767 réponses à ce sujet

[TonberryFeye]

I've said this before about the voice acting, but tone needs to be set by the player at the start, not on the fly.

That's part of what made DA2 seem so off. Yes, it was appropriate my Rogue Hawke got really angry whenever someone threatened her family, or when someone decided that becoming an Abomination would be a fun thing to do, because I had decided myself that this is what pushed her over the edge. For just about everything else, a smart-alek reaction was the norm.

But it was never possible to have both. It was never possible to be 'humourous & nice' or 'humourous & aggressive'. What further compounded the problem is sometimes the purple icons seemed to be nastier than I thought they should be; it wasn't Hawke making light of a situation, but Hawke insulting the person she was talking to.

Allowing us to set tone at the start fixes this. If I decide at the start that I want a 'witty' PC who tries to turn every conversation into a series of one-liners, I can. However, this will then flavour all other conversations, so that it is no longer possible to jarringly swing from one to the other. You can blend a little of course (it's hard to be witty when you're outright trying to threaten people, just as you can't be violent and diplomatic) but in theory the core of who your character is should always be there, leaving us free to enact it as we see fit.

[Jerrybnsn]

TonberryFeye wrote...
 It was never possible to be 'humourous & nice' or 'humourous & aggressive'.

That's why DA Origins worked better for playing as the "hero of the story" rather than DA2 allowing you to play the part of the dev that decides the personaility of the "heroe of the story".

The question is do you want to play an rpg that allows you to play the hero for an more immersive experience, or play an rpg that allows you to help direct the hero for a more cinematic experience?

Modifié par Jerrybnsn, 28 juin 2012 - 11:04 .

[AkiKishi]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

TonberryFeye wrote...
 It was never possible to be 'humourous & nice' or 'humourous & aggressive'.

That's why DA Origins worked better for playing as the "hero of the story" rather than DA2 allowing you to play the part of the dev that decides the personaility of the "heroe of the story".

The question is do you want to play an rpg that allows you to play the hero for an more immersive experience, or play an rpg that allows you to help direct the hero for a more cinematic experience?

I don't think one is any more or less immersive than the other. It's just different. Currently as things stand as stated by Bioware option 2 is what they are aiming for.

[AkiKishi]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...
Bob, think it's not just different but the freedom you have in DAO for playing your character was more. This of course due to the writing leading to the cinematics in DA2, which results in the game holding the players hand towards the cinematics.

In the sence of immersion DA2 was lacking for me. I felt more like a bystander then in DAO where I could RP the warden more then I could Hawke.

DA2 is different. It presents you with the idea of creating your own character then takes it away while you play the game.
DA:O tends to only railroad you in your role as a Warden which is not your whole character (much like BG used the Bhaalspawn as the plothook).

Witcher/2 on the other hand makes no pretence and is very easy to get immersed in because you are not pitting your character against the creators. Same with Deus Ex/Alpha Protocol (although the controls hamper it).

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Witcher/2 on the other hand makes no pretence and is very easy to get immersed in because you are not pitting your character against the creators. Same with Deus Ex/Alpha Protocol (although the controls hamper it).

Is there an example of this sort of design that has a playable combat system so I can try it out?

[Cutlasskiwi]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

TonberryFeye wrote...
 It was never possible to be 'humourous & nice' or 'humourous & aggressive'.

That's why DA Origins worked better for playing as the "hero of the story" rather than DA2 allowing you to play the part of the dev that decides the personaility of the "heroe of the story".

The question is do you want to play an rpg that allows you to play the hero for an more immersive experience, or play an rpg that allows you to help direct the hero for a more cinematic experience?

I don't think one is any more or less immersive than the other. It's just different. Currently as things stand as stated by Bioware option 2 is what they are aiming for.

Bob, think it's not just different but the freedom you have in DAO for playing your character was more. This of course due to the writing leading to the cinematics in DA2, which results in the game holding the players hand towards the cinematics.

In the sence of immersion DA2 was lacking for me. I felt more like a bystander then in DAO where I could RP the warden more then I could Hawke.

