Dragon Age 2 - Female Hawke at PAX

DArtagnan said:

In my personal experience with women, they're not drawn to violent fantasy CRPGs like many men are - and in fact they detest that sort of juvenile fantasy - that Bioware tried to market. You might have been drawn to the game for other reasons, but I bet you didn't exactly mind the violence.

Click to expand...

In my personal experience with men, the ones who are drawn to violence is a minority. But my friends are usually computer nerds or academics. Neither I or my cohabit reflect on virtual violence, we are more concerned with game mechanics, numbers to be built, items to be collected, puzzles to be solved, achivements to be earned. But I am also interested in philosophical questions, storybuilding, character portraits etc, where the setting is just a backdrop. Violent conflict is a common backdrop for human history and thus represent a good background for telling a story. I appreciate other settings though.

wolfgrimdark said:

Released today - figured it would go well in this thread:

Click to expand...

That's good. Now I only wish to see her animated.

Not a fan of default FemHawke, unsurprisingly. I've been following DA2 with a very critical eye since it was announced, and I've been applying it to that image.

1. Giraffe neck again. It's a common "problem" with Mass Effect and FemShep.
2. Jay Leno's chin reappears!

Yeah, she's kinda cute, but I'm not sure. She seems to completely contrast with ManHawke (He seems more "cartoony" whereas she seems more realistic), and I'm... I'm unsure.

JemyM said:

In my personal experience with men, the ones who are drawn to violence is a minority. But my friends are usually computer nerds or academics. Neither I or my cohabit reflect on virtual violence, we are more concerned with game mechanics, numbers to be built, items to be collected, puzzles to be solved, achivements to be earned. But I am also interested in philosophical questions, storybuilding, character portraits etc, where the setting is just a backdrop. Violent conflict is a common backdrop for human history and thus represent a good background for telling a story. I appreciate other settings though.

Click to expand...

You're a nerd and a core gamer, Jemy - just as I am. We're not the large market anymore.

I specifically said you don't get pushed away BECAUSE of violence. That's the difference I'm referring to.

My personal experience isn't just about my own close circle of friends, it's about human beings in general.

Most women still think of singleplayer CRPGs as somewhat geeky and don't enjoy blood being spattered all over the place.

If you really insist that "young men/men in general" respond equally to a violent fantasy CRPG as does the average woman, then I'll leave that to you.

Whenever a player make a choice, they give up content. Content that took time and resources to create. I have almost never heard the male voice of Shepherd, nor did I see the darj side endings of KOTOR or Jade Empire. But when the option to make that choice is the key behind the customer buying the game, and the customer getting immersed into the game, and have fun with the game, spending resorces to improve the players choice is worth it. Choice is actually a way to make one-game-fits-all, than trying to find the "average player" and build a game for him, ignoring the rest of your potential customers.

I know that if I recommend some games to friends, they might enjoy the game like I did, but they didn't play the game the way I did. One could say they played a game more suited for their taste.

There's a reason you can have a fanta or a sprite rather than only Coca-Cola. There's enough room in the fridge for more kinds of customers.

In fact, once there was a major research done on the ultimate tomato sauce. After developing the perfect and most beloved taste, the company lost customers. They learned that producing a number of different tastes, they sold more, even if it demanded more resources.

Click to expand...

For Ultima 7 part II the choice was great, there were lots of things which would play differently if you were a woman or a man and it worked out really well. But to create the animation and graphics needed was almost no work, besides the avatar is a person very much defined by the players actions.

But in bioware games, they try to flesh out the character more make romancing options with each character and so on. I think it is hard to make a story of that kind consistent without a pre-defined gender. They did it well in jade empire though.

If it pays of from a marketing perspective... that's another question though, I meant if it paid off in a game quality perspective.....

JemyM said:

Ignore 20% of the players and maybe lose another 5%. Acknowledge 20% of the players and maybe gain another 5%. The "find the generic player archetype" is the misguided goal that in the long run decrease interest for your product when you could expand your market. Sims is the most popular franchise ever that dwarfs even the most popular "male" games. Maybe that should tell you something about what potential you waste when you try to appeal to the majority.

