1044 réponses à ce sujet

[Beerfish]

There is a large metal container.

There is a large amount of water to be poured into that container.

BioWare says, you can fill up this container with a hose or a pail or with your shoe if you like.



Sylvius wants to remove the walls of the container because they are too big of a restriction but he will also be surprised when the water doesn't just sit there but spills out all over the place.



A big part of the identity of characters is restricted. Because it is very very tough to clearly define and control a character if you don't put restrictions on them. These are the sides of the water box.

You can certainly remove those sides and have Icewind dale, where you create all of your companions from top to bottom. Totally free to create classes, looks, you name it. You of course get no meaningful dialogue with them, they have no identity, they have no back ground story, there is no desent in the group.



BioWare uses walls, it's a must for the type of games they make. The statement about 'making it your game' being not accurate is correct however.

[Chris Priestly]

It's your game to experience what we have created. In the same way that a novel is your adventure to experience.

If you want your game to play as you want, I wish you luck in creating your own game.

[Ryzaki]

Dhiro wrote...


I don't see how DA II let you experiment a story any less than Origins :< ...Except the no-race and the voice actor part.

You don't see how the framed narrative is more restrictive?

[Sigil_Beguiler123]

Ryzaki wrote...

More JRPG like. As in the devs telling you the story they want to tell instead of letting you experiment.

Besides for the tool kit I never felt Bioware has been much for letting you just experiment. If it was they wouldn't be considered story-based RPG games in my eyes and more considered open-world RPGs like Elder Scrolls.

[Heimdall]

Ryzaki wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

I feel your pain. Really though I've felt BW games were becoming more and more JRPG like. Granted there's nothing wrong with that per sa but it's disappointing.

They are? I know of J-RPGs, and I can say that DA II is far from one.

More JRPG like. As in the devs telling you the story they want to tell instead of letting you experiment.

Bioware's always done that.  You can't make the story whatever you wish, you are always within their framework.  There are variable paths through that framework and that hasn't changed.

[Dhiro]

Ryzaki wrote...

Dhiro wrote...


I don't see how DA II let you experiment a story any less than Origins :< ...Except the no-race and the voice actor part.

You don't see how the framed narrative is more restrictive?

I... confess that I don't have total understandment of what a framed narrative is :< /stupidDhiro

[Ryzaki]

Sigil_Beguiler123 wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

More JRPG like. As in the devs telling you the story they want to tell instead of letting you experiment.

Besides for the tool kit I never felt Bioware has been much for letting you just experiment. If it was they wouldn't be considered story-based RPG games in my eyes and more considered open-world RPGs like Elder Scrolls.

This I agree with. But lately I felt they've been getting more restrictive.

[Sir JK]

Ryzaki wrote...
More JRPG like. As in the devs telling you the story they want to tell instead of letting you experiment.

Bioware has always told us the story they wanted to. Some of them have had leeway enough to allow you the illusion that it was a story of your choosing, but it was always at most alternate paths to the same end.

They have never made a open-story game.

[Ryzaki]

Dhiro wrote...

I... confess that I don't have total understandment of what a framed narrative is :< /stupidDhiro

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Frame_story

[Xewaka]

Dhiro wrote...
I... confess that I don't have total understandment of what a framed narrative is :< /stupidDhiro

The narrative mechanism that consist in a story within a story. We have a character narrating to another character a certain plot, with cuts in the plot when the narrator stumbles or glosses over parts of the story.

[Shepard Lives]

Ah, Sylvius's jaw-droppingly outlandish threads.

[Ryzaki]

Sir JK wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...
More JRPG like. As in the devs telling you the story they want to tell instead of letting you experiment.

Bioware has always told us the story they wanted to. Some of them have had leeway enough to allow you the illusion that it was a story of your choosing, but it was always at most alternate paths to the same end.

They have never made a open-story game.

Did I say they had made an open-story game?

I said I felt the games were getting more and more restrictive in my view. (Thus my becoming more and more like JRPG comment).

Modifié par Ryzaki, 17 janvier 2011 - 07:08 .

[Dhiro]

Xewaka wrote...

Dhiro wrote...
I... confess that I don't have total understandment of what a framed narrative is :< /stupidDhiro

The narrative mechanism that consist in a story within a story. We have a character narrating to another character a certain plot, with cuts in the plot when the narrator stumbles or glosses over parts of the story.

Oooooh, I see. Thanks

Still don't know how this makes DA II more restrictive, but maybe I'm just dense.

[Ryzaki]

Dhiro wrote...
Oooooh, I see. Thanks

Still don't know how this makes DA II more restrictive, but maybe I'm just dense.

You're not dense. I'm just finicky.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The difference is in how they've done it this time.

It would appear, for example, that in DA2 Isabela doesn't have access to archery talents, and thus cannot under any circumstances equip a bow, despite being a Rogue.

As Mike said during a podcast "she's not much of a bow girl."  This is arguably even relevant to her personality.

But in DAO, these things were done using a far less restrictive talent system.  Sten was supposed to use a two-handed sword, but if the player wanted him to be an archer, or a S&S warrior, or frankly anything else, we could do that.  The game wasn't designed to go out of its way to force us to play him the way BioWare thought best.

But DA2 seemingly is designed like that.  Rather than Isabela having access to the full range of Rogue talents so that we could use her as an archer if we wanted, they've taken away our ability to make her an archer - even a bad archer - just because they think it doesn't suit her.

