170 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sounds like you want an MMO.

If only they didn't have other players in them...

[Lord Bolton]

I prefer someone like Shepard or Hawke- protagonist with multiple personalities, where you can choose one, or just one, but really interesting type of character (like in TW3).

I hate how DA:I forced me to headcanon pretty much everything, including my Inquisitor's personality, because otherwise he was dull as hell (emotional responses and stuff like that didn't help). I'm just tired of headcanoning and I want to see everything in the game. 

 

I just hope that ME will still be ME in this regard and BW won't change anything.

[Gileadan]

I hate how DA:I forced me to headcanon pretty much everything, including my Inquisitor's personality, because otherwise he was dull as hell (emotional responses and stuff like that didn't help). I'm just tired of headcanoning and I want to see everything in the game.

This.

 

Despite that there was something called an "emotion wheel" available during some conversations, the Inquisitor's personality still felt mostly "neutral" to me. The one really emotional moment is in the Trespasser trailer. In most other conversations, the "emotional responses" are so close to neutral that they barely seem to have any impact on your protagonist's personality. When I select a reply marked with a teary-eye-icon, I expect something more sad than "Aw, bummer about all those dudes who died at Haven". When the icon is a raised fist, "Corypheus will pay for this." is a bit underwhelming.

 

It could have been a great tool to shape your character if it had gotten you responses like in the Trespasser trailer, but as it is, it only adds spice in homoeopathic doses to a somewhat bland basic dish.

[Han Shot First]

I'd rather have a military background than be a scientist or engineer or w/e.  Most of what we do ingame is pseudo military stuff, running around going pew pew at enemies.  The reason the various science types are always supporting NPCs is because doing the science-ey stuff can be boring.  Imagine if you had to solve a third order non-homogeneous differential equation involving a 3rd rank tensor in 4 dimensions every time you access the galaxy map and plot a course?  Or having to do a groundwater chemical composition analysis for every new planet to see if the water is safe to drink?  Having the science people being NPCs lets them hand wave all that away.  Basically, the only reason to be a science type is to do science, which I don't want to do in a game because I can (and do) do science safely and easily in real life, at whatever level I want from reading Discover to getting a degree in physics.  What I can't do in real life is run around and save the day by blowing the nasty bad guys to kingdom come, but its fun to pretend I am so I play games.  Basically, I play games in general, and RPGs in specific so I can pretend to do something cool and awesome that I cannot do, or or cannot do safely, in real life.  Being that egghead who has the military escort is much less interesting to me than being the military escort, because I can egghead in real life.  I can't (safely, conveniently, or in a manner inducing to having fun) be a military escort in real life.

 

Good post. 

 

If Bioware does go with a protagonist who is a scientist or an engineer, I hope the character also has a former military background so that their combat prowess is somewhat plausible. It's not like one can't be both. A good number of NASA's astronauts for example have been both former military aviators and engineers or scientists, including Neil Armstrong.

[Helios969]

Good post. 

 

If Bioware does go with a protagonist who is a scientist or an engineer, I hope the character also has a former military background so that their combat prowess is somewhat plausible. It's not like one can't be both. A good number of NASA's astronauts for example have been both former military aviators and engineers or scientists, including Neil Armstrong.

Agreed though I'm not sure Air Force and Naval aviators would survive 5 minutes in a ground conflict conducting search and destroy...I mean, sweep and clear ops.  Even had he been armed appropriately I tend to think had Neil Armstrong encountered aliens on the moon he would have gotten his azz kicked.

[Fredward]

Agreed though I'm not sure Air Force and Naval aviators would survive 5 minutes in a ground conflict conducting search and destroy...I mean, sweep and clear ops.  Even had he been armed appropriately I tend to think had Neil Armstrong encountered aliens on the moon he would have gotten his azz kicked.

 

So would most soldiers, you tend to play the exceptional in games.

[Han Shot First]

Agreed though I'm not sure Air Force and Naval aviators would survive 5 minutes in a ground conflict conducting search and destroy...I mean, sweep and clear ops.  Even had he been armed appropriately I tend to think had Neil Armstrong encountered aliens on the moon he would have gotten his azz kicked.

 

I don't know. I might bet on Buzz Aldrin against a hostile alien. 

 

Buzz Aldrin Slugs a Tinfoil Hat Wearing Fool

 

[Helios969]

 

I don't know. I might bet on Buzz Aldrin against a hostile alien. 

 

Buzz Aldrin Slugs a Tinfoil Hat Wearing Fool

 

Lol, I like that...guy's got some spunk.

[SardaukarElite]

If Bioware does go with a protagonist who is a scientist or an engineer, I hope the character also has a former military background so that their combat prowess is somewhat plausible. It's not like one can't be both. A good number of NASA's astronauts for example have been both former military aviators and engineers or scientists, including Neil Armstrong.

