153 réponses à ce sujet

[Renmiri1]

Cole is a bit like that.

[Lluthren]

Half-wit... Do you mean a jester? I'd like a jester. I could go to him when i'm bored and want to hear jokes.

But really, you don't mean just a goofy character. I don't know how that would work. A silent character, sure, but a character that just growls or shouts "Hammeeeer!"... wait, that might work for some people... don't know about in the long run though.

[Sejborg]

Look at a character like Kenny from South Park. Noone can understand what he is saying. But he is still there in alot of episode and has likes and dislikes. I just imagine a character similar to that; a character that only have a handful of ways to express himself.

If anyone have read Dan Simmons's Hyperion then at some point one of the characters gets a temporary speech disorder which renders him only capable of speaking these seven words: ****, ******, ****, ****, ****sucker, mother****er and ******.

Just like Hodor is only capable of saying Hodor it is still often possible to understand happy, sad, confused and so on by the way "Hoder" is said. I just reckon it must be a low cost character to write and include, and I personally think I would find a character like that more interesting than the dog.

[Dominari]

David7204 wrote...

You'll notice you never have complete half-wits in good stories. Because if you did, the audience would just hate them for continually screwing everything up. Even when you have a stupid character, they do some things right. Zach Galifianakis from The Hangover is a very good example.

'Never go full retard' indeed.

Less Gilligan and more Lennie Small. 

[RebelAgainstSin81]

I think this is an interesting idea, and I would support it if the character is as deep and entertaining as say, the character Gary Bell played by Ryan Cartwright on Alphas. Gary had high-functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder. He was easily the most amusing character on the show, as he would often say out loud what everyone were too polite to say, and bring a different perspective that others hadn't considered.

It wouldn't be easy to pull off, but done correctly, could make bring an aspect of realism to video games that no one has yet seen.

[Sibu]

Someone like Beavis or Butthead? Yes please



To be honest, maybe something like what JWvonGoethe said sounds really cool

[chuckles471]

Sejborg wrote...

Look at a character like Kenny from South Park. Noone can understand what he is saying. But he is still there in alot of episode and has likes and dislikes. I just imagine a character similar to that; a character that only have a handful of ways to express himself.

If anyone have read Dan Simmons's Hyperion then at some point one of the characters gets a temporary speech disorder which renders him only capable of speaking these seven words: ****, ******, ****, ****, ****sucker, mother****er and ******.

Just like Hodor is only capable of saying Hodor it is still often possible to understand happy, sad, confused and so on by the way "Hoder" is said. I just reckon it must be a low cost character to write and include, and I personally think I would find a character like that more interesting than the dog.

People in South Park can understand Kenny, we can't. That's the joke, Kenny was used to say things that would never get by Comedy Central in the early episodes.  And by looking at the context of the conversation with kenny and another character, you can figure out what he says.

[Fredward]

I'm curious, do people want a half-wit along because "HAHA he's retarded! Lets laugh because funny" or because he/she could instead stand in for the dog as a nicely ornamental object that occasionally brings you stuff? Including a mentally handicapped person for depth is counterintuitive (unless done extremely well) and this doesn't seem to be what anyone here is arguing for anyway. And the idea that we should use someone with a mental disability as a stand in for a pet makes me want to vomit on my keyboard.

[Dusk Wolf]

You mean Ohgren doesn't count? In all seriousness, I'm not sure how this could be interesting to add unless Sandal maybe joins as a temporary companion for a mission just for the laughs since he is kind of funny but simply just creating a "half-wit" character just to be a companion just to be laughed or for comic relief. I'm not saying this isn't a good idea because of political correctness, really, but more along the lines of there being parents of special needs children that would definitely not like this. Now if a character with something similar to asperger syndrome were added and he/she was given a serious role in the game, whether they're a companion or not, I'd think that would be cool since the people who have that in real life contribute a lot to life and are very intelligent.

[Sejborg]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

I'm curious, do people want a half-wit along because "HAHA he's retarded! Lets laugh because funny" or because he/she could instead stand in for the dog as a nicely ornamental object that occasionally brings you stuff? Including a mentally handicapped person for depth is counterintuitive (unless done extremely well) and this doesn't seem to be what anyone here is arguing for anyway. And the idea that we should use someone with a mental disability as a stand in for a pet makes me want to vomit on my keyboard.