You see it as roleplaying your character and I see it as roleplaying BioWare's character. I roleplay Hawke just as I did the Warden only for me I ended up liking DA2 much more, simply because it suited my playstyle more. The VO and cinematic are a big part of that reason. And since I see it as BioWares character I don't have to care about how the voice sounds since it's not my character.  

[AkiKishi]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Witcher/2 on the other hand makes no pretence and is very easy to get immersed in because you are not pitting your character against the creators. Same with Deus Ex/Alpha Protocol (although the controls hamper it).

Is there an example of this sort of design that has a playable combat system so I can try it out?

Witcher2 has a different combat system from Witcher. Deus Ex you can get on steam for next to nothing,it's old but still very good or HR (the prequel).

[EricHVela]

Written words stick with me more than spoken words. Maybe I'm more atypical than I thought.

Anyway:
Someone threw out an idea (while intended something different): I would not mind having a single protagonist with a single background for one of the Dragon Age games (assuming we're not going to stop with DA1/2/3). I liked the idea of playing Cullen in a game (and with Cullen becoming a very important figure in the Seekers' plans from his adventures -- I was thinking Dragon Age: Templar -- leaning heavily towards mystery-solving).

The time saved with VOs in that single-protagonist scenario might be less than more. Most of the NPC VOs are the same with specific instances where the dialog considers gender, class and/or race. The variables in DA:O for the player's character seemed far too many to make it reasonable for the protagonist's VO, but even with two Hawkes and three classes, I think the sheer number of NPCs outweigh any benefit from reducing 6 backgrounds into one for Dragon Age: Templar (if such a game existed).

If the variables for the next protagonist are as numerous as DA:O, I say go ahead and take the protagonist VO out of the picture. Otherwise, I say go with protagonist VOs.

As for how to choose a response, I'm okay with summaries that accurately represent the tone of the response.

My issue is that some of the summaries belied the tone of the response.

As for showing which response is an agreement, a romance, a disagreement, a crude response, a joke or such, I'm not partial towards it. I'm also not partial towards the whole "Up is paragon, down is renegade, left is investigate and right is neutral-just-move-on" responses. I prefer the 1-6 numbers of DA:O without icons.

I would enjoy an option to have no dialog wheel and have no icons with the dialog choices in no specific order associated with the wheel. Let me have the option to pick 1-6 like KotOR and DA:O on PC with no other hints than the summary itself being accurate on the tone of the response.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Witcher2 has a different combat system from Witcher.

That's good.  The Witcher had just about the worst combat system I've ever seen.

Deus Ex you can get on steam for next to nothing,it's old but still very good

The first Deus Ex has full text dialogue options.  It's not relevantly similar to what BioWare is doing now.

From the little I saw of The Witcher, I didn't mind the voice there at all.  It's paraphrases that are the bigger problem.  The voice might break some character designs, but paraphrases break all character designs.

[ashwind]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Witcher2 has a different combat system from Witcher.

That's good.  The Witcher had just about the worst combat system I've ever seen.

Witcher2 has a pretty brutal combat system even on normal difficulty for those who are not use to it.

It is however an awesome awesome game and very beautiful.

+edit+ If you like RPG that requires you to read your journal and figure things out for yourself and making decisions - you will love it even more. Many RPG elements that are missing in many games can be re-discover in TW2.

Modifié par ashwind, 28 juin 2012 - 04:25 .

[robertthebard]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

TonberryFeye wrote...
 It was never possible to be 'humourous & nice' or 'humourous & aggressive'.

That's why DA Origins worked better for playing as the "hero of the story" rather than DA2 allowing you to play the part of the dev that decides the personaility of the "heroe of the story".

The question is do you want to play an rpg that allows you to play the hero for an more immersive experience, or play an rpg that allows you to help direct the hero for a more cinematic experience?

