706 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

Well, I can see how someone can believe that the tracking is detrimental to his personal interests. For instance, if you're interested in playing as an elf or a dwarf. Tracking certainly didn't help that stay in, and may have given it a push out.

I'm saying that given the existence of the tracking, and BioWare's intent to use it, it is in a player's interests to allow BioWare to track his gameplay.

Yes, we might rather they didn't have those data available, but they do, and there's nothing we can do about it.

[AlanC9]

tmp7704 wrote...

No amount of different and hypothetical alternate reality scenarios would make the results in our own reality any less disappointing. I take it what you're getting at is some sort of "It could be even worse without the metrics" reasoning, but that doesn't change the current "it's bad" from being exactly that.

I'm confused. If you're still talking about the tracking, what are you saying about it? Did it make things worse, better, the same, don't know?

And if it's "don't know," what exactly are you posting for?

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I'm saying that given the existence of the tracking, and BioWare's intent to use it, it is in a player's interests to allow BioWare to track his gameplay.

Yes, we might rather they didn't have those data available, but they do, and there's nothing we can do about it.

True. We can't make Bio go back to designing games in ignorance, so we need to ensure we're in the data if we want to count.

I suppose we can wonder about whether an ignorant Bio would make games we like more, but that's idle speculation.

[tmp7704]

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm confused. If you're still talking about the tracking, what are you saying about it? Did it make things worse, better, the same, don't know?

And if it's "don't know," what exactly are you posting for?

From my point of view, the presence of tracking didn't result in making sequel of DAO match my tastes any better than DAO did. The new game actually matches my tastes less, although i cannot tell how much of that can be attributed to tracking alone. Still, from this personal viewpoint and given this track record, Sylvius' remark how it's in one's interest to leave the tracking on etc... while theoretically true, in practice doing that doesn't appear to produce these theoretical, desired results.

Modifié par tmp7704, 02 mars 2011 - 10:16 .

[Dragoonlordz]

I do not believe the tracking had any effect on the games development in any way, like I said earlier game development regardless of in a series or not changes based on the person appointed in charge of the project and becomes a mix of his vision for the games future while trying not to alienate the fanbase too much. I have yet to see a game where this wasn't the case, Bioware like some companies invite people to voice their opinions and things would like but the only things picked to put into game(s) being made are the things that coincide with the lead developers vision where he want's to take the series. The tracking imho only shows them where they can change with the least impact on original fanbase aka the weak points but that doesn't mean they will or have to implement anything the data suggests.

[AlanC9]

tmp7704 wrote...
Still, from this personal viewpoint and given this track record, Sylvius' remark how it's in one's interest to leave the tracking on etc... while theoretically true, in practice doing that doesn't appear to produce these theoretical, desired results.

Sylvius meant that it's in your interest to leave your own tracking on, I'm sure.

You very well might be better off if Bio had never started using tracking at all. But getting Bio to stop trying to find out what their players actually do with the games isn't on the menu for you. All you can make sure is that when Bio counts this stuff you are being counted.

[tmp7704]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sylvius meant that it's in your interest to leave your own tracking on, I'm sure.

Yes, i also think that's what he meant. I actually did have tracking enabled in DAO for this very reason. And DA2 is the outcome.

Given this outcome, i have to conclude the theoretical effect Sylvius is speaking of doesn't translate into any actual, practical benefit. Whether that's due to composition of gathered data, or how BioWare chose to interpret it, or maybe both... that isn't for me to tell, nor really changes the outcome in any way. Neither do any possible alternate reality could-have-beens.

All you can make sure is that when Bio counts this stuff you are being counted.

I can also accept that there's no point in pretending whether i make sure of that or not matters.

For this matter, when you get down to it then there's no metrics that can be gathered from DA2 that could result in sending signal about my preferences when it comes to these games. How for example do i send a metric signal that i enjoy altering appearance of my companions, when the game doesn't allow me to change them to begin with? Or i'm not very fond of the AAAAwesome choppy animations when there's no other animations in the game? Or that i prefer full text in dialogue selection over the paraphrases when again it's either one way or the highway? Or that i enjoy playing characters other than humans, when i can only have human PC? Etc, and so on.

