608 réponses à ce sujet

[StingingVelvet]

Simple version:

Fallout New Vegas was praised for adding depth and complexity. Fable 3 and Gothic 4 were bashed for removing depth and complexity. Does this mean anything to Dragon Age 2 and Bioware? More specifically, will this
impact review scores? Sales? Public opinion? Will the game be effected in some minor way?
__________________________________________________________________

Long version:

New Vegas added a lot of complexity and roleplaying back into the Fallout 3 paradigm.  The factions make decisions matter, as pleasing often means losing gameplay oppotunities with the other.  You can actually fail quests, for instance.  The damage threshhold system (DT) actually makes killing a Deathclaw with a pistol almost impossible, as you need a weapon that can bust through its armor.  The hardcore mode adds roleplaying elements like eating, drinking and sleeping, plus companion permanent death.  The stat and perk systems were redesigned to keep a player from being a master of everything.

Rather than be bashed for this Obdisian seems to have earned much praise for it.  Pretty much every review only points out bugs as a negative, but praises the new elements and increased weight of choices and dialogue.  In contrast games like Fable 3 and Arcania: Gothic 4 were bashed by reviewers for being too simplified and without any complexity.  I was happy to see this, as I think most "old school" RPG gamers like myself were worried we were headed toward even simpler games, but this is a light in the tunnel so to speak.

So... my question is, what does this mean for Dragon Age 2?  Things are kind of foggy right now with not a lot of information out there, but the general consensus is that things are being streamlined compared to DA:O.  Is this the opposite of what the market is actually looking for now?  Does the added complexity in New Vegas and how well it was received point more toward keeping the complexity of DA:O or even expanding on it?  Perhaps Western RPGs are familiar enough to mainstream gamers now that they crave the depth and complexity the old school crowd wants back as well?

And what does it mean for Bioware as a whole?  Does the sucess of New Vegas and the comments against Fable and Arcania mean anything to Bioware for the future?  Will they look more at adding complexity and roleplaying mechanics back into their games?  Mass Effect 2 ditched a lot of RPG elements, will Bioware maybe feel confident about putting those elements back in the game to some extent?

These are actual questions, I am not looking to make a subversive point.  I was really surprised by New Vegas and how RPG it was, and then surprised again at how much praise that got from both fans and reviewers.  I want to know if it effects the future of multiplatform RPGs, and Dragon Age 2 in particular.

Modifié par StingingVelvet, 14 novembre 2010 - 07:15 .

[hexaligned]

I had nothing really against Fallout 3, I thought it was a decent game by modern standards, but I didn't have any intrest in buying New Vegas either. At least not until I was over at my brothers a couple weekends ago, and saw all the more classic rpg elements that got reinjected back into the system (hardcore mode in particular). Needless to say I stopped and bought a copy on the way home that night. What that means for Bioware I have no idea, but Obsidian got at least an extra 60 dollars out of it.

Modifié par relhart, 14 novembre 2010 - 03:56 .

[Ulous]

StingingVelvet wrote...

Hear me out.

New Vegas added a lot of complexity and roleplaying back into the Fallout 3 paradigm.  The factions make decisions matter, as pleasing often means losing gameplay oppotunities with the other.  You can actually fail quests, for instance.  The damage threshhold system (DT) actually makes killing a Deathclaw with a pistol almost impossible, as you need a weapon that can bust through its armor.  The hardcore mode adds roleplaying elements like eating, drinking and sleeping, plus companion permanent death.  The stat and perk systems were redesigned to keep a player from being a master of everything.

Rather than be bashed for this Obdisian seems to have earned much praise for it.  Pretty much every review only points out bugs as a negative, but praises the new elements and increased weight of choices and dialogue.  In contrast games like Fable 3 and Arcania: Gothic 4 were bashed by reviewers for being too simplified and without any complexity.  I was happy to see this, as I think most "old school" RPG gamers like myself were worried we were headed toward even simpler games, but this is a light in the tunnel so to speak.

So... my question is, what does this mean for Dragon Age 2?  Things are kind of foggy right now with not a lot of information out there, but the general consensus is that things are being streamlined compared to DA:O.  Is this the opposite of what the market is actually looking for now?  Does the added complexity in New Vegas and how well it was received point more toward keeping the complexity of DA:O or even expanding on it?  Perhaps Western RPGs are familiar enough to mainstream gamers now that they crave the depth and complexity the old school crowd wants back as well?