I don't see why they are mutually exclusive.  ME was definitely a more cinematic experience, and yet I didn't have any problems become immersed in it.  I can say the same for DA 2, although there were more "wtf moments" in dialog choices.  Again, BioWare has commented that the paraphrasing could have been better, it's not like critiqueing it now is going to fix it, which is why, a year later, I still can't figure out why people are harping on it like it's going to get changed.  VO with cinematics is the way that BioWare plans to take the next installment, it's been flatly stated in these forums, maybe even in this very topic thread.

DA 2 went exactly the same direction as ME, barring some flaws in the dialog.  A semi-fixed protaganist, Hawke, in one form or another == Shepard in one form or another.  Dialog wheels, with limited choices are, after all, dialog wheels with limited choices.  Something that both games presented.  A point that, once again, seems to need to be beat home is that BioWare has said that some of the dialog was problematic, however, with time to do it, I have no doubt that BioWare can pull it off, after all, they did it in the ME series, so maybe some time to establish the characters, like what they had with ME would benefit the system over all, which brings me back to my first point; you can have an immersive RPG with a lot of cinematics, after all, there were a lot of cinematics in DA: O as well, with the only difference being every line of dialog from the Warden could have just as easily been "..." during cutscenes, since they just stood there blankly.

[Sylvius the Mad]

robertthebard wrote...

Again, BioWare has commented that the paraphrasing could have been better, it's not like critiqueing it now is going to fix it, which is why, a year later, I still can't figure out why people are harping on it like it's going to get changed.

Because harping on it keeps the alternative in the public eye.

If we don't talk about the fundamental problems PC VO has, they'll get swept under the rug and no one will know what they're missing (just as people who favour the dialogue wheel didn't know what they were missing before playing ME).

ashwind wrote...

Witcher2 has a pretty brutal combat system even on normal difficulty for those who are not use to it.

I despise action combat.  Whenever I'm forced to play a game that uses it, I try to ignore the combat as much as I can to get through the rest of the game.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 28 juin 2012 - 05:00 .

[robertthebard]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Again, BioWare has commented that the paraphrasing could have been better, it's not like critiqueing it now is going to fix it, which is why, a year later, I still can't figure out why people are harping on it like it's going to get changed.

Because harping on it keeps the alternative in the public eye.

If we don't talk about the fundamental problems PC VO has, they'll get swept under the rug and no one will know what they're missing (just as people who favour the dialogue wheel didn't know what they were missing before playing ME).

The thing is, they aren't fundamental problems, they are preference problems, and there is a big difference.  I don't have a problem with either system being used, barring implementation.  Of course, I have played games that didn't have any dialog, Doom/Quake back in the 80's or 90's, age is showing, for example, or where all the dialog was cutscene, with no input from the player whatsoever.  I enjoyed those games for what they were at the time every bit as much as I enjoy some of the newer games I've been playing over the last few years, even some MMO's, where there aren't many, if any dialog choices with NPC's.  Most of the time it's "yeah, I saw what you said", or "Accept/Decline" quests.  I enjoyed them too, for a time.  Even DDO wasn't much different from that.

[Realmzmaster]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Again, BioWare has commented that the paraphrasing could have been better, it's not like critiqueing it now is going to fix it, which is why, a year later, I still can't figure out why people are harping on it like it's going to get changed.

Because harping on it keeps the alternative in the public eye.

If we don't talk about the fundamental problems PC VO has, they'll get swept under the rug and no one will know what they're missing (just as people who favour the dialogue wheel didn't know what they were missing before playing ME).

ashwind wrote...

Witcher2 has a pretty brutal combat system even on normal difficulty for those who are not use to it.

I despise action combat.  Whenever I'm forced to play a game that uses it, I try to ignore the combat as much as I can to get through the rest of the game.

What you are saying has to do with preference not fundamental problems. It is a fundamental problem to you because you do not like the PC VO and it affects how you roleplay. It is not a problem to me because I can roleplay in either environment. Just like you despise action combat. I can play in turn-based, realtime with pause or straight up action. The story and gameplay can be described to me like in Eamon or Swordthrust and I am good to go.
IF like Infocom. Level 9 were some of my favorite games. 

