820 réponses à ce sujet

[FiveThreeTen]

Lol no.

 

I recently lauched ME3 after 3 years. A mere hour into the game, and sometimes it feels like I'm watching a comedy, Shepard characterisation just doesn't do it for me. Too much auto-dialogue without the player input. Too little dialogues overall. My roleplay was always limited with Shepard though it was more nuanced in ME.

 

I'm not against a voiced protagonist, I liked my Quizz and Hawke overall. But should Bioware choose to make a DA game with a silent protagonist I will certainly buy it. DAO remains my favourite game of the franchise. I have 3 distinctive main Wardens that I love to play. The same can't be said of Hawke and the Inquisitor (though it's less of a problem with the Inquisitor thanks to race selection and less forced characterization, but it's still limited).

 

If people want to play with a more fixed protagonist, there are plenty other genres that can provide that. Personally that's not why I buy RPGs.

[Morroian]

Regardless of how "extreme" it may be, everybody's opinion is of equal weight. I don't believe I ever claimed roleplay didn't have a place. In fact, I have stated multiple times that the story is first and roleplay is second. BioWare is trying to find a way to appease fans without crippling the story too much. 

 

Since when does rping require crippling a story? POE has a far better story than DAI and far far more rping options. Same with Fallout New Vegas.

[AWTEW]

Lol no.

 

I recently lauched ME3 after 3 years. A mere hour into the game, and sometimes it feels like I'm watching a comedy, Shepard characterisation just doesn't do it for me. Too much auto-dialogue without the player input. Too little dialogues overall. My roleplay was always limited with Shepard though it was more nuanced in ME.

 

I'm not against a voiced protagonist, I liked my Quizz and Hawke overall. But should Bioware choose to make a DA game with a silent protagonist I will certainly buy it. DAO remains my favourite game of the franchise. I have 3 distinctive main Wardens that I love to play. The same can't be said of Hawke and the Inquisitor (though it's less of a problem with the Inquisitor thanks to race selection and less forced characterization, but it's still limited).

 

If people want to play with a more fixed protagonist, there are plenty other genres that can provide that. Personally that's not why I buy RPGs.

 

Right, because only people who like to play blank state characters/ self insert  can play Bioware Games 

[Paul E Dangerously]

Right, because only people who like to play blank state characters/ self insert  can play Bioware Games 

 

It has less to do with "muh self insert" and more "Why the hell can't Bioware keep a character consistent through the entire series?". For no small amount of people, Shepard is grossly out of character for a lot of ME3, and that's actual canon events, decisions, and characterizations, not headcanoned. It's not really any different than if a character in a movie or novel starts acting the same way in a sequel.

 

Not to mention, whoever decided to stick you with default everything until you get like an hour into the game should be flogged. Maybe it's just me, but I can't stand the N7 gear Bioware can't stop sticking him in. Even when he doesn't work for the Earth Alliance in ME2 and should start with Cerberus stuff.

[phaonica]

Regardless of how "extreme" it may be, everybody's opinion is of equal weight. I don't believe I ever claimed roleplay didn't have a place. In fact, I have stated multiple times that the story is first and roleplay is second. BioWare is trying to find a way to appease fans without crippling the story too much. As far as how the story ultimately shaped up, I wouldn't jump to conclusions and assume even with the addition of other races that the story didn't go through some revisions. An entire year is a long time to make corrections and alter VO, writing, etc. We can try and make excuses for why multi-race was not a problem, but that merely does the game and BioWare a disservice by not targeting what is making their products suffer. Better to find the cause and come to a conclusion on how to rectify it.

 

Instead you're just jumping to conclusions in the other direction and assuming that adding multirace DID force them to compromise the story.  You are framing the argument with the assumption that multirace is an objective problem that needs to be addressed, even though multirace is only a problem to you because of your personal preference. And you're claiming that you understand Bioware's purpose better than everyone else even though you don't work with them.

[FiveThreeTen]

Right, because only people who like to play blank state characters/ self insert  can play Bioware Games 

Huh? Not only did you completely missed my point but you assume I believe I have the right to determine which audience plays Bioware games.

 

I don't care, I'm just voicing what I prefer and what I would like to be avoided in the DA serie compared to ME.

 

While some of my characters reflect me in some ways I don't tend to play self inserts. On the contrary, I dislike it when developers turns the protagonist into one giant caricature whose only goal is fanservice or stroking the player's ego and has to take into account every headcanon.

