223 réponses à ce sujet

[abat223]

A seemingly easy way to have a full, hardy story that won't be a let down, but also be short enough for people with short attention spans/ little time would be to make the full game, with all the trimmings, and then make a short version.



This could be chosen at the main menu either "play full story" or "play quick story"

The full story could be as large or larger than Origins (20-60 hours) and the short story could cut a lot of side quests, and just focus on main events, being 4-10 hours long.

[Atakuma]

abat223 wrote...

A seemingly easy way to have a full, hardy story that won't be a let down, but also be short enough for people with short attention spans/ little time would be to make the full game, with all the trimmings, and then make a short version.

This could be chosen at the main menu either "play full story" or "play quick story"
The full story could be as large or larger than Origins (20-60 hours) and the short story could cut a lot of side quests, and just focus on main events, being 4-10 hours long.

it may seem easy but it would be a lot of work for very little reward.

[asaiasai]

i can not speak for anyone but myself but having played Oblivion, DAO, Fallout 3, and now Fallout New Vegas i can honestly say that the reason i like these games is because there is way to much to cover in a single play through. I liked those games because there was always some other reason to fire the game up again to try something different. The player is not trapped into a ME2 or GTA4 linear game play experience, point A to B to C shoot a bunch of people blow up a bunch of stuff roll credits. In DAO, FO3, FONV, and Oblivion i can be this person today and someone completely different next week and never cover ALL the content or story lines with a single character. It is this depth of story and character customization options that transcend just the physical appearance that will keep providing a reason for me to come back again and again. In order for DA2 to actually join the esteemed company i listed and not become just another ME2/GTA4 flash in the pan linear grab a few quick bucks game as many today are it will need to be built around the principles that DAO, Oblivion, FO3 and FONV employ to engage and hold the player's attention.



Asai

[Atakuma]

asaiasai wrote...

i can not speak for anyone but myself but having played Oblivion, DAO, Fallout 3, and now Fallout New Vegas i can honestly say that the reason i like these games is because there is way to much to cover in a single play through. I liked those games because there was always some other reason to fire the game up again to try something different. The player is not trapped into a ME2 or GTA4 linear game play experience, point A to B to C shoot a bunch of people blow up a bunch of stuff roll credits. In DAO, FO3, FONV, and Oblivion i can be this person today and someone completely different next week and never cover ALL the content or story lines with a single character. It is this depth of story and character customization options that transcend just the physical appearance that will keep providing a reason for me to come back again and again. In order for DA2 to actually join the esteemed company i listed and not become just another ME2/GTA4 flash in the pan linear grab a few quick bucks game as many today are it will need to be built around the principles that DAO, Oblivion, FO3 and FONV employ to engage and hold the player's attention.

Asai

DAO was just as linear as ME2

[Monica83]

Dragon age origins is avaliable also in Italian my language..

[Bryy_Miller]

asaiasai wrote...
GTA4

GTA4 is a sandbox game, just like Fallout and New Vegas. 

[asaiasai]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

asaiasai wrote...
GTA4

GTA4 is a sandbox game, just like Fallout and New Vegas. 

The world may be a sand box, but i am Nico today, was Nico 2 months ago, and will be Nico if i decide to play the game again. There was only one way to do the story and only 2 choices that were different from one play through to the next and they had little or no impact on the world or how it percieved me. In DAO i could decide which king for the drarves, Isolde Conner or no one died, werewolves of Dailish as an ally just to name a few were decisions that the player was not allowed to make but forced to make and these decisions were at least reflected on by the game in dialog choices to connect the player to the decisions and the world. There was none of that depth as simple as it was in GTA 4, GTA4 was a still just a linear progression one person to the next to the next  until it is roll credits time. Is it possible for the developers to completely open the world to an anything goes idea not really but there were signifigantly more options in one play of DAO than in a dozen GTA4 games. That is my point, plus i got to play as anybody i wanted instead of just being stuck as Nico. GTA4 was worth 2 or 3 plays at most (being generous) and it was done, i have 22 completed DAO characters and a few in various states of completion.

