268 réponses à ce sujet

[Sable Rhapsody]

Fawx9 wrote...

Dear god don't give them ideas.

I do not want Thessia 2.0

The thread isn't about Thessia 2.0.  It's about having the dialogue option to react in an emotionally charged way.  It's just an option, and you don't have to pick it.

Thessia was awful because there were no options.  Because no matter what you said or did, it was always "ZOMG THE ASARI I AM SO SAD."  That's just as bad, possibly worse.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

How often is your attention focused on you?

In RL? I'm always aware of my social/personal space. I'm hypervigilant in that regard. 

If you mean in-game, most of the time.

Given how I play, I don't see how those two things are different.

I typically look at the character, and in conversations I generally always look at the character who is speaking - so this means the PC when (s)he is talking. I would find it very striking if the camera wasn't on the PC when he was speaking.

Whereas, I find seeing the character speak at all quite jarring.  Just as it would be weird to see myself speak from a third-person perspective, it is weird to see my character speak from a third-person perspective.

In cutscenes, I follow the PC, unless someone is speaking, but I'm aware of the where the PC is, and when the PC isn't on camera. It's very easy to follow, because the game never shows a lot on screen.

In cutscenes, I never look at the PC.  I'm looking at everything around the PC so that I can see everything that he can see.  It is here where I find depth of field effects jarring, as they prevent me from examining what I think my character is examining.

As far as I'm concerned, cutscenes have almost no value.

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Given how I play, I don't see how those two things are different.

Well, you can't be aware of space in the same way.

Whereas, I find seeing the character speak at all quite jarring.  Just as it would be weird to see myself speak from a third-person perspective, it is weird to see my character speak from a third-person perspective.

I just don't find that to be true. I'm already looking at the computers screen. I find first person silly - because usuall most of your body isn't visible like it should be, and moreover, there's no sensory feedback like we actually have. 

The game is through an interface. I'm not the character. I don't have the same feedback as the character. 

In cutscenes, I never look at the PC.  I'm looking at everything around the PC so that I can see everything that he can see.  It is here where I find depth of field effects jarring, as they prevent me from examining what I think my character is examining.

I can't look where the PC is looking. This is especially bad with isometric cams, but even with non-isometric cams, it's still not from the POV of the PC. 

What I see and what my characters see is not the same thing. I need that information, but I don't need to share the perception.

Modifié par In Exile, 26 janvier 2013 - 12:48 .

[deatharmonic]

FreshIstay wrote...

If my character fists shakes at the Heavens with a single tear dripping from his eye at any point, Im coming for everybody on this thread, Liam Neeson Taken (1) style, and I shall leave a photo of a crying protagonist attached to each body.

[Steppenwolf]

EntropicAngel wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...

Only if you think that exchanges need to "flow" more than think your character needs to be controlled by you. I'm less interested in Aaron Sorkin-style dialogue exchanges and more interested in, ya know, role playing.

Read what I wrote. I said that Bioware was heading that way, not me. No need for the dig.

Your post said minimizing forced auto-dialogue and auto-emotions on our PC would "cripple the flow of a scene." You didn't say that that's what Bioware thinks. If your intention was to communicate that Bioware thinks that way but you don't, your post doesn't convey that in the slightest.

Modifié par BasilKarlo, 26 janvier 2013 - 01:12 .

[DPSSOC]

Ok to address something I'm seeing a lot of in the first couple pages, you don't need to have the PC breakdown over every person they kill for this to work, you don't need it for anybody really. All you really need is a moment, maybe a few, where an NPC turns to your character and asks, "How you doing?"

ME3 did it with Liara and ignoring the nightmares those scenes aren't bad. Example you have an old veteran soldier in your party, 1 day from retirment until he met you kind of guy, who about half way through the game says to the PC, "30 years a soldier and I've killed more men fighting alongside you than in any war. Does it ever get to you?" The player is then given options to respond.

One maybe two moments like that in the game would be fine, it allows the player to establish that, while it might not show, they do have thoughts and issues about killing people enmasse, and even express growth.

[nightcobra]

DPSSOC wrote...

