180 réponses à ce sujet

[CLime]

Batman90 wrote...

Secondly, WRPGs are no different; ultimately, it's about a lone hero (Or a band of plucky adventurers) taking on the "dark lord" (And/or THOSE GODDAMN ORKS) and bringing peace to the land. It isn't any more sophisticated, at all.

Finally, that's a grotesque stereotype. FFVII, for example, has far more
complex themes than most WRPGs (Which are usually straightforward "good
versus evil" adventures), touching on eco-terrorism, the effects of
letting unregulated oil (Which "Mako" pretty much represents) companies
run rampant, genetic engineering, reincarnation, and whatnot. Certainly
not your average "four year old's" themes. FFIX is another great
example, which is pretty much all about existential crises--what it
means to be alive, self-discovery, would you rather live an incredibly
long life with no emotions or a short emotional life, do artificial
constructs have "souls"--and there are plenty of other games with, at
the very least, mature presentation,
such as the Persona series.

While we're on the subject of grotesque stereotypes, there have been a few gross generalizations about WRPGs in this thread.  I'm just picking this one because it's the easiest to disprove.  It's easy to look at the genre as a whole and pick out games like Fallout or Alpha Protocol that don't fit with the Tolkein-esque model, but we don't even have to look outside BioWare's portfolio.  Their most recent RPG franchises include The Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, and Dragon Age, the latter being the only one with "goddamn Orcs," or their close analogues.

It's also a grotesque stereotype to so freely conflate the FF series with JRPGs as a whole.  If you want to see real stagnation, look at Dragon Quest.  I'm a big fan of the Tales series myself, but even I can recognize that nearly all their recent titles have the protagonist (male) running around the same fantasy/soft sci-fi fusion world used by so many other JRPGs, FF included, saving the world from yet another technolgoical apocalypse brought on by man's reckless use of EX-spheres/fonons/blastia.  I'm just waiting for the next game when the player must solve yet another energy crisis after reckless mining exhausts the world's supply of MacGuffinum. To be fair, someone mentioned something about finding a key a few pages back- JRPGs have been doing that forever, it's called "missable sidequests" and when you fill the game with them it can really ****** people off.

There are certainly JRPGs that don't fit this model, such as the MegaTen series, but I'm confident in saying that by and large, WRPGS offer the player a hell of a lot more choice than JRPGs. (That's what this thread is about, right? Options?)  In most JRPGs, the only influence the player has over the storyline is whether or not to complete it.  You ARE going to save the world, like it or not, and Companion X is going to die and Companion Y is going to betray you, and there's nothing you can do about it.  The choice systems in most WRPGs may not be as robust as some of us would like, but if you're dying of thirst in the desert you're not going to turn down a drink just because the water is a bit sandy.

[Batman90]

CLime wrote...

While we're on the subject of grotesque stereotypes, there have been a few gross generalizations about WRPGs in this thread.  I'm just picking this one because it's the easiest to disprove.  It's easy to look at the genre as a whole and pick out games like Fallout or Alpha Protocol that don't fit with the Tolkein-esque model, but we don't even have to look outside BioWare's portfolio.  Their most recent RPG franchises include The Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, and Dragon Age, the latter being the only one with "goddamn Orcs," or their close analogues.

Those are only a few examples. For every WRPG that isn't DnD or LotR-esque high fantasy, there are five or so that are, and you know it.

It's also a grotesque stereotype to so freely conflate the FF series with JRPGs as a whole.

I didn't. I believe I also mentioned Persona, Valkyria Chronicles and Xenosaga. There are other JRPGs that I can bring up to back up my point, as well, such as Lost Odyssey (A criminally unnoticed game) and Xenogears.

I'm a big fan of the Tales series myself, but even I can recognize that nearly all their recent titles have the protagonist (male) running around the same fantasy/soft sci-fi fusion world used by so many other JRPGs, FF included, saving the world from yet another technolgoical apocalypse brought on by man's reckless use of EX-spheres/fonons/blastia.

Sci-fi/fantasy fusion settings are as common in JRPGs as "Middle Earth" is in WRPGs. 

Note that I'm not denying that both genres are stagnant; rather, I'm arguing that there are jewels to be found among both piles of steaming crap.

To be fair, someone mentioned something about finding a key a few pages back- JRPGs have been doing that forever, it's called "missable sidequests" and when you fill the game with them it can really ****** people off.

And WRPGs don't do that? A good example is Dragon Age: Origins itself with Lothering (Or, later in the game, Redcliffe).

What I'm suggesting is implementing them in far more subtle ways.

