3855 réponses à ce sujet

[hussey 92]

A human protagonist? Thats rare.

[upsettingshorts]

Satyricon331 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...
The short version is basically that now that I have a game that caters to my playstyle, why would I want to go back to simply having mine accomodated alongside others in what I consider a sort of clumsy hybrid? 

Upsettingshorts wrote...
[...]That's what compromises are about.  Learn to share, people.

Sometimes I think the Chinese government could take huge swathes of the BSN, translate it to Mandarin, and use it as successful anti-democracy propaganda.  

What is nuance?  These statements are not inconsistent in context, but seeing as you've stripped the context, I'll reintroduce it:

One point was regarding an issue in which there is possibility of overlap.  There is a group of fans who wants companion armor customization, and a group of fans that want distinctive looks for their companions.  By allowing you to swap out armor type but retaining looks in DA3, that is an attempt at compromise.

Tell me how to compromise between a third person cinematic approach with a voiced protagonist, and a first person PnP-style approach with a silent protagonist.  Difficulty: It can't be hideously expensive.  I've supported a few notions in the past, but none have gained much traction.

I hardly appreciate being lectured on what democracy is when I'm the one arguing that there is no consensus and we should stop pretending that we aren't each in our own factions with our own desires.  The BSN asserts with regularity that all "old fans" represent a one-party state that speaks with one voice and metrics or new fans don't matter.  Talk about anti-democracy propaganda.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 octobre 2012 - 10:59 .

[Palipride47]

Satyricon331 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...
The short version is basically that now that I have a game that caters to my playstyle, why would I want to go back to simply having mine accomodated alongside others in what I consider a sort of clumsy hybrid? 

Upsettingshorts wrote...
[...]That's what compromises are about.  Learn to share, people.

Sometimes I think the Chinese government could take huge swathes of the BSN, translate it to Mandarin, and use it as successful anti-democracy propaganda.  

Hehe.....

Or support the Qun......

[MorningBird]

DG:

I'll say this much: when the original thread was up, I asked the rest of the team what they remembered of the original game, and we all agreed that "atheism" was not something we'd ever supported as a viewpoint for the PC. And by supported, I mean something that-- whenever the topic arose-- we would make sure we included it as an option. Anything we consider "supported" is something we would make sure to maintain consistently throughout the game... that's a design term we take seriously.

Yes, there was indeed the occasional dialogue option to express it-- something you guys obviously remember better than we do (writing something over six years will definitely do that, let me tell you). I don't know if we would consider that "supported" as I defined above, but you're correct that it definitely pops up.  Probably because, at the time, such an option seemed appropriate, and I wouldn't have a problem with that even now.

The part where I get stuck, and am clearly quite poor at expressing the exact point where my support for this idea breaks down, is where "atheism" stops being "I doubt that the Maker actually exists" to being some kind of political view... as atheism often is in the modern world. More secularization than atheism, really. There's a strong streak of anti-religious organization present here on the forums, and when the topic is broached it seemed to be done in the sense of "I should be allowed to go on a crusade against all religion", which is really the thing that I believe is out of place in our setting. Being able to occasionally express doubt, sure... but in order to make such a view supported we would need to provide a full path for such a stance.

The forums being what they are, they will automatically interpret that as in only the extreme opposite must then be the truth-- I'll never be able to express ANYTHING anti-religious and therefore must myself BE RELIGIOUS OMG!... which of course is simply not so, but I guess if you intend to freak out about it go ahead and get it out of your system.

And that's as far as I'll go on that topic. Thanks.

Link (may involve some scrolling)

I'd pay specific attention to that third paragraph.  DG never says that the PC HAS to play as a devote Andrastian, merely that Atheism as we know it is unlikely to exist in Thedas.  It is still possible to express doubt/uncertainty in the Maker, Andraste, and Chantry.

