245 réponses à ce sujet

[Bryy_Miller]

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

aberdash wrote...

Mary Kirby wrote...

aberdash wrote...

If you know of a game with a framed narrative that has had great commercial sucess I would love to see it.

Alpha Protocol was the last to do it and it flopped.

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

Never played but I've never heard its story praised before now. Most of what I hear is how fun the running and jumping is. Will DA2 have fun running and jumping?

It's posts like these that make me wonder why you still choose to post.

Oh, what can you possibly be referring to? The spotless consistency of his analogy?

I was more going for how Abby likes to insult the devs, but sure, yours works, too.

[David Gaider]

aberdash wrote...
My main concern is the narrative is going to be forcing me through the game. If there is enough that we can do between the major plot points then it wont bother me. If we can do side-quests, chat up our party members, screw around in camp for a while, explore a random cave, and then continue on with the story I'm fine with it.

I'm not going to go into details about how the story is laid out just yet... but of course you can do these things. Are you assuming you wouldn't?

[aberdash]

No, I'm assuming each part of the plot takes place in a relativily small area with only a few side-quests to give the illusion you aren't being railroaded through the plot.

[AntiChri5]

No, I'm assuming each part of the plot takes place in a relativily small area with only a few side-quests to give the illusion you aren't being railroaded through the plot.

That sounds a lot like Origins to me.

[aberdash]

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

What an pretty co|ck. I am referring, of course, to the avatar.

What you did there. I saw it.

AntiChri5 wrote...

No, I'm assuming each part
of the plot takes place in a relativily small area with only a few
side-quests to give the illusion you aren't being railroaded through the
plot.

That sounds a lot like Origins to me.

Nah, origins had a lot of areas you could go to at any time. And you could do the side-quests anytime you wanted. They have already said once you pass a point you cant do the some side-quests in DA2.

Modifié par aberdash, 27 juillet 2010 - 04:35 .

[Arttis]

David Gaider wrote...

aberdash wrote...
My main concern is the narrative is going to be forcing me through the game. If there is enough that we can do between the major plot points then it wont bother me. If we can do side-quests, chat up our party members, screw around in camp for a while, explore a random cave, and then continue on with the story I'm fine with it.

I'm not going to go into details about how the story is laid out just yet... but of course you can do these things. Are you assuming you wouldn't?

We assume at this point anything can happen.

[David Gaider]

slimgrin wrote...
Well, this is a Bioware game, which from my experience tend to be pretty focused on the main narrative rather than free-form gaming. I have to say I kinda assumed I wouldn't either. And lets face it, many have said the side quests in DA:O were lacking.

Perhaps we're not talking about the same thing, then. He didn't ask if there was free-form world exploration a la Oblivion/Fallout-- of course we don't do that. But of course there will be plenty of side-quests to do, large and small, and things to do such as talking to your party members (among many others).

Modifié par David Gaider, 27 juillet 2010 - 04:32 .

[Arttis]

aberdash wrote...

JoePinasi1989 wrote...

What an pretty co|ck. I am referring, of course, to the avatar.

What you did there. I saw it.

AntiChri5 wrote...

No, I'm assuming each part
of the plot takes place in a relativily small area with only a few
side-quests to give the illusion you aren't being railroaded through the
plot.

That sounds a lot like Origins to me.

Nah, origins had a lot of areas you could go to at any time. And you could do the side-quests anytime you wanted.

And the main quests sometimes you can drop and go back to.

[Addai]

Lilacs wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

... But of course there will be plenty of side-quests to do, large and small, and things to do such as talking to your party members (among many others).

If talking to party members is "a la Awakening", no thank you.  How I hoped there was an off button to shut a party member up (Without turning off my sound, of course) when I accidentally clicked on him or her (i.e., their harsh replies, or odd ball superfluous comments, oh dear).  The intense sense of disconnection with our party members in DAO: Awakening has truly dampened my enthusiasm for replay-ability.

Hence, if talking or interacting with party members is similar to our conversations with our companions in Dragon Age Origins... then I am really looking forward to it.

I agree.  I also wonder if it will feel odd that the interaction is happening through the lens of a narrator.

[jackkel dragon]

Addai67 wrote...
I also wonder if it will feel odd that the interaction is happening through the lens of a narrator.

Maybe the narrator won't tell every minute detail of the story. Heaven forbid, Alpha Protocol example coming up (just finished this part of the game.)

In AP, the hero is a narrator to the villain for most of the game, as seen in the opening. Thing is, the villain already knows quite a bit of the story and doesn't always ask for specific details. The hero doesn't give the little details of what he did (in the game segments) unless asked to. This is shown where the hero asks the villain about a certain character that was just met in-game, but the villain didn't even remember that the character existed. The villain will also ask leading questions to set up each new segment, and there will be a recap after a segment that summarizes your choices (if you killed someone important near a camera feed, the villain will bring up the image. If not, he'll chastise/praise you for not killing them.)

