200 réponses à ce sujet

[Iwasdrunkbro]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Heh, like there's any way whatsover that a BSN user wouldn't answer "when did Bioware stop challenging itself" with the year of whatever game they subjectively disliked was released.  What an absurd premise and question.

It would make more sense, in being critical of Dragon Age 2 (or anything else), to say that they challenged themselves and failed than to say they didn't challenge themselves at all. Especially considering that the biggest complaints are over changes, not things that remained the same.

And it's not as if people don't complain when things stay the same either, the Total War Center has been complaining about the poor reinforcement mechanic for years. And guess what's back in Shogun 2? The same bad reinforcement mechanic. Maybe they should have "challenged themselves."

I hit a nerve?

[Dr. Impossible]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Mass Effect was supposed to be an entry level RPG for the 360 anyway. Maybe it made them realise they could get by "phoning it in" though.

Jade Empire was much the same thing for Xbox.

I actually liked Jade Empire a lot.

[upsettingshorts]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

I hit a nerve?

I assume you're wondering if I'm upset? No, I post like that a lot as others can likely testify.  Mostly in response to silly arguments that annoy me because they're not coherent - not necessarily because I disagree on a fundamental level with the conclusions of the poster presenting it.

Though I was responding to the people who took - or will take - your rhetorical question literally and supplied an answer.

[Foolsfolly]

I love sandbox games, OP.

However, a finely made linear mission is always my preference. You cite Oblivion which was a fine game but it really lacked in the story and character department. The best thing about that game were the guilds you joined. I enjoyed buying a house and somewhat customizing it and I must have had 20 different characters for that game alone.

But I play BioWare games for a different reason all together. Story and character. And while I'd like larger maps with less load zones breaking up the gameplay...I'd also like them to work with their core.

Like the OP said, Rockstar has its niche in big open worlds. And they do do it best. BioWare does characters that stick with you.

[AkiKishi]

Dr. Impossible wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Mass Effect was supposed to be an entry level RPG for the 360 anyway. Maybe it made them realise they could get by "phoning it in" though.

Jade Empire was much the same thing for Xbox.

I actually liked Jade Empire a lot.

The Galaxian bits were out of place and it was shadow of the game it was originally going to be.Otherwise I liked it. Well it holds my record for most disapointing end boss ever , but still.

I liked ME as well, sticking to the plot planets only.

Foolsfolly wrote...
Like the OP said, Rockstar has its niche in big open worlds. And they do do it best. BioWare does characters that stick with you.

I don't think I've ever finished a rockstar game. I still get great value out of them, I just like to do my own thing rather than follow the plot and by the time I get back to the plot I've sort of forgotten about it anyway.

Red Dead was in my blu ray drive for over a month, but I still never finished it.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 20 mars 2011 - 11:02 .

[Iwasdrunkbro]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Dr. Impossible wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Mass Effect was supposed to be an entry level RPG for the 360 anyway. Maybe it made them realise they could get by "phoning it in" though.

Jade Empire was much the same thing for Xbox.

I actually liked Jade Empire a lot.

The Galaxian bits were out of place and it was shadow of the game it was originally going to be.Otherwise I liked it. Well it holds my record for most disapointing end boss ever , but still.

I liked ME as well, sticking to the plot planets only.

You have to be joking....

JE spoilers**

Seriously what other game lets you basically kill off all your companions just because? That end boss had to be one of the best ones in... then again I like playing the evil guy. I should really do a "good" runthrough of that game.

Red Dead was in my blu ray drive for over a month, but I still never finished it.

Trust me. You're not missing much.

Modifié par Iwasdrunkbro, 20 mars 2011 - 11:03 .

[AkiKishi]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Dr. Impossible wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Mass Effect was supposed to be an entry level RPG for the 360 anyway. Maybe it made them realise they could get by "phoning it in" though.

Jade Empire was much the same thing for Xbox.

I actually liked Jade Empire a lot.

The Galaxian bits were out of place and it was shadow of the game it was originally going to be.Otherwise I liked it. Well it holds my record for most disapointing end boss ever , but still.

I liked ME as well, sticking to the plot planets only.

You have to be joking....