As for Hawke shouting, 'Maker!' as a battle cry (or something to that effect) during combat, well, I'm not at all religious, but I still say, 'God dammit' five times a day... >>

[Jerrybnsn]

John Epler wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

Messi Kossmann wrote...

Only Human, but with playable backgrounds would be a good way.

The backgrounds are not playable per interview with David Gaider.  It'll be a la Mass Effect short paragraphs to choose from.

They're not playable, but we've said nothing beyond that they will be of some significance. Please don't put words in our mouths.

Will there be words use to be read about your possible background choices? 

[Tarathelion]

Well, personally i prefer playing humans to other races. However, i am aware that are people for which customization and race choices play a huge role in playing rpgs, So i'm gutted for them.

I would be lying if i said i was surprised. There was an understanding that new DA game will again have a voiced protagonist (which is my personal preference). I believe it would be very costly to make a game with 3 races, different genders and voiced protagonist. It looked unlikely.

"Would it be better to have multiple races as an option for main character in game as opposed to predetermined human" Yes but unfortunately options like that comes with price.
Firstly, the story for each race has to be atleast adjusted (if its even possible for story to work with other characters, for example if main char is inquisitor). The truth is dwarves and elves are very well recognised in fantasy world, everybody seems to have a very clear picture of how dwarf or elves should look, behave, talk etc (even if creators of DA have somewhat attempted to change that perception a bit). I just don't see how it would be possible to add these choices without writing new lines (some of them at least) for each race, not to mention using the same voice actor. I just can't imagine having the same voice for elf and dwarf. Someone mentioned that SWTOR uses same actor for every race. That is correct, however in star wars universe (swotor) races don't alter the perceptions that npcs have about you. It doesn't matter who you are, they will treat you the same. The race factor have no meaning really, just like the color of your eyes. Also races are very similar in that way they are portrayed (playable ones) In DA it is different. So, you need to add the npcs reactions to you depending on your races too. These things have to be written. It takes time and money.
the real question is: Would you rather have multiple race choices with a shorter gameplay or just one race with longer one. I would go for the latter, As i stated above, i prefer humans myself but i wouldn't mind elf or dwarf as only option as long as the story and overall experience is good. ( it will never happen unfortunately). The reality is most people prefer to play humans. Game industry is business. So the decision is a natural choice.

Same logic probably applies to having origins story in game like the ones in DA:O. Most people play the game once (a lot of them don't even finish it). This forum is used by most devoted minority of fans. If a Origin story would take 2 hours out of 40 hours of gameplay, its just 5% of experience for average person. However making it for every race/class would take much more time and resources than that portion.More like 15/20 % (just a guess). So again ,i would prefer to have longer overall gameplay that everybody would experience rather than extra content that require to play the game multiple times (as cool as it is).

If think Bioware took sensible choices here, well thats just my opinion.

Bottom line is you can have great game with multiple races like Dragon Age: Origin or great game with just human (just look at Torment - for me the best rpg ever). Lets hope that regardless of choices made it will be a great one,

[Rawgrim]

Ivandra Ceruden wrote...

'Non-playable backgrounds' sounds text-based to me. Which is meh. :/

Reminds me of when they said companions would be customizable in DA2. We got to give them belts and rings...

[Emzamination]

MorningBird wrote...

<Snip>

Thanks morningbird

[Palipride47]

MorningBird wrote...

DG:

I'll say this much: when the original thread was up, I asked the rest of the team what they remembered of the original game, and we all agreed that "atheism" was not something we'd ever supported as a viewpoint for the PC. And by supported, I mean something that-- whenever the topic arose-- we would make sure we included it as an option. Anything we consider "supported" is something we would make sure to maintain consistently throughout the game... that's a design term we take seriously.

Yes, there was indeed the occasional dialogue option to express it-- something you guys obviously remember better than we do (writing something over six years will definitely do that, let me tell you). I don't know if we would consider that "supported" as I defined above, but you're correct that it definitely pops up.  Probably because, at the time, such an option seemed appropriate, and I wouldn't have a problem with that even now.

