223 réponses à ce sujet

[Stick668]

hannibal555 wrote...

So the point is, not enough people ended their playthrough of DA:O and ME2, so there had to be made changes in the future games to end this, right? Well, to make them shorter would obviously make more gamers play them through, that is only a logical conclusion.I can't help but to smile while writing this.

Well, since we're talking about automated feedback, I decided to look at Valve's numbers for Half-Life 2: Episode 1.

35.58% completed games. A highly popular, beautiful, entirely linear first-person shooter with spiffy level design, the best auto-checkpointing available (on top of regular "save anywhere") that can be completed in 4-6 hours with far from punishing difficulty even on the hardest setting and one in three people completed it.

Contrasted with that, the "roughly 50%" of the far longer, more complicated Mass Effect 2 seems a huge number. (I couldn't find any public data on DA:O, but I only spent a minute googling.)

As for what is the "logical" response, I know of one example from Ep1. There was a siege scene - waiting for an elevator, in the dark, with zombies coming in from all sides. Lots of people never got any further. Valve changed the scene - basically, lowered the difficulty by tweaking number of critters, available health kits and ammo. Completion improved.

(Incidentally, I got through it on the second attempt by, erm, roleplaying a physicist. "Guns? I have gravity at my disposal and a veritable shedload of junk to fling. This is not a tense shooting gallery. It's an absolutely hilarious bowling match.")

It is of course possible to draw several different conclusions from the same set of numbers, but one of them is looking a bit inescapable:

I am not in the majority. At least not the overwhelming majority. And quite probably, neither are you.

Now, of course, our opinions are better and more valid, but the funny thing about any kind of applied democracy? A dedicated, passionate minority is still a minority.
We may not get our way just because we're right. 

[AlanC9]

Rixxencaxx wrote...
nice post but....
1) no party customization = money related...less armours less work less money to spend for development
2) no bird eye camera on pc = money related...less work on textures less money to spend for development
3) framed narrative =  money related no world map less work on areas and subquests
4) shorter than dao = obviously money related
5) more action oriented game = target casual gamers = money related

Leaving aside the well-deserved critique of these points, how does VO for the protagonist enter into your interpretation?

[Xewaka]

AlanC9 wrote...

Rixxencaxx wrote...
nice post but....
1) no party customization = money related...less armours less work less money to spend for development
2) no bird eye camera on pc = money related...less work on textures less money to spend for development
3) framed narrative =  money related no world map less work on areas and subquests
4) shorter than dao = obviously money related
5) more action oriented game = target casual gamers = money related

Leaving aside the well-deserved critique of these points, how does VO for the protagonist enter into your interpretation?

I'd say it also joins point five: cater to a (allegedly) wider audience.

[nijnij]

crimzontearz wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Honestly, I would've completely been fine with a shorter Origins. Deep Roads and Fade stopped me from playing multiple playthroughs, I need to essentially "detox" myself from the game if I want to replay it so I don't gouge out my eyes from the Deep Roads and Fade segment.

Though I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way.

yes the fade was.......bad

I have done 3 playthroughs in arow since october 18th....(when I stopped after the 30th or so ME2 playthrough to get ready for DA2) ...and the Fade always ALWAYS makes me put the controller down for about a day afterward

It's funny, everyone seems to hate the Fade ! I thought it had some brillant gameplay ; all the different shapes and the hidden bonuses, it really makes you feel how demons are powerful and not just some monsters you have to p0wn your way through ; definitely the epic peak of the game IMO. I loved the Deep Roads just as much, at least until Anvil of the Void ; to me, the fight with the Broodmother was so cool that it stood as the biggest secret within the Deep Roads (an already long section); so having to go on after that did feel like the plot was lingering. Although to me, the part that got the most boring was Orzammar itself rather than the Deep Roads ; I kind of think people would have liked the Deep Roads better if the Dwarves didn't ask so much of you in the first place.

[2papercuts]

filetemo wrote...

Maybe the main quest of DA2 will be short and intense, for players not to lose their interest and get bored.

like its very cinamatic and just has a bunch of set pieces?
that would be terrible

[Bryy_Miller]

2papercuts wrote...

filetemo wrote...

Maybe the main quest of DA2 will be short and intense, for players not to lose their interest and get bored.

like its very cinamatic and just has a bunch of set pieces?
that would be terrible

You just described every single modern game ever. Apparently "cinematic" is now a buzzword for "bad". What do you call cutscenes in RPGs? And what are you referring to by "set pieces"? Mario World level 1-1 was a set piece. It was a level.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 16 novembre 2010 - 12:08 .

