597 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

Persephone wrote...

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.

I wouldn't call Merrill wrong at all.

Romancing her makes her become less fanatical. The Eluvian is just a project then.

[ipgd]

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

Just what the BSN needs more of, sweeping ignorant generalizations and sex negative **** shaming!

I'm pretty sure you can make any character sound stupid if you reduce them to an incredibly simplistic and innacurate snippet.

[luki1234567]

Persephone wrote...

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.

I konw there is more about them by i hate that they are working on plus minus rule
meriil - naive kid to counter oversexualized isabella
fenris to counter anders
carver to counter bethany
ohh and varrik but he is a bro

[TEWR]

ipgd wrote...

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).

No it wouldn't. You could pick your purple dialogue options at any point in the game, and then feel comfortable instead of having to stick to just purple when you really wanted to pick the red option.


Example: Situation A makes me respond sarcastically, but Situation B and Situation C make me respond agressively. I then come to a point where Situation D allows me to use a witty bonus line to get out of something. This means that on subsequent playthroughs I can now play Situations A, B, and C differently. I can go fully sarcastic in all of those scenarios, 2 sarcastic and then 1 aggressive, and so on and so forth.

The current system has me forced to stay as a person picking purple in Situations A-F if I want to access the witty line in Situation G.


I'm at work now so I can't respond to your first point.

[Persephone]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Persephone wrote...

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.

I wouldn't call Merrill wrong at all.

Romancing her makes her become less fanatical. The Eluvian is just a project then.

That settles in. Rivalmancing her next time. :happy:

[KnightofPhoenix]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
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.

You can make Geralt express his love to her, in his way. Like say giving her a petal from the flower.
Or telling her he wants to leave everything behind and go live with her (doesn't change the game naturally).
And you have characters, such as Ves or Shilard, who ask him about his relationship with Triss. You can reply differently.

And that, for me, is more than enough.
But I understand it may not be enough for you.

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".

Act 2 is virtually completely different depending on that one choice with regards to characters you meet, location, main quests, sidequests and it even shows parts of the story that you didn't know or just heard of in the other path.
Compared to the RPGs I've played, that's certainly a choice that matters. Or matters more than the others.

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.

Killing Henselt. At that point, and as he says, everything he loved is dead or dying, so he just wants blood. His desire to kill Henselt has little to do with Temeria, but with revenge. And Geralt can guide him to either enact his revenge, or resist the temptation.

Also, his dilemma with regards to preserving Temerian unity, at the risk of sarcrifing its independence, is something I appreciate it. And he can end up in different places. Maybe it's my mindset, I prefer to see characters reacting to the big events, issues and trends around them.  

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.

Of course it's my opinion.

And it's not so much what happens with Carver. It's the fact that he doesn't stfu about it (ironically that's what he tells Anders). Every time I talk with him, or when he sends me a bloody letter, he has to mention that he is jealous. That for me is not nuanced at all.
I have not played Legacy (nor do I plan to), so I can't comment.

I definitely agree that Bioware games have more character development when it comes to companions.
But my mindset is such that I focus on the story as a whole, and setting (And I believe TW is superior when it comes to that), if I am to enjoy them, and that I find Bioware's writing when it comes to them gradually losing subtelty. Hence why I prefer TW characters.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 03 août 2011 - 05:59 .

[TEWR]

Persephone wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Persephone wrote...

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.

I wouldn't call Merrill wrong at all.

Romancing her makes her become less fanatical. The Eluvian is just a project then.

That settles in. Rivalmancing her next time. :happy:

actually I was talking about friendmancing. You want her to become more fanatical don't you? That's mean

[KnightofPhoenix]

Persephone wrote...
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:

Or it might just be a facade. Ever thought of that?
Though I do not share the sentiment with TW2 Triss. What is happenign to Geralt and him recorving his memories, must be pressuring her a lot. And that's why I believe she is less strong than in TW1. 
I really think she is torn between her love for Geralt, and her friendship with Yennefer whom Geralt is starting to remember as his original lover.

EDIT: and I gtg. Will respond later
Cheers!

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 03 août 2011 - 06:00 .

[Mr.House]

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

Ignorent post is ignorent.

[luki1234567]

Mr.House wrote...

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

Ignorent post is ignorent.

you mean ignorant? i won't stop talking crap about them until every one of you stop talking crap about geralt
ignorance is ignorance

[Aaleel]

Merrill was a character I just never got. Her race is oppressed, they're always under threat of slavers taking them away, or humans coming in and running them off. I just don't buy any elf, especially one who was basically the Keeper's understudy to be that naive.

