572 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

Oh, the Roles You Can Play!

A Dr. Seuss Parody Poem by Fast Jimmy

You can roleplay some characters

That's what you can do.

You can roleplay just one

or roleplay a crew

You can roleplay a motive

You can roleplay a goal

You can roleplay a horse

Oh, the roles you can role!

Oh the roles you can roleplay

if only you try!

If you try, you can roleplay

a multi-faceted guy

And you don't have to stop

you can roleplay backdrop

Backdrop, backdrop, beautiful backdrop

a beautiful backdrop that dev writing won't force you to chop

You can roleplay some thugs

You can roleplay some jugs

You play a long time as a thug with his jugs

You can roleplay a dwarf glad to abandon his home

and welcomes the escape to a world outside the dome

Roleplay a Templar

Roleplay his outcry

He stands up for mages

and doesn't just stand by

You can roleplay a Knight

A knight without his dander up

He helps out the helpless, but does so quite gruff

You can roleplay a Mage

A Mage who is just about to break

Demons are corrupting her

while she's not awake

Role! Role and create

Create and role

Will the guilt of all that killing

eat away at their soul?

You can roleplay how long...

...until a Dalish belongs?

There are so many roles

A roleplayer can role!

Would you dare imagine lore

not found in a Codex scroll?

And what would you do

with no character behavior cues?

Oh the roles you can role!

Roleplay Peter the Warden

Who unwillingly fights

Against all the Darkspawn... and in Awakening, twice

Role! You can roleplay any role that you wish.

Role a rogue... with a past... with some loss... and a twist!

Roleplay wrong

Roleplay right

Role a morally conflicted fight

Role!

Role a drip

Roleplay someone who is whipped

Give them mother issues

and confidence has zip

And vile!

Roleplay vile!

And roleplay great style

Why do ones who are vile

usually have such good style?

And why are so many protags morally right?

You can roleplay like that any game, any night

Role vile and role right

and role loud and role shy

Oh the roles you can roleplay... if only you try

[Gothfather]

 

I love voiced protags, especially if the rest of the cast are fully voiced.  If it were a Neverwinter Nights situation where voice work was minimal (I believe your companions only say the first line of each conversation, if memory serves) the absence of a protag voice isn't so apparent...but in DAO it was completely jarring and made me feel like I was directing a plank of wood around the battlefield.  I felt little to no attachment to my Warden outside of how the other characters responded to her/it.  Hawke, however, I am invested in.

 

Dude!

[Br3admax]

*snip*

Next time: Oh, the Voices You'll Hear 

[Pasquale1234]

 
I love voiced protags, especially if the rest of the cast are fully voiced.  If it were a Neverwinter Nights situation where voice work was minimal (I believe your companions only say the first line of each conversation, if memory serves) the absence of a protag voice isn't so apparent...but in DAO it was completely jarring and made me feel like I was directing a plank of wood around the battlefield.  I felt little to no attachment to my Warden outside of how the other characters responded to her/it.  Hawke, however, I am invested in.

I think one of the problems is the way DAO's dialogue scenes were presented. I always treated them in first-person, and essentially ignored the Warden on the screen, focusing on the other character(s) in the conversation.

Hawke felt like another NPC to me, one that never really brought me into the story or world. I can't role-play a character when the VAs and cinematic designers have already fully baked the character.

[AlanC9]

How is it the rest of the world is exactly the same except for the PC?

You shouldn't expect things without evidence for those things. There isn't any evidence that the Alistair in one playthrough is the same as the Alistair in the next. And given that his reactions don't change when faced with different PC behaviour, I would argue that there is evidence that he is not the same.

This argument depends on assuming that the PC's behavior is different when different PCs pick the same line. I don't agree with that assumption in the first place, so the argument fails. (Obviously, this won't shake your beliefs.)

What would count as "evidence that the Alistair in one playthrough is the same as the Alistair in the next," anyway? I can't think of anything that you couldn't handwave away. (Suddenly I find myself thinking of IT.)

Besides, we know that Alistair is the same from one game to the next because we can see the code that governs his actions. That's the written Alistair. Anything else is a fantasy version of him. It's the same way that we know that nothing else is different in the game-world except for specifically-coded effects, such as reactions to the PC's origin. Or does this not count because it isn't in-game? I'm not talking about in-game, myself.

