46 réponses à ce sujet

[esper]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

To me, at least, the reaction to the sibling's death from Hawke and the kid's death from Shepard were very much the same.

Your position makes no sense.

When Shepard sees the kid get exploded, the dialogue wheel does not pop up and give you the opportunity to decide the reaction.  Hawke gets one, and after Leandra responds if memory serves, another one. 

Shepard just puts on a grimaced expression and climbs up the Normandy's ramp and the scene ends. 

That's an objective difference.  Whether or not the player had any emotional response to either is subjective.

I love da2 to bits, but it has taken me five playthrough with my canon Hawke to care even a little bit about Bethany as a player.

I am not saying that you can't roleplay her death, because that is easy enough since as you say Leandra reacts to your Hawke's attitude, but as a player I first started caring for Bethany the moment my main Hawke was so fleshed out that I had a full head canon off her life before the game including what her little sister and father meant to her.

The question is wherever or not that we as a player are meant to care about the first's siblings death or if we are merely meant to roleplay it.

[upsettingshorts]

esper wrote...

The question is wherever or not that we as a player are meant to care about the first's siblings death or if we are merely meant to roleplay it.

Probably both.  I get the argument that more information/familiarity would have been useful in either case, of course.  But it did present an opportunity to RP so I don't think it's a complete waste, as it's often described.  

[Bfler]

Skyrim, as example, shows how to do it. At first there is the very atmospheric opening, when you are on the horse cart and the people introduce you to the situation and the conflicting parties, this continues without action mode until Alduin, the big bad, finally arrives just before your execution. And even then you are only introduced to the movement controls and can't fight until you choose a side.

And in DA2 I don't care about the sibling or Wesley, because I don't know them. In Origins, I care f.e. about Duncan, because he and his story is introduced before his death.

Modifié par Bfler, 26 octobre 2012 - 08:42 .

[esper]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

esper wrote...

The question is wherever or not that we as a player are meant to care about the first's siblings death or if we are merely meant to roleplay it.

Probably both.  I get the argument that more information/familiarity would have been useful in either case, of course.  But it did present an opportunity to RP so I don't think it's a complete waste, as it's often described.  

I agree with it not being a waste because from rp stand point I does help me form Hawke, but I also agree that I couldn't care less about Bethany and have trouble not playing a mage, because I miss Carver who I as a player have become attacthed too.

But I have also trouble saying were that sweet spot for now I am attached to the characther goes. The Cousland family is often compared to the situation, but I also couldn't care less about the Couslands... whereas I was pretty willing to adopt Jowan as my foolish brother-y best friend who got me into trouble in the mages origin. I don't know what the difference was, expect perhaps that I spend most part of the mage origin helping Jowan where as the Cousland where 'just' slaughtered.

[esper]

Bfler wrote...

Skyrim, as example, shows how to do it. At first there is the very atmospheric opening, when you are on the horse cart and the people introduce you to the situation and the conflicting parties, this continues without action mode until Alduin, the big bad, finally arrives just before your execution. And even then you are only introduced to the movement controls and can't fight until you choose a side.

Skyrim shows how not to do it. God I hated that intro, I spend most of it going, how do I get out of first view I am getting sea sick here. Oh there is a dragon fireballing at me, oh I have to choose between... who were you two again?

I ended up choosing side because I was still figuring out the controls and I didn't really see in which direction the other characther ran. The most random decision I have ever made. Then I will rather have da2 that at least let me form my characther with my choices.

[BouncyFrag]

A bit more context and build up in DA2 would have given it a stronger start. For instance, I was hoping to see the sacking of Lothering since that is something we only heard about and didn't see. . Maybe even the caging of Sten and even catching some gossip about some Grey Warden and the odd folks he is traveling around with. More context is good just as long as it doesn't drag down too much.

[Bfler]

esper wrote...

 Oh there is a dragon fireballing at me, oh I have to choose between... who were you two again?

You obviously didn't listen to the people before Alduin attacked.

[upsettingshorts]

Bfler wrote...

You obviously didn't listen to the people before Alduin attacked.

Oh I listened, but Bethesda's voice actors cannot help but fail to be compelling. I think it's in their contract to be wooden and detached. 

But that's off-topic.