Do not even get me started on how so little of a sand box game GTA4 is in comparison to FO3 or FONV. I have 3 completed characters for FONV and have several in design stages for later games. Just because you can go anywhere in GTA4 does not make it a deeper experience than the limited movement of DAO. There was more story and detail in DAO than in GTA4 and GTASA combined. Now if YOU want to toss FO3 and FONV into the mix as you have that shows just how linear GTA4 was in comparison to FO3, FONV or even DAO. ME2 as linear and limited as that story was is still more of an in depth experience than the "one path do it this way" game that was GTA4 or even GTA SA.  Do not get me wrong i am not a Rockstar basher, i have always liked thier games for what they are, linear romps of consequence free mayhem, that is all they are, but sometimes it is cool to be the bad guy. But even as poor of a port as Saints Row 2 was it was twice the game as GTA4 just by the sheer volume of stuff to do. Most importantly by doing certain diversions, and activities Volition incorporated some basic aspects of character building (RPG lite?)  that were in GTA SA but removed for GTA4.

Alot of you guys seem to forget or seem to take it for granted  just how many decisions the player had to make in DAO which started with character design, development and continued to progress deeper in detail as the story unfolded before the player. GTA4 was incredibly streamlined as opposed to the level of detail the player could delve into during the average DAO run.  I remember when, ......... i had to walk 5 miles in the snow up hill both ways fending off bears with my loose leaf note book, ...........  games like Doom2, Halflife, Quake were the standard and were the top of thier art, but i want more than just some static character, and game design that goes deeper than just locate the red, blue and green keys.

Asai

Modifié par asaiasai, 17 novembre 2010 - 10:41 .

[crimzontearz]

Monica83 wrote...

Dragon age origins is avaliable also in Italian my language..

Ok, then you can speak your concerns to me and Federico in italian because we are italian as well maybe that will help

[catabuca]

I'd imagine developers and publishers don't simply rely on information collected via xbox live or the psn. Simply because it's difficult to know exactly how many players play online. That skews the results.



I've played ME1 something like 7 times, ME2 6, and I'm on my 4th playthrough of DAO at the moment. I very rarely play while connected to xbox live. I might connect once in a while to see if there have been any updates, to sync my achievements, to search for dlc, but 95% of the time I'm offline. I'd imagine I'm not alone.

[Perles75]

filetemo wrote...

After reading the data Bioware made public that states a huge portion of customers never finished ME2 and DAO, it seems inevitable that from now on, all bioware games are going to be shorter, more streamlined, with a voiced protagonist, with less companions, less romances and more DLC.

It's the only thing that makes sense from a financial standpoint, sadly

I'm still in shock that several thousands of gamers never finished either game. And as they say, their money is as valuable to Bioware than that from us fans who roam the forums every day and finish several playthroughs.

Because, more romances, longer gameplay, several origins, and depth of RPG gameplay do not add to the sense of perceived quality to those people who doesn't finish the game, because they never got to feel those anyways.They never played other romances or other origins, yet they paid for the game and many of them are willing to buy a sequel.

Why developing content people does not play? it's better to release it as DLC since rabid fans are going to pay extra for it and people who does a single playthrough and never finishes it wasn't going to experience it.

And this is not a rant on console users. Many PC players never finished DAO and ME2.

Maybe the main quest of DA2 will be short and intense, for players not to lose their interest and get bored. Or maybe it will be longer so there's less optional quests that many people wasn't going to play anyways.

So this days, developers have a new challenge. Make players complete the games they buy, and make sure developed  content is played by everybody.And in a branched-story decision-heavy game like bioware does, that can be aserious headache and money bleeding issue.

Discuss away

Uhm, I think that most of the games are bought and not finished (I'm speaking about games that actually have an end like RPGs, of course), and I don't think that this has a significant effect on sales.

Besides I do not really agree that the solution would be "less companions, less romance", it is well known that these are the details that stir up a lot the curiosity of the people.

Of course the developers want to make a game that pushes you to finish it, but I would find strange that this is the main line of thought in the decisions made in the development.

[errant_knight]

catabuca wrote...

I'd imagine developers and publishers don't simply rely on information collected via xbox live or the psn. Simply because it's difficult to know exactly how many players play online. That skews the results.

I've played ME1 something like 7 times, ME2 6, and I'm on my 4th playthrough of DAO at the moment. I very rarely play while connected to xbox live. I might connect once in a while to see if there have been any updates, to sync my achievements, to search for dlc, but 95% of the time I'm offline. I'd imagine I'm not alone.

I'm going to decide that you're right. Enough things in life are my fault without this being my fault too.

[AlanC9]

catabuca wrote...

I'd imagine developers and publishers don't simply rely on information collected via xbox live or the psn. Simply because it's difficult to know exactly how many players play online. That skews the results.

