1080 réponses à ce sujet

[Wittand25]

Wulfram wrote...

"My favorite thing, it's funny when you still see
it, but the joke of some of the dialogue systems where it asks, 'do you
wanna do this or this,' and you say no. 'Do you wanna do this or this?'
No. 'Do you wanna do this or this?' No. Lemme think -- you want me to
say 'yes.' And that, unfortunately, really characterized the JRPG."

Having just played through the mage Origin in DA:O, this is pretty funny.

Try saying that you don´t care about the blight and that you are no Grey Warden at Flemeth´s hut after Ostagar, my favourite point of ignoring what the player says in the whole game.

[Dave of Canada]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Huh?  Jowan is going to attempt to escape, and you are going to "help," but the nature of your involvement can be fundamentally different.

But you can't outright refuse, you helping Jowan is a "but thou must" moment.

Note: I haven't followed the discussion, I just jumped in without knowing what I'm saying.

[Meltemph]

Hint: If character creation cannot define what an RPG is, sure as heck dialog choices can't either.

You are still creating Hawk though, so I would just assume that is what they meant by it.

[upsettingshorts]

tmp7704 wrote...

I don't think it's about being worried about reactions of people on the forum. The part to worry about is -- if the competition you make fun of is supposedly in financial trouble because they keep delivering the same stuff to the point it stops selling, is it then really smart to deliver the same thing that --according to your own belief-- your potential customers are already fed up with because they got too much of it from other sources?

If we assume the features being implemented are inspired by are copies of JRPG mechanics, I don't know enough about them to say myself, then the counterargument is this:

The problem - except in the case of that example of dialog not allowing player choice - is that their issue with JRPGs isnt any particular set of features, but the fact they do not change.  The stagnation is the problem, not whatever features JRPGs decided to stick with.

So if Bioware decided that their next game would be a Final Fantasy style game where you scroll between options at the bottom of the screen while they appear matched up with the enemy like its a Street Fighter game - that still wouldn't be hypocritical as it wouldn't represent stagnation unless they then made near-exact copies of the same game for years after.

Dave of Canada wrote...

But you can't outright refuse, you helping Jowan is a "but thou must" moment.

Note: I haven't followed the discussion, I just jumped in without knowing what I'm saying.

Yeah, but.... it's not a sandbox game.  Bioware doesn't make and has never made those.  In Fallout NV I could skip the tutorial and go shoot Doc Mitchell and Sunny Smiles in the face.  Different entirely.

Bioware attempts to give us as much choice within the framework of a fixed narrative as they can.  In order for the Mage Origin to stand out and be recruited by Duncan and get out of the Tower and move the plot forward, he either needs to get involved in the Jowan issue.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:04 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

tmp7704 wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I think Bioware's perspective is that their creative decisions got them, as a company, where they are today.  I doubt they view the notion that they should start navel gazing and doubting their own choices now as a particularly valid one.

They didn't become one of the most respected video game developers in the West by worrying about the reaction of people on their forums.

I don't think it's about being worried about reactions of people on the forum. The part to worry about is -- if the competition you make fun of is supposedly in financial trouble because they keep delivering the same stuff to the point it stops selling, is it then really smart to deliver the same thing that --according to your own belief-- your potential customers are already fed up with because they got too much of it from other sources?

Thats the part where EA's deep pockets come in. And when they fail to deliver 10 million sellers because RPG's tend to be a niche genre, and they get shuttered 5 years down the line, they'll have no one to blame but themselves for it.

[Aermas]

Yeah if you don't help him, your not role-playing right, he is supposed to be your friend, & people help their friends

[ladydesire]

Logabob wrote...

@ ladydesire:
You must have been very annoyed with Morrigan, then.

.

No, simply because I could change what she was wearing at any time. If I get DA2, I'll find the not being able to change companion outfits quite annoying.

[g-vapen]

tmp7704 wrote...

Bringing Sephiroth up is funny in a way though, considering just how recently BioWare was openly mocking JRPGs for the choices they make in their development. Yet they are making pretty much the same choices here with their latest own production.

And I thought I was the only one who noticed the irony.

[upsettingshorts]

Aermas wrote...

Yeah if you don't help him, your not role-playing right, he is supposed to be your friend, & people help their friends

You can make fun of him constantly for being an annoying load from the second he wakes you up.  I do it every single playthrough.  Whether or not my characters support him is always a matter of principle, not Jowan's personality.

[AlanC9]

tmp7704 wrote...
It could work as pretty sensible compromise imo, actually -- if someone chooses to swap the "iconic character appearance" for generic outfit, odds are they indeed don't have that much problem with reverting to default form because they attach higher value to being able to just customize appearance in the first place. Or maybe they even welcome that effect if the particular unique body model bothers them to begin with. While at the same time people who value higher the "iconic unique appearance" remain unaffected as their characters retain that unique look.

