118 réponses à ce sujet

[lx_theo]

the_one_54321 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...
Uou are biggest idiot I've net on this boards. Go on and be as ignorant as you want. Just remember its not a proper argument.

"He that first resorts to violence has lost the argument."

Show me, or explain to me with "basic logic" how a silent PC demonstrates to you, definitively, how a line is delivered in dialog.

Sorry? Violence? Hmm... Maybe you should try harder. I can't recall throwing any punches

Read what I've wrote. I've alredy written it all down. Ingrained ideas and common interpretations between people should be enough to explain it, but obviously you think you're special in areas no one is.

lx_theo wrote...
You insist that the way I percieve playing the games is based around how I play them, but I have not. I only use that as an example for what I know is possible. Otherwise, I'm just looking through the simple trins of thought that will go through most everyone's head.

Logic is strict. 

"A is possible" !=> "B is not possible" unless you can demonstrate it definitively. You have done no such thing. All you have said is "lots of people did it the same way I did." 

*SIgh*

Sad, but you really do think that it matters, eh?

Modifié par lx_theo, 06 avril 2012 - 08:53 .

[the_one_54321]

I apologize, everyone!

It seems that counterexample is inapplicable as an argument when it's inconvenient for the other debater.

I wonder if reductio ad absurdum is likewise off the table. And I wonder, if I specifically elaborated on the liberal use of converse accident, would that also be a breach of basic logic? 

[tmp7704]

lx_theo wrote...

If you are referring to injecting your own voice, I've already answered that in another person's argument on that. I will not answer it again because you believe I didn't answer everything in one post.

I have to say i actually didn't understand the argument with 'first/third person conversation' which followed your acknowledgement that there can indeed be an upside to silent protagonist. The way that objection was worded was rather confusing and felt largely arbitrary.

If you could clarify what you meant, it'd be helpful.

[lx_theo]

the_one_54321 wrote...

I apologize, everyone!

It seems that counterexample is inapplicable as an argument when it's inconvenient for the other debater.

I wonder if reductio ad absurdum is likewise off the table. And I wonder, if I specifically elaborated on the liberal use of converse accident, would that also be a breach of basic logic?

Like I said, you're too stupid to understand the argument. So instead of actually trying to, you make up stuff and call it a contradiction. Then you run over to wikipedia to find big enough words to try to make yourself off as intelligent. Don't worry, its the internet, no one cares.

I'm done here. If you want to discuss the original topic of Open-world style levels in DA3, be my guest.

[lx_theo]

tmp7704 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

If you are referring to injecting your own voice, I've already answered that in another person's argument on that. I will not answer it again because you believe I didn't answer everything in one post.

I have to say i actually didn't understand the argument with 'first/third person conversation' which followed your acknowledgement that there can indeed be an upside to silent protagonist. The way that objection was worded was rather confusing and felt largely arbitrary.

If you could clarify what you meant, it'd be helpful.

Fair enough, though you could have responded to that instead first time, instead complaining that my one answer to one part didn't answer another part.

What I meant is that the idea of injecting your own voice, or all the little details how how its said, is a first person style dialogue. The dialogue in these games is in third person, as you see your character reacting adn such rather than from their eyes. This contrast is imersion breaking, largely undermining the effect.

Though I can't comment further. How immersion braking this in paticular is not something I can accurately assess, unlike the basic rational of a person with societal and other ingrain ideas in their head percieving a tone.

Modifié par lx_theo, 06 avril 2012 - 08:46 .

[barenas]

Well I would love for the world to be more open. Yeah I get that Bioware does directed games well and DA3 won't be a sandbox (I'm assuming of course). But I felt Origins and especially DA:2 felt restricted. I want to explore a bit more and provide some cool things to discover that way.

[Maria Caliban]

Oh look, it's this conversation again. I guess it's to be expected. It's not like there are other threads in the forum where people are arguing about voiced vs silent protagonists.

barenas wrote...

Well I would love for the world to be more open. Yeah I get that Bioware does directed games well and DA3 won't be a sandbox (I'm assuming of course). But I felt Origins and especially DA:2 felt restricted. I want to explore a bit more and provide some cool things to discover that way.

Yeah, it's hard to find an appropriate balance. You want to get the feel of exploration and openness without it taking a massive investment of time and resources, or letting the players spend too much time away from the plot.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 06 avril 2012 - 09:03 .

[the_one_54321]

lx_theo wrote...
So instead of actually trying to, you make up stuff and call it a contradiction. Then you run over to wikipedia to find big enough words to try to make yourself off as intelligent.

Reeeeeeeally?

the_one_54321 wrote...
Like the character I played for several years on an NWN player world. Or lots of the PCs in RPGs that predated voice acting.

= counterexample

Proof by contradiction is a pretty basic as far as logical analysis is concerned. A counterexample serves to disprove any instance of "always" or "only."

