201 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

I guess my point is that the odd Alistair is fine if done right, but there must be plenty of realistic more Sten/Oghren types to counter balance that throughout the game.

Well, there's Alistair vs. Sten, Zevran, Oghren and Loghain in DAO, and with the other four in DA2, I don't think you have anything to worry about.

[Paul E Dangerously]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...
This kinda answers Xilizhra's point above - when you meet Alistair he'snot an A-typical warrior. Also he does get "hardened" throught the game - his own story is that of becoming tougher and stronger.

Alistair was done so, so, so well that it fit in to place very nicely. But he was definitely an exception and not the rule, and that's a balance I'd like to see return.

I'm actually fine with it. Alistair was an attempt to liven up the cardboard Bioware First NPC Guy (Carth, Kaidan) and it worked. Hell, if you didn't like him there was always Sten, who in my book is the most interesting NPC in the game. He's a member of a culture utterly alien to you, has an interesting outlook on things that you can question him about, and doesn't really conform to the standard morality scale.

DAO at least had a balance. DA2 really didn't - and I like the majority of DA2's NPCs.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Sopa de Gato wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...
This kinda answers Xilizhra's point above - when you meet Alistair he'snot an A-typical warrior. Also he does get "hardened" throught the game - his own story is that of becoming tougher and stronger.

Alistair was done so, so, so well that it fit in to place very nicely. But he was definitely an exception and not the rule, and that's a balance I'd like to see return.

I'm actually fine with it. Alistair was an attempt to liven up the cardboard Bioware First NPC Guy (Carth, Kaidan) and it worked. Hell, if you didn't like him there was always Sten, who in my book is the most interesting NPC in the game. He's a member of a culture utterly alien to you, has an interesting outlook on things that you can question him about, and doesn't really conform to the standard morality scale.

DAO at least had a balance. DA2 really didn't - and I like the majority of DA2's NPCs.

Agreed. DA:2's changes detracted from the overall feel of the game, and there was far too much softness asll round IMO. Bethany, Carver, Merrill, Fenris, Isabela, Anders, Varric (a dwarf without a beard FFS lol) - all of them were pretty soft-centred and there was only Aveline with much "hardyness" about her.

It really did feel like a Beverly Hills version of the game, and any medival fantasy without some beer-swilling, long bearded, "hairy shoulders and bulls ballacks" blokes in there is drifting far too close to a JRPG/Final Fantasy vibe to be immersive for me.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 25 février 2013 - 02:48 .

[Xilizhra]

Agreed. DA:2's changes detracted from the overall feel of the game, and there was far too much softness asll round IMO. Bethany, Carver, Merrill, Fenris, Isabela, Anders, Varric (a dwarf without a beard FFS lol) - all of them were pretty soft-centred and there was only Aveline with much "hardyness" about her.

What are you even talking about? Merrill and Bethany I can sort of see, but are you really calling the wrath-riven Anders, ex-slave supersoldier Fenris, regular soldier Carver, pirate queen Isabela, or even Varric overly soft? Heck, I'd say Merrill and Bethany would make decent contrasts. But how are you defining hardness anyway?

It really did feel like a Beverly Hills version of the game, and any medival fantasy without some beer-swilling, long bearded, "hairy shoulders and bulls ballacks" blokes in there is drifting far too close to a JRPG/Final Fantasy vibe to be immersive for me.

**** that. Truly. It has no inherent value and is frequently just obnoxious; it only works when there's hidden depths to then, which happened with Oghren, but beyond that... no.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Xilizhra wrote...

Agreed. DA:2's changes detracted from the overall feel of the game, and there was far too much softness asll round IMO. Bethany, Carver, Merrill, Fenris, Isabela, Anders, Varric (a dwarf without a beard FFS lol) - all of them were pretty soft-centred and there was only Aveline with much "hardyness" about her.

