178 réponses à ce sujet

[Meris]

Eudaemonium wrote...

They've already stated that silent protagonist is not on the table. They are going with voiced. People should really start exploring ways they can do a voiced protagonist with more customisation rather than asking for this, since it'd be far more productive and Bioware might actually implement some decent suggestions.

I have an idea, remove paraphrasing, write for the Voiced Protagonist the same way you would for a Silent one and hire 5 voice actors per race - that should give us as many voice options as we had in Origins, if you are unwilling to phase out the combat emotes. Not very practical but I wouldn't settle for less customization than what you've got with the Silent Protagonist (don't know why anyone would ever settle for less customization in any RPG), and that's just the tip of the iceberg to reach the SP.

[DeadPoolX]

Meris wrote...

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Shadowlit_Rogue wrote...
In D&D, the DM doesn't play your character; you do.

Maybe so, but Dragon Age has never been part of the D&D world. 

You must be confusing setting, gaming genre and gaming system on purpose.

Dragon Age was the spiritual succession of a CRPG niche that corresponded to tabletop tradition.

DA was always designed as a CRPG.  Tabletop pen-and-paper games are an entirely different entity.  That's partially why D&D works better as a PnP game than as a CRPG one. 

[Melca36]

I want finishing moves back...

I don't want my rogues to be an over the top kamikaze superhero, please tone them down.

Please keep the Force Mage skills if you can...really enjoyed them.


**PLEASE** Less Fetch/Deliver quests and more side quests like Magistrates Orders, Raiders on The Cliffs,

More Red Jenny stuff but let us see who/what this Red Jenny is....

Keep the codexes scattered around...love that

Enjoyed the Forbidden Knowledge quests as well as the The Awiergan Scrolls
quests

Make some quests affect the relationships you have with your friends/companions


Less 3X damage rings...

Make some of the rare items tributes to former characters....

Hawke's staff, Aveline Valen's sword......

[Shadowlit_Rogue]

Meris wrote...

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Shadowlit_Rogue wrote...
In D&D, the DM doesn't play your character; you do.

Maybe so, but Dragon Age has never been part of the D&D world. 

You must be confusing setting, gaming genre and gaming system on purpose.

Dragon Age was the spiritual succession of a CRPG niche that corresponded to tabletop tradition.

Pretty much. DA:O was a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate, which is a game set in the Forgotten Realms D&D campaign setting. They're both in the same boat, though DA:O didn't use the D&D ruleset. Licensing issues, and all.

[Meris]

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Meris wrote...

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Shadowlit_Rogue wrote...
In D&D, the DM doesn't play your character; you do.

Maybe so, but Dragon Age has never been part of the D&D world. 

You must be confusing setting, gaming genre and gaming system on purpose.

Dragon Age was the spiritual succession of a CRPG niche that corresponded to tabletop tradition.

DA was always designed as a CRPG.  Tabletop pen-and-paper games are an entirely different entity.  That's partially why D&D works better as a PnP game than as a CRPG one. 

D&D > Baldur's Gate > Dragon Age: Origins (Spiritual Successor of Baldur's Gate).

In all three of them, the player roleplays not the DM and all three of them follow the same tradition.

[DeadPoolX]

Shadowlit_Rogue wrote...

Meris wrote...

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Shadowlit_Rogue wrote...
In D&D, the DM doesn't play your character; you do.

Maybe so, but Dragon Age has never been part of the D&D world. 

You must be confusing setting, gaming genre and gaming system on purpose.

Dragon Age was the spiritual succession of a CRPG niche that corresponded to tabletop tradition.

Pretty much. DA:O was a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate, which is a game set in the Forgotten Realms D&D campaign setting. They're both in the same boat, though DA:O didn't use the D&D ruleset. Licensing issues, and all.

Spirital successor simply means it has some similarities.  DA was never meant to be anything like a tabletop PnP game.  It was always a CRPG.

[DeadPoolX]

Meris wrote...

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Meris wrote...

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Shadowlit_Rogue wrote...
In D&D, the DM doesn't play your character; you do.

Maybe so, but Dragon Age has never been part of the D&D world. 

You must be confusing setting, gaming genre and gaming system on purpose.

