738 réponses à ce sujet

[fightright2]

Mr. Laidlaw,

I am coming to the notion that you honestly believe that the world of DA is so uniquely wonderful, you believe that most people who haven't played an RPG, if given the chance through DA, they will more than likely find it equally wonderful.

The thing is, as someone who enjoys various games from FPS and MMO's and RPG's, I can tell you after hours upon hours of shooting other players online, I turn to an RPG when I am tired of screaming players trying to prove something that I want to take it down a notch to a slower pace of gaming and turn to an RPG for a litttle breath of fresh air. 
RPG's are great for that in that they are more in depth and yet, if I don't feel like having a hardcore battle at that moment, I can freely choose to explore somewhere or interact with NPC's to establish a connection with at my own pace.
 
And with much regard to trying to introduce fans of FPS's [like COD fans] to an RPG, regardless of how cool we think DA is, I can honestly say many will not like it because it boils down to the feeling the glory-rush of 'owning' some other real-life player or team.
Some people live, eat, breathe for that feeling daily. I know. Trust me. I was addicted to it once.

A lot of the gamers I have played with in the past admitted they wouln't touch an RPG unless if it was free. Simply because they enjoy "spanking the noobs' online and spawnkilling them with delight.
They enjoy being hated as it aligns them with being cool.
Unless, DA3 is a MMORPG game, I don't see winning them over as an RPG. And certainly not as a hybrid of RPG and FPS.

I used to play competitively, in GRAW2, I was even asked to be in two of the top 14 teams on the world leaderboards because I was that good.[And yes it was also because I was a girl.^_^ They loved that I intimidated the guys with my gender.]  Anyways, as I stated, some people live for that intimidation of real live players.

Yet, before I got into that, I used to play with the co-op crowd. In co-op, we faced the NPC's together.
But I had friends in both groups and never, ever, did they mix or get along with each other. I had to close off the games to invite only since both groups clashed and hated each other.

Looking back I see the co-ops were slow paced,laid back players and the competitive players were the hated, hardcore, glory-hounds.

My point is, while I equally believe the world of DA is uniquely, wonderful; I don't think altering BW's current loved RPG's is the way to go about introducing new players to RPGs.

For a long, long time my husband hated RPGs as he was a hardcore FPS fan. All it took was for me to hand the controller to him on the character creation of Oblivion saying "I'm just curious as to just what you will choose." and that was it. He fell in love with the unfolding of a good storyline. He has been hooked on RPGs since then. He is estatic over Skyrim. And loved DAO.
But after seeing me play the demo of DA2, he said he would stick to his BFBC2 and Fallout New Vegas and Red Dead Redemption in the mean time.
He has both ME and Fable 1 and 2 but never really got into them. He did like Deus Ex, however.

Still, I will say, it wasn't the numbers that intimidated him on my screen when I played my RPGs, but rather it was how easy the beginning was for him to understand just what each button and trigger did. He is a hands-on learning kind of player and doesn't care for reading any manual. He likes being able to figure out the basic commands and go from there. I think many FPS players fall into that category. I have met hundreds of players over the years.

I think if you want to introduce FPS's  to RPG's. Make the tutorial an option and make it easy as pie, and make that demo include it and available to them.

I also think DA is a big enough world that it doesn't have to try to be one series that tries to please everyone as much as possible. That it can branch into two seperate kind of gameplay series that it doesn't have sacrifice one for the sake of the other.

[Morroian]

Alex Kershaw wrote...

But Mr. Laidlaw, your argument only has foundation if a) Origins did not sell well or Origins was not a good game, but we know that Origins is Bioware's best selling title 

Not this again, ME2 is BWs best selling title not DAO.

[Serpieri Nei]

Morroian wrote...

Alex Kershaw wrote...

But Mr. Laidlaw, your argument only has foundation if a) Origins did not sell well or Origins was not a good game, but we know that Origins is Bioware's best selling title 

Not this again, ME2 is BWs best selling title not DAO.

Can you post the sales numbers for them?

[Zanallen]

Alex Kershaw wrote...

