400 réponses à ce sujet

[Xewaka]

Zjarcal wrote...
Well, in DAO my warden was forced to do some things I wouldn't want her to do because the plot demanded it, yet I still considered her my character. To me that's no different than the occasional surprise from a voiced PC.

There is a great gap between being forced to do something with the player properly warned than have the PC suddenly break character when the player thought he was making an in-character choice. Being surprised by your character is far worse than being railroaded. The latter allows for space to adapt your character to the situation before it happens, the former doesn't.

[Cutlasskiwi]

Xewaka wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...
Well, in DAO my warden was forced to do some things I wouldn't want her to do because the plot demanded it, yet I still considered her my character. To me that's no different than the occasional surprise from a voiced PC.

There is a great gap between being forced to do something with the player properly warned than have the PC suddenly break character when the player thought he was making an in-character choice. Being surprised by your character is far worse than being railroaded. The latter allows for space to adapt your character to the situation before it happens, the former doesn't.

I disagree. It's one of the things that kept me from really enjoying DAO. Not when quest after quest seemed like something my character would never do, especially the ashes quest. I'd much rather take a few possible reloads than being forced into playing a character that I don't want to just so the story will make sense.  

[Zjarcal]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

The way I am thinking it could be done, is have two origins, one a male and the other a female. Ideally, both should be in the story already, so as to not waste ressources on VA 50% won't hear.  That way, people can pick their gender as well. The Origin can be much more extensive than just gender, it could be social / racial bg, personal experience...etc. So two set characters.

The only potential problem with that is class. Not sure how the mage class can be integrated in those origins. In principle, I would not mind having one PC be warrior / rogue and the other PC be strictly a mage, if it's also included in the story itself. But I can see the complications with that.

Just a suggestion / personal preference of course. I find myself being unable to truly RP Shepard and Hawke, and unable to care about them as characters because they are not set. So it's an awkward middle for me. Although that may be because of the execution of the two (and the story they are in), because like I said, I really like playing Mike Thorton, but that's mostly because he can be a magnificent bastard, so...

Now this doesn't sound bad at all (and thanks for explaining it).

I would say that it's more about execution in terms of why you preferred Thorton over the other two. With Hawke you were never able to make him what you wanted him to be, so that was a big factor in you not caring for him.

And I most certainly support being able to be a magnificient bastard. 

Persephone wrote...

Or hire a VO actor who can do accents. They do exist, Audible.com features the work of hundreds of them. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/happy.png[/smilie]

The only issue there is that you'd still need to record the dialogue several times. It would be less expensive than separate VOs for sure, but still may prove to be too resource heavy for BW.

Xewaka wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...
Well, in DAO my warden was forced to do some things I wouldn't want her to do because the plot demanded it, yet I still considered her my character. To me that's no different than the occasional surprise from a voiced PC.

There is a great gap between being forced to do something with the player properly warned than have the PC suddenly break character when the player thought he was making an in-character choice. Being surprised by your character is far worse than being railroaded. The latter allows for space to adapt your character to the situation before it happens, the former doesn't.

Well, this one is highly subjective. I may be able to adapt but I'll still have to do something that I don't want to, and no matter how "adapted" I am, so to speak, it will always be jarring. Being surprised by a line can be just as jarring but I can also try and see if the other available lines fit better to what I want. In the end, to me at least, they are both equally jarring.

Either way, neither flaw prevents me from feeling my character is still my character.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 22 août 2011 - 06:56 .

[Sith Grey Warden]

Getting a silent protagonist as a bonus just solidifies my support for race choice.

[AmstradHero]

Persephone wrote...

RagingCyclone wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...
While I don't care much for the races, I do support their inclusion if only so that those who want them don't feel alienated. I suppose they could do multiple races and have them all with the same voice if they could find a VA that was fitting. I mean, while the dalish had their unique accents, the city elves and dwarves didn't really had any unique accent that would make it weird for them to have the same voice as a human.

