Aller au contenu

Photo

Less pre-game customization imakes for a better story IMO


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
289 réponses à ce sujet

#51
Joe25

Joe25
  • Members
  • 2 947 messages

J. Reezy wrote...

How did I know The Witcher was going to be used to make this point?

Because, when DA2  came out on the market there was a out cry on wich was the better RPG The Witcher or Skyrim that left DA2 to be "Carvered" instead being a stand alone due to the shadow of those games. 

Back to the topic. I disagree customization is key to getting a persons mind into the game. Yes, someone can write their face in a game doesn't show your PC face that's the fun of RPG's you get to put a piece of yourself in the story. But, to use The Witcher as an example to use on DA3 is wrong; it's like comparing apples to oranges. If, the Bioware was telling that they were making a game off of the novels the yes The Witches is a perfect example. Dut, even in the next Witcher game you get to pick your own hair style.  

Modifié par joe2353, 14 mai 2013 - 03:33 .


#52
ArcaneJTM

ArcaneJTM
  • Members
  • 157 messages

Plaintiff wrote...

<snip>

But I think the claim that race options are needed in an RPG, or somehow make an RPG better, are stupid claims. There are plenty of RPGs set in fictional worlds where alternative races do not exist, or are different from the usual (if I made RPGs, I would never include a single elf or dwarf, or the option to play as one, because I am sick to my ****ing back teeth of elves and dwarves). What would the complainers in this thread do then? Their precious elves and dwarves would still not be available to them.

<snip>


Nice try, but wanting the option to pick a race is not in any way specifically limited to elves and dwarves.  In any game.  A world that includes them however should have the option available to the player.

By the way, don't complain about people who want more role play to be in their role playing game just because you don't like role play.

#53
Steppenwolf

Steppenwolf
  • Members
  • 2 866 messages
If I was only interested in a stellar story I wouldn't be playing a video game, I would be reading a novel. I want to be immersed in a world and the best way for me to do that is to feel like my character is MY avatar in said world. Comprehensive customization is a must for me. I play RPGs for immersion and limiting my customization sticks in my craw.

#54
-TC1989-

-TC1989-
  • Members
  • 751 messages

Plaintiff wrote...
There are plenty of RPGs set in fictional worlds where alternative races do not exist, or are different from the usual (if I made RPGs, I would never include a single elf or dwarf, or the option to play as one, because I am sick to my ****ing back teeth of elves and dwarves).


You hate playing games that involve having elves and dwarves, yet you're playing Dragon Age? I guess I'm confused? Are you saying you want the series to continue without including those races? Or are you only specifically implying that they be excluded from CC?

 

What would the complainers in this thread do then? Their precious elves and dwarves would still not be available to them.


And you think that would stop them? You cannot be that naïve. The people who love being an elf, or dwarf, will be begging Bioware for them to return until the end of time. That isn't going to change. So my suggestion is to learn to accept some people will love their racial preferences.

#55
Urazz

Urazz
  • Members
  • 2 445 messages

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Less character customisation makes for fewer stories, regardless of quality.

It may well be that the best possible story a game can tell requires a fixed character design, but then that story becomes the ONLY story that game can tell.

I'd much rather have a game within which I can tell many stories.

Actually, the main factor that results in multiple playthroughs in a game is if it has good gameplay to make the game fun to play.  If a game doesn't have that then it doesn't matter if the game has a lot of customizations/choices or not.

But you are right in your example though.  Stories that are more fixed make for better stories and makes it easier to do sequels.  Games that have a lot of customizations/choices end up needing to either have past choices minimized in effect it has on the overall story to allow for sequels to happen.

Games with more customizations/choices make for a game to have more playthroughs than a game with a fixed protagonist if the gameplay is good but the storyline ends up suffering in most cases in those games.

BasilKarlo wrote...

If I was only interested in a stellar story I wouldn't be playing a video game, I would be reading a novel. I want to be immersed in a world and the best way for me to do that is to feel like my character is MY avatar in said world. Comprehensive customization is a must for me. I play RPGs for immersion and limiting my customization sticks in my craw.