But Mr. Laidlaw, your argument only has foundation if a) Origins did not sell well or Origins was not a good game, but we know that Origins is Bioware's best selling title and it received an outstanding metacritic score of 91, so where is the issue? Why do things need to change so drastically when you had a formula that worked so well?

Furthermore, I'm a little confused at why your posts seem so positive and what the community wants to hear when your actions are completely different. For example, you said 'doesn't mean we should cut stats' when you removed skills entirely from the franchise. You seem to be presenting the point that you only want to change the presentation of the game so tha the deep RPG system isn't immediately off-putting to new players who would actually like RPGs, but don't know that they do. That's a fair point, but it isn't backed up when you consider the streamlining of the inventory system and the customisability of party members.

Technically, DA:O's sales figures are colored by the fact that it is also the first Bioware game available across all major platforms at release. Also, I believe ME2 was better received than Origins. Not that Origins was a bad game, far from it. But there is still room to improve.

The skills in Origins were terrible. Most were useless or redundant. I'm not sad to see them go. However, if Bioware can find a useful, interesting way to implement them again? All for it.

The inventory system needed to be cut back. It wasn't ME1 bad, but it was still pretty bad. Party customization is an interesting debate, at least when it comes to armor. A lot of people enjoyed the unique outfits and body types in DA2. That being said, there is a middle ground that can be found.

[Morroian]

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Not this again, ME2 is BWs best selling title not DAO.

Can you post the sales numbers for them?

Only anecdotally 6.6 million for ME2, 4,2 million for DAO.

[TheStrand221]

scyphozoa wrote...

Creators don't need to sell x amount of units to justify creating new content. Picasso didn't change his style from blue to cubism because blue wasn't selling enough units.

Yes he did.

[Wulfram]

Zanallen wrote...

The inventory system needed to be cut back. It wasn't ME1 bad, but it was still pretty bad. Party customization is an interesting debate, at least when it comes to armor. A lot of people enjoyed the unique outfits and body types in DA2. That being said, there is a middle ground that can be found.

The inventory system was much better in Origins than DA2.  Any benefit from "streamlining" was cancelled by all the swarms of generic jewellery with random powers which you had to sort through by mousing over.

[Zanallen]

Wulfram wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

The inventory system needed to be cut back. It wasn't ME1 bad, but it was still pretty bad. Party customization is an interesting debate, at least when it comes to armor. A lot of people enjoyed the unique outfits and body types in DA2. That being said, there is a middle ground that can be found.

The inventory system was much better in Origins than DA2.  Any benefit from "streamlining" was cancelled by all the swarms of generic jewellery with random powers which you had to sort through by mousing over.

I didn't say DA2's system was better. I said Origins' system needed to be cut back. I disliked the generic rings and boots and crap in DA2. I also hated the [Insert Material] [Noun] set up for worthless armor in DA:O as well.

Modifié par Zanallen, 29 mai 2011 - 10:46 .

[Alex Kershaw]

Zanallen wrote...

Alex Kershaw wrote...

But Mr. Laidlaw, your argument only has foundation if a) Origins did not sell well or Origins was not a good game, but we know that Origins is Bioware's best selling title and it received an outstanding metacritic score of 91, so where is the issue? Why do things need to change so drastically when you had a formula that worked so well?

Furthermore, I'm a little confused at why your posts seem so positive and what the community wants to hear when your actions are completely different. For example, you said 'doesn't mean we should cut stats' when you removed skills entirely from the franchise. You seem to be presenting the point that you only want to change the presentation of the game so tha the deep RPG system isn't immediately off-putting to new players who would actually like RPGs, but don't know that they do. That's a fair point, but it isn't backed up when you consider the streamlining of the inventory system and the customisability of party members.

Technically, DA:O's sales figures are colored by the fact that it is also the first Bioware game available across all major platforms at release. Also, I believe ME2 was better received than Origins. Not that Origins was a bad game, far from it. But there is still room to improve.

The skills in Origins were terrible. Most were useless or redundant. I'm not sad to see them go. However, if Bioware can find a useful, interesting way to implement them again? All for it.

