180 réponses à ce sujet

[joriandrake]

deus_ wrote...

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.

I didn't like planescape, deus ex is a so-so, Witcher is based on the polish Witcher saga so it is normal it has nearly no costumization, just as it would make no sense having any if you play a Star Wars game build around Luke Skywalker or Han Solo

[Spawny]

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.

If you like to play a game like Witcher I guess it would be awesome

But for a lot of people options means personalization and that for them makes it more enjoyable because you are working your own character in DA that follows a story loosely based on the books and you get to make a character that is "yours" to walk through the story. If I understand The Witcher is based on that main one hero as it's more solely based on the books? if so then it was never meant as a "role your own" character where DA has made it this. If they wanted to go a witcher path they could of had a only one-two hero option using main heroes out of the books like say Loghain.
Hence why I like playing DA and not so much games like The Witcher, I want options because I love a RPG that   lets me play what I "role up" and not overly "forced" into a character.
 
I would like to say this was not a Witcher bash, just using the game example you used as to why I enjoy  personalization

Modifié par HagSpawn, 09 juillet 2010 - 06:23 .

[deus_]

Vicious wrote...

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.

MMO's? GOOD LORD, NO!
The only thing MMO's can be good at is combat grind.

PnP RPG's is the inspiration and origins of CRPG's, and it is still something game designers should strive for to mimic.

I personally love gaming, but i barely get my group together to do 2 session for every third month, and many other can't/won't take up the hobby.

Therefore we have computer games that can be reproduce the same richness of a PnPRPG, the the extent that is possible. 

Hell, i fell in love with Baldurs Gate long before i know what PnPRPG was about. 

And i didnt replay the fallout games, baldurs gate, bloodlines and icewind dale for the 100'th time, because i felt that story deserved a nobel prize in litterature. 

And i would hate if every future RPG game will be more storyline  focused then gameplay focused, these are games, not realtime rendered movies. 
(the last part is a bit of a hyperbole, i still love Planescape, Deus Ex and witcher, and they do have great gameplay, but god damnit i want another Icewind Dale 2)

[Davasar]

grieferbastard wrote...

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.

Absolutely.

They made their new game, but not with the core fanbase of DAO in mind, but for the masses/button mashers in hopes of greater profit while losing sight of the fact that they will lose the true core audience, self blinding fanboys excluded.

Go EAoware.

[Davasar]

Double post

Modifié par Davasar, 09 juillet 2010 - 07:14 .

[Kalmarath]

ReinaHW wrote...

Until new ideas appear, or at least better writers with new ideas, then all RPG's are likely to be generic.  After a long while of 'being the chosen one' in games, it would be nice to see a different aspect done on the player character.

The issue with many female characters who aren't created by the player, not all but most, is that they tend to be made into some kind of male fantasy with a bust size so over sized that they would just have to turn and kill someone with a slight turn.
In real life such a woman with a slim body would have back problems after a while, the benefit of creating a female character is that the player can be more realistic, if they at least have the patience to try for that.  In Second Life the number of male fantasy female avatars can be horrible to see, if avatars complained then I think the ones in SL would be complaining while making their creators sorry for being born.

JRPG's are like the books read as a kid, they were fun back then, but over time you begin to notice that some things arent changing and as an adult you notice just how lacking they are.
JRPG's are much like a story for a four year old - Young male teen who's barely a decade out of nappies saving the world from a great evil/God/general loser with a grudge using weapons bigger than themselves, usually, with an expertise which would never happen in real life without decades of training and practice to use such large weapons.
Along with the usual love interest of a young girl a little younger or the same age as them who's usually helpless and needs saving from everything ranging from a tiny monster to their own bad hairstyles.

Such things were cute when I was young, but they don't interest me anymore.  WRPG's are still fairly generic, but at least I can create my character to my liking, well as long as the game allows for gender choice and character creation, and will sometimes have a stronger story than 'teen is chosen one'.
But gaming in general is largely generic due to the catering of those who find anything that isn't 'kick ball in net/have big gun and kill many/man save universe/world/man kill many because man rules all' and the other done to death plot lines to be far too complex and complicated for them to grasp.

