87 réponses à ce sujet

[Cutlass Jack]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
No one complained that the events in NWN never referred to the PC's background.

Thats because most were busy complaining how bad the overall campaign was. It was poor on every level.

But You'll note that in NWN2 they referred to background quite a bit. In fact, everyone went out of their way to comment on your swamp stench. And yes I know Obsidian did that game, but its obvious they took feedback from the first one into account.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

I favor the idea of blank slate PC but like others I doubt that BioWare want that. It's difficult to expect Gaider will give more freedom to players when he seem likely to invade player's territory more and more with each BioWare's publication and he is well aware about it. DA 2 is an experiment of such invasion. BioWare telling their story through the use of Varric, instead of allowing the player to tell the story themselves. Hawke story is set in the past, and the encouragement to use one of the preset voice tone in order to gain personality dominant dialogue bonuses. The illusion of choices etc....This are all the examples of their experimental invasion into player territory.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 23 août 2011 - 08:12 .

[esper]

I don't like the blank slate character. I don't think I have ever completed an elder scroll game, and I seriously doubt that I will be buying Skyrim. I just lose my reason to keep playing, because my character doesn't feel involved with the plot.
I wouldn't mind some sort of origins again, though. They had some really good backgroudn stories i da:o, I would just want them to be more noted by the other npc's than they did in da:o.

[Teddie Sage]

Like I said many times before, I want to play my Hawke again and I couldn't care less about a blank slate character. I don't want to play a warden too. I don't like how the writers make them look like they are the only ones who can fight. Hawke owned tons of darkspawns and never had the need to consume their blood, nor did he gain the plague, unlike you know who.

Blank slates characters are just dull to me. I don't like how they are voiceless. If I wanted to read something, I'd read a book. With today's modern technology, voiceless characters is just lazy programming (from a casual player's point of view) and doesn't fit in the modern aspect of gaming. Sure, some engines don't allow voice acting, like a bunch of DSes games, but right now they advanced the technology so much that we don't HAVE to be forced to read those texts any longer.

Still, people will insist that it breaks their immersion and all stuff. You want real immersion? Sorry for being so biased, but I think you'd rather play table-like RPGs and probably read CYOA books instead of playing a video game where a voiced character just breaks your immersion. I played tons of video games with voiced alter egos and never complained. Sure, some heroes don't have the personalities you want to give them, but with a bit of imagination, you can do lots of miracles.

My two cents.

Modifié par Teddie Sage, 23 août 2011 - 08:34 .

[FieryDove]

Teddie Sage wrote...

Like I said many times before, I want to play my Hawke again and I couldn't care less about a blank slate character. I don't want to play a warden too. I don't like how the writers make them look like they are the only ones who can fight. Hawke owned tons of darkspawns and never had the need to consume their blood, nor did he gain the plague, unlike you know who.

Hawke has awesome plot armor, nothing can touch him/her, I agree.

[Teddie Sage]

I don't really consider the armours and the weapons to be Hawke's best traits. I thought it had something to do with his bloodline or something. He had a lot of mages ancestors, after all. So this could explain why he has a solid immunity against the taint. But yeah, I never read anywhere that mages were more resistant to the taint than normal people.

This needs to be explored a little bit more. Since both of your you know what can be affected by the taint.

Modifié par Teddie Sage, 23 août 2011 - 08:58 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Teddie Sage wrote...

I don't really consider the armours and the weapons to be Hawke's best traits. I thought it had something to do with his bloodline or something. He had a lot of mages ancestors, after all. So this could explain why he has a solid immunity against the taint. But yeah, I never read anywhere that mages were more resistant to the taint than normal people.

This needs to be explored a little bit more. Since both of your you know what can be affected by the taint.

I have to ask, you do know what FieryDove meant by plot armor, right?

(I know you probably do, but I can't help but ask)

Modifié par mrcrusty, 23 août 2011 - 09:04 .

[esper]

All pc-characters have awesome plot-amor. Normally a pc-character can only die at the very end of the game. The warden had an awesome plot amour as well.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

esper wrote...

All pc-characters have awesome plot-amor. Normally a pc-character can only die at the very end of the game. The warden had an awesome plot amour as well.

Except for TNO of course.



Though I guess that's still a form of plot armor.

But you know what, I would've loved the idea of the Taint and Demon Possession (for Mages) becoming game mechanics or something that the player has to deal with, in either game.

Make the damn transfer from story to gameplay rather than keeping them unrelated and separated. The story existing in a bubble of cinematics makes me sadface.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 23 août 2011 - 09:20 .

[esper]

mrcrusty wrote...

esper wrote...

All pc-characters have awesome plot-amor. Normally a pc-character can only die at the very end of the game. The warden had an awesome plot amour as well.

Except for TNO of course.



Though I guess that's still a form of plot armor.

