650 réponses à ce sujet

[Drachasor]

haroldhardluck wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
I take it you mean this article.  The problem is, what does that statistic (only 52% of Xbox 360 players got the achievement for finishing the game) really mean?  Origins still sold gangbusters and was critically praised, so I'm tempted to ask- so what if people didn't finish?  If they still liked the game and told others to buy it, what does that matter?

The article has a link to the original statistics and it shows 73% completed the human noble origin but only 37% completed the dwarf nobe origins with the others falling in between. The 52% is the average and is misleading because it hides the fact that not all the origins were equally appealing to gamers. That is real take away from DAO. The Xbox players prefer playing humans over mages over elves over dwarves. However since race is irrelevant for mages, it is not known whether the mage played was human or non-human. I suspect (s)he was human.

So the results of the Xbox statistics is that players prefer playing humans over all other races. The elf origin was the next highest at 45% which is significantly lower than the 73% for humans. However the second highest was the "raceless" mage at 57%. I suspect that is the real reason Hawke is human only. There is no sense in creating a non-human Hawke when less than half of the players will play that character.

Harold

You know, even 30% of the player base is a huge number.  What those statistics show is that all the origins were pretty popular.

[Zem_]

Pedrak wrote...
The devs themselves, years ago, admitted on these forums that a game with a voiced PC would simply have to be much shorter than DAO.

Not "a game".  DAO specifically.  And they did not give any details.  It was an off-the-cuff "Oh... it would have been half as big" comment.  Were they thinking this would have involved six full sets of player dialogue voice-overs? (one for each gender and race combo).  I just do not buy the idea that one male and one female VO for the main character (such as we have in DA2) could possibly cost so much that it turns a 4-year development into 18 months.  The difference in the amount of unique content in DAO vs. DA2 is just staggering even were you to consider just playing through as one of the origins to the end.   It's still way more content than in DA2.  No WAY is that entirely due to voice acting costs.  It's not like the people they use to voice the main characters are big name Hollywood stars.  They are known reasonably well for their VA work but they are not going to be paid star salaries.

There is already quite a lot of voice work for everyone ELSE in DAO and that's just voice acting.  There are many more costs associated with making a game.  To actually halve the game, adding main character VO would have to double the cost of making the whole game.  Not even just doubling the VO budget.

[Drasanil]

haroldhardluck wrote...
So the results of the Xbox statistics is that players prefer playing humans over all other races. The elf origin was the next highest at 45% which is significantly lower than the 73% for humans. However the second highest was the "raceless" mage at 57%. I suspect that is the real reason Hawke is human only. There is no sense in creating a non-human Hawke when less than half of the players will play that character.

Harold

There's also the fact that the human noble origin was percieved as the "default" one, and that humans are generally the safe generic option most people will opt for especially when they don't know much about what they're getting into.

I for one thought the city elf origin was the best done and the most powerful, it certainly seemed far more like the "default" if you will. The human noble felt kind of tacked on in that your parents really get caught with their pants down due to their own stupidity. What kind of (idiot) noble lets an other's army camp in his fortress and sends off his own to the war front? I don't care that Howe was your "friend", with political instincts like those it's a wonder the Cousland line managed to survive all those centuries.

[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.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Zem_ wrote...

Not "a game".  DAO specifically.  And they did not give any details.  It was an off-the-cuff "Oh... it would have been half as big" comment.

It was Georg.  Georg didn't make off-the-cuff comments.  Georg was the guy who'd swoop into a thread and stop it dead by finally giving us all the facts we'd been demanding but didn't ever really expect to see.

I miss Georg.

There is already quite a lot of voice work for everyone ELSE in DAO and that's just voice acting.  There are many more costs associated with making a game.  To actually halve the game, adding main character VO would have to double the cost of making the whole game.  Not even just doubling the VO budget.

I doubt the relationships are anywhere near that linear.

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

I'm still hopeful that you won't always have a voiced protagonist from here on out.

[Drasanil]

David Gaider wrote...

Incorrect.

