673 réponses à ce sujet

[Rockpopple]

There are at least some things BioWare definitely should not take from The Witcher 2. Like lack of fun, for example:

Zero Punctuation The Witcher 2 Review

I bring it up because not only is it a hilarious review from Yahtzee - again, as usual, it should be relevent. After all, people used his DA II review like gospel. Turns out he couldn't stand the 1st Witcher title for more than a few minutes.

I also think his commentary about pc and console gamers is especially lol-inducing.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 08 juin 2011 - 06:48 .

[bEVEsthda]

The Witcher 2 is an absolutely  fabulous game. Mindblowing.

It features many things I actually "don't like" (in a RPG): Twitch play combat. Lots an lots of movie cut scenes. Completely fixed protagonist. Male protagonist.

And it doesn't matter. This wonderful game sends thrills of exitement through my body. There are TONS of atmosphere and there is something very interesting going on. I can only compare this exitement with Baldur's Gate, Morrowind, VtM:Bloodlines, Fallout 3 and Dragon Age:Origin.

But there is little I want Biowate to take. Their games are different and should be. I like "spirit of Baldurs Gate".

I do want Bioware to be as careful as CDProject, about their world and environment though. Make it consistent, believable, a solid culture. Not disgusting, random "kewl" nonsens, or ad hoc, random JRPG elements, like in DA2 . Be dignified, and take yourself and your DA world seriously. Don't look for what you think anime-damaged pre-teens might think is cool. They aren't your market and never will be.

[Ariella]

digby69 wrote...

were talking about RPG here folks, so day/night cycles and npc behavour is critical to having a real life like experience. Even if it is blood fustrating (just like life).

The point of games is to have fun, not be frustrated by them. Day/Night cycles are fine if they're required by a mechanic (character has to sleep/meditate to level up/gain spells etc). However, that's NOT something required in the DA series, so it makes more sense that the day/night cycle would be attached to plot not mechanic.

Games should not be frustrating, and RPGs don't need to mimic real life so closely that it killls the fun.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Ariella wrote...

digby69 wrote...

were talking about RPG here folks, so day/night cycles and npc behavour is critical to having a real life like experience. Even if it is blood fustrating (just like life).

The point of games is to have fun, not be frustrated by them. Day/Night cycles are fine if they're required by a mechanic (character has to sleep/meditate to level up/gain spells etc). However, that's NOT something required in the DA series, so it makes more sense that the day/night cycle would be attached to plot not mechanic.

Games should not be frustrating, and RPGs don't need to mimic real life so closely that it killls the fun.

You are near to what I think about it. However, I think fun has nothing to do with it. Day/night cycles fit well in open world RPGs. In those games the illusion of reality is more important than in story driven RPGs, like DA2. In DA2 day and night make more sense when it fits the quest's story.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 08 juin 2011 - 08:37 .

[bEVEsthda]

Ariella wrote...

digby69 wrote...

were talking about RPG here folks, so day/night cycles and npc behavour is critical to having a real life like experience. Even if it is blood fustrating (just like life).

The point of games is to have fun, not be frustrated by them. Day/Night cycles are fine if they're required by a mechanic (character has to sleep/meditate to level up/gain spells etc). However, that's NOT something required in the DA series, so it makes more sense that the day/night cycle would be attached to plot not mechanic.

Games should not be frustrating, and RPGs don't need to mimic real life so closely that it killls the fun.

Too much "fun" kills the fun.
If a game isn't to a slight degree "frustrating" it's not interesting and not fun. It's not just about "challenge", it's about that little part of pain and exhaustion that puts the "epic" into the experience.

[Realmzmaster]

Day and night cycles make sense in an open world where you have exploration. The passage of time should be noticeable. It is not as essential in a story driven world. Example the meeting with Sister Nightingale occurs at night because there is less traffic in the Keep at that time and it minimizes collateral damage by being in a closed section of the Keep. It would make no sense to have to wait around for the passage of time to complete the quest. The same in DAO the changing of time is triggered by talking to an NPC to start the quest like the attack on Redcliffe or if you camp it is always night because you travel during the day. no need to have time pass.

[Ariella]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Ariella wrote...

digby69 wrote...

were talking about RPG here folks, so day/night cycles and npc behavour is critical to having a real life like experience. Even if it is blood fustrating (just like life).

The point of games is to have fun, not be frustrated by them. Day/Night cycles are fine if they're required by a mechanic (character has to sleep/meditate to level up/gain spells etc). However, that's NOT something required in the DA series, so it makes more sense that the day/night cycle would be attached to plot not mechanic.

