215 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

fchopin wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The first thing I want from an RPG is the ability to roleplay a character of my own design.  His personality should not in any way be established by the game's designers.

Such a game does not exist.

Sure it does.  The classic Ultima games all did that.  Baldur's Gate does that.  NWN and KotOR both do that.  The Elder Scrolls games do that.

[Sylvius the Mad]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Would you say DA:O did that?

No.  DAO did have significant restrictions on PC personality.  The game's lore informs character design, and yet many designs based on that lore aren't permitted.  City elves, in particular, are badly handled by DAO.

That is not to say that DAO is especially bad in this regard.  It's vastly superior to any of BioWare's voiced-protagonist games, but it falls short of the standard set by BioWare's earlier titles.

I notice you said "personality," and not "backstory."

While I feared the limited backstories in DAO, I found they actually aided roleplaying by offering me a framework within which to create my character's personality.

DA:O offers a decent range of personalities. I personally fell right into expressing myself in DA:O on my first run.

I didn't encounter a significant deficiency in DAO's personality permission until my seventh character.  An earlier character, which DAO accommodated remarkably well, had crippling social anxiety.  Try that in DA2 (or any game with a voiced PC) and you'll have your character design ruined the first time your character speaks.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 19 septembre 2011 - 05:35 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Yes, I'll be honest that though ME2 was my...second quote unquote "RPG" (first I didn't even know it at the time--see my signature), I have found it impossible to Roleplay my character at all; it just seems very difficult. I think the whole dialog wheel idea was very crippling.

Yes.  Voicing the PC is bad, and the paraphrase system is bad, and putting the two together creates an insurmountable barrier to roleplaying with each and every dialogue option.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 19 septembre 2011 - 05:44 .

[Chuvvy]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

On the idea of roleplay related to personality, I didn't REALLY feel Oblivion offered much in that department, because it didn't feel like your character had much of a personality. While I found the game highly enjoyable, and will no doubt be getting Skyrim, it feels like the roleplaying is limited to mechanics, as in skills, and not really the character him/herself. Am I crazy?

Of course your PC had a personality in Oblivion, he/she could either except, or deny a quest. Personality.

[Chuvvy]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

On the idea of roleplay related to personality, I didn't REALLY feel Oblivion offered much in that department, because it didn't feel like your character had much of a personality. While I found the game highly enjoyable, and will no doubt be getting Skyrim, it feels like the roleplaying is limited to mechanics, as in skills, and not really the character him/herself. Am I crazy?

Of course your PC had a personality in Oblivion, he/she could either except, or deny a quest. Personality.

That can barely be called personality. That's like saying Assassins Creed Brotherhood had RP because you can refuse or accept the sidequests.

That is the joke.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Slidell505 wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

On the idea of roleplay related to personality, I didn't REALLY feel Oblivion offered much in that department, because it didn't feel like your character had much of a personality. While I found the game highly enjoyable, and will no doubt be getting Skyrim, it feels like the roleplaying is limited to mechanics, as in skills, and not really the character him/herself. Am I crazy?

Of course your PC had a personality in Oblivion, he/she could either except, or deny a quest. Personality.

It's not just what the character does in the game.  It's why the character does those things.  Why does your character accept or deny any given quest?  What are his motives in doing so?  What does he hope to achieve?  Does this action illustrate any fundamental beliefs or values the character holds?

This works terrifically in Oblivion (and may other older CRPGs) because the game never tried to tell you about your character.  A game like KotOR2, for example, makes a point of trying to reveal the Exile's personality to you during the game, and that's completely unacceptable.  The PC's personality should be knowable for the player during character creation so that roleplaying concerns can drive things like class selection, or even appearance.

Whether the details of your character's personality are ever shown in the game isn't relevant (in fact, it's probably a bad thing, as the designers can't foresee all possible character designs).

[Mercannis]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

This has been a very informative thread.

There are terrific deals for Paradox products on Steam, right now. And Vaeliorin already directed me toward Spiderweb, but it's nice to see confirmation, as his preferences are nearly as specific as mine, though different.

Thanks for the suggestions, everyone.

You could also look into KIng Arthur : The roleplaying wargame. The collection is on sale as you probably noticed on Steam at a fair price.

Its a weird blend of Total war+ Text based questing, which affects the overall morality of your ruler. Im currently a Tyrant/ pagan king.