What are you even talking about? Merrill and Bethany I can sort of see, but are you really calling the wrath-riven Anders, ex-slave supersoldier Fenris, regular soldier Carver, pirate queen Isabela, or even Varric overly soft? Heck, I'd say Merrill and Bethany would make decent contrasts. But how are you defining hardness anyway?

It really did feel like a Beverly Hills version of the game, and any medival fantasy without some beer-swilling, long bearded, "hairy shoulders and bulls ballacks" blokes in there is drifting far too close to a JRPG/Final Fantasy vibe to be immersive for me.

**** that. Truly. It has no inherent value and is frequently just obnoxious; it only works when there's hidden depths to then, which happened with Oghren, but beyond that... no.

That's the thing - I didn't believe that any of Anders, Fenris, or Isabela were remotely tough despite the game telling me they were. Their overall vibes were that of Final Fantasy, over-sexualized under-realized saps IMO. Varric looked soft for a dwarf, and Carver was middle of the road at best. Just from their personas I'd put none of them up against Sten, Ogrhen or Loghain and the whole game was far too soft for me to believe in.

That's why I don't want to see men made overly soft all-round. It's just not realistic and doesn't belong in a Western FRPG.

You might not like the more realisic view of a medival-based world, but I do and from the latest obsession we seem to be seeing on the net with The Witcher 2 I'd say it's what many have been craving for. Not everyone has to be like that of course, but a dirt free world inhabited by clean shaven men who get manacured is certainly something I 'd hate to see, and DA:2 wasn't that far away from it IMO.

I'd much preffer a Flotsam type vibe than a Kirkwall one.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 25 février 2013 - 03:06 .

[Xilizhra]

That's the thing - I didn't believe that any of Anders, Fenris, or Isabela were remotely tough despite the game telling me they were. Their overall vibes were that of Final Fantasy, over-sexualized under-realized saps IMO. Varric looked soft for a dwarf, and Carver was middle of the road at best. Just from their personas I'd put none of them up against Sten, Ogrhen or Loghain and the whole game was far too soft for me to believe in.

I still don't see how you're defining "soft," and am trying to see how one could possibly use it to describe someone who blows up large buildings.

You might not like the more realisic view of a medival-based world, but I do and from the latest obsession we seem to be seeing on the net with The Witcher 2 I'd say it's what many have been craving for. Not everyone has to be like that of course, but a dirt free world inhabited by clean shaven men who get manacured is certainly something I 'd hate to see, and DA:2 wasn't that far away from it IMO.

Alas, I can't play it. Well, I could, but I refuse to because the set protagonist goes against everything I want to actually play.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Xilizhra wrote...

That's the thing - I didn't believe that any of Anders, Fenris, or Isabela were remotely tough despite the game telling me they were. Their overall vibes were that of Final Fantasy, over-sexualized under-realized saps IMO. Varric looked soft for a dwarf, and Carver was middle of the road at best. Just from their personas I'd put none of them up against Sten, Ogrhen or Loghain and the whole game was far too soft for me to believe in.

I still don't see how you're defining "soft," and am trying to see how one could possibly use it to describe someone who blows up large buildings.

You might not like the more realisic view of a medival-based world, but I do and from the latest obsession we seem to be seeing on the net with The Witcher 2 I'd say it's what many have been craving for. Not everyone has to be like that of course, but a dirt free world inhabited by clean shaven men who get manacured is certainly something I 'd hate to see, and DA:2 wasn't that far away from it IMO.

Alas, I can't play it. Well, I could, but I refuse to because the set protagonist goes against everything I want to actually play.

The actions are that of a tough people, but the characters themselves don't in any way convey that persona. I can live with that for a select group of characters, but for almost all of them? (as in DA:2 case) it just waters the game down IMO.

Think of it this way, would you have Robert Pattison play Conan the Barbarian? Nope. And a DA sort of medival period would have been full of Conan-esq types. DA:O had a nice balance of both soft and hard, but DA:2's was too far.

