206 réponses à ce sujet

[Tinxa]

imo Awakening probably had too many joinable companions for an expansion, the number was almost the same as in DA. Maybe it would be better with just 3-4 and make them more connected to the plot. You didn't even get to know the last one who joined because the final battle started.



I think that dialogue should be more evenly spaced through the game. In DA you could go through the list rather quickly and then they wouldn't have anything to say for a long time. I sort of like awakening approach of finding something new about a companion in each area, but I think the interactable objects are too easy to miss, I'd like it better if the conversation triggered on it's own.

[Asdara]

Syracuse wrote...

Gosh...did everyone forget the original Zelda games? The first three had *one* main character, and as for plot, you could have named them all "Sleeping Beauty and the Magic Triangle of Mystery:Variations on a Theme". And we LOVED them; weird, square side-scrolling Link and the townspeople apparently so inbred that they all looked the same, everywhere...Spectacle Rock and the Master Sword...those games were a staple for a whole generation; bad graphics, cliche plot and all. We all muddled through without seven-page meltdowns about the video game apocalypse.

We loved them because they gave us exactly what we fell in love with the first time, expected, and wanted more of.  I know that's the opposite of your point, but I was hoping it would have been.  We aren't lab rats, we aren't a test group, we're the fan-base, we're paying customers, and we want what we liked before and anything new you can ADD to that, without taking away from what we liked.  It isn't hard.  I don't know why anyone would want to make it harder than that.  

[Hollingdale]

Imo this whole Awakenings or Origins debatte is mildly uninteresting. There's a lack of striking arguments from the Origins side which instead merely reeks of typical fanbase conservatism.

You need to accept that it's often a good thing in the end, to kill your darlings.

Furthermore the true culprit as regards character interaction seems to have escaped the attention of the entire forum population. I mean, of course, the horrible gift system which is basically an ingame cheating mechanism that completely ruins believability and defies all logic.

**** the gift system.

Modifié par Hollingdale, 26 mai 2010 - 11:35 .

[GardenSnake]

Hollingdale wrote...

Imo this whole Awakenings or Origins debatte is mildly uninteresting. There's a lack of striking arguments from the Origins side which instead merely reeks of typical fanbase conservatism.

You need to accept that it's often a good thing in the end, to kill your darlings.

Furthermore the true culprit as regards character interaction seems to have escaped the attention of the entire forum population. I mean, of course, the horrible gift system which is basically an ingame cheating mechanism that completely ruins believability and defies all logic.

**** the gift system.

WTF? What's wrong wit hthe gift system? What if you're playing a goodie two shoes character but want to screw Morrigan (oh, sorry, I mean have a romance with Morrigan ). What the hell are you supposed to do? The gifts system is fine.

[I Valente I]

Asdara wrote...

Syracuse wrote...

Gosh...did everyone forget the original Zelda games? The first three had *one* main character, and as for plot, you could have named them all "Sleeping Beauty and the Magic Triangle of Mystery:Variations on a Theme". And we LOVED them; weird, square side-scrolling Link and the townspeople apparently so inbred that they all looked the same, everywhere...Spectacle Rock and the Master Sword...those games were a staple for a whole generation; bad graphics, cliche plot and all. We all muddled through without seven-page meltdowns about the video game apocalypse.

We loved them because they gave us exactly what we fell in love with the first time, expected, and wanted more of.  I know that's the opposite of your point, but I was hoping it would have been.  We aren't lab rats, we aren't a test group, we're the fan-base, we're paying customers, and we want what we liked before and anything new you can ADD to that, without taking away from what we liked.  It isn't hard.  I don't know why anyone would want to make it harder than that.  

I'm not sure if you're insisting that we DO NOT get what we want, hoped for, and wanted more of...but you DO have a very rose-colored view of the past. Maybe the fact that there wasn't a percieved amount of hysteria about new realeases for the classics(like Zeldas and old RPGs) is becaues they were before the internet/forum age, and people had a harder time congregating to complain and petition. It's entirely possible that people were outraged over games geteting "casualized" or 'dumbed" down back in 1994 when A Link to the Past came out; just like people are whining today. Hell, I remember the Interplay forums where people bashed BG2 for selling out, that Plansecapoe: Torment was garbage, over at the Elder Scrolls forums, TES III: Morrowind was ripped to shreds because it wasn't Daggerfall. I guarantee you that people were typing rant posts until their fingers bled when Zelda went 3D with Ocarina of Time. The past you see seems more built on nostalgia than anything else.

