207 réponses à ce sujet

[Addai]

In Exile wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
And players also used the other races. 

They did. But not very much.

And not many people played female Shepard- that is the OP's point and what Stan was responding to.  So just saying "well some people want to play women because they're women" is a weak follow-on.  Some people want to play elves or dwarves because they just do.  That's not a reason to either include those options or exclude them.

Supposing I actually agree with you and don't find it racist, all of this turns on my having extensive, extensive knowledge of the setting. You don't see a problem with this?

No.  Elder Scrolls is lore-driven.  If you want to play it as a vapid dungeon crawl, you can do so.  If you're going to expound on story themes, however, you're going to have to work harder.  That's how I like it.  I much prefer environmental storytelling than sitting through tons of cutscenes.  Vive la difference.

It's not subversive at all.

Uh... ok.  Whatever.  You were missing large pieces of information, but I'm supposed to accept your insight into the story is crystal clear?

The style being, read books and pretend what happens on screen ... is different, somehow?

Recognize that you got one piece of information but it's probably not all there is to the story.

The origin stories are much more than one quest. They're quite massive. And they're a key part of the character, and your past. It's the reason for. I'm sorry, but you're greatly underselling their value here.

Have you played Origins lately?  It's one quest, and then a smattering of NPC dialogue throughout the rest of the game.

[Fisto The Sexbot]

In Exile wrote...

If the game supports your background as well as my fiction that the PC is a shapeshifting alien from the planet Zorblanax 19, preparing the world for invasion, then it's fan-fiction.

[spam image removed]


If the game would support that kind of background then by definition it isn't fan fiction.

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 14 janvier 2013 - 08:32 .

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...
There are differences between the Dunmer, Argonian, Orc, and the other people of Mundus. There are histories to their respective cultures.

I get that part of it. But I don't see what human/non-human has to do with it.

Bad blood between some of the people. Some players are able to enjoy playing as a certain protagonist from a particular race that isn't there when their only option is to play as a human protagonist.

Having varied cultures does not have very much to do with having multiple races, other than the fact that it seems to be an (IMO offensive) fantasy trope that 'exotic' cultures are non-human.

For some people, the human protagonist is very bland and boring.

People keep saying this, but haven't given a reason outside of culture, which is absurd (IMO), because all it involves is someone lifting an actual human culture and giving to a group of humans with pointy ears.

[MisterJB]

Addai67 wrote...
I really don't like playing humans in the DA universe.  They aren't very diversified in culture,

That is hardly true. There are many differences between the multiple human cultures in Thedas. Fereldans are an harsh, proud people that value freedom and honor and tradition above all things, amongst them the power rises from the commoners, their fashion and architecture are entirely centred around practicality rather than beauty. Then we have orlesians that place utmost value in image, beauty, wild colors and extravagant forms and who entertain themselves in playing aristocracy games, their monarchy is absolute. There are the Anderfels who we know live in a barren wasteland, in structures built into the earth, are threatned by the darkspawn daily and are thus practically lead by the Grey Wardens. The rivains whose society is largely tribal and use piercings and tatoos to denote their rank and who place much more value in the words of hedge witches than the rest of Thedas. The nevarrans bury their dead rather than burn them altough we know little more about them. There are the Tevinter who revere power above everything and live in a very cutthroat society engaged in an eternal war.

Human culture is Thedas is quite diverse. But in both games we played with a fereldan and Kirkwall just failed to convey a busy multicultural city.

If anything, it's the dwarven and elven societies that lack diversity because there are two dwarven cities left and even at the height of their power, they were but a nation and the dalish entire culture is centered around looking for their lost one with little difference between clans.

Modifié par MisterJB, 13 janvier 2013 - 10:15 .

[In Exile]

Addai67 wrote...
And not many people played female Shepard- that is the OP's point and what Stan was responding to.  So just saying "well some people want to play women because they're women" is a weak follow-on. 

Wait, I just missed that. Is that what Stan said? I'm going to go back and read it over, because if so, I completely apologize for wasting your time, you're totally in the right.

No.  Elder Scrolls is lore-driven. 

Not at all.

