! It would have been sexier if he swore at me.

[Rockpopple]

If DA II is a "role-watching game" then I've never played a "Role-Playing Game". Even with Origins I never felt like I was the Warden. I was just telling the Warden what to do, who to kill, who to sleep with. Same with the PC's in Oblivion, Fallout 3, just about every Western RPG I've ever played.

Really it all boils down to how one experiences the game they play.

[Sussurus]

Hmmm in DA:O I managed to become a female dalish, that fell in love with a king in waiting.
Made him impregnate my bff for a ritual.
All this while looking at a female avatar I'd say yes to, despite being tranquil in facial expresions.

In DA:2 the dialogue or system it used would have had to be in swahili to break immersion for me tbh.

Modifié par Sussurus, 04 mai 2011 - 08:31 .

[Lupinate]

I'm sitting here watching my girlfriend play her DA2 character, and we both believe that the dialogue wheel is a benefit, mainly because it allowed for Bioware to do a "voiced protagonist", as "Smiley" put it.  This is a thousand times better than a mute one, and it is such a small thing to leave out that it irks me.  The dozens of RPGs with characters that never talk in game have always frustrated me somewhat, as it seems like such a simple thing to include.  Giving a voice to someone and NEVER hearing it is annoying.

Simply put, there is no real need to hire a voice actor if a character's response is displayed in full, so the dialogue wheel allowed Bioware to make this game a bit more interesting than most of the others in this genre.

There was so much more they could have made out of it, however.  The dialogue moments between characters were varied and numerous in DAO, but here its almost as problematic as pulling a wisdom tooth to get more than 20 seconds worth of history around some of the characters, and the interactions became quests themselves.  Annoy someone enough, and you'll learn s0d all.

Yes, it was annoying to get stuck trying to loot something and alistair gets in the way, but if they took the companion zones as areas where the old origins dialogue options existed, I really think they would have hit on a winner.  My first playthrough, I really expected the companions to talk your ear off and have proper conversations with you, just like origins.  Unfortunately, the reality was 20 min or so of total character background for the ones I enjoyed playing, and 10 or so for those i didn't.

All in all it is an improvement on the old system simply because they gave Hawke a voice, and made the warden a mute.  I really think Bioware could have done a lot more with it though.

[Zjarcal]

erynnar wrote...
Exactly! It really does just come down to personal pref. I totally respect others who felt the silent one is not as immersive. I was just wondering if those that felt that way felt that way because they don't like to imagine a voice and personality (which is fine, nothing wrong with that) or is it because the Warden didn't have appropriate expressions. Would expressions make it better for those who disliked the non-voiced version. I think that is worth looking into, if BioWare would.

Better expressions for the Warden would've helped (provided they were fitting for the dialog you chose), but for me, a silent protagonist just feels jarring. It's not that I can't imagine a voice or my character having a personality (I do imagine all those things... A LOT), I just prefer to actually see it play out. It feels better to actually hear my character say "I love you" to her lover than just watching the back of her head as she leans in for a kiss after "saying it".

It's not a case of not wanting to imagine things. I imagine things for both my silent Warden and my voiced Hawke (or Shepard). After all, Bioware can't take into account all the things I would like for my character to do or say. But with a voiced PC, some of the basic stuff that I feel my character should be saying works out better.

erynnar wrote...
And neither did the creators who tried it out and found it broke immersion and people being able to be the Warden. Again for those that couldn't because of the non voice, was it really the no voice aspect or that the Warden had no lifelike expressions? I am very curious about that.

That's actually another thing. I keep hearing people say how they ARE the character in RPGs. I never do that and I don't even really understand the notion. When I roleplay my characters I'm roleplaying someone else, not me, so I don't need to feel like I am that character.

I love both my Warden and Hawke (and Shepard) as characters I created, but I don't need to feel like I am them. Sure, when I'm playing I get into their shoes and must view things from their perspective to properly roleplay, but even then, I don't think to myself "okay, now I'm Dana Cousland", instead I just think "well, what would Dana do?".

As long as the game allows me to roleplay according to the personalities I've created for them, that's enough for me. A voice doesn't get in the way of that.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 04 mai 2011 - 09:44 .

[Zem_]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
Trying to get back on topic... For me the third person view does little to identify me with the character. It feels like I am controlling the character and not playing the character.

To me it feels like I am driving a vehicle... with blinders on cutting off my peripheral vision.  And a neckbrace requiring me to pivot my entire body to look left or right.  THAT to me is first-person perspective in video games.  By contrast in third-person my character is right there in front of me reminding me who I am in this particular drama.  I can see things going on right next to me that I wouldn't see without furious mouselooking left and right in first-person.  And particularly in melee combat I can see what *I* am doing rather than just seeing my sword disappear off screen as I start a strike and then come back on when it swings in front of my face.

Third person is no more immersion breaking for me than the fact I am looking at a computer screen and have a mouse+keyboard in front of me instead of actually inhabiting the body of the character I am playing.

I am fine with that, though, because the character doesn't look like me anyway. A thing that I liked about Oblivion was that you could switch from third person view to first person view.

