225 réponses à ce sujet

[straykat]

When did this happen though? The only thing that is determined by your race is your canonical background, which is general enough to support all personalities.

 

Race does determine the potential paths one might take in dialogue, but isn't that one of the perks?

 

It's not general enough. Not for mundane humans. I only feel that way about the Circle mage (and even then, it's only open insofar as Circle stuff goes).

 

I think the game was designed to be open, but they fucked it up by putting in the extra races. I bet anything the human had the merc and smuggler stories once.

[RoboticWater]

I see no meaningful difference between a silent and voiced protagonist in terms of tone and intent. We can imagine tone because our PC is an expressionless mannequin, but the line clearly has fixed results anyway. 

I can sympathize with Sylvius' opinion on the matter to a degree. Even a fixed sentence with a fixed result can vary in tone at least somewhat. However, I don't think that a marginal degree of tonal fluidity makes silent protagonists objectively better. Of course, mileage varies and I think that most people care far more about functional differences than they do about imagined ones.

 

Like I said before: it's mainly a cosmetic trade off between presentation and small freedoms.

[Lebanese Dude]

It's not general enough. Not for mundane humans. I only feel that way about the Circle mage (and even then, it's only open insofar as Circle stuff goes).

 

I think the game was designed to be open, but they fucked it up by putting in the extra races. I bet anything the human had the merc and smuggler stories once.

 

I felt that I was capable of making characters of different characteristics no matter my race.

 

Perhaps it's because I often headcanon'd intent for some dialogue?

 

For example, in a ruthless Cousland playthrough, I chose lines of dialogue that are normally associated with being "good" when speaking to the Teyrn and the Teyrna. He was also polite and proper to his guests. He still spoke condescendingly to Ser Gilmore, and was self indulgent when asking Dairren what he thought about him in the library.

 

To be honest I would also prefer to have more options for humans rather than more races, as I typically stick to playing humans, but that seems to be an unpopular opinion around here.

 

If ME:A had you only playing a human with more variation in your role, I wouldn't bat an eye.

[straykat]

I felt that I was capable of making characters of different characteristics no matter my race.

 

Perhaps it's because I often headcanon'd intent for some dialogue?

 

For example, in a ruthless Cousland playthrough, I chose lines of dialogue that are normally associated with being "good" when speaking to the Teyrn and the Teyrna. He was also polite and proper to his guests. He still spoke condescendingly to Ser Gilmore, and was self indulgent when asking Dairren what he thought about him in the library.

 

To be honest I would also prefer to have more options for humans rather than more races, but that seems to be an unpopular opinion around here.

 

If ME:A had you only playing a human with more variation in your role, I wouldn't bat an eye.

 

Cousland had more room to RP because they weren't cramped down with a Chantry heavy family. You could probably still slum it in Highever and Denerim. It also helps that your own mom is an ex-Pirate.

 

But it also helped that the rogue-ish stuff was spread out to City Elves too. And not just Dwarves like this. By rogue, I mean underworld stuff. Not just the class. Of course, Dalish can be rogues too... but it's supposed to be more of a hunter archetype. And if other Dalish are any indication, they're not supposed to be masters of the universe of all things social. They're naive like Merrill and Velanna.

 

Gaider himself doesn't believe in these backstories enough though. He just waved it off and said to headcanon things too. But that's kind of sad to me.

[Lebanese Dude]

Cousland had more room to RP because they weren't cramped down with a Chantry heavy family. You could probably still slum it in Highever and Denerim. It also helps that your own mom is an ex-Pirate.

 

But it also helped that the rogue-ish stuff was spread out to City Elves too. And not just Dwarves like this. By rogue, I mean underworld stuff. Not just the class. Of course, Dalish can be rogues too... but it's supposed to be more of a hunter archetype. And if other Dalish are any indication, they're not supposed to be masters of the universe of all things social. They're naive like Merrill and Velanna.

 

Gaider himself doesn't believe in these backstories enough though. He just waved it off and said to headcanon things too. But that's kind of sad to me.

 

I think implementing a background in itself is already constraining enough. Even the most open introductions have limitations of their own. One might argue whether it's better to just dispose of them completely.

[straykat]

I think implementing a background in itself is already constraining enough. Even the most open introductions have limitations of their own. One might argue whether it's better to just dispose of them completely.

 

It worked well enough before. Somehow by simply offering a codex this time, I feel my hands are tied behind my back even more. Strangely. First off, the question of age. "Youngest child" (does that mean I was young when I joined the Chantry or young now?). And if I can be old, then did I run away from my Chantry obligations and "explore the world"? Does that mean I only came back to it around the time of the Conclave? Or was I forced to be a priest or Templar this whole time? And if I AM a Templar Trainee AND OLD, then why don't I already have a Templar skillset?

 

I settled on a guy who was a Chantry brother (not a Templar), but did some hunting and still had his noble upbringing in weaponry.. He's around 30 or so. Real interesting, eh? :\ The goddamn height of roleplaying.

