136 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

and you'd be wrong

a "role" is not always a blank slate open ended character

No, it isn't, but I don't see how else the play could be goven enough information about the character without having been the author of that information.

The problem with a pre-set character (The Exile from KotOR2 is an excellent example of this) is that the player doesn't possess the information which his character does (or should), thus producing incoherent character behaviour.

It's theoretically possible to roleplay a pre-set character, but I've never seen one where the player was given enough information about him in order to do it.

[Steelcan]

No, it isn't, but I don't see how else the play could be goven enough information about the character without having been the author of that information.

The problem with a pre-set character (The Exile from KotOR2 is an excellent example of this) is that the player doesn't possess the information which his character does (or should), thus producing incoherent character behaviour.

It's theoretically possible to roleplay a pre-set character, but I've never seen one where the player was given enough information about him in order to do it.

and that is not always the case, lets take the Witcher series for example, there are a plethora of books and short stories for the player to get the picture on Geralt's characters, but failing even that the options presented are consistent with his characterization whether its anti-political, anti-confrontational (unless necessary), loyal to his friends almost to a fault, and so on.

 

Elaborate backstory is not always essential to designing a character

[In Exile]

I agree with the first statement.

As to the second, I think for me it was more a matter of the constant cutscene railroading, autodialogue, and forced emotions / reactions. But I knew Shepard was Bioware's character starting in ME1, so there's that.

It's very hard to write the character the same way. The is because in a Bioware game the PC has different writers depending on the zone, plot, etc. As the company shifts people around the PCs voice changes. Then you have issues like the change in direction for a series once a new game comes out. Bioware doesn't stick to one formula or even one cohesive genre (from a writing POV).

[Sylvius the Mad]

and that is not always the case, lets take the Witcher series for example, there are a plethora of books and short stories for the player to get the picture on Geralt's characters, but failing even that the options presented are consistent with his characterization whether its anti-political, anti-confrontational (unless necessary), loyal to his friends almost to a fault, and so on.

Elaborate backstory is not always essential to designing a character

Does the player know these things about Geralt at the start of the game?

Also, how much space is there for the player to alter the character? Are there gaps to fill in? If I play the game more than once, how different can Geralt be?

Presumably there are gaps. Since there are choices to be made within the game, and the character's choices are driven by his personality, either there's wiggle room in there or the choices don't matter.

When presented with a choice, I always construct a justification for making that choice before I make it. The game cannot later contradict that justification, so I need to know everything the writers know about the character when I start the game.

[CrutchCricket]

Well, there certainly are costs. ME3 had to burn a ton of zots to handle the SM.

Well, that's why you don't make it possible to kill every character in the second installment.

[AlanC9]

and that is not always the case, lets take the Witcher series for example, there are a plethora of books and short stories for the player to get the picture on Geralt's character

As long as we get all those books and short stories included with the game, this approach could work

[Steelcan]

Does the player know these things about Geralt at the start of the game?
Also, how much space is there for the player to alter the character? Are there gaps to fill in? If I play the game more than once, how different can Geralt be?
Presumably there are gaps. Since there are choices to be made within the game, and the character's choices are driven by his personality, either there's wiggle room in there or the choices don't matter.
When presented with a choice, I always construct a justification for making that choice before I make it. The game cannot later contradict that justification, so I need to know everything the writers know about the character when I start the game.

. The first game (and into the second) side skirts the issue by giving Geralt amnesia, so you have time to see how other people react to you and what they expect you to be like. It doesn't just throw you in medias res and expect you to know what kind of person Geralt is.

As for altering, its less changing what kind of person he is, for example Geralt will never not care about Ciri and Triss and his fellow witchers. That doesn't preclude you from calling Lambert an arrogant ass. As for an example of a choice that gives you wiggle room, there is the who you side with after an assassination, you can wash your hands of politics, in line with his character, or you can save your friends also in line with his character. Either option is consistent with him.

[Hazegurl]

Who thinks this would be for the best?
 

I don't. DA has no identity or focus and the cameos were all lackluster because the new PC had to meet them so essentially you were faced with meeting the returning characters over and over and over again.  Every romance is brand new so you never get to see how it develops in the long run, and there is always some contrived excuse created to send everyone packing once the story is over.  I was attached to Shep, his squad, his romances, and his story far more than I ever was any DA PC so I hope they won't go that route.  But I have very little faith in BW right now.

 

Edit: I do like that we have a new PC for Andromeda.  Shep's story is over and I'm looking forward to new squadmates, new romances, new buddies for my PC.  I just wouldn't want this done for every single game.

[Ambivalent]

"Hey Leliana, remember me? No? It is 3rd time we met actually, i was in different skin/race/gender."

 

I don't really want to meet same characters from first game as a different person over over again...

 

Also having seperate player characters ruin the continuity by degrading our previous character's choices. They generally have little to no effect in new game.

 

"Our Queen Warden is alive and well but you can't see her or hear much from her because there are players who haven't chosen that option or even haven't played the first game so implementing would be waste of resources. Not mentioning that she had no voice actress in that time. Ah well i got nothing much for you, sorry mate."

 

But by moving timeline by a decade or so it might work. Just like how Fallouts did. 

[DebatableBubble]

No more badly-done trilogies, please. 

[Celtic Latino]

Definitely. The reason Elder Scrolls and even the DA series works so well is because there are different protagonists each game. More storytelling opportunities and less tied down to maintaining a narrative over the span of a series of games. ME is a huge universe and I'd love to be able to experience different stories through different protagonists. Just like you have Warden-Hawke-Inquisitor you can have Shepard-Pathfinder-*insert different protag in a future post Andromeda ME game from a far distant future*

[Teddie Sage]

No more badly-done trilogies, please. 

If they're going to do a trilogy, I want them -- I hope -- to plan everything in advance and stick to it.