15882 réponses à ce sujet

[Rawgrim]

Anyone? Sorry, but I shall choose for myself, and I prefer Bioware titles to most. But thanks for your opinion.

 

I think the other poster meant to say "everyone". As in "It is not for everyone".

[Medhia_Nox]

@Br3dmax:  I'm sorry you don't have good experiences.  My warden was quite a deep experience - and I really enjoyed playing on the themes of faith, doubt, responsibility and the purpose of 'truth' I felt detailed in DA:I. 

 

I am highly suspect of what people consider "deep personality" on characters - but I'm not shilling out the money just to play a pre-made to find out.

 

Can you, or anyone, provide other characters that might be deep by your standards?

 

It's interesting - if you say Hawke and Shepard - we're back to square one (on my end).  I don't want the game to tell me who my character is. 

[Spectre Impersonator]

A memorable one was where three peasants were going to hang a Nilfgaardian deserter who was trying to get back home to his wife. The peasants cannot be talked down so you either have to let them hang the guy or forcibly stop them. I chose to stop them and ended up killing them in the ensuing fight. The Nilfgaardian thanked Geralt and told him that he'd done the right thing, to which Geralt replies (paraphrasing here) with something like "Did I? If I hadn't have intervened one man would've died, now there's three."

 

The fact that Geralt doesn't take a life lightly is a refreshing change from most videogame protagonists.

I agree and this includes Dragon Age. Hawke would slaughter thirty street ruffians before breakfast without a peep or a flinch. Varric even jokes about how many people the team butchers. This holds true for all the games. The enemies, especially the human enemies, feel archaically gamey. It's the emotional equivalent of blasting these:

 

Conversely, TW3 has made me feel bad for killing various disgusting monsters who are more than simply obstacles.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Spector Impersonator:  On that aspect - I'd recommend Shadowrun: Dragonfall.  That's a game where you can get through a huge amount of it without causing carnage if you take your time, you're smart and possess the right skills.  

 

I recall my body count being pretty significant in the Witcher 2... so, TW3 is very different from that then?  Cause I recall wading through whole castles of enemies by myself in the beginning of TW2.

 

Also... how DARE you disparage Galaga!!!  

[yawnandshrug]

Bioware - you do you and we'll be fine.

 

That's part of the problem with DAI isn't it? Bioware isn't sticking to their strengths, rather DAI feels like Skyrimlite and WOWlite with a dose of Bioware. If anything, it feels most like The Old Republic and that comparison really doesn't bode well. Not to say that DAO was perfect, in terms of writing we still need a worthy successor to deus ex, but we haven't seen companions of the Morrigan/Alistar calibre since. I personally think Dragon Age should focus on creating even better companions and quest narratives instead of trying to be what it isn't. The reason people are saying that Dragon Age should be more like the Witcher 3 is because it takes what Bioware is traditionally thought to be good at (storytelling) and what it wants to be good at (open world gameplay) and surpasses it on both counts.

[Torgette]

The Inquisitor is one of the weakest characters I've ever seen, I say one of because the Warden is even worse, so BioWare doing BioWare definitely isn't fine for anyone.Especially when this is the result. I'd rather play an actual character than be a plot device, which is what BioWare protagonists have been reduced to. Even Shepard in all their idiocy is one of the strongest characters BioWare has ever produced. That's not a good thing. And putting in stats at level up won't make up for the hours of boring dialogue that needs to be sat through. 

 

I think Bioware should stick to what they do best when it comes to story and protagonist - they're great at scale for story and they're great at fill-in-the-blank player characters (even if the inquisitor wasn't afforded many chances for this). They can still learn from other video games or non-video games on how to show and tell more, but it would be missing the point for them to abandon their themes because somebody else made a good game. The Witcher games themselves aren't good because they're about a preset protagonist anyways, it's the world they built around them that makes them an asset to the experience.

[Rawgrim]

@Spector Impersonator:  On that aspect - I'd recommend Shadowrun: Dragonfall.  That's a game where you can get through a huge amount of it without causing carnage if you take your time, you're smart and possess the right skills.  

 

I recall my body count being pretty significant in the Witcher 2... so, TW3 is very different from that then?  Cause I recall wading through whole castles of enemies by myself in the beginning of TW2.

