332 réponses à ce sujet

[Monica83]

The cat example reminds me nwn2 lol many situation like that .. I loved much more baldur's gate 2 and jonv thanks

The new design of things looks better yes i love the qunari ones and i want to see elves and dwarfs too

what i hope is dragon age 2 will be a nice rpg game but i must admit that what i read don't likes me very much!

[Rake21]

Monica83 wrote...

The cat example reminds me nwn2 lol many situation like that .. I loved much more baldur's gate 2 and jonv thanks
The new design of things looks better yes i love the qunari ones and i want to see elves and dwarfs too
what i hope is dragon age 2 will be a nice rpg game but i must admit that what i read don't likes me very much!

Here's the new concept art for DA 2 races.  Dwarves and Elves included.

http://images4.wikia...6/Da2_races.jpg

[javierabegazo]

Marionetten wrote...

Phoenixblight wrote...

More Content =/= better game.

More content does equal a better game assuming the content is of equal quality.

Ah but you see what you did there? That assumption is a massive one, and one that will likely never hold true for one piece of material across a wide group of people. Some enjoy the simple fetching side quests that are so widely used in cRPG's.

By all means, more content of a good game is always welcome, but there comes a point when then the production costs and values of making an incredibly detailed game come into play as well. This is one reason why I almost never ever play MMO's. Sure they can last well, practically forever, but it can never be as engrossing as a game with a beginning, a middle, and most importantly, an end.

[errant_knight]

javierabegazo wrote...

Maconbar wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

A 5-min chess game can be high quality. A 5-min rpg, not so much.

Well of all the games I've played, a longer game does in no way mean it's superior to the shorter games I've played, when it comes to quality of story,

Because a short game likely indicates fewer sidequests and less variationof sidequests for different kinds of roleplay (ie: some of my characters might do mage/thieves quest, some might not dream of it), shorter, less involved encounters with NPCs, and less conversation with companions. The length difference has to mean something is gone.

[Schwadragon]

Totally agreeing that length=/=quality. One of the best games ever, in my opinion, was Portal, which clocked in at around 3 hours. DA2 may be shorter than DA:O, but DA:O's time was padded by the boring-ass Chantry Board/Mage's Collective side quests.

[bluewolv1970]

javierabegazo wrote...

Monica83 wrote...

Well this is not true that depend from many factors.. nice improvements can be made the game more longer also deep and different situation side quest and others.. If a game is short is short.. In a short game you cann't expect to find many different quest than the main one unless they are semplicistic and with less details...A nice example oblivion is longer if you made all the side quest.. But the story is weak dialogue are nearly absent its all like find that.. kill that follow him... And many other schematic things...For example da2 can have a great main storyline and weaks sidequest... Or also can have a medium storyline and cute sidequest.. But if a game is shorter something will be always missing..

And yet in longer RPG's there seems to always be loads of filler quests, where you play message courier.

"I need to cross this river"
But first, I must get a boat, but before X lends me his boat, I must feed his cat, but to feed his cat, I must travel through the depths of Y to kill R and then bring the meat to U to prepare the meat the way the cat likes it, so X will lend me the boat to cross the river.

Sorry but things like this always make me roll my eyes, and I LOVE RPG's they are what brought me to gaming in the first place

you obviously have not played a game like morrowind, where you can essentially join factions and do misc quests (including a lot of freeform) without ever even finishing the main quest and feel like you got your moneys worth...

In my experience short rpg's are rarely deep or fulilling - case in point while origins does drag oafter the 5th playthrough at times (deep roads) - I would still prefer that to a game that feels shallow the first time I play it (awakening) 

[TMZuk]

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

Because all the great crpg's I love are LONG! Darklands, Daggerfall, Baldur's Gate, Baldur's Gate II etc. etc.

And the fillerquests are supposed to be FUN, as in BG/BG2, and not the contrived crap they were in DA:O.

The reason DA2 is being planned as short, IMO, is the price of voice acting, the lack of development time and the greed of EA/Bioware.

