833 réponses à ce sujet

[slashthedragon]

Cultist wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

slashthedragon wrote...
Mr. Gaider, most everyone here wants to know exactly what their character is going to say and do not want paraphrases. Can you please consider that? If not, please tell us why.

I understand there's a lot of people in this thread who have expressed that desire, but please understand that doesn't mean it's by any means universal. That it's not universal doesn't mean your opinions are irrelevant, but there may only be so much we can do that would actually address the concern.

Insofar as what I feel about the subject, I'd suggest reading some of my comments in this thread. There are still many things which are open to change with regards to our approach-- but the basic premise is not one of them.

After DA2 disaster and ME3 ending controversity people are already suspicious about BioWare and future products. Maybe it's time to end risky experiments and make a use of a proven approach that actually was praised by consumers?

^^^well said^^^

[Sylvianus]

bEVEsthda wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...
Not a trade off at all. It's watching a movie. If you feel the voiced protagonist is more 'interesting' or 'alive', you're watching a movie. You may "define" caring for the hero in that movie as 'role playing' until you get blue in the face. It's still watching an interactive movie. I'm not saying some people may not love that, or that it's objectively bad, but that's what it is.

You trade a better presentation for your ability to control that presentation...

The better presentation is only relevant if you're watching a movie.
But OK, tradeoff. You trade watching a movie for your ability to 'role play' (as some people define it).

I can role play with a voiced protagonist. I have many shepard in my mind with different personnalities, thanks to the dialogue option. In DAO, the protagonist is silent, but it is the same thing, you pick what you want to say to the npc, according to what the game offers to you. And I'm stil watching a movie, even if the protagonist is silent, if there are cinematics.

[bEVEsthda]

David Gaider wrote...
If that's a deal-breaker for someone, then they should consider themselves duly informed-- especially since we've never implied otherwise-- though I would suggest waiting until we show what we're actually working on, and how we're going about it, before someone jumps to conclusions.

It goes without saying, however, that no matter what we do it's hardly going to magically satisfy everyone.

Here's a question you should be able to answer:
- Are you going to implement the dialog-wheel and voice, in different ways than DA2? Different with the intention to change what was deal breaking with the last version?  (I'm not asking how or if you'll succeed, I'm asking about intent).

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 04 avril 2012 - 06:06 .

[bEVEsthda]

Filament wrote...
I trade watching a movie for watching a silent film, if I wanted to use your logic. You can define roleplaying as exclusively as you want, but I did find the "silent film" DAO to be roleplaying nonetheless, and DA2 was no different.

Yes. I totally understand. Belive me, I do. 

Even for those who do see a difference (because of their pretend tones), I find it curious how one arbitrary level of limitation is good enough to "still be roleplaying" while beyond that it magically stops being so.

'Role play' is just a label. I don't care about the label. Whatever, however, you enjoy the game is fine. If you want to call it 'role play', it's fine.
I do care about that my relation to the game is not the same as yours, though.

[bEVEsthda]

Sylvianus wrote...
I can role play with a voiced protagonist...
... And I'm stil watching a movie, even if the protagonist is silent, if there are cinematics.

Yes, I totally understand. You're always watching a movie. Or role playing, as you would say. Great.

[Sylvianus]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
I can role play with a voiced protagonist...
... And I'm stil watching a movie, even if the protagonist is silent, if there are cinematics.

Yes, I totally understand. You're always watching a movie. Or role playing, as you would say. Great.

Your point is just useless. Roleplaying, what it is ? You pick what you want to say, what you want to decide, when it is allowed, whether it is a voiced protagonist or a silent protagonist according to what the game offers to you. Actually you don't decide what they could say without that. In DAO and DA2, we had cinematics, you didn't  control  their movements, their gestures, etc. You just watched them like with a movie, while you were only allowed to choose what you wanted to say.

I just don't understand why we can't role play with a voiced protagonist, only with a silent protagonist, when basically it is the same thing if there are cinematics. It is just different. You still decide how your character reacts to something with a voiced protagonist, even if he is showing more emotions.

More interpretive possibilities with a silent protagonist ? yes, we could say that. But no possibilities to role play with a voiced protagonist ? No. I disagree.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 avril 2012 - 06:32 .