Just think about the potential gain from expanding your market to the other sex and suddenly you see that you have WASTED resources by not making that investment, just like not spending money on advertisement on a product you payed to develop is a tremendous waste of resources.

Click to expand...

The other way around really - if you have had equal opportunity in the past and thus feel your research represents the general market situation then spending 5% more zots on 80% of the potential market will bring you a much larger market gain than those same zots on 20% of the potential market.

I tend to blame VO for most of the issues plaguing RPGS these days. I know people love it (I admit I enjoy it) but it seems to use up many valuable resources I would rather see in content, story, etc. It limits flexibility and increases costs a great deal, especially when people use big names.

But it is not all EA/BW at fault here. This generation of gamers seems to crave it and so it is a mix of many things.

I certainly prefer not to have my own character voiced. It really does nothing for me, except take me out of the role.

DArtagnan said:

I certainly prefer not to have my own character voiced. It really does nothing for me, except take me out of the role.

Click to expand...

Depends on the role for me. If it's an RPG where I'm playing my own character then yes. If I'm playing a character in a story then I'm not so fussed, be that Shepard, Geralt or The Nameless One.

But I think it's a good point that full VO has some quite serious consequences for flexibility etc.

kalniel said:

Depends on the role for me. If it's an RPG where I'm playing my own character then yes. If I'm playing a character in a story then I'm not so fussed, be that Shepard, Geralt or The Nameless One.

But I think it's a good point that full VO has some quite serious consequences for flexibility etc.

Click to expand...

I want all my RPGs with my own character

When I played Leliana's Song I got a very strong feel that I was only there to watch a story rather than create my own. Dialogue options doesn't really matter and usually I felt that it's Leliana saying this and that, not me. It was different from playing Origins and Awakenings in which I really was the warden. I could hear my own voice in my head uttering the dialogue option I picked, and then I got the NPC's response.

JemyM said:

When I played Leliana's Song I got a very strong feel that I was only there to watch a story rather than create my own. Dialogue options doesn't really matter and usually I felt that it's Leliana saying this and that, not me.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what your point is with this? Leliana's Song is about her, and about her past. It's not there for you to create your own past or story for Leliana, you're living it through her, basically. Your comment seems to imply that you think it's a bad thing, but I could be wrong.

As for the dialogue point with the Warden? One problem I've found, as others have, is that it's rarely what you choose.

JemyM said:

It was different from playing Origins and Awakenings in which I really was the warden. I could hear my own voice in my head uttering the dialogue option I picked, and then I got the NPC's response.

Click to expand...

It was kind of weird in DA though…
I don't remember people complaining that much that their character was unvoiced in other games - like in Bethesda's games for example (unless I missed it)
In DA my character felt somehow 'mute' to me as well…
I'm guessing it might be because he was often so shown - I got to see his expression and his reactions when NPCs talked but I never got to see him talk, which did feel odd (besides that I liked the effect though).


And by the way, I'd like to take this opportunity to praise Bloodlines for having the best NPC interaction I've even experienced… Everyone just felt so alive (which is kind of ironic considering that most were undead) that it was easily the most immersive game I've played in that department. I don't know why, but I feel that Bioware has still a long way to go before they can reach that level.

I always found those statements interesting, how it bothered people that the Warden was mute in DAO.

It never once (and this is not an exaggeration) even entered my mind as an issue that he didn't speak. He was "me" and his voice was in my head overall (minus his combat dialogue). As I choose his dialogue I said the words in my own head, with my own voice.

It was as natural as thinking so the voice existed just fine. I have no need to actually hear him speak - to do so is detrimental to immersion to me. Then it is NOT me speaking but someone else and the character is no longer my character but someone else.

I don't mind VO for the NPC's as they are already someone else (well except that I would like to see the money put elsewhere, I just mean I am not as opposed to it with NPC's as I am to the protagonist). But I hate it for my character. Nor do I need it since I hear it just fine in my own head. Maybe it has something to do with imagination and growing up in an era where you had to use more of your imagination to fill things in with games, versus now a days where you don't need to use your head as the games do most of it for you.

I will most likely enjoy DA2 to some degree but not nearly as much as DAO I bet (I could eat these words and I honestly hope I do … but I suspect not) because Hawke will be less my character and more some guy I get to direct, as if in a play and I am the director. Not always bad mind you … but I prefer we keep variety in games and not make them all the same format.

