650 réponses à ce sujet

[MDT1]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

But thats exactly the point. With different origins the game would have needed different approaches for each one to get big in Kirkwall. This would have added so much value to the game and its replayability.
But I understand that this would have been to ambitious for DA2 and the goals of the project.

And about VPC: there is certainly a lower number of choices in the approach DA2 took compared to DAO, what helped in the result that Hawk stayed alien to me, but on the other hand I had never such problems with Shepard.

Modifié par MDT1, 25 mai 2011 - 10:19 .

[Zanallen]

MDT1 wrote...


But thats exactly the point. With different origins the game would have needed different approaches for each one to get big in Kirkwall. This would have added so much value to the game and its replayability.
But I understand that this would have been to ambitious for DA2 and the goals of the project.

Nah, it would have been more expensive and possibly not doable within the development timeframe.

[JakePT]

Luke Barrett wrote...

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!)

I feel like writers are rewriting the lines when it comes to paraphrasing, like they're bored with the original already and want something new. I completely understand not wanting players to read the line and then have to hear it said out loud again, but sometimes it seems like the writers are just trying to be creative. Paraphrases should not be a creative writing job, it should be a UI/Usability job. The paraphrase should be as close as possible to the original line, not a witty new take on it that obfuscates the original meaning.

As far as I'm aware the writers do the paraphrases as well. If so, I'd go as far as to say they shouldn't. I'd imagine that would probably lessen those issues if a third party did them, or at least evaluated them.

There are some cases though that are completely ridiculous. "I'll take responsibility" has the complete opposite meaning to the line that's actually delivered. I have no idea how the hell anyone, in the writing room or QA, thought they were a good match at all. Oh wait, yes I do. *cough*14 months*cough*

Also, the paraphrase, ideally, should never imply a cooler line than the one delivered. I hate it when the option is "Shut Up" and the character not only doesn't say "Shut Up!", but isn't even really telling the other person to literally be quiet, which is what Shut Up implies. Too often Shut Up is used as a paraphrase for a generic put down (I may be mixing DA and ME here).

Another thing is how the lines affect role playing. I don't like it when lines invoke the Maker/Andraste when I'm trying to role play a non-religious character, which other choices in the game indicate is a choice I am supposed to be able to make. If a line is going to invoke an important role-playing element, such as religiosity, racism, sexuality etc. it should be indicated in the paraphrase.

[MDT1]

Zanallen wrote...

MDT1 wrote...


But thats exactly the point. With different origins the game would have needed different approaches for each one to get big in Kirkwall. This would have added so much value to the game and its replayability.
But I understand that this would have been to ambitious for DA2 and the goals of the project.

Nah, it would have been more expensive and possibly not doable within the development timeframe.

And since when is investing more time and money in the quality of a product a bad thing?

[Xewaka]

MDT1 wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

MDT1 wrote...
But thats exactly the point. With different origins the game would have needed different approaches for each one to get big in Kirkwall. This would have added so much value to the game and its replayability.
But I understand that this would have been to ambitious for DA2 and the goals of the project.

Nah, it would have been more expensive and possibly not doable within the development timeframe.

And since when is investing more time and money in the quality of a product a bad thing?

Since it became sinonymous with "lower profit margin".

Modifié par Xewaka, 25 mai 2011 - 10:40 .

[MDT1]

Xewaka wrote...

MDT1 wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

MDT1 wrote...
But thats exactly the point. With different origins the game would have needed different approaches for each one to get big in Kirkwall. This would have added so much value to the game and its replayability.
But I understand that this would have been to ambitious for DA2 and the goals of the project.

Nah, it would have been more expensive and possibly not doable within the development timeframe.

And since when is investing more time and money in the quality of a product a bad thing?

Since it became sinonymous with "lower profit margin".

Yes, but I'm not the publisher, I'm the customer. For me its good when they put more time and money in it, and if they ever want to get my money again they'll have to, if they don't want my money, I'm fine with it and buy my games from developers that can satisfy my demands.

[Shadowlit_Rogue]

JakePT wrote...

Luke Barrett wrote...

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!)

Another thing is how the lines affect role playing. I don't like it when lines invoke the Maker/Andraste when I'm trying to role play a non-religious character, which other choices in the game indicate is a choice I am supposed to be able to make. If a line is going to invoke an important role-playing element, such as religiosity, racism, sexuality etc. it should be indicated in the paraphrase.

What he said!

I mean, my ideal solution for the PC going forward would be to have the paraphrases match what is actually going to be said much closer (a question equals a question, etc.) so that the "I'll take responsibility" moment doesn't happen again. And give the player the option to mute the PC, so that people can play old school style. I would probably end up using both options, if that were the case.

