3855 réponses à ce sujet

[Salaya]

For those people arguing that there are great RPGs without race choice out there... what is the point with that? Of course; lots of great RPGs had no race option. But, Origins, one of the greatest, made of race selection a sign of identity and a great gameplay implementation (I do not agree with those saying that race had no impact at all during the adventure). But, honestly, with DA2 and ME3 as the last products from Bioware... do you really believe that they can make a great RPG, at the same level as those classics you mention? If DA2 is what BW thinks of a great RPG without race selection, I'm pretty sure DA3 will be even worse than the previous entry.

The problem is, the absence of race choice is not a design decision, made to benefit writing or story (not only, at least); race is not present because, among other things, BW is trying to approach wider game audience, while trying to convince some of us that they are going to mix both philosophies.

[Cutlasskiwi]

Salaya wrote...

For those people arguing that there are great RPGs without race choice out there... what is the point with that? Of course; lots of great RPGs had no race option. But, Origins, one of the greatest, made of race selection a sign of identity and a great gameplay implementation (I do not agree with those saying that race had no impact at all during the adventure). But, honestly, with DA2 and ME3 as the last products from Bioware... do you really believe that they can make a great RPG, at the same level as those classics you mention? If DA2 is what BW thinks of a great RPG without race selection, I'm pretty sure DA3 will be even worse than the previous entry.

The problem is, the absence of race choice is not a design decision, made to benefit writing or story (not only, at least); race is not present because, among other things, BW is trying to approach wider game audience, while trying to convince some of us that they are going to mix both philosophies.

..I'm just curious how removing race selection will help them approach a wider audience?


And yes, I think they can make an excellent RPG, especially the DA team, if they don't rush out a game in under a year.

[Chaos Lord Malek]

Salaya wrote...

For those people arguing that there are great RPGs without race choice out there... what is the point with that? Of course; lots of great RPGs had no race option. But, Origins, one of the greatest, made of race selection a sign of identity and a great gameplay implementation (I do not agree with those saying that race had no impact at all during the adventure). But, honestly, with DA2 and ME3 as the last products from Bioware... do you really believe that they can make a great RPG, at the same level as those classics you mention? If DA2 is what BW thinks of a great RPG without race selection, I'm pretty sure DA3 will be even worse than the previous entry.

The problem is, the absence of race choice is not a design decision, made to benefit writing or story (not only, at least); race is not present because, among other things, BW is trying to approach wider game audience, while trying to convince some of us that they are going to mix both philosophies.

Not great. The best are - Planescape Torment, had no race or even gender/character selection. Witcher doesn't have it either. Even Mass Effect 1, which was so praised had only a choice between genders.  The KOTOR had it almost same as Mass Effect, except you could pick a name.

Making a set character is greatest bonus for story a game developer can make. There will never be a game with Characer selection and better story and atmosphere then those without it. 

Modifié par Chaos Lord Malek, 25 octobre 2012 - 12:00 .

[Salaya]

Cutlasskiwi wrote...

Salaya wrote...

A good joke without any doubt  

..I'm just curious how removing race selection will help them approach a wider audience?

...

Cuting options that add complxity; exactly the same that happened with weapons and armor penetration. Or getting rid of skills. The less the variables in different category levels, the wider the audience.

Of course, it's just my opinion.

[Salaya]

Chaos Lord Malek wrote...

Salaya wrote...

beatiful poetry

Not great. The best are - Planescape Torment, had no race or even gender/character selection. Witcher doesn't have it either. Even Mass Effect 1, which was so praised had only a choice between genders.  The KOTOR had it almost same as Mass Effect, except you could pick a name.

Making a set character is greatest bonus for story a game developer can make. There will never be a game with Characer selection and better story and atmosphere then those without it. 

I've said "great" precisely because saying "the best" it's a bit presumptuous. Clearly Planescape and The Witcher are great games (I love Planescape, one my favorites), but I rather say those are great.

And I do not agree with your last sentence. Origins is a big counterexample. Any Warden is far great in atmosphere/context/writing than Hawke. 

Modifié par Salaya, 25 octobre 2012 - 12:31 .

[PizzaThe Hutt]

Hopefully a rumour is just a rumour and we'll be able to play more than just a human...

[AlexJK]

PizzaThe Hutt wrote...

Hopefully a rumour is just a rumour and we'll be able to play more than just a human...

It's not a rumour, it's 100% confirmed.

Salaya wrote...

For those people arguing that there are great RPGs without race choice out there... what is the point with that?

They're trying to illustate that racial selection does not instantly and magically a great RPG make. Do you not think this is a valid counter argument to all the people saying "but more choices are always, categorically, better"?

Of course; lots of great RPGs had no race option. But, Origins, one of the greatest, made of race selection a sign of identity and a great gameplay implementation.

