Ce sujet est fermé
I'll give you the warden (since its established god tier ect) but the Inquisitor better than Hawke? Hell, to the no.
I agree with you. The inquisitor is an empty shell with the personality of a bathtub plug. But some people like that.
Which has nothing to do with their accomplishments as heroes, which was what was being discussed 
Hawke cannot compare to the Inquisitor, Herald of Andraste, slayer of would be gods and 11 dragons.
But didn't many people complain about the dialogue wheel and charisma system in DA2?
Besides, DAI introduced "emotional responses" (that crying eye). I just thought that whatever you picked, it hardly transported much of a feeling. But that might have been me only.
I agree with you, imo I felt the problem with it was that the main dialogue was always neutral
The idea can work if Bioware improves on it
I think they might have tried to recapture the neutrality of the warden, i recall a lot of fans calling for a silent protagonist for DA I but since Bioware put their foot down and said that they werent going back to that format they thought that perhaps that this was the next best thing for those fans. Thing is though they didnt account for the fans on the other side of spectrum who actually enjoyed the PC showing emotions.
I honestly don't get what you guys are talking about in relation to emotions. Quizzy may not be a grinning idiot borderline senile like Hawke, but there's emotion. I think maybe there's a difference between voice actors. Zevran's voice actor did a great job for males.
I think you misunderstood me in regards to shepard though, i liked ME3's shepard as well, i was just pointing out that, like Hawke, some people thought that he/she had too much personality of his/her own in ME3 as opposed to ME2 and 1 where he was pretty bland and they could role play him/her more. I agree with you however.
<snip>
I also share your sentiment on DA2,
<snip>
eh ill stop as i could go on for a while on how much i really enjoyed DA2 but then we'd be here all day
.
Yes, I obviously misunderstood. Thinking of ME1/2 Shepard didn't strike me as being a too strong character. And ME3 took away player choice in general. The ending was basically the same, no matter what you did before. More even, since it was the last part of the series and the only thing you got was an epilogue, even all the choices you made didn't mean anything anymore. Maybe they tried to make Shepard stronger to justify the direction the game took toward the end? I am not sure. However, I should also say that I am not an enemy of the original ME3 ending. I enjoy a strong story more than full control. But I'm not a roleplayer, I'm rather an observer.
I guess there is only so much we could argue about DA2 anyway, assuming that I'd most likely agree with whatever you say. 
I agree with you, imo I felt the problem with it was that the main dialogue was always neutral
The idea can work if Bioware improves on it
Yes, I also can see it work. But it would require more depth with this neutrality. And, I guess, the fact that BW stripped you of free choice also didn't help. In DAO you could actually make choices, decisions, pick sides (and live with the consequences... e.g. you could kill all the Dalish to gain the full werewolf force but it would also cost you the only elfroot merchant in a game with a limited supply of healing herbs). In DAI you were the hero, whatever you did. You could not be really ruthless or anything. I felt I was supposed to be a particular type of character, which would limit my "roleplaying" anyway.
(I personally wasn't affected by it too much because I play self-insert, but replaying DAO as a ruthless killer at the same time, I did see how limiting this DAI approach is.)
but since Bioware put their foot down and said that they werent going back to that format
And I am so glad about that.
But it's really hard to do both, provide a strong character and a blank one, both in the same person. What they probably would need to do is write two protagonists and let the player choose what sort of experience he wishes to have. And that means a hell lot of development effort, which directly translates to money.
I honestly don't get what you guys are talking about in relation to emotions. Quizzy may not be a grinning idiot borderline senile like Hawke, but there's emotion. I think maybe there's a difference between voice actors. Zevran's voice actor did a great job for males.
I liked the Brit tooo. Patton.
*smacks hand*
Do you want Cass to die because her armour is a pile of junk?
Bad, Chip! No!
What? No.
I'm just saying that I'd go for a set of armor that accented her lovely and magnificent bum. Quizzy's gotta have dat ass later on, so he'd be more inclined to fight harder to protect Cassandra. Besides, she's got a shield anyway, and her Guard never depletes.
Yes, I also can see it work. But it would require more depth with this neutrality. And, I guess, the fact that BW stripped you of free choice also didn't help. In DAO you could actually make choices, decisions, pick sides (and live with the consequences... e.g. you could kill all the Dalish to gain the full werewolf force but it would also cost you the only elfroot merchant in a game with a limited supply of healing herbs). In DAI you were the hero, whatever you did. You could not be really ruthless or anything. I felt I was supposed to be a particular type of character, which would limit my "roleplaying" anyway.
(I personally wasn't affected by it too much because I play self-insert, but replaying DAO as a ruthless killer at the same time, I did see how limiting this DAI approach is.)