Or, rather, I should say that not having a voiced protaganist wouldn't suddenly have made other playable races manifest themselves.

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

There are multiple reasons why this was so, from animations & modelling times for the extra appearances to story convenience.

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.

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.

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.

[PlumPaul93]

Much rather have a better story. Voiced was nice I guess but story is the reason I play the game.

[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.

[silentassassin264]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

Well the problem is, Lord Gaider, having a mage sibling did not matter at all and Malcolm only really comes up as being a mage in DLC items and trying to give Carver a name.  You could have just as easily made Malcolm a normal fugitive  (Carta for Dwarf, Crow for elf) that is actually "innocent" but still with the authorities after him and you get that covered.  Bethany being a mage was just for people to say "See their are non psychotic mages in Kirkwall".  If she was not there it really would not have mattered.  You could have just given us another one scene (Act rather) mage chew toy to build sympathy for mages who gets sent to the Gallows.  

As far as going to Kirkwall, If protagonist is Dwarven, give them some family in the Merchant's Guild or something which incidently could have made things funnier with Varric.  If they were an elf, family still works but as an assassin/kicked out Dalish/or just straight alienage.  Family lineage was pointless because you have to rebuy the estate regardless.  And as far as an elf in Hightown, there ended up an elf in hightown in most of my games anyway because of sweet Merrill.

Magic in your family was very much overrated in this game.  I mean they seriously would let my blood mage Hawke rule Kirkwall as Viscount as long as I was willing to betray all my mage kin.  So yes, you can pretty much rule as a Free Marching Magister in a city of Templars.  Yeah...

[Drasanil]

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?

Well first off I played a mage Hawke and had Carver as my surviving sibbling and I have to say it hardly felt like Hawke being a mage had a significant impact on things, no one seemd to notice and no one seemed to care apart for Meredith at the last second and even then it was because she was more paranoid about your influence than your actual use of magic. I ended up sidding with the templars to spite Anders more than anything else, family had little to do with the desicion.

A dwarf family could have easily had a similar mage/templar divide with out the need for magic. Betha-dwarf could have been a rogue and Lyrium smuggler putting her at odds with the templars and the chantry while Carver-dwarf could have been a warrior and rune maker in the service of the templars putting him at odds with the mages who feel they are becoming even less useful and relevant now that the chantry is on the verge of gaining the knowledge and ability of runes with out them.

Then there's also what role your companions play in it, if you were really good friends with Anders or Merill odds are you'd side with the mages regardless of whether or not your family were dwarves and didn't have magic. Similarily if you were buddy-buddy with Fenris, Anders' little display would have further strengthened his view of mages and lead you to side with his side. There's also the jealousy angle, jus because dwarves can't have magic doesn't mean that can't be jealous of those who do or fearful of them, another excellent reason to go with the templars, or you could be Dagna style obsessed and side with the mages thinking it's super-awesome and not caring all that much about the dangers due to the dwarves' inherent resistance. 

Or elves, and thus altering the nature of th family in Kirkwall they come from?

 
The easiest fix for this is simply have your family be from the alienage in Kirkwall, they'd still have some one to return to. As for the manor and property, one could have made elf-Hawke Haren of the alienage post Act 1 and a chieved a similar strata of influence and renown while still being readily looked down upon by most. Otherwise, the family's history and nature didn't really play a significant role in the story itself nor was it crucial to how events unfolded.

The biggest hang up would have been an elf-champion after the Arishok's defeat, but that could easily be handled if viewed in the lense of political practicality, give the elves their champion and some token amount of respect to help calm things down in the wake of the Qunari attack and the lost oppurtunity it presented for them.

For elves and dwarves the viscount issue, is easily solved by just changing it to Chancellor and having a human viscount appointed, it leaves a good grey area as to how much power they have or not and also makes it easier to explain why they would suddenly pack up and leave. Unlike my viscount Hawke who "made it" and basically got to lord over his own city but still decided to disappear.

Unless your solution is that Hawke was adopted, having an elven or dwarven protaganist affects many other elements aside simply who the protaganist is.

