123 réponses à ce sujet

[TheKomandorShepard]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

 What I meant is, the player never has the option to roleplay as someone who for example thinks the only way to beat the Blight is to go to Orlais and get their assistance. Or for your example, you had to go after Irenius. What is you wanted to roleplay someone who didn't want to? The reason is because the character is fixed, and what you do is simply guide them down the course to the objective. With the limited space of data on games, an unfortunate truth is that "your" character is limited in reactions and choice. This goes for personality as well as plot roleplaying.

As i said you are creating character not world you can only affect that when vide games have limitations for example you can't play as rapist or take over the world but you are in control over character you have to follow main plot but once as i said it is required to have game but plot don't control your cahracter mindset , ideals , viewpoints , feelings and other things only player in origins you could say that you belive in maker or just state that you don't belive simple you had control over your character it was your character without your influence you couldn't put any characteristics to the warden besides that he have taint in his vein only thing that you are obligated is stop blight because game requires that.

Why your warden tried stop blight it is up to you thats only thing that you are forced to do. As i said plot is required and you always will be forced to follow it but in dao you wasn't forced to have view point that you don't want... so simple player creates their own character and only they know what they created in dao possibilites were huge...

[leaguer of one]

Nefla wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

 agree with you but....


At times it's ok to assume when the person is "that "close to you...

In rpg worst thing is when game or devs assume in what way pc would respond when it should be completely up to player how pc reacts on certain events in think that dao did pretty much nice (not perfect) job doing that even if you romanced someone game never assumed that you had care about li you could but you didn't had to ,it had some consequences...

pretty much i hated when in daa my warden kneel before alistair/anora without simple giving dialogue option if my warden should do that or not it was moment screwing with my character...

Pretty much i don't like done protagonists like shepard like hawke who i control only partially when game assume what my pc would do so they felt rather as direct protagonist of shooter game than rpg... 

So it's bad to assume that you and your character is going to be sad that a person they  openly loved is dead?

It has to be taste fully done. There bad ways to do it like the case with the Warden and there good ways to do it like with Femshep cry of Thane's death.

It's not bad to assume someone would be sad if their loved one died, but it is bad to assume their reaction. Some people show grief plain and simple, crying and looking sad. Others show grief through anger or self destruction, some hide their feelings behind a mask of calm or humor, and still others are not capable of open emotion or sharing and they bottle everything up. I also think it's bad to decide what the player is sad about and to what extent, especially when the tragic event is poorly written, more boring or ridiculous than sad for most people, and very forced. How many people cried when that random kid died at the beginning of ME3? I didn't. It was a random NPC you see for 5 seconds, but the game decided that even completely evil, mass murdering Shepards were so distraught over one random kid that they had weird PTSD about it the entire game.

Things like dodging out of the way of an attack in a cutscene or asking "what do you mean?" are fine and dandy, but if I wanted the game to decide how my character acts, and feels then I would play a game with a fixed protagonist.

Which is why I said orginally that I agreed with him. But this is a digital rpg. It will inheritly have limits to what the player can do. It's a damn if you do , damn if you don't issue. Some times they have no choice but to assume beause of the limits of the medium. This does not have the freedoms of a pen and paper rog.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

 What I meant is, the player never has the option to roleplay as someone who for example thinks the only way to beat the Blight is to go to Orlais and get their assistance. Or for your example, you had to go after Irenius. What is you wanted to roleplay someone who didn't want to? The reason is because the character is fixed, and what you do is simply guide them down the course to the objective. With the limited space of data on games, an unfortunate truth is that "your" character is limited in reactions and choice. This goes for personality as well as plot roleplaying.

As i said you are creating character not world you can only affect that when vide games have limitations for example you can't play as rapist or take over the world but you are in control over character you have to follow main plot but once as i said it is required to have game but plot don't control your cahracter mindset , ideals , viewpoints , feelings and other things only player in origins you could say that you belive in maker or just state that you don't belive simple you had control over your character it was your character without your influence you couldn't put any characteristics to the warden besides that he have taint in his vein only thing that you are obligated is stop blight because game requires that.

Why your warden tried stop blight it is up to you thats only thing that you are forced to do. As i said plot is required and you always will be forced to follow it but in dao you wasn't forced to have view point that you don't want... so simple player creates their own character and only they know what they created in dao possibilites were huge...

You are playing a character, not creating one. In open world game, maybe you're creating them. But in story driven ones, you are simply playing a choose your own adventure story. And all choose your own adventure stories have limited emotional/personality imput.

