235 réponses à ce sujet

[Sharn]

After how Origins allowed you to pick a name, race,  and origin story for your character with dialogue options that weren't just either nice, sassy, or mean we're suddenly back to DA2 or Mass Effect. Why are we forced to play as a voiced human who mostly likely has their own preset name and back story when we had so many options in Origins? Who could possibly prefer that over being able to create their own hero instead of someone else's? 

It just doesn't make sense and greatly restricts the role playing in a game that is supposedly an RPG. Having a voiced character also means there are less dialogue options which origins had so many of. 

This was one of my main peeves with Mass Effect, shepherd was just so boring and lifeless.

Modifié par Sharn, 13 mai 2013 - 07:34 .

[IanPolaris]

Because making real (what I would regard as 'real') RPGs is too much work apparently. That's my take.

-Polaris

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

I'm always kind of torn on this. Hawke felt like he/she was more a 'part' of the universe...but in the process he/she wasn't my character, unlike the Warden.

I prefer DA:O's approach, but the ME/DA2 one has its benefits, I think. Voice acting can add some emotional impact to scenes...but then sometimes I feel like I have to make the character around that voice, too. And I can't just imagine what my character sounds like, and I've always liked doing that.

Really don't like the whole human thing though.

Modifié par SergeantSnookie, 13 mai 2013 - 07:42 .

[Uccio]

IanPolaris wrote...

Because making real (what I would regard as 'real') RPGs is too much work apparently. That's my take.

-Polaris

Hear hear.

[Uccio]

SergeantSnookie wrote...
 Voice acting can add some emotional impact to scenes...

The problem I have with this is that the emotion shown is many times not the emotion I feel. Thus the character doesn´t feel like mine.

Modifié par Ukki, 13 mai 2013 - 07:59 .

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

^Also very true.

[Lavaeolus]

DAO was intended as a general introduction to the world. So you had the various origins. DA2 was meant to an introduction to a specific plot in that world, and they wanted a more personal vehicle for it (Hawke), instead of letting characters go all willy nilly.

If they do stick with the no-choosing-species thing, I really want to see some games later on down the line where the player is a forced dwarf or an elf. If they can liven up the place a little, vary it a bit more, Orzammar would be a pretty interesting place to have a story set in.

I'd like it if all the different backgrounds had their on surname this time 'round, like in Origins. It's hardly necessary, but it'd add more a touch for customisation. "This time I was an Argle, next time I'll be a Blogity." Then again, might end up stereotyping the different backgrounds.

Modifié par Mr Maniac, 13 mai 2013 - 08:04 .

[AlanC9]

IanPolaris wrote...

Because making real (what I would regard as 'real') RPGs is too much work apparently. That's my take.

-Polaris

Of course, BG1 had a protagonist with a background every bit as set as Hawke's, and more set than Shepard's. You could play as a non-human, but you couldn't play as a character who was raised anywhere but in Candlekeep. By Gorion. With Imoen hanging around.

[10K]

I'd like it if we'd got to pick our voice like in Saint's row or Def Jam: fight for NY (best fighting game ever), to have more emphasis on our created character. I think That would be pretty cool, but sadly a lot of time and money must go into that idea

We already know that the PC will be voice acted, I think the next step should be giving the players the option on what their character should sound like.

[9TailsFox]

StreetMagic wrote...

DAO was intended as a general introduction to the world. So you had the various origins. DA2 was meant to an introduction to a specific plot in that world, and they wanted a more personal vehicle for it (Hawke), instead of letting characters go all willy nilly.

It's not that hard to understand. So many games, books, and movies have personal stories too. There's advantages and disadvantages to either approach when it comes to RPGs. I think they tried to reach a middle ground, in allowing you to still set your stats, plot points, and appearance.

Human noble story was much more personal just saying. I don't say Hawke was bad I love story of DA2 until I start reading forums and understand wath fool Hawke is and everything he tuch burns, I need stop read it's not healthy:unsure:

[IanPolaris]

AlanC9 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Because making real (what I would regard as 'real') RPGs is too much work apparently. That's my take.

-Polaris

Of course, BG1 had a protagonist with a background every bit as set as Hawke's, and more set than Shepard's. You could play as a non-human, but you couldn't play as a character who was raised anywhere but in Candlekeep. By Gorion. With Imoen hanging around.

Yes and it's one thing I didn't like about BG1 either.  That said, other than being raised at Candlekeep, everything else was pretty much up to you.  This was even more true in BG2.  The Backstory was set and so were the people in the cages, but everything else was up to you.

