152 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

andyr1986 wrote...

If you do the circle tower quest first and cull the mages the 'third' option is removed...seems pretty reactive to me. 

Sure, but a framed narrative makes things like that easier to do more frequently without accounting for every possible order and outcome.  By locking down the order, the outcome can be made more dynamic.

That being said I don't know how it will work in DA2 without playing it, but I enjoyed how effective it was in The Witcher. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 04 janvier 2011 - 04:43 .

[addiction21]

But having more choices is a good thing right?

[Ziggeh]

addiction21 wrote...

But having more choices is a good thing right?

Not if it negates the other options.

The redcliffe one wasn't all that bad, they are quite explicit that you wouldn't make it back in time so you have to meta game for it to be a "safe" option, but still, not ideal.

[addiction21]

But I dont see it as negating those other options just because it exists as an option. Its still up to me to decide what will happen. I havent been forced into that choice in any manner what so ever and it is only by meta gaming you could know it is "safe" but when your first making it I dont know its safe. Once the meta gaming knowledge comes into play it is still up to me to make that choice for my character.

For me the inclusion of a third choice does not preclude, distory, negate (or whatever the proper term would be) the other choices and their moral grounds. Redcliff being a good example. Just because the choice to go to the tower and get help exists does not make the choice between killing hte mother to save the child or killing the child outright any less grey.

The choice has not been made yet for that story or for that character.

[YoziMaiden]

Come on don't tell me none of you killed that woman because she mean to little witle whiny alistair. If you say you haven't I know you're lying.

[Count Viceroy]

This is why a framed narrative is so much better. You can build a more engaging story by limiting the variables a bit. I'm not saying they should remove all choice or anything, but the free roaming part of DAO had be designed so you could do it in any order. And the story really suffers for it.

[upsettingshorts]

Oh keep the choice, but fix the order so the player can witness and interact with the consequences. Otherwise you're stuck with epilogue cards.



Leave the free roaming stuff for open world games.

[Felfenix]

It's not like the "free roam", if it can even be called that, actually added anything to the game.

[TheMadCat]

Count Viceroy wrote...

This is why a framed narrative is so much better. You can build a more engaging story by limiting the variables a bit. I'm not saying they should remove all choice or anything, but the free roaming part of DAO had be designed so you could do it in any order. And the story really suffers for it.

Or they could do what Obsidian did with Alpha Protocol and you know, actually do the work and make the events from one area be reflected in the next areas you venture, making the impact and choices from your past areas felt throughout the game. Framed narrative and restriction seems more the lazy way to pull it off the exact same thing. 

Modifié par TheMadCat, 04 janvier 2011 - 05:27 .

[Count Viceroy]

TheMadCat wrote...

Or they could do what Obsidian did with Alpha Protocol and you know, actually do the work and make the events from one area be reflected in the next areas you venture, making the impact and choices from your past areas felt throughout the game. Framed narrative and restriction seems more the lazy way to pull it off the exact same thing. 

With the size and variables in games such as Dragon age, it really becomes too much for them to do that extensively. Alpha protocol doesn't even come close in comparrison.

Free roaming never helped a good storyline. Never. That is why the best free roaming sandbox games are virtual playgrounds first and foremost.

Modifié par Count Viceroy, 04 janvier 2011 - 05:38 .

[upsettingshorts]

TheMadCat wrote...

Or they could do what Obsidian did with Alpha Protocol and you know, actually do the work and make the events from one area be reflected in the next areas you venture, making the impact and choices from your past areas felt throughout the game.

I played AP and The Witcher, and the latter was much more reactive.  I expect DA2 to surpass Alpha Protocol as well in that regard, though its glaring lack of Scarlett Lake is a huge problem for me.  AP had stuff like "Oh, so this guys disapproves of the fact I met some mercenary chick and I took a -1 hit to my approval."  Or "that guy I didn't kill in the prologue might have more to say to me at the end of the game." 

The impact of the choices in the Moscow, Rome, and Taipei missions relative to each other in AP was... subtle at best, and that was fine - but let's not make them out to be more than they were.  Though I don't want to do that with The Witcher either.  Let's just say that when Bioware folk say that DA2's framed narrative and fixed protagonist will allow for a more personal and reactive story, I've seen it done in other games well enough to believe them.  But we'll see.