The inventory system needed to be cut back. It wasn't ME1 bad, but it was still pretty bad. Party customization is an interesting debate, at least when it comes to armor. A lot of people enjoyed the unique outfits and body types in DA2. That being said, there is a middle ground that can be found.

What does the fact that Mass Effect 2 was better received than Origins have to do with it? I mentioned that DAO sold better than ME2 not to compare the two but simply to make the point that DAO sold fine and there certainly didn't need to be changed made to the quality of the game in an attempt to sell more.

You claim that the skills were terrible but if you look at any Origins reviews, can you find any critics who actually say this, because I can't. Have you honestly completed the game on Nightmare difficulty without creating potions?

Having completed Origins three times, the only fault with the skills system is that eventually it can become useful to have your party members at camp learn all the skills such as potion-making and trap-making. However, that's still a tactic in itself and surely is still better than having them sat at camp doing nothing?

Let's look at individual skills. The first one is the one which shows how likely you are to persuade or intimidate somebody, adding complexity to the game and making you decide whether that's worth dropping a point elsewhere. This is much better than DA2's system or not having any persuasion/lying checks at all. Then there's the potion/poison/trap making which you must agree was useful and added complexity. Survival allowed you to see enemies on the minimap before you encountered them so you could plan accordingly. How are these useless?

Again - can you find me a critic review that actually disliked Origins's inventory system? Yet almost every single review hates the appalling DA2 system where everything is simply called 'ring' or 'amulet'. In fact, I found myself using my inventory more in DA2 simply because your equipment becomes redundant so quickly - it was way more tedious in DA2 to just take everyone's equipment off and go through the motions of looking at the five-star system than actually have unique pieces of equipment that you can recognise by name in Origins and customise at will?

As for a lot of people liking the removal of party member customisation, it seems that you're just saying things that you like personally and putting 'a lot of people liked' at the front, because I've seen very few people who like this change.

[Alex Kershaw]

Morroian wrote...

Serpieri Nei wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Not this again, ME2 is BWs best selling title not DAO.

Can you post the sales numbers for them?

Only anecdotally 6.6 million for ME2, 4,2 million for DAO.

That was not my point - I was merely saying that DAO sold well and wasn't trying to be anti-ME2 (in fact I loved ME2), but 6.6??? Where are you getting these numbers from? On VGCharts, DAO has [millions] 2.06 on X360, 1.26 on PS3 and 0.39 on PC, with Awakening also having 0.3 on X360 and 0.17 on PS3. ME2 has 2.4 on X360, 0.43 on PS3 and 0.17 on PC. Of course, that doesn't track digital sales but DAO has more PC sales so probably more digital sales surely? (As an aside - based on VGCharts, DA2 will not come close to selling even half as many as DAO)

But yeah - that wasn't my point. There was an interview once where someone at Bioware said that DAO sold better than ME2, but maybe things have changed since then. My point was just that DAO sold well enough, and did well enough critically, not to be changed 180 degrees.

Modifié par Alex Kershaw, 29 mai 2011 - 10:55 .

[Tommy6860]

fightright2 wrote...

Mr. Laidlaw,

I am coming to the notion that you honestly believe that the world of DA is so uniquely wonderful, you believe that most people who haven't played an RPG, if given the chance through DA, they will more than likely find it equally wonderful.

The thing is, as someone who enjoys various games from FPS and MMO's and RPG's, I can tell you after hours upon hours of shooting other players online, I turn to an RPG when I am tired of screaming players trying to prove something that I want to take it down a notch to a slower pace of gaming and turn to an RPG for a litttle breath of fresh air. 
RPG's are great for that in that they are more in depth and yet, if I don't feel like having a hardcore battle at that moment, I can freely choose to explore somewhere or interact with NPC's to establish a connection with at my own pace.
 
And with much regard to trying to introduce fans of FPS's [like COD fans] to an RPG, regardless of how cool we think DA is, I can honestly say many will not like it because it boils down to the feeling the glory-rush of 'owning' some other real-life player or team.
Some people live, eat, breathe for that feeling daily. I know. Trust me. I was addicted to it once.