[bEVEsthda]

Sylvianus wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
I can role play with a voiced protagonist...
... And I'm stil watching a movie, even if the protagonist is silent, if there are cinematics.

Yes, I totally understand. You're always watching a movie. Or role playing, as you would say. Great.

Your point is just useless. Roleplaying, what it is ? You pick what you want to say, what you want to decide, when it is allowed, whether it is a voiced protagonist or a silent protagonist according to what the game offers to you. Actually you don't decide what they could say without that. In DAO and DA2, we had cinematics, you didn't  control  their movements, their gestures, etc. You just watched them like with a movie, while you were only allowed to choose what you wanted to say.

I just don't understand why we can't role play with a voiced protagonist, only with a silent protagonist, when basically it is the same thing if there are cinematics. It is just different. You still decide how your character reacts to something with a voiced protagonist, even if he is showing more emotions.

More interpretive possibilities with a silent protagonist ? yes, we could say that. But no possibilities to role play with a voiced protagonist ? No. I disagree.

I've seen this reasoning a gazillion times in discussions involving St Mad. It doesn't mean much to me.
You have to understand that I'm not saying you are enjoying these games less or in any wrong manner. And it does seem that you & co, at least on Bioware forums, are claiming ownership to the label 'role playing' these days. You can have it. The label means nothing to me. Be happy that you are fine, and don't try to impose your perception on me.

"no possibilities to role play with voiced protagonist" ?
Using my take on 'role play', I haven't totally given up hope. It wasn't possible in DA2. What would happen if the worst features of that system were removed? And I tried real hard? I don't know. But obviously, surprise dialog has to go.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 04 avril 2012 - 06:52 .

[brushyourteeth]

I don't know, if you had told me that there would be auto-dialogue in DAII I would have been extremely skeptical before I experienced it (I am an admitted control freak), but there were a few times in DAII that the surprise dialogue from my Hawke was pleasant.

The "Maker, she's bad at this!" In The Long Road for instance was, in my opinion, completely priceless and wouldn't have been as much fun if I'd had to punch a button to say it.
Also in party travel banter when two companions would be talking about your sex life and Hawke would interrupt by saying "Please stop talking" - hilarious.

So used sparingly, I actually like auto-dialogue. Though not being able to preview what my character is going to actually say is the epitome of irritating for me. If we're to keep the dialogue wheel, it needs a definite makeover.

Since you're interested in our opinions Mr. Gaider, I'd like to point out the "charming" option as a real issue. Usually, I didn't find it charming at all, but rude and egotistical, or completely inappropriate for the moment (as in a certain tragic event during the prologue, for example).

I also loved the idea of the friendship/rivalry system, although I found it limiting in that I couldn't always express affection or dislike for a companion when I wanted to - I could basically only respond to their preset beliefs or attitudes. In real life some of my deepest and most interesting relationships are with people whose values and opinions contrast sharply with mine, and I think the team meant to reflect that. However I felt like I spent more time scolding them when i would have rather comforted or punched them in the face. I could rarely just choose to be "mean" or "nice" to a character based on my feelings about them, - instead my relationship consisted of only whether they approved of my actions or not.

IRL if I see you steal from the Salvation Army bucket I will disapprove, and if you tell me that you hate me I will disapprove, but they're different kinds of disapproval. If you steal but compliment me I will disapprove but may like you more, and if you give but say you hate me I will dislike you but still respect you. Would it be possible to have a 4-dimensional approach to relationships?

For instance, Fenris: being pro-mage lead you down a rivalry path, while being kind about his background lead you down a friendship path, which may have left some of us in the middle. It would have been nice to choose both without those choices being in conflict.

Modifié par brushyourteeth, 04 avril 2012 - 06:59 .

[klebaart]

The only problem that I had with the wheel is that agressive/ sarcastic/"nice" tones were too distinct from those who had special icon: I think that the companion, star and heart one could be included in the tones as well, as personnaly every time I could I asked for one of my companions help, knowing that it could only help. More generally, maybe the ''good'' choices were too obvious with the wheel system; if I wanted to seduce a character, I just had to chose the heart and if I wanted to get the better out of a situation I'd choose the star or the companion icon. That was the same in Mass Effect 1 (which the only one I played so far): the conciliation or pragmatic answers had better results than normal ones.
I didn't feel this way in DA:O and in my opinion it was better.