[Hollingdale]

GardenSnake wrote...

Hollingdale wrote...

Imo this whole Awakenings or Origins debatte is mildly uninteresting. There's a lack of striking arguments from the Origins side which instead merely reeks of typical fanbase conservatism.

You need to accept that it's often a good thing in the end, to kill your darlings.

Furthermore the true culprit as regards character interaction seems to have escaped the attention of the entire forum population. I mean, of course, the horrible gift system which is basically an ingame cheating mechanism that completely ruins believability and defies all logic.

**** the gift system.

WTF? What's wrong wit hthe gift system? What if you're playing a goodie two shoes character but want to screw Morrigan (oh, sorry, I mean have a romance with Morrigan ). What the hell are you supposed to do? The gifts system is fine.

Then you'll have to betray your ideals in her presence, you see, everything can't come without a price even if most things do nowadays.

I have little urge to argue with the kind of people who think it's fine that you can start a romance with a party member whom you never use and whose philosophy is in conflict with your own just by showing up with flowers and chocolate in the party camp once every two weeks or something or who similarly find nothing amiss in the fact that a even Wynne will look the other way as you behead innocents so long as you have something up your sleeve to throw at her feets.

It is tiring too have to explain why some things do actually need to be sacrificed in the name of logic. My female PC's romance with Alistair didn't feel as genuine when I realised he'd practically bed Morrigan if only she were willing to hand him some magical items now and then.

Indeed it is rather disgusting how relationships in Dragon Age by means of gifts becomes just another experience bar to fill rather than something you genuinely earn through interacting while roleplaying.


Conclusion: **** the world of warcraft gaming age of casuals who want everything for free.

[MistySun]

I have to agree that the *Feast day* gifts should not of changed the approval so much as it does. +50 is simply over the top. I remember when i gave Morrigan the gold mirror and she commented that i should get something in return and i said it's a gift ( i won't say all the dialogue) and i got +6 approval from her.
That gave me more pleasure than giving her a feast day gift which shot approval up by +50.
I know the other *Rotten* gifts can change approval in the other direction too...but even so it is still far too much.

But one thing stands out for DAO that no other game...and i mean no other game (and i have played many , many games from the humble Amstrad 464 to the PC's of today) where i can grow to like (and love) the characters.
They become like family (and lovers). 
i hated Morrigan at the start...but ended up liking her a lot at the end.
I loved Leliana from the start and still loved her at the end 
I grew to like Wynne slowly through  the game.
I liked Alistair from the start and kept him as likeable throughout the game.
Sten and Oghren i could never improve with.
Shale was very funny and likeable enough.
Zev was a no no...i killed him during the random encounter.
Dog...well dog was dog...a good companion to have around.

So ask me to name any character from any of my other games and i couldn't.

[Lyna357]

Add me to the people that agree that the Feast Day gifts were over the top approval wise and none of them were really fun. Even more insulting is the fact that PS3 users got theirs for FREE and the rest of us lot had to pay.



The approval system in Origins seems just about right. As Misty Sun stated, +6 from giving Morrigan the mirror is a good example. I never really tried to get 100 approval from all of my characters but those gifts made it way too easy, and there was nothing to work toward. The approval system in Awakening (for some at least) was broken - intant 100% approval upon giving a gift. If you didn't get that glitch, just the regular approval was too high imo. Again not much sense of accomplishment with a +23 approval for doing a quest. Without the original conversation system, I think I see why they had to artificially boost the approval because of the constraints (shorter time, lower budget). I wonder at the fact, correct me if I am wrong, that Awakening was created on 1/10 the budget of Origins, yet the price for the expansion was 2/3 the cost of same.



To Hollingdale: Why do we need to "accept that it's often a good thing in the end, to kill your darlings"? I play rpgs to escape reality, to create a world and characters to have fun with. Why would killing them off after investing so much time and energy in them need to be acceptable?

[Darth Drago]

I have to agree on the gifts and how they are very easy to use to gain loyalty in DAO. I have yet to use the Feast Day ones but I don’t need to with any of them since you get plenty of points for the ones in the game and just talking to them they way they want to be talked to.

Maybe this is one of those point that need working on. Give more negative loyalty points on more things and maybe even include the outcome of quests to those stuck at camp by giving some negative points on your choices. They would confront you with an automatic dialog so you know who your in trouble with.

