221 réponses à ce sujet

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

TJSolo wrote...

No company needsto or will update the public to their licensing meetings, development/design plan, and production schedule, unless that company wants to. You not being informed by Atari and Interplay on the current status of BG3/Dark Alliance does mean either company has changed their stated goals. Stop saying garbage like "no one cares" as if you speak for anyone other than yourself.

Please stay on topic.  We've been talking about how no one cares about numbers heavy Dinosaur Games like BG/NWN//Excel anymore and you keep trying to drag this off topic.  Please stop spamming this thread with off topic suppositions.  If you want to be schooled in how marketing works, please put something together in the Off Topic forum.  Thanks!

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

kelvarnsen wrote...
what was so good about the story? i like the idea, but for me the execution was poor. i templar/mage conflict should have been brought up explicitly much sooner. we should have met/seen meredith and orsino from the start and seen how the characters/conflict evolved. instead we were running around doing boring chores for random people in kirkwall.

That's a fair point, but for me the story was right out in front in the first act.  The story is the life of Hawke.  It's about his first real defining actions, escaping from Lothering and getting his family protected, and it's about the friends he made along the way to the fight with a certain foreign warlord he was essentially dragged into...  It's about his rise from above average adventurer into a Champion and from Champion into a legend.


I think a lot of the Dinosaur Game fans are programed to look for "Where.  Is.  Big.  Boss.  Story.  About.  Big.  Boss." and tracking down tiny gear upgrades along the way.  DA2 abandons both the "Must Slay Archdemon" trope and the crappy gear mechanic from the past. 

To me, the bigger success is the removal of the tedium from the game...  The article I linked earlier asks the question:  Why do we need numbers in our RPG games?  The Dinosaur Game Fans answer that question with "Because it's always been that way and we'll have tantrum if you change things!"

[Rylor Tormtor]

Actually, the original point of your post was that DA2 privileged story over game-play, and when some people argued, you replied with inane drivel and emoticons. You seem to conflate sophistication with complexity, arguing that any game with a deep and intricate system is necessarily bad. The other games that people were referring to had both. Now, I am against complexity for complexity's sake, but there seems to shift in interactivity and instrumentality of the player in the creation in his character. Some people like this, great. I liked ME for what it was, an action game ported to the PC. However, just because more people like it, does not make it particularly good or innovative. Saturating the market with rushed products the appeal to the widest possible audience is indeed a successful business strategy in the short term. However, less sophistication leads to less replay value, which leads to less return business, and, in the long run, reduces the sales number of a particular game. In the last two decades, more people have read Stephan King than Joyce, but that doesn't equate to King being a better author. Nor will it equate to King still being read in a hundred years.*


*NB - The active ingredient in this comparison is hyperbole. Consult psychiatrist before use. Side effects include: minor humor, rampant rage in fan boys/girls, indigestion, and rectal leakage.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Rylor Tormtor wrote...

Actually, the original point of your post was that DA2 privileged story over game-play, and when some people argued, you replied with inane drivel and emoticons. You seem to conflate sophistication with complexity, arguing that any game with a deep and intricate system is necessarily bad.

You say "deep and intricate" and I hear "Load up Excel!  Loot some boots!"  Boring.

However, just because more people like it, does not make it particularly good or innovative.

Conversely, just because a small group of people like Dinosaur Games, doesn't mean they're worth preserving.

However, less sophistication leads to less replay value, which leads to less return business, and, in the long run, reduces the sales number of a particular game.  In the last two decades, more people have read Stephan King than Joyce, but that doesn't equate to King being a better author. Nor will it equate to King still being read in a hundred years.

Specious in bold.  Less tedium leads to more replay value, because it lets me run through the story more often.  Rather than 20 hours of story and 20 hours of "exciting" tactical combat and the "exciting" selling of junk loot, I can get 20 hours of story and 10 hours of combat.  I've already done three play throughs of DA2 and I've got two more planned.  I could only plow through BG2 once and NWN twice before I was too bored to go back to them.

WIth less numbers in an RPG, as the article suggests, there's more room to actually play the game.