JE spoilers**

Seriously what other game lets you basically kill off all your companions just because? That end boss had to be one of the best ones in... then again I like playing the evil guy. I should really do a "good" runthrough of that game.

Any of the BG games, Fallout etc.

The end boss lasted about 15 seconds.

[Killer3000ad]

Because developing an open world sandbox game ala Elder Scrolls would take more than TWO years which doesn't fit into EA's business model of a SEQUEL every two years.

[upsettingshorts]

RDR was a beautiful game with a good story and some great music.

But it really did make me realize how utterly sick of Rockstar's questing I am. Go to Annoying Character, do Chores, repeat.

So I only played it once.

Killer3000ad wrote...

Because developing an open world sandbox game ala Elder Scrolls would take more than TWO years which
doesn't fit into EA's business model of a SEQUEL every two years.

Dragon Age: Origins was developed over more than two years and they still didn't make a sandbox. 

Baldur's Gate 2 was released almost as soon after its predecessor as DA2, and it wasn't a sandbox either.

SWTOR is getting all the time and money it needs thrown at it - apparently - and that isn't being made into a sandbox MMORPG.

Bioware doesn't make sandbox games.  It's got nothing to do with their development cycle or publisher.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 mars 2011 - 11:08 .

[Maconbar]

Gadarr wrote...

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...
I simply cannot understand why throwing a bigger explorable world on top of an already great script makes the story any less than it would be. All you're doing is making the world larger. Nobody in this thread is asking to trade in the story for exploration.

Because you'd need to fill the bigger explorable world with content. I suppose it is possible to do that and still keep the player focused on the story, but the bigger the world, the more difficult it gets. And of course, it takes a whole lot more development time. If you want to combine open world with a strong narrative, you can't just copypaste some dungeons or villages all over the place, you need to fill them with meaning and story elements that connect to the other areas of the world. Otherwise, it's just pointless and actually distracting.

Take DA:O as an example: Would you have felt the urgency of your mission in any way, if you were allowed to roam the world freely and visit random farms and towns? I'd bet no. Actually, I found most of those sidequests already distracting.

Good points. I tend to be a completionist but doing some of the fetch quests in DA:O seemed silly in light of the overwhelming blight that we were dealing with. Doing lots of little gathering quests in DA:2 seemed to make more sense, at least when compared to DA:O.

[Iwasdrunkbro]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Dr. Impossible wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Mass Effect was supposed to be an entry level RPG for the 360 anyway. Maybe it made them realise they could get by "phoning it in" though.

Jade Empire was much the same thing for Xbox.

I actually liked Jade Empire a lot.

The Galaxian bits were out of place and it was shadow of the game it was originally going to be.Otherwise I liked it. Well it holds my record for most disapointing end boss ever , but still.

I liked ME as well, sticking to the plot planets only.

You have to be joking....

JE spoilers**

Seriously what other game lets you basically kill off all your companions just because? That end boss had to be one of the best ones in... then again I like playing the evil guy. I should really do a "good" runthrough of that game.

Any of the BG games, Fallout etc.

The end boss lasted about 15 seconds.

Yea BG is the only Bioware game I havent played. I played Fallout 2 but never really finished it. I know, Im missing out.

[Drake Sigar]

I disagree strongly with your first point OP, Oblivion’s world is as soulless as they come. It’s like playing an MMO on single player. Don’t get me wrong, everybody loves a good sandbox game from Mount & Blade to Sid Meier’s Pirates, but those vast landscapes come at a cost. These games don’t tend to have any meaningful choices or relationships, and letting players do whatever the hell they want from the get-go prevents the game from having a strong narrative. Choose Your Own Adventure books didn’t revolutionize the literary world for a reason.

[Iwasdrunkbro]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

RDR was a beautiful game with a good story and some great music.

But it really did make me realize how utterly sick of Rockstar's questing I am. Go to Annoying Character, do Chores, repeat.

So I only played it once.

Killer3000ad wrote...

Because developing an open world
sandbox game ala Elder Scrolls would take more than TWO years which
doesn't fit into EA's business model of a SEQUEL every two
years.

Dragon Age Origins was developed over more than two years and they still didn't make a sandbox.