As for the OP topic.
-I haven’t played Awakenings yet (and have no interest with its overpriced price tag for a 15 or so hour game) so I don’t know about these changes.

I will say that the camp is one of the best parts in the game. You get to freely talk to all your companions, even the ones you don’t use or just cant stand to use when you want to. It gives the game a more real feeling when your at the camp as well. Like its just not about you and your quest but the rest of the companions as well and those odd ball stragglers you pick up. I shouldn’t have to take someone (or all of them at some point) with me on a quest to get all the information about them, especially if its forced on me.

If anything I would like to see them add more camp dialog. Not between me and each companion but between each of the companions themselves. Have Alistair talk with Wynne or Zevran hitting on Morrigan for examples. Sort of like the random banter that they already have outside of camp.

Have them move around a little wouldn’t hurt either. I feel like I’m on the Normandy from the Mass Effect games with everyone standing around in the exact place all the time like statues. Its annoying and uninspiring to see this in a game these days especially when you look back to Bethesda and Fallout 3 and Oblivion where everyone in the game had a set program on what they did and when.

[MistySun]

This is what i wanted too Darth Drago...if only the other companions talked to each other...did something other than stand around.
I know they talk to each other on the road but in camp would be so much better.
Imagine the PC walking up to say Wynne and Morrigan and Sten and asking how are things

Not *What are you all talking about* I can imagine Morrigan saying *Don't be so nosy*

[Hollingdale]

Lyna357 wrote...

Add me to the people that agree that the Feast Day gifts were over the top approval wise and none of them were really fun. Even more insulting is the fact that PS3 users got theirs for FREE and the rest of us lot had to pay.

The approval system in Origins seems just about right. As Misty Sun stated, +6 from giving Morrigan the mirror is a good example. I never really tried to get 100 approval from all of my characters but those gifts made it way too easy, and there was nothing to work toward. The approval system in Awakening (for some at least) was broken - intant 100% approval upon giving a gift. If you didn't get that glitch, just the regular approval was too high imo. Again not much sense of accomplishment with a +23 approval for doing a quest. Without the original conversation system, I think I see why they had to artificially boost the approval because of the constraints (shorter time, lower budget). I wonder at the fact, correct me if I am wrong, that Awakening was created on 1/10 the budget of Origins, yet the price for the expansion was 2/3 the cost of same.

To Hollingdale: Why do we need to "accept that it's often a good thing in the end, to kill your darlings"? I play rpgs to escape reality, to create a world and characters to have fun with. Why would killing them off after investing so much time and energy in them need to be acceptable?

The Darlings are of course not the roleplaying games but certain elements in them that, while enjoyable and well liked, hold the genre back from developing and as such should be killed in order to make room for future elements that may surpass them.

Fanbases typically mourn the death of their darlings and hurl their fists at their killers, and snarl at the replacements. Nonetheless the act of killing your darlings has historically yielded good results.

Be it in game development, science, art, philosophy or litterature.

[Lyna357]

Hollingdale wrote...

Lyna357 wrote...

Add me to the people that agree that the Feast Day gifts were over the top approval wise and none of them were really fun. Even more insulting is the fact that PS3 users got theirs for FREE and the rest of us lot had to pay.

The approval system in Origins seems just about right. As Misty Sun stated, +6 from giving Morrigan the mirror is a good example. I never really tried to get 100 approval from all of my characters but those gifts made it way too easy, and there was nothing to work toward. The approval system in Awakening (for some at least) was broken - intant 100% approval upon giving a gift. If you didn't get that glitch, just the regular approval was too high imo. Again not much sense of accomplishment with a +23 approval for doing a quest. Without the original conversation system, I think I see why they had to artificially boost the approval because of the constraints (shorter time, lower budget). I wonder at the fact, correct me if I am wrong, that Awakening was created on 1/10 the budget of Origins, yet the price for the expansion was 2/3 the cost of same.

To Hollingdale: Why do we need to "accept that it's often a good thing in the end, to kill your darlings"? I play rpgs to escape reality, to create a world and characters to have fun with. Why would killing them off after investing so much time and energy in them need to be acceptable?

The Darlings are of course not the roleplaying games but certain elements in them that, while enjoyable and well liked, hold the genre back from developing and as such should be killed in order to make room for future elements that may surpass them.

Fanbases typically mourn the death of their darlings and hurl their fists at their killers, and snarl at the replacements. Nonetheless the act of killing your darlings has historically yielded good results.