Simple fix for the bolded part...just because that Dalish clan had those accents does not mean every clan has the same accent.

Or hire a VO actor who can do accents. They do exist, Audible.com features the work of hundreds of them. :happy:

Sorry, but people making this suggestion (and there have been a few of them so far) and people suggesting "just have voiced protagonist and lots of different races, each with a different voice" need to learn something about the video game industry. Here are a few points people should keep in mind.

1) Firstly, on a slight tangent, it's not about the skill of the voice actor(VA). The vocal delivery of a VA is viewed very differently by different players - some love particular voiced protagonists and will praise the work of the VA, whereas others will declare it to be horrible. Look at this very thread if you need proof. Trawl the forums here (and elsewhere) if you need more.

2) It's not about the ability to find voice actors. There are lots of people doing paid VA work within the video games industry. The issue is about the cost of recording those lines. There was a recent article on gamasutra about VA costs. For a VA doing work for ambient dialogue (that's characters whom are just talking in the background), the union rate is $800 for 3 hours work. It doesn't matter if you're hiring one actor or six to fulfill the role of your protagonist, you've still got to pay the hourly rate.

3) Further to the cost of the actual recording is the cost of integrating those lines. In addition to getting three differet lines for each player choice, the animators are going to have to do different animations of the protagonist for each of those lines. They're also going to have to customise the facial expressions for them. They might have to pick a different camera shot depending on the player's action. Then to top it off, if you've got different races, you might have to redo the entire scene multiple times to cope with the fact that other races aren't "human-sized". That takes a lot of time and money.

If you spend all that money on providing a multi-race voiced protagonist, you're will have to cut other areas. (Maybe say... level design?) It's that simple.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 22 août 2011 - 09:28 .

[Tommy6860]

Aeowyn wrote...

I will say that while I enjoyed playing the Warden, watching the back of her head 90% of the game did not make me feel included in the game at all. It felt like my Warden was watching a scene from afar. The only times we did see the Warden's face, it was blank, not showing the emotion that I as a player would imagine her to show, and while I enjoyed DAO immensely, it felt quite jarring to go back to play my Warden after having spent months playing ME1&2 and DA2.
I feel more connected to Shepard and Hawke than I will ever do with my Warden, because those characters felt more alive and wasn't just a blank face.

While I agree that your taste is your taste in what you want for seeing
facial experessions, of which IMO, just takes away precious time from
developing a richer story and more engaging dialogue, I just don't see
it that way. No one developer can replace the expressions I would imagine
while engaging my companions or NPCs, theya re simply the devs expressions. To see Hawke use the same
expresssion for 10 different situations made it worse, IMO. I mean, I don't
see that in real life, even in a brief conversation.

However, I do NOT want a set personality for my protagonist like KoP suggested. I can still roleplay my Shepard and Hawke, and they both have two backgrounds and personalities that I made for them.
To answer the OPs question, for me it's a difficult choice. While I enjoy a voiced proganist over a silent one, I would also like the ability to play other races.

I can see backgrounds for Shep, but what exactly do you mean by "two backgrounds" for Hawke?

Edit to add: There were times when my Shepard and Hawke reacted in ways that I did not want them to act. But it didn't bother me as much as the blank faced, silent Warden.

DA2 had so many dialogue occurrences where Hawke didn't react the way I thought, that it was game breaking. Not only that, most choices I made in dialogue entailed gettiing soemthing worse, a reaction from my companions that didn't fit what I thought I chose in the dialogue wheel. Getting rid of paraphrasing would be a big plus to prevent that from happening.

Having said that, Mass Effect is one game that worked for me, but I think that is because it was designed that way as a new IP, DA wasn't.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 22 août 2011 - 09:58 .

[Zjarcal]

Tommy6860 wrote...

