194 réponses à ce sujet

[daft inquisitor]

Filament wrote...

 Zelda is the best RPG. 

...I don't think I want to talk to you anymore... 

[The_11thDoctor]

MOre personality choices would be amazing.

Sarcastic
Dark Dry Humor
Straight Shooter serious
Timid
Clumsy cutesy
morbid negative type

etc. It would add some flavor! More work for the writers, but it would be amazing for us...

[Talonfire]

ShadowDragoonFTW wrote...

I'm just going from the roots up. Fact is, Dragon Quest was THE first "RPG" video game, with Final Fantasy 1 hot on its heels, and my definition, I believe, describes them perfectly. But, others are welcome to their own interpretations. As long as we agree the definition itself is flawed, then I have no reason to argue the point further here.

That's not really a fact though, Ultima and Wizardry (both of which have deeper RPG mechanics) predate Dragon Quest by five years. In fact those games were what inspired the developers at Enix to create Dragon Quest.

You have to take a look at Ultima and Wizardry to see the real beginnings of the genre. Unfortunately the original Wizardry is a bit hard to find these days.

Modifié par Talonfire, 06 janvier 2013 - 08:31 .

[Volus Warlord]

This is only possible with a character that has a highly railroaded personality.

[Kidd]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Filament wrote...

 Zelda is the best RPG. 

No wai, FF.

Best fake RPG.

No wai. FF isn't even the best thing that developer has put out. 

[Estelindis]

I enjoyed DA2 very much, but in fact the Warden stands out to me much more than Hawke.

Part of this is because the Warden feels more personalised to me. Every Hawke was from Lothering, lost one sibling in one way and the other in a different way, lost their mother in a third way still, was confronted by what to do in the context of Anders' actions in the final act, etc. Not every Warden was a city elf who loved Alistair, lost him when he became king, and lost him again when he gave his life to save her. The options in DA:O, the consequences of my choices, made my Warden more interesting to me than my Hawke was.

[legbamel]

For me, having a background, whether pre-defined or something I decide myself, only sets up the events in a PC's life, not his or her reactions to them or the motivations derived therefrom. That's where the RP part comes in: I should be able to pick what effect that history has on my PC and how she expresses it. Both games gave me options to do that, though I will agree that DA:O did a better job of it. That has nothing to do with VO and everything to do with the actual story.

That said, I quite liked DA2. Neither Hawke nor the Warden were much of anything without my own headcannon, which is just how I like it. I would much rather the story and the antagonists be more interesting and reactive to the role I choose to play. Otherwise, why replay? I already know the whole story of my character after playing it once.

[AlexanderCousland]

Estelindis wrote...

I enjoyed DA2 very much, but in fact the Warden stands out to me much more than Hawke.

Part of this is because the Warden feels more personalised to me. Every Hawke was from Lothering, lost one sibling in one way and the other in a different way, lost their mother in a third way still, was confronted by what to do in the context of Anders' actions in the final act, etc. Not every Warden was a city elf who loved Alistair, lost him when he became king, and lost him again when he gave his life to save her. The options in DA:O, the consequences of my choices, made my Warden more interesting to me than my Hawke was.

100% agree. 


Mages or Templars might be the only choice that mattered, and maybe not because the Templars still took the city regardless.  Hawke' s are a boring and leave alot to be desired, the story is also really boring, my first time playing the game i was thinking, "what' s my goal? why am I doing all this?"  

[In Exile]

Estelindis wrote...
Not every Warden was a city elf who loved Alistair, lost him when he became king, and lost him again when he gave his life to save her. The options in DA:O, the consequences of my choices, made my Warden more interesting to me than my Hawke was.

But every Warden was made a Warden at Ostagar, barely escaped alive from the Tower of Ishal, worked with Alistair at others to use the Grey Warden treaties the Warden took from Flemeth, travelling to Haven, Orzammar, the Deep Roads, the Brecillian Forest and Denerim. Each Warden killed a broodmother, crowned a Monarch (twice!), was forced to abandon their home to becoem a Grey Warden...