Be it in game development, science, art, philosophy or litterature.

This is why I play them (bolded above). Why are they so hell-bent now on changing them just for the sake of change?

Quoting Ray Muzyka and Greg Zeschuk in a team Xbox interview:
"TeamXbox: Dragon Age: Origins is a step back for Bioware to a more traditional setting for RPGs, fantasy. Why?

Ray: We have a portfolio that’s quite diverse, and that’s very intentional. We want to reach different target audiences on different platforms and explore different geographies and genre settings. For us, fantasy and the traditional fanbase bioware has, are very important. We want to make games that make them happy, and it’s been awhile since we’ve done a game like Dragon Age. Not since Neverwinter Nights. (my bold)

Greg: It’s almost like an homage to our classic audience, the folks that got us established. In many ways it’s a game for them. We know they still play games, and they’ve been pining for a really strong story-driven, party-based, mature fantasy game. And it hasn’t been done for a long time, so we thought: hey, that’s where we came from, so lets do a kick-ass one that takes today’s technology and wraps it all together." ~ end quote

This does not sound like "killing the darlings". This sounds like what I want (like they knew what I want): using words like "traditional fanbase" and "classic audience". Ray said they want to make games that make them (traditional fanbase) happy and they must have suceeded. So what changed? Let me say again, I love Dragon Age: Origins. It is all I could want in a game (and apparently not the only one since it got game of the year). I can only guess that now they want to make some other audience happy with offerings like Awakening & Darkspawn Chronicles. 

I may need to find another hobby to replace video games if this continues. Do you think I would be here complaining if I had a good rpg to play? Dragon Age: Origins was so good I may just go play that even though I have played through it completely 4 times already. I could barely play through Awakening once. I refuse to buy mindless stuff like Darkspawn Chronicles (sorry, it's the way I feel). Or I guess I could always go back to the tried and true Zelda games.

[Hollingdale]

Lyna357 wrote...

Hollingdale wrote...

Lyna357 wrote...

Add me to the people that agree that the Feast Day gifts were over the top approval wise and none of them were really fun. Even more insulting is the fact that PS3 users got theirs for FREE and the rest of us lot had to pay.

The approval system in Origins seems just about right. As Misty Sun stated, +6 from giving Morrigan the mirror is a good example. I never really tried to get 100 approval from all of my characters but those gifts made it way too easy, and there was nothing to work toward. The approval system in Awakening (for some at least) was broken - intant 100% approval upon giving a gift. If you didn't get that glitch, just the regular approval was too high imo. Again not much sense of accomplishment with a +23 approval for doing a quest. Without the original conversation system, I think I see why they had to artificially boost the approval because of the constraints (shorter time, lower budget). I wonder at the fact, correct me if I am wrong, that Awakening was created on 1/10 the budget of Origins, yet the price for the expansion was 2/3 the cost of same.

To Hollingdale: Why do we need to "accept that it's often a good thing in the end, to kill your darlings"? I play rpgs to escape reality, to create a world and characters to have fun with. Why would killing them off after investing so much time and energy in them need to be acceptable?

The Darlings are of course not the roleplaying games but certain elements in them that, while enjoyable and well liked, hold the genre back from developing and as such should be killed in order to make room for future elements that may surpass them.

Fanbases typically mourn the death of their darlings and hurl their fists at their killers, and snarl at the replacements. Nonetheless the act of killing your darlings has historically yielded good results.

Be it in game development, science, art, philosophy or litterature.

This is why I play them (bolded above). Why are they so hell-bent now on changing them just for the sake of change?

Quoting Ray Muzyka and Greg Zeschuk in a team Xbox interview:
"TeamXbox: Dragon Age: Origins is a step back for Bioware to a more traditional setting for RPGs, fantasy. Why?

Ray: We have a portfolio that’s quite diverse, and that’s very intentional. We want to reach different target audiences on different platforms and explore different geographies and genre settings. For us, fantasy and the traditional fanbase bioware has, are very important. We want to make games that make them happy, and it’s been awhile since we’ve done a game like Dragon Age. Not since Neverwinter Nights. (my bold)

Greg: It’s almost like an homage to our classic audience, the folks that got us established. In many ways it’s a game for them. We know they still play games, and they’ve been pining for a really strong story-driven, party-based, mature fantasy game. And it hasn’t been done for a long time, so we thought: hey, that’s where we came from, so lets do a kick-ass one that takes today’s technology and wraps it all together." ~ end quote

This does not sound like "killing the darlings". This sounds like what I want (like they knew what I want): using words like "traditional fanbase" and "classic audience". Ray said they want to make games that make them (traditional fanbase) happy and they must have suceeded. So what changed? Let me say again, I love Dragon Age: Origins. It is all I could want in a game (and apparently not the only one since it got game of the year). I can only guess that now they want to make some other audience happy with offerings like Awakening & Darkspawn Chronicles. 