[TheKomandorShepard]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

You are playing a character, not creating one. In open world game, maybe you're creating them. But in story driven ones, you are simply playing a choose your own adventure story. And all choose your own adventure stories have limited emotional/personality imput.

As i said not rly im playing and creating one as i said apparence is up to me as well personality true im creating it by choosing possibilities put in game but any aspect of personality isn't thrown at my character in dao (besides such ocasions like in daa that i mentioned). 

Simple as i said the warden without player is empty shell player fills it by many possibilities we are able create complex personality in our character and as i said only and only thing we have to do is do main quests...

And again could we express that we belive in maker we could could we express that we don't belive in maker we could simple matter it wasn't enforced.Could we choose about certain companion that we care we could could we chose that we don't care about them we could...

Simple there is no ready personality and our character traits aren't put outside our premission because we choose them and create their personality by choosing details it is adventure enforced not our character personality...

[Hanako Ikezawa]

leaguer of one wrote...
Which is why I said orginally that I agreed with him. But this is a digital rpg. It will inheritly have limits to what the player can do. It's a damn if you do , damn if you don't issue. Some times they have no choice but to assume beause of the limits of the medium. This does not have the freedoms of a pen and paper rog.

Exactly. If there was unlimited data, then every ssingle action the PC does can be chosen by the player. But since that is not the case, then some places have to be chosen to be made for you. And in DA2's case, one of those was Leandra's death because most people would be broken up by their mother dying in their arms.

[TheKomandorShepard]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
Which is why I said orginally that I agreed with him. But this is a digital rpg. It will inheritly have limits to what the player can do. It's a damn if you do , damn if you don't issue. Some times they have no choice but to assume beause of the limits of the medium. This does not have the freedoms of a pen and paper rog.

Exactly. If there was unlimited data, then every ssingle action the PC does can be chosen by the player. But since that is not the case, then some places have to be chosen to be made for you. And in DA2's case, one of those was Leandra's death because most people would be broken up by their mother dying in their arms.

What leandra death was enforcing character personality by choosing about who pc care about do you had to care about peoples in ferelden no simple put your reasons here you don't need care about anyone as the warden but you can.Enforcing to political views , religion or love pc is another matter than simple "kill kraken" main quest...

[Hanako Ikezawa]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
Which is why I said orginally that I agreed with him. But this is a digital rpg. It will inheritly have limits to what the player can do. It's a damn if you do , damn if you don't issue. Some times they have no choice but to assume beause of the limits of the medium. This does not have the freedoms of a pen and paper rog.

Exactly. If there was unlimited data, then every ssingle action the PC does can be chosen by the player. But since that is not the case, then some places have to be chosen to be made for you. And in DA2's case, one of those was Leandra's death because most people would be broken up by their mother dying in their arms.

What leandra death was enforcing character personality by choosing about who pc care about do you had to care about peoples in ferelden no simple put your reasons here you don't need care about anyone as the warden but you can.Enforcing to political views , religion or love pc is another matter than simple "kill kraken" main quest...

Considering in Origins you are fighting to save Ferelden, then I would say yes the Warden cared about at least a few people there in order to fight for it. If they just cared about themselves they wouldn't risk their life, would they? But then we come back to limited data forcing you to fight for it. Now I will admit we joked about the prospect of if that was an option, it should lead to a cutscene of the map of Thedas turning black from the Taint and leading to a Game Over screen.

[TheKomandorShepard]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

 Considering in Origins you are fighting to save Ferelden, then I would say yes the Warden cared about at least a few people there in order to fight for it. If they just cared about themselves they wouldn't risk their life, would they? But then we come back to limited data forcing you to fight for it. Now I will admit we joked about the prospect of if that was an option, it should lead to a cutscene of the map of Thedas turning black from the Taint and leading to a Game Over screen.

not rly my friedn here i tend play as less moral well without morality character... warden could care bud didn't had to why he saved blight it is up to you you could want save everyone and be hero , but you would want simple money and profit.If you play as super di*** even alistair calls you on that you are pri*** that don't care about anyone...

similiar thing with irenicus when he kidnapped imoen your siter/best firend you wasn't forced to love her and follow him because you wanted save her but you could reason could be revenge , lust for power or other reasons...

same was with warden...

As i said you were forced to adventure not personality so there is no forced love ,character traits or other philosofical view points in dao...  