I could keep going.

[AlexanderCousland]

In Exile wrote...

Estelindis wrote...
Not every Warden was a city elf who loved Alistair, lost him when he became king, and lost him again when he gave his life to save her. The options in DA:O, the consequences of my choices, made my Warden more interesting to me than my Hawke was.

But every Warden was made a Warden at Ostagar, barely escaped alive from the Tower of Ishal, worked with Alistair at others to use the Grey Warden treaties the Warden took from Flemeth, travelling to Haven, Orzammar, the Deep Roads, the Brecillian Forest and Denerim. Each Warden killed a broodmother, crowned a Monarch (twice!), was forced to abandon their home to becoem a Grey Warden...

I could keep going.

Correct, but all of the quests that you just named could be be resolved very differently depending upon player choice, your Warden could have chosen to to resolve Orzammar very different from mine. etc. :innocent: (i could go on)

If you take compaions death' s out of the equation (those are subjective), I doubt my Hawke and your Hawke are different at all in terms of main  plot descions, I can almost gurantee there is a 50% chance we choose the same thing; wether or not we give Isabela to the Qunari, or the choice between Mages or Templars.

[In Exile]

FreshIstay wrote...
Correct, but all of the quests that you just named could be be resolved very differently depending upon player choice, your Warden could have chosen to to resolve Orzammar very different from mine. etc. :innocent: (i could go on)

Edit: Actually, let's outline all the so-called choices you have in DA:O. In Orzammar you have two, two times: (i) Save the Anvil, or Destroy it (which itself has two options, via Branka or Caridan); and then (ii) name Bhelen or Harrowmont King. That's the most branching in any of the main quests. In the Circle tower we have three choices: (i) save the mages, (ii) save the mages then have them locked up; or (iii) kill the mages (and Wynne). Sacred ashes has two options: corrupt or not. Lots of mini-choices along the way.

DA2 allows you to do that to, save for parts of Act III (especially near the end, where the rushing shows).

Feynriel's quest has multiple resolutions - you can send him to the Dalish or the Circle, and then you can either make him Tranquil, have him sent off to Tevinter, or made into an abomination. You have multiple solutions for Enemies Among Us, and three ways to solve Thrask's last quest.

Bioware didn't change their quest design. Act III, again, wasn't well done. But Act I had traditional Bioware quest design (even if it didn't have direction, and even though I'm sure Bioware meant it as a nod to BGII that no one liked) and so did, really, Act II.

If you take compaions death' s out of the equation (those are subjective), I doubt my Hawke and your Hawke are different at all in terms of main  plot descions, I can almost gurantee there is a 50% chance we choose the same thing; wether or not we give Isabela to the Qunari, or the choice between Mages or Templars.

Really? So did we both save Grace and the other mages by killing Thrask, or lying? Did we give Feynriel to the Circle and then turn him into an abomination? Did we have give Katojan away or did we resist the Qunari?

Not to mention that Carver/Bethany have two totally different paths as GW/Templar.

There was no 'main quest' in DA2, really. But quests often had more varied ending options.

DA2 did lots of things wrong - but most quests had more outcomes than DA:O, until you get quite late into the game and the rushing shows. But even with that, Bioware gave lots of options. They were totally meaningless - but the DA:O options didn't even have in-game consequences. And Bioware's shown consistently they don't really do branching content.

Modifié par In Exile, 07 janvier 2013 - 08:45 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

In Exile wrote...

DA2 allows you to do that to, save for parts of Act III (especially near the end, where the rushing shows).

Feynriel's quest has multiple resolutions - you can send him to the Dalish or the Circle,

Which result of him getting possesed at the Dalish Camp anyway, regardless you sent him to the Circle or not. It didn't happen in DAO. If I choose to kill Connor, Connor is dead not Connor is alive just to make Sacred Ashes plot relevant.  

In Exile wrote...

and then you can either make him Tranquil, have him sent off to Tevinter, or made into an abomination.