[Sylvius the Mad]

This argument depends on assuming that the PC's behavior is different when different PCs pick the same line. I don't agree with that assumption in the first place, so the argument fails. (Obviously, this won't shake your beliefs.)

I think you've followed the conditional the wrong way. While this stance might be required by the assumption that the PC's behaviour is different, it's not limited to that state.

What would count as "evidence that the Alistair in one playthrough is the same as the Alistair in the next," anyway? I can't think of anything that you couldn't handwave away. (Suddenly I find myself thinking of IT.)

Besides, we know that Alistair is the same from one game to the next because we can see the code that governs his actions. That's the written Alistair. Anything else is a fantasy version of him. It's the same way that we know that nothing else is different in the game-world except for specifically-coded effects, such as reactions to the PC's origin. Or does this not count because it isn't in-game? I'm not talking about in-game, myself.

The written Alistair is not all of Alistair. The written Alistair is only the things he happens to say or do during the course of the game. His feelings or motives are not contained in the written content. It doesn't tell us what he thinks about when the party is hiking between locations. It doesn't tell us what his favourite food is, or whether he prefers to sleep on his back or on his side, or if he thinks his boots or comfortable. So we know that the written Alistair is incomplete.

So why assume that the other parts are fixed?

[AlanC9]

I think you've followed the conditional the wrong way. While this stance might be required by the assumption that the PC's behaviour is different, it's not limited to that state.

Ah, right. I assumed you were talking about the identical PC lines having multiple meanings. But then I don't see your point at all. Different PC dialogue selections do produce different behaviors from Alistair, at least some of the time.

The written Alistair is not all of Alistair. The written Alistair is only the things he happens to say or do during the course of the game. His feelings or motives are not contained in the written content. It doesn't tell us what he thinks about when the party is hiking between locations. It doesn't tell us what his favourite food is, or whether he prefers to sleep on his back or on his side, or if he thinks his boots or comfortable. So we know that the written Alistair is incomplete.
So why assume that the other parts are fixed?

Because to the extent that those other parts exist at all, they were created by the writers.

Are you actually finding this perspective hard to understand? I'm not really sure what sort of answer you're looking for with that last question.

[Il Divo]

Ah, right. I assumed you were talking about the identical PC lines having multiple meanings. But then I don't see your point at all. Different PC dialogue selections do produce different behaviors from Alistair, at least some of the time.

Because to the extent that those other parts exist at all, they were created by the writers.

Are you actually finding this perspective hard to understand? I'm not really sure what sort of answer you're looking for with that last question.

 

I think this just comes down to that for Sylvius, Alistair is only ever how your self-made character interprets him to be. Different experiences, different perspectives, etc, allow for different interpretations of his character.

 

It's not something I can honestly say I agree with, but there it is. 

[Tevinter Soldier]

I used to be in the boo voiced boat.

Until i played Skyrim and vegas again.

 

After playing through the ME series and DA2 and the witcher 2.

going voiceless again just seemed to lack gravity to the interactions. It felt more like picking an option only to get to the next step. conversations just lacked emotional input and seemed bland and not just from the PC side, but the NPC's reactions were dull as well. like your choice never actually mattered rather a mechanical "you have picked option 2 i will now say this."

 

DAO runs the middle vain with this where surprisingly the NPC's react with some solid emotion, but there's still something lacking something off putting, that i cant quiet put into words.

 

I guess it depends on whether you can interpret the Dialogue wheel. DA2 had some glaring issues (she wont be alone for example) but across ME i can never remember picking a choice for shepard where i went, wait what?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Because to the extent that those other parts exist at all, they were created by the writers.

For Alistair to exist as a person in a world, they have to exist. And the writers did not write them (or, if they did, that content didn't make it into the game).

My concern here is that you (and others) are presupposing that Alistair is always the same person, and then drawing the conclusion thay he can't be different.

Well of course not, but your argument is question begging.

[Exaltation]

Make 2 protagonists like in F.3.A.R. lol.
I prefer voiced characters,either everyone voiced or none.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I think this just comes down to that for Sylvius, Alistair is only ever how your self-made character interprets him to be. Different experiences, different perspectives, etc, allow for different interpretations of his character.

That would work, but no, that's not it.

In each playthrough, there exists an objectively true Alistair. It is based on the actions of that Alistair that any and all characters within that playthrough will draw conclusions about Alistair. But even if two characters disagree, who Alistair is remains constant within that playthrough.