Modifié par TheKomandorShepard, 17 février 2014 - 02:25 .

[Hanako Ikezawa]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

 Considering in Origins you are fighting to save Ferelden, then I would say yes the Warden cared about at least a few people there in order to fight for it. If they just cared about themselves they wouldn't risk their life, would they? But then we come back to limited data forcing you to fight for it. Now I will admit we joked about the prospect of if that was an option, it should lead to a cutscene of the map of Thedas turning black from the Taint and leading to a Game Over screen.

not rly my friedn here i tend play as less moral well without morality character... warden could care bud didn't had to why he saved blight it is up to you you could want save everyone and be hero , but you would want simple money and profit.If you play as super di*** even alistair calls you on that you are pri*** that don't care about anyone...

similiar thing with irenicus when he kidnapped imoen your siter/best firend you wasn't forced to love her and follow him because you wanted save her but you could reason could be revenge , lust for power or other reasons...

same was with warden...

As i said you were forced to adventure not personality so there is no forced love ,character traits or other philosofical view points in dao...  

So he did care about the people of Ferelden, as in he cared for their wealth and praise. 

[TheKomandorShepard]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...
So he did care about the people of Ferelden, as in he cared for their wealth and praise. 

What?

Well it is rather selfishness and self-serving rather than desire to saving lifes... considering that the warden could be villain protagonist if desired that crushes life of others just for own amusment...

And as i said that one reason you always have 1000 others be that heroic reason ,anti-heroic or just villainous reason like in baldurs gate you could...

[Hanako Ikezawa]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...
So he did care about the people of Ferelden, as in he cared for their wealth and praise. 

What?

Well it is rather selfishness and self-serving rather than desire to saving lifes... considering that the warden could be villain protagonist if desired that crushes life of others just for own amusment...

And as i said that one reason you always have 1000 others be that heroic reason ,anti-heroic or just villainous reason like in baldurs gate you could...

i was trying to end with a joke. You said your Warden posibly wouldn't care but rather was in it for money and glory. And in order to get that, the people of Ferelden need to be alive. So your Warden cared about their wellbeing in the sense that he wanted their praise and wealth for saving them. Or for your evil Warden, he cares about saving them because if the Darkspawn win, he is robbed of his playthings. So he cares about the people of Ferelden in the sense they are tools for his amusement. 

[TheKomandorShepard]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...
So he did care about the people of Ferelden, as in he cared for their wealth and praise. 

What?

Well it is rather selfishness and self-serving rather than desire to saving lifes... considering that the warden could be villain protagonist if desired that crushes life of others just for own amusment...

And as i said that one reason you always have 1000 others be that heroic reason ,anti-heroic or just villainous reason like in baldurs gate you could...

i was trying to end with a joke. You said your Warden posibly wouldn't care but rather was in it for money and glory. And in order to get that, the people of Ferelden need to be alive. So your Warden cared about their wellbeing in the sense that he wanted their praise and wealth for saving them. Or for your evil Warden, he cares about saving them because if the Darkspawn win, he is robbed of his playthings. So he cares about the people of Ferelden in the sense they are tools for his amusement. 

hey my warden like your perspective he wanted just secure everyone wealth in ferelden by taking that himself

[Nefla]

leaguer of one wrote...

Nefla wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

 agree with you but....


At times it's ok to assume when the person is "that "close to you...

In rpg worst thing is when game or devs assume in what way pc would respond when it should be completely up to player how pc reacts on certain events in think that dao did pretty much nice (not perfect) job doing that even if you romanced someone game never assumed that you had care about li you could but you didn't had to ,it had some consequences...

pretty much i hated when in daa my warden kneel before alistair/anora without simple giving dialogue option if my warden should do that or not it was moment screwing with my character...

Pretty much i don't like done protagonists like shepard like hawke who i control only partially when game assume what my pc would do so they felt rather as direct protagonist of shooter game than rpg... 

So it's bad to assume that you and your character is going to be sad that a person they  openly loved is dead?

It has to be taste fully done. There bad ways to do it like the case with the Warden and there good ways to do it like with Femshep cry of Thane's death.

It's not bad to assume someone would be sad if their loved one died, but it is bad to assume their reaction. Some people show grief plain and simple, crying and looking sad. Others show grief through anger or self destruction, some hide their feelings behind a mask of calm or humor, and still others are not capable of open emotion or sharing and they bottle everything up. I also think it's bad to decide what the player is sad about and to what extent, especially when the tragic event is poorly written, more boring or ridiculous than sad for most people, and very forced. How many people cried when that random kid died at the beginning of ME3? I didn't. It was a random NPC you see for 5 seconds, but the game decided that even completely evil, mass murdering Shepards were so distraught over one random kid that they had weird PTSD about it the entire game.

