309 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

errant_knight wrote...

I don't like being forced into options that my character wouldn't take. Removing the option to go to the tower would have done that in the same way that an end game choice in Awakening did.

A third option however is the option that makes everything happier all across the board (as the trope shows). I wouldn't mind the Mage Tower choice if say... it punished you by the demon coming back and killing Teagan.

[errant_knight]

Vaeliorin wrote...

Personally, I say to keep the third option, but with some caveats. First of all, it shouldn't be easy. It should require some extra work. Since it's optional, it could have really difficult puzzles/combat in order to be successful.

Second, I think it should be able to fail without getting a game over, but instead being left with no other choice beyond one of the first two. For example, in the Connor/Isolde issue, if whoever you send into the Fade via lyrium dies, instead of it simply being game over, I think that character should be dead, and you then have to either kill Connor, or try to convince the mages to let you do the blood magic bit with Isolde (and if that fails, another dead character and you have to kill Connor.) This isn't to say that a character should always die if you fail at a third option, just that it should have the expected outcome of that failure.

Even if you manage to complete the extra work for the third choice, however, I don't think that necessarily means it should be successful. Sometimes you go out of your way to try and do something good, and even if you're successful in what you were trying to do, it won't necessarily matter because you take too long, or the situation changes.

It really would bother me to totally remove it, however. Not giving my character the choice to look for a better outcome would quite often result in a character who was just stuck for me. Since I quite often play good characters, the option to not even look (even if it turns out unsuccessful) for a palatable option leaves me with a character who can't possibly proceed because the only choices are ones that that character would never make.

This is exactly it. I'm not opposed to making it more difficult, or to adding a chance of failure, as long as it's possible to succeed.

Modifié par errant_knight, 07 octobre 2010 - 01:24 .

[Daerog]

Should make a poll.

1. Yes. Let's all compromise and join hands in a circle of love and harmony.

2. No. Someone will end up unhappy, deal with it.

3. Yes, but rarely used. Like only once or twice.

4. Yes, but never for the big, main mission decisions.

or something like that.

[errant_knight]

Dave of Canada wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

I don't like being forced into options that my character wouldn't take. Removing the option to go to the tower would have done that in the same way that an end game choice in Awakening did.

A third option however is the option that makes everything happier all across the board (as the trope shows). I wouldn't mind the Mage Tower choice if say... it punished you by the demon coming back and killing Teagan.

If you aren't punished for making 'bad' choices, you shouldn't be punished for making 'good' ones. Making the third option more difficult and dangerous, that would be something else.

Modifié par errant_knight, 07 octobre 2010 - 01:25 .

[Merced256]

errant_knight wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

I don't like being forced into options that my character wouldn't take. Removing the option to go to the tower would have done that in the same way that an end game choice in Awakening did.

A third option however is the option that makes everything happier all across the board (as the trope shows). I wouldn't mind the Mage Tower choice if say... it punished you by the demon coming back and killing Teagan.

If you aren't punished for making 'bad' choices, you shouldn't be punished for making 'good' ones.

In the case in question you're punished because you don't keep eamon's immediate family intact, i've always saved his family so i'm not sure dramatic of a divergence it is to not.

[theamplifiedsoul]

I still don't buy the whole forced thing. I played all the outcomes. It is a choice. Kill Conner, let Isolde die, or go to the Mages Circle. Sure one seems the best option but you have to thoroughly use the conversation tree to get it. You can still choose any one you want. I know I did. It's not a major advantage one over the other. You get Alistair ticked off, but oh well. Alistair chose to follow, that means you make the decisions. I actually liked the conversations better when someone didn't approve, so that was a reward in itself. If you don't want to the win-win scenario, then don't choose it.

[errant_knight]

Merced256 wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

I don't like being forced into options that my character wouldn't take. Removing the option to go to the tower would have done that in the same way that an end game choice in Awakening did.

