13812 réponses à ce sujet

[erynnar]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

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.

ROFL! I will, I promise! I  do want imports for my oh sixth or seventh, or eight playthroughs...  But all these arguments for "new players" is moot to me. I am a new player and I didn't mind the lack of tutorial. I didn't the story explained to me more fully or the world I was in. This game makes me use my ears for somthing than keeping my ears from clanking together. And I love it. 

At times it's frustrating ( figuring out how to get the drunk guys to <spoiler>) but once I figure it out, victory is all the more sweet and so damn rewarding.

I do wish they had a junk button, I missed out on cash when I needed it by not selling 25 rags in my inventory.

[Bejos_]

YohkoOhno wrote...

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.

You have a point. Libraries would be rare things, though, in a low technology milieu. I do remember running around some places, like the chapel in the prologue, wishing I could grab the books off the shelves. Those would be perfect places to acquire them. This brings up the topic of how easy it is to steal from people, in-game, but let's not go there.

Why didn't they populate all the shelves with interesting titles? Hm. CDPR did cop out, there. 'Course all Bioware games do the same thing, but that doesn't excuse it.

I suppose it's a time- and labour-saving limitation.

[erynnar]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

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.

And you meant died in childbirhth, heheh. :lol:Yeah you could have knocked me over with a feather when that part of the story came out in Witcher 2, casually I might add. I thought it was fantastic and so unique. And very controversial.

Modifié par erynnar, 10 juin 2011 - 01:01 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Bejos_ wrote...
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 think I understand where you are comign from.

TW characters are there to advance the well built plot. While in Bioware games, the plot (even if weak, like in Origins) is there to flesh out characters.

I think that's fair to say, more or less.

That said, I find myself liking Roche as much as Garrus personally. And I really like Siegfried, Radovid, Letho, Jacques..etc. I personally think that TW characters are strong in their own right personally, especially sicne they are in a believable plot. Maybe they didn't have as much focus as Bioware games (because of the companion system for the most part). But I didn't feel they were weak characters, I felt they had character development and interesting character details.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 10 juin 2011 - 01:02 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Ringo12 wrote...

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.

I don't know I thought she kept things interesting. Fenris was as cliché as can get and tried too hard to pull of the cool guy act. Anders remake was dubious and soul destroying regarding how they changed him. Aveline was well thought out personality and so was Varric, Merrill filled nothing more than the gimmick spot tbh for me. Anyways thats a bit off topic. I haven't met everyone in TW2 yet so glancing over posts in relation to characters.

[slimgrin]

erynnar wrote...

I do wish they had a junk button, I missed out on cash when I needed it by not selling 25 rags in my inventory.

there's a mod for this now.


http://witchernexus..../file.php?id=87

[Bejos_]

erynnar wrote...
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.

BWAHAHahahahahAHAHAHAHAHA!!
Erynnar, I love you just for that.
How awesome would it be if the evil empire were called Nifflegard?!

[Dragoonlordz]

erynnar wrote...

I do wish they had a junk button, I missed out on cash when I needed it by not selling 25 rags in my inventory.

I'm sure there will be a mod for that at some point if one does not currently exist. Oh I do love modders. <3

However I will state that I do not class that as a flaw in the game not being able to sell things when they is no one to buy them around. There is inventory mod already I think that allows you to carry more though that might not be the resolution your after with regard to carrying around what you view as junk. Feel free to knit me a scarf out of those rags.

[erynnar]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Bejos_ wrote...
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 think I understand where you are comign from.

TW characters are there to advance the well built plot. While in Bioware games, the plot (even if weak, like in Origins) is there to flesh out characters.

I think that's fair to say, more or less.

That said, I find myself liking Roche as much as Garrus personally. And I really like Siegfried, Radovid, Letho, Jacques..etc. I personally think that TW characters are strong in their own right personally, especially sicne they are in a believable plot. Maybe they didn't have as much focus as Bioware games (because of the companion system for the most part). But I didn't feel they were weak characters, I felt they had character development and interesting character details.

They don't have as much focus. But they are deep and complex people. None of them are really a stereotype per se. They aren't angels or devils, emo, or hookers with hearts of gold or cliched. They are people who have their own agendas and secrets. Dandelion is closer to Varric to my mind. Reading his journal entries, especially about Geralt, his missoins, or Dadelion himself are hilarious.

[erynnar]

Bejos_ wrote...

erynnar wrote...
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.

BWAHAHahahahahAHAHAHAHAHA!!
Erynnar, I love you just for that.
How awesome would it be if the evil empire were called Nifflegard?!