But as it stands, having the paraphrases match is definitely a plus, and I would further agree with Jake's point. The game just needs more roleplaying options. Even if I never see (hear?) another mute PC again, extensive-ish roleplaying options are a must. I wanted to play a non-religious character, as well, but the game just didn't allow for it like DA:O did. And there were times when the game would jump through many, many hoops in order to keep you corralled into making a certain decision.

The Sister Petrice incident comes to mind, after the stuff she pulled with the qunari mage. There should've been an option to let her have it right there, but the game kinda revels in not letting you kill her, despite all the trouble she ends up causing afterward. Or during the final battle when Orsino does his thing, Hawke just kinda stands there and doesn't do anything.

More options. When I was in the Hanged Man talking to Varric, being able to ask if I could buy him a drink was awesome, and a perfect example of what I mean. What sucked was how selecting that option resulted in both of them standing there awkwardly before continuing the conversation. <_<

[macrocarl]

Luke Barrett wrote...

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.

I think this would be a great idea. Personally I didn't have an issue with the paraphrasing because I like the shocked surprise sometimes, but if you are going to make changes, sticking closer to what will actually be said seems a good direction to go.

[In Exile]

MDT1 wrote..
But thats exactly the point. With different origins the game would have needed different approaches for each one to get big in Kirkwall. This would have added so much value to the game and its replayability.
But I understand that this would have been to ambitious for DA2 and the goals of the project.

But that only works if the choices  aren't just cosmetically different (like being a mage was). In DA:O, the Origin was cosmetic.

[Nerevar-as]

In Exile wrote...

MDT1 wrote..
But thats exactly the point. With different origins the game would have needed different approaches for each one to get big in Kirkwall. This would have added so much value to the game and its replayability.
But I understand that this would have been to ambitious for DA2 and the goals of the project.

But that only works if the choices  aren't just cosmetically different (like being a mage was). In DA:O, the Origin was cosmetic.

They also made the world richer. Even if they don´t for you, it would have been easy to adapt the parts of DA2 where race is important race (there aren´t that many - an elf wouldn´t get a house in Hightown, but what difference would that make?). They also could have done something similar to ME multiple choice past to avoid mage Hawke being an apostate. DA2 is probably the worst offender in story-gameplay segregation killing SOD in recent years.

And I really missed Renegade interrupts. Too many characters deserved them.

[tmp7704]

In Exile wrote...

My point, though, is that the mage implementation didn't work at all. It effectively broke the plot. Why would following this be any sort of good idea?

It's a good question to ask, sure, but probably for entirely separate discussion. (one about what DA3 is going to be like, maybe?) Clearly, they didn't think it's a bad idea to have such unreactive implementation in the first place, seeing how that's the state in which DA2 shipped.

I think prejudice still rules out the elves. You'd run into mage Hawke all over again.

We know from Leliana in DAO that elves can be rich to the point where "they can even have servants themselves", at least in Orlais. The neighbours may not appreciate having a wealthy elf in the neighourhood but ultimately it's the money that does the talking. Heck, if DA2 is any example then all the prejudice in the world fails to prevent Fenris from squatting right in the middle of the Hightown for years.

[MDT1]

In Exile wrote...

MDT1 wrote..
But thats exactly the point. With different origins the game would have needed different approaches for each one to get big in Kirkwall. This would have added so much value to the game and its replayability.
But I understand that this would have been to ambitious for DA2 and the goals of the project.

But that only works if the choices  aren't just cosmetically different (like being a mage was). In DA:O, the Origin was cosmetic.

No it wasn't. There where various moments when origin made the difference. Most obvious are things like marriing Alistair, freeing the Circel, give the dalish a home but also things like human nobles looking down on elfs etc.
Perhaps the main reason why it seemed cosmetic to you, was that your origin was overshadowed by beeing a warden.
Of course in DA2 the differences would have been much more serious as nobody had to respect you, because you are a warden, but this is the point that would have made the game so much more interesting...

Modifié par MDT1, 25 mai 2011 - 04:14 .

[Drasanil]

In Exile wrote...

MDT1 wrote..
But thats exactly the point. With different origins the game would have needed different approaches for each one to get big in Kirkwall. This would have added so much value to the game and its replayability.
But I understand that this would have been to ambitious for DA2 and the goals of the project.

But that only works if the choices  aren't just cosmetically different (like being a mage was). In DA:O, the Origin was cosmetic.

The entire landsmeet dynamic is different between the City Elf and Human Noble for one and that certainly isn't cosmetic. The city elf one really stacks the deck for you kill Loghain, and the alienage quest line is probably the most personal quest in the game if you're playing a CE.... it felt a hell of a lot more personal than anything Hawke got.