[Xewaka]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

2papercuts wrote...

filetemo wrote...

Maybe the main quest of DA2 will be short and intense, for players not to lose their interest and get bored.

like its very cinamatic and just has a bunch of set pieces?
that would be terrible

You just described every single modern game ever.

Save Civilization V.
Nothing can beat good ol' TBS.

[Bryy_Miller]

Xewaka wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

2papercuts wrote...

filetemo wrote...

Maybe the main quest of DA2 will be short and intense, for players not to lose their interest and get bored.

like its very cinamatic and just has a bunch of set pieces?
that would be terrible

You just described every single modern game ever.

Save Civilization V.
Nothing can beat good ol' TBS.

You don't consider the opening scene as cinematic? And the entire world was the set piece.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Just look how well Black Ops is doing and you will soon realize why devs like Bioware want to attract that fanbase. They are easy to amuse and are VERY willing to spend a large amount of money each year. That includes the game and $15 map packs each year.

[MerinTB]

Dave of Canada wrote...
Honestly, I would've completely been fine with a shorter Origins. Deep Roads and Fade stopped me from playing multiple playthroughs, I need to essentially "detox" myself from the game if I want to replay it so I don't gouge out my eyes from the Deep Roads and Fade segment.
Though I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Both were sticking points in our podcast about it, yep.

Benton hated the Fade.  I felt the Deep Roads were ridiculously long and tedious.

[Bryy_Miller]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Just look how well Black Ops is doing and you will soon realize why devs like Bioware want to attract that fanbase. They are easy to amuse and are VERY willing to spend a large amount of money each year. That includes the game and $15 map packs each year.

That's assuming DA2 is going after ME2's fanbase. That would be like the same company putting out two different MMOs at the same time (that are not a sequel or expansion pack). It makes no sense to go after the fanbase of a franchise that you already own.

[In Exile]

Bryy_Miller wrote..

That's assuming DA2 is going after ME2's fanbase. That would be like the same company putting out two different MMOs at the same time (that are not a sequel or expansion pack). It makes no sense to go after the fanbase of a franchise that you already own.

That's not a good analogy, because MMOs are excludable goods, but SP games aren't. If I'm paying 20$ a month (or however much an MMO costs) I'm likely to want a return on my investment. But an SP game, I can just shelf that for later. So I could buy to SP games and be happy with both, but only want one MMO.

[mr_luga]

It sucks how much truth is in this thread -.-

They damn well put the price of the game down if they acually PLAN on milking the costumer afterwards though.

[Imryll]

Some non-completers are undoubtedly folks who quickly lost interest, but I'd imagine a lot of others could be chronic restarters who actually logged a lot of playtime. It really isn't all that hard to imagine someone doing all the DA:O romances without ever having completed the main quest. I think it would be very easy to make wrong assumptions about which content was "wasted."

[JoHnDoE14]

Congratulations for the amazing OP, I agree 100% with you.



Now to be more on topic, yes I think that it is more than easy to make false assumptions about wasted content as Imryll and LostScout satated, but I doubt EA and/or BioWare employees draw their coclusions so quickly. Unless I really am wrong, I beleive that they spend weeks analysing data.

[crimzontearz]

Look....I was just replaying awakening and rhe more I replay it the more I realize that a general streamlining is needed.



I am playing as always with a 2 hander warrior



I have some 4 talents for AOE damage, three for AOE kockdown...four with the long range one three forced criticals three sustainables to increase damage and attack....and for the love of god they all almost work the same way! We need less redundancy and abilities that actually workas they are supposed to (forced criticals my ***....cone of cold + forced critical practically never ends up in a shattering effect)



Speaking of which...mages have even more redundancy...like six spells for paralisys...three of them with added damage, two with chance of shatter. Several AOE damage spells differing solely in the type of damage dealt



Yes...I'd say intelligent streamlining is much needed

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Just look how well Black Ops is doing and you will soon realize why devs like Bioware want to attract that fanbase. They are easy to amuse and are VERY willing to spend a large amount of money each year. That includes the game and $15 map packs each year.

That's assuming DA2 is going after ME2's fanbase. That would be like the same company putting out two different MMOs at the same time (that are not a sequel or expansion pack). It makes no sense to go after the fanbase of a franchise that you already own.

I know many people who played and loved Mass Effect but did not like Dragon Age at all. It doesn't have to be the same as Mass Effect to attract those people, it just has to be something familiar to ME and easier to get into. And what have we heard so far? That it's "easier to pick up and play" and "we are injecting some of Mass Effect's features into DA2".