 

Also... how DARE you disparage Galaga!!!  

 

You weren't by yourself...you had the king with you + his army.

[Hazegurl]

Bioware also always been completely honest on where they stand on the social issues. Developers told players to get over it when they didn't like Anders hitting on them in Dragon Age 2, same thing with Inquisition. Bioware never said they would allow players to take a homophobic stance in their games yet people still get annoyed at limited options when it comes to Dorian. Aka Bioware once again did their game the same way they advertise them.

Is there any examples of where Bioware offer these limited choices that isn't tied to the social stuff that internet loves to argue about?

Sure the devs told players to get over it, then they made sure that no one hits on the PC unless the PC flirts first in DAI.  Their words did not match their actions.

 

As for Dorian, I love his character, but this is just another case of the devs words not matching their actions.  DG claims on one hand that Dorian helps him cast off the issues he was having with being gay but on the other hand claims Dorian's quest has nothing at all to do with him being gay. So if Dorian's quest has nothing at all to do with social issues, then why can't a human noble agree with Dorian's father that Dorian should marry to preserve his family line.  It seems like an opinion a human noble would have.  Sure some idiots want to be able to call Dorian gross, a deviant et al, which is stupid considering that would be OOC for a person not living in Tevinter. 

 

However, being pigeonholed into agreeing or needing to be educated with certain situations is a legit complaint.  Retconning their lore (The Qunari) just to tackle social issues is a legit complaint.  Especially when the storyline could have been better without them having to do it.

 

Note: There is nothing wrong with NPCs telling off the PC.  They can still disagree, hate him, et al.  It's just that an actual story would have been much better than a lecture and it would have been nice to have more than two types of roleplay options.  It would have helped if I at least had a "I don't give a crap" option. Geralt certainly had that option.

[SnakeCode]

Yup, and Geralt even remarks on how it's a stupid war, and how he's basically strong armed into it since he's Foltest's favourite new bodyguard/plaything. 

[Medhia_Nox]

@yawnandshrug:  I found characters like Cassandra to be far better than the high school triumverate of the jock(Alistair)/the goth(Morrigan)/and the cheerleader(Leliana).  I use those titles not to suggest you should like them or "my" idea of them is what you like... you clearly see them differently.  

 

I believe, overall, the interactions I had with the companions in DA:I were superior to much of what I've seen in cRPGs.   This is, of course, opinion.

 

On the more "factual" level we're in agreement - Bioware should stick with strong characters.  I believe this so deeply that I think that the next title should be centered far more around the companions than around any sort of big conflict.  

[Rawgrim]

Being hit on by Anders never bothered me, though. Being hit on by a gay person can happen in real life too. It is out of your control when it happens there too. So that bit just makes the gameworld more believable. If someone hits on you, no matter their gender, take it as a compliment. Which it what it really is.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Rawgrim:  Does that change my body count?  (Edit:  I see why you said what you did - I wasn't "by myself" - that's true.  However... it wasn't like I didn't fight micro-battles during the conflict that involved just me.  Coat it with all the sugar in the world - it's still just the same model better masked.)

Also - I believe there's also a mansion I invaded in W2 where I killed plenty of guards.. can't recall.  

 

So... I'm not buying this "lives matter" concept I'm hearing (which ultimately doesn't matter to anyone but me).

[SnakeCode]

Body count is irrelevant, it's just a nice change to have a protagonist that isn't completely apathetic towards those that they kill.

[Rawgrim]

@Rawgrim:  Does that change my body count?  

Also - I believe there's also a mansion I invaded in W2 where I killed plenty of guards.. can't recall.  

 

So... I'm not buying this "lives matter" concept I'm hearing (which ultimately doesn't matter to anyone but me).

 

Considering that it happened during a big siege, yes it matters. If you had been running down a street of a peaceful town (alone) and chopping down a bunch of people it would be different. A siege or a battle will have casualties.

[Xetykins]

@yawnandshrug:  I found characters like Cassandra to be far better than the high school triumverate of the jock(Alistair)/the goth(Morrigan)/and the cheerleader(Leliana).  I use those titles not to suggest you should like them or "my" idea of them is what you like... you clearly see them differently.  