I prefer the PC VO especially if the NPCs are going to be voiced otherwise let it be like Drakensang: The Dark Eye with nothing voiced.
So you are talking preference not fundamental problems. The dialogue wheel is not a problem for me. I do not need to see the full line to roleplay. 

Harping on the alternative is fine for keeping it in the public eye. The nice part of harping is that it works both ways because it keeps all alternatives in the public eye. Yyou cannot harp for something without mentioning what you are harping aganist.

[Sylvius the Mad]

robertthebard wrote...

The thing is, they aren't fundamental problems, they are preference problems, and there is a big difference.

Whether the voice is a good feature is a matter of opinion.  The effect the voice has on some types of gameplay is a matter of fact.

A playstyle that had been previously supported is no longer supported.  That's a fundamental problem.

Realmzmaster wrote...

What you are saying has to do with preference not fundamental problems. It is a fundamental problem to you because you do not like the PC VO and it affects how you roleplay. It is not a problem to me because I can roleplay in either environment.

That the problem doesn't affect how you play doesn't make it anty less of a problem.  It just makes the problem less relevant to you.

So you are talking preference not fundamental problems. The dialogue wheel is not a problem for me. I do not need to see the full line to roleplay. 

Without full text, how do you know whether the line you're choosing is one that will not break your character?  What system do you use to choose among paraphrases?

The system I'm using - reading them - clearly isn't working.  How do you determine which dialogue option to choose?

[Realmzmaster]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Without full text, how do you know whether the line you're choosing is one that will not break your character?  What system do you use to choose among paraphrases?

The system I'm using - reading them - clearly isn't working.  How do you determine which dialogue option to choose?

Depends on which personality I choose to play. If I am going to play an aggressive Hawke I will pick the aggressive paraphase and be consistent with that choice. If I want to play a aggressive sarcastic Hawke I will make my choice from those two paraphases. The paraphase gives me enough information to form my choice.  I also look at the situation and who Hawke is talking to.

I also have no problem with uncertainty. I do not need complete control for my playstyle. You may want and need that. Therefore it is a problem for you and not for me.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 29 juin 2012 - 12:46 .

[robertthebard]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

The thing is, they aren't fundamental problems, they are preference problems, and there is a big difference.

Whether the voice is a good feature is a matter of opinion.  The effect the voice has on some types of gameplay is a matter of fact.

A playstyle that had been previously supported is no longer supported.  That's a fundamental problem.

Realmzmaster wrote...

What you are saying has to do with preference not fundamental problems. It is a fundamental problem to you because you do not like the PC VO and it affects how you roleplay. It is not a problem to me because I can roleplay in either environment.

That the problem doesn't affect how you play doesn't make it anty less of a problem.  It just makes the problem less relevant to you.

So you are talking preference not fundamental problems. The dialogue wheel is not a problem for me. I do not need to see the full line to roleplay. 

Without full text, how do you know whether the line you're choosing is one that will not break your character?  What system do you use to choose among paraphrases?

The system I'm using - reading them - clearly isn't working.  How do you determine which dialogue option to choose?

You touched on the issue with your reply:  That the problem doesn't affect how you play doesn't make it anty less of a problem. It just makes the problem less relevant to you.  Since it can fall on either side of the discussion, it's a matter of preference, and expectations.  There are lots of playstyles that are no longer supported, and that's not necessarily a bad thing, since technology has evolved.  It wasn't too long ago that we didn't have 3D games.  The industry evolves, and we either evolve with it, or stay in our comfort zones.  If I had done that, I might still be lamenting the loss of 5in floppy drives for some of my games.

[ashwind]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

ashwind wrote...

Witcher2 has a pretty brutal combat system even on normal difficulty for those who are not use to it.

I despise action combat.  Whenever I'm forced to play a game that uses it, I try to ignore the combat as much as I can to get through the rest of the game.

I think you will have a love hate relationship regarding Witcher 2 then. You probably hate the combat but will love the RPG elements.

