202 réponses à ce sujet

[AmstradHero]

Firky wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...
As I've said before, I'd love to see smaller developers work on a "risky" "classic RPG" with less cinematic presentation and without full voice acting. I'd help work on one. But as you've said, that's not a AAA title.

Hey, Amstrad. How's tricks? Have you played Spiderweb games? http://www.spidweb.com/

*cries* Still getting to Avadon.

I often hear people talking about how you shouldn't change stuff that works, etc, but would "today's gamer" whoever he or she is, really want (a literal) Baldur's Gate all over again, especially in competition with other "AAA" games. (I would, but I honestly don't know if it could ever go beyond it's niche.)

Hi Firky, I'm still working away slowly on The Shattered War. It'll get done eventually. 

I'd never heard of Spiderweb games. They look like they would be right up the alley of some of the people on these boards who lament "the death of the real RPG", but at the same time, I agree with you that I don't see them ever progressing beyond a small niche. Sure, it'll deliver something that a small group of people will applaud and rave about to no end, but it'll ultimately be a small fish in the giant ocean of video games.

dragon_83 wrote...
For a few years, adventure games were dead. There were very few good adventure games in the mid 2000s. Since the late 2000s, we started to get more and more adventure game, but mostly they are not as good as the classics. Maybe the RPG genre will follow the same trend.

So why aren't they "as good as the classics?"

The basic concept of an adventure game has hardly changed since "the good old days of adventure games", though they've become more accessible (good riddance to pixel hunting!) and "modernised". Voiced characters, better graphics, improved interfaces...

On the whole there's no reason that a modern adventure game shouldn't hold up against older ones except for the fact that we now expect "more" from modern games and we've got a long standing sense of nostalgia about those "good old adventure games".

Come to think of it, that sounds surprisingly similar to some of the things said by "stalwart fans of the RPG genre"...

Modifié par AmstradHero, 25 août 2011 - 12:34 .

[cruelgretchen]

haha greg zeschuks vision probably is soming like this:
average gameplay downtuned to 10 hours main game 49$
20 different DL items ...each 10$
DL content 1 hour each title for 10$
/sarcasm off

relevant is only $$ in the company pocket, as if the fanbase has a say in anything...just a pool for
to pick up ideas of others from time to time ....free;)

Modifié par cruelgretchen, 25 août 2011 - 12:54 .

[dragon_83]

AmstradHero wrote...

dragon_83 wrote...
For a few years, adventure games were dead. There were very few good adventure games in the mid 2000s. Since the late 2000s, we started to get more and more adventure game, but mostly they are not as good as the classics. Maybe the RPG genre will follow the same trend.

So why aren't they "as good as the classics?"

The basic concept of an adventure game has hardly changed since "the good old days of adventure games", though they've become more accessible (good riddance to pixel hunting!) and "modernised". Voiced characters, better graphics, improved interfaces...

On the whole there's no reason that a modern adventure game shouldn't hold up against older ones except for the fact that we now expect "more" from modern games and we've got a long standing sense of nostalgia about those "good old adventure games".

Come to think of it, that sounds surprisingly similar to some of the things said by "stalwart fans of the RPG genre"...

I like the new adventure games, but it is not hard to see that these games put a bigger emphasis on storytelling, and less on interesting puzzles (and I'm not talking about pixel hunting). The games are very easy, the puzzles are obvious. And sometimes even the stories lack the quality of the older games (Longest Journey, Syberia series, Sanitarium etc).

Modifié par dragon_83, 25 août 2011 - 01:23 .

[Morroian]

AmstradHero wrote...

DA2 suggests that your DAO choices matter in a significant fashion during the character creation process. They don't. That's poor expectation management, and effectively mistreating your customers. That's why I disapprove.

I disagree, granted I followed the DA2 development so I knew what the options were going to be but the character creation process did not imply what anything other than a persistent universe created by your decisions in DAO, something Bioware followers would have had experience of in Kotor 2. The very fact that it was so separated from DAO in terms of characters and location, which anyone would have known had they done the slightest bit of research, also counts against those expectations.  

