188 réponses à ce sujet

[thegreateski]

Hollingdale wrote...
Just because the story progresses in a linear fashion doesn't that you can't visit older locations freely in whichever way you want to. It simply means that you unlock areas as you progress to them through the mainstory.

You mean . . . just like it already is in Dragon Age?

[Dansayshi]

Did somebody say FFX was crap? WTF!? Its brilliantly written, (Althoguh I did hate the beginning, and Tidus.... but it made up for it at the middle and end) and had quite afew secret areas near the end, secret bosses etc.



FF13 tho.... thats a failure, its like FFX but is even more linear, with no little sidequests, or towns / cities or minigames with the dullest battlesystem ever known.



But.... Every game benefits from linerity, soley because you can pack more in along the way, making it seem more full, instead of it loosely hanging about. As for weather it'd suit DA tho.... well it already is linear tbh, you can just choose what you do first, its just well disguised linearity, and I like the way it is, because it gives me abit of choice, and I dont feel cornerstoned.

[Hollingdale]

Dragon Age doesn't progress in a linear fahsion, it gives you four seperate areas each containing mini stories that in the end matter little in regards to the main story which you may explore in whichever order you like.

There's quite a big difference between this and the linearity of say NWN2 or FFX tbh.

I feel kind of obliged to repost this link: WARNING CONTAINS SPOILERS http://img28.imagesh...4areasystem.jpg

As it appears to me lots of didnt read it, will add it to OP aswell.

Modifié par Hollingdale, 07 avril 2010 - 09:40 .

[Dansayshi]

Well it may not "progress" in a linear fashion, so to speak, it still is linear, you just choose what order you do it in, it still has the same beginning (Ostegar) and end (Denerim). Tho I see your point, I never bother to read the OP after the 1st page except for important messages, only reason for that is that threads tend to drift, considerably.



A small tweak in freeroam linearity for me tho, which dragon age would benefit from is forced at the beginning, till you get to "freeroam" the world, then after doing 1 thing, you get another forced event, then another "freeroam" choice, then another forced event. It keeps things more managable, and gives more control over how the game plays. Infact, I beleive they tried it with ME2, giving you "freeroam" until you completed afew recruitment quests, before forcing you to do abit of the main story. I wouldnt mind Dragon age being like that, I did feel a little spoilt originally doing the dalish clan first, just feel like the mages tower should be done first, as you sorta need wynne to live.

[Hollingdale]

But then again Mass Effect 2 does suffer from the same predictability that Dragon Age aswell as Kotor does.



Instead of Starmaps or Armies you get recruits. But yes it is spiced up with surprise events. Something that Dragon Age really lacks.

[thegreateski]

Hollingdale wrote...

Dragon Age doesn't progress in a linear fahsion, it gives you four seperate areas each containing mini stories that in the end matter little in regards to the main story which you may explore in whichever order you like.

There's quite a big difference between this and the linearity of say NWN2 or FFX tbh.

I feel kind of obliged to repost this link: WARNING CONTAINS SPOILERS http://img28.imagesh...4areasystem.jpg

As it appears to me lots of didnt read it, will add it to OP aswell.

You start in your origin.
You go to Ostagar
-Battle of Ostagar-
You go to Lothering
-You finish the Mage's treaty by recruiting a group
-You finish the Elves treaty by recruiting a group
-You finish the Dwarves treaty by finding a paragon, doing something with a certain item, then returning the Orzamar and recruiting a group.
-You go to Redcliffe to check on someone.
You do something.
-You go to Redcliffe castle
-You go somewhere and do something with an item of a religious nature.
You return to Redcliffe
You recruit the help of an Arl.
You go to a certain place with him and recruit the help of the Humans.
You go back to Redcliffe
You then go back to a certain place
You kill something
The game ends.

mix up the "-" as you see fit.

Modifié par thegreateski, 07 avril 2010 - 10:12 .

[Nikatjef]

Hollingdale wrote...
I feel kind of obliged to repost this link: WARNING CONTAINS SPOILERS http://img28.imagesh...4areasystem.jpg

   I have looked at it and find it completely based on opinion.  When you get right down to it the "surprise" factor that you are referring to could easily have been added to DA:O while still retaining Bioware's own version of linearity.  That Bioware chose not to does not, IMO, detract from the story one iota.