If I was only interested in making my character my own and having a world where things can end drastically different then I'd play D&D or other paper RPG like games instead of playing a video game.

You got to accept that video games have their limitations because they require a lot of money to make and have limited time to make the game.  Game makers have to decide between the two choices because they can't do both.  They have to decide if the game is going to overall be a game full of exploration, choices, and character customization, or will it focus on telling a story.

Modifié par Urazz, 14 mai 2013 - 04:42 .


#56
AmRMa

AmRMa
  • Members
  • 429 messages
I totally agree. Most games give you a fixed protagonist - Uncharted, GTA, Tomb Raider, etc and at least Bioware allows for some customization. I think that  Bioware allowed you to chose races the first game to get the players familiar with Thedas and its different societies. DAO had a pretty straight forward plot- recruit these allies and defeat this enemy, this and a lack of a character voice made dialogue options more basic. DAI seems to be planned with  a more intricate plot which will require more voiced dialogue options, which makes having multiple races on top of multiple backgrounds all voiced would be ridiculously long (not to mention more expensive) in production.
 
I rather have a character whose background plays more into the story rather than the occasional non-voiced comments on my character's race or one story background section of gameplay. If you want to play an elf or a dwarf go play an MMO or Skyrim which is more about gameplay than story- which I do on occasion. I like Bioware games for the  rich story telling, character development, and snarky  dialogue. So I will happily play a customizable human with a customizable background and not complain since many games as stated before don't even allow you do have different options.

Also, some games allow for massive customization of characters without really changing the character response in the game ex. Saints Row 2 & 3 (had a girl that still acted like a guy).

#57
ArcaneJTM

ArcaneJTM
  • Members
  • 157 messages
Story and customization are not mutually exclusive things. They can do both. It's not that hard. Frankly, putting artificial limits on the PC's race and background is a crutch far more than it is a boon where writing is concerned.

Also, having a voiced NPC is neither necessary nor limiting to having a great story or customization. That seems to be a common misconception around here. I swear that if Bioware had had even just one voice actor reading the lines for the PC in DA:O, with no other changes whatsoever, this wouldn't even be an issue.

#58
Chaos Lord Malek

Chaos Lord Malek
  • Members
  • 735 messages

Xebioz wrote...

 Having a character thrust upon you over which you have little control *hrrm*DialogueWheel*hrmm* is not what I enjoy nor many others.


Dalogue wheel is not customization. Customization is chosing looks, voice, race, class, origin, backgrounds, skills, traits, perks. 

Dialogue is a story element, as everything that is related to it. And in Dragon Age origins, entire story is a terrible cliche, with only exception being Morrigan sex ritual.

Dialogue wheel has nothing to do with customization, and doesn't limmit story either, becuase you can simply add subb-choices. Origins didn't have anymore choices then Dragon Age 2, its just missconception, that has already being explained multiple times on this forum.

#59
Plaintiff

Plaintiff
  • Members
  • 6 998 messages

ArcaneJTM wrote...
Nice try, but wanting the option to pick a race is not in any way specifically limited to elves and dwarves.

I didn't say it was, but their existence as a staple of Fantasy fiction means a lot of people expect them to be included by default.

People in this thread are specifcally bemoaning the exclusion of elves and dwarves, but there are several more races that exist in the world of Thedas.

In any game.  A world that includes them however should have the option available to the player.

Why? Why is the ability to create a character of a fictional species more important than narrative cohesion? Because you prefer it? Because you don't want a plot-heavy game anyway?

You don't care about race choice. You care about the race you want to play, which is an elf or a dwarf. Next to nobody is complaining about the inability to play a kossith, or a fex, probably because it was never included in the first place, so they don't suffer under the illusion of 'losing' something.

Does the same logic extend to nationality? Because there's never been an option to be Rivaini, or Nevarran, or Chasind or Anders or Tevinter or Orlesian or Antivan, but these nationalities exist in Thedas and we've seen individuals of those nationalities in Ferelden or Kirkwall, so location is not a good enough reason to exclude them.