I may need to find another hobby to replace video games if this continues. Do you think I would be here complaining if I had a good rpg to play? Dragon Age: Origins was so good I may just go play that even though I have played through it completely 4 times already. I could barely play through Awakening once. I refuse to buy mindless stuff like Darkspawn Chronicles (sorry, it's the way I feel). Or I guess I could always go back to the tried and true Zelda games.

Dude, rather than just bold out the ''while ejoyable and liked'' and then going onto asking why they want to change things? You could have taken some time to reflect over the ''hold the genre back from developing and as such should be killed in order to make room for future elements that may surpass them''
The Mass Effect franchise (for one) would never have seen the light of the day if it were not for the willingness to experiment that fanbases oppose.

Furthermore I am aware that Origins was made largely for biowares classic audience but seriously do you need Bioware to make another two identical games? I would rather they keep on improving and experimenting with different approaches to storytelling and character development so as to allow them implement new better approaches.

Although yeah, I really agree with you on the fact that there's really not many good rpg's coming out nowadays, especially with all the jrpg's being crap. With that in mind I guess I can sympathize a bit more with the ignorant conservatism that this thread is so full off.

[Master Shiori]

Hollingdale wrote...

Dude, rather than just bold out the ''while ejoyable and liked'' and then going onto asking why they want to change things? You could have taken some time to reflect over the ''hold the genre back from developing and as such should be killed in order to make room for future elements that may surpass them''
The Mass Effect franchise (for one) would never have seen the light of the day if it were not for the willingness to experiment that fanbases oppose.

Furthermore I am aware that Origins was made largely for biowares classic audience but seriously do you need Bioware to make another two identical games? I would rather they keep on improving and experimenting with different approaches to storytelling and character development so as to allow them implement new better approaches.

Although yeah, I really agree with you on the fact that there's really not many good rpg's coming out nowadays, especially with all the jrpg's being crap. With that in mind I guess I can sympathize a bit more with the ignorant conservatism that this thread is so full off.

I agree that improvements and experimentation can make a game better.

However, that doesn't mean you should go ahead and completely remove things that people like. A better solution is to keep those elements of the game that your customers liked while removing or improving things that people didn't like.
All previous Bioware franchises like BG saga or NWN didn't change drastically between games. It was just a matter of tweaking things to make them work better.

"Killing your darlings" ,as you're fond of saying, can be a double-edged sword. On one hand you can implement new ideas that may prove more popular than what was there before. On the other hand, you could very well end up destroying what made the game special in the first place and thus kill the interest in it.

My opinion is that Bioware will try and improve on what is already there, rather than implement dramatic changes.

Modifié par Master Shiori, 27 mai 2010 - 02:05 .

[Lintanis]

 The camp could of done with more animation.   the companions moving around talking, Alistair doing some cooking 

[Hollingdale]

Well the darling (although Im personally not that fond of it) that I refer to is merely Origins conversation system. Which it seems likely will be blended with an improved version of the Awakenings one in the upcoming sequel to Origins.



Perhaps the term killing you darling is a little too strong for the context (though the Origins dialogues do qualify as darlings for a lot of people here I'm unsure whether the probable changes are great enough to be termed as a ''kill'', but its just semantic crap anyway).



Also I think Awakenings is a perfect example of the double-edged sword, while the system is fundamentally superior to that of Origins it suffers from typical childhood diseases such as the need to hold TAB down and look everywhere. But It will probably rock next time Bioware use it as they'll have learned from their misstakes.

[Pious_Augustus]

This reminds me of reading the old Final Fantasy X strategy guide in which they gave developer interviews. For over 15 years at that time Final Fantasy was the lead RPG series and it was known for its amazing story telling and system in which presented it self.
 

However one of the interviews showed the ‘infection’ in the younger staff who would soon take over the franchise and other J RPG franchises and sink all major flagship series.
 

The younger staff commented on how next time they will be in control and the changes they wanted will come true. Then all of a sudden Western Game Developers starting giving regular gamers what they wanted and made games that don’t focus on just FPS but on the larger perspective.
 