A third option however is the option that makes everything happier all across the board (as the trope shows). I wouldn't mind the Mage Tower choice if say... it punished you by the demon coming back and killing Teagan.

If you aren't punished for making 'bad' choices, you shouldn't be punished for making 'good' ones.

In the case in question you're punished because you don't keep eamon's immediate family intact, i've always saved his family so i'm not sure dramatic of a divergence it is to not.

There's a big difference between making Eamon and Alistair unhappy and killing Teagan.

[Merced256]

errant_knight wrote...

Merced256 wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

I don't like being forced into options that my character wouldn't take. Removing the option to go to the tower would have done that in the same way that an end game choice in Awakening did.

A third option however is the option that makes everything happier all across the board (as the trope shows). I wouldn't mind the Mage Tower choice if say... it punished you by the demon coming back and killing Teagan.

If you aren't punished for making 'bad' choices, you shouldn't be punished for making 'good' ones.

In the case in question you're punished because you don't keep eamon's immediate family intact, i've always saved his family so i'm not sure dramatic of a divergence it is to not.

There's a big difference between making Eamon and Alistair unhappy and killing Teagan.

How so? So far as i can tell teagen's only role after redcliffe is completed is to take over the arling when eamon abdicates it and show up in the final battle cutscene. I mean don't get me wrong i liked Teagan but hes not integral, but neither is connor or isolde.

Modifié par Merced256, 07 octobre 2010 - 01:30 .

[errant_knight]

theamplifiedsoul wrote...

I still don't buy the whole forced thing. I played all the outcomes. It is a choice. Kill Conner, let Isolde die, or go to the Mages Circle. Sure one seems the best option but you have to thoroughly use the conversation tree to get it. You can still choose any one you want. I know I did. It's not a major advantage one over the other. You get Alistair ticked off, but oh well. Alistair chose to follow, that means you make the decisions. I actually liked the conversations better when someone didn't approve, so that was a reward in itself. If you don't want to the win-win scenario, then don't choose it.

 Yep, that's the way I feel about it. Then everyone can play the game as they want to. If I get to a choice that my good character absolutely wouldn't take, but would look for another way, and there isn't another way, I get stopped in my tracks. If there hadn't been a third option, the game would have ended for me right there.

Awakening was sneakier, because you didn't know that you would be forced to confront the big bad without any choice. Now that REALLY forced your hand.

Modifié par errant_knight, 07 octobre 2010 - 01:33 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Any suggestion of removing choice options is a bad idea to begin with. These game are narrow enough in scope as it is. Why anyone would honestly suggest to remove even more dialog or possible quest solutions is beyond me in the first place.

[Dave of Canada]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Any suggestion of removing choice options is a bad idea to begin with. These game are narrow enough in scope as it is. Why anyone would honestly suggest to remove even more dialog or possible quest solutions is beyond me in the first place.

But I didn't advocate the removal of choice options, I suggested the removal of the happily ever after choices. They can still exist, just with consequences of their own instead of having no consequences.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Dave of Canada wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Any suggestion of removing choice options is a bad idea to begin with. These game are narrow enough in scope as it is. Why anyone would honestly suggest to remove even more dialog or possible quest solutions is beyond me in the first place.

But I didn't advocate the removal of choice options, I suggested the removal of the happily ever after choices. They can still exist, just with consequences of their own instead of having no consequences.

Sure you are, your advocating removal of any happy endings for quest solutions. I'm all for adding more meaningful consequences or just over all more solutions in general, but removing simply for the sake of "oh no one got hurt, my choice didn't cost anything"  eh, not so keen on that.

[errant_knight]

Dave of Canada wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Any suggestion of removing choice options is a bad idea to begin with. These game are narrow enough in scope as it is. Why anyone would honestly suggest to remove even more dialog or possible quest solutions is beyond me in the first place.

But I didn't advocate the removal of choice options, I suggested the removal of the happily ever after choices. They can still exist, just with consequences of their own instead of having no consequences.