Kudos for sticking to your guns with TWI2 - I really didn't like it at first for combat & plot reasons, but if you dedicate enough time to it there's a great game in there. I'd certainly recomend trying it at least.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 25 février 2013 - 03:45 .

[Wulfram]

Xilizhra wrote...

I still don't see how you're defining "soft," and am trying to see how one could possibly use it to describe someone who blows up large buildings..

I guess he means "emotionally vulnerable"

[Xilizhra]

The actions are that of a tough people, but the characters themselves don't in any way convey that persona. I can live with that for a select group of characters, but for almost all of them? (as in DA:2 case) it just waters the game down IMO.

Will you please explain your actual definition of "tough" and/or "soft?"

Think of it this way, would you have Robert Pattison play Conan the Barbarian? Nope. And a DA sort of medival period would have been full of Conan-esq types. DA:O had a nice balance of both soft and hard, but DA:2's was too far.

I hate Conan.

[Lennard Testarossa]

Plaintiff wrote...
Scientific evidence is not required. The truth is self-evident to anyone who is not a bigot or a drooling moron.

All other variables of something as complex as a human personality being completely independent of something so very central to human behaviour as sexuality is the very opposite of self-evident.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Xilizhra wrote...

The actions are that of a tough people, but the characters themselves don't in any way convey that persona. I can live with that for a select group of characters, but for almost all of them? (as in DA:2 case) it just waters the game down IMO.

Will you please explain your actual definition of "tough" and/or "soft?"

Think of it this way, would you have Robert Pattison play Conan the Barbarian? Nope. And a DA sort of medival period would have been full of Conan-esq types. DA:O had a nice balance of both soft and hard, but DA:2's was too far.

I hate Conan.

Modern day tough men would fall into the category of football hooligans, prisoners, prison gaurds, unlicensed boxers etc. - the real people who go toe to toe with other people. Usually heavily built or thick set, tall, and someone who's not vain at all because all they focus on is the practicality of winning.

A good example is someone like Lenny McClean the street boxer....

www.youtube.com/watch

This is fairly modern, and if you go back several hundred years that type of person was far more common place as you often had to fight to survive. The middle-England village I was raised in valued toe-to-toe fighting ability above most things aprt from work ethic, and most men in that area were brought up that way. Not everyone has to be like that in the game, but to not have it in favour of DA:2 style "glamour" would just weaken the game again IMO

There's a place for games without such a vibe, and that's JRPGs. Good in their own right, but one of the things which makes Western FRPGs so absorbing is their root connection with real life medival living.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 25 février 2013 - 04:11 .

[Xilizhra]

Modern day tough men would fall into the category of football hooligans, prisoners, prison gaurds, unlicensed boxers etc. - the real people who go toe to toe with other people. Usually heavily built or thick set, tall, and someone who's not vain at all because all they focus on is the practicality of winning.

But they appear in abundance in the DA series. Granted, they generally appear to get mowed down in abundance, but still, they're around. In DA2 terms... Varric and Sebastian are not straight-up fighters, they're archers (and Varric doesn't really like fighting anyway); Anders is a mage, and is also not a melee combatant. Fenris is an elf, and they physically cannot be thickly set in the same manner that humans can be. Isabela uses a different fighting style, one more akin to certain Asian or other martial arts in its emphasis on agility, than straight-up brawling. Merrill is, again, a mage. And Carver already does fit your criteria. Also, none of them have backgrounds that correspond to your village place; Anders is a Circle mage, Fenris is a slave-soldier, Merrill is a Dalish, Sebastian is a prince, and Varric is also from a household that used to be noble and is still very wealthy.

In any case, very few companions are from typical backgrounds at all.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 25 février 2013 - 04:31 .

[Paul E Dangerously]

Carver's pretty whiny, all things considered. Even Varric makes fun of him for it.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Xilizhra wrote...