[esper]

Bfler wrote...

esper wrote...

 Oh there is a dragon fireballing at me, oh I have to choose between... who were you two again?

You obviously didn't listen to the people before Alduin attacked.

I got who the Nord was, kinda, but I have no idea where he freaking went druing the dialog because I was too busy concentrating on the controls. so I just followed the guard.

It is like that link showed. The game gave me control in the minute a huge dragon was fireballing at me, and since I am not used to first person view controlling a characther I did not have time to deal very well with the choices suppossed to be made.

At least in Oblivion I had a couple of minutes to figure out the controls before the Emporor waded in.

[Maria Caliban]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

To me, at least, the reaction to the sibling's death from Hawke and the kid's death from Shepard were very much the same.

Your position makes no sense.

Something you've decided before asking for elaboration or even describing what you see as the differences in the scene.

That's an objective difference.

Yes, you've shown there are objective differences in whether or not the dialogue wheel pops up. But the question is if both games let the player pick the PC's reaction to the death or if they dictate the reaction to you. DA II explicitly gives you dialogue lines and ME 3 gives you a scene that can be read in a number of ways because Shepard has no expression.

Both of those are ways to let the player decide what the PC's reaction was.

Whether or not the player had any emotional response to either is subjective.

Then it's a good thing that, you know, I didn't mention player response, but the PC's reaction.

[Pzykozis]

Haha ME3 that kid death I actually burst out laughing at that point, that forced Shephard stare so unbelievably just didn't care.

I don't mind an In Media Res opening but it has to be backed by some sort of grounding after the fact like a oh this happened then two weeks earlier etc. gripping opening and then the needed pace change after that settles in and grounds the story. Then again I love Dead Leaves and that has no pace change just starts out insane and carries it forward.

[Karlone123]

MisterJB wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...
ME2's Arrival DLC is what happened.

Had they showed a scene of the Normandy being aprhended and Shepard arrested, let us actually meet James Vega rather than have it be done off screen, etc, the opening to ME3 would have been better in my humble opinion.

Plus the supposed Shepard trial that we thought was supposed to happen, was done off screen. Kind of wish I played single-player off screen,

[masterdark30]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

masterdark30 wrote...

P.S. Stop killing characters off at the very beginning of the game. It doesnt work. No one cares about these charcaters. People arn't that shocked when characters die in games, it happens alot. However, people are shocked when relatable well built up (through dialogue) characters die. In DA:2 it was a game requirement that failed emotionally because we didnt really know any of the characters at that point. It also didnt work in ME3 with the boy. 

In Dragon Age 2 - less so Mass Effect 3, Shepard's reaction is pretty much locked in - the death of your sibling as well as the Templar provided you with opportunities to roleplay.  You could decide how Hawke felt about, and reacted to, these events.  If you feel that Hawke should have not cared about his sister or the Templar, you are free to choose that option.  The other characters react appropriately.  

If you don't know how Hawke would react to that event, then... how would you define roleplaying?

Ok i see your point, leave it up to the player and to be honest i think i sort of did that while playing, been ages since i played DA:2. Though i only really did it because the game sort of forces it on you. I dunno i've probably been spoilt by some game or another but i sort of expect more when it comes to RPG's. Some people complained about the epilogue at the end of Origins because they said it explained too much, i felt it explained just enough while still allowing me to ponder what the characters could of gotten up to afterwards. I knew next to nothing about the Siblings at the start of DA:2 and just as i get to know them, one dies suddenly without any dying words or anything. 

If i'm going to assume the role of a character that has a brother or sister then i need to at least get to know what makes these characters a family and not just people who happened to live together. I need more than Bioware telling me 'Yep thats your sister/ brother you must care deeply about them'.

Just thinking aloud here but a good example (not a RPG game) but Assassins Creed 2 and how that family in the beginning was handled. I actually cared what happened to them. Again its about a gradual progression. There is a time and place for our imaginations and head cannon to run wild, in the very start of the game we should be easily lead through the experience not just dumped into the thick of it. 

