457 réponses à ce sujet

[Matthew Young CT]

lol, bg and nwn were both on rails too.

[Sam -stone- serious]

Wait, what? DA:O is almost identical in terms of layout and structure to Baldurs Gate, NWN, The Witcher and Vampire Bloodlines (they're the ones on your list I've played personally). All of them use the same ideas as DA:O in terms of non-sandbox RPGs with the ability to run multiple quests at the same time with a series of interconnected areas which need to be individually loaded.

Excuse me have you ever played any of said games you say DAO  resembles? Just because something "looks" like another doesnt mean it -plays- like another. The idea of DAO  is to offer you a story. Thats about it. Your gameplay is limited, your choices are limited, your impact in the game world is limited except "your ultimate fate". Thats a Japan design if i ever saw one.

[Axterix]

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

You should understand when i say that DAO  is -design- wise a J-type RPG. It has limited "freedom" (doesnt really have any), its story driven mostly and you really have no power to change much other than what is pre-determined for you to change. Look at some western RPGs.

- Fallout series
- Baldurs Gate series
- Neverwinter Nights series
- Drakensag
- Witcher
- Vampire Bloodlines

Just a few popular western RPGs. What do those games have in common? Right, freedom and open ended gameplay and world interactivity. 3 things that DAO  majorly lack and are the things that arguably J-RPGs routinely dont have in favour of better presentation and book-like story progression much like what DAO  offers.

Not getting it. 

Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, pretty much the exact same thing.  You got zones.  Interparty interaction.  And you can hop around the world, doing side quests and part of the main quest in any order.  Of course, those games are also Bioware games and that is pretty much the Bioware formula.  DA feels a lot more like those games than say FF, Lost Odyssey, Wild Arms, etc.

DA feels to me like the other Bioware games, with the exception of some dumbed down fighting options (and that is something I wish they'd fix, make more BG like).  It does feel like a smaller game, less zones, than the earlier Bioware games, but that's 3D for you, tends to get you shorter games.  Neverwinter Night's official campaign wasn't that long either.

Thats why DAO  is a western RPG  with Japan gameplay and design mechanics hence why the "clothing" is different. If i went and converted the visuals and ONLY the visuals of DAO  into an Asian setting i reckon nobody would understand that it was made from a western developer except maybe the simplified combat and lack of awesome spell and creature effects.

The shear amount of dialogue options (just having options, for that matter), the combat system, and the utter lack of 3 minute summon animations would give it away pretty quickly   Sorry, but to me, it feels like a Bioware RPG.

[Sam -stone- serious]

Matthew Young CT wrote...

lol, bg and nwn were both on rails too.

Ah no.

[Sam -stone- serious]

Not getting it. 

Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, pretty much the exact same thing.  You got zones.  Interparty interaction.  And you can hop around the world, doing side quests and part of the main quest in any order.  Of course, those games are also Bioware games and that is pretty much the Bioware formula.  DA feels a lot more like those games than say FF, Lost Odyssey, Wild Arms, etc.

DA feels to me like the other Bioware games, with the exception of some dumbed down fighting options (and that is something I wish they'd fix, make more BG like).  It does feel like a smaller game, less zones, than the earlier Bioware games, but that's 3D for you, tends to get you shorter games.  Neverwinter Night's official campaign wasn't that long either.

Yes but they all let you interact with their world while DAO  does not. Can you go about killing whole villages in DAO?  No. Can your party start fighting so someone dies or leaves the group? No. Do you have choices abound to play with the items, mentalities or whatever and face the consequences?  No. Can you wear the drake armor and be constantly in danger of being waylaied by a red dragon that seeks vengeance for slaying his kin? No. And of course a mirriad of other things that simply dont happen in DAO. Its a dumped down western RPG made to please the masses and by default this means less complexity. I realize that this is not always a bad thing but it just shows too much. The game holds your hand way too much and that is something that by default western RPGs did not do.

The shear amount of dialogue options (just having options, for that matter), the combat system, and the utter lack of 3 minute summon animations would give it away pretty quickly   Sorry, but to me, it feels like a Bioware RPG.

I dont know any other game other than Final Fantasy that has 1-2-3 minute long summon animations from the japanesse RPGs and trust me when i say this that i have played nearly the lot of them since the days of the NES and the first Gameboy across all consoles so dont go thinking that every J-RPG is like final fantasy. They really are as different the lot of them as night and day between franchises.

Remember the spin-off that EA  released for Lord of the rings that was a complete and utter copy of Final Fantasy 10 but in a LOTR  "coat"?  Yeah. I can reverse do that easily with DAO as well.