[Akka le Vil]

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

How can you NOT include length into the several factors of quality ?

[Marionetten]

javierabegazo wrote...

Ah but you see what you did there? That assumption is a massive one, and one that will likely never hold true for one piece of material across a wide group of people. Some enjoy the simple fetching side quests that are so widely used in cRPG's.

By all means, more content of a good game is always welcome, but there comes a point when then the production costs and values of making an incredibly detailed game come into play as well. This is one reason why I almost never ever play MMO's. Sure they can last well, practically forever, but it can never be as engrossing as a game with a beginning, a middle, and most importantly, an end.

Which no one is arguing. The question is if it's worth it.

We already know that the voiced player character is responsible for shortening the game. To me, that just isn't a worthwhile tradeoff. To me, actual content adds more quality to a game than my character having a set voice.

Modifié par Marionetten, 08 septembre 2010 - 05:12 .

[Monica83]

In DAO i enjoyed the party relationship i had a romance with leliana a nice character i hope dragon age 2 will have deep character too with interact

[Wyndham711]

I feel there is a certain point up to which length is crucial in games, and this point always needs to be reached to create a satisfying experience. The point varies between genres and even within genres of course, and is partly subjective.
But with RPGs it is surely at a level higher than average. When your game has reached that point, further length (given high quality) is still beneficial, but it starts to suffer diminished returns in terms of how important it is to the satisfaction awarded by the experience.

Modifié par Wyndham711, 08 septembre 2010 - 05:14 .

[Schwadragon]

bluewolv1970 wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Monica83 wrote...

Well this is not true that depend from many factors.. nice improvements can be made the game more longer also deep and different situation side quest and others.. If a game is short is short.. In a short game you cann't expect to find many different quest than the main one unless they are semplicistic and with less details...A nice example oblivion is longer if you made all the side quest.. But the story is weak dialogue are nearly absent its all like find that.. kill that follow him... And many other schematic things...For example da2 can have a great main storyline and weaks sidequest... Or also can have a medium storyline and cute sidequest.. But if a game is shorter something will be always missing..

And yet in longer RPG's there seems to always be loads of filler quests, where you play message courier.

"I need to cross this river"
But first, I must get a boat, but before X lends me his boat, I must feed his cat, but to feed his cat, I must travel through the depths of Y to kill R and then bring the meat to U to prepare the meat the way the cat likes it, so X will lend me the boat to cross the river.

Sorry but things like this always make me roll my eyes, and I LOVE RPG's they are what brought me to gaming in the first place

you obviously have not played a game like morrowind, where you can essentially join factions and do misc quests (including a lot of freeform) without ever even finishing the main quest and feel like you got your moneys worth...

DA:O wasn't that type of game, though. No Bioware game is*. Bioware games are focused on the story, and put a lot less focus on side quests. So OK with fewer side quests if it means higher quality side quests, and a higher quality story.

*I haven't actually played Baldur's Gate or Neverwinter Nights, so I don't know if this applies to them. It applies to every Bioware game since KOTOR, though.

[Schwadragon]

Akka le Vil wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

How can you NOT include length into the several factors of quality ?

Do you include length as a factor in the quality of a book or a movie?

[Blastback]

Schwadragon wrote...

Akka le Vil wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

How can you NOT include length into the several factors of quality ?

Do you include length as a factor in the quality of a book or a movie?

Yeah, I do.  Sometimes a movie or book will draw out what should be a shorter story, which will affect quality.  Sometimes they will rush one.  It ties in with pacing.

[Herr Uhl]

Schwadragon wrote...

Akka le Vil wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

How can you NOT include length into the several factors of quality ?

Do you include length as a factor in the quality of a book or a movie?

Yes.

Edit: There be too short and too long for both.

Modifié par Herr Uhl, 08 septembre 2010 - 05:24 .

[Monica83]

Well Schwadragon isn't the same thing.. A movie and a book are much more different than a videogame and much different from an Rpg.. In a book or in a movie you read or watch a story you didin't interact with the world or with character in it.. Its too much complicated to compare movies and book with rpg...

