350 réponses à ce sujet

[Rawgrim]

We not only differ on what is considered giggling, but on what are characteristic choices. When exploring a romantic interest, I hope for laughter, and when choosing whether to hire the Crows at the War Table or not is something I ponder with the varied characters of my Inquisitors (eg; did so with my Dwarven Rogue; chose other options with my Human Mage). While it will never be perfect, it is fine for myself.

 

Not saying the giggling should be removed. I am saying it should be one of several options. Would you say someone like Stannis from Game of Thrones would giggle like a girl when trying to romance someone? Or Conan the barbarian?

[Dominic_910]

We not only differ on what is considered giggling, but on what are characteristic choices. When exploring a romantic interest, I hope for laughter, and when choosing whether to hire the Crows at the War Table or not is something I ponder with the varied characters of my Inquisitors (eg; did so with my Dwarven Rogue; chose other options with my Human Mage). While it will never be perfect, it is fine for myself.

Again, its fine for YOU. This is a rpg, people should have options and auto-dialogue should not happen since it could potentially conflict with who the player wants their character to be. If bioware was to make all the Auto-Dialogue into evil actions like slapping Cassandra then i doubt people that want to play a nice Inquisitor would like it, i would like it because i like playing a bad guy but there should always be options for more than one type of person.

[Xralius]

Funny how I got many people in my last game to leave. You obvious played the wrong choices then.

If there are wrong choices then it's not a choice at all, isnit. DAI is total crap. Everything about it is bad except the graphcis and music.

[DaemionMoadrin]

Are you guys still trying to argue with Elhanan?

 

Beating your head against a wall is going to produce more result and hurt less in the long run.

[Rawgrim]

Are you guys still trying to argue with Elhanan?

 

Beating your head against a wall is going to produce more result and hurt less in the long run.

 

I am too stubborn not to! Doesn't hurt, though.

[Elhanan]

Not saying the giggling should be removed. I am saying it should be one of several options. Would you say someone like Stannis from Game of Thrones would giggle like a girl when trying to romance someone? Or Conan the barbarian?

Cannot speak to GoT as I do not watch it, but Conan; absolutely. Remember the face plant into the stew, dressing as a cultist and holding flowers, etc.

[Xralius]

The combat is so boring and just awful I stopped playing before the final battle. There is basically zero ability/ character customization. The villian is dumb. The game feels and plays like a single player MMO. You spend literally 99% of your time doing meaningless crap. And for those who say "herp derp but that stuff is all optional", well so is having a romance. So is recruiting certain characters. In fact, completing the main story is optional too. The truth is that it's all part of the game, which as a whole is terrible.
I can't tell which i hate more: the terrible quests, the awful hack and slash combat, or the bad atmosphere.
Oh I didn't mention the terrible atmosphere? Yeah, green blobs.crapping demons from the sky everywhere, shards and astrolabes, jumping around, people calling my character the chosen of Andraste, random identical chests everywhere in the wilderness... Basically zero immersion with this game.
I would have payed probably $1000 for a true sequel to DA:O. Even DA2 is better than this. It had better characters, epic duel with he Arishok, and SOMEHOW even had better character design and combat, even though I they were bad. It's like they said "OK, what did people hate about DA2? Alright, lets make a full game of that."

[ComedicSociopathy]

Not saying the giggling should be removed. I am saying it should be one of several options. Would you say someone like Stannis from Game of Thrones would giggle like a girl when trying to romance someone? Or Conan the barbarian?

 

Or Nathan Drake. Or Mario. Or Solid Snake. Or Kratos.

 

Or any other of the limitless potential characterizations possible. The fact is that Inquisition has a voiced protagonist whose limited by a word budget that only gives your player about three options to any response. Your going to find times when none of those responses fit align with your specific PC or you might not like the voice actors delivery of that  response. Back in Origins you were a voiceless, expressionless robot, who did manage to have more responses, which allowed for more replay potential, but still frequently had times when none of them fit with your character. The point is we are very unlikely to a rpg game where very option is going to perfectly fit with the nuance and flavor of your PC, and while that's annoying and immersion breaking, I just think that its a limit of the technology we have available. 

[Dominic_910]

Or Nathan Drake. Or Mario. Or Solid Snake. Or Kratos.

