249 réponses à ce sujet

[whykikyouwhy]

telephasic wrote...

I agree.  I think Bioware gets a bad rep here in some gamer's quarters because the forum, in particular, has some really bizzarely obsessed uhh...is shippers the word?  I find it amazing people can develop such strong feelings on the matter, given how little time in the games the love interests actually have.  Then again, people write slash fiction about the weirdest things.  

The focus on the romance aspects goes back to having something relatable. People want to identify with characters - in games, movies and novels. That's not the only way we absorb entertainment, but sometimes we do it subconsciously. We can relate to something in the backstories, or qualities of the characters, and we can relate to the romances. They appeal based on their realism (of emotion), even if they are still fantasy driven.

Folks are going to feel strongly about romances, or combat, or canon - anything that triggers that appeal and drives a certain passion of fandom is going to be both unifying and divisive. And outside of the BSN, the passionate fans may look obsessed or bizarre or crazed, what have you. But it's probably because their passion does not match the passion of that person on the outside. Kind of like a scenario where a Star Trek fan and a Star Wars fan are eyeing each other warily from opposite sides of the same room. They may not understand each other and therefore find the other a bit odd.

[Il Divo]

First, I'd like to applaud the OP as this is a nice change of pace from the usual forum topics.

To answer the question, yes, I consider Bioware to be good story-tellers. That said, I don't think that it stems only from their skill as writers, but also from the medium through which they have chosen to tell their stories. In that sense, it's probably better to say that I enjoy the medium through which their stories are told.
 
Unlike novels, comics, films, etc, where the viewer is merely a passive observer, video games (especially RPGs) are an interactive medium, which plays an important role as the story must be told within that context. In the case of RPGs, by assuming the role of the main protagonist (choosing his words, actions, morality, etc), there is a greater sense of connection between myself and the main character. I'm not completely separate from his actions; I helped shape them.
 
In Star Wars, I merely watch as Luke Skywalker mourns Ben Kenobi, confronts his father, becomes a Jedi Knight, etc. In KotOR, I'm a part of that experience. For that essential difference, KotOR's plot twist felt more significant to me (as the player/character) than Episode V's plot twist, despite how much I enjoyed Darth Vader/Luke Skywalker as characters.

Modifié par Il Divo, 11 juillet 2011 - 02:03 .

[Nivilant]

Fallout is one of those game series' I wish I'd known about sooner. I can spend hours on end in that game without getting bored... though I do get annoyed in NV when I stumble into a Cazadore nest without antivenom and spend ages looking for one after with that annoying pssshhhh sound going off and frantically chugging Sarsparilla. At least I get caps out of it.

In terms of overarching story I didn't mind quite so much as I could have. I like stories where the characters aren't perfect. I roleplayed my Warden that way, and my favourite collection of short stories to write centres around a female soldier who buckles under the pressure rather than rising to the challenge but still pushes on. It's struggle that makes interesting work. So in that regard I do like DA2's story. My problem comes from the execution.

[Phaelducan]

Aye, Fallout never gets the credit it deserves. Great series.

As far as DA2, I agree that conceptually it was cool, I just feel like WAY too much hinged on Anders (whom I thought was lame and poorly written from the moment I met him), and that Hawke simply wasn't as interesting as most of the DA:Origins Warden options.

For that matter, most people these days aren't able to look at a companies entire body of work. I heard someone say the other day that Square sucked because FFXIII sucked. While everyone can have any opinion they want, I never think it's fair to crucify a company because of 1 or 2 so-so games if they have 10+ stellar ones.

[Il Divo]

scyphozoa wrote...

It is sad to me then that games like Assassin's are telling more compelling story arcs than recent Bioware games. I would love to see Bioware renew its emphasis on telling an incredibly primary story arc.

I could be wrong on this, but with ACII and especially Brotherhood, wasn't one of the primary criticisms that the storyline (especially the ending) was too confusing to understand? That's how I felt at least.

Modifié par Il Divo, 11 juillet 2011 - 02:24 .

[Slayer_22]

infalible wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

First, this should be in the Off-Topic section since it's only tangently, at best, related to DA2.