[Schwadragon]

Blastback wrote...

Schwadragon wrote...

Akka le Vil wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

How can you NOT include length into the several factors of quality ?

Do you include length as a factor in the quality of a book or a movie?

Yeah, I do.  Sometimes a movie or book will draw out what should be a shorter story, which will affect quality.  Sometimes they will rush one.  It ties in with pacing.

Sure, but that kind of fits my point. I think a game can be too short, but I also think it can be too long. A lot of people are arguing that longer=better, and it's just not as simple as that.

[javierabegazo]

Schwadragon wrote...

Akka le Vil wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

How can you NOT include length into the several factors of quality ?

Do you include length as a factor in the quality of a book or a movie?

This is what I'm getting at. I look at video games as a medium of story telling. I play them first and foremost for that purpose. If they remove side quests that have no direct correlation with the story, or it doesn't enrich the experience in anyway, ala "Please deliver 5 sovereigns to X", then I'm all for it.

If they add sidequests that do the opposite, that intrigue me and enrich the story, that develop characters, then once again, I'm all for it, but I'd rather them sacrifice meaningless, forgettable side quests than sacrifice the main narrative and story arc and character development. 

[Aradace]

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

I could tell you the answer to that but I'd probably get perma banned for the "color language" and other deroggitory comments I'd use to express it

[Marionetten]

javierabegazo wrote...

... but I'd rather them sacrifice meaningless, forgettable side quests than sacrifice the main narrative and story arc and character development.

Which isn't the case.

They are sacrificing it for the sake of presentation.

[the_one_54321]

javierabegazo wrote...
Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

It is content, not length, that has to do with the value of a game. This, still, is not directly related to the quality.
High quality content tends to take up slightly more time than low quality content, but the overall length of the game is more effected by the volume of the content, rather than the quality of the content. The issue with the game being "short" is not that the story will be told poorly, but that you will not being getting enough volume of story even if it's done well.

[marquiseondore]

Rake21 wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

Final Fantasy XIII:  about 80 hours of crap.

This a million times.  The game was beautiful but was the most tedious sorry excuse for an RPG.  By the end of the game I hate all the characters.


Winged Warrior by comparison was very short but fun.

Modifié par marquiseondore, 08 septembre 2010 - 05:35 .

[Wyndham711]

javierabegazo wrote...

This is what I'm getting at. I look at video games as a medium of story telling. I play them first and foremost for that purpose. If they remove side quests that have no direct correlation with the story, or it doesn't enrich the experience in anyway, ala "Please deliver 5 sovereigns to X", then I'm all for it.

If they add sidequests that do the opposite, that intrigue me and enrich the story, that develop characters, then once again, I'm all for it, but I'd rather them sacrifice meaningless, forgettable side quests than sacrifice the main narrative and story arc and character development. 

I disagree. We don't need to "sacrifice" the main narrative or character development. They are still there, with RPGs we get something special to accompany those central things.

I feel one of the reasons RPGs are such an endearing and powerful medium of storytelling is that they typically aren't as efficient at it in comparison to say films or novels. The sense that there's no need to be straight to the point. You can wonder around, do some completely trivial things, even some that might be classified as "boring" if studied out of context.

This particular unhurried, respiring way of telling a story is something pretty unique, and an aspect of RPGs that I deeply adore.

Modifié par Wyndham711, 08 septembre 2010 - 05:35 .

[the_one_54321]

marquiseondore wrote...

Rake21 wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...
Why do people insist that Length has anything to do with the quality of a game...?

Final Fantasy XIII:  about 80 hours of crap.

This a million times.  The game was beautiful but was the most tedious sorry excuse for an RPG.  By the end of the game I hate all the characters.

Winged Warrior by comparison was very short but fun.

FFXIII is a horrible example. When making examples to prove a point, you should find objects that are almost universally agreed upon. There are tons of people that disagree with you about FFXIII. All you accomplish is creating a whole seperate argument about FFXIII.