I don't really agree to what you have said. But I hope you've played Septerra Core

[wikkedjoker]

One there is a difference between a Choice and a Problem.

Example

Choice:
Leliana or Morrigan.

Since there is no benefit other than personal taste this is a choice.

A problem has a goal attached to the end of it, it also has an apparent benefit over the other.

In dragon age your problem is Slay the Arch Demon your options are.

A) I send in Alistair to die, and lose Morrigan before the final boss fight.
I send in Logan to die, and lose Morrigan before the final boss fight.
C) I send in Myself to die, and lose Morrigan before the final boss fight.
D) I sleep with Morrigan, I have my entire party with me when I go and fight the Arch Demon, and oh yeah I don’t die.

I wonder which option has the best outcome? Hmmm?

Sure you have the illusion of choice with this, but really its not because one is far more rewording than the other, once you know there is a reward for picking a choice its no longer a choice but a problem and answer.
 

A choice should have no apparent answer, and leave the player thinking, something that expands on the human experience that is the game.


Games are not like TV, Movies, or Books, they are an interactive medium, and as such they need to be more expressive, and draw the player in more and more though the human experience. If I wanted to see something with a finite story line I would, but I don’t play bioware game for that.


This is another example.

 Moral Choices, most of the time in games this is a joke. We ether pick the I’m Hitler, or I’m the Pope choice, based on a stat that we want to increase, or a pay off at the end, or how much more content we get for said choice. It‘s never really been done great.

But Dragon age does it well.

And some of the situations make you set back and think, how would the game have played out if I picked this or that. If you let the werewolves kill the elves you get a line of dialoged for Zevran that you wouldn’t have gotten if you picked something else and his view of you goes down, or with Alistair, you could enter the fade Killing his Ant, or end it killing Connor, or end it having her kill Conner or travel to tower of Mage’s to help him, in which you will have to do the Mage’s quest. If you do this you lose the ability to gain Blood Magic, but it’s the apparent right choice, its not so black and white because every option is the correct one, I first let Conner‘s mother kill him because I didn‘t know of other choice‘s, or rewards because there wasn‘t an apparent one. And after doing that I sat there going WOW. . . That just happened.

Moral Choice make better writing and better game play, the higher the stakes on the choice in an unknown outcome the better the experience.

I think they should get rid of meters that show Saint over Hitler, and make the progression invisible so you don’t instantly know if your choice was good or bad, making people think more about the repercussions of choice.

OR

Keep the meter but add more variables to it, balancing between categories on it. Fable 2 sort of did this it the good/evil and pure/impure this gave you the ability to make apparently bad choices, but it was there better of the 3 evil’s

One that comes to mind is from Fallout 3

Kidnap a kid and get a cure, or just kill the gang leader.

No one is at fault her the kid is innocent, but the people are suffering, what is the right choice, I mean there is no guarantee that they wont kill the kid, but there dying and kidnapping the kid will save them.

Hard choice and there’s not big pay off for doing ether one of them, this is an example of a compelling moral choice.

Another way to do this is perception of people around you. Dragon age sort of did this, but I don’t think it went far enough.

Do something to Help a Mage and the Tempers lose respect more me. Do a quest for one guy, but ****** of the elves. This was as I said done on a small scale with your companions, help a child out and Morrigan hated you. Threaten a nun, everyone hated except Morrigan. Your actions had an immediate effect on the people around you. The only problem was, it was to easy to undo the negative effect  

The point is divergent paths and moral choices, with no other bearing than to make you think, are what makes games the medium it is.


Its all about the experience, and the evolution of gaming as a medium, dropping players into worlds that there actions have an effect on the world, and it’s a different effect for someone else who chose something earlier on but is unknowingly playing for it now. Being able to talk to people you know saying I made this choice and all this happened, and I made this choice and this happened, giving them the same experience, but through different perspectives.

We don’t have choice in games, we have the illusion of choice in game, at the end of the day no matter what we pick, we will still go and fight the big baddy at the end of the game. No matter what we do there isn’t a choice for “Nope I don’t wanna fight the end game boss, I’m going to set in a bar and let the kings number 2 choice deal with it.” The only game I’ve ever seen this in is Shadow Complex, were the chick gets kidnapped and you latterly just turn around and leave,  ending the game.