And what does it mean for Bioware as a whole?  Does the sucess of New Vegas and the comments against Fable and Arcania mean anything to Bioware for the future?  Will they look more at adding complexity and roleplaying mechanics back into their games?  Mass Effect 2 ditched a lot of RPG elements, will Bioware maybe feel confident about putting those elements back in the game to some extent?

These are actual questions, I am not looking to make a subversive point.  I was really surprised by New Vegas and how RPG it was, and then surprised again at how much praise that got from both fans and reviewers.  I want to know if it effects the future of multiplatform RPGs, and Dragon Age 2 in particular.

The problem is that this could lead into a debate about what one considers RPG elements or not, for all it's good or bad points FNV is still miles away from being the old school clssic RPG and I don't think it was ever trying to be.

Secondly the RPG genre is changing and evolving, Bioware I believe are aware of this and are adapting accordingly, if they start making U-turns and taking steps backwards they run the risk of being left behind and/or ultimately being left bankrupt, while Lionhead Studios, Bethesda and Obsidian etc point their fingers and laugh.

Modifié par Ulous, 14 novembre 2010 - 03:30 .

[GreenSoda]

FNV's success will have zero impact on DA2 -obviously. (We are too far along in the dev. cycle).

...also one single title doesn't break the trend. You'd be surprised how many FNV players actually complained that it wasn't more like F3 and how F3's story telling was superior (I'm not even joking on that one).

There's also the point that -even though FNV is a success- F3 still was more successful and actually also got higher ratings across the board.

Modifié par GreenSoda, 14 novembre 2010 - 03:29 .

[MIke_18]

New Vegas reminded me so much of Old Fallout games.



Like a character taking pity on me because i have low intellegence skill . FFFantastic.



We will never see that in a Bioware game though,

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Complexity is for work. Fun stories are for games.



BioWare will continue to streamline the banal aspects of RPGs (loot, useless items, complexity for no reason). This will continues to annoy the "Old Skool" (I call them Excel gamers) because they love to see how the numbers "move" in the equations and impact the mechanics, but most people won't care. Most people want the character and plot choices and the fun story to look back on. Dragon Age 2 looks (we don't *know*) like it is going to offer a play style that takes a solid step toward the storytelling they did with Mass Effect 2... The games is going to rock so much ass. :-)







Another rehash thread, really. No time for it. :-)

[Khayness]

Nothing for BioWare. Obsidian is superior in game mechanics, BioWare excels in storytelling.

[Lord Gremlin]

New Vegas is a broken crap, full of bugs and glitches. This is one of few (or the only?) console game that Is reliably broken.

It means nothing to DA2, well, perhaps DA2 will look better when there are such garbage around goes by the name of RPG.

[Grand_Commander13]

I can't wait for Bioware or Obsidian to release a game where most of your gold stores come from stipends given to you by your employer, standard issue equipment is available via requisition (but realize that in a modern fire team, the assault rifle, machine gun, grenade launcher, and marksman rifle are all "standard issue" so there is ample breadth of outfitting possibilities) and additional funds, assistance, and equipment come from the side quests.

It would annoy all the right people ("where's my loot!?!?!") while still giving all the character customization and incentive to side quest while making me very happy. Rather than having to hope for good loot, all the good stuff is available if I'm willing to devote the acquisitions budget to it or do its side quest.

[Brockololly]

Yeah, thats the thing- New Vegas is more of a unique game because of things like Hardcore mode and the increased emphasis on stats and bringing RPG mechanics to the forefront and not going the ME2 route of hiding them away like they're some horrible mutant nobody wants to look at.

So it likely doesn't affect DA2 at all, but maybe it affects their thinking for DA3. Then again, depending on how RPG like DA2 is, you'd have thought the success of Origins would be reason enough to build more on the straight up RPG path, rather than streamlining and making more"accessible."

[StingingVelvet]

Khayness wrote...

Nothing for BioWare. Obsidian is superior in game mechanics, BioWare excels in storytelling.

New Vegas has a pretty good story, and perhaps more importantly it is very non-linear.  Bioware makes a better linear story though, yes.

