Aller au contenu

Photo

Zeschuk and Muzyka explain why sequels are good and what "innovation" means


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
194 réponses à ce sujet

#126
Bryy_Miller

Bryy_Miller
  • Members
  • 7 676 messages

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

While I do agree ME3 has promise, it's not what I really want when I think Bioware CRPG.  That they seem to think they need to reinvent the genre is actually kind of troubling.


This right here is a sticky wicket.

You need to reinvent something or else it grows stale. The closer the reinvention is to the actual old formula, you risk not rejuvinating your franchise at all. You go too far, and it is unrecognizable. Of course, genre in itself is just a summary. ME2, even though it's quite frankly a FPS, walks the line well. ME1 didn't know what it wanted to be.

#127
hexaligned

hexaligned
  • Members
  • 3 166 messages
Pfft, simplistic rushed console RPG's have been around for decades,even DA2's more semi-laudible "features", (like the framed narrative) have all been done before, and at least imo, much better.  Calling this game innovating is either just blind ego, or outright snake-oil hocking.

Modifié par relhart, 20 juin 2011 - 09:48 .


#128
Guest_Rojahar_*

Guest_Rojahar_*
  • Guests
Regardless of whether you like or hate DA2, I don't see how people can really fault them for such a philosophy.They're saying they don't want to just remake the same exact one game again and again, much like you see with EA Sports games, or would you guys rather they be that way, recycling the same gameplay and story with a facelift? Sure, DA2 may not have been the right formula, but at the very least it's a learning experience for them on which features people love and hate, which will and won't work, which they don't know unless they try.

On a positive note, at least their "experiment" was low-budget and only took up a small amount of dev time. Take Mass Effect, for example. ME3 is supposedly incorporating a lot more customization than there ever was in ME1, while still having a lot of the gameplay improvements of ME2. ME2 allowed them to know which changes worked and which didn't work. People often have this idea in their head that things have to be one extreme or the other, but I agree with the dev sentiment that middle ground exists and trying new things can lead to great new game elements.

Modifié par Rojahar, 20 juin 2011 - 10:17 .


#129
twincast

twincast
  • Members
  • 829 messages

Persephone wrote...

twincast wrote...

Awakening was bad because of its changes, not because of what it kept.


What did it change? (Cutting features doesn't count, same as DAII)

...yeah, that makes total sense.

but fine, I'll bite: the "innovative" dialogue system was a joke. the energy refill rates went from a bit too slow to way too fast. the new specialisations, while cool, were balanced even worse than DA:O's.
... and to add a book-to-game change: the Architect suddenly went from a special hurlock emissary to a look even most anime would deem too silly.

and it's too short, but wait, that doesn't count for some reason.

the one good (balancing) thing it did was to add stamina potions.

#130
the_one_54321

the_one_54321
  • Members
  • 6 112 messages
Am I the only one that enjoyed Awakening? I mean, it wasn't as fun as Origins, but the fighting all worked the same, from what I could tell the dialog didn't really work any differently, and the story was worth playing through if not as memorable as Origins.

#131
hexaligned

hexaligned
  • Members
  • 3 166 messages

the_one_54321 wrote...

Am I the only one that enjoyed Awakening? I mean, it wasn't as fun as Origins, but the fighting all worked the same, from what I could tell the dialog didn't really work any differently, and the story was worth playing through if not as memorable as Origins.


It was ok? I guess.  My major gripe with it is that they didn't "fix" the scaling mechanic that DAO had, so your level 30 characters are still fighting level 15 baddies.  The ease of the game sucked all the fun out of it for me, I don't think it was bad story wise or anything, I actually liked a few of the companions more than the DAO ones. 

#132
Morroian

Morroian
  • Members
  • 6 395 messages

alex90c wrote...

Morroian wrote...

They are actually using it in a way that is perfectly in keeping with how the term is used these days, even if it doesn't quite meet the literal definition, but then I think even thats arguable in terms of mechanics like the F/R system.


Well i've either not played many games (and to be fair I did lack interest in games until about a year ago) or Bioware's PR seems to stand out for me as just simply being really bad. The game didn't do anything innovative

And you're not actually responding to what I said, the friendship/rivalry system is an innovation. Is the game as a whole innovative, no but elements of it are.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Archaven wrote...

DAO and Witcher 2 have the dialogues list and it's button awesome for me. They should have retained that.


I thought Witcher 2 had a dialogue wheel that occasionaly had Geralt say what was shown on the wheel? or is that The Witcher 1?


Nope TW2 has paraphrases, Archaven is wrong.

alex90c wrote...

While the backstory was preset, you as a player were definitely allowed to create your own character and personality from it.


Yes and you can do it to exactly the same extent in DA2.

ItsTheTruth wrote...