However, I do NOT want a set personality for my protagonist like KoP suggested. I can still roleplay my Shepard and Hawke, and they both have two backgrounds and personalities that I made for them.
To answer the OPs question, for me it's a difficult choice. While I enjoy a voiced proganist over a silent one, I would also like the ability to play other races.

I can see backgrounds for Shep, but what exactly do you mean by "two backgrounds" for Hawke?

I don't think she's referring to the "set background" given by the game.

While we are limited with certain aspects about Hawke's background (specifically that you lived in Lothering and you are a member of the Hawke family), nothing else is set in stone. I can come up with variations in that background to fit whatever I want.

[Siansonea]

Voiced protagonist. Silent protagonists are SO over. If DA3 went back to that model, I wouldn't buy it. I wouldn't throw a fit, get mad, throw chairs, or anything like that, I just wouldn't buy it. I don't like silent protagonists. I don't care how good the rest of the game is, if it's a silent protagonist, it doesn't go into my shopping cart. Simple.

[Tommy6860]

Zjarcal wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

However, I do NOT want a set personality for my protagonist like KoP suggested. I can still roleplay my Shepard and Hawke, and they both have two backgrounds and personalities that I made for them.
To answer the OPs question, for me it's a difficult choice. While I enjoy a voiced proganist over a silent one, I would also like the ability to play other races.

I can see backgrounds for Shep, but what exactly do you mean by "two backgrounds" for Hawke?

I don't think she's referring to the "set background" given by the game.

While we are limited with certain aspects about Hawke's background (specifically that you lived in Lothering and you are a member of the Hawke family), nothing else is set in stone. I can come up with variations in that background to fit whatever I want.

Like what? I am being honest, because I cannot think of any. Hawke is totally guided through the game that has a story in which nearly all of the plots cannot be changed due to any choices I make. I have no choice living with Gamlen, I have no choice staying in my Hightown estate. I have no choices about what family member I can save or keep, etc (exceot near the end)  And I have no choice in the dialogue convos, they just happen when scripted. That's not much of a background to me, that's Bioware's developed background which makes me play it..

[Tommy6860]

Siansonea II wrote...

Voiced protagonist. Silent protagonists are SO over. If DA3 went back to that model, I wouldn't buy it. I wouldn't throw a fit, get mad, throw chairs, or anything like that, I just wouldn't buy it. I don't like silent protagonists. I don't care how good the rest of the game is, if it's a silent protagonist, it doesn't go into my shopping cart. Simple.

Opposite for me. I have no issues with a VP, but if it is a hand holding experience like DA2, then I will pass. I would not put DA2 even close to DA:O, and I don't think it comes close to role playing like ME does. It can work, adding player agency where decisions I make have consequences would be it, that's essentially what killed my DA2 experience. However, using a VP, takes away from that kind of development, since using a VP takes more time because resources (especially, development time) are used to make facial animations for the VP in conversation cinematics.

Me thinks Bioware is looking at the "player agency" aspect a bit more for DA3, hopefully

[Zjarcal]

Tommy6860 wrote...

Like what? I am being honest, because I cannot think of any. Hawke is totally guided through the game that has a story in which nearly all of the plots cannot be changed due to any choices I make. I have no choice living with Gamlen, I have no choice staying in my Hightown estate. I have no choices about what family member I can save or keep, etc (exceot near the end)  And I have no choice in the dialogue convos, they just happen when scripted. That's not much of a background to me, that's Bioware's developed background which makes me play it..

Eh, this is where our different views and approach to the game kind of clash.

You keep talking about choices affecting the plot, while I'm thinking about the more personal stuff. If I say that my Hawke was a Chantry devout, then maybe she'll have an issue with Anders and pursue the rivalry path, and support the Templars as well (regardless of how that plays out). Maybe she'll also be a more polite person due to that Chantry devotion (I can imagine she spent a lot of time learning with the sisters), thus sticking to the diplomatic dialogue options.

