597 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

Persephone wrote...
In my world, friendship, love, losing loved ones or not, betrayals, redemption vs. a terrorist/martyr act are anything but insignificant. That was what my Hawke experienced in abundance, with different nuances, dialogue....her journey counted to me. Getting there had me smiling, crying, hold my breath in shock....wait for it, everything I want out of roleplaying a character. Much more than the Warden ever did. And Geralt, who cannot even decide just WHO his girlfriend is supposed to be.

By "superficial", I mean that the game ultimately does not change. Your experience with it might, and that's good for you (though it requires you buying into it in the first place). But ultimately, the game doesn't react in any significant material way to that. It's more "in your head", which is fine if that's your cup of tea.

And we both know the situation with Geralt's love life is more complicated than that.
Which incidently I find much more interesting than my romance experience in ME1, 2 and DA2.
DA:O beats it, but it's Morrigan

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 03 août 2011 - 05:27 .

[AtreiyaN7]

luki1234567 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

csfteeeer 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

Geralt is Uninteresting?
Then What the Hell is Hawke?

I can make Hawke intresting. I can write her backstory, I can fill in the gaps between each act ect. You can not with Geralt, Geralt has a set personlty, a set past a set everything.

you can change his believies and point of view and to some degree change his personality.

Whatever changes you can make to Geralt, I rather doubt that includes changing his flat, boring, largely emotionless delivery. I also doubt that it includes giving him a decent sense of humor - but perhaps I'm mistaken and he actually manages to say something somewhere that qualifies as being intentionally funny? I tried to play TW1, but Geralt himself was a major turn-off from the start. Even with 007's treatment of women being somewhat misogynistic (which can be said of Geralt), the difference is that James Bond is sufficiently suave, dangerous and charming - unlike Geralt - that I can see jumping into bed with Bond. Geralt...not in a million, billion years would I ever be tempted to sleep with the guy.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 03 août 2011 - 05:33 .

[erynnar]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...
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.

Geralt was never meant to be your character, of course he is a set character.
You can alter his perceptions about himself and the world around him (that's especially the case with TW1), but he ultimately remains Geralt. And I don't mind that.

I'd much rather have that with choices that matter, than superficial differences that the game barely recognizes and reacts too. 

And that's a difference in taste.

And Geralt does care about a number of things, and we can actually change what he cares about (and there are things we can't change). The fact that he is naturally introverted and sounds detached does not mean he doesn't care.

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.

Vernon Roche prior to happens to the blue stripes, is not exactly the same as him after what happened. He is a character that reacts to what is happening around him, and I prefer that, than a forced and artificial substantial character development in a story that is supposed to span a few weeks at most. TW2's pacing is too fast to have any substantial character development that wouldn't feel forced and artificial.
Iorveth has the most development, thought his days as a terrorist butcher are not shown in the game. 

And ultimately, I found TW2 characters a lot more compelling than most Bioware characters, companions included.
I think they have a subtelty in them that the latter do not have (and imo, often end up being overblown). In addition to being projected in a story and setting I find much more interesting (and projected in a better way). They look, sound and feel more like normal people (circumstances considered) to me.

As opposed to say Carver who has to say he is jealous everytime he opens his mouth.

I agree with you Knight. And (color me shocked, I didn't think I'd like playing a male and a set character) Geralt is not nearly as shallow, set in stone, or base as some would make such a pre-formed character is. You can alter him. My Geralt is not like Knight's Geralt, etc..

Now I do prefer choices that make a difference, but I love making the character mine too. But DA2 didn't give me either in any signifigant way  that I like playing a character. Hawke was just too in the middle, not formed enough, and too set to really jump into them like my Warden. 

[KnightofPhoenix]

erynnar wrote...
I agree with you Knight. And (color me shocked, I didn't think I'd like playing a male and a set character) Geralt is not nearly as shallow, set in stone, or base as some would make such a pre-formed character is. You can alter him. My Geralt is not like Knight's Geralt, etc..

I (presume) our Geralts would be different, vis-a-vis choices, perceptions and even with regards to persuasion / manipulation / intimidation. But ultimately, the personality is more or less the same. The direction is different.

Which is something I do not mind.

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Persephone wrote...
In my world, friendship, love, losing loved ones or not, betrayals, redemption vs. a terrorist/martyr act are anything but insignificant. That was what my Hawke experienced in abundance, with different nuances, dialogue....her journey counted to me. Getting there had me smiling, crying, hold my breath in shock....wait for it, everything I want out of roleplaying a character. Much more than the Warden ever did. And Geralt, who cannot even decide just WHO his girlfriend is supposed to be.

