232 réponses à ce sujet

[Morroian]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

In a game where the PC doesn't need to attract followers, or influence people's decisions, I think they could handle disparate races with exactly the sort of approach they used in DAO - a handful a throwaway lines.

What would be the point of doing that if it is essentially irrelevant?

[Edhriano]

I really miss my elf rogue, and my cute dwarf warrior >.<...

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Not if the PC's race isn't relevant to the plot.

It's not the plot itself that has to matter; it's whether the race is relevant to the world.

A good example is race in our world. In Canda or America, it doesn't really matter if you are a different race. But 250 years ago, it did.

In a game where the PC doesn't need to attract followers, or influence people's decisions, I think they could handle disparate races with exactly the sort of approach they used in DAO - a handful a throwaway lines.

If the world has different standards of treatment for different races (e.g. elves are second class citizens) throw-away lines may not be enough. It all depends on what the plot of the game is, and what the lore is.

Alternately, you could set the bulk of your game in a part of your world where the races aren't treated differently.  Recall in DAO - the Avvars treated everyone like strangers, because everyone was a stranger.  Since you couldn't play an Avvar, you were just restricted to races that are treated similarly.  You could do the same thing in the Deep Roads as long as you're not allowed to play a Dwarf (even forcing you to play a Dwarf wouldn't work, unless you also either required or prohibited playing the casteless).

You could, so long as there aren't internal divisions with that part of the world (e.g. all outsiders suck, but elves > humans too).

Allowing race selection doesn't require they allow a completely unrestricted race/background selection

But it does require either making the background irrelevant or making the story branching.

outlaw1109 wrote...
In Origins, the people that knew you were a
slum-elf, treated you as such...or at least acknowledged it.  Same if
you were a casteless dwarf.  EVERYONE isn't going to call you "alienage
elf" because they don't know that for sure.  As an elf, you do still
encounter some NPC's that mistake you for a servant.  Most people know,
however, that you're a Warden and that trumps any title, it
seems.

Actually, they didn't.

You said: I have a sword and I'm a Warden, and they were like, "Oh, we'll totally shelf our racism and take your word for it."

Speaking as someone who comes from a country where my ethnic group was discriminated against, people totally don't deal with it that way.

[Red Panda]

Rock must be an option, no matter the cost!

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Allowing race selection doesn't require they allow a completely unrestricted race/background selection

But it does require either making the background irrelevant or making the story branching.

It only requires the background be irrelevant to the responsive parts of the game.

I recognise that you think only the responsive parts of the game matter, but let's not thrust your preerences upon everyone.

[Archaven]

I think DA3 will continue the story of Hawke. This way it will be EASIER and reduce the resources in creating many different types of races, gender, voice-overs.

Those cost alot of ZOTS so i believe maintaining ShepHawke is the way to go with EA.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
It only requires the background be irrelevant to the responsive parts of the game.

I recognise that you think only the responsive parts of the game matter, but let's not thrust your preerences upon everyone.

Every part of the game can be responsive; I think the game fails if it doesn't explicitly show those outcomes, but you have to agree with me that an RPG can support multiple outcomes for any one situation.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

Every part of the game can be responsive; I think the game fails if it doesn't explicitly show those outcomes, but you have to agree with me that an RPG can support multiple outcomes for any one situation.

Of course.  But the development of every one of those supported outcomes carries an opportunity cost.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Of course.  But the development of every one of those supported outcomes carries an opportunity cost.

Absolutely. My issue with multiple races that (lore-wise) should matter is this: such a design provides many opportunities for the world to be broken.

[outlaw1109]

In Exile wrote...

Actually, they didn't.

You said: I have a sword and I'm a Warden, and they were like, "Oh, we'll totally shelf our racism and take your word for it."

Speaking as someone who comes from a country where my ethnic group was discriminated against, people totally don't deal with it that way.

So, you're fighting a blight and are willing to sacrifice yourself by slaying an archdemon?

Can't really compare the two.

On the other hand...

A guy walks up to you with an assault rifle and says he's a soldier.  You think people are going to spout racism at a guy with a gun?  Or are they going to believe he's a soldier?

If you were to say you were a soldier, saving someone's life, and they still discriminated against you, then it might be different, but in real life, the guy saving your hide could be pink and I doubt you or anyone else would care too much. 

Modifié par outlaw1109, 18 juin 2011 - 01:13 .

[Siven80]

If the choice of being a human,elf or dwarf fit into the overall plot and ideas behinf the game then sure i'd like to see race selection in.

Human only worked for DA2 due to the story.

But i dont want race selection pushed into the game if it doesnt fit just to appease people.

