8 réponses à ce sujet

[BP20125810]

From what I know, the voiced main charachter was one of the reason DA2 had only a human PC.  Would you be willing to ditch that for more replayability and customization in DA3, at the loss of not having a voiced protagonist?

Modifié par BP20125810, 19 mai 2011 - 10:16 .

[David Gaider]

BP20125810 wrote...
From what I know, the voiced main charachter was one of the reason DA2 had only a human PC.  Would you be willing to ditch that for more replayability and customization in DA3, at the loss of not having a voiced protagonist?

Incorrect.

Or, rather, I should say that not having a voiced protaganist wouldn't suddenly have made other playable races manifest themselves. There are multiple reasons why this was so, from animations & modelling times for the extra appearances to story convenience.

This is not to say we will only have human player characters from here on, simply that this is how it worked out for DA2. If the assumption is that player voice automatically means human PC, that is an extrapolation which is simply untrue.

[David Gaider]

Drasanil wrote...
I'll take your word for it, but it does seems like one lead to the other.

If you say so.

I buy the animation and modelling times, given how rushed the game was. But the last part seems like bunk given how detached Hawke was from everything (the DLC Dog had more meaningful relationships with your companions than you did) and how little a role family actually played in game. The story would have functioned just as well with a talking-pig.

I see. Explain to me, then, how the story would have worked with Hawke and his siblings as dwarves-- and thus none of them having magic? Or elves, and thus altering the nature of th family in Kirkwall they come from? Unless your solution is that Hawke was adopted, having an elven or dwarven protaganist affects many other elements aside simply who the protaganist is.

Should we have put those variations into the story? Possibly. You seem to think a talking pig would work as well, however, so maybe you have a better idea of how it works than I do.

I think it ties more to the fact that many fear dwarf and elf PCs will always get the axe even when there's no tangible story reason for it to be the case as DAII demonstrated. The full VO just gets blamed  for it as it's the most apparent change to the player character.

As I said, it's due to multiple contributing factors. One can point to a single factor if they wish, but even if that was changed it doesn't make the other things up and vanish. That's all I'm saying.

[David Gaider]

silentassassin264 wrote...
Which was completely unnecessary because if you running around with banner saying "I AM A MAGE" it would have made no difference because running around in a mage robe and mage staff was practically doing that and no one noticed.  Plus, over the game you get to see the sheer amount of apostates running around in Kirkwall just fine.  The main reason to me for Act 1 was to satisfy Birthright for Mother.

After all, if they really wanted to be safe from Templars, they would have just joined the Coterie which seems to keep mages in their emply covered.  No.  They were trying to make it big for more than running from Templars.

Plus, If you rrrreally want the hide from Templars storyline, you can just do what I said further in that post.  Give us another random mage chew toy who gets sent to the gallows.  Cue encounter running from Lothering when you pick up a scared elf mage kid who Dwarf Carver gives his life heroically to save.  One year later, your adopted chew toy still needs to hide from Templars.  

If your point is "if you'd written a different story you wouldn't have needed to be human, because I didn't like this one" then yes... if we had written the story differently, you wouldn't have needed to be human.

[Luke Barrett]

Somewhat related question:

Could this frustration with the voiced protaganist be somewhat alleviated if we were more specific with our chat options? My understanding of some of the issues with this is that the paraphrase text (the small text you pick from the wheel) wasn't closely related enough to what Hawke actually said. Would this be less of a problem if we were much more stringent with the paraphased text relative to what is actually said? This is much easier to accomplish than completely reinventing the wheel (I love when puns just appear by accident!)

[Luke Barrett]

iakus wrote...

Well, for me the biggest problem with voiced protagonists isn't (usually) the paraphrasing.  The mood icons really helped wit that.   Typically, the problem is the lack of responses that I personally want my character to make.

To put it bluntly, the dialogue wheel needs more spokes.

Of course, more dialogue options=more resources, higher costs, and so on. With a silent protagonist, far more possible responses could more easily be listed. Even if many of them lead to the same result, at least you got to that result in character.

We should just support a usb microphone and let you pick an emotion and say whatever you want . The endless amount of comical/nsfw youtube videos alone would be worth the extra work!

(disclaimer: the above statement was in jest and does not represent, even remotely, an actual plan)

[Luke Barrett]

Technically in DA2, depending what your character favors (diplomatic, sarcastic, aggressive) certain ambient 'flavor' dialog will play throughout the game. These are mostly ambient responses to quest turn-ins and reactive statements when you pickup items and what not.

Edit: To clarify, when I say ambient I mean dialog that occurs outside of a conversation on the fly (party banter, for example, is ambient)

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I'd be appalled if you weren't already trying to get the paraphrase to match the resultant line as closely as possible.

That is most obviously the intent but through numerous amounts of reiteration it sometimes gets skewed and it would then be QAs job to point out any obvious discrepencies that have occured (or that could be interpreted differently than intended by the writer). Now, this does happen but obviously in the future we can, as I implied, be much more stringent on exactly how spot on the paraphrases are for mood and intent in hopes that we greatly reduce this divide that players are feeling.

Modifié par Luke Barrett, 25 mai 2011 - 12:42 .

[John Epler]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

That's not surprising. BW didn't create that game. If they did you would have loved the cussing and yelling.

Cute.

This is gonna be good. *gets some popcorn and soda*

Let me put the kibosh on this right now before it goes any further.

Respect and civility. This includes avoiding the temptation to take potshots at other posters because you happen to disagree with them.

[John Epler]

Slidell505 wrote...

I hate this argument so much. Two camps, both filled with elitism. Both have their ups and their downs. With a voiced you get tone and your character feels alive. With no voice you get more dialog and races. With a voice your character interacts more in conversation. With no voice you can create your own voice.

Sir, I don't know if you've just never been on the internet before, but I'm going to have to ask you to be significantly less reasonable.

Maybe you're new to these parts, I don't know, but by gods, I expect you to pick a position and defend it to the death.