Yes it did. But why does Origins doing something well automatically mean that other games set in the same world space are somehow lessened by the absence of that racial choice? Thats right, it doesn't.

The problem is, the absence of race choice is not a design decision, made to benefit writing or story (not only, at least); race is not present because, among other things, BW is trying to approach wider game audience, while trying to convince some of us that they are going to mix both philosophies.

This is your opinion and interpretation. Given that Bioware themselves have said that there are "story and customisation" reasons for the single racial option, you would seem to be incorrect.

Modifié par AlexJK, 25 octobre 2012 - 02:42 .

[Sandy]

PizzaThe Hutt wrote...

Hopefully a rumour is just a rumour and we'll be able to play more than just a human...

Sorry to be the one to bring you the news, but it is not a rumor. It has been confirmed.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Skyrim had a more varied race selection than DA:O. Did that make it a better roleplaying experience than DA:O? Or was it the fact that one had the many different background stories to choose from? I'm genuinely curious.

[Sandy]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Skyrim had a more varied race selection than DA:O. Did that make it a better roleplaying experience than DA:O? Or was it the fact that one had the many different background stories to choose from? I'm genuinely curious.

In my opinion Skyrim isn't as much a roleplaying game as it is a rolleplaying/fighting/adventure/exploration-hybrid game. Of course it is till technically a roleplaying game, but it will never be up there with Bioware games when it comes to story, conversation, choices, narrative, characters, which to me are the key aspects to a roleplaying game.

Others may disagree and think that character looks, gear progression, level progression and exploration is more important, but I would argue that those aspects can be found in other games besides roleplaying games. For all I care Skyrim could have had 100 races and still wouldn't be as deep in terms of roleplaying as Dragon Age: Origins or even The Mass Effect series and Dragon Age 2. Races in Skyrim is an example of pure cosmetic changes, a few racial stats and only a handful of dialogue lines mentioning the player's race. I'd much rather have origins like in DA:O or backgrounds like in Mass Effect (but more detailed and with greater impact like it seems we will be getting in DA3).

[Rinji the Bearded]

What I've gathered here and elsewhere on the forum (Upsettingshorts's thread, for example), is that some people are sad at the lack of racial choices, but most people, if given the choice, prefer a strong origin/background story rather than just racial choice. If the backgrounds given to the DA3 protagonist were better fleshed out than they were in DA:O (which, let's admit it, they could have been much more reactive and deeper), would that satisfy the naysayers?

[Nerevar-as]

RinjiRenee wrote...

What I've gathered here and elsewhere on the forum (Upsettingshorts's thread, for example), is that some people are sad at the lack of racial choices, but most people, if given the choice, prefer a strong origin/background story rather than just racial choice. If the backgrounds given to the DA3 protagonist were better fleshed out than they were in DA:O (which, let's admit it, they could have been much more reactive and deeper), would that satisfy the naysayers?

As long as the game doesn´t delve in issues such as Thedas speciesm, or lore about elves and dwarves, it would be OK. But there are themes that just ask for a non-human POV. Take the qunari invasion. For a human is just an attack, but what would a city elf think learning they´ll be treated according to their merits and not their ears?

[Rinji the Bearded]

Nerevar-as wrote...

As long as the game doesn´t delve in issues such as Thedas speciesm, or lore about elves and dwarves, it would be OK. But there are themes that just ask for a non-human POV. Take the qunari invasion. For a human is just an attack, but what would a city elf think learning they´ll be treated according to their merits and not their ears?

You don't think a person who is ambivalent about the Maker, or someone who is less fortunate would also find reason with the Qun?  Not all humans feel the same about the Qunari.

[Nerevar-as]

It´s just not the same as when your whole species is mistreated, not by a long shot.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Nerevar-as wrote...

It´s just not the same as when your whole species is mistreated, not by a long shot.

Of course not.   They haven't ruled out non-human PCs in the future, I'd rather them do it when it seemed necessary in the story.  They've already stated that the Qunari, while they will play a big part in DA3, are not going to be the main focus.  We're going into the mage-templar war.  Elves have equal ground with humans within the Circle.  We've already seen an elven first enchanter, and the Grand Enchanter herself is an elf.

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 25 octobre 2012 - 03:23 .

[Darth Krytie]

I think I'll be happy with a human-only protag as long as we get a great diversity in our companions. (And also replayability depending upon background and class selection)

[Elanor]

I'm fine with human protagonist. I would be play human even if there would be other choice.

[Salaya]

AlexJK wrote...

They're trying to illustate that racial selection does not instantly and magically a great RPG make. Do you not think this is a valid counter argument to all the people saying "but more choices are always, categorically, better"?

Of course. It is a valid counterexample for "more choices are always better"; but I don't think anyone with common sense defends that.