The part where I get stuck, and am clearly quite poor at expressing the exact point where my support for this idea breaks down, is where "atheism" stops being "I doubt that the Maker actually exists" to being some kind of political view... as atheism often is in the modern world. More secularization than atheism, really. There's a strong streak of anti-religious organization present here on the forums, and when the topic is broached it seemed to be done in the sense of "I should be allowed to go on a crusade against all religion", which is really the thing that I believe is out of place in our setting. Being able to occasionally express doubt, sure... but in order to make such a view supported we would need to provide a full path for such a stance.

The forums being what they are, they will automatically interpret that as in only the extreme opposite must then be the truth-- I'll never be able to express ANYTHING anti-religious and therefore must myself BE RELIGIOUS OMG!... which of course is simply not so, but I guess if you intend to freak out about it go ahead and get it out of your system.

And that's as far as I'll go on that topic. Thanks.

Link (may involve some scrolling)

I'd pay specific attention to that third paragraph.  DG never says that the PC HAS to play as a devote Andrastian, merely that Atheism as we know it is unlikely to exist in Thedas.  It is still possible to express doubt/uncertainty in the Maker, Andraste, and Chantry.

As for Hawke shouting, 'Maker!' as a battle cry (or something to that effect) during combat, well, I'm not at all religious, but I still say, 'God dammit' five times a day... >>

And this is why I say there is no "evidence" for atheism. Poltical Atheism, there will never be any, and the game mechanics combined with the story they want to tell will not make it so. Personal Atheism, yes, that can still be there. 

Belief in the ideas =/= belief in the instittution......


********************

I'm tired, and I've been on BSN wayyy too long, so I'll take my leave, and watch this thread be locked tomorrow 

Modifié par Palipride47, 21 octobre 2012 - 10:58 .

[WhiteThunder]

Palipride47 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Palipride47 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Palipride47 wrote...

I will diagree on the bolded point, in that it may be your play style, but not mine. If they can smush them together nicely (which I think DAO does) then, sure, I'm 100% for it. 

If they can't, then I will relegate it to whatever they chose (and if I can't enjoy it with my more "old-school immersion" style, I'll stop).

Yeah but here's the thing.

Why is BioWare the one that has to deliver this approach, if - as Fast Jimmy says - DA2 is broadly the way BioWare wants to go whats stopping any of you guys from saying, "Oh well" and hopping over to Project Eternity/Wasteland 2?  They could use the support.

I don't think Bioware has to do anything. I think it would be prudent to do so.

And if I cannot deal with it, I will leave, and I may be bitter about it, but I'm not going to pretend they did it because Bioware/EA/Gaider and Co. hates me specifically and are cackling as they count their piles of cash about how nicely they crushed the hopes of "old school RPGers."

And I won't pretend your style is less "legitimate" than mine. It stinks of nostalgia-based pretension that gives all old school RPGers a bad name. And i receive it even from others who play like me base on the priniciple that my parents had sex too late for me to play Ultima. 

Well...you could flip it around too. A fanbase who has supported Bioware and bought their products since they started making games, suddenly gets alienated because Bioware now wants to make action games instead, but still claims they are making rpgs to make sure their old fanbase buys some.

But that is the nature of the gaming industry, and if we don't like it, we can take our money and go support Project Eternity (never mind that I think they are just throiwng old school RPG names around to make us quiver in our loins and throw our money at them <_<) or something else.

ME3 got the things they wanted when they yelled loud enough, but they yelled loudly enough with ONE VOICE. If our voices are so disparate, they are not going to abandon one base for another (now that they essentially have two, with some people, like me, caught in the middle)

Have you never heard of Obsidian Entertainment? They're a pretty established studio.  Admittedly, it is kind of unbelievable that all of the leading lights of RPG design in the 90s are working together under one roof, but they were all working together in the 90s, too. They basically reformed Black Isle Studios when they brought in Tim Cain last year.  They are legit as heck.