It seems like todays generations just want a movie to play.

EDIT: While now and then I was a tad unsure if a line was joking (in regards to dialogue choices) or snarky overall I had little issue with picking a dialogue choice in DAO and getting what I expected. I think maybe once or twice did I get something unexpected.

I have very little imagination and I still hate having others voice my character

Personally, I think it's about the importance you place on the sensation of personal freedom. I can't take a single step in real life without feeling free from all bonds, and as such I despise it when games curtail my actions or sense of self, needlessly.

Naturally, there are limits and natural restrictions - and pre-scripted dialogue is still preferable to me, to word-based dialogue - because it's simply too lifeless.

But, there is no right or wrong here - just a matter of personal taste. Some people greatly enjoy the opportunity to play "someone else", or partake in a story where you're not, personally, doing what's being done. That's great and there should be games to facilitate that.

I always prefer having as much control over the experience as is plausible, and that's especially relevant when it's a single character RPG (as well as party-based where you're not directly in control of playing or creating the members) - because I really love immersing myself in a role that I create for myself. As a sidenote, I actually just play "myself" as a fantasy variant, instead of someone who would do things that I wouldn't feel comfortable with, myself. Aside from the heroic stuff, naturally

The problem with something like Dragon Age, is that the developers create the dialogue, and it's their job to "guess" what kinds of people are going to play. That means that while I found the dialogue very well written, I'd often be looking for ways of responding that weren't available. So, it's never REALLY possible to satisfy my preferences in a game like this.

Because of that, I prefer games that don't let dialogue reflect choices. I'd much rather have my actions be OUTSIDE NPC "talky bits." I mostly consider dialogue interactions to be little episodes that I have to go through, so that I can back to playing my role.

Dwagginz said:

I'm not sure what your point is with this? Leliana's Song is about her, and about her past. It's not there for you to create your own past or story for Leliana, you're living it through her, basically. Your comment seems to imply that you think it's a bad thing, but I could be wrong.

Click to expand...

My comment was a reflection upon how Leliana's Song felt as a teaser for how it's going to feel like to play "Biowares story about Hawke" in Dragon Age 2, compared to how it felt to play "your story as the warden" in Dragon Age 1. Having played 120 hours of the Warden, it was odd to hear Leliana's voice speaking the dialogue.

JemyM said:

My comment was a reflection upon how Leliana's Song felt as a teaser for how it's going to feel like to play "Biowares story about Hawke" in Dragon Age 2, compared to how it felt to play "your story as the warden" in Dragon Age 1. Having played 120 hours of the Warden, it was odd to hear Leliana's voice speaking the dialogue.

Click to expand...

Ah, I see. Fair enough!

wolfgrimdark said:

I tend to blame VO for most of the issues plaguing RPGS these days. I know people love it (I admit I enjoy it) but it seems to use up many valuable resources I would rather see in content, story, etc. It limits flexibility and increases costs a great deal, especially when people use big names.

Click to expand...

I agree. This money is better spent somewhere else - but some people just don't care - or they complain anyway, no matter whether VO or not.

I like good VO. It increases my immersion in the story. There is nothing more immersion-breaking for me than hearing everyone else speak except the main character. To me, that's bizarro-world. It removes my ability to identify with a character, if I cannot hear him/her.

I approach game stories as I approach other stories, viewing them from the outside and identifying with the characters as much as the game makes possible. Although I enjoy shaping a character to fit my preferences, I am not really "playing me" in a game. It's not me. It's Sarah Shepherd (or whoever). I'm not really interested in playing me anyhow; I do that in real life. I'm interested in this particular character, this other person. Maybe it's an alter ego of sorts, a Mr. Hyde to my Dr. Jeckyl, but usually not.

Good VO conveys more interpersonal information and is more realistic as a communication between two people. So much of communication is via tone of voice and delivery, which you are left clueless about in most games without VO. In novels, the author lets you know about the person's mindset and the tone of delivery, but in games, you get just the verbal content and that's it, no nuance or tone.

So, thumbs up for good VO from my corner. Note that I said "good VO." Bad VO will wreck a game pretty quickly.