200 réponses à ce sujet

[Steks25]

Well, with RPG you usually have to choose between a freeroam, alive, open world

and

Linear, walk down a predetermined path, but with an awesome story.

I really dont get it but thats the way it is.
I mean I assume that the majority of dev time is spent coding...so whats preventing a dev team from adding a great, immersive story to an open world rpg o.O

[Shockwave Pulsar]

Because Bioware wants to tell stories and not send their players running through huge maps and killing ten thousands of enemies. What makes their games different is the focus on characters, interactivity and story, and the relationships with their interactivity, alternate versions, friendship/rivalry and so on. I imagine it's a monumental task to develop a game like Dragon Age and make all the different outcomes work, so there's really no time for creating a huge world. Open world RPGs tend to have fixed story, characters, conversations, etc. and there are many of those, so I'm glad Bioware is doing something different. (But I agree that there are too few environments in DAII, it's obvious that they didn't enough time)

[Dr. Impossible]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Then you can go ahead and explain it to everyone else, and I'll just sit here drooling on my keyboard.

A list of games that pulled off a compelling narrative as well as an open world at the same time would be a good start.

Sandbox games are not required by law to be exactly like Oblivion. There is nothing inherent in the sandbox style that inescapably results in a game exactly like Oblivion. How the developer wants to tell the story is up to the developer.

[Il Divo]

Dr. Impossible wrote...

Sandbox games are not required by law to be exactly like Oblivion. There is nothing inherent in the sandbox style that inescapably results in a game exactly like Oblivion. How the developer wants to tell the story is up to the developer.

Not always true. The very purpose of the sand-box world defies your point. In a sand box world, the number one goal is freedom: freedom to choose where I go, what I do, etc. Because I (the player) can choose to continue the main quest at my own leisure, this makes it almost impossible for a developer to pace a main quest properly. While the two can be combined (as Planescape demonstrates), it's hardly the easiest thing for a developer to do.

This is why you don't find any Bioware games with Bethesda-style features.

Modifié par Il Divo, 20 mars 2011 - 01:36 .

[upsettingshorts]

That wasn't really what I was claiming. My point is that in terms of storytelling it is inherently more limiting - in terms of what you can do in the narrative - if you can never be sure what page your audience is going to be on at any given time. A sandbox game by its nature gives the player the freedom to read whatever page they want, in any order they want.

Linearity fixes the order of things - either in terms of physical limits or the passage of time or both - in order to ensure that the audience will see events and meet characters in a more set order, and therefore they can be written to fit together.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 mars 2011 - 01:43 .

[Frumyfrenzy]

 I wholeheartedly agree with the OP. People who are against an open world Dragon Age usually fear that it will have an negative impact on story, because they find open world games very lacking in this regard. Therefore, they conclude, open world games cannot deliver a good story and good presentation. I disagree and so do other advocates of open world games.

What opponents of a Dragon Age open world RP can probably agree on is that there are too many tiny maps and too much linearity in them, which precludes exploration. Remember Baldurs Gate 1/2? There you had a compromise of map size and freedom of exploration.In Baldurs Gate I felt like I was exploring. Bioware does not need to go from their current level-design-philosophy all the way to open world, but they could move more towards freedom of exploration by making bigger maps and eliminating a lot of linearity which forced us to take this ony single narrow path. So I support this more reasonable stance on what the next Dragon Age should do: 

Minimizing linearity (narrow paths), fewer loading screens and maximizing level size (especially for outdoor levels). 

Is this more agreeable?

Modifié par Frumyfrenzy, 20 mars 2011 - 01:45 .

[upsettingshorts]

More open and expansive level design? That'd be fine. I would say I'd be in favor of it, but it's not a priority for me in BioWare games.

A sandbox game/open? That's different. I get my fill of that from Bethesda games.

[malakian]

I thought DA1 struck a good balance between freedom and narrative. Fallout 3 and NV were both fun to play but always felt utterly un-epic to me, plot wise.

DA2...well...um...one city is a bit hard to swallow.

[upsettingshorts]

I liked the one city a lot. I'd have liked for it to be more open - as one big level perhaps - but otherwise it was kind of nice to be in a real urban environment for a change.

[Frumyfrenzy]

I liked the concept of being in one city too, in theory, but the lack of visual diversity and its small size was a bit disappointing. Remember Athkatla?

[AkiKishi]

malakian wrote...

I thought DA1 struck a good balance between freedom and narrative. Fallout 3 and NV were both fun to play but always felt utterly un-epic to me, plot wise.

DA2...well...um...one city is a bit hard to swallow.

Do you get epic in post nuclear adventures? 

I don't dislike non epic plots. But I really did not like DA2's at all. So it must go beyond just not being epic.

[malakian]

Well that was a short answer, i didn't explain properly there - I mean the delivery wasn't as engaging, despite the scale. This is a lot due to the technical limitations of scripted events in bioware's oblivion/fallout engine...every plot point played out in a kind of cardboard way imo.