[Jonfon_ire]

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

Not getting it. 

Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, pretty much the exact same thing.  You got zones.  Interparty interaction.  And you can hop around the world, doing side quests and part of the main quest in any order.  Of course, those games are also Bioware games and that is pretty much the Bioware formula.  DA feels a lot more like those games than say FF, Lost Odyssey, Wild Arms, etc.

DA feels to me like the other Bioware games, with the exception of some dumbed down fighting options (and that is something I wish they'd fix, make more BG like).  It does feel like a smaller game, less zones, than the earlier Bioware games, but that's 3D for you, tends to get you shorter games.  Neverwinter Night's official campaign wasn't that long either.

Yes but they all let you interact with their world while DAO  does not. Can you go about killing whole villages in DAO?  No. Can your party start fighting so someone dies or leaves the group? No.

Erm, yes you can actually.

Do you have choices abound to play with the items, mentalities or whatever and face the consequences?  No. Can you wear the drake armor and be constantly in danger of being waylaied by a red dragon that seeks vengeance for slaying his kin? No. And of course a mirriad of other things that simply dont happen in DAO. Its a dumped down western RPG made to please the masses and by default this means less complexity. I realize that this is not always a bad thing but it just shows too much. The game holds your hand way too much and that is something that by default western RPGs did not do

So is it a dumbed down western RPG with less complexity or a JRPG?

I agree with you that it mightn't give you the same freedom to do whatever you want as much as older games, and I do miss character creation complexity and options, but in terms of end-game choices it trumps BG2 and NWN in terms of end game choices easily. NWN & BG2 were mostly on-rails from chapter 2 or 3 onwards.

And given that proper, really old school western RPGs are things like The Bards Tale, Pools of Radiance and the other SSL games which were totally linear and had very few branching choices or endings I don't see how you can say DA:O isn't decended and evolved from them to be honest.

[Allen63]

crashxdjp wrote...
The only thing Oblvion was better about was the freedom .. after a while you noticed that the monsters were the same, all the caves and forts were all the same...

I gave DA a 10 for what it did well (despite obvious flaws) and Oblvion a 9 measuring against perfection and what was possible in 2006 -- remember DA is 3 years newer -- that's a couple lifetimes in computer years.

However, in DA (much more than Oblivion) the monsters are the same and the caves/dungeons are "extremely" undetailed and similar.

Moreover, Oblivion had over 9000 different items one could pick up (before modders added hundreds of new armors, weapons, etc). DA items are very limited and boring. I only open chests to see if there is a "plot item" inside.

Now, don't get me started about how in DA "monsters appear out of thin air" -- that's just lazy game development.

DA is a "game". Oblivion was a "fantasy world simulator" -- which I prefer.

[Jonfon_ire]

Allen63 wrote...

Now, don't get me started about how in DA "monsters appear out of thin air" -- that's just lazy game development.

Ah the old Doom school of level design.

*pop* *rawr*

[Akka le Vil]

Jonfon_ire wrote...

Allen63 wrote...

Now, don't get me started about how in DA "monsters appear out of thin air" -- that's just lazy game development.

Ah the old Doom school of level design.

*pop* *rawr*

Actually, in Doom, monsters NEVER "appeared" out of nowhere (except the respawns in Nightmare). They were ALWAYS coming from a place that opened up.
I especially liked this, as "spawn" was always something I found idiotic.

[Jonfon_ire]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Jonfon_ire wrote...

Allen63 wrote...

Now, don't get me started about how in DA "monsters appear out of thin air" -- that's just lazy game development.

Ah the old Doom school of level design.

*pop* *rawr*

Actually, in Doom, monsters NEVER "appeared" out of nowhere (except the respawns in Nightmare). They were ALWAYS coming from a place that opened up.
I especially liked this, as "spawn" was always something I found idiotic.

Oh ok so, spoilsport.

The Doom 3 school of level design!

[Sam -stone- serious]

Jonfon_ire wrote...

Erm, yes you can actually.

I went in Denerim, tried to slay the chantry to cause a racus out there. I failed and not because my characters started attacking people. I did the same with the Dalish camp.....nope...still no attacks. The mage tower? Nah-uh. Orzamar?  Pffff nothing still. Unless of course you are talking about that certain something near the end of the game. I dont consider that "freedom". 

So is it a dumbed down western RPG with less complexity or a JRPG?