Edit: Ok i completely forgot about the PC reaction option to the Sibling death, shows its been awhile. That helped but again personally i needed more back story or a true dying speech scene to even start to care. I dont think it would of worked for Mass Effect in the kid scene because it would of been abit jarring to pause the cutscene for player input. Also no one was really around Shepard focusing on the shuttle with him at the time so he'd just be mumbling to himself instead of being able to react and feed off of the reactions of those around him/her. Though it would of been fun to get another STEEEEVE moment lol. 

Modifié par masterdark30, 26 octobre 2012 - 10:16 .

[masterdark30]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I don't care how Hawke reacts to his sibling's death as much as I care about how *I* react to that event. And yes, the death of the sibling wasn't that good for me.

Alternatively, when Bethany was taken away by the Templars, I had a rather strong reaction.

Because you had enough time with Bethany to really form an attachment and care about the charcater. I was pretty upset at that point aswell. I was ready to take on all the Templars right there lol.

[upsettingshorts]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Something you've decided before asking for elaboration or even describing what you see as the differences in the scene. 

That's a neat trick.  I'm going to post misleading, incomplete, opinions in the context of disagreeing with someone and then only later respond with elaboration that completes the thought after their incredulous reply. 

[masterdark30]

MisterJB wrote...

hhh89 wrote...
Agreed.
But anyway, didn't ME2 started with pew pew explosions? I'd say having a Collector ship cutting the Normandy as it was butter with his beam would've put ME2's openining in the pew pew explosions openings.

ME2 is an example of a quick and shocking opening done right.
We start up at, relatively, the same place we ended in ME1 with some dialogue to inform what has been happening. There is the old Normandy, the LI, it's a setting you identify with and it's why you are appaled when it's destroyed.
ME3 took what ME2 did right and did it spectacularly wrong. We begin the game in a place we've never been, talking to a guy we've never met before; our ship, LI and team are God knows where and we have no idea what happened between the end of ME2 and the beginning of ME3.

Completely agree on both accounts. Dragon Age 3 while it will certainly be familar (even in the fact that it has Dragon Age in the title) we need to be introduced into the world all over again. Especially as it'll be the first time with a brand new engine so i'm sure things arnt exactly going to look like they looked in DA:2 (thank god for the most part). 

I'm using the old time-machine abit here but i'm sure Knights of the Old Republic had a relatively pew pew explosion beginning while still being fairly gradual. Yes the ship was  exploding around you but you got eased into it through conversation from the soldier who wakes you up. You were able to learn the mechanics without any real sense of immediate danger by being initially locked in your cabin. Once you felt you had a proper handle on the controls you were given the option to continue. I'd say it worked ok in that game not great and yes a character died early on aswell but i think it worked alot better  than what we see in Mass Effect 3, maybe on par with DA:2.

So would people be for pew pew explosions if you started off in a relatively controlled 'safe' environment like Kotor or are ME1 (exploring the normandy, free to converse), ME2 (exploring normandy with ease into combat later), Dragon Age: Origins (exploration of a fair sized map, free to converse with combat much later on) the ideal ways to go? Or do you just want to start the game have a little bit of exposition and get straight into the killing? ala, DA:2/ ME3. 

[Wulfram]

Epic action doesn't meld well with tutorial - this is perhaps one reason why the ME3 opening doesn't work very well, since the whole tutorial thing fits poorly with the End of the World going on around you.

For me the first part of an RPG should be about helping the player get acquainted with their character, by putting them in situations that pose interesting questions, where the answers the player selects tells them something their character - and something more than just "is/is not a jerk".

For example, the DN origin, in a few conversations, asks you "How does your character treat people of inferior rank?", "Are they a politician?", "Are they interested in history?", "do they care about historical truth?", "Are they ruthless or merciful?", "if they are ruthless are they subtle or open about it?" and some other stuff too.

Even if at the beginning you went in with nothing but a name and maybe some sense of their DnD alignment, at the end you'll have a fairly interesting character to play the rest of the game with. That's what the start of an RPG should achieve.

[The 13th Dark Sheep]

 With the exagerated combat scene in the begining ofI DA][ there was a potential for a good solution to the "pew pew" opening. 
You suddenly find yourself in direct combat with a horde of darkspawn. It's quite an exhillerating thing with all the flashing lights and animations - and with all the available abilities it's even rather easy to make it through in one go. And then Varric shoots in and interupts..! Here they could have used the opportunity to take a few steps back and start the story anew in Lothering whith freedom to explore (which has has already been mentioned). Then they could have moved you forward to the desolate wasteland full of impressions and relations, Where they had a fantastic opportunity to combine two very different kinds of openings, they instead force you to play through the pew pew opening not once, but twice - with almost no connection to the world.