   Additionally, contrary to your commentary, the decisions you make while doing three of these four areas does affect the game at later stages.  For example the Dwarves or Golems.  While it may be true that many people do not need or care about the changes at those later stages, the simple fact is they are there and again it is your choice whether or not those changes are useful.

   I also feel the need to point out that there is no way to prove or disprove your commentary about the comparitive complexities of linear vs free form as applied by DA.  Through the use of some fairly simple coding Bioware was able to make level scaling work in DA to balance the challenge / reward throughout DA:O.  Additionally, other than a few minor areas where lore / canon does break in DA:O, Bioware appears to have kept the story line very flexible and quite complex.  I can honestly say that, IMO of course, the story line in DA:O was easily as complex as Guild Wars (Very linear story) and light years more complex than 95% of all other commercial games out there.

[Hollingdale]

thegreateski wrote...

Hollingdale wrote...

Dragon Age doesn't progress in a linear fahsion, it gives you four seperate areas each containing mini stories that in the end matter little in regards to the main story which you may explore in whichever order you like.

There's quite a big difference between this and the linearity of say NWN2 or FFX tbh.

I feel kind of obliged to repost this link: WARNING CONTAINS SPOILERS http://img28.imagesh...4areasystem.jpg

As it appears to me lots of didnt read it, will add it to OP aswell.

You start in your origin.
You go to Ostagar
-Battle of Ostagar-
You go to Lothering
-You finish the Mage's treaty by recruiting a group
-You finish the Elves treaty by recruiting a group
-You finish the Dwarves treaty by finding a paragon, doing something with a certain item, then returning the Orzamar and recruiting a group.
-You go to Redcliffe to check on someone.
You do something.
-You go to Redcliffe castle
-You go somewhere and do something with an item of a religious nature.
-You return to Redcliffe
You recruit the help of an Arl.
You go to a certain place with him and recruit the help of the Humans.
You go back to Redcliffe
You then go back to a certain place
You kill something
The game ends.

mix up the "-" as you see ft.

Your point being? Im puzzled.

[Hollingdale]

Nikatjef wrote...

Hollingdale wrote...
I feel kind of obliged to repost this link: WARNING CONTAINS SPOILERS http://img28.imagesh...4areasystem.jpg

   I have looked at it and find it completely based on opinion.  When you get right down to it the "surprise" factor that you are referring to could easily have been added to DA:O while still retaining Bioware's own version of linearity.  That Bioware chose not to does not, IMO, detract from the story one iota.

   Additionally, contrary to your commentary, the decisions you make while doing three of these four areas does affect the game at later stages.  For example the Dwarves or Golems.  While it may be true that many people do not need or care about the changes at those later stages, the simple fact is they are there and again it is your choice whether or not those changes are useful.

   I also feel the need to point out that there is no way to prove or disprove your commentary about the comparitive complexities of linear vs free form as applied by DA.  Through the use of some fairly simple coding Bioware was able to make level scaling work in DA to balance the challenge / reward throughout DA:O.  Additionally, other than a few minor areas where lore / canon does break in DA:O, Bioware appears to have kept the story line very flexible and quite complex.  I can honestly say that, IMO of course, the story line in DA:O was easily as complex as Guild Wars (Very linear story) and light years more complex than 95% of all other commercial games out there.

As I mentioned it is of course possible to have elements of surprise despite using the 4 area system. Nonetheless the story at large will still be predictable.

And come on people we've seen it in the Kotor 1 and 2, we've seen it in Mass Effect 1 and 2, and we've seen it in Dragon Age Origins and Awakenings.

Frankly I would love for a new way of telling a story in Dragon Age 2.

[demongirl420]

more sexhttp://social.bioware.com/brc/967354

[thegreateski]

Ah . . . a keylogger.



I was wondering when these would start poping up.

[thegreateski]

Hollingdale wrote...

thegreateski wrote...

Hollingdale wrote...

Dragon Age doesn't progress in a linear fahsion, it gives you four seperate areas each containing mini stories that in the end matter little in regards to the main story which you may explore in whichever order you like.

