201 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Autolycus wrote...

As for playing on easy....you proved my point. You learn how the game works. dumbing them down even more for people whom have never played a game before is just,.....well...I won't be buying them lets put it that way

Neither the OP or their friend really suggested dumbing down.  

Redcoat wrote...

In regards to the point about developers' attitudes towards gamers, there's the contemptible notion as of late that, if a player cannot instantly grasp a game's mechanics, then he will not enjoy the game at all.

I gave up a game once due to incomprehensible mechanics and poor UI.  Hearts of Iron III.  It can happen.  Show me a good tutorial on how to do something in that game and I'd be all over it.  But it lacks one.  

"Here's the world in the 1930s.  Try to survive the Second World War.  Oh, and I'm not going to tell you the importance of anything.  Have fun!" 

...and their other grand strategy games don't give me such problems at all.  Presumably because the mechanics of EU3 and Victoria 2 are better explained and presented.  It's not that they're less complicated, it's that you aren't immediately smacked in the face with an unrewardingly steep learning curve.  Granted, my issues with this particular game are compounded by the fact I wouldn't be able to learn what or how I ****ed up until years (many hours) later.  Figuring out what X mistake led to Y failure is even harder.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 30 mai 2011 - 09:12 .

[Relix28]

So, after all those tutorials that you gave her....did you, u know, do it then? hehehe *Oghren laughter*

[Dragoonlordz]

First explain the controls yourself to her or ask her to read the manual, as every gamer should do when first starts gaming in learning how a game is played. Second off would be you are not going to know what darkspawn, or most of the things in a new game are about until you play the game or read a book about the game. Thats the whole point in playing the game to find out these things and play the story.

On top of that you threw her into a sequel where past information about such things as the blight and darkspawn are covered in the previous title and no sequel can cover everything that might have happened in the prequel or even most of it.

While what you have shown might be more inline with how to get non-gamers into gaming thats not the audience exactly that I think Bioware was after, it's actual gamers who prefer other genres they are trying to sway. However I have no objections to an optimisation function in game as long as it's not mandatory or requires streamling the genre anymore than they already have done, a simple option or button bit like a 'sort' at bottom of list that is all and optional if click it or not.

Just like if was option of both allowing companions to wear what want them too or turn on a function where has either initial clothing or selection of clothing say 3-5 and those type outfits auto level. But again an option can have turned on or off is what I prefer.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 mai 2011 - 09:23 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Alistairlover94 wrote...

@DL: Sorry, cannot read your wall of text.

Sorry I type first > format later.

[Sidney]

Marionetten wrote...

I'm not going to say that RPGs are at the top but they do unarguably come with a whole lot more rules than the most basic platformers. Denying that is just absurd.

I basically went from SPace Invaders and Missle Command ....long gap...to Wasteland. Most people don't teach themselves to play video games because frankly there's no much you learn from Mario and Myst to help you play BG2.

[Icinix]

I'm a fan of bringing back an intro movie that explains some of the back story before we take the first steps in the game proper. Even if you're familiar with the game, it helps set the mood for what you're about to embark on, and if you're not familiar, it gives you some basic point to start from.

DA2 felt like "This Dwarf is about to tell a story, go kill stuff." Which is fine - but the same thing was done earlier and better in a game that came out in '94 called Conan the Cimmerian.
Anyway - what I'm basically saying is that the introduction to the story / game needed a tad more work.

[Aradace]

Alistairlover94 wrote...


Yeah, a toggle option for companion customization might not have been such a bad idea. Kind of like Hardcore mode for New Vegas. And a non-mandatory option also sounds like a fantastic idea. Bravo.

HM for NV was actually really cool.  Cant tell you how many times I was playing FO3 wishing that my bullets actually had weight to them.  Or that I actually HAD to eat and sleep and keep hydrated.  Nice that there was a trophy for completing the game in HM too.  Sorry, OT.  Didnt mean to ninja like that.

[TEWR]

how was XIII streamlined Ali? because that could mean something different then what I'm thinking.

[Marionetten]

Sidney wrote...

I basically went from SPace Invaders and Missle Command ....long gap...to Wasteland. Most people don't teach themselves to play video games because frankly there's no much you learn from Mario and Myst to help you play BG2.

I'll give you that. But it's really more of a case of a Wasteland requiring you to learn more than say Mario. In Mario you can get by with nothing but some basic twitch skills. It's a fun little game which comes natural to just about everyone. You run and you jump. That's it and therein lies the hierarchy.

[Justin2k]

Its nice and all that games companies want to attract new gamers, but easy doesn't always mean this.

Like, when I started playing games, they were hard. And if i died, that was it, start at the beginning of the level. This doesnt work for games like DA I understand that, and I agree with autosave systems, but in general the dumbing down of games is sad to me.

I agree with an easy mode, or a casual mode. But now they tend to say "here, stick it on nightmare", which is your only challenge, and all they do is throw a lot more enemies at you so it takes 30 minutes to finish combat. With the grindy nature of the game, I'd rather not... not for challenge but for boredom.

