184 réponses à ce sujet

[wsandista]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

I've asked this question before, but haven't yet seen a response.

What, really, is the difference between a fixed PC and Hawke?

Hawke has a variable personality and requires the player to provide some motivations. The problem with this is that the player can't create any personality they wish(they have the choice between "Spineless Positive Guy" "One-Liner Joker" and "Assh*le", no other options are there) and that any motivations the player is required to provide can be contradicted by the ones Hawke always has. So you get stuck playing a character that you can't actually design yourself, yet requires input from the player to determine personality(out of a small list of choices) and motivations(even though they can be contradicted).

In short, Hawke is very weak as a fixed PC(because the motivations for certain actions simply aren't there and the player must select a variable personality) and very weak as a player generated PC(because player design can be contradicted and the player has no real control over Hakwe).

[Pasquale1234]

So far, so good, thanks.

What advantages would you gain from a fixed PC?

[wsandista]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

What advantages would you gain from a fixed PC?

They work better with VA and in cinematic games.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Cimeas wrote...

So Baldurs' Gate 2 was not an RPG then?
Because I seemingly remember, after your buddies were arrested, the quest goal popped up to help them by raising the money to pay the guy in the slum, and you couldn't just say 'no, I'm going to go travel to Neverwinter and find a wife and have kids and live a happy peaceful life without killing' could you.   Your character DECIDED to help them, thus writing it down in his/her quest journal, without your consent.   

Could you show me how you reached that conclusion from what I wrote?  It would help tremendously in discussing this with you if I understood your system of reasoning.

Because from here, that looks like a complete non sequiter.  At no point did I require that the decisions be unlimited in scope or direction.  At no point did I demand unfettered freedom to express or implement those decisions with in the game world.

Either you're using a blatant straw man, or you made a gross error of logic, or you're reasoning on some level beyond my comprehension.

Which is it?

[Pasquale1234]

wsandista wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

What advantages would you gain from a fixed PC?

They work better with VA and in cinematic games.

With no other evidence - I guess I'll take your word for it.

For now, anyway. 

[Cimeas]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

So Baldurs' Gate 2 was not an RPG then?
Because I seemingly remember, after your buddies were arrested, the quest goal popped up to help them by raising the money to pay the guy in the slum, and you couldn't just say 'no, I'm going to go travel to Neverwinter and find a wife and have kids and live a happy peaceful life without killing' could you.   Your character DECIDED to help them, thus writing it down in his/her quest journal, without your consent.   

Could you show me how you reached that conclusion from what I wrote?  It would help tremendously in discussing this with you if I understood your system of reasoning.

Because from here, that looks like a complete non sequiter.  At no point did I require that the decisions be unlimited in scope or direction.  At no point did I demand unfettered freedom to express or implement those decisions with in the game world.

Either you're using a blatant straw man, or you made a gross error of logic, or you're reasoning on some level beyond my comprehension.

Which is it?

If Hakwe gets sad when his mother dies, that's bad, you say, because some people's Hawkes might be heartless bastards/not have good relationships with their mother/etc....

If the protagonist of Baldurs Gate decides that he cares enough about his friends to attempt to raise a ridiculous amount of gold to rescue them, that's OK?



1) Protagonist cares about mother, shows it by grieving: Bad.
2) Protagonist cares about friends, shows it by rescuing them: Good. 


Now, it's true, I haven't played BG2 in a very long time, and I had to confirm some of this stuff on Wikipedia, but it seems to be as I remembered it.  Why the double standards?

[Cimeas]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

What advantages would you gain from a fixed PC?

They work better with VA and in cinematic games.

With no other evidence - I guess I'll take your word for it.

For now, anyway. 

Yeah, to be honest, simple as that.  I like cinematic choice-driven games with side-quests and companions etc... And right now there aren't many of those around.  That's why I don't want Bioware to stop making these kind of games, because I enjoy them.  Of course there is room for improvement, but going *backwards* is not the answer in my opinion. 

[Allan Schumacher]

To be fair to the old movie comment, Ultima IV is a game that has not aged particularly well at all. A lot of games from the 80s haven't.

That was the point of the comparison to the really old movie, and I agree that many really old movies can be difficult to watch as well.


EDIT: I just realized this thread is several pages (and days) old....

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 19 juillet 2012 - 01:03 .

[Cimeas]

Haha Allan, this has turned into the standard Dragon Age Forums: Battle of Voice Acting Valley fight that it usually does.

[Allan Schumacher]

Eh, as I've read through this thread, I think I'm going to close it.

It's already starting off somewhat off topic, but the discussions going on now already occur in other places.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 19 juillet 2012 - 01:31 .