706 réponses à ce sujet

[ObserverStatus]

David7204 wrote...
The more freedom you have to kill or dismiss or even dislike characters, the less involvement they can have in a story and with each other.
If you demand complete freedom to treat characters how you want, then you better be ready for characters that have zero involvement in the story and with each other. Which more-or-less makes it impossible for a story to function in the first place.

Meh, I'd rather play a game where the way you treat the other characters actually changes the outcome of the story, rather than the way you treat the other characters and the outcome of the story both being on rails. If a story like that won't function, it was just poorly designed to begin with.

Modifié par bobobo878, 21 juillet 2013 - 08:17 .

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

Enough of this nonsense. Parroting each other does not make you any more convincing.

And you making comments like the one I replied too, doesn't make it accurate 

[Ravensword]

David7204 wrote...

Enough of this nonsense. Parroting each other does not make you any more convincing.

Even if DA:Os dialogue and companion system was really that good, which I very seriously doubt, DA:O is not Mass Effect. It took six years of development. It had half the work for conversations thanks to a silant protagonist. It has far less of a focus on characters returning through sequels.

Don't knock it till you try it.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

Enough of this nonsense. Parroting each other does not make you any more convincing.

Even if DA:Os dialogue and companion system was really that good, which I very seriously doubt, DA:O is not Mass Effect. It took six years of development. It had half the work for conversations thanks to a silant protagonist. It has far less of a focus on characters returning through sequels.

You've never even played Dragon Age: Origins. You have no idea what you're talking about on this topic.

Does anybody even take you seriously anymore? All you do is insult people and try to make objective claims to subjective issues.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 21 juillet 2013 - 08:19 .

[SlottsMachine]

David7204 wrote...

Enough of this nonsense. Parroting each other does not make you any more convincing.

Even if DA:Os dialogue and companion system was really that good, which I very seriously doubt, DA:O is not Mass Effect. It took six years of development. It had half the work for conversations thanks to a silant protagonist. It has far less of a focus on characters returning through sequels.

Pretty please. 

[David7204]

bobobo878 wrote...

David7204 wrote...
The more freedom you have to kill or dismiss or even dislike characters, the less involvement they can have in a story and with each other.
If you demand complete freedom to treat characters how you want, then you better be ready for characters that have zero involvement in the story and with each other. Which more-or-less makes it impossible for a story to function in the first place.

Meh, I'd rather play a game where the way you treat the other characters actually changes the outcome of the story, rather than the way you treat the other characters and the outcome of the story both being on rails. If a story like that won't function, it was just poorly designed to begin with.

Wow! Someone would rather have a game where treating characters differently does have an effect on the story, instead of not having an effect at the story! How amazingly unique and unexpected! And here I've been thinking for years that all players prefered to play games where treating characters differently had no effect! Someone call Guinness! Next you'll be telling me you prefer having lots of money to not having lots of money!

Modifié par David7204, 21 juillet 2013 - 08:21 .

[SlottsMachine]

Money is overrated.

[Ravensword]

David7204 wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

David7204 wrote...
The more freedom you have to kill or dismiss or even dislike characters, the less involvement they can have in a story and with each other.
If you demand complete freedom to treat characters how you want, then you better be ready for characters that have zero involvement in the story and with each other. Which more-or-less makes it impossible for a story to function in the first place.

Meh, I'd rather play a game where the way you treat the other characters actually changes the outcome of the story, rather than the way you treat the other characters and the outcome of the story both being on rails. If a story like that won't function, it was just poorly designed to begin with.

Wow! Someone would rather have a game where treating characters differently does have an effect on the story, instead of not having an effect at the story! How amazingly unique and unexpected! And here I've been thinking for years that all players prefered to play games where treating characters differently had no effect! Someone call Guinness! Next you'll be telling me you prefer having lots of money to not having lots of money!

You appear to be a little upset. Perhaps a game of DA:O will make you feel better? 

[SlottsMachine]

Ravensword wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Wow! Someone would rather have a game where treating characters differently does have an effect on the story, instead of not having an effect at the story! How amazingly unique and unexpected! And here I've been thinking for years that all players prefered to play games where treating characters differently had no effect! Someone call Guinness! Next you'll be telling me you prefer having lots of money to not having lots of money!

You appear to be a little upset. Perhaps a game of DA:O will make you feel better? 

Just make sure you play it on easy, might be to stressful otherwise. 

[DeinonSlayer]

General Slotts wrote...