Merrill from the Dalish Origin in Origins made much more sense given the circumstances of her life.

But I will say the party banter between Merrill and Varric in Legacy when she asks Varric what his stories say about her almost had me fall off the couch I was laughing so hard lol

[Duncaaaaaan]

meteorswarm wrote...

Some deeply storytelling,one protagonist ,no companions and no teammates .The third person visual  is nearly the witcher 2 of course,better with the first person visual if it has.

I think bioware needs to make Dragon Age: origins 2, not Dragon age 3.

A continuation of the grey warden story line, and to make the end really really epic, the game fast forwards many years later, and the warden finally hears the calling, and the very last quest in the game is to wonder into the deep roads and kill a ridiculous amount of darkspawn, eventually dying himself.

[luki1234567]

double

Modifié par luki1234567, 03 août 2011 - 06:02 .

[Mr.House]

luki1234567 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

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.

I konw there is more about them by i hate that they are working on plus minus rule
meriil - naive kid to counter oversexualized isabella
fenris to counter anders
carver to counter bethany
ohh and varrik but he is a bro

They did this "counter" stuff with the DAO romances too......

[ipgd]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

No it wouldn't. You could pick your purple dialogue options at any point in the game, and then feel comfortable instead of having to stick to just purple when you really wanted to pick the red option.


Example: Situation A makes me respond sarcastically, but Situation B and Situation C make me respond agressively. I then come to a point where Situation D allows me to use a witty bonus line to get out of something. This means that on subsequent playthroughs I can now play Situations A, B, and C differently. I can go fully sarcastic in all of those scenarios, 2 sarcastic and then 1 aggressive, and so on and so forth.

Or I could reach Situation D, know that the only way to get out of it is to have enough Purple Points, and then deliberately respond to Situations A, B and C sarcastically in order to be able to. I want to be able to play Situations A, B and C any way I want with absolutely no bearing on Situation D. If I want to get out of Situation D with a sarcastic option, I want to have that sarcastic option whether I've never chosen a sarcastic option before or not. Anything else leads to metagaming.

The current system has me forced to stay as a person picking purple in Situations A-F if I want to access the witty line in Situation G.

But it doesn't? The system works as such that I can pick a few options at the very beginning of the game, set my desired personality, then effectively forget about it for the rest of the game. I've never had the personality change on me when I didn't want it to.

I don't want there to be any personality-based bonus options at all (though there aren't too many in the game, and they aren't very meaningful -- all I can remember off the top of my head is the pointless one in the prologue at the Gallows, the diplomatic option with the Dalish and Werewolves, the aggressive option to convince Maraas to fight with you, the sarcastic option to distract the guards on the dock, the "intimidate" option on the docks that only seems to work if you're aggressive, and the big stinker, the aggressive Petrice option). Anything that gives you any sort of game-impacting bonus for picking a type of dialogue choice a certain number of times will incentivize the player to pick that dialogue choice a certain number of times.

Modifié par ipgd, 03 août 2011 - 06:06 .

[Atakuma]

Duncaaaaaan wrote...

meteorswarm wrote...

Some deeply storytelling,one protagonist ,no companions and no teammates .The third person visual  is nearly the witcher 2 of course,better with the first person visual if it has.

I think bioware needs to make Dragon Age: origins 2, not Dragon age 3.

A continuation of the grey warden story line, and to make the end really really epic, the game fast forwards many years later, and the warden finally hears the calling, and the very last quest in the game is to wonder into the deep roads and kill a ridiculous amount of darkspawn, eventually dying himself.

I would absolutely hate that.

[lolnoobs]

Aaleel wrote...

Merrill was a character I just never got. Her race is oppressed, they're always under threat of slavers taking them away, or humans coming in and running them off. I just don't buy any elf, especially one who was basically the Keeper's understudy to be that naive.

Merrill from the Dalish Origin in Origins made much more sense given the circumstances of her life.

But I will say the party banter between Merrill and Varric in Legacy when she asks Varric what his stories say about her almost had me fall off the couch I was laughing so hard lol

That is because you didn't pay enough attention. Replay and really pay attention. Merrill is an incredible deep and awesome character.

[AngryFrozenWater]

I think DA3 might learn some things from TW2, but BW games have their own atmosphere and that shouldn't be replaced by something total alien to them.

