I like it. I'd have to wonder, though, how it might be written - any choices you'd be asked to make would need to be in-character for that NPC. A lot of people feel a natural revulsion to making choices for NPCs.
With Anderson choices might have to be limited to his character, but with Coats there's more room because we don't know much about him
They've have playable races on ME3 multiplayer and succeded
They also don't have to deal with cutscenes and voice filters since hardly have dialogue
They've have playable races on ME3 multiplayer and succeded,
the Elder Scrolls series are successful of having playable races,
so what's stopping them from doing it?
I think they just making excuses for themselves for them not to make improvements on animations, expressions,
With Anderson choices might have to be limited to his character, but with Coats there's more room because we don't know much about him
That's just combat. No selectable dialogue or cutscenes, only combat barks.
Apples and oranges. TES doesn't have voiced protags or very many cutscenes.
A lot of people here have tried to explain the ramifications.
It isn't just "improvements". They would need entirely different sets of voices and cutscene animations for protags of different species. They would also need a lot more variance in dialogue.
As near as I can tell, Bioware has never once suggested that they'd be interested in offering multiple playable species. Like a lot of other things, this is a player request - and one I don't expect will ever come to fruition.
If the story they want to tell is about finding a home for humanity, then that is the story they should tell. For playable races to be an option, it would need to be a story about finding separate homes for all species and that story isn't as focused and unless you really care about each species as equally as the next, it might be hard to care about what you're doing as a player.
they did fine with DA: Inquisition of playable races without compromising the game and storyline.
That's not true at all. The Dragon Age devs have said numerous times that they had to rework the story and cut content to accommodate race selection in Inquisition. The Inquisitor was meant to have a lot more personality, story integration and character interactions but they had to make everything much more generic to add race selection.
they did fine with DA: Inquisition of playable races without compromising the game and storyline.
Even though they had to rewrite parts of the game and story just to get some race dialogue in....
It worked in Inquisition, I think, and was fairly successful. The race selection increased replayability and I feel like I get a somewhat different experience with my multiple playthroughs. For example, a Dalish Inquisitor of any class presents some of the most interesting roleplaying options going forward with the late game emphasis on the Elves misunderstood history. I also prefered the Inquisitor over Shepard because my roleplay was always limited with Shepard (Earth! Earth! Earth!) while I had more nuanced roleplaying opportunities in Inquisition.
I'm really disappointed that my Рrotagonist will be a human only, the announced has definitely killed some of my enthusiasm.
Wow,so many angry and mad replies over one simple suggestion lol So this is the thread where I need to bring my popcorns instead.
Isn't it just the same people that are being negative as in most of the threads? It feels like deja vu...
That's not true at all. The Dragon Age devs have said numerous times that they had to rework the story and cut content to accommodate race selection in Inquisition. The Inquisitor was meant to have a lot more personality, story integration and character interactions but they had to make everything much more generic to add race selection.
[citation needed]
[citation needed]
The Inquisition forums. The Dragon Age devs actually participated in discussions.
The Inquisition forums. The Dragon Age devs actually participated in discussions.
Great, then you should have no problems finding the relevant quotes and post them here.
I find so many arguments, especially against multiple character races, so very selective. Why is it harder to make a game for a blue/green woman, or a "whatever from planet ego"? Yes, it requires some discipline in writing the thing, but it is the writing that dictates if it has to be any difference at all.
In ME1-3 has humanity been among alien races for some time. Even if Andromeda is before ME1-3 is it still many aliens that can have been living on earth and many humans that can have been born and raised in other non-human cultures. Meaning that the characters can have identical background regardless of race. Not so different from men and women having the same background story despite the differences.
Some of you that argue against this doesn't consider creativity, rationality and how to structure a story. Yes, if you take many stories and suddenly change the main character into something else, then the story might seem weird and surreal. It is nothing wrong with that if the story never was designed to handle it. But if you're willing to shape the story to make it plausible and coherent, then it doesn't have to be any difference at all (other than the player's head-canon and the player's different associations that is shaped by the choice of race, gender and appearance).
I seriously think you underestimate the writers if you think they can't handle that.
That said, perhaps the story is written in "stone" and that the whole game is based upon this story. That is however a choice and not meaning it would be impossible to have written a different story.
Great, then you should have no problems finding the relevant quotes and post them here.
Pfft. I'm not digging through multiple forums to find specific posts from so long ago that I can't even recall if they were made this year or last. I'm going to bed in a few minutes and I actually have something resembling a personal life.
