400 réponses à ce sujet

[Rinji the Bearded]

mrcrusty wrote...

Meh. The Origins themselves were the best part of DA:O imo. How many games actually let you choose from multiple, tangible backstories, then let you play them?

While it wasn't perfect, it's an aspect that should be brought back and expanded upon, not ditched.

It was innovative, if I may say so.

I didn't feel much from the origins.  It seemed like they were nothing more than a 30-minute or so quest before the game started.   Besides maybe Human Noble origin where you got to confront Arl Howe in a major questline, I felt like the game didn't address the origins nearly as much as they should have.

Upsettingshorts wrote...
The origins were fun, but the
fact they were mostly ignored once reaching Ostagar beyond aesthetics
demonstrated a fundamental flaw with them - they can't be supported in a
satisfying way without making the game tremendously short or narrowly
focused.

Any major choice - origin or plot - placed that early in
the narrative is going to alter the amount of branching content later
in the game, and shorten the experience. Zots aren't unlimited.

I'd
rather the choices be placed in the middle, such as in The Witcher 2.
 If they're at the beginning and they matter, the game is shortened, if
they don't matter, then there's no point.  If they're at the end, they
don't matter because you don't experience the consequences, and the
sequel will either have to pick a canon or ignore them entirely.  The
middle is the best place to put them, I think.

Nicely put!

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 03 août 2011 - 03:37 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

RinjiRenee wrote...

I didn't feel much from the origins.  It seemed like they were nothing more than a 30-minute or so quest before the game started.   Besides maybe Human Noble origin where you got to confront Arl Howe in a major questline, I felt like the game didn't address the origins nearly as much as they should have.

mrcrusty wrote...

While it wasn't perfect, it's an aspect that should be brought back and expanded upon, not ditched.

[upsettingshorts]

mrcrusty wrote...

While it wasn't perfect, it's an aspect that should be brought back and expanded upon, not ditched.

How would you suppose they do this, given the issues I raised on the previous page?

ipgd wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

[Snip]

Which is, again, why I dislike the Warden as a roleplaying character. I cannot play him as my own, because any character concept I envision cannot be realized through the limitations of the set dialogue because he can only say things the writers thought of. I am unable to fit that character into the shell of the Warden, because he is "written" in my voice, whereas the dialogue options may only realize a character written with the voice of the writers. It is unavoidably incongruous.

At the same time, I am unable to build a character through those options, because Origins provides a very poor framework with which to build characters -- the game simply does not care what the Warden thinks or feels about
anything, only what he does, and the game does not provide prompts that ask about him as a person. I can develop those thoughts and feelings on my own, but then that inevitably leads to conflict with the writers' intent -- they cannot account for those motivations that I have created outside of the game, and when I reach a point where I would like to express those sentiments but cannot because I have created a character that does not mesh with the writers' voice, I am taken out of immersion in that character.

For me, Hawke does not have that problem. I begin with only the loosest of character concepts, and allow the dialogue options as presented to shape my conception of that character. The game is constantly providing opportunities for me to establish him in my mind on a personal level. So while he is not wholly my character -- and neither could a Warden be -- he is a character, one I fully understand, and one which organically fits into the writers' voice because I "created" him through their voice.

Exactly. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 août 2011 - 03:36 .

[LeBurns]

rabbitor wrote...

With a ton of race choices the story gets watered down to a point where the race doesn't matter beyond personal aestethic preferences.

This wasn't a problem for me with Origins though.  The separate starting quests made each unique from the beginning and the other references you find in game that differ based on your origin where enough to make each play-through different enough and fun.

If they put the work into it that they did in Origins (I wouldn't hold my breath) it would be great to have the race options and no voice.  I think it worked really well there and made me want to play the other origins.  My fear is though that the current BioWare developement team would just screw it up if they tried and rabbitor's fears would be realized.

[Wydi]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

While it wasn't perfect, it's an aspect that should be brought back and expanded upon, not ditched.

How would you suppose they do this, given the issues I raised on the previous page?

Well..you know..it's not up to us to do the math. We aren't really supposed to give some valid and reasonable input.
It just would be nice to have different origins with more variety in how they change the game, since it definitely improves the whole game. And as we all know, DA2 neither had different origins nor was it any longer than DAO.

[upsettingshorts]

@LeBurns:  If 2-3 lines and a slightly different boon in the epilogue were "different enough" for you, I'm not sure how I can even conceive how BioWare could possibly water it down more.