Why couldn't they "innovate" Mass Effect instead of ruining the Dragon Age series?


They did, ME2.

Rubinato wrote...

Which brings to mind social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/9/index/4571084/2#4575266

Chris Priestly wrote...

We did not expect DA2 to come together so well or so quickly. We could have chosen to delay DA2 and continued to put out DA:O DLC, but we know how awesome DA2is going to be. The decision was made to continue making DLC all the way to Witch Hunt and then it would end as we ramped up for DA2. When we said "2 years of DLC" we said that in good faith, but when something as excellent as Dragon Age 2 comes along, it changes plans for the better.


Good pick up, I like the game but it definitely needed to be delayed to polish it. This is almost mindboggling if the timeframe wasn't forced by EA. Big mistake by Bioware.

#133
errant_knight

errant_knight
  • Members
  • 8 256 messages
"Surprise and delight'
...

heh heheh Bwahahaha!

Modifié par errant_knight, 20 juin 2011 - 10:46 .


#134
Firky

Firky
  • Members
  • 2 140 messages
I thought Awakening was fun. But they just added more skills, talents and abilities. I stopped caring about choosing stuff for my characters because there was so much stuff and nothing I genuinely needed. I couldn't tell you what the new specs were, etc etc. I just churned through it, on nightmare, to get the story. I would have preferred to have to fight for the story, like more of a consistent gameplay balance.

"We use the phrase, 'surprise and delight' our fans with our games, and if you fail at that..." What's the rest of this quote? (Having said that, I think "surprise and delight" would pretty accurately sum up my reaction to many parts of DAII, like getting my ass kicked in combat and many of the plot moments.)

#135
Zjarcal

Zjarcal
  • Members
  • 10 836 messages

errant_knight wrote...

"Surprise and delight'
...

heh heheh Bwahahaha!


I was delighted. :police:

#136
errant_knight

errant_knight
  • Members
  • 8 256 messages

Zjarcal wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

"Surprise and delight'
...

heh heheh Bwahahaha!


I was delighted. :police:

Well, that's why there was no little arrow pointing to the name Zjarcal when I laughed.

#137
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages

the_one_54321 wrote...

Am I the only one that enjoyed Awakening? I mean, it wasn't as fun as Origins, but the fighting all worked the same, from what I could tell the dialog didn't really work any differently, and the story was worth playing through if not as memorable as Origins.


I hated it. It combined everything I disliked from Origins while generally being more buggy and removed companion interact as well as nerfing the combat difficulty on top of it.

#138
the_one_54321

the_one_54321
  • Members
  • 6 112 messages

In Exile wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
Am I the only one that enjoyed Awakening? I mean, it wasn't as fun as Origins, but the fighting all worked the same, from what I could tell the dialog didn't really work any differently, and the story was worth playing through if not as memorable as Origins.

I hated it. It combined everything I disliked from Origins while generally being more buggy and removed companion interact as well as nerfing the combat difficulty on top of it.

I didn't really even play Origins until most of the updates were out because I was busy with other activities and finishing other games. When I got through those two, I found that the addition of stamina potions and crafting runes was quite nice. While I was dissatisfied with the volume of companion interaction, I was happy with the inclusion of new companions while simultaneously saddened by the lack of old companions. Overall, I didn't really notice any difference between combat in Origins to Awakening and for the most part I enjoyed Awakening well enough.

#139
alex90c

alex90c
  • Members
  • 3 175 messages
The difficulty in Awakening did pretty much suck arse. Also, we need more Sigrun.

#140
fightright2

fightright2
  • Members
  • 773 messages

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

That's the same feeling I have about DA2. They didn't take any risks. Instead BW dreamed up several cost savings operations (some pioneered by the Mass Effect team) and asked marketing to explain it. Hence the whole streamlining and (relevant to this topic) innovation.


I think your mostly right in that. But I think they also really did want to expand the DA world beyond the tale of the Warden and Blights. I really believe they did want to expand the whole DA world by having the world explode into a state of chaos over mages and magic and how that state now effects not only every country but every person during that time. How that struggle not only causes rifts in families and friendships but also forms bonds as well. And most importantly, how that pertains to those seeking power over all and those that seek it to protect the ones without it.

Though in order to make that world culminate to that point, it meant that it would take something monumental to ripple  out toward the edges, and have to be pinpointed down to one moment and one person.

Was it innovative to shift the DA world in that direction? I think so.

But cutting the costs(streamlining) while trying to make that story shift happen was not.
I think it was too much to want to change the direction of the storyline/DA world and try to implement budget savers from borrowing from another game (ME) to gain a new kind of fans. 

I think it was too big a risk in that it should have been one or the other but not both at the same time.
One was a dramatic change in storyline for unfolding of change in the DA world and the other was a dramatic change in the gameplay.