If writers cant make a compelling story with divergent paths or seemingly divergent paths than in a game that could in fact use them, like Dragon Age, Masseffect and even Alpha Protocol, than they shouldn’t be writing for that game. Very few stories with no divergent paths are compelling

COD, Halo, Gears of War, God of War, and others are all very good games, but there basically.

This is why your fighting, now go kill things because we say to.

Dragon age and Mass Effect say This is way your fighting, go kill things, oh but than you find out you don’t know the whole story, or you find out that along the way is not as simple as just kill things and your than forced to rethink your actions based on how you want things to fold out.
Or what alliances you want, or what character you like. It shapes the game to become more personal to the player. More so than Halo or Gears could ever be, even Half life or Final Fantasy with there compelling storytelling, still fall short of making me upset, when a character I’ve invested time into dies, not because it was scripted, but because along the way I make choices that are coming back to bite me in the ass and now a character I liked is dead. It invest more into the player, and brings the player on more emotionally.


I was upset when I read my Gray Warden would not be the hero in DA2, why? Because of the time I’ve invested in his story, more so the time I invested in crafting his story and world, and not just watching the world of a prefabricated character.


I hope this helps you see why choice is a big deal

In short choice is a big deal because REAL choice is not picking the best possible outcome based simply on Money, stats , or loot. A choice is when you have two different thing of serpent but equal value and no reward other than your personal taste. A morel choice is something that has far reaching effects, and can shape the world and have consequences that will effect you. That will make you think or emotionally touch you in someway, out of anger, or shock or sadness or joy, or something else.

Choice is another way to tell a story a more human story, it draws the player into what other wise would be a this is why your killing something, now go kill it game. It forces you to invest and hope for the best.


 

[CLime]

Batman90 wrote...

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.

That's just not true.  Cognitive bias abounds in these kinds of debates, but it's not hard to find actual statistics.  Let's take a look at the JRPGs and WRPGs announced for release in America this year, according to Wikipedia.

JRPG: Star Ocean: The Last Hope; FFXIII; Pokemon HeartGold/SoulSilver; Resonance of Fate; SMT: Strange Journey; Nier; Trinity Universe; Persona 3; DQIX; Arc Rise Fantasia; White Knight Chronicles; KH Birth By Sleep; Pokemon Black/White; Golden Sun: Dark dawn

14 games, ten of which I'm comfortable placing in either a traditional fantasy setting, or an FF-esque fantasy/punk/scifi mashup setting.  Half of the remaining games are Pokemon titles, which are their own sort of miscellaneous setting.  The last two are MegaTen games, which are also a scifi/fantasy mix, but more modern, with various religious elements.

Actually, both HeartGold/SoulSilver and Persona 3 are remakes, so let's cut those out.  That leaves ten of twelve JRPGs in either the traditional or scifi mashup fantasy camps, one dark scifi/fantasy, and one Pokemon.

WRPGs: Dragon Age: Origins; Alpha Protocol; Mass Effect 2; Divinity 2: Ego Draconis; Two Worlds II; Echalon: Book II; Fallout: New Vegas; Fable 3; Arcania: Gothic 4; Afterfall Universe

Ten games, six of which look like traditional Western sword-and-sorcery.  There's a bit of varation within the remaining four.  ME2 is pure futuristic scifi, Alpha Protocol is modern espionage, and New Vegas and Afterfall are both alternate reality post-apocalyptic.

Conclusion: The ratio of fantasy to non-fantasy in WRPGs is closer to 3:2, while the 5:1 ratio belongs to JRPGs.  I'm sure the ratios would be a bit closer to each other if you look at the entire history of the genre, and there certainly was a time when most North American developers were just spinning off D&D, but as things stand today the Western RPG studios are using a noticeably broader range of settings than the Japanese ones.  This is true whether you look at all titles published this year, or just the big names.

Batman90 wrote...
 

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?