Oblivion just did a very poor job of third-person.   In melee combat, you'd be hit by a sword slash that looked in third-person like it missed you by a mile.  Not really a problem in most other games.

But getting back to topic... I actually didn't have a problem with EITHER silent or voiced protagonist.  And neither felt more or less immersive or role-play capable.  Whether I know the exact wording or not of the dialogue line I am choosing, it was not a line that was written by ME in any case.  So I entirely fail to see how one is more limited than the other.  They are both, bottom line... the same damned thing with different window dressing.   You cannot attach your own meaning to a line of dialogue merely because you don't hear the character speak it.  If it is meant to be a sarcastic reply, then it is a sarcastic reply whether you read it as such or not.  The NPC "listening" to the line heard it the way the script-writer intended.  Not the way you did.

[mesmerizedish]

Zjarcal wrote...

That's actually another thing. I keep hearing people say how they ARE the character in RPGs. I never do that and I don't even really understand the notion. When I roleplay my characters I'm roleplaying someone else, not me, so I don't need to feel like I am that character.

I love both my Warden and Hawke (and Shepard) as characters I created, but I don't need to feel like I am them. Sure, when I'm playing I get into their shoes and must view things from their perspective to properly roleplay, but even then, I don't think to myself "okay, now I'm Dana Cousland", instead I just think "well, what would Dana do?"

I feel like you might be misunderstanding the concept a little bit. When I roleplay outside the bedroom, I'm not playing myself, no. But for me, it's an exercise not in *acting* like someone else, but actually *becoming* someone else. cRPGs never let me do that completely, but they can occasionally come close.

My point is that, for me, the goal of roleplaying is neither to think "now I'm Dana Cousland" nor to think "what would Dana do?" The goal is not to think at all, because if I'm roleplaying "correctly," it's completely intuitive.

As long as the game allows me to roleplay according to the
personalities I've created for them, that's enough for me. A voice
doesn't get in the way of that.

And yet I completely agree with this. Because I ackowledge the limitations of a cRPG as opposed to tabletop, and I can embrace them as something different.

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 04 mai 2011 - 09:46 .

[Everwarden]

Rockpopple wrote...
 Same with the PC's in Oblivion, Fallout 3, just about every Western RPG I've ever played.

Try New Vegas!

[Zjarcal]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...
The goal is not to think at all, because if I'm roleplaying "correctly," it's completely intuitive.

I can't "not think"... I always overthink everything. 

It's why I usually stare at the monitor for 10 minutes before big decisions. 

And even if I was acting as someone else, I wouldn't really be trying to "become" them. Maybe I'm just missing something here.

And yet I completely agree with this. Because I ackowledge the limitations of a cRPG as opposed to tabletop, and I can embrace them as something different.

Admittedly I've never played a tabletop RPG, but I can also understand that cRPGs will always be limited by technicalities.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 04 mai 2011 - 09:56 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Zem_ wrote...

To me it feels like I am driving a vehicle... with blinders on cutting off my peripheral vision.  And a neckbrace requiring me to pivot my entire body to look left or right.  THAT to me is first-person perspective in video games.  By contrast in third-person my character is right there in front of me reminding me who I am in this particular drama.  I can see things going on right next to me that I wouldn't see without furious mouselooking left and right in first-person.  And particularly in melee combat I can see what *I* am doing rather than just seeing my sword disappear off screen as I start a strike and then come back on when it swings in front of my face.

Third person is no more immersion breaking for me than the fact I am looking at a computer screen and have a mouse+keyboard in front of me instead of actually inhabiting the body of the character I am playing.

I think your misunderstanding what is mean't by third and first person playing in RPGs which is being talked about here as opposed to first and third person (camera/perspective) gameplay mechanics.

a) First person ~ The way of placing yourself in that world in those situation as though your character through CC and such mimmicks as close as can get your physical appearence, silent protaganist where the voice you apply to your character is your own as you read the dialogue and also the choices you make are the choices you would pick if you was there, in that position or as close as can get given amount of options available. (DAO as example is first person by design *developers Bioware said this themselves in designing DAO/ME* though people could in a more limited way apply the third person method). In simple terms placing yourself in that world in those situations making those choices as you would if it was you there not Hawke or Shepherd.

Third person ~ The way of taking control of a pre-defined or pre-set character and like a puppeteer you shape the character as though they are a seporate entity from your own personality (aka not you) and your picking the choices you think 'they' would pick attributed to the personality the developers or yourself applies to this character but he/she is never you only you are looking in and controlling someone else. This includes generally a voiced main character not your own in your mind. (ME 1+2 and DA2 are third person type games by design and first person method becomes vastly harder to apply in these titles). In simple terms playing as someone else choosing options you think that person would have pick and how he would have reacted to situations as Hawke or Shepherd not yourself.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 04 mai 2011 - 10:06 .

[mesmerizedish]

Zjarcal wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...
The goal is not to think at all, because if I'm roleplaying "correctly," it's completely intuitive.

I can't "not think"... I always overthink everything. 