[RosaAquafire]

This isn't a deal-breaker, but it IS a huge, huge blow. If there was one thing I wanted brought back from Origins, it was race selection. I don't care about aesthetics, I just like how DA's races have such interesting backgrounds and cultures, where humans ... don't. It's FUN to play as a different culture, to put yourself into those shoes. Especially as an elf -- there's something completely satisfying about playing as a second-class citizen to me, being treated like crap by NPCs. I love that.

I thought there was at least a 30% chance of races coming back and the fact that they're not is a HUGE bummer. For those of us who consider the roleplaying experience the most important part of an rpg, this sucks really hard. Really hard. Playing as a different race transforms the world around me. Even if it doesn't react to me, *I* react to *it* through my RP. I would rather all four races with no customization than a human I can make into anything I want. They'll still be human, DA's most vanilla race.

I'm glad there are different backgrounds, though them not being playable is also a huge blow. I don't think just being TOLD about being kidnapped on my wedding day and my cousin being raped would have created the emotional connection to my history and background that actually playing the City Elf Origin did. But different backgrounds is a definite improvement over DA2 and a definite way to make our Inquisitor different from someone else's Inquisitor, as opposed to everyone having the same Hawke.

I don't know, we'll see. Not a deal-breaker but basically the worst news I personally could have gotten headed into DA3. Especially since it looks very likely that both male LIs are human.

[Rawgrim]

[/quote]

But that is the nature of the gaming industry, and if we don't like it, we can take our money and go support Project Eternity (never mind that I think they are just throiwng old school RPG names around to make us quiver in our loins and throw our money at them <_<) or something else.

ME3 got the things they wanted when they yelled loud enough, but they yelled loudly enough with ONE VOICE. If our voices are so disparate, they are not going to abandon one base for another (now that they essentially have two, with some people, like me, caught in the middle)

[/quote]

Have you never heard of Obsidian Entertainment? They're a pretty established studio.  Admittedly, it is kind of unbelievable that all of the leading lights of RPG design in the 90s are working together under one roof, but they were all working together in the 90s, too. They basically reformed Black Isle Studios when they brought in Tim Cain last year.  They are legit as heck.[/quote]

Absolutely.

[Jerrybnsn]

Direwolf0294 wrote...

I'm really disappointed with this. Fantasy RPGs that don't allow race choice just feel wrong to me, I can't really explain it. I hope their idea of giving us races isn't to just have them as playable in multiplayer like ME3 has, because that would also be rather disappointing.

One of the needs that video games provide it the feeling of having a certain amount of control over our actions or who we are perceived to be.  In a world that regulates to having to constantly compromise and go with the flow, our drive towards autonomy, where video games offer that amount of control.  The more things we can manipulate in a game the better we respond positive towards it.  This is true especially in picking your character in an rpg.

[Satyricon331]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Satyricon331 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...
The short version is basically that now that I have a game that caters to my playstyle, why would I want to go back to simply having mine accomodated alongside others in what I consider a sort of clumsy hybrid? 

Upsettingshorts wrote...
[...]That's what compromises are about.  Learn to share, people.

Sometimes I think the Chinese government could take huge swathes of the BSN, translate it to Mandarin, and use it as successful anti-democracy propaganda.  

What is nuance?

One point was regarding an issue in which there is possibility of overlap.  There is a group of fans who wants companion armor customization, and a group of fans that want distinctive looks for their companions.  By allowing you to swap out armor type but retaining looks in DA3, that is an attempt at compromise.

Tell me how to compromise between a third person cinematic approach with a voiced protagonist, and a first person PnP-style approach with a silent protagonist.  Difficulty: It can't be hideously expensive.