Ok to address something I'm seeing a lot of in the first couple pages, you don't need to have the PC breakdown over every person they kill for this to work, you don't need it for anybody really. All you really need is a moment, maybe a few, where an NPC turns to your character and asks, "How you doing?"

ME3 did it with Liara and ignoring the nightmares those scenes aren't bad. Example you have an old veteran soldier in your party, 1 day from retirment until he met you kind of guy, who about half way through the game says to the PC, "30 years a soldier and I've killed more men fighting alongside you than in any war. Does it ever get to you?" The player is then given options to respond.

One maybe two moments like that in the game would be fine, it allows the player to establish that, while it might not show, they do have thoughts and issues about killing people enmasse, and even express growth.

in DAO most of the choices changed the world around you
in DA2 most of the choices changed your PC's outlook on the world

i hope for DA:I to strike a medium between the two (though with more emphasis on the choices changing the world)

as to how this relates to the subject at hand imagine this:

during the game proper, you make your choices with most changing the world around you and some your view on it but rarely showing your true feelings on the matter.
then in our base there could be sections where the party members want to discuss the reasons for our choices 
or maybe even putting the PC talking to himself in order to justify his choices to himself (a section of vinland saga's story as an example *1*2*3*4*5*6*)

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

I just don't find that to be true. I'm already looking at the computers screen. I find first person silly - because usuall most of your body isn't visible like it should be, and moreover, there's no sensory feedback like we actually have.

I agree first-person is silly. I like third-person cameras because they give me an awareness of the area around my character - an awareness I think my character should have.

The game is through an interface. I'm not the character. I don't have the same feedback as the character.

No, but you're aware of what that feedback is.

I can't look where the PC is looking. This is especially bad with isometric cams, but even with non-isometric cams, it's still not from the POV of the PC.

You don't need to see what they see, but you need to discern what they discern.

They don't discern their own emotional state; they already know that. If I'm busy watching the PC to learn about him, then I'm missing everything else around him. It takes me out of character two different ways.

[FireDire]

This is a pretty good idea, maybe not for every single person he kills, but for the first few kills maybe he is nervous about doing so, or maybe feels weird about doing so. And towards the end, maybe it all gets too much for your character, all the killing and unwanted fighting.

[Twisted Path]

Fawx9 wrote...

Dear god don't give them ideas.

I do not want Thessia 2.0

Yeah, for me the absolute worse thing about Mass Effect 3 was that the game suddenly started deiciding how the player character felt about stuff. It was especially jarring since the first two games did a pretty good job of making the PC a blank slate that the player mostly defines, despite having a voiced protagonist.

The more the player can customize and define their little in-game-avatar in roleplaying games, both physically and personality wise, the better.

[vanom66]

Just for once let me cry...

Seriously I feel like a robot.. For example in DA2 your sibling died gruesomely by a ogre in front of you and not even a whimper from Hawke beside that mild frowny face there's no hint of a soul in Hawke ..And **** the " he has to be strong for the group.." no just no ...Seriously I would like the option for the PC to lose his/her composure at moment like those otherwise I feel disconnected to this character for me .

[Allan Schumacher]

There may have been a tech limitation on crying with Eclipse. Does it happen anywhere? I can't recall any scenes in DAO or DA2....

[Medhia Nox]

I'd prefer roleplay where I didn't have to be a mass murderer - to roleplay where I cried about being a mass murderer.

But it's much more likely we'll get your option before mine in a video game - so, I'm all for having a human with a shred of empathy.

[NUM13ER]

There are some deaths where there could be room for regret or even the outright dismissal of any guilt. Depending how idealistic you wish to your character to be.

I think in Hawkes case being a former soldier and serving at Ostagar it makes sense that he or she isn't broken up about cutting down bandits, slavers or especially blood mages.

Modifié par NUM13ER, 28 janvier 2013 - 07:01 .

[Lasien]

DPSSOC wrote...

Ok to address something I'm seeing a lot of in the first couple pages, you don't need to have the PC breakdown over every person they kill for this to work, you don't need it for anybody really. All you really need is a moment, maybe a few, where an NPC turns to your character and asks, "How you doing?"

