384 réponses à ce sujet

[AlexXIV]

Yeah but you could pick the Origin. So you have a 6 times higher chance that people are happy with one of 6 origins than if they have one of one.

[jlb524]

AlexXIV wrote...
Yeah but you could pick the Origin. So you have a 6 times higher chance that people are happy with one of 6 origins than if they have one of one.

There's more variety, yes.  The characters in each origin aren't anymore 'blank slate' than Hawke is, though.

Variety is the difference between DA:O and DA2.  Though, I'd say it's not significant considering all the Origins converge to the same character very early in the game.

[Metalunatic]

I agree, OP. It's the choice of being the heroic selfless guy, the sarcastic takes-nothing-serious guy or the aggressive someone-pissed-in-my-cereal guy. In that regard DAO is way superior. I hate that dialogue wheel in DA.

Modifié par Metalunatic, 31 octobre 2011 - 09:01 .

[eroeru]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Paraphrasing is always going to be limited, because it is simply that - paraphrasing.

And this is exactly why many people want paraphrasing gone from their game.

jlb524 wrote...

I personally like that, as I don't RP as 'myself' but as a character that I create.

I
see it this way, BW gives me a skeleton of a character and it's my job
to fill in the rest to create a whole person.  I never have free reign
to create a character from a blank slate and am always restricted by
what this skeleton is, but I can further define it through my in-game
actions or the role-playing I do in my head.

Hawke was not a skeleton - he was very fully defined when comparing with the feel of previous Bioware games. At least that's how I felt and I'm not the only one.

And aside that, I always need my RP character to "feel" myself, not be myself in traits. I must be able to imagine myself into it - every good RP is basically founded on your "being" the character, not "seeing" him (actually, if I think about it, "seeing" a character you play with from the side and at the same also creating him along the way seems schisophrenic and contradictory, so I think you just don't prefer to so much "create" your own character, but rather "see" him?).

Modifié par eroeru, 01 novembre 2011 - 12:52 .

[Sylvianus]

eroeru wrote...

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Paraphrasing is always going to be limited, because it is simply that - paraphrasing.

And this is exactly why many people want paraphrasing gone from their game.

I do not really like this system, the same as in Deus. You read the sentence and then you hear it again. That's not terrible in my opinion.

I'd rather just plead for better accuracy. DA2  hasn't done a very good job according to me.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 01 novembre 2011 - 01:06 .

[Heather Cline]

Would you people who are whining and complaining like some cheese to go with that whine?

[Sylvianus]

Why do you not allow those people complain, and why not pray the god bioware like others in this thread so fun and so smart ?

http://social.biowar...5/index/8588316

Modifié par Sylvianus, 01 novembre 2011 - 01:20 .

[tmp7704]

FASherman wrote...

Repeat after me...

Good, sarcastic, mean
Good, sarcastic, mean
Good, sarcastic, mean
Good, sarcastic, mean

Thats all you get and expecting anything more is ridiculous.

I can't tell which colour button you've used to post that reply.

( "Blue.  No, yel--" )

Modifié par tmp7704, 01 novembre 2011 - 01:22 .

[Sylvianus]

tmp7704 wrote...

FASherman wrote...

Repeat after me...

Good, sarcastic, mean
Good, sarcastic, mean
Good, sarcastic, mean
Good, sarcastic, mean

Thats all you get and expecting anything more is ridiculous.

I can't tell which colour button you've used to post that reply.

This thread is also pretty chaotic, indeed. There is a bit of everything actually. Like.... Subliminal messages too, sometimes. I've seen a lot. Don't be so naive.

If someone wants to whine about those who complain, they can use this topic as many have already done whit he the humor, ( good, sarcastic, mean )

Here, some people want maybe to talk about some problems you don't care. At least if you disagree with them, try to bring something else that what I see above.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 01 novembre 2011 - 01:25 .

[Fast Jimmy]

I would like to see more variety of reactions of not only my PC, but also the responses from NPCs.

Even in ME and ME2, where the dialogue wheel was implemented a little more logically, you still knew if you replied Paragon to "good" characters and Renegade to "bad" characters, they will go up or down, correspondingly. Why not have a chance of getting a positive or negative response from a neutral response? Someone who believed an extreme response either way would be disingenuous, or who hated you being wishy washy one way or the other?

I, for one, like the dialogue wheel in ME, but it does not feel like it belongs in the DA universe. There has been a lot of backlash against both the paraphrasing, the ambiguous icons, the three tones and some of the pigeon hole limitations of having any change in plot require the VA to come back in and record new dialogue. If you want to edit something on the fly, which do you think is easier - changing a line of text, or increasing the budget to pay for more voice over work?

Unless significantly more money is poured in the dialogue system for DA3, then I don't think the DA franchise will be as strong from a character option standpoint as it would under a much cheaper non-voiced PC or a PC voiced only during cut scenes.

[Morroian]

Metalunatic wrote...

I agree, OP. It's the choice of being the heroic selfless guy, the sarcastic takes-nothing-serious guy or the aggressive someone-pissed-in-my-cereal guy. 