In closing, King is ten times the author James Joyce could ever dream of being.  Approval by a tiny group of snobs does not a good writer make.  We can take that to off topic though.  ;)

Modifié par RinpocheSchnozberry, 29 mars 2011 - 02:33 .

[DJ0000]

Personally, I think there is a lot less story in this game.

I liked it and all but it got boring a lot faster than the original mainly because of the lack of different story paths.

[pwnjuicesucka]

Lack of different story paths??? In origins You spent 10 minutes on your characters Origin and then everything after that happened generally the same no matter what origin you chose. There is nostalgia effecting people who remember Origins as being any less linear then Dragon Age 2.

I can go to Orzammar first or I can go to the circle first but it always leads me along a linear path to the Landsmeet. Dragon age 2 is the same. I can do the quests however I want but it will always lead me to the end of the act. DA2 and DAO are equally linear the only difference was what my characters backround was when I got there.

Which is something that confuses me about DA2 though. Why couldn´t I have been an Elf or a Dwarf that ran from Lothering instead of a human? It would effect nothing other then character models but would go a long way to making my Hawke feel more like MY Hawke. DA2 did limit customization which I didn´t like but to say DAO had more varied story paths isn´t true other then the opening 10 or 15 minutes of the game.

[Pandaman102]

Hey, let's just remove everything that everyone considers "tedious" and pay $60 for an empty box.

Just because you find one particular feature "boring" doesn't make it bad, nor does it make the people who do like it any lacking in taste. It's fine that you don't like certain features, but honestly how would you like it if people were ranting for more features you find boring and making backhanded insults at all the games you enjoyed that didn't have those features? Not at all? Then perhaps a toning down of your attitude and laying off the one-line strawman arguments I see you tossing all over the board is in order.

[Aermas]

It's the bottleneck.

In DA2 it goes.

Choices
End of Act
Choices
End of Act
Choices
End of Act.

In Origins it went
Choices
Choices
Choices
Choices
Landsmeet
Choices
End of Game

[Pandaman102]

pwnjuicesucka wrote...

Lack of different story paths??? In origins You spent 10 minutes on your characters Origin and then everything after that happened generally the same no matter what origin you chose. There is nostalgia effecting people who remember Origins as being any less linear then Dragon Age 2.

I can go to Orzammar first or I can go to the circle first but it always leads me along a linear path to the Landsmeet. Dragon age 2 is the same. I can do the quests however I want but it will always lead me to the end of the act. DA2 and DAO are equally linear the only difference was what my characters backround was when I got there.

You can let Redcliffe burn, knife Jowan, and kill the Earl's son.
You can save Redcliffe (and all the little subplots related to saving Redcliffe), spare Jowan, sacrifice the Erlessa, and sell the Earl's son's soul to a demon.
You can save Redcliffe (and all the little subplots related to saving Redcliffe), spare Jowan,  spare the Erlessa, and save the Earl's son.
UIltimately those all lead to the same plot-important conclusion: you save Earl Eamon. Those are different story paths.

Can you say the same about what Anders does in Act 3? Or what happens to Leandra Hawke? Or how you deal with the Qunari? Or any other main plot decision except for what you do with your sibling for the Deep Roads quest?

[Glorfindel709]

Pandaman102 wrote...

You can let Redcliffe burn, knife Jowan, and kill the Earl's son.
You can save Redcliffe (and all the little subplots related to saving Redcliffe), spare Jowan, sacrifice the Erlessa, and sell the Earl's son's soul to a demon.
You can save Redcliffe (and all the little subplots related to saving Redcliffe), spare Jowan,  spare the Erlessa, and save the Earl's son.
UIltimately those all lead to the same plot-important conclusion: you save Earl Eamon. Those are different story paths.

Can you say the same about what Anders does in Act 3? Or what happens to Leandra Hawke? Or how you deal with the Qunari? Or any other main plot decision except for what you do with your sibling for the Deep Roads quest?