If you're going to expound on story themes, however, you're going to have to work harder. 

Talking about racism as it's portrayed in-game is expounding on a story theme.

That's how I like it.  I much prefer environmental storytelling than sitting through tons of cutscenes.  Vive la difference.

I love environmental story telling. Dishonoured does a brilliant job with that. TES does not.

Reading a codex entry is not environmental story telling.

Uh... ok.  Whatever.  You were missing large pieces of information, but I'm supposed to accept your insight into the story is crystal clear?

It wasn't a comment on the lore, which you expounded beautifully. It was a comment on what was portrayed in game, which is quite a lot of racism, on which a person can take a stand as to whether it's quite as bad as one side says or the other.

But a lecture on lore doesn't somehow make what's happening on screen different.

Recognize that you got one piece of information but it's probably not all there is to the story.

Once again: did DA2 handle blood mages well by stuffing all that information into a codex? Because I don't think so.

Have you played Origins lately?

I did. The Mage origin is quite expansive. You have the actual tower itself, the bottom floors, the side quest, the Fade itself ... you get almost as many areas as the Ostagar round.

It's quite massive. Other origins are much shorter, but both Mage and CE are very large and very well done.

It's one quest, and then a smattering of NPC dialogue throughout the rest of the game.

It's several quests, again.

[LobselVith8]

In Exile wrote...

People keep saying this, but haven't given a reason outside of culture, which is abused (IMO), because it involves lifting an actual human culture and giving to a group of humans with pointy ears.

I'm fairly certain there isn't an equivalent to the Telvanni or their artificially grown towers, or the worship of living Gods who are literally interacting with their people in a realm where Aedra and Daedra exist. If you don't understand why, it speaks to our differing tastes. I doubt that you would change your mind any more than someone else would change their mind about their preference for non-human protagonists simply because someone prefers a human protagonist.

For me, the Elder Scrolls opens up a variety of interesting races, with their own lore, and a lot for a person to roleplay and immerse themselves in. I like the Dunmer; they have an interesting history, some nice abilities, they can live for centuries, and they provide me with some nice aspects for playing the protagonist in a variety of ways that aren't available with a human protagonist. Many people have their own preferences for one of the specific races of Tamriel, and they all have an interesting lore behind their culture and people. Immersion, role-play, entertainment, preference - there are a lot of reasons why some players prefer a non-human protagonist over a human protagonist.

[Galbrant]

Question what was the ratio of the races played in origins?

[element eater]

my favourate experiance of da was playing dalish. It doesnt realy matter why i dont care for playing a human protagonist in this setting, but human only is certainly not going to persuade me top buy da3

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...
I'm fairly certain there isn't an equivalent to the Telvanni or their artificially grown towers, or the worship of living Gods who are literally interacting with their people in a realm where Aedra and Daedra exist.

In the real world? Of course not. They're made up fantasy things. But there's nothing non-human about them.

I doubt that you would change your mind any more than someone else would change their mind about their preference for non-human protagonists simply because someone prefers a human protagonist. 

I asked you what makes humans intrinsically bland. When you say that you want to play fantasy races, you're making a categorical statement. I can relate to a claim like: I would prefer to play a Qunari from Par Vollen over a human from Ferelden in DA3 (party because that's my own position).

But saying something like "humans are bland" doesn't mean anything.

For me, the Elder Scrolls opens up a variety of interesting races, with their own lore, and a lot for a person to roleplay and immerse themselves in. I like the Dunmer; they have an interesting history, some nice abilities, they can live for centuries, and they provide me with some nice aspects for playing the protagonist in a variety of ways that aren't available with a human protagonist.

So if there was a fantasy setting where everything was the same, but the Dunmner all looked like this:



All of a sudden it wouldn't count? That's my point: that human non-human is just a mesh. 

Many people have their own preferences for one of the specific races of Tamriel, and they all have an interesting lore behind their culture and people. Immersion, role-play, entertainment, preference - there are a lot of reasons why some players prefer a non-human protagonist over a human protagonist.

That's not a justification for the statement "humans are bland" or in a fantasy game I want to play non-humans.