Heh, so Cass giggling and squeeing over a romance novel is not very high school-like eh? Or getting in a brawl with Varric? That's pretty much my high school days -Varric.

For the record. I love Cass.
Carry on.

[Han Shot First]

Being hit on by Anders never bothered me, though. Being hit on by a gay person can happen in real life too. It is out of your control when it happens there too. So that bit just makes the gameworld more believable. If someone hits on you, no matter their gender, take it as a compliment. Which it what it really is.

 

I think the issue with Anders was not so much that he makes a move on Hawke, but that if Hawke turns him down he acts like a big baby about it. He throws a temper tantrum instead of handling rejection like an adult.

 

Of course considering everything else Anders gets up to in game perhaps that was entirely in character. That wasn't the last or his greatest overreaction. 

[Torgette]

@yawnandshrug:  I found characters like Cassandra to be far better than the high school triumverate of the jock(Alistair)/the goth(Morrigan)/and the cheerleader(Leliana).  I use those titles not to suggest you should like them or "my" idea of them is what you like... you clearly see them differently.  

 

I believe, overall, the interactions I had with the companions in DA:I were superior to much of what I've seen in cRPGs.   This is, of course, opinion.

 

On the more "factual" level we're in agreement - Bioware should stick with strong characters.  I believe this so deeply that I think that the next title should be centered far more around the companions than around any sort of big conflict.  

 

I felt like the companions were a strong part of DAI, they were all pretty interesting and imo at least equal in interest as the DAO companions. The only thing the DAI companions lacked was the whole predicament of being on your own, as part of the Inquisition they lose some of their individuality whereas in DAO that individuality and comrade-ship was the only thing that got you through the events. Much like the Inquisitor themselves, the companions were somewhat suffocated by the events at hand. That said some companions felt enhanced by the Inquisition - Solas, Cassandra and the 3 advisers were served pretty well by that environment.

 

Of course that suffocation doesn't have to be a negative for a story, not everybody has to have the limelight and feel like they fit in - it can add to the environment and add drama. I guess the only problem is it doesn't add to the overall narrative, rather it feels compartmentalized like the loyalty missions in ME2.

[Rawgrim]

I think the issue with Anders was not so much that he makes a move on Hawke, but that if Hawke turns him down he acts like a big baby about it. He throws a temper tantrum instead of handling rejection like an adult.

 

Of course considering everything else Anders gets up to in game perhaps that was entirely in character. That wasn't the last or his greatest overreaction. 

 

Yeah, but still. It could happen.

 

 

And I agree. Anders was rather whiney and full of himself. Might be the reaction was indeed in character.

[Hellion Rex]

I think the issue with Anders was not so much that he makes a move on Hawke, but that if Hawke turns him down he acts like a big baby about it. He throws a temper tantrum instead of handling rejection like an adult.

 

Of course considering everything else Anders gets up to in game perhaps that was entirely in character. That wasn't the last or his greatest overreaction. 

Perhaps, but there were certainly many that did complain that they were being hit on by another guy at all.

[Rawgrim]

Perhaps, but there were certainly many that did complain that they were being hit on by another guy at all.

 

There was. I remember all those threads about it. "Dragon Age tried to make me gay!!!" etc. I think that was an actual title for a thread, to be honest.

[Br3admax]

@Br3dmax:  I'm sorry you don't have good experiences.  My warden was quite a deep experience - and I really enjoyed playing on the themes of faith, doubt, responsibility and the purpose of 'truth' I felt detailed in DA:I. 

The Warden was a deep as you needed them to be because the Warden's character does not actually exist. "Muh Warden" statements are always hilarious for this reason alone.

I am highly suspect of what people consider "deep personality" on characters - but I'm not shilling out the money just to play a pre-made to find out.

I want the character to actually exist, for one. That's always a good start. DA:O is a great game for it's supporting cast, not its PC which was as lackluster as they come. BG/NWN/2's PC was better, which is odd given the games have exactly the same design in them. Probably because they too had one set origin and story. 

 

 

 

Can you, or anyone, provide other characters that might be deep by your standards?

 

It's interesting - if you say Hawke and Shepard - we're back to square one (on my end).  I don't want the game to tell me who my character is. 