BW could use the branching stories, though. The way decisions are implemented now defies the whole idea of making them, because they switch back to the main railroaded story as soon as possible. To me the DA2 world feels like a collection of points of interest, puzzles and bosses placed on the map and connected by a story. No matter what decisions you make you usually visit the same points on the map and fight the same bosses. The "decisions" wrap back to the same story line within no time. The dialogue variations act as rationalizations to get you there. That makes the decisions feel cosmetic and the dialogue feel constructed and artificial. All that has a negative impact on telling the story. Put all that energy in something meaningful, please.

Something that I love about TW2 is that the world feels bigger and more alive. NPCs seem to do things. The world is dirty and feels like it is being lived it. It feels like TW2's devs gave it a lot of love and attention. In Kirkwall there is no dirt. It feels like it is kept clean 24/7. Even the Alienage (which is no more than a square with a tree and a couple of doors) has no dirt. There is no detail. NPCs are static. It feels like it has no soul.

Even though DA2 supports DX11 it doesn't look as good as the TW2. The lighting and scenery are breath taking. Nothing in DA2 compares to that, so DA2 could use a bit of that.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 03 août 2011 - 06:14 .

[lolnoobs]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I think DA3 might learn some things from TW2, but BW games have their own atmosphere and that shouldn't be replaced by something total alien to them.

BW could use the branching stories, though. The way decisions are implemented now defies the whole idea of making them, because they switch back to the main railroaded story as soon as possible. To me the DA2 world feels like a collection of points of interest, puzzles and bosses placed on the map and connected by a story. No matter what decisions you make you usually visit the same points on the map and fight the same bosses. The "decisions" wrap back to the same story line within no time. The dialogue variations act as rationalizations to get you there. That makes the decisions feel cosmetic and the dialogue feel constructed and artificial. All that has a negative impact on telling the story. Put all that energy in something meaningful, please.

Something that I love about TW2 is that he world feels bigger and more alive. NPCs seem to do things. The world is dirty and feels like it is being lived it. It feels like TW2's devs gave it a lot of love and attention. In Kirkwall there is no dirt. It feels like it is kept clean 24/7. Even the Alienage (which is no more than a square with a tree and a couple of doors) has no dirt. There is no detail. NPCs are static. It feels like it has no soul.

Even though DA2 supports DX11 it doesn't look as good as the TW2. The lighting and scenery are breath taking. Nothing in DA2 compares to that, so DA2 could use a bit of that.

Did you play DA2 with low settings? It looks incredibly detailed on my high end user pc.

[philippe willaume]

Hello
It probably has been expressed in one form or another. DA3 do not need to be like TW2 nor does it need to be Skyrim or M E n+1.

For me,DA3 really needs to be more varied than DA2. Waves are ok. 2.2897 * 10^9 hit points boss that takes 30 minutes to whittle down are fine. Provided that they do not occur every time in every fight.


On the same vein it is fine to have quest or story arc that you can not influence, it makes the one that you can influence much more palatable.
But if all the story arcs are like that, really we have real life management meeting to get the Technicolor panoramic impression of “that was a good input but we are not going to take it into account.”

The same goes for romance, and talent/skill set


phil

[tmp7704]

ipgd wrote...

But it doesn't? The system works as such that I can pick a few options at the very beginning of the game, set my desired personality, then effectively forget about it for the rest of the game.

If i'm not mistaken the way it actually works is, the personality is changed to the one chosen most times whenever the amount of times you select that personality becomes twice as large as the number associated with currently active personality. The numbers are also reset at the beginning of each act (meaning the few choices you made at the beginning of the game stop to have any influence as soon as act 2)

This means selecting purple a few times at the beginning isn't going to set the purple as long-term 'desired personality' since it'll flip as soon as you select blue or red dozen or so times. As long as you don't touch the purple as well often enough.

The fact these calculations are done and kept under the hood and as such absolutely opaque only makes it worse.

I've never had the personality change on me when I didn't want it to.

That implies you were also able to change the personality when you did want to. Given the way the system works, i'd be curious how you achieved that, and how long did it take to switch them.

[Mr.House]

Duncaaaaaan wrote...

meteorswarm wrote...

Some deeply storytelling,one protagonist ,no companions and no teammates .The third person visual  is nearly the witcher 2 of course,better with the first person visual if it has.

I think bioware needs to make Dragon Age: origins 2, not Dragon age 3.

A continuation of the grey warden story line, and to make the end really really epic, the game fast forwards many years later, and the warden finally hears the calling, and the very last quest in the game is to wonder into the deep roads and kill a ridiculous amount of darkspawn, eventually dying himself.