Well that is one way to take offense.

The dog is an easy to write character and it cost less to include a character like dog than it does to include a character like Lelianna or Zevran. 

The dog is not very interesting and have been included in two games already. That is why I propose a half wit instead because that would feel fresh and it could be interesting. Noone is asking for the half wit to crawl around on all four and lift his leg (- yet). So I don't really understand why you are rambling about the half wit being a stand in for the dog and that he would be bringing you stuff. 


It's quite simple really. Would you rather have a half wit (someone similar to Hodor and Sandal) or dog as a companion?

[Sutamina]

The dog qualifies as a freakish genius compared to a great many characters in DAO and DA2.

[BouncyFrag]

Sutamina wrote...

The dog qualifies as a freakish genius compared to a great many characters in DAO and DA2.

Proof.

[JWvonGoethe]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...
I'm curious, do people want a half-wit along because "HAHA he's retarded! Lets laugh because funny" or because he/she could instead stand in for the dog as a nicely ornamental object that occasionally brings you stuff? Including a mentally handicapped person for depth is counterintuitive (unless done extremely well) and this doesn't seem to be what anyone here is arguing for anyway. And the idea that we should use someone with a mental disability as a stand in for a pet makes me want to vomit on my keyboard.

After reading this I looked over my first post on this thread, where I said 'we can reasonably expect there to be a dog to function as the half-wit companion.' That was a very poorly worded statement, for which I am deeply sorry if I caused offence. I can completely understand how that came across as insensitive.

To clarify, I had interpreted the OP's request for a 'half-wit' along the more general lines of "Can we have a companion who doesn't have much dialogue?" Then I was using the term 'half-wit' when I should have used the term 'non-verbal' or 'mute.' I should have taken more care in choosing my words.

Since you ask, the desire to have a non-verbal companion comes from wanting an extra companion who we otherwise wouldn't get, since they don't use up a lot of writing resources. It has nothing to do with wanting to have someone with special needs to function as a pet.

[WhiteKnyght]

Sejborg wrote...

How about a companion like Hodor (from ASOIAF) or that enchantment dude. A character that don't need much writing because all they do is say the same word again and again. I believe a character like that is low cost but they are nice to have none the less, just so there is more options as for the companions you bring along. Sorta like the dog but just a half-wit.

I think it would be interesting. What do you think?

We already had them in both DA games.

They were called Alistair and Merrill.

[Fredward]

JWvonGoethe wrote...

Foopydoopydoo wrote...
I'm curious, do people want a half-wit along because "HAHA he's retarded! Lets laugh because funny" or because he/she could instead stand in for the dog as a nicely ornamental object that occasionally brings you stuff? Including a mentally handicapped person for depth is counterintuitive (unless done extremely well) and this doesn't seem to be what anyone here is arguing for anyway. And the idea that we should use someone with a mental disability as a stand in for a pet makes me want to vomit on my keyboard.

After reading this I looked over my first post on this thread, where I said 'we can reasonably expect there to be a dog to function as the half-wit companion.' That was a very poorly worded statement, for which I am deeply sorry if I caused offence. I can completely understand how that came across as insensitive.

To clarify, I had interpreted the OP's request for a 'half-wit' along the more general lines of "Can we have a companion who doesn't have much dialogue?" Then I was using the term 'half-wit' when I should have used the term 'non-verbal' or 'mute.' I should have taken more care in choosing my words.

Since you ask, the desire to have a non-verbal companion comes from wanting an extra companion who we otherwise wouldn't get, since they don't use up a lot of writing resources. It has nothing to do with wanting to have someone with special needs to function as a pet.

Almost nothing you've said in this thread has been offensive actually buuuuut...

Sejborg wrote...
Well that is one way to take offense.

The
dog is an easy to write character and it cost less to include a
character like dog than it does to include a character like Lelianna or
Zevran. 

The dog is not very interesting and have been included
in two games already. That is why I propose a half wit instead because
that would feel fresh and it could be interesting. Noone is asking for
the half wit to crawl around on all four and lift his leg (- yet). So I
don't really understand why you are rambling about the half wit being a
stand in for the dog and that he would be bringing you stuff. 