I said I had 3 main Wardens. Do you seriously think I played three self inserts?

Give me some different defined backgrounds to choose from (and better yet, play a little of it) and I'm relatively content. Origins in DAO didn't give you blank state characters for example but gave you sufficient opportunities to roleplay whithout it being detrimental to the mainplot.

 

It's ludicrous to think that we either have to choose between auto dialogues and what some people call "blankstate" characters.

Some found the Inquisitor lacking in personality, but I don't know if reducing player's input and dialogues is really going to solve this for them.

 

It didn't seem to work in ME3. For me it made Shepard boring, and generic.

And as Paul E pointed out, Shepard is annoyingly inconsistent compared to the previous ME titles. It was sort of inevitable that this would occur when you even had an option to turn off player input in dialogue choices. Of course it's only an option but the game was designed with that option in mind.

 

It made me less involved in the plot (which isn't helped by the fact that so much of said plot is pretty lol worthy even before the ending).

[Enigmatick]

The only Dragon Age needs is to go back to the silent protagonist instead of taking after Mass Effect even more.

[AresKeith]

The only Dragon Age needs is to go back to the silent protagonist instead of taking after Mass Effect even more.

 

So having voiced protagonists is taking after Mass Effect? 

[Enigmatick]

So having voiced protagonists is taking after Mass Effect? 

It was definitely part of their attempt to widen their audience by using mass effect esque features yes.

[daveliam]

I'm definitely not in favor of going the Shepard-esque PC route for Dragon Age.  But I don't mind seeing voiced protagonists.  I actually think that the Inquisitor was a step in the right direction.  Hawke was too much of a predefined character for my liking.  I just felt two restricted in who s/he was.  I know that there was variation possible, but it was too limited for what I'm looking for in a PC.  The Inquisitor was a step in the right direction.  There was alot more variation in my opinion.  The one place where they fell down with the Inquisitor was around selfish or evil PCs.  Had that been an option too, I would think that DA: I did the best job.  I'm hoping that whoever the next PC is (and I really hope it's someone new like before), they are like the Inquisitor with some more role-playing options. 

[AresKeith]

I'm definitely not in favor of going the Shepard-esque PC route for Dragon Age.  But I don't mind seeing voiced protagonists.  I actually think that the Inquisitor was a step in the right direction.  Hawke was too much of a predefined character for my liking.  I just felt two restricted in who s/he was.  I know that there was variation possible, but it was too limited for what I'm looking for in a PC.  The Inquisitor was a step in the right direction.  There was alot more variation in my opinion.  The one place where they fell down with the Inquisitor was around selfish or evil PCs.  Had that been an option too, I would think that DA: I did the best job.  I'm hoping that whoever the next PC is (and I really hope it's someone new like before), they are like the Inquisitor with some more role-playing options. 

 

Tbh, I feel like they really do need to go back to playable origins-type intros for the PCs

[Enigmatick]

Tbh, I feel like they really do need to go back to playable origins-type intros for the PCs

I don't feel that they need entire separate origins per say, but it was a mistake to not actually let the player play through the peace talks. You can still have a lot of the origin stuff in there and you wouldn't have to create entirely different levels for it.

 

This should have really been done for ME3 with earth too.

[AresKeith]

I don't feel that they need entire separate origins per say, but it was a mistake to not actually let the player play through the peace talks. You can still have a lot of the origin stuff in there and you wouldn't have to create entirely different levels for it.

 

This should have really been done for ME3 with earth too.

 

It's possible to have one origin intro that can fit for multiple races 

[Enigmatick]

It's possible to have one origin intro that can fit for multiple races 

That is what I meant. The peace summit is that 'origin', we never got to play it.

[Hazegurl]

For one, silent protagonists are a dead archetype. Thankfully, it seems BioWare has finally come to this conclusion and discarded any chance of ever having a dumbfounded main character awkwardly staring at everybody else while they talk for 50 hours.

 

Secondly, multi-race selection with multiple backgrounds is bad for game development and storytelling. When there are so many variables and possibilities to consider, it dilutes and cheapens the overall story. The reason Shepard's story and even Hawke's story were so engaging is because they were more defined. However, in that definition, we also had more flexibility to shape their personality.

 

You can't do that with a silent protagonist or a main character who can be four different races with a dozen different backgrounds. There's just too many variables and not enough defined points. Giving players more choice and freedom negatively impacts the overall game and the story BioWare can create.