I vaguely remember playing one really freakish game where a part of the story was to die and every time you died you moved to a new level... It was really weird, but I can't remember what it ws about. Expect I think I doomed the world two or three times in one playthrough

But normally the rule is pc-character dead = Game over = reload. So all pc-characters are protected by the fact that if they failed in life they can save, reload and then just do the whole thing over. Wish real life worked that way sometimes.

[Melyanna]

I'd rather like to have a pseudo-blank slate PC like in Origins that a purely fixed one as in DA II.
I do think that a completely blank slate PC is quite difficult to do if you have to support a strong story line (though it has been done well so far in The Elder Scroll series, in my opinion), however, I liked how Origins let you chose different back stories for your character: I think it was the perfect compromise between blank slate and fixed character.
When playing as Hawke in DA II I found it more difficult to identify myself with the main character, than while playing my very custom dalish elf in Origins.
I think that what they did in Origins was absolutely perfect, with just the addition of reintroducing the <charname> function: it would be nice to be called by your name from time to time, at least in writte n dialogues.

[furryrage59]

I wouldn't mind an amnesia scenario or some other roleplay blank slate reason.

What i would not like though is my character to have no history or past for no other reason than just because.

[Wynne]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

So while I obviously would not enjoy a set character, I also think that DAO-style origins are still too restrictive.  There's a continuum here, and DAO-style origins are not one end of it.  A set character is one end, DAO-style origins are in the middle.  The other end is a blank slate character, and that's what I'd like to see in future games.

This is what you were looking for. You are accidentally in the Dragon Age forums.

Later, dude.

[the_one_54321]

FieryDove wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...
Like I said many times before, I want to play my Hawke again and I couldn't care less about a blank slate character. I don't want to play a warden too. I don't like how the writers make them look like they are the only ones who can fight. Hawke owned tons of darkspawns and never had the need to consume their blood, nor did he gain the plague, unlike you know who.

Hawke has awesome plot armor, nothing can touch him/her, I agree.

Sounds like borderline broken plot to me. But then, none of the party members in DA:O were blighted either. So it's a blurry line.

[Teddie Sage]

mrcrusty wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...

I don't really consider the armours and the weapons to be Hawke's best traits. I thought it had something to do with his bloodline or something. He had a lot of mages ancestors, after all. So this could explain why he has a solid immunity against the taint. But yeah, I never read anywhere that mages were more resistant to the taint than normal people.

This needs to be explored a little bit more. Since both of your you know what can be affected by the taint.

I have to ask, you do know what FieryDove meant by plot armor, right?

(I know you probably do, but I can't help but ask)

Yeah, yeah. I just added to my previous comment.

[furryrage59]

the_one_54321 wrote...

FieryDove wrote...

Teddie Sage wrote...
Like I said many times before, I want to play my Hawke again and I couldn't care less about a blank slate character. I don't want to play a warden too. I don't like how the writers make them look like they are the only ones who can fight. Hawke owned tons of darkspawns and never had the need to consume their blood, nor did he gain the plague, unlike you know who.

Hawke has awesome plot armor, nothing can touch him/her, I agree.

Sounds like borderline broken plot to me. But then, none of the party members in DA:O were blighted either. So it's a blurry line.

Technically, Allistair and yourself are blighted

[the_one_54321]

The two guys that drank dark spawn blood? Yeah, I was aware they were blighted.

[Sylvius the Mad]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I find BG2 significantly more restrictive than BG.  It's one of several reasons I prefer the first game.

In what ways? I think your actions are more restricted, because it's less "open-worldy" and the constructed narrative is a larger part of the game, but I don't think roleplaying is any more restricted.

The actions are part of the roleplaying.  There's no part of the game that isn't part of the roleplaying.  Even inventory management is roleplaying, as long as you make those decisions in-character.

To be honest, I haven't actually seen all of BG2.  I never came close to finishing it.  But the extent to which the plot is tied to the PC's relationship with Imoen - someone he might have left behind in the first game - isn't a great feature.

[mesmerizedish]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I find BG2 significantly more restrictive than BG.  It's one of several reasons I prefer the first game.

In what ways? I think your actions are more restricted, because it's less "open-worldy" and the constructed narrative is a larger part of the game, but I don't think roleplaying is any more restricted.

The actions are part of the roleplaying.  There's no part of the game that isn't part of the roleplaying.  Even inventory management is roleplaying, as long as you make those decisions in-character.

To be honest, I haven't actually seen all of BG2.  I never came close to finishing it.  But the extent to which the plot is tied to the PC's relationship with Imoen - someone he might have left behind in the first game - isn't a great feature.

Okay, I'll buy that.

I guess, just as it's lucky you usually like to roleplay bookish nerds who grew up in libraries, it's lucky I usually like to roleplay characters who are as in love with Imoen as I am

I think BGII is definitely where we begin to see evidence of the direction BioWare have taken since then.

[Xilizhra]

Blank slate PCs only work for tabletop RPGs and are, I feel, bad for video games. So no.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Xewaka wrote...