 

Given the whole starting at level 1 in an RPG thing (presumably) I think it would make a lot of sense to be someone with military training but not actual combat experience. This could include (expendable) experts of a variety of backgrounds put through basic.

[LinksOcarina]

And I'm saying the process you described doesn't explain why I lack that certainty.  It has nothing to do with the pre-written background of pre-written character.

 

ME fails purely because of the abysmal paraphrasing and heavy-handed voice-acting.

 

Why you lack such certainty is a different question all together. I would argue the paraphrasing actually works, just not in a way of giving you 100% of the information of your response, which is more or less the point.

 

The backgrounds and characterization of Shepard is part of that too though; you can't control all of Shepards emotions, mind you. So it would be a mix of all of this, which constitutes the games design.

[KaiserShep]

If only they didn't have other players in them...

I think open world would be the more obvious alternative, but I don't think that BioWare would do very well to do this sort of thing, because it plays to none of their real strengths.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Good post.

If Bioware does go with a protagonist who is a scientist or an engineer, I hope the character also has a former military background so that their combat prowess is somewhat plausible.

I hope they let us not have combat prowess.

[Han Shot First]

I hope they let us not have combat prowess.

 

Just as a backstory, or do you mean you'd rather the combat gameplay aspects were reduced or cut?

[RandomSyhn]

As far as exploring foreign planets and trying to stay alive I wouldn't see why a scientist on a ground team wouldn't go through even basic combat training. Hell it could be a tutorial level. I'm personally hoping for a non-military protag so I can be at odds with my military counterpart. I also think it could be really interesting if we were not a soldier, not a scientist but a stowaway. You could even come up with some sort of background that would have combat training.

[KaiserShep]

I hope they let us not have combat prowess.

In a shooter game? I like you Sylvius, but I find your madness often comes between us.

[Brightwolf]

I hope they let us not have combat prowess.

 

How would you want that?  A blanket -20% to all health, damage, and shields for the protag?  We stay on the ship and play some sort of science minigame while the soldier types lead the away team?  What type of gameplay are you looking for that doesn't involve combat, and if you want a non combat game are you sure that Mass Effect, which has always been a shooter/RPG hybrid, is the right game for you when you consider that "shooter" is inextricably linked to "combat?"

[Mdizzletr0n]

The protagonist could be combat trained without having a military background. Just saying. Also, it's never been stated that you're exceptional in that regard either.

[Mdizzletr0n]

How would you want that?  A blanket -20% to all health, damage, and shields for the protag?  We stay on the ship and play some sort of science minigame while the soldier types lead the away team?  What type of gameplay are you looking for that doesn't involve combat, and if you want a non combat game are you sure that Mass Effect, which has always been a shooter/RPG hybrid, is the right game for you when you consider that "shooter" is inextricably linked to "combat?"

You don't necessarily have to stay on this ship. The protagonist is an explorer. If anything, the soldier/merc types would be more in the way of escorts. Doesn't mean that the protagonist is gonna run and hide when **** hits the fan. He/she just wouldn't be on their level in terms of combat.

[7thGate]

I mean, you can build an RPG such that there are many paths to accomplishing your character's goals, only some of which involve shooting everything.  Fallout 1 did that pretty well, IIRC.  I don't think they intend to go that route with ME: Andromeda, but it could be kind of cool if enough of the game could be shortcutted/bypassed/dealt with using various non-combat abilities to make it viable to play as a character specializing in diplomacy or technical skills.  

[Brightwolf]

You don't necessarily have to stay on this ship. The protagonist is an explorer. If anything, the soldier/merc types would be more in the way of escorts. Doesn't mean that the protagonist is gonna run and hide when **** hits the fan. He/she just wouldn't be on their level in terms of combat.

 

Again, how would you implement this in game?  You could either sink a LOT of time and money into trying to make an AI that is better than me at the game, or you could reduce my damage/durability to the level where the squad does is more effective even though I (me Brightwolf controlling Pathfinder, not Pathfinder) am more skilled than the AI.  Neither of these two solutions is very good.  Building an AI that is better than a human is at this sort of thing is very very difficult, and almost certainly not cost effective in either time or money.  Reduceing my damage,is only going to frustrate people.  Having my guns/powers do significantly less damage than my squadmates using the same guns/powers on the same targets because "bad at combat" sounds like a recipe for frustration.  Even if it wasn't frustrating, we always want more player agency in the story, why would we want less in terms of combat?  If in every combat encounter you do 1/3 the damage that your squaddies do, whether you win or lose is largely dependent on your squadmates AI, not on you which sounds both boring and frustrating.  Also, this is easy to test.  Go do an ME3 playthrough where you never fired your gun or used your powers (to show no combat skill) or only used the predator pistol at rank one and powers at rank 1 (to show minimal combat skill), and relay on your companions for everything, without micromanaging them.  You will find that gameplay has become boring as hell on easy difficulties, and impossible AND boring on harder ones.