There's quite a big difference between this and the linearity of say NWN2 or FFX tbh.

I feel kind of obliged to repost this link: WARNING CONTAINS SPOILERS http://img28.imagesh...4areasystem.jpg

As it appears to me lots of didnt read it, will add it to OP aswell.

You start in your origin.
You go to Ostagar
-Battle of Ostagar-
You go to Lothering
-You finish the Mage's treaty by recruiting a group
-You finish the Elves treaty by recruiting a group
-You finish the Dwarves treaty by finding a paragon, doing something with a certain item, then returning the Orzamar and recruiting a group.
-You go to Redcliffe to check on someone.
You do something.
-You go to Redcliffe castle
-You go somewhere and do something with an item of a religious nature.
-You return to Redcliffe
You recruit the help of an Arl.
You go to a certain place with him and recruit the help of the Humans.
You go back to Redcliffe
You then go back to a certain place
You kill something
The game ends.

mix up the "-" as you see ft.

Your point being? Im puzzled.

It is possible to do both Linearity and non-Linearity in a game and still have a winning formula.

[Vicious]

I am of the opinion that the ''classical bioware here are four areas visit them in whichever order you like'' is really quite unnecessary and bad for their games and that this shows quite clear in Dragon Age.

I agree. It's tiresome. Linearity would help a lot.





I have come to HATE the 4 area system. They should follow Baldur's Gate route. LOTS of side missions and quests, then all of a sudden the plot comes in and smacks you with the reality bat.





And if they can't do that, give us more then 4 places to visit. Really.

[Traesket]

To be honest, I'm not really sure if it's the lack of linearity that made me dislike DA:O. But I'm quite certain it added to it. SPOILERS BY THE WAY!

The main "Fail", in my humble opinion, is the fact that the 4 choices you have in DAO all suck. They have nothing to do with the main story (except perhaps Redcliff) and they might as well have been side-quests or DLCs. I understand that had the problems been at hand at the four locations, the main character would have been required to help them. But those 3 (or 4) problems at those locations are just nuisance. It could just as well have appeared in a DLC or a sidequest.

In Mass Effect, those 4 (or however many they were) actually had something to do with the main storyline. Sure, we needed the army of the mages, elves, dwarves and humans. But their side-missions were just dull as hell and didn't give anything to the main story. In ME, all the places (from how I recall it) made sense in regards to the main story. You needed to get Liara because you needed to know more about the Protheans etc and she was a Prothean expert. You needed to do something on Feros, and you ended up getting to know more about Sovreign and a lot of other things. Basically, all these places actually had main story in them. But in DAO. Did you, for example, learn ANYTHING from saving the godforsaken elves? I really don't recall it perfectly, but from how I remember it you learned nothing you cared about.

Due to the fact that you did had four places to choose from, you quickly realised after playing 1-2 that all of them would just be roadblocks in the storyline, rather than something actually adding to it. You understood that basically the only thing you needed to do in the game was do those retarded missions for the people who couldn't possibly do anything themselves, then possibly do 1-2 more things and then you're off to kill the Dragon.

My least favorite thing was the ending though. Hardly anything you did felt as if it had any effect, and in my first playthrough someone else actually killed the dragon for me while I was trying to figure out where it was. Then the screen went black and I was like "Wut?" and then suddenly I was in a room full of people and I had apparently saved the day. On the second playthrough I actually saw the Dragon get slain by someone else ... and seeing as I on both playthroughs had killed the dragon in the mountains I knew exactly how slaying a dragon looked like. And guess what? This is exactly the same. Never mind having some special cutscene or something when killing the END BOSS. Let's just re-use something we already had. And it's just a killing blow so it's not that awesome anyway seeing as although the Dragon Killingblow is by far the coolest, there's a lot of special killing blows.

Modifié par Traesket, 08 avril 2010 - 12:05 .

[thegreateski]

Traesket wrote...

To be honest, I'm not really sure if it's the lack of linearity that made me dislike DA:O. But I'm quite certain it added to it. SPOILERS BY THE WAY!

The main "Fail", in my humble opinion, is the fact that the 4 choices you have in DAO all suck. They have nothing to do with the main story (except perhaps Redcliff) and they might as well have been side-quests or DLCs.

