221 réponses à ce sujet

[Tekman9]

im still waiting for someone to tell me why dice rolling (ie the backbone of these games) is obsolete .

Modifié par Tekman9, 24 mars 2011 - 11:48 .

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Glorfindel709 wrote...

DA2 did not have a story.

You didn't pay attention to it.  :kissing:

There was no decision I could make that wouldnt lead to the events they wanted to happen.

You didn't talk to any of your companions did you?  :P:P

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Tekman9 wrote...

im still waiting for someone to tell me why dice rolling (ie the backbone of these games) is obsolete .

It's not.  It should happen in the background.  I don't eat in the kitchen, so don't try to cook in my dinning room.  Unless you're making sushi.  But then you had better be a gorgeous asian girl like the one that makes my shrimp rolls on Dead FIsh Mondays.

[Glorfindel709]

@Rinpoche

I did pay attention between icing my thumb so I wouldnt get carpel tunnel and head-desking.

Act 2 was the only part of the game that had a story, and that was only at the tail end of Demands of the Qun. Everything else was "Oh Hawke, see that bottle on the desk? Go and deliver it to its owner, someone you've never met but you found their ID stuck to the bottle so go for it!" or "Oh Hawke, something happened in *insert recycled map area* to *insert random NPC that 9/10 wont ever matter once you save them for sweet sweet sovereigns* so you can save up enough money to get on the expedition." or, my personal favorite "Hawke! You have little to no information about the motivations of each side, and game mechanics are lining up against you to make one side look evil while Lore is stacked up to make the other side look like sadists. GO! MAKE MAGIC HAPPEN!"

And Yes Rin, I did infact talk to my companions. I especially enjoyed Varric. But the only time that it came down to a matter of importance was the final moments of Act 3, and even if they didnt agree with my choice one diplomatic option later and they were back on my side fighting for the side they hated (Fenris, for example)

[Tekman9]

i eat in my kitchen =( is that why i have all the combat feedback turned on? haha

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

[quote]Glorfindel709 wrote...

@Rinpoche

I did pay attention between icing my thumb so I wouldnt get carpel tunnel and head-desking.

Act 2 was the only part of the game that had a story, and that was only at the tail end of Demands of the Qun.


[quote]"Hawke! You have little to no information about the motivations of each side, and game mechanics are lining up against you to make one side look evil while Lore is stacked up to make the other side look like sadists. GO! MAKE MAGIC HAPPEN!"[/quote]

How can you have little to no information and simultaneously see one side as evil and the other as sadists?  As for mechanics making you see a story... all I can do to that is :huh: cause that makes no sense.


[quote]
And Yes Rin, I did infact talk to my companions. I especially enjoyed Varric. But the only time that it came down to a matter of importance was the final moments of Act 3, and even if they didnt agree with my choice one diplomatic option later and they were back on my side fighting for the side they hated (Fenris, for example)[/quote]

Adults don't run away when they disagree with their friends.  Adults keep their word when they say they're going to stick around and help.  Hawke made friends with all the companions and all the companions became friends with Hawke.  Once people grown into mature individuals, they start to value people that don't agree with them.  The friendship/rivalry mechanic in DA2 describes that.  That's why the companions stuck it out with Hawke even when they didn't agree with Hawke.  It's a more mature story for a more mature audience.  I'm sorry if it wasn't Gossip Girl enough for you.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Tekman9 wrote...

i eat in my kitchen =( is that why i have all the combat feedback turned on? haha

:)  I eat in my living room, so I don't even know how I fit into my own analogy.  :lol:

[Glorfindel709]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Glorfindel709 wrote...

@Rinpoche

I did pay attention between icing my thumb so I wouldnt get carpel tunnel and head-desking.

Act 2 was the only part of the game that had a story, and that was only at the tail end of Demands of the Qun.

"Hawke! You have little to no information about the motivations of each side, and game mechanics are lining up against you to make one side look evil while Lore is stacked up to make the other side look like sadists. GO! MAKE MAGIC HAPPEN!"