I've played ME1 something like 7 times, ME2 6, and I'm on my 4th playthrough of DAO at the moment. I very rarely play while connected to xbox live. I might connect once in a while to see if there have been any updates, to sync my achievements, to search for dlc, but 95% of the time I'm offline. I'd imagine I'm not alone.

PC versions collect information and upload it the next time you log in. I don't see any reason why an XBox wouldn't.

And even if there is a skew because some folks never log in at all, what of it? The devs wouldn't know which data was skewed which way, so they might as well just use whatever data comes in. Sure, you've got less confidence in that data, but you still have to make decisions with whatever you do have.

[In Exile]

AlanC9 wrote...
PC versions collect information and upload it the next time you log in. I don't see any reason why an XBox wouldn't.

And even if there is a skew because some folks never log in at all, what of it? The devs wouldn't know which data was skewed which way, so they might as well just use whatever data comes in. Sure, you've got less confidence in that data, but you still have to make decisions with whatever you do have.

If the error isn't systematic, then random error just adds noise to the data that reduces power. That isn't a big deal.

[StingingVelvet]

JohnEpler wrote...

So to end a somewhat rambling rant - you're right, in the end, you're not obligated to finish a game. Heck, I've got a massive backlog that I really need to pay some attention to someday. But we want you to finish the game. Because we put a lot of ourselves into the games we make, and we want you guys to experience that.

Which is great, I love that, but at the same time I think it is important to know your eclectic audience wants different things.  This medium is driven by a core contingent who play and beat most of their games and a more casual contingent who might boot up Mass Effect 2 for 10 hours and then move on.  I don't think you're ever going to turn the latter into the former and if you shorten and limit games to make the latter feel better you'll just ****** off the former, who arguably drive more sales with their passionate promotion and discussion.

Modifié par StingingVelvet, 17 novembre 2010 - 07:01 .

[Vena_86]

Atakuma wrote...

asaiasai wrote...

i can not speak for anyone but myself but having played Oblivion, DAO, Fallout 3, and now Fallout New Vegas i can honestly say that the reason i like these games is because there is way to much to cover in a single play through. I liked those games because there was always some other reason to fire the game up again to try something different. The player is not trapped into a ME2 or GTA4 linear game play experience, point A to B to C shoot a bunch of people blow up a bunch of stuff roll credits. In DAO, FO3, FONV, and Oblivion i can be this person today and someone completely different next week and never cover ALL the content or story lines with a single character. It is this depth of story and character customization options that transcend just the physical appearance that will keep providing a reason for me to come back again and again. In order for DA2 to actually join the esteemed company i listed and not become just another ME2/GTA4 flash in the pan linear grab a few quick bucks game as many today are it will need to be built around the principles that DAO, Oblivion, FO3 and FONV employ to engage and hold the player's attention.

Asai

DAO was just as linear as ME2

The main quests in ME2 appear in a strictly linear order and can be predicted, in DAO you have more control over that. In DAO you have origin stories. In DAO doors are not closed behind you. DAO is not nearly as open as Morrowind, Gothic 2 or Fallout 3 but certainly not as linear as ME2.

Modifié par Vena_86, 17 novembre 2010 - 07:35 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Mass Effect 2 was more on-rails than Dragon Age, but it's important to remember that Bioware makes linear games. I wouldn't knock any of their games for that.

[Imryll]

Revan312 wrote...
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.

And I saw the redundancy as a cooldown management opportunity.  My mages tended to be CC specialists rather than direct damage dealers or buffbots. Particularly in a game with so few classes, each class having enough depth that it can be played in a variety of ways is important. Not selecting abilities that you view as redundant makes sense. Assuming that others would also view multiple CC abilities as uselessly repetitive is unimaginative.

[Stick668]

kr33g0r wrote...

You would select an option on the wheel and Shepherd would say something completely different to what you thought because you interpreted the wheel wrong. Totally kills immersion and is annoying when you have to go back to a previous save just so you can choose a different option and go down the path you wanted to go down in the first place.

Having your PC stand around like some kind of telepathic mime artist when everybody else has lovely voices also murderizes "immersion". So it's a trade-off. Like so many things.

A trade-off that quite a few people don't mind, at that. Partly because it improves replayability - you can be surprised by a dialogue choice your second time around. And surprise is good. Unless you feel it's your inalienable right to determine exactly what Your Character says in any situation. But lets face it, in that case you're scrooooed with or without dialogue wheel and should probably go write a novel or play a pen & paper RPG.