The problem with that though is it really wasn't desmonstrated all that well, Hawke being human or an Amell never felt crucial to the story. I felt like there was more effort in making a personal story for me CE Warden in DAO then there were personal plot-lines for Hawke in DAII despite the fact Hawke was far more of a fixed character.

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.

The talking pig was a bit of an exaggeration, but given how little of inpact Hawke's desicions had on the story itself and how little s/he contributed to the culminating events it becomes rather easy to make a case for a similar situation unfolding over the course of ten years had the Hawke family been slaughtered in Lothering and never made it to Kirkwall. Hawke felt like a passenger tacked on to the story rather than some one that was crucial to it, and as such lost a lot of relevance.

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.

I don't disagree, I'm just saying VO gets the blame because they are the two most jarring and apparent changes to the player character.

[Dave of Canada]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Well the problem is, Lord Gaider, having a mage sibling did not matter at all

Except the entire purpose of act 1 is because of them / you.

[rmp]

I like the voiced protagonist. Sounds like it wasn't a strictly a choice between that and playing different races, but if it was, I'd choose the voice.

[silentassassin264]

Dave of Canada wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

Well the problem is, Lord Gaider, having a mage sibling did not matter at all

Except the entire purpose of act 1 is because of them / you.

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.  

Modifié par silentassassin264, 20 mai 2011 - 09:38 .

[Brea]

I'd prefer a silent protagonist. For me, it's hard to play two different Lady Hawkes when they have the same voice. :/

As long as the game is good in other aspects, I'm not too hung up on being able to choose our race, as much as I loved my elven wardens.

[The Dubious]

Preferred the silent protagonist I could really immerse myself, imagining the Warden's reaction and attitude, because he/she felt like my character.

While Hawke just seemed like a Shepherd clone and I couldn't really get myself immersed, maybe it would have been different if I could chose different voice banks (if you will). The default Hawke sounded fine, but "my" Hawke with the default's voice just seemed off a tad (and lady Hawke's voice drove me nuts, her voice was like listening to a vapid bimbo).

All-in-all it was harder to get immersed, personally.

[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.

[silentassassin264]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

I'm glad you agree.  This is why I love you.

[TEWR]

David Gaider wrote...

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.

I've been telling people this exact thing on other threads Mr. Gaider (well, more or less). That a voiced protagonist in DA2 doesn't mean we're playing as a set race from this point on. And they just dismissed me. Probably because I'm not WoG like you are.

IMO, I see the DA series going something like :

Game 1 - Origins
Game 2 - set race
Game 3 - Origins
Game 4 - Origins
Game 5 - Set race
Game 6 - Origins


and so on and so forth with something along those lines. I'm not sure how you guys are gonna make the games, but that's how I see it and for the time being it's enough for me. We've only seen one game of both types. The DA story seems to be about Thedas, which means important people will exist who were only human or dwarven or elven and that's the role we have to play.

Just.... no more completely reactive protagonists please?

[BP20125810]

I see why the origins storyline wasn't used for DA2. It just would have felt like it was forced in there. With budget and time constraints, they would have had to stay with two Voice artists for the male and female pcs. And, as good as the voices were for humans, you still had people who felt it didn;t fit their characther. It just wouldn't hae felt right with this storyline, and they could have changed it a little to force it in there, but it would have been obvious that they were forcing the origins into DA2.

I'm stuck in the middle. Voiced characthers, IMO, are so much more effective, but origins storlines added so much replayability for me.

[TEWR]

I hope they give us the option to pick from various voices for our origin character.

Just think if you could have Gideon Emery voicing your protagonist in the game.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 21 mai 2011 - 12:18 .

[Ariella]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I hope they give us the option to pick from various voices for our origin character.

Just think if you could have Gideon Emery voicing your protagonist in the game.

Mystical Human Male voice

If I have to play a male human, I'd rather have John Noble

[TEWR]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I hope they give us the option to pick from various voices for our origin character.

Just think if you could have Gideon Emery voicing your protagonist in the game.

Mystical Human Male voice

Ah yes I remember that voice. It was very.... mystical.