It's quite simple really. Would you rather have a half wit (someone similar to Hodor and Sandal) or dog as a companion?

This on the other hand. You seem to have absolutely no problem equating a human being with a dog. Repeatedly. So this companion is mentally disabled and cannot speak, does this exclude them from any kind of emotional reaction (apart from what the dog is capable of) that other human companions might engage the player with? Are interactions that do not include a simple scold/praise system beyond them? Oh and don't bother giving them any kind of emotional story arc, after all they're just retarded.

I get that the rights of people with disabilities isn't NEARLY as much of a progressive buzzword as feminism and gay rights but this kind of selective social justice is just disgusting. Irony being that choosing to fight for the rights of some people and excluding others is repeating the pattern of the status quo so many rail against.

Lets make an analogous example since some seem incapable of identifying something as wrong unless a large group of people have told them it is: Instead of having a well developed and romancable gay companion just give us an obedient Tevinter sex slave on a leash. This will satisfy the LGBT community* and not waste valuable resources through fairly and accurately representing some minority no one really cares about.

Offended yet?

* - which includes me btw, so put down your torches and pitchforks. 

[Plaintiff]

Sejborg wrote...
Look at a character like Kenny from South Park. Noone can understand what he is saying.

Yes they can. The audience may not always understand Kenny, but his friends understand him just fine. Kenny is not mentally handicapped, his voice is just muffled by his hoodie. It is also possible for the audience to decipher his comments from the general context of the conversation and the tone and rhythm of his muffled voice.

Just like Hodor is only capable of saying Hodor it is still often possible to understand happy, sad, confused and so on by the way "Hoder" is said. I just reckon it must be a low cost character to write and include, and I personally think I would find a character like that more interesting than the dog.

But we can't understand WHY Hodor is happy or sad, we can't understand if he might've had something meaningful to contribute to the conversation.

How do we access his quests? How can we be sure if he himself understands what we're saying to him? What would be the point of engaging in dialogue with him? We can't discern his past or his likes or dislikes. We have no way of determining how to go about forging a friendship with him, unless he's constantly accompanied by an interpreter, which would just be an extra, unnecessary step in communicating with him.

Dog's limitations mean that he has very little in the way of utility, and Mabari are supposed to be extremely intelligent. The player can only react with him in an extremely limited number of ways. Unless you're okay with a developmentally challenged charactger being relegated to fetching random trash and licking blood of your face, I don't see what they could offer that Dog cannot. And furthermore, I don't think I trust Bioware to implement such a character with the sensitivity and tact that ought to be required. Hodor doesn't sound like a sensitive or accurate portrayal of the mentally handicapped, he sounds like he exists to be a recurring gag.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 26 avril 2013 - 09:03 .

[Firky]

Plaintiff wrote...
How do we access his quests? How can we be sure if he himself understands what we're saying to him? What would be the point of engaging in dialogue with him? We can't discern his past or his likes or dislikes.

...

Hodor doesn't sound like a sensitive or accurate portrayal of the mentally handicapped, he sounds like he exists to be a recurring gag.

Oh man. Those questions you raised are great. I think the answer to a creating an amazing companion would lie in precisely answering those questions. It could totally be done.

Plaintiff, have you read the Game of Thrones series? (I've read the books, not seen the TV series.) Personally, I think Hodor is portrayed beautifully in the books. He's valued by others, understood and has his niche.

GOT spoilers - It's like, everyone just accepts Hodor. They even, erroneously, think that's his name. I was fortunate to grow up around (mostly physically) disabled people (thanks to my mum's line of work) and a guy I dated had a sister with cerebral palsy and she called their cat, "Beeha." So the family named the cat Beeha, many years before they realised she was saying, "****cat," and it just sounded like, "Beeha." Language is a fascinating thing to interpret, and acceptance comes in many forms, most of them very simple.

And Sandal. I think he became a bit of a gag in DA2, mostly because Hawke didn't really seem to understand him, to my mind anyway, and in a meta sort of a way through memes, etc, but in Origins, Bodahn showed a real caring spirit towards him, he was incredibly useful and he proved to be inexplicably strong in Fort Drakon. (And I love that BioWare used that "we need a merchant here" thing to give him his moment.)