I think if casuals want to play video games, theres plenty of fun easy to pick up games. An rpg should have features, options, challenges. Its part of the genre.

[TEWR]

I figured exploration was one of them. I miss the exploration. And the mini-games ( you Blitzball!).


But I don't see how overdrives would've even worked with the combat. Which to me is kinda what I was looking for in terms of being tactical, though if I had some semblance of control over their actions (attacking and magic) that would've been nice. But hey, at least they gave us ultimate attacks for each character.

Sovereign fist for Snow and others. While not the same thing, it isn't too far off.

[Tommy6860]

Brockololly wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I would like a system in which the game asks you if you were a new player unfamiliar with RPGs or the series. In that case it invokes a number of in-game messages to explain the background or game mechanics more thoroughly. That way character creation could be at the start of the game. The way it is implemented now is annoying for people like me who are already familiar with the game.

Yup- If devs want to have the super handholding option I almost think they should look at sports games like Madden, where you can have it pick a play for you if you want. But its just an option.

I understand where Laidlaw is coming from with wanting a low barrier to entry, but the way DA2 did things early on had many issues, IMO:

1.) You had little to no vested interest in why Super Hawke was killing a bunch of monsters from a story perspective. Personally, I think this is one of DA2's biggest overall problems, where you're just killing crap without knowing why you're killing stuff or what the significance of killing the stuff is or even having the option to kill stuff.

I know they wanted to get you right in the combat, but thats the problem when you have no idea why you're fighting, who you are and what the hell is going on. In an RPG, the combat generally needs some context to have it hold much weight. So while an individual fight may be interesting tactically or gameplay wise, why I'm fighting, who I'm fighting, and the context surrounding the fight is just as important.

I'd liken it to a Total War campaign battle versus just a single skirmish- if you're just playing a single battle, it lacks context and its mostly done for the tactical RTS gameplay. But when you have the campaign map open and you get into a battle, you have a broader context for the significance of the battle and why you're fighting. So a mundane battle on the more micro RTS level might be super significant given the campaign map macro level in that it could wipe out an enemy nation. Yet, I felt too often DA2 either gives really flimsy context for the battles or doesn't at all.

2.) Really, I don't think devs need to simplify or dumb things down for new people, they just have to do a better job explaining things- and sometimes that means getting into nitty gritty detail. I think way too many developers seem to think gamers are complete slobbering fools that can't wake up and tie their shoes in the morning without getting distracted. Sure, you need to make things interesting to keep people engaged, but I think thats where you have to make a strong first impression and hook the player with something like impressive graphics/visuals or an interesting story that the player takes notice of- that stuff can be appreciated by most anyone regardless if they know what an RPG is or not. Then once the player is interested, ease into the gameplay. I mean, I know some of my friends that have little to no interest in RPGs that once showed the opening military camp in The WItcher 2 were blown away and engaged by the game just by the visuals- that was enough to hook them and get them interested in how the rest of the mechanics of the game worked.

I don't think DA2 did a decent job of that as it just chucks you in combat, not only with little context but also in a fairly drab looking area visually.

3.) I think starting with some more involved character creation can act as an easy hook to keep the player's attention.  Not the Diablo-esque pick a Hawke screen of DA2, but even if it was something similar but add in the face customization- something anyone can do pretty easily. And have that sort of thing integrated in the story/plot like the Fallout games do it. That way it doesn't seem as abstract in just picking stuff out of a menu, but you're still "playing" the game when fiddling with the stats.So stuff like Fallout's SPECIAL or the GOAT is a good example.

This^ is why I like and respect this guy a lot. Very well said!

[Tommy6860]

I am on the fence with this really...

I think it's cool that you're introducing your friend to gaming on this scale, but I don't know how one can draw any definitive conclusion from this. I think from first impressions that your friend liked or disliked certain aspect of the game would be taken with a grain of salt, based on the fact that this is a near first time experience.

The person would also have to draw some indicator of what they liked or disliked without any input from you as an experienced gamer, lead not by influence so to speak. You never know, playing the game more in-depth may garner a different reaction from the player after a time.

You being the tutor so to speak, may have had different results had the game did the tutoring. I think it is hard extrapolate much from this experience.itself.

[Realmzmaster]

Autolycus wrote...

Upsetting...nice and sarcastic...but no.

You learn....like we all did. There are already plenty of games on the market that cater to that kind of person, role playing games, have never been that type of game.

So how are those people going to learn how to play CRPG if they are not accessible to them.

[Sidney]

The notion that things are dumbed down is where this gets silly.

There is nothing dumbed down about not playing dress up with companions. I'd argue there's nothing smart about putting better armor on people and since there almost no trade offs for most armor it isn't an issue. Assuming you can do "<" or ">" operations you can outfit armor. I checked, my 8 year old properly optimized armor onto my DAO party for example. It isn't like you are making choices that really affect your tactical options.

What people overlook is that with the runes you can add to armor and shields you are likely doing a lot more combinations of things than you ever did in DAO where you basically put together pre-built sets. The runes provide for a lot more customization because I can choose elemental immunity to avoid FF or jack up armor if my mages are in a support role more than an attack.