WRPGS offer the player a hell of a lot more choice than JRPGs. (That's what this thread is about, right? Options?)

Yes, but that doesn't mean that WRPGs offer a lot more choice well. Most of the choices boil down to options involving superficial morality or "LIFE-CHANGING PLOT POINTS;" there are few WRPGs where the choices are by and large subtle and "subconscious" (Instead, most of the choices are shoved in your face; it insults the player's intelligence if the game just comes up and says, "okay, time for you to make a choice now").

 

In most JRPGs, the only influence the player has over the storyline is whether or not to complete it.  You ARE going to save the world, like it or not

Yes, but that's how it is in WRPGs, as well. In order to complete Dragon Age, you still have to slay the Archdemon and save Ferelden. In Mass Effect, you still have to put a ton of bullets in a ton of geth asses.

Obviously, the only choices that actually work WELL and don't feel disjointed and/or clunky are the subtle ones. So why not do away with "BIG IMPORTANT SEGMENT" choices and concentrate on the subtle ones?

Modifié par Batman90, 09 juillet 2010 - 04:16 .

[Arttis]

the_one_54321 wrote...

You know, good writers write their best when they are allowed some freedom to write what they wish. "Options" are like a choke chain on them that cuts them off when their creativity takes them anywhere that is solid or concrete.

More options equal more replay.More replay equals more time spent playing for less money.Less money spent equals more money saved.More money saved equals to contributing to getting something a person may want that is expensive.

[Abriael_CG]

Because "options" are the very staple of classic western-style computer RPGs. Dragon Age's major advertisement mantra was that it was the "heir" to those RPGs, and that's the whole reason why many of us are here.



Remove those options, and the game ends up being more or less the same as many others that crowd the market nowadays.

[joriandrake]

Paromlin wrote...

Because it's not a book or tv film, it's an rpg.

and without options an rpg becomes something like an "adventure game"...

[Abriael_CG]

I remember a certain Bioware writer going as far as openly criticizing a rather big RPG published this year during an interview (something that I personally felt was very rude and unprofessional by the way), calling it "not an RPG" due to it's lack of... options!



How droll.

[Swoo]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Swoo wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
You know, good writers write their best when they are allowed some freedom to write what they wish. "Options" are like a choke chain on them that cuts them off when their creativity takes them anywhere that is solid or concrete.

Great attempt at trolling or someone who needs to stick to Halo? I'm undecided.

Niether. I'm quite serious. What exactly is so great about having a customizable character in every game? Would it kill people to just let the writers do the writing once in a while? 

Although, with the maturity level of most of the responses so far, I'm starting to feel like this is a waste of breath. Is anyone going to actually respond with why they think the customization is so important, or is going to be the usual spam that fills things up around here? 

I'm sorry, the original post was so stupid I didn't think it actually warranted a legitimate response. Anyone who can say a lack of freedom - be it customization, alternate scenarios, multiple pathways to the Point B goal, dialogue and goal branches, personas, and what have, is a good thing with a straight face needs to stick to Halo. It's those very options that seperate the great RPGs from the good ones, and being stuck on an unbending rail destroys most of the replayability factor that Bioware has been known for.

Now, do I believe Dragon Age 2 is ready to be damned for lack of options already? In character creation, yes it seems so, in gameplay...not enough information to say yet. Bioware's track record leaves me giving them the benefit of the doubt at the moment, even if I am pretty guarded in that hope after the DLC, Awakening, and this opening round of DA2 information.

They can straight-jacket us in character creation and personality and still deliver a mighty fine game. We have plenty of time before shipping to see exactly what we are dealing with.

[Blastback]

It's because choice and options are part of what Bioware games are about. They allow for us to be a participant in the creation of the narrative, rather than just a spectator like most media. That's a big part of why I love Bioware so dang much. They allow me to make these stories my own.

[errant_knight]

the_one_54321 wrote...

By options I mean character customization.

And there are lots of games with static protagonists. The Witcher for instance. And that game was pretty awesome.

I almost never play those games. I'm just not that interested in playing a character that I can't customize to relate to. At very least, (and I do mean least) I want to be able to pick the gender. At least DA2 will have that.

[Chuvvy]

Giving the writer the ability to do different things, write different things and giving the player options limits them? I'm not sure I follow your logic, or maybe I'm just misunderstanding you. At any rate the reason people want options is because that's what WRPGs are about. If I wanted to play the same rehashed game that I'm set down a liner path I'd play a JRPG. Or, a shooter. That market has stagnated, you're either a space marine or a modern soldier. But that's an entirely different topic.