The game NEEDS to tell you who your character is, whether you like it or not, or you aren't a character. It would be great if we could have a character that would be unique unto themselves, branch, mix-and-match, and all kinds of great worlds that mean unique, but in the end, that's not practical. BioWare's proved that twice now, promising something and going back on it at the last minute. If you want to be bland, that's fine; I'm sure the character you come up with to compensate for the game presenting you with this blandness is great. I want to find a way to make it through 100+ hours of character development however, and character is frequired for that. My companions shouldn't be the only people to grow. 

[Rawgrim]

The Warden was a deep as you needed them to be because the Warden's character does not actually exist. "Muh Warden" statements are always hilarious for this reason alone.

I want the character to actually exist, for one. That's always a good start. DA:O is a great game for it's supporting cast, not its PC which was as lackluster as they come. BG/NWN/2's PC was better, which is odd given the games have exactly the same design in them. Probably because they too had one set origin and story. 

The game NEEDS to tell you who your character is, whether you like it or not, or you aren't a character. It would be great if we could have a character that would be unique unto themselves, branch, mix-and-match, and all kinds of great worlds that mean unique, but in the end, that's not practical. BioWare's proved that twice now, promising something and going back on it at the last minute. If you want to be bland, that's fine; I'm sure the character you come up with to compensate for the game presenting you with this blandness is great. I want to find a way to make it through 100+ hours of character development however, and character is frequired for that. My companions shouldn't be the only people to grow. 

 

An rpg doesn't need to tell the player anything about the character you play. The whole point of an rpg is that the player should get to create as much about their own character as possible. Personality, motivations, world-view, likes and dislikes. This only works to a certain degree in crpgs, of course. But when a game goes too far with fleshing out the character you are supposed to "create" the character is no longer a PC but an NPC you happen to have some control over.

[Han Shot First]

Perhaps, but there were certainly many that did complain that they were being hit on by another guy at all.

 

I don't doubt that, but I think Ander's reaction was also responsible for a good deal of the fan griping.

 

I say that because I don't remember as much complaining about Zevran, who is much more aggressive. Although with Zevran you did get a few hilarious complaints that people's Wardens accidentally slept with him. I mean how is that even possible? Its like accidentally sleeping with Morrigan. It couldn't be any more obvious.

[yawnandshrug]

@yawnandshrug:  I found characters like Cassandra to be far better than the high school triumverate of the jock(Alistair)/the goth(Morrigan)/and the cheerleader(Leliana).  I use those titles not to suggest you should like them or "my" idea of them is what you like... you clearly see them differently.  

 

 

I feel like the three of them had superior writing in that they were given layers that go beyond the appearance vs reality juxtaposition that writers commonly use to create complex characters. For example I like Cassandra and I would say that Cassandra has a very tough exterior with a softer centre, appearance vs reality. Then we have Morrigan who acts like a B**ch and to an extent she is a b**tch and we find out that she wants to be one, yet really she isn't. There is a level of insecurity and maternalism and idealism and hatred of flemeth that ties all of this up and then you aren't quite sure which is what anymore, which makes her, for myself, a much more interesting character.

 

And in many ways that's what the writing of the main cast in the Witcher 3 is like. Complex, just look at the debate surrounding Yen.

[Hellion Rex]

I want the character to actually exist, for one. That's always a good start. DA:O is a great game for it's supporting cast, not its PC which was as lackluster as they come. BG/NWN/2's PC was better, which is odd given the games have exactly the same design in them. Probably because they too had one set origin and story. 

The game NEEDS to tell you who your character is, whether you like it or not, or you aren't a character. It would be great if we could have a character that would be unique unto themselves, branch, mix-and-match, and all kinds of great worlds that mean unique, but in the end, that's not practical. BioWare's proved that twice now, promising something and going back on it at the last minute. If you want to be bland, that's fine; I'm sure the character you come up with to compensate for the game presenting you with this blandness is great. I want to find a way to make it through 100+ hours of character development however, and character is frequired for that. My companions shouldn't be the only people to grow. 

I absolutely agree. I didn't give a hoot about my Warden, cause he never felt real or alive to me, just a puppet to move through combat.