@YuusouAmazing
So very Assassin looks the same from behind!?
So you never played Liberation HD?
@ALL
KCD vs. Skyrim is like apple vs. banana
Skyrim/Oblivion/Fallout are not designed to show emotions through facial animations.
Mass Effect is already more on the right track.
But Mass Effect calls the player not with his first name.
KCD has the bases to realize more emotions.
But that isnât the goal of KCD. I think after all ACTâs
things like, jobs, professions etc. can be implemented with some DLCâs
Most stuff for this will be presented with the first three acts, i hope!
@YuusouAmazing
You will play ASCR IV BF ?
Most players will say, "Oh it is okay but not good"
But I can say, "it is the best PotC cover Game 4ever!"
Only if âRavenâs Cryâ have more things to do and more interaction with ships and world!
Hey is this a more story driven game than Mount and Blade WHICH NO ONE EVEN MENTIONS IS A INSPARATION!!! sorry⊠just finished watched IGNâs video over the tech demoâŠ
I agree with the suggestion that the lead protagonist should be able to be female, however that would also mean a double VO budget for the entire dialogue tree, question is if that money is more worth being spent elsewhere, for example in more indepth conversations with iNPCs, more idle talk or just more contextualized ambient dialogue from passer-bys to make the world more âlivingâ (compare The Witcher 3 or GTA5 with Far Cry where the bots repeat the same sentence everytime you pass them). To my understanding Warhorse donât have the same VO budget as for example BioWare (and even in Dragon Age Inquisition the ambient dialogueâs and non-interactive NPCs was pretty sparseâŠ)
This is not a game set in 2015.
Having a female character would be a completely different game because of gender roles.
Every single quest would need to be in two versions, every single NPC would need different things they say and all that would need voice actingâŠ
All the clothing, armor, animation for fighting would need to be made in two versions⊠if done properly.
That would be a huge amount of extra work⊠And result in a game experience where most NPCs would simply not accept your character. Henry, as the son of a blacksmith might have a hard time being taken serious⊠a female millers daughter⊠100x harder.
In the current alpha you can ask for some training in sword fighting⊠The soldiers wouldnât take that serious if you played a womanâŠ
Hell even today females have to fight to be allowed to be soldiers in the UK and USâŠ
Yeah, a female main character couldâve been a blacksmith and all, but when you get past the backstory it becomes kinda problematic. Rogue and bard would be open, but the whole knight path would pretty much be blocked off. Not to mention, again, the way people would interact with you would be vastly different. Youâd either end up with an RPG shoehorned onto both sexes, or two done properly at greater expense.
In the witcher games you couldnât create your own character and it turned out to be great, and maybe even better then most of âthat line of gamesâ.
Iâm expecting the same from KCD even if youâre just the son of a blacksmith.
Okay? Theyâre two different types of games. What I said isnât opinion. That is how those games are intended to be played. Not all games need to be a locked in place character, and âthat line of gamesâ is for freedom of choice.
Other than the hair thing (because why not?), I disagree with the OP. This is a set character, my point was Abraham trying to say he couldnât connect with his character in skyrim, only shows he couldnât come up with someone interesting.
Maybe thats because alot of games with character costumisation lack the voice of your character in conversations and i think the talking of your character is a very important part for âconnectingâ with him/her, but maybe thats just an opinion.
A voice makes it a set character, or one of three (good, evil, neutral). That limits your ability to create. That is far too much of restriction, and defeats the purpose, making it the worst of both types. Lack of real personality, plus a lack of ability to fully create the character yourself. Fallout 4 is a âgoodâ example of this effect.
Itâs up to you to create a character in those games, that you can connect too. One that does not necessarily conform to a specific personality, which a voice would no doubt enforce. As I said that is the point of them.
You sound like the people complaining that this game isnât like that=/ Youâre both saying the same thing from the opposite side.
Problem is, you donât make your own character in Skyrim. You may chance its appearance, but no matter what you do youâre still the legendary dragon slayer, Dovahkiin. You have no power to change the story. You can make up his/her backstory I guess, but that will have no effect on the game at all, and is therefore not relevant.
If you think that playing Skyrim is roleplaying, then you clearly have no idea what roleplaying is.
Nope. Simply false actually. Where is it written that you have to do the main story? Where? If you ignore it, the dragons never even show up (apart from the very beginning), no one refers to you as dragon born.
âthe acting out or performance of a particular role, either consciously (as a technique in psychotherapy or training) or unconsciously, in accordance with the perceived expectations of society as regards a personâs behaviour in a particular context.â
Very simple, one that all of the elder scrolls and fallout fit very well. I donât know what kind of point you were trying to make there.
I ask you to watch many of the roleplaying letsplays on youtube (sorcerer dave, veriax, etc) If the next thing you were going to say is that you need the main quest to have a real story. Really, please to watch them. Only if you want to feel foolish however:(
Sure you donât have to do the main quest. But the quest you do, whether itâs the thievesâ guild or the companions, the outcome the quest are already determined. You have no way in changing anything. You talking to your screen instead of your character talking doesnât make any difference. Youâre still not roleplaying.
Roleplaying is not âdoing stuff because the game tells me toâ, itâs coming up with what your character would do and how she/he would reaction under specific circumstances that fits the personal traits and background you have been given.
