87 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

I disagree that DAI actually has that potential. With the voiced protagonist, there is a canonical delivery of each line with inflection and phrasing. As a Tal'vashoth it is established that you were a merc hired as security. That got botched, and the way it is actually voiced in game makes the PC deliver the lines in a specific way. Yes, I could headcanon it to seem like the most convincing liar in history, but having to do that constantly over the actual delivery of each line breaks the flow and the RP effect. Unlike Shepard in the ME series (or even Hawke), the voiced Inquisitor never really seems to develop a personality. Each conversation is approached as a tabula rasa, undermining the weight or impact any previous conversations and decisions could have had.

That tabula rasa is what makes it good.

And I disagree that the inflection or delivery of the lines requires a specific interpretation (which is basically what you're saying with your tabula rasa complaint, so I don't really understand your point).

Any personality the PC develops needs to come from the player, not the writers. The player only really gets to roleplay if he has some sense of authorship.

An interactive story where I get little or no input, like Mass Effect, doesn't interest me at all.

[DaemionMoadrin]

That tabula rasa is what makes it good.

And I disagree that the inflection or delivery of the lines requires a specific interpretation (which is basically what you're saying with your tabula rasa complaint, so I don't really understand your point).

Any personality the PC develops needs to come from the player, not the writers. The player only really gets to roleplay if he has some sense of authorship.

An interactive story where I get little or no input, like Mass Effect, doesn't interest me at all.

 

I disagree with pretty much everything you wrote in this thread.

 

If I can make up whatever I want about my character and it is never mentioned in the game or has any consequences, then it is pointless. The Inquisitor isn't a fleshed out character like the Warden or Hawke, s/he is your avatar in the game.

 

What I would like to see is my character changing according to the choices I make in the game and the environment reflecting those choices. Remember alignment from AD&D? BG1+2? Being rude, evil and greedy meant some people wouldn't even speak to you. Being good meant people were more willing to talk to you.

 

I -could- create the personality, backstory and interests of my Inquisitor for myself. To some degree we've always done that with our DA characters, for example when it comes to their romances. But am I supposed to remember all that next year? Dragon Age Keep thoroughly confused me at first because I have ~16 characters to choose from and I mostly went with the standard appearances (cause single player game). I didn't remember much about the individual playthroughs. Who was my love interest as human noble? When I played a gay dwarf, who was the father of Morrigan's kid? As female mage Hawke, did Carver die, become a Warden or become a Templar?

If I can't even remember those details, how am I supposed to remember -everything- about my characters? I might want to play 3-4 more, just to see the differences.

 

I expect that my character has some sort of impact, that he's part of a living, breathing world. But if the world of Thedas doesn't give me any feedback, then why am I even bothering?

 

It's not just the origins, it's all of the game. It doesn't matter if you saved the refugees in the Hinterlands or if you spoke out for the mages, the next conversation about it starts at zero. Tabula Rasa.

It doesn't matter if you play as a faithful follower of Andraste or oppose the chantry and its teachings. Even when you get the chance to speak about it, it never changes anything. Same for every other issue. It doesn't matter if you are brilliant or stupid. Rude or polite. Helpful or merciless. The world doesn't care, so why should I?

 

And really, I am actually supposed to come up with my own story despite playing a story driven RPG that limits and railroads me? Could you please make up your mind, BioWare?

 

I expect DA:I to remember that I use sarcasm a lot. I expect it to remember that I'm honest. I expect it to remember at least the core attributes of my character and adjust new conversations, offer quests and have people react to my presence accordingly.

 

Oh, and don't tell me that isn't possible because BioWare already did that in previous games.

[Sylvius the Mad]

How would you suggest yhe game remember that you've used sarcasm a lot? DA2 tried, but the problem there was it assumed that you wanted to be sarcastic all of the time, which wasn't necessarily true.

Inquisition succeeds because your character can be who you want him to be, which DA2 and ME didn't allow.

In Origins, I remember my characters because I crafted them, and I cared about them (as I never cared for Hawke or Shepard - I was wholly indifferent to Shepard, and I actively disliked Hawke). I can explain at length how each of them handled that greedy merchant in Lothering, and why, because I was in control.

The Warden, and the Inquisitor, are as fleshed out as I make them.

I only wish we had more control of the companions, like we did in BG.

[abearzi]

That tabula rasa is what makes it good.