Dragon Age was the spiritual succession of a CRPG niche that corresponded to tabletop tradition.

DA was always designed as a CRPG.  Tabletop pen-and-paper games are an entirely different entity.  That's partially why D&D works better as a PnP game than as a CRPG one. 

D&D > Baldur's Gate > Dragon Age: Origins (Spiritual Successor of Baldur's Gate).

In all three of them, the player roleplays not the DM and all three of them follow the same tradition.

There is no DM in CRPGs.  Besides, roleplaying can take many forms.  You roleplay in ME just as much as you do in DA, it's just a different variety. 

[Draythe]

BrotherWarth wrote...

Darrah and Laidlaw have already confirmed that they won't be returning to a silent protagonist. No point in arguing it's merits or lack thereof.

There is absolutely a point to arguing it's merits. It's something that really will make or break the game for a lot of people. I don't really want to take a side one way or the other on the whole ME3 ending fiasco, but that right there is an example of them really listening and making a decision that very few developers would ever consider. If they really have a set vision for DA3 that they are determined to follow through with even if it clashes with what DAO fans liked, then you are right, there's no point. But there's no reason everyone shouldn't make it clear what they'd like while it's in early development. Who knows, they might change things for the better, and it might not take a bunch of people donating tens of thousands of dollars in a bizarre rage campaign.

[Meris]

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Spirital successor simply means it has some similarities.  DA was never meant to be anything like a tabletop PnP game.  It was always a CRPG.

Dragon Age: Orgins was meant to be the spiritual successor of Baldur's Gate, whose spirit comes from the tradition of tabletop gaming where the character you make is yours.

Also: Dragon Age II was a sequel to Origins, which implies more familiarity than being a spiritual successor. Dragon Age II should have stayed true to Origins' literary spirit.

Really, I don't know how many ways to spell this out for you.

Modifié par Meris, 23 mars 2012 - 01:15 .

[WardenWade]

These are some great ideas!

For my part I'd like to see, as has been mentioned here, choices that really matter. And the sense that there are in fact choices to be made, rather than feeling like a victim of circumstance. Also, I'd like to see sufficient time taken in design and development to make the game great.

I absolutely want all races back as playable in DA3, myself. The devs have mentioned a potential one race per game concept that, while appreciated, is IMO largely the same situation we had in DA2 with human-only. As our character in DA3 is not hinted to be a specific individual I personally don't see any reason why races shouldn't be an option again. As far as a voiced protagonist goes, alienage elves, dwarves and many humans or even qunari, for example, share or could share a similar accent...one that could presumably be adjusted in pitch/tone as needed by a voice actor/actress. It isn't that race options in DA3 would asking for something extra that we never had; it would be *giving us back* something Origins provided.

I'd personally like to see a return to the Origins style of elves, as well. At least I'd like for them to have nose breaks/brow ridges again. I'm looking forward to seeing female dwarves again, and ask that the mage/templar war will not hem those who choose to play mages in as far as their roleplaying options.

Modifié par WardenWade, 23 mars 2012 - 01:32 .

[DeadPoolX]

Meris wrote...

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Spirital successor simply means it has some similarities.  DA was never meant to be anything like a tabletop PnP game.  It was always a CRPG.

Dragon Age: Orgins was meant to be the spiritual successor of Baldur's Gate, whose spirit comes from the tradition of tabletop gaming where the character you make is yours.

Also: Dragon Age II was a sequel to Origins, which implies more familiarity than being a spiritual successor. Dragon Age II should have stayed true to Origins' literary spirit.

Really, I don't know how many ways to spell this out for you.

Spiritual successor only means it has some similarities.  That's it. 

It doesn't matter how a tabletop game is run, because this isn't about a tabletop game!  It's a computer game, therefore it is played and run like a CRPG.

The character is yours to define as the game goes on.  You decide how to grow them, more or less.  So they speak?  Big deal.  It just means they actually interact with the world instead of acting like an (even more) moronic version of Mr. Bean, who just stands there like a twit and makes awkward faces. 

Games are cinematic experiences, not literary.  If being a literary experience is really better, we might as well go back to Text Adventures. 

Modifié par DeadPoolMK, 23 mars 2012 - 01:32 .