Or if I decide that my Hawke was all about mage freedom, constantly getting in fights playing the protective sister of Bethany, maybe I'll be all up for mage freedom in the game (again, regardless of how that plays out).

Maybe my hawke was a sneaky person and she'll be impressed by Isabela and Varric, and perhaps won't take well to Aveline's law abiding attitude.

Again, you felt limited because the choices in the game regarding the plot almost always played out the same, thus you felt like everything was set (and you would have a point regarding the main plot). But as I said before, I'm focusing more on the relationships with companions and the general attitude my character will display in the game. Whether that makes a difference in the plot is irrevelant for me in terms of what I decided was fitting for my character (and I understand it isn't for you, you already explained that to me).

That's what I mean when I talk about setting a background for my character.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 22 août 2011 - 10:24 .

[Aeowyn]

Tommy6860 wrote...

However, I do NOT want a set personality for my protagonist like KoP suggested. I can still roleplay my Shepard and Hawke, and they both have two backgrounds and personalities that I made for them.
To answer the OPs question, for me it's a difficult choice. While I enjoy a voiced proganist over a silent one, I would also like the ability to play other races.

I can see backgrounds for Shep, but what exactly do you mean by "two backgrounds" for Hawke?

I'm not saying that Hawke has two backgrounds. I'm saying that I created these backgrounds for MY PCs. Yes Hawke has a set background of where she's lived most her life, who her parents were etc, but I don't let that stop me from creating a fuller background for my PC. Just like I don't let my canon Shepard's Earthborn/Sole survivor background stop me from evolving that background. I build on that, write about it, imagine it when I'm playing a game with that specific character. I still see my Hawke & Shepard as my characters because I created a backstory for them, and I fill in the gaps the game doesn't provide me with. 

Cousland was born in Highever and we knew who his/her parents were and what the Couslands had done. You can't say "Well my Cousland was born in Lothering".  How is that any different than Hawke's in game background?

Modifié par Aeowyn, 22 août 2011 - 10:56 .

[Tommy6860]

Zjarcal wrote...


Eh, this is where our different views and approach to the game kind of clash.

You keep talking about choices affecting the plot, while I'm thinking about the more personal stuff. If I say that my Hawke was a Chantry devout, then maybe she'll have an issue with Anders and pursue the rivalry path, and support the Templars as well (regardless of how that plays out). Maybe she'll also be a more polite person due to that Chantry devotion (I can imagine she spent a lot of time learning with the sisters), thus sticking to the diplomatic dialogue options.

Or if I decide that my Hawke was all about mage freedom, constantly getting in fights playing the protective sister of Bethany, maybe I'll be all up for mage freedom in the game (again, regardless of how that plays out).

Maybe my hawke was a sneaky person and she'll be impressed by Isabela and Varric, and perhaps won't take well to Aveline's law abiding attitude.

Yet so little of your inflections have little change in your companions, seriously. Just changing your tone while not having an impact on the game itself seems pretty empty to me. I mean, yes, you ultimately can get Anders to sympathize with the Templars, but does it matter in the end, doesn't he still do the dirty deed, even though you garnered a change of heart? That is immersion breaking in just one rspect. The fact that I can be devout, or whatever in what you show here in examples (like protecting Bethany), doesn't change anything with the story or with my companions, other than increasing rivalry or firendship. You may feel like you are protecting her and even feel like it is RPing, but what are the effects, shouldn't they at least show up in the game?

Again, you felt limited because the choices in the game regarding the plot almost always played out the same, thus you felt like everything was set (and you would have a point regarding the main plot). But as I said before, I'm focusing more on the relationships with companions and the general attitude my character will display in the game. Whether that makes a difference in the plot is irrevelant for me in terms of what I decided was fitting for my character (and I understand it isn't for you, you already explained that to me).

That's what I mean when I talk about setting a background for my character.