Upon hearing things like rushing due to riding the success of DAO and the engine reaching it's end and budget costs as the reason for using ME operations and trying to draw an action oriented crowd and opening up the world to a chaotic state for more future stories that reach across Thedas..... I don't see how really DA2 really could have came out really successful with a formula like that.
With too many goals in mind, it only succeeded in spreading itself out too thin.
It's really a wonder as it is.


Now I think, if they had wanted to change the world to that chaotic state then it certainly would have made more sense to develop a game with borrowed mechanics and gameplay that appealed to new fans as an experiment after the DA world culminated to the chaotic state over magic. That way it would have maintained the fans, yet open them up to a new innovative kind of game that could be judged on it's own without derailing the originality of the first game. And depending on the successes of both of them, make the decision as to what to keep and dump for future installments.

But as they say, it's always easy to see 20/20 in hindsight. 

#141
Redcoat

Redcoat
  • Members
  • 267 messages

relhart wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Am I the only one that enjoyed Awakening? I mean, it wasn't as fun as Origins, but the fighting all worked the same, from what I could tell the dialog didn't really work any differently, and the story was worth playing through if not as memorable as Origins.


It was ok? I guess.  My major gripe with it is that they didn't "fix" the scaling mechanic that DAO had, so your level 30 characters are still fighting level 15 baddies.  The ease of the game sucked all the fun out of it for me, I don't think it was bad story wise or anything, I actually liked a few of the companions more than the DAO ones. 


It wouldnt' say Awakening was awful, but as the conclusion to the Warden's story, it just sort of fizzled. And I expected that, since my Warden was at a high-level, that I would face high-level foes (a la Throne of Bhaal), but I never encountered any foe that was particularly challenging. The companions had potential, but your interactions with them felt shallow. Lastly, as many others have pointed out, the expansion is buggy as hell. The Silverite Mines bug is something that should have been caught and dealt with forthwith, yet it remains unfixed.

#142
KnightofPhoenix

KnightofPhoenix
  • Members
  • 21 527 messages
[quote]the_one_54321 wrote...

Am I the only one that enjoyed Awakening? I mean, it wasn't as fun as Origins, but the fighting all worked the same, from what I could tell the dialog didn't really work any differently, and the story was worth playing through if not as memorable as Origins. [/quote]
[/quote]

I liked it quite a bit personally, everything considered. It did a much better job at making it look like the Warden is a commander, than DA:O did. I actually quite naively thought that DA2 was going to expand on that, but it went backwards in the complete opposite direction (and instead expanded on the things I didn't like). Its political intrigue and military aspect were meh, but relatively decent when compared to other Bioware RPGs I've played. Still, it made choices irrelevent, which is what all Bioware games do. And its ending was bad, but not as much of a debacle as DA2's imo.

If I am to rate DA2 and Awakening as a full game, I'd give Awakening a higher score.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 20 juin 2011 - 11:22 .


#143
Gunderic

Gunderic
  • Members
  • 717 messages

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Archaven wrote...

Why don't they just admit the game was rushed and they are lazy instead of Innovation?


A few reasons:

1) I think everyone agrees that it was rushed. But to say so is bad business. When someone ragequits and then says "DA2 was rushed, blah blah blah" (and please don't bring up Brent Knowles, that's just lame), then, for whatever reason, you can come on the forums and say "told you so". 

2) Perhaps they actually did what they wanted to do with DA2? Perhaps they do think DA2 was innovative? There is a *lot* of justiifying and finger-waging going on in order to feel secure that BioWare still makes games "for harcore fans/true RPG lovers/etc."


I'm having a hard time believing that, honestly. None of the developer/CEO comments I've seen so far show that BioWare has any intention of making a full return to elements that will appeal to "hardcore fans".

Dragon Age: Origins was not an overly complex game. It could have stood to have more things added to it, rather than taken out or 'made more accessible'. Nothing suggests to me that BioWare is ever willing to go down the same route as they did with Origins too soon -- despite the game selling well -- let alone add more complex elements to the formula.

The developers still have an obvious talent for storytelling and writing, but the core elements of their games have been gradually made less complex for a while now.

Mike Laidlaw said something to this effect pre-release: their team could have easily made a more 'fiddly-stats' experience to cater to more 'hardcore' fans', but chose to go into another direction.

So, I assume their talent for creating the type of games traditional RPG fans love could still be there.

Still, if BioWare intends to keep up with their new design philosophy, I'd prefer it if  they altogether drop the concept/vision of creating highly accessible RPG's, and simply go down the action-adventure/shooter route -- a path this developer is very close to taking, if it hasn't already.

