384 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

Zanallen wrote...

eroeru wrote...

It is vastly different, as many players have pointed out their frustration.

First off, I can imagine countless possibilities into the meaning of text-based responses. The benefit of Bioware's games (the ones until DA:O) is a loose direction without a certain tone, attitude, but rather with well written often five-six possibilities that give a direction, but do not define.

DA2 is defined and very movie-like. Exactly how I don't like a (hopefully) choice-based RPG (or any game). I can place myself in the shoes of Hawke as likely as I can with any movie-character. It doesn't feel like my character, it is more pre-defined (to a large and onto-frustration sufficient extent)...

You might be able to imagine countless possibilities, but that doesn't mean they exist. The NPCs only respond to one possibility. That is the tone and intent established by the writer when he wrote the line and the NPC's response. The certain tone and attitude is there, it is just less apparent without a voiced protagonist. And no, you did not get five or six possiblities. You received three or four. The rest were investigate options. Same with DA2.

This.

Sure you can imagine that there are 15 ways to say a line, but then you also have to think that everyone you're traveling with is incompetent at having interactions with another human being in order to get those various ways to even work a little bit.

And the companions are not incompetent at having interactions with other people.

[maxernst]

Zanallen wrote...

How is this any different from any Bioware game ever? Responses always boil down to nice, angry and jokey. They might throw in a neutral comment as well. But that's it.

Actually, in DA:O, there were a lot of fairly neutral comments you can make.  I recall somebody complaining that you couldn't really play a sarcastic Warden.  And I agree with the OP that because of the way the voice acting works, when you choose a dialogue option that's not your most common choice, it feels jarring, but I think a lot of people feel the same way about playing a Paragade in the ME games.

In any case, the tone problem bothers me much less than the surprise content in Hawke's dialogue.

[DreGregoire]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

No, it hasn't. In Mass Effect it is very easy to roleplay complex characters, and even easier in DAO. 

@Zanellan: In BW's non voiced games, it wasn't an issue as any of the options could be said in any tone you interpret it as. In ME, there is always a neutral option.

Lies. There is always a tone intended, even with a silent protagonist. That is why that response is paired with the specific NPC dialogue. The writer has an implied tone to the line that the NPC reacts to.

Doesn't matter how it's intended, in any RPG with a non-voiced PC it is up to the player how the dialogue is said.

With a voiced PC however, your character is at the mercy of the writers, but Mass Effect still managed to pull off the ability to roleplay a variety of characters.

Not to mention that how you imagined your character saying something and a companion misunderstanding your intent is more natural to me than everybody always knowing you are being a jerk, nice, or snarky.

There were many instances in DAO that I choose an option and meant it differently than how a companion perceived it. This made the game feel more real to me; made me feel as if I was roleplaying opposed to just following a script. I even remember imagining saying something in a nasty angry manner and Alistair took it like it was a joke and I got more angry. Another playthrough in the same scene I meant it as a joke so Alistair taking it that way was fine with my pc and they went on their merry way. DAII limited my ability to roleplay each line how I wanted it to be delivered, despite how a companion choose to take it.

Modifié par DreGregoire, 30 octobre 2011 - 05:35 .

[DreGregoire]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Sure you can imagine that there are 15 ways to say a line, but then you also have to think that everyone you're traveling with is incompetent at having interactions with another human being in order to get those various ways to even work a little bit.

And the companions are not incompetent at having interactions with other people.

It's not even about them being incompetent in interactions, because to me I felt that their response to my "attitude" was well thought out. Somebody choosing to take something somebody says a different way is actually a sign of a competent people person. And how they respond can have an even greater impact on how my pc perceived things. How many times has somebody spoken to you in a certain manner and you have attempted to deflect it into a different direction by responding in a manner you hope will defuse the situation?

Modifié par DreGregoire, 30 octobre 2011 - 05:48 .

[TMA LIVE]

Sadly, I'm more of stuck role playing Bioware games similar to directing an actor in an improv play. I can't really create a character I want to make. I've tried and found places where the character doesn't have an option that would fit with him or her. Instead, I have to create the character from scratch as I'm playing, based on the options that are there. Because if I make rules, then the game finds a way to break them. Like trying to not break the law after becoming the Champion, but then be completely ok with robing people in MOTA, because hey, my character likes to help people, and steal treasure from rich people.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 30 octobre 2011 - 05:53 .

[DreGregoire]

TMA LIVE wrote...

