143 réponses à ce sujet

[Bernhardtbr]

So a game where you were Luke Skywalker after he destroyed the first Death Star would automatically be crap? Maybe for you, but not for everyone.

People are so narcisitic and selfish in these forums it´s unbelievable...

[Fredward]

Maria Caliban wrote...
I assume the problem is that you want to make choices that are true to the character. If the character is someone else's creation, you want enough information about that character to weigh out the value of each choice.

For example, if there was an RPG where you played Hamlet, someone who'd seen the play would have a much better grasp of what the character might appropriately do than someone who hadn't.

This basically. And Bioware has always given me enough info to play one of "their" characters like I feel they're supposed to be played. I know a lot of people don't agree with that but I don't really care. xp

[FaWa]

In BG, DA, and NWN I felt as if I made the character. ME and DA not so much

[SpunkyMonkey]

Bernhardtbr wrote...

Yeah having a character with a background does limits the character´s development during the game. It´s the same as The Witcher where you are Geralt. Sure you develop the character in the path of sword, magic or alchemy but you are certainly restricted.

In the end it´s a matter of taste and (to a certain extent) having a deeper/less replayable story or having more shallow/more replayable one. I definitedly enjoyed Witcher 2 much more than Oblivion or Morrowind, but total game time I´ve played was less than in either of those. Then again 25 hours is the same as watching the entire Game of Thrones series so far, so they weren´t few hours of fun. No dev can please everyone. The problem is when they TRY to please everyone.

Good post. I think the stickler is that DA set itself up from both the 1st game, and fact that it is in the D&D universe, as a game which should be all about player-generated-characters. That's not saying Bioware can't do it, but it's kind of like gearing yourself up for a full roast dinner and getting a spicey pizza instead - it can be as nice as it wants, but it isn't what you really wanted or were expecting.

It's a risky move considering the misfire that was DA:2.

[FaWa]

Spunkey Monkey: The differences between Dalish Elf and Elf are basically as large as elf and Dwarf. I can't believe you even played these games without knowing that tbh. Its not being anal, its a fact. I'll gladly go into detail.

[Todd23]

FaWa wrote...

Spunkey Monkey: The differences between Dalish Elf and Elf are basically as large as elf and Dwarf. I can't believe you even played these games without knowing that tbh. Its not being anal, its a fact. I'll gladly go into detail.

Dalish elves are arragant and a tiny bit more elven.  That's it.

[upsettingshorts]

Todd23 wrote...

FaWa wrote...

Spunkey Monkey: The differences between Dalish Elf and Elf are basically as large as elf and Dwarf. I can't believe you even played these games without knowing that tbh. Its not being anal, its a fact. I'll gladly go into detail.

Dalish elves are arragant and a tiny bit more elven.  That's it.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 05 décembre 2012 - 04:57 .

[Dessalines]

If a game doesn't have character customization, then I am not wasting money on the game. I am talking being able to design what the character looks like. I don;t think you need to roll every aspect of the character to make it a great game.
Actually, Dragon Age: Origins for most of the origins felt lie someone's else story, because I could never get past that being the wardens kept the whole dying, and being tormented by darkspawn dreams from you.

[Biotic Sage]

When I'm playing a story-driven game, I damn well expect it to be "someone else's" story. I paid good money to experience a well-crafted, coherent narrative. I didn't pay money to stare at a blank journal, think of a story to write in it, and then go through the process of writing that story. I can do that for free, and although it is very gratifying, it is gratifying in a completely different way.

Would I like to have some agency when experiencing a story-driven game?  Hell yeah.  But I should hope that every possible path the story could take has been considerered from a story-crafting perspective and while each can flavor the narrative differently, the narrative is ultimately cohesive regardless of which branching path I go down.  There needs to be some authorial purpose holding things together, otherwise I'm just scampering around a halfbaked chain of events.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 05 décembre 2012 - 06:20 .

[Warden661]

FaWa wrote...

Spunkey Monkey: The differences between Dalish Elf and Elf are basically as large as elf and Dwarf. I can't believe you even played these games without knowing that tbh. Its not being anal, its a fact. I'll gladly go into detail.

I could have sworn both had pointy ears.... hmmm

[Todd23]

BoBear wrote...

FaWa wrote...

Spunkey Monkey: The differences between Dalish Elf and Elf are basically as large as elf and Dwarf. I can't believe you even played these games without knowing that tbh. Its not being anal, its a fact. I'll gladly go into detail.

I could have sworn both had pointy ears.... hmmm

The Dalish' are a little more pointy... huge difference 

[jillabender]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I assume the problem is that you want to make choices that are true to the character. If the character is someone else's creation, you want enough information about that character to weigh out the value of each choice.

For example, if there was an RPG where you played Hamlet, someone who'd seen the play would have a much better grasp of what the character might appropriately do than someone who hadn't.

That's exactly how I feel. Part of my difficulty with DA2 was that I didn't feel I knew enough about Hawke to make decisions for him or her from an in-character perspective – I often felt as though there was something I was missing.

Modifié par jillabender, 07 décembre 2012 - 12:54 .

[jack253]

When I play an rpg the first thing I look for is customization as I want to be able to play the character I want to play. However in general I am less concerned with creation as I am with the impact of my character on the story namely my choices having an impact. This is what disappointed most of all in DA2 not the fact that I couldn't play an elf or dwarf (it just didn't fit in the story they wanted to tell) but the fact that the choices were very limited and lacked impact (I made the same choices like 90% of the time).

[Svanhildr]

I always love the stories that makes you feel that it's yours and not someone elses like how MoTA felt... </3 Character creation is a big deal to me, if I can't feel satisfied with my characters I make it never is a too good experience and enjoyment.