They could try adding more emotional responses to the neutral dialogue, similar to how DE:HR did their dialogue
Though I wouldn't really call it stripping away free choice, but I kinda like that Bioware is going the route of having things make sense in the setting/story they want to tell. It worked well in Origins, and while they could do it in Inquisition it probably would've interfered in the story they wanted to tell imo
They could try adding more emotional responses to the neutral dialogue, similar to how DE:HR did their dialogue
Though I wouldn't really call it stripping away free choice, but I kinda like that Bioware is going the route of having things make sense in the setting/story they want to tell. It worked well in Origins, and while they could do it in Inquisition it probably would've interfered in the story they wanted to tell imo
Tbh, I'd rather be forced to be a hero and have it make more sense than be given the choice to be a ruthless d**k, but being a ruthless d**k doesn't really mean anything. You're already given plenty of options to be a d**k in Inquisition anyway, just not the stab-happy serial killer you could be in Origins. I get that people want choices when they RP, but I can never do it. I try to make sense of my RP in the setting of the game.
If I have to gather allies and forge alliances with other nations to stop an evil would-be god, why would I go out of my way to harm people who could be helpful? Why would I murder-knife someone just because I didn't like them? That's not only a d**k thing to do, but stupid, since you're effectively wasting resources and throwing away potential manpower.
They could try adding more emotional responses to the neutral dialogue, similar to how DE:HR did their dialogue
Though I wouldn't really call it stripping away free choice, but I kinda like that Bioware is going the route of having things make sense in the setting/story they want to tell. It worked well in Origins, and while they could do it in Inquisition it probably would've interfered in the story they wanted to tell imo
DE:HR was so well done and is one of my all-time favorites. But it was a completely different sort of game. It was a stealth game first, shooter second, and only had some RPG elements. I would not actually call it an RPG the way BW makes them. You had a strongly typed character with a developed backstory, clearly defined motivations etc. There was little room for headcanon or creation; no more than AC, Gears of War or any other action game allows.
Yes, I do see why they made these decisions for DAI and it is true, a ruthless psychopath inquisitor would make little sense. But I still felt DAO offered more freedom. But, again, that's highly subjective and others might feel very differently about it. My opinion isn't the law, nor the only one I will accept. I see what you mean and I even agree, I just have particular feelings toward particular issues.
DE:HR was so well done and is one of my all-time favorites. But it was a completely different sort of game. It was a stealth game first, shooter second, and only had some RPG elements. I would not actually call it an RPG the way BW makes them. You had a strongly typed character with a developed backstory, clearly defined motivations etc. There was little room for headcanon or creation; no more than AC, Gears of War or any other action game allows.
True but I was more referring to how they did the dialogue wheel lol
Like how they had the main dialogue and occasionally you could expand it to get even more dialogue, Bioware could do that with their more emotional dialogue
Tbh, I'd rather be forced to be a hero and have it make more sense than be given the choice to be a ruthless d**k, but being a ruthless d**k doesn't really mean anything. You're already given plenty of options to be a d**k in Inquisition anyway, just not the stab-happy serial killer you could be in Origins. I get that people want choices when they RP, but I can never do it. I try to make sense of my RP in the setting of the game.
If I have to gather allies and forge alliances with other nations to stop an evil would-be god, why would I go out of my way to harm people who could be helpful? Why would I murder-knife someone just because I didn't like them? That's not only a d**k thing to do, but stupid, since you're effectively wasting resources and throwing away potential manpower.
Which brings me to my wish that just once, we could play a villain rather than a hero. Vlad the Impaler style. Make me a Tevinter if you wish, and lets invade Orlais.
Like how they had the main dialogue and occasionally you could expand it to get even more dialogue, Bioware could do that with their more emotional dialogue
Isn't that how ME did it too, allowing you to ask questions but not forcing you?
Isn't that how ME did it too, allowing you to ask questions but not forcing you?
Yea ME and I think DA2 also did the "investigate" branch
Yea ME and I think DA2 also did the "investigate" branch
So did DAI.
You know it is funny I do recognize that DA O is probably the superiror game technically speaking....but I did enjoy DA 2 more.
Yep. The plots kind of stupid, but overall I enjoy playing it much more than I do playing DA:O.
Hawke is among the strongest characters, especially protagonist, DA or any BioWare game has ever seen. The problem is, RPGers don't like strong characters, unless they can be blank slates they can control every little thing about, not realizing the production curve. As my economy professor used to put it, "Guns and Butter(country as ****, but I live in SC so what can you do?)." For every gun you make, there will be less butter that can be made. RPGers prefer the gun to butter, the meat of the issue. Hawke's more butter which I appreciate. I don't need to control everything about my character.