[Lebanese Dude]

It worked well enough before. Somehow by simply offering a codex this time, I feel my hands are tied behind my back even more. Strangely. First off, the question of age. "Youngest child" (does that mean I was young when I joined the Chantry or young now?). And if I can be old, then did I run away from my Chantry obligations and "explore the world"? Does that mean I only came back to it around the time of the Conclave? Or was I forced to be a priest or Templar this whole time? And if I AM a Templar Trainee AND OLD, then why don't I already have a Templar skillset?

 

I settled on a guy who was a Chantry brother (not a Templar), but did some hunting and still had his noble upbringing in weaponry.. He's around 30 or so. Real interesting, eh? :\

 

I think the "youngest" is there to sever you from any potential familial obligations from a lore perspective.

 

It also offers a reasonable explanation for why your character isn't trained already from a gameplay perspective.

 

I think all PCs at the start of "fresh slate" games are going to be inherently boring. They become interesting as you affirm their personality throughout the game.

 

How would you implement a less constrained character feasibly?

[straykat]

I think the "youngest" is there to sever you from any potential familial obligations from a lore perspective.

 

And it would have been better if I didn't deal with the family to begin with then...if that's the case. Plenty of humans could easily have been the smuggler or merc. They are all over DAO/DA2. Instead they had to make way for some races added at the last minute to take that idea. And those too have their own roleplaying problems.. they come from insular, dejected cultures.. yet they can act like they're both Fonzie AND Jesus here. To me, that's ridiculous. In addition to them simply looking like ****. So I won't play them.. and take the best of bad options. Human mage is the least problematic, but I like the other classes a little more.

[Lebanese Dude]

And it would have been better if I didn't deal with the family to begin with then...if that's the case. Plenty of humans could easily have been the smuggler or merc. They are all over DAO/DA2. Instead they had to make way for some races added at the last minute to take that idea. And those too have their own roleplaying problems.. they come from insular, dejected cultures.. yet they can act like they're both Fonzie AND Jesus here. To me, that's ridiculous. In addition to them simply looking like ****. So I won't play them.. and take the best of bad options.

 

DAO and DAI races weren't last minute though. 

 

Still I would have loved to have more human options.

 

I think the main reason the always give humans the "Noble" tag is because technically they are the only ones who could be noble (on the surface, at least). It also added a lot to the story in DAI, in a way that the commoner background wouldn't.

 

So it makes sense from that perspective to distribute the other archetypes to other races. Still, giving humans an additional "Commoner" background wouldn't be a bad idea.

[straykat]

DAO and DAI races weren't last minute though. 

 

Still I would have loved to have more human options.

 

I think the main reason the always give humans the "Noble" tag is because technically they are the only ones who could be noble (on the surface, at least). It also added a lot to the story in DAI, in a way that the commoner background wouldn't.

 

So it makes sense from that perspective to distribute the other archetypes to other races. Still, giving humans an additional "Commoner" background wouldn't be a bad idea.

 

Yeah, they were.. in DAI. Not as races in general. They extended the last year to add them. It was human only before.. and some talk about variations being like Shep.

 

Just to add though.. notice the Circle Trevelyan is the only one that doesn't say "youngest". It's a different origin. That frees up a lot right there. One little word. lol

[Lebanese Dude]

Yeah, they were.. in DAI. Not as races in general. They extended the last year to add them. It was human only before.. and some talk about variations being like Shep.

 

Just to add though.. notice the Circle Trevelyan is the only one that doesn't say "youngest". It's a different origin. That frees up a lot right there.

 

Ah that's not really last minute though, but I see where you coming from.

[straykat]

Ah that's not really last minute though, but I see where you coming from.

 

That was their big last step afaik. They were releasing info by that point, and when they did.. some people raised hell about "humans being boring". Something about Hawke touching them in a bad place. I don't know. But what they got were late additions that are still basically human. And after ME3, I bet they took any threat or boycott seriously. Even if it's just 5% of the fanbase.

[Lebanese Dude]

That was their big last step afaik. They were releasing info by that point, and when they did.. some people raised hell about "humans being boring". Something about Hawke touching them in a bad place. I don't know. But what they got were late additions that are still basically human. And after ME3, I bet they took any threat or boycott seriously. Even if it's just 5% of the fanbase.

 

True.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm sorry, why shouldn't your character's motive and intent be important?

It is important - to the character. The game world shouldn't ever be aware of it. The NPCs can't read my character's mind.

Moreover, by leaving the intent and motive hidden, the game leaves us space to resolve that ambiguity as we see fit.

We have to be able to headcanon motive and intent. We do it all the time whenever we make a choice within the game. So having control of motive or intent wrested from us is at best jarring, and at worst character-breaking.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Oh I never played NWN2 so I can't tell. I was speaking from DAO experience.

I wouldn't mind the approach you mentioned, although I see how it can potentially limit the player. Still, would that be inherently different from making a plot-critical choice and having to live with the choice you made?