I find so many arguments, especially against multiple character races, so very selective. Why is it harder to make a game for a blue/green woman, or a "whatever from planet ego"? Yes, it requires some discipline in writing the thing, but it is the writing that dictates if it has to be any difference at all.
What's the point of having race selection if it has no actual impact at all?
A difference in the story. For the player does it of course have an impact. Otherwise, why do you think people want it? Same with gender, colour, custom face and ugly hairstyles. Why not just have one pixel, or a line of pixels, you move around on the screen, like in pong: Because we care, obviously, and so do you.
What's the point of having race selection if it has no actual impact at all?
What's the point of having gender selection if it has no actual impact at all?
A difference in the story. For the player does it of course have an impact. Otherwise, why do you think people want it? Same with gender, colour, custom face and ugly hairstyles. Why not just have one pixel, or a line of pixels, you move around on the screen, like in pong: Because we care, obviously, and so do you.
A difference in the story. For the player does it of course have an impact. Otherwise, why do you think people want it? Same with gender, colour, custom face and ugly hairstyles. Why not just have one pixel, or a line of pixels, you move around on the screen, like in pong: Because we care, obviously, and so do you.
What's the point of having gender selection if it has no actual impact at all?
Gender selection isn't the same thing as imaginary races at all.
Yes, by necessity games limit what you can actually do - but you can still play a character who looks for an opportunity to do a certain thing, even if the game never presents that opportunity. And in this case, a character could well find marrying Alistair / Anora to be an acceptable way to accomplish a goal.
That's not my point. My point is that there's a difference between being allowed to do something and failing (e.g. flirting with Dorian/Sera as the opposite gender and getting rejected), and being denied the opportunity to express something (announcing to Wynne you're a blood mage in DA:O vanilla). In DA:O, the HN can't offer himself or herself as a Landsmeet candidate. It doesn't matter whether this option works. It matters that it doesn't exist.
A character who would do this - announce their candidacy - is impossible. This is not a character that exists in DA:O. If you make this character, the game will refuse to allow you to play him or her.
This is where mental fantasy comes in.
Once your character drank the kool-aid, s/he was in fact a GW.
Shepard was a Commander in the Alliance Navy, an N7, and required to become a Spectre.
No. Drinking the kool-aid, as you put it, allows the GWs to try to claim jurisdiction over you. It may well be that nations will recognize that jurisdiction. But that they can't force you to identify with their order. DA:O forces you to identify with the identity of a GW, despite not making this part of the starting premise of the origin story. It's really badly done from the perspective of a game wanting to say there's room to RP. And ME1 is actually a great counter-example.
Shepard identifies as an Alliance military officer. But ME1 never forces Shepard to actually identify with the goal of the Spectres, or to place Citadel aims above humanity. That you're made into a Spectre is different from identifying as a Spectre, and in fact the game constantly allows you to either introduce yourself as Alliance Navy or as a Spectre.
I find so many arguments, especially against multiple character races, so very selective. Why is it harder to make a game for a blue/green woman, or a "whatever from planet ego"? Yes, it requires some discipline in writing the thing, but it is the writing that dictates if it has to be any difference at all.
In ME1-3 has humanity been among alien races for some time. Even if Andromeda is before ME1-3 is it still many aliens that can have been living on earth and many humans that can have been born and raised in other non-human cultures. Meaning that the characters can have identical background regardless of race. Not so different from men and women having the same background story despite the differences.
Some of you that argue against this doesn't consider creativity, rationality and how to structure a story. Yes, if you take many stories and suddenly change the main character into something else, then the story might seem weird and surreal. It is nothing wrong with that if the story never was designed to handle it. But if you're willing to shape the story to make it plausible and coherent, then it doesn't have to be any difference at all (other than the player's head-canon and the player's different associations that is shaped by the choice of race, gender and appearance).
I seriously think you underestimate the writers if you think they can't handle that.
That said, perhaps the story is written in "stone" and that the whole game is based upon this story. That is however a choice and not meaning it would be impossible to have written a different story.
Isn't it just the same people that are being negative as in most of the threads? It feels like deja vu...
That's not true at all. The Dragon Age devs have said numerous times that they had to rework the story and cut content to accommodate race selection in Inquisition. The Inquisitor was meant to have a lot more personality, story integration and character interactions but they had to make everything much more generic to add race selection.
Strange. Every time I saw Bioware talking about why they cut what they did from DAI, the answer was always because of the limitations the Xbox 360 and PS3 had, hence why they didn't even get most of the DLC. I never saw race selection be used as an explanation for why things were cut once.
What's the point of having race selection if it has no actual impact at all?
To let players have fun. Or is that not a valid reason to include something in a electronic entertainment medium?
Retour en haut
