97 réponses à ce sujet

[Nefla]

And that's still making a judgement call? And it maybe one reason of many. Is it really that hard to ask someone not deride someone of playing a self insert unless you know they admit to playing the character as a self insert? There are people who do that and have no issues admitting it. You don't need to sweep everyone incorrectly under the same brush

 

I imagine you have the amount of care about that as I do about people playing dwarves so...?

So assuming someone is playing a self insert is deriding them? People can play self inserts if they want to, playing a self insert isn't an insult. (you're the one making it an insult) All *I* said about it was that it's not something that interests me. I don't think assuming someone who's sole criteria for their character is that said character be like them is playing a self-insert is much of a stretch. You seem to have taken this whole discussion as a personal attack for some reason. You can play your game however you want. You can play only human if you want. You can play only one gender if you want. You can play only one class if you want. You can play the same character in every playthrough if you want. You can play every possible combination if you want. I don't care. Just because I find a playstyle unappealing doesn't mean you can't love it. Even if I thought you were stupid or playing "the wrong way" or something, it should not affect your enjoyment of the game. People can dislike or even hate things you like about a game, that doesn't make those things lesser and it's not a personal attack. I would rather watch paint dry than play a game like CoD, and I write an essay as to why. Does that mean CoD sucks or that people who play it are dumb? No. It means they look for different things than I do and they have different tastes.

 

So, why bring up "humans are chosen more in SWtOR?" that literally has no point in this discussion. To tell me I should restrict myself to only human too because the majority does? I wont, and I don't care about your statistics.

 

**edit**

 

This will be my last reply, I'm done with this pointless argument.

[Ryzaki]

So assuming someone is playing a self insert is deriding them? People can play self inserts if they want to, playing a self insert isn't an insult. (you're the one making it an insult) All *I* said about it was that it's not something that interests me. I don't think assuming someone who's sole criteria for their character is that said character be like them is playing a self-insert is much of a stretch. You seem to have taken this whole discussion as a personal attack for some reason. You can play your game however you want. You can play only human if you want. You can play only one gender if you want. You can play only one class if you want. You can play the same character in every playthrough if you want. You can play every possible combination if you want. I don't care. Just because I find a playstyle unappealing doesn't mean you can't love it. Even if I thought you were stupid or playing "the wrong way" or something, it should not affect your enjoyment of the game. People can dislike or even hate things you like about a game, that doesn't make those things lesser and it's not a personal attack. I would rather watch paint dry than play a game like CoD, and I write an essay as to why. Does that mean CoD sucks or that people who play it are dumb? No. It means they look for different things than I do and they have different tastes.

 

So, why bring up "humans are chosen more in SWtOR?" that literally has no point in this discussion. To tell me I should restrict myself to only human too because the majority does? I wont, and I don't care about your statistics.

 

My fault then. I'm used to it being used as an insult (or a way of saying "you're rping wrong!" or not rping at all as the case maybe). If you weren't doing that then it's not an issue. That said assuming someone's playing a self insert in the first place because they and their character share some traits is questionable to begin with. Especially when the traits are as simple as both being human.

 

It doesn't. I'm just really tired of hearing it. It gets old. And it's not from you only. Every time there's a human thread here people come to complain about how much they don't like playing human or why don't you play a different race you'll get a better rp experience or other crapola.

 

Not to mention this simply began from me trying to explain why plenty of people do like playing humans and they can get a plenty different experience playing human from their day to day.

 

I'm sure you don't go into CoD discussion threads to say that though do you? Simply saying I dislike something is one thing (and perfectly valid). Saying you dislike it and those who play it for Y reasons are doing Z is another. One if simply saying why you dislike it. Another is making an assumption on other people. There's a difference in "I hate CoD" and "CoD fanboys only play it cause they can't find a better shooter."

 

Simply because it explains why the devs restricting race is a perfectly fine value judgement on their part. When it comes down to sheer numbers and they can only offer one race the most obvious conclusion is human because the sheer amount they're played over every other. Ideally of course the option is to have optional races anyway but if there must only be one the most bang for buck option is a human. Why on earth would you think I'd care about you not playing human? I didn't make a judgement on you playing non humans for any reason whatsoever other than to say it was outside the majority. I didn't claim you were self inserting either.

[Ryzaki]

This will be my last reply, I'm done with this pointless argument.

 

*shrugs*

 

Welp was fun chatting

[Thandal N'Lyman]

This will be my last reply, I'm done with this pointless argument.

 

'bout time. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Edit: Ha, me and Felene are on the same page.

 

Why not just have us choose Gender first. Then use a selection screen like DA2's Hawke menu to choose race. All four would be presented at once on even ground and selecting gender first would help prevent overcrowding the screen. 

 

Better yet, I think it would be really nice if they could do it all with the tarot cards. Use them for the gender selection then again for the race selection and finally class selection. Order doesn't really matter then, especially if none of the options are preselected for your cursor/controller highlight. 

The order matters.  Why do you think phone pollsters shuffle the sort of options they present?  Because offering it the same way to everyone would bias the results.