[Jonp382]

Luc0s wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Yes, I'll be honest that though ME2 was my...second quote unquote "RPG" (first I didn't even know it at the time--see my signature), I have found it impossible to Roleplay my character at all; it just seems very difficult. I think the whole dialog wheel idea was very crippling.

Yes.  Voicing the PC is bad, and the paraphrase system is bad, and putting the two together creates an insurmountable barrier to roleplaying with each and every dialogue option.

The Witcher and The Witcher 2 does a very good job in this though. So does Deus Ex Human Revolution.

Both The Witcher and Deus Ex HR allow you to read (almost) the entire phrase that the character is about to say if you would pick that dialogue option. If the dialogue-option says "Today felt good, surprisingly good." then the character will indeed say that, and not something like "DUDE TODAY WAS F*CKING AWESOME!"

Choosing dialogue-options in The Witcher and Deus Ex Human Revolution is so much easier than in Mass Effect, where every dialogue option is a bit of a gamble.

The Witcher 1/2 and Deus Ex: Human Revolution aren't really games that Sylvius would like. Geralt and Jensen's personalities are basically completely out of the player's hands. So while they give the player an infinitely better idea of what their character will do(well, at least Deus Ex: Human revolution does, been a while since I tried to play The Witcher games), they still can't play their character, so the choices become arbitrary and meaningless.(To the player who wants to play a character rather than a game)

[Sacred_Fantasy]

1. Divinity II - I never complete it though because I don't like it's puzzles which are mostly required precision, timing, skill and luck. Very hard to solve.

2. Dungeon Lords - Be advised. This game is heavily bugged but the story is impressive.

3. Most MMORPGs. There are many new release MMORPGs and I'm sure you won't have problem to find them and of course expect them to be sandbox while some may have many quests to keep you busy. Just make sure you don't play 24/7 though. ( I did that and that's not the kind of life I want to have. )

4. I can think of many classic games but I don't know if they are still available. If you are lucky you may find some at abandonware sites. All TSR & SSI RPG, Sir-Tech's Realm of Arkania series and Wizardry.

5. Search for Wizard of Coast publications.
http://en.wikipedia....and_supplements

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 19 septembre 2011 - 02:36 .

[sp0ck 06]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

fchopin wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The first thing I want from an RPG is the ability to roleplay a character of my own design.  His personality should not in any way be established by the game's designers.

Such a game does not exist.

Sure it does.  The classic Ultima games all did that.  Baldur's Gate does that.  NWN and KotOR both do that.  The Elder Scrolls games do that.

Your character in Baldur's Gate is completely established by the game's designers.  The only hand the player has in shaping your character is picking from a list of pre determined dialogue.

In KoTOR, your character is even more established.  You're Revan, and you don't even know it for most of the game...

[Jestina]

Wizardry...ummm.

There's not really anything going on in RPG land right now. I think Bethesda is the only company that still makes RPG's.

[wizardryforever]

Despite disagreeing with your tastes, I find myself morbidly curious about what you thought of NWN2, Sylvius.  Have you played that?  I found it a definite improvement over NWN1.

Oh, and about character definement, most RPGs define the basics of your character.  Who they are (in broad terms), where they come from, and their general motivations are usually defined by the game to some degree.  Sandbox RPGs like the Elder Scrolls games avoid most of that by gving you almost nothing to work with in terms of character.  Games like Baldur's Gate, for example, define your past and your destination.  It's how you get there that is up to you.  You have no choice to but to be Gorion's ward in BG, nor do you have any choice but to defeat Sarevok.  How you go about that and how your character feels though, is ultimately up to you.

[Sylvius the Mad]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

Your character in Baldur's Gate is completely established by the game's designers.  The only hand the player has in shaping your character is picking from a list of pre determined dialogue.

In KoTOR, your character is even more established.  You're Revan, and you don't even know it for most of the game...

That's backstory, not personality.

Right at the start of BG when you leave Candlekeep and get ambushed, what does your character do next?  Why?  Does he follow Gorion's advice and go to the Friendly Arm Inn?  Why?  Does he decide to head to the nearest town because it's safer?  Why?  Does he decide that the roads aren't safe, and Gorion's advice was bad because it got them ambushed and instead get off the road as soon as possible?  Why?

