13812 réponses à ce sujet

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Origins almost compeltely failed to explain the Civil war and had one idiotic side quest for it. The LKandmseet is a joke comapred to the Loc Muinne Conference. And finally, the bipolarity it has, which is shared by all Bioware games, has nothing overly complex or intriguing about it, and it's not how real politics work. REal politics involve a multitude of factions, all playing their own game and the TW2 pulled it off almost perfectly.

This is something I noticed especially. It's been a Bioware standard now, but they cannot into political intrigue and motivations. It's always so binary. Mage/Templar, Loghain/Eamon, Harrowmont/Bhelen. Quite frankly, Witcher 2's take on politics is refreshing and much closer to how it works.

Even New Vegas does this aspect much better.

YohkoOhno wrote...

In any event, I doubt this reduces it significantly, but I still think keeping the lore in books that you have to purchase is a poor way to encourage reading about the lore of the game.

Finding grand tomes in a cave full of monsters is a poorer way. I personally prefer the Elder Scrolls method, where books are physical objects which can be bought, owned, etc.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 10 juin 2011 - 12:18 .

[YohkoOhno]

Yeah, I have to agree with that point about the politics of Bioware. Of course, much of Bioware's stuff is based on the Epic Quest. Of course, the flip side is sometimes if you have too much political shennanegans, it can become a little bit of a zero sum game and less enjoyable.

The one thing I'd hate is for an RPG to feel like the Congressional Battles in the US...

Finding grand tomes in a cave full of monsters is a poorer way. I personally prefer the Elder Scrolls method, where books are physical objects which can be bought, owned, etc.

In this case, I think realism should take a back seat to accessibility.  But mostly just in this case.

Modifié par YohkoOhno, 10 juin 2011 - 12:20 .

[DragonRageGT]

The Witcher EE has sold 1.5 million copies in one year. A lot more recently but let's use the first figure CDPR used:

N. America - 150k
Russia - 500k
Europe and rest of the World - 850k

The Witcher 2 has sold some 500k copies on the first week according to those CDPR guys in the Live Feed from California, few days ago.

Those wishing it sells **** might start changing business because forecast and prediction is not for them!

TW2 will outsell the first by a long margin and on the PC alone it is likely to sell a lot more than the whole of DA2 in all platforms.

[Dragoonlordz]

YohkoOhno wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...
And how many points did you mark the game down for that if I might ask?

Sigh--You now just seem to want to get the last word.  I am trying to give you an out by moving on to discuss things with others, but you keep on with bringing up what I talk about with others.  Just ignore me if you don't like what I have to say.  I'm not leaving the thread.   I don't think you realize that you're arguments are starting to annoy a few other people.

In any event, I doubt this reduces it significantly, but I still think keeping the lore in books that you have to purchase is a poor way to encourage reading about the lore of the game.

Its the same discussion we were already having. Lore within the game...

[slimgrin]

TheMufflon wrote...

True objectivity is, in practice, wholly unnecessary while there is a wide reaching consensus. That is the axiom upon which all reviewing is based. And the overwhelming consensus is that telling a story through terse wikia entries is a terrible idea, because how information is conveyed matters. If a game has to rely on such means of conveying information, it is for all intents and purposes flawed.

Please enlighten us further, professor.

[Bejos_]

YohkoOhno wrote...

Bejos_ wrote...
I agree with your stance on archetypes. I'm against tropes, however. It seems like they're in every medium nowadays, though, so I can't really mark down for their inclusion.

There's also an important difference between archetypes and cliches. Archetypes tap deeper into the entertainee's psyche, which allows for him or her to be more invested in the story while simultaneously allowing a deeper understanding of it; whereas cliches prevent the entertainee's engagement, and prevent that kind of instinctual connection. DA:O largely has archetypes as characters, while TW2 largely has cliches as characters.

I think Foltest is a great example of an archetype, though. That's one of the characters that was really well done in TW.