Things like dodging out of the way of an attack in a cutscene or asking "what do you mean?" are fine and dandy, but if I wanted the game to decide how my character acts, and feels then I would play a game with a fixed protagonist.

Which is why I said orginally that I agreed with him. But this is a digital rpg. It will inheritly have limits to what the player can do. It's a damn if you do , damn if you don't issue. Some times they have no choice but to assume beause of the limits of the medium. This does not have the freedoms of a pen and paper rog.

I feel that they actually never really have to assume. Again I bring up ME3's vent boy PTSD/angst/obsession. It weirded people out and frustrated them and I don't know of anyone that liked it. Even with the 3 choice restriction of DA2 you could give the player a choice of how to react, for example:

Your loved one is killed and you have 3 dialogue choices towards the killer
1)Why?! He was innocent...(makes PC cry or fall to their knees in despair)
2)You'll pay you bastard! (PC attacks in a rage)
3)I never liked him anyway (evil bastard choice)

With any of these choices you could headcannon the PC's motivation while being shown their emotion. There was a reaction choice very similar in DA2 when Grace and co. kidnap someone the choices were something like:

1)Please don't hurt them!
2)If one hair on their head is harmed I'll gut you like a pig!
3)Meh (the I never liked them anyway response)

Though obviously the situation isn't very weighty and is quickly resolved, I think the formula works.

[esper]

I think da2 did the right amount with the reactions to Leandra's dead.
The LI tries to comfort the main character and you generally have the option to dismiss them or grieve in various states. Likewise Aveline who knew Leandra and Hawke the longest also have a talk scene and there is mention in about it in banter.... I think furhter impact on the protagonist is up to the players.

[TheKomandorShepard]

esper wrote...

I think da2 did the right amount with the reactions to Leandra's dead.
The LI tries to comfort the main character and you generally have the option to dismiss them or grieve in various states. Likewise Aveline who knew Leandra and Hawke the longest also have a talk scene and there is mention in about it in banter.... I think furhter impact on the protagonist is up to the players.

yes they only forced my pc to love her , care about her and grief because of her...

[KaiserShep]

You must've been frustrated when the Warden was forced to look scared after Duncan killed Jory.

[TheKomandorShepard]

KaiserShep wrote...

You must've been frustrated when the Warden was forced to look scared after Duncan killed Jory.

Face animation put into gameplay and story segregation please don't even tell me that the warden had retarted face in some moments... and best part that we aren't forced with even care about him in dialogues and that wasn't even refered it could be if you wanted as far renember there was dialogue option "i can't belive that you killed jory" if you wanted cry over that but you wasn't forced...

Only moment where i was flustrated was kings/queen meeting in dao and daa...

[ziloe]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

You must've been frustrated when the Warden was forced to look scared after Duncan killed Jory.

Face animation put into gameplay and story segregation please don't even tell me that the warden had retarted face in some moments... and best part that we aren't forced with even care about him in dialogues and that wasn't even refered it could be if you wanted as far renember there was dialogue option "i can't belive that you killed jory" if you wanted cry over that but you wasn't forced...

Only moment where i was flustrated was kings/queen meeting in dao and daa...

Bowing is simple etiquette, especially in those times. And while it might be nice to see an option for it, especially if you're confronting some villain who wants you to bow, it's still animation. What I'm talking about is simply extra dialogue for those who feel it would be nice to have the added sentiment.

[TheKomandorShepard]

ziloe wrote...

Bowing is simple etiquette, especially in those times. And while it might be nice to see an option for it, especially if you're confronting some villain who wants you to bow, it's still animation. What I'm talking about is simply extra dialogue for those who feel it would be nice to have the added sentiment.

Simple i don't wont to be forced to do anything nor follow anyone philosophy , religion , laws or traditions make it an option not enforced not everyone want play as lawful character and not everyone want play as chaotic character...

And as i said i would love more dialogue options and reactions simple because i like rp but what i don't want is forced reaction if i want play as di*** i don't want my character out from nowhere started be nice and vice versa also what i don't want see is 2 kind of option is either accept something and be nice guy or be d*** and refuse and in opposite direct as well...

