Father_Jerusalem wrote...
So this really has turned into another Witcher forum now? That's... that's super.
All hail our new Witcher overlords.
I'll drop it.
Modifié par Alpha-Centuri, 19 juin 2011 - 11:12 .
Alpha-Centuri wrote...
I guess if you want to look at it like that until they release the DLC or whatever, you're well in your right. I'd like to think of it as a "Oooh my Geralt is gonna get his ass kicked by Shani when we see her next". YMMV
Well, I don't know about that. Despite what he recently said, we know Shepard needs a better plan than "fight or die". How the Commander explores various options, builds alliances and so on - one would think it would be possible to have somewhat different paths through that story.1136342t54 wrote...
Better branching gameplay can and will likely be done in ME3. The problem is that some Witcher fans want some gameplay to change the main plot in major ways and that can present many problems with the story. In ME3 you have to stop the Reapers which is your main objective. Changing the main plot too much can screw with the story.
AlanC9 wrote...
Ironically, the pitchfork wielders would almost certainly be self-described BG2 fans.
AlanC9 wrote...
Ironically, the pitchfork wielders would almost certainly be self-described BG2 fans.
Inexile wrote...
Bioware dug their own grave with ME1 marketing. They hyped up decisions, but I don't think what Bioware thought 'decisions matter' and the fanbase thought 'decisions matter' was the same. In the same way that what 'spiritual succesor' means to Bioware and to the fanbase, i.e. how ME1 was the 'spiritual succesor' of KoTOR.
Modifié par Il Divo, 19 juin 2011 - 11:23 .
DarkLord_PT wrote...
Yes, and I semi-completely agree. Were ME3 the true final game of the Mass Effect Universe, I'd love to see it diverge into as many branching paths as possible.DaveExclamationMarkYognaut wrote...
That's an interesting point. I think that, since ME3 is the last Mass Effect installment, it makes since to have it branch made on both previous and current choices, especially since Mass Effect has thus far prevented the choices from making the story branch significantly. But hopefully it's not going to be a choice between having previous choices have no consequences and retconning them.
However, one must also account that it seems ME3 is only the final game of Shepard's trilogy.
Let's assume that in one ending the Reapers are vanquished, but only Humanity survived, and in another, the Reapers are vanquished at the expense of Humanity? How would you make a new story post-ME3 to account for both branches that are mutually exclusive? Either it'll hurt the game's characters and plot (can't be too defined due to uncertainty of the character's race and surrounding environment), or you'll actually be making *two* whole different games to account for both possibilities.
That said, I *do* hope we'll see far more meaningful branching paths in ME3. It adds to replayability and to the sense of what you did before actually amounting to something.
Cyberfrog81 wrote...
Well, I don't know about that. Despite what he recently said, we know Shepard needs a better plan than "fight or die". How the Commander explores various options, builds alliances and so on - one would think it would be possible to have somewhat different paths through that story.
Alpha-Centuri wrote...
AlanC9 wrote...
So there was no real choice between them in TW1 in the first place, and so nothing to retcon? OK, but they still have to retcon the journal entries.
I guess if you want to look at it like that until they release the DLC or whatever, you're well in your right. I'd like to think of it as a "Oooh my Geralt is gonna get his ass kicked by Shani when we see her next". YMMV
I didn't read the books and the TW1 save I imported, Geralt was monogamous, so I think you can see how it impacted my experience right off the bat... It was, literally, a "WTF" moment. No explanation given in-game.Alpha-Centuri wrote...
Retcon? You must be talking about Shani. It's not a retcon, its a plot progression. Jan Bartkowicz promised that she is in their plans, and its a plot point for those than romanced her as to why Geralt is waking up in the bed of Triss. Remember, Geralt aint the most monogomous, from the books to the game.
I wouldn't either, depending on the impact of the choice, that is.DaveExclamationMarkYognaut wrote...
That's a good point, as well. If they want to do spin-offs I wouldn't mind retcons too much because it isn't Shepard's story any more. Of course, some people may have very different opinions on the topic
In Exile wrote...