QFT

Not to mention, in Origins there were a plethora of random semi-unimportant NPC given quests that had their own back story and little dilemmas in them. Dagna in Orzammar comes to mind. In DA2, it didnt really have anything like that except for a few glaring exceptions (Last of His Line[Harrowmont quest] for example). It was usually a quest given by a semi-important NPC that didnt really have much in the way of choice or dilemma, or worse yet the "I found your address taped to this bottle, here you go!" quests.

Modifié par Glorfindel709, 29 mars 2011 - 02:26 .

[neppakyo]

heh. Those useless DA2 side quests were more like you worked for KPS (Kirkwall Parcel Service)

[ZombiePowered]

pwnjuicesucka wrote...

Which is something that confuses me about DA2 though. Why couldn´t I have been an Elf or a Dwarf that ran from Lothering instead of a human? It would effect nothing other then character models but would go a long way to making my Hawke feel more like MY Hawke. DA2 did limit customization which I didn´t like but to say DAO had more varied story paths isn´t true other then the opening 10 or 15 minutes of the game.

I think it was mostly a practicality thing, with a little lore sprinkled in. Your family in Kirkwall would have been quite different depending on your race--an elf wouldn't have had an estate, because they are discriminated against, not to mention Lothering didn't have any elves--they tend to go to city alienages or be Dalish, either way they aren't present in Lothering. A dwarf would be similar, since surface dwarves tend to migrate to cities for mercantalist or crime, though one living in Lothering isn't entirely unbelievable. Still, with both scenarios you have very different receptions from both family and various races depending on your race. It gets especially complicated when you consider who is allowed to own an estate. It is said in codex entries that many elves who live outside the alienage are harassed and/or murdered. There is a lot of racial tension that arises when people step outside their perscribed positions in society, and the game would have to be changed greatly to represent that. It would've been a large amount of work to do that. In Origins it was doable because more stock was placed in status as a Grey Warden than your race, but when your defining characteristic to many is your race, things get extremely complicated.

[Pyrate_d]

I can't believe people are still being trolled by this idiot.

[LocutusX]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Havokk7 wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...
Those games had great story, but loot and gear mechanics chewed away at the tasty part, inflating play times while players went through boring crap to get to the story.

Personally, I want the stuff that you describe as "boring crap". It is neither boring nor crappy to me; it is an essential part of an RPG.

Which is totally cool.  More power to you!  I hope you get a ton of games that flip your switches and make you squee.  However, I don't think you're in the majority anymore.  I think there are more players that are bored of that stuff or not even interested.

Correct. The direction of the market is console gaming (PS4, XBOX720) and the direction of said gaming is single-direction railroad-style shooting games (think Call of Duty, Gears of War, God of War).

RPGs shall be allowed to exist, insofar as they adapt to as many of the CoD/GoW conventions as they can, and appeal to the primary target audience of the Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo gaming bohemoths. Lots of teen girls are getting into gaming now, thus the Twilight-style romances are essential, as well.

Hence... DA2.

[TJSolo]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

No company needsto or will update the public to their licensing meetings, development/design plan, and production schedule, unless that company wants to. You not being informed by Atari and Interplay on the current status of BG3/Dark Alliance does mean either company has changed their stated goals. Stop saying garbage like "no one cares" as if you speak for anyone other than yourself.

Please stay on topic.  We've been talking about how no one cares about numbers heavy Dinosaur Games like BG/NWN//Excel anymore and you keep trying to drag this off topic.  Please stop spamming this thread with off topic suppositions.  If you want to be schooled in how marketing works, please put something together in the Off Topic forum.  Thanks!

My post is on topic, well as on topic as I can be in this mess of a thread. You have brought BG and games like it into this thread. The garbage you were spewing about the no one caring about future BG and Dark Alliance games was wrong not off-topic. Your topic hinges on the idea that "no one cares" about RPG various that you deem boring.