Games should not be frustrating, and RPGs don't need to mimic real life so closely that it killls the fun.

Too much "fun" kills the fun.
If a game isn't to a slight degree "frustrating" it's not interesting and not fun. It's not just about "challenge", it's about that little part of pain and exhaustion that puts the "epic" into the experience.

In the game Betrayal at Krondor, part of thge system was one had to eat. Thing is those rations couldd go bad an poison you. It was something hard to keep track of and was removed in ther sequel. And after playing the Ultima series along with QfG and Fable day/night cycles thend to loose their luster as having *impact* as part of the world. Honestly, DA2's solution is very elegant. I don't have to waste time in game sleeping to get to night so as to do cetain quests.

And honestly, I can do without pain and exhaustion, and still get epic out of a game.

[_Aine_]

i love day/night cycles that occur without your participation (clicking a button) for the subtle changes. Intelligent AI have different routines (and as long as I can find them *somewhere* i don't care if my quest giver is in their day location or sleeping in their huts) and that adds to the world's feel for me. As far as other stuff, I like the small details: wind blowing long grasses and trees, birds flying when I get too close, NPCs going about other things when I mess the fire they were warming themselves at when they realize i put it out, not standing statically in one location even if they *are* quest givers, rain etc with the npcs reacting to it, running for cover etc. Little things, but they added up to an enjoyable experience, for me, without it causing issues or inconvenience.

[Realmzmaster]

A game does not need frustration to be interesting and fun. Frustration becomes tedium. Tedium is not fun. I have played games where you had to worry about eating, sleeping and drinking. If you did not your stats were affected. As Ariella stated some games the food would go bad and poison you. Not only that certain food went bad before others due to the passage of time. If you like that level of micromanagement that is good. But for some that is game killing.

Some games had weather condition affects where you could freeze to death. I played those games and enjoyed them, but those games had a great deal of exploration and a overarching plot. Much like the TES games. But there is a thin line between fun and frustration.
Too much micromanagement becomes frustration. There has to be a balance.

[TEWR]

If a day/night system was implemented and we went to sleep as a mage, could we experience the Fade and see demons sometimes pestering us?


"I can make you powerful. Do you want what I can give you?"


"No."

[AngryFrozenWater]

shantisands wrote...

i love day/night cycles that occur without your participation (clicking a button) for the subtle changes. Intelligent AI have different routines (and as long as I can find them *somewhere* i don't care if my quest giver is in their day location or sleeping in their huts) and that adds to the world's feel for me. As far as other stuff, I like the small details: wind blowing long grasses and trees, birds flying when I get too close, NPCs going about other things when I mess the fire they were warming themselves at when they realize i put it out, not standing statically in one location even if they *are* quest givers, rain etc with the npcs reacting to it, running for cover etc. Little things, but they added up to an enjoyable experience, for me, without it causing issues or inconvenience.

I agree. That's really great if a game can provide that. That works best in an open world. You simply cannot drop it into a story driven game. There the day or night has to fit the quest. The day or night lasts as long as the quest takes. On the other hand in DA2 you also had to switch between day and night, depending on the quest. In Oblivion you could simply advance hours in a few seconds by using the "wait" function. In DA2 you had to exit the level to access the map and switch to night or day and select a new location. So, I don't buy that the night/day cycles of open world games are more cumbersome. You know what I mean?

[Parahexavoctal]

Actually, I found DA2's system to be much superior and less cumbersome, at least for a story driven game. Sure you had to go through the map to change between day and night, but in most cases, your objective was in a different part of Kirkwall anyway, so you were going through the map regardless.

In DA2 I got the smooth feeling that my character simply went to the right location at the right time and progressed the plot - much like a story might start a new paragraph with "Later that night..".

In e.g. Oblivion I got the weird feeling my character showed up at the wrong time and waited for half a day doing nothing, while the system forced me to manually estimate and calculate the number of hours my character should twiddle their thumbs to advance the plot. If anything, this felt artificial and more immersion breaking than the seamless plot driven day/night changes between transitions from DA1/2, despite technically being more realistic.

[Dariuszp]

 From the start (almost). You didn't play game but you leave comment. So naive...

- I want to buy something but shop isn't open; have to use the wait command to have my character twiddle her thumbs for 5 hours.. this doesn't help my immersion at all and it's frustrating to boot.

OR you can just go to that person house and ask him to sell it.