 

Thus, I believe the next protagonist in DA4 needs to be more akin to Shepard/Hawke and less so to the Inquisitor/HoF.

I don't think silent protags are dead.  There are still many people who love them.  IMO, I prefer voiced. I think it's the better option, especially since games are played differently nowadays.  As much as I liked Pillars, it's a game I would never want to livestream, and watching streamers abandon it and opt to play it off screen or struggle to finish it on screen confirms it for me.  A lot of it had to do with reading out loud and how it affected their voice.

 

Anyway, I do agree that DA needs a strong defined central protagonist like Shepard was to ME.  I really think they need to change their minds on going the different protag for every game.  ME had several advantages of having Shepard.

 

Cameos of past characters were more meaningful.  And since fans love seeing past characters again, it makes more sense to do it with a cemented protag than a brand new one who has to meet them over and over and over again. Romances are deeper.  It's far more rewarding romancing a character and knowing them over multiple games than just one.  With DA, every relationship is brand new and is still new when the story ends and they'll most likely just leave you at the end so they can come across like some summer camp fling than a solid relationship.  We also got to see how Shepard develops over the course of the entire story instead of just wishing for cameos and hearing snippets of their future exploits.

 

As for multiple races. I enjoy playing as a human more than anything but I do think multiple races should be there for those who don't want to play as human.  However, if there is no point to adding them AND the story suffers as a result then I'd rather they not bother.

 

Rich story > Multiple races

 

I wish DA:I spent that year adding the keep system they talked about in alpha than wasting it creating deformed Elf and Qunari bodies.

 

Hawke should have been the protagonist in Inquisition.  We had already experienced his story, he had a family, friends, a lover, people he hated and cared for, and he had a better connection to the villain, as well as prior meeting with Flemeth. Including the creepy possibility that she was in his house watching Sandal. 

[AWTEW]

Huh? Not only did you completely missed my point but you assume I believe I have the right to determine which audience plays Bioware games.

 

I don't care, I'm just voicing what I prefer and what I would like to be avoided in the DA serie compared to ME.

 

While some of my characters reflect me in some ways I don't tend to play self inserts. On the contrary, I dislike it when developers turns the protagonist into one giant caricature whose only goal is fanservice or stroking the player's ego and has to take into account every headcanon.

I said I had 3 main Wardens. Do you seriously think I played three self inserts?

Give me some different defined backgrounds to choose from (and better yet, play a little of it) and I'm relatively content. Origins in DAO didn't give you blank state characters for example but gave you sufficient opportunities to roleplay whithout it being detrimental to the mainplot.

 

It's ludicrous to think that we either have to choose between auto dialogues and what some people call "blankstate" characters.

Some found the Inquisitor lacking in personality, but I don't know if reducing player's input and dialogues is really going to solve this for them.

 

It didn't seem to work in ME3. For me it made Shepard boring, and generic.

And as Paul E pointed out, Shepard is annoyingly inconsistent compared to the previous ME titles. It was sort of inevitable that this would occur when you even had an option to turn off player input in dialogue choices. Of course it's only an option but the game was designed with that option in mind.

 

It made me less involved in the plot (which isn't helped by the fact that so much of said plot is pretty lol worthy even before the ending).

 

I misread your previous post, my bad.

[Morroian]

The only Dragon Age needs is to go back to the silent protagonist instead of taking after Mass Effect even more.

 

DAI has far more things that need to be fixed before the voiced protag.

[Dyne-]

It isn't "humans make better stories!" it's lazy damned writing.

 

My human Warden had no stake whatsoever on the choice of Dwarven King in DAO, he just needed something done. Either of my dwarves, however, really did - do I pick the one that's stood by my family all along, but might be a worse candidate for Ozammar's future? Do I pick the other, regardless of my background? What about my character's family? They're decidedly better off with Bhelen if I'm casteless. The City and Dalish elves also had connections to plot stuff, and even the Human Noble does - even if a lot of that plot is dropped.

 

Here's the kicker: Inquisition does a lousy job at this. You get choices, but they're rarely personal. Your companions aren't your friends as much as they're your employees, and it feels like it. The Inquisitor himself has nothing relating to his background outside of some war table missions. You never get to meet any of your Qunari mercenaries, or your Dwarf Carta family members, or the Noble's family or Dalish clan. DA2's story was done badly, but it did have some resonance because Hawke was connected to a lot of it - the entirety of Legacy, especially if you have Carver or Bethany around. It wasn't because he was human, but because he was connected to the events in a personal fashion.