You are covering one man's article about numbers/stats in games and are trying to tie that into some point about story quality, which he never mentions. There is no mention is his article about "no one" caring about stats other than himself and there is no tone in the article that hints at games like BG/NWN being excel like or dinosaurs of the genre.  If any thing the title "Why Do Our Role-Playing Games Still Need Numbers Everywhere?" means that numbers are still generally being used in games, not extinct. The author focused on ME2, one RPG that happened to have less numbers than contempories on the market.  He also mentioned Oblivion and FO as part of a trend that obsufactes the numbers from the player's but I don't know what he is on but FO:NV and Oblivion. Open a pipboy and the various numbers on items and stats are there plain as day. Oblivion does not traditional stats at all.

The topic of marketing has not been mentioned in the article and is not the topic of this thread. If you want to school me in marketing in this thread then that will just make you look like an even bigger hypocrite.

Modifié par TJSolo, 29 mars 2011 - 04:08 .

[TJSolo]

ZombiePowered wrote...

pwnjuicesucka wrote...

Which is something that confuses me about DA2 though. Why couldn´t I have been an Elf or a Dwarf that ran from Lothering instead of a human? It would effect nothing other then character models but would go a long way to making my Hawke feel more like MY Hawke. DA2 did limit customization which I didn´t like but to say DAO had more varied story paths isn´t true other then the opening 10 or 15 minutes of the game.

I think it was mostly a practicality thing, with a little lore sprinkled in. Your family in Kirkwall would have been quite different depending on your race--an elf wouldn't have had an estate, because they are discriminated against, not to mention Lothering didn't have any elves--they tend to go to city alienages or be Dalish, either way they aren't present in Lothering. A dwarf would be similar, since surface dwarves tend to migrate to cities for mercantalist or crime, though one living in Lothering isn't entirely unbelievable. Still, with both scenarios you have very different receptions from both family and various races depending on your race. It gets especially complicated when you consider who is allowed to own an estate. It is said in codex entries that many elves who live outside the alienage are harassed and/or murdered. There is a lot of racial tension that arises when people step outside their perscribed positions in society, and the game would have to be changed greatly to represent that. It would've been a large amount of work to do that. In Origins it was doable because more stock was placed in status as a Grey Warden than your race, but when your defining characteristic to many is your race, things get extremely complicated.

You are  treating that coming from Loethering is somehow mandated and inseparable from the story. Coming from Loethering is key for Hawke as a human but could be entirely optional for a  Dwarf or Elf. There is no reason you can drum up that would explain why a dwarf or elf from Fereldan would not have made it to Kirkwall and have an "in" to get into the city. Especially since there are dwarves and elves from Fereldan living in Kirkwall for some reason or another. Having a player controlled dwarf or elf with some backstory would be as easy as putting pen to paper and making it so.

Modifié par TJSolo, 29 mars 2011 - 04:18 .

[Deylar]

I personally need the numbers. If I have equipment that gives me Xamount of physical attack, then that Xamount is important to how I am going to kill an enemy.

I have always been a fan more of the sandbox style RPGs. But I take RPGs always as "Choose Your Own Adventure Books".

As a kid I loved those books because my choices had meaning. They had impact, they changed the flow and flavor of the world around me and the story. RPGs are Choose Your Own Adventure.

Railroading me into a story isn't allowing me to Choose My Own Adventure. Its forcing me into a story.

DA2 is to fast food as a Fable 3 is to home cooked meal.

[Jman5]

While I understand the author's point that RPG numbers can be overwhelming and confusing, I disagree that they should be removed or hidden.

Without a multiplayer environment, stats and figures give a game like Dragon Age replayability. It allows players to think and strategize about how they want to build a character and what items to equip. Ultimately it allows your hardcore playerbase to enjoy the game long after their first play through. While they may be a small number compared to total sales, they are vital for a company's future. They provide the word of mouth and "expert" opinions when people consider buying a product.

The future of RPGs is going to be a middle ground that DA2 headed towards, but I felt ultimately did not reach. The game has to be set up in a way that allows new players to get through the game without drowning in statistics. Players need to be given clear guidance on how to make a decently strong character. At the same time it has to provide an adequate and engaging challenge for experienced hardcore players. It also must be flexible enough to allow experimentation and diversity.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

Unfortunately for me the story I encountered was crawling thorough the same dungeon for 40 hours while being asked to care about the plight of mages when I was a mage and had particular trouble with the templars. Not to mention the only indication that time had passed was Varric and I gained a title with none of the perks because the city of Kirkwall was so full of morons that my input was never taken into consideration.

