597 réponses à ce sujet

[luki1234567]

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Like I said, if the only customisation for my character is cosmetic (equipment doesn't count since it matters in gameplay), I'd much rather have a preset character with depth that I can mold to my liking through the story and character system.

Because at this rate, sports games have better and more meaningful character customisation than most RPGs.

Btw, have you played Planescape: Torment?

If you disliked the way a character looked what would you do?

I wouldn't play the game and also stop whining and caring about it

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Like I said, if the only customisation for my character is cosmetic (equipment doesn't count since it matters in gameplay), I'd much rather have a preset character with depth that I can mold to my liking through the story and character system.

Because at this rate, sports games have better and more meaningful character customisation than most RPGs.

Btw, have you played Planescape: Torment?

If you disliked the way a character looked what would you do?

Ugly as hell.

But it was the best story I ever played through.

[luki1234567]

mrcrusty wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Like I said, if the only customisation for my character is cosmetic (equipment doesn't count since it matters in gameplay), I'd much rather have a preset character with depth that I can mold to my liking through the story and character system.

Because at this rate, sports games have better and more meaningful character customisation than most RPGs.

Btw, have you played Planescape: Torment?

If you disliked the way a character looked what would you do?

Ugly as hell.

But it was the best story I ever played through.

agree. also everyone who did not play such classics (or even bother try) don't know anything about rpg genre

[wetnasty]

Sure let's make DA3 into a misogynistic, one dimensional, hot mess. I'll get my wand.

[AloraKast]

I absolutely love how in this one relatively short thread we have covered so many different aspects of DA:O, DA2, Witcher 1 and 2, RGP, action-adventure-RPG and gaming in general with so many different points of view. It never ceases to amaze me, the truly mind-blowing evolution of a healthy (for the most part) dialogue.

These are the times when I adore these forums the most.

Modifié par AloraKast, 03 août 2011 - 04:23 .

[Mr.House]

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

[KnightofPhoenix]

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

In your opinion.
I find Geralt an interesting character, with an interesting story.
And yea, I like the VO.

[luki1234567]

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

arguments? it's pretty pointless to discuss without them ( why he is boring (not to you but as a whole))

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

In your opinion.

*wants to get a quote pyramid going, that'd be pretty cool*

[Mr.House]

luki1234567 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

arguments? it's pretty pointless to discuss without them ( why he is boring (not to you but as a whole))

I never said he was boring.

[grregg]

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

Well, that's always a problem for fixed-protagonist games. If you happen to not like the main char, then the game is pretty much a loss.

[Mr.House]

mrcrusty wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

In your opinion.

In your opinion.

[luki1234567]

Mr.House wrote...

luki1234567 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

arguments? it's pretty pointless to discuss without them ( why he is boring (not to you but as a whole))

I never said he was boring.

"difference though, the namelless is interesting character" and if this is the difference than geralt is boring in your opinion. unless you mean something else by difference

[tmp7704]

mrcrusty wrote...



Ugly as hell.

But it was the best story I ever played through.

I suspect only getting to see your character like this



helped to cope by quite a bit.

[Mr.House]

luki1234567 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

luki1234567 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

arguments? it's pretty pointless to discuss without them ( why he is boring (not to you but as a whole))

I never said he was boring.

"difference though, the namelless is interesting character" and if this is the difference than geralt is boring in your opinion. unless you mean something else by difference

You assume I think he is boring, that's not the case, I dislike the character as a whole. his personality, his looks, his past everything. I don't like anything nor can I get into his boots when I played TW, so the games fail as RPGs for me because I'm not really role playing, I'm just playing a video game and there is better games out there for that.

[leeboi2]

Because boring hack n slash, terrible voice acting and lots of pointless sex and language is so awesome.

[Mr.House]

leeboi2 wrote...

Because boring hack n slash, terrible voice acting and lots of pointless sex and language is so awesome.

Remember, very funny means f**k off.

Modifié par Mr.House, 03 août 2011 - 04:46 .

[John Epler]

We're no longer talking about DA2 - if you'd like to get back to a DA2 related topic, that would be swell.

Otherwise, I'm going to lock this thread, as it seems to have become infested with quote trees.

[csfteeeer]

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

Geralt is Uninteresting?
Then What the Hell is Hawke?