I am also about relationships with companions, that is a very important aspect for me in RPGs, otherwise I typically don't like the exclusion of that aspect. PS:T may be the one game where that didn't bother me, though The Nameless One had a love in his life at one time.

But even then, when you focus on your companions, what changes? Not much, except for a differences in what Anders can choose, or what Iza does whe the time comes, I thought those were great. But if you romance, for example, Iza, then go ahead with Merrill, or vice-versa, you get no other person to person convo regarding your choices. No jealousy, or being pissed that one felt she was used, just ambient chatter about how happy the winning partner seems and how happy the losing partner is for the winner's relationship with Hawke. Would that even work IRL?

Unlike in DA:O, where Leliana/Morrigan force a choice and get one gets steamed over it in a an actual convo, though they can continue on with the quest, at YOUR choice. Not only that, that choice can have an effect on how loyal your companion remains to you when they degrade in friendshipm (note Urn of the Sacred Ashes). You also lose points in frienship with them when you make the choice, nothing like that happens in DA2. Can you make Merrill or Iza leave your party at any time, or get that offer at all to not want them with you by making a choice (see what I mean)? I think DA2 jsut over-simplified how game companions work with the PC, for whatever reason Bioware did this, it failed with me.

If you totally ****** off Merrill, she stays happy go lucky with you, no change in even ambient dialogue. If I am evil as hell, Isa comments no differently. If I am totally evil throughout DA:O, at the final camp (if I did the DR), Leliana makes some harsh comemnts to me and my actions. Wynne is so pissed that after even making a conciliatory remark ro her, she leaves the camp forever, stating that I am not the kind of person she thought I was andwho she would want to be around with. That's what companions relationships should do when RPing, IMO.

[Tommy6860]

Aeowyn wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

However, I do NOT want a set personality for my protagonist like KoP suggested. I can still roleplay my Shepard and Hawke, and they both have two backgrounds and personalities that I made for them.
To answer the OPs question, for me it's a difficult choice. While I enjoy a voiced proganist over a silent one, I would also like the ability to play other races.

I can see backgrounds for Shep, but what exactly do you mean by "two backgrounds" for Hawke?

I'm not saying that Hawke has two backgrounds. I'm saying that I created these backgrounds for MY PCs. Yes Hawke has a set background of where she's lived most her life, who her parents were etc, but I don't let that stop me from creating a fuller background for my PC. Just like I don't let my canon Shepard's Earthborn/Sole survivor background stop me from evolving that background. I build on that, write about it, imagine it when I'm playing a game with that specific character. I still see my Hawke & Shepard as my characters because I created a backstory for them, and I fill in the gaps the game doesn't provide me with. 

Cousland was born in Highever and we knew who his/her parents were and what the Couslands had done. You can't say "Well my Cousland was born in Lothering".  How is that any different than Hawke's in game background?

OK, I understand that, really I do. But exactly how are you creating a background, what do you do that really shows this in the game itself? To do so, has to reflect in the game, that's my opinion of course .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Zjarcal wrote...
Now this doesn't sound bad at all (and thanks for explaining it).

I would say that it's more about execution in terms of why you preferred Thorton over the other two. With Hawke you were never able to make him what you wanted him to be, so that was a big factor in you not caring for him.

And I most certainly support being able to be a magnificient bastard. 

It must be said, that I did not care for Mike Thorton much as a character. I absolutely loved playing as him, because of the story he is projected in, the setting, the way he interacts with people, and the choices he can make. But I would not say Mike is a very memorable character (in and of himself) for me. Whereas I can say such a thing when it comes to Geralt for example, despite him never even coming close to being a magnificent bastard.

Yes execution is a crucial factor. And a major reason as to why I can enjoy playing as Shepard, but can't stand playing as Hawke. But me not really caring about either (and Thorton) as characters in and of themselves, is also due to the way they are designed.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 23 août 2011 - 01:42 .

[Zjarcal]

Tommy6860 wrote...