[Maria Caliban]

Meris wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

They're not going back to the silent protagonist. You might be better off telling them how to do a voiced protagonist that aggravates you as little as possible.

One that doesn't speak.

How unfortunate. Dragon Age III may not be the game for you.

[Realmzmaster]

Actually DA has been translated into a p n p system. The system has major differences from the D & D system. DA has vast differences from Baldur's Gate and many games based on the D & D system. There are similarities but that it it. In BG the PC has one origin. It does not matter if the PC is any of the six races (except when it came to picking a class and some arbitrary changes in the attribute scores ). The PC is the Bhaalspawn. The race of the PC barely means anything in relation to the story which is one of the similarities with the warden story. Outside of the origins your race really does not matter much.

As far as spiritual successor that is marketing PR IMHO.

[Mmw04014]

Honestly, the only way I think I will ever (begrudingly) be ok with a voiced protagonist is if they enable it so we don't have to rely on these damn paraphrases. I've read Laidlaws distaste for reading a line and then hearing it repeated back, but I just don't share that distaste. I want to know exactly what my character is going to say. That would go a long way into making the character feel more like my own and not like I'm just borrowing him from bioware for a couple hours.

I'll still forever lament giving up the ability to apply my own tone to a line.

[Circle_Mage]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Meris wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

They're not going back to the silent protagonist. You might be better off telling them how to do a voiced protagonist that aggravates you as little as possible.

One that doesn't speak.

How unfortunate. Dragon Age III may not be the game for you.

But isn't this the issue?  That Bioware may end up creating another game that alienates some Origins fans once again?  I understand that Bioware is not returning to the silent protagonist in DA3 and of course that's their right, but surely there could be some way to please both fans of voiced and silent protagonists in the next installment.  As I believe someone on this thread has already mentioned, the option to turn off the voice would be welcome.  For my part I liked my silent warden - though in combat, she was anything but silent -  and I can see where people might enjoy the fully voiced Hawke, but I dislike the notion that in order to fully appreciate DA3, concessions must be made by fans.  Of course it would be impossible for Bioware (or any company) to produce a game that pleases absolutely 100% of the audience, but there are quite a lot of people who would welcome a return to a silent character, among other things like retuned race options, and I'm not certain that it's fair for people who were already feeling stung by DA2 to have to simply like DA3 or lump it. 

[wowpwnslol]

Start making RPGs for hardcore RPG gamers, not console kiddies.

[Amycus89]

How about this? Forget about the voiced protagonist only temporarily, until you have written the dialogue trees for the whole game a la DA:O - THEN make voiceovers for them, and "categorize" them if you so wish in different symbols like a fist or theater mask, etc.

This way you easily avoid the pithfall of "we HAVE to have exactly ONE diplomatic, ONE sarcastic and ONE evil choice". This was an unwritten rule in DA2 that personally annoyed me even more than the reused maps.

Also one thing I forgot to say before:
Please readd the "killer knife" from DA:O that would be an option in certain conversations (like the conversation with the barkeeper in redcliffe. Either as a "conversation option" or as a quicktime event like in ME.

Modifié par Amycus89, 23 mars 2012 - 03:08 .

[WardenWade]

Circle_Mage wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Meris wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

They're not going back to the silent protagonist. You might be better off telling them how to do a voiced protagonist that aggravates you as little as possible.

One that doesn't speak.

How unfortunate. Dragon Age III may not be the game for you.

But isn't this the issue?  That Bioware may end up creating another game that alienates some Origins fans once again?  I understand that Bioware is not returning to the silent protagonist in DA3 and of course that's their right, but surely there could be some way to please both fans of voiced and silent protagonists in the next installment.  As I believe someone on this thread has already mentioned, the option to turn off the voice would be welcome.  For my part I liked my silent warden - though in combat, she was anything but silent -  and I can see where people might enjoy the fully voiced Hawke, but I dislike the notion that in order to fully appreciate DA3, concessions must be made by fans.  Of course it would be impossible for Bioware (or any company) to produce a game that pleases absolutely 100% of the audience, but there are quite a lot of people who would welcome a return to a silent character, among other things like retuned race options, and I'm not certain that it's fair for people who were already feeling stung by DA2 to have to simply like DA3 or lump it. 