Alpha-Centuri wrote...
I guess if you want to look at it like that until they release the DLC or whatever, you're well in your right. I'd like to think of it as a "Oooh my Geralt is gonna get his ass kicked by Shani when we see her next". YMMV
Because of an off-screen decision you had no role in? It's terrible design. It was bad when Bioware did it with BGII.
Modifié par Alpha-Centuri, 19 juin 2011 - 11:31 .
Alpha-Centuri wrote...
In Exile wrote...
Alpha-Centuri wrote...
I guess if you want to look at it like that until they release the DLC or whatever, you're well in your right. I'd like to think of it as a "Oooh my Geralt is gonna get his ass kicked by Shani when we see her next". YMMV
Because of an off-screen decision you had no role in? It's terrible design. It was bad when Bioware did it with BGII.
The game's not perfect, and neither is its story. I believe that what can be taken as a positive is that it attempted and pulled off the ability to not only take all your decisions from TW1, put the relevant ones around Aedirn to good use, and allow you to branch the ones you make in TW2 to the point where you are not only in an entire different city/fortification, none of the quests overlap and you can see the damage of your actions.
Spoilers for those that haven't played:
On one playthrough, I wanted to be buddy buddy with the "bandit elf" faction, the Scoi'atel. I have the choice of giving the leader Iorveth a sword or not. The first time I didn't, and everything runs smoothly more or less, little damage to both sides. I gave the sword to Iorveth the second time, and he and his men kill several human soldiers. These people had loved ones in the local city and rioted, and started massacring all non-humans (where you can choose to stop or mind your own business). One decision that is literally spur of the moment (it's timed, and seemingly harmless if you give to him cause he should have the right to defend himself), two completely different effects.
Compare that to Mass Effect. I see so many possibilites. Don't send in data to the Alliance and the Alliance doesn't brief the Turians who in turn get ambushed by Reapers. Or Help Tali against the Geth, only to have her get shot while Legion is trying to protect her from the heretics. You then have a set of missions post-death that dominates the story until the last act/section, where you eventually clear the Geth from their homeland, making it bittersweet that the Quarians are liberated, but your friend and/or love would never get to see it.
Not the best ideas as I haven't thought them out or anything. But that's the kind of stuff I want to see in terms of branching storylines and consequences. ME3 just has So. Much. Potential.
Alpha-Centuri wrote...
The game's not perfect, and neither is its story. I believe that what can be taken as a positive is that it attempted and pulled off the ability to not only take all your decisions from TW1, put the relevant ones around Aedirn to good use, and allow you to branch the ones you make in TW2 to the point where you are not only in an entire different city/fortification, none of the quests overlap and you can see the damage of your actions.
Compare that to Mass Effect. I see so many possibilites. Don't send in data to the Alliance and the Alliance doesn't brief the Turians who in turn get ambushed by Reapers. Or Help Tali against the Geth, only to have her get shot while Legion is trying to protect her from the heretics. You then have a set of missions post-death that dominates the story until the last act/section, where you eventually clear the Geth from their homeland, making it bittersweet that the Quarians are liberated, but your friend and/or love would never get to see it.
Not the best ideas as I haven't thought them out or anything. But that's the kind of stuff I want to see in terms of branching storylines and consequences. ME3 just has So. Much. Potential.
In Exile wrote...
Alpha-Centuri wrote...
The game's not perfect, and neither is its story. I believe that what can be taken as a positive is that it attempted and pulled off the ability to not only take all your decisions from TW1, put the relevant ones around Aedirn to good use, and allow you to branch the ones you make in TW2 to the point where you are not only in an entire different city/fortification, none of the quests overlap and you can see the damage of your actions.
Very few decisions from TW1 were imported. In fact, all you had in TW2 was Thaler, metions of Adda, and Sigfriend. And then the overridding of Geralt with Shiani. It was hit & miss.Compare that to Mass Effect. I see so many possibilites. Don't send in data to the Alliance and the Alliance doesn't brief the Turians who in turn get ambushed by Reapers. Or Help Tali against the Geth, only to have her get shot while Legion is trying to protect her from the heretics. You then have a set of missions post-death that dominates the story until the last act/section, where you eventually clear the Geth from their homeland, making it bittersweet that the Quarians are liberated, but your friend and/or love would never get to see it.