[StingingVelvet]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

BioWare will continue to streamline the banal aspects of RPGs (loot, useless items, complexity for no reason). This will continues to annoy the "Old Skool" (I call them Excel gamers) because they love to see how the numbers "move" in the equations and impact the mechanics, but most people won't care. Most people want the character and plot choices and the fun story to look back on. Dragon Age 2 looks (we don't *know*) like it is going to offer a play style that takes a solid step toward the storytelling they did with Mass Effect 2... The games is going to rock so much ass. :-)

DT is a number, sure, but it has a real gameplay effect: you can't kill an armored robot with a 10mm bullet.  That makes you change your tactics and your equipment on the fly, which is fun.  Similarly Mass Effect 2 offered choice but it had very little effect on the game... imagine if choosing the renegade path meant not getting one of your team, or if sacrificing a team member meant getting another, or a great weapon?  Those kinds of choices add real weight to the decisions, which make them more fun.

New Vegas actually did a REALLY good job at adding in that old school RPG complexity but making it fun and useful, not cumbersome and annoying.

[Saibh]

Khayness wrote...

Nothing for BioWare. Obsidian is superior in game mechanics, BioWare excels in storytelling.

NWN2, KotOR2, F: NV all use an engine previously developed. If they don't need to make an engine, they can spend more time improving it.

EDIT: And Alpha Protocol is, I think, the only game they made by themselves...and it didn't do that well.

Modifié par Saibh, 14 novembre 2010 - 03:54 .

[Ensgnblack]

"the general concensus is that DA2 is being streamlined compared to DAO"
First of all, you might mean the "general concensus" of the loud forum complainers, but certainly cannot speak to the "general concensus" of people who are following  the game.  So its a bit premature to presume to speak to how everyone, it seems, views the new game.

Secondly, you do know the people who are making that "concensus" have an absurdly small amount of information, certainly not enough to actually make that determination. 
How about people wait until the game comes out before calling it too easy, or too streamlined, or too this, or too that?  While much information has been released, we hardly have enough to make judgement calls on the entire game.

[StingingVelvet]

Ensgnblack wrote...

"the general concensus is that DA2 is being streamlined compared to DAO"
First of all, you might mean the "general concensus" of the loud forum complainers, but certainly cannot speak to the "general concensus" of people who are following  the game.  So its a bit premature to presume to speak to how everyone, it seems, views the new game.

Secondly, you do know the people who are making that "concensus" have an absurdly small amount of information, certainly not enough to actually make that determination. 
How about people wait until the game comes out before calling it too easy, or too streamlined, or too this, or too that?  While much information has been released, we hardly have enough to make judgement calls on the entire game.

I didn't say "too streamlined" I just said streamlined, and the devs themselves say the goal is to streamline the game while still keeping the tactical combat intact.  I'm not saying anything off the wall.

[Veex]

I'm not sure I'd consider the additions to New Vegas more complex, with the exception of the DT system perhaps. Hardcore mode adds a bit of depth that is otherwise absent but certainly isn't more difficult in my opinion, simply more time consuming.



I think the crux of the issue for many "old school" gamers is that streamlining games often means you get less mileage out of the title in the long run. No matter how mundane a task is, as long as it adds some additional length to a playthrough many people will enjoy it. That said I did enjoy New Vegas and the faction system, as well the fine tuning of the stats and perks system.



Overall I don't think the praise New Vegas has received will change the direction of BioWare games. If they intend to make changes in the future it will be because it best suits the intended direction of the franchise as they see fit. They didn't modify the combat of Dragon Age because God of War sells so well, but rather because the shuffling and sluggish pace of DA:O didn't meet their expectations.

[Wyndham711]

New Vegas also sold huge amounts, despite its horrendously buggy state, dated graphics, and expansion packy nature. Regardless, it sold much more than something like DA:O or Mass Effect 2. To me it just tells that the Bethesda way of RPG is significantly more appealing to the masses than the Bioware one. People just love the open world.

[FedericoV]

What does New Vegas means for DA2? Nothing. The complexity of NV was really all about the story and quest design, an area that can be improved but that was allready excellent in DA:O.

In terms of gameplay, having played Fallout since the original games, there is nothing more streamlined than the Bethesda/Obsidian adaptation of the Special system. So, don't really understand what the OP is talking about.

Btw, NV is a good game and I'm happy for Obsidian success, but the setting has nothing to do with the original and has not the Fallout's feel at all.

Modifié par FedericoV, 14 novembre 2010 - 04:00 .