So what? He should be in the Circle taking the Harrowing instead of running away to the Dalish Camp. That's why I choose him to be sent to the circle.

In Exile wrote...


You have multiple solutions for Enemies Among Us,

Like what? Choose to ignore the quest? Or do you mean choice of killing Idunna or not by bringing a mage along? That's hardly called a choice since you're are not expecting her to cast a charmed spell on you.

In Exile wrote...



and three ways to solve Thrask's last quest.

Thrask died regardless of the three ways solution you mentioned. That's what matter the most to me. No matter what ****ing choice I've made. I could prevent Isolde and/or Connor's death in DAO. And both of them will be there when Eamon awake and Alistair won't storm on me for the bad call.  DA 2 just want to ****** the players with single railroad.

In Exile wrote...


But Act I had traditional Bioware quest design (even if it didn't have direction, and even though I'm sure Bioware meant it as a nod to BGII that no one liked) and so did, really, Act II.

What choice do they offer to us beside getting 50 golds and Anders's map in ACT I? Skip the fedex quest and contact the thugs. Yeah sure. Way to branch out content. /sarcasm

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 07 janvier 2013 - 09:50 .

[Plaintiff]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The only way to ensure that the protagonist is "interesting" to all players is to allow the players to define the protagonist's personality themselves.

Except it ensures nothing of the kind. A character I already know everything about is not interesting to me in the least.

[Plaintiff]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

In Exile wrote...

DA2 allows you to do that to, save for parts of Act III (especially near the end, where the rushing shows).

Feynriel's quest has multiple resolutions - you can send him to the Dalish or the Circle,

Which result of him getting possesed at the Dalish Camp anyway, regardless you sent him to the Circle or not. It didn't happen in DAO. If I choose to kill Connor, Connor is dead not Connor is alive just to make Sacred Ashes plot relevant.  

In Exile wrote...

and then you can either make him Tranquil, have him sent off to Tevinter, or made into an abomination.

So what? He should be in the Circle taking the Harrowing instead of running away to the Dalish Camp. That's why I choose him to be sent to the circle.

In Exile wrote...


You have multiple solutions for Enemies Among Us,

Like what? Choose to ignore the quest? Or do you mean choice of killing Idunna or not by bringing a mage along? That's hardly called a choice since you're are not expecting her to cast a charmed spell on you.

In Exile wrote...



and three ways to solve Thrask's last quest.

Thrask died regardless of the three ways solution you mentioned. That's what matter the most to me. No matter what ****ing choice I've made. I could prevent Isolde and/or Connor's death in DAO. And both of them will be there when Eamon awake and Alistair won't storm on me for the bad call.  DA 2 just want to ****** the players with single railroad.

In Exile wrote...


But Act I had traditional Bioware quest design (even if it didn't have direction, and even though I'm sure Bioware meant it as a nod to BGII that no one liked) and so did, really, Act II.

What choice do they offer to us beside getting 50 golds and Anders's map in ACT I? Skip the fedex quest and contact the thugs. Yeah sure. Way to branch out content. /sarcasm

"I didn't get exactly the choices I wanted, so there aren't really any choices at all!'

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Plaintiff wrote...
"I didn't get exactly the choices I wanted, so there aren't really any choices at all!'

No. It's "don't waste my time expecting the end result if you can't provide them." 

[Icesong]

Plaintiff wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The only way to ensure that the protagonist is "interesting" to all players is to allow the players to define the protagonist's personality themselves.

Except it ensures nothing of the kind. A character I already know everything about is not interesting to me in the least.

You don't have to define everything about your character at the start of the game, and even if you do there's always character development.

[Fredward]

I played the Walking Dead recently. It kicked me in the feels. Repeatedly. And then laughed at my pain.

BUT!

That is beside the point (of this thread). Lee is probably one of the most average (besides the killing someone thing but eh) people you can get. It worked BEAUTIFULLY. Also it was probably one of the most un-contrived games I have ever played. I mean I didn't even realize how contrived most games were till after I played it. But that's beside the point (of this thread).