Modern day tough men would fall into the category of football hooligans, prisoners, prison gaurds, unlicensed boxers etc. - the real people who go toe to toe with other people. Usually heavily built or thick set, tall, and someone who's not vain at all because all they focus on is the practicality of winning.

But they appear in abundance in the DA series. Granted, they generally appear to get mowed down in abundance, but still, they're around. In DA2 terms... Varric and Sebastian are not straight-up fighters, they're archers (and Varric doesn't really like fighting anyway); Anders is a mage, and is also not a melee combatant. Fenris is an elf, and they physically cannot be thickly set in the same manner that humans can be. Isabela uses a different fighting style, one more akin to certain Asian or other martial arts in its emphasis on agility, than straight-up brawling. Merrill is, again, a mage. And Carver already does fit your criteria. Also, none of them have backgrounds that correspond to your village place; Anders is a Circle mage, Fenris is a slave-soldier, Merrill is a Dalish, Sebastian is a prince, and Varric is also from a household that used to be noble and is still very wealthy.

In any case, very few companions are from typical backgrounds at all.

But all you've done is state reasons as to why DA:2's characters aren't like that  - that doesn't change the fact that DA:2 had a severe absence of such NPCs to have in your party.

It's a mistake which I'm hoping that BW don't repeat for DA:3

And IMO Carver's whole persona is quite soft - again clean cut, clean shaven, well groomed, whiney - he doesn't convey a hard image or persona.

Just because people say "he's a knight" or "he's tough" isn't good enough for me really, the game should do more to create that persona as in real life your outward appearance often reflects your experience. Again just look at The Witcher, even if you haven't played it screenshots will shoe you  that Geralt is a well built, heavily scarred warrior ala Wolverine - not a human who's trying to look like an elf or deviod of any signs of battle.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 25 février 2013 - 04:39 .

[Xilizhra]

But all you've done is state reasons as to why DA:2's characters aren't like that - that doesn't change the fact that DA:2 had a severe absence of such NPCs to have in your party.

I honestly care nothing at all about that, so I suppose it's just a matter of taste. It being a matter of taste, it's not a mistake to not include plebeian brawlers.

And IMO Carver's whole persona is quite soft - again clean cut, clean shaven, well groomed, whiney - he doesn't convey a hard image or persona.

Oh no, shaving! And being angry about things! Truly we have blasphemy against the realism of all medieval warriors everywhere.

Just because people say "he's a knight" or "he's tough" isn't good enough for me really, the game should do more to create that persona as in real life your outward appearance often reflects your experience. Again just look at The Witcher, even if you haven't played it screenshots will shoe you that Geralt is a well built, heavily scarred warrior ala Wolverine - not a human who's trying to look like an elf or deviod of any signs of battle.

And here, I'd say that declaring what he looks like for all players is itself a mistake, but it might just be taste again.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Xilizhra wrote...

But all you've done is state reasons as to why DA:2's characters aren't like that - that doesn't change the fact that DA:2 had a severe absence of such NPCs to have in your party.

I honestly care nothing at all about that, so I suppose it's just a matter of taste. It being a matter of taste, it's not a mistake to not include plebeian brawlers.

And IMO Carver's whole persona is quite soft - again clean cut, clean shaven, well groomed, whiney - he doesn't convey a hard image or persona.

Oh no, shaving! And being angry about things! Truly we have blasphemy against the realism of all medieval warriors everywhere.

Just because people say "he's a knight" or "he's tough" isn't good enough for me really, the game should do more to create that persona as in real life your outward appearance often reflects your experience. Again just look at The Witcher, even if you haven't played it screenshots will shoe you that Geralt is a well built, heavily scarred warrior ala Wolverine - not a human who's trying to look like an elf or deviod of any signs of battle.

And here, I'd say that declaring what he looks like for all players is itself a mistake, but it might just be taste again.

