244 réponses à ce sujet

[cjones91]

In past games many choices ended up telling the player how badass and awesome they are, but would anyone like it if some choices did'nt do that and instead they mocked the player in-game for making them?It would be interesting to have several ego deflating moments and it would add some interesting elements to the story.For example you try to kill someone but later on they survived and lay a trap for you,that would make players think twice before they kill everyone they meet.

What does everyone think?

Modifié par cjones91, 27 août 2013 - 11:22 .

[MaraGriffyn]

Seems like they did quite a bit of that in DA2, and you can see for yourself the reactions it got from posters on this forum. Hawke doesn't actually have a lot of agency, not when it comes to major events - can't stop Leandra from being killed, can't stop the Qunari from attacking, can't stop Anders from blowing up the Chantry...

[KainD]

In DA2 Hawke ended up as the most legendary screw up in the history of bioware games, and it wasn't even a choice.

[Shadow Fox]

Damn does every argument start a thread on this board?

[AresKeith]

Did this really need to be a thread?

[PsychoBlonde]

Give some examples of how you expect this to work. Personally, I expect it'd just be annoying to have the devs a.) require you to make a choice then b.) sneer at you for making it. What are you supposed to do? There's no "**** off, you're ALL idiots" button unless the devs give you one.

I like to have a few badass moments, but I've pretty much enjoyed the overall schema where neither choice is the "correct" one--only correct from a given standpoint. This is not the same thing as arbitrarily making ALL options bad and FORCING you to play as a flaming idiot.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

That first example doesn't sound so bad, so sure.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 27 août 2013 - 11:38 .

[Steelcan]

Yes because "heroism"

[Ravensword]

Steelcan wrote...

Yes because "heroism"

Yes because "heroism"

[cjones91]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Give some examples of how you expect this to work. Personally, I expect it'd just be annoying to have the devs a.) require you to make a choice then b.) sneer at you for making it. What are you supposed to do? There's no "**** off, you're ALL idiots" button unless the devs give you one.

I like to have a few badass moments, but I've pretty much enjoyed the overall schema where neither choice is the "correct" one--only correct from a given standpoint. This is not the same thing as arbitrarily making ALL options bad and FORCING you to play as a flaming idiot.

Okay let's say you made a deal with a faction but then someone offered to give you some magical item that makes you more powerful if you betray and and kill the faction.Most players would choose the item but let's imagine if that choice backfired and you are left without a faction because you foolishly killed them.That's the kind of choice that would make players think twice before letting their ego control how they play.

[cjones91]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Damn does every argument start a thread on this board?

Who said anything about a argument?I just wanted to see if people would like some choices that don't make them feel like a badass.

[Phate Phoenix]

 I like the idea, but it has to be done carefully or else you end up with a situation like in ME3 and Kai Leng. It has to feel like, when I made that choice, it was the right one, and the not like the game is purposefully setting me up for a fall.

In a similar vein, I propose that our companions play a larger roll in these kinds of things. Say I'm playing a mage and, generally, mages don't have a lot of cunning. If we were to come into a situation where a person is lying, my character wouldn't be able to figure that out because it requiress a cunning check to pass. However, if I had a companion who could clear that check, they would step forward and alert my character. That way, instead of feeling, "Oh man, my character is such a dweeb," I'm feeling, "Dude, my companion is awesome!"

[Maria Caliban]

cjones91 wrote...

In past games many choices ended up telling the player how badass and awesome they are, but would anyone like it if some choices did'nt do that and instead they mocked the player in-game for making them?

Dragon Age II rarely made me feel badass or awesome. Mass Effect certainly did though.

I'd like some choices to have good outcomes and some choices to have bad outcomes.

cjones91 wrote...

Okay let's say you made a deal with a faction but then someone offered to give you some magical item that makes you more powerful if you betray and and kill the faction.Most players would choose the item...

This is incorrect. The majority of people play 'good' characters.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 27 août 2013 - 11:46 .

[MaraGriffyn]

Phate Phoenix wrote...