No its not because dialogue tone doesn't fully define a character any more than choices or actions do. You're perfectly free to role play possibilities around the tones.

eroeru wrote...

Hawke was not a skeleton - he was very fully defined when comparing with the feel of previous Bioware games. At least that's how I felt and I'm not the only one.

I don't see how s/he was any more defined than any 1 of the origins from DAO. The difference is that in DAO we had a choice between skeletons.

if I compare Hawke to say Jensen from Deus Ex HR there's no comparison or I guess Geralt from TW.

Modifié par Morroian, 01 novembre 2011 - 02:46 .

[Reno_Tarshil]

I guess I must be doing it wrong because I had a nice easy time roleplaying Hawke as myself.

[TheRealJayDee]

Heather Cline wrote...

Would you people who are whining and complaining like some cheese to go with that whine?

Really?

[Gibb_Shepard]

Heather Cline wrote...

Would you people who are whining and complaining like some cheese to go with that whine?

I think you belong here, in this thread full of incredibly intelligent people:
http://social.biowar...5/index/8588316

Constructive Criticism =/= Whining.

[GodWood]

Indeed it is difficult roleplaying in this game.

Even when I metagame I struggle to roleplay a character let alone multiple different characters.

[Saberchic]

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. 

I also had problems trying to roleplay. It felt like I was more along for the ride as opposed to driving to where I wanted to go. In fact, it's one of the reasons I don't really play DA2 as much; it just sounds like the same character when I try to make a new Hawke even when I try to pretend they have different motivations. (It's what I miss about DAO's dialogue.)

Perhaps they should fix the dialogue so that there is more of a chance for the player to put their interpretation upon it instead of sounding "broken" when selecting a type of response that is different than the one before. This would mean less "enthusiastic" responses by the voice actors. Maybe they should not go for 3 extremes (except for certain scenes which might call for an extreme reaction) but try to have more evenly delivered diaglue. At least with DAO, I could "imagine" the different inflections and attitude my warden had. If they toned down the responses, we might actually have a better chance at roleplaying the character we choose to create.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Saberchic wrote...


Perhaps they should fix the dialogue so that there is more of a chance for the player to put their interpretation upon it instead of sounding "broken" when selecting a type of response that is different than the one before. This would mean less "enthusiastic" responses by the voice actors. Maybe they should not go for 3 extremes (except for certain scenes which might call for an extreme reaction) but try to have more evenly delivered diaglue. At least with DAO, I could "imagine" the different inflections and attitude my warden had. If they toned down the responses, we might actually have a better chance at roleplaying the character we choose to create.

Completely agree here. For example, Geralt from TW2 is a set character with certain set characteristics, but i can roleplay many different variations of this character. One of the large reasons for this is the less "extreme" dialogue, in the sense that he doesn't express a mood as vehemently as DA2, which lets the player interpret that piece of dialogue in varying ways.

It's funny how many people have condemned TW2 because the character is supposedly "set", yet i can get many more varying versions of Geralt than i can from Hawke.

[AlexXIV]

jlb524 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Yeah but you could pick the Origin. So you have a 6 times higher chance that people are happy with one of 6 origins than if they have one of one.

There's more variety, yes.  The characters in each origin aren't anymore 'blank slate' than Hawke is, though.

Variety is the difference between DA:O and DA2.  Though, I'd say it's not significant considering all the Origins converge to the same character very early in the game.

Not really. You don't only get to answer in different tones, you get to answer different content. For example Cailan. You can RP a loyal royalist. Or you can RP a sort of revolutionary who hates monarchy, etc. It does not change much, but at least you can take a stance in words. Maybe DA:O did miss some opportunities to be more RPish by giving the player more options to form their character. I am not going to pretend it was perfect. But what's clear to see is that DA2 gives even less options.

I mean an illusion of choice may not be much, but it is better than no choice in some respects. Because you don't just RP in the game, you also do it in your head while you play. Anyway, DA2 doesn't let you as much as DA:O. But I really don't know why bring up DA:O all the time. I would like to see some examples of DA2 'great RP opportunities', but all you get from DA2 supporters is something along 'I liked it' or DA:O bashing. Their arguments are just as shallow as DA2 itself, which kind of figures.

I mean ok, you can say looking at DA2 and DA:A then you choices in DA:O were not really important because they didn't really have alot of impact on the expansion and the sequel. But that's hardly DA:O's fault. Just because the sequels nullify the choices of the original doesn't make the original the bad game. It makes the sequels the bad games. Otherwise it's just reverse logic.

[philippe willaume]

hello
May be it is because what you say ultimately does not really matter regarding the plot in general or of the particular action. In fact we could say that dialog is mainly for getting rivalry or friendship.
in DA:0 dialog could change the outcome of the plot more often.