[axa89]

I remember a Bioware dev stating that what the PC says should surprise the player, be unexpected.
I know that one of the principles used to create paraphrases is that they should not contain any word the PC will then utter. Are you following these guidelines for DA Next?

[AkiKishi]

axa89 wrote...

I remember a Bioware dev stating that what the PC says should surprise the player, be unexpected.
I know that one of the principles used to create paraphrases is that they should not contain any word the PC will then utter. Are you following these guidelines for DA Next?

Maybe we can have a PC with Taurettes....

[Sylvianus]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
I can role play with a voiced protagonist...
... And I'm stil watching a movie, even if the protagonist is silent, if there are cinematics.

Yes, I totally understand. You're always watching a movie. Or role playing, as you would say. Great.

Your point is just useless. Roleplaying, what it is ? You pick what you want to say, what you want to decide, when it is allowed, whether it is a voiced protagonist or a silent protagonist according to what the game offers to you. Actually you don't decide what they could say without that. In DAO and DA2, we had cinematics, you didn't  control  their movements, their gestures, etc. You just watched them like with a movie, while you were only allowed to choose what you wanted to say.

I just don't understand why we can't role play with a voiced protagonist, only with a silent protagonist, when basically it is the same thing if there are cinematics. It is just different. You still decide how your character reacts to something with a voiced protagonist, even if he is showing more emotions.

More interpretive possibilities with a silent protagonist ? yes, we could say that. But no possibilities to role play with a voiced protagonist ? No. I disagree.

I've seen this reasoning a gazillion times in discussions involving St Mad. It doesn't mean much to me.
You have to understand that I'm not saying you are enjoying these games less or in any wrong manner. And it does seem that you & co, at least on Bioware forums, are claiming ownership to the label 'role playing' these days. You can have it. The label means nothing to me. Be happy that you are fine, and don't try to impose your perception on me.

I answered and gave my opinion, my point of view about this issue. And you really need to read your posts, because, while you are saying be fine with that, you imply also that players who like the voiced protagonist aren't concerned by roleplay. This isn't true, we may have different perceptions, opinions, but I care as much as you about roleplay and I just wanted to show you that basically, it is the same thing even if DAO had more variables. I have no issues with the voiced protagonist if the game offers me enough to role play. Yes role play.

And yes, I like the voiced protagonist, but it isn't just because I " like watching movies. "

[AkiKishi]

Sylvianus wrote...
I answered and gave my opinion, my point of view about this issue. And you really need to read your posts, because, while you are saying be fine with that, you imply also that players who like the voiced protagonist aren't concerned by roleplay. This isn't true, we may have different perceptions, opinions, but I care as much as you about roleplay and I just wanted to show you that basically, it is the same thing even if DAO had more variables. I have no issues with the voiced protagonist if the game offers me enough to role play. Yes role play.

And yes, I like the voiced protagonist, but it isn't just because I " like watching movies. "

Well it's more about the paraphrasing, but it's essentially correct

Roleplaying in the old school definition is about becoming the character. You probably know what you are going to say before you say it ? Therefore you can't become a character in a paraphrase system.
You can still direct a character, so if you have no interest in viewing yourself as the character , it won't matter a great deal what the character says as long as you know the direction of the conversation.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 04 avril 2012 - 07:29 .

[David Gaider]

Cultist wrote...
After DA2 disaster and ME3 ending controversity people are already suspicious about BioWare and future products. Maybe it's time to end risky experiments and make a use of a proven approach that actually was praised by consumers?

Ignoring that DA2 war hardly a "disaster" any more than DAO was universally praised, as the selective perception in both sentiments is a little misleading, I understand what you're saying. In the end, it is naturally everyone's prerogative to determine whether a coming game is what they're interested in-- as it is a company's prerogative to determine what is the level of risk they wish to undertake.

Personally, I can only speak from the development side. I don't really see how some of the comments being made-- which boil down to someone must either a) dislike RPG's, be insane or c) be stupid to like the approach we're taking-- are particularly helpful, but if someone feels they need to vent their desires then so be it. As I've said before, I like the discussion and find some of it informative. So there you go.