I agree with you that it mightn't give you the same freedom to do whatever you want as much as older games, and I do miss character creation complexity and options, but in terms of end-game choices it trumps BG2 and NWN in terms of end game choices easily. NWN & BG2 were mostly on-rails from chapter 2 or 3 onwards.

And given that proper, really old school western RPGs are things like The Bards Tale, Pools of Radiance and the other SSL games which were totally linear and had very few branching choices or endings I don't see how you can say DA:O isn't decended and evolved from them to be honest.

I never really minded about linear or non linear branching as long as i was free to play and mold the world and the items and the (virtual) community in them to my liking. The interactivity if you will. Now dont go telling me that DAO is an interactive RPG in the same sense as Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter Nights or Oblivion because we both know that this is not the case. To deny me this kind of "freedom" and "fun" takes away from the immersion of the game and since such "freedom" was done with every western RPG in the past i kind of expected to see the same, at least on a logical level, from DAO.

As i said before what i say may be taken wrong that i did not like the game which is not true. I just find myself dissapointed at what was done in the past and was kind of expecting 10 steps forward and not 5 steps forward and 5 steps back which happened with DAO. It just reminds me so much of a J-RPG in disguise that really buffles me.

[Sidney]

Allen63 wrote...

Moreover, Oblivion had over 9000 different items one could pick up (before modders added hundreds of new armors, weapons, etc). DA items are very limited and boring. I only open chests to see if there is a "plot item" inside.

5000 of those are forms of flatware, 1000 drinking containers, and so on  so really who cares? Seriously, I'm trying to save the world, kitchenware isn't on my hit list of things to do.

Frankly, all swords are the same. Dont' care about "more" of them because the only difference is plus this and minus that and add 10% to this skill. That doesn't add anything to my gaming experience just my insane need to collect crap.

DA items are boring bu that's because all items are boring after a point.

[Jonfon_ire]

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

Jonfon_ire wrote...

Erm, yes you can actually.

I went in Denerim, tried to slay the chantry to cause a racus out there. I failed and not because my characters started attacking people. I did the same with the Dalish camp.....nope...still no attacks. The mage tower? Nah-uh. Orzamar?  Pffff nothing still. Unless of course you are talking about that certain something near the end of the game. I dont consider that "freedom". 

So is it a dumbed down western RPG with less complexity or a JRPG?

I agree with you that it mightn't give you the same freedom to do whatever you want as much as older games, and I do miss character creation complexity and options, but in terms of end-game choices it trumps BG2 and NWN in terms of end game choices easily. NWN & BG2 were mostly on-rails from chapter 2 or 3 onwards.

And given that proper, really old school western RPGs are things like The Bards Tale, Pools of Radiance and the other SSL games which were totally linear and had very few branching choices or endings I don't see how you can say DA:O isn't decended and evolved from them to be honest.

I never really minded about linear or non linear branching as long as i was free to play and mold the world and the items and the (virtual) community in them to my liking. The interactivity if you will. Now dont go telling me that DAO is an interactive RPG in the same sense as Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter Nights or Oblivion because we both know that this is not the case. To deny me this kind of "freedom" and "fun" takes away from the immersion of the game and since such "freedom" was done with every western RPG in the past i kind of expected to see the same, at least on a logical level, from DAO.

If you mean "I can kill NPCs in the older games but not now" then we've two different ideas of freedom to be honest. DA:O gives me far more choices in terms of making decisions which affect the outcome of sections (and the end of) the game. DA:O doesn't let you do friendly fire doesn't mean it's more limited than older games in terms of choice and freedom.

Not that I don't miss friendly fire a bit of course, but I don't see it as the Be All in terms of personal freedom in an RPG (I did enjoy nuking the magic items shop in BG2).

[Sidney]

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

Why take this kind of freedom away from me? Why "reduce" the effectiveness,  cunning and potency of a thief / rogue / whatever in such a sterile world? As much sterile as the Oblivion world is (without mods) its still more fun and more involving that what DAO  offers. Why? Because it does not "restrict" me in any way. EVERYTHING  IS  POSSIBLE in oblivions game world while in DAO  its like i have a hidden spirit holding my hand and not letting me do what i want. Is it not what such games are all about? 

It is called opportunity cost. Things exist in the real world and that means that to create the logic of what happens when you create your own personal version of Saw out of the Denerim beggars takes time. You want to go into every random house and steal? Well they have to build textures and maps - and then you whine because every home looks the same (see Fallout 3). All of that takes time and in a world where you can chose between more story, more plot and dialog and allowing really pointless levels of "freedom" I'll take the former. All games are trade-offs in time and money and I'd rather see time and money poured into meaningful things and not just goofy crap because, in the end, even if you could rob a house people would gripe you couldn't burn it down.