I agree with that second paragraph.  Of course, other people disagree, say "Bioware just does the same characters each game, etc".    

The big thing about Foltest though is that he was a character from a novel, so maybe that was more helpful on that front and prevented him from being a cliche.

This thread is moving quickly. I don't know if you missed the edits to the above post. (They have bearing on the next paragraph, so I'll copy-paste.)

"I think Foltest is a great example of an archetype, though. That's one of the characters that was really well done in TW.
Addendum: Actually, the whole of the prologue is really well done, at least in terms of archetypes. (I, personally, actually enjoy everything about the prologue, at least up until the jail sequence.) The story does lose a bit of that joie de vivre by Act 1, some more in Act 2, and becomes quite limp by Act 3. I think the question to be taken from this is how to more adequately interweave story and gameplay elements. ME2 (despite all of its other flaws) does this fairly well, as does DA:O.

Further addendum: Possibly the best archetype I've ever experienced in a game is DA:O's Flemeth. The shortcomings of DA2's team (in regard to story and storytelling) are summed up perfectly in the way in which they presented Flemeth in the sequel. In DA:O she was an archetype. In DA2, she wasn't even a cliche. She was just ... nothing. She didn't mean anything. All the gravitas was gone."

Anyway.

I'm not an avid gamer; I've only played select Bioware titles, but Bioware does present a lot of Freudian situations. So maybe "game recycling" is a valid criticism. I don't know.

As for TW2 and Foltest ... I read the first few pages of The Wish but couldn't get through the rest. Maybe Sapkowski's better at characterisation than he is at the other elements of writing (or maybe much of what makes him so cherished in Poland is lost in the translation to English). I suppose it's possible that the game character benefited from the books; from what I have read, though, I wouldn't bet on the books providing much of literary merit. Until there's any evidence to the contrary, I think CDPR is responsible for the better parts of the game story.

Have you read the books? What did you think of them?

Modifié par Bejos_, 10 juin 2011 - 12:28 .

[YohkoOhno]

Those wishing it sells **** might start changing business because forecast and prediction is not for them!

TW2 will outsell the first by a long margin and on the PC alone it is likely to sell a lot more than the whole of DA2 in all platforms.

I don't think anybody here is wishing it sells poorly, but I think people should have a skeptical nature and not predict things too easilly based on their own preferences.   I'll be glad if it does.  I just don't want to hear people predicting it's going to suddenly do gangbusters based on two weeks of sales.  And based on your statements, it's still going to be a much bigger hit in Europe than it will be here, which could lead to several changes, such as not having an English translation if it did poorly here.  (That's a hypothetical).

I'm hoping we have a sequel.  But I also don't think it's suddenly going to beat "All of Bioware's games" in sales.

Modifié par YohkoOhno, 10 juin 2011 - 12:25 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Of course, the flip side is sometimes if you have too much political shennanegans, it can become a little bit of a zero sum game and less enjoyable.

The one thing I'd hate is for an RPG to feel like the Congressional Battles in the US...

Maybe you don't give a crap about politics in a game, but there are some who do. I personally could care less about "Heroism" and all that BS.

Could it have been done better in TW2...certainly, as everything in any game could be done better, but they did it well enough in my opinion

[DragonRageGT]

♬Girl you thought he was a man/ But he was a muffin/ He hung around till you found/ That he didn't know nuthin... ♫

And I hate that person who cause The Beatles to break up!

(just kidding!)

Modifié par RageGT, 10 juin 2011 - 12:27 .

[Bejos_]

RageGT wrote...

The Witcher EE has sold 1.5 million copies in one year. A lot more recently but let's use the first figure CDPR used:

N. America - 150k
Russia - 500k
Europe and rest of the World - 850k

The Witcher 2 has sold some 500k copies on the first week according to those CDPR guys in the Live Feed from California, few days ago.

Those wishing it sells **** might start changing business because forecast and prediction is not for them!