I hardly appreciate being lectured on what democracy is when I'm the one arguing that there is no consensus and we should stop pretending that we aren't each in our own factions with our own desires.  The BSN asserts with regularity that all "old fans" represent a one-party state that speaks with one voice and metrics or new fans don't matter.  Talk about anti-democracy propaganda.

Oh, please.  You were there, telling LobselVith8 that between a a system that had set armor and a system that had set appearances regardless of armor, mashing them together in a way Lobs seemed to feel was a "clumsy hybrid" was fine.  Then you said the earlier Bioware games were such that "Players like me and players like Sylvius the Mad were, up till then [DA2], enjoying BioWare games in our own way without any knowledge that the other existed."  Now you're wanting to claim that having games that accommodate a variety of "playstyle[s]" (to use your word) are beyond the possibility of compromise.

I was just having a little bit of light-hearted fun with you, but really you need to get over yourself.  And lol @ the idea that was a "lecture."

[Fast Jimmy]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

@Fast Jimmy

I've spoken on this at length before, and broadly I agree with your observations but not your conclusion. Here's an old post, it's kinda off topic for here though.

The short version is basically that now that I have a game that caters to my playstyle, why would I want to go back to simply having mine accomodated alongside others in what I consider a sort of clumsy hybrid? 

Because, Shorts... you need to learn to Share. 

And because of Governing Dynamics. You're not ignoring the blone.

Sharing is cool, but not when what we both want is mutually exclusive.  

I was doing a bit of pantomime of a response from you on Page 8.

Governing Dynamics states that doing what is best for the group (what I would consider the fanbase of Bioware) is going to net us all the best result. Doing what is best for just those who enjoy a more cinematic approach will not be the best, as it narrows the number of players who may enjoy the gamestyle. It is sub-par for an RPG elitist to not have the option of refusing Duncan or refusing to go after the Archdemon. Or to refuse to take Bodahn and Sandal along, or to be forced to trust Riodian and his shifty Orlesian accent. But its a medium with which many felt comfortable and which was the most accomodating. With DA:O, we were all getting laid.

A cinematic approach is half of the fanbase going for the blonde. While you may succeed, the rest of us will be upset. And you may find you don't even enjoy the blonde, in which case we all lose. 

Bioware steering away from the design of their most successful and wide-reaching game to date in an attempt to gain more fans by mimicing other genres designs is them chasing the blonde as well. But I have no control over what Bioware does. Although, granted, I have no control over you. But I can say that you sitting there going "neiner, neiner, neiner, I got what I wanted, you all didn't" is probably not accurate, since you may find that in the long term, it isn't exactly what you bargained for.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 21 octobre 2012 - 11:06 .

[Puffybread]

LOL NO RACES HAHAHAHAHAHAHAA

[Palipride47]

Rawgrim wrote...

Have you never heard of Obsidian Entertainment? They're a pretty established studio.  Admittedly, it is kind of unbelievable that all of the leading lights of RPG design in the 90s are working together under one roof, but they were all working together in the 90s, too. They basically reformed Black Isle Studios when they brought in Tim Cain last year.  They are legit as heck.

THEY KEEP DRAGGIN ME BACK!!!!

I'm more concerned about "hype vs. reality."  Bioware colored me jaded. 

Modifié par Palipride47, 21 octobre 2012 - 11:05 .

[breyant]

I like this decision. I would play human anyway, especially if elves still look the same as they did in DA2.

Hopefully this means more time and resources can be spent on developing the story and characters since they won't need to plan out multiple races/ starting quests/ storylines.

[Rawgrim]

Palipride47 wrote...

WhiteThunder wrote...

Palipride47 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Palipride47 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Palipride47 wrote...

I will diagree on the bolded point, in that it may be your play style, but not mine. If they can smush them together nicely (which I think DAO does) then, sure, I'm 100% for it. 

If they can't, then I will relegate it to whatever they chose (and if I can't enjoy it with my more "old-school immersion" style, I'll stop).

Yeah but here's the thing.