BG grants the player trememndous freedom in character design.  It does so more than any subsequent BioWare game, in fact, because it also allows free travel, so your character can actually go anywhere for any reason, regardless of whether the game is aware of that reason (this free travel disappeared in BG2, and hasn't been seen again in a BioWare game with the possible exception of Mass Effect).

[Sylvius the Mad]

wizardryforever wrote...

Despite disagreeing with your tastes, I find myself morbidly curious about what you thought of NWN2, Sylvius.  Have you played that?  I found it a definite improvement over NWN1.

I haven't played NWN2 as much as I would like.  I quite enjoyed it, though I found the implementation of full party control quite clumsy.

I think NWN was terrific, though, so I can't imagine I'd see NWN2 as a big improvement, because not much in NWN needed fixing.

Oh, and about character definement, most RPGs define the basics of your character.  Who they are (in broad terms), where they come from, and their general motivations are usually defined by the game to some degree.  Sandbox RPGs like the Elder Scrolls games avoid most of that by gving you almost nothing to work with in terms of character.  Games like Baldur's Gate, for example, define your past and your destination.  It's how you get there that is up to you.  You have no choice to but to be Gorion's ward in BG, nor do you have any choice but to defeat Sarevok.  How you go about that and how your character feels though, is ultimately up to you.

Defining your past isn't relevant.  And I dispute that the game defines your destination.  You don't have to defeat Sarevok in BG.  You just run out of things to do sooner.

[MerinTB]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

Your character in Baldur's Gate is completely established by the game's designers.  The only hand the player has in shaping your character is picking from a list of pre determined dialogue.

In KoTOR, your character is even more established.  You're Revan, and you don't even know it for most of the game...

That's backstory, not personality.

Right at the start of BG when you leave Candlekeep and get ambushed, what does your character do next?  Why?  Does he follow Gorion's advice and go to the Friendly Arm Inn?  Why?  Does he decide to head to the nearest town because it's safer?  Why?  Does he decide that the roads aren't safe, and Gorion's advice was bad because it got them ambushed and instead get off the road as soon as possible?  Why?

BG grants the player trememndous freedom in character design.  It does so more than any subsequent BioWare game, in fact, because it also allows free travel, so your character can actually go anywhere for any reason, regardless of whether the game is aware of that reason (this free travel disappeared in BG2, and hasn't been seen again in a BioWare game with the possible exception of Mass Effect).

While I didn't get FAR in BG in the three times I tried playing it, I agree.

Also, as far as "being Revan" - that's who you WERE, not who you are.  Even if you choose to return to the path Revan took, that person is GONE.  You are, more or less, tabula rasa at the start of the game.

And being the child of whom your the child of in the Baldur's Gate series doesn't even choose your race for you, so that's not really "establishing your character for you" in all but the broadest of terms.

[Tommy6860]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

On the idea of roleplay related to personality, I didn't REALLY feel Oblivion offered much in that department, because it didn't feel like your character had much of a personality. While I found the game highly enjoyable, and will no doubt be getting Skyrim, it feels like the roleplaying is limited to mechanics, as in skills, and not really the character him/herself. Am I crazy?

Of course your PC had a personality in Oblivion, he/she could either except, or deny a quest. Personality.

It's not just what the character does in the game.  It's why the character does those things.  Why does your character accept or deny any given quest?  What are his motives in doing so?  What does he hope to achieve?  Does this action illustrate any fundamental beliefs or values the character holds?

This works terrifically in Oblivion (and may other older CRPGs) because the game never tried to tell you about your character.  A game like KotOR2, for example, makes a point of trying to reveal the Exile's personality to you during the game, and that's completely unacceptable.  The PC's personality should be knowable for the player during character creation so that roleplaying concerns can drive things like class selection, or even appearance.

Whether the details of your character's personality are ever shown in the game isn't relevant (in fact, it's probably a bad thing, as the designers can't foresee all possible character designs).

I don't see where you think this works "terrifically" in Oblivion. Any quest you choose, and especially the main quest-line, you have no choice in doing it or not. Yes, you can avoid doing side quests if you want, but you cannot avoid how those quests play out Even if you have certain innate moral compositions that would reflect what you would choose to do personally, they don't exist in the game. The only real RP features are stat and appearance building for the class you choose. Otherwise, the only things that reflect choices is how evil or good you are (infamy stat) and that certain things are accessible or not in the game and people view you a certain way.