- I need to speak to someone for a quest, but they are nowhere to be found. Just yesterday I wasted an hour of fruitlessly searching for an NPC that I wouldn't even have found if I hadn't read a wiki entry mentioning she is scripted to visit her good friend in a far away city every month... 5 points for realism, -10 points for wasting my time.

Or you just go to that NPC house and you will find it there. Some of them at night are in tavern

- Quest or plot event is scripted to take place at a certain time; yeah, it's good for immersion when the NPC tells you to meet them at the bar tonight. But what really happens? You go to the bar right away and use the wait function to accellerate to evening - and then you twiddle your thumbs in front of your screen for 5 minutes, bored out of your skull while you wait for the NPC to show up, afraid of missing the meeting if you timeskip any further...
(And let's not forget the fun variant where the quest doesn't clearly infer that time of day matters and you spend half an hour of your life wondering why the stupid thing just doesn't trigger)

Or when NPC tell you to visit tavern at night you set 00:00 and he will be there. It's not like night "trigger" their movement. They move even when you fast forvard the game so if NPC will be there 0:00 he will. And if you will move to 1:00 he still will be there.

So you just waste your mouth or these arguments because it's never happened in the game. And if needed i just "WAIT". In DA II you need to leave the location. switch time from day to night and find that place again. This is much more frustrating. 

@Rockpopple, if we skip lack of tutorial in the game (i myself die 3 times before i learn how to play - it take about 3 min or less - you die quickly in the scene with the dragon and 3 enemies at start) then we got very good RPG game. Unbalanced ? Sorry. Game is fine because i did win fights without much problem after i learn controls. 
I definitly hate bioware way of things. No matter HOW you will train your character - mobs will just be rescripted to have specific strenght just for your party. So every stupid battle is the same. You just smash buttons and wait until the end.
If you move to nightmare then you will smash buttons little longer because mobs have more hp...
You people probably think that game should have no challenge and if you cannot push awsome button then you cannot win and it's no fun.
Just like stupid dialogues in Mass Effect. If available - you just select (paragon/renegade) "I WIN" sentence and conversation is yours. It's so stupid I cant stand it. So you want something like that in entire game. Some awsome i win button that will finish all fights and dialogues because "you are so powerfull". Yeah right. I remember times with Gothic when you just wal AROUND forest just because there was large pack of wolf there. And this pack was getting larger in time. So you wait until you are strong enough. 
Lack of fun ? No. I have so much fun with TW2 i played it TWICE without a break. Just because I was so interesting what will happen when I select other options. And I only see 2 among 16 outcomes. 
With DA II i push myself to finish the game but it was so frustrating. Every quest was marked on the map. You just do what you need, go to map, select another glowing location etc. Stupid sidequest (fetch hawk - fetch!). After few hours I never ever think what i should do. I just go to location and see what's happened. Then move to another because i just want to finish it faster.
I just play a little DA II after there release new patch. Just to test game. Sorry but after TW2 experience, DA II is just boring, empty world when BW hold your hand with everything and every fight is the same because it's calculated so you can win it.
This is lack of fun. Game that do everything it can so you can win...

Some of you guys just forget what GAMES are. You expect some interactive animation. Go watch movies...

[Cody211282]

Rockpopple wrote...

There are at least some things BioWare definitely should not take from The Witcher 2. Like lack of fun, for example:

Zero Punctuation The Witcher 2 Review

I bring it up because not only is it a hilarious review from Yahtzee - again, as usual, it should be relevent. After all, people used his DA II review like gospel. Turns out he couldn't stand the 1st Witcher title for more than a few minutes.

I also think his commentary about pc and console gamers is especially lol-inducing.

Hey not all people who didn't like DA2 like TW1 and 2. the first gmae bored me to death, and the only reason I have the second one is because a friend gave it to me as a gift.

Can't we just agree that DA2 and TW both suck?

[Dariuszp]

Well no because i personaly love TW :-) I dont even know why it's sux. EE version was fixed and redesigned in some aspect. Combat was strange because you need to click when Geralt finish one combat animation but it was also fun. Require a little focus. It was skill based, require some tactics and preparations (alchemy). It was nice.
And story - one of the best i have seen so far. Love ending.

So you can just say that TW suck in your humble opinion :-)

[Cody211282]

Dariuszp wrote...

Well no because i personaly love TW :-) I dont even know why it's sux. EE version was fixed and redesigned in some aspect. Combat was strange because you need to click when Geralt finish one combat animation but it was also fun. Require a little focus. It was skill based, require some tactics and preparations (alchemy). It was nice.
And story - one of the best i have seen so far. Love ending.