[aduellist]

tmp7704 wrote...

I think prejudice still rules out the elves. You'd run into mage Hawke all over again.

We know from Leliana in DAO that elves can be rich to the point where "they can even have servants themselves", at least in Orlais. The neighbours may not appreciate having a wealthy elf in the neighourhood but ultimately it's the money that does the talking. Heck, if DA2 is any example then all the prejudice in the world fails to prevent Fenris from squatting right in the middle of the Hightown for years.

Just two quick points.

We know from dialog in DA:O that, at least in Denerim, elves who try to move out of the Alienage at best get burned out of their new homes and return.  At worst, they end up dead "under mysterious circumstances".

We know from party banter in DA2 that Aveline exerts considerable effort to mask Fenris' presence in High Town.

So I'd say the anti-elf prejudice is still alive and well.

[MonkeyLungs]

aduellist wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

I think prejudice still rules out the elves. You'd run into mage Hawke all over again.

We know from Leliana in DAO that elves can be rich to the point where "they can even have servants themselves", at least in Orlais. The neighbours may not appreciate having a wealthy elf in the neighourhood but ultimately it's the money that does the talking. Heck, if DA2 is any example then all the prejudice in the world fails to prevent Fenris from squatting right in the middle of the Hightown for years.

Just two quick points.

We know from dialog in DA:O that, at least in Denerim, elves who try to move out of the Alienage at best get burned out of their new homes and return.  At worst, they end up dead "under mysterious circumstances".

We know from party banter in DA2 that Aveline exerts considerable effort to mask Fenris' presence in High Town.

So I'd say the anti-elf prejudice is still alive and well.

There were like 5 houses in Hightown so it was easy for Fenris to blend in.

[Zem_]

Nerevar-as wrote...

In Exile wrote...

But that only works if the choices  aren't just cosmetically different (like being a mage was). In DA:O, the Origin was cosmetic.

They also made the world richer. Even if they don´t for you...

No, they didn't.  The fact there is a city elf origin does not make my play-through as a human noble "richer".  Richer to me would mean containing more and better quality content.  DEPTH.... not breadth.  Origins add breadth.  The ability to choose different parallel paths.  Nice, but it doesn't make any one of those paths any better.  Had Origins been as dull and recycled as DA2, we would not be praising the fact you could experience its dull and recycled story multiple different ways.

This is what you'd get with multiple origins in DA2:  The chance to complain that your elf Hawke was just as boring as your human Hawke.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm inclined to agree that the Origins weren't really necessary in DAO. I was worried that the point of the Origins was to get us used to a more rigidly defined background for the PC (and we wouldn't complain, because we got to choose among 6 different rigidly defined backgrounds), but DAO's origins weren't all particularly rigid (some of them were), and DA2 didn't really define our background for us at all, so my fears were unfounded.

That does not mean, however, that I think the voice should stay, or that DAO isn't a vastly superior game. But I think arguing that the origins are what made DAO special is a weak position.

[Drasanil]

aduellist wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

I think prejudice still rules out the elves. You'd run into mage Hawke all over again.

We know from Leliana in DAO that elves can be rich to the point where "they can even have servants themselves", at least in Orlais. The neighbours may not appreciate having a wealthy elf in the neighourhood but ultimately it's the money that does the talking. Heck, if DA2 is any example then all the prejudice in the world fails to prevent Fenris from squatting right in the middle of the Hightown for years.

Just two quick points.

We know from dialog in DA:O that, at least in Denerim, elves who try to move out of the Alienage at best get burned out of their new homes and return.  At worst, they end up dead "under mysterious circumstances".

We know from party banter in DA2 that Aveline exerts considerable effort to mask Fenris' presence in High Town.

So I'd say the anti-elf prejudice is still alive and well.

We also know that from the human noble origin that elves can make it to a higher social status, even if it is rare and hard, given the elf in it was made a a lady in waiting or what not. We also know elves can become the grandmaster of the crows based on one of Zevran's possible endings.... this being an organisation that can freely topple kings and queens. We also know that in Tevinter, where elves are arguably treated the worst and slavery is not only still legal but acceptable, that they do in fact have rich elves (more so than any other country) and that it doesn't seem to cause many problems. Funny how humans are perfectly willing to be hypocritical about things when it suits their purposes. Who's to say elf-Hawke wouldn't have fallen under the exception clause? Prejudice isn't much of an excuse.

[tmp7704]

aduellist wrote...

We know from dialog in DA:O that, at least in Denerim, elves who try to move out of the Alienage at best get burned out of their new homes and return.  At worst, they end up dead "under mysterious circumstances".