Modifié par Stick668, 17 novembre 2010 - 11:41 .

[kr33g0r]

Stick668 wrote...

kr33g0r wrote...

You would select an option on the wheel and Shepherd would say something completely different to what you thought because you interpreted the wheel wrong. Totally kills immersion and is annoying when you have to go back to a previous save just so you can choose a different option and go down the path you wanted to go down in the first place.

Having your PC stand around like some kind of telepathic mime artist when everybody else has lovely voices also murderizes "immersion". So it's a trade-off. Like so many things.

A trade-off that quite a few people don't mind, at that. Partly because it improves replayability - you can be surprised by a dialogue choice your second time around. And surprise is good. Unless you feel it's your inalienable right to determine exactly what Your Character says in any situation. But lets face it, in that case you're scrooooed with or without dialogue wheel and should probably go write a novel or play a pen & paper RPG.

Fair enough. I don't mind a PC not having a voice as I can imagine myself saying the line. If that is a problem, have a voiced PC say exactly what is on the screen. What is wrong with that? Why paraphrase everything to vague reflections of what may or may not be said which then means you have to add an icon to indicate exactly what the intentions are?

Modifié par kr33g0r, 18 novembre 2010 - 12:34 .

[kr33g0r]

oops! Double post

Modifié par kr33g0r, 18 novembre 2010 - 12:34 .

[Stick668]

kr33g0r wrote...

I don't mind a PC not having a voice as I can imagine myself saying the line.

Oh, I do that all the time. It allowed for playing an unhinged sarcastic psycho in KotOR 1 and still ending up with mostly light-side points. Perhaps not optimal, but amusing.

If that is a problem, have a voiced PC say exactly what is on the screen. What is wrong with that? Why paraphrase everything to vague reflections of what may or may not be said which then means you have to add an icon to indicate exactly what the intentions are?

There's nothing wrong with it. It's one way of doing things. That said... when playing Deus Ex - and more recently, the Witcher - I found picking a line and then hearing the line word for word... well, eerie and redundant. (And hey presto, look what they're doing with W2.)

It's not a thing written in stone, but I think... Pre-defined PC works best with a voiced character. And a voiced, pre-defined PC lends itself to Intent Paraphrase, simply because... what I said before. You retain the element of newness and surprise.

But I get it comes down to personal preference. I've never felt betrayed or confused by the way the "tone" choices turned out in the Mass Effects. Either the line was functional, or it was awesome. (Playing JenHale Shepard improves the Awesome quotient.)

There's probably a whole discussion that could be had about roleplaying "stances" with regard to the way the PC is handled. As in, the "traditional" way leans more towards the "actor" stance and the voiced intent-paraphrase model leans towards "director" stance. I don't have a problem with either, but it should be said that even the cRPG "actor" stance is limited by design. You never get any real freedom.

Modifié par Stick668, 18 novembre 2010 - 01:21 .

[Elite Midget]

Since we lost Tactical View for the PC Version I agree with the TC.... Streamlining is the path Bioware walks and will continue to walk in the future. They'll end up with more profits that way.

[2papercuts]

Atakuma wrote...

asaiasai wrote...

i can not speak for anyone but myself but having played Oblivion, DAO, Fallout 3, and now Fallout New Vegas i can honestly say that the reason i like these games is because there is way to much to cover in a single play through. I liked those games because there was always some other reason to fire the game up again to try something different. The player is not trapped into a ME2 or GTA4 linear game play experience, point A to B to C shoot a bunch of people blow up a bunch of stuff roll credits. In DAO, FO3, FONV, and Oblivion i can be this person today and someone completely different next week and never cover ALL the content or story lines with a single character. It is this depth of story and character customization options that transcend just the physical appearance that will keep providing a reason for me to come back again and again. In order for DA2 to actually join the esteemed company i listed and not become just another ME2/GTA4 flash in the pan linear grab a few quick bucks game as many today are it will need to be built around the principles that DAO, Oblivion, FO3 and FONV employ to engage and hold the player's attention.

Asai

DAO was just as linear as ME2

there were usually more choices in DAO than in ME2 or at least more varied choices and outcomes

also the customization added more thought and time, and although the maps might be closer in size, more of the things in ME2 you couldn't return to

Modifié par 2papercuts, 18 novembre 2010 - 03:30 .