Second, it's pointless to compare "game stories" to "book stories." If we were to start nitpicking away at game stories, it's laughable that you fight as many enemies as you do when, for instance, no single character actually fights or kills that many enemies in the entire LOTR saga. I'll repeat: you can't compare book, game, or even movie stories against one another. They're shaped differently, they're marketed differently, they appeal to our senses differently. You can only compare game stories against other game stories in the same genre. Maybe you can even compare against other titles of the same developer to consider storyline evolution.

I don't buy into the "you can't compare game stories to book stories" argument at all. People say the same about movies, that you can't compare a film to a book, and then you point out great movies that have presented brilliant stories and they have no idea what to say back to you. If they do, it's generally "I haven't seen that movie" in response.

And that bring me neatly onto my retort to the "you can't compare game stories to book stories" argument: perhaps you can't do that because no one has managed to tell a good enough game story to be compared to a novel? 

All forms of story telling use the same devices to get their points across, to create drama, to make you love a character or hate a character etc etc. And whilst there are of course difference in the mediums, I think it's snobbery to try to claim that those difference totally remove any kind for comparison. I don't think that's true at all. Shakespeare wrote plays and yet his work has had a direct influence on the way novels have been written (outside of the language of course). In school you compare Shakespeare to modern literature as part of your education. By your logic, that's wrong because Shakespeare wrote plays and plays aren't books... so they can't be compared. And yet they are. And they are because story telling, at a fundamental level, is no different depending on the medium. The presentation may be different, the freedom of choice may be different, the way in which a story evolved in a book is clearly different to the way it evolves in a game, but at base when all things are considered the mechanics in use to tell that story outside of the unique elements of the platform are, in all forms of story telling, the same. And you CAN compare that across mediums with great ease.

Okay, So you're saying Video Game storytelling is the same as a book's, right? Do books have any sort of interactivity, not CYOAs, but actual books. Any sort of gameplay they have to live up to. Has there ever been a gameplay that could live up to Moby Dick? Would anyone try to make a game like it? What would be the gameplay?

Games need to live up to gameplay, not stories. Bioware makes the game exiciting, they can't just write a book and make it a game, because they would have to think "I have to make a game around this, add gameplay and interactvity, make fights in-between, something to keep other gamers interested. Because, let's face it, Bioware has fans that don't listen to any dialouge at all. And they HAVE to appeal to them for the money, because more money means more of everything else, like more money to make games and the equipment for it. So they can't just take a chance and make a story, then base a game around it, without any changes to the story. They will need to change things about it, period. No way of getting around it, unless you are to make a story that has battles every five to fifteen minutes to imitate the whole of the gameplay. 
Have there ever been extremely good and successful games based on amazing books? By good, I mean that many people loved it. And not books based on video games, books that were made by authors that had no ties to any video game company. To my knowledge, there has not.
You can't rightfully compare book stories to a video games, too many variables inbetween. Like how you cannot compare a shooter to a RPG, too many things are different. If you're trying to complain about DA2, complain about DA2 and get it over with. kthxbai

Edit: Bringing in 2001: A Space Odyssey, can you make a game about that? A good game, I mean. One that will interest millions like DA:O, ME, ME2, ME3, DA2, ect. did? What about Titanic? Gone with the wind? If so, explain the plot pls.

Modifié par Slayer_22, 11 juillet 2011 - 02:34 .

[Il Divo]

scyphozoa wrote...

Not to derail the thread about AC, but no, not IMO. I beat AC1, AC2 and ACB, and while there are many unanswered questions, it is not so confusing that it is not enjoyable or compelling.

Fair enough. Thank you for indulging my curiosity.

[Harid]

Il Divo wrote...

scyphozoa wrote...

Not to derail the thread about AC, but no, not IMO. I beat AC1, AC2 and ACB, and while there are many unanswered questions, it is not so confusing that it is not enjoyable or compelling.

Fair enough. Thank you for indulging my curiosity.

They are considered convoluted since AC:2 in all honesty.

[Il Divo]

Harid wrote...

They are considered convoluted since AC:2 in all honesty.

