it's the point you been using. How does it sound when every example of player character freedom you use is an evil choice?
The point I'm trying to make is that In Exile's point that "bioware mcs have always been like that", "that" being "working on a two axis of [eager-hesitant] and [kind-some times ruthless], but ultimately working for the greater good" is incorrect. I'm using examples of characters that were self/serving immoral and by extension evil to prove my point. I never said that being able to be self-serving/immoral is a necessity for every type of roleplayer. What is confusing you?
The point I'm trying to make is that In Exile's point that "bioware mcs have always been like that", "that" being "working on a two axis of [eager-hesitant] and [kind-some times ruthless], but ultimately working for the greater good" is incorrect. I'm using examples of characters that were self/serving immoral and by extension evil to prove my point. I never said that being able to be self-serving/immoral is a necessity for every type of roleplayer. What is confusing you?
But your missing that fact that it sounds that you just want to play a super evil character. Yes, you can play a jerk. All bw games allow you to play as a Jerk. You can be on in dai. Being a despot has some degrees to it in dai. You can;t be a bay stomper but you can be a backstabber, and you can push force on people who don't fallow your will. you can be a hanging Judge, you can control the mages with force, you can kill of a noble family to make a point to the other nobles not to mess with you. You can have the most powerful people of orlais under your thumb. And even destroy the chanty.
But your missing that fact that it sounds that you just want to play a super evil character. Yes, you can play a jerk. All bw games allow you to play as a Jerk. You can be on in dai. Being a despot has some degrees to it in dai. You can;t be a bay stomper but you can be a backstabber, and you can push force on people who don't fallow your will. you can be a hanging Judge, you can control the mages with force, you can kill of a noble family to make a point to the other nobles not to mess with you. You can have the most powerful people of orlais under your thumb. And even destroy the chanty.
you can still be evil, just not chaotically evil.
I don't care what "it sounds" like. At all. I explained my point. I simply disagree on In Exile's point that we haven't had self serving or immoral protagonists in bioware titles. Anything else you're trying to turn this into is irrelevant to what I'm arguing.
I don't care what "it sounds" like. At all. I explained my point. I simply disagree on In Exile's point that we haven't had self serving or immoral protagonists in bioware titles. Anything else you're trying to turn this into is irrelevant to what I'm arguing.
I play a self-serving Mage in all of the DA titles; simply do not speak or act overtly to conceal my goals, unless the character would become emotional for some reason. There is no need for any MHU-Hahahaha speeches or publically revealing the goal to become the power behind the curtain to play an Evil character.
Giving from all the absolutes you're speaking in, I'm beginning to wonder whether it'd still be "roleplaying" in your case, anyways.
You're basically a little Sith Lord yourself.
I'm arguing in absolutes, because I'm arguing that you can play self-serving and immoral characters in bioware titles. Which is absolutely true and evident to whoever played swtor, nvn and others. There's no room for doubt ,that's a fact.
And I'm a big Sith Lord, not a little one, thank you very much.
I don't care what "it sounds" like. At all. I explained my point. I simply disagree on In Exile's point that we haven't had self serving or immoral protagonists in bioware titles. Anything else you're trying to turn this into is irrelevant to what I'm arguing.
And we were allowed the choticly evil MC...to comic effect, mind you. Just because we can't truely be that does not mean you can't roleplay in dai. At the most you can be lawfully evil.
I've played some RPGs (TW3 aside) since playing DAI. It made me realize our flexibility to mold our character. Other games have complete blank slate or completely defined characters. Of course, we want more choices or variations of consequences at some point. As of now, I'm coming back with a new mind set. It turns out, IMO, the IQ is not so bad.
Inquisitor's depth... I don't know I liked the Inquisitor and found him/her to be well rounded, but I didn't feel like there was much depth behind him/her. I'm not sure if that makes sense.
I liked the fact you could make different decisions and say different things without sounding so extreme. So often in DA2 if you picked a different tone from usual, even if the paraphrase matched what you wanted to say, it would end up coming out quite stupid.
I just couldn't imagine a mainly diplomatic Hawke saying 75+% of the sarcastic Hawke options for instance, it would seem completely out of character.
I was quite pleased with my inquisitor's personality.
Me, too.
I played an open minded but not andrastian, diplomatic, witty (male) Inquisitor and his personality fitted the picture I had in my mind perfectly. I'm very satisfied with him.
I realized I was wrong about finding the protagonist's personality unsatisfying.
My main gripe with it was that for the leader of a large military organization she was not charismatic and confident enough. Now I realize that it was because of the female voice that I chose. It's polite and somewhat timid. I do not know if other voices are more confident, but the one I chose is not. Without this voice, though, I could easily pretend that the main char is charismatic.
Also the face I created is too "soft", but I'm not a good face creator, so that was the best I could do. Coupled with voice it produced a timid image.
Inquisitor's depth... I don't know I liked the Inquisitor and found him/her to be well rounded, but I didn't feel like there was much depth behind him/her. I'm not sure if that makes sense.
It actually makes a lot of sense. The IQ feels well rounded because you can never really zero in on a set personality like Shepard and Hawke. As a result, the IQ feels to be so neutral on everything rather than take a strong stance in situations.