 

The Inquisitor is just kinda..there. You show up, get a glowy mark on your hand, and proceed to walk into the leadership of the Inquisition without a damned thing in your path. The Wardens all had to overcome something before they got there, even Hawke did. DAI's just a power fantasy without any of the real elements that make that sort of thing endearing.

Someone give this man a medal.

 

For one, silent protagonists are a dead archetype. Thankfully, it seems BioWare has finally come to this conclusion and discarded any chance of ever having a dumbfounded main character awkwardly staring at everybody else while they talk for 50 hours.

 

Secondly, multi-race selection with multiple backgrounds is bad for game development and storytelling. When there are so many variables and possibilities to consider, it dilutes and cheapens the overall story. The reason Shepard's story and even Hawke's story were so engaging is because they were more defined. However, in that definition, we also had more flexibility to shape their personality.

 

You can't do that with a silent protagonist or a main character who can be four different races with a dozen different backgrounds. There's just too many variables and not enough defined points. Giving players more choice and freedom negatively impacts the overall game and the story BioWare can create.

 

Thus, I believe the next protagonist in DA4 needs to be more akin to Shepard/Hawke and less so to the Inquisitor/HoF.

I disagree. The reason Shepard's story and even Hawke's story were so engaging is because there was more effort put into the telling of it. Shepard has relationships with characters that span across three games. Shepard also has the opportunity to form an emotional connection with every single one of them which in turn makes the player actually give a **** about what happens to them.

 

The same can be said about Hawke. He's emotionally invested in the story and much of what happens is personal to him and those he cares about.

 

In my opinion The Warden had this as well if the player chose to become close to all of the available companions. People become emotionally invested in characters with good stories, which is why there are 12313717532458902810982034 bring the warden back threads on this forum.

 

Multiple races to choose from and multiple backgrounds isn't bad for game development and storytelling. Jumping around a fictional setting creating more loose ends than answers and sidestepping previous content is bad for storytelling.

 

I'm sure if time and money weren't so much of an issue in game development Bioware could knock it out of the park with storytelling and continuity, regardless of multiple starting points. For what it's worth they do a pretty good job with the time they're allotted.

[In Exile]

Absolutely not true. Silent protagonists are a design decision and not a dead archetype. It is according to the type of game you are making.

When done well, however, there's no real difference with VO beside the line being said out loud (and some people being more comfortable pretending otherwise). A well done silent PC still has actual lively dialogue. With actual VO you can write bland dialogue and still have a PC with some personality, but the reverse doesn't work.

In any event the real problem IMO is mixing systems. POE is a great illustration of this problem where the voice over just becomes confusing, as the text includes descriptions of actions not always in line with the cadencne or pace of NPC voices.

[AWTEW]

Someone give this man a medal.

I disagree. The reason Shepard's story and even Hawke's story were so engaging is because there was more effort put into the telling of it. Shepard has relationships with characters that span across three games. Shepard also has the opportunity to form an emotional connection with every single one of them which in turn makes the player actually give a **** about what happens to them.

The same can be said about Hawke. He's emotionally invested in the story and much of what happens is personal to him and those he cares about.

In my opinion The Warden had this as well if the player chose to become close to all of the available companions. People become emotionally invested in characters with good stories, which is why there are 12313717532458902810982034 bring the warden back threads on this forum.

Multiple races to choose from and multiple backgrounds isn't bad for game development and storytelling. Jumping around a fictional setting creating more loose ends than answers and sidestepping previous content is bad for storytelling.

I'm sure if time and money weren't so much of an issue in game development Bioware could knock it out of the park with storytelling and continuity, regardless of multiple starting points. For what it's worth they do a pretty good job with the time they're allotted.

They could cut costs easily.
Reduce the LI back to four
Reduce the races to two per game then change them up in the next game.
Go back to two voice actors for the protagonists.

[9TailsFox]

I'm definitely not in favor of going the Shepard-esque PC route for Dragon Age.  But I don't mind seeing voiced protagonists.  I actually think that the Inquisitor was a step in the right direction.  Hawke was too much of a predefined character for my liking.  I just felt two restricted in who s/he was.  I know that there was variation possible, but it was too limited for what I'm looking for in a PC.  The Inquisitor was a step in the right direction.  There was alot more variation in my opinion.  The one place where they fell down with the Inquisitor was around selfish or evil PCs.  Had that been an option too, I would think that DA: I did the best job.  I'm hoping that whoever the next PC is (and I really hope it's someone new like before), they are like the Inquisitor with some more role-playing options. 