Voiced PCs are not the "only" ones that feel alive.

lx_theo wrote...
You insist that the way I percieve playing the games is based around how I play them, but I have not. I only use that as an example for what I know is possible. Otherwise, I'm just looking through the simple trins of thought that will go through most everyone's head.

= converse accident

Your entire argument is based on a logical fallacy. Meaning, it's incorrect.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 06 avril 2012 - 09:15 .

[lx_theo]

the_one_54321 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...
So instead of actually trying to, you make up stuff and call it a contradiction. Then you run over to wikipedia to find big enough words to try to make yourself off as intelligent.

Reeeeeeeally?

the_one_54321 wrote...
Like the character I played for several years on an NWN player world. Or lots of the PCs in RPGs that predated voice acting.

= counterexample

Proof by contradiction is a pretty basic as far as logical analysis is concerned. A counterexample serves to disprove any instance of "always" or "only."

Voiced PCs are not the "only" ones that feel alive.

lx_theo wrote...
You insist that the way I percieve playing the games is based around how I play them, but I have not. I only use that as an example for what I know is possible. Otherwise, I'm just looking through the simple trins of thought that will go through most everyone's head.

= converse accident

Your entire argument is based on a logical fallacy. Meaning, it's incorrect.

So my logical fallacy came in the form of not my argument or really any part of it?

Bravo, you win, lol. Seriously, give it up.

[the_one_54321]

lx_theo wrote...
I only use that as an example for what I know is possible. Otherwise, I'm just looking through the simple trins of thought that will go through most everyone's head.

Ok, folks, tell me, am I getting elaborately trolled, or is this guy for real? Because I can't tell anymore.

[Korusus]

simfamSP wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

I just want to throw this out there. If I want Skyrim....I'll play Skyrim. Bioware should focus on doing what they do best. Writing great stories with great characters with comanion style RPGing. A bigger part of the world to play in? Absolutely. I want to see Orlais and Antiva and Tevinter. Free roaming sandbox that is aimless and clinging to a barely there plot? No, thank you.

You could argue that BG1 was a little bit sandboxy xD

A little bit?  A lot a bit.  :happy:

Even compared to BG2 which was waaay more linear than BG1. 

It's sad that BioWare is so known for small closed-off theme park style level design, it doesn't have to be that way.  Not everyone on the team is a writer.

[lx_theo]

the_one_54321 wrote...

lx_theo wrote...
I only use that as an example for what I know is possible. Otherwise, I'm just looking through the simple trins of thought that will go through most everyone's head.

Ok, folks, tell me, am I getting elaborately trolled, or is this guy for real? Because I can't tell anymore. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/pouty.png[/smilie]

No, you're just stupid.

You do realize you don't have control over your subconscious reaction when getting an impression after reading somnething right? For tone, societal impressions and such make it so that almost everyone will have the same reaction.

Those are the trains of thought that go through most everyone's head I referred to.

The other part of that statement did not have to do with it. I was referring to that I only used my personal experience adn how I play the game to show possibilities like the ability to role play effectively with the voiced system.

Seriously, stop trying to find a hole in something that neither has one and is one that minimally relates.

Modifié par lx_theo, 06 avril 2012 - 11:40 .

[cJohnOne]

I haven't really thought out which is preferable voiced or non-voiced, but it seems to me that choosing from a list is harder but more rewarding. On the other hand it is harder and takes more time. The dialogue wheel organizes you responses so it's easier to respond quicker and easier. Easy and fun for me at least. It all matters how they take advantages of the strengths and weakness of each system.

Modifié par cJohnOne, 07 avril 2012 - 12:24 .

[danteliveson]

That sounds awful.

[Chromie]

Korusus wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

I just want to throw this out there. If I want Skyrim....I'll play Skyrim. Bioware should focus on doing what they do best. Writing great stories with great characters with comanion style RPGing. A bigger part of the world to play in? Absolutely. I want to see Orlais and Antiva and Tevinter. Free roaming sandbox that is aimless and clinging to a barely there plot? No, thank you.

You could argue that BG1 was a little bit sandboxy xD

A little bit?  A lot a bit.  :happy:

Even compared to BG2 which was waaay more linear than BG1. 

It's sad that BioWare is so known for small closed-off theme park style level design, it doesn't have to be that way.  Not everyone on the team is a writer.

Even the writers aren't writers.

[DarkDragon777]

I doubt having an open world would work good with Dragon Age.

[Wentletrap]

Even if it's not open world... I'd at least like the *implication* of a world.

in DAO, (and BG 1+2) we had a map to click on. We couldn't go everywhere, but at least we could imagine, and wonder.

in DA2, we got only... Kirkwall / Coast / Sundermount. no in-between to even dream about.

[GodWood]

Skyrim sucked.

If they're going to continue with the whole 'cinematic' thing, they should stop half arsing it and be like the Witcher.