Toss in that in DA2 there are a lot more "locked" companion quests and so unlike DAO where I stuffed Allistair into the best armor and was done with it because I didn't use another warriors that doesn't work as well if the game is making me take a wider mix of folks. Now, assuming you are optimizing your party - and that is the only reason you play dress up - that means mechanically you are going to force a lot more outfit management than you ever had in DAO and by and large that's not a good thing. The more time you spend on an inventory or paper doll screen and the less on a exploration/combat/dialog screen the worse off your game is..

[Aradace]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Autolycus wrote...

Upsetting...nice and sarcastic...but no.

You learn....like we all did. There are already plenty of games on the market that cater to that kind of person, role playing games, have never been that type of game.

So how are those people going to learn how to play CRPG if they are not accessible to them.

Because they're selfish and think that they should only be accessible to the "elite" so to speak. 

[Sidney]

Realmzmaster wrote...

So how are those people going to learn how to play CRPG if they are not accessible to them.

Only the chosen are able to play RPG's. They are predestined at birth for greatness and so they were born able to understand complex things like "hit points" and "attack bonsues". The rest of the population is little more than unknowning trash mobs.

[In Exile]

Marionetten wrote..
More likely he played simplistic games and then gradually moved up to more complex games instead of asking for every single game created to be super accessible from the get-go. You cannot cater to everyone. It's just not going to happen and I don't see why BioWare should waste more resources on trying to cater to non-gamers when they can barely appeal to gamers as things stand. They need to come back strong with Dragon Age III and that means focusing their design efforts. If they don't we're just going to get another Dragon Age II.

While the thought is nice it's not particularly realistic.

Putting aside how DA2 was designed (since we have disagreements over what a proper RPG is) consider the general question:

Do you think a game should attract a new audience at all? I know you loathe an easy mode in games on principle, so I'm curious. A related question: how do you think a genre remains strong and viable?

[Aradace]

Sidney wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

So how are those people going to learn how to play CRPG if they are not accessible to them.

Only the chosen are able to play RPG's. They are predestined at birth for greatness and so they were born able to understand complex things like "hit points" and "attack bonsues". The rest of the population is little more than unknowning trash mobs.

I see what you did there...lol

+5 troll points.

[Tommy6860]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

shantisands wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...
Which reminds me, we should be able to outfit companions all at once like in Origins. I hate this switch them out stuff.

Agreed. We should have been able to access all their inventories at the Hawke Estate. We were able to do all their runes there, so made no sense we couldn't do inventory as well. And levelups if we wanted.

Signed.  This would be a logical thing.

The same goes for shopping. In DA:O the player's inventory and shop's inventory both had a simple dropdown list where you were able to select a companion to compare selected gear with. Of course that was "simplified". Why can't they just improve things instead of dumbing down every feature in the game?

I don't think DA:O's system worked like that, in fact, having that drop down list didn't fundtion much for anything at all in shop comparisons. If you were in a shop and looked at the shop's inventory, everything in your list is shown in common as "Party Inventory", no matter who you choose in the list. The only time the I had what you say work the way it does, is by going into the inventory on my own, then choosing my character or my companion. Then it only shows the different characteristics between inventory items in my backpack and what is used by my me or my companions.

Unless I am misunderstanding you, this is how I see it worked anyway.

I also actually think the system in DA2 works better because it works the way you describe above, except I don't like not having the item pics and the inability to use different outfits on my companions..

[Dragoonlordz]

One thing I know from experience is the fact you picked DA2 was quite irrelevant because growing up I had those exact same discussions about almost every single genre and game that came out on the Nes, GB, Mastersystem, Megadrive and Snes and more from both people who never played games before to people who had played vast amounts but asked the same questions. So that offers little insight into any changes because it has more to do with curiosity of "Ooh whats that?", "How did you do that?", "What does that mean?" on every game or every type. Thats part and parcel of playing a new game, any game.

They can make the intro longer if curious as to why there are Darkspawn or what happened at Lothering or Ostagar, alternatively play the previous title which was about those events. But in the end other than the optimisation function not much else was learned from her playing. Maybe add the ME style comic book intro too if needed but tbh you would still end up having questions asked even about that or regardless of how long intro is.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 mai 2011 - 10:19 .

[In Exile]

Marionetten wrote...
Of course there is a hierarchy. Do you think I went straight from Mario to Ultima? No, I actually bridged that gap with adventure games before I even attempted the leap.

I'm not going to say that RPGs are at the top but they do unarguably come with a whole lot more rules than the most basic platformers. Denying that is just absurd.

But rules aren't complex. Have you ever had to work with AI? The degree of challenge in doing just about anything that's even moderately physical is aeons more complex than rule-following.

A game like Ninja Gaiden is just as hard as TW2 at equivalent difficulty, and Europa Universallis is much harder than DA:O on nightare.

Madden or NBA2KXX can be just as challenging and strategic if you're playing franchise mode and building your team, plus dealing with the AI on max difficulty, calling plays, etc.

RPGs offer a certain kind of challenge, but isn't a partiularly special kind of challenge.