[ShadyKat]

Bioware also revealed the data for the Mass Effect series, and only 18% played as female Shepard. So should they scrap female player characters? .....


I also wonder what percentage of male to female ratio was in Origins?

[Ina]

Bioware also revealed the data for the Mass Effect series, and only 18% played as female Shepard. So should they scrap female player characters? .....
 

 

I don't think people are suggesting removing non-humans just cos most play humans. Besides the devs have said such stats would not be a reason for them to scrap anything. So there's no need to worry about that.

[Ryzaki]

Bioware also revealed the data for the Mass Effect series, and only 18% played as female Shepard. So should they scrap female player characters? .....


I also wonder what percentage of male to female ratio was in Origins?

 

Where is anyone suggesting they scrap multiple races? I merely said as a value judgement (which I don't think anyone could deny DA2 WAS) sticking to human only makes more sense due to the sheer numbers they're played over the other races. This is of course assuming they're restricted to only playable race. Which isn't ideal.

 

Hell I'm still sour over being restricted to dalish elves.

 

I believe more people romanced Leliana with a female than played rogue so there's that XD

[Magdalena11]

The order matters.  Why do you think phone pollsters shuffle the sort of options they present?  Because offering it the same way to everyone would bias the results.

If the selector follows the same format as the DAI site does, the default will be a dwarf rogue female.  The site's alphabetical though.  The data that will be evaluated is what characters are being generated and uploaded.  They might see if the BSN polls are different, and how it changes as people upload multiple characters.

[EnduinRaylene]

The order matters.  Why do you think phone pollsters shuffle the sort of options they present?  Because offering it the same way to everyone would bias the results.

Phone pollsters are on the far side of the spectrum compared to what I'm saying though, they couldn't be much more different than what I described. When presenting a person with a photo of 4 people standing side by side, or even four headshot photos side by side, there isn't the same inherent order or hierarchy present as there is when being presented with a text list and certainly not when the options are being dictated to you one by one. 

 

All that visual information is much harder to take in that just reading words or listening. Every person latches onto and focuses on different things, so their order is far less important. People scan the group and then focus in on something or someone. Sometimes it's who is the most centered subject, while some go left to right, but often people will focus on what is different like a bright color or unfamiliar and unique clothing item. In the case of DAI I would bet many people would be drawn to the Qunari horns or the Dwarf's shortness. So it really wouldn't matter if they were lined up. You could randomize it if you really wanted to but I don't think it would really matter with something like this:

 

 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Phone pollsters are on the far side of the spectrum compared to what I'm saying though, they couldn't be much more different than what I described. When presenting a person with a photo of 4 people standing side by side, or even four headshot photos side by side, there isn't the same inherent order or hierarchy present as there is when being presented with a text list and certainly not when the options are being dictated to you one by one.

All that visual information is much harder to take in that just reading words or listening. Every person latches onto and focuses on different things, so their order is far less important.

Tell that to political strategists who argue about where their candidate should stand for a televised debate.

If it matters for pollsters, it matters here. In both cases, we're talking about getting accurate and unbiased statistics out of it.

[EnduinRaylene]

Tell that to political strategists who argue about where their candidate should stand for a televised debate.

If it matters for pollsters, it matters here. In both cases, we're talking about getting accurate and unbiased statistics out of it.

That's a whole other can of worms with way more factors and nuance, whether it deserves it or not, than just choosing a character race in a game. That's about selling yourself and ideas, presenting a certain aura and disposition. It's also dealing with cameras and where they're focused at any given time. None of which is at play here.

 

And again pollsters have to randomize their questions because the very nature of the mode in which they collect data over the phone or internet is list based. They have to give the respondents the options in an order, there's no other way to ask them questions. That's not the case with presenting character options in a game because there isn't the same inherent hierarchy to them when they're just side by side. Where is the bias in that Diablo III class screen?

[Sylvius the Mad]

That's a whole other can of worms with way more factors and nuance, whether it deserves it or not, than just choosing a character race in a game. That's about selling yourself and ideas, presenting a certain aura and disposition. It's also dealing with cameras and where they're focused at any given time. None of which is at play here.

And again pollsters have to randomize their questions because the very nature of the mode in which they collect data over the phone or internet is list based. They have to give the respondents the options in an order, there's no other way to ask them questions. That's not the case with presenting character options in a game because there isn't the same inherent hierarchy to them when they're just side by side. Where is the bias in that Diablo III class screen?

We can't tell where the bias is unless we compare it to a control group.

[EnduinRaylene]

We can't tell where the bias is unless we compare it to a control group.

I meant the obvious bias as was present in DAO. Sure if you want the most scientific and accurate of data with the smallest percentage of error you'd need a control, but that's not the point. The point was simply to remove or reduce the rather obvious bias that the character creator in DAO had in presenting one race option at a time and in the same order every time with a default male Human character. Not to come up with a totally bias free selection screen, just a less biased one.