DA2 follows an entirely different design philosophy.

[Sir JK]

I thought that was implied... you claimed that they are taking their games toward jrpgs by telling you the story they wanted to. They always did though, they have not move either to or from that. Baldurs Gate 1 allowed you to travel anywhere on the Sword Coast yes, but it was still about Sarevok hunting you. Not about anything else. Kotor was a story about the desperation of the jedi and what they did to you. Origins was how the fifth blight was stopped.



Always their story.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Chris Priestly wrote...

It's your game to experience what we have created.

That explanation would make Mike's initial remark a meaningless platitude.

Surely you're not accusing him of that.

[Ryzaki]

Sir JK wrote...

I thought that was implied... you claimed that they are taking their games toward jrpgs by telling you the story they wanted to. They always did though, they have not move either to or from that. Baldurs Gate 1 allowed you to travel anywhere on the Sword Coast yes, but it was still about Sarevok hunting you. Not about anything else. Kotor was a story about the desperation of the jedi and what they did to you. Origins was how the fifth blight was stopped.

Always their story.

Eh. Now that you mention it. They've always been pretty JRPG like.

/shrugs

I guess the whole character customization (NPCs) in this game is just an extension of that.

[Chris Priestly]

You can keep reading what you want and making up your own outlandish results Sylvus. That's why we love* you.



* not really love.

[Drizzt ORierdan]

Exactly as Sir JK says... If you want YOUR game as a creative experience, Sylvus, better team up with your buddies for some Pen and Paper sessions...

Modifié par Drizzt ORierdan, 17 janvier 2011 - 07:15 .

[October Sixth]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

It's your game to experience what we have created.

That explanation would make Mike's initial remark a meaningless platitude.

Surely you're not accusing him of that.

You're taking Mike's remark out of context.

He said that if you mod the game it becomes yours and you have only yourself to blame for subsequent lore/story inconsistencies. This statement was in regard to making every NPC a mage. He never said that the game is your story all along.

[Sir JK]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The difference is in how they've done it this time.

It would appear, for example, that in DA2 Isabela doesn't have access to archery talents, and thus cannot under any circumstances equip a bow, despite being a Rogue.

As Mike said during a podcast "she's not much of a bow girl."  This is arguably even relevant to her personality.

But in DAO, these things were done using a far less restrictive talent system.  Sten was supposed to use a two-handed sword, but if the player wanted him to be an archer, or a S&S warrior, or frankly anything else, we could do that.  The game wasn't designed to go out of its way to force us to play him the way BioWare thought best.

But DA2 seemingly is designed like that.  Rather than Isabela having access to the full range of Rogue talents so that we could use her as an archer if we wanted, they've taken away our ability to make her an archer - even a bad archer - just because they think it doesn't suit her.

DA2 follows an entirely different design philosophy.

Indeed. From what I've gathered this was to increase their characterisation, taking it a step further from origins (so they're essentially doing what "we" asked for... improving what was good. We should be more careful what we ask for perhaps ).

By locking their "spec" down, it makes it a part of them and thus by extent something they can use in the story (wether it is we'll see). Unlike an archer, S&S or anything else Sten since there would be too many iterations to take into account.

[Images]

Chris Priestly wrote...

If you want your game to play as you want, I wish you luck in creating your own game.

Forty years later. Sylvius completed his game. Unfortunately by this time Chris Priestly would be unable to play it as he had evolved into a form of pure light and energy and had not the fingers to tap out attack commands.

[Sigil_Beguiler123]

Drizzt ORierdan wrote...

Exactly as Sir JK says... If you want YOUR game as a creative experience, Sylvus, better team up with your buddies for some Pen and Paper sessions...

Even then, it isn't like you can go to another player's PC and go, "I am going to completely change what you like to wear, what weapons you prefer, what fighting style you prefer, etc." for no in-character reason. Which is essentially what you are doing in DA:O when making such changes.

A P&P game in my mind is actually no different from DA2. Each character has a established personality, goals, likes, dislikes, preferences in equipment, etc. They are wholely distinct onto themselves. Hell DA2 has more control over other characters then a P&P since we can still pick weapons, amulets, rings, etc.

[Herr Uhl]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The difference is in how they've done it this time.

It would appear, for example, that in DA2 Isabela doesn't have access to archery talents, and thus cannot under any circumstances equip a bow, despite being a Rogue.

As Mike said during a podcast "she's not much of a bow girl."  This is arguably even relevant to her personality.

But in DAO, these things were done using a far less restrictive talent system.  Sten was supposed to use a two-handed sword, but if the player wanted him to be an archer, or a S&S warrior, or frankly anything else, we could do that.  The game wasn't designed to go out of its way to force us to play him the way BioWare thought best.

But DA2 seemingly is designed like that.  Rather than Isabela having access to the full range of Rogue talents so that we could use her as an archer if we wanted, they've taken away our ability to make her an archer - even a bad archer - just because they think it doesn't suit her.

DA2 follows an entirely different design philosophy.

This could also be seen as the party-members being less of your puppets and more defined characters, even in battle. Same goes for the static clothing, they wouldn't accept you deciding over them completely.

Instead of being minions that the player decides over they're a more complete character. I don't mind it as an idea, but it complicates making a balanced party.