I really liked sarcastic hawke the best. Still Wardens was the best in RP department, you can be saint or be evil(and I don't mean killing you can insult) or be more or less neutral.

And Inquisitor was.

[9TailsFox]

They could cut costs easily.
Reduce the LI back to four
Reduce the races to two per game then change them up in the next game.
Go back to two voice actors for the protagonists.

This. Bioware making DA:I can be described by this picture.

.

[AWTEW]

This. Bioware making DA:I can be described by this picture.

.

 

Pretty much, yeah.

[sammyz]

For one, silent protagonists are a dead archetype. Thankfully, it seems BioWare has finally come to this conclusion and discarded any chance of ever having a dumbfounded main character awkwardly staring at everybody else while they talk for 50 hours.

 

Secondly, multi-race selection with multiple backgrounds is bad for game development and storytelling. When there are so many variables and possibilities to consider, it dilutes and cheapens the overall story. The reason Shepard's story and even Hawke's story were so engaging is because they were more defined. However, in that definition, we also had more flexibility to shape their personality.

 

You can't do that with a silent protagonist or a main character who can be four different races with a dozen different backgrounds. There's just too many variables and not enough defined points. Giving players more choice and freedom negatively impacts the overall game and the story BioWare can create.

 

Thus, I believe the next protagonist in DA4 needs to be more akin to Shepard/Hawke and less so to the Inquisitor/HoF.

 

Thas gewd, thas gewd, mang.  You feel however you want, and you can do whatever you want in your own Dragon Age Keep.  But don't you dare take away my choice of protagonists.  Hawke was about as deep as a mud puddle on a concrete sidewalk.  The story was even more "black and white," "option one or two," than DAI is.  And that's saying something.  This means that's pretty much how Hawke is, too.  He either hates mages everywhere always, or he loves mages everywhere always. Except blood mages, which he hates everywhere always, anyway.

 

I've spent over 600 hours in DA:O.  Over 600.  Yeah, that's a lot.  And I did it more or less during one summer at college, too.  Why?  Because I loved it. I loved the story, the way things panned out, how my choices affected the world around me, the endings, just.. everything.  To me the "silent" protagonist wasn't actually silent, they just didn't have a voice actor, and I was okay with that.  The protagonists in DA:O weren't silent, they talked, they stated their opinion, they flirted, they loved, they laughed, and they lived.  Just because you couldn't hear it doesn't mean they were silent, because you sure could read it.  You want a silent protagonist?  Look up Fable 1 guy.  The extent of his interaction is pelvic thrusts, farts, and "come hither" looks.  Your choices in that game are only in what quest cards you pick up and whether or not you murder a town to buy all the houses and have everyone pay rent to you.

 

If they had the Keep around during DA:O they could have easily handled everyone's unmodded stories and choices in there and it would have progressed into DA2 seamlessly, thus even possibly allowing an unmodded warden to show up at some point for a cameo.  But, unfortunately, they didn't.  With it now, however, there is no purpose of having "a Shepard" in the DA franchise.  We've already got that, Hawke.  I'd rather stick with limited options of player characters and choose them in my Keep than have another character like that.  If I want a Lavellan or a Cadash to appear in my next DA, then that's what I should get.  If it were entirely Bioware's/EA's story there would be no options and no need for a keep.  But it's not, it's as much mine as it is theirs, thus is why they implemented the keep.

 

So, again, I reiterate, don't go around saying there needs to be "a Shepard" in the next Dragon Age.  There doesn't.  Dragon Age is not ME.  They started the ME series out that way, so it made sense to keep it that way until the end.  DA, however, was not started that way.  We've already toyed with going that route with Hawke, it didn't work too well.  In DA you can be more or less whomever you want to be and make whomever you want the important character of that game.  With the addition of the Keep it's even easier to keep all the important details down.

 

So, in conclusion, I get it, you want Hawke, or someone like them, to be the big kahuna across all your games.  Maybe you'll have a chance to do that.  For your sake I sincerely hope so.  Yet that doesn't mean we all want that.  So why limit what others get, why limit the Keep and its functionality?  I say nay to your assertion that we need "a Shepard" for the remaining, or even the next, DA.