What about social class? Last I checked, Origins only offered one possible Origin for humans, and that was nobility. I guess it's not a 'real' role-playing game because I can't be a merchant's son, or an orphaned peasant.

Does your argument extend to include these things? Or is 'race' the only thing that matters, because self-serving hypocrisy?

Just because elves and dwarves exist in a given setting doesn't mean it makes sense for them to be protagonists, just like it doesn't make sense for a Khajiit in Skyrim to be able to join the Stormcloaks, or buy a house. The nature of Dragon Age's setting means that elves and dwarves are limited vastly more than humans. Until that aspect of the setting changes, including the option to be an elf or dwarf limits the kinds of stories that can be told, and offers nothing in terms of functionality that a human doesn't.

By the way, don't complain about people who want more role play to be in their role playing game just because you don't like role play.

Having the ability to create a character doesn't necessarily facilitate an increase in "role playing", and Bioware is not obligated to provide a particular "level" of role-playing.

Bioware games have always been about telling a story. You, the player, are along for the ride, and that means certain options won't be available either because it doesn't make sense to have them, or because including every single possible choice simply isn't reasonable. You don't get to complain about people who want a more cohesive narrative in their heavily narrative-based game.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 14 mai 2013 - 06:38 .


#60
The Night Haunter

The Night Haunter
  • Members
  • 2 968 messages
I'm sorry, but you are saying the Witcher has good Character Development/Customization? It had a fun story, but it was pretty much choice a (side with humans) choice b (side with non-humans) and everything thing else played out the exact same. Sure you could select a few different dialogue options, but Geralt is always Geralt. The most you can do to 'personalize' him is to stay faithful to triss or tramp around.

DAO on the other hand had an excellent story (not necessarily better than Witcher story wise, but as good) and was very customizable. If we ignore DA2 and just take DAO as its own game then you can have several different endings, plus all the side quests that lead to subtle differences in the ending slides.

Fallout New Vegas was the exact same as DAO in terms of ability to affect the endins (maybe even more so), and you have even more ability to customize your character.

How about Walking Dead? You can customize your character's attitude quite well, and although it has a very predetermined endings (and every character in the game always meets the same fate regardless of your input) it tells a wonderful story while allowing the player to play as vastly different characters.

#61
The Night Haunter

The Night Haunter
  • Members
  • 2 968 messages

Chaos Lord Malek wrote...


Dalogue wheel is not customization. Customization is chosing looks, voice, race, class, origin, backgrounds, skills, traits, perks. 

Dialogue is a story element, as everything that is related to it. And in Dragon Age origins, entire story is a terrible cliche, with only exception being Morrigan sex ritual.

Dialogue wheel has nothing to do with customization, and doesn't limmit story either, becuase you can simply add subb-choices. Origins didn't have anymore choices then Dragon Age 2, its just missconception, that has already being explained multiple times on this forum.


Not gonna disagree with you, just pointing out that the Dialogue Wheel IS customization. It allows you to customize your characters 'attitude', friendly, joker or jackass (i know the option is theoretically supposed to just be no-nonse and gruff, but every time i try it i just think Hawke is being a giant douche).

So the Dialogue wheel is an option towards customization, while in DAO players simply selected what they wanted to say in DA2 they feel obligated (or at least I do) to stay true to my prefered Dialogue Wheel option. Now having said that I dont actually disapprove of the dialogue wheel, it allows the voice acters/script writers to make a more cohesive conversation that just throwing in three random sentences that may or may not fit with one of the three 'attitude' choices or each other.

However I would like more than 3 'attitudes' to choose from, especially since I like playing renegade in ME but not being a total douche I was disappointed by the 'angry' DA2 option.

I also liked in ME3 that sometimes one of the 3 choices (paragon, neutral, renegade) where sometimes omitted as being not really appropriate to the specific branch int he conversation.

#62
Sanunes

Sanunes
  • Members
  • 4 382 messages

Xebioz wrote...