By "superficial", I mean that the game ultimately does not change. Your experience with it might, and that's good for you (though it requires you buying into it in the first place). But ultimately, the game doesn't react in any significant material way to that. It's more "in your head", which is fine if that's your cup of tea.

And we both know the situation with Geralt's love life is more complicated than that.
Which incidently I find much more interesting than my romance experience in ME1, 2 and DA2.
DA:O beats it, but it's Morrigan

It's not in my head, as all of these things happened. In game. Nothing I mentioned above is me RPing in my head. The game told me a different story as these characters changed, developed and grew. So far I find romance in TW2 to be completely meh. TW2 Triss is the worst LI I ever encountered. No elven garden and moaning as she spells away her clothes will change that.

And buying into it is required to like ANY game. Even TW2.

I was referring to him airbrushing Shani, btw. 

[TEWR]

ipgd wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

where you're still greatly restricted. If you want access to a dialogue option, you have to stay a certain personality type.

The dominant personality system should be replaced with a numerical tally system, where if you pick the sarcastic option 8 times in the game, when you come across the chance to use a sarcastic bonus dialogue that requires you to have chosen purple 8 times, you're good. You don't need to stay as purple.

Also, it should keep track of what option you picked the most, sort of like it does now. Whatever you picked the most becomes the dominant personality, but that doesn't mean you won't ever be able to access an aggressive bonus choice if you're a sarcastic character.

I despise those systems. Anything that requires you to choose certain dialogue options in order to be able to pick ones that don't suck in the future is immediately conducive to metagaming. I really do not want any sort of system in my head when I'm deciding what dialogue choice to pick -- and that's precisely the reason why I can't see Shepard as a character, because half my motivation for dialogue choices is basically "I need to keep picking paragon or I might get locked out of something important later (also Renegade gets shafted constantly !!!)".

The personality system isn't perfect -- as mentioned, I don't like the personality-based "bonus" options that require a particular personality to execute, scarce as they are (the option to side with Petrice certainly shouldn't have been tied to it) -- but I prefer it to neutral delivery of choice path lines, and I greatly prefer it to the paragon/renegade system that requires you to choose certain dialogue options in order to accumulate metagame points to spend on actually being able to take decisive actions in some dialogues.

Right now the personality system is essentially a flavor element kept in the background, which is what it should be.

At least with the system I suggested it wouldn't be as metagamey, if at all. You could pick whatever option suited your character best instead of saying "Purple. Purple. Purple."

Now, there would still be the flaw of what was mentioned prior about how Hawke switched from aggressive to sarcastic without the player's saying so, but the dialogue system would be much improved.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

DA:O beats it, but it's Morrigan

Blasphemous heathen! Merrill beats Morrigan!





how can you deny that face?!

[luki1234567]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

luki1234567 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

csfteeeer 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

Geralt is Uninteresting?
Then What the Hell is Hawke?

I can make Hawke intresting. I can write her backstory, I can fill in the gaps between each act ect. You can not with Geralt, Geralt has a set personlty, a set past a set everything.

you can change his believies and point of view and to some degree change his personality.

Whatever changes you can make to Geralt, I rather doubt that includes changing his flat, boring, largely emotionless, delivery. I also doubt that it includes giving him a decent sense of humor - but perhaps I'm mistaken and he actually manages to say something somewhere that qualifies as being intentionally funny? I tried to play TW1, but Geralt himself was a major turn-off from the start. Even with 007's treatment of women being somewhat misogynistic (which can be said of Geralt), the difference is that James Bond is sufficiently suave, dangerous and charming - unlike Geralt - that I can see jumping into bed with Bond. Geralt...not in a million, billion years would I ever be tempted to sleep with the guy.

English voice acting of geralt is pretty terrible( that can make him very boring) = , polish is briliant with evyrything i need. i wouldn't even bother myself playing tw in english. vo is at best average with some exceptions

Modifié par luki1234567, 03 août 2011 - 05:35 .

[Tirfan]

@TEWR: Easily. Morrigan is perfect, Merril is annoying kid.

Modifié par Tirfan, 03 août 2011 - 05:35 .

[TEWR]

I hear not your blasphemy Tirfan!

[tmp7704]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Blasphemous heathen! Merrill beats Morrigan!

KoP likes his women intelligent and scheming. Merrill really comes short in this department.

[hoorayforicecream]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Geralt was never meant to be your character, of course he is a set character.
You can alter his perceptions about himself and the world around him (that's especially the case with TW1), but he ultimately remains Geralt. And I don't mind that.

I'd much rather have that with choices that matter, than superficial differences that the game barely recognizes and reacts too. 

And that's a difference in taste.

And Geralt does care about a number of things, and we can actually change what he cares about (and there are things we can't change). The fact that he is naturally introverted and sounds detached does not mean he doesn't care.