About the only way would be possibly not playing the game at all, but that doesn't exactly give precise signal what specifically i disliked about the new offering, does it?

Modifié par tmp7704, 02 mars 2011 - 11:29 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

tmp7704 wrote...

Yes, i also think that's what he meant. I actually did have tracking enabled in DAO for this very reason. And DA2 is the outcome.

Given this outcome, i have to conclude the theoretical effect Sylvius is speaking of doesn't translate into any actual, practical benefit.

The marginal impact of one person's tracking data is effectively zero, yes, but it isn't actually zero, so you should leave it on.

And again, you can't tell whether it made any difference because you weren't privy the the design decisions that went into DA2 and you don't have an alternate version to which to compare it.

And you're wrong again, as you don't "have to conclude" anything in the absence of conclusive evidence.  You might want to jump to concuisions, but this is by no means mandatory.

Whether that's due to composition of gathered data, or how BioWare chose to interpret it, or maybe both... that isn't for me to tell, nor really changes the outcome in any way. Neither do any possible alternate reality could-have-beens.

No one's disputing that DA2 is what it is.  This is a tautology.  But the question you should be asking is if DA2 is what it would have been in the absence of your tracking data.  And as you point out, you don't know that.

For this matter, when you get down to it then there's no metrics that can be gathered from DA2 that could result in sending signal about my preferences when it comes to these games. How for example do i send a metric signal that i enjoy altering appearance of my companions, when the game doesn't allow me to change them to begin with? Or i'm not very fond of the AAAAwesome choppy animations when there's no other animations in the game? Or that i prefer full text in dialogue selection over the paraphrases when again it's either one way or the highway? Or that i enjoy playing characters other than humans, when i can only have human PC? Etc, and so on.

Obviously the tracking data can't do that.  You already know this.

For those issues, that's why you post here.  That's certainly why I post here.

[Saibh]

tmp7704 wrote...

Well, that's not clear but meaningless. The segment itself has no opinions, so what it portrays can only be important either to these who view it, or these who take part in it. Or both. So when you say "the exact appearance isn't important" you'd need to specify to whom that isn't supposed to be important.

And like i said already, i wouldn't consider either "it's not important to the player" nor "it's not important to Cassandra" to be true.

The entire story is a framed narrative. You know that. This is what Varric says happens. Not only does it establish that Varric is a pants-on-fire liar, but it also establishes that you have a legend. He is telling that legend. And, in this legend, it's not really important what you look like. To whom? The people who hear this legend to begin with, the citizens of Thedas. They don't care who your family is (except for the powerful surviving one), they don't care why you're there, they don't really care what you look like. They care that you're a powerful badass.

So, this segment is supposed to show you, the player, that at the end of the game no one in the game world even knows or cares what your character looks like, and they just imagine some generic whitebread bearded dude that may be completely unlike your customized character? And that the public doesn't actually know anything about what happened to your character or what he/she went through?

And that's supposed to be incentive to play the game? How?

Because maybe they don't view it in a negative light. Similar to how I choose to look at it. So what if they don't know what you look like? As has been repeated time and again, an accurate way to spread information--especially images--is pretty much nonexistent. They don't know what your sister or your brother looks like. They apparently have no idea you have a mother, or consider Aveline important. Why?

Because those aren't important. You have this huge legacy, as an incredibly tough and fearless badass. You're also supposed to look strong and handsome, an extra bonus for Howe-look-alikes. It's not like people want to imagine a weaselly looking gonk when they think of the powerful Champion.

See above. I think the only way it makes sense and takes nothing is if you actively stick head in the sand and do your best to ignore the parts where it does not make sense, and where it does put in question why you'd even want to bother to play.