How can you have little to no information and simultaneously see one side as evil and the other as sadists?  As for mechanics making you see a story... all I can do to that is :huh: cause that makes no sense.

Too little information and see one side as evil and the other side as sadists. Well, without getting too specific, we are in a spoiler free forum after all, on the evil side we only have two mages in the entire game who dont fall into one of several categories: Maleficar, abomination, abomination waiting to happen, consorting with demons, murderer, or a combination of any of those.  on the side of sadists, we have 3 named Templars who are not scum: Keran, Thrask, and Cullen. every other templar comes off as either blind to the insanity of their commanders and the wrongness of what they're doing (forcing tranquility, breaking chantry law, hunt/kill squads in Lowtown etc etc) or a sadist willfully enjoying what they do to mages (the one templar who wants to sexually assault the "lone mage girl who puts a toe out of line" comes to mind)

And Look, let's be honest here. The story reason that Mages were not big bads is that they're not all going to be maleficar abominations etc etc. They can be good people just like a regular citizen, it's not their fault that they were born with special powers. And yet... I defy you to point me two a single mage you didnt have to fight that didnt rely on blood magic, summoning demons, etc etc etc. The game mechanics broke the dialogue and reasoning of the story.

And Yes Rin, I did infact talk to my companions. I especially enjoyed Varric. But the only time that it came down to a matter of importance was the final moments of Act 3, and even if they didnt agree with my choice one diplomatic option later and they were back on my side fighting for the side they hated (Fenris, for example)

Adults don't run away when they disagree with their friends.  Adults keep their word when they say they're going to stick around and help.  Hawke made friends with all the companions and all the companions became friends with Hawke.  Once people grown into mature individuals, they start to value people that don't agree with them.  The friendship/rivalry mechanic in DA2 describes that.  That's why the companions stuck it out with Hawke even when they didn't agree with Hawke.  It's a more mature story for a more mature audience.  I'm sorry if it wasn't Gossip Girl enough for you.

Really? Adults dont run away from their friends and always keep their word?

I hate to come off as condescending, but grow the hell up. People part ways over political and religious beliefs as they grow older and become more defined as an individual. Not every person can just agree to fight for the people that he hates and distrusts more than anything else, ever. People don't work like that.

I'm sorry if DA:O wasnt mature enough for you where people actually disagreed and walked away from a conflict and friendship (that was certainly deeper in DA:O than anything in DA2 could ever try to get close to) because they had actual convictions. You know, the thing that people gain as they mature.

Modifié par Glorfindel709, 25 mars 2011 - 12:34 .

[Tekman9]

@auto good post. i take issue with all the 'console' stuff tho. I used to PC game. i played WoW as recently as 08. played league of legends this year.

At some point in your life, a lot of us just feel that its not worth the headache/hassel of gaming on PC, let alone cost. That doesnt make us want any less complicated games. My main gripe (i actually wrote this on a question in a job interveiw) with DA:O was that I felt like i was playing a PC game shoehorned onto the console. but that wasnt because it was complicated. it was because i couldnt ****ing move my party members around unless i move them manually.

I dont think all console gamers are dense. Sure theres a ton that are, but theyre not who youre selling RPGs to really. Well at least you shouldnt be, that just makes a worse game for everyone. These consoles are capable of nice things. I have a 52inch 1080p tv. i work on a computer all day. i want to come home and sit on the couch =P

You can say that pc gamers are elevated, but thats true, you need to have a certain degree of know how to run these games and keep ur computer updated, and troubleshoot, and theirs a large cost of entry. But i dont think that just because im playing a game on an xbox means i want buttonmash '11. I think theres a lot of people like me, and i think you could almost point to origins sales as proof.

[Chaos_1001]

Tekman9 wrote...

@auto good post. i take issue with all the 'console' stuff tho. I used to PC game. i played WoW as recently as 08. played league of legends this year.

At some point in your life, a lot of us just feel that its not worth the headache/hassel of gaming on PC, let alone cost. That doesnt make us want any less complicated games. My main gripe (i actually wrote this on a question in a job interveiw) with DA:O was that I felt like i was playing a PC game shoehorned onto the console. but that wasnt because it was complicated. it was because i couldnt ****ing move my party members around unless i move them manually.