Um . . . what?

[gingerbill]

Traesket wrote...

To be honest, I'm not really sure if it's the lack of linearity that made me dislike DA:O. But I'm quite certain it added to it. SPOILERS BY THE WAY!

The main "Fail", in my humble opinion, is the fact that the 4 choices you have in DAO all suck. They have nothing to do with the main story (except perhaps Redcliff) and they might as well have been side-quests or DLCs.

lol . You might have noticed you need allies to defeat the blight , so recruiting  allies is very much part of the story , silly to make out otherwise.

[Traesket]

thegreateski wrote...

Traesket wrote...

To be honest, I'm not really sure if it's the lack of linearity that made me dislike DA:O. But I'm quite certain it added to it. SPOILERS BY THE WAY!

The main "Fail", in my humble opinion, is the fact that the 4 choices you have in DAO all suck. They have nothing to do with the main story (except perhaps Redcliff) and they might as well have been side-quests or DLCs.

Um . . . what?

Not sure what you're commenting on...

It's not mainly the linearity I comment on, but rather the fact that Bioware wrote a crap story when it came to those 4 choice-places. It could be that had they concentrated on a linear storyline they might have done it better, but I doubt that's the reason. Thus, I'm not sure it's the lack of linearity that made me dislike DA:O or only that they suck at writing.


@Gingerbill:
Read my post. Reply later. TL:DR? Don't join the discussion.

Modifié par Traesket, 08 avril 2010 - 01:20 .

[Hollingdale]

Yeah it's ''part of the story'' but its predictable and dull nonetheless. All you do is fix their ****ed up **** so that they can help you over and over.

[thegreateski]

Hollingdale wrote...

Yeah it's ''part of the story'' but its predictable and dull nonetheless. All you do is fix their ****ed up **** so that they can help you over and over.

Welcome to real life. Where people won't do anything for you unless you help them first.

I would also like to point out that whether it's "predictable and dull" is entirely your opinion.

Not sure what you're commenting on...

It's not mainly the linearity I comment on, but rather the fact that Bioware wrote a crap story when it came to those 4 choice-places. It could be that had they concentrated on a linear storyline they might have done it better, but I doubt that's the reason. Thus, I'm not sure it's the lack of linearity that made me dislike DA:O or only that they suck at writing.

What am I commenting on? Your insanity obviously.

You just said that going to the Dwarves, Elves, and Mages had nothing at all to do with the story . . . even though those parts of the game make up THE MAJORITY of the story.

Linearity? How would the game's story be any better if it was linear? Linearity does not equal good writing.

[miltos33]

I am surprised that some people think that the game is not linear enough as it is. But each to their own I guess. I have to admit that I am partial to open ended structures.

[Kalcalan]

thegreateski wrote...
Linearity? How would the game's story be any better if it was linear? Linearity does not equal good writing.

Exactly.

I did check the link posted by Hollingdale (http://img28.imagesh...4areasystem.jpg)

It contains major spoilers for DAO and Kotor (don't look at it if you haven't played Kotor).

To be honest I fail to see your point, there is no way your straight line can be better. You argue that it increases suspense which seems to me rather subjective (to say the least).

Having four areas may be dull for some players but it allows for some flexibility in different playthroughs. A more linear game (and I maintain that DAO is already a linear game) would mean that you'd have to play all areas in the very same order every time... That would mean almost no replay value whatsoever. DAO can be played several times because it allows you to try things differently and in a different sequence. Taking NPCs that you didn't take in another playthrough so that you can hear their comments for instance.

IMO playing a game like DAO only once is a terrible waste. In any case I'm convinced that DAO could benefit from a little less linearity (the only good thing is that linearity in DAO allows level scaling to work). Somebody posted a map of Baldur's Gate. Now BG was a semi linear game with a story divided in chapters that would take you through areas in the same order (the straight line sequence if you like) BUT it also allowed the exploration of many unrelated areas and the late game offered the opportunity to explore the entire city of Baldur's Gate. It's the possibility to explore so many areas that made the linearity in Baldur's Gate bearable. If Baldur's Gate didn't allow you to stray away from the main quest it would have been incredibly boring to replay the game. The only way linearity works is if it is complemented by a huge amount of side quests and areas that are unrelated to the main quest and that is just not the way most games are made anymore. DAO offers a middle ground. Applying the BG formula to DAO would introduce the problem of level scaling... As it is in DAO you have the opportunity to level up your characters before getting to the end of a part of the main quest. As a result level scaling doesn't mess up with the coherence of the universe too much (like it does in Oblivion).