Absolutely no part of it doesn't make sense. In fact, it baffles me that this is a problem for some people.

[TheRealJayDee]

Saibh wrote...

The entire story is a framed narrative. You know that. This is what Varric says happens. Not only does it establish that Varric is a pants-on-fire liar, but it also establishes that you have a legend. He is telling that legend. And, in this legend, it's not really important what you look like. To whom? The people who hear this legend to begin with, the citizens of Thedas. They don't care who your family is (except for the powerful surviving one), they don't care why you're there, they don't really care what you look like. They care that you're a powerful badass.

Because maybe they don't view it in a negative light. Similar to how I choose to look at it. So what if they don't know what you look like? As has been repeated time and again, an accurate way to spread information--especially images--is pretty much nonexistent. They don't know what your sister or your brother looks like. They apparently have no idea you have a mother, or consider Aveline important. Why?

Because those aren't important. You have this huge legacy, as an incredibly tough and fearless badass. You're also supposed to look strong and handsome, an extra bonus for Howe-look-alikes. It's not like people want to imagine a weaselly looking gonk when they think of the powerful Champion.

Tell me one advantage this approach has for the players. Just tell me what you gain from it. What makes it better than creating your character at the start? I really, seriously want to know.

And I don't want speculations about how it could make sense inside of the game and the framed narrative, because from my point of view it just doesn't, for all the reasons that have been stated already.

So, again, how does playing default Hawke in the prologue enhance your gaming experience?

[Nocturnius89]

The advantage is that people won't stop playing the game early on. By starting mid fight with the darkspawn it gives players a feel for combat and how skills are used straight from the beginning. In DA:O you had to create a character, which takes up time. Then watch cutscenes and more cutscenes before getting into your first battle. All this is even stated by one of the developers in an Interview. DA 2 is doing the "Get the player interested/immersed within the first 10 minutes of the game" path with this game. Bioware acknowledges that not all players liked how long it took for DA:O to really get interesting. Sure Bioware could of done this in many different ways but the fact is, they chose this path for the game. 

Modifié par Nocturnius89, 03 mars 2011 - 01:32 .

[Nymphonomicon]

madsabroo wrote...

There are these things and we call them bards.

That reminds me, I need to put more points into my Bard talents...

[Aesieru]

Apparently Stanley has played no BioWare games, whatsoever...

The woe, a developer who hasn't played his own games!

<.< (Sarcasm).

[Sarielle]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

Tell me one advantage this approach has for the players. Just tell me what you gain from it. What makes it better than creating your character at the start? I really, seriously want to know.

And I don't want speculations about how it could make sense inside of the game and the framed narrative, because from my point of view it just doesn't, for all the reasons that have been stated already.

So, again, how does playing default Hawke in the prologue enhance your gaming experience?

You get to see what high-level play (IE, when you have a lot of your skills) will be like on your chosen class right from the get-go, so you can get a feel for what the playstyle will actually be like. Without spending (and possibly wasting) a long time in character creation first.

Modifié par Sarielle, 03 mars 2011 - 01:43 .

[tmp7704]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The marginal impact of one person's tracking data is effectively zero, yes, but it isn't actually zero, so you should leave it on.

And again, you can't tell whether it made any difference because you weren't privy the the design decisions that went into DA2 and you don't have an alternate version to which to compare it.

The impact is effectively zero if there's no bearing on the final design. And if this final design disregards my input and opts for alternative then i can tell that my input didn't make any practical difference -- the proof is in the pudding or rather in the game which was the result of this input.

Our difference in views may come from focusing on different aspects -- if for example, the amount of people who played characters of races other than humans made the designer hesitate for a minute longer (or a day, or a week, whatever) before they made decision that the next game should have only human protagonist, you may consider this phase of doubt to be impact of your data. While what i'm looking at is that in the end the game was created with human protagonist only. And that potential hesitation over your data, it amounted to nothing. In this sense your input made no practical impact. And it isn't like --had you turned off the tracking and your data hadn't been there-- the decision would've been to include even less of playable races other than humans... because it already doesn't have any.