Of course,  this necessarily commits you to the poor quality of the DAO body system, where the head is obviously just stuck on a generic body. That's the specific problem I was talking about -- I should have been clear about that. You also have to precisely match generic bodies and specific bodies in height or the cutscene camera angles will be off, which limits the design of the specific forms somewhat.

If you want a better compromise, how about ME1? While armor was theoretically freely interchangeable, in practice you could do specific models for everything in the game because there just weren't very many models needed. The aliens except Liara have gear that only they can wear, which isn't really all that different from DA2. For the humans and Asari, you need to do everything for Ash and both Shepards.  But Liara and Kaidan can only wear light armors, so the mediums and heavies only need to fit Ash and Shep.

[tmp7704]

Meltemph wrote...

To insinuate that they are moving into a "stagnant and over delivered" approach because of choice of how they deal with companion equipment/body meshes, does not strike me as being objective or level headed, in regards to what the changes actually are.

I'm basing this on this new system being virtually identical in effect with how the FF series dealt with character equipment since initial installments -- characters are pretty much locked when it comes to their appearance, but you can still equip different individual pieces with their own attributes and stats, which provide customization "under the hood". FF12 is probably the closest equivalent here.

I mean, you are almost sounding like you are saying that character customization is not stagnant and over delivered(I know that is not what you are saying, but it would be very easy to flip the argument on itself).

It would be quite fair point to make, too. Except it would only render that BioWare quote rather hypocritical, since they would be then essentially calling competition stagnant while practicing their own version of that, for the most part.

[Dave of Canada]

*fail quote*

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:16 .

[Meltemph]

I'm basing this on this new system being virtually identical in effect with how the FF series dealt with character equipment since initial installments -- characters are pretty much locked when it comes to their appearance, but you can still equip different individual pieces with their own attributes and stats, which provide customization "under the hood". FF12 is probably the closest equivalent here.

So then what is Hawk? I don't think the 2 sub-genre's/types of games are exactly able to be properly compared, in terms of what means what, since there is a lot more to consider when talking about companions.



As for hypocritical... I personally don't see it being represented, just because of how they deal with the companions. Are there similarities? Yea, sure, but I don't think they are "virtually identical". I think there are enough differences in how the games themselves are handled differently. But then again, I'm not attached to one way or the other.

[Logabob]

The Warden is as much your character as Hawke is. Really, I don't give a %*(^ if you're a Dwarf or you're an outcast mage; it's a narrative about a character with a fixed conclusion and multiple different permutations.

[AlanC9]

Wittand25 wrote...

Try saying that you don´t care about the blight and that you are no Grey Warden at Flemeth´s hut after Ostagar, my favourite point of ignoring what the player says in the whole game.

What else could Bio do? I remember an NWN1 mod where the player could refuse the mission that begins the adventure. If he does refuse, the PC walks out and... the module ends. 

[tmp7704]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

If we assume the features being implemented are inspired by are copies of JRPG mechanics, I don't know enough about them to say myself, then the counterargument is this:

The problem - except in the case of that example of dialog not allowing player choice - is that their issue with JRPGs isnt any particular set of features, but the fact they do not change.  The stagnation is the problem, not whatever features JRPGs decided to stick with.

However, stagnation effectively means sticking with specific set of features, whatever that set is. So from customer's point of view, they're getting bored with that particular set of features.

If you get hamburger as your meal day after day after day then eventually you aren't sick with just the act of getting the same meal every time, but you also can't stand the hamburger itself. And getting it from another food chain isn't going to make the taste better if they don't use different recipe.

[Dave of Canada]

AlanC9 wrote...

What else could Bio do? I remember an NWN1 mod where the player could refuse the mission that begins the adventure. If he does refuse, the PC walks out and... the module ends. 

Golden Sun had a part in the beginning where you're asked to save the world and given a yes or no option, if you answer no - the characters in the room will become more and more desperate for you to say yes considering you're the only one who can save the world. If you refuse around three to four times, they go "Fine then. Leave the world to die.". The entire screen goes black, it pretty much says the world ended and then the game goes back to the intro screen.

SHORTEST GAME EVER.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:24 .

[In Exile]

FellowerOfOdin wrote...

As I stated, I still hope that the decision was mainly forced by EA and not by Bioware themselves...I highly doubt that a former top-RPG developer suddenly decides to alienate core gamers, it's more like EA will have told them to GET MOAR CASUAL GAMAZ.

People seem intent on saying that Bioware is some kind of monolithic traditional RPG developer, but what evidence is there for this?