Just listen to what they say about the game and connect the dots. I'm not trying to bring them down or say these are bad ideas (in theory), but it is a little concerning coming off of something like Origins.

That said, they may not be able to attract the folks who didn't enjoy the first game, but with everything being "more action oriented" and "pick up and play", and the trailers of the game stressing that, they have a far better chance than they ever did with Origins.

[Revan312]

crimzontearz wrote...

Look....I was just replaying awakening and rhe more I replay it the more I realize that a general streamlining is needed.

I am playing as always with a 2 hander warrior

I have some 4 talents for AOE damage, three for AOE kockdown...four with the long range one three forced criticals three sustainables to increase damage and attack....and for the love of god they all almost work the same way! We need less redundancy and abilities that actually workas they are supposed to (forced criticals my ***....cone of cold + forced critical practically never ends up in a shattering effect)

Speaking of which...mages have even more redundancy...like six spells for paralisys...three of them with added damage, two with chance of shatter. Several AOE damage spells differing solely in the type of damage dealt

Yes...I'd say intelligent streamlining is much needed

I see the redundency as flavor.. My first mage was an elf that I concentrated on nature abilities.  I threw earth primal into that as it treaded in the same vein of style and I never touched Blood Magic or entropy with her because it seemed completely OOC.

Now many people thought it was rehashing and as you say redundent, so I propose, not with DA2 as it's essentially done, but with DA3 to allow us to customize the look, animation, color and name of a spell/ability.  Now I say this knowing that it's a ridiculous request and would take a ton of dev time to implement something like that, but that would still solve everyone's qualm.

I like the plethora of spells/abilities, even if many do the same thing, others don't, so add customization of but a few and it's win/win

Modifié par Revan312, 16 novembre 2010 - 09:39 .

[crimzontearz]

Oblivion tried to do that....it was rather pointless

[Revan312]

crimzontearz wrote...

Oblivion tried to do that....it was rather pointless

And again we differ, as I thought that was one of the coolest parts of the game *shrug*

Guess you just don't like customization and lots of choices

[crimzontearz]

Customization....yes



Redundancy? No...



Give me a few effective abilities over an arsenal of redundant and less effective ones

[Stick668]

Revan312 wrote...
Guess you just don't like customization and lots of choices  

1) (Shrug) Oh, I do. To the exclusion of everything else? No.

2) (Snark) Because there's only one way of including those.

3) (Persuade) There's a point where feature creep and redundancy detracts from the core of any game. This point moves around a lot. I spent entirely too much time crafting in KotOR2, Morrowind and Oblivion. I spent too much time collecting and sorting loot in DA:O. And let's not even mention the choice of which planet to launch mining probes at.

4) (Payne) There are no choices. Nothing but a straight line. The illusion comes afterwards, when you ask 'Why me?' and 'What if?'. When you look back and see the branches, like a pruned bonsai tree, or forked lightning. If you had done something differently, it wouldn't be you. It would be someone else looking back, asking a different set of questions.

5) (Morrigan) Gear and dialogue trees are fleeting. Responsiveness has meaning. Personal connection has meaning. Story has meaning.

Modifié par Stick668, 17 novembre 2010 - 12:54 .

[DaddyFoxDerek]

Damnit...do I choose 3 or 5? ....... Why didn't I save recently?

[Revan312]

crimzontearz wrote...

Customization....yes

Redundancy? No...

Give me a few effective abilities over an arsenal of redundant and less effective ones

Well how was the spell creation system in Oblivion redundant?  Maybe I'm thinking back on my modded Oblivion, but IIRC you could add multiple effects to either ranged or touch spell types.. Such as paralysis and frost on a palm spell or weaken and flame on a ranged etc etc..

I just don't know how, in a single player RPG that stacking more and more choices on top = a bad thing

Imo, balance doesn't come into a SP game at all and so I don't see as lots of spells or abilities that all do relatively the same thing as something bad, it adds flavor and choice. DA:O would have been boring as hell if there was one shield bash, one paralyze spell, one heal, one damage spell etc etc There's only so many types of effects in a game like this and by adding only whats needed you run into the ME syndrome wherein you have choices...... that are all extremely linear and so few as to be considered pointless. You might as well just remove leveling and tree choice if you take too much out.

I just don't understand the reasoning behind removing spells and abilities when they harm absolutely nothing and add more flavor.. Unless you just want a win all button that you spam ad nausium like cloak/adrenaline rush in ME2, which again, is soooooo boring..