While personally I support a blank slate player character (it allows more flexibility and creative freedom when coming up with a character, and it's accomodating to a wider amount of motivations and personality), due to the narrative style Bioware's been adopting since they moved to voiced characters, I doubt we'll see it, as player freedom to make a character clashes with the story they want to tell.

They're never going to bother improving the voice or the implementation of the voice unless there's a game-related reason to do so.  I'm trying to give them a game-related reason.

With a pre-set protagonist, the voice can work pretty much just like it does in ME and DA2.  And I hate the way the voice works in ME and DA2.

Then again, the gameplay and character mechanics usually require far more thought and flexibility to work with a blank slate than what Bioware's been offering lately.

Again, so if they do use a blank slate PC they'll need top improve the game in other ways as well.

There's no downside.

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Thats because most were busy complaining how bad the overall campaign was. It was poor on every level.

But You'll note that in NWN2 they referred to background quite a bit. In fact, everyone went out of their way to comment on your swamp stench. And yes I know Obsidian did that game, but its obvious they took feedback from the first one into account.

I liked the NWN OC.

Teddie Sage wrote...

Blank slates characters are just dull to me. I don't like how they are voiceless. If I wanted to read something, I'd read a book. With today's modern technology, voiceless characters is just lazy programming (from a casual player's point of view) and doesn't fit in the modern aspect of gaming. Sure, some engines don't allow voice acting, like a bunch of DSes games, but right now they advanced the technology so much that we don't HAVE to be forced to read those texts any longer.

Could you at least consider that some of us don't want to HAVE to listen to a voice?

Still, people will insist that it breaks their immersion and all stuff. You want real immersion? Sorry for being so biased, but I think you'd rather play table-like RPGs and probably read CYOA books instead of playing a video game where a voiced character just breaks your immersion.

I think a CRPG's primary objective should be to reproduce the gameplay experience of a tabletop game, but without the need for other people.  So, yes, that's what I want.

I played tons of video games with voiced alter egos and never complained.

Video games and RPGs are different things.

esper wrote...

All pc-characters have awesome plot-amor. Normally a pc-character can only die at the very end of the game. The warden had an awesome plot amour as well.

That's not true at all.  The Warden can die at any point.  The game just doesn't model the events following that death.

The only BioWare game where it can credibly be argued that the PC cannot die before the end of the game is DA2.  The framed narrative certainly suggests that Hawke survived the escape of Lothering, for example, but since we never see Cassandra's reaction to that version of the story, we can't really say for sure.  So even that argument isn't very strong.

The PC can almost always die.  Hawke can die.  Shepard can die.  The Spirit Monk can die.  Revan can die.  The Hero of Neverwinter can die.  And the Bhaalspawn can die (we even see what happens if he does with that great dissolving hand animation).

The PC can die.  The games just don't model those outcomes.

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sounds like borderline broken plot to me. But then, none of the party members in DA:O were blighted either. So it's a blurry line.

Agreed.  The lore didn't inform the gameplay as well as it should have, there.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 23 août 2011 - 06:36 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

I think BGII is definitely where we begin to see evidence of the direction BioWare have taken since then.

Yes, BG2 is where it all started to go wrong.

Wynne wrote...


This is what you were looking for. You are accidentally in the Dragon Age forums.

Later, dude.

If TES games didn't have action combat, I'd probably play them incessantly.

But they do have action combat.

I hate action combat.

[Teddie Sage]

Sylvius: 

So video games and RPGs can't fit in the same sentence? HA! Glorious.

Also, it's okay if you don't want voiced characters, but it's just not for me. It's probably thing I'll hate from Skyrim. Doesn't mean I won't play it, I'll just take my character less seriously.

So I take it you also don't like Zelda games?

Modifié par Teddie Sage, 23 août 2011 - 08:21 .

[csfteeeer]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sounds like borderline broken plot to me. But then, none of the party members in DA:O were blighted either. So it's a blurry line.

Agreed.  The lore didn't inform the gameplay as well as it should have, there.

You know, now that you mention it, i think David Gaider said something about how they intended to do something about the Blight and the Companions in DA:O.
i think, Originally, they had the intention to make the Companions infected and have to possibilty to make them Grey Wardens, but there were Scripts problems, and they had to drop it.
i think that's what he said, but what i do remember is that he out right said "Gameplay > Lore" (well, not like i did, but he said that gameplay beats lore).
So..... Assume they did the same thing with DA:2, but it's actually worse there, because..... a special someone, gets infected along the way, and it just makes everything worse cause it's not a tragic misfortune, it's a plot convenience, created solely for the purpose of pulling people's heartstrings.

Either way however, i don't think it's acceptable, if anything they should have pointed it out, but no, they leave it as a simple plot (while deliberately taking it further, for self convenience, in DA2)

Modifié par csfteeeer, 23 août 2011 - 09:20 .

[csfteeeer]

Double Post