TW2 will outsell the first by a long margin and on the PC alone it is likely to sell a lot more than the whole of DA2 in all platforms.

Rage, I sometimes can't tell whether you're being earnest or ironic. Sometimes you seem so reasonable. At other times ...

[KnightofPhoenix]

YohkoOhno wrote...

Yeah, I have to agree with that point about the politics of Bioware. Of course, much of Bioware's stuff is based on the Epic Quest. Of course, the flip side is sometimes if you have too much political shennanegans, it can become a little bit of a zero sum game and less enjoyable.

For me, a game that pretends to have a political plot, but does so in a very simplsitic or idiotic way, is less enjoyable to me.

TW2's political plot (or plots) was very enjoyable and is superior to any Bioware game. And imo, this is the case for plot in general and not just politics.

[DragonRageGT]

Bejos_ wrote...

Rage, I sometimes can't tell whether you're being earnest or ironic. Sometimes you seem so reasonable. At other times ...

hehe.. I'm just filled with... Rage! But time will tell, won't it? About the sales, I mean!

[Bejos_]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

YohkoOhno wrote...

Yeah, I have to agree with that point about the politics of Bioware. Of course, much of Bioware's stuff is based on the Epic Quest. Of course, the flip side is sometimes if you have too much political shennanegans, it can become a little bit of a zero sum game and less enjoyable.

For me, a game that pretends to have a political plot, but does so in a very simplsitic or idiotic way, is less enjoyable to me.

TW2's political plot (or plots) was very enjoyable and is superior to any Bioware game. And imo, this is the case for plot in general and not just politics.

Oh, yeah, TW2 definitely outdoes Bioware on the political front. On the other fronts ... well, that's debatable.

[Dragoonlordz]

YohkoOhno wrote...

Those wishing it sells **** might start changing business because forecast and prediction is not for them!

TW2 will outsell the first by a long margin and on the PC alone it is likely to sell a lot more than the whole of DA2 in all platforms.

I don't think anybody here is wishing it sells poorly, but I think people should have a skeptical nature and not predict things too easilly based on their own preferences.   I'll be glad if it does.  I just don't want to hear people predicting it's going to suddenly do gangbusters based on two weeks of sales.  And based on your statements, it's still going to be a much bigger hit in Europe than it will be here, which could lead to several changes, such as not having an English translation if it did poorly here.  (That's a hypothetical).

I'm hoping we have a sequel.  But I also don't think it's suddenly going to beat "All of Bioware's games" in sales.

As most of the world speaks English whether first language or second, it will be translated if there is a TW3 (which there will be regardless of your glass half empty view of the world). As it stands right now given your 'devils advocate' approach and using preference as flaws I am beginning to not care what you think.

[Bejos_]

YohkoOhno wrote...

Yeah, I have to agree with that point about the politics of Bioware. Of course, much of Bioware's stuff is based on the Epic Quest. Of course, the flip side is sometimes if you have too much political shennanegans, it can become a little bit of a zero sum game and less enjoyable.

The one thing I'd hate is for an RPG to feel like the Congressional Battles in the US...

Finding grand tomes in a cave full of monsters is a poorer way. I personally prefer the Elder Scrolls method, where books are physical objects which can be bought, owned, etc.

In this case, I think realism should take a back seat to accessibility.  But mostly just in this case.

Oh good, some things I actually disagree about with you.

I thought the politics was a little over the top (because it was so badly explained) in TW2, but I still think it's far preferrable to what we got in DA2.

As for the books ... I prefer the more realistic approach of having them be valuables, which must be bought. (Especially considering the low technology milieu of most fantasy games.) I do think there are other ways to present in-game information, though, such as through oral tradition. Your player could listen to a song (on- or off-screen) and the information that the song conveyed could then be displayed in your journal, there for you to peruse at your leisure.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Bejos_ wrote...
On the other fronts ... well, that's debatable.

Of course it's always debatable.