[David Gaider]

bEVEsthda wrote...
- Are you going to implement the dialog-wheel and voice, in different ways than DA2? Different with the intention to change what was deal breaking with the last version?  (I'm not asking how or if you'll succeed, I'm asking about intent).

There will be a wheel interface and voiced protaganist, of that I have little doubt. As to the implementation of such, there are still a number of options we're considering. I've laid out my thoughts on some of the options suggested in this thread-- they have merit, but also drawbacks which I can't discount. As does any implementation, really, but that shouldn't be earth-shattering news.

Modifié par David Gaider, 04 avril 2012 - 07:40 .

[bEVEsthda]

Sylvianus wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
I can role play with a voiced protagonist...
... And I'm stil watching a movie, even if the protagonist is silent, if there are cinematics.

Yes, I totally understand. You're always watching a movie. Or role playing, as you would say. Great.

Your point is just useless. Roleplaying, what it is ? You pick what you want to say, what you want to decide, when it is allowed, whether it is a voiced protagonist or a silent protagonist according to what the game offers to you. Actually you don't decide what they could say without that. In DAO and DA2, we had cinematics, you didn't  control  their movements, their gestures, etc. You just watched them like with a movie, while you were only allowed to choose what you wanted to say.

I just don't understand why we can't role play with a voiced protagonist, only with a silent protagonist, when basically it is the same thing if there are cinematics. It is just different. You still decide how your character reacts to something with a voiced protagonist, even if he is showing more emotions.

More interpretive possibilities with a silent protagonist ? yes, we could say that. But no possibilities to role play with a voiced protagonist ? No. I disagree.

I've seen this reasoning a gazillion times in discussions involving St Mad. It doesn't mean much to me.
You have to understand that I'm not saying you are enjoying these games less or in any wrong manner. And it does seem that you & co, at least on Bioware forums, are claiming ownership to the label 'role playing' these days. You can have it. The label means nothing to me. Be happy that you are fine, and don't try to impose your perception on me.

I answered and gave my opinion, my point of view about this issue. And you really need to read your posts, because, while you are saying be fine with that, you imply also that players who like the voiced protagonist aren't concerned by roleplay. This isn't true, we may have different perceptions, opinions, but I care as much as you about roleplay and I just wanted to show you that basically, it is the same thing even if DAO had more variables. I have no issues with the voiced protagonist if the game offers me enough to role play. Yes role play.

And yes, I like the voiced protagonist, but it isn't just because I " like watching movies. "

Still doesn't mean anything to me. I've said you can have 'role play'. What more do you want from me?

"while you are saying be fine with that, you imply also that players who like the voiced protagonist aren't concerned by roleplay"

So you have a problem with that? I said you can have 'role play'. I can do no more.
"Imply"?   - You are not the least concerned with my take on "role play"!   I have no power over that.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 04 avril 2012 - 08:29 .

[AkiKishi]

David Gaider wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...
- Are you going to implement the dialog-wheel and voice, in different ways than DA2? Different with the intention to change what was deal breaking with the last version?  (I'm not asking how or if you'll succeed, I'm asking about intent).

There will be a wheel interface and voiced protaganist, of that I have little doubt. As to the implementation of such, there are still a number of options we're considering. I've laid out my thoughts on some of the options suggested in this thread-- they have merit, but also drawbacks which I can't discount. As does any implementation, really, but that shouldn't be earth-shattering news.

Are we going to be a someone , like Hawke ?
Or a something ,like the Warden?

[David Gaider]

brushyourteeth wrote...
Since you're interested in our opinions Mr. Gaider, I'd like to point out the "charming" option as a real issue. Usually, I didn't find it charming at all, but rude and egotistical, or completely inappropriate for the moment (as in a certain tragic event during the prologue, for example).

I agree, though it's a toss-up whether the problem is with the name of the tone (and thus the expectation from that) or the consistency of the tone itself. A little of column A and a little of column B, I suspect.

I also loved the idea of the friendship/rivalry system, although I found it limiting in that I couldn't always express affection or dislike for a companion when I wanted to.

I commented earlier on the issue with the current system, and I'd say your issue is an outgrowth of this. I know some people seem to favor the idea of adding more vectors to the relationship, trying to chart it along several different paths, but I'd resist making the system more complex. Complexity, particularly in something which is abstracted out of necessity (as a relationship must be), isn't better... just as simplicity doesn't mean the relationship its abstracted must be simple. So long as it's something that can be easily understood by both the writers and the users, and is consistent in its implementation, I'd be happy.