What Japanese Developers especially J RPG developers have done for the past decade has been vanity gaming. They make games they think is great and uses mechanics that people don’t like but because they think there ideas are great everyone else would.
 

For ten years JRPG franchises have sunk or have become ignored. Bioware is the top RPG developer right now or should I say one of the top RPG developers. Don’t let the new staff or people with controversial ideas take a hold of franchises. Let them make there own IPs games they think will do well.
 

Don’t be like Square Enix and give the SaGa team a series that never sold well the reigns to the best JRPG franchise Japan once had!

[Vicious]

I agree with everything Hollingdale said. The gift system is a joke, just a 'gimme' for those who cannot handle consequences and want to do everything.

[grieferbastard]

Threads like this are a good example of why game designers do not, and should not, listen too much to the forums for game design.

You are the 'THE consumer'. You are 'A consumer'. There is a critical difference.

DA:O is upwards of 3.5 million copies sold. That's a lot of people with a lot of interests. Even in this thread people don't agree on how they like or dislike a gift system or conversation system. A common problem people have is the erroneous belief that what they like or dislike somehow represents the majority or at least the correct way of doing things. Be it games, food, religion or relationships it's how people tend to think.

The game is not made for 'you'. It's made for as many people as possible while still sticking to the core concept. More 'classical' RPGs like DA:O are the minority. Halo 2 for example sold over 8 million copies. I don't think it involved several hours of voice acting and over 100 hours of playtime, hence was likely less expensive to develop and support and then sold more copies. We're something of a niche market.

BioWare will continue to make refinements on the forumula of any game they make. I hope they do; it keeps them fresh and healthy. Some of them you will like and some you won't. I betcha that for the vast majority of player the likes will surpass the dislikes but of course, nobody is going to consider anything perfect unless it was tailor made for them.

What I hope WILL happen is that the Dragon Age franchise continues to grow and be profitable, showing that deep, VA heavy classic style RPGs are a good investment for game publishers (not just developers) going forward. What should NOT happen is for the franchise to focus on the wants and needs of the most vocal and extreme slice of its fans. If you feel that some change to the game or other consumers of the game are not 'hardcore' enough the problem is not BioWare or the game -

It's you. Try to find a constructive way to offer your criticism or feedback or express your personal interests and then accept that you may or may not get your way in the face of the majority of consumers. This isn't a bad thing - this is how niche concepts like 100-hour + RPG games can afford to get developed and published in the face of 30 or 40 hour long games selling 5 million copies.

[Catcher]

Lyna357 wrote...
This is why I play them (bolded above). Why are they so hell-bent now on changing them just for the sake of change?

     If you had read the thread I linked in my first reply, or really just about any of my posts on this thread, you would see that the Awakening conversation system was NOT change for chage sake at all. Part of it is because, without any other controls on when you speak to a Companion, its really very easy to get the pacing of conversations all wrong and 'burn through' them in a timescale that's unrealistic and jarring. Further, it's really very unrealistic for Companions who have only just met the PC to divuldge deep personal information without some sort of shared Context. Ironically, both Allistair and Morrigan make exactly this point in their own way... then proceed to let the PC do exactly that.  Another reason Bioware is looking to change the conversation system is to get more impact out of the "word budget" they have. This is where some Posters are getting the idea (mistaken, in my belief) that the Awakenings system was some sort of cost-cutting measure. I think that's getting the 'cart before the horse' as it were. Instead, it is much more likely that a "word budget" of 1/10th the size of Origins was given to the Awakenings crew and they said, "We need to make lemonade out of these lemons." Firing off conversations with Context, so the writers don't have to use large portions of their word budget on exposition, means more meat, not less. If the Awakenings writers had used the Origins system, you may have had more control, but you also would have found the amount of Dialogue even more depressingly short. The implementation was flawed, in part due to the newness in part due to a lack of time/resources, but David's already admitted that.

Lyna357 wrote...
Quoting Ray Muzyka and Greg Zeschuk in a team Xbox interview:
"TeamXbox: Dragon Age: Origins is a step back for Bioware to a more traditional setting for RPGs, fantasy. Why?