A lot of the gamers I have played with in the past admitted they wouln't touch an RPG unless if it was free. Simply because they enjoy "spanking the noobs' online and spawnkilling them with delight.
They enjoy being hated as it aligns them with being cool.
Unless, DA3 is a MMORPG game, I don't see winning them over as an RPG. And certainly not as a hybrid of RPG and FPS.

I used to play competitively, in GRAW2, I was even asked to be in two of the top 14 teams on the world leaderboards because I was that good.[And yes it was also because I was a girl.^_^ They loved that I intimidated the guys with my gender.]  Anyways, as I stated, some people live for that intimidation of real live players.

Yet, before I got into that, I used to play with the co-op crowd. In co-op, we faced the NPC's together.
But I had friends in both groups and never, ever, did they mix or get along with each other. I had to close off the games to invite only since both groups clashed and hated each other.

Looking back I see the co-ops were slow paced,laid back players and the competitive players were the hated, hardcore, glory-hounds.

My point is, while I equally believe the world of DA is uniquely, wonderful; I don't think altering BW's current loved RPG's is the way to go about introducing new players to RPGs.

For a long, long time my husband hated RPGs as he was a hardcore FPS fan. All it took was for me to hand the controller to him on the character creation of Oblivion saying "I'm just curious as to just what you will choose." and that was it. He fell in love with the unfolding of a good storyline. He has been hooked on RPGs since then. He is estatic over Skyrim. And loved DAO.
But after seeing me play the demo of DA2, he said he would stick to his BFBC2 and Fallout New Vegas and Red Dead Redemption in the mean time.
He has both ME and Fable 1 and 2 but never really got into them. He did like Deus Ex, however.

Still, I will say, it wasn't the numbers that intimidated him on my screen when I played my RPGs, but rather it was how easy the beginning was for him to understand just what each button and trigger did. He is a hands-on learning kind of player and doesn't care for reading any manual. He likes being able to figure out the basic commands and go from there. I think many FPS players fall into that category. I have met hundreds of players over the years.

I think if you want to introduce FPS's  to RPG's. Make the tutorial an option and make it easy as pie, and make that demo include it and available to them.

I also think DA is a big enough world that it doesn't have to try to be one series that tries to please everyone as much as possible. That it can branch into two seperate kind of gameplay series that it doesn't have sacrifice one for the sake of the other.

Awesome post! You got into my head on that one. I play console games, though I haven't in a while. Most all of my XBL friends are racing/shooter fans, but there are those who like the RPGs. I can say this, not one them, and I have/had over 50 XBL over the years, and not one of them have DA2, because some were put off by the demo. I haven't checked in a while, but none bought it last time I was on XBL. I know at least of few of them boguht Origins and liked it, that says soemthing to me. Most of them have all played a mix of Oblivion, Fallout 3, ME and ME2. Only two of those friends play PC game that I know of, and they are typically the casual type games, or games that are PC exclusive.
.
You used yourself as a good example of an action game lover who knows what they want and like and doesn't need to be catered to.. I played shooters to death (the last I really loved was Battelfield Bad Company) and I still love action game (Bayonetta FTW!) and I will still get them for console and I still love console gaming. It's just gotten stale for me the past few years.

[Dexter111]

I play pretty much every genre out there (aside of Sports games) as long as they are good...

I started with Platformers, then Adventures (because they were the most artfully done and beautiful games at that time period and told an interesting/intriguing story and required some brain activity), which were my favorite genre for a while and I hope will have a comeback with the likes of L.A.Noire and Heavy Rain getting such recognition. Then I stumbled upon RPGs with the likes of Ultima and Baldur's Gate (BG2 still being my fav. game to date) and later I started dipping into other genres like StarCraft/Age of Empires etc. for RTS and FPS (both mainly for Online with friends but there are some with good SinglePlayer stories as well) etc.

Suffice it to say... if I want to play an RPG I expect exactly that when I put the disc in and if I want to play an FPS or Hack&Slay I will be doing exactly the same and start up Battlefield or CS:S or L4D (respectively Diablo, Torchlight, Sacred, Titan Quest etc.) and I don't want them to Mix too much... Mass Effect 2 was a good example of a Story-Based shooter but Dragon Age 2 was (imo) an utter failure of a game, not only because it tried to mix 2-3 genre together and did none right but also because of the lack of production value overall.