TheMadCat wrote...

Framed narrative and restriction seems more the lazy way to pull it off the exact same thing. 

I hate the way "lazy" is used on these forums.  It reads like "seems like something I don't like is being used to do something I don't like or don't appreciate."  But hey, I'm sure you are a game developer or author in real life so you make these kinds of decisions all the time, and probably recognize laziness in your own field.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 04 janvier 2011 - 05:39 .

[TJPags]

YoziMaiden wrote...

Come on don't tell me none of you killed that woman because she mean to little witle whiny alistair. If you say you haven't I know you're lying.

I killed her because she was a whiny, selfish, annoying b*****.   And, you know, she suggested it, after all.

[Insomniak]

Lord Atlia wrote...

The choice between the dwarf leaders seemed gray as did the landsmeet if you are not biased in favor of Alistair because he is the love of your life. I would like more scenarios where the "best" outcome is the result of doing something morally murky, make the good two-shoes squirm. Similarly there should be scenarios where the "best" outcome is from the most altruistic path. All types of characters should at some point suffer and there should be no perfect "play through"

Even for the landsmeet, I picked the "easy third option" by persuading Alistair and Anora to marry and rule Ferelden jointly. I was not romantically involved with him, however...

Modifié par javajedi217, 04 janvier 2011 - 05:47 .

[Ziggeh]

addiction21 wrote...

But I dont see it as negating those other options just because it exists as an option. Its still up to me to decide what will happen. I havent been forced into that choice in any manner what so ever and it is only by meta gaming you could know it is "safe" but when your first making it I dont know its safe. Once the meta gaming knowledge comes into play it is still up to me to make that choice for my character.

As I say, I didn't think Redcliffe was all that bad. The elf choice was worse, in my mind. While killing Tuvok wasn't exactly sparkly white, he was essentially out of his tree and set on staying there, it felt justified and left little moral tension. Sure the other options existed, but most players and indeed characters are going to be trying to get through the game reasonably clean, one barmy elf barely left a mark. If you're playing someone for whom wiping out a bunch of dudes is an option in comparison, they have an unusual morality anyway and so the tension is unlikely to be there either.

addiction21 wrote...
For me the inclusion of a third choice does not preclude, distory, negate (or whatever the proper term would be) the other choices and their moral grounds.

It depends on the implementation, three choices isn't bad on it's own, it's only a problem if one is far more morally justified than the others, removing, as I say, the moral question and thus the point of having a decision to begin with (well, in my eyes at least). This is what I mean by negating.

I pretty much play Bioware games for this effect, and virtually never replay them as the tension is gone once I know the outcomes, so it's hard for me to say if redcliffe would be a problem during a second run. I would say probably, despite the inherent contradiction between my knowledge and the characters. It's not longer an interesting question for me, even if it might be for him.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 04 janvier 2011 - 05:58 .

[addiction21]

TJPags wrote...

YoziMaiden wrote...

Come on don't tell me none of you killed that woman because she mean to little witle whiny alistair. If you say you haven't I know you're lying.

I killed her because she was a whiny, selfish, annoying b*****.   And, you know, she suggested it, after all.

I second that and will add I imagined her (for some of my characters) causing more problems I'd end up having to clean up in the future.

[TheMadCat]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I played AP and The Witcher, and the latter was much more reactive.  I expect DA2 to surpass Alpha Protocol as well in that regard, though its glaring lack of Scarlett Lake is a huge problem for me.  AP had stuff like "Oh, so this guys disapproves of the fact I met some mercenary chick and I took a -1 hit to my approval."  Or "that guy I didn't kill in the prologue might have more to say to me at the end of the game." 

The impact of the choices in the Moscow, Rome, and Taipei missions relative to each other in AP was... subtle at best, and that was fine - but let's not make them out to be more than they were.  Though I don't want to do that with The Witcher either.  Let's just say that when Bioware folk say that DA2's framed narrative and fixed protagonist will allow for a more personal and reactive story, I've seen it done in other games well enough to believe them.  But we'll see.

Never really claimed it was done on some grand level, but the game did track your progress and developed itself around the path and actions you took which differes from the route Dragon Age took which was each area is totally isolated from one another until the very end. Subtle yes, but it was certainly there and reconizable.