For myself, I do agree. I think they're all great games, but I had much more difficult understanding where AC2's story was going, mainly due to Minerva's unexpected twist. And then Brotherhood kept the weirdness going. On the bright side, Ubisoft has promised that Revelations will provide "more answers than questions", so here's hoping they deliver the goods.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Harid wrote...

Well it is, but it doesn't stop your comparison from being bad.  He was talking about mature themes which would fall under blood, sex, and nudity, and, well, good storytelling, and you picked on only the latter point, ignoring the former ones.  If you didn't quote that guy your point would have been perfectly reasonable, but I figured you were responding to that guy.

Perhaps I should have used this quote of the OP's instead, where he was comparing the storytelling of Bioware's games to books both modern and classic.

Go to your bookcase and look at your books. I'd say that many of you have books like Harry Potter, Twilight, or books from the Discworld series. Some of you may even have classics like Moby Dick, or Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, or The Count of Monte Cristo. A few may have books like The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, or The Gap Conflict. And then there are the modern classics like A Song of Ice and Fire, and The Wheel of Time. Can you say with confidence that the stories presented by Bioware even vaguely compare to those presented in the greatest (or even average) works of written fiction? I can't. I don't believe it when I say it. I find the notion to be a mockery of my sense.

Or just quoted the entire thing, but eh.

If you'd rather argue that my comparison is bad than the point of the comparison itself, fair enough.

[ImoenBaby]

Alright, name your best videogame storytelling.

I'll assume Planescape:Torment is near the top.

P.S. Bioware can tell a good story. A recent example: Loghain's story in Origins - how a man can utterly fall while striving to do the best he can.

[Ollys]

In my opinion, biggest problem is fanservice. Bioware doesnt create complex characters anymore, they make hentai harem party for virginal basement dwellers & obese fat yaoi fangirls. You don't have difficult moral dilemmas and shades of the gray, but instead you can romance every single character in game.

[Il Divo]

ImoenBaby wrote...

Alright, name your best videogame storytelling.

I'll assume Planescape:Torment is near the top.

P.S. Bioware can tell a good story. A recent example: Loghain's story in Origins - how a man can utterly fall while striving to do the best he can.

Barring Planescape, this is in no particular order.

1. Planescape: Torment.

2. Bioshock.

3. Legacy of Kain series (Blood Omen 2 excluded)

4. Shadow of the Colossus

5. Jade Empire

6. Assassin's Creed 1

Edit: I also forgot Heavy Rain.

Modifié par Il Divo, 11 juillet 2011 - 03:52 .

[Brockololly]

scyphozoa wrote...

I think Bioware used to be a story-driven developer. Now they are a character-driven developer. Companions have become too emphasized in recent Bioware games.

This.

The problem I have with things like ME2 and DA2 is that they lean so heavily on the character's own individual loyalty quests to the extent that those make up the bulk of the game. So if you don't end up caring for most of the characters, the game is going to sink pretty quickly story wise. Good characters aren't an excuse for a weak or non-existant main plot. Characters are only as good as the plot they're working with. They might be wonderful characters with neat personalities but what fun are they if they sit on their ass for ten years?


Emphasizing companions and characters is fine, but if you're going to do that you better make them more integral to the main plot in some way or have the core plot of the game heavily influenced by how you've been interacting with the companions. In that sense, I liked how Alistair and Morrigan functioned in DAO, in that they both played major plot roles which could play out differently.  Although it would have been better if there was even more divergence in their main plot roles based on your relationship with them.

Even in something like DAO, the main plot with the Blight was often too far removed from the treaty quests. The Deep Roads was good, but there needed to be some more central hubs or points where you were reminded that the goal was to stop the Blight, not just go on a cross country trip solving problems across Ferelden.



I'd just like to see BioWare get back to a main plot that has some elements of mystery and discovery  to it. Where you're trying to figure out something. Its fine if you unravel a mystery as you save the world or stop an ancient evil or whatever, but their last several games have been pretty much devoid of decent suspense and mystery to sort of drop enough plot bread crumbs to keep the player interested as you progress the main plot.