[Sam -stone- serious]

If you mean "I can kill NPCs in the older games but not now" then we've two different ideas of freedom to be honest. DA:O gives me far more choices in terms of making decisions which affect the outcome of sections (and the end of) the game. DA:O doesn't let you do friendly fire doesn't mean it's more limited than older games in terms of choice and freedom.

Not that I don't miss friendly fire a bit of course, but I don't see it as the Be All in terms of personal freedom in an RPG (I did enjoy nuking the magic items shop in BG2).

Its not -only- the friendly fire though i can start seeing your point of view. I like my choices in games to be open for me at any time and the results/ consequences to happen in a timely and realistic manner. Making choices to affect the end of the game is all fine and dandy but its "limiting" for me. I like that i can accidentaly missfire a fireball, cone of cold or something and take others apart from the enemies with them. When dwarves attack you in orzamar i can just unleash fireballs and high level AOE  magic without a care in the world and that may seem "liberating" for a lot of people but to me it seems "limiting". I want Wynne and Morrigan to duel it out due to the differences in their law (Morrigan is outside the circle after all) at some point into the game with the danger of losing one of them (but of course thats an example).

There is so much that i wanted the game to offer and stay true to its western heritage that it fell flat on its ass. Were my expectations too high? Apparently not as i play at the same time right now again a moded BG2 (to fit my 22" 16:10 monitor otherwise its unplayable) and i am outstanded at what was possible back in the day in both BG2 and Neverwinter Nights (that never really left my PC) that makes me wonder what exactly was the idea behind the limiting of such freedom for DAO?

[Orca Orcinus]

Okay, I agree with Sidney to a point - but there is another factor at play here. They are trying to generate more content, to charge more money, while reducing their build costs. This game has a million examples (slight exaggeration) of things that were not polished. I mean, come on - things like texturing and mapping take time - but not that much time once you have a toolset of resources. Bioware used to operate on that principle, in the olden days of Baldur's Gate. Some say it's the EA effect, but I noticed it quite poignantly in ME as well. DA:O game is great, but not anywhere what I would consider perfect. Oblivion's world was much more alive, despite not having an arsenal of creative characters. Oblivion was far more immersive as a game world, because you could travel and see all the sights of it - instead of fast-travelling everywhere and only being able to interact with specific locales inside the main hub. When you break the suspension of disbelief in video games, as well as movies, I just don't enjoy it as much. Mind you, I certainly am not suggesting that Oblivion was a perfect game either. IMHO considering the amount of sheer quest material, the interaction level, and the overall world-structure though; I would favor Oblivion over DA:O. (Also, the bugs in the 360 version make it less enjoyable as well. More money saved, because the players can pay us to playtest - Hurray EA FTW!!)

[Jonfon_ire]

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

If you mean "I can kill NPCs in the older games but not now" then we've two different ideas of freedom to be honest. DA:O gives me far more choices in terms of making decisions which affect the outcome of sections (and the end of) the game. DA:O doesn't let you do friendly fire doesn't mean it's more limited than older games in terms of choice and freedom.

Not that I don't miss friendly fire a bit of course, but I don't see it as the Be All in terms of personal freedom in an RPG (I did enjoy nuking the magic items shop in BG2).

Its not -only- the friendly fire though i can start seeing your point of view. I like my choices in games to be open for me at any time and the results/ consequences to happen in a timely and realistic manner. Making choices to affect the end of the game is all fine and dandy but its "limiting" for me. I like that i can accidentaly missfire a fireball, cone of cold or something and take others apart from the enemies with them. When dwarves attack you in orzamar i can just unleash fireballs and high level AOE  magic without a care in the world and that may seem "liberating" for a lot of people but to me it seems "limiting". I want Wynne and Morrigan to duel it out due to the differences in their law (Morrigan is outside the circle after all) at some point into the game with the danger of losing one of them (but of course thats an example).

There is so much that i wanted the game to offer and stay true to its western heritage that it fell flat on its ass. Were my expectations too high? Apparently not as i play at the same time right now again a moded BG2 (to fit my 22" 16:10 monitor otherwise its unplayable) and i am outstanded at what was possible back in the day in both BG2 and Neverwinter Nights (that never really left my PC) that makes me wonder what exactly was the idea behind the limiting of such freedom for DAO?