Yet so little of your inflections have little change in your companions, seriously. Just changing your tone while not having an impact on the game itself seems pretty empty to me.

To you, but not to me.

You may feel like you are protecting her and even feel like it is RPing, but what are the effects, shouldn't they at least show up in the game?

I don't need to see the effects of a character trait or quirk for it to matter to me. It's very nice when I get a chance to show it in game (such as with Aveline's husband or any time Fenris started going on about mages, where me standing up for mages was part of that character trait), but in terms of me feeling that my character has a particular trait, I don't need to see it happen in game.

I gave you once an example about choosing to kill someone or letting them go only for someone else to kill them and then everything goes on as usual. We both agreed that it woul've been more significant if my choice to not kill them (or do) had a big consequence later on, that it would make everything feel more involved, but my point back then (and now) is that what I decide to do is based on the personality I created. Whether or not it makes a difference to the game doesn't affect that. It may affect one's enjoyment of the game, sure (and I know it pretty much kills your enjoyment), but for me it doesn't affect what I've done with my character.

But even then, when you focus on your companions, what changes? Not much, except for a differences in what Anders can choose, or what Iza does whe the time comes, I thought those were great. But if you romance, for example, Iza, then go ahead with Merrill, or vice-versa, you get no other person to person convo regarding your choices. No jealousy, or being pissed that one felt she was used, just ambient chatter about how happy the winning partner seems and how happy the losing partner is for the winner's relationship with Hawke. Would that even work IRL?

First, i agree that there should've been some jealousy dialogues, although not so much with Isabela, given how she only really falls for Hawke at the end of the game (prior to that it's just fun and games, she really shouldn't be that jealous). But I wouldn't have minded some jealousy dialogues from the other companions.

But once again, we're going back to the whole choice having a consequence thing that isn't really what I was talking about in my above post.

And for the record, since I wasn't really referring to romances, I do feel that plenty changes with them depending on how I handle things. The difference between the final conversation with Isabela for instance, between rivalry and friendship, was incredibly significant to me as it was the culmination of everything that had been building up between them. Same goes for Merrill deciding to abandon blood magic or not, or Anders deciding that everything he had done was wrong. Hell having Aveline beat the crap out of Hawke if I pissed her off enough, while not necessarily a big change (since she still ends up respecting me) was a rewarding moment if I had really been a jerk to her.

Unlike in DA:O, where Leliana/Morrigan force a choice and get one gets steamed over it in a an actual convo, though they can continue on with the quest, at YOUR choice. Not only that, that choice can have an effect on how loyal your companion remains to you when they degrade in friendshipm (note Urn of the Sacred Ashes). You also lose points in frienship with them when you make the choice, nothing like that happens in DA2. Can you make Merrill or Iza leave your party at any time, or get that offer at all to not want them with you by making a choice (see what I mean)? I think DA2 jsut over-simplified how game companions work with the PC, for whatever reason Bioware did this, it failed with me.

If you totally ****** off Merrill, she stays happy go lucky with you, no change in even ambient dialogue. If I am evil as hell, Isa comments no differently. If I am totally evil throughout DA:O, at the final camp (if I did the DR), Leliana makes some harsh comemnts to me and my actions. Wynne is so pissed that after even making a conciliatory remark ro her, she leaves the camp forever, stating that I am not the kind of person she thought I was andwho she would want to be around with. That's what companions relationships should do when RPing, IMO.

Again, this has kind of degraded into a different conversation but I'll bite.

The examples you gave to me are no different than how not having enough friendship/rivalry with someone can make them leave forever at certain points, or side against me in the final battle. To me that feels like a consequence of how I handled things with them in the game.

I get that it's not the kind of relationship development you'd want, and I can even understand that given the nature of the DA2 story, it doesn't seem entirely coherent at times (as in the companions don't really have a reason to be there if they don't like you).