Modifié par Kalcalan, 08 avril 2010 - 10:19 .

[DarkCamel]

One thing that has not been adressed so far is that DAO has multiple starting locations, while linear plots do not. Every linear game starts in one geographical spot, and the PC usually has a background that explains why the PC is in that location at the beginning of the game (Candlekeep or a starship for example). Thus a linear story has a clear starting point which makes it easier to define the path forward. Origins is unique in that the PC does not start at a fixed linear point, even if they are funneled to the same place quickly.



The four area system complements the multiple starting points. A linear story would lock in a path which might make perfect sense for one origin, but no sense for another. The PC's origin provides a motivation to take differing paths. Mages, dwarves and Dalish elves all have good reasons to take differing paths from one another. Thus, with the origins, the four area system makes it much easier to roleplay differing origins following different paths. This increases the replayability.



To summarize, a linear story would clash with the multiple origins background rather than complementing it.

[k9medusa]

DarkCamel wrote...

~snip~

To summarize, a linear story would clash with the multiple origins background rather than complementing it.

I totally agree. I like the fact is can have so many replays and chooses. In Fact, DAO should be less linear then what it already is, least have more side quests or more areas to explore  - that where DLCs comes in or the reason that we have the toolset to make own story or add to the OC.

[Hollingdale]

DarkCamel: That's just not true, the seperate backgrounds could have worked fine with a linear plot. I don't see what youre getting at tbh.



Thegreatski: What's your problem dude? Do you honestly not get what Traesket was writing? I suggest you read this part again with your eyes open this time:



''In Mass Effect, those 4 (or however many they were) actually had something to do with the main storyline. Sure, we needed the army of the mages, elves, dwarves and humans. But their side-missions were just dull as hell and didn't give anything to the main story. In ME, all the places (from how I recall it) made sense in regards to the main story. You needed to get Liara because you needed to know more about the Protheans etc and she was a Prothean expert. You needed to do something on Feros, and you ended up getting to know more about Sovreign and a lot of other things. Basically, all these places actually had main story in them. But in DAO. Did you, for example, learn ANYTHING from saving the godforsaken elves? I really don't recall it perfectly, but from how I remember it you learned nothing you cared about.''



How can you now get what he means? It is true that the whole mainstory progresses almost nothing apart from the actual armies that you recruit while you visit the 4 areas.



Could linearity remedy this aswell? Yes it could.



Kalcalan: So basically you cant play an RPG with a linear story unless it offers massive side questing? This strikes me as rather ignorant. I take it you have never played a JRPG or NWN2 and MOTB? Many of them contain replay value.

Yes naturally the replay value would decrease with a more linear plot but saying that it would vanish completely is a grave overstatement.



It is also a fact that linear plot if properly written will ALLWAYS be dramaturgically better than a free one. As I stated earlier just try having a writter of classic litterature writing a book where you get to read four of the mid chapters in whichever order you like. It wouldn't, it couldn't be as well balanced as a normal book.



On a sidenote it may be hailed as avant garde but that's hardly the case with games anyway.

[CybAnt1]

Some say the problem with DAO is it has no chapters. I disagree. It just doesn't have an obvious "chapter marker splashscreen" like BG2 but it's clear it's broken into chapters.



Chapter 1 is your Origin.

Chapter 2 is Ostagar, Korcari Wilds, and Lothering.

Chapter 3 is ... most of the game. Really the only nonlinear time. Your four mainquests & whatever else on the side, including DlC zones.

Chapter 4 is ... all Denerim based. Prep for Landsmeet. Investigate Alienage. The rescue.

Chapter 5 is the Landsmeet proper.

Chapter 6 is the Final Battle, Ending, Afterscenes, and Epilogue.



About the only part of the story that is nonlinear really is "chapter 3".