In a similar vein, I propose that our companions play a larger roll in these kinds of things. Say I'm playing a mage and, generally, mages don't have a lot of cunning. If we were to come into a situation where a person is lying, my character wouldn't be able to figure that out because it requiress a cunning check to pass. However, if I had a companion who could clear that check, they would step forward and alert my character. That way, instead of feeling, "Oh man, my character is such a dweeb," I'm feeling, "Dude, my companion is awesome!"

I'd love more autonomous input from companions.

Then again, I'm always in favor of more companion interactions in general.

[Shadow Fox]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Damn does every argument start a thread on this board?

Yes. And it goes both ways; every thread starts an argument. It's a never-ending cycle.

Right untill the Inquisitor's long lost little sister kills the Maker.

[Taleroth]

I don't believe choices should be judged. You can't roleplay "wrong." And that's what it amounts to. When you treat a choice as bad, you're telling the player they are playing the game incorrectly.

A choice should simply be a way to express yourself. The only time a player should be berated for a choice is if it seems the player is trying to play a character that they want to be berated. Which is probably pretty hard to judge. Though low-int choices are a place to play around with it. Also Dark Knight archetypes, that is, the character gets the best results, but the world hates him for it.

Worse than that is when the player is berated for choices they were denied. That one's such a big no no for me it's enough to make me stop playing game altogether. I should win or lose by my merits, losing because the writer decided I had to so he could create drama has never done well in a game.

Modifié par Taleroth, 27 août 2013 - 11:55 .

[Potato Cat]

Yes, I would want that. I'm honestly tired of all the genocide and needless evil behaviour going effectively unpunished. That said, being a Lawful Good self righteous nitwit should also be punished from time to time.

[cjones91]

Maria Caliban wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

In past games many choices ended up telling the player how badass and awesome they are, but would anyone like it if some choices did'nt do that and instead they mocked the player in-game for making them?

Dragon Age II rarely made me feel badass or awesome. Mass Effect certainly did though.

I'd like some choices to have good outcomes and some choices to have bad outcomes.

cjones91 wrote...

Okay let's say you made a deal with a faction but then someone offered to give you some magical item that makes you more powerful if you betray and and kill the faction.Most players would choose the item...

This is incorrect. The majority of people play 'good' characters.

And most play good characters because the game makes them feel awesome/godly.Which is why most people pick Paragon/Good choices in the Mass Effect /Dragon Age games because they always get the best rewards.

That's why choices like the two I gave need to happen so some could see not everything they do works out in the end.

[berelinde]

That sounds an awful lot like this

Hey, Inquisitor, time to make a choice.
1 Obviously stupid decision which will be mocked
2 "Right" choice
3 "Clever" choice which winds up being "wrong"

BioWare isn't really about "right" and "wrong". Sure, there are times when some options are less kind/noble/brave than others, but there are usually really good reasons to take the alternative paths. They've always been really keen on decisions where there has been no clear "good" solution, nothing that comes without sacrifice. I like that.

If I made an in-game decision and somebody came along later and slapped me upside the head with the rubber fish of dumbassery, I'd be seriously disappointed at them for making something so blatantly binary.

That isn't to say that decisions shouldn't have unintended consequences or that those consequences always have to be pleasant, but I don't expect to open the journal and find "LOL doofus" in my completed quest log.

[AppealToReason]

People will say yes because they 1) "wah wah heroism sucks" or 2) choices with consequences but then when/if it happens they will be up in arms crying about how Biower is railroading them or nothing in the game makes sense anymore or something

[cjones91]

Taleroth wrote...

I don't believe choices should be judged. You can't roleplay "wrong." And that's what it amounts to. When you treat a choice as bad, you're telling the player they are playing the game incorrectly.

A choice should simply be a way to express yourself. The only time a player should be berated for a choice is if it seems the player is trying to play a character that they want to be berated. Which is probably pretty hard to judge. Though low-int choices are a place to play around with it. Also Dark Knight archetypes, that is, the character gets the best results, but the world hates him for it.

It's not about choices being right or wrong but them having consequences that the player can't control or erase.

[Am1vf]

Yes, I would like that a lot.

[MaraGriffyn]

In the DAI coverage this month, Bioware has emphasized the idea of the choices we make having long-term and sometimes unforeseeable consequences. So hopefully it will happen to some extent.