I sincerely hope that Varric (the dwarf, right?) doesn't go into too much detail during his scenes. I don't need to watch Hawke have sexytime and then have a narrator... narrate it. *shiver*

[trying_touch]

Addai67 wrote...

Lilacs wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

... But of course there will be plenty of side-quests to do, large and small, and things to do such as talking to your party members (among many others).

If talking to party members is "a la Awakening", no thank you...

I agree.  I also wonder if it will feel odd that the interaction is happening through the lens of a narrator.

i actually liked the interaction in awakening... i liked knowing all that needs to be said has been said instead of awkwardly trudging through the conversation menu to make sure that i've heard everything a companion has to say for now...

but about this "interaction happening through a narrator" silliness, is this right? i mean, i barely makes sense... are you saying we interact with our companions by picking out what an NPC has to say about us?

Modifié par trying_touch, 27 juillet 2010 - 06:36 .

[CptSkull]

This sounds like what the Fable games should have been.

[Addai]

jackkel dragon wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
I also wonder if it will feel odd that the interaction is happening through the lens of a narrator.

Maybe the narrator won't tell every minute detail of the story. Heaven forbid, Alpha Protocol example coming up (just finished this part of the game.)

No, but whether we hear the narrator commenting or not, everything is being told as a narrative from the dwarf to the Chantry Seeker.  That's pretty much the premise of the game, if I understand it correctly.

I sincerely hope that Varric (the dwarf, right?) doesn't go into too much detail during his scenes. I don't need to watch Hawke have sexytime and then have a narrator... narrate it. *shiver*

Well yeah, that's what I'm saying.  If Hawke is having sexytime on screen, it's because Varric (sp?) is telling Cassandra about it.  Some Chantry chick.

Eww.

[Marek-B]

trying_touch wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Lilacs wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

... But of course there will be plenty of side-quests to do, large and small, and things to do such as talking to your party members (among many others).

If talking to party members is "a la Awakening", no thank you...

I agree.  I also wonder if it will feel odd that the interaction is happening through the lens of a narrator.

i actually liked the interaction in awakening... i liked knowing all that needs to be said has been said instead of awkwardly trudging through the conversation menu to make sure that i've heard everything a companion has to say for now...

Totally agree. One thing I personally liked about the interaction in DA:A is that the companions reacted to their environment. I was disappointed of DA:O's system because - like trying_touch said - I was seeking new things they could tell me all the time when I started a dialogue with them rather then really talking with them about the events. I really hoped that whenever I was in decision time or similar I could ask my companions about their opinion. Like asking Sten what he is thinking of Alistair as a king, etc. But all I could ask was if he thinks Ferelden is strange.... wait... this does suit somehow.

So, I really hope BioWare proceeds with the idea of talking about general and personal stuff at camp while speaking about the events when they really happen (although Awakening did not do that but hinted at it with the "environment-reactions").

My biggest concern about the narrative structure is that BioWare wants a canon result of the events but does not want to force it on the player while playing (thus created the framed narrative structure). This would feel like whatever we are doing we cannot change the outcoming/being of the "real Hawke". This would give me the feeling I'm rather playing Varric, respectively his story, than Hawke. I would hate having no impact on the true story of Hawke.

Modifié par Marek-B, 27 juillet 2010 - 09:48 .

[FedericoV]

aberdash wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Ah, so you know exactly how we're doing it and how the story plays out. Well, I guess I can't argue with that, then.

If you know of a game with a framed narrative that has had great commercial sucess I would love to see it.

Alpha Protocol was the last to do it and it flopped.

Assassin Creed I & II. Successfull enough?

Modifié par FedericoV, 27 juillet 2010 - 10:24 .

[FedericoV]

David Gaider wrote...

FedericoV wrote...
Are you happy with the "no canon" direction you have taken with the DA's franchise? Don't you think that the continuity between games will suffer a lot because of that? Sorry if I ask but I'm very curios (I was one of the few who supported the "canon" direction whatever the canon would have turned to be...).

"No canon" direction? You mean the fact that there is no canonical story? Why wouldn't I be happy with that? I could see it working either way, to be honest, but I like the idea of the world being reactive to your earlier choices and i suspect many others will as well.

Yep, I was talking about the canonical history. You know, I'm happy too with the reactivity of the playing world to the choices of players. My only concern is that without a canonical history, you have not a proper continuity... and so even if the choices we have made will be carried over from one game to the next, they will not have any major impact on the story of thedas, otheriwise it would be a complete mess to settle a game related to our previous choices. Sorry in advance if I'm not clear enough. For example, I'm really curios to see how you will manage to implement the choices of players about the dwarves in the next games.