As for depth, that is true also. Both Shepard and Hawke had more interaction with their past than the IQ. Also the character development for the IQ is just lacking. The Warden and Revan didnt have a voice and yet they had more depth and personality variance to them than the IQ who was fully voiced!
I like my inquisitor. I think it was a good job. My Hawke was funny, it fit well, but I think they do the inquisitor well, somewhat naive, learning as she goes along.
It actually makes a lot of sense. The IQ feels well rounded because you can never really zero in on a set personality like Shepard and Hawke. As a result, the IQ feels to be so neutral on everything rather than take a strong stance in situations.
As for depth, that is true also. Both Shepard and Hawke had more interaction with their past than the IQ. Also the character development for the IQ is just lacking. The Warden and Revan didnt have a voice and yet they had more depth and personality variance to them than the IQ who was fully voiced!
I found both the Warden and Revan lacking in that they weren't fully voiced. Revan had NO facial expression what so ever, and the Warden's facial expressions, such as there were, and what there were of them, were exaggerated. Especially the "Oh my God" wide eye expression, which is actually the only facial expression I remember my Warden making, even during the blasted romantic scenes.
Hawke, Shepard and the Herald have wonderful facial expression and an aliveness Revan and the Warden can't match, and on top of that you have the voices, which add another layer.
And while I'd like a little more with the past; I also like the fact that I can fill in some of the blanks. My Trevelyan for example is an only daughter, which is why her parents made arrangements for her to visit home eve though she was in the circle, they wanted to see their baby girl.
And Shepard didn't have all that much interaction with her past. One mission in ME, an email in ME 2 IIRC, and nothing in ME 3 except a call from Mom if you played Spacer in Citadel.
And Shepard didn't have all that much interaction with her past. One mission in ME, an email in ME 2 IIRC, and nothing in ME 3 except a call from Mom if you played Spacer in Citadel.
That is true. It almost doesn't feel like it though, and I'm wondering if that's just because the background choices we got in ME were a little more fleshed out and detailed. They could even impact gameplay a little bit (some combos would give you a boost to your paragon or renegade meter), so it was maybe easier to identify with and build your own headcanon off off? Some of the psychological profiles were downright traumatic too, like being attacked by slavers. That made the background memorable and explains why Shepard might have developed a ruthless or renegade personality. There's no similar morality system in DAI.
Really, I just might create a The Inquisitor's Support Thread in the Story/Campaign section just to get some different opinions for once.
There are funny dialogue options, compassionate and soft, rude and blunt, etc. I've never found myself bored as far as interactions go.
...
In some RPG games the protagonist is fully preestablished while in others it's a blank state.
DA:I's main character is a perfect blend where there is a clear background but you get to determine the details and how your character feels about it (all in game).
...
Agreed in general. Though, the protagonist should have the player-determinant personality. It's a tool, just like a keyboard (gamepad), a method to interact with characters and the game's world. The personality must be presented via their reactions on the protagonist.
That is true. It almost doesn't feel like it though, and I'm wondering if that's just because the background choices we got in ME were a little more fleshed out and detailed. They could even impact gameplay a little bit (some combos would give you a boost to your paragon or renegade meter), so it was maybe easier to identify with and build your own headcanon off off? Some of the psychological profiles were downright traumatic too, like being attacked by slavers. That made the background memorable and explains why Shepard might have developed a ruthless or renegade personality. There's no similar morality system in DAI.
I never really paid attention to the paragon/renegade, and the Colonist background was really the only one that hit me with major impact because of the mission dealing with the survivor.
The Survivor/Ruthless/Medal of Honor gets a little deeper on one mission or another, but still doesn't seem like a deep "foot print" as it were.
The conversation with Josephine about your background at Haven is wonderful, and does a great deal toward building a head canon, not only because it fills information, but you can chose what information. Human Mages have that too to a small extent when you first talk to Viv.
I found both the Warden and Revan lacking in that they weren't fully voiced. Revan had NO facial expression what so ever, and the Warden's facial expressions, such as there were, and what there were of them, were exaggerated. Especially the "Oh my God" wide eye expression, which is actually the only facial expression I remember my Warden making, even during the blasted romantic scenes.
Hawke, Shepard and the Herald have wonderful facial expression and an aliveness Revan and the Warden can't match, and on top of that you have the voices, which add another layer.
And while I'd like a little more with the past; I also like the fact that I can fill in some of the blanks. My Trevelyan for example is an only daughter, which is why her parents made arrangements for her to visit home eve though she was in the circle, they wanted to see their baby girl.
And Shepard didn't have all that much interaction with her past. One mission in ME, an email in ME 2 IIRC, and nothing in ME 3 except a call from Mom if you played Spacer in Citadel.
Clearly you aren't a ME junkie like I am. But Shepard has more interaction with his/her past than the IQ did.