OHHHH unintentional but totally hilarious oops by me! ROFL!! Okay I am laughing at myself now! And I haven't had any wine yet! And that would be an awesome name! I think CDPR needs to pay me for it...in free DLC. Oh wait...dammit! :lol::lol:

[Boiny Bunny]

erynnar wrote...

Boiny Bunny wrote...

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.

And you meant died in childbirhth, heheh. :lol:Yeah you could have knocked me over with a feather when that part of the story came out in Witcher 2, casually I might add. I thought it was fantastic and so unique. And very controversial.

Yes I did mean at childbirth!  I quite enjoy characters that are built around plots like these - you just don't see them around very often.  Foltest is a far more intriguing character (IMO) than Cailan ever could have hoped to be.

[erynnar]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

erynnar wrote...

I do wish they had a junk button, I missed out on cash when I needed it by not selling 25 rags in my inventory.

I'm sure there will be a mod for that at some point if one does not currently exist. Oh I do love modders. <3

However I will state that I do not class that as a flaw in the game not being able to sell things when they is no one to buy them around. There is inventory mod already I think that allows you to carry more though that might not be the resolution your after with regard to carrying around what you view as junk. Feel free to knit me a scarf out of those rags.

Oh it isn't a flaw, I just found it funny. I keep forgetting to check for dirt encrusted rings, necklaces, rags... And you bet your hot tight heiny that I got that no weight mod ASAP.

[dzizass]

Bejos_ wrote...
 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.

Sorry... but what story are we talking about in DA:O and ME2? Especially in DA:O there
was basically no story, at all except for the prologue and some
side-stories in  redcliffe/breccilian forest. Unless you call "now kill
1000 darkspawn" a story In ME2 there was also hardly any story
progression, since the story was exactly bland.

Bejos_ wrote...
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.

Heh. I see exactly the opposite way. BioWare's characters are either extremely cliched or extremely goofy and one-dimensional. It would have helped if Hepler and Gaider could write dialogues but most of them are usually terribly written and unrealistic... On the other hand, CDPR's characters feel like people, have their strengths and weaknesses... Also, care to explain further how the TW characters feel as if they were there only to advance the plot? Cause I can't really tell

[KnightofPhoenix]

erynnar wrote...
They don't have as much focus. But they are deep and complex people. None of them are really a stereotype per se. They aren't angels or devils, emo, or hookers with hearts of gold or cliched. They are people who have their own agendas and secrets. Dandelion is closer to Varric to my mind. Reading his journal entries, especially about Geralt, his missoins, or Dadelion himself are hilarious.

Agreed. I think TW2 had a good amount of primary and secondary characters that I found very interesting and memorable.

[Bejos_]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
That said, I find myself liking Roche as much as Garrus personally. And I really like Siegfried, Radovid, Letho, Jacques..etc. I personally think that TW characters are strong in their own right personally, especially sicne they are in a believable plot. Maybe they didn't have as much focus as Bioware games (because of the companion system for the most part). But I didn't feel they were weak characters, I felt they had character development and interesting character details.

Like I said, some characters are realistic. The ones you pointed out I agree with, except for Letho. His OTT characterisation, both visually and aurally, is at odds with what the rest of the game is trying to accomplish.

Roche is a bro Saskia's not far behind in my graces.

Modifié par Bejos_, 10 juin 2011 - 01:23 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I think that is the difference for me too. You get to know Bioware's characters in much more depth, but I just felt that CDPR's characters are just more interesting. They are believable people who aren't always set to an archetype like many of Bioware's characters.

I do agree that this leads to a "character built to enhance the plot" as opposed to a "plot built to explore the characters" type of game which highlights the different focuses of CDPR and Bioware, respectively. But seeing as I find it hard to connect with a fleshed out character I don't like as opposed to a less explored character I do like, I much prefer CDPR's method.

Bioware's method can be better, but it's utterly reliant on creating good, relate-able and interesting characters. Dragon Age 2 really fails for me in this respect. It's either playing on a stereotype, cool for the sake of cool, devoid of logic or a combination of all 3. If Cassandra and Varric were the only companions, and you could murder knife everyone else from the beginning... I'd be much happier.

[erynnar]

slimgrin wrote...

erynnar wrote...

I do wish they had a junk button, I missed out on cash when I needed it by not selling 25 rags in my inventory.

there's a mod for this now.


http://witchernexus..../file.php?id=87

I can't get it to download....<_<

[Bejos_]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Ringo12 wrote...

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.

I don't know I thought she kept things interesting. Fenris was as cliché as can get and tried too hard to pull of the cool guy act. Anders remake was dubious and soul destroying regarding how they changed him. Aveline was well thought out personality and so was Varric, Merrill filled nothing more than the gimmick spot tbh for me. Anyways thats a bit off topic. I haven't met everyone in TW2 yet so glancing over posts in relation to characters.