 Having a character thrust upon you over which you have little control *hrrm*DialogueWheel*hrmm* is not what I enjoy nor many others.


What about the 1 - 6 option in Dragon Age: Origins, its no different then Upper Left/Right, Middle Left/Right, and Bottom Left/Right with a dialogue wheel.

#63
Guest_Puddi III_*

Guest_Puddi III_*
  • Guests
Yes, scrap character creation, canon big gay inquisitor.

#64
Plaintiff

Plaintiff
  • Members
  • 6 998 messages

Filament wrote...

Yes, scrap character creation, canon big gay inquisitor.

I'd play it.

#65
Plaintiff

Plaintiff
  • Members
  • 6 998 messages

-TC1989- wrote...
You hate playing games that involve having elves and dwarves, yet you're playing Dragon Age?

I don't hate them, I hate the fact that they and other over-used tropes are stagnating the Fantasy genre when it has the potential to be so much more.

I tolerate elves and dwarves in Dragon Age because the individual characters are engaging, and because it features homosexual characters.

I guess I'm confused? Are you saying you want the series to continue without including those races? Or are you only specifically implying that they be excluded from CC?

Neither.

And you think that would stop them? You cannot be that naïve. The people who love being an elf, or dwarf, will be begging Bioware for them to return until the end of time. That isn't going to change. So my suggestion is to learn to accept some people will love their racial preferences.

By the same token, maybe they should learn to accept that not having elves and dwarves isn't the end of the world, and that having them doesn't obligate developers to provide an option to play them.

#66
Sylvius the Mad

Sylvius the Mad
  • Members
  • 24 112 messages

EntropicAngel wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

So, metagaming.

I want to roleplay characters.  The characters make decisions themselves - I don't make decisions for them.  I can't just decide that he's going to do something different without breaking his character.

The problem with this si that, as nice as it sounds, it isn't always true because we are forced to decde what decision that character makes--we are forced to interpret each situation and judge how that character would respond to it.

The character interprets the situation, not us.  And then he responds.

To put it another way, ten different RPers playing the same character, with the same background, with the same attributes and values, would have ten different characters when the game ends, because we are forced to make judgement.

That the characters behaved differently requires that they were different characters.

And that makes sense, given your example.  The only way 10 players could all play exactly the same character would be to have exactly the same exhaustive knowledge of  that character's personality.

There's no room for judgment when roleplaying a full realised character.  The only decisions being made by the player are those that determine what the character's characteristics are.  But it is those characteristics that drive the decision.

If 10 different players all began with exactly the same information, but that information was not exhaustive, then they could produce different outcomes, because each player would be forced to add to the character's design as new situations arose.  But those player decisions would resolve details about the character that were previously uncertain.  If the players make different decisions about that, then the character actions can differ, yes, but as soon as the players make different decisions then the characters are no longer identical.  The players are no longer playing the same character, because each one is playing a character whi, presented with exactly the same stimulus, makes a different decision.

Basd on what?  Difference.

How does a quiet, somewhat reserved yet basically kind city elf respond to the attempted rape of his fiance by humans?

That depends on the other characteristics of that elf.  Characteristics you didn't define in advance, and thus have to define on the fly.

But as soon as you define them, you've produced a character who is different from what he would have been had you defined them differently.

It's just like bubble universe theory, but with characters.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 14 mai 2013 - 07:51 .


#67
Sylvius the Mad

Sylvius the Mad
  • Members
  • 24 112 messages

Plaintiff wrote...

Bioware games have always been about telling a story.

What does that mean?

Certainly, they've always told a story.  But until the voiced protagonist came along, they also always allowed roleplaying.  So why place one above the other?

#68
Guest_Guest12345_*

Guest_Guest12345_*
  • Guests
Voiced protag/silent protag, human-only protag/various species options are just design choices. There is no universal "right" or "best" way to roleplay. These different designs facilitate and promote different kinds of gaming and roleplaying experiences. I sort of wish people would stop insisting that their way of roleplaying is best, and instead try to appreciate the variety of approaches, as they all have their own merits.