It's wated potential it is..

[SirGladiator]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I don't care how Hawke reacts to his sibling's death as much as I care about how *I* react to that event. And yes, the death of the sibling wasn't that good for me.

Alternatively, when Bethany was taken away by the Templars, I had a rather strong reaction.

Exactly.  Im still dumbfounded that we were never given a chance to rescue Bethany or otherwise free her (we were working for the head of the city, surely we could've struck a deal like 'OK, you want me to risk my life taking on the Qunari and whoever else, I need my sister freed to help me or you're on your own pal').  The part about Bethany dying if you simply choose to play as a mage was bad enough, the inability to make any effort whatsoever to free her from the Templars was completely inexplicable.  Apparently we werent supposed to care about our siblings at all, or at least not enough to care whether they're dead or somebody's slave or whatever, and that was just so very, very wrong.

To the more general, original question, I agree with the original comment as well, I too thought, when I played the Demo way back when, that they were leaving the opening part of the game out on purpose, I didn't honestly expect that to BE the opening part of the game, as that is a pretty terrible way to open a game.  In DAO, whichever origin you choose, there's going to be a period of calm, where you learn about your character, various characters that are relevant to your character, your surroundings, etc. you get to have fun in a way that sets up the future chaos nicely.  In DA2 you're just thrown right into it, and it's like 'who are these people?  Why do I care?' and for the most part you just don't.  I cared about my sister because she was my sister and I wanted to protect her, and of course my mother as well, but as for the rest of them, they were just there, and I wouldn't have cared one little bit if Flemeth had eaten them as payment for saving Hawke and what was left of her family.  I hope that DA3 starts out more like DAO, with a nice quiet time where we can get to know our surroundings, some of the characters in the game, etc. before the action really heats up. 

[masterdark30]

The 13th Dark Sheep wrote...

 With the exagerated combat scene in the begining ofI DA][ there was a potential for a good solution to the "pew pew" opening. 
You suddenly find yourself in direct combat with a horde of darkspawn. It's quite an exhillerating thing with all the flashing lights and animations - and with all the available abilities it's even rather easy to make it through in one go. And then Varric shoots in and interupts..! Here they could have used the opportunity to take a few steps back and start the story anew in Lothering whith freedom to explore (which has has already been mentioned). Then they could have moved you forward to the desolate wasteland full of impressions and relations, Where they had a fantastic opportunity to combine two very different kinds of openings, they instead force you to play through the pew pew opening not once, but twice - with almost no connection to the world.

It's wated potential it is..

Its a shame aswell because in a game like Dragon Age i'd say its most defining character and story element is its world and lore. Opposed to something like Mass Effect where the characters define the world and story for the player. To have insights into the world pushed aside for the sake of combat in any part of an RPG not just the beggining is indeed wasted potential. 

This is why a gradual progression is so important not just for the player and the learning experience but for the game world to go from (exactly that) a game world to an immersive experience. DA3's codex should help with this. I enjoyed the overall style of the codex more in DA:O, being like an old book or parchment where my character had hidden all sorts of useful information. I felt it lost this charm in 2. The fact that the game would indicate when you'd found a new codex entry and how the overall system was presented made it much more compelling to read, especially during the actual origin sections. I spent more time reading the DA:O codex  than i have ever done in ME or DA:2 with its more modern (bland) style.

[Linksys17]

ME2 is an example of a quick and shocking opening done right.
We start up at, relatively, the same place we ended in ME1 with some dialogue to inform what has been happening. There is the old Normandy, the LI, it's a setting you identify with and it's why you are appaled when it's destroyed.
ME3 took what ME2 did right and did it spectacularly wrong. We begin the game in a place we've never been, talking to a guy we've never met before; our ship, LI and team are God knows where and we have no idea what happened between the end of ME2 and the beginning of ME3.

not if you purchased the completely optional Arrival dlc lol