[Saibh]

Wyndham711 wrote...

New Vegas also sold huge amounts, despite its horrendously buggy state, dated graphics, and expansion packy nature. Regardless, it sold much more than something like DA:O or Mass Effect 2. To me it just tells that the Bethesda way of RPG is significantly more appealing to the masses than the Bioware one. People just love the open world.

Well...no. Not exactly. It sold less than ME2. And DAO, I think, sold more, if only for being available on the PS3. Not to mention Awakening's sales can be considered in, as well.

So far, at least. The game hasn't been out that long.

Modifié par Saibh, 14 novembre 2010 - 04:02 .

[b09boy]

I doubt New Vegas has much of an effect on the franchise so much as how DA2 is received in comparison to Origins. If DA2, an established franchise, does not outsell Origins by much then what does that say about appealing to wider audiences? Or if critical backlash is heavy when the game is released what does it say about what fans actually wanted?



I mentioned elsewhere that DA2 was begun when they probably didn't realize how successful Origins actually would be. With that in mind I think there will be more of the cut elements in DA3, though just how many more is a toss-up by this point. It really all depends on how each individual element is received I think.

[Saibh]

b09boy wrote...

I mentioned elsewhere that DA2 was begun when they probably didn't realize how successful Origins actually would be. With that in mind I think there will be more of the cut elements in DA3, though just how many more is a toss-up by this point. It really all depends on how each individual element is received I think.

DA2 started development shortly after DAO's release. They would have had plenty of time to gauge reactions and success that early in develoment.

[Wyndham711]

Saibh wrote...

Wyndham711 wrote...

New Vegas also sold huge amounts, despite its horrendously buggy state, dated graphics, and expansion packy nature. Regardless, it sold much more than something like DA:O or Mass Effect 2. To me it just tells that the Bethesda way of RPG is significantly more appealing to the masses than the Bioware one. People just love the open world.

Well...no. Not exactly. It sold less than ME2. And DAO, I think, sold more, if only for being available on the PS3. Not to mention Awakening's sales can be considered in, as well.

So far, at least. The game hasn't been out that long.

It already surpassed sales of 5 million. At least I haven't heard of such sales with BioWare's franchises. What were the sales figures of DAO or ME2, then?

[Ziggeh]

Ensgnblack wrote...

"the general concensus is that DA2 is being streamlined compared to DAO"
First of all, you might mean the "general concensus" of the loud forum complainers, but certainly cannot speak to the "general concensus" of people who are following  the game.  So its a bit premature to presume to speak to how everyone, it seems, views the new game.

Oh no, I think it's reasonably clear that it is being streamlined, but for most people, the devs included this means "addressing problems" rather than "moving away from the principles of my imaginary rpg ideal".

Complexity can be a good thing, but far too often it is needless complexity. I can think of very few examples in which "loot" is a strong resource system, fallout is one of them, due to the vast number of lootable locations, without which it wouldn't feel like a world. I don't believe Origins was, but I do believe it was a concession to the aforementioned fantasy rpg ideal, something I don;t hold myself and so see as a shame.

I would assume that the 10 year storyline alone adds a good deal of complexity to the narrative, as the effects of each decision ripple across the decade, so it's probably a bit premature to say that it is any more or less complex as a whole than Origins, streamlining or no.

[Saibh]

Wyndham711 wrote...

Saibh wrote...

Wyndham711 wrote...

New Vegas also sold huge amounts, despite its horrendously buggy state, dated graphics, and expansion packy nature. Regardless, it sold much more than something like DA:O or Mass Effect 2. To me it just tells that the Bethesda way of RPG is significantly more appealing to the masses than the Bioware one. People just love the open world.

Well...no. Not exactly. It sold less than ME2. And DAO, I think, sold more, if only for being available on the PS3. Not to mention Awakening's sales can be considered in, as well.

So far, at least. The game hasn't been out that long.

It already surpassed sales of 5 million. At least I haven't heard of such sales with BioWare's franchises. What were the sales figures of DAO or ME2, then?

Huh. Really? Last I heard, it was hovering a bit over two million. In that case, yeah, it outsold DAO or ME2.

[Virginian]

Khayness wrote...

Nothing for BioWare. Obsidian is superior in game mechanics, BioWare excels in storytelling.

Sounds to me like someone should merge the two. You can't have one without the other unless you want a story read to you by your mommy.