The NWN storyline for me was one of the most disappointing and dull I think Bioware ever managed, personally. So disappointed with it. The only freedom I enjoyed was the freedom to download and play some of the excellent modules the fanbase made. It was only when Hordes came out (and that was totally linear) that I really enjoyed it.

Different stroke for different folks in fairness. 

[Kimberly Shaw]

Here's an example that bothers me about DA:O linearity.



I'm the big bad Warden. I can easily dispatch a small army of city guards, solo or with my rugged band of a massive Golem, terrifying war dog, and sultry bard with a bow. I desire to go visit the alienage in Denerim.



"Stop! You can't go in there, its closed for the moment."

Me "Oh gee, golly. I guess I'll come back later. Wouldn't want the SINGLE guard who is controlled by #1 enemy to be mad at me."



If the game was non-linear, I could go in the alienage and push the guard out of the way or kill him, or I could be a goody goody and listen to the stupid guard who is rude to me.



Hate stuff like that, why on earth should I care what this guard has to say? I just killed the Arl's men, and Logain's men in various side quests in Denerim and outside, but suddenly in this back alley I care what this one says? Why? Not like they couldn't just not have the quests in the alienage start that they don't want you to see?



Argh.



Beyond that, the posters who favor ITEM scaling have my hatred. I see no reason why any game should have ITEM scaling except by monetary means in stores in that certain goods should be available later because you can save up and buy them. Unique drops should not be tier 1 because you found them early but tier 7 if you find them late, it punishes you for doing quests in any order which is the whole point of non-linearity (unless you can level up the gear in game with you via some method, which is a work around I would tolerate).

[Dark83]

Drakensang has the same quest/story structure as DA:O.

Common start, branching middle, common end. I'm just saying.

[Sidney]

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

Hate stuff like that, why on earth should I care what this guard has to say? I just killed the Arl's men, and Logain's men in various side quests in Denerim and outside, but suddenly in this back alley I care what this one says? Why? Not like they couldn't just not have the quests in the alienage start that they don't want you to see?

Maybe because there's a huge portcullis there and you can't open it w/o the guard's okee-dokey. I guess you could kill the people in the gatehouse as well but then there's still no one to raise the gate for you. I guess real freedom would be the freedom to go buy a rope and climb over the wall or to craft a "Raise Gate" spell.

[Dark83]

I'm going to reply to Sam here the same thing I said elsewhere, since it's covering exactly the same thing.

Dark83 wrote...

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

I wanted to start a big
havoc in Denerim for some reason. I have no means of doing so and deal
with the guards and whatever consequences just to see what happens. Its
the kind of world that does provoke you to act as such. Maybe its only
me that i like my western medieval RPGs not holding my hand and leaving
me a LOT of tools to play with at my own leissure.

Shamus
Young once wrote an article regarding this. He referred to it as
"experimenting with the gameworld." This happens when players don't
play the role they are assigned, and are just poking at the game to see
how it responds. The Grey Warden is not a randomly violent psychopath -
so the game doesn't allow you to make him act that way. Other games
handle it in different ways.

Think of Half-Life 2: You can shoot Alyx right in the face and the
bullets go right through and hit the wall behind her. She won’t even
notice. If you start acting like an idiot, the game world stops paying
attention to you.

That's
the "no feedback" approach. There's the "negative feedback" approach -
send guards after you, or simply let you break the game and not allow
you to progress. (Morrowind, if you kill plot characters. BG gets
pretty unplayable when you can't interact with anyone in towns, too.)
DA:O goes with the denial approach - you just can't do it. Period.

Those are the three ways games handle it.

Check out the short article here.

In a "real" RPG (P&P), he's the problem player. His Grey Warden attacks the townspeople he's saving while the other players thinkhe's a disruptive, annoying jerk acting completely out of character. He's poking the world to see how it responds. Half-Life 2 ignores it when you act like an OOC idiot (Why's Freeman shooting Alyx in the ass?). Morrowind lets you do it and makes no attempt to stop you. (Kill a plot NPC? You're stuck. Too bad. Being a psychotic serial killer nets no rewards? Too bad. So sad.)

DA:O simply prevents you from acting out of character. The Grey Warden doesn't randomly massacre villages, so you can't. Similiarly, the Cousland Warden is white and has no tattoos, regardless of what actor (avatar) is playing the part.

For those of us who don't stab Imoen in the face when she says "Hiyas!"  just to see what happens, it's not an issue.