Agreed, Circle_Mage.  I greatly appreciate Bioware's candor lately, and their encouragement of healthy discussion, but some days you wonder who they are making games for?  Everyone's opinion is worthy, and the current ME3 debate has shown that not taking "no" for an answer can even begin to yield results in unprecedented areas.  At this early stage in DA3's development, perhaps some real compromise on points like this is possible between the devs and gamers...something where everyone can genuinely walk away satisfied?

Modifié par WardenWade, 23 mars 2012 - 03:32 .

[Sutekh]

Leaving the voiced / unvoiced debate aside because that's an old one, and, clearly, there will never be a consensus among pro and anti VA.

I'd only like "PnP players = automatic unvoiced partisans" to stop being used as an argument, because of the implications ("true RPGers don't like VA", but I admit I may be reading too much into this), and also because I've been a PnP player for quite some time, and I happen to prefer VA in plot-driven cRPGs, and I'm not the only one. To each his own way to connect and breath life into the bunch of pixels and code lines the PC is, after all.

Moving on.

I have one criticism aimed at both DAO and DA2, it's the way you have to make contact before initiating combat, which doesn't leave any room for stealth tactics at all. It's been worsened (a lot) in DA2 where stealth couldn't be sustained and so only usable while fighting. Even without stealth, I'd like to be able to play sniper and ambush (with restrictions, if necessary), plan a strategy before engaging, or even charge the enemy by surprise. Not always, because logically, it isn't always possible, but from time to time would be nice.

[QueenPurpleScrap]

I also miss choosing race as well as gender and class. I enjoyed seeing which interactions were different because I was an elf or dwarf instead of a human. Even if the backstory for the protagonist is that he/she was guard for a merchant who was driven out of business, there would still be some differences in people interactions based on the race and gender. Just because you only have 2 or 3 origins stories doesn't mean that there can't be further differences due to race.

I don't necessarily dislike the VA, I do want more options. I have made a few Hawkes, mostly female. And all had the same voice. Even if the options are limited to the pitch (high, deep, etc.) that makes my different characters feel more separate from each other.

I miss skills, as I have said elsewhere. One thing I thought about recently, there are so many places in Kirkwall where you can change your party members but nowhere in Sundermount, etc. where you can do the same. I would like to be able to switch up my party without having to go all the way back to the city.

I also would like more area of effect spells. In DAO that was a nice tactical advantage to start a blizzard before the bad guys were aware.

[Morroian]

My preferences/improvements:

1. Voiced protagonist with dialogue wheel
2. Paraphrasing that genuinely summarises the dialogue and is not an unspoken beginning to the dialogue. BW seems to have adopted this as a house style because TOR has a similar problem. BW must move to paraphrases that are simply a summary of the dialogue.
3. An option to display the full line when the paraphrase is highlighted.
4. Slow down combat to somewhere between DAO and DA2.
5. Make the animations more realistic.
6. Better, more thoughtful encounter design which encompasses less use of waves.
7. Enemies have a wider range of abilities and better AI.
8. Isometric view or the ability to unhook the camera.
9. Bring back dual wield warrior as a speciality different to rogue.
10. Bring back bard and ranger specs for rogue
11. If possible refine the personality system by adding a respect meter in conjunction with the friendship/rivalry system.
12. Establish a perk system that would include skills like crafting as well as passive combat abilities -similar to Fallout New Vegas or TOR both of which allow character specialisation through the perk tree.
13. It goes without saying but less area re-use and where there is re-use hide it better.
14. Interrupts for party banter so players can choose whether to interject.
15. Give players more options to speak to their companions at a wider range of locations.
16. The suggestions that have been floated by BW staff about having fixed looks but being able to equip loot for the stats is something I agree with. But give players a choice of fixed looks (and not as DLC).
17. Dialogue battles similar to Deus Ex HR perhaps being able to be influenced by either stats, perks or the default personality.
18. Race selection would probably be a good idea.
19. Some form of crafting, I like the crafting in TOR.

Modifié par Morroian, 23 mars 2012 - 06:38 .

[Eudaemonium]

Amycus89 wrote...