That's not how it is in Fallout 3.  Or Jade Empire. Or Alpha Protocol. Or KotOR.  Plenty of WRPGs don't force you to be the good guy, but let you destroy or rule the world rather than saving it.  Even in Dragon Age or Mass Effect, where you have to defeat the big bad, you've got a lot more choice along the way.  Believe it or not, some players actually like having "big choices," rather than just clicking through to the next slide in the magic-and-airships Powerpoint.

Modifié par CLime, 09 juillet 2010 - 09:35 .

[deus_]

I think the issue was more in regards to having freedom to create a character you want, race, class, etc.

[joriandrake]

deus_ wrote...

I think the issue was more in regards to having freedom to create a character you want, race, class, etc.

yes

[mopotter]

Batman90 wrote...

mopotter wrote...

Jestina wrote...

Final Fantasy went downhill around V or VI. I played some of XII and that was atrocious. That series went totally down the toilet.

Was that the one you got to play dress up.  oh, I'll put on my healer costume and you can be the shooter and she can be the sword fighter.  Wait lets change clothing and I'll be the shooter.  -- yes I actually played it.  

That was Final Fantasy X-2, which never happened. The words "Final Fantasy X-2" shall not be spoken again.

 

Gppd idea.    

[hawat333]

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.

You are aware you are talking about an RPG?

Oh, yes ,you are, mr troll.

[mopotter]

McHoger wrote...

I wonder how big the uproar would have been if they had fixed Hawke as a male character.

 

and the uproar if they would have if  Hawke was fixed as a female character?  probably the same..

Thing is, BioWare has a long past history  for giving us choices in character creation and thus an expectation for this in any of their rpg games.  

It sets them apart from the others.  The only other games I can think of where you have this much control over your character are games like Fallout and Oblivion but the npc / character interaction is no wear near the quality of BioWare.  I find the games fun and do replay them, but I don't get the immersion in their games that I get from BioWare games.

Some day the other developers may catch up.  And I do not play a women all the time.  I play both.  Once again, the choices of character creation, class skill choices even the romances all  help make the game  replayable.  

[mopotter]

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 agree.  It would be nice to have other races to play because then I could try them all out and see what the differences are, but I am looking forward to DA2.  

[mopotter]

DrunkDeadman wrote...

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.

From past experience, most of the female hair will suck and the male will have a nice long braid.    Most of my games I get for the xbox 360, but any game like this I usually get for the pc so when the talented people out there make new hair styles, I can use them.  

[FRZN]

I feel like Bioware has, over the years, been trying to eliminate the more superficial options in their games and letting the choices they do leave in carry more weight. Whether or not your ears were pointy didn't matter to the gameplay (a couple of stat points) or the story, it just meant that you'd be called "knife-ears" about a hundred times before the same people gave out the same information for the same quests. That's a lot of work for something that's ultimately pretty trivial.
I'd rather see more choices that determine if villages get burned to the ground and mean the writers have to come up with wider branching storylines rather than minor changes in dialog trees.

Modifié par FRZN, 09 juillet 2010 - 11:27 .

[SOLID_EVEREST]

Damn, this guy is such a freaking troll. "Options choke writers," wow, I wonder why anyone made Baldur's Gate, Fallout, or even Dragon Age: Origins, if options clearly destroy a story.

[mopotter]

Davasar wrote...

grieferbastard wrote...

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.

Absolutely.

They made their new game, but not with the core fanbase of DAO in mind, but for the masses/button mashers in hopes of greater profit while losing sight of the fact that they will lose the true core audience, self blinding fanboys excluded.

Go EAoware.

Well, I do disagree, politely.    I consider myself part of their core fanbase, I have and replay every game they have put out since BG.  

I admit to being concerned when I first heard about ME, but I love it.  KOTOR is still my #1 game but ME is 2nd and  I enjoy ME2 and I'm looking forward to ME3.  I don't mind playing a set character like Shepard, I could still control what Sheaprd looked like, bad hair and all.  

I was a set character in Jade Empire just choosing which character I wanted to play  and KOTOR, with a little more choice in what my character looked like.  

I enjoyed DA a lot, and I am looking forward to DA2.  Yes it would be nice to have more races to choose from, but as long as I can change the sex and hopefully have different skills to choose from I'll be a happy camper.  (oh and as long as the ending does not include anything like DA with Alistair.)