[ziloe]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

ziloe wrote...

Bowing is simple etiquette, especially in those times. And while it might be nice to see an option for it, especially if you're confronting some villain who wants you to bow, it's still animation. What I'm talking about is simply extra dialogue for those who feel it would be nice to have the added sentiment.

Simple i don't wont to be forced to do anything nor follow anyone philosophy , religion , laws or traditions make it an option not enforced not everyone want play as lawful character and not everyone want play as chaotic character...

And as i said i would love more dialogue options and reactions simple because i like rp but what i don't want is forced reaction if i want play as di*** i don't want my character out from nowhere started be nice and vice versa also what i don't want see is 2 kind of option is either accept something and be nice guy or be d*** and refuse and in opposite direct as well...

...And this is why we can't have nice things.

[TheKomandorShepard]

ziloe wrote...



...And this is why we can't have nice things.

?

[QueenPurpleScrap]

Don't forget that in DA2 if you clicked on Leandra's bedroom door then Hawke said to herself, "No, I can't face going in there yet." Or something to that effect. Even in Act III. One thing I found a bit odd was that when Leandra actually died your companions didn't say anything. Yes, there was the sort of finale with Gamlen, the LI scene, an Aveline scene, the sibling scene and I think both Fenris and Sebastian had a banter moment (which you couldn't acknowledge). I don't put Meredith's remarks in the same category. But all those are later. I simply can't recall any on the spot comments.
I can see why all party members might not have something to say later. Or even feel too awkward saying something. But when you're holding your dead mother in your arms I would think something could be said. Even just moving closer in a silent sign of support. Other than that I was fine with the level of grief displayed.

[ziloe]

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

ziloe wrote...



...And this is why we can't have nice things.

?

I was referring to your last statement. It seemed that for you, Bioware was either damned if they did, or damned if they don't, because regardless you'd still find issue in it.

[Master Warder Z_]

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

TheKomandorShepard wrote...

LDS Darth Revan wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
Which is why I said orginally that I agreed with him. But this is a digital rpg. It will inheritly have limits to what the player can do. It's a damn if you do , damn if you don't issue. Some times they have no choice but to assume beause of the limits of the medium. This does not have the freedoms of a pen and paper rog.

Exactly. If there was unlimited data, then every ssingle action the PC does can be chosen by the player. But since that is not the case, then some places have to be chosen to be made for you. And in DA2's case, one of those was Leandra's death because most people would be broken up by their mother dying in their arms.

What leandra death was enforcing character personality by choosing about who pc care about do you had to care about peoples in ferelden no simple put your reasons here you don't need care about anyone as the warden but you can.Enforcing to political views , religion or love pc is another matter than simple "kill kraken" main quest...

Considering in Origins you are fighting to save Ferelden, then I would say yes the Warden cared about at least a few people there in order to fight for it. If they just cared about themselves they wouldn't risk their life, would they? But then we come back to limited data forcing you to fight for it. Now I will admit we joked about the prospect of if that was an option, it should lead to a cutscene of the map of Thedas turning black from the Taint and leading to a Game Over screen.

I'd dispute the whole mindset of "needing" to care personally.

What about Mercenary Orienated or Sociopathic, or outright Psychotic PC's?

I think the supposed end of the world would draw many diffrent ideologies and mindsets of how to deal with life and its issue and i don't nessarily think "caring" is needed. Crud even the selfish, stingy and the crazy realize what a blight represents, And in DAO you see all of the Above fighting to end it.

Modifié par Master Warder Z , 18 février 2014 - 01:24 .

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Master Warder Z wrote...

I'd dispute the whole mindset of "needing" to care personally.

What about Mercenary Orienated or Sociopathic, or outright Psychotic PC's?

I think the supposed end of the world would draw many diffrent ideologies and mindsets of how to deal with life and its issue and i don't nessarily think "caring" is needed. Crud even the selfish, stingy and the crazy realize what a blight represents, And in DAO you see all of the Above fighting to end it.

I addressed that later.

"You said your Warden posibly wouldn't care but rather was in it for money and glory. And in order to get that, the people of Ferelden need to be alive. So your Warden cared about their wellbeing in the sense that he wanted their praise and wealth for saving them. Or for your evil Warden, he cares about saving them because if the Darkspawn win, he is robbed of his playthings. So he cares about the people of Ferelden in the sense they are tools for his amusement. ^_^"

Modifié par LDS Darth Revan, 18 février 2014 - 01:28 .