Modifié par Morroian, 25 août 2011 - 01:21 .

[Barry Bathernak]

cruelgretchen wrote...

haha greg zeschuks vision probably is soming like this:
average gameplay downtuned to 10 hours main game 49$
20 different DL items ...each 10$
DL content 1 hour each title for 10$
/sarcasm off

relevant is only $$ in the company pocket, as if the fanbase has a say in anything...just a pool for
to pick up ideas of others from time to time ....free;)

its really sad that this seems to be true.

[AmstradHero]

Morroian wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

DA2 suggests that your DAO choices matter in a significant fashion during the character creation process. They don't. That's poor expectation management, and effectively mistreating your customers. That's why I disapprove.

I disagree, granted I followed the DA2 development so I knew what the options were going to be but the character creation process did not imply what anything other than a persistent universe created by your decisions in DAO, something Bioware followers would have had experience of in Kotor 2. The very fact that it was so separated from DAO in terms of characters and location, which anyone would have known had they done the slightest bit of research, also counts against those expectations.  

For starters, KotOR 2 was made by Obsidian, and there is no import there, merely occasional reference to events within KotOR. The player can suggest what happened in KotOR at a couple of points, but that's it. There are also no consequences as a result of this. It's merely flavour. But this is fine, because the player is never led to believe that they'll get anything more.

In case you didn't realise from my sig, I'm a Dragon Age modder, and I take DA lore in my mods seriously. I do a lot of research to make my work fit in with all the Dragon Age lore that players have at their disposal. I follow the Dragon Age franchise pretty closely as a result, which includes DA2's development. Part way through the dev cycle there was reference to decisions from DAO being imported. Not importing your character, because DA2 was with a new character, but importing your decisions. This suggests that these decisions should matter to a certain degree.

When you import your character from DAO (or expansion/DLC), you get a big list of decisions that you made with that character, which to me fairly explicitly indicates that these should have an effect on DA2. They don't, and herein lies the disconnect. Due to DA2 spoilers I can't go into detail, but I've previously addressed the subject in this blog post, 

I'm speaking as someone who likes DA2 and DAO, but as far as I'm concerned this is one case where the franchise really drops the ball by actively setting expectations for the player that the writers weren't prepared to meet.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 25 août 2011 - 01:58 .

[Zjarcal]

AmstradHero wrote...

When you import your character from DAO (or expansion/DLC), you get a big list of decisions that you made with that character, which to me fairly explicitly indicates that these should have an effect on DA2. They don't, and herein lies the disconnect. Due to DA2 spoilers I can't go into detail, but I've previously addressed the subject in this blog post, 

Well to be fair they do have an effect... a incredibly tiny effect. Although the Connor and Cailan decisions do indeed have zero effect.

[maxernst]

Zjarcal wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

When you import your character from DAO (or expansion/DLC), you get a big list of decisions that you made with that character, which to me fairly explicitly indicates that these should have an effect on DA2. They don't, and herein lies the disconnect. Due to DA2 spoilers I can't go into detail, but I've previously addressed the subject in this blog post, 

Well to be fair they do have an effect... a incredibly tiny effect. Although the Connor and Cailan decisions do indeed have zero effect.

Fortunately, they won't have that problem with DA3, since Hawke doesn't make any meaningful decisions. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

mrcrusty wrote...

But as that's not really relevant to the topic, I'll try and bring it back. No, I don't think RPGs are irrelevant at all, neither as a concept, nor as it's own genre.

It's just that RPGs have always been a niche on the cusp of being mainstream. What's changed isn't the perception of RPGs, or it's relevance, it's how developers and publishers look at the genre in terms of market size. RPGs are not mainstream games and even commercial success stories in the genre only sell ~2-3 million copies (BG/BG2) with the exception being Bethesda's open world sandbox games. Even the better A or AA RPGs only sell around 500k-1mil copies. They aren't a AAA blockbuster genre.

So, if you want to grow the audience to the point where you're selling 5-6 million copies while actively taking steps to ensure that the niche and hardcore elements are less prominent to attract such a crowd, you can't then say that the genre has become less relevant as a whole, it's just less relevant to you.

