1230 réponses à ce sujet

[CarlSpackler]

 The
admittedly few few revelations of DA2 released are foreshadowing a slightly (or drastically depending on your view) type of game than DAO.  Whats bewildering to me are the "why" and "when" questions.  First of all DAO was excellent, an engrossing experience with a 1st person narrative from a AAA developer and publisher.  Please correct me if I'm wrong but there are very few games that come to mind when it comes to 1st person narratives.  Secondly from all the press releases, vgchartz, download service charts, etc, DAO sold extremely well.  (For example check out this link: http://gamebanshee.c...ass-effect.html.) 

So it would seem there is a clear audience for this type of game, quite frankly no other AAA developers are developing games in this mold, so the question remains, why change the approach?  As a corollary to that question, when was the change decided upon?  To be more specific going from a 1st person narrative to a 3rd (a la Hawke via Sheppard), using the dialog wheel, and fully voiced PC.  Now there are number of other troubling buzzwords but the preceding examples are confirmed.  While I understand Bioware is constantly wanting to try new storytelling techniques, I applaud them for the ME games as they’ve turned out,largely because they seem to be hitting the mark they set out for and merging a genre I have no interest in (1st or 3rd person shooters) with an RPG. Great!  However, the ME games never came close to delivering the gamingexperience and fun of DAO.   So why alter the approach to an admittedly successful game when there really isn’t much else on the market that resembles it? EVERY other major title I can think of employs the 3rd person narrative and PC voice over.  Lastly, DAO was announced VERY early in development to let their gaming community know that they were in fact trying to carry on the BG tradition of the traditional CRPG experience.  And while I have no doubt DA2 will be fun in on its own terms, Bioware no longer has anything currently announced that delivers a more traditional type of gaming experience.  Sadly as a result I’ve seen they are losing some of their longtime fans.  Keep in mind I’m not talking about the “YOU SUCK BIOWARE!” folks, but rather reasoned people who enjoy a very specific type of game.  Their dollars are gone with not really any other games to sink them.  I know I’ll play DA2, but the market of games out there that interest me is very shallow.  A few more “upgrades” to Bioware game design and my gaming dollars may disappear as well with nowhere to invest them. I  don’t play shooters, action games, or most sports games.  (And no one really develops the old-school adventure games L .) 

So back to my questions, why was this approach decided upon when the first game was such a critical and commercial success?  And was it decided upon before DAO was released?  Was it perhaps apprehension by higher level folks who lacked faith in the product before shipping?  It all seems very strange.  Anyways, as always, I’m sure the story, atmosphere, companions, will be great, but I’m already lamenting the loss of the first person narrative.  And yes I’ve seen posts where the devs confirm Hawke is more about how we define him that Sheppard, but the switch will be noted, as will the fully voiced PC (which likely means a short game as well since we were told many times on the old forums that the game was able to be longer due to not having to pay for PC VO) which just pulls me a little out of the game instead of into it.  Good luck with the rest of the development, despite how my above rant may come across, I really am looking forward to the game.  Cheers. 

Modifié par CarlSpackler, 12 juillet 2010 - 01:32 .

[angelgaidin]

It's only third person if you have trouble roleplaying a voiced character. I have no such problems, so to me, both Mass Effect and Dragon Age 2 are 1st person. To each his own.

[Davasar]

I asked these questions before in a different thread...and the crickets answered me.

One of the other posters came up with an hypothesis....I will repost it here:


Akizora wrote...

The world is changing, I feel it in the earth, I feel it in the water, I smell it in the air. Much that once was is now
forgotten; for none now live who remember it.

It began with the making of the great games: Three of Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter Nights were given to the oldschool RPG-fans, the most dedicated and loyal of all beings. Two of Knights of the Old Republic and Jade Empire were given to the new generation of RPG fans, great gamers and players of the new era. And Two were passed to the race of men, who  above all else desire power and were thus given Mass Effect.

The oldschool RPG-fans rejoiced upon the release of Dragon Age: Origins and as did all the other races.

...But they were all of them decieved for another game was made: in the halls of Bioware, in the fires of Internet Hate, the dark lord Gaider forged, in secret, a master game to control all others. And into this game he poured his cruelty, his malice, and his will to dominate all life....This game was Dragon Age 2


Had to copy this over, it was too good not to share

Modifié par Davasar, 12 juillet 2010 - 01:38 .

[Zanderat]

CarlSpackler wrote...

 

I have been asking that exact same thing.  Makes no sense for such a radical and disappointing departure.

[CarlSpackler]

angelgaidin wrote...