That's fair enough with regards taste, I would say though that TWI2's success includes a gritty, more realistic foundation which appealed to enough gamers to cause a large stir, and that shows there are plenty of others out there with similar tastes to myself. So it should be something BW seriously consider.

And I don't think you've grasped what I'm talking about with regards Carver but I don't honestly know how to explain a "hard man" any further, or how else I can get across the point that character image and persona is just as important to conveying a character as are their actions?

Regards Geralt I suggest you at least check out his images. It's plain as day to see he bares the scars of battle.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 25 février 2013 - 05:35 .

[Zkyire]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

And IMO Carver's whole persona is quite soft - again clean cut, clean shaven, well groomed, whiney - he doesn't convey a hard image or persona.

To be fair, given the fact that they spend so much time out in the open, among the dirt, animals, insects etc. It's better to shave regularly and have short hair.  Easier to keep clean.

Beards and long hair are alright for the Mages in the Circle tower, but outside in the mud, Carver has the right idea. He's hygenic.

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Just because people say
"he's a knight" or "he's tough" isn't good enough for me really, the
game should do more to create that persona as in real life your outward
appearance often reflects your experience. Again just look at The
Witcher, even if you haven't played it screenshots will shoe you  that
Geralt is a well built, heavily scarred warrior ala Wolverine - not a
human who's trying to look like an elf or deviod of any signs of battle.

While I agree with you that that's what a warrior would likely look like over time, the thing is that Carver is still relatively new to the whole thing. He had some combat experience, but not the decades that Geralt has under his belt, so he wouldn't be as scarred and weathered as the Witcher. To reflect this, his appearance should have changed (not just his armour) by the end of the game but really, none of them do. So that's a fault of the design rather than Carver himself.

[Xilizhra]

That's fair enough with regards taste, I would say though that TWI2's success includes a gritty, more realistic foundation which appealed to enough gamers to cause a large stir, and that shows there are plenty of others out there with similar tastes to myself. So it should be something BW seriously consider.

It's really not more realistic, it just has a different style and culture to its pure fantasy world. If it's more appealing, then, well, I question the taste of many if that's their reason.

And I don't think you've grasped what I'm talking about with regards Carver but I don't honestly know how to explain a "hard man" any further?

Evidently.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Zkyire wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

And IMO Carver's whole persona is quite soft - again clean cut, clean shaven, well groomed, whiney - he doesn't convey a hard image or persona.

To be fair, given the fact that they spend so much time out in the open, among the dirt, animals, insects etc. It's better to shave regularly and have short hair.  Easier to keep clean.

Beards and long hair are alright for the Mages in the Circle tower, but outside in the mud, Carver has the right idea. He's hygenic.

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Just because people say
"he's a knight" or "he's tough" isn't good enough for me really, the
game should do more to create that persona as in real life your outward
appearance often reflects your experience. Again just look at The
Witcher, even if you haven't played it screenshots will shoe you  that
Geralt is a well built, heavily scarred warrior ala Wolverine - not a
human who's trying to look like an elf or deviod of any signs of battle.

While I agree with you that that's what a warrior would likely look like over time, the thing is that Carver is still relatively new to the whole thing. He had some combat experience, but not the decades that Geralt has under his belt, so he wouldn't be as scarred and weathered as the Witcher. To reflect this, his appearance should have changed (not just his armour) by the end of the game but really, none of them do. So that's a fault of the design rather than Carver himself.

It's the overall persona I'm getting at with Carver. He doesn't seem at all "weathered" or "tough" yet he was being quoted as an example of a typical tough man.

Like I've said earlier I could live with the odd Carver, or the odd Alistair, but DA:2 is full of too many non-typical warriors and it dilutes the game for me. Brave maybe, but also an immersion killer.

It's just if you put Sten or Logain next to Carver and I'd be backing them to rip Carvers head off every time. It's just the personas they have, and DA:3 shouldn't ignore more realistic hard men personas IMO.