[Addai]

MisterJB wrote...
Human culture is Thedas is quite diverse. But in both games we played with a fereldan and Kirkwall just failed to convey a busy multicultural city.

If anything, it's the dwarven and elven societies that lack diversity because there are two dwarven cities left and even at the height of their power, they were but a nation and the dalish entire culture is centered around looking for their lost one with little difference between clans.

Compared to the humans, the dwarves and elves' cultures are quite different.  So together they make for diversity,  hence being able to play an elf or dwarf PC has some actual meaning in terms of story tension, RP perspective etc.  The differences between the human cultures are superficial and slight.  They look the same, most are some version of Andrastian faith, etc.

[MisterJB]

Addai67 wrote...
Compared to the humans, the dwarves and elves' cultures are quite different.  So together they make for diversity,  hence being able to play an elf or dwarf PC has some actual meaning in terms of story tension, RP perspective etc.  The differences between the human cultures are superficial and slight.  They look the same, most are some version of Andrastian faith, etc.

Dwarven culture is quite different from human culture but no more or less than Orlesian culture is different from Fereldan. The two countries are very much polar opposites in just about everything except matters of religion. In fact, the Andrastian Faith is quite possibly the one thing all of these human nations have in common.

Therefore, while I can understand the wish to play in different cultures, I don't see why these culture must necessarely be non-human. It's not like Bioware will ever make a game where you can only be non-human and, even in DAO, the differences between playing with a human or playing with an elf were minimal.

[LobselVith8]

In Exile,

Some people find humans to be bland in a fantasy setting. You seem to be arguing against the personal preference that some people have for non-human protagonists, and I really don't see the point. It's like asking someone why they might prefer a particular gender. You should know from the multiple threads about this issue that are there a multitude of reasons why some people have expressed a strong preference for non-human protagonists.

The fact that some players find humans to be bland in a fantasy setting doesn't have to mean anything to you, because it's not your opinion. Some people find the humans of Thedas to be incredibly bland and boring, in comparison to their elven and dwarven counterparts. It's simply a matter of opinion.

As for justification, it's a matter of personal preference, not a universal viewpoint.

[XX-Pyro]

LobselVith8 wrote...

In Exile,

Some people find humans to be bland in a fantasy setting. You seem to be arguing against the personal preference that some people have for non-human protagonists, and I really don't see the point. It's like asking someone why they might prefer a particular gender. You should know from the multiple threads about this issue that are there a multitude of reasons why some people have expressed a strong preference for non-human protagonists.

The fact that some players find humans to be bland in a fantasy setting doesn't have to mean anything to you, because it's not your opinion. Some people find the humans of Thedas to be incredibly bland and boring, in comparison to their elven and dwarven counterparts. It's simply a matter of opinion.

As for justification, it's a matter of personal preference, not a universal viewpoint.

What's the difference between playing a tall human or a short human with pointy ears? If they don't make them vasatly different (ie. different abilities, vastly different outcomes during quests, etc) that's essentially all you're doing.

EDIT: Holy crap does that Warden look good, In Exile. 

Modifié par XX-Pyro, 13 janvier 2013 - 11:20 .

[LobselVith8]

XX-Pyro wrote...

What's the difference between playing a tall human or a short human with pointy ears?

How people respond to my Dunmer, an apology from a character who made a disparaging remark about the Dunmer, a myriad of Dunmer who acknowledge my protagonist as a brother, a remark from a Companion who noted that we are all "Ashlanders" now, and the specific background I gave to my protagonist.

[Jaryk]

Okay, two things...

First, saying that you prefer to play non-human races in DAO and would have preferred them in DA2 because you thought the humans in those games were boring or bland is a perfectly valid argument.  Saying the same for DA3 is not.  Without any knowledge of how the humans in the next came are going to be presented and what their culture will look like, you cannot possibly say that you will find them bland and boring with any amount of credibility.  If the game comes out and you still find humans to be so uninteresting, then fine.  But as of now, no.  Not a valid argument.