[Zanallen]

Alex Kershaw wrote...

What does the fact that Mass Effect 2 was better received than Origins have to do with it? I mentioned that DAO sold better than ME2 not to compare the two but simply to make the point that DAO sold fine and there certainly didn't need to be changed made to the quality of the game in an attempt to sell more.

I mentioned it merely to show that there is room for improvement. Mass Effect 2 is critically considered the better game. It was also heavily streamlined from its predecessor.

You claim that the skills were terrible but if you look at any Origins reviews, can you find any critics who actually say this, because I can't. Have you honestly completed the game on Nightmare difficulty without creating potions?

Having completed Origins three times, the only fault with the skills system is that eventually it can become useful to have your party members at camp learn all the skills such as potion-making and trap-making. However, that's still a tactic in itself and surely is still better than having them sat at camp doing nothing?

Your second paragraph is exactly why the skills were useless. They required no decision making. Oh, I don't plan on using this character in combat so I can make him into a crafting mule. If I ever need any crafting done, I can simply use him. There is no decision or sacrifice with this system. Therefore, I much prefer DA2's system of locating recipes and having someone else craft items.

Let's look at individual skills. The first one is the one which shows how likely you are to persuade or intimidate somebody, adding complexity to the game and making you decide whether that's worth dropping a point elsewhere. This is much better than DA2's system or not having any persuasion/lying checks at all. Then there's the potion/poison/trap making which you must agree was useful and added complexity. Survival allowed you to see enemies on the minimap before you encountered them so you could plan accordingly. How are these useless?

Persuade/Intimidate was a no brainer. Four points and you'll never fail a check. Three points will get you pretty much all of them. It makes putting points in cunning pointless when not playing as a rogue. And DA2 has persuasion checks. They just happen under the hood. Depending on your companions or your personality, you gain access to persuasions that would otherwise not be available. I believe it to be a more realistic system then just putting points into an arbitrary skill. I already addressed how potions/poisons/traps were not complex as you can have them all without impacting the abilities of your main party. Survival was nice, sure. But it is unneeded without other skills in place and I believe the other skills to be pointless.

Again - can you find me a critic review that actually disliked Origins's inventory system? Yet almost every single review hates the appalling DA2 system where everything is simply called 'ring' or 'amulet'. In fact, I found myself using my inventory more in DA2 simply because your equipment becomes redundant so quickly - it was way more tedious in DA2 to just take everyone's equipment off and go through the motions of looking at the five-star system than actually have unique pieces of equipment that you can recognise by name in Origins and customise at will?

I already agreed that DA2's inventory system needs work. That doesn't mean that DA:O's system was good. The unique equipment was nice, but the sheer amount of worthless material+noun armors was crap.

As for a lot of people liking the removal of party member customisation, it seems that you're just saying things that you like personally and putting 'a lot of people liked' at the front, because I've seen very few people who like this change.

Have you been reading the actual threads? I have seen a number of people who enjoy having companions with unique body types and personalized armor. From my experience, the opinions seem fairly evenly split.

[Morty Smith]

Tommy6860 wrote...

fightright2 wrote...

Mr. Laidlaw,

I am coming to the notion that you honestly believe that the world of DA is so uniquely wonderful, you believe that most people who haven't played an RPG, if given the chance through DA, they will more than likely find it equally wonderful.

The thing is, as someone who enjoys various games from FPS and MMO's and RPG's, I can tell you after hours upon hours of shooting other players online, I turn to an RPG when I am tired of screaming players trying to prove something that I want to take it down a notch to a slower pace of gaming and turn to an RPG for a litttle breath of fresh air. 
RPG's are great for that in that they are more in depth and yet, if I don't feel like having a hardcore battle at that moment, I can freely choose to explore somewhere or interact with NPC's to establish a connection with at my own pace.
 