And I disagree that the inflection or delivery of the lines requires a specific interpretation (which is basically what you're saying with your tabula rasa complaint, so I don't really understand your point).

Any personality the PC develops needs to come from the player, not the writers. The player only really gets to roleplay if he has some sense of authorship.

An interactive story where I get little or no input, like Mass Effect, doesn't interest me at all.

 

I'll try to clarify a bit. Having a tabula rasa character who is also voiced is a problem for me. In DAO the character was also only as deep as the player wanted them to be, but they didn't have bland and often emotionless delivery to distract the player from head-canoning the way it was intended. In DAI either the delivery of lines is just flat (so as to let the player impose their personal take on it) or has a specific inflection which may not match the emotion I feel the line should have. 

 

The bland delivery just distracts from the actual dialogue since I'm having to do all the work anyway. And many lines are delivered in a way which I don't agree with (which isn't a problem with silent protagonists), so then I get to reload and pick a line with a more flat delivery. I'm more attached to any of my silent Dragonborn in Skyrim than I am to the Inquisitor. Hawke was a character who developed a personality (same with Shepard), and the Warden never developed so I was free to RP every aspect of their personality. The Inquisitor takes the worst of both methods.

 

 

In Origins, I remember my characters because I crafted them, and I cared about them (as I never cared for Hawke or Shepard - I was wholly indifferent to Shepard, and I actively disliked Hawke). I can explain at length how each of them handled that greedy merchant in Lothering, and why, because I was in control.

 

I completely agree with this, but I am constantly pulled out of the experience by the Inquisitor being voiced, often without emotion or with what I think is the wrong emotion. I really came to love FemShep since I feel Jennifer Hale did a superb job conveying emotion to the character. The line on Tuchanka when she yells, "THERE'S A REAPER IN THE WAY WREX!" has what I feel a perfect amount of trepidation, rage, and annoyance with Wrex. And those moments just aren't there in DAI, since the emotion largely has to come from the player, but the voice has already been input and has to account for all the options players might want it to convey.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Since I don't generally find tone meaningful, and often prefer stoicism over histrionics, the DAI voice works for me.

 

At least, the ones I've tried do.  I'm not confident the American male will - it reminds me of ManHawke and MaleShep, both of which I couldn't stand because of their excessive gruffness.

 

Having any emotion audible in the line is a problem for me, since it's almost certainly not the emotion I want.  And I simply refuse to play a character whose personality was crafted by someone else.

[hong]

I just need to know who my character is so I can react properly in conversations. What's my motivation/reason for anything really?

Seriously, I fell out of the Fade and didn't know how to feel about it. Scared? Angry? Confused?
At some points people ask you about your beliefs, your family, your history etc... and how am I supposed to know?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain

[Realmzmaster]

I do not need a backstory for DAI. I am with Sylvius the Mad in this respect. I will create my own backstory. One of the points I like about BG1 was that I could create the backstory. In BG1 the protagonist had to be the Bhaalspawn, but everything else was left to the gamer. The same with DAI the protagonist has to be the Herald of  Andraste, but everything else is left to the gamer. Why is my Herald at the conclave? I get to write the reason and the backstory. I do not want it handed to me. 

 

Some posters keep saying it feels like an MMO because of the way the Herald is dropped into the action. The same can be said for BG1. DAI is far more like BG1 than any MMO (IMHO). Bioware is actually going back to its roots in that DAI is more of the spiritual successor to BG series than DAO ever was. The strength of the early crpgs was the fact that the gamer got to create the backstory and not have it handed to them. (again IMHO).

 

The Herald as a blank slate works fine for me. The voice in no way bothers me. I picked a voice that fit my Herald.

 

But, YMMV.

[TristynTrine]

I just want more magic/healing and more than 8 slots... They might of built the skill trees around that 8-slot limit. If they did, that infuriates me so much. Cause why only 8 slots? More story for the side quest zones would of been nicer than "oh look a note."

[DaemionMoadrin]

I do not need a backstory for DAI. I am with Sylvius the Mad in this respect. I will create my own backstory. One of the points I like about BG1 was that I could create the backstory. In BG1 the protagonist had to be the Bhaalspawn, but everything else was left to the gamer. The same with DAI the protagonist has to be the Herald of  Andraste, but everything else is left to the gamer. Why is my Herald at the conclave? I get to write the reason and the backstory. I do not want it handed to me. 