Sadly, I'm more of stuck role playing Bioware games similar to directing an actor in an improv play. I can't really create a character I want to make. I've tried and found places where the character doesn't have an option that would fit with him or her. Instead, I have to create the character from scratch as I'm playing, based on the options that are there. Because if I make rules, then the game finds a way to break them. Like trying to not break the law after becoming the Champion, but then be completely ok with robing people in MOTA, because hey, my character likes to help people, and steal treasure from rich people.

Play MotA before becoming the champion. I know you might be past that point but you could go back in your saves and play it earlier in the game. I have a playthrough now that I'm playing MotA at different times; just to see the different interactions.

Modifié par DreGregoire, 30 octobre 2011 - 05:56 .

[KilrB]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

 At the moment i'm trying to play a stoic character whom has a cynical view of the world, yet does attempt to do as much good as he can. And it's pretty much impossible. My character is not an angry man, and is usually calm and collected even under the most stressful circumstances. But the only choices i have are to be a kissass or an aggressive ass. The character fits into neither of those categories, and he seems fairly basic from a roleplaying stand point. 

On top of this, when i do have to pick between condemning someone to death or asking if i can look for their long lost mother, the character's voice is COMPLETELY different. NO ONE's voice lowers several octaves when they are aggressive like Hawke's does, it gives a bipolar quality that i have not yet seen in a game. Between this bipolar voice change, lack of neutrality and horribly done paraphrases; it is ridiculously hard to roleplay in this game. 

But i guess it's my fault for attempting to make a character that isn't 1 dimensional. 

Believe it or not; adding a neutral option, entire sentences (No more paraphrasing, please? Look at DX: HR) and a voice that can express anger without going from Isabella to Fenris tonality wise, the game's roleplaying ability would be a lot more in-depth. Hell, ME has two of these already sorted out, a neutral option and VA's that can express different moods without sounding like they just smoked a pack of cigarettes. 

Your mistake, and mine, was trying to roleplay at all in DA2.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Apparently the Awesome button didn't include the roleplay aspect of this cRPG for many people.

[Reaverwind]

KilrB wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

 At the moment i'm trying to play a stoic character whom has a cynical view of the world, yet does attempt to do as much good as he can. And it's pretty much impossible. My character is not an angry man, and is usually calm and collected even under the most stressful circumstances. But the only choices i have are to be a kissass or an aggressive ass. The character fits into neither of those categories, and he seems fairly basic from a roleplaying stand point. 

On top of this, when i do have to pick between condemning someone to death or asking if i can look for their long lost mother, the character's voice is COMPLETELY different. NO ONE's voice lowers several octaves when they are aggressive like Hawke's does, it gives a bipolar quality that i have not yet seen in a game. Between this bipolar voice change, lack of neutrality and horribly done paraphrases; it is ridiculously hard to roleplay in this game. 

But i guess it's my fault for attempting to make a character that isn't 1 dimensional. 

Believe it or not; adding a neutral option, entire sentences (No more paraphrasing, please? Look at DX: HR) and a voice that can express anger without going from Isabella to Fenris tonality wise, the game's roleplaying ability would be a lot more in-depth. Hell, ME has two of these already sorted out, a neutral option and VA's that can express different moods without sounding like they just smoked a pack of cigarettes. 

Your mistake, and mine, was trying to roleplay at all in DA2.

What were you thinking, anyway? This game is all about smashing endless waves of generic enemies while running from quest marker to quest marker in between cinematic sequences. And of course, there's the occasional boss fight ripped straight out of a certain popular mmo (though I recommend playing the real thing if that's what you're into).

[Zanallen]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

What? Sure you can't side with the archdemon, but thats about where it ends when creating a character with a non-voiced PC. Absolutely everything about the PC is decided by the player.

Anyway, this isn't supposed to be a voice vs non-voice thread. I'm just dogging out DA2's roleplaying abilities. I can roleplay SO MANY different Geralts in TW2, and SO MANY different shepard in ME, but in DA2, just as our good friend  mentioned before, is limited to "Mean, Good and funny".

Video games are basically large choose your own adventure books. You can choose between two different options, but you are still limited to the options that the writer has laid out for you. You can choose to go to page 46 or to page 153, but that is it. Your only other choice is to close the book and end the adventure. There is no way to move outside of the writer's intent and design. Games are not anywhere near reactive enough for the player to move beyond what the writer has planned. With any given dialogue option, you might like to pretend that their are countless ways to say that line, but there isn't. There is one and that is the way the writer envisioned the intent of the line when pairing it with the NPC response.