So you can just say that TW suck in your humble opinion :-)

My biggest problem was Geralt. I don't know if it was how he was writen or the VA but he came across as monotone and borring. but other then that the combat was lackluster, characters were flat, and the story felt like it was going nowere. Overall the game just felt borring and that I wasn't getting anything out of it.

[Corto81]

Cody211282 wrote...



My biggest problem was Geralt. I don't know if it was how he was writen or the VA but he came across as monotone and borring. but other then that the combat was lackluster, characters were flat, and the story felt like it was going nowere. Overall the game just felt borring and that I wasn't getting anything out of it.

I thought Geralt was awesome, and it was a genuine attempt at an RPG... No streamlining etc., just not executed that well.

IMO TW1 was adequate to okay, nothing great, but not really "bad" either.

DA2 was worse (for me) as it was not a failed attempt at a great RPG, but rather a failed attempt at  a streamlined, dumbed-down, poor excuse for an RPG experience.
From a company that held the lion's share of the RPG market for so long... And then decided to put that audience aside, hoping to appeal to a "broader audience"...

TW2, OTOH, was a successful attempt at a great RPG.
Just like Origins.
They are both great, yet very different in the areas they excel in.

So, yeah...
TW2 and DA:O = great.
DA2 and TW1 = meh.

Modifié par Corto81, 09 juin 2011 - 07:54 .

[Dariuszp]

Well meaby it was just too much for you to handle. Dont know. Witcher is very prized around the world.
Probably it was not for you just like DA II is not for me.

Still as I say before - I have much deeper experience with this game because I know the book very well and all characters. Still game have very nice review around the world. Both The Witcher: Enchanced Edition and The Witcher 2.

[Cody211282]

Corto81 wrote...

Cody211282 wrote...



My biggest problem was Geralt. I don't know if it was how he was writen or the VA but he came across as monotone and borring. but other then that the combat was lackluster, characters were flat, and the story felt like it was going nowere. Overall the game just felt borring and that I wasn't getting anything out of it.

I thought Geralt was awesome, and it was a genuine attempt at an RPG... No streamlining etc., just not executed that well.

IMO TW1 was adequate to okay, nothing great, but really "bad" either.

DA2 was worse (for me) as it was not a failed attempt at a great RPG, but rather a failed attempt at  a streamlined, dumbed-down, poor excuse for an RPG experience.
From a company that held the lion's share of the RPG market for so long... And then decided to put that audience aside, hoping to appeal to a "broader audience"...

TW2, OTOH, was a successful attempt at a great RPG.
Just like Origins.
They are both great, yet very different in the areas they excel in.

So, yeah...
TW2 and DA:O = great.
DA2 and TW1 = meh.

Well since I have TW2 I might give it a try, I hope at least they put some decent characters  in it or gave the existing ones an overahaul.

[Dariuszp]

You must be kidding or something @Cody211282

[Cody211282]

Dariuszp wrote...

You must be kidding or something @Cody211282

What? A  guys not allowed to find a game borring?

[Dariuszp]

I'm talking about that "decent characters" part

[Cody211282]

Dariuszp wrote...

I'm talking about that "decent characters" part

So far the only intresting one was the adda and Ive seen her twice, for maybe 5 mintues total.

[Zimary]

Diversity. DA only had werewolves, and even then you couldn't really interact with them in a non story way.

Also, the adult elements. As an example:

The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings
Rating: Mature
Content descriptors: Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Nudity, Strong Language, Strong Sexual Content, Use of Drugs

Although I doubt anything like that will happen, after the major blunder FOX made with Mass Effect 1. Plus, they didn't make the retraction as public as their accusations, so you could only find it if you knew what you were looking for, so most people just believed them.

[Chromie]

Zimary wrote...

Diversity. DA only had werewolves, and even then you couldn't really interact with them in a non story way.

Also, the adult elements. As an example:

The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings
Rating: Mature
Content descriptors: Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Nudity, Strong Language, Strong Sexual Content, Use of Drugs

Although I doubt anything like that will happen, after the major blunder FOX made with Mass Effect 1. Plus, they didn't make the retraction as public as their accusations, so you could only find it if you knew what you were looking for, so most people just believed them.

I would like that the next DA wasn't filled with black and white decisions. Witcher does that great with all decisions being shades of grey and as the player you should always try to find out about the player.