I hate the way "lazy" is used on these forums.  It reads like "seems like something I don't like is being used to do something I don't like or don't appreciate."  But hey, I'm sure you are a game developer or author in real life so you make these kinds of decisions all the time, and probably recognize laziness in your own field.

Please don't patronize me, it accomplishes absolutely nothing.

Poor word choice perhaps, but when you take shortcuts on a doable task in order to avoid a problem which is entierly avoidable by doing a bit more work, that's typically called being lazy. But yes, here we can call it a somwhat poor design choice. 

Modifié par TheMadCat, 04 janvier 2011 - 05:55 .

[upsettingshorts]

TheMadCat wrote...

Never really claimed it was done on some grand level, but the game did track your progress and developed itself around the path and actions you took which differes from the route Dragon Age took which was each area is totally isolated from one another until the very end. Subtle yes, but it was certainly there and reconizable.

And a fixed narrative allows for those consequences to be more than subtle.

TheMadCat wrote...

Please don't patronize me, it accomplishes absolutely nothing.

Sure it does.  It's cathartic for me.

TheMadCat wrote...

But yes, here we can call it a somwhat poor design choice. 

And your proposed alternative is Alpha Protocol, then?

[Ziggeh]

TheMadCat wrote...

Poor word choice perhaps, but when you take shortcuts on a doable task in order to avoid a problem which is entierly avoidable by doing a bit more work, that's typically called being lazy. But yes, here we can call it a somwhat poor design choice. 

Depends on the choices. And the results, really. If we're seeing a culture evolve over the course of ten years, maybe we're talking buildings and such, things that would take that time.

[TheMadCat]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

And a fixed narrative allows for those consequences to be more than subtle.

Certainly, and it comes at the cost of removing a feature which has been a staple in BioWare games.

Sure it does.  It's cathartic for me.

Bit selfish aren't we? 

TheMadCat wrote...

And your proposed alternative is Alpha Protocol, then?

It's a possible alternative.

[PsychoBlonde]

I like third way choices, myself, but I like them to involve a bunch of work and fishing around to the point where most people would be unlikely to discover them without a hint guide--I don't expect to find them first time through, but I like having them for later playthroughs. That being said, it might have been interesting if you'd gotten an epilogue for Connor where if you left both of them alive, you got a bizarro mixed result like Isolde went crazy when they sent Connor to the tower and she eventually wasted away and died, or the mages decided Connor was too weak-minded to be a mage and had him made Tranquil or something. You don't really get a *bad* epilogue unless you kill Isolde and make the deal with the demon, though, IIRC, so I don't really think that entire setup was supposed to be a big "test"--they just gave you some options so you could have options.

[upsettingshorts]

TheMadCat wrote...

Certainly, and it comes at the cost of removing a feature which has been a staple in BioWare games.

You say staple, I say vestigal structure of Baldur's Gate 1 that has been getting smaller and less significant in each subsequent game. 

Wait... what feature do you mean?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 04 janvier 2011 - 06:06 .

[PsychoBlonde]

TheMadCat wrote...

Poor word choice perhaps, but when you take shortcuts on a doable task in order to avoid a problem which is entierly avoidable by doing a bit more work, that's typically called being lazy.

It's not "a bit" more work, and every "bit" more work that anyone wants done on a game usually involves HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.  It's not laziness (no lazy person could ever manage to actually get a video game to ship), it's the permanent and relentless burden of The Budget.

[Ziggeh]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

I like third way choices, myself, but I like them to involve a bunch of work and fishing around to the point where most people would be unlikely to discover them without a hint guide--I don't expect to find them first time through, but I like having them for later playthroughs.

That would still break it for me personally, if I'm being asked to do something abhorent, I'm going to explore every avenue first. There were a wide array of political questions I wanted to ask the dwarf dudes, for example, and talked to everyone in Orzammer before making a decision.

I suppose ultimately the redcliffe one suits both points, as they were very clear it wouldn't be an option, despite the fact that it was, misinformation served to render it harmless. Mostly harmless.

[Ziggeh]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Wait... what feature do you mean?

LINEAR TIME ITSELF!

[YoziMaiden]

Can the Doctor be a companion? I think it would make this whole ten year span story far more awesome.