The difference, I think, between a game like the Walking Dead and Dragon Age is that in WD the world already has gone to ****, there's nothing to be done, you just have to SURVIVE. In a game like DA you're trying (and almost inevitably succeed) in STOPPING the world from going to ****. SO. I don't reeeeaaaalllllyyyyy think a game like DA could go for a "average" hero so super interesting works too I guess. xp

[LinksOcarina]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...
"I didn't get exactly the choices I wanted, so there aren't really any choices at all!'

No. It's "don't waste my time expecting the end result if you can't provide them." 

Well, do you have full control over the plot to begin with is the question then.

[Tootles FTW]

If I wasn't playing a choice-heavy RPG I would agree with you. In RPGs the PC is an avatar for you to explore the world and the characters, so while I want to be cool and relevant through my choices the real experience is interacting with the environment and the people in it.

In RPGs that are not so choice-heavy, like Far Cry 3, I think liking the protagonist is more of an issue as your dialogue and choices are not your own. I DETEST Jason Brody (FC3), I want him dead, and this is a problem when I'm supposed to care about saving him and his stupid entitled friends.

[AlexanderCousland]

In Exile wrote...

Edit: Actually, let's outline all the so-called choices you have in DA:O. In Orzammar you have two, two times: (i) Save the Anvil, or Destroy it (which itself has two options, via Branka or Caridan); and then (ii) name Bhelen or Harrowmont King. That's the most branching in any of the main quests. In the Circle tower we have three choices: (i) save the mages, (ii) save the mages then have them locked up; or (iii) kill the mages (and Wynne). Sacred ashes has two options: corrupt or not. Lots of mini-choices along the way.

DA2 allows you to do that to, save for parts of Act III (especially near the end, where the rushing shows).

Feynriel's quest has multiple resolutions - you can send him to the Dalish or the Circle, and then you can either make him Tranquil, have him sent off to Tevinter, or made into an abomination. You have multiple solutions for Enemies Among Us, and three ways to solve Thrask's last quest.

Bioware didn't change their quest design. Act III, again, wasn't well done. But Act I had traditional Bioware quest design (even if it didn't have direction, and even though I'm sure Bioware meant it as a nod to BGII that no one liked) and so did, really, Act II.

 So did we both save Grace and the other mages by killing Thrask, or lying? Did we give Feynriel to the Circle and then turn him into an abomination? Did we have give Katojan away or did we resist the Qunari?

Not to mention that Carver/Bethany have two totally different paths as GW/Templar.

There was no 'main quest' in DA2, really. But quests often had more varied ending options.

DA2 did lots of things wrong - but most quests had more outcomes than DA:O, until you get quite late into the game and the rushing shows. But even with that, Bioware gave lots of options. They were totally meaningless - but the DA:O options didn't even have in-game consequences. And Bioware's shown consistently they don't really do branching content.

 nice try.

Your first paragraph hilights the mutiple choices in DAO, and acutally proves the point, the choices provided in each of those quests and how they are resolved can make my  Warden's overall story very different from Yours, there are mutiple variables we can discuss, involving the main quests required to get to the Landsmeet, that makes your Warden different from mine, even more so if we include the DLC. 

Feynriel is an example, that first descision involving him is a side quest. Yes you have to go to the fade and save him, but is that supposed to have some sort of impact or significant meaning? i guess well find out, or maybe not. 
Grace still kidnaps your sibling no matter what you choose, and the choice is irrelevant because throughout the whole game you have one choice, mages or templars. Ketojan is irrelevant, you still had to fight the Qunari, and none of those choices had in- game consequences either.  Carver/Bethany is just another plot point that proves to me that companions are more important DA2' s story then Hawke ever was. and DA2 had main quests, those were the quests designed to get you to the next act, to the final shabang or lack thereof, DA2 worked for people who cared about their companions storys more than their own, Im not one of those people. 

[legbamel]

Just because you didn't find the choices and surrounding stories compelling doesn't mean that they didn't exist. When you look at the state of Thedas right now, your choices in neither game amounted to a hill of beans taken all together. They're all false choices. Lambasting DA2 for it while defending DA:O is hypocritical.