#69
Plaintiff

Plaintiff
  • Members
  • 6 998 messages

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Bioware games have always been about telling a story.

What does that mean?

Certainly, they've always told a story.  But until the voiced protagonist came along, they also always allowed roleplaying.  So why place one above the other?

It means that the fixed narrative element was always the primary focus. As opposed to games like Skyrim, where the primary focus is creating a play-space that allows for infinite exploration with little to no requirement to progress the 'main' story.

I don't suport your premise that the introduction of voice acting has reduced the role-playing element that already existed in Bioware's games. The restrictions always existed, they're just more readily apparent.

#70
Fiery Knight

Fiery Knight
  • Members
  • 656 messages
"Most people want to play as different races"? Hard to imagine, since over 80% played as humans in DAO, 15% as elves and 5% as dwarves.

No wonder we are stuck playing as humans. Number's don't lie.

#71
Fiery Knight

Fiery Knight
  • Members
  • 656 messages

Sanunes wrote...

Xebioz wrote...

 Having a character thrust upon you over which you have little control *hrrm*DialogueWheel*hrmm* is not what I enjoy nor many others.


What about the 1 - 6 option in Dragon Age: Origins, its no different then Upper Left/Right, Middle Left/Right, and Bottom Left/Right with a dialogue wheel.


except that the dialog wheel as room for 1-10 options.

Dialog wheel > DAO System.

#72
Aolbain

Aolbain
  • Members
  • 1 206 messages
Each for their own but I feel the opposite. If the character has no background, no connection to the world s/he just feels like a empty shell.

#73
Keeper of Light

Keeper of Light
  • Members
  • 193 messages

EntropicAngel wrote...

I think there's a middle area. The middle area is where most Bioware games lie, to a degree. In ME you were forced to be a human, which was a fundamental part of the story (first human Spectre, humanity earning their own Reaper, etc.), but you could choose gender and visual characteristics.

Skyrim is a good example of it being too open--it's a mile wide and an inch deep. I personally would use TW as an example of a too restrictive system--you're forced to play a white male around 40, who's had a certain life up to this point (although, nudge nudge wink wink amnesia). Plus the game's dialog is essentially linear.

Origins in DA:O are another example of that middle area--they restrict your character in race, to a socioeconomic background, but that's it.

So I understand your position, and agree to an extent. To an extent.


Geralt is 40 years old? Um, you're wrong on that one, he's about over a 100 years old. What do you mean by linear? The choices you make could possibly take you to a whole different region than the other after ACT 1. You call that linear? Although I agree with your point.  You're forced to play as Geralt, but you have the freedom to give him his own personality, ideals, motives, etc, etc.

#74
Keeper of Light

Keeper of Light
  • Members
  • 193 messages

Hawke_12 wrote...

Sanunes wrote...

Xebioz wrote...

 Having a character thrust upon you over which you have little control *hrrm*DialogueWheel*hrmm* is not what I enjoy nor many others.


What about the 1 - 6 option in Dragon Age: Origins, its no different then Upper Left/Right, Middle Left/Right, and Bottom Left/Right with a dialogue wheel.


except that the dialog wheel as room for 1-10 options.

Dialog wheel > DAO System.


Totally agree. I'd rather have a voiced protagonist with the dialogue wheel. I remember for the first time playing Dragon Age: Origins back in 2009 and how confusing the dialogue system was. I'm glad we got the dialogue wheel and Bioware decided to retain such system. It works fairly well, and is very simple with neat little icons.

#75
A Crusty Knight Of Colour

A Crusty Knight Of Colour
  • Members
  • 7 466 messages

Darksiders2 wrote...

Totally agree. I'd rather have a voiced protagonist with the dialogue wheel. I remember for the first time playing Dragon Age: Origins back in 2009 and how confusing the dialogue system was. I'm glad we got the dialogue wheel and Bioware decided to retain such system. It works fairly well, and is very simple with neat little icons.


Image IPB