Wydi wrote...

Well..you know..it's not up to us to do the math.

True, since we don't know the numbers doing so is counter productive. 

Wydi wrote...

We aren't really supposed to give some valid and reasonable input.

I disagree.   I think that's the best way to be taken seriously.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 août 2011 - 03:44 .

[ipgd]

Wydi wrote...

Well..you know..it's not up to us to do the math. We aren't really supposed to give some valid and reasonable input.
It just would be nice to have different origins with more variety in how they change the game, since it definitely improves the whole game. And as we all know, DA2 neither had different origins nor was it any longer than DAO.

They can't exactly pull the time and money required to make truly impactful origins out of their asses. Bottlenecking is simply a fact of any reactive game, because they do not have the resources to make what may essentially amount to several entirely different games in one.

"Idk, just do it" isn't a very compelling statement to make in an argument where the other side has actually presented reasons for why things like the Origins were not and honestly cannot be that meaningful on a larger scale.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

While it wasn't perfect, it's an aspect that should be brought back and expanded upon, not ditched.

How would you suppose they do this, given the issues I raised on the previous page?

Well, to begin with, it probably won't work with a voice, so this is hypothetical.

Reduce the number of Origins in order to reduce the strain and increase the depth of the ones left. Considering the storyline, Seeker, Templar, Circle Mage and Commoner ought to be enough. Then I'd intersect the Origins with one another to save on things like assets. Sure, the cries of recyling may come by, but if you set the game in 1-2 key cities, no one's gonna complain as long as you don't re-use all the environments like DA 2 did.

So, your Circle Mage and Templar questlines would be similar, with most of the same characters, etc, except on opposite sides of the equation. A Circle Mage Origin has you supporting (or suppressing) an uprising from a Mage's point of view, whereas the Templar would do the same from a Templar point of view. Certain characters and information regarding to the plot would be unique to the Origin, as well as consequences later.

Then, the choices (especially ones not changing the world state) ought to be tied more to mechanics. I think New Vegas' faction mechanics are a good example. But perhaps a personal reputation system ought to be established, that way your choices may not necessarily alter the world state, but do have noticeable effects. If these reputations are linked to certain NPCs like shopkeepers and the Chantry, giving you comments here and there, or giving you discounts/quests, then good.

So, to go back to the Circle Mage/Templar Origin, regardless of how you handle it, there's a bloodbath and the world state is roughly the same either way. But siding with the Mages nets you a negative reputation with the Chantry and Templars, but a positive one amongst apostates. This opens up new quests, a new merchant, discounts, new items and differing NPC responses depending on what you did (or didn't do). Now, these not need be long, drawn out conversations with cinematics. If you have enough NPCs around, simple barkstrings are enough. There's a bit of this in DA 2 already, but the lack of NPCs and lack of events they comment on make it look weak.

Then, I'd link back specialisations to plot points and make certain ones available during the Origins and only the Origins.

Things like that.

Of course, I wouldn't actually know the specifics on how it would all work.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 03 août 2011 - 03:50 .

[Apollo Starflare]

Voiced character.

...But with the race being fixed to 'Dwarf'.

[ipgd]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

Voiced character.

...But with the race being fixed to 'Dwarf'.

Only if the PC is the digital avatar of Peter Dinklage voiced by Peter Dinklage and the party is fixed to him, Varric and Oghren. With dress spheres.


edit: (don't think i'm joking, i would play the **** out of this game)

Modifié par ipgd, 03 août 2011 - 03:57 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Dwarven Age 3. Sounds good.

[LadyJaneGrey]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

Voiced character.

...But with the race being fixed to 'Dwarf'.

Yes please!  

[wetnasty]

I say they do it Sims style, where you choose one of 3 (or hell, even just one) voices and adjust the pitch through a scale. That saves on both resources and money on VAs. There were times where I thought if femHawke's voice was just a biiiit lower, it would be perfect for my personal Hawke.

[Giubba]

Voiced & Race Selection.

Don't care each race have a different accent

[dheer]

ipgd wrote...

dheer wrote...
Having to save before every conversation because of the conversation roulette paraphrases doesn't help either.

People didn't also do this in DAO? I know I saved and reloaded compulsively.

I saved before what I felt were important points in the story but before each conversation? Not really, no. I feel my roleplaying is enhanced by picking what I want my character to say and living with consequences. It's why I have so much trouble with the paraphrases. Many times what I thought I would say, generally, was completely different.