And with much regard to trying to introduce fans of FPS's [like COD fans] to an RPG, regardless of how cool we think DA is, I can honestly say many will not like it because it boils down to the feeling the glory-rush of 'owning' some other real-life player or team.
Some people live, eat, breathe for that feeling daily. I know. Trust me. I was addicted to it once.

A lot of the gamers I have played with in the past admitted they wouln't touch an RPG unless if it was free. Simply because they enjoy "spanking the noobs' online and spawnkilling them with delight.
They enjoy being hated as it aligns them with being cool.
Unless, DA3 is a MMORPG game, I don't see winning them over as an RPG. And certainly not as a hybrid of RPG and FPS.

I used to play competitively, in GRAW2, I was even asked to be in two of the top 14 teams on the world leaderboards because I was that good.[And yes it was also because I was a girl.^_^ They loved that I intimidated the guys with my gender.]  Anyways, as I stated, some people live for that intimidation of real live players.

Yet, before I got into that, I used to play with the co-op crowd. In co-op, we faced the NPC's together.
But I had friends in both groups and never, ever, did they mix or get along with each other. I had to close off the games to invite only since both groups clashed and hated each other.

Looking back I see the co-ops were slow paced,laid back players and the competitive players were the hated, hardcore, glory-hounds.

My point is, while I equally believe the world of DA is uniquely, wonderful; I don't think altering BW's current loved RPG's is the way to go about introducing new players to RPGs.

For a long, long time my husband hated RPGs as he was a hardcore FPS fan. All it took was for me to hand the controller to him on the character creation of Oblivion saying "I'm just curious as to just what you will choose." and that was it. He fell in love with the unfolding of a good storyline. He has been hooked on RPGs since then. He is estatic over Skyrim. And loved DAO.
But after seeing me play the demo of DA2, he said he would stick to his BFBC2 and Fallout New Vegas and Red Dead Redemption in the mean time.
He has both ME and Fable 1 and 2 but never really got into them. He did like Deus Ex, however.

Still, I will say, it wasn't the numbers that intimidated him on my screen when I played my RPGs, but rather it was how easy the beginning was for him to understand just what each button and trigger did. He is a hands-on learning kind of player and doesn't care for reading any manual. He likes being able to figure out the basic commands and go from there. I think many FPS players fall into that category. I have met hundreds of players over the years.

I think if you want to introduce FPS's  to RPG's. Make the tutorial an option and make it easy as pie, and make that demo include it and available to them.

I also think DA is a big enough world that it doesn't have to try to be one series that tries to please everyone as much as possible. That it can branch into two seperate kind of gameplay series that it doesn't have sacrifice one for the sake of the other.

Awesome post! You got into my head on that one. I play console games, though I haven't in a while. Most all of my XBL friends are racing/shooter fans, but there are those who like the RPGs. I can say this, not one them, and I have/had over 50 XBL over the years, and not one of them have DA2, because some were put off by the demo. I haven't checked in a while, but none bought it last time I was on XBL. I know at least of few of them boguht Origins and liked it, that says soemthing to me. Most of them have all played a mix of Oblivion, Fallout 3, ME and ME2. Only two of those friends play PC game that I know of, and they are typically the casual type games, or games that are PC exclusive.
.
You used yourself as a good example of an action game lover who knows what they want and like and doesn't need to be catered to.. I played shooters to death (the last I really loved was Battelfield Bad Company) and I still love action game (Bayonetta FTW!) and I will still get them for console and I still love console gaming. It's just gotten stale for me the past few years.

This has to be one of the best posts on the subject. I hope it will sink in.

[Wulfram]

The best way to expand the audience for RPGs is to make really good RPGs, not to assume that people who don't like RPGs run in panic at the sight of numbers.

You definitely aren't going to attract them by an opening "exaggerated sequence" where you keep having to reassure people that the real game won't actually play like that.

[Zanallen]

I have no problem with allowing a simpler introduction that builds up to complexity. It all depends on how it is implemented.

[taine]

I don't think DA2 was really as terrible as a lot of people have made it out to be in hindsight, but if what you were going for was a complex party-based RPG, then you simply did not succeed. The way it was designed made controlling party members unreasonably clunky, and the bizarre stripping of the overhead camera exacerbated this issue. Combat was ever-present, but was probably the most clunky part of the game if you wanted to try to implement any sort of strategy.