ME3 did it with Liara and ignoring the nightmares those scenes aren't bad. Example you have an old veteran soldier in your party, 1 day from retirment until he met you kind of guy, who about half way through the game says to the PC, "30 years a soldier and I've killed more men fighting alongside you than in any war. Does it ever get to you?" The player is then given options to respond.

One maybe two moments like that in the game would be fine, it allows the player to establish that, while it might not show, they do have thoughts and issues about killing people enmasse, and even express growth.

Thank You! finally someone mentioned this possibility. I've been wondering if someone was going to say this or not. I don't really get why so many people seem to think that the option to express regret will somehow ruin the game. If your character racks up a large kill-count of animal and non-thinking creatures like darkspawn, I don't see a need to mention it, but once it starts being sentient creature, that aren't obviously trying to eat your soul, it seems a little odd that your character doesn't get questioned on it by NPCs - such as merril or sebastian.

I am saying this applies even if the human mobs are actively attacking - it would just be nice to have the option to say something like, "I know it had to be done, but that doesn't mean I like it", or even react like Zevran "Killing is an art form - and I am a very good artiste!"

[Dutchess]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

There may have been a tech limitation on crying with Eclipse. Does it happen anywhere? I can't recall any scenes in DAO or DA2....

Nope, no tears in either game. I've only seen tears in ME.

[Wulfram]

The visible tears in ME looked kind of fake.  I'd prefer to avoid it unless it can be done better.  You can do crying without visible tears.

Like Aveline

[Gnoster]

I feel it is a question of a broad variation of choices opposed to depth in narrow range of choices.

Let's say the PC and his/her companions experience a certain traumatic thing, be it death of a companion, a tough heart breaking ethical choice, or something like that.

The question is I feel, do we as players want either:
1) A lot of different choices on how to react to said event, or
2) Do we want fewer initial choices, but each one providing depth to the experience

Of course most would prefer the best of both worlds, a wide range of choices with each one providing equal depth to that choice and the consequences of it. However I really think that would lead to an impossible situation for any developer to handle on the long run, so if it comes to it, would we as players prefer one over the other.

Personally regarding ME and DA experiences I play both these games quite differently. I think ME3 did scenes like the death of Mordin very well, while in the DA series the same depth just wasn't there, but that was in times ok because I roleplayed my character more (for lack of a better term). That is not to say that DA2 couldn't have handled events like mother and sister/brother dying a bit better, but I "fixed" that myself by roleplaying my character to become a more bitter and harsh character lading to change in his dialogue choices.

[Sol Downer]

Really? I like not caring about anything I kill. Violent Wardens had these hilarious lines that came with them!

[Dutchess]

Wulfram wrote...

The visible tears in ME looked kind of fake.  I'd prefer to avoid it unless it can be done better.  You can do crying without visible tears.

Like Aveline

I don't know, I think I'd rather have an attempt at tears that are not 100% realistic (exploding enemies are even less realistic, so...). So far sad characters that are supposed to be crying look a bit too emotionless to me. Sure, you hear the sadness in the voice, but that's not enough when you get this  face at most instead of . When the ogre squashes Carver/Bethany, I've always wondered why Leandra isn't visibly crying. 

[nightscrawl]

EntropicAngel wrote...

I think one thing that made tears seem so fake, too, was that they were shown trickling down the face. One way they could do it, that I've seen recently, is have the person lean forward so their tears fall away from them, eliminating the need to work with the fact that way.

You can also do what I like to call the "shiny eyes." You see this occasionally in movies/tv, usually with men, who are being emotional about something. You can see it in their face: shiny eyes, some redness in cheeks/nose, but the person doesn't actually cry. Voice acting can help a lot here as well. Adding a choked up option would add to the overall effect.

All of these things should be left up to the player of course. If someone wants to play a stone-cold killer or the veteran who has seen it all they should be allowed to do that, just as the players who want to see their emotions (instead of talk about them) should be able to do that.


[edit]
The very best portrayal of this level of emotion is Anders's reaction at the clinic to almost killing (or killing) the mage Ella. That was perfect.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 29 janvier 2013 - 02:06 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

nightscrawl wrote...

All of these things should be left up to the player of course.

The most important part of this thread.