 

Some posters keep saying it feels like an MMO because of the way the Herald is dropped into the action. The same can be said for BG1. DAI is far more like BG1 than any MMO (IMHO). Bioware is actually going back to its roots in that DAI is more of the spiritual successor to BG series than DAO ever was. The strength of the early crpgs was the fact that the gamer got to create the backstory and not have it handed to them. (again IMHO).

 

The Herald as a blank slate works fine for me. The voice in no way bothers me. I picked a voice that fit my Herald.

 

But, YMMV.

 

The main difference is that in BG1 I wasn't confronted with all of the plot at once, I worked my way towards it slowly. All the while the world reacted to my character. My alignment influenced how and if people talked to me and people in the streets commented on your adventures. "You are the heroes who cleared the mines of Nashkell, are you not?"

In DA:I it makes no difference what I do. I can roleplay as the herald of Andraste, the champion of justice and protector of the innocent... and get the exact same reactions as an evil, greedy, ruthless Inquisitor who demands people to worship him. The only difference is how my friends react and that is minimal.

 

I do not need a full backstory, but having a part that slowly leads up to the climax would be helpful. Simply deciding on a personality is not the same as creating it through interactions within the world of Thedas. You could argue that this happens later, throughout the game... but again, the world gives me barely any feedback on my personality, so why should I even bother?

 

We probably have a different approach to roleplay and that's okay.

[King Dragonlord]

I do not need a backstory for DAI. I am with Sylvius the Mad in this respect. I will create my own backstory. One of the points I like about BG1 was that I could create the backstory. In BG1 the protagonist had to be the Bhaalspawn, but everything else was left to the gamer. The same with DAI the protagonist has to be the Herald of  Andraste, but everything else is left to the gamer. Why is my Herald at the conclave? I get to write the reason and the backstory. I do not want it handed to me. 

 

Some posters keep saying it feels like an MMO because of the way the Herald is dropped into the action. The same can be said for BG1. DAI is far more like BG1 than any MMO (IMHO). Bioware is actually going back to its roots in that DAI is more of the spiritual successor to BG series than DAO ever was. The strength of the early crpgs was the fact that the gamer got to create the backstory and not have it handed to them. (again IMHO).

 

The Herald as a blank slate works fine for me. The voice in no way bothers me. I picked a voice that fit my Herald.

 

But, YMMV.

 

Um actually you were a Bhaalspawn who was found as a child and raised by the mighty retired adventurer Gorion along side your adopted sister Imoen, educated in whatever your class skills are and living a sheltered life among books in the highly unusual library town of Candlekeep.

 

The game opens with you walking about your hometown interacting with villagers (granted a lot of it is tutorial and you can skip it and run straight to Gorion if you want to kick things off but the background details are still pretty specific.)

 

Almost all of that is established right out of the gate in the first game. There's still some flexibility in there for interpretation but no more so than in any of the diverse Origins of DAO. Point is, there are some pretty specific details in there limiting what your background can be. 

[SpiritMuse]

Not sure why it would have been so hard to add more to the begining. A mini origin that led up to you entering that room

Or maybe a scene of you and your people arriving at the conclave.

I'm imagining the Qunari mercenaries making their way there and one of then asks you "remind me why we're here again?" and you can give all kinds of different reasons like "this war has to end and the peace talks are important," or "the divine is an important religious figure and needs our protection," or "I'd really rather be fighting dragons but the money's good." Then more conversation happens that defines your character and gets some lore thrown at you.

Then at the end of the scene you enter the temple, fade to black. Beat. Explosion.

It's pretty much the same thing as you telling Josie, for example, except in "show" form not "tell".

[Lintton]

I think we are missing something important. While I would like a flashback or more clarification as to our lives before the conclave(in order to understand how, say, a dailish elf would react) the events at the conclave should be a jumble due to the explosion/fade trip we experienced. Part of the plot is trying to understand what went down at the divine's death. It is our lack of knowledge and implication as a suspect is one of the reasons we join the inquisition in the first place.

That said I don't have a problem with my choices, or how they are all of world shattering importance what I say to the grand cleric after she gets k.o.'ed. If anything, having every line reflect on you and the world would feel more restrictive, and the restarts would likely get worse.

Even heroes have to shoot the breeze.

[Silcron]

They didn't even need different Origins. If they had just let us play the conclave, get to know our Inquisitor there, and just change the final sequence so we still don't know who did it. I think that would have help a lot, right now you have to read the cards to know something about your background (instead of just picking your race, class...without reading them.)