[Jestina]

Quote trees, as much fun as point and kill games pretending to be RPG's.

[ipgd]

csfteeeer wrote...

Geralt is Uninteresting?
Then What the Hell is Hawke?

What You Make Him.

[hoorayforicecream]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

In your opinion.
I find Geralt an interesting character, with an interesting story.
And yea, I like the VO.

Geralt's VO was a lot like Geralt's character - stiff, detached, and completely immutable. I didn't find Geralt particularly compelling, because I couldn't see him change or grow over the course of the game. He remembered stuff, but it didn't make *him* change, it just made his *goals* change. OTHER things changed over the course of the game, but Geralt didn't. I didn't like that, because it just reinforced that Geralt was never "my" character to begin with, he was just "a" character that I happened to issue orders to. I made choices, and he voiced those choices, but he never really cared either way about practically anything. With Hawke, I could make those choices, and I could see Hawke expressing desires differently. I could see that in the companions too, as the rivalry and friendship stories progressed toward their ends, and the characters are different from when they started.

I suspect that if I played a Witcher game with a protagonist Witcher that was actually allowed to develop, I'd have enjoyed it a lot more. But given my impression of the nature of the characters in W2, that's not something that CDPR is good at. None of the characters really grow or change over the course of the game, they just have their own set role that they play. Vernon Roche is still the same Vernon Roche at the end as he was in the beginning. Geralt is the same Geralt, plus a few memories and a new thing to chase after. We learn more about their roles and history as the game progresses, but we don't see them actually develop into something else.

I chose to follow Roche. Perhaps all the character development was on the other side.

Edit: KoP  - yes, one of three personality types, or a mix of all three. At least I can choose how Hawke behaves and reacts, and Hawke definitely changes from the prologue to the epilogue. I understand it is not your cup of tea to feel that everything ultimately dovetails to similar resolutions, but different strokes for different folks. I prefer to look at the journey, and not the results.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 03 août 2011 - 04:56 .

[John Epler]

Jestina wrote...

Quote trees, as much fun as point and kill games pretending to be RPG's.

If you'd care to contribute to the thread, that would be swell.

If you'd rather do nothing but engage in snide remarks, then perhaps you'd be best off on another forum. We promote discussion 'round these parts, not attempting to score points in some bizarre game of internet one-upsmanship.

[KnightofPhoenix]

ipgd wrote...

csfteeeer wrote...

Geralt is Uninteresting?
Then What the Hell is Hawke?

What You Make Him.

You mean one of 3 dominant personality types, all ultimately doing the same thing as to not change the story baring superficialities.

[luki1234567]

Mr.House wrote...

luki1234567 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

luki1234567 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Difference though, the Nameless One was a interesting character, Geralt is just a pile of fail that is ugly as sin but women want to have sex with him? O_o

arguments? it's pretty pointless to discuss without them ( why he is boring (not to you but as a whole))

I never said he was boring.

"difference though, the namelless is interesting character" and if this is the difference than geralt is boring in your opinion. unless you mean something else by difference

You assume I think he is boring, that's not the case, I dislike the character as a whole. his personality, his looks, his past everything. I don't like anything nor can I get into his boots when I played TW, so the games fail as RPGs for me because I'm not really role playing, I'm just playing a video game and there is better games out there for that.

SO you admit that he is properly write character but you dislike him? that's alright if so. this is a dnager of pre defined character. if you find him boring the game will suck for you. I had similiar issue with hawke. Yes you could change his appearence but no matter what happened i disliked him and his family with my heart and soul. the bound between hawke and his family ws cheap and i didn't care about death of family members. I also have to say that dragon age 2 has terrible issue with dialogue system. i wouldn't care about this mass effect dialogue choice system if hawke do say what i click but he won't do it. He will say sth entirely different in 8/10 cases and in 2/10 the offered responses does not satisfy me. And one more retarded thing about are the icons. Further in the game i was chossing dialogue respond by it's icon which completely denies playing a role in game. That's why it's hard to consider da2 as ROLE PLAYING game when dialogue system is terribly flawed

i had some isuees with geralt saying sth different in tw 2 but there it wasn't as terrible. I mean at 19/20 cases he said what i wanted, no some retarded response from nowhere. (at least in polish version, i don't know how it is in english

Modifié par luki1234567, 03 août 2011 - 04:58 .