Modifié par Siven80, 18 juin 2011 - 01:24 .

[Pasquale1234]

outlaw1109 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

In a game where the PC doesn't need to attract followers, or influence people's decisions, I think they could handle disparate races with exactly the sort of approach they used in DAO - a handful a throwaway lines.

Allowing race selection doesn't require they allow a completely unrestricted race/background selection.

QFT


A few VO lines from various NPC's could be the difference between the races.

A good example, off the top of my head, would be what they did in ME and the differences between Colonist, Spacer, and Earthborn.


People trying to justify the limitation with the whole, "it costs too much" line when its something a simple as a few extra lines of dialogue/MAYBE slight tweaks to cutscenes.

It's much more than that.

All of the armors have to be modeled for all of the body types.

All of the cutscenes need to be re-done for each race, or at least modified so that a single cutscene execution can accommodate all of the races.

Here are a couple of examples of the kinds of cutscenes you get when you replace a character with one of a different race:





It basically amounts to creating additional content.

Modifié par Pasquale1234, 18 juin 2011 - 02:28 .

[In Exile]

outlaw1109 wrote...


So, you're fighting a blight and are willing to sacrifice yourself by slaying an archdemon?

Can't really compare the two.

Dude, that's uncalled for.

I'm telling you how racism works. Not to mention that no one knows what a Grey Warden has to do to stop the blight.

On the other hand...

A guy walks up to you with an assault rifle and says he's a soldier.  You think people are going to spout racism at a guy with a gun?  Or are they going to believe he's a soldier?

They're going to start a lynch mob, and probably find a way to take you down.

If you were to say you were a soldier, saving someone's life, and they still discriminated against you, then it might be different, but in real life, the guy saving your hide could be pink and I doubt you or anyone else would care too much. 

If they're not racist. If they are racist... then they'll absolutely care. If they even want your help in the first place. This is how racism works.

[Blastback]

It depends on how strong the racial prejudice is. Some racists will simply see any other group as inferior, not nessecarily to be hated, but not as equals. But in extreme circumstances, they would probably be willing to accept than one or two exectional members of a "lower race" were worthy of following.

Then you get some folks who are more violent in their racism, who hate any group of people that isn't theirs.

[In Exile]

Blastback wrote...

It depends on how strong the racial prejudice is. Some racists will simply see any other group as inferior, not nessecarily to be hated, but not as equals. But in extreme circumstances, they would probably be willing to accept than one or two exectional members of a "lower race" were worthy of following.

Oh, absolutely. But imagine an armed ex-slave around the Civil War period in the US. It's a lot less likely you're going to have people cowed and a lot more likely (if the means exists) that it creates the ME1 problem: ''That slave has a gun and is sorrounded by soldiers! Shoot!''

I think racism, to an extent, is seen through too modern of a lense sometimes, in the sense that as a society we are now much less violent than the past.

[AAHook2]

The Whole point of Origins was to show that any kind of person could be a hero.

It takes a certain kind of person to prefer being a dwarf rather than a human. Some people would not mind being an elf.
The point was that you had that option if you fancied a bit of a change in the norm.

I found that it really added something to your adventure to not only challenge the evil of the Blight, but also the preconceived notions cast upon Dwarves. Not to mention a casteless dwarf who faced discrimination from even other dwarves,

If you chose in Origins to play as a Dwarf or an Elf, you really were an underdog and managed really wonderful things. It added to the story that was told.
Humans had their moments of course, but generally all they really fight for is honor and vengeance, things that they feel entitled to anyway.

To some degree, I suspect that many people who would rather turn away from being anything but human warriors have a hard time grasping what it is actually like to be a minority and treated as different or even less than a "normal" person.

Speaking for myself, I am considered a minority, even amongst minorities in my country. It's a hard pill to swallow even when you gain people's respect for what your abilities are, it always comes with this sense of wonder that someone "like me" could possibly have something to add to my surroundings that is actually extraordinary.
I guess I have an affinity for Dwarves that many people wouldn't have based on the fact that most people would judge a Dwarf just by the way they appear. In the case of Dragon Age Origins, many were often surprised by just how capable that particular Dwarf was. Chances are, if you didn't fancy even trying to play as a dwarf, you probably have a hard time in general accepting that anyone who is not a stereotypical tall and strong hero could even be a hero.

I mean, this could be me just making generalizations, but if you think I'm wrong, then ask yourself if you had a choice be a Warden, with all their abilities and powers, would you choose to be so at the expense of having to be a Dwarf?