Body language is as much as important to convey what you mean as what you actually say and how you say it.
i.e. you can say in the most civil tone " I am sorry. I do not want any trouble" but your body language say "listen dude, what I am saying is for the CCTV so that I am not going to be done for GBH (AA in the US?) when I am finished with you"

So the "tone" of the dialogue could be imagined to be conveyed by the body language, though I agree that the tone is sometimes detracting from that.

and I think this is where dialog based skill, like the paragon/renegade option could be useful. or may be the skill could be used to see what dialog options will produce the result in line the skill. (provided that talking your way out of situation is the same game wise than fighting it out)

Philippe

[TheRealJayDee]

AlexXIV wrote...

I mean ok, you can say looking at DA2 and DA:A then you choices in DA:O were not really important because they didn't really have alot of impact on the expansion and the sequel. But that's hardly DA:O's fault. Just because the sequels nullify the choices of the original doesn't make the original the bad game. It makes the sequels the bad games. Otherwise it's just reverse logic.

Thank you, thank you so much!

It's really really frustrating hearing people rant about how DA:O didn't have meaningful choices, while completely ignoring that actually it's the sequels that fail to build up on what was done in the first game.

[The Big Nothing]

The whole voiced protagonist thing is a hindrance to my role-playing, but it appeals to the masses who do not want to read or think about what they are saying--essentially, non-Bioware fans. The developers are catering to the indifferent.

I liked Origins much more than it's 'sequel'.

Modifié par The Big Nothing, 01 novembre 2011 - 03:36 .

[Terraforming]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Saberchic wrote...


Perhaps they should fix the dialogue so that there is more of a chance for the player to put their interpretation upon it instead of sounding "broken" when selecting a type of response that is different than the one before. This would mean less "enthusiastic" responses by the voice actors. Maybe they should not go for 3 extremes (except for certain scenes which might call for an extreme reaction) but try to have more evenly delivered diaglue. At least with DAO, I could "imagine" the different inflections and attitude my warden had. If they toned down the responses, we might actually have a better chance at roleplaying the character we choose to create.

Completely agree here. For example, Geralt from TW2 is a set character with certain set characteristics, but i can roleplay many different variations of this character. One of the large reasons for this is the less "extreme" dialogue, in the sense that he doesn't express a mood as vehemently as DA2, which lets the player interpret that piece of dialogue in varying ways.

It's funny how many people have condemned TW2 because the character is supposedly "set", yet i can get many more varying versions of Geralt than i can from Hawke.

Huh, I guess that would work. But with the example of Geralt, I thought his voice acting was really...unsastisfactory. Not bad per se, but not good either. A more neutral reading would be hard to get right without making the character sound stilted or stiff, I think.

I like the emotion that Hawke uses, but I also agree that it can vary too heavily between responses. Especially if you use a "hammer" response then immediately follow with a diplomatic response. There is very little nuance and it can be distracting.

I know my post sounds ridiuculously contradictory -- I just think that voice acting immediately puts a certain  restriction on roleplaying and I don't know how that could be fixed.

[Saberchic]

Terraforming wrote...

Huh, I guess that would work. But with the example of Geralt, I thought his voice acting was really...unsastisfactory. Not bad per se, but not good either. A more neutral reading would be hard to get right without making the character sound stilted or stiff, I think.

I like the emotion that Hawke uses, but I also agree that it can vary too heavily between responses. Especially if you use a "hammer" response then immediately follow with a diplomatic response. There is very little nuance and it can be distracting.

I know my post sounds ridiuculously contradictory -- I just think that voice acting immediately puts a certain  restriction on roleplaying and I don't know how that could be fixed.

Actually, I find your post spot on. There are pros and cons to voiced and silent protagonists, and I think that's where the main problem lies (which option has the better trade off?). I hope that this will be something Bioware refine as they go.

I've seen some people say  on the BSN that if someone doesn't like the "break" in character, then don't pick that option. However, if we're only supposed to pick one option, then that defeats the purpose of  having a choice to select diagloue. The developer might as well have us pick the type of Hawke we want (diplomatic, sarcastic, aggressive) in the character creation menu, and then we'd just watch our game, only interacting when the fights occur or to select who we wanted to romance. (Boring!)

I can appreciate that Bioware wanted to try something new with the dialogue wheel, but when the responses are limited as they are by heavy inflections, then that, for me, diminishes the replayability.

edited to cut down the dialogue boxes.

Modifié par Saberchic, 01 novembre 2011 - 08:01 .

[Morroian]

The Big Nothing wrote...

The whole voiced protagonist thing is a hindrance to my role-playing, but it appeals to the masses who do not want to read or think about what they are saying--essentially, non-Bioware fans. The developers are catering to the indifferent.
 

Wrong.

[Sylvianus]

Morroian wrote...

The Big Nothing wrote...

The whole voiced protagonist thing is a hindrance to my role-playing, but it appeals to the masses who do not want to read or think about what they are saying--essentially, non-Bioware fans. The developers are catering to the indifferent.
 

Wrong.

I'd say wrong too. Sometimes I really wonder what are the " masses " you are all talking about.
I love reading, and thinking - sometimes -

And I prefer a voiced protagonist.

Not because I don't want to read, but because it is dynamic, more alive, more potential for immersion, and emotions.  It's quite honest, I think. I don't doubt many ( in the masses ) think like me.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 01 novembre 2011 - 08:27 .