(And, I , personally, don't think Merrill was a "halfwit" but I think the portrayal of her character was amazing.)

Edit:  Swear filter. Now it's even harder to understand what she was saying.

Modifié par Firky, 26 avril 2013 - 09:52 .

[JWvonGoethe]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

Almost nothing you've said in this thread has been offensive actually buuuuut...

Ah well good to know. Reading back over my post it did seem to me to be quite likely to cause offense to others, though, so good job I've edited it now.

Modifié par JWvonGoethe, 26 avril 2013 - 09:55 .

[Gamer Ftw]

We already have Alistair,Merrill and sometimes Leliana I'm kind of getting tired of dealing with them.

Modifié par Gamer Ftw, 26 avril 2013 - 09:58 .

[Plaintiff]

Gamer Ftw wrote...

We already have Alistair.

DING DING DING!

Congratulations! You're the millionth posteer to make this joke. Please step up and accept your prize...

THIS LOVELY GIFTBASKET!!!

Modifié par Plaintiff, 26 avril 2013 - 10:00 .

[apascone]

Sejborg wrote...

How about a companion like Hodor (from ASOIAF) or that enchantment dude. A character that don't need much writing because all they do is say the same word again and again. I believe a character like that is low cost but they are nice to have none the less, just so there is more options as for the companions you bring along. Sorta like the dog but just a half-wit.

I think it would be interesting. What do you think?

No, I would rather have the developers put the time and resources into the other companions who can hold an actually conversation.

[Gamer Ftw]

Rolls eyes.
Plaintiff,Did you bother to read the rest?
My point is there are way too many half wit characters.
It ruins the game to have to worry about the approval of these people.
Because they are morons.
dragging Alistair along and listening to his whining and complaining is like being followed with an immature ten year old with a sword.
With a half wit character I would just never use him unless I had to.
Unless he was a badass like Sandal.

Modifié par Gamer Ftw, 26 avril 2013 - 10:14 .

[JWvonGoethe]

Gamer ftw wrote..
Plaintiff,Did you bother to read the rest?

I think it's fair to assume that Plaintiff started writing a reply to your post before you edited in the additional bit about the other two characters.

[Plaintiff]

Firky wrote...
Plaintiff, have you read the Game of Thrones series? (I've read the books, not seen the TV series.) Personally, I think Hodor is portrayed beautifully in the books. He's valued by others, understood and has his niche.

No, I haven't. I've watched some of the TV series and frankly it's not my bag. I'm told the book series is a bit less gratuitous in terms of the nudity and violence, but political drama has never been a genre that interested in me and there's really just too many characters to keep track of, and not enough actual fantasy elements for my taste. 

When I'm tyring to read a book or watch a show, I don't really want to be constantly looking up the Game of Thrones wiki to rember who Irredeemable Douchebag #27 is or why he matters.

But I digress. I'm willing to take your word for it that the portrayal of the "Hodor" character may in fact be very nuanced and respectful, but it would be extremely difficult to do, and "let's shoehorn a retard into the plot because it wouldn't cost very much" is a horrible attitude to take, and not one Bioware should be adopting at all.

Luckily I don't think they do have that attitude, I think they have a vested personal interest in equality. But the limitations of a character like Hodor (I know you said that's not his name but I don't know what else to call him) are extremely constraining. It would be very difficult to write him in such a way as to make him an equal, valued member of the party, and while the challenge might be appealing, you risk offending a lot of people if you get it wrong, without necessarily meaning to.

To take an example from my own life: I'm writing a Western/Fantasy novella for a dissertation-type project, and I originally wanted to include in the core cast a black character. Specfically, a former slave that had had his tongue removed before he escaped. I didn't realise how potentially problematic it would be until a friend of mine pointed out that the character was reinforcing some pretty unfortunate stereotypes. Because he lacked a voice, he was prevented from contributing in any sort of intellectual way, which gave the impression that he was only useful as muscle to help the more able white characters, which is not the image I was going for at all.

In order for a mentally/verbally challenged character to have equal value in Dragon Age, I think they at least have to be able to form full sentences.