Yep. The plots kind of stupid, but overall I enjoy playing it much more than I do playing DA:O.
Hawke is among the strongest characters, especially protagonist, DA or any BioWare game has ever seen. The problem is, RPGers don't like strong characters, unless they can be blank slates they can control every little thing about, not realizing the production curve. As my economy professor used to put it, "Guns and Butter(country as ****, but I live in SC so what can you do?)." For every gun you make, there will be less butter that can be made. RPGers prefer the gun to butter, the meat of the issue. Hawke's more butter which I appreciate. I don't need to control everything about my character.
Neither do I. I actually prefer...I mean I view myself not as the author of theDA world, and my characters, that is foolish anyways andleads to a lot of the complaining about ME and DA in general...but I am in collaboration with BioWare and the stronger the foundation they give me for my role playing the happier I'll feel. Why I loved Hawke, the Male Noble, and SHepard. The back stories for the different Shepard's was awesome how it could provide you wth a strong foundation to create a great headcannon.
Personally, Shepard is still my favorite Bioware protagonist, and one of my favorite protagonists of all time.
But then I've also invested much more into Shepard, since ME is my favorite series, and I've played each game countless amounts of times. I could make an entire expanded universe with all the headcanon I have for Shepard and ME.
Personally, Shepard is still my favorite Bioware protagonist, and one of my favorite protagonists of all time.
But then I've also invested much more into Shepard, since ME is my favorite series, and I've played each game countless amounts of times. I could make an entire expanded universe with all the headcanon I have for Shepard and ME.
I have written over 5 fics and probably a 100 chapters based on my Fem SHep. And could write two pretty cool Origin stories.
Yep. The plots kind of stupid, but overall I enjoy playing it much more than I do playing DA:O.
Hawke is among the strongest characters, especially protagonist, DA or any BioWare game has ever seen. The problem is, RPGers don't like strong characters, unless they can be blank slates they can control every little thing about, not realizing the production curve. As my economy professor used to put it, "Guns and Butter(country as ****, but I live in SC so what can you do?)." For every gun you make, there will be less butter that can be made. RPGers prefer the gun to butter, the meat of the issue. Hawke's more butter which I appreciate. I don't need to control everything about my character.
My thing was, if I wanted to play that sort of game, I already had Mass Effect. Dragon Age Origins was special in the freedom of character it gave. Inquisition didn't really get there but I'm glad some of that returned personally.
My thing was, if I wanted to play that sort of game, I already had Mass Effect. Dragon Age Origins was special in the freedom of character it gave. Inquisition didn't really get there but I'm glad some of that returned personally.
That's not a problem either. I enjoy a broad spectrum of games, and I loved, love, DA2 for what it was. I also loved DA:O, before coming here, for what it was. This forum really killed the whole thing for me. It shouldn't have but it did. I can still play it and get enjoyment from it, from time to time, but the experience will never be the same.
This forum really killed the whole thing for me. It shouldn't have but it did. I can still play it and get enjoyment from it, from time to time, but the experience will never be the same.
How is that?
Btw, Al, Max, Ventus, Ares - I would have pinned a few likes on your posts. But since BW feels I shouldn't be too positive around the BSN I cannot.
That's not a problem either. I enjoy a broad spectrum of games, and I loved, love, DA2 for what it was. I also loved DA:O, before coming here, for what it was. This forum really killed the whole thing for me. It shouldn't have but it did. I can still play it and get enjoyment from it, from time to time, but the experience will never be the same.
Yea... I can relate to that, which is why I avoided reading this forum while playing. I was on the witcher forum though and they're the biggest negative nancies in the world, especially when it comes to Bioware. After I decided I liked Inquisition (after almost getting my money back because of Hinterlands), I avoided that place for a bit too.
I got my money's worth out of DA 2, and I enjoyed the armor especially, and the years it took to tell the story, the humor, Arishok of course. It was a good game, and I certainly don't regret buying and playing it loads, regardless of my issues with it.
Yea... I can relate to that, which is why I avoided reading this forum while playing. I was on the witcher forum though and they're the biggest negative nancies in the world, especially when it comes to Bioware. After I decided I liked Inquisition (after almost getting my money back because of Hinterlands), I avoided that place for a bit too.
I got my money's worth out of DA 2, and I enjoyed the armor especially, and the years it took to tell the story, the humor, Arishok of course. It was a good game, and I certainly don't regret buying and playing it loads, regardless of my issues with it.
What's the Witcher forum got against us?
Retour en haut
