544 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

@TurretSyndrome - you have a point (several, in fact), but I think some of that could be mitigated by making the voiced lines shorter. IIRC, the Warden's lines were pretty short and direct, whereas Hawke was relatively chatty.

I would suggest that if the voiced lines were shorter, there would be less opportunity to break characters - although it may also detract from the personable PC the writers might be wanting to implement.

David Gaider even pointed that out, once.  He mentioned that showing the full line wouldn't produce a DAO-like experience unless they went back to writing player lines like they did with an unvoiced protagonist.

Which is something I think they should do, regardless of whether they keep the voice.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Is it? Is it roleplaying? Or is it pretending you have a choice in your background when really, the only reason you even can have such fantasies is that the game simply didn't fill that part in nor care enough about it to address it.

Is there a difference?

It doesn't matter why this gameplay approach is available to us.  It matters that it is.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Is it? Is it roleplaying? Or is it pretending you have a choice in your background when really, the only reason you even can have such fantasies is that the game simply didn't fill that part in nor care enough about it to address it.

Is there a difference?

It doesn't matter why this gameplay approach is available to us.  It matters that it is.

It actually does matter. It's the difference between having something and pretending you have something.

The difference between having say 1000 dollars and pretending you have 1000 dollars, but you actually have 200 dollars, and you just make up a story about what you did with the imaginary 800 dollars.

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 29 janvier 2014 - 12:08 .

[CybAnt1]

I want a little pathos in my characters dammit.

Oh I would have loved some pathos from Hawke, too. Too bad instead of being constantly angry, funny, or diplomatic, he was incapable of expressing sadness, despair, regret, or remorse. Human personalities contain lots of emotions, and it's odd to say someone has a personality composed only of three. 

In fact, I think in any era, somebody would think somebody like that needed help, or perhaps in Thedas, an exorcism. 

[Cainhurst Crow]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Cause I wasn't facing that direction when I got control of my character. Believe me, I tried to go against the game and follow neither the stormcloak or imperial guy and head out the gate, and I auto-died.

So I just gave up and went along the fixed path the game obviously set up for me. Really it was just doing whatever other characters told me without any feeling or connection of my own. Bascially a personality and history devoid philisophical zombie like the game creators wanted you to play.

So you tried one time, during the game's tutorial, and then just gave up.

I think you just made a good argument for scrapping in-game tutorials.

What would it matter? I ignore all the quests and don't talk to anyone. Great, now I have a 60 dollar paper weight that does nothing.

I follow the story up until the point I apparently decide not to, giving no reason why and having no characters try to persuade me otherwise or really express any opinions on my actions at all. Great, now I have a 60 dollar paper weight that does nothing.

Or I follow the story even if I don't agree with it in order to experience the full story and all the missions ahead of time, go back, and try to roleplay a character using only my imagination. Great, I now am not roleplaying in the game but using predictive metagaming.

I am glad you found some way to using headcanon and fanfiction writing techniques to make the game seem more then what it is for you. But that doesn't work for me, and I hope I have explained why that doesn't work for me.

Someone else said if I don't just completely fill the game with my imagination then I'm not playing a roleplaying game. To them, I ask them if there is a limit to how much imagination you can use to create a roleplaying rich game? If there isn't, then I suggest they play tetris or snake, and just use their imagination to come up with a backstory of what the character is, what they are doing there, and why they are doing what they are doing, so as to make it the greatest rpg of all time and go celebrate it that way. I will be looking at these games as games and judging them by what they bring, not what they are too lazy to provide under the guise of giving players choices. As if not doing something for the player were some kind of favor we should be greatful for. Thank you game, you gave nothing and told me to bow down because of it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

It actually does matter. It's the difference between having something and pretending you have something.

The difference between having say 1000 dollars and pretending you have 1000 dollars, but you actually have 200 dollars, and you just make up a story about what you did with the imaginary 800 dollars.

As long as I derive $800 worth of value from that pretend money, then there's no difference.

All roleplaying is pretending.

[Br3admax]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

It actually does matter. It's the difference between having something and pretending you have something.

The difference between having say 1000 dollars and pretending you have 1000 dollars, but you actually have 200 dollars, and you just make up a story about what you did with the imaginary 800 dollars.

As long as I derive $800 worth of value from that pretend money, then there's no difference.

All roleplaying is pretending.

You aren't geting $800 worth of value when someone gives you nothing. That doesn't even make any sense. As to the second part, are you roleplaying someone who roleplays someone who actually has a role? Because that would be the only way that makes any sense in the context of this conversation. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Br3ad wrote...

You aren't geting $800 worth of value when someone gives you nothing. That doesn't even make any sense.

I don't think you know what value means.

[Br3admax]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

You aren't geting $800 worth of value when someone gives you nothing. That doesn't even make any sense.

I don't think you know what value means.

Don't even buy the game. Stare at the concept art and pretend you played the game. Then you're getting even more value, and it's all free. 

In the analogy given, someone gave you $200 and you pretended that you had $1000, but spent $800. You weren't really just a guy on a cart, you were a knight on a cart, even if the game tells you flat out this didn't happen, and why, because you say so that's why. And I'm not a poor college kid, I'm really an eccentric billionaire who only pretends to have nothing, and why, because no one can tell me what value I really have in my wallet. And the option is there for me to believe I am everything, even when I'm told that I am nothing, because options!!!