It would be like the paraphrase system, where you're not allowed to know exactly which choice you're making at any given moment.

I don't mind choices that lock off future options, but I want that to be based on a choice I actually made, rather than one that was nonsensically tied to a choice I made.

[Lebanese Dude]

It would be like the paraphrase system, where you're not allowed to know exactly which choice you're making at any given moment.

I don't mind choices that lock off future options, but I want that to be based on a choice I actually made, rather than one that was nonsensically tied to a choice I made.

 

Yeah they could stand to be a little more transparent.

[SNascimento]

It is important - to the character. The game world shouldn't ever be aware of it. The NPCs can't read my character's mind.

In a way, they can. Dialogue in any game have, be it Baldur Gate 2 or Dragon Age Inquisition, will have a certain tone and intent to them. A threat will be a threat, no matter if you head cannon it to be a joke. And you can tell a certain character perceived it as so by they answer to it. Sometimes there is enough ambiguity when the character(s) are not voiced to let the player decided just how that happened, but more often the not you can tell just what tone that dialogue is having. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I see no meaningful difference between a silent and voiced protagonist in terms of tone and intent. We can imagine tone because our PC is an expressionless mannequin, but the line clearly has fixed results anyway.

I see no rigid relationship between the tone and results that would make the results at all relevant to the determination of tone.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In a way, they can. Dialogue in any game have, be it Baldur Gate 2 or Dragon Age Inquisition, will have a certain tone and intent to them. A threat will be a threat, no matter if you head cannon it to be a joke.

If I headcanon it as a joke, then it's a joke. Whether the NPC interprets it correctly doesn't change that.

I make jokes other people don't get (or even seem to notice) all the time. But that's okay, because I didn't make the jokes for them.

And you can tell a certain character perceived it as so by they answer to it.

This is where we disagree. I don't think it is possible to do what you describe.

[SNascimento]

If I headcanon it as a joke, then it's a joke. Whether the NPC interprets it correctly doesn't change that.

But we're talking of situation that can mean life and death, or extremely important decisions. One can head cannon all you like, but you are going against what the game is trying to do. Which is not inhenrently bad, I certainly did my share of that in Baldur's Gate II, but it's worth noting things for what they are.
 

 

This is where we disagree. I don't think it is possible to do what you describe.

I'm using Baldur Gate II as my reference here, as it was the last game without voiced protagonist (and characters) that I played. And I can certainly say you can tell the tone of the dialogue many times. I imagine my character saying stuff one way, but I could tell that's not quite how the other character understood it. It might not have happened to you, but it's something that I dare say happens to a lot of people who play the game like that.

Anyway, Andromeda will not go back to that kind of dialogue. Which I say is a good thing. There are other games that can do that, but that's not for Mass Effect, not the main games at least. 

[Fortlowe]

I see no meaningful difference between a silent and voiced protagonist in terms of tone and intent. We can imagine tone because our PC is an expressionless mannequin, but the line clearly has fixed results anyway.

This is what I want to change. Think of the wheel as it is now except in addition to selecting the line of dialogue, you're also selecting the tone that dialogue will be delivered in.

So now that we have input in not just what is said, but how it is said, the mannequin can wake up and demonstrate the state of mind you wish and the game can react and record accordingly.

[AlanC9]

I'm using Baldur Gate II as my reference here, as it was the last game without voiced protagonist (and characters) that I played. And I can certainly say you can tell the tone of the dialogue many times. I imagine my character saying stuff one way, but I could tell that's not quite how the other character understood it. It might not have happened to you, but it's something that I dare say happens to a lot of people who play the game like that.

Wait... you skipped NWN, KotOR, DA:O, everything Bethesda, etc......?

[AlanC9]

If I headcanon it as a joke, then it's a joke. Whether the NPC interprets it correctly doesn't change that.

I make jokes other people don't get (or even seem to notice) all the time. But that's okay, because I didn't make the jokes for them.This is where we disagree. I don't think it is possible to do what you describe.

The downside, of course, is that this introduces flaws into your understanding of the NPC's personality. (Which is only a problem if you care about such things.) I could never do this because I'd know I'm introducing garbage data into the process. I wouldn't believe my own headcanon, which I can't sustain for any length of time.

[SNascimento]

Wait... you skipped NWN, KotOR, DA:O, everything Bethesda, etc......?

No, I just mentioned the oldest and newest Bioware game I've played. 

[KaiserShep]

This is what I want to change. Think of the wheel as it is now except in addition to selecting the line of dialogue, you're also selecting the tone that dialogue will be delivered in.
So now that we have input in not just what is said, but how it is said, the mannequin can wake up and demonstrate the state of mind you wish and the game can react and record accordingly.

I'd be curious how one would design this. Would it be a two-step process to select a line then select the tone, or would it be a wheel full of the same line each with different tones assigned? Then there's determining which lines would be suited or ill-suited for multiple tones, the latter of which I'm guessing would be a good amount. I can't say that this sounds very appealing to me, but I'd really have to see just how it would function.