 

Or any other of the limitless potential characterizations possible. The fact is that Inquisition has a voiced protagonist whose limited by a word budget that only gives your player about three options to any response. Your going to find times when none of those responses fit align with your specific PC or you might not like the voice actors delivery of that  response. Back in Origins you were a voiceless, expressionless robot, who did manage to have more responses, which allowed for more replay potential, but still frequently had times when none of them fit with your character. The point is we are very unlikely to a rpg game where very option is going to perfectly fit with the nuance and flavor of your PC, and while that's annoying and immersion breaking, I just think that its a limit of the technology we have available. 

have you been paying attention to this discussion or did you just jump in without reading everything, we are talking about AUTO DIALOGUE. As in you get no choice, you don't get three options you get NONE. There is no reason for this, it's just horrible design for an rpg where you are supposed to have control over what your character says.

[Fidite Nemini]

Or Nathan Drake. Or Mario. Or Solid Snake. Or Kratos.

 

Or any other of the limitless potential characterizations possible. The fact is that Inquisition has a voiced protagonist whose limited by a word budget that only gives your player about three options to any response. Your going to find times when none of those responses fit align with your specific PC or you might not like the voice actors delivery of that  response. Back in Origins you were a voiceless, expressionless robot, who did manage to have more responses, which allowed for more replay potential, but still frequently had times when none of them fit with your character. The point is we are very unlikely to a rpg game where very option is going to perfectly fit with the nuance and flavor of your PC, and while that's annoying and immersion breaking, I just think that its a limit of the technology we have available. 

 

A good question would be what people think is more immersive or less immersion breaking: voiced protagonists with three basic response types, or silent protagonist with a lot more stylized options?

 

I never felt like "oh man, I really wished my Warden wasn't a mute" in DAO, but I also loved Silly!Hawke in DAII (though only Silly!Hawke and less because that was voiced as much as it was simply ridiculously funny). Overall I felt the protagonist dialogue in DAI to be fairly generic, and overall not an improvement over DAO's silent protagonist system.

[ComedicSociopathy]

have you been paying attention to this discussion or did you just jump in without reading everything, we are talking about AUTO DIALOGUE. As in you get no choice, you don't get three options you get NONE. There is no reason for this, it's just horrible design for an rpg where you are supposed to have control over what your character says.

 

There was auto dialogue in Dragon Age 2, and the entire mass effect trilogy. It's nothing new. Hell, in Origins you got auto dialogue from your voice sets. 

[Dominic_910]

A good question would be what people think is more immersive or less immersion breaking: voiced protagonists with three basic response types, or silent protagonist with a lot more stylized options?

 

I never felt like "oh man, I really wished my Warden wasn't a mute" in DAO, but I also loved Silly!Hawke in DAII (though only Silly!Hawke and less because that was voiced as much as it was simply ridiculously funny). Overall I felt the protagonist dialogue in DAI to be fairly generic, and overall not an improvement over DAO's silent protagonist system.

The thing i liked about the system in DA2 is you had 3 defining personalities, Paragon, Sarcastic, Aggresive. This gave me 3 playthroughs minimum already. DAO had alot more, i could be aggresive, paragon, sarcastic, clueless etc. In Inquisition though most of the options seem like minor variations from eachother. Most of which come of as neautral. I felt a bit like a robot at times. Then i would come across auto dialogue that would conflict with the personality my inquisitor had and it killed it for me.

[Elhanan]

A good question would be what people think is more immersive or less immersion breaking: voiced protagonists with three basic response types, or silent protagonist with a lot more stylized options?
 
I never felt like "oh man, I really wished my Warden wasn't a mute" in DAO, but I also loved Silly!Hawke in DAII (though only Silly!Hawke and less because that was voiced as much as it was simply ridiculously funny). Overall I felt the protagonist dialogue in DAI to be fairly generic, and overall not an improvement over DAO's silent protagonist system.

Am a huge fan of DAO, but did miss the Full VO when I returned to it after playing other games. And while DA2 and the ME series kinda locked in to a few types, DAI offers more choices; options I enjoy having as it offers more for varies personalities.

[Dominic_910]

There was auto dialogue in Dragon Age 2, and the entire mass effect trilogy. It's nothing new. Hell, in Origins you got auto dialogue from your voice sets. 