Ravensword wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

David7204 wrote...

The more freedom you have to kill or dismiss or even dislike characters, the less involvement they can have in a story and with each other.

If you demand complete freedom to treat characters how you want, then you better be ready for characters that have zero involvement in the story and with each other. Which more-or-less makes it impossible for a story to function in the first place.

David, please play DA:O

[Teddie Sage]

doozer12 wrote...

Oh this blue vs everyone sh*t again. How cute. Its surprising how extreme everyones fondness (or lack there of) is for her. Folk s either adore her... or folks want to kill her. Theres like no middle ground for her. Its interesting how rare the "Eh, shes an all right friend" responses are. Such a passionate bunch BSN is

On topic:
Femshep: Liara M!shep: Ashley.

Personally, I always turn down Liara because I see her more as an adoring little sister than love material.

On topic: Male Shep and Kaidan is my favourite relationship so far. It was worth the wait... Even though it was so short!

[o Ventus]

Ravensword wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Enough of this nonsense. Parroting each other does not make you any more convincing.

Even if DA:Os dialogue and companion system was really that good, which I very seriously doubt, DA:O is not Mass Effect. It took six years of development. It had half the work for conversations thanks to a silant protagonist. It has far less of a focus on characters returning through sequels.

Don't knock it till you try it.

Remember who you're talking to.

[Ravensword]

o Ventus wrote...

Ravensword wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Enough of this nonsense. Parroting each other does not make you any more convincing.

Even if DA:Os dialogue and companion system was really that good, which I very seriously doubt, DA:O is not Mass Effect. It took six years of development. It had half the work for conversations thanks to a silant protagonist. It has far less of a focus on characters returning through sequels.

Don't knock it till you try it.

Remember who you're talking to.

Oh, I know. I know only all too well who I'm talking to.

Modifié par Ravensword, 21 juillet 2013 - 08:48 .

[Han Shot First]

doozer12 wrote...

Oh this blue vs everyone sh*t again. How cute. Its surprising how extreme everyones fondness (or lack there of) is for her. Folk s either adore her... or folks want to kill her. Theres like no middle ground for her. Its interesting how rare the "Eh, shes an all right friend" responses are. Such a passionate bunch BSN is

On topic:
Femshep: Liara M!shep: Ashley.

Interesting that your other choice was Ashley, who is also one of the more polarizing squadmates. People either love her or hate her, and there isn't a lot of in between. Like Liara, its also rare to have any thread discussing her that doesn't devolve into back and forth bickering.
 
BSNuser1:"She's a racist!"

BSNuser2: "No she's not! And you're an idiot." 

Ect, Ect.

[DuskWanderer]

Since this is devolving into a shout-fest, how about I try to put it back with a related, but separate question.

Which of your squadmates do you like more as a platonic friend than a romance? For me, it's Garrus, and M!Shep/Kaidan. The former just has better dialogue, and the latter I just didn't see the romantic chemistry.

[Sir DeLoria]

DuskWanderer wrote...

Since this is devolving into a shout-fest, how about I try to put it back with a related, but separate question.

Which of your squadmates do you like more as a platonic friend than a romance? For me, it's Garrus, and M!Shep/Kaidan. The former just has better dialogue, and the latter I just didn't see the romantic chemistry.

Tried a Kaidan romance once, expected something like this:

Shep: Isn't this wine nice? 
Kai: Yeah, do you need me for anything?
Shep: No, let's just relax and enjoy the view.
Kai: Sure? I can cook, or fix something.
Shep: Relax. Shall I put on some romantic music?
Kai: Naw, let's talk about how great Vancouver is...

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

Enough of this nonsense. Parroting each other does not make you any more convincing.

Even if DA:Os dialogue and companion system was really that good, which I very seriously doubt, DA:O is not Mass Effect. It took six years of development. It had half the work for conversations thanks to a silant protagonist. It has far less of a focus on characters returning through sequels.

. What astounds me is why you think anybody cares what you have to say.  You are not qualified to make such judgements on DA:O until you have played it.  Then you will see that characters CAN be treatrd poorly by the PC and still make an impact, until then would you kindly shut up about a game you have not played.

[Teddie Sage]

Necanor wrote...

Tried a Kaidan romance once, expected something like this:

Shep: Isn't this wine nice? 
Kai: Yeah, do you need me for anything?
Shep: No, let's just relax and enjoy the view.
Kai: Sure? I can cook, or fix something.
Shep: Relax. Shall I put on some romantic music?
Kai: Naw, let's talk about how great Vancouver is...