I dont think all console gamers are dense. Sure theres a ton that are, but theyre not who youre selling RPGs to really. Well at least you shouldnt be, that just makes a worse game for everyone. These consoles are capable of nice things. I have a 52inch 1080p tv. i work on a computer all day. i want to come home and sit on the couch =P

You can say that pc gamers are elevated, but thats true, you need to have a certain degree of know how to run these games and keep ur computer updated, and troubleshoot, and theirs a large cost of entry. But i dont think that just because im playing a game on an xbox means i want buttonmash '11. I think theres a lot of people like me, and i think you could almost point to origins sales as proof.

Whole-heartedly agree !   ^

[Glorfindel709]

Amen Tekman!

I'm a console gamer, simply because I do not have the money to upgrade my computer to be a decent game running machine. I don't enjoy button mash games either :-p

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Glorfindel709 wrote...

Really? Adults dont run away from their friends and always keep their word?

Adults don't bail on their friends, no.  ^_^  

[Glorfindel709]

Oh, I would love to live in the imaginary world you live in Rin, I really would.

Cling to your delusions if you must, they'll make the harsh sting of reality that much harsher

[DrGulag]

I'm just going to say nice trolling rin ....and lets leave it at that.

edit : Actually no. Pointless to continue this discussion.

Modifié par DrGulag, 25 mars 2011 - 01:44 .

[DamnThoseDisplayNames]

Why Do Our Role-Playing Games Still Need Numbers Everywhere?

Because computer operates in numbers. It's a computer, not a living being, it can't have an opinion at how good your roleplaying is, how well you stick to your role. You can explain your character to DM, but you can't do so for your computer. More of that, while there are roleplay sessions with almost absolute narrative rights for each player, or real life roleplay experiences, still there will be situations where DM's judgement is not enough, not absolute, that's why even most free roleplay sessions usually have at least a minor amount of dice rolling. As for Bioware games of today, they don't even have a diplomacy skill to balance battle-oriented and social-oriented characters numbers-wise, and do not relate at player's ability to roleplay (dialogues consistently lack requirement to think and analyse dialogue branches). In DA:O, player needed at least some effort to understand his companions. In ME you just push one button. DA2 gone ME road, thus actually making 180 turn *away from* roleplaying.

Modifié par DamnThoseDisplayNames, 25 mars 2011 - 01:16 .

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Glorfindel709 wrote...

Oh, I would love to live in the imaginary world you live in Rin, I really would.

Cling to your delusions if you must, they'll make the harsh sting of reality that much harsher

:lol:

[Pwnsaur]

There is a critical piece of information being lost/ignored here, and Sylvius brought it up earlier. Role playing games are games where the person PLAYING the game assumes the role of the person IN the game. Therefore, the things that affect the person IN the game, must also affect the person PLAYING the game.

When anything that affects the person IN the game becomes beyond the control of the person PLAYING the game, it loses a bit of the 'role playing' aspect. To people who are just interested in the story, the choices, the dialogue and the cutscenes, the role-playing aspect is obviously less important. Unfortunately, within a genre defined as 'Role-Playing-Game,' removing role playing aspects is going to disenfranchise the people who buy RPG's expecting to role play.

And, as these forums depict, people who feel marginalized and alienated from the genre they've helped support and expand express outrage; And rightfully so. BioWare has risen to prominence, popularity, and success by always delivering a quality product without compromising their original vision for the possibility of appealing to more casual gamers.

EA bought out BioWare when BioWare was ONLY known as a premier RPG developer. They had become successful enough to appeal to the biggest name is gaming production by only sticking to their 'niche.' I think this fact alone discredits the argument that remaining loyal to the people who built your reputation is financial suicide. As history and sales figures have shown, BioWare had only expanded and grown by sticking to this formula, not diminished.

My final point is simple; Please stop taking the role playing out of role playing games. There is enough money out there for every genre to be successful and clearly defined. Gaming has never been a more profitable, popular, and mainstream business venture than it is right now. Greed doesn't ALWAYS have to win. It just always has...