Ray: We have a portfolio that’s quite diverse, and that’s very intentional. We want to reach different target audiences on different platforms and explore different geographies and genre settings. For us, fantasy and the traditional fanbase bioware has, are very important. We want to make games that make them happy, and it’s been awhile since we’ve done a game like Dragon Age. Not since Neverwinter Nights. (my bold)

Greg: It’s almost like an homage to our classic audience, the folks that got us established. In many ways it’s a game for them. We know they still play games, and they’ve been pining for a really strong story-driven, party-based, mature fantasy game. And it hasn’t been done for a long time, so we thought: hey, that’s where we came from, so lets do a kick-ass one that takes today’s technology and wraps it all together." ~ end quote

This does not sound like "killing the darlings". This sounds like what I want (like they knew what I want): using words like "traditional fanbase" and "classic audience". Ray said they want to make games that make them (traditional fanbase) happy and they must have suceeded. So what changed? Let me say again, I love Dragon Age: Origins. It is all I could want in a game (and apparently not the only one since it got game of the year). I can only guess that now they want to make some other audience happy with offerings like Awakening & Darkspawn Chronicles. 

I may need to find another hobby to replace video games if this continues. Do you think I would be here complaining if I had a good rpg to play? Dragon Age: Origins was so good I may just go play that even though I have played through it completely 4 times already. I could barely play through Awakening once. I refuse to buy mindless stuff like Darkspawn Chronicles (sorry, it's the way I feel). Or I guess I could always go back to the tried and true Zelda games.

      This is an interesting attitude that I've noticed among some posters recently. Do the Doctors musings mean that Bioware should ONLY make games that satisfy "traditional fanbase" and "classic audience"? Or is it just anything that has the word Dragon Age attached to it? Darkspawn Chronicles really seems to get on this group's nerves. Why is it that when every DLC is not targeted at you it's a Portent of Doom when the same elements in a game you love (say the same-sex romances for me in DA:O) are not? The beauty of DLC is that you can use it to address all kinds of groups individually with content "for them" instead of trying to package it all into one expensive bundle. Further, you can use the low cost to experiment and also entice various audiences to broaden their palattes.
 

     I've used this analogy before with people who act overly entitled, but I think it's apropros. There's a Bugs Bunny/Daffy Duck cartoon where Bugs and Daffy find a fabulous treasure in the desert. After Bugs fools the comic foil guard away, Daffy starts gathering up the heaps of treasure because he's a "greeeedy cowardly duck". When Daffy finds an old lamp and polishes it up to add to his hoard, a genie predictably appears. Daffy's reaction though, is to immediately start stuffing the genie back into the lamp screaming "It's mine! Mine! All mine! You can't have it! You hear?!" Cut away to Bugs on Pismo Beach wondering whatever happened to "that screwy duck". Bugs finds a pearl in an oyster he cracks then finds out what happened to Daffy when a minature Daffy comes scrambling out of a hole in the sand after Bugs' pearl screaming "It's mine! Mine! All mine!" Either those of us who are  "traditional fnabase" need to learn how to share our space with others or we'll simply be marginalized into irrelevance, like Daffy.

     Hope this helps.

[Catcher]

Pious_Augustus wrote...

This reminds me of reading the old Final Fantasy X strategy guide in which they gave developer interviews. For over 15 years at that time Final Fantasy was the lead RPG series and it was known for its amazing story telling and system in which presented it self.
 

However one of the interviews showed the ‘infection’ in the younger staff who would soon take over the franchise and other J RPG franchises and sink all major flagship series.
 

The younger staff commented on how next time they will be in control and the changes they wanted will come true. Then all of a sudden Western Game Developers starting giving regular gamers what they wanted and made games that don’t focus on just FPS but on the larger perspective.
 

What Japanese Developers especially J RPG developers have done for the past decade has been vanity gaming. They make games they think is great and uses mechanics that people don’t like but because they think there ideas are great everyone else would.
 

For ten years JRPG franchises have sunk or have become ignored. Bioware is the top RPG developer right now or should I say one of the top RPG developers. Don’t let the new staff or people with controversial ideas take a hold of franchises. Let them make there own IPs games they think will do well.
 

Don’t be like Square Enix and give the SaGa team a series that never sold well the reigns to the best JRPG franchise Japan once had!

      Here's the funny thing about posting without doing basic research. Open up a BG2 Manual and look for the name David Gaider. Open a Neverwinter Nights manual and look for the same. Open a SW: KotOR manual. Open the Dragon Age: Origins manual. Now, look at who's dared to say that maybe Bioware needs to try different things with conversations. This is the Old Skool talking, not some new youngbloods. Thanks much.