I think we all agree on that. Where we differ is whether that objectively true Alistair is always the same across multiple playthroughs, and there is absolutely no evidence for that. There is also no evidence against. There cannot be, as the two playthroughs cannot interact.

But given the complete lack of evidence either way, why are people arguing so strongly for one specific interpretation?

I only ever present my side as a valid option, and then people jump on me telling me it's not valid. But it's demonstrably as valid as the opposite, which some keep insisting is the only one available.

The NPC reactions only break the headcanoned silent protagonist if the player wants them to. The silent protagonist works just fine with fixed NPC reactions if the player is willing to entertain the possibility that the NPCs are not necessarily constant across playthroughs.

[Keroko]

No, the voiced reaction of the NPCs only show their intent. I can easily say that the NPC didn't pick up on the PC's tone; it's entirely believable, and often occurs in actual conversations.

I think that the case of a person attempting to say something in a particular way, but not at all managing to, is much less likely (if most people are angry, they'll sound angry; if they're upset, they'll sound upset, and so forth). I suppose you could decide that any given thing is being said that way for a sarcastic or mocking reason, but that's the only different way you could possibly interpret the voiced lines without trying to ignore the subtext entirely.

I'll admit I'm probably more sensitive to the whole subtext/intent issue due to doing so much acting and directing than many people are, but for me, hearing that shows one very definite interpretation and there is really no wiggle room (except possibly deciding that it's being said in that manner for a mocking effect). Hearing the NPC's subtext only shows the intent behind their words; it doesn't explicitly say anything about what your character did, while the voice acting does. There are, in fact, several different ways that your character could've said something that the NPCs could entirely reasonably react to in the same way, but that would say noticably different things about their personality.

 

I don't see how it's easier to say that the NPC didn't pick up on the PC's tone when the continuation of the conversation or the resulting actions only has options that make sense if your character was sincere.
 

Say you've got Loghain on his knees, and you joke about killing him. Except, the dialogue is followed by your character chopping of Loghain's head. No chance to go back and go "guys, guys, I was just joking."

 

Sure, you can still say he was just joking and going along with it because nobody got the joke, but at that point it's no different from my 'templar Hawke who pretended to by sad over Bethany's death' scenario.

 

 

How is it the rest of the world is exactly the same except for the PC?

 

You shouldn't expect things without evidence for those things.  There isn't any evidence that the Alistair in one playthrough is the same as the Alistair in the next.  And given that his reactions don't change when faced with different PC behaviour, I would argue that there is evidence that he is not the same.

 

Uhh, doesn't that prove that he's exactly the same Alistair? If he'd be a different Alistair, he'd react to the world in ways he would not have in the previous playthrough. Because that tends to be what "different" means.

[Fast Jimmy]

Uhh, doesn't that prove that he's exactly the same Alistair? If he'd be a different Alistair, he'd react to the world in ways he would not have in the previous playthrough. Because that tends to be what "different" means.

 

Sylvius' argument is that your character doesn't know there are other Allistairs. From your character's perspective (which removes any meta-gaming aspects of what the player knows), you have no idea what Allistair will say or how he will react.  From that perspective, every encounter is fresh and unknown, untainted by player past knowledge.

[fchopin]

The developers are artists they have a vision of what they want their art to be and the media for that art THEY want their art to include. So suck it up and stop QQing.

The problem with this attitude is that we saw the Bioware response to what they wanted to make with DA2 and look at the sales numbers.
I like voiced PC characters but i also know that they work very well with set or semi set characters but they do not work well with PC made characters.
Whatever you say cannot change that and that signifies Bioware will have to create more set characters in the future to make voiced characters work.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sylvius' argument is that your character doesn't know there are other Allistairs. From your character's perspective (which removes any meta-gaming aspects of what the player knows), you have no idea what Allistair will say or how he will react. From that perspective, every encounter is fresh and unknown, untainted by player past knowledge.

You're still not getting it, Jimmy.

I'm saying that there's no way to compare Alistairs across playthroughs that shows them to be the same, or different, without making other assumptions first.

If you assume that PC behaviour isn't pre-written, he looks different. If you assume... actually, I don't know what you could assume to make him look the same. There would never be enough information to draw a firm conclusion.

[Fast Jimmy]

You're still not getting it, Jimmy.

I'm saying that there's no way to compare Alistairs across playthroughs that shows them to be the same, or different, without making other assumptions first.