I never said he doesn't have anything he cares about. I just said that I felt powerless to enact any sort of meaningful change with him or the things he cares about. He sort of likes Triss, and despite everything I did to try to make him romance her, he still treats her like a sibling for most of the game. That made me feel like I was merely a bystander and observer. I might be able to make changes to the political climate of whatever world he lives in, but I felt powerless to change even the smallest thing about him. 

The choices that matter aren't as important to me, because it just highlights the disparity even more. I know internally that all the "choices that matter" are is just some plot flags and slightly different branches in cutscenes (barring the *one* choice that affects which act 2 you play - the only choice that *really* matters) that ultimately dovetail to the same thing anyway, so maybe it's just my jaded, cynical view on "choices that matter". 

Vernon Roche prior to happens to the blue stripes, is not exactly the same as him after what happened. He is a character that reacts to what is happening around him, and I prefer that, than a forced and artificial substantial character development in a story that is supposed to span a few weeks at most. TW2's pacing is too fast to have any substantial character development that wouldn't feel forced and artificial.
Iorveth has the most development, thought his days as a terrorist butcher are not shown in the game.  

Vernon Roche starts as the man who is willing to do anything for Temeria. Vernon Roche ends as the man who is willing to do anything for Temeria. He does things that he knows are terrible, but he does them for Temeria. And that's entirely who he is, from start to finish.He does things that he's not proud of, but he is still very much the exact same guy he was when he started. There is no point in the game at which Act 1 Roche would do something that Act 3 Roche would not.

And ultimately, I found TW2 characters a lot more compelling than most Bioware characters, companions included.
I think they have a subtelty in them that the latter do not have (and imo, often end up being overblown). In addition to being projected in a story and setting I find much more interesting (and projected in a better way). They look, sound and feel more like normal people (circumstances considered) to me.

As opposed to say Carver who has to say he is jealous everytime he opens his mouth.

That's your opinion, and that's fine. I found the characters in W2 reasonably detailed in their stories, but the lack of actual change or growth among them bothered me greatly.

Carver was really not so bad. He started off as a man without a purpose in the shadow of his older, more succcessful sibling. That seems to be the Carver you saw. But if you made him a Warden, he mellows out considerably. If you make him a Templar, he's less mellow, but he does get better. Both paths result in him finding purpose in his life that he was missing. And if you take him with you in Legacy, he has quite a few scenes where he argues and jabs at his older sibling, but you can tell through the voice acting, expressions and body language (three things that W2 is sadly lacking) that the jabs aren't anywhere near as serious as they were at the start of the game. I played through it with a postgame save. At the end of Legacy, there's actually a rather touching scene between Hawke and Carver that does address the issues between them, and provides a better view on how it is. And that's what W2 so desperately lacks - nuance of character that isn't immediately apparent. I feel like the characters there are mostly WYSIWYG, and that's not something I like.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 03 août 2011 - 05:38 .

[Oopsieoops]

tmp7704 wrote...

ipgd wrote...

3 core tones that can be mixed for a wide range of character permutations.

It's unfortunate the game simply ignores any mixing you might want to do and simplifies your character down to single personality, as far as it's concerned.

And on top of that essentially punishes you for not being consistent on intimidation\\convincing checks. So yeah, not only any potential permutations are rendered moot, but the game actually goes out of its way to ensure it will be so.

[Persephone]

Tirfan wrote...

@TEWR: Easily. Morrigan is perfect, Merril is annoying kid.

Merrill is a young, sheltered woman trying to save a dying culture. Sacrificing everything. The conclusion to her last quest....DAMN.

Misled. Yes. Wrong. Yes. Fanatical. Yes. Disturbingly short sighted re: blood magic. Yes. A child? No.

[luki1234567]

Srsly romance options in da2
Merill - retarded naive kid. she should go to psychologist
isabela - There is nothing more about this character than sex. she is perfect to work in a brothel
fenris - look how i hate mages character. cliche
anders - look how i hate templars character cliche

[KnightofPhoenix]

Persephone wrote...
It's not in my head, as all of these things happened. In game. Nothing I mentioned above is me RPing in my head. The game told me a different story as these characters changed, developed and grew. So far I find romance in TW2 to be completely meh. TW2 Triss is the worst LI I ever encountered. No elven garden and moaning as she spells away her clothes will change that.

And they do not alter the game (nor the overall plot) in any material sense, hence why I think it's superficial.
Characters say they grew, but I didn't see them grow or do anything to show that they have grown, barring a few instances (usually at the very end). The game does not change based on that. Your experience with it might.

As opposed to Roche or Iorveth path, where the game does recognize your choice rather significantly and in a material sense beyond a few lines of dialogue different.