[mopotter]

SOLID_EVEREST wrote...

Damn, this guy is such a freaking troll. "Options choke writers," wow, I wonder why anyone made Baldur's Gate, Fallout, or even Dragon Age: Origins, if options clearly destroy a story.

I have found the responses very interesting.  Doesn't matter why the op started it, it's been a very good read.

[deus_]

*sigh* Can some one explain the game aspect of dialog tree's for me?

[pprrff]

All we know at this point is that the main guy/girl is hawke, and she/he is a blight survivor. Just because you can only play as human doesn't mean there is no customization. We know it can be male or female, so there is the option of sex. We know he can be rogue warrior or mage, so the option of class is there. As for his background, who is to say that we won't have 3 different starting stages. He can be child of a noble, a child of some criminal or a child of some peasant. May be there could be a selection of what the character's personality in the character selection: he can be a altruistic hero, an ambitious fart or an selfish ******, and depending on that the goal of the game or the victory condition is different. See, there are plenty of ways to write in option with a character like Hawke.

[grieferbastard]

mopotter wrote...
Well, I do disagree, politely.    I consider myself part of their core fanbase, I have and replay every game they have put out since BG.  

I admit to being concerned when I first heard about ME, but I love it.  KOTOR is still my #1 game but ME is 2nd and  I enjoy ME2 and I'm looking forward to ME3.  I don't mind playing a set character like Shepard, I could still control what Sheaprd looked like, bad hair and all.  

I was a set character in Jade Empire just choosing which character I wanted to play  and KOTOR, with a little more choice in what my character looked like.  

I enjoyed DA a lot, and I am looking forward to DA2.  Yes it would be nice to have more races to choose from, but as long as I can change the sex and hopefully have different skills to choose from I'll be a happy camper.  (oh and as long as the ending does not include anything like DA with Alistair.)

I can appreciate your point of view and you're right - the changes from DA:O to DA2 seem more in keeping with BioWares historical strengths. The problem is that for some of us, I don't so much care what the protagonist looks like - what hair style, etc - so much as who they are. That's the difference. I played Jade Empire through - once. ME and KotOR a few times - DA:O? A dozen. The truth is though that for some of us what we really, really want is a Bethesda-style sandbox game (a la Oblivion, or even better Morrowind) but with BioWare quality story and writing. In fact I'd sacrifice a bit of precise story detail in order to have less 'do A so you can get to B' and let me just go do my own thing in the amazing world that's been created.

I hope BioWare continues to enjoy critical success in their games and I greatly hope that the concept of continuing to produce DLC for a game long after its release catches on - for games like DA:O that have a lot of replayability I'm generally happy to buy it. The more cinematic a story gets though the less replay value it has for some of us - if the excitement is in hearing the story it wears thin pretty quickly. If the excitement is making a living breathing character and seeing how they work out in a living and breathing world.... well, that's what has created and sustained tabletop gaming for 30+ years.

Not that I object to a good story. Just not what I'm looking for in a good game. I've attempted to get all the way through Pride and Predjudice three times and failed - that doesn't mean that Jane Austen isn't a brilliant writer, just that it's not what interests me.

[snfonseka]

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.

Because this not a FPS where you play the game according to the given story. We are taking about RPG !!!!

Edit: So by using the word "options" you mean only the "customization".... NICE !!!!! <_<

Modifié par snfonseka, 09 juillet 2010 - 03:54 .

[mopotter]

grieferbastard wrote...

mopotter wrote...
Well, I do disagree, politely.    I consider myself part of their core fanbase, I have and replay every game they have put out since BG.  

I admit to being concerned when I first heard about ME, but I love it.  KOTOR is still my #1 game but ME is 2nd and  I enjoy ME2 and I'm looking forward to ME3.  I don't mind playing a set character like Shepard, I could still control what Sheaprd looked like, bad hair and all.  

I was a set character in Jade Empire just choosing which character I wanted to play  and KOTOR, with a little more choice in what my character looked like.  