-Polaris

[Sharn]

AlanC9 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Because making real (what I would regard as 'real') RPGs is too much work apparently. That's my take.

-Polaris

Of course, BG1 had a protagonist with a background every bit as set as Hawke's, and more set than Shepard's. You could play as a non-human, but you couldn't play as a character who was raised anywhere but in Candlekeep. By Gorion. With Imoen hanging around.

But even that would be better than what we're getting. They can force us to be a templar inquisitor or whatever but as long as we get to choose a race or name then everything else is up to the player.

[Catroi]

IanPolaris wrote...

Because making real (what I would regard as 'real') RPGs is too much work apparently. That's my take.

-Polaris

^what this great man said

hey guys I has an idea

multiple voice actors for the hero depending of the race/gender

just an idea for a non-lazy developper

Modifié par Catroi, 13 mai 2013 - 09:07 .

[Sweawm]

StreetMagic wrote...

The downside of not having a more focused personality is that heroes end up as the stereotypical mute Cowboy mysteriously appearing/saving the day/and riding off into the sunset. It's a trope I have nothing but hatred for. And happens far too often in CRPGs. Bioware is a little less guilty about it, but it happened to the Warden as well. It happens to every Elder Scrolls character especially.

For all of the various origins in DAO, "many options" virtually turns out to be fewer options. The different plot points become so hard to manage that the character never gets any sense of closure. He/she rides off into the sunset, probably never to be seen again. And further stories can never address the subject except in an offhand way. "Oh yeah, there was once this badass who changed our lives.. but... umm.. we don't know where he is. Or she. I don't remember their gender. In fact, I don't even remember their name. Oh well."

Now this is an agreeable opinion. I myself, enjoyed Dragon Age II's having actual main character. I feel Origins could have been the greatest freaking RPG ever if it had a voiced PC's in the conversation and not just combat lines. The only thing I dislike about Origins is the silent, seemingly one-way conversations the Warden has.

I'm honestly a supporter of Bioware taking a more focused route that will allow them to tell greater stories with better characters, over catering to the hard core self-insertive Role Players (who honestly, will rarely ever be pleased with anything Bioware do). I feel DA2 was a step in the right direction, and I hope Bioware go further with that in DA3:I 

[Rawgrim]

AlanC9 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Because making real (what I would regard as 'real') RPGs is too much work apparently. That's my take.

-Polaris

Of course, BG1 had a protagonist with a background every bit as set as Hawke's, and more set than Shepard's. You could play as a non-human, but you couldn't play as a character who was raised anywhere but in Candlekeep. By Gorion. With Imoen hanging around.

Quite true. But you could still create your own character. Name, gender, race, pick between (10?) classes. All wich had subclasses too. And your choice of gender was actually recognized in the game as well, and played a part.

DA2 had nothing of this. You get a set character (who belives in Andraste), and you pick the look of the person and how he\\she kills the enemies. Thats it. Its as much of an rpg as Diablo is. Allthough DA2 does have more dialogue.

[Catroi]

StreetMagic wrote...

I say again.. For the love of the Maker, please make some these glorious real RPGs some of you have in mind. "If you build it, they will come". I would definitely give it a chance, in all honesty. You all sound like you've graduated from players of RPGs into full blown competitors, ready to face the world on your own, and make your own stuff.

Jean Luc Godard was once a film critic, y'know. And then went on his own and became one of the great French film directors, and ushered in a new wave of cinema. You could be just like him, and show us the light.

Otherwise, I'm tired of hearing about great ideas, and then never see anything come of them. All my time on the internet, I must've heard the rantings of many visionaries, and all of them were full of empty promises. Except the promise of more complaints about other people's games, of course

So basically you cant critique something if you havent made better in that domain but you can praise the living **** out of it even if you have no idea what you're talking about?

logic, you fail at it

[Knight of Dane]

Let's face it, choosing the voice in Origins meant nothing, the only time you heard is whas when you gave instructions or failed to open a door or chest.
In DA2 at least your responses woul alter the experience of the story a bit.

The reason why a set human protagonaist is chosen is because it is easier to work into the world, they can sort of make more quality on that one instead of a quantity of choices.
I think the compromise with background in DA:I sounds good, we can at least have some agency while bioware can attempt their new formula again.

I'm not saying I disagree, Origins is my favorite game of all times, but there are reasons for Biowares design choices.

[Sejborg]

Because what Bioware thinks make a great RPG is not what you'd expect.

[Heimdall]

I don't understand. You say you can't roleplay unless you get to chose species? How limited. As to the voice, the idea was to integrate the character into the game world more thoroughly.