[seraphymon]

Zanallen wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

What? Sure you can't side with the archdemon, but thats about where it ends when creating a character with a non-voiced PC. Absolutely everything about the PC is decided by the player.

Anyway, this isn't supposed to be a voice vs non-voice thread. I'm just dogging out DA2's roleplaying abilities. I can roleplay SO MANY different Geralts in TW2, and SO MANY different shepard in ME, but in DA2, just as our good friend  mentioned before, is limited to "Mean, Good and funny".

Video games are basically large choose your own adventure books. You can choose between two different options, but you are still limited to the options that the writer has laid out for you. You can choose to go to page 46 or to page 153, but that is it. Your only other choice is to close the book and end the adventure. There is no way to move outside of the writer's intent and design. Games are not anywhere near reactive enough for the player to move beyond what the writer has planned. With any given dialogue option, you might like to pretend that their are countless ways to say that line, but there isn't. There is one and that is the way the writer envisioned the intent of the line when pairing it with the NPC response.

At times there is just one envisioned response from an NPC, but alot of what DAo had or other games have are neautral no matter what tone it is expressed in. Even in DA2 at times. but many of the time was a sort of fill in the hole neutral type of response. I cant speak for anyone else, but being able to imagine how i said those lines i really had no major problems with what tone i imagined for DAO, even if the limited option or response from an NPC, im conversing with is there. Theres always a limited amount of of options, some even like a book, but that doesnt mean  your imgaination is completely lost, and imo nor should it be totally. I imagine certain steps would be to choose a line and then choose a tone, even though that would be tedious and overly complicated. But weighing in the options, i dont want 3 different ways to say yes, as in DA2.

[Morroian]

eroeru wrote...

It is vastly different, as many players have pointed out their frustration.

First off, I can imagine countless possibilities into the meaning of text-based responses. 

I can and have imagined possibilities surrounding the DA2 dialogue. The tone doesn't come close to fully defining a character.

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

With a voiced PC however, your character is at the mercy of the writers, but Mass Effect still managed to pull off the ability to roleplay a variety of characters.

DA2 inspired me to imagine the possibilities surrouding Hawke and role play more different types of Hawkes than MEs flat delivery.

Modifié par Morroian, 30 octobre 2011 - 09:38 .

[highcastle]

Morroian wrote...

eroeru wrote...

It is vastly different, as many players have pointed out their frustration.

First off, I can imagine countless possibilities into the meaning of text-based responses. 

I can and have imagined possibilities surrounding the DA2 dialogue. The tone doesn't come close to fully defining a character.

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

With a voiced PC however, your character is at the mercy of the writers, but Mass Effect still managed to pull off the ability to roleplay a variety of characters.

DA2 inspired me to imagine the possibilities surroudnign Hawke and role play more different types of Hawke's than MEs flat delivery.

This. Yes, DA2 utilizes a tone system. But the tone of those responses doesn't define their characterization. You can still choose in your mind why Hawke would be speaking that way. For instance, sarcastic!Hawke often makes a lot of inappropriate jokes. Why? Is he socially awkward on account of moving around so much as a child and never really interacting with outsiders on a consistent basis? Does he try to ease the tension with jokes because he doesn't want to get into a fight? Is he an insensitive jerk? The reasons behind his tone are fully left in the player's hands to determine. I don't see the problem here.

[Fenris_13]

highcastle wrote...
This. Yes, DA2 utilizes a tone system. But the tone of those responses doesn't define their characterization. You can still choose in your mind why Hawke would be speaking that way. For instance, sarcastic!Hawke often makes a lot of inappropriate jokes. Why? Is he socially awkward on account of moving around so much as a child and never really interacting with outsiders on a consistent basis? Does he try to ease the tension with jokes because he doesn't want to get into a fight? Is he an insensitive jerk? The reasons behind his tone are fully left in the player's hands to determine. I don't see the problem here.

Alot of people don't think that way, and just simply choses one option and expects the PC to say the way the player intended the PC to say.

[Persephone]

Ryllen Laerth Kriel wrote...

Apparently the Awesome button didn't include the roleplay aspect of this cRPG for many people.

What Awesome Button? I haven't found that yet. I mean....people keep bringing it up ad nauseam, so I have to wonder just where it's supposed to be.

Seriously, the whole Awesome Button snark is about as funny as sour milk at this point.<_<

[Persephone]

Reaverwind wrote...