Fun fact: I have Asperger's. I consciously process everything. Nothing is intuitive or natural. So, the entire history of my interaction with other human beings has essentially been a "role-playing game." But I've had twenty years of practice with it, so I've almost perfected the process of "becoming" someone else.

And even if I was acting as someone else, I wouldn't really be trying to "become" them. Maybe I'm just missing something here.

As above, any time I talk to someone else, I'm acting and role-playing. I'm still myself, but "being myself" doesn't come naturally to me, I have to cogitate (is that a word? it is now) it. And because of that, acting like someone completely different actually isn't that different from what I do every day.

[Tommy6860]

Zjarcal wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...
The goal is not to think at all, because if I'm roleplaying "correctly," it's completely intuitive.

I can't "not think"... I always overthink everything. 

It's why I usually stare at the monitor for 10 minutes before big decisions. 

And even if I was acting as someone else, I wouldn't really be trying to "become" them. Maybe I'm just missing something here.

And yet I completely agree with this. Because I ackowledge the limitations of a cRPG as opposed to tabletop, and I can embrace them as something different.

Admittedly I've never played a tabletop RPG, but I can also understand that cRPGs will always be limited by technicalities.

See, I can see where this fits for you as you described in your previous post as well. I personally cannot take another voice made in game as that it isn't me talking, it is someone else's inflections as their personality doing it when the intone I hear isn't what I thought would be from a certain response. Same way with seeing the face of my PC and including expressions, most times, they do not fit. Having a voiced PC, especially as I expereinced this in DA2, was very jarring when the intones and especailly the answers just did not fit what I thought my answer would be, and sometimes the flow of the tone was totally broken with the responses and inflections. I can make video to emphasize this, but I think you get the point. 

With an SP, I can make my own intones as I feel the game is playing out with my companion/NPC interactions, and they feel more real. I understand how you can get what you do, considering you say you have no experience with TPRPGs. I am pretty old school by today's standard by far, and have been playing RPGs since the mid 1970s. When I started playing cRPGs, I realized those limitations, but I also found that by leaving the PC silent and mostly faceless, it really worked better and I could relate to "old school". So, it really comes down to a reference point for some from older experiences (not saying that is the only way that the experience works), you just don't have that to fall back on, and I can see now where that can work for many. But, IMO, nothing can take the place of my character being played by me and not one created with voices and expressions created by someone else.

As an aside, I think reading questions or answers I choose as what they are by reading the actual response, and not some parapharased answer with an emoticon of some sorts, is more immersive, IMO. The DA2 system breaks that for me and I many times got responses that just fit what I thought I chose. When I am choosing an answer with the icon showing it means what it is supposed to mean, while paraphrased, just takes away the emotion I feel would be put in the responses from my own perpsective. For example, a snarky reply may very well be snarky, but the answer was someone else's snarky response, not mine, I could not put the tone into it.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Zem_ wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...
Trying to get back on topic... For me the third person view does little to identify me with the character. It feels like I am controlling the character and not playing the character.

To me it feels like I am driving a vehicle... with blinders on cutting off my peripheral vision.  And a neckbrace requiring me to pivot my entire body to look left or right.  THAT to me is first-person perspective in video games.  By contrast in third-person my character is right there in front of me reminding me who I am in this particular drama.  I can see things going on right next to me that I wouldn't see without furious mouselooking left and right in first-person.  And particularly in melee combat I can see what *I* am doing rather than just seeing my sword disappear off screen as I start a strike and then come back on when it swings in front of my face.

Third person is no more immersion breaking for me than the fact I am looking at a computer screen and have a mouse+keyboard in front of me instead of actually inhabiting the body of the character I am playing.

I am fine with that, though, because the character doesn't look like me anyway. A thing that I liked about Oblivion was that you could switch from third person view to first person view.

Oblivion just did a very poor job of third-person.   In melee combat, you'd be hit by a sword slash that looked in third-person like it missed you by a mile.  Not really a problem in most other games.

But getting back to topic... I actually didn't have a problem with EITHER silent or voiced protagonist.  And neither felt more or less immersive or role-play capable.  Whether I know the exact wording or not of the dialogue line I am choosing, it was not a line that was written by ME in any case.  So I entirely fail to see how one is more limited than the other.  They are both, bottom line... the same damned thing with different window dressing.   You cannot attach your own meaning to a line of dialogue merely because you don't hear the character speak it.  If it is meant to be a sarcastic reply, then it is a sarcastic reply whether you read it as such or not.  The NPC "listening" to the line heard it the way the script-writer intended.  Not the way you did.

I tell you how I experience third person view (you quote that) and that somehow triggers you to tell me how you experience first person view and that has to indicate that my viewpoint is wrong? Then you tell me that what I like about Oblivion's view switching is somehow wrong. Erm... Interesting. You either don't understand me or you do not want to understand me. Both are fine. But is there some underlying problem, Zem_? Please tell me. Do you have a problem with me? You give the impression that you somehow get angry or irritated because of how I experience games. That is not healthy. Really. If you have problems with my opinion then just take a deep breath, count to 10 and read the next post.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 04 mai 2011 - 10:28 .