[macrocarl]

Thanks for taking the time to write in this thread David. I loved both DA titles and am looking forward to the next one
While I don't have anything constructive to add I do have a question. Moving forward, the end of DA2 had Orsinio (sorry if I spelled that wrong) turn into the flesh Voltron no matter how well the fight went if you were pro-mage. Moving forward, do you see the franchise having more varied endings closer in execution to DAO? I know there probably was the same amount of endings in both titles, but maybe have them feel more varied? Does that make sense?
Anyway, thanks for your time! I really like hearing everyone's thoughts from the creative team.

[brushyourteeth]

Ditto above. How anyone can accuse you or the rest of the team of not listening is beyond me. I'm all half "yay, David Gaider answered my question!" and half "Shouldn't he be writing us a new book? Shoo!"

I look forward to seeing how our feedback and the team's know-how combine in the next game.

Modifié par brushyourteeth, 04 avril 2012 - 07:52 .

[nightscrawl]

brushyourteeth wrote...

For instance, Fenris: being pro-mage lead you down a rivalry path, while being kind about his background lead you down a friendship path, which may have left some of us in the middle. It would have been nice to choose both without those choices being in conflict.

This is going away from the dialogue system a bit, but I feel compelled to resppond to this specifically and the building of relationships in DA2.

I agree with this post completely, and the way I've "solved" it while playing is to switch out characters for various quests to game the system. However, I really wish I didn't have to do that. I feel that I should be able to support Fenris personally, even if I'm against his mage beliefs. Similarly, I feel that I should be able to be against the Anders/Justice merge, but still be supportive of mages overall. At the moment, I'm going for a rivalmance with Anders, but I can't really express any interest in him, or say anything nice at all until pretty much Dissent/Questioning Beliefs because I will get friendship points. It's very frustrating.

[Cultist]

David Gaider wrote...
Ignoring that DA2 war hardly a "disaster" any more than DAO was universally praised, as the selective perception in both sentiments is a little misleading, I understand what you're saying. In the end, it is naturally everyone's prerogative to determine whether a coming game is what they're interested in-- as it is a company's prerogative to determine what is the level of risk they wish to undertake.

Personally, I can only speak from the development side. I don't really see how some of the comments being made-- which boil down to someone must either a) dislike RPG's, be insane or c) be stupid to like the approach we're taking-- are particularly helpful, but if someone feels they need to vent their desires then so be it. As I've said before, I like the discussion and find some of it informative. So there you go.

I called it a "Disaster" mostly because DA2 managed to alienate existing fabsase of "BG2 style" RPG and failed great expectations most fans put into it. This could be seen at the forums - it's been more than a year and still they are boiling with significant portion of negative. I can't call this situation normal. Fanbase is slpit up. And I fear that should DA3 go the same way, the great franchise may not survive another fandom disappointment due to failed expectations. More to that. Right now DA Next thing is the closest project by which BioWare can redeem themselves in fan's eyes for both ME3's endings rant and DA2.
That's why I wonder why developers are distancing theselves from solutions that worked in BG, NWN and Origins in favor of experimental ones that spawned so many discussions and controversity?

[Sylvianus]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
I answered and gave my opinion, my point of view about this issue. And you really need to read your posts, because, while you are saying be fine with that, you imply also that players who like the voiced protagonist aren't concerned by roleplay. This isn't true, we may have different perceptions, opinions, but I care as much as you about roleplay and I just wanted to show you that basically, it is the same thing even if DAO had more variables. I have no issues with the voiced protagonist if the game offers me enough to role play. Yes role play.

And yes, I like the voiced protagonist, but it isn't just because I " like watching movies. "

Well it's more about the paraphrasing, but it's essentially correct

Roleplaying in the old school definition is about becoming the character. You probably know what you are going to say before you say it ? Therefore you can't become a character in a paraphrase system.
You can still direct a character, so if you have no interest in viewing yourself as the character , it won't matter a great deal what the character says as long as you know the direction of the conversation.

Fortunately, the old school definitions , the old school labels about what is an rpg, or what is role play I do not respect them.