What were you thinking, anyway? This game is all about smashing endless waves of generic enemies while running from quest marker to quest marker in between cinematic sequences. And of course, there's the occasional boss fight ripped straight out of a certain popular mmo (though I recommend playing the real thing if that's what you're into).

What game were you playing?

And how is that different from DAO and its quest markers (In DAII you can actually turn them off, fyi), random spawns and occasional boss fights? Except that the hero shows no emotion, has only one expression on his face ("O_o) and no personality? (Leliana telling my bubbly Warden how "severe" she always is....) Or the clunky combat? Of course DAO is much more than that. But if one wanted to be as hostile as you were above, that's all DAO is.

Reducing a game to such ridiculous remarks....it can be done to any game.

Modifié par Persephone, 30 octobre 2011 - 09:45 .

[AlexXIV]

I think Hawke is inspired by Shepard from ME. Reason why you have not so many freedoms roleplaying your own Hawke is because it is not your Hawke. Just like it is not your Shepard. Some things you can influence because these are the options you get from the writers without completely overwriting the protagonist the writers made. I personally like it the way they did it. With too many freedoms the narrative at some point doesn't make sense or it has to be written that neutral that it loses depth.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 30 octobre 2011 - 09:56 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

highcastle wrote...

Morroian wrote...

eroeru wrote...

It is vastly different, as many players have pointed out their frustration.

First off, I can imagine countless possibilities into the meaning of text-based responses. 

I can and have imagined possibilities surrounding the DA2 dialogue. The tone doesn't come close to fully defining a character.

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

With a voiced PC however, your character is at the mercy of the writers, but Mass Effect still managed to pull off the ability to roleplay a variety of characters.

DA2 inspired me to imagine the possibilities surroudnign Hawke and role play more different types of Hawke's than MEs flat delivery.

This. Yes, DA2 utilizes a tone system. But the tone of those responses doesn't define their characterization. You can still choose in your mind why Hawke would be speaking that way. For instance, sarcastic!Hawke often makes a lot of inappropriate jokes. Why? Is he socially awkward on account of moving around so much as a child and never really interacting with outsiders on a consistent basis? Does he try to ease the tension with jokes because he doesn't want to get into a fight? Is he an insensitive jerk? The reasons behind his tone are fully left in the player's hands to determine. I don't see the problem here.

Because no matter what, he is still a sarcastic jerk. I can envision many ways into why he is a sarcastic jerk, but he will always be a sarcastic jerk. Thats the same with an aggressive ass and a kissass. But in the end, there are still only 3 different personality types.

@ Morroain: The fact that ME has a neutral option already puts it leagues ahead of DA2 from an RPing standpoint. If your character doesn't feel obligated to speak out against or for a particular topic, it can be done. As opposed to becoming the Joker everytime you don't want to comment on plight of mages.

[AlexXIV]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

highcastle wrote...

Morroian wrote...

eroeru wrote...

It is vastly different, as many players have pointed out their frustration.

First off, I can imagine countless possibilities into the meaning of text-based responses. 

I can and have imagined possibilities surrounding the DA2 dialogue. The tone doesn't come close to fully defining a character.

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

With a voiced PC however, your character is at the mercy of the writers, but Mass Effect still managed to pull off the ability to roleplay a variety of characters.

DA2 inspired me to imagine the possibilities surroudnign Hawke and role play more different types of Hawke's than MEs flat delivery.

This. Yes, DA2 utilizes a tone system. But the tone of those responses doesn't define their characterization. You can still choose in your mind why Hawke would be speaking that way. For instance, sarcastic!Hawke often makes a lot of inappropriate jokes. Why? Is he socially awkward on account of moving around so much as a child and never really interacting with outsiders on a consistent basis? Does he try to ease the tension with jokes because he doesn't want to get into a fight? Is he an insensitive jerk? The reasons behind his tone are fully left in the player's hands to determine. I don't see the problem here.

Because no matter what, he is still a sarcastic jerk. I can envision many ways into why he is a sarcastic jerk, but he will always be a sarcastic jerk. Thats the same with an aggressive ass and a kissass. But in the end, there are still only 3 different personality types.

@ Morroain: The fact that ME has a neutral option already puts it leagues ahead of DA2 from an RPing standpoint. If your character doesn't feel obligated to speak out against or for a particular topic, it can be done. As opposed to becoming the Joker everytime you don't want to comment on plight of mages.