That's like slowly adding Coca Cola to your Pepsi bottles because you think it'll get more customers then eventually proclaiming that Pepsi is no longer relevant to today's beverage market.

It's still relevant, just not to your drinks anymore since you are slowly phasing it out.

If developers and publishers wanted to start with more grounded projects and targets (10 mil budget, 2 1/2 years, 500k sales or something), then you'd see a lot more traditional RPGs in the market. There is actually quite a healthy handheld market for JRPGs which basically work under this model. Modest investments, modest returns.

Unfortunately, while there are developers who'd be happy to do that here in North America (Obsidian), no publisher wants that, preferring the higher risk & reward scenarios of shorter dev times, higher budgets and mandates for things like visuals, cinematics, advertising as well as a high mark for profit. Obviously, the developer is gonna try and pull in more people but making it appeal less to it's niche fundamentals and make it more Action-y instead to try and meet the publisher's demands. After all, they've gotta eat and feed their families, too. It's a shame, but such is business.

This is why I had hoped, during DAO's development (remember that DAO was being developed as a PC title only) that BioWare, while continuing to make some console games (like ME), and some of those would likely be quite good (like KotOR was), would abandon traditional publishing for their PC games entirely, and move to a self-published digital download model.  BioWare would make PC games, and BioWare would sell PC games through their online store, and that way they could afford to make smaller games if they wanted to serve a smaller market.  A bigger market would obviously mean cross-platform games, and they would still have their console development team for that.

Sadly, though, instead of doing that they sold their entire operation to a publisher, and a publisher - as you point out - has different objectives.

[string3r]

Bioware is becoming less relevant.

[Tsuga C]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
This is why I had hoped, ...

^This is the #1 missed gaming opportunity of the decade, at least. 

[alex90c]

maxernst wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

When you import your character from DAO (or expansion/DLC), you get a big list of decisions that you made with that character, which to me fairly explicitly indicates that these should have an effect on DA2. They don't, and herein lies the disconnect. Due to DA2 spoilers I can't go into detail, but I've previously addressed the subject in this blog post, 

Well to be fair they do have an effect... a incredibly tiny effect. Although the Connor and Cailan decisions do indeed have zero effect.

Fortunately, they won't have that problem with DA3, since Hawke doesn't make any meaningful decisions. 

Sure he does. He makes the decision to become everyone's b!tch

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

alex90c wrote...

maxernst wrote...

Zjarcal wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

When you import your character from DAO (or expansion/DLC), you get a big list of decisions that you made with that character, which to me fairly explicitly indicates that these should have an effect on DA2. They don't, and herein lies the disconnect. Due to DA2 spoilers I can't go into detail, but I've previously addressed the subject in this blog post, 

Well to be fair they do have an effect... a incredibly tiny effect. Although the Connor and Cailan decisions do indeed have zero effect.

Fortunately, they won't have that problem with DA3, since Hawke doesn't make any meaningful decisions. 

Sure he does. He makes the decision to become everyone's b!tch

It's not a decision if you want to finish the game.

[Morroian]

AmstradHero wrote...

When you import your character from DAO (or expansion/DLC), you get a big list of decisions that you made with that character, which to me fairly explicitly indicates that these should have an effect on DA2. They don't, and herein lies the disconnect. Due to DA2 spoilers I can't go into detail, but I've previously addressed the subject in this blog post, 

So its about Leliana, who a vanishing minority killed in DAO, and if you read the codex she does have a reason for being alive even if you killed her. Unless you killed her I don't really see that you've got anything to complain about and even then you should adopt a wait and see strategy.

Modifié par Morroian, 26 août 2011 - 04:40 .

[Elvhen Veluthil]

There is a relevant blog post at Gamasutra about the topic discussed here:

http://www.gamasutra..._of_the_RPG.php

[Nozybidaj]

mrcrusty wrote...
 I'll actually be grateful when they can just come outright and say they don't want to make RPGs anymore, but interactive narratives stacked with combat instead.