For the psychological profile Shepard, these missions features unique dialog that pertains to the said background:
Ruthless - UNC: Major Kyle
War Hero - UNC: Espionage Probe
Sole Survivor - UNC: Dead Scientist
For their physical background they get this:
Earthborn: Gang member mission in Chora's Den
Spacer: Conversation with mother
Colonist: Mission with escaped slave
Also, Shepard's background/psychological profile is referenced throughout ME1 with many characters and even in ME2/ME3.
______________
If that isn't enough for you then.....
......Also the problem that many people have with the IQ is that he/she is too neutral and the game limits your chances to really "define" them through dialog that presents a variance of emotions. With the IQ, the game requires head cannon (like protagonist in Fallout or Skyrim) to really give personality and how Shepard, through dialog could really give a certain scene or part in the game a level of emotion. Watch these videos and just see how there were moments where we as the player could "set the stage" for a baseline personality type for Shepard through dialog:
These are but a few examples of Shepard showing varying degrees of emotion in dialog situations. Now to be fair I went back to see if I could find anything similar for the Inquisitor but I couldn't. But if you want to prove me wrong, find me videos of the IQ giving emotional speeches are showing varying degrees of emotion in dialog....you won't find them, but you can look all you want.
Come to think of it, I do not recall the IQ giving ANY speeches.
________________
Now I know that you or ghostbusters or someone else will come and rebuttle this but that is to be expected. Like I said MANY of times before elsewhere, this forum is nothing but a bubble of DAI supporters who will defend DAI at every turn. Venture outside of this bubble and goto other gaming communities and you'll see a more fair approach to DAI, including the IQ and how he/she compares against protagonist such as Commander Shepard. It is good that you enjoyed the IQ's so called "personality" but many others found him/her to be boring and too neutral to the point where you pretty much HAD to use head cannon and imagine that the IQ is this or that whereas with Shepard you can just do that through the cinematic conversations.
E3 is just around the corner in which Mass Effect 4 will be officially revealed. When Mass Effect 4 comes out, it will be interesting to compare and contrast the personalities of the ME4 Hero to that of DAI to see which one was more satisfying. If it is illegal here to compare DAI to other games (Such as Witcher 3), then it should be fair game to compare DAI to other Bioware games and ME4 would be a good measuring stick to do just that.
My only problem is that there are no choices that would back a ruthless Inquisitor. All through out the game we're told that power can corrupt and the Inquisitor could let power get to his head but there is not a single choice where I felt like I was powerful and in control.There was no way to play a take-no-**** type of Inquisitor.
Everyone just seems happy to kiss ass and join up.
My only problem is that there are no choices that would back a ruthless Inquisitor. All through out the game we're told that power can corrupt and the Inquisitor could let power get to his head but there is not a single choice where I felt like I was powerful and in control.There was no way to play a take-no-**** type of Inquisitor.
Everyone just seems happy to kiss ass and join up.
That IS funny, is it not? I also wondered that with all this staggering power at my disposal - the military might, the diplomatic ties, spies everywhere, not to mention a magic glowing hand that lets me physically walk in the Fade and SUMMON THE VOID OF DOOM, DEATH AND DESTRUCTION AT WILL - what is stopping me from me carving a bloody path across the established power structures? More importantly, why are precisely none of the power structures worried about this? Sure, right now the Inquisition is too busy fighting one of the original magisters who ventured into the Black City, but what do they expect will happen after I ruin his day so thoroughly it is not even funny anymore? Politely shuffle off into the background and quietly disband this monstrous power base I have developed?
lol noob.
This I think could have been developed more. The fear of the growing power of the Inquisition and, by extension, the Inquisitor, could have been portrayed as more rising a concern, especially across the various authorities we got to meet. Yes we get "they do not know what to make of you" from time to time, but not enough "how do we know that after this is done you wont make the streets run red with blood?" (The answer to that, by the way, is "Nothing.")
Clearly you aren't a ME junkie like I am. But Shepard has more interaction with his/her past than the IQ did.
For the psychological profile Shepard, these missions features unique dialog that pertains to the said background:
Ruthless - UNC: Major Kyle
War Hero - UNC: Espionage Probe
Sole Survivor - UNC: Dead Scientist
For their physical background they get this:
Earthborn: Gang member mission in Chora's Den
Spacer: Conversation with mother
Colonist: Mission with escaped slave
Also, Shepard's background/psychological profile is referenced throughout ME1 with many characters and even in ME2/ME3.
You know what they say about assumptions, right
Major Kyle, The Probe and Corporal Toombs are all available to any Shepard. You just get extra dialogue depending on which you choose but it's nothing more than that.
Having played both 2 and 3 in the past couple of months, I can say it doesn't come up that much. The only major time someone brings it up in 2 is just after Lazarus Station when Jacob starts quizing you. Other than that, and a couple of emails related (You get one from the kid in the Reds egging you on because some people he knew were lost on Freedom's Progress). I know there's one from Toombs as well, but I can't remember if it's specific for a survivor or for everyone who did that mission.
In three, the only mention that ever sticks out is when Trayor calls out the fact you're from a colony.
As for the rest, you remind me of the same people who made DA2 forum so toxic. You're free to dislike DAI as you choose, but don't assume your attitude stands for everyone, Jazz.
Retour en haut