Yeah I think DA2 had alot of forcing you on one side or other without real explaination why. I don't actually understand why because it's untypical for Bioware. Probably because they somehow needed to push Hawke into action without real motivation. As for example Shepard has the motivation as a Spectre and the Hero of Ferelden being a Grey Warden.

[Reaverwind]

Persephone wrote...

Reaverwind wrote...


What were you thinking, anyway? This game is all about smashing endless waves of generic enemies while running from quest marker to quest marker in between cinematic sequences. And of course, there's the occasional boss fight ripped straight out of a certain popular mmo (though I recommend playing the real thing if that's what you're into).

What game were you playing?

And how is that different from DAO and its quest markers (In DAII you can actually turn them off, fyi), random spawns and occasional boss fights? Except that the hero shows no emotion, has only one expression on his face ("O_o) and no personality? (Leliana telling my bubbly Warden how "severe" she always is....) Or the clunky combat? Of course DAO is much more than that. But if one wanted to be as hostile as you were above, that's all DAO is.

Reducing a game to such ridiculous remarks....it can be done to any game.

Is bringing up DA:O the best you can do for a rebuttal? Seriously?

[DreGregoire]

It's not tone; it's intention. Tone refers to how the actor delivers it not the option the pc makes. Considerate, fun-loving, or harshly determined; diplomatic, charming, or threatening. In the realm of things these options seem to give you some flexibilty, but with a voice actor; a symbol showing that you have limited choices in conversation; and hiding the true words your pc will speak, restricts creativity.

And having your personality determine if a threat, diplomacy, or charm is successful is extremely limiting. If you are normally a joker, no matter your attributes, you will be unsuccessful attempting to threaten somebody. You are trapped in a narrow margin of personality; sure you can go back and forth between the types in different situations but this actually causes your character to act in ways that reflect whichever of the three personality types you have used the most; recently.

Modifié par DreGregoire, 30 octobre 2011 - 10:23 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

Yeah, i'm more so speaking about intention, but tone does come into it when Hawke's voice lowers to that of Fenris's. Seriously, picking multiple dialogue options in DA2 is the most jarring experience i've ever had.

[KilrB]

Forget paraphrasing and tones ...

Show me one way I could have killed Petrice, her side-kick, and the Qunari mage the first time I met all three and knew "this is going to be trouble".

Show me how the Viscount, Seamus, and Orsino or Meredith could still be alive at the end.

Show me how Hawke was the "Champion of Kirkwall".

Show me how I could become "Ruler of Kirkwall".

The idea that we were role-playing Hawke is rubbish.

We were just along for the ride, not in the driver's seat ... and we had to ride in the back too.

[eroeru]

Every problem that has been pointed out here maybe isn't a big deal in its own right, potentially, aside the whole context and without it relating to DA2, but the really important thing is that people actually feel bad about DA2 whilst pointing out these things. It isn't because of confusion that they're doing so, surely some importance and merit is in every claim, despite the style or degree of generalization they put into it (besides, all claims are done so to a degree). The differences come forth only because people do not draw the "significant-nonsignificant" line in the exact same places.


I feel this was lost a bit from all the text:

eroeru wrote...

Do you claim that written text has exactly the same level of defined meaning to it as spoken text?

eroeru wrote...

Many, including myself, find practically the only real meaning in interpreting games via creativity and imagination - or the awe at the imagination of the creators (the creation part is more and the second point relatively less so with previous Bioware games, you must hand us at least that...).

And a game-world is certainly less easily and not as well interpreted if given less - and very strict at that - info (=less choices) - which you must confess is true for DA2 in relation to BG until DA:O.

And it kinda goes with the last quote that diversity is a thing you can't have too much...

Modifié par eroeru, 30 octobre 2011 - 11:59 .

[Nerdage]

I could understand how picking a different tone each line would make a conversation seem disjointed, but I'd expect that anyway, how many people do you know who change mood on a dime like that? My own experience is that it feels pretty natural to either default to one tone, picking one of the others whenever it's appropriate; or to have the entire tone of a conversation change part way through. So (within the boundries you're given, at least, that are always there) roleplaying's been pretty easy for me..

That or I'm just really good at it.

If the problem is the delivery... could I suggest rerolling female? Not sure if it's any different since I haven't played many mHawkes, but I can honestly say I haven't felt any of the female VO has been out of character, even when choosing a different tone mid conversation.

Modifié par nerdage, 30 octobre 2011 - 11:55 .