It's only third person if you have trouble roleplaying a voiced character. I have no such problems, so to me, both Mass Effect and Dragon Age 2 are 1st person. To each his own.

Yeah I think part of it is if you identify with the voice actor.  In the case of ME I really don't like the VA for Shep.  As result it was always someone else's story.

[Khayness]

To ensure a more immersive storytelling and better cinematic experience some gameplay limitations had to go.

[Zanderat]

Khayness wrote...

To ensure a more immersive storytelling and better cinematic experience some gameplay limitations had to go.

That's what the ME franchise is for.......

[CarlSpackler]

Khayness wrote...

To ensure a more immersive storytelling and better cinematic experience some gameplay limitations had to go.

Immersive can be a relative thing.  The things they have confirmed for DA2 wouldn't have affected my immersion for DAO in a positive way.

[_-Greywolf-_]

Khayness wrote...

To ensure a more immersive storytelling and better cinematic experience some gameplay limitations had to go.

Immersive for who though?

[Khayness]

Zanderat wrote...

That's what the ME franchise is for.......

BioWare is working with the rEApers, the patterns are there, buried in the data.

Wow folks, I'm just trolling with PR lines.

Modifié par Khayness, 12 juillet 2010 - 01:44 .

[angelgaidin]

_-Greywolf-_ wrote...

Khayness wrote...

To ensure a more immersive storytelling and better cinematic experience some gameplay limitations had to go.

Immersive for who though?

Me, for one.  Silent characters just don't do it for me.  If I wanted to use my imagination, I'd go run a D&D game.

[SirOccam]

Dragon Age: Origins WAS an excellent game, but was it a PERFECT game? No, of course not.

There are improvements to be made even to a game so excellent as that. I think a lot of people are losing perspective. Since they love DAO so much, they act as though every minuscule part of the game HAS to be exactly the same or it will automatically be worse. So then things become "worse" not on their own strengths or weaknesses, but by the magnitude of their difference from DAO.

Is there an objective reason why the dialogue wheel as described CAN'T be used well? Or why a voiced main character NECESSARILY IMPLIES a worse game? Both of these things are different from DAO, but that doesn't mean they can't work well anyway. There's no one right answer to everything.

And if you didn't like a game that used these things, it's the same principle. The dislike for that game gets applied to each part of that game. Just because you didn't like a game doesn't mean it did every single thing wrong. Just that it didn't all work together well enough to suit you.

[CarlSpackler]

SirOccam wrote...

Dragon Age: Origins WAS an excellent game, but was it a PERFECT game? No, of course not.
There are improvements to be made even to a game so excellent as that. I think a lot of people are losing perspective. Since they love DAO so much, they act as though every minuscule part of the game HAS to be exactly the same or it will automatically be worse. So then things become "worse" not on their own strengths or weaknesses, but by the magnitude of their difference from DAO.
Is there an objective reason why the dialogue wheel as described CAN'T be used well? Or why a voiced main character NECESSARILY IMPLIES a worse game? Both of these things are different from DAO, but that doesn't mean they can't work well anyway. There's no one right answer to everything.
And if you didn't like a game that used these things, it's the same principle. The dislike for that game gets applied to each part of that game. Just because you didn't like a game doesn't mean it did every single thing wrong. Just that it didn't all work together well enough to suit you.

While I agree with you that DAO was not perfect, and I am happy they are wanting to improve and experiment some; the reasons some folks are disgruntled is because PC voice-over and the dialog wheel (for examples) are known quantities, and some of us prefer what was there already.  

[SirOccam]

CarlSpackler wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

Dragon Age: Origins WAS an excellent game, but was it a PERFECT game? No, of course not.
There are improvements to be made even to a game so excellent as that. I think a lot of people are losing perspective. Since they love DAO so much, they act as though every minuscule part of the game HAS to be exactly the same or it will automatically be worse. So then things become "worse" not on their own strengths or weaknesses, but by the magnitude of their difference from DAO.
Is there an objective reason why the dialogue wheel as described CAN'T be used well? Or why a voiced main character NECESSARILY IMPLIES a worse game? Both of these things are different from DAO, but that doesn't mean they can't work well anyway. There's no one right answer to everything.
And if you didn't like a game that used these things, it's the same principle. The dislike for that game gets applied to each part of that game. Just because you didn't like a game doesn't mean it did every single thing wrong. Just that it didn't all work together well enough to suit you.

While I agree with you that DAO was not perfect, and I am happy they are wanting to improve and experiment some; the reasons some folks are disgruntled is because PC voice-over and the dialog wheel (for examples) are known quantities, and some of us prefer what was there already. 