[Xilizhra]

It's the overall persona I'm getting at with Carver. He doesn't seem at all "weathered" or "tough" yet he was being quoted as an example of a typical tough man.

Wait, so in your village of plebeian brawlers, being 18-19 was automatically a disqualification for toughness? Exactly what's the hierarchy like over there?

[SpunkyMonkey]

Xilizhra wrote...

That's fair enough with regards taste, I would say though that TWI2's success includes a gritty, more realistic foundation which appealed to enough gamers to cause a large stir, and that shows there are plenty of others out there with similar tastes to myself. So it should be something BW seriously consider.

It's really not more realistic, it just has a different style and culture to its pure fantasy world. If it's more appealing, then, well, I question the taste of many if that's their reason.

And I don't think you've grasped what I'm talking about with regards Carver but I don't honestly know how to explain a "hard man" any further?

Evidently.

That's the danger - that just because it's a fantasy world devs will ignore the reality on which it is based. ME could have coloured space blue and we could have made the excuse that "so what, it's a fantasy space opera?".

[Zkyire]

Plaintiff wrote...

The same can be said of many homosexuals. Simply failing to express or explore the desire does not mean it doesn't exist. Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.

A man not expressing or exploring any homosexual desires = probably bisexual?

The writers have pretty much established that nobody (which is beyond belief) has any problem with the sexuality of individuals, so given that, what possible reason could Alistair have for not expressing it to anyone, ever if he had any such desires to begin with?

Don't you think it's just as likely if not more likely that he's simply not interested?

[SpunkyMonkey]

Xilizhra wrote...

It's the overall persona I'm getting at with Carver. He doesn't seem at all "weathered" or "tough" yet he was being quoted as an example of a typical tough man.

Wait, so in your village of plebeian brawlers, being 18-19 was automatically a disqualification for toughness? Exactly what's the hierarchy like over there?

I've rarely ever known a single 18-19 y/o which could do the top men in the area tbh. 10-20 years of experience and daily graft weathers people plenty, and most 18-19 y/os are miles off the mark.

Plebeian brawlers were a mainstay of medival society. Granted in a fantasy world they shouldn't be that mainstay, but they shouldn't be ignored as they were in DA:2 either, else you may as well have a JRPG

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 25 février 2013 - 05:52 .

[Zkyire]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

It's the overall persona I'm getting at with Carver. He doesn't seem at all "weathered" or "tough" yet he was being quoted as an example of a typical tough man.

Like I've said earlier I could live with the odd Carver, or the odd Alistair, but DA:2 is full of too many non-typical warriors and it dilutes the game for me. Brave maybe, but also an immersion killer.

It's just if you put Sten or Logain next to Carver and I'd be backing them to rip Carvers head off every time. It's just the personas they have, and DA:3 shouldn't ignore more realistic hard men personas IMO.

Oh fair enough then, and yes, agreed.

But then again, Dragon Age has never been about realism. I play the Witcher when I want that grittier more realistic look, I play Dragon Age for something a bit lighter.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Zkyire wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

It's the overall persona I'm getting at with Carver. He doesn't seem at all "weathered" or "tough" yet he was being quoted as an example of a typical tough man.

Like I've said earlier I could live with the odd Carver, or the odd Alistair, but DA:2 is full of too many non-typical warriors and it dilutes the game for me. Brave maybe, but also an immersion killer.

It's just if you put Sten or Logain next to Carver and I'd be backing them to rip Carvers head off every time. It's just the personas they have, and DA:3 shouldn't ignore more realistic hard men personas IMO.

Oh fair enough then, and yes, agreed.

But then again, Dragon Age has never been about realism. I play the Witcher when I want that grittier more realistic look, I play Dragon Age for something a bit lighter.

Yeah and I wouldn't expect DA to be a true reprisentation of a medival world, I just think DA:2's NPC setup was a step too far away from it, and that DA:3 would be better for the presence of more masculine types of characters as it reflects both a troubled world, and gives more substance to the medival setting.