Second, while the discussion of the different races in Skyrim and what they bring to the game is interesting, it's kind of missing the point.  Yes, Skyrim has 10 races, and yes that adds to the experience of the game.  But in terms of game development and resource allocation, implementing more playable races in an Elder Scrolls game seems like it would take much less effort than doing the same in a Dragon Age game.  This, as has been stated in this thread and countless others that compare the franchises, is largely due to the massive difference in focus between the developers.  Because of Bioware's focus on cinematic storytelling, the decision to include voiced protagonists, and the large differences in the sizes and shapes of the different races of Thedas, adding more playable races would involve a pretty massive effort.  For Bethesda, where there is no voiced protagonist, none of the same kinds of cinematic scenes included in Bioware games, and where all of the different races largely share the same body model, adding more playable races, while still an effort, is not nearly as much of one.  So any kind of argument that bares down to the point of "well Skyrim did it" is going to be, again, not valid.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

MisterJB wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
Compared to the humans, the dwarves and elves' cultures are quite different.  So together they make for diversity,  hence being able to play an elf or dwarf PC has some actual meaning in terms of story tension, RP perspective etc.  The differences between the human cultures are superficial and slight.  They look the same, most are some version of Andrastian faith, etc.

Dwarven culture is quite different from human culture but no more or less than Orlesian culture is different from Fereldan. The two countries are very much polar opposites in just about everything except matters of religion. In fact, the Andrastian Faith is quite possibly the one thing all of these human nations have in common.

Therefore, while I can understand the wish to play in different cultures, I don't see why these culture must necessarely be non-human. It's not like Bioware will ever make a game where you can only be non-human and, even in DAO, the differences between playing with a human or playing with an elf were minimal.

I think I'll have to agree with this in so much that "races" in real-life are all just different kinds of people, rather than what we see in games which are more like species. So human cultures can be just as different such that we have cannibalistic, braless women. What playing as a different species mostly offers is different physical attributes, both in appearance and abilities.


But Skyrim I am disappoint, as with it it does mainly boil down to appearances. It has no effect on quests and I can't even jump across roofs as Khajiit or play Argonians as aquatic predators anymore, because you have no means to attack and a slaughter fish would slaughter you.


But theeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeen again, it's not like Bioware are offering us the chance to choose whether we're Orlesian or Ferelden

Modifié par fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb, 14 janvier 2013 - 12:34 .

[Fallstar]

Oh it's that time of week again is it.

Loss of extra races sucks. But, they'd need different VAs for each race. Another element of character creation thrown out of the window in the name of cinematic gameplay.

As for Laidlaw's promises of more races in future games, isn't that a typical marketing strategy. Take something popular away, but promise it will come back in some new and improved form in the future to stop people from complaining.

I really doubt DA3 will do well enough to give them enough resources for DA4 that they can hire multiple VAs who will have to put a lot of time in for the protagonists.

[Dragoonlordz]

In Exile wrote...

-snip-

I need to get involved now because this is doing my head with the stance your taking on this...

The races cultures, appearences and societies in DA have been set in lore. As have the human cultures in it, you know what each believes, prejudices and appearences, laws and idiologies, religions and cultures in general for each race which is a combination of all those things to each one. Those differences both visually and culturally plus how treat each other are one of the major reasons why some people prefer one over another and your attempt to go against this reasoning is that "they could be same cultures and look human" is quite honestly silly at this stage.

The reason being is they are already defined from the creation of the franchise and it is those pre-existing defined cultures and beliefs, idiologies, societies and appearences that people have grown to care about and is partially it's same reason why people kick up fuss over appearence of elves changing or darkspawn. They preferred and have grown to like the original defined version before they (re)defined them into something they liked less. If they had never designed or defined them the way they did originally then there would be far less (if any) complaints about the new versions. The way they did it especially with the elves is very bad though, it's like LotR if released first film and hobbits looked as they do now then second film they made them all bald as a race people would not be happy then just like they are not with elves in DA changing after they were already defined as one style.

A short human is not a dwarf in DA and a human with pointy ears is not an elf in DA because the lore and design of the world shows it to not be the case. You would have to retcon the entire franchise back to square one to make your analogies even have the slightest relevence as that would be the only way to redefine the humans to match that of another race which someone already has grown attached to. The reality is people like playing the dwarven race as it has been defined already, someone might like playing the elven race as it is defined already. Some people do not like playing the human race the way it has been already defined both from a cultural and visual standpoint. Do you understand now?