That's exactly my point.

[phaonica]

angelgaidin wrote...

It's only third person if you have trouble roleplaying a voiced character. I have no such problems, so to me, both Mass Effect and Dragon Age 2 are 1st person. To each his own.

Bioware representatives have said that Mass Effect is choice-driven third-person and Dragon Age: Origins is first-person. () The Elder Scrolls series and Fallout 3 are also award-winning first-person perspective games. I'm sure that DA2 is going to be a very good third-person perspective game, but the definitively first person perspective is what caused me to become an Origins fan, and I'm sorry that they aren't making DA2 another one.

[angelgaidin]

Whatever they called Mass Effect, I was able to play it first-person (not the camera angle, of course, but the roleplaying).

[phaonica]

SirOccam wrote...
Or why a voiced main character NECESSARILY IMPLIES a worse game? 

The voiced character implies a switch from first to third person perspective. It doesn't make the game a bad game. But, almost by definition, writers use a first person perspective to bring readers closer to their characters and third person comes with a degree of separation from the character.

[SirOccam]

phaonica wrote...

SirOccam wrote...
Or why a voiced main character NECESSARILY IMPLIES a worse game? 

The voiced character implies a switch from first to third person perspective. It doesn't make the game a bad game. But, almost by definition, writers use a first person perspective to bring readers closer to their characters and third person comes with a degree of separation from the character.

It's not that different from DAO, though. Except that you hear it as well as read it.

I'm not even sure how DAO could be called "first-person" anyway. I mean, your character SPOKE in first-person of course, but then, he will in DA2 as well, naturally. I don't recall any narrative text anywhere in the form of a diary or journal or something that could contribute to that aspect.

Books can be in first person if the action is written like "I crossed the room" instead of "He crossed the room," but that doesn't even apply since you just watch it happen and there really is no narration in that sense. Visually, first-person refers to the perspective of the camera, and DAO definitely wasn't first-person in that regard. Anything I can think of that would paint DAO as first person also applies to DA2.

[David Gaider]

I would suggest that you wait to hear exactly what our approach is before trying to figure out whether it's what you're interested in or not.



People appear to be acting as if the scant details we've revealed are all they'll ever learn about the game ever, and they're thus required to render judgment immediately.



You're really not. You might, in fact, want to see exactly how we're implementing these features you dislike and seeing for yourself whether they differ from, say, Mass Effect's. There are similarities, of course, but there are also differences... and to assume you know everything about how the game is going to feel based off the most cursory of information is just going to make you look foolish.



Perhaps in the end DA2 won't be for you after all. That's fair. You should be able to judge prior to actually playing it-- there will be information galore available prior to its release, I'm sure. But if you want to have questions asking the "why" regarding our approach taken seriously, it might be sensible to wait and see what that approach is first.

[Ecael]

why change the approach?

Why not?

Dragon Age was never a first-person RPG.

[LPPrince]

I wonder how many times David has to stress this before everyone understands what he means.



I'll bet Eleventeen more times.

[David Gaider]

LPPrince wrote...
I wonder how many times David has to stress this before everyone understands what he means.

I'll bet Eleventeen more times.

Well, I imagine until we put out more information on the game. Then people will either feel their fears have been prophetic or get to be pleasantly surprised. Win/win, I suppose.

[Arttis]

David Gaider wrote...

LPPrince wrote...
I wonder how many times David has to stress this before everyone understands what he means.

I'll bet Eleventeen more times.

Well, I imagine until we put out more information on the game. Then people will either feel their fears have been prophetic or get to be pleasantly surprised. Win/win, I suppose.

So he is really saying everyone is wrong.

[joriandrake]

David Gaider wrote...

LPPrince wrote...
I wonder how many times David has to stress this before everyone understands what he means.

I'll bet Eleventeen more times.

Well, I imagine until we put out more information on the game. Then people will either feel their fears have been prophetic or get to be pleasantly surprised. Win/win, I suppose.

I don't believe anyone would be happy if their fears become real, that is like doomsayers at the start of apocalypse cheering and saying "I told you so"

[LPPrince]

David Gaider wrote...

LPPrince wrote...
I wonder how many times David has to stress this before everyone understands what he means.

I'll bet Eleventeen more times.

Well, I imagine until we put out more information on the game. Then people will either feel their fears have been prophetic or get to be pleasantly surprised. Win/win, I suppose.

I hope to the Maker you're right, Mr. Gaider. For your sake and ours.