But there are no real consequences to killing Connor or Isolde. Eamon still supports you without issue, and while Alistair gets very angry, it's not permanent. Why should there be a heavier price to pay for trying to save Eamon's family?

[Lukas Kristjanson]

Eh, in hindsight there are perhaps better ways to present an option like the Circle solution to the Connor plot. Maybe telegraphing it earlier in a less direct way, before you get anywhere near the choke point. “Sounds like mage work.” “Yes, but the Circle is busy with their own problems.” Then when the choice comes, only show the Circle as an option if you have already gone to the tower and gained the mages as allies. That way it’s still a reward for exploration and investigation, but is not out of the blue.
 
Because that’s what these are intended to be, rewards for the player who does the legwork, which has to balance in that weird zone between random and obvious. When you deal with the size of weave that we tend to produce, it's good and interesting when plots affect each other. Like the “rally the crowd” option in Tali’s loyalty mission in ME2. Players who got it thought it was a really cool result for consistent support of various quarian interests. Those who didn’t see it had no idea it was even possible. I’m on the fence about the visibility of it, but I would definitely rather have it present than not at all.
 
So we’re always looking to balance this sort of thing. Will we remove “third options” simply for the sake of satisfying those who think every plot should be a choice between suck and blow? Nope. But neither will we add them just for the sake of making everything rosey. And I do agree they can bring other consequences depending on what you have to do to get them.

 
By the way, “trope” is getting a little overused lately. Why don’t people trot out the “mistakes video game villains make so the plot is somewhat interesting and longer than the time it takes to cap your hero in the back of the head” lists again? Those made people feel smart too, you know.

[silentassassin264]

It isn't about removing choices, it is about actual having grey morality instead of a clear cut "this is what you should do unless you are a bastard" choice. Orzammar was done perfectly for example. Harrowmont was a good man but his traditionalist policies were horrible. Bhelen was a homicidal jerk but he was ultimately what Orzammar and Ferelden needed. Then combine that with the Anvil of the Void choice which either choice has their good and bad side to them. That makes it more engaging rather than, going down to the anvil ignore the squabbling Paragons, get Oghren to find you a crown and go back and crown Dagna Queen of Orzammar and say Caridin/Branka endorsed your choice but you never found the anvil or some other Deus Ex Machina to keep you from having to make a real choice.

[GodWood]

Errant_Knight wrote...
But there are no real consequences to killing Connor or Isolde. Eamon still supports you without issue, and while Alistair gets very angry, it's not permanent. Why should there be a heavier price to pay for trying to save Eamon's family?

The consequence is the death of Connor or Isolde.

Modifié par GodWood, 07 octobre 2010 - 01:44 .

[errant_knight]

Lukas Kristjanson wrote...

Eh, in hindsight there are perhaps better ways to present an option like the Circle solution to the Connor plot. Maybe telegraphing it earlier in a less direct way, before you get anywhere near the choke point. “Sounds like mage work.” “Yes, but the Circle is busy with their own problems.” Then when the choice comes, only show the Circle as an option if you have already gone to the tower and gained the mages as allies. That way it’s still a reward for exploration and investigation, but is not out of the blue.
 
Because that’s what these are intended to be, rewards for the player who does the legwork, which has to balance in that weird zone between random and obvious. When you deal with the size of weave that we tend to produce, it's good and interesting when plots affect each other. Like the “rally the crowd” option in Tali’s loyalty mission in ME2. Players who got it thought it was a really cool result for consistent support of various quarian interests. Those who didn’t see it had no idea it was even possible. I’m on the fence about the visibility of it, but I would definitely rather have it present than not at all.
 
So we’re always looking to balance this sort of thing. Will we remove “third options” simply for the sake of satisfying those who think every plot should be a choice between suck and blow? Nope. But neither will we add them just for the sake of making everything rosey. And I do agree they can bring other consequences depending on what you have to do to get them.

