Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Oblarg

  1. Not much has been revealed about the stealth system thus far, but please, please, PLEASE make it better than most RPG stealth systems. I don't want to turn invisible and walk around having to pretend that I'm sneaking, I want to actually have to sneak. This is an espionage game, after all.

  2. You're there to stop the apocalypse from happening, where's the ambiguity exactly?


    It's silly to think the Reavers as anything other than Shadows/Inhibitors/(insert random alien machine threat here). A clear villain with clear objectives. The only ambiguity was in Saren, but I failed to see how exactly he had more depth than, say, Malak. A much more competent VO and better lines though.


    You still don't know why the reapers exist. You don't know what exactly they are. You don't know what made them.


    There's a lot of room for expansion in there - that's what makes a good plot. I loved the Mass Effect universe and story, they're in-depth and well thought out. But that's not my point, and I fear we've gone off on a bit of a tangent here.


    My point is that deep characters are created through dialogue and interactions with the player. You cannot have a deep character with simplistic dialogue: Mass Effect and KotOR1 are proof enough of that fact (in fact, the only character in KotOR1 that I found to have any depth at all was Jolee Bindo).

  3. Whoa, hold on. How did Mass Effect have a deep story? Unless I missed something, the entire plot premise is a race of machines that wipes out all organic life because . . . well . . . it creates an excuse for the player to shoot them.


    Ambiguity adds depth, to an extent. I'm sure the reason will be revealed later on. It's not simply because it gives us an excuse to shoot them.

  4. I didn't like the extremes of "paragon" and "renegade," simply because what is paragon in the eyes of one may be renegade in the eyes of another.


    Not really.


    Paragon = follows protocol and directions.

    Renegade = whatever needed to get the job done.


    But, like Jade Empire, it was poorly implemented.


    Which reminds me, any type of personality meter in the game? Dove vs Hawk, Obedient vs Maverick, Isolated vs Friendly?


    Not exactly, at least not based at all on what was seen in game.


    Following protocol and directions is waaay to simplified to have an entire extreme of your personality based on it. And it's not just protocol, saving the colonists on Feros wasn't "protocol," in fact, there is no protocol for Spectres. Paragon is nice, Renegade is mean. It's as simple as that, and that's why Mass Effect has shallow characters. It's a great game, with a plot that is anything but shallow, however the characters are lacking.


    The characters in KotOR1 were slightly better, but they, too, were a bit lackluster until KotOR2 came along and expanded on them. Revan was no longer "all good" or "all evil," and his "fall" fell into question. A character cannot have absolutes to be deep, there have to be questions and ambiguity. This is true in all forms of storytelling, in literature, in movies, and also in video games.


    This is why I'm glad it's Obsidian making this game, as they have the ability to pull it off.

  5. From what I've experienced, the thing that adds that kind of depth to a game is dialogue. That's not to say that kind of depth is the only thing that makes a game great - I love Mass Effect, even with it's somewhat lacking dialogue, because the story is amazing. But if you want to truly feel attached to characters in a game, they have to have well written lines that really create a personality. Mass Effect was lacking in this in that the personalities were all somewhat shallow.


    This is why I'm glad it's obsidian making Alpha Protocol, because KotOR2 simply has the most brilliant dialogue I've seen in a game. Kreia is an example of one of the best developed characters in any RPG to date.

  6. I'd rather have fewer dialogue options producing more tangible results than the inverse. If it becomes a degenerate meta-game, that is a problem, but I do think that it's good to always produce some in-game effect when the player is asked to make a dialogue choice.


    I like this approach, and it's one of the things I admire about Obsidian and am hoping Alpha Protocol really focuses on.


    Personally, I liked approach KotOR2 took to dialogue, with every major character having a different opinion of the Exile based on dialogue and actions. It's unfortunate KotOR2 wasn't really finished, as that had a lot of potential, but I'm truly hoping that Alpha Protocol can do great things with dialogue, something that's lacking from most other RPG's I've played.


    Mass Effect dialogue seemed overly wordy and I didn't like the extremes of "paragon" and "renegade," simply because what is paragon in the eyes of one may be renegade in the eyes of another. I find any game that has all characters react too similarly to your choices to be a bit watered down, and Mass Effect was no exception. Don't get me wrong, I loved ME, but the dialogue is not where it shined. KotOR2, on the other hand, has the best pieces of dialogue in any game I've played thus far.

  • Create New...