38 réponses à ce sujet

[TheDon81]

 I just finished DA2 a couple of days ago. It wasn't THAT bad. I actually enjoyed it quite a lot.

Then I started a new character (Dwarf Noble) in DA:O, it had been about a year since last I played.
Quite honestly I was blown away. Everything was better, right down to the UI and maps. It all felt so much more polished and natural.
I had so many more choices, so much more to do with every single thing.

I had even the choice to be a whiny snob who whines and complains about everything, even if it doesn't affect the overall story, still you get some response or change in how people act towards you, and that is GOLD!
It's these details in everything that makes the game so awesome!
I had forgotten how much I enjoyed DA:O, and why I enjoyed it so immensly.

This is what Hawke lacks, IMO, choice of personality. You feel you are playing Hawke, and not playing yourself. In DA2, I've noticed, you just get an added response, before going back to the conversation as it never happened. I had the same conversation (reloads) many times with sarcastic or angry comments, and still came to the same outcome in the end, as with friendly/diplomatic.
This, I didn't notice so much in DA:O, perhaps because I was so focused on my characters personality... I dunno.

My point is that Bioware should allow for more options to answer back in DA3, just like in DA:O, let US give our character personality.

Modifié par TheDon81, 04 décembre 2012 - 10:54 .

[Doctoglethorpe]

The reason you feel like you had more choice in determining the wardens personality is because the warden has no personality to begin with. Its literally a blank slate for you to imagine whatever you wish, an avatar. Not saying that's bad, just what it is.

A voiced and animated protagonist will never achieve that same feeling.

Edit:  I actually prefer the latter, for the record. 

Modifié par Doctor Moustache, 05 décembre 2012 - 11:58 .

[whykikyouwhy]

I had no problem role-playing Hawke. But then, I don't expect to play characters as me (last time I checked, I wasn't a sword-wielding warrior). Perhaps aspects of myself carry over in decisions I make for my PC, but both Hawke and the Warden were characters that I provided nuances for in my playthroughs, and through whom I was given the opportunity to see a new world.

I think a lot of the connection to a PC often depends on the expectations of the player for that particular role-playing experience.

Modifié par whykikyouwhy, 04 décembre 2012 - 11:09 .

[Adugan]

Doctor Moustache wrote...

The reason you feel like you had more choice in determining the wardens personality is because the warden has no personality to begin with. Its literally a blank slate for you to imagine whatever you wish, an avatar. Not saying that's bad, just what it is.

A voiced and animated protagonist will never achieve that same feeling.

Thats the whole problem. BW gave us ALL the choices in DAO and then took them away in DA2. Of course people will hate it and rage. If they did the opposite, people would be kissing BW's feet and saying how awesome and creative the company was and how the game is the best of the decade. Maybe some people prefer the Hawke thing, but I am sure everyone would be upset if people reduced their choices in anything.

[TheDon81]

Doctor Moustache wrote...

The reason you feel like you had more choice in determining the wardens personality is because the warden has no personality to begin with. Its literally a blank slate for you to imagine whatever you wish, an avatar.  

That is what role-playing game is all about.
The fun part is playing the role.
Having an avatar!

It makes a world of difference!

[Dhiro]

TheDon81 wrote...

Doctor Moustache wrote...

The reason you feel like you had more choice in determining the wardens personality is because the warden has no personality to begin with. Its literally a blank slate for you to imagine whatever you wish, an avatar.  

That is what role-playing game is all about.
The fun part is playing the role.
Having an avatar!

It makes a world of difference!

Depends. I can't play my Hawke as myself, but I can't play my Warden as myself, either. But I can play them as other people, characters I create, and both DA: O and DA II gave me the tools I needed for that.

[TheDon81]

Dhiro wrote...

Depends. I can't play my Hawke as myself, but I can't play my Warden as myself, either. But I can play them as other people, characters I create, and both DA: O and DA II gave me the tools I needed for that.

But what do you prefer? I mean, if you want to create a char, you want maximum control, right? Not just a witty remark, with zero consequense. That was the thing in DAO, you could say something to tick people off to fight.

[Kidd]

TheDon81 wrote...

This is what Hawke lacks, IMO, choice of personality. You feel you are playing Hawke, and not playing yourself. In DA2, I've noticed, you just get an added response, before going back to the conversation as it never happened.

Dialogues often look like this, yes,

NPC: Hello. Want to quest for me?
PC: Sure, anything for you! / I might if there's coin in that. / I don't see why I'd bother.
NPC: You sure bend quickly! / Yeah you'll get your sodding bits. / Then get out of my face until you change your mind. {dialogue end}
NPC: So here's the plan.

but that goes for both games, not just DA2.

[Dhiro]

TheDon81 wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

Depends. I can't play my Hawke as myself, but I can't play my Warden as myself, either. But I can play them as other people, characters I create, and both DA: O and DA II gave me the tools I needed for that.

But what do you prefer? I mean, if you want to create a char, you want maximum control, right? Not just a witty remark, with zero consequense. That was the thing in DAO, you could say something to tick people off to fight.

