431 réponses à ce sujet

[The Heretic of Time]

Shepard being rebuild with Reaper tech was nothing more than a popular fan theory, which I admittetly believed in, based on the similiarities between renegade Shepard's eyes and TIM's eyes. But like a lot of other things, it never amounted to anything.

 

Unless you believe Bioware to be so subtle and so brilliant not to have such a bomb be dropped during Chronos Station, and if you do, there's an old group here on the BSN that I think you might fit right in with. 

 

Careful there son. You wouldn't wanna be kicked out of the Brotherhood after receiving a buck fifty now would you?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Yes on the tactical combat. No on the silent protagonist. I absolutely HATE silent protagonists. In this day and age that crap just doesn't fly no more. We're living in 2015 people, silent protagonists are a thing of the past.

Voiced protagonists will not match silent protagonists until we can choose the full text of what we say, and the delivery of that line, and we can choose those things separately.

And that's just for one playthrough. If I play the game again, I want a different voice for each character I create.

As it is so far, the voice adds nothing to the game save expense.

[RZIBARA]

Voiced protagonists will not match silent protagonists until we can choose the full text of what we say, and the delivery of that line, and we can choose those things separately.

And that's just for one playthrough. If I play the game again, I want a different voice for each character I create.

As it is so far, the voice adds nothing to the game save expense.

 

I disagree, having a voice makes the game much more immersive for me, nothing takes me out of an RPG more than not hearing anything out of my characters mouth

[PhroXenGold]

Voiced protagonists will not match silent protagonists until we can choose the full text of what we say, and the delivery of that line, and we can choose those things separately.

And that's just for one playthrough. If I play the game again, I want a different voice for each character I create.

As it is so far, the voice adds nothing to the game save expense.

 

Given that you can't chose how a line is delivered with a silent protagonist - and no imagining it doesn't help, beacuse the way people react imply you spoke in a particular manner - I don't know why you brought that up, and to be honest, you don't get to chose the full text of what your character says either. You get a list of things the devs wanted you to say.

 

Voiced protagonists add massively to the immersion of a game, and apart from the cost, I can't see any real drawbacks. If you want a completely controllable player character, go play PnP. When it comes to designing video games, they should  play to the strengths of that media, with things like voiced characters, rather than halfway-house systems like silent protagonists. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I disagree, having a voice makes the game much more immersive for me, nothing takes me out of an RPG more than not hearing anything out of my characters mouth

To each his own.

If I could disable the voice, I would.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Given that you can't chose how a line is delivered with a silent protagonist - and no imagining it doesn't help, beacuse the way people react imply you spoke in a particular manner

No they don't. That's not how implication works.

You might assume that it does, but I get around that by not assuming it.

I don't know why you brought that up, and to be honest, you don't get to chose the full text of what your character says either. You get a list of things the devs wanted you to say.

A lost from which you get to choose, and if you control delivery as well, and there are no actions tied to the line, then you can have your character say that thing for a wide variety of reasons.

And if that's still not enough control, you can interpret the full text as an abstraction of the actual line (just as the keyword dialogue systems of old worked), thus allowing you to write the line directly.

Voiced protagonists add massively to the immersion of a game, and apart from the cost, I can't see any real drawbacks.

They make the character more difficult to control, and less mine as a result.

If you want a completely controllable player character, go play PnP. When it comes to designing video games, they should play to the strengths of that media, with things like voiced characters, rather than halfway-house systems like silent protagonists.

As I have argued many times before, I think the point of CRPGs is to recreate the tabletop RPG experience without the need for other players.

PnP is multiplayer. I play single-player games.

[Sylvius the Mad]

DP

[PhroXenGold]

No they don't. That's not how implication works.

You might assume that it does, but I get around that by not assuming it.

 

Assumptions? More like logical conclusions drawn from experience. People react to different tones of voice is different ways. If people react in a particular way that is associated wiuth a particular tone to a peice of dialogue, the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn it that the dialogue was spoken in that manner. TO do otherwise is to completely ignore the basics of human interaction.

 

 

 

A lost from which you get to choose, and if you control delivery as well, and there are no actions tied to the line, then you can have your character say that thing for a wide variety of reasons.

And if that's still not enough control, you can interpret the full text as an abstraction of the actual line (just as the keyword dialogue systems of old worked), thus allowing you to write the line directly.

 

So....what you're saying is "if I ignore what the game is presenting to me, I can imagine it's really however I want it to be". Then why not do the same with a voiced PC. Imagine he's actually saying something else?

 

 

 

They make the character more difficult to control, and less mine as a result.

 

The only extra control you gain with a silent PC is what you imagine your voice sounds like. Everything else - from tone to dialogue options - are the same with both. You don't control them. The writers do.