[Pheonix57]

If I wanted to play someone else's story, I've got a whole slew of games for that. But these are Bioware games. I don't buy them so I can live someone else's legacy, I buy them because I want to make my own.

[Plaintiff]

Pheonix57 wrote...

If I wanted to play someone else's story, I've got a whole slew of games for that. But these are Bioware games. I don't buy them so I can live someone else's legacy, I buy them because I want to make my own.

What does it even mean to be a 'Bioware' game? Is Bioware obligated to make the same kind of game over and over again and never try anything different?

[Todd23]

Plaintiff wrote...

Pheonix57 wrote...

If I wanted to play someone else's story, I've got a whole slew of games for that. But these are Bioware games. I don't buy them so I can live someone else's legacy, I buy them because I want to make my own.

What does it even mean to be a 'Bioware' game? Is Bioware obligated to make the same kind of game over and over again and never try anything different?

Yes.  Should Beethoven had done Jazz?  Should Da Vinci have done martial arts?

[AllThatJazz]

Todd23 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Pheonix57 wrote...

If I wanted to play someone else's story, I've got a whole slew of games for that. But these are Bioware games. I don't buy them so I can live someone else's legacy, I buy them because I want to make my own.

What does it even mean to be a 'Bioware' game? Is Bioware obligated to make the same kind of game over and over again and never try anything different?

Yes.  Should Beethoven had done Jazz?  Should Da Vinci have done martial arts?

Had Jazz been around, Ludwig could well have been fantastic at it! And he absolutely should have given it a go to see! Also Da Vinci did lots of different things (including engineering and botany), it isn't like he did a really nice painting once and then thought 'you know what? I'll just stick with that one thing just in case I can't do anything else'. Quite the loss to cultural history it would have been had he taken such a narrow path.

Not that Bioware can .. er .. quite compare to either of those two, but imo they should definitely not be afraid to try new approaches.

OT - both? Playing Planescape: Torment felt like 'my story' despite no race or gender selection and the world not being a sandbox environment and the story being linear and fairly clearly 'someone else's'. The writing can be key here, I think. Planescape was amazing at making me feel like the story was mine, even though it was really Chris Avellone's/Black Isle's. I also feel ownership of Shepard (yes, even in ME3) depite pre-definition. Perhaps it's the relationships I form with other characters (not really talking about romance here) which gives me that attachment.

I am not particularly attached to my characters in TES, though. They are to me just vehicles I use to get around the world, regardless of how much control I have over my appearance or what have you. The world itself is the interesting thing in the Elder Scrolls games for me, I really couldn't care less about the story. There is a charm in emergent narrative, but it's one that can't seem to sustain my interest long term

[LinksOcarina]

I am actually writing an editorial at the moment regarding this.

From research and general feeling, its essentially both, the plot is BioWares, and the story is the fans.
Of course, you need to differentiate the two because they are not the same, and that disconnect is the only thing missing.

But this goes for all games. Instead of focusing on BioWare I talk about The Walking Dead and how it is similar to most games that follow "choices and consequences", the plot is set in stone while the story always changes, so the illusion is the choices made and how they effect the plot.

But the story is how we expereince the narrative. It is a subtle difference and developers seem to know how to pull that off in choice-based mechanics. BioWare is not the only one doing that, of course. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 08 décembre 2012 - 12:37 .

[Plaintiff]

Todd23 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Pheonix57 wrote...

If I wanted to play someone else's story, I've got a whole slew of games for that. But these are Bioware games. I don't buy them so I can live someone else's legacy, I buy them because I want to make my own.

What does it even mean to be a 'Bioware' game? Is Bioware obligated to make the same kind of game over and over again and never try anything different?

Yes.  Should Beethoven had done Jazz?  Should Da Vinci have done martial arts?

I see no reason why they should not have. I am not the one presuming to make judgements about what any individual 'should' do. You're the one stating that Bioware games should be a certain way. I'm just asking you to explain your viewpoint.

[DarkSpiral]

Todd23 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Pheonix57 wrote...

If I wanted to play someone else's story, I've got a whole slew of games for that. But these are Bioware games. I don't buy them so I can live someone else's legacy, I buy them because I want to make my own.

What does it even mean to be a 'Bioware' game? Is Bioware obligated to make the same kind of game over and over again and never try anything different?

Yes.  Should Beethoven had done Jazz?  Should Da Vinci have done martial arts?

You're attempting to place your limitations on geniuses that exceeded the limitations of their own time and society?


...righto then.  Clearly you know whats best for the Bioware team.

[DadeLeviathan]

In an RPG, I want it to feel like my story, even if it's a linear style, with a predetermined character.

In other types of games, I am less demanding about the game feeling like 'my' story.

[Conquerthecity]

 None of it came from my head, so it's not my story. Even with the PC, I can imagine a bunch of things about him/her. But all that stuff is fanfiction-y at best, because they're still not 100% made by me. 

[lothvamp]

Either/Both... as long as it's a GOOD story

[Thomas Andresen]

This again? The way I see it, I would rather play a well-written character in a well-written story than anything I would ever be able to come up with. Character creation is an element that I find adds to the experience, but however much I like being able to play something other than human, that's not nearly as important to me as my character being well-written.

The stories in any game you didn't write from scratch yourself are never yours, and blank-slate player characters can never work in a story-driven* game. Whenever I'm delivered a blank-slate player character, I stop caring about the story.

* Note: There's a difference between a game being story-driven and having a focus on story. BioWare's games are, as a rule, story-driven; Skyrim has a focus on story, but is not story-driven.