 

DAO had a clear and very evident preference towards a human male. Player's had to actively choose to view the other options, which presented a barrier of entry however small, and would still be present if you simply randomized the initial race option. But a Diablo III selection screen doesn't have that inherent and obvious preference or barrier to view the other races because they are all there for all to see in the same shot. There may in fact be some kind of bias, but it's by no means obvious or clear as it was in the DAO style setup.

 

Maybe if there were 8 or more of them on screen it would favor those closer to the center, but with just four options none of them are outside, or on the edges, of the viewers attention. Each one has roughly the same odds of catching the player's attention, but even then that doesn't exclude the others since they are still on screen. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I meant the obvious bias as was present in DAO. Sure if you want the most scientific and accurate of data with the smallest percentage of error you'd need a control, but that's not the point. The point was simply to remove or reduce the rather obvious bias that the character creator in DAO had in presenting one race option at a time and in the same order every time with a default male Human character. Not to come up with a totally bias free selection screen, just a less biased one.

If I'm going to use the data to draw conclusions about player preferences, I want the minimum bias.

Why half-ass it? If you're going to do a job, do it well. If BioWare wants to be able to determine what players actually like, they should want as unbiased a dataset as possible.

[AshenEndymion]

We can't tell where the bias is unless we compare it to a control group.

Couldn't DA2 be the "control group" if they went with the line-up version of choosing race?  I mean, we don't know the makeup of which Hawke was the most popular, but it was a version of the line-up used in Diablo 3.  If they randomize the order of classes in DAI every time you start a new game, that could help Bioware determine what race players like, or whether most players just choose the option on the furthest left(or center left)...
 
That said, I don't think Bioware will randomize the list(s) in DAI.  Regardless of whatever way they choose to present the character creation options.

[OptionFour]

I think the people who only do one run of the game don't care about character customisation and just go with the default (what my BF did during his Origins and DA2 play-throughs). He just wanted to play the game and didn't care about customisation. 

 

Not sure that's true.

Most RPGs I only play through once, and character customization is one of my major priorities. My wife is the same way. Without seeing any sort of data I'd have to believe the two things aren't necessarily related at all.

 

That said, I often do play humans. Usually going into a game the first time (like playing through Dragon Age: Origins when you have no experience with the setting) I find it hard to get into the head space of a culture like Dwarves or Elves without really knowing what they're about. I don't have that info at character creation, so I default to human since I can usually be sure that I'll have at least some understanding of their social and cultural anchors.

So I may choose something else in DAI, I suppose.

[Ryzaki]

Also didn't like 83% of players customize their Shepards?

 

People don't just smash play.

[Felene]

If I'm going to use the data to draw conclusions about player preferences, I want the minimum bias.

Why half-ass it? If you're going to do a job, do it well. If BioWare wants to be able to determine what players actually like, they should want as unbiased a dataset as possible.

 

IMO, best way to present race with minimum bias from Bioware side will be to present a blank white background with nothing but name of races in black. When click or highlight on background change to said race artworks. But that can only do so much considering players themselves already have bias of their own, some prefer human while others might  prefer elves or dwarves.

 

Plus, blank white background with a few words might not be pretty or fancy enough by video game standard.

 

However, there is no need for such extreme, GW2/Diablo3 example are good enough in most cases.

[PillarBiter]

 

I'm curious as to what statistics have been used and what audience we're talking about here. Are we talking about BSN profiles and the characters they uploaded (because the percentage then seems true from what I've seen on here) or players everywhere? The actions of BSN users in Bioware games often differ from what I see on GameFaqs for example.

 

It's not shocking really. I think most people choose human for any game with racial selection.

 

 

Which held little weight. Becoming king/queen as human is just as irrelevant as the dwarven noble becoming a paragon.

 

 

You could become a paragon in DAO as a dwarf??? holy heck! Wish I had time to replay the game and do that (never had a noble dwarf warden)

 

Ah well, DA keep

[SurelyForth]

Just have 22 default Inquisitors, one representing every single race/gender/class combo, and have it randomize what you get when you go into the CC. Or just have it randomize from all of the presets. If you wanna futz around with it, you can. If you wanna roll again, you can. If you wanna get to Inquiring, like, yesterday, you can! It would eliminate the need to choose between anything, or fill in the blanks left after "Default White Human".

[Rivaini Rogue]

I'm sure that percentage will be higher in Inquisition. I played as a human in Origins, I just coudln't get into playing as an Elf or Dwarf though, to me they didn't suit the story, personally. And I just can't take Dwarf's seriously as the hero's of the story lol. And The Elves were just a little too small as well in Origins, they didn't look heroic enough to lead the party.

 

The Elves look a lot better balanced proportions wise in this game though. And especially their faces, they don't look like Nugs anymore.

[HTTP 404]

BSN pop is not representative of overall bioware gamer pop.  So it isn't surprising that many choose human to play.  I feel like I am in the minority on BSN for loving to play as human warriors but I know it to be the norm outside of BSN.  BSN have plenty of creative folk that want to expand beyond the vanilla offering.  I get it.