I don't remember much auto dialogue in Dragon age 2. Mass effect is a different game, i don't give a crap what mass effect has, this isn't mass effect. Origins auto dialogue isn't even comparable with Inquisition, it happens during combat and you got to pick his voice set before the game.

[ComedicSociopathy]

A good question would be what people think is more immersive or less immersion breaking: voiced protagonists with three basic response types, or silent protagonist with a lot more stylized options?

 

I never felt like "oh man, I really wished my Warden wasn't a mute" in DAO, but I also loved Silly!Hawke in DAII (though only Silly!Hawke and less because that was voiced as much as it was simply ridiculously funny). Overall I felt the protagonist dialogue in DAI to be fairly generic, and overall not an improvement over DAO's silent protagonist system.

 

Now that's something that people can argue about. Both voiced and silent protagonists have their flaws and strengths that definitely add to immerse, with voiced having more emotional connection while silent with more response flexibility. That said, I think its a mote point. Bioware is never going back to the silent model, at least with their triple AAA games. 

 

I will say through that the protagonist in Inquisition can feel generic at times and that that the "aggressive" has turned more into "blunt/get to the point" then anything else. I honestly wish that the game gave you more chances to use those five new emotion options. Would have definitely helped with the role playing factor.  

[Elhanan]

I am too stubborn not to! Doesn't hurt, though.

And you debate the issues; not the Player. Many of the rest have been set to Ignore status. I thank you for that.

[Dominic_910]

I will say through that the protagonist in Inquisition can feel generic at times and that that the "aggressive" has turned more into "blunt/get to the point" then anything else. I honestly wish that the game gave you more chances to use those five new emotion options. Would have definitely helped with the role playing factor.  

That's because the "aggresive" option is "Direct" now. The sarcastic option is "Clever" and the paragon option is now "Noble". They changed it to make it different from hawke but it feels...i don't know, weaker i suppose.

[atlantico]

And you debate the issues; not the Player. Many of the rest have been set to Ignore status. I thank you for that.

 

You realize that when you declare that something works fine in DA:I because it works for you and your fertile imagination, you're saying that the other Players are to blame for their lack of headcanon, thus debating the Player, not the issues?

[AlanC9]

If there are wrong choices then it's not a choice at all, isnit.

All choices should be right? How would that even work?

[ComedicSociopathy]

That's because the "aggresive" option is "Direct" now. The sarcastic option is "Clever" and the paragon option is now "Noble". They changed it to make it different from hawke but it feels...i don't know, weaker i suppose.

 

Yes, both these dialogues are incredibly similar and I'm not terribly sure that's a good thing. I will say Inquisition's better then DA 2's though, if only because at least this one allows us to talk to our companions when their sitting around Skyhold or Haven. 

[Dominic_910]

All choices should be right? How would that even work?

He didn't say all choices should be right. A game about choices shouldn't have obvious "right" and "wrong" choices they should have choices that both have pro's and con's.

[atlantico]

All choices should be right? How would that even work?

Define "right" and "wrong".

[Dominic_910]

Yes, both these dialogues are incredibly similar and I'm not terribly sure that's a good thing. I will say Inquisition's better then DA 2's though, if only because at least this one allows us to talk to our companions when their sitting around Skyhold or Haven. 

Having to run around kirkwall to check in on Companions is one of the things i hated most about DA2. Atleast in DAI they are all pretty close to eachother.

 

I prefer Hawkes personality to Inquisitor though, I usually play a aggresive character and direct just doesen't really do it for me, direct seems more passive aggresive than anything else.

[Elhanan]

You realize that when you declare that something works fine in DA:I because it works for you and your fertile imagination, you're saying that the other Players are to blame for their lack of headcanon, thus debating the Player, not the issues?

Perhaps, but given the entire context, I believe I was responding in kind, but within the rules of posting here. Now they have been placed to Ignore, and I choose to debate the differences in views with others. And while I cannot recall when and where, Rawgrim I have debated before on other threads; nothing too raucous, I hope.

[AlanC9]

Define "right" and "wrong".

A right choice accomplishes what my character was trying to accomplish, a wrong choice doesn't. But really, I should leave this one to Xralius.