I enjoyed DA a lot, and I am looking forward to DA2.  Yes it would be nice to have more races to choose from, but as long as I can change the sex and hopefully have different skills to choose from I'll be a happy camper.  (oh and as long as the ending does not include anything like DA with Alistair.)

I can appreciate your point of view and you're right - the changes from DA:O to DA2 seem more in keeping with BioWares historical strengths. The problem is that for some of us, I don't so much care what the protagonist looks like - what hair style, etc - so much as who they are. That's the difference. I played Jade Empire through - once. ME and KotOR a few times - DA:O? A dozen. The truth is though that for some of us what we really, really want is a Bethesda-style sandbox game (a la Oblivion, or even better Morrowind) but with BioWare quality story and writing. In fact I'd sacrifice a bit of precise story detail in order to have less 'do A so you can get to B' and let me just go do my own thing in the amazing world that's been created.

I hope BioWare continues to enjoy critical success in their games and I greatly hope that the concept of continuing to produce DLC for a game long after its release catches on - for games like DA:O that have a lot of replayability I'm generally happy to buy it. The more cinematic a story gets though the less replay value it has for some of us - if the excitement is in hearing the story it wears thin pretty quickly. If the excitement is making a living breathing character and seeing how they work out in a living and breathing world.... well, that's what has created and sustained tabletop gaming for 30+ years.

Not that I object to a good story. Just not what I'm looking for in a good game. I've attempted to get all the way through Pride and Predjudice three times and failed - that doesn't mean that Jane Austen isn't a brilliant writer, just that it's not what interests me.

I get it.   I've always dreamed of a game that combined BioWare and Bethesda aspects.  I still enjoy playing FallOut 3 (once I got the dlc broken steel)  In fact just started playing it again a couple of weeks ago and I've found all of the map sites, reached my 30 limit and right now I'm sitting in my house reading a book. 

I didn't make it through Pride and Prejudice either, but I was Judy Bolton (Margaret Sutton '32) and Vanessa March (Mary Stewart Airs Above the Ground) when I read them and I was Anny Oakely when I played with my cousin
i've been able to carry it over to my rpg playing.  I was Revan in KOTOR, well when I was female I was Revan.  I'm not quite as good at becoming the male character, but I try.  

And in DA I was that mage who loved Alistair and BioWare does such a great job with their characters that I was totally furious when the endings were not as logical as they should have been. 

I do see where you are coming from and I hope BioWare will be giving us some future games where we can make all of the choices we made in DA.  

[grieferbastard]

mopotter wrote...

I get it.   I've always dreamed of a game that combined BioWare and Bethesda aspects.  I still enjoy playing FallOut 3 (once I got the dlc broken steel)  In fact just started playing it again a couple of weeks ago and I've found all of the map sites, reached my 30 limit and right now I'm sitting in my house reading a book. 

I didn't make it through Pride and Prejudice either, but I was Judy Bolton (Margaret Sutton '32) and Vanessa March (Mary Stewart Airs Above the Ground) when I read them and I was Anny Oakely when I played with my cousin
i've been able to carry it over to my rpg playing.  I was Revan in KOTOR, well when I was female I was Revan.  I'm not quite as good at becoming the male character, but I try.  

And in DA I was that mage who loved Alistair and BioWare does such a great job with their characters that I was totally furious when the endings were not as logical as they should have been. 

I do see where you are coming from and I hope BioWare will be giving us some future games where we can make all of the choices we made in DA.  

Just fired FO3 up again myself with a pile of new mods. I'm actually considering firing Oblivion back up - there are mods out now to almost double the games playable area.

As to the story... well, that's the crux isn't it? Whos story is the game about? Is it someone elses story, told within the confines they have written, or is it yours? What options are left out because a writer doesn't feel it's suitable for their character, a reasonable consideration given they created them, but that would be something the player wants for their own game? 

BioWare makes great stories and does well selling the stories they have written - perhaps it's my own fault for being a greedy consumer but at the end of the day I'd rather pay for a game that lets me make my own story in a well designed and fleshed out world than play a cast role in someone elses story.

Said it before, will say it again. I have every expectation that DA2 will be a great commercial success and will deserve to be acknowledged as such. Just not my sort of game.