 

Finally, as I mentioned earlier, what do you want to be doing instead of shooting?  Play science minigames?  Solve differential equations?  What is it you want your scientist/engineer Pathfinder to be doing instead of shooting?

[themikefest]

Agreed though I'm not sure Air Force and Naval aviators would survive 5 minutes in a ground conflict conducting search and destroy...I mean, sweep and clear ops.  Even had he been armed appropriately I tend to think had Neil Armstrong encountered aliens on the moon he would have gotten his azz kicked.

Depends on how many aliens he encounters. Does he have the element of surprise?

[Fredward]

Yah know. When I said I wanted to play a scientist I just meant in terms of roleplay/story, not gameplay mechanics. Like I seriously don't want a groundwater analysis mini-game. And I definitely don't wanna do less damage than my squadmates. I just want to be my own exposition vehicle, not stare idly into the middle distance as Liara or EDI pontificates.

[Mdizzletr0n]

Again, how would you implement this in game? You could either sink a LOT of time and money into trying to make an AI that is better than me at the game, or you could reduce my damage/durability to the level where the squad does is more effective even though I (me Brightwolf controlling Pathfinder, not Pathfinder) am more skilled than the AI. Neither of these two solutions is very good. Building an AI that is better than a human is at this sort of thing is very very difficult, and almost certainly not cost effective in either time or money. Reduceing my damage,is only going to frustrate people. Having my guns/powers do significantly less damage than my squadmates using the same guns/powers on the same targets because "bad at combat" sounds like a recipe for frustration. Even if it wasn't frustrating, we always want more player agency in the story, why would we want less in terms of combat? If in every combat encounter you do 1/3 the damage that your squaddies do, whether you win or lose is largely dependent on your squadmates AI, not on you which sounds both boring and frustrating. Also, this is easy to test. Go do an ME3 playthrough where you never fired your gun or used your powers (to show no combat skill) or only used the predator pistol at rank one and powers at rank 1 (to show minimal combat skill), and relay on your companions for everything, without micromanaging them. You will find that gameplay has become boring as hell on easy difficulties, and impossible AND boring on harder ones.

Finally, as I mentioned earlier, what do you want to be doing instead of shooting? Play science minigames? Solve differential equations? What is it you want your scientist/engineer Pathfinder to be doing instead of shooting?

Honestly, i'd be fine if my companions are better at shooting things than I was Ecstatic even.. Especially over being another untouchable mega soldier like Shep was and how useless the squad felt at times. I'd like to be able to rely on my smarts more than just pure gun slinging brawn. It could be done. Sure, it may be difficult but it could be done.

I'd also like doing more "science-y" things along with the usual combat stuff. Handling everything with just combat is boring after awhile. That said, the more science based (not equations though..lol.) stuff should be optional as it wouldn't be for everyone.

I understand that it wouldn't be a popular play style as ME became far more of a twitch Shooter as time went on and many people, if not most, seem to prefer it that way in terms of gameplay.

[sjsharp2011]

Yah know. When I said I wanted to play a scientist I just meant in terms of roleplay/story, not gameplay mechanics. Like I seriously don't want a groundwater analysis mini-game. And I definitely don't wanna do less damage than my squadmates. I just want to be my own exposition vehicle, not stare idly into the middle distance as Liara or EDI pontificates.

yeah that's kind of what I'd like too really I like the idea of playing a scientist who just happens to be working for the military qand has some basic combat training and allow us to build our character up from there or something.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Why you lack such certainty is a different question all together. I would argue the paraphrasing actually works, just not in a way of giving you 100% of the information of your response, which is more or less the point.

The backgrounds and characterization of Shepard is part of that too though; you can't control all of Shepards emotions, mind you. So it would be a mix of all of this, which constitutes the games design.

If we can't control Shepard's emotions, then we can't roleplay Shepard. Roleplaying requires control of the character's mental state.

You were asserting that my approach doesn't work because of the pre-determination inherent in the game. You also denied a meaningful difference between a pre-written personality and a pre-written background. And since Shepard clearly has a pre-written background, you're therefore asserting that she has a pre-written personality.

Though I think KotOR drives home the background/personality divide pretty clearly.

If I ignore that, however, then you seem to be arguing that the game doesn't really offer choices beyond the big ones, thus any personality I might invent is largely meaningless outside of those events (which are so infrequent as to make me wonder why anyone would bother playing the game for hours just to reach one).

Actually, no, that shouldn't have been parenthetical. Having hours of filler between gameplay events doesn't make any sense at all. Even if a player doesn't find the combat relentlessly dull (as I do - boring combat is a plague that afflicts most shooters), if the regular dialogue isn't intended for roleplaying, why is it there?

As for hybridization, I've argued before that DAO was a hybrid, given the simplified combat and limited story options and party restrictions and rigid backgrounds. That was my compromise. That's about as far as I'm willing to go. That's about all the storytelling I can handle in my RPGs.