If your goal is to get more people to play your game (an admirable goal, surely) then rather than thinking about how to make it simpler and more inviting, think about how you can make it *better*. I won't expand on that beyond saying that while sometimes less is more, please take the time required to make a good game.

[wildannie]

Persephone wrote...

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...
That said, I think this area needs to be built upon even further. Increasing the amount of player initiated dialogue with companions would make many of the old school RPGers happy. Without driving away the more action orientated sorts since it would be optional.

Agreed.

I never thought a single word could make me THIS happy. I felt that, even though beautifully written, the dialogue with party members kinda got pushed into the background too much.... Don't get me wrong, the Questioning Beliefs conversations were very well done........but there was only one of them per act.... Maybe opening topics up as the friendship/rivalry progresses or as certain quests unfold could be an option? Oh, and some LI exclusive stuff.... I for one loved being able to kiss my LI any time I liked in DAO. Maybe adding dialogue once they move in? (Puppy had his mansion quest too, after all!) 

Well, this kind of made my afternoon :happy:

[Wulfram]

Why can't Bioware go after the Total War or Civilization crowd, anyway?

That's where they got me from.

[Elhanan]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Yes, I do. To use one example, I know that there are people who fire up a game like Origins, see either character generation or a big wall of stats to pick and they immediately turn it off again. I also am cognizant that there are people who see that big wall of stats and get really excited.

I believe that there are more of the former than the latter. It doesn't mean either side is wrong, and it sure as hell doesn't mean we should cut stats, it just means that, perhaps, opening the game with a big wall of them is not ideal.

Having recently encountered this exact issue with my brother while teaching him on DAO, I see your point. He wanted a good design from which to play, and was unaware of which stats would be useful in that class build. He did not want to pick attributes that would waste points, so this is when I chimed in to help.

OTOH, I have also seen several folks on the forums mention that it was frustrating to repeatedly having to see the Tutorial before creating their character. Personally, I did not mind, but for repeated play, it may become wearing. And trying to frame the reason as a tale within the story may become old rather quickly.

Using the DA2 model, perhaps a solution lies again in compromise.

Suppose at the beginning, emplace the initial CC, and when the class is chosen, the Primary attributes are highlighted that will be required to improve the basic design, along with the extant explanations. Then after completing CC customization, the Player begins to depart Lothering, and encounters the Tutorial.

After this section, or after hitting Esc to bypass, a refinement CC appears to complete the desired build; like the user friendly 'Are You Certain' sceens that appear frquently . Like in the Black Emporium, the face and stats may be altered after seeing them in action and within a cut-scene, and the Player can be off again quickly; like a final check in the mirror when leaving the house.

On a personal observation, I have no qualms with reaching out to other genre fans and inviting them to see what we have in RPG that is special. I have little to no knowledge of FPS, RTS, and MMO styles of play, so I do not know what they deem attractive as a lure from which to bite. However, what I wish to avoid is leaving the bank or the boat, and getting into the water with them and get wet, as the goal is for them to join me for dinner on the shore for the story.

For example, in DAO and subsequent games, I have seen the Threat control items and abilities that have appeared like Taunt. It is my undertanding that this may be a common element seen in a MMO. And from the forums, I have often seen people discussing usage, issues, etc. As for myself, I have never used them directly, and probably never will. I do not need to lose Threat, as I am unconcerned in gaining it; just skip over those choices, and pick something else. Same for the new Combo's; perhaps more. That seems to be a lot of zots.

What I wish to avoid is the dilution of what I find enjoyable in the RPG itself. Currently, I still have plenty of choices. But seeing the growing areas of Talents that I will not use, restrictions on items, and other gaming mechanics tied to such, I do wonder if we are losing what makes us special and different, and impares the Player from the tale being told, and places too much emphasis on what gets us there.

If that makes any sense, I am content. And thanks for the ear... eye... whatever. Thank you.

Edit for clarification.

Modifié par Elhanan, 29 mai 2011 - 12:05 .

[Zanallen]

Wulfram wrote...