[Pasquale1234]

AAHook2 wrote...
I mean, this could be me just making generalizations, but if you think I'm wrong, then ask yourself if you had a choice be a Warden, with all their abilities and powers, would you choose to be so at the expense of having to be a Dwarf?

OTOH - some of us who are minorities irl get enough of it irl, and don't especially want to have to experience it in a game.

Two sides to every coin - yanno?

[Sidney]

outlaw1109 wrote...


I disagree with this.

In Origins, the people that knew you were a slum-elf, treated you as such...or at least acknowledged it.  Same if you were a casteless dwarf.  EVERYONE isn't going to call you "alienage elf" because they don't know that for sure.  As an elf, you do still encounter some NPC's that mistake you for a servant.  Most people know, however, that you're a Warden and that trumps any title, it seems.

You got the merchant at Ostagar calling you a servant and IIRC another "knife ears" comment that got retracted into the same wall of text everyone else faced. It wasn't a meaningful set of options.

The notion that if you had a 1950 RPG in the USA and the only difference between a black and white PC was a handful of lines of dialog is silly. Elves aren't some "just another race" like in BG2. They are explicitily made a target of marginalization and abuse and yet nothing in the game really shows that. It makes the "choice" meaningless.

Really one of the biggest failures of DAO is that elves and mages are marginalized, oppressed and targets of suspicion and very little happens in the game to drive either of those points home because the game had to be designed to handle that AND the generic human warrior who faces none of those issues. Breadth and no depth.

[In Exile]

Sidney wrote...
Really one of the biggest failures of DAO is that elves and mages are marginalized, oppressed and targets of suspicion and very little happens in the game to drive either of those points home because the game had to be designed to handle that AND the generic human warrior who faces none of those issues. Breadth and no depth.

And I think it's precisely this attitude on the part of Bioware (the fact that the mere options is important) that led to the mage protagonist being treated almost equivalently. Becuase it seems that the player base is okay with the dialogue generally acting as if you're the same with exceptions.

[Clangeddin86]

The first problem is that they once said that Hawke is the most influential-whatever character in all history of Thedas, the second problem is that they really didn't manage to show that in DAII, so now they'll have to cover it up either with an expansion, or by making another game around Hawke.
Or maybe they are just lazy and they want to make Hawke their medieval fantasy Shepard version.

[Loc'n'lol]

Clangeddin86 wrote...

The first problem is that they once said that Hawke is the most influential-whatever character in all history of Thedas.

In present history. As in, at the time of DA2. Doesn't have to hold true for the future.

[Uccio]

I hope DA3 has a option to continue either with the original Warde, Hawke or a new character and all the storylines would cross at some point. To approach the goal from different sides so to speak.

[outlaw1109]

In Exile wrote...


Dude, that's uncalled for.

I'm telling you how racism works. Not to mention that no one knows what a Grey Warden has to do to stop the blight.

I don't need YOU to tell me how racism works.

They're going to start a lynch mob, and probably find a way to take you down. 

Really?  You think so?  How many lynch mobs are going on in Iraq?  Because, well, when I went over there, they didn't seem to care too much about a black AMERICAN trying to protect their skin.  Which is my point.  No, they might not know what the Wardens do, but they do know they fight the blight. 

If they're not racist. If they are racist... then they'll absolutely care. If they even want your help in the first place. This is how racism works.

Damn.  You REALLY don't need to tell me how racism works.  It sounds like what you're saying is that you want Racial EXTREMISTS to be included in the game.  I can go back to my tour in Iraq for another example:  there are terrorists there, that don't like the American's (infidel) and take advantage of every oppurtunity to kill just one.  Willing to sacrifice hundreds of civilians to kill that one soldier. 

There are other groups that hate and despise Americans, but instead of strapping a bomb to their chest, they just protest our presence, but they really didn't bother us too much.

[outlaw1109]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

It's much more than that.

All of the armors have to be modeled for all of the body types.

Yes.  But that has to be done anyway because of dwarf/elf NPC's.  It's not 'extra' to have a PC dwarf with armor over an NPC dwarf with armor.  It's the same model.


Like I said about cutscenes, though, I could see some slight differences required.

[Pasquale1234]

outlaw1109 wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

It's much more than that.

All of the armors have to be modeled for all of the body types.

Yes.  But that has to be done anyway because of dwarf/elf NPC's.  It's not 'extra' to have a PC dwarf with armor over an NPC dwarf with armor.  It's the same model.


Like I said about cutscenes, though, I could see some slight differences required.

That depends on whether they let you change your companion's armor.  DAO did, DA2 did not - so they were able to cut corners by only needing to make the armor models for humans.