I don't think TW2 is better on all fronts. But in terms of overall plot and plot progression? I find TW2 better than the others. Especially the recent games, like ME2 and DA2. 

[erynnar]

YohkoOhno wrote...

I loved system shock 2 but it did (not) do a great job in introducing the world with all its backstory and it certainly did not cover all the lore from the first title.

I'm not really talking about backstory here.

Let me give you a specific example. In TW1, there were several good books on the politics of various elements of the world. Those are more or less lacking in TW2. One thing that I felt could have been done better is letting people know more about Nilfgaard. They turned out to be the major antagonists, but it would have been nice to have seen a little more information on why that nation was so feared by the northern kingdoms.

This is why I found DA:O's storytelling a lot better than TW2s. You are introduced to all the kingdoms you need to deal with. You don't have to know about the other nations far away, about the only few hints you get are about Orlais, and that's because they are near each other. I felt the game should have done things better explaining some of the things that might not be obvious to the new player. It can be as simple as providing an additional dialog tree to find out about the politics, or an in game book, but they should give the players the option to get more backstory without leaving the game. Knowing about the history of Nilfgaard might have given the new player a better emotional impact.

Little things like that are why I'm going to rank DA:O better than TW2.

So you want it all front loaded and spoon fed for you at the start?  I never played Witcher 1. I have a box copy, a gift from a friend, sitting on my desk in front of me. I have yet to crack it open and play, yet I am having no difficutlty in figuring out the kingdoms of the North, vs Nifflegard. Nor am I having any trouble with following the information repeated in 2 that I would have gotten in 1.

And by the by, all you need to know is conviently placed in codexes in your journal, just like DAO did. And what fun, they are told by Dandelion himself, which makes much of it funny. Even without reading the journal, I follow along just fine.I am missing where the confusion about the story of Witcher 2 and being able to follow it comes from.

And I am a brand new player and hardly exceptional. So to me, your arguments for new players is moot.

Also, I love that this game gives us real choices, and I don't mean in the games story. I mean you can choose to read the manual, read the journals with the turtorial, you can choose to play and learn as you go, or you can choose to do none of those things and throw your hands up in the air in frustration and quit playing it.

What I also love, is that the game, and CDPR chose to not hold our hands, pat us on the head, spoon feed us everything, or front load it all just to make it easier. You want to make the game easier on yourselves? Google the story from 1, read a book, read the manual, read the journals, or  *gasp* pay attention in the game. The story is explained to you in game if you only listen.

Modifié par erynnar, 10 juin 2011 - 12:47 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Bejos_ wrote...
I thought the politics was a little over the top (because it was so badly explained) in TW2, but I still think it's far preferrable to what we got in DA2.

I am curious. How is it so badly explained?

[Dragoonlordz]

erynnar wrote...

YohkoOhno wrote...

I loved system shock 2 but it did (not) do a great job in introducing the world with all its backstory and it certainly did not cover all the lore from the first title.

I'm not really talking about backstory here.

Let me give you a specific example. In TW1, there were several good books on the politics of various elements of the world. Those are more or less lacking in TW2. One thing that I felt could have been done better is letting people know more about Nilfgaard. They turned out to be the major antagonists, but it would have been nice to have seen a little more information on why that nation was so feared by the northern kingdoms.

This is why I found DA:O's storytelling a lot better than TW2s. You are introduced to all the kingdoms you need to deal with. You don't have to know about the other nations far away, about the only few hints you get are about Orlais, and that's because they are near each other. I felt the game should have done things better explaining some of the things that might not be obvious to the new player. It can be as simple as providing an additional dialog tree to find out about the politics, or an in game book, but they should give the players the option to get more backstory without leaving the game. Knowing about the history of Nilfgaard might have given the new player a better emotional impact.

Little things like that are why I'm going to rank DA:O better than TW2.