[Sidney]

Orca Orcinus wrote...
Oblivion's world was much more alive, despite not having an arsenal of creative characters. Oblivion was far more immersive as a game world, because you could travel and see all the sights of it - instead of fast-travelling everywhere and only being able to interact with specific locales inside the main hub.

Doesn't that very trait break immersion for you? Because it killed me after awhile. I can travel from England Chroal and Kvatch up to Norway in Bruma is what, about 3 minutes I've entered a totally different culture and ethnic region? At some point the insanely small scale of the map overwhelmed me with just how SMALL the world really was and how very not real this all felt. I have no idea what scale DOA operates at but it can be really any size I imagine since that space between the game spaces can be huge or small.

[Kimberly Shaw]

Sidney wrote...

Kimberly Shaw wrote...

Hate stuff like that, why on earth should I care what this guard has to say? I just killed the Arl's men, and Logain's men in various side quests in Denerim and outside, but suddenly in this back alley I care what this one says? Why? Not like they couldn't just not have the quests in the alienage start that they don't want you to see?

Maybe because there's a huge portcullis there and you can't open it w/o the guard's okee-dokey. I guess you could kill the people in the gatehouse as well but then there's still no one to raise the gate for you. I guess real freedom would be the freedom to go buy a rope and climb over the wall or to craft a "Raise Gate" spell.

Hmmm there's just so many instances in the game where the game's physical barriers and the actual barriers are different (being stopped by a puddle, invisible walls, a 2 foot incline or decline stopping me from advancing) that I tend not to think of anything but a "Door cannot be picked" as actual barriers. But yeah, I guess a physical barrier does stop you from going in...

[Jonfon_ire]

Dark83 wrote...

I'm going to reply to Sam here the same thing I said elsewhere, since it's covering exactly the same thing.

Dark83 wrote...

Sam -stone- serious wrote...

I wanted to start a big
havoc in Denerim for some reason. I have no means of doing so and deal
with the guards and whatever consequences just to see what happens. Its
the kind of world that does provoke you to act as such. Maybe its only
me that i like my western medieval RPGs not holding my hand and leaving
me a LOT of tools to play with at my own leissure.

Shamus
Young once wrote an article regarding this. He referred to it as
"experimenting with the gameworld." This happens when players don't
play the role they are assigned, and are just poking at the game to see
how it responds. The Grey Warden is not a randomly violent psychopath -
so the game doesn't allow you to make him act that way. Other games
handle it in different ways.

Think of Half-Life 2: You can shoot Alyx right in the face and the
bullets go right through and hit the wall behind her. She won’t even
notice. If you start acting like an idiot, the game world stops paying
attention to you.

That's
the "no feedback" approach. There's the "negative feedback" approach -
send guards after you, or simply let you break the game and not allow
you to progress. (Morrowind, if you kill plot characters. BG gets
pretty unplayable when you can't interact with anyone in towns, too.)
DA:O goes with the denial approach - you just can't do it. Period.

Those are the three ways games handle it.

Check out the short article here.

In a "real" RPG (P&P), he's the problem player. His Grey Warden attacks the townspeople he's saving while the other players thinkhe's a disruptive, annoying jerk acting completely out of character. He's poking the world to see how it responds. Half-Life 2 ignores it when you act like an OOC idiot (Why's Freeman shooting Alyx in the ass?). Morrowind lets you do it and makes no attempt to stop you. (Kill a plot NPC? You're stuck. Too bad. Being a psychotic serial killer nets no rewards? Too bad. So sad.)

DA:O simply prevents you from acting out of character. The Grey Warden doesn't randomly massacre villages, so you can't. Similiarly, the Cousland Warden is white and has no tattoos, regardless of what actor (avatar) is playing the part.

For those of us who don't stab Imoen in the face when she says "Hiyas!"  just to see what happens, it's not an issue.

Much as I agree with your excellent points you gotta admit stabbing Imoen in the face is a valid reaction.
"Here Jon, you take her for your evil experiments. I don't mind. Would you like to take Jaheira and Jan Jansen as well?"

[Sidney]

Jonfon_ire wrote...
Much as I agree with your excellent points you gotta admit stabbing Imoen in the face is a valid reaction.
"Here Jon, you take her for your evil experiments. I don't mind. Would you like to take Jaheira and Jan Jansen as well?"

Frankly a hit list of the whiney Bioware men I'd be happy to feed over to Jon:

Jahlid
Aonomen
Carth
Alistair
Kaiden

Why does Bioware hate men?

...but yes, stabbing Imoen is a valid reaction, I played the first half of BG2 trying real hard to care about actualy saving her.