But the question you should be asking is if DA2 is what it would have been in the absence of your tracking data.  And as you point out, you don't know that.

See above -- in the absence of my tracking data the game wouldn't be any different in the sense these things which already deviate from my personal tastes can't be made to deviate even more. Voiced protagonist can't become even more voiced protagonist. Race selection cannot be narrowed any further. Lack of full text in dialogues cannot be removed even further. Unability to alter appearance of my companions as i see fit cannot be removed more than it already was. Not making me able to customize the character from the start is already in place. Etc and so on. These are elements which either are, or aren't present. And if they aren't present with the input to support them then lack of this input couldn't lead to them being not present even more, because that's simply not possible.

Obviously the tracking data can't do that.  You already know this.

Which only stresses the point there's no need to overblow it -- if just because about the only thing it can really signal is that player either utilized/experienced part of the content in question or not; but tells nothing about actual reasons behind that.

[Saibh]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

Tell me one advantage this approach has for the players. Just tell me what you gain from it. What makes it better than creating your character at the start? I really, seriously want to know.

And I don't want speculations about how it could make sense inside of the game and the framed narrative, because from my point of view it just doesn't, for all the reasons that have been stated already.

So, again, how does playing default Hawke in the prologue enhance your gaming experience?

Because it sets the stage for The Legend--the remote idea of the player. The overpowered badass, shrouded in ambiguity and exaggerated bard's tales. This, to me, is simply another emphasis on the exaggerated prologue, that is already rife with lies and misinformation.

I am not playing my character, so it is not an affront to my character.

So, there we go. It enhances my playthrough experience by emphasizing the framed narrative, an aspect of the story and storytelling.

Modifié par Saibh, 03 mars 2011 - 01:57 .

[tmp7704]

Sarielle wrote...

You get to see what high-level play (IE, when you have a lot of your skills) will be like on your chosen class right from the get-go, so you can get a feel for what the playstyle will actually be like. Without spending (and possibly wasting) a long time in character creation first.

One may argue this can just as easily lead to opposite effect -- the player sits through the opening cinematics, experiences what's supposed to be "legendary gameplay" with whole 6 skills, effortlessly explodes some darkspawn ... and goes "that's it, that's what the game has to offer at the end?" and quits right there and then. And not in small part because they have no emotional investment whatsoever in the default "legendary" Hawke which makes the quitting all the easier (since that's what spending and possibly wasting long time in the character creation does, mostly -- creates attachment to something you've made yourself)

[Sarielle]

tmp7704 wrote...

Sarielle wrote...

You get to see what high-level play (IE, when you have a lot of your skills) will be like on your chosen class right from the get-go, so you can get a feel for what the playstyle will actually be like. Without spending (and possibly wasting) a long time in character creation first.

One may argue this can just as easily lead to opposite effect -- the player sits through the opening cinematics, experiences what's supposed to be "legendary gameplay" with whole 6 skills, effortlessly explodes some darkspawn ... and goes "that's it, that's what the game has to offer at the end?" and quits right there and then. And not in small part because they have no emotional investment whatsoever in the default "legendary" Hawke which makes the quitting all the easier (since that's what spending and possibly wasting long time in the character creation does, mostly -- creates attachment to something you've made yourself)

One may argue that...but now I get the feeling you are arguing for the sake of arguing. If the opening cinematic/fight scene is going to make them quit and not ever pick it up again, then the game wasn't going to interest them anyways. Thus...you've still saved them some time. Rather considerate, really.

Imo, it really blows to get 10 or so hours in, keep thinking "well surely rogue gameplay gets better at some point..." and be forced to either stick with that character because you've invested that much time, or reroll and have to do that all over again.

Neither is that appealing. Speaking from a personal point of view here, THAT is what will make ME put a game down. I don't want to repeat content I've just done, but I don't want to keep playing the character I have.