It's almost like different parts of the world could treat various social groups differently

We don't know whether Kirkwall is more like Ferelden or Orlais in this regard, but considering the city was at some point "liberated" by rebelled elf slaves i'd guess it's more like the latter than the former -- people tend to be more cautious about stepping on toes of these numerous enough to burn them and their own houses down in response.

We know from party banter in DA2 that Aveline exerts considerable effort to mask Fenris' presence in High Town.

So I'd say the anti-elf prejudice is still alive and well.

I don't think complaints about a squatter necessarily indicate anti-elf prejudice. But it shows two other things:

* that in Kirkwall it's not exactly customary to burn down houses outside the Alienage if they happen to have elves inside. Formal complaints are made instead if there's legal basis for them, and things are left at that.
* that the same excuse could be easily used to hand-wave how elf Hawke can stay in Hightown.

Modifié par tmp7704, 25 mai 2011 - 09:00 .

[Xewaka]

In Exile wrote...

MDT1 wrote..
But thats exactly the point. With different origins the game would have needed different approaches for each one to get big in Kirkwall. This would have added so much value to the game and its replayability.
But I understand that this would have been to ambitious for DA2 and the goals of the project.

But that only works if the choices  aren't just cosmetically different (like being a mage was). In DA:O, the Origin was cosmetic.

Each Origin had a different prologue to play. Even if the rest of the game stayed the same, playing each Origin prologue allows for a more complete understanding of the setting. They're expository in nature, small vignettes to th different strata of society in Thedas.
That's the value I placed in them, and they serve that introductory and expository purpose excellently.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Xewaka wrote...

Each Origin had a different prologue to play. Even if the rest of the game stayed the same, playing each Origin prologue allows for a more complete understanding of the setting. They're expository in nature, small vignettes to th different strata of society in Thedas.
That's the value I placed in them, and they serve that introductory and expository purpose excellently.

I would agree with that, as well.

I don't think the origins were an integral part of DAO, but I did derive considerable value from them.

[In Exile]

Nerevar-as wrote...
They also made the world richer.

No. For me, they made the world much poorer. It's not just that it's a feature that's value neutral for me but positive for others. I'd be okay with that. It's that it actively undermines how much I can enjoy the game.

Even if they don´t for you, it would have been easy to adapt the parts of DA2 where race is important race (there aren´t that many - an elf wouldn´t get a house in Hightown, but what difference would that make?). They also could have done something similar to ME multiple choice past to avoid mage Hawke being an apostate. DA2 is probably the worst offender in story-gameplay segregation killing SOD in recent years.

And I really missed Renegade interrupts. Too many characters deserved them.

And just with being a mage, that made the experience poor. Being an elf or dwarf would make it even worse. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...
They also made the world richer.

No. For me, they made the world much poorer. It's not just that it's a feature that's value neutral for me but positive for others. I'd be okay with that. It's that it actively undermines how much I can enjoy the game.

Wait, what?  So you're saying that you would have enjoyed playing DAO more if all but one origin was simply removed?

I don't think that's what you're trying to say, but that's how I read your remarks.

[aduellist]

tmp7704 wrote...

aduellist wrote...

We know from dialog in DA:O that, at least in Denerim, elves who try to move out of the Alienage at best get burned out of their new homes and return.  At worst, they end up dead "under mysterious circumstances".

It's almost like different parts of the world could treat various social groups differently

We don't know whether Kirkwall is more like Ferelden or Orlais in this regard, but considering the city was at some point "liberated" by rebelled elf slaves i'd guess it's more like the latter than the former -- people tend to be more cautious about stepping on toes of these numerous enough to burn them and their own houses down in response.

That's really what I was trying to say.  Misfortunately, I did a really bad job of it.

tmp7704 wrote...

We know from party banter in DA2 that Aveline exerts considerable effort to mask Fenris' presence in High Town.

So I'd say the anti-elf prejudice is still alive and well.

I don't think complaints about a squatter necessarily indicate anti-elf prejudice. But it shows two other things:

* that in Kirkwall it's not exactly customary to burn down houses outside the Alienage if they happen to have elves inside. Formal complaints are made instead if there's legal basis for them, and things are left at that.
* that the same excuse could be easily used to hand-wave how elf Hawke can stay in Hightown.

Good points.

[Shadowlit_Rogue]

I thought the origins were a fantastic idea, and I still do. They not only allow you to get introduced to the world in different ways, but they make replaying the game much more interesting. You're not playing through an extended intro sequence like Taris or Eden Prime or Peragus II to get to the main part of the game. By the time I get to Ostagar, I don't even care anymore.