To me it always occured that Kaidan was homesick whenever he mentioned Vancouver, so I just played along, trying to cheer him up. But yeah, I kinda wish Kaidan had more lines in the romance. Virmire Survivors had less dialogues than other characters in the third game, because of you know what. Well I'm not sure if they had less lines, but they did appear on less missions due to their statuses.

Modifié par Teddie Sage, 21 juillet 2013 - 09:29 .

[Ymladdych]

David7204 wrote...

The more freedom you have to kill or dismiss or even dislike characters, the less involvement they can have in a story and with each other.

If you demand complete freedom to treat characters how you want, then you better be ready for characters that have zero involvement in the story and with each other. Which more-or-less makes it impossible for a story to function in the first place.

I agree that NPC deaths are a major block to any future plot significance, which is why I'd like to see fewer of them.

I disagree about the player's behavior, though. If a character's motivations are relationship-independent, then they can easily retain their plot significance.

Morrigan's a perfect example. People can RP hating her guts or loving her to death. Either way, she's one of the most significant characters of the franchise.

DuskWanderer wrote...

Which of your squadmates do you like more as a platonic friend than a romance?

Garrus and Kaidan.

Modifié par Ymladdych, 21 juillet 2013 - 09:44 .

[SiniisteR]

My favorite romance? Tali. How much do I love her? This much. 

The thing I regret most, is that I started the trilogy with the plan of Liara being my main romance option through all three games, so I romanced her in ME1. It was only because I don't have the Shadow Broker DLC that I chose to romance someone else in ME2. I was on the fence between Tali and Miranda, but eventually chose Tali in the end, which was the best decision I've ever made. She's so much more interesting and relatable than Liara will ever be for me (We share a common fear of spiders ).

I also noticed that her evacuation in the Extended Cut seems to the only one that had effort put into it, since all the other MShep LI's goodbyes just followed the same formula:

"No matter what happen's, I'll always love you"

"Shepard, I..."

*Insert last line here*

Meanwhile Tali's actually stood on its own. Her "Come back to me" line made my heart melt.

I've also noticed in some places people saying that Tali is better off being with than Garrus than Shepard, just because they are both dextro-protein races, so they can get past boundaries that would be between humans and quarians. But what sounds like a better love story, two people of different races being together because they have the most similarites in comparison to other races, or two people from different races being together despite their differences and the boundaries they would face?

Modifié par SiniisteR, 21 juillet 2013 - 09:49 .

[Mr.House]

David7204 wrote...

Enough of this nonsense. Parroting each other does not make you any more convincing.

Even if DA:Os dialogue and companion system was really that good, which I very seriously doubt, DA:O is not Mass Effect. It took six years of development. It had half the work for conversations thanks to a silant protagonist. It has far less of a focus on characters returning through sequels.

Says the person who has not even played DAO. Untill you play DAO you should not even try to argue about it, it just makes you look worse then you already are.

[Han Shot First]

DuskWanderer wrote...

Since this is devolving into a shout-fest, how about I try to put it back with a related, but separate question.

Which of your squadmates do you like more as a platonic friend than a romance? For me, it's Garrus, and M!Shep/Kaidan. The former just has better dialogue, and the latter I just didn't see the romantic chemistry.

Garrus.

Besides my canon Shep being a dude, I never quite understood why Garrus was a romance option at all for Fem Shep. Human/Turian pairings are kind of weird.

Kaidan, Vega, ect are also always in the platonic category, but unlike with Garrus I can understand why some Fem Shep fans wanted either one of those characters for their Shep's LI. Ditto for Cortez and some MShep players.

[Melbella]

DuskWanderer wrote...

Since this is devolving into a shout-fest, how about I try to put it back with a related, but separate question.

Which of your squadmates do you like more as a platonic friend than a romance? For me, it's Garrus, and M!Shep/Kaidan. The former just has better dialogue, and the latter I just didn't see the romantic chemistry.

For femShep: Kaidan. There was just too much bitterness after Horizon to try to make it work again in 3. Plus, Horizon didn't bother me near so much if Kaidan wasn't romanced in ME1.  No preference for male Shep really.

Modifié par Melbella, 21 juillet 2013 - 09:58 .

[Teddie Sage]

I really wanted Vega to be a love interest. *pouts*
(Citadel FemShep fling doesn't count to me.)

Modifié par Teddie Sage, 21 juillet 2013 - 10:02 .