So you want it all front loaded and spoon fed for you at the start?  I never played Witcher 1. I have a box copy, a gift from a friend, sitting on my desk in front of me. I have yet to crack it open and play, yet I am having no difficutlty in figuring out the kingdoms of the North, vs Nifflegard. Nor am I having any trouble with following the information repeated in 2 that I would have gotten in 1.

And by the by, all you need to know is conviently placed in codexes in your journal, just like DAO did. And what fun, they are told by Dandelion himself, which makes much of it funny. Even without reading the journal, I follow along just fine.I am missing where the confusion about the story of Witcher 2 and being able to follow it comes from.

*Grumble grumble* I don't love you no more

Play Wticher 1, it's not as bad as people make it out to be it's a lot of fun to be honest. Plus will give you imports for TW2. That's what I'm currently working on, creating some imports. See how they pan out within TW2.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 10 juin 2011 - 12:46 .

[YohkoOhno]

Bejos_ wrote...
As for the books ... I prefer the more realistic approach of having them be valuables, which must be bought. (Especially considering the low technology milieu of most fantasy games.) I do think there are other ways to present in-game information, though, such as through oral tradition. Your player could listen to a song (on- or off-screen) and the information that the song conveyed could then be displayed in your journal, there for you to peruse at your leisure.

The happy medium would be to have them in a library, where you could read them, your Journal would be updated, and there you go.  And I agree it shouldn't always be text.  I just think buying the books is more of a punishment--spend cash which is a limited resource--add weight to character--then sell them back.  It just seems to be a complicated mechanic.  

Note that Geralt doesn't have to eat or drink in this game, nobody's complaining about the lack of that requirement.

Modifié par YohkoOhno, 10 juin 2011 - 12:48 .

[slimgrin]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Bejos_ wrote...
On the other fronts ... well, that's debatable.

Of course it's always debatable.

I don't think TW2 is better on all fronts. But in terms of overall plot and plot progression? I find TW2 better than the others. Especially the recent games, like ME2 and DA2. 

Lets not forget C&C and moral dilemma's, which I think The Witcher series does better than just about any other game I've played. I will say TW2 lacks a certain polish when compared to DA:O or ME2, mostly from a technical standpopint. Hell, I don't think its as polished as TW1. They should do another enhnaced edition imo.

[Boiny Bunny]

Without going into the specifics of his in-game presentation, I think Foltest makes a fairly unique character by his backstory alone. This is a man who fell in love with his sister and impregnated her. He would have married her too had she not died at birth.

That's not something I would have ever expected to see in a video game. It's too controversial.

[Bejos_]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Bejos_ wrote...
On the other fronts ... well, that's debatable.

Of course it's always debatable.

I don't think TW2 is better on all fronts. But in terms of overall plot and plot progression? I find TW2 better than the others. Especially the recent games, like ME2 and DA2.

For overall plot and plot progression ... I'd agree, TW2 does it better.

I'd say that Bioware characters (up until DA2; ****, is there nothing that isn't wrong with that game?) have more "artistic" merit than TW2 characters, though. Some TW2 characters are realistic, but a lot of them are also cliches, and some of them are just too hip for their own good. I don't quite know how to explain my preference for Bioware characters over CDPR characters, other than to say that CDPR characters feel like they're there to advance the plot, more than Bioware characters do. If that makes any sense. I think Bioware plot is more coherent, maybe, which lends more weight to the characters. Or there's just something a bit wooden about CDPR characters.

I'm confused. I definitely appreciate (non-DA2) Bioware characters more.

CDPR sets the stage well. Bioware inhabits it better.

[Dragoonlordz]

Bejos_ wrote...

Some TW2 characters are realistic, but a lot of them are also cliches, and some of them are just too hip for their own good.

First image that popped into mind was Fenris when read what I highlighted.

[Chromie]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Bejos_ wrote...

Some TW2 characters are realistic, but a lot of them are also cliches, and some of them are just too hip for their own good.

First image that popped into mind was Fenris when read what I highlighted.

Fenris and Isabella here. Worst characters in any Bioware game imo.