I actually have an unfinished origins game because of this exact issue.


Edited for grammar failings.

Modifié par Sarielle, 03 mars 2011 - 02:08 .

[Icy Magebane]

CC should have been at the beginning, just like ME or any other game that has ever used CC. It's actually somewhat annoying to learn that people have attention spans so short that they can't just sit through CC (or simply press Quick Play) before getting straight into the action... In ME, Shepard was your character from start to finish, and they didn't need some BS about "legends" to justify anything.

Also, that whole legendary argument is tiresome. Legends don't form over a period of 10 years... nobody's memory is so short that they would have no idea what Hawke looked like... stupid idea.

And what exactly is complicated about choosing a class?  Why would you even need to see the endgame power levels, and abilities?  Hell, I have no intention of ever learning fire spells, so what is the point of my Mage Hawke having those powers in the beginning of the game?

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 03 mars 2011 - 02:09 .

[Saibh]

Icy Magebane wrote...

CC should have been at the beginning, just like ME or any other game that has ever used CC. It's actually somewhat annoying to learn that people have attention spans so short that they can't just sit through CC (or simply press Quick Play) before getting straight into the action... In ME, Shepard was your character from start to finish, and they didn't need some BS about "legends" to justify anything.

Also, that whole legendary argument is tiresome. Legends don't form over a period of 10 years... nobody's memory is so short that they would have no idea what Hawke looked like... stupid idea.

...:\\ You didn't play ME2, did you?

Also, I'm getting tired of people missing a point I find arguments.

1) Yes, they do. The game and its marketing explicitly call you a legend.
2) NO INTERNET. The great majority of people in Kirkwall probably don't have the slightest idea of what Hawke looks like.

Modifié par Saibh, 03 mars 2011 - 02:09 .

[Icy Magebane]

Saibh wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

CC should have been at the beginning, just like ME or any other game that has ever used CC. It's actually somewhat annoying to learn that people have attention spans so short that they can't just sit through CC (or simply press Quick Play) before getting straight into the action... In ME, Shepard was your character from start to finish, and they didn't need some BS about "legends" to justify anything.

Also, that whole legendary argument is tiresome. Legends don't form over a period of 10 years... nobody's memory is so short that they would have no idea what Hawke looked like... stupid idea.

...: You didn't play ME2, did you?

Yeah I did.  And I saw the big assed helmet Shepard was wearing to conceal his face.

I don't care what the marketing team says.  10 years is the present or very recent past, and not enough time to form any legends. 

To your second point, I don't need the internet to know what my neighbor looks like.  You'd think Hawke never went outdoors with all the inconsistencies...

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 03 mars 2011 - 02:11 .

[Vicious]

ME2 doesn't deserve to be in this because it did a damn good job of introducing you to the character without SHOWING YOU THEIR FACE.

Unlike DA2. I will live with the introduction as-is, but I already dislike it greatly.

[Ryzaki]

Edit: Correction ME2 while annoying made a hell of alot of sense. DA2 is just irritating and somewhat bizzarre. 

Any game with character creator that makes you sit through an unskippable sequence without autosaving before the character creation is poor design.

And I find it utterly fascinating how they know how everyone single one (with the exception of sibing) of Hawke's merry band looks except for him. And it's only been 10 years. 

That's utterly ridculous. They actually expect me to believe someone who is searching for someone has no basic grasp on what they look like? 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 03 mars 2011 - 02:13 .

[NIMA7223]

................

[Icy Magebane]

Ryzaki wrote...

ME2 was stupid DA2 is slightly less stupid.

Any game with character creator that makes you sit through an unskippable sequence without autosaving before the character creation is poor design.

Not being able to save was terrible, especially considering the game freeze that occurred so many times when you'd finished that sequence and you were waiting for Shepard to wake up... still, it wasn't that bad of an idea because you knew what Shepard looked like under that helmet.  The game didn't just decide for you.