80 réponses à ce sujet

[kraze07]

AndarianTD wrote...

tjm335 wrote...

It seems that something has gone awry. In DA:O you made a nearly perfect game... The DA universe was teeming with posibility... Then the news of DA2 comes. However, it seems that instead of sticking to what brought the franchise so much success, you guys at Bioware have changed the formula (emphasis added).

In my opinion, this concern about "changing the formula" is where many of the people complaining about DA2 are going profundly wrong at the outset. On that premise, we'd still be riding horses and slicing our own bread. It reminds me of the attitude of the architects in "The Fountainhead," who proclaimed that everything good in architecture had already been discovered and that all we could do now was to copy and create variations on those known styles.

Computer gaming is a brand new field for artistic and creative expression. It provides a new and interactive paradigm for storytelling that we're just beginning to even try to figure out how to work with. And yet, some people are so tied to what's been done in the past that they don't want to see innovation, or experimentation with new forms of the art. They like what they've seen before and just want to see more of it. In my view this attitude is a big reason why we keep getting endless and typically mindless sequels in movies.

Re-hashing known formulas from the past rather than trying something new is a prescription for killing any kind of creative endeavor. That's why I don't want to see a formulaic sequel to Dragon Age: Origins. I want to see something new: a new story concept that's not necessarily chained to the tale or characters from DA:O, a new approach to play dynamics that's not necessarily tied to what's been done before, and so on. I want to see growth and innovation in gaming, not stagnation.

Not only is that paragraph far from the truth, but why should pc gaming start copying what's been going on in console gaming for so long.

That's what brand new IPs are for.

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

tjm335 wrote...

It seems that something has gone awry. In DA:O you made a nearly perfect game. It was fun, and successful (both critically and financially). You created a rich tapestry of a game which satisfied rpg fans everwhere. It was hailed as the spiritual sucessor to Baldaur's Gate, and was a rejoice to old school rpg players for its tactical and strategic play. The DA universe was teeming with posibility...

For the record, there seem to be a fair number of rpg fans who wanted to see more and different things in DA.  I certainly number myself among them.  I also don't think that any game Bioware is likely to produce will be tilted toward a niche market, like "old school rpg players".  Broadening the appeal of a game is good business.  I also happen to like some of the design philosophy going into DA2.

Twelve years after Baldur's Gate was released, I don't necessarily want its spiritual successor to look entirely like it physical successor.  I don't find the click-on-circle gameplay to add much to plot, setting, or characterization.  I'm not sure that micro-managing the whole team in combat (which has the effect of nullifying the protagonist's class choices) is particularly immersive or enriching, either.  We're not playing with clunky D&D rules anymore; there's no reason to think that other departures might not move RPG's in a positive direction.

Obviously these represent my preferences.  I'm not suggesting that characteristics of old RPG's are bad, I'm just saying I've had enough of them and I would prefer something new.  DA2 is apparently being marketed to me.  Thing is, I never gave Bioware any feedback before they started on their new design.  This suggests that they believe that many others feel the same way.  If DA2 were, in terms of gameplay, a complete re-hash of DA, I likely wouldn't buy it. 

As reviled as ME2 is in these parts, the changes were a response to the common complaints of many players.  I can't help thinking that DA2 is following suit.  I will certainly miss the multiple background options and some of the wonderful garnishes that made DA entertaining.  If I'm to buy DA2, though, I want some different and better gameplay.

Just one (old) man's opinion, though.

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

kraze07 wrote...

AndarianTD wrote...

Re-hashing known formulas from the past rather than trying something new is a prescription for killing any kind of creative endeavor. That's why I don't want to see a formulaic sequel to Dragon Age: Origins. I want to see something new: a new story concept that's not necessarily chained to the tale or characters from DA:O, a new approach to play dynamics that's not necessarily tied to what's been done before, and so on. I want to see growth and innovation in gaming, not stagnation.

Not only is that paragraph far from the truth, but why should pc gaming start copying what's been going on in console gaming for so long.

That's what brand new IPs are for.

What an immensely arbitrary idea that is, and one with which Bioware manifestly disagrees.  Judging from ME2, Bioware seems interested in improving their games and broadening their appeal right in the middle of a series.  We can argue about whether there is actual improvement, but it's clear that they don't see any given IP as a cage, within which they must carefully pace off the parameters of the next game.

[kraze07]

Tantum Dic Verbo wrote...

kraze07 wrote...

AndarianTD wrote...

Re-hashing known formulas from the past rather than trying something new is a prescription for killing any kind of creative endeavor. That's why I don't want to see a formulaic sequel to Dragon Age: Origins. I want to see something new: a new story concept that's not necessarily chained to the tale or characters from DA:O, a new approach to play dynamics that's not necessarily tied to what's been done before, and so on. I want to see growth and innovation in gaming, not stagnation.

Not only is that paragraph far from the truth, but why should pc gaming start copying what's been going on in console gaming for so long.

That's what brand new IPs are for.

What an immensely arbitrary idea that is, and one with which Bioware manifestly disagrees.  Judging from ME2, Bioware seems interested in improving their games and broadening their appeal right in the middle of a series.  We can argue about whether there is actual improvement, but it's clear that they don't see any given IP as a cage, within which they must carefully pace off the parameters of the next game.

And that's one of their downsides imo. It's as if they make a game to cater to their RPG fanbase, then switch it up the next game drawing in a different audience, while knowing that their true fans and the RPG fans will still purchase the new game expecting the game to be much of the same when it's not. If ME's story and lore wasn't so good I wouldn't even think about buying ME3, but because I want to see how the story plays out I'll buy the game.

Modifié par kraze07, 28 juillet 2010 - 02:56 .

[javierabegazo]

http://social.biowar...1/index/3099230

[javierabegazo]

Sorry but the link I've provided is a much more established thread, with Dev quotes and all, please migrate there