Modifié par Brockololly, 11 juillet 2011 - 03:44 .

[ademska]

Ollys wrote...

In my opinion, biggest problem is fanservice. Bioware doesnt create complex characters anymore, they make hentai harem party for virginal basement dwellers & obese fat yaoi fangirls. You don't have difficult moral dilemmas and shades of the gray, but instead you can romance every single character in game.

yeppers yeppers you shure nailed it right on the head

[jds1bio]

To answer the topic's question, yes. Particularly KOTOR and ME1. DA1, DA2, and ME2 did seem to focus on characters and do-or-die scenarios more than out-and-out story, but it's perfectly reasonable to have a story emerge from the lives and times of a group of characters.

But what if the topic's answer was "no"? Nevermind BioWare, what would that say about us? That we'd have been suckers for so long for the use of common literary tropes in videogame stories? That we would revel in substandard stories to develop RPG characters in? That we really do think that quality voice acting automatically makes any written word sound better? I'm glad we don't have to play through this scenario.

One piece of input for the future for everyone: no one really cares how many Hurlock Alpha brains I collect for the local witch's insomnia antidote. Nor is the endgame the time to be bothering to rescue someone from someone who will never have any connection to the story or the characters in it. Use sidequests to better flesh out some aspects of the main story rather than purely serve as a level-up device. If someone skips the sidequests, then I guess they just don't find out certain things. Surely everyone and their mother has a story behind how they got to their present day life.

Modifié par jds1bio, 11 juillet 2011 - 04:00 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

scyphozoa wrote...

I think Bioware used to be a story-driven developer. Now they are a character-driven developer. Companions have become too emphasized in recent Bioware games.

Agreed.

And I'll add, that the companion writing is losing subtelty. It's like they are written for movies. In lieu of slow and subtle character development, we are having emotions be overblown, electrified and perhaps worse of all, have one emotion be stapled on each character and overblown even more. I think that's especially the case for ME2 (with the exception of Mordin especially) and DA2 (with the exception of Varric and Aveline).

One example is Carver. His character is essentially "I am jealous of my older sibling", and he never fails to remind us of this, every time he opens his mouth or even when he writes a bloody letter. Seriously? 
Anders can be sumarized as "Chantry hate", were it not for the intriguing and confusing state he is in. Fenris is the angst "mage hate"...etc. So not only are they less subtle, less complex and less realistic imo, but they act as extreme opposites.

That's part of the reason why Bioware's entire writing philosophy is losing my interest.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 juillet 2011 - 04:13 .

[Il Divo]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Agreed.

And I'll add, that the companion writing is losing subtelty. It's like they are written for movies. In lieu of slow and subtle character development, we are having emotions be overblown, electrified and perhaps worse of all, have one emotion be stapled on each character and overblown even more. I think that's especially the case for ME2 (with the exception of Mordin especially) and DA2 (with the exception of Varric and Aveline).

One example is Carver. His character is essentially "I am jealous of my older sibling", and he never fails to remind us of this, every time he opens his mouth or even when he writes a bloody letter. Seriously? 
Anders can be sumarized as "Chantry hate", were it not for the intriguing and confusing state he is in. Fenris is the angst "mage hate"...etc. So not only are they less subtle and less complex imo, but they act as extreme opposites.

That's part of the reason why Bioware's entire writing philosophy is losing my interest.

This was the case even with some earlier Bioware games, especially KotOR and Jade Empire.

Carth is "Betrayal/Trust".
Juhani is all about controlling her emotions/traumatic past.
Mission is all about her brother.
And Bastila is really a giant lecture about the nature of the dark side.

Most Bioware characters have a 'story arc' which is built up through conversation and which the companions are centered around. I think this is a bigger case of DA:O having excellent/more varied character development than other Bioware games having lackluster characters.

Modifié par Il Divo, 11 juillet 2011 - 04:18 .

[In Exile]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
And I'll add, that the companion writing is losing subtelty. It's like they are written for movies. In lieu of slow and subtle character development, we are having emotions be overblown, electrified and perhaps worse of all, have one emotion be stapled on each character and overblown even more. I think that's especially the case for ME2 (with the exception of Mordin especially) and DA2 (with the exception of Varric and Aveline). 