-Except for Jonas Salk.

[Pyrate_d]

 The story in DA2 was completely incoherent, and the characterization wasn't much better. They aren't trading complicated mechanics for a better story, they're trading a slowly-developed, quality game for quickly-developed, mass-produced crap.


DAO took 5 years to make. DA2 took 18 months. DA2 exists in its current (awful) state because Bioware can't make a franchise out of quality games that take 5 years to develop--it's just impossible. They can easily make a franchise out of games like DA2 however.

Modifié par Pyrate_d, 25 mars 2011 - 07:04 .

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Pwnsaur wrote...

There is a critical piece of information being lost/ignored here, and Sylvius brought it up earlier. Role playing games are games where the person PLAYING the game assumes the role of the person IN the game. Therefore, the things that affect the person IN the game, must also affect the person PLAYING the game.

Your premise is flawed.  You don't get to decide how everyone plays.  I've never =been= the person in the story.  I've always guided them through their story.

When anything that affects the person IN the game becomes beyond the control of the person PLAYING the game, it loses a bit of the 'role playing' aspect. To people who are just interested in the story, the choices, the dialogue and the cutscenes, the role-playing aspect is obviously less important. Unfortunately, within a genre defined as 'Role-Playing-Game,' removing role playing aspects is going to disenfranchise the people who buy RPG's expecting to role play.

Your entire argument is flawed as you intial premise is no good.  DA2 offered plenty of RPG nomnomnom.

And, as these forums depict, people who feel marginalized and alienated from the genre they've helped support and expand express outrage; And rightfully so. BioWare has risen to prominence, popularity, and success by always delivering a quality product without compromising their original vision for the possibility of appealing to more casual gamers.

The dinosaurs expressed outrage.  They cried too.  They pointed their blunt, dim eyed faces at the sky and said "mmmwuuuuurgh!"  And then they went extinct.  Happily, all is still well in the world.  And those of use who like a great story and a fun game will continue to enjoy those things from BioWare.

We'll visit the old bones on occassion though, just to see how far we've come.

EA bought out BioWare when BioWare was ONLY known as a premier RPG developer. They had become successful enough to appeal to the biggest name is gaming production by only sticking to their 'niche.' I think this fact alone discredits the argument that remaining loyal to the people who built your reputation is financial suicide. As history and sales figures have shown, BioWare had only expanded and grown by sticking to this formula, not diminished.

Think about it your post.  Did BioWare buy EA?  No.  Why?  BioWare couldn't afford it.  EA bought BioWare.  Why?  EA had the money.  Who was more successful as a company?  EA.  Why?  They developed games that gave them big audiences mean big money meaning buy more studios.  DA2 and the games that follow are going to appeal to a bigger market.  Same great story, same great game, less boring mechanics to shackle the game to a niche.

My final point is simple; Please stop taking the role playing out of role playing games. There is enough money out there for every genre to be successful and clearly defined. Gaming has never been a more profitable, popular, and mainstream business venture than it is right now.

Only because it has continues to change and appeal to larger and larger markets. 

Greed doesn't ALWAYS have to win. It just always has...

Greed has always won, greed is winning now, and greed will always win in the future.  That's how a free market works.  That's how life works.  ;)

Modifié par RinpocheSchnozberry, 25 mars 2011 - 02:22 .

[MrTijger]

Autolycus wrote...

Really, to my mind, their first big and greatest game, under their own steam (ME1), was influenced by EA....and did not use an engine of their creation. That speaks volumes to me.

In all fairness, the engine is totally irrelevent and unimportant, high quality engines are available on the market and re-inventing the wheel unnecessarily is what kills companies.

Bioware has been about the writing and imagination, not the engines.

[TJSolo]

Now I do agree that catering to a niche market, can and will sustain any good company. CDProject have and are doing it. Bioware did it (unless they really were up the creek)...

I have to ask.
What is a niche market in gaming? The sales of RPGs can be high or low just like any other genre.