Could they have created three tribes of humans with same attributes as the different races, yes they could and maybe people here would be asking for ability to play the forest tribe of humans or the city tribe of humans or even cave tribe of humans within this thread instead of elves, dwarfs and humans in such a situation BUT they did not create it that way and cannot at this stage change this so your point is irrelevant when trying to argue symantics with others in here about human non-humans.

Having said that, I personally do not mind human if it is done very well and they make up for lack of choice in this area with added choices and differences in other areas. My preference however is race selection from those pre-existing cultures and appearences that I have grown attached to but it is a preference and the world does not end just because one of my preferences is not met. However your stance arguing from in order to discredit why someone likes those other races, wishes to play them again and does not like the human one in DA is pure symantics and logical nonsense at this stage since what they have grown attached to and reason asking for such is because of what has already been defined and experienced by those players was enjoyed by them.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 14 janvier 2013 - 05:09 .

[LAZERAK47]

Horsecrap! I played Elf in Origins 9 times out of 10.

[K_Tabris]

LAZERAK47 wrote...

Horsecrap! I played Elf in Origins 9 times out of 10.

Me too.  I am finally on my third human, but only to vary the experience.

Once they figure out what to do with the elves, it would be awesome to play as one again.  Untl then, however, it's not worth playing one.

[Addai]

MisterJB wrote...

Dwarven culture is quite different from human culture but no more or less than Orlesian culture is different from Fereldan. The two countries are very much polar opposites in just about everything except matters of religion. In fact, the Andrastian Faith is quite possibly the one thing all of these human nations have in common.

Therefore, while I can understand the wish to play in different cultures, I don't see why these culture must necessarely be non-human. It's not like Bioware will ever make a game where you can only be non-human and, even in DAO, the differences between playing with a human or playing with an elf were minimal.

The differences between dwarven and elven to human are much larger.   We're going to have to agree to disagree on this I think.  The only human culture I'd be interested in playing would be a Chasind or hill tribe background.

[sympathy4sarenreturns]

Addai67 wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Dwarven culture is quite different from human culture but no more or less than Orlesian culture is different from Fereldan. The two countries are very much polar opposites in just about everything except matters of religion. In fact, the Andrastian Faith is quite possibly the one thing all of these human nations have in common.

Therefore, while I can understand the wish to play in different cultures, I don't see why these culture must necessarely be non-human. It's not like Bioware will ever make a game where you can only be non-human and, even in DAO, the differences between playing with a human or playing with an elf were minimal.

The differences between dwarven and elven to human are much larger.   We're going to have to agree to disagree on this I think.  The only human culture I'd be interested in playing would be a Chasind or hill tribe background.

Addai, don't waste your time with Dragon Age 3. You know like me its probably going to be bad. The only possible way this human choice can redeem itself is if it goes the Dark Souls route. Even then it suffers from having dwarves and elves in the setting, unlike Dark Souls. 

But there are so many other good, quality, fun games coming out that will have more effort put into it then friggin 'Dragon Age 3'. Join me on the Cyberpunk 2077 forums.

[Maria Caliban]

Galbrant wrote...

Question what was the ratio of the races played in origins?

According to Bioware telemetry, 80% of players chose Human origins, 15% - Elven origins (with the Elven Mage being the most popular) and 5% - Dwarven origins. This accounts for all registered playthroughs ever started, but not for playthroughs on unconnected consoles.

According to Silverman, "Overall, 18 percent of everyone who plays Mass Effect plays it with a female character."

What we don't know is how many Dragon Age and DA II players used a female character. I expect it would be a bit higher than ME's percentage both because of marketing and different player demographics.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 14 janvier 2013 - 04:54 .

[ISpeakTheTruth]

I want to say that data is wrong... but seeing as I've made three human mages I guess that might be correct.

By the way Maria its nice to see you liked my response to that horrible thread... now I have to remember that horrible topic ever time I see one of your posts. Good on you! *Thumbs up*

[Maria Caliban]

I live to serve.