However the way DA2 handled the relationships, there really isn't any hate going, just mutual respect, even if the people involved differ a lot. I guess one could say this is a limitation to a player who actually wants to have a hateful relationship with a companion and I won't begrude anyone who resents that limitation, but I'll say that personally, I much prefer to be able to disagree with them whenever I wanted and for it to no devolve into petty hatred, for them to be reasonable about things.

Personal preference of course, but it's something I enjoyed a lot more.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

It must be said, that I did not care for Mike Thorton much as a character. I absolutely loved playing as him, because of the story he is projected in, the setting, the way he interacts with people, and the choices he can make. But I would not say Mike is a very memorable character (in and of himself) for me. Whereas I can say such a thing when it comes to Geralt for example, despite him never even coming close to being a magnificent bastard. 

Yes execution is a crucial factor. And a major reason as to why I can enjoy playing as Shepard, but can't stand playing as Hawke. But me not really caring about either (and Thorton) as characters in and of themselves, is also due to the way they are designed. 

Understandable.

I'm all up for finding a compromise that would satisfy everyone. Not sure if your earlier idea would really result in something satisfying for everyone, but it's an idea at least.

But I will say this. If my only choices were playing a set character a la Geralt, and a silent PC, I would prefer the silent PC. Reluctantly as I really don't want to go back to that, but  would prefer it nonetheless.

[MKDAWUSS]

Microsoft Sam for VA. Best of both worlds.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

MKDAWUSS wrote...

Microsoft Sam for VA. Best of both worlds.

That would be epic.

[AmstradHero]

Siansonea II wrote...

Voiced protagonist. Silent protagonists are SO over. If DA3 went back to that model, I wouldn't buy it. I wouldn't throw a fit, get mad, throw chairs, or anything like that, I just wouldn't buy it. I don't like silent protagonists. I don't care how good the rest of the game is, if it's a silent protagonist, it doesn't go into my shopping cart. Simple.

One question: Why?

[edeheusch]

Aeowyn wrote...

Cousland was born in Highever and we knew who his/her parents were and what the Couslands had done. You can't say "Well my Cousland was born in Lothering".  How is that any different than Hawke's in game background?

The huge difference is that if my Warden Cousland is born in Highever, my warden Tabris is born in an Alienage and my warden Mahariel is born in a Dalish camp.... and they had all different parents, different reasons to join the Grey Wardens and very different backstories. Even if starting with Ostragar the game was essentially the same, because of the backstory, I still felt I was playing a different character that will take different decisions (for example the Warden Aeducan and the Warden Brosca will have very good reasons to find a different solution to Orzammar's problem).

For me it is what make DAO a replayable game and DA2 a non-replayable game. 

Modifié par edeheusch, 23 août 2011 - 06:56 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Zjarcal wrote...
But I will say this. If my only choices were playing a set character a la Geralt, and a silent PC, I would prefer the silent PC. Reluctantly as I really don't want to go back to that, but  would prefer it nonetheless.

A la Geralt, you mean gender / personality wise, or set protagonists in general even if female and more interesting to you?

[AmstradHero]

Zjarcal wrote...
But I will say this. If my only choices were playing a set character a la Geralt, and a silent PC, I would prefer the silent PC. Reluctantly as I really don't want to go back to that, but  would prefer it nonetheless.

If I had to order them:
Silent PC
Voiced PC
Voiced PC with set character & personality
Unvoiced PC with set character & personality

While I've explained my rationale for the first two items under roleplaying and budgetary constraints previously, I'll explain my reason for the last two here.

I hate having a set personality in RPGs. Even if I have lots of choices, if I have a set personality, I'm not playing an RPG. It's more like I'm playing an adventure game with some choices.  And to cater to modern sensibilities, the set personality has to be a dark, broody, anti-hero like a medieval batman, with cliches to the wazoo. Hell. No.