AlexJK wrote...
Yes it did. But why does Origins doing something well automatically mean that other games set in the same world space are somehow lessened by the absence of that racial choice? Thats right, it doesn't.

Not automatically. I'm not talkig of artihmetic here; but, given the precedent -DA2-, when we were told more or less the same reasons for the race-choice absence, the result was disastrous. What I see here is the same pattern. It's reasonable to think that, after the events on DA2 development and final result, that the absence of of race choice would not mean anything good for the game.

An opinion, of course, but with some justification.

AlexJK wrote...
This is your opinion and interpretation. Given that Bioware themselves
have said that there are "story and customisation" reasons for the
single racial option, you would seem to be incorrect.

Bioware stated similar quotes in the past. What is worse, they have clearly lied to us in some aspects (both in DA2 and ME3). Particularly, about race selection in DA2, Hawke turned to be a complete disaster. Why I would believe them now? My past experience with them was exactly the opposite. So yes, now I don't believe they are forcing human for the reasons they say.

And, of course, it is my interpretation. My opinion. What's the point of marking that? Half the discussions here end with this. Everyone has his/her opinion.

[Samzo77]

I like limiting the choice to human for this game. My reasons:
1: DA is a story driven franchise. Origins did a great job at bringing multiple races and classes to the same place, but that's not always appropriate. Having read some of the corresponding books, I believe the writers have a specific direction for where this story goes, and they must have felt the best way to implement that was to keep the hero a human. I trust that judgement.
2: I appreciated being able to choose a cool background in Origins, and gain an understanding of the social status for each race, and how their communities interacted. But now I'm done with that. I played each origin, and now I get it. Outside of the Grey Wardens, where can an alienage elf become a hero?
3: Not being able to play as a specific race makes those races more interesting to me. I love the concept of the Qunari, but I feel if I was to play as one, it might ruin the mystique.

Those might not be acceptable answers to everyone as to why I like this decision, but that's okay. I don't insist to be right, but this is my thought and preference. I look forward to playing this game.

[Sylvius the Mad]

sandellniklas wrote...

In my opinion Skyrim isn't as much a roleplaying game as it is a rolleplaying/fighting/adventure/exploration-hybrid game. Of course it is till technically a roleplaying game, but it will never be up there with Bioware games when it comes to story, conversation, choices, narrative, characters, which to me are the key aspects to a roleplaying game.

Others may disagree and think that character looks, gear progression, level progression and exploration is more important, but I would argue that those aspects can be found in other games besides roleplaying games. For all I care Skyrim could have had 100 races and still wouldn't be as deep in terms of roleplaying as Dragon Age: Origins or even The Mass Effect series and Dragon Age 2. Races in Skyrim is an example of pure cosmetic changes, a few racial stats and only a handful of dialogue lines mentioning the player's race. I'd much rather have origins like in DA:O or backgrounds like in Mass Effect (but more detailed and with greater impact like it seems we will be getting in DA3).

I think Skyrim does a very good job of offering opportunities to create an emergent narrative.  The only aspect of Skyrim that I think harms roleplaying is the action combat.

I'm currently roleplaying a character in Skyrim who ran away from home as a teenager, moved to Cyrodiil, became a cat burglar, and upon reaching adulthood decided to return home to Skyrim to find her family (in Riften).  They're not there, so she's using all the means at her disposal to find them.  Now, I know her family doesn't exist, but she doesn't, so it works for roleplaying.

I do agree with you that DAO is the superior roleplaying game, but I would happily rank the Mass Effect games and DA2 far beneath Skyrim (though not because of race selection).

[ManiacG]

its regrettable in my opinion, im always open for more variation in a game, big or small.

[Blood Wraith]

I would prefer other race options like in DA:O, but a human with with several possible backgrounds/origins options(with some impact on the strory), like a noble's son/daughter being taught "The Game", a mage/blood mage's apprentice, maybe even a female(or male) chevalier, would work just as well in DA3.

[Brohammed]

It is going to severely limited the replay value of the game and thus its legacy. Race selection is also cool for game-play reasons and character rolling.

Its just such a shame that of the little information we have most of it is bad

[alhamel94]

the problem with it is not the lack of race choice but the removal of race choice. if there was no race choice initially it would have been fine. I am also curious to see if they are actually going to incorporate dao and da2 in this game. because theres seriously no continuity, its hard to have a trilogy without continuity

[Nerevar-as]

alhamel94 wrote...

the problem with it is not the lack of race choice but the removal of race choice. if there was no race choice initially it would have been fine. I am also curious to see if they are actually going to incorporate dao and da2 in this game. because theres seriously no continuity, its hard to have a trilogy without continuity

What I´d like to know is whether I´ll be able to import the DA:O save without having to play through DA2 again.