[AlexanderCousland]

legbamel wrote...

Just because you didn't find the choices and surrounding stories compelling doesn't mean that they didn't exist. When you look at the state of Thedas right now, your choices in neither game amounted to a hill of beans taken all together. They're all false choices. Lambasting DA2 for it while defending DA:O is hypocritical.

Oh, my friend. Im not saying there werent any choices, Im saying the choices provided were irrelvant to the overall plot of ONE PARTICULAR GAME NOT THE ENTIRETY OF THEDAS. The circle was ablosihed that was clear from the Prolouge, Hawke really didnt have much to do with that at all, so my thing was,"why am i playing this?" You can skip playing DA2 altogether and read Asunder and come out more informed about the upcoming feud.  and its not really hypocritical to compare the two, considering In Orgins you personally impacted a whole Nation, and nations that lie within Ferelden' s border' s in a varations of different way' s i.e. My warden can even be a totally different race or from a very different part of the country from yours, let alone the differences between how each of us might have resolved certain quests.

In DA2 you were pretty much watched your companions make descions that impacted the city without your input, and decided  wether you liked them or not like some sort of moral counselor. you had one choice, Mages or Templars....and the Templars still took Kirkwall and some Mages still escaped to tell the Story regardless of that choice. So again, unless your a player who values your companions story more than your own, i dont see what the beauty of DA2 is. 

[M Hedonist]

In DA2, when Anders blew up the Chantry, I was like "Damn. I wanna be that guy. He's doing stuff."
But alas, I was Hawke, tasked with cleaning up after the true protagonist.

[In Exile]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
Which result of him getting possesed at the Dalish Camp anyway, regardless you sent him to the Circle or not. It didn't happen in DAO. If I choose to kill Connor, Connor is dead not Connor is alive just to make Sacred Ashes plot relevant. 

If you chose to kill Connor, you get one cutscene, and then Arl Eamon is totally cool with it and Connor never gets mentioned again until an epilogue slide.

So what? He should be in the Circle taking the Harrowing instead of running away to the Dalish Camp. That's why I choose him to be sent to the circle.

He left. The Circle would make him Tranquil. You have the choice to do that. If the decision doesn't turn out how you like, it doesn't lie with you to complain unless the outcome is illogical.

Like what? Choose to ignore the quest? Or do you mean choice of killing Idunna or not by bringing a mage along? That's hardly called a choice since you're are not expecting her to cast a charmed spell on you.

There are two main conclusions: Kieran stays with the Templars or is kicked out. You can either straight up plead for him with Cullen, or if (a) you have Anders or ( Merrill, then they can check for demons and you get a unique solution. That's ignoring that there are the two ways of dealing with Iduna, and the unique class specific option.

Thrask died regardless of the three ways solution you mentioned.

No. Thrask lives in Act I. This is exactly how Bioware does its quests - you have three ways of solving it: lying to the templars, killing the templars, or forcibly bringing in the mages.

That's what matter the most to me. No matter what ****ing choice I've made. I could prevent Isolde and/or Connor's death in DAO. And both of them will be there when Eamon awake and Alistair won't storm on me for the bad call.  DA 2 just want to ****** the players with single railroad.

DA:O doesn't have to show you the consequences of your actions. Connor dies? So what? Thrask can die in Act I. Or Thrask can live until Act III.

Just like ME2-ME3 showed, Bioware doesn't do significant branching content for your choices. You have the same number of options: three to resolve the quest. If you want to complain about there not being enough exclusive content for choices or Bioware not showing enough consequences, that's a justified complaint.

BUt you are clearly and objectively wrong. Here.

What choice do they offer to us beside getting 50 golds and Anders's map in ACT I? Skip the fedex quest and contact the thugs. Yeah sure. Way to branch out content. /sarcasm

I just showed you. If you want to be in denial about it, it's your business. But screaming that the sky is green doesn't make it green, it just makes you wrong.