[88mphSlayer]

the in-between vs. Oblivion/Fallout model is S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

the game loads up areas of "the zone", each area uniquely different from the others, thing is the areas are still pretty large and have their own personality, their own dangers and their own stories, you access these areas as you progress but each area still feels pretty open and there's still freedom

tho i think Rockstar does an amazing job of creating open world games that you genuinely want to explore where there's something really interesting around every corner

in a way SWTOR is already Bioware's best attempt at open world, i too would like to see them try an open world game tho if simply as an experiment, i think people would enjoy it more than they think

[bill4747bill]

I can't help but wonder what a collaboration between Bioware and Bethesda would produce.

[Il Divo]

bill4747bill wrote...

I can't help but wonder what a collaboration between Bioware and Bethesda would produce.

Probably something like Planescape: Torment or Baldur's Gate in 3-D.

[AkiKishi]

bill4747bill wrote...

I can't help but wonder what a collaboration between Bioware and Bethesda would produce.

Something simliar to NV but with higher production values.

[Squire]

Because the more open you make something, the less personal it becomes.

On one extreme, you have a deeply personal, involving story where your character feels part of the world and everyone reacts to what he does. His name is spoken by all, his deeds are recounted in stories and there is a statue of him built right at the end. You make friends and enemies, your class/race/build makes a difference in how other people see you, and you truly feel like you've had an impact on the world around you. But you must follow the path, and cannot deviate from it; choice is limited.

On the other extreme, you have a total sandbox. You are free to go where you wish, do (or don't do) whatever quests you wish, and basically be exactly who you want to. But whatever you play, you are little more than a generic entity that passes through the world, and noone remembers your name or speaks your deeds, you make no friends and no enemies, and the only people who respond to what you do are the quest givers; their response is limited to "thank you. Here's payment."; there is nothing personal about it, and whatever race/class/build you are, you will hear the same dialogue and experience the same quests (the only difference being some you won't be able to do because of your class).

The ideal game is one that strikes a balance between the two.

[Dr. Impossible]

Squire wrote...

Because the more open you make something, the less personal it becomes.

On one extreme, you have a deeply personal, involving story where your character feels part of the world and everyone reacts to what he does. His name is spoken by all, his deeds are recounted in stories and there is a statue of him built right at the end. You make friends and enemies, your class/race/build makes a difference in how other people see you, and you truly feel like you've had an impact on the world around you. But you must follow the path, and cannot deviate from it; choice is limited.

No reason whatsoever why this can't be done in a sandbox-like game.

[Il Divo]

Dr. Impossible wrote...

No reason whatsoever why this can't be done in a sandbox-like game.

It's impossible to pace a story-line properly when you have no way of knowing at what point your players will reach that part of the story. Notice for example that even though Bioware games offer multiple side quests, there's only ever so much you can do before you have to move things forward.

This is not the case in sand-boxes; worlds are usually so large that you might never hit the main quest.

[dreman9999]

I completly agree. The game should of been made in a sandbox due to how much back tracking you had to do. It would cut this game repeative nature in half. We would not be complaining about going to the same cave, or going the same wharehouse if it was a different one or location.

[dreman9999]

Steks25 wrote...

Well, with RPG you usually have to choose between a freeroam, alive, open world

and

Linear, walk down a predetermined path, but with an awesome story.

I really dont get it but thats the way it is.
I mean I assume that the majority of dev time is spent coding...so whats preventing a dev team from adding a great, immersive story to an open world rpg o.O

With the amount of broken up quest in this game, It would have worked as an open world game.

[wowpwnslol]

Because sandbox games are stupid. The end.

[dreman9999]

Il Divo wrote...

Dr. Impossible wrote...

No reason whatsoever why this can't be done in a sandbox-like game.

It's impossible to pace a story-line properly when you have no way of knowing at what point your players will reach that part of the story. Notice for example that even though Bioware games offer multiple side quests, there's only ever so much you can do before you have to move things forward.

This is not the case in sand-boxes; worlds are usually so large that you might never hit the main quest.

....Act 1....
All side quest......
Act 2....
It has a clear definition of when Act 2 ends
 plus the exclimation points stating you have quests ready and letters.
Act 3.....
The same thing and act 2.

[Il Divo]

dreman9999 wrote...

....Act 1....
All side quest......
Act 2....
It has a clear definition of when Act 2 ends
 plus the exclimation points stating you have quests ready and letters.
Act 3.....
The same thing and act 2.

And compare that to a sandbox. Compare even Origins to a sandbox; there is only so much you can do before the Warden is forced back into the main quest, hence why it is much easier to pace. Morrowind is a terrific game that offers an absurd amount of exploration, yet all this comes at the expense of a terrible narrative.

[BioSpirit]

Now let me ask you Fallout 3 players a question. How many of you have actually explored every part of that game? So when I say explored I mean you went over everything with a fine tooth comb yes? You have seen everything in that world. Not many I wager. The fact is the majority could pop in Fallout 3 right now and within 20 minutes find something that they havent seen before. Thats an impressive feat considering how old that game actually is. You simply cant say that about a game like Kotor or even Dragon Age 2.

I explored about 10% on my first play through and about 20% on a second play through. It is impressive environment without any significant loading delays. But it doesn't make it superior or better game in any way. I still prefer NWN2, KOTOR and DA:O over the FallOut 3 and Oblivion. There is no need for BioWare to go in that direction.