[DarthRomance]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Because "options" are the very staple of classic western-style computer RPGs. Dragon Age's major advertisement mantra was that it was the "heir" to those RPGs, and that's the whole reason why many of us are here.

Remove those options, and the game ends up being more or less the same as many others that crowd the market nowadays.

Yep. 

[Chuvvy]

errant_knight wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

By options I mean character customization.

And there are lots of games with static protagonists. The Witcher for instance. And that game was pretty awesome.

I almost never play those games. I'm just not that interested in playing a character that I can't customize to relate to. At very least, (and I do mean least) I want to be able to pick the gender. At least DA2 will have that.

True, I feel way more connected to my warden than I do to Shepard. Of course I don't feel connected to Shepard at all. He's just some guy I play in a game. The Warden I see as more of an extension of myself.

Also there can be some drastic changes to the game before it gets put out. So the protagonist thing may change.

[Batman90]

Swoo wrote...
 Anyone who can say a lack of freedom - be it customization, alternate scenarios, multiple pathways to the Point B goal, dialogue and goal branches, personas, and what have, is a good thing with a straight face needs to stick to Halo.

Wait, so anyone who thinks that carefully planned linearity (As opposed to the ridiculous linearity of FFXIII) could be a good thing is automatically some FPS fanboy who couldn't appreciate a quality RPG experience? Wow, WRPG fans can be such fanboys.

Modifié par Batman90, 09 juillet 2010 - 05:24 .

[casedawgz]

Why do people assume that if you enjoy an FPS you're a simpering troglodyte who can't comprehend an RPG? I've been playing RPGs for 15 years, but that doesn't give me some kind of moral high ground where I can say that people who play Halo or Call of Duty are intellectually decrepit imbeciles. I love RPGS. I love shooters. Depends on my mood. Deal with it. Don't insult my intellect.

[AlanC9]

It isn't really true to say that Bio games are about choices. The BG games had hardly any, and choices in the NWN OC were mostly confined to their own sidequests.

[Swoo]

casedawgz wrote...

Why do people assume that if you enjoy
an FPS you're a simpering troglodyte who can't comprehend an RPG? I've
been playing RPGs for 15 years, but that doesn't give me some kind of
moral high ground where I can say that people who play Halo or Call of
Duty are intellectually decrepit imbeciles. I love RPGS. I love
shooters. Depends on my mood. Deal with it. Don't insult my intellect.

And you are incorrectly projecting what you want to onto something I never said. If you believe that's what I was
saying, that's on you and not me. I said if you do not want options or choices and want to play a linear game where you run from A to B then stick to games like Halo that are built to played in such a way. RPGs are built around options, an RPG without options is going to be a worthless option.

I own Halo, I like Halo, I know what Halo is and enjoy that. Bioware RPGs are not that. If you want that non-choice A to B linear rail, then play Halo. If you take that as an insult, whatever.

Editied : I love these forums and their wacky auto-formatting.

Modifié par Swoo, 09 juillet 2010 - 06:09 .

[Vicious]

I tried to tell you guys that DA2 would have a PRE-MADE, VOICED chaaracter and you wouldn't listen.

[TuringPoint]

Well, we know that we at least get to choose male or female.



It won't be DA: 2 in the spiritual sense if they go dialogue wheel and totally stock character, but it might be a decent game.

[Swoo]

Batman90 wrote...

Swoo wrote...
 Anyone who can
say a lack of freedom - be it customization, alternate scenarios,
multiple pathways to the Point B goal, dialogue and goal branches,
personas, and what have, is a good thing with a straight face needs to
stick to Halo.

Wait, so anyone who thinks that carefully
planned linearity (As opposed to the ridiculous linearity of
FFXIII) could be a good thing is automatically some FPS fanboy
who couldn't appreciate a quality RPG experience? Wow, WRPG fans
can be such fanboys.

And we have another one who is so rabid to come to his own defense he has to make slights where
there weren't any. I never said it was the lesser of playstyles, and I never said the design philosophy was inheriently poor compared to RPGs. I said if you want an RPG built like a shooter (lack of choices, linearity, ect), play a shooter instead.

Who needs to get the point when you have insults to make though, amirite?!

Modifié par Swoo, 09 juillet 2010 - 06:06 .

[joriandrake]

Blastback wrote...

It's because choice and options are part of what RPG are about.

fixed

[deus_]

A good story is important in an RPG, and removing character variables in order to be more authorial in the narrative does give greater freedom and possibility to write a good epic.