How about this? Forget about the voiced protagonist only temporarily, until you have written the dialogue trees for the whole game a la DA:O - THEN make voiceovers for them, and "categorize" them if you so wish in different symbols like a fist or theater mask, etc.

Sadly, this doesn't really work, primarily due to how the two different types of protagonist (silent, voiced) are actually written. David Gaider pointed out that they both have strengths, but that writing dialogue for one is completely different from the other, because of them involves actual acting.

This boils down to the literary/cinematic division Meris was discussing. Dialogue in a novel and dialogue in a movie are often completely different, because they're meditated to the audience in radically different ways. This si why lines ripped directly from novels for film adaptations often sound incredibly clunky and out-of-place (not always, mind you). There is also the element of motion that acting brings, whereas in a novel you use your imagination to fill in the narrative gaps. Novels can have far more complex and clunky utterances which, if you read them aloud, often sound rather strange, but they are able to get away with it because the medium is different.

One isn't inherently better than the other, but they are different, which makes writing the dialogue without the voice in mind and then voicing it wouldn't really be feasible.

I found the DA2 system fine in most, but not all cases, but I'm not a hardcore roleplayer. Part of my history with JRPGs is that I tend to approach games very-much as being along for the ride, for the characters and the story, not to live out the elements of fantasy that WRPGs typically cater to with their customisation options and ability to insert the player directly into the narrative. The customisable interactivity was always a nice feature but it was never really key to my core engagement with the product. I would rather have more limited customisation and a character that acts and feels like a character within the narrative, which is why Hawke was perfect for me. Hawke is a character that can take many different forms (within defined limits), but s/he is still a character in the narrative, rather than merely a player avatar or vessel for projection.

That doesn't mean the system can't be improved at all, because it most definitely can. Like Morroian stated, I would vastly prefer the dialogue prompts to be summaries rather than unspoken initiations, or that they actually adopted a system more like Deus Ex: HR or Alpha Protocol where what you pick is the tone/style of delivery (with pop-up line involved when selecting/mousing over the option, so not timed ala AP).

Modifié par Eudaemonium, 23 mars 2012 - 09:22 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Meris wrote...

DeadPoolMK wrote...

Shadowlit_Rogue wrote...
In D&D, the DM doesn't play your character; you do.

Maybe so, but Dragon Age has never been part of the D&D world. 

You must be confusing setting, gaming genre and gaming system on purpose.

Dragon Age was the spiritual succession of a CRPG niche that corresponded to tabletop tradition.

DA was always designed as a CRPG.  Tabletop pen-and-paper games are an entirely different entity.  That's partially why D&D works better as a PnP game than as a CRPG one. 

Here's a brief CRPG history for you.

1970s - Tabletop Wargame
1980s-  Dungeon & Dragon  published by CLOAD originated from Pen & Paper RPG  for TRS80 model 1. The earlist microcomputer RPG. Others like Ultima and Wizardry were direct adaption from D&D
1982- Dragonstomper on Atari 2600. The first console RPG
1985 - Starting in 1984 with Questron and 50 Mission Crush, SSI produced many series of CRPGs. Pool of Radiance ( 1988 ) , Phantasie ( 1985 ), The Bard tale, Might of magic, Ultima series etc..
1990s - isometric sprite RPG: Baldur Gate ( 1988 ) , Fallout, Icewind Dale, Diablo.

Every cRPG was born from D&D except Ultima and Wizardry which are direct adaptation from D&D. cRPG simply remove the need for human DM and help to store data for easier access. Baldur Gate used Advance Dungeon & Dragons 2nd Edition. Neverwinter Night used D&D 3th Edition. So if DAO is spiritual successor to Baldur Gate then DA too originated from D&D.  

[Sacred_Fantasy]

DeadPoolMK wrote...
Games are cinematic experiences, not literary.  If being a literary experience is really better, we might as well go back to Text Adventures. 

Final Fantasy 7 is a cinematic game back then in 1997 and everyone want to follow. Games are not cinematic by nature. The first modern RPG is not cinematic. It's tabletop. It's JRPG that make cinematics their standard but that because the Japanese like animation.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 23 mars 2012 - 11:13 .