Eh. As far as roleplaying goes, I don't consider DA: O's method superior to DA II's. The only thing that truly bothers me sometimes are the paraphrases, as I had to reload a few times because the line didn't came out like I wanted it to. So I really don't care one way or another.

[esper]

TheDon81 wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

Depends. I can't play my Hawke as myself, but I can't play my Warden as myself, either. But I can play them as other people, characters I create, and both DA: O and DA II gave me the tools I needed for that.

But what do you prefer? I mean, if you want to create a char, you want maximum control, right? Not just a witty remark, with zero consequense. That was the thing in DAO, you could say something to tick people off to fight.

Maximum control ,meams nothing if the world doesn't react to the personality I create. Like Skyrim, I can't roleplay that game, jsut can't.

Da:o is also bad because the warden feels like an stiff wood avatar who doesn't exist on the same plane as the rest of the world. I simply cannot see the wardens as something else than an avatar.

Hawke on the other hand feels on par with the world and they react to how I mold her personality. So I will much rather have restrictions if it means that I will get to feel part of the world while playing.

[SpunkyMonkey]

TheDon81 wrote...

 I just finished DA2 a couple of days ago. It wasn't THAT bad. I actually enjoyed it quite a lot.

Then I started a new character (Dwarf Noble) in DA:O, it had been about a year since last I played.
Quite honestly I was blown away. Everything was better, right down to the UI and maps. It all felt so much more polished and natural.
I had so many more choices, so much more to do with every single thing.

I had even the choice to be a whiny snob who whines and complains about everything, even if it doesn't affect the overall story, still you get some response or change in how people act towards you, and that is GOLD!
It's these details in everything that makes the game so awesome!
I had forgotten how much I enjoyed DA:O, and why I enjoyed it so immensly.

This is what Hawke lacks, IMO, choice of personality. You feel you are playing Hawke, and not playing yourself. In DA2, I've noticed, you just get an added response, before going back to the conversation as it never happened. I had the same conversation (reloads) many times with sarcastic or angry comments, and still came to the same outcome in the end, as with friendly/diplomatic.
This, I didn't notice so much in DA:O, perhaps because I was so focused on my characters personality... I dunno.

My point is that Bioware should allow for more options to answer back in DA3, just like in DA:O, let US give our character personality.

Did EXACTLY the same about 3 months ago (right down to choosing a Dwarf Noble too! lol) and felt EXACTLY the same too.

Honestly, I think I may have possessed you in my sleep and posted this through you as it's so damn spot on.

I hated Hawke, truly loathed and despised the schizophrenic ****. The main motivation to continue my DA:2 playthrough was to see if I could find some way of killing Hawke.

If you play DA:A you can just see and feel a few of the things which ruin DA:2 starting to creep into it.

I honestly can't wait to see how DA:3 turns out because, despite Bioware saying they are going to address the issues and make it better, the only things which they have actually done have gone against fan wishes or the original so far (voiced protagonist/lack of races etc.)

[upsettingshorts]

esper wrote...

TheDon81 wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

Depends. I can't play my Hawke as myself, but I can't play my Warden as myself, either. But I can play them as other people, characters I create, and both DA: O and DA II gave me the tools I needed for that.

But what do you prefer? I mean, if you want to create a char, you want maximum control, right? Not just a witty remark, with zero consequense. That was the thing in DAO, you could say something to tick people off to fight.

Maximum control ,meams nothing if the world doesn't react to the personality I create. Like Skyrim, I can't roleplay that game, jsut can't.

Da:o is also bad because the warden feels like an stiff wood avatar who doesn't exist on the same plane as the rest of the world. I simply cannot see the wardens as something else than an avatar.

Hawke on the other hand feels on par with the world and they react to how I mold her personality. So I will much rather have restrictions if it means that I will get to feel part of the world while playing.

Yep.

OP will discover if this thread lasts long enough that among DA players some prefer the freedom to imagine your character is whatever you want, like DAO offers, and others prefer that their choices are reflected explicitly ingame, something DA2 does better.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 04 décembre 2012 - 03:45 .

[Maria Caliban]

I shall ponder how many people can't separate their personal preferences from issues of quality. How many of them can't even see their personal preferences as preferences.

[Sibu]

In other words... people want to role play as a self insert mary sue that every single NPC worship

Man, you guys suck

[Nurot]

If you want to experience what the dominant tone does for your playthrough, you can't just reload a conversation and choose different answers. You have to replay with another dominant tone. I never realised how good the dominant tone-system really is until I replayed with diplomatic as the dominant tone (first playthrough was aggressive). The tone will change how Hawke voices different lines. Different choices (based on two very different personalities for my Hawkes, made up entirely by me) combined with different dominant tones gave me two vey different playthroughs. It almost made me feel like playing two different games, storywise. A rare feeling. DAO is very good and replayable in its own fashion, but it still feels like playing the same game again. It doesn't react as well as DA2 to my choices (at least not in my opinion).

This still may not change the OPs mind about roleplaying Hawke, but at least give Bioware credit where it is due.