[Torgette]

I would've been totally fine with Shepard secretly being a reaper-tech cyborg, in fact it would've been a pretty cool revelation to have right before the end of the trilogy.

[FKA_Servo]

I'd rather have a voiced protagonist too, but I don't understand why they can't A) give us the full text of a given dialog choice these days (just make it context sensitive so it's revealed when you highlight the paraphrase. It's not like it occupies that much screen real estate, anyway. We could do it in friggin' KoTOR and DAO), and B ) just give us the ability to mute the PC VO for those who would like the option.

 

Especially the latter seems like it would be pretty cheap-to-implement way of appeasing the small but (ironically) vocal group of proponents for silent PCs.

[Golden_Persona]

Both the Rannoch Reaper and Kai Leng on Cronos Station are the best boss battles in the entire series. 

I'm glad I'm not the only one. Something about Shepard facing down a Reaper beam that has murdered millions and actually winning is probably the crowning moment of badass for Shepard, and she's had a lot.

 

Kai Leng takes me back to ME2 when most of the missions ended with a fight against a conventional boss. ME3 had you fighting Reapers during it's climaxes, it lacked the personal fight of ideals that most bosses in ME2 had. That's also why Petrovsky from Omega DLC is a great villain as well. He's a conventional opponent, and it's a battle of ideals. It's also why I like the Citadel DLC's plot. Again, it's two parties fighting each other in a personal bout of skill and ideals.

[Golden_Persona]

My above post leads me to these opinions

 

>I loved the plot of the Citadel DLC. It once again took me back to ME2. No galaxy-fate deciding stakes. Just Shepard and his/her crew up against another party. It's another personal story and ME does those so freaking well. It also went into the silly, zaney, yet nonsensical and stupid territory that I loved from ME2. My posts make me realize more and more that I actually hate the ME plot with the Reapers. Everything I love about ME has nothing to do with the Reapers. So I guess...

 

>I hate the Reaper plot post ME1

 

>I actually like Kai Leng as a villain. You can't do much wrong with an asian space ninja. Plus he knocks Shepard off his/her pedestal for the only time in the series, which was both frustrating as hell but awesome. Who didn't want to gut Kai Leng with his own sword 1000x after he sends you that message post-mission. A good villain is one who succeeds in pissing you off. The interupt to kill him is sooooo satisfying as well. I could end a playthrough right after that fight and I'd be satisfied without finishing the rest of the game.

 

I think the Kai Leng hate comes from the fact that he was apparently a MUUUCH better character in the books. I never experienced his character degradation.

[Altair_ShepardN7]

Yeah.

 

And now that I think of it, the same should have happened with a romanced Liara. She should have ditched Shep for Feron.

-Tali goes with Kal'Reegar

-Liara ditches Shepard for For Feron... Or maybe cheats on you with Javik? Maybe both. 

-Garrus finds that turian with flexibility

-Ashley stops believing in premarital sex, maybe joins a convent? 

-Kaidan ditches you after he finds that Turkish girl from the biotics program

-Miranda finally becomes pregnant... But it's not Shepard's.

-Jack goes back to doing what she did before you found her.

-Jacob already ditches you.

-Thane is dying, so he decides to spend all his money on asari prostitutes. He has one besides him every day until the day of his death.

[Golden_Persona]

Assumptions? More like logical conclusions drawn from experience. People react to different tones of voice is different ways. If people react in a particular way that is associated wiuth a particular tone to a peice of dialogue, the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn it that the dialogue was spoken in that manner. TO do otherwise is to completely ignore the basics of human interaction.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I can't really role play as a character who is constantly angry when NPCs react nonchalantly to what I say, as if I said "how's the day going" instead of "you're Fing stupid I will gut your whole family". At least with a voice I get that feeling across.

 

I think one of the Fallout 4 VAs leaked the fact that you can choose what tone your character will speak in. Apparently you can make your character say a line in an angry tone, in a happy tone, in a snarky tone... takes me back to DA2. I still say DA2 was the best implementation of tones Bioware has ever done. Not only can you be kind, mean, or a smartass, but the autodialogue also changes depending on your personality. ME3's autdialogue would not have been as bad if Shepard's lines changed depending on previous choices or karma alignment you had.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Assumptions? More like logical conclusions drawn from experience. People react to different tones of voice is different ways. If people react in a particular way that is associated wiuth a particular tone to a peice of dialogue, the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn it that the dialogue was spoken in that manner. TO do otherwise is to completely ignore the basics of human interaction.

If doing that improves the game, why not do it?

So....what you're saying is "if I ignore what the game is presenting to me, I can imagine it's really however I want it to be". Then why not do the same with a voiced PC. Imagine he's actually saying something else?