Baldur's Gate 2 was released almost as soon after its predecessor as DA2, and it wasn't a sandbox either.

Bioware doesn't make sandbox games.  It's got nothing to do with their development cycle or publisher.

I agree completely though it looks like theyre trying to switch that up a bit in their new game thats coming out. I dont even know what its called but it looks kinda cool..

[upsettingshorts]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

I agree completely though it looks like theyre trying to switch that up a bit in their new game thats coming out. I dont even know what its called but it looks kinda cool..

I believe you're thinking of L.A. Noire, and you're right - I'm definitely looking forward to that one.

[Iwasdrunkbro]

Drake Sigar wrote...

I disagree strongly with your first point OP, Oblivion’s world is as soulless as they come. It’s like playing an MMO on single player. Don’t get me wrong, everybody loves a good sandbox game from Mount & Blade to Sid Meier’s Pirates, but those vast landscapes come at a cost. These games don’t tend to have any meaningful choices or relationships, and letting players do whatever the hell they want from the get-go prevents the game from having a strong narrative. Choose Your Own Adventure books didn’t revolutionize the literary world for a reason.

Oh but they were so fun to read though werent they? "Turn to page 64 and... you get eaten by wolves!". How awesome.

Still, why not let the player go off and do what they want? You always know that eventually when you get around to it you have an epic story to go back to. IMO it only adds depth and length to the game.

We have to remember that Oblivion is almost 6 years old here and comparing it to a game like DA2 isnt exactly fair.

[Perles75]

I don't mind not having an open world.
Some RPGs are planned like that -and some people find they lack focus-, some others are more story-focused -and some people complain about the lack of liberty-.

They're just a different kind of game, and I'm happy to find in the market fine examples of both, because sometimes I enjoy the freedom of open world games, and sometimes I enjoy a less dispersive experience. I wouldn't like to see the same structure for all RPGs.

[Drake Sigar]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

Drake Sigar wrote...

I disagree strongly with your first point OP, Oblivion’s world is as soulless as they come. It’s like playing an MMO on single player. Don’t get me wrong, everybody loves a good sandbox game from Mount & Blade to Sid Meier’s Pirates, but those vast landscapes come at a cost. These games don’t tend to have any meaningful choices or relationships, and letting players do whatever the hell they want from the get-go prevents the game from having a strong narrative. Choose Your Own Adventure books didn’t revolutionize the literary world for a reason.

Oh but they were so fun to read though werent they? "Turn to page 64 and... you get eaten by wolves!". How awesome.

Still, why not let the player go off and do what they want? You always know that eventually when you get around to it you have an epic story to go back to. IMO it only adds depth and length to the game.

We have to remember that Oblivion is almost 6 years old here and comparing it to a game like DA2 isnt exactly fair.

Wait, no I didn’t, my hand was still on the previous page! *Shifty eyes* I had more do-overs than the Spiderman franchise.

Fallout 3 is more recent and it was exactly the same, though slightly more justified considering roaming the decimated wasteland mad-max style was the entire point. Baldur’s Gate 2 had the perfect balance for me, a large but contained set of areas that you couldn’t move an inch in without tripping over an interesting encounter, or a deep and consequential plotline.

Modifié par Drake Sigar, 20 mars 2011 - 11:22 .

[Iwasdrunkbro]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

RDR was a beautiful game with a good story and some great music.

But it really did make me realize how utterly sick of Rockstar's questing I am. Go to Annoying Character, do Chores, repeat.

So I only played it once.

Killer3000ad wrote...

Because developing an open world sandbox game ala Elder Scrolls would take more than TWO years which
doesn't fit into EA's business model of a SEQUEL every two years.

Dragon Age: Origins was developed over more than two years and they still didn't make a sandbox. 

Baldur's Gate 2 was released almost as soon after its predecessor as DA2, and it wasn't a sandbox either.

SWTOR is getting all the time and money it needs thrown at it - apparently - and that isn't being made into a sandbox MMORPG.

Bioware doesn't make sandbox games.  It's got nothing to do with their development cycle or publisher.

wait.... WHAT?! TOR isnt going to be a sandbox mmo?

link. link now. link. no seriously... link.