Why can't Bioware go after the Total War or Civilization crowd, anyway?

That's where they got me from.

Warden vs Darkspawn RTS?

[Zanallen]

@ Elhanan

Something like the Fallout system, perhaps? You make your character, apply your points, and then do an introduction series of quests at the end of which you have an option to change your starting stats based on how they worked out for you?

[aliastasia]

Sorry for late response - Different timezone fun :-)

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Woah woah woahhhh there.

I will not have my love of RPGs called into question without retort. As I type this I am looking at my displayed original boxes of Wasteland, Ultima 4, 5, 6, and 7 and the original Phantasie for the C64.

The fact you own those boxes, and have played the games, implies, but does not autoequate a love for the genre. Especially not taking the way DA2 turned out into consideration. But fair enough - I'll take the retort into consideration.
I stand corrected

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
I like RPGs. I like them a lot. So much so that I will fight tooth and nail to keep party-based mechanics and gameplay viable in todays market, when it would have been infinitely easier for me to move Dragon Age to a single-character RPG or action game.

You can't say that without giving us context, because it implies someone wanted the game fundamentally changed. And even though EA has a fairly abysmal history, I am not entirely convinced they'd want to change some of the fundamentals in a solidly selling and critically acclaimed game straight out of the buyup starting gate.

Now, as to this thread, which I find illuminating, let me quite clear: I am absolutely, positively, all about expanding the audience for party-based RPGs. I am shameless in wanting the entire planet to enjoy a genre I am passionate about. It is not an easy task, and I do not think we made a perfect move to do so in DAII; I have said as much already.

I don't think any of us mind EA/BioWare expanding the user base. Neither do we mind new stuff, or changes being made. It's how you stay in business. What it does boil down to, for most of us, is that we were not given what was advertised:

Personally, I came to Origins from FPSes, strategy games, and The Elderscrolls world. The *only* issue I had as a person new to playing with a group, was the fact I didn't know I could pause and define moves or tactics. I had no issue w the stats, I had no issue w talking, I generally had a rollicking great time, I wasn't even aware Alistair was hitting on me in-game until the rose and subsequent scenes, so it was all new, all... WOW. I finally figured the spacebar after Redcliffe, where I'd just run up and down the hill. kiting. And that was fun too.

Dragon Age: Kirkwall was a whole different experience: I never minded the story being told from one person's perspective, I never minded the new design, I did mind the poor storytelling, the embarrassingly simple combat, I did mind the crashes, I did mind the quests showing up out of nowhere, I did mind the repetitive levels, I did mind the waves, I did mind that neither my import, nor my actions in the game had any consequences. I paid in advance and I did not get the game which was advertised at me.

Others have probably said it more eloquently than I, and you're probably heard it a bazillion times before, so I'll not elaborate any further. In any case - i do have questions- I am not sure they will be answered, but I will ask anyway:

* If you perceive there is a barrier to RPGs - you have two big companies big, big writing and marketing engines at your disposal. Why not use these to lower the perceived barrier rather than rework a formula which actually gave the company considerable RoI and critical acclaim? The game was neither advertised, nor reviewed in any of the non-RPG channels - at least not in Northern Europe, where I live, and neither did I see differently in UK or American media.

* Would it be possible to answer how said barrier is/was perceived? Because the thread-responses show otherwise. Personally, I picked up ME2 and then Me1 and then all the DLC for ME based on Origins - so a good game does mean cross-sales - and, not believing for a second I am speshul, I think this is also how a good portion of sales are generated, in addition to showing that people do not necessarily mind different entry levels or angles when playing

* Working in SWE myself, the game looks as if considerable compromises were made to make a hard deadline. As we're seeing DA3 is in the works, would it be possible to say something specific, non-hyperbolish about *how* you're going to take user feedback into consideration`? And whether this time around it will be given time to actually *be* developed?

/A
 

[Elhanan]

Zanallen wrote...

@ Elhanan

Something like the Fallout system, perhaps? You make your character, apply your points, and then do an introduction series of quests at the end of which you have an option to change your starting stats based on how they worked out for you?

Perhaps; never played it.