[Rawgrim]

I wasn`t able to roleplay as Hawke at all, given that he never ever felt like my own character, and the auto-dialogue constantly made him say stuff I didn`t want him to say.

[devSin]

I'm not bothered at all by the voiced protagonist (or the tone, or the wheel, or the icons, or whatever else is currently being derided). But I do agree that Origins had a certain magic that DA2 mostly lacked.

It was just better. Everything about it seemed like a game made with passion. With care. With a love for detail and an attention to detail. Origins had there there. With DA2, as much as I adore the content, it often felt like it was just pasted into the book and scribbled in the margins and stuck between the pages.

Rarely do things come together so seamlessly as it all felt in Origins. I doubt we'll ever see its like again.

Modifié par devSin, 05 décembre 2012 - 08:18 .

[Inquisitor Recon]

Sibu wrote...
In other words... people want to role play as a self insert mary sue that every single NPC worship

Man, you guys suck

I want the commoners to hate me tbh. I want somebody like Morrigan before she got nice always insulting you.

[AshenShug4r]

Sibu wrote...

In other words... people want to role play as a self insert mary sue that every single NPC worship

Man, you guys suck

Who said that?

[Sable Rhapsody]

Sibu wrote...

In other words... people want to role play as a self insert mary sue that every single NPC worship

There's an element of that to every RPG protagonist 

[Bernhardtbr]

Sibu wrote...

In other words... people want to role play as a self insert mary sue that every single NPC worship

Man, you guys suck

Not only worshipped, but also fapped to

Seriously now, what some people want is a character that is truly powerful and relevant in the world at the end of the game, others can be satisfied by knowing that, while their character was powerful, he only accomplished something because of team work (and sometimes, luck). And sometimes, he just simply couldn´t save everyone.

Neither of the extremes are wrong. As a matter of fact people should stop being so arrogant and try to define taste as something objectively better. It simply ISN`T. Why some people like fish and some don´t? Is there a rational explanation for that? NO.

So why there must be a rational and objective reason for prefering one style of narrative over the other?

[DPSSOC]

Doctor Moustache wrote...

The reason you feel like you had more choice in determining the wardens personality is because the warden has no personality to begin with. Its literally a blank slate for you to imagine whatever you wish, an avatar. Not saying that's bad, just what it is.

A voiced and animated protagonist will never achieve that same feeling.

I think it's even simpler than that.  Hawke doesn't have a personality either, we never see Hawke being Hawke regardless of our choices, we assign Hawke one of the three personalities.  The problem is that Hawke has tone.  The Warden's line's are pure text so we read them in whatever tone we think our character would say them based on the personality we've given them.  If you play a generally nice guy who gets angry and threatens somebody you're probably hearing the threat as righteous fury rather than sadistic glee.

Because Hawke's lines are voiced we lose that.  If you play a diplomatic Hawke who gets angry and threatens somebody he/she doesn't sound like a nice person who's been pushed too far they sound like a nice person with a split personality.

Silent protagonists allow us to play more nuanced characters because the subtleties of language are left to the player so there's no disconnect when you make the odd choice against type.  There's no real solution for a voiced protagonist unless you have the VA's record every line 3 (or more) times with 3 slightly different inflections (not going to happen), or have VA's be so bland that it's the same tone regardless of the choice you make.

[Doctoglethorpe]

DPSSOC wrote...

Doctor Moustache wrote...

The reason you feel like you had more choice in determining the wardens personality is because the warden has no personality to begin with. Its literally a blank slate for you to imagine whatever you wish, an avatar. Not saying that's bad, just what it is.

A voiced and animated protagonist will never achieve that same feeling.

I think it's even simpler than that.  Hawke doesn't have a personality either, we never see Hawke being Hawke regardless of our choices, we assign Hawke one of the three personalities.  The problem is that Hawke has tone.  The Warden's line's are pure text so we read them in whatever tone we think our character would say them based on the personality we've given them.  If you play a generally nice guy who gets angry and threatens somebody you're probably hearing the threat as righteous fury rather than sadistic glee.

Because Hawke's lines are voiced we lose that.  If you play a diplomatic Hawke who gets angry and threatens somebody he/she doesn't sound like a nice person who's been pushed too far they sound like a nice person with a split personality.

Silent protagonists allow us to play more nuanced characters because the subtleties of language are left to the player so there's no disconnect when you make the odd choice against type.  There's no real solution for a voiced protagonist unless you have the VA's record every line 3 (or more) times with 3 slightly different inflections (not going to happen), or have VA's be so bland that it's the same tone regardless of the choice you make.

I disagree.  I mixed Hawke up quite a bit and felt it was blended very well.  Whenever I hear people say you have to pretty much stick with one of three archetypes to not sound bipolar I wonder what game they were even playing, not the same I did. 

[Fiacre]

It always depended on the situation for me -- sometimes diplomatic (and sarcastic) a well as the inquisition options blended really well with agressive. Sometimes my Hawke had a serious split personality problem, particularly when Boulton got all growly.