Role play, isn't only about viewing in myself as the character, or becoming the character . It is also about to be able to create your own character, what you decided that your pc would be. That's also role play. When you go to the rpg forums, you see that players create their characters with their own personalities and don't play them as themself. What I do with Bioware's games. It's also called role play.

So, with the paraphrase system, if it is worked, I can know what my character is going to say, even If I don't know exactly each words, that's enough for me. The rest is in my head; This is really a minor issue for me and that doesn't prevent me to imagine my own character. I find that the wheel is really worked in M3. The sentences are really close to what meant the paraphrase. Never I was surprised.

 If you role play a character you imagined whether he is silent or voiced, full line or paraphrase, what the game offers never fits exactly to what you would have chosen or said or imagined for him. In DAO, how many times, what I picked was only the closest to what I wanted to say for my character ? This is the same, The pc gives a sentence that you only expected, but that's it. it is only approximate, so it does not change much. You  must adapt to what the game gives you and the rest is in your head. ( When I have written a fanfiction with my warden, telling his story, I never chose the same sentences proposed by DAO  )

But, I must admit, that for those who are playing as themself, It migh be more difficult for them to accept this system.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 04 avril 2012 - 08:19 .

[TEWR]

brushyourteeth wrote...
Since you're interested in our opinions Mr. Gaider, I'd like to point out the "charming" option as a real issue. Usually, I didn't find it charming at all, but rude and egotistical, or completely inappropriate for the moment (as in a certain tragic event during the prologue, for example).

Ignoring how I felt that moment in the "prologue" was an entirely hamfisted and ******-poor one, the second Charming response in regards to that event -- after the prayer uttered -- felt appropriate for the scene, even if the events themselves shouldn't have been in the prologue (IMO).

Not sure about the first response. I can't remember what the first Charming response was during that moment.

In fact, it's been a long time since I played DAII. I can't remember many of the responses, Charming or otherwise.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 04 avril 2012 - 08:51 .

[slashthedragon]

Sylvianus wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
I answered and gave my opinion, my point of view about this issue. And you really need to read your posts, because, while you are saying be fine with that, you imply also that players who like the voiced protagonist aren't concerned by roleplay. This isn't true, we may have different perceptions, opinions, but I care as much as you about roleplay and I just wanted to show you that basically, it is the same thing even if DAO had more variables. I have no issues with the voiced protagonist if the game offers me enough to role play. Yes role play.

And yes, I like the voiced protagonist, but it isn't just because I " like watching movies. "

Well it's more about the paraphrasing, but it's essentially correct

Roleplaying in the old school definition is about becoming the character. You probably know what you are going to say before you say it ? Therefore you can't become a character in a paraphrase system.
You can still direct a character, so if you have no interest in viewing yourself as the character , it won't matter a great deal what the character says as long as you know the direction of the conversation.

Fortunately, the old school definitions , the old school labels about what is an rpg, or what is role play I do not respect them.

Role play, isn't only about viewing in myself as the character, or becoming the character . It is also about to be able to create your own character, what you decided that your pc would be. That's also role play. When you go to the rpg forums, you see that they create their characters and don't play them as themself. What I do with Bioware's games. It's also called role play.

So, With the paraphrase system, if it is worked, I can know what my character is going to say, even If I don't know exactly each words, that's enough for me. The rest is in my head; This is really a minor issue for me and that doesn't prevent me to imagine my own character. I find that the wheel is really worked in M3. The sentences are really close to what meant the paraphrase. Never I was surprised.

 If you role play a character you imagined whether he is silent or voiced, full line or paraphrase, what the game offers never fits exactly to what you would have chosen or said or imagined for him. In DAO, how many times, what I picked was only the closest to what I wanted to say for my character ? This is the same, The pc gives a sentence that you only expected, but that's it. it is only approximate, so it does not change much. You  must adapt to what the game gives you and the rest is in your head. ( When I have written a fanfiction with my warden, telling his story, I never chose the same sentences proposed by DAO  )

But, I must admit, that for those who are playing as themself, It migh be more difficult for them to accept this system.

There is something fundamentally wrong with the paraphrase, as people here have admitted to reloading a game several times because what came out of the PC's mouth was unexpected.