 
By the way, “trope” is getting a little overused lately. Why don’t people trot out the “mistakes video game villains make so the plot is somewhat interesting and longer than the time it takes to cap your hero in the back of the head” lists again? Those made people feel smart too, you know.

Thanks so much, that adds a lot of clarity to the question.

[Rhayth]

I think the third option is viable to some situations...but like with Connor the whole thing about it is he is an abomination and leading up to him you are told there is only one thing to do....killl the kid....but wait you can save him with blood magic which is forbidden...ok great scenario that shouldnt have had a third option just my opinion

[errant_knight]

GodWood wrote...

Errant_Knight wrote...
But there are no real consequences to killing Connor or Isolde. Eamon still supports you without issue, and while Alistair gets very angry, it's not permanent. Why should there be a heavier price to pay for trying to save Eamon's family?

The consequence is the death of Connor or Isolde.

Lol! I suppose that's true. I kind of overlooked that, didn't I? I've never done either of those things, so they're not repercussions that I actually think about. But yeah, I guess that's on par. Still, in the example, the likable character dies if you do good.

Modifié par errant_knight, 07 octobre 2010 - 01:48 .

[Ortaya Alevli]

errant_knight wrote...

theamplifiedsoul wrote...

I still don't buy the whole forced thing. I played all the outcomes. It is a choice. Kill Conner, let Isolde die, or go to the Mages Circle. Sure one seems the best option but you have to thoroughly use the conversation tree to get it. You can still choose any one you want. I know I did. It's not a major advantage one over the other. You get Alistair ticked off, but oh well. Alistair chose to follow, that means you make the decisions. I actually liked the conversations better when someone didn't approve, so that was a reward in itself. If you don't want to the win-win scenario, then don't choose it.

 Yep, that's the way I feel about it. Then everyone can play the game as they want to. If I get to a choice that my good character absolutely wouldn't take, but would look for another way, and there isn't another way, I get stopped in my tracks. If there hadn't been a third option, the game would have ended for me right there.

Awakening was sneakier, because you didn't know that you would be forced to confront the big bad without any choice. Now that REALLY forced your hand.

It's difficult to make a choice knowing you have a way to cop out. Feels a little morbid, like sadomasochism. In the Connor example, you gotta be a monster to let Connor or Isolde die when you know there's a way to save both and there's no price to pay in doing so.

[Dave of Canada]

errant_knight wrote...

But there are no real consequences to killing Connor or Isolde. Eamon still supports you without issue, and while Alistair gets very angry, it's not permanent. Why should there be a heavier price to pay for trying to save Eamon's family?

How is say... Teagan dying a heavier price? Connor and Isolde are just as close to Eamon.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 07 octobre 2010 - 01:47 .

[ErichHartmann]

GodWood wrote...

Errant_Knight wrote...
But there are no real consequences to killing Connor or Isolde. Eamon still supports you without issue, and while Alistair gets very angry, it's not permanent. Why should there be a heavier price to pay for trying to save Eamon's family?

The consequence is the death of Connor or Isolde.

Remind me to cry over killing Connor.....NOT!   It was a necessary decision. 

[Daerog]

Lukas Kristjanson wrote...

By the way, “trope” is getting a little overused lately. Why don’t people trot out the “mistakes video game villains make so the plot is somewhat interesting and longer than the time it takes to cap your hero in the back of the head” lists again?

Heh, reminds me of the Evil Overlord list.

[Dave of Canada]

Lukas Kristjanson wrote...
 
So we’re always looking to balance this sort of thing. Will we remove “third options” simply for the sake of satisfying those who think every plot should be a choice between suck and blow? Nope. But neither will we add them just for the sake of making everything rosey. And I do agree they can bring other consequences depending on what you have to do to get them.

Thanks for the entire response but that bolded part made me smile. Thank you, Lukas.