Modifié par Br3ad, 29 janvier 2014 - 12:32 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

It actually does matter. It's the difference between having something and pretending you have something.

The difference between having say 1000 dollars and pretending you have 1000 dollars, but you actually have 200 dollars, and you just make up a story about what you did with the imaginary 800 dollars.

As long as I derive $800 worth of value from that pretend money, then there's no difference.

All roleplaying is pretending.

Roleplaying is not the same thing as playing a roleplaying game. In fact I would stipulate the "game" part of the word completely overshadows the "roleplaying" simply by the nature of how a game operates. It presents scenarios for you to choose from, it doesn't work in a collaborative effort to allow you and it to create a role for you to play. The game gives you a pre-defined role, and tells you to play it because that is the technological limitation we have in our games. They can't take anything we think or or express into account unless it gels with the games pre-programed set of expressions or thoughts. It's basically an entirely one way experience with a simple multiple choice test disguised as you having the freedom to truly play a role.

Too many people seem to have it in their heads that all roleplaying is the same. That what works with a table top campaign with multiple people all communicating and working with one another is the same as what works in a video game programed by the team whose never meet or communicated with you ever.

[Fast Jimmy]

His conversation has wandered into "what is roleplaying/a roleplaying game?" Which means it is going to be locked imminently. Let's try to steer the conversation back to the DA series and the dialogue wheel.

[Enigmatick]

Or I could post some Shrek, that's always good.

[Fast Jimmy]

Enigmatick wrote...

Or I could post some Shrek, that's always good.

You're working your way to a smacked bottom. 

[Wulfram]

The best option is voice recognition so that the player reads out the line and thus voice acting is superfluous.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Roleplaying is not the same thing as playing a roleplaying game. In fact I would stipulate the "game" part of the word completely overshadows the "roleplaying" simply by the nature of how a game operates. It presents scenarios for you to choose from, it doesn't work in a collaborative effort to allow you and it to create a role for you to play. The game gives you a pre-defined role, and tells you to play it because that is the technological limitation we have in our games. They can't take anything we think or or express into account unless it gels with the games pre-programed set of expressions or thoughts. It's basically an entirely one way experience with a simple multiple choice test disguised as you having the freedom to truly play a role.

Too many people seem to have it in their heads that all roleplaying is the same. That what works with a table top campaign with multiple people all communicating and working with one another is the same as what works in a video game programed by the team whose never meet or communicated with you ever.

D&D is a roleplaying game.

I maintain, however, that roleplaying games are not games, because they don't have winning or losing conditions.  You can't win a roleplaying game.  You can only play, until you stop.

[Fast Jimmy]

Wulfram wrote...

The best option is voice recognition so that the player reads out the line and thus voice acting is superfluous.

Even if the PC had my voice and said whatever I wanted, the game has to have some form of response/consequence. 

I couldn't accuse Cullen of blowing up the Death Star because that would make no sense. I would be forced to voice act tons of lines until one worked (much like the old text based games, where you had to often find the exact write combination of written commands to do what you wanted).

Until such a time as a sentient computer can begin making video games, we're stuck with pre-renders responses, either though text or voice actors. 

[GreyLycanTrope]

I don't have much issue with showing spoken lines in advance, I mean I tend to think things before I say them. Well usually.

[Wulfram]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

The best option is voice recognition so that the player reads out the line and thus voice acting is superfluous.

Even if the PC had my voice and said whatever I wanted, the game has to have some form of response/consequence. 

I couldn't accuse Cullen of blowing up the Death Star because that would make no sense. I would be forced to voice act tons of lines until one worked (much like the old text based games, where you had to often find the exact write combination of written commands to do what you wanted).

Until such a time as a sentient computer can begin making video games, we're stuck with pre-renders responses, either though text or voice actors. 

The line would be written out for you, you'd just select it by reading it.

Of course we can't have free conversations with NPCs.  If we could, we'd have to worry about them asking if they have souls.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

His conversation has wandered into "what is roleplaying/a roleplaying game?" Which means it is going to be locked imminently. Let's try to steer the conversation back to the DA series and the dialogue wheel.

Strictly speaking, this thread is about the paraphrases.

I'm going to test the paraphrases in this one.  I should have done this in DA2, but I 'll do it for Inquisition.  I'm going to post first-impressions of DAI's use of paraphrases, line by line, at the start of the game.

I'll explain, line-by-line, what I think my character's opinions and goals are, and what I hope to get out of each paraphrase selection, and then we'll see whether I get that.

Then, if there's a way to play the game better, someone can point it out.

[CybAnt1]

Oh sure. Of course, whether it's in the form of a list or a wheel, everyone will have a moment where it's clear an option of something you'd want to say (and would be in character, as opposed to asking about the Death Star) is not there.

That has been the problem, since forever. "Pick the least inconsistent with your head canon," et al.

But one thing I can definitely concur with Sylvius about is the current DA2 system is often having me say things my character never would have said - without getting the chance to even think about that -, and that feels even ... odder.

At the end of the day, even dialogue lists are not really an improvement over wheels, if the lines in them are crappy writing. The quality of the writing is always independent of the mechanism of how it's presented. And could be good or bad in either kind of game.

Thing is, I get a better sense of the quality of writing, when I get to read it, then when I just get to hear it recited. 

Incidentally, I see no relationship between quality writing, and quantity, like quantity of words. A game can contain a large number of words (perhaps most of them are item descriptions), but not feel ... well written. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 29 janvier 2014 - 01:18 .