Other than that, yeah, great story.

[Pious_Augustus]

JRPGs used to be about exploring hell you had an entire world map to just travel and do whatever. In Final Fantasy VI you had over ten characters to choose as your main hell at the end of the game you didn't need to recruit but three from what you were forced to.

Then small devolopers who failed at making games took the reigns of directing popular franchises now JRPGs are a joke

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

Rylor Tormtor wrote...

I am continually mystified that people keep trying to use the "story' of DA2 as a positive note. The entire narrative structure is inconsistent, repetitive, and one -dimensional. Bioware's choice to work on a framed narrative was an interesting one, and I did in fact enjoy much of the dialog and stylized cut scenes during that part, but unfortunately the frame seems to have become a running joke, with every inconsistency blamed on Varric's recollection or exaggeration. In addition, while I am generally against the single, pre-chosen voiced protagonist, I was willing to give DA2 a shot (I have played both ME's but they are like junk food, and I was hoping that the DA series might stay up to the standards of fine dining, but I suppose more people eat at McDonald's than at a 5 star restaurant), but unfortunately I felt that most of my characters development was going on during these cut scenes, where I had no input.

The NPCs reaction to the Hawke seem, at least to me, to have no basis in any sort of rational structure. You save them, they love you, they give you money, they try to kill you. Also, Hawke's psychic ability to locate the owners of random junk that he finds is amazing to say the least, why doesn't my PC just stop all this dangerous adventure and hire himself out as a finder and returner of lost items? My companions stories range from mildly compelling to banal, my interaction with them barely advances the plot at all. While DAO most of my companions annoyed me from time to time, except for Varric and Aveline, I literally wanted to set each and every one of them on fire.

EDIT - Also, how can this be a personal story? I don't get to live most of my life as the PC, I have no connection to the people around me, and while my social standing ostensibly changes, nothing in PC's life is substantionalably altered over the course of 7 years.

My actions in each act or inexplicable at best, and utterly insane at the worst. My actual trip to the Deep Roads needlessly occurs, only to introduce an completely absurd plot-twist that would make M. Night ashamed. I was not actually sure what I was doing in Act 2 at first or why I would do it instead of retiring out to the country in same estate, except the country side is endlessly repetitive and replete with Quanari and Human bandits who just seem to hang-out. Again, a problem is presented that I would only be tangentially interested in and I am given an over-complicated set of tools to resolve it.

The major conflict at the end of the game is, I think, the worst part of it. Bioware in the past is usually more sensitive in their treatment of complex social issues, and I expected something better out of a Canadian based company. And instead we get hyperbolic one-dimesional card-board cut-outs of people. Extremism is embraced and rational thought is thrown out the window, and we are presented with a city that should have torn itself apart long-before we ever arrived because every, single, person in the city is either insanely evil, insanely zealous, or insanely stupid.

Thank you for this. I thought I was the only one completely bothered by how the entire city reacts. If the option to "Throw your hands up in disgust and get drunk instead" were available I would have taken it. I felt as if the story would have moved on regardless of Hawke's involvement and that frankly, sucks. No one wanted my help and when I gave it they seemed entirely ungrateful. A few going so far as to stab you in the back later on. By the end my diplomatic Hawke, seemingly upset about how events unfolded had forgotten all about it by the end and merrily ran off in the end. Even Paragon Shepard had a better sense of justice. It seemed that the man in the Hanged Man was right. You know, the "crazy" one. There is Lyrium in the water and the only person not imbibing is me.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

[quote]Glorfindel709 wrote...

[quote]Pandaman102 wrote...

UIltimately those all lead to the same plot-important conclusion: you save Earl Eamon. Those are different story paths.