Modifié par Gunderic, 20 juin 2011 - 11:46 .


#144
Morroian

Morroian
  • Members
  • 6 395 messages

Gunderic wrote...

I'm having a hard time believing that, honestly. None of the developer/CEO comments I've seen so far show that BioWare has any intention of making a full return to elements that will appeal to "hardcore fans".

If you mean a full return to DAO style no they aren't but from what they've said they will move back in that direction and take the best from DAO and DA2.

#145
Shadow of Light Dragon

Shadow of Light Dragon
  • Members
  • 5 179 messages

the_one_54321 wrote...

Am I the only one that enjoyed Awakening? I mean, it wasn't as fun as Origins, but the fighting all worked the same, from what I could tell the dialog didn't really work any differently, and the story was worth playing through if not as memorable as Origins.


I liked Awakening except for one thing:

Dialogue changes from DA:O. And I guess it was foreshadowing for DA2. No longer could you talk to your companions on the road, unless you reached a designated talky area a particular companion was compatible with. You could only talk to your companions during allotted pow-wow sessions and when giving gifts.

Compared to DA:O where you could chat whenever it felt very...lonely. Something that carried on into DA2, IMO. DA:O just felt like there was a helluvalot more opportunities for camaraderie and getting to know your team mates.

#146
phoenixgoddess27

phoenixgoddess27
  • Members
  • 144 messages

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Compared to DA:O where you could chat whenever it felt very...lonely. Something that carried on into DA2, IMO. DA:O just felt like there was a helluvalot more opportunities for camaraderie and getting to know your team mates.


My words exactly. Whenever things got too lonely in DA:O, I randomly asked for a kiss form Alistair. Can I get that from Fenris? No. I get a "Hawke." Hawke... Hawke what? Hawke this isn't the best time? Hawke you're embarrassing me? Hawke you know better than to talk to me around my friends? Hawke you act like you've had... too many lampposts in Winter? Hawke what?

I hope this is one thing they'll take from DA:O and add into DA3.

Modifié par phoenixgoddess27, 21 juin 2011 - 12:46 .


#147
Guest_Puddi III_*

Guest_Puddi III_*
  • Guests

phoenixgoddess27 wrote...

My words exactly. Whenever things got too lonely in DA:O, I randomly asked for a kiss form Alistair. Can I get that from Fenris? No. I get a "Hawke." Hawke... Hawke what?


Wrex.

#148
Firky

Firky
  • Members
  • 2 140 messages
^ This is going to sound odd, but I rivalmanced Fenris and, after a certain action, he suddenly stopped saying "Hawke" when I clicked on him and started saying "I am yours" and I was like WOW. It's a tiny detail, but one that really grabbed me. (This game was full of tiny wow moments for me.)

I wasn't overly worried by only talking to companions as the plot progressed myself, but I can understand why this would irk people. (Having said that, having specific "on the road" dialogue in addition to the camp/home-base dialogue would be pretty cool.)

Modifié par Firky, 21 juin 2011 - 12:54 .


#149
FieryDove

FieryDove
  • Members
  • 2 635 messages

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

I liked Awakening except for one thing:

Dialogue changes from DA:O. And I guess it was foreshadowing for DA2. No longer could you talk to your companions on the road, unless you reached a designated talky area a particular companion was compatible with. You could only talk to your companions during allotted pow-wow sessions and when giving gifts.

Compared to DA:O where you could chat whenever it felt very...lonely. Something that carried on into DA2, IMO. DA:O just felt like there was a helluvalot more opportunities for camaraderie and getting to know your team mates.


That was on purpose. They wanted to remove *laundry lists* of trivia and yes that was one of the terms thrown around and people having to spend so much time *making the rounds* to get all discussions completed at any given time. There were people that complained about it.

Of course there were a lot of people that complained about too much talk period in DAO. I think it was some of those people who watched the new %hit video and bought the game thinking it was going to be something else. I still feel that was a bit unfair marketing, but people really should research more when they buy stuff.

I liked awakening but didn't like the limited companion interaction, critical bugs that still are not fixed or the level scaling of enemies. I'm lvl 30 fighting lvl 15-22 mobs...what? Image IPB

#150
phoenixgoddess27

phoenixgoddess27
  • Members
  • 144 messages

Firky wrote...

^ This is going to sound odd, but I rivalmanced Fenris and, after a certain action, he suddenly stopped saying "Hawke" when I clicked on him and started saying "I am yours" and I was like WOW. It's a tiny detail, but one that really grabbed me. (This game was full of tiny wow moments for me.)

I wasn't overly worried by only talking to companions as the plot progressed myself, but I can understand why this would irk people.


Oh, no, he says that, too. I'm just mentioning one of the things he says. Regardless, it's not really... a conversation, so to speak.