And I personally enjoyed the romance with Triss more than ME1, 2 and DA2, and it has nothing to do with the moaning and sex. I in fact hated that she used magic to undress, that's taking half the fun away.

And buying into it is required to like ANY game. Even TW2.

I was referring to him airbrushing Shani, btw. 

Of course. Did I imply otherwise?

And yea Shani was a bad move on their part. I don't think they should have had her as an option in TW1 in the first place.

[KnightofPhoenix]

tmp7704 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Blasphemous heathen! Merrill beats Morrigan!

KoP likes his women intelligent and scheming. Merrill really comes short in this department.

Exactly.

Probably why I like Triss, come to think of it.

[Persephone]

tmp7704 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Blasphemous heathen! Merrill beats Morrigan!

KoP likes his women intelligent and scheming. Merrill really comes short in this department.

And compared to Atia of the Julii dear Morri is a cute beginner. :happy: There will always be such a comparison.

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Blasphemous heathen! Merrill beats Morrigan!

KoP likes his women intelligent and scheming. Merrill really comes short in this department.

Exactly.

Probably why I like Triss, come to think of it.

I give you that for TW1 Triss. Cutesy girl on a crush ala Triss retcon in TW2? Not so much.

*Runs away to escape KOP's wrath*:happy:

[dragonfire100]

Guys stop spamming with pictures your gona get the tread locked!

[ipgd]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

You could pick whatever option suited your character best instead of saying "Purple. Purple. Purple."

But that's how it works now. I didn't choose purple every time, I picked whatever option I thought my character would have said in that situation. I didn't feel incentivized to stick to any one tone -- the personality system remained in the background and it didn't influence my dialogue choices at all. It only showed up in cases where there would either a) be neutral delivery, or no input from the PC at all.

At least with the system I suggested it wouldn't be as metagamey, if at all.

The system you proposed would be very metagamey -- if it's tied to a tally of points, and those points unlock certain dialogue options, it's exactly what the paragon/renegade system is. I would feel incentivized to metagame in order to be able to choose the "purple" option, or whatever. Unless those options are entirely meaningless flavor lines, in which case, why have this system at all and not just let you choose those lines yourself? (And to answer my own rhetorical question -- it probably has something to do with the fact they can't fit 3+ personality options onto the list/wheel for every single choice in the game, and the alternative to having the dominant personality for choice delivery is entirely neutral delivery (and phrasing, which was as much an issue for the silent Warden), which I like less than the personality system).

[tmp7704]

Persephone wrote...

Misled. Yes. Wrong. Yes. Fanatical. Yes. Disturbingly short sighted re: blood magic. Yes. A child? No.

She's also extremely scatterbrained. That can be associated with either mental level of a child or a genius, but let's be honest, Merrill doesn't show many signs of being the latter.

[Persephone]

luki1234567 wrote...

Srsly romance options in da2
Merill - retarded naive kid. she should go to psychologist
isabela - There is nothing more about this character than sex. she is perfect to work in a brothel
fenris - look how i hate mages character. cliche
anders - look how i hate templars character cliche

First impressions....not always correct. As Elizabeth Bennet found out.

Never mind the sexism.

Modifié par Persephone, 03 août 2011 - 05:43 .

[luki1234567]

dragonfire100 wrote...

Guys stop spamming with pictures your gona get the tread locked!

It shoul be locked becuase it was created by a guy who thinks that copy-pasting witcher will make da better

[Lenimph]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Exactly.

Probably why I like Triss, come to think of it.

So it's not the shapeshifting? How boring!  D:

[Persephone]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Persephone wrote...
It's not in my head, as all of these things happened. In game. Nothing I mentioned above is me RPing in my head. The game told me a different story as these characters changed, developed and grew. So far I find romance in TW2 to be completely meh. TW2 Triss is the worst LI I ever encountered. No elven garden and moaning as she spells away her clothes will change that.

And they do not alter the game (nor the overall plot) in any material sense, hence why I think it's superficial.
Characters say they grew, but I didn't see them grow or do anything to show that they have grown, barring a few instances (usually at the very end). The game does not change based on that. Your experience with it might.

As opposed to Roche or Iorveth path, where the game does recognize your choice rather significantly and in a material sense beyond a few lines of dialogue different.

And I personally enjoyed the romance with Triss more than ME1, 2 and DA2, and it has nothing to do with the moaning and sex. I in fact hated that she used magic to undress, that's taking half the fun away.

And buying into it is required to like ANY game. Even TW2.

I was referring to him airbrushing Shani, btw. 

Of course. Did I imply otherwise?

And yea Shani was a bad move on their part. I don't think they should have had her as an option in TW1 in the first place.

The "outside" story does not change dramatically, which I actually liked, as that is realistic and I adore storm tossed characters. But that's a difference of taste. :happy: