82 réponses à ce sujet

[Youknow]

Maybe you are head cannon-ing all the stuff in Skyrim. You'd have to because precious little of anything is actually in the game. The game is the game, the part that interacts with you is what matters. Head cannon is pointless since you can head cannon up pretty much any game including Pac- Man (and if you can't you are missing the context driving the experience) so once you move past that and actually look at what the game is doing it makes all the difference in the world.

Except it's clear that the content is made the way it is in Skyrim to allow the headcanon to happen.There's plenty of books and lore to get involved with in Skyrim, and it's avoidable enough to where if a person just wants to dink around in the world they can do that too. It's open and sandbox like to allow for a different style of game. Sure, there are games like GTA5 that nail a story and sandbox words, but they also offer a much different experience than Skyrim. They don't really offer lore for the world. Why? It's a fictional version of earth. We already know everything there is to know about it. But it's still not a RPG, it's a sandbox action game. You can become invested in the game, but you're not going to become "loss and enchanted by a fictional world to explore." Some people like that aspect to their games. 

 

Both the blank slate AND the structured character have their pros and cons. Some people find that having a RPG where they get to develop a character's skills as the only thing they want, other people like games where they follow a rigorous story where they follow a set character as good.  Some people like a combination of the two and realize that it might not be as refined as other games that focus on one (obviously), but still offers an unique enough experience to be worth playing. That was Mass Effect 1 for instance. Gives a semi-fixed character with very little background to cloud or sway a player on how they feel the character Sheperd should act. Neither one is inherently better than the other. Even the semi-fixed character isn't exactly a bad thing. 

 

Having a fixed character isn't going to make Bioware suddenly be able to write a better story. We've seen this, because even when they decide to say "**** your decisions," things still somehow manage to get pants on head silly even with those choices. Udina for instance? Let's force him to be the councilor regardless of your actions and then just kinda... Do nothing useful with the character even with the result of this forced decision. Your choice in ME1 or ME2 did not mess up what they could have done with Udina being forced to be councilor. Fact is, the writing skill has to be good from the writer for it to even matter. They aren't spreading themselves too thin, they just aren't respecting their own plots is the issue. 

 

I don't care which one they employ, but neither makes for a better game. 

[Mdizzletr0n]

1. Sales figures <> quality. Taylor Swift > Vivaldi? Mike Bey > Akira Kurosawa? Skyrim > Planescape Torment or maybe Flappy Bird > XCOM? You also wrongly assume it is the role playing experience that sells Skyrim when the fact that it can be played as an endless kill-A-thon using the same skills one uses in COD isn't why it sells so many copies. Let's face it if you think the story is a major element of role playing (and it is because that is where you interact wi the world beyond killing things) TES clearly isn't selling anything based on the plot. Plus, it is equally clearly not playing as a tiger-man that is why it sells a bazillion copies. I'd bet the insanely overwhelming number of players are humans.

2. All posts on message boards are opinions unless one is trying to show a specific fact. When people don't have a good argument they devolve into the "na uh that is just like your opinion man" bit.

Taylor Swift is hotter. Argument invalid.

Game, Taylor.

But to the TES style v. ME style... Why not a balance between both? Like ME1 but polished. Lol.

[Sidney]

Taylor Swift is hotter. Argument invalid.
Game, Taylor.
But to the TES style v. ME style... Why not a balance between both? Like ME1 but polished. Lol.

Well that is slightly different than the pure single race issue.

In the modern era only one game has pulled that off -- FNV and they managed that by having the usual mountain of Obsidian bugs in the game. ME1 had a story but the worlds were mostly empty spaces with little development and a lot of cut n' paste. Skyrim is a ton of re-use because all of their barrow mounds use the same tiles just rotated and rearranged - a plan which shows BTW just how totally lazy the DA2 approach to reuse was - and really no story.

[Sidney]

Except it's clear that the content is made the way it is in Skyrim to allow the headcanon to happen.There's plenty of books and lore to get involved with in Skyrim, and it's avoidable enough to where if a person just wants to dink around in the world they can do that too. It's open and sandbox like to allow for a different style of game. Sure, there are games like GTA5 that nail a story and sandbox words, but they also offer a much different experience than Skyrim. They don't really offer lore for the world. Why? It's a fictional version of earth. We already know everything there is to know about it. But it's still not a RPG, it's a sandbox action game. You can become invested in the game, but you're not going to become "loss and enchanted by a fictional world to explore." Some people like that aspect to their games. 
 
Both the blank slate AND the structured character have their pros and cons. Some people find that having a RPG where they get to develop a character's skills as the only thing they want, other people like games where they follow a rigorous story where they follow a set character as good.  Some people like a combination of the two and realize that it might not be as refined as other games that focus on one (obviously), but still offers an unique enough experience to be worth playing. That was Mass Effect 1 for instance. Gives a semi-fixed character with very little background to cloud or sway a player on how they feel the character Sheperd should act. Neither one is inherently better than the other. Even the semi-fixed character isn't exactly a bad thing. 
 

There is really nothing to stop head cannon in any game. Even DAO where I have origins other than those specific revealed points anything past that is possible. I find the whole head cannon thing irrelevant because I can imagine, other than actual fixed points, anything about any character. Whatever good that does me it still does nothing in the game. It is the difference between a CRPG and an RPG. In the latter the game leader can take those details and work off of them. In TES I can decide my character is was raised by a father who was a carpenter and a mother who was a cook so I know how to whittle and cook a mean stew and growing up my favorite thing to do was to build houses of cards and read penny dreadfuls......and the game yawns and moves right on. There is nothing really any CRPG can do about that level of head cannoning.

That still drafts away from the issue of racial selection and the ability of the game to react properly to that. That isn't a "dad was a carpenter" thing. The game does know it and should react. When it doesn't that should be bad. In DOA I played as an Elven Mage a fact that was shockingly unremarked upon. It would be like playing a black American in the 1930's and the difference its picking the white character was that most of the time no one mentioned anything other than a couple of insults and one other black American feeling sympathetic to you. That would not only be lame the writers would be crucified for being lazy.

[exboomer]

First off we're stuck playing as just a human again? I mean really? This isn't the Milky Way where humanity was the new kid on the block, and is trying to fit in. This is literally a new frontier for all the milky way species. The whole galaxy is basically Terra Incognita for all the Milky Way species but we're stuck in one perspective again.

It could have been something like the Milky Way species, specifically the council species working together in new territory to find a place for all of them.

Secondly. "The Remnants"? Really? Just couldn't resist adding Protheans 2.0 huh? Now we're gonna have to deal with some bullcrap about running around the new Galaxy grabbing as much ancient tech as we can that for some reason hasn't already been scooped up by the native species. Though I think I can sort of appreciate it as being similar to the Gold Rush. But it's just gonna be another tedious "find the mcguffin that will fix all our problems" situation.

Why not just let the Milky Way species just settle and grow on their own merits without having to scrounge and rely on ANOTHER dead species technology.

Thirdly. We have to save the Galaxy again!? How CONVENIENT that the moment our human protagonist sets their foot in a new Galaxy that it needs to be saved right off the bat. Because heaven forbid that humanity can't go someplace without it miraculously needing be saved by their chosen special snowflake of the decade.

Why did we have to save the Galaxy again? I get that we need a "big bad" or whatever, but I would think that starting a foundation colony in a new Galaxy, working with(and competing with) other species from the Milky Way while trying to get along with(or subdue) native Alien species would be exciting enough. But no they just couldn't resist "upping the ante".

Not everything has to be as big as saving a galaxy for there to be some tension. Saving your species whether it's human, asari, turian, salarian, or whatever is plenty tense enough. Just ask the Quarians.

I was hoping for this cool space cowboy, manifest destiny sort of thing, just focusing on having a stable place for your species to settle, and develop.

I don't know maybe it will be OK, maybe the plot won't be garbage, maybe I'm just salty that I can't play a Asari space cowgirl. I just needed to say something.

Also I'm expecting there to be comparisons between Native Americans, and Andromedan aliens.

Also Cerberus, because of course Cerberus will show up.

If you hate the game so much without even knowing anything about it other than 1 trailer then maybe you shouldn't play it...just sayin.

[The Arbiter]

First off we're stuck playing as just a human again? I mean really? This isn't the Milky Way where humanity was the new kid on the block, and is trying to fit in. This is literally a new frontier for all the milky way species. The whole galaxy is basically Terra Incognita for all the Milky Way species but we're stuck in one perspective again.

It could have been something like the Milky Way species, specifically the council species working together in new territory to find a place for all of them.

Secondly. "The Remnants"? Really? Just couldn't resist adding Protheans 2.0 huh? Now we're gonna have to deal with some bullcrap about running around the new Galaxy grabbing as much ancient tech as we can that for some reason hasn't already been scooped up by the native species. Though I think I can sort of appreciate it as being similar to the Gold Rush. But it's just gonna be another tedious "find the mcguffin that will fix all our problems" situation.

Why not just let the Milky Way species just settle and grow on their own merits without having to scrounge and rely on ANOTHER dead species technology.

Thirdly. We have to save the Galaxy again!? How CONVENIENT that the moment our human protagonist sets their foot in a new Galaxy that it needs to be saved right off the bat. Because heaven forbid that humanity can't go someplace without it miraculously needing be saved by their chosen special snowflake of the decade.

Why did we have to save the Galaxy again? I get that we need a "big bad" or whatever, but I would think that starting a foundation colony in a new Galaxy, working with(and competing with) other species from the Milky Way while trying to get along with(or subdue) native Alien species would be exciting enough. But no they just couldn't resist "upping the ante".

Not everything has to be as big as saving a galaxy for there to be some tension. Saving your species whether it's human, asari, turian, salarian, or whatever is plenty tense enough. Just ask the Quarians.

I was hoping for this cool space cowboy, manifest destiny sort of thing, just focusing on having a stable place for your species to settle, and develop.

I don't know maybe it will be OK, maybe the plot won't be garbage, maybe I'm just salty that I can't play a Asari space cowgirl. I just needed to say something.

Also I'm expecting there to be comparisons between Native Americans, and Andromedan aliens.

Also Cerberus, because of course Cerberus will show up.

What you are asking for could have been achieved via Milkyway. End of reaper threat, no more war, species settling down, or maybe attempting to look for new solar systems in the Milkyway itself or even travel to Andromeda. But as we all know that is not happening because RGB

[Han Shot First]

I think it is far too early to draw many conclusions about Andromeda. The only thing we know for certain at this point is the setting. Even if some of the leak details are legit (likely IMO), it still isn't much at all to go on. 

[Remix-General Aetius]

we really need a dislike button.

 

where is the airlock so I may throw you out of it? PROTHEAN NO LIKE YOUUUUU!!!