[Master Shiori]

Catcher wrote...

      This is an interesting attitude that I've noticed among some posters recently. Do the Doctors musings mean that Bioware should ONLY make games that satisfy "traditional fanbase" and "classic audience"? Or is it just anything that has the word Dragon Age attached to it? Darkspawn Chronicles really seems to get on this group's nerves. Why is it that when every DLC is not targeted at you it's a Portent of Doom when the same elements in a game you love (say the same-sex romances for me in DA:O) are not? The beauty of DLC is that you can use it to address all kinds of groups individually with content "for them" instead of trying to package it all into one expensive bundle. Further, you can use the low cost to experiment and also entice various audiences to broaden their palattes.
 

     I've used this analogy before with people who act overly entitled, but I think it's apropros. There's a Bugs Bunny/Daffy Duck cartoon where Bugs and Daffy find a fabulous treasure in the desert. After Bugs fools the comic foil guard away, Daffy starts gathering up the heaps of treasure because he's a "greeeedy cowardly duck". When Daffy finds an old lamp and polishes it up to add to his hoard, a genie predictably appears. Daffy's reaction though, is to immediately start stuffing the genie back into the lamp screaming "It's mine! Mine! All mine! You can't have it! You hear?!" Cut away to Bugs on Pismo Beach wondering whatever happened to "that screwy duck". Bugs finds a pearl in an oyster he cracks then finds out what happened to Daffy when a minature Daffy comes scrambling out of a hole in the sand after Bugs' pearl screaming "It's mine! Mine! All mine!" Either those of us who are  "traditional fnabase" need to learn how to share our space with others or we'll simply be marginalized into irrelevance, like Daffy.

     Hope this helps.

Imo, what Bioware should do is provide things that make their games great (story, character interaction and choices) in a way that appeals to today's playerbase. If this means changing the gameplay system along the way then fine, but whatever they do they should stay true to what made their company so successfull in the first place.

The problem with Darkspawn Chronicles is that it provides none of the things that people love about DA:O. It's focus is on mindless slaughter of your companions and anyone else who gets in your way. There is no story, character interaction or choices. It doesn't add any new insight into the darkspawn themselves, no new lore and no replayability value (unless you go for the achievements).
That is the core of the problem that many on these forums have with that particular dlc.

While I can understand Bioware wanting to experiment with new things, this particular experiment created a product that doesn't provide what players have come to expect from Bioware.

[Vicious]

Darkspawn Chronicles was terrible. Not because of what it was, nor how it was done [it was done quite well] but because it built off the worst part of DAO. The combat.

[Lyna357]

To Catcher:

If you feel that I act overly entitled, then sir that is your opinion. Neither do I feel a part of the "traditional fanbase" as I have not played any of the older Bioware titles. I did buy Mass Effect and played up until I got the ship but it just wasn't my cup of tea. I am sure many others enjoyed it though. I am a lover of most RPGs and J RPGs and play them almost exclusively.

I acknowledge that I don't know anything about developing games, as some of you defending Bioware do, but I am simply stating what I enjoy. Take it for what it is worth, which is obviously nothing.

[Eshaye]

Lyna357 wrote...

To Catcher:
If you feel that I act overly entitled, then sir that is your opinion. Neither do I feel a part of the "traditional fanbase" as I have not played any of the older Bioware titles. I did buy Mass Effect and played up until I got the ship but it just wasn't my cup of tea. I am sure many others enjoyed it though. I am a lover of most RPGs and J RPGs and play them almost exclusively.
I acknowledge that I don't know anything about developing games, as some of you defending Bioware do, but I am simply stating what I enjoy. Take it for what it is worth, which is obviously nothing.

Whoa!! You are entitled to your opinion and expressing your fears about something on the forum of the game you play and love, there is nothing wrong with that at all. 
Ignore the hell bent forum warrior over there who needs to chill out at this point and go for a walk, or three. :happy:

I'm looking forwards to a new and better system then both Origins and Awakenings, Origins was what we are used to with some refinement and old annoyances (burning through dialogues for example), and awakenings is frustrating in other ways. I still really like to click on people, but if I can't have that PLEASE refine the find the trigger easter hunt! 

That is all. 

Oh! Since DLC's were mentioned here's some feedback, I have not bought the silly Feast Day gifts or the Darkspawn Chronicles, those things give me zero interest.

Modifié par Eshaye, 27 mai 2010 - 10:49 .