From Wikipedia:
âA role-playing game is a game in which the participants assume the roles of characters and collaboratively create stories. Participants determine the actions of their characters based on their characterisation.â
1.In Skyrim, you have no way of creating stories. You may ignore some, but you never create any.
2.You donât determine any action. The game determines everything of importance for you.
3.Since the game forces you to do things the way the games want, and no other way, thereâs no reason to create a background or characteristics since these wonât be reflected in the game in any way.
Create stories: When do you create stories with a set character? Theyâre all laid out. You can make decisions within those stories, but the same goes for the elder scrolls. I wonât pretend theyâre significant. The set story is one of the weakest parts of modern elder scrolls, but Iâll get to why thatâs irrelevant to my point below.
Determining actions: This doesnât specify within the quests themselves. The elder scrolls beats set character games when it comes to decision making, overall. (see below)
Based on their characterization: Both types of game have this. However the characterization is mostly predetermined within one, allowing you to decide the characterization itself.
1.In Skyrim, you have no way of creating stories. You may ignore some, but you never create any.
100%, objectively false. I always know my opponents are struggling, when they have to ignore what I say. Did I not refer you to the role playing series on youtube? Please watch some of them before replying again, as you sound like a moron right now. I donât know what else to say, they, and many people that play them make this incorrect. It seems the problem is your lack of imagination.
2.You donât determine any action. The game determines everything of importance for you.
Whether or not quests are of importance to you, IS your choice. It determines nothing of the sort, you donât have to do anything if you donât want too. You decide your characters focus and goals.
3.Since the game forces you to do things the way the games want, and no other way, thereâs no reason to create a background or characteristics since these wonât be reflected in the game in any way.
The game doesnât force you to do anything. Not unless youâre OCD and you feel compelled to do every single quest in your journal. This is again, objectively false. It doesnât force you to do anything. The fact that youâre saying there is no point in creating a character, only reveals your inability to do so. As for being reflected in the game, once again, watch some role-playing series. Iâll link you to some of my favorites:
Really, do watch them. Theyâll make you feel very stupid for saying any of this. Youâre simply incorrect about everything you said!
Both of these game types have there place. I donât prefer one overall, but both for different things. But I wonât standby if incorrect statements are made about either one of them.
A great, subtle example of this would be the reaction a woman would receive in a tavern.
In the Holy Roman Empire it was ILLEGAL â and thatâs no exaggeration, it was an OUTRIGHT LAW â for a ârespectableâ woman to visit a tavern without a male (usually her husband) escort. Thus any woman visiting a tavern alone would most likely be automatically assumed to be a prostitute and treated as such.
The gender laws in the HRE may have been even more restrictive than in France, which was pretty tough on women itself. England was probably the most âprogressiveâ for the time but even THAT is just by virtue of comparison to what else was going on in Europe.
First off, Iâm not going to spend an hour watching someone else playing a video game, but after skimming through the three videos, all they seemed to do is creating a backstory for their character. As I have already said, this is not roleplaying, since thereâs no possibility to reflect how the character reacts to the world.
Create stories: When do you create stories with a set character? Theyâre all laid out. You can make decisions within those stories, but the same goes for the elder scrolls. I wonât pretend theyâre significant. The set story is one of the weakest parts of modern elder scrolls, but Iâll get to why thatâs irrelevant to my point below.
Determining actions: This doesnât specify within the quests themselves. The elder scrolls beats set character games when it comes to decision making, overall. (see below)
Based on their characterization: Both types of game have this. However the characterization is mostly predetermined within one, allowing you to decide the characterization itself.
I never claimed that having a set character would change anything in regards to this. I donât even think an open world single-player role-playing video game with todayâs technology is possible.
1.In Skyrim, you have no way of creating stories. You may ignore some, but you never create any.
100%, objectively false. I always know my opponents are struggling, when they have to ignore what I say. Did I not refer you to the role playing series on youtube? Please watch some of them before replying again, as you sound like a moron right now. I donât know what else to say, they, and many people that play them make this incorrect. It seems the problem is your lack of imagination.
Giving your character a background is not the same as creating a role-play story. This mix-up probably derives in your lack of knowledge of role-playing (not that I claim to know too much about it either).
2.You donât determine any action. The game determines everything of importance for you.
Whether or not quests are of importance to you, IS your choice. It determines nothing of the sort, you donât have to do anything if you donât want too. You decide your characters focus and goals.
3.Since the game forces you to do things the way the games want, and no other way, thereâs no reason to create a background or characteristics since these wonât be reflected in the game in any way.
The game doesnât force you to do anything. Not unless youâre OCD and you feel compelled to do every single quest in your journal. This is again, objectively false. It doesnât force you to do anything. The fact that youâre saying there is no point in creating a character, only reveals your inability to do so.
Yes, you can choose to do some quest and ignore others, however, this is, once again, not role-playing. Once you have chosen a quest that you want to play, to have no way to change the outcome based on your characterâs traits, motives, and ambitions.
Lastly, I canât say I truly see that points in your consistent insults. They only make your arguments seem weaker and even less serious than they already are.
Evidence that it is a was that was in effect in the entire HRE
Evidence that is was actually enforced
Yes the gender roles was rather specific. So adding a female main character would be like making a compleetly new game⊠but I would still like you to prove that statement