The GW can be dead.:innocent:

[AngryFrozenWater]

lolnoobs wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I think DA3 might learn some things from TW2, but BW games have their own atmosphere and that shouldn't be replaced by something total alien to them.

BW could use the branching stories, though. The way decisions are implemented now defies the whole idea of making them, because they switch back to the main railroaded story as soon as possible. To me the DA2 world feels like a collection of points of interest, puzzles and bosses placed on the map and connected by a story. No matter what decisions you make you usually visit the same points on the map and fight the same bosses. The "decisions" wrap back to the same story line within no time. The dialogue variations act as rationalizations to get you there. That makes the decisions feel cosmetic and the dialogue feel constructed and artificial. All that has a negative impact on telling the story. Put all that energy in something meaningful, please.

Something that I love about TW2 is that he world feels bigger and more alive. NPCs seem to do things. The world is dirty and feels like it is being lived it. It feels like TW2's devs gave it a lot of love and attention. In Kirkwall there is no dirt. It feels like it is kept clean 24/7. Even the Alienage (which is no more than a square with a tree and a couple of doors) has no dirt. There is no detail. NPCs are static. It feels like it has no soul.

Even though DA2 supports DX11 it doesn't look as good as the TW2. The lighting and scenery are breath taking. Nothing in DA2 compares to that, so DA2 could use a bit of that.

Did you play DA2 with low settings? It looks incredibly detailed on my high end user pc.

I am playing on maxed out settings and I use Crossfire. Don't make me laugh. Did you play TW2?

[hoorayforicecream]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

You can make Geralt express his love to her, in his way. Like say giving her a petal from the flower.
Or telling her he wants to leave everything behind and go live with her (doesn't change the game naturally).
And you have characters, such as Ves or Shilard, who ask him about his relationship with Triss. You can reply differently.

But none of them actually react. As your complaint is with DA2, it ultimately doesn't matter. In my game, Geralt fought his way through a horde of armed guards and tried to proclaim his love for Triss at every opportunity, and he gets nary a flirt, a smile, or even a mention from her, even after rescuing her from her captors. Everyone in the game that mentions it thinks that Geralt and Triss are together except for Geralt and Triss. If Geralt says otherwise, it doesn't matter. If Geralt agrees, it doesn't matter. Triss treats Geralt like a sibling the entire time, except for the one scene, which just makes it even *more* jarring, due to how the rest of the "relationship" is handled. That's what grates on me, because I wanted Geralt to have a relationship, and everyone else in the game SAYS that Geralt has a relationship, but when I actually see the two of them together, there *is* no relationship past "friends and **** buddies that one time". 

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".

Act 2 is virtually completely different depending on that one choice with regards to characters you meet, location, main quests, sidequests and it even shows parts of the story that you didn't know or just heard of in the other path.
Compared to the RPGs I've played, that's certainly a choice that matters. Or matters more than the others.

I don't think you read what I wrote. The choice of what Act 2 you play is the *only* real choice that matters in W2. The others are smaller scale and mostly fluff from an actual gameplay perspective. It doesn't matter whether Henselt is alive in Act 3. It doesn't matter if Geralt chose to rescue Triss or Anais, the dragon still attacks, the lodge is still exposed, and the game still dovetails. The river has the same source and the same destination. It has a few small channels that don't make much difference, and one large fork that converges later on anyway.

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.

Killing Henselt. At that point, and as he says, everything he loved is dead or dying, so he just wants blood. His desire to kill Henselt has little to do with Temeria, but with revenge. And Geralt can guide him to either enact his revenge, or resist the temptation.

Except it doesn't make a difference later on. I wasn't convinced that he made a genuine change, because as soon as I got to Act 3, he was the exact same Vernon Roche as he was in Act 1, regicide or no.

I definitely agree that Bioware games have more character development when it comes to companions.
But my mindset is such that I focus on the story as a whole, and setting (And I believe TW is superior when it comes to that), if I am to enjoy them, and that I find Bioware's writing when it comes to them gradually losing subtelty. Hence why I prefer TW characters.

If the characters aren't relatable to me, I can't care about the setting. I'm perfectly willing to handwave away the setting if I can have a good character story. This is why I enjoyed the Matrix, but not its sequels.

[Sutekh]

lolnoobs wrote...

Did you play DA2 with low settings? It looks incredibly detailed on my high end user pc.

True, it does.

The only problem being that there's not that many details to detail, to begin with. If there's an area where TW2 wins absolutely, it's the visual department. This game is somptuous.

This said, minimalism can be nice too, as an artistic choice. It does give a certain atmosphere.