Given the cinematic style, I think they are being written for movies. But I think the real issue, once again, is not so much the writing but the design. Since characters are written around their quests (that's their content that the player experiences, essentially) they're entire character is dominated by this one issue. To expand:

One example is Carver. His character is essentially "I am jealous of my older sibling", and he never fails to remind us of this, every time he opens his mouth or even when he writes a bloody letter. Seriously? 
Anders can be sumarized as "Chantry hate", were it not for the intriguing and confusing state he is in. Fenris is the angst "mage hate"...etc. So not only are they less subtle, less complex and less realistic imo, but they act as extreme opposites.

Anders has pro-mage quests, Fenris has anti-mage quests (to a degree), Isabella has her... well, let's say unique rogue quests, Aveline has her guard quests...

...It ends up being the case that the quests defin the characters and they seem to lose depth because they each have a thing that they revolve around. 

The better approach (IMO) would be to have each character caught up in the quest. To use DA2 as an example:

We follow your suggest and cut the antagonists in Act 2 and move Act 3 to where Act 2 was. Then, we have each member of the party take a side right at the start of the act. The story (branching, in this case) develops as a consequence of two major characters (beside the protagonist) while each character essentially comes alive in the context of the conflict that is the backdrop for the story. 

Instead of Anders being the crazy dude with the mage problem, he's the abomination who wanted to do nothing more than help who gets caught up in a conflict outside of his control and who is torn between his old, fearful self and this spirit of Vengeance growing inside him that demands action against one faction.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Il Divo wrote...
This was the case even with some earlier Bioware games, especially KotOR and Jade Empire.

Carth is "Betrayal/Trust".
Juhani is all about controlling her emotions/traumatic past.
Mission is all about her brother.
And Bastila is really a giant lecture about the nature of the dark side.

Most Bioware characters have a 'story arc' which is built up through conversation and which the companions are centered around. I think this is a bigger case of DA:O having excellent/more varied character development than other Bioware games having lackluster characters.

That is true. But in the case of Kotor, I felt the central plot was interesting enough that I didn't mind that much. Essentially, it was not a companion driven story (only Bastilla was really important).

ME2 and DA2 on the otherhand had a much weaker central plot, relying too much on companions, who suffer from this problem. Hence, the problem magnifies for me.

EDIT:
@ The Exile.
That is an excellent point. Personally I think it's both writing and design (and overal design in general) that are flawed. But it's true that writing can't produce much if the overal vision is not favorable to subtelty.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 juillet 2011 - 04:27 .

[Mongerty2]

The problem with Complex characters is that you cannot have a approve/ rival system in place because people would complain. It would be too hard to gain friendships as truly complex characters do not move on a point scale for how much they like someone.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Mongerty2 wrote...

The problem with Complex characters is that you cannot have a approve/ rival system in place because people would complain. It would be too hard to gain friendships as truly complex characters do not move on a point scale for how much they like someone.

Yes, which is why a single meter is very limited and flawed. Having two scales (disposition and respect) would alleviate the problem imo. Would it make companions complex to realistic levels? No, but it would help improve them.

Like In Exile said, the entire design is not favorable to complex writing imo. 

[In Exile]

Mongerty2 wrote...

The problem with Complex characters is that you cannot have a approve/ rival system in place because people would complain. It would be too hard to gain friendships as truly complex characters do not move on a point scale for how much they like someone.

I think you can. You just rework it.

Instead of making it about your actions, you make it about debates. Quests can trigger debates (when NPCs are present) but so can ''I heard you did...'' dialogues. 

All of it boils down to the PC and the NPC debating whether it was right or wrong for the PC act a particular way, with values shot back and forth.

Have 3 conversations of these sort for +25 each and have unique NPC relations for +75 (Loyal), -75 (Converted), +50 (Friend), -50 (Rival). 

You don't need stuff like +10 Rivalry Anders for saying ''Mages are dumb-dumb heads and their robes smell like poo!''

Modifié par In Exile, 11 juillet 2011 - 04:38 .