If I'm playing an RPG, the game should not be telling me what my character is. It's that simple. In a "hack-and-slash action rpg", I'll accept it, and in every other genre, I'm more than happy to be given a set protagonist. But if you're telling me I'm playing a role playing game, I had better be able to define my character's personality and their motivations to some degree.

Lastly, if you're going to remove all control over the character in that manner, then at least go ahead and give me a movie presentation of the character you've lumped me with. If you're going to give me that personality, you had better use ever tool at your disposal to let me know the nature of the character you're lumping me with. I don't have a choice in the matter anyway, so I may as well get to know the personality of the developer's protagonist (it sure as heck isn't MY protagonist's personality) as well as possible.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 23 août 2011 - 07:07 .

[AmstradHero]

edeheusch wrote...

Aeowyn wrote...

Cousland was born in Highever and we knew who his/her parents were and what the Couslands had done. You can't say "Well my Cousland was born in Lothering".  How is that any different than Hawke's in game background?

The huge difference is that if my Warden Cousland is born in Highever, my warden Tabris is born in an Alienage and my warden Mahariel is born in a Dalish camp.... and they had all different parents, different reasons to join the Grey Wardens and very different backstories. Even if starting with Ostragar the game was essentially the same, because of the backstory, I still felt I was playing a different character that will take different decisions (for example the Warden Aeducan and the Warden Brosca will have very good reasons to find a different solution to Orzammar's problem).

For me it is what make DAO a replayable game and DA2 a non-replayable game. 

And with that it seems you've just stated that no RPG other than DAO is replayable.

[edeheusch]

AmstradHero wrote...

edeheusch wrote...

The huge difference is that if my Warden Cousland is born in Highever, my warden Tabris is born in an Alienage and my warden Mahariel is born in a Dalish camp.... and they had all different parents, different reasons to join the Grey Wardens and very different backstories. Even if starting with Ostragar the game was essentially the same, because of the backstory, I still felt I was playing a different character that will take different decisions (for example the Warden Aeducan and the Warden Brosca will have very good reasons to find a different solution to Orzammar's problem).

For me it is what make DAO a replayable game and DA2 a non-replayable game.

And with that it seems you've just stated that no RPG other than DAO is replayable.

Indeed I was speaking about the difference between DAO and DA2, in some other RPG (like the 2 Neverwinter nights for example) the backstory is much less defined which let me imagine a completely different backstory for my character each time I replay the game.   

However, even if I prefer the gameplay of Neverwinter Nights 2, because of the Origin system I have replayed DAO much more than NWN2, for me the origin system was really the greatest strength of Dragon Age franchise.

[Zjarcal]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...
But I will say this. If my only choices were playing a set character a la Geralt, and a silent PC, I would prefer the silent PC. Reluctantly as I really don't want to go back to that, but  would prefer it nonetheless.

A la Geralt, you mean gender / personality wise, or set protagonists in general even if female and more interesting to you?

Even if it was April Ryan (my favorite female character outside of a BW game) or Lara Croft. Sure, I would probably enjoy roleplaying them but that is not what I want from BW games. The reason why I love these games so much is because I get so attached to my characters (and yes, that includes Hawke and Shepard). Take that away and while it could still be a great game worth playing (and probably more enjoyable to some), it wouldn't be what I have grown to love so much.

AmstradHero wrote...

I hate having a set personality in RPGs. Even if I have lots of choices, if I have a set personality, I'm not playing an RPG.
...

If I'm playing an RPG, the game should not be telling me what my character is. It's that simple. In a "hack-and-slash action rpg", I'll accept it, and in every other genre, I'm more than happy to be given a set protagonist. But if you're telling me I'm playing a role playing game, I had better be able to define my character's personality and their motivations to some degree.

Yeah, that's how I would feel. Now, I'm not saying an RPG with a set protagonist isn't an RPG, but it's definitely not the kind of RPG I would want from Bioware. Defining my character is what has made me love their games to the extent I do (and again, that includes defining Hawke and Shepard).