Isabella was alright. She's at least a believable character. You meet her all the time in the real world.
Fenris, I have to admit, despite all of his oh so annoying character traits, is probably my favourite DA2 character, just because he's not the joke that everyone else is. He's cliched, and he's emo, but it's all justifiable within the framework of his background. The other characters (bar Isabella) weren't nearly as tidy or logical [Edit: or non-annoying] in their personalities as was Fenris.

Merrill. Merrill would have been curbstomped by someone before reaching her 21st human year, IRL.

Modifié par Bejos_, 10 juin 2011 - 01:24 .

[Dragoonlordz]

mrcrusty wrote...
 If Cassandra and Varric were the only companions, and you could murder knife everyone else from the beginning... I'd be much happier.

Now thats a DLC I would be willing to shell out for.

[slimgrin]

erynnar wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

erynnar wrote...

I do wish they had a junk button, I missed out on cash when I needed it by not selling 25 rags in my inventory.

there's a mod for this now.


http://witchernexus..../file.php?id=87

I can't get it to download....<_<

It's not a restricted mod and I don't think it requires registration at Nexus either. At any rate, work at it. This mod is one the best available so far.

[Bejos_]

mrcrusty wrote...

I think that is the difference for me too. You get to know Bioware's characters in much more depth, but I just felt that CDPR's characters are just more interesting. They are believable people who aren't always set to an archetype like many of Bioware's characters.

I do agree that this leads to a "character built to enhance the plot" as opposed to a "plot built to explore the characters" type of game which highlights the different focuses of CDPR and Bioware, respectively. But seeing as I find it hard to connect with a fleshed out character I don't like as opposed to a less explored character I do like, I much prefer CDPR's method.

Bioware's method can be better, but it's utterly reliant on creating good, relate-able and interesting characters. Dragon Age 2 really fails for me in this respect. It's either playing on a stereotype, cool for the sake of cool, devoid of logic or a combination of all 3. If Cassandra and Varric were the only companions, and you could murder knife everyone else from the beginning... I'd be much happier.

Yes to all of this (except Cassandra and Varric).

[erynnar]

mrcrusty wrote...

I think that is the difference for me too. You get to know Bioware's characters in much more depth, but I just felt that CDPR's characters are just more interesting. They are believable people who aren't always set to an archetype like many of Bioware's characters.

I do agree that this leads to a "character built to enhance the plot" as opposed to a "plot built to explore the characters" type of game which highlights the different focuses of CDPR and Bioware, respectively. But seeing as I find it hard to connect with a fleshed out character I don't like as opposed to a less explored character I do like, I much prefer CDPR's method.

Bioware's method can be better, but it's utterly reliant on creating good, relate-able and interesting characters. Dragon Age 2 really fails for me in this respect. It's either playing on a stereotype, cool for the sake of cool, devoid of logic or a combination of all 3. If Cassandra and Varric were the only companions, and you could murder knife everyone else from the beginning... I'd be much happier.

ROFL! And yes they helped with the story and are part of the story.

[Zcorck]

Bejos_ wrote...

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.

A bit confusing, but fairly valid criticism. (EDIT:Think the 2nd sentence is also applicable to chars in some BW games, although more like some than a lot in regards to TW2 for me.)
There has been some pretty enjoyable moments with Geralt's friends, but yeah they were rather plot-advancement-y important. Think CDPR should know of this kind of criticism if they haven't been told that already, mainly 'cos they seem pretty eager at delivering a game as solid as possible.
Characters are pretty much a BioWare strength(not counting DA2 as well:innocent:).
I like how BioWare executed their characters in a way that showed us the personality of their characters in a way that you'd really get the sense of who they were.


On another note, does anyone else here think that there should've been different modes like "best of x rounds" in dice poker so you could wager a higher amount of orens, or fight club(could be fun if they can make Kinect work with it though not likely to happen methinks) with a smaller interval between the QTEs, or something like that at least.
I pretty much made most of my money from arm-wrestling. Btw anyone manage to defeat the Mighty Numa unnerfed?

@RageGT(goes for everyone else as well!) which leagues are you in sc2 btw? euro server?

2nd EDIT:mellow::  Too bad there aren't many Vipers left. Would've liked to see the Wolves and the Vipers clash in an expansion or sequel. Maybe more Wolves though. Them I like!

Modifié par Zcorck, 10 juin 2011 - 01:38 .

[DragonRageGT]

YohkoOhno wrote...

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.

Somehow I don't see you as a Gothic player by miles! The last game I played with such requirements (sleep or rest) forced upon us was NWN.

[Anathemic]

So, i just finished Act 2 Roche path, I let him kill Henselt, whooo, lol