I havent played the Easy mode on Witcher 2 but even on Normal, some find it to be too brutal - especially certain encounters. Mainly because you have to prepare before hand and failing to do so will make things much harder and it has a very poor tutorial - basically doesnt provide enough information to guide 1st time players.

The RPG elements however are just wonderful. I find myself looking for clues and reading journals carefully trying to figure out what is the best course of action. It's journal system is beautiful - god I miss these type of journal... even in Skyrim, the journal system is dumbdown; not streamlined but outright dumbdown 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Depends on which personality I choose to play. If I am going to play an aggressive Hawke I will pick the aggressive paraphase and be consistent with that choice. If I want to play a aggressive sarcastic Hawke I will make my choice from those two paraphases.

Is "aggressive sarcastic" a complete description of his personality?  What if you want to play an absent-minded Hawke?  Or a devious Hawke?  Or a Hawke who values individual freedom over all else?  How would you select paraphrases then?

And what if your character design is more complex than that?

robertthebard wrote...

There are lots of playstyles that are no longer supported, and that's not necessarily a bad thing, since technology has evolved. 

I don't think that's true.  What other playstyles for computer roleplaying games have stopped being supported?

My complaint here is that this core playstyle - deep roleplaying based on detailed character creation - has always been supported by computer roleplaying games, and then BioWare unceremoniously threw it away.  And worse, they didn't appear to realise they'd done so until we pointed it out.

[Realmzmaster]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Depends on which personality I choose to play. If I am going to play an aggressive Hawke I will pick the aggressive paraphase and be consistent with that choice. If I want to play a aggressive sarcastic Hawke I will make my choice from those two paraphases.

Is "aggressive sarcastic" a complete description of his personality?  What if you want to play an absent-minded Hawke?  Or a devious Hawke?  Or a Hawke who values individual freedom over all else?  How would you select paraphrases then?

And what if your character design is more complex than that?

robertthebard wrote...

There are lots of playstyles that are no longer supported, and that's not necessarily a bad thing, since technology has evolved. 

I don't think that's true.  What other playstyles for computer roleplaying games have stopped being supported?

My complaint here is that this core playstyle - deep roleplaying based on detailed character creation - has always been supported by computer roleplaying games, and then BioWare unceremoniously threw it away.  And worse, they didn't appear to realise they'd done so until we pointed it out.

In DAO I could not play an absent minded warden or a devious warden or a freedom loving warden (otherwise I would have walk away from the Blight). In Icewind Dale no one in my party could be absent minded. I had to play within the confines of the game mechanics and story  that were presented. I could not play an absent minded mage. I had to meet the intelligence prequiste. Deep roleplaying does not require detailed character creation. One can deeply role play a predetermined character.

I have no problem roleplaying a character I create or one that is created for me. I simply assume the role. I do not need a tabula rasa to roleplay.

[Sylvius the Mad]

How can you assume the role if you don't know every detail about that role? how can you know that some aspect of your decision-making process now won't later be contradicted by the writing?

I had no problem playing a cowardly Warden, a self-absorbed Warden, a Warden obsessively committed to defending property rights, a Warden who was indifferent to the plight dwarves, a Warden who was indifferent to the plight of elves, or a Warden whose interest in the Blight was primarily academic.

But try playing Hawke like that.

And you could totally play a devious Warden in DAO. Conceal information. Lie. Pursue your own goals while appearing to pursue the goals of others. DAO fully allowed that sort of roleplaying.

But DA2 did not.

[Vaeliorin]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
And you could totally play a devious Warden in DAO. Conceal information. Lie. Pursue your own goals while appearing to pursue the goals of others. DAO fully allowed that sort of roleplaying.

I played such a Warden in DA.  She was a mage, and upon learning that Alistair was in line to be king, she set about seducing him, doing "good" things even though she didn't really care about them.  Her eventual goal was to put Alistair on the throne, have Alistair's kid, kill Alistair, become regent over her child, and take control of Fereldan.  She wanted to make others suffer as she felt she had suffered as a mage.

At the end of DA, she was well on her way to success...no idea what will eventually become of her.