Can you say the same about what Anders does in Act 3? Or what happens to Leandra Hawke? Or how you deal with the Qunari? Or any other main plot decision except for what you do with your sibling for the Deep Roads quest?
[/quote]

Yes, you can say the exact same thing.  No matter what you do in the DAO examples you made, you get the exact same out come.  No matter what you do to Anders/Leandra/Qunari (antagonistic, friendly, indifferent), you get the exact same outcome.  So yes, you can say the exact same thing about DA2 that you said about DAO.  :D:D



[quote]
QFT

Not to mention, in Origins there were a plethora of random semi-unimportant NPC given quests that had their own back story and little dilemmas in them. Dagna in Orzammar comes to mind. In DA2, it didnt really have anything like that except for a few glaring exceptions (Last of His Line[Harrowmont quest] for example). It was usually a quest given by a semi-important NPC that didnt really have much in the way of choice or dilemma, or worse yet the "I found your address taped to this bottle, here you go!" quests.

[/quote]

More like "Quoted For Fail!"  :lol:

DA2 offers several choices that change NPC's lives.  The kidnapped
Alienage boy (twice!), the kids from the smuggler quest, Oriana from a certain companion quest... 
There are quite a few places where Hawke can change the entire course
of people's lives in DA2.  The same "NPC character's story" mechnic is found in DA2 that you're swooning over from DAO.

Don't get me wrong!  I swoon over choices like that too.  I think there should be half as much loot and gear to stare at and twice as many choices like Feynriel, Dagna, Oriana, and the baby mama dwarf in DAO, things like that.

You're pretty much on my side here, which is great.  Numbers aren't what makes an RPG great:  It's the fun side quests and secondary quests that complement the main story.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Deylar wrote...

DA2 is to fast food as a Fable 3 is to home cooked meal.

:sick:  No one eat at Deylar's house!

[Well]

Khayness wrote...

The moral highground called.

"You are just as biased as the ones whom you are trying to argue with. Get off me please."

"People who play RPGs need more than some pretty graphics and nonstop
action to whet their claymores; they want depth and character and wit
and drama. They want the thickest, most involving novel that they've
ever read translated to their 720p screen, with themselves as the hero.
That's what I love about people who play RPGs. They're so reasonable"

That hit the nail on the head.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Jman5 wrote...

While I understand the author's point that RPG numbers can be overwhelming and confusing, I disagree that they should be removed or hidden.

Woot!  I love to disagree.  :)

Without a multiplayer environment, stats and figures give a game like Dragon Age replayability. It allows players to think and strategize about how they want to build a character and what items to equip. Ultimately it allows your hardcore playerbase to enjoy the game long after their first play through. While they may be a small number compared to total sales, they are vital for a company's future. They provide the word of mouth and "expert" opinions when people consider buying a product.

I find zero replayability in numbers.  In fact, it totally boggles me that you can find replayability in them.  For me (and I believe many others), I want the numbers stuffed way into the background.  I want the story to be right up front, with all feedback on weapon effectiveness and character developement to be visual.  The way the character moves through the story is where replayability comes from for me.  Which do you prefer:  Play through three getting a Spectral Sword +11 for the first time, or realizing that you can massacre qunari prisoners if you take enough "mean" choices through out a game?  For me, it's the later.

The future of RPGs is going to be a middle ground that DA2 headed towards, but I felt ultimately did not reach. The game has to be set up in a way that allows new players to get through the game without drowning in statistics. Players need to be given clear guidance on how to make a decently strong character. At the same time it has to provide an adequate and engaging challenge for experienced hardcore players. It also must be flexible enough to allow experimentation and diversity.

Totally, totally agree with the bold!  The old formula of story to math mechanics is dead, buried in tar, and stood up on wires at the local museum.  DA2 needs plenty of tweaks, I agree, but DA2's model is the next big thing.  The problem becomes...  how do you attract a crowd that, when their inalienable right to play the same game again and again is challeneged, turn into the unregistered forum crowd?  

You can't attract that crowd.  You have to drop them and move on.  Most of them will come around, grow up a little, and come back to play fun games.  The rest... can keep playing their Dinosaur Games.