Why is BioWare the one that has to deliver this approach, if - as Fast Jimmy says - DA2 is broadly the way BioWare wants to go whats stopping any of you guys from saying, "Oh well" and hopping over to Project Eternity/Wasteland 2?  They could use the support.

I don't think Bioware has to do anything. I think it would be prudent to do so.

And if I cannot deal with it, I will leave, and I may be bitter about it, but I'm not going to pretend they did it because Bioware/EA/Gaider and Co. hates me specifically and are cackling as they count their piles of cash about how nicely they crushed the hopes of "old school RPGers."

And I won't pretend your style is less "legitimate" than mine. It stinks of nostalgia-based pretension that gives all old school RPGers a bad name. And i receive it even from others who play like me base on the priniciple that my parents had sex too late for me to play Ultima. 

Well...you could flip it around too. A fanbase who has supported Bioware and bought their products since they started making games, suddenly gets alienated because Bioware now wants to make action games instead, but still claims they are making rpgs to make sure their old fanbase buys some.

But that is the nature of the gaming industry, and if we don't like it, we can take our money and go support Project Eternity (never mind that I think they are just throiwng old school RPG names around to make us quiver in our loins and throw our money at them <_<) or something else.

ME3 got the things they wanted when they yelled loud enough, but they yelled loudly enough with ONE VOICE. If our voices are so disparate, they are not going to abandon one base for another (now that they essentially have two, with some people, like me, caught in the middle)

Have you never heard of Obsidian Entertainment? They're a pretty established studio.  Admittedly, it is kind of unbelievable that all of the leading lights of RPG design in the 90s are working together under one roof, but they were all working together in the 90s, too. They basically reformed Black Isle Studios when they brought in Tim Cain last year.  They are legit as heck.

THEY KEEP DRAGGIN ME BACK!!!!

I'm more concerned about "hype vs. reality" 

Well the screenshots and all the other stuff they have allready showed us is "reality" not hype.

[Puffybread]

im guessing its becaues you require several voice actors for each race whcih enroaches upon Bioware's resources. Plus animations and armor models would also be another factor.

[upsettingshorts]

Satyricon331 wrote...

Oh, please.  You were there, telling LobselVith8 that between a a system that had set armor and a system that had set appearances regardless of armor, mashing them together in a way Lobs seemed to feel was a "clumsy hybrid" was fine

No, I said in a post you didn't quote that pretending it wasn't an attempt at compromise was unfair because the effort was made.  While I did say that compromise was about sharing, I did not say that he could not prefer and desire the DAO system anyway.  Quite the opposite.

Satyricon331 wrote...

.  Then you said the earlier Bioware games were such that "Players like me and players like Sylvius the Mad were, up till then [DA2], enjoying BioWare games in our own way without any knowledge that the other existed."  Now you're wanting to claim that having games that accommodate a variety of "playstyle[s]" (to use your word) are beyond the possibility of compromise.

Because they reached a point where a wedge was driven.  That's the point of the argument, in fact.  Now that cinematic games are possible and not limited by technology, the game (pun not intended) has changed.

Satyricon331 wrote...

I was just having a little bit of light-hearted fun with you, but really you need to get over yourself.  And lol @ the idea that was a "lecture."

Now it is.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 21 octobre 2012 - 11:10 .

[Rawgrim]

breyant wrote...

I like this decision. I would play human anyway, especially if elves still look the same as they did in DA2.

Hopefully this means more time and resources can be spent on developing the story and characters since they won't need to plan out multiple races/ starting quests/ storylines.

That time and effort will be spent on the multiplayer bit.

[Jerrybnsn]

Rawgrim wrote...

Ivandra Ceruden wrote...

'Non-playable backgrounds' sounds text-based to me. Which is meh. :/

Reminds me of when they said companions would be customizable in DA2. We got to give them belts and rings...

If text-based backgrounds are not going to be use and you can't have a playable origins then that leaves...........

Five Minute Cinematic Movie!!!