Since 2003 (7 years ago) Bioware has released the following games:

Knights of the Old Republic
Jade Empire
Mass Effect
Dragon Age
Mass Effect 2

The only "traditional" RPG on the list is Dragon Age, and it is absolutely alien in a lot of dramatic ways with BG. It includes the cinematic presentation common to all Bioware games post-NWN, it has invincible NPCs, it has health and mana regeneration, it uses an MMO-like aggro mechanic...

I mean, I could just go on. Bioware does not design the sort of games you think it does. Since NWN it produced two non-RPGs (by the standards of this board) in Jade Empire and Mass Effect. Hell, Bioware developed the VO and paraphrase system that is seen as anathema to role-playing on this forum on their own.

I really think there is some kind of fundamental disconnect in terms of what Bioware makes and what people think they make, because DA:O stopped being the "rule" of what Bioware makes 7 years ago.

[grregg]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

grregg wrote...

I can understand if you prefer 'full customization' side of the this trade off, but I think it is a valid compromise to make and not an abomination unto RPG as some people make it out to be.

If you think customizing the equipment of your companions is a major part of RPG gameplay, you're well within your rights to label it an abomination unto RPG.

If you don't, you won't.

(...)

Not sure if I agree here. I can point out a number of games that lacked features that I consider important or even indispensable and somehow I never felt like they were abominations. They might have been disappointing, but abominations? Nah...

Certainly I never considered any missing feature in a game to be a valid reason to insult game's developers.

[upsettingshorts]

tmp7704 wrote...

However, stagnation effectively means sticking with specific set of features, whatever that set is. So from customer's point of view, they're getting bored with that particular set of features.

If you get hamburger as your meal day after day after day then eventually you aren't sick with just the act of getting the same meal every time, but you also can't stand the hamburger itself. And getting it from another food chain isn't going to make the taste better if they don't use different recipe.

I'm not sure how that applies. Bioware's audience and the JRPG audience, it would seem, share very little in common.
Some people might play both, but I think Square Enix and Bioware would probably both say there's more conflict than overlap in terms of their fanbase's expectations and what they are or aren't "bored" with.

Stagnation - of the sort I think Bioware is talking about - can't really be viewed with the perspective of the fan. It's purely an issue of development priorities the way he's talking about it. They don't want their games to be the same as the games that precede it - even if that's precisely what some of their fans legitimately desire. It's not how they do things, and their point is to criticize JRPG developers for that mindset, not for any particular features. That example of dialog being the exception.

grregg wrote...

Not sure if I agree here. I can point out a umber of games that lacked features that I consider important or even indispensable and somehow I never felt like they were abominations. They might have been disappointing, but abominations? Nah...

Certainly I never considered any missing feature in a game to be a valid reason to insult game's developers.

That wasn't my point really, I'm not going to defend the rhetorical style of every critic on the boards - suffice to say that everyone has their priorities and if the equipment management of their companions was one of theirs, then they've got a right to be upset. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 06 novembre 2010 - 06:28 .

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote..
It could work as pretty sensible compromise imo, actually -- if someone chooses to swap the "iconic character appearance" for generic outfit, odds are they indeed don't have that much problem with reverting to default form because they attach higher value to being able to just customize appearance in the first place. Or maybe they even welcome that effect if the particular unique body model bothers them to begin with. While at the same time people who value higher the "iconic unique appearance" remain unaffected as their characters retain that unique look.

No, never. This trade-off is useless. Instead of Bioware designing yet another custom and iconic outfit, they are wasting time to see if every NPC can fit in the generic mook mesh. I would always trade the ability to fit them into any armour for an iconic armour because the ability to fit them into any armour has 0 utility for me, so there is never an argument you can propose that would make agree with you that your preference should be in-game short of assuming Bioware has infinite time and resources to produce the game.

[tmp7704]

Meltemph wrote...

So then what is Hawk?

He isn't companion, for starters   Granted this can be seen as a cop-out but i was looking at it from perspective of companion customization/equipment like the topic says. As such, the protagonist is a (slightly) different animal.

[Wulfram]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Having just played through the mage Origin in DA:O, this is pretty funny.

Huh?  Jowan is going to attempt to escape, and you are going to "help," but the nature of your involvement can be fundamentally different.

Once you talk to Irving having refused Jowan, you're entirely railroaded into betraying him

[In Exile]

Dave of Canada wrote...

But you can't outright refuse, you helping Jowan is a "but thou must" moment.

Note: I haven't followed the discussion, I just jumped in without knowing what I'm saying.

The plot doesn't advance if you don't, but you can help either Irving or Jowan and that creates a very different experience. You can confess to Jowan your betrayal in the phylactry chamber.

So it's not a but thou must in the same way as a JRPG would be, where it is absolutely linear and you can't even pick vanilla flavour dialogue choices.