If you assume that PC behaviour isn't pre-written, he looks different. If you assume... actually, I don't know what you could assume to make him look the same. There would never be enough information to draw a firm conclusion.

Well, I think if you look in the games coding and saw that there was no other lines or dialogue, that would be enough information. But again, that isn't really in the spirit of RPing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Well, I think if you look in the games coding and saw that there was no other lines or dialogue, that would be enough information. But again, that isn't really in the spirit of RPing.

It doesn't matter. If we look in the game's coding, we see big gaps in Alistair's personality. That's where the differences can occur between playthroughs.

[Remmirath]

I don't see how it's easier to say that the NPC didn't pick up on the PC's tone when the continuation of the conversation or the resulting actions only has options that make sense if your character was sincere.
 
Say you've got Loghain on his knees, and you joke about killing him. Except, the dialogue is followed by your character chopping of Loghain's head. No chance to go back and go "guys, guys, I was just joking."
 
Sure, you can still say he was just joking and going along with it because nobody got the joke, but at that point it's no different from my 'templar Hawke who pretended to by sad over Bethany's death' scenario.

That's a rather extreme example. Yes, in those few cases it won't work, but most of the time the worst thing you'll end up with is a slightly odd reaction or it being obvious that the NPC must have then misunderstood your character or misinterpreted their tone. An NPC getting offended by something that was supposed to be a joke, or taking a joke as a sincere expression of condolence (for example), are things that are easily believable.

The difference is that any disconnect comes in the reaction of the NPC, and such things happen quite frequently in actual conversations. People misunderstand each other, and they often don't even realise it until after the conversation is done. At the very least the great majority of people do not say things that they had no intention at all of saying, or that they didn't know they were going to say, and usually people know how they're going to say something as well. It's extremely different to me, but I certainly accept that it may not be to you.
 

From your character's perspective (which removes any meta-gaming aspects of what the player knows), you have no idea what Allistair will say or how he will react. From that perspective, every encounter is fresh and unknown, untainted by player past knowledge.

That is basically my take on it. Also, even people you know well can react in unexpected ways, and can certainly misunderstand you.
 

I like voiced PC characters but i also know that they work very well with set or semi set characters but they do not work well with PC made characters.
Whatever you say cannot change that and that signifies Bioware will have to create more set characters in the future to make voiced characters work.

And that is really my problem with them. I don't mind having voiced characters at all in other genres, or even in RPGs where the character is actually complete set and was never supposed to be your character (although those aren't my preferred games, and I don't usually play them); when you are creating your own character, the voice is a problem.

The paraphrasing I would've thought to be a problem no matter what, but apparently some people like being surprised by what their character will say, as odd as I find that (and some people are also apparently far better at predicting it from the paraphrase than I am).

[Sylvius the Mad]

I don't think the conversation is a thing. It doesn't have flow or direction. It is merely a collection of statements and interpretations.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The paraphrasing I would've thought to be a problem no matter what, but apparently some people like being surprised by what their character will say, as odd as I find that (and some people are also apparently far better at predicting it from the paraphrase than I am).

Because, by random chance, they share the writers' assumptions. But that can't work for the rest of us unless the writers document those assumptions.

And I suspect the writers aren't consciously aware of their assumptions.

[Fast Jimmy]

Because, by random chance, they share the writers' assumptions. But that can't work for the rest of us unless the writers document those assumptions.

And I suspect the writers aren't consciously aware of their assumptions.

Or they blurt out their assumptions at cons, like how ME's writers did before ME3's release, saying after making an entire game where you had a Shep who could outwardly support Cerberus, TIM and using Reaper tech to fight for humanity, that when asked prior to ME3 if Shep could stay loyal to Cereberus, the response was "of course not, they are the bad guys!"

Writer assumptions indeed.

[Remmirath]

I don't think the conversation is a thing. It doesn't have flow or direction. It is merely a collection of statements and interpretations.

I'd agree with this, really. I tend to use the term conversation to apply to any lengthy exchange between people, but I wouldn't say that there's any implied assumption of a direction or even necessarily coherence to that. I can certainly think of conversations I've had where it has felt like everybody involved might not even be talking about the same things.

Because, by random chance, they share the writers' assumptions. But that can't work for the rest of us unless the writers document those assumptions.

And I suspect the writers aren't consciously aware of their assumptions.

That makes sense. Whatever their assumptions are, I apparently tend not to share them, because a good half of the time in every game I've played that had the paraphrase system the resulting line has appeared almost random to me.