I actually tried that in DA2. The problem was that the writers seem to assign intent to the lines (moreso than they did with the silent protagonist), so Hawke would end up being required to do things I didn't think he wanted to do, and hadn't been mandatory until I'd been tricked into selecting them.

Honestly, my bigger complaint is the paraphrases. If I were allowed to know what line I was choosing, the voice would bother me less.

The only extra control you gain with a silent PC is what you imagine your voice sounds like. Everything else - from tone to dialogue options - are the same with both. You don't control them. The writers do.

But you do get to choose from that list, which the ME games have never allowed.

[Dantriges]

>I actually like Kai Leng as a villain. You can't do much wrong with an asian space ninja. Plus he knocks Shepard off his/her pedestal for the only time in the series, which was both frustrating as hell but awesome. Who didn't want to gut Kai Leng with his own sword 1000x after he sends you that message post-mission. A good villain is one who succeeds in pissing you off. The interupt to kill him is sooooo satisfying as well. I could end a playthrough right after that fight and I'd be satisfied without finishing the rest of the game.

 

I think the Kai Leng hate comes from the fact that he was apparently a MUUUCH better character in the books. I never experienced his character degradation.

 

Not really. I never read the books and hate Kai Leng.

He is a complete pushover when you fight him, brags about his awesome victory like a 14 year old and behaves like he actually won, but it was his air support. And you would have killed him three or four times if you actually had control over your character and didn´t turn into a braindead husk in the cutscenes.

[The Elder King]

Renegade Control is the only ending other than Destroy that makes any sense to me. You don't just command a fleet of killships to be nice to everyone.

It depends on the definition of 'nice'. Organics might still not like the Reapers' involvmejt in Their affairs.
Also, the new entity is based on Shep's values and personality. It's logical that if follows his/her values, Regardless if Paragon or Renegade.

[Ahriman]

Not really. I never read the books and hate Kai Leng.

He is a complete pushover when you fight him, brags about his awesome victory like a 14 year old and behaves like he actually won, but it was his air support. And you would have killed him three or four times if you actually had control over your character and didn´t turn into a braindead husk in the cutscenes.

Well, I guess that's why he posted it as unpopular opinion.

I'd suggest you to read the book though. Kai Leng acts more like N7 there, not some ninja in space with mentality of 14 years old.

[Hazegurl]

Renegade Control is the only ending other than Destroy that makes any sense to me. You don't just command a fleet of killships to be nice to everyone. 

Control shouldn't have even been an option to Paragons.

[FKA_Servo]

Well, I guess that's why he posted it as unpopular opinion.

I'd suggest you to read the book though. Kai Leng acts more like N7 there, not some ninja in space with mentality of 14 years old.

 

Not having read the book either, my impression of Kai Leng in ME3 is best summed up by my nickname for him, which was "Shitty Nightwing."

 

Was that the book that was so egregiously wrong in its details that it essentially had to be "patched?"

[The Elder King]

Control shouldn't have even been an option to Paragons.

Why?

[KotorEffect3]

Once the extended cut came out I was fine with the Mass Effect 3 ending.  Come at me.

[Jester]

Control shouldn't have even been an option to Paragons.

What do you mean? Destroy is as Renegade as it gets (it's even colored red...).

If anything, destroying all people having cybernetic implants and all those Geth you just made peace with should not be allowed for Paragons. 

 

Control is pretty neutral, as it depends how you use it. 

[Seboist]

Control should've been available only to those whom kept the CB.

 

 

What do you mean? Destroy is as Renegade as it gets (it's even colored red...).

If anything, destroying all people having cybernetic implants and all those Geth you just made peace with should not be allowed for Paragons. 

 

Control is pretty neutral, as it depends how you use it. 

 

 

So? The Renegade explosion for keeping the CB is blue...

[Hazegurl]

Why?

For the reasons Kaiser mentioned.  And also, if you are Paragon and believe the Geth have a soul then why would you then take total control over a sentient race of machines? And thus use them for your own purposes.  Sounds far too hypocritical for the Paragon. 

 

What do you mean? Destroy is as Renegade as it gets (it's even colored red...).

If anything, destroying all people having cybernetic implants and all those Geth you just made peace with should not be allowed for Paragons. 

 

Control is pretty neutral, as it depends how you use it. 

Destroying the Reapers is actually more Paragon than Control.  You treat them like the unreasoned with sentient race they are and destroy them.  Not mindless machines you can do as you want with them.  Not after using EDI and Geth being alive as your reasoning.   Renegade Control is the only logical reason behind anyone taking that option.  I would say that Synthesis is the true Paragon choice.

 

Control should've been available only to those whom kept the CB.

 

 

True, and there should have been an option to use Cerberus's research on Reaper control from Sanctuary.  It's so bogus how the game auto Paragons Shepard into not even considering the benefits of controlling Reaper ground forces.

 

"The cost was too high."