Certainly Planescape, Deus Ex and The Witcher is a testament to that.



However...this sort of authorial narrative defeats some of the purpose of a solid RPG.



Which is to choose, build and roleplay your own character, make your own story, fight the way you want and solve problems with your own attitude for your role, based on the ups and down of your race, class and alignment.



Game designers and writers must back off and let the player decide, you might not get the next LotR, but you can build it up with a solid replayability.

Good and interesting stories for both the main quest and side quest is still important, but you are not writing a novel.

RPG can offer more then just "A" story.

[grieferbastard]

Why the fascination with 'options'..... good question. To be fair it's about on par with 'why Cyberpunk over Shadowrun'? There's a lot of flavor and nuance involved.

I'm a big Dragon Age fan. I've probably got 300 hours of playtime in the game world and have picked up the tabletop RPG and put a couple of hundred hours into that with my friends - so much so that I've house-ruled the game all the way to level 20 since Green Ronin is going to take approximately 2 years to fill in the gaps for where I'm already playing. I enjoy the environment, enjoy the CRPG quite a bit. I've picked up all but the most recent DLC and enjoyed all of it for what it is.

I have 0 interest in DA2. Strange, I know. I realize that I'm certainly make a judgement based on a tiny bit of information, but that bit of information is pretty critical to me. You know what's funny? What it really comes down to?

I don't want to play Hawke. It's the same reason I picked up ME when it was on discount and while I played ME2 a little on a friends system will likely never pick it up myself. I have no doubt what so ever that DA2 will be an amazing story. Well written and interesting. ME2 is an amazing piece of cinema, also a very well told story.

It's not my story though. Or my character. Mass Effect 2 is a great movie to watch - very interesting and very dramatic. To me though, I confess this is probably just my own mental associations, but it just reminds me of Space Ace (or Dragon Slayer) Delux. A newer version of the idea of an interactive movie. I just can't bring myself to buy it as I know I'll never get through even 1 playthrough.

If you enjoy interactive movies, games like The Witcher where you are playing a pre-set character (even if you're making your own decisions) through a largely pre-ordained story that's awesome. You are the market that games like ME2 and it sounds like DA2 are aimed at.

I like BioWare. I like their policies, I like how they treat their community, I love how they've expanded the DLC concept for RPG games, I like their writing for stories, I like the quality of games they produce - for whatever people whine about bugs, every game I've owned since my ADAM computer and my Atari 2600 has had technical issues. BioWare has done a great job producing great products that they have every right to be proud of.

I'm not a fan of this style of game though. I want my own character in a story I have more control over. I realize this does not facilitate voice-overs for the lead character and complicates story writing. I'm fine with that, the more sandbox options for me the better. When you name my character and pre-set their background I might enjoy watching someone else play the game but it doesn't interest me.

That doesn't mean it's a bad game - I have every expectation that DA2 will, like ME2, be an amazing game and that the target audience it's designed for will find it amazing. I'm just not it. There are a lot of people who were attracted to the open origins and story of the first game who will be put off by the nature of the second one. Unfortunate for us but it's BioWares IP. I hope it keeps Chris Priestly and David Gaider knee deep in hookers and blow for many years to come. I hope it's immensely popular. I hope the long-term support of new DLC for an RPG game is profitable enough that it carries through to other IPs with other publishers/developers.

As silly as it may seem to someone else though, the concepts put forward (as little as that is) for DA2 are not in my interests. DA - Buzzkill! Ah well. I'll happily check it out after it's released, as I said I realize I'm making a pre-judgement on very little info - just that the info that's provided, preset character name/history that I'll make cosmetic changes to, is 100% of no interest to me to play. Same reason I've never picked up The Witcher - an otherwise excellent game.

It's not about 'options'. It's about WHICH options.

[Vicious]

You're talking about Pen and Paper. or MMOs perhaps. The medium is there. As you yourself said though

A good story is important in an RPG, and removing character variables in order to be more authorial in the narrative does give greater freedom and possibility to write a good epic.

Makes sense to me.

[Special_Agent_Goodwrench]

Well, since we can only be male and female human, an incredible character creation system that'll leave no character created by the community looking the same is a must. That means tons of different hairstyles, beards, eyes, etc. I want Fightmaster Hawke's epic beard to be like none other's.

[Chuvvy]

Alocormin wrote...

Well, we know that we at least get to choose male or female.

It won't be DA: 2 in the spiritual sense if they go dialogue wheel and totally stock character, but it might be a decent game.

I'm sure it will be a decent game if they do that. I don't want decent. I want good.