Quicksaving before I talked to people in real life would be handy though. So many mistakes that could be corrected. Heh.

[Zanallen]

I prefer a voiced protagonist and, as has been discussed before, having racial options with origins that all share the same voice. It is completely doable and can make sense depending on which origins are used. That being said, if they go back to a silent PC, they really need to can the cinematic conversation system 'cause seeing the PC's blank stares or pantomimed "emotions" is just awful.

Edit: Also, there is no need to pair the paraphrase system with voiced PC. As has been discussed multiple times, there are options to fix that issue. The mouse-over option being my favorite of the bunch.

Modifié par Zanallen, 03 août 2011 - 07:05 .

[Captain_Obvious]

I also prefer voiced, but I really don't mind a fixed race for the protagonist. Origins were fine, but that made me play through each Origin, not necessarily the whole game. I played a dwarven commoner once until I finished the Deep Roads, and it didn't have any meaningful differences to an elven or human playthrough. Dialogue was a little different, sure, but that was all. I rented Two Worlds 2 recently, and you picked the line, then the character read the line. Ugh. Not a good way to go. I haven't had a problem with the paraphrasing in ME or DA2, but I know others have, so maybe they can tighten that up just a bit.

[Wydi]

TBH, I don't even know what paraphrasing is for and why it has to be paired with a voiced character.
You can still write out the whole lines and possibly add a little icon to the very left, as an emotional indicator. What's the problem?

[Iosev]

I prefer a voiced protagonist without the ability to select race. More specifically, I want to play as Hawke again for DA 3.

A big part of DA 2 focuses on shaping Hawke's relationships with his or her companions, and I'm personally interested in seeing how each of these companions can be presented in a sequel. For example, based on your friendship/rivalry, would Isabela remain a self-motivated pirate in DA 3, or would she be more selfless and willing to help others in need? Does Merrill continue working on the Eluvian, or is she instead focusing on helping city elves?

Most of the grey wardens that I've played in DA:O have had varying degrees closure in their stories (one did the ultimate sacrifice, another is married to Anora, and and another is raising a child with Morrigan), whereas I feel like Hawke's story has only begun, and I want to see more.

I'm open-minded, so I wouldn't mind playing as a new protagonist in DA 3, but I personally want to play as Hawke again.

Wydi wrote...

TBH, I don't even know what paraphrasing is for and why it has to be paired with a voiced character.
You
can still write out the whole lines and possibly add a little icon to
the very left, as an emotional indicator. What's the problem?

I can't speak for others, but for me personally, I do not like reading a line and hearing it spoken in verbatim immediately afterwards.  For example, In The Witcher (the first game, I haven't played the second one yet), I hated how you would select one of the lines, and immediately hear it spoken in verbatim by Geralt.  The repitition ruins the experience for me.

Modifié par arcelonious, 03 août 2011 - 07:46 .

[Zanallen]

Wydi wrote...

TBH, I don't even know what paraphrasing is for and why it has to be paired with a voiced character.
You can still write out the whole lines and possibly add a little icon to the very left, as an emotional indicator. What's the problem?

Repetition. Reading the line and then having the same line spoken by the VA tends to get a lot of flak. Focus groups don't like it. They even changed TW2 to include paraphrased lines instead of the whole line like TW1 had. The problem with the paraphrase is that the lines aren't written well enough to convey the actual spoken line. That could be addressed with a toggle or, as I prefer, a mouse-over option where if you have a specific paraphrase highlighted for a few seconds the full line will be shown.

[corkey sweet]

my Grey Warden was always human, but i love the choice of being able to choose. plus the voice acting of Hawke took away personalization of the character.

[Wydi]

Well, I got the idea then, even though I'd be totally fine with the repetition.

If that's a part of the decision between VO and multiple races, I'm pro races even more now.

[corkey sweet]

they can ditch the voiced main character. the dialog options in DA:O where much greater and better designed

[Chaos Lord Malek]

Definitely voiced. Don`t even think about going back to the mute.

If it means a set-race, then so be it, even if it would had to be the ugly elves. But i would rather continue with Hawke if possible.

[corkey sweet]

Chaos Lord Malek wrote...

Definitely voiced. Don`t even think about going back to the mute.

If it means a set-race, then so be it, even if it would had to be the ugly elves. But i would rather continue with Hawke if possible.

you would be the minority then. i hope bioware gives hawke an offscreen death