Didn't they already say that in the lead up to DA2?  I seem to recall a statement along those lines, to the effect that "we aren't making games for rpg fans".  That stands out fairly clearly in my mind, though I'm far too lazy to go dig up a quote.

[AmstradHero]

Morroian wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

When you import your character from DAO (or expansion/DLC), you get a big list of decisions that you made with that character, which to me fairly explicitly indicates that these should have an effect on DA2. They don't, and herein lies the disconnect. Due to DA2 spoilers I can't go into detail, but I've previously addressed the subject in this blog post, 

So its about SPOILERS REMOVED, who a vanishing minority SPOILERS REMOVED, and if you read the codex  {there's a reason}. Unless you SPOILERS REMOVED I don't really see that you've got anything to complain about and even then you should adopt a wait and see strategy.

It's not merely about that choice, and if you'd read carefully, there's another very significant issue that can occur based on the events of Awakening and DA2. One that would pretty much destroy a major point of DA2's narrative. Sure, these can be explained away by "a wizard did it" excuses, but that comes across as poor writing. Even worse is that it's totally unnecessary and could have been avoided entirely. In that blog post, I'm simply using a prominent example to demonstrate the symptoms of a larger problem.

The issue is that it's clear that the writers in Dragon Age want to tell their story.  Arguing with this point is ridiculous because David Gaider explicitly stated it!  Moreover, I have absolutely no problem with that, provided that the design and marketing don't suggest that it's primarily the player's story. That's misleading, and that's where I'll take umbrage at the behaviour.

Furthermore, the choices in what I consider my "canon" playthrough are irrelevant if it turns out that things would have turned out exactly the same no matter what choice I had made. DA2 does this a lot, not just with decisions in DAO, but decisions within the game itself. A choice isn't meaningful if every possible decision leads to exactly the same outcome. To invalidate the decisions in DA2 is bad enough, but to invalidate previously meaningful decisions of its predecessor while still trying to suggest that they were important is disrespectful to the player.

[Lucy Glitter]

Well he sucks if he said that.

It's sad he has that mindset, too. Makes me wonder what i've been supporting and fangirling over all my life lol.

Modifié par Lucy_Glitter, 26 août 2011 - 07:25 .

[FieryDove]

Lucy_Glitter wrote...

Well he sucks if he said that.

It's sad he has that mindset, too. Makes me wonder what i've been supporting and fangirling over all my life lol.

I can't believe he said that. I won't! I'm going...away now.

[eroeru]

string3r wrote...

Bioware is becoming less relevant.

[Zanallen]

I really don't see what the problem is here. All he is really saying is that the genres are blending and Bioware hopes to make great games with strong stories, fun combat and a sense of character progression. And since no one can agree as to what the hell an RPG really is, I think his assessment is just fine.

[Yrkoon]

So... the RPG genre, which we can't define, is blending with another genre, which we can't mention? Not sure I understand what the hell that's supposed to even mean.

But I do know one thing. RPGs and Action have always been fused together. BG1, now 13 years old, isn't turn-based by default. It's real time.

Greg Zeschuk's comment is silly.

[Zanallen]

Yrkoon wrote...

So... the RPG genre, which we can't define, is blending with another genre, which we can't mention? Not sure I understand what the hell that's supposed to even mean.

But I do know one thing. RPGs and Action have always been fused together. BG1, now 13 years old, isn't turn-based by default. It's real time.

Greg Zeschuk's comment is silly.

Blending with several genres, actually. More and more games are using what were traditionally "RPG elements".

[Yrkoon]

If more and more games are becoming RPG-like, then how in the maker's name can anyone say that RPG's are becoming less relevant?

Modifié par Yrkoon, 26 août 2011 - 02:58 .

[Zanallen]

Yrkoon wrote...

If More and more games are becoming RPG-like, Then how in the maker's name can anyone say that RPG's are becoming less relevant?

He isn't saying that role-playing games are becoming less relevant. He is saying that the term "RPG" is becoming less relevant. Which makes sense if genres are beginning to belnd together. He is saying that all that really matters is that it is a good game with a strong story, fun mechanics and a sense of progression.