[AkiKishi]

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

RDR was a beautiful game with a good story and some great music.

But it really did make me realize how utterly sick of Rockstar's questing I am. Go to Annoying Character, do Chores, repeat.

So I only played it once.

Killer3000ad wrote...

Because developing an open world sandbox game ala Elder Scrolls would take more than TWO years which
doesn't fit into EA's business model of a SEQUEL every two years.

Dragon Age: Origins was developed over more than two years and they still didn't make a sandbox. 

Baldur's Gate 2 was released almost as soon after its predecessor as DA2, and it wasn't a sandbox either.

SWTOR is getting all the time and money it needs thrown at it - apparently - and that isn't being made into a sandbox MMORPG.

Bioware doesn't make sandbox games.  It's got nothing to do with their development cycle or publisher.

wait.... WHAT?! TOR isnt going to be a sandbox mmo?

link. link now. link. no seriously... link.

It's some weird story mode thing like the "plot" scenerios in LOTRO.

[Dr. Impossible]

Drake Sigar wrote...

These games don’t tend to have any meaningful choices or relationships, and letting players do whatever the hell they want from the get-go prevents the game from having a strong narrative. Choose Your Own Adventure books didn’t revolutionize the literary world for a reason.

If a sandbox game doesn't have meaningful choices it's only because the developers didn't put them there.

A "strong narrative" is not some inherently good thing that should be present in every game. In fact, video games usually suffer from having too much narrative.

Choose Your Own Adventure books are not comparable to video games since video games are not about story-telling.

Modifié par Dr. Impossible, 20 mars 2011 - 11:25 .

[cotheer]

I think majority is missing the point of OP.
No one asked copy/paste of Bethesda model, but rather "fusion" of Biowares story telling and character handling with Bethesdas open world and graphics.
I'm strongly against empty open world, but with Bioware in the same story, i't "wouldn't" fail.

Modifié par cotheer, 20 mars 2011 - 11:27 .

[Iwasdrunkbro]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Iwasdrunkbro wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

RDR was a beautiful game with a good story and some great music.

But it really did make me realize how utterly sick of Rockstar's questing I am. Go to Annoying Character, do Chores, repeat.

So I only played it once.

Killer3000ad wrote...

Because developing an open world sandbox game ala Elder Scrolls would take more than TWO years which
doesn't fit into EA's business model of a SEQUEL every two years.

Dragon Age: Origins was developed over more than two years and they still didn't make a sandbox. 

Baldur's Gate 2 was released almost as soon after its predecessor as DA2, and it wasn't a sandbox either.

SWTOR is getting all the time and money it needs thrown at it - apparently - and that isn't being made into a sandbox MMORPG.

Bioware doesn't make sandbox games.  It's got nothing to do with their development cycle or publisher.

wait.... WHAT?! TOR isnt going to be a sandbox mmo?

link. link now. link. no seriously... link.

It's some weird story mode thing like the "plot" scenerios in LOTRO.

You've got to be joking... how does Bioware plan to compete? Having an open world is essential to the mmo experience.

Oh this WILL be interesting. Very, very interesting. I seriously had no idea just how far off the map they were trying to take this game. Truley they are throwing every egg they have into the same basket.

[Iwasdrunkbro]

cotheer wrote...

I think majority is missing the point of OP.
No one asked copy/paste of Bethesda model, but rather "fusion" of Biowares story telling and character handling with Bethesdas open world and graphics.
I'm strongly against empty open world, but with Bioware in the same story, i't "wouldn't" fail.

Thank god.

[upsettingshorts]

Oh whether or not it's open isn't what I'm talking about. I haven't been following terribly closely.

What I meant was that it isn't going to be like early SWG in that there were almost no (or few) quests, and that players played in the sandbox and in a sense created their own content in the world. How much physical freedom players have to move around in TOR isn't something I actually know.

[cotheer]

SW:TOR is classic MMO with personal story going in parallel to the rest of the game.
It's not single player MMO (lol) as such, but it is more oriented towards that "personal story" aspect than any other MMO.

Modifié par cotheer, 20 mars 2011 - 11:32 .