Not the best ideas as I haven't thought them out or anything. But that's the kind of stuff I want to see in terms of branching storylines and consequences. ME3 just has So. Much. Potential.
The issue is cost. The more you want the story to branch, the less content you can have on the same budget. Of course, you could always increase the budget. But that means that you need more sales for the same margin. And that becomes a question of whether branching content sells.
In Exile wrote...
Very few decisions from TW1 were imported. In fact, all you had in TW2 was Thaler, metions of Adda, and Sigfriend. And then the overridding of Geralt with Shiani. It was hit & miss.
Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 19 juin 2011 - 11:44 .
Cyberfrog81 wrote...
Well, I don't know about that. Despite what he recently said, we know Shepard needs a better plan than "fight or die". How the Commander explores various options, builds alliances and so on - one would think it would be possible to have somewhat different paths through that story.1136342t54 wrote...
Better branching gameplay can and will likely be done in ME3. The problem is that some Witcher fans want some gameplay to change the main plot in major ways and that can present many problems with the story. In ME3 you have to stop the Reapers which is your main objective. Changing the main plot too much can screw with the story.
Sure. Developing large chunks of content for 1/10000 players (or fewer) probably doesn't seem very sensible.In Exile wrote...
You would think. But Bioware is generally not pro exclusive content. Not that they don't have it, but they take the issue of content players will never see very seriously.
Alpha-Centuri wrote...
You're right, and its a valid issue. Time and money is always working against you though. I'll always advocate for longer development times, which means more care can go into a game. Bioware is big now, it has the manpower. It also has the money evidenced by TOR (estimated over 150 million dollars development!? I heard more I think).
Cyberfrog81 wrote...
Sure. Developing large chunks of content
for 1/10000 players (or fewer) probably doesn't seem very sensible.
Still:
1)
I have a Shepard who never recruited Tali. That's the contents of two
full missions (recruitment + loyalty) missed. Not to mention all Tali
content outside of her own missions (except for when you first meet her,
of course).
2) I have a Shepard who romanced Tali. I think,
anyway. Losing track of my Shepards.
So, personally, I won't ask
for much more than the experiences of those Shepards being somewhat
different. Yes, that's already asking for more than most game developers
would deliver... but the ME team still seems rather ambitious, don't
they? Maybe they'll exceed this natural born pessimist's expectations.
It's happened before.
Morroian wrote...
Great more forums infected with off topic Witcher discussion.
In Exile wrote...
You're right, and its a valid issue. Time and money is always working against you though. I'll always advocate for longer development times, which means more care can go into a game. Bioware is big now, it has the manpower. It also has the money evidenced by TOR (estimated over 150 million dollars development!? I heard more I think).
A lot of it seems to actually be about TW2 itself, like someone else said the OP should have just had a subject as branching storylines and used TW2 as a brief example of a game that did it right in the body of the message.MonkeyLungs wrote...
Morroian wrote...
Great more forums infected with off topic Witcher discussion.
The discussion is about branching gameplay. The Witcher is used as an example. The OP think that TW2 use of non linearity is done very well and would like to see choices lead to different gameplay scenarios in an even better way in Bioware titles.
Its been used to bash DA2 and Bioware since a long time before even DA2 even came out.MonkeyLungs wrote...
Why are people so threatened by The Witcher 2? It really seems to bother people quite a bit. I like comparing RPG's to each other ... it's informative and fun.
They actually did go to the trouble of giving a different line to Shepard in ME2 when that's the case with Garrus. But sure enough, after that Garrus acts like you're best buddies.In Exile wrote...
Given that Tali and Garrus both knew Shepard in ME2 despite the fact you can't take them along in ME1 (I think), I wouldn't get my hopes up.
Modifié par Cyberfrog81, 20 juin 2011 - 12:28 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut