791 réponses à ce sujet

[PsychoBlonde]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Good thing there's an easy way to gauge difficulty and find that balance between complexity and difficulty for everyone, eh?

Oh dear, the old "you are designing for the dumbest person in the world" problem.

I'm an "average" gamer in just about every way as far as I can tell.  I play most stuff on mediumish to easy difficulty settings and enjoy it.  I can beat games without much difficulty any more.

Then I started playing an MMO.  And played it for a year and a half.  And oh boy is there a huge difference between me and the *actual* average players now.  It's not a skill difference.  It's *familiarity*.

A lot of the time, when confronted with something really unfamiliar, people just freeze up, to the point where they cannot even analyze the problem.  They become not just incapable of completing it but incapable of even figuring out how to APPROACH it.  For some reason, I usually only do this, myself, when people are around watching me (or trying to instruct me).  If I'm alone, I don't freeze up.  But other people freeze up in different ways.

And you can't write a subroutine for "light a fire under their ass".

[Firky]

This is a long thread.

But, from the bits I've scanned, I haven't seen the aspect I'm vaguelly interested in. Has anyone raised questions about whether iconic looks are simply more consistent with the cinematic approach?

I'm one of those people who barely notices cutscenes, really, and would prefer Origins style armour, but maybe those evocative cinematic moments, in game, actually would look a lot less evocative if Isabela was flirting with x NPC wearing one of every bit of mismatched rogue gear?

DA2 did have a lot of cutscenes. Maybe thet were designed to take colours of outfits etc into account. Like I said, this isn't something I really notice, but it would make sense, right?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Firky wrote...

This is a long thread.

But, from the bits I've scanned, I haven't seen the aspect I'm vaguelly interested in. Has anyone raised questions about whether iconic looks are simply more consistent with the cinematic approach?

I did mention that the iconic looks should make it easier to design cutscenes, as you'd have fewer variabled to worry about in terms of blocking or clipping when setting animations and camera angles.

I play a modded DA2 where I can equip any armour to any character, and Fenris often has his pauldrons clip through his face when he gestures.

Luckily, I don't care about that, because I barely watch the cutscenes.  I care about them only insofar as they portray events.  The cinematic aspect of the scenes (shot framing, lighting, focus) are actually something I try to ignore, because I think they damage the game.

[Firky]

^ So pauldrons are killing RPGs!

Yeah, I guess that would make sense. (Don't get me wrong, I thought DAII was great) but the idea that cutscenes might be driving armour choices (or lack of) is depressing.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Cinematics drive a lot in the game, and it makes perfect sense that companion armour could be one of those factors. Another is the rise of 'quality' cinematics and desire to keep that quality high being (one of?) the reason(s) cited for 'dialogue anywhere' talking heads being removed. I can understand the choice, but I think it's deeply regrettable.

High-end cinematics are nice and all, but they seem to be getting a lot of emphasis and importance ascribed to them. A sign of the times, maybe. :/

[Sabariel]

Cinematics are evil. They're the reason I only got to play about 40% of FFXIII

[Feraele]

RussianSpy27 wrote...

PLEASE DON'T START A WAR HERE. I am honestly just trying to understand the corporate strategy here and I can't seem to do it.

So BioWare is ready for a compromise where they may let us add items but not SHOW them. They are adamant about it and I still have not figured out the reason.

1)  Marketting - Could it be that having party members in non-changing attire is somehow good for marketting? I don't see how. If they need posters and TV commercials with Isabella looking the way she does, what's to stop them from doing it if  a player has a choice to change up attire around and SEE it during mid game?

2) Programming Hassle - I am sure programmers spend countless hours writing difficult code for the game. I'm no expert but if it was done in Origins, how much heavy duty unbearable weight on system specs would it be to do so again and let players see different armor/attire sets? 

3) Helping non RPG players get used to RPG -  I understand the move of DA2 and desire to try and streamline the whole process like in ME2. Fair attempt. But once you say that customization will be back, how is it a strain on a non RPG player to view with her own eyes what the armor looks on a party member? 

In KOTR and in Origins, iconic looks were there. I had those Jedi robes. I had Morrigan's clothing. But I also found it very enjoyable to see Morrigan in another attire. I mean, she can put some other magical robe on and let me view it, right? 

If they chose to just purely stick with DA2 version, I may not be a fan of that, but I would at least understand it. But once there is talk of letting us customize, why the fear of party members show what they look like in other attire? I do not get it, friends.

I have a hunch about this, and it all involves, Lucas Arts, and what they did back in the day to SWG, well..wasn't only them ..was S.O.E too heh.      Took the game SWG and first did the "CU" (combat upgrade)  then  the NGE (new game experience)      The new game experience consisted of removing many, many professions that people had been playing over the years,  (this wasn't beta by the way, this was plain in the middle of people paying their monthly subs AND a brand new expansion)        

This was done all in favour of the "new" ICONIC professions.    Alot was taken away,  a massive exodus of gamers also took place, in protest, I guess you could say.    People were really really upset.

Fast forward to today, and again Lucas Arts is in the picture for SWTOR,  guess what,  iconic characters surface again.    

My hunch is, that Bioware is pretty much homogenizing their games, in the end they will all play the same and pretty much resemble each other.    Hence the changes to Dragon Age, and why the protagonist is now a pre-made Bioware character and not one you built yourself.    It seems that the cinematic way..will be the way they are headed, even though if we back up and remember,   prior to Awakening  being released, we were told that Dog (mabari warhound) would not be in Awakening due to the fact that he was all cinematic, and cinematics are costly.     *laughs*

Dragon Age 2:   Alot of cinematics,  isn't it lovely... you just sit back there and watch the game play for you.    

[Feraele]

Stanley Woo wrote...

How often do you see Superman wearing a green costume? How about orange or yellow? when have you seen him dye his hair brown or blonde? Or grow his hair out? How often is he portrayed as a lean, wiry fellow rather than a muscular build?

Or something even more specific: Green Lantern. His costume is usually a certain shade of green, but very bold. it's not teal, not turquoise, not even olive. And even when possessed by Parallax, his mask remains the same.

Even Spider-Man, who has gone through several different costume changes, has a particular build and way of moving that defines the character. His colours are always bold (blue and red, black and white, red and gold, blue and white, etc.), so you don't see him in grey or pastels or depicted as having a bulky, muscular build.

That's what iconic means--to have a certain look that defines the character. Lara Croft wears a tight t-shirt, khaki shorts, carries two guns and has her hair in a single braid--instantly recognizable. Ronald McDonald--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Flemeth--instantly recognizable. Dragon Age II Isabela--also instantly recognizable. The blood smear across the nose of Hawke--instantly recognizable. Darth Vader, Master Chief, Optimus Prime, Predator, Tali, Daleks, RoboCop, Death's Hand--all instantly recognizable for who they are and what they represent for their respective brands.

That's what we're going for when we talk about iconic party members.

Your #2 point doesn't really have anything to do with iconic characters. It is trying to dictate to us where we spend our resources. The point you make is not impossible, nor is it necessarily difficult to include in a game, but given finite resources and time, where do we put people and what do we have them do? Your point #2 is not a bad idea, certainly, but in Dragon Age II, we decided to put those resources elsewhere.

Stan, we aren't playing Champions Online, or City of Heroes.   We liked our characters  and team mates in DA: Origins.    Morrigan is iconic in her own right by just being who she is, same for Flemeth,  Alistair,  Leiliana.   It wasn't about what they were wearing.  It was about who they were/are.    

You guys had a great thing going in Dragon Age: Origins,  should never have second-guessed yourselves.    But ..it's too late for that now. 

[Monica21]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

@monica - The only reason I mentioned the Anders thread thing is because you said you participated in the Anders debates while apparently trying to support your opinion of Anders, etc. - just don't remember you from there or the other threads. Either way, yes, let's get back on topic (such as it is).

No, I didn't. I didn't bring up Anders until another poster did. 

And since this is a non-spoiler forum my initial comment about non-polarizing characters wasn't even about the companions. It was about the utter lack of motivation from either of the end bosses. If I'd meant companions I would have said companions. (Not that I expect anyone to read my mind.) Somehow it spiraled into a really weird Anders/Loghain tangent, which was never my intention. Lack of sleep, dealing with frustrating co-workers, and only being able to read a forum a few hours after you've posted in a rush is, again, another lesson learned. Thanks guys!

Modifié par Monica21, 09 septembre 2011 - 01:26 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Xewaka wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...
The modern gamer doesn't want to know what THAC0 is, couldn't care less whether Choking Cloud gives you a -2 or -3 to Acrobatics, and who chooses Fire Arrow over Fireball not because it does more damage, but because it looks friggin' BOSS when it explodes on the Mayonnaise Elemental's face!

I don't know if to be amused at your disconnection or offended by your condescension and patronizing. I'll choose the former, it leaves us both better.

I chose both. I want to start a successful business some day and after a few years of building a dedicated customer base, I plan on changing it all just for the sake of trying to reach a segment of the market that isn't into the type of product I make, and using lower quality parts/products and see how many of those customers I can keep. It'll be like a mini game. .

[Pasquale1234]

Feraele wrote...

I have a hunch about this, and it all involves, Lucas Arts, and what they did back in the day to SWG, well..wasn't only them ..was S.O.E too heh.      Took the game SWG and first did the "CU" (combat upgrade)  then  the NGE (new game experience)      The new game experience consisted of removing many, many professions that people had been playing over the years,  (this wasn't beta by the way, this was plain in the middle of people paying their monthly subs AND a brand new expansion)        

This was done all in favour of the "new" ICONIC professions.    Alot was taken away,  a massive exodus of gamers also took place, in protest, I guess you could say.    People were really really upset.

Fast forward to today, and again Lucas Arts is in the picture for SWTOR,  guess what,  iconic characters surface again.    

My hunch is, that Bioware is pretty much homogenizing their games, in the end they will all play the same and pretty much resemble each other.    Hence the changes to Dragon Age, and why the protagonist is now a pre-made Bioware character and not one you built yourself.    It seems that the cinematic way..will be the way they are headed, even though if we back up and remember,   prior to Awakening  being released, we were told that Dog (mabari warhound) would not be in Awakening due to the fact that he was all cinematic, and cinematics are costly.     *laughs*

Dragon Age 2:   Alot of cinematics,  isn't it lovely... you just sit back there and watch the game play for you.    

Yep.  DA2 took a huge leap toward producing an interactive movie marketed as an RPG.

Some people do seem to really like, possibly even prefer that genre.  But it is an entirely different genre.  Whether that audience will be enough to support the franchise going forward remains to be seen.

Bioware set a very different direction for DA2, and I have seen no indication of any intention to change that direction.  Just an occasional bone thrown at those of us who do not like the new direction - but what I have seen thus far does not constitute a return to the type of RPG I so enjoyed with DAO.

Sigh.

[RussianSpy27]

I would like to extend my appreciation to Stan Woo and Mr. Gaider in taking the time to address our concerns about this topic. I didn't expect my OP to generate so much detailed developer feedback here. Thank you so much. At the end of the day, folks, the developers are familiar with our arguments and they're taking all of it into account.

If I may throw my two cents into this, I think the feedback helped me understand and clarify my question. Yes, development costs are involved, and yes, iconic appearance is what BioWare wishes to move forward because they believe that will make their vision of the product better.

I have two final comments on this:

(1) Stan, do you recall specific DA:O item packs from Blood Dragon Armor, Return to Ostagar and Warden's Peak for instance? So, my Warden was a rogue and couldn't for a while equip most of these armor sets that were specifically designed in their own way and if I'm not mistaken used in some commercials. So, not being able to have enough strength to equip the items, I gave King Calian's armor to Alistar and Warden Commander one to Stan and while my Warden did not portray the famed sets in game, his companions did, which made me "proud" of the fact that the sets were indeed as good looking and legendary as we were told. I even called a buddy the other day and said "yo dude check it out my Stan is rocking the Warden's keep armor!"

Now, neither DA:O nor DA2 are MMOs, so it's not like there is any sort of "showing off" your armor to anyone but programmed AI (I do not talk to my computer when I'm bored : P), but it did make me appreciate the DLC set designs much more.

(2) Stan rightly pointed out how customizing the player is core of an RPG; I'd just like to point out that DA party characters are not NPCs. NPCs are allies you can't control. We control party guys just as much as the player, with the exception of dialogue and the fact that our hero is the main one whom we can't deselect. Sometimes we even needed to choose party members (Malbari dominance, stealing/lockpicking, journey to Fade to save Connor, etc). I think of each of them as the PC, not NPC or at least 2/3 PC.

[tmp7704]

Monica21 wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

Edit: So, after reading...It makes him a deserter. He deserted the field, justified or not. And, knowing the sheer number of darkspawn that he faces, it makes his other actions even more questionable.

So, any military commander anywhere that's ever retreated is a deserter?

Essentially, it's court martial material, yes. Cowardice, desertion, and insubordination are all considered military crimes. The actual punishment may vary depending on how the trial goes, but it is a reason to hold one.

[Monica21]

tmp7704 wrote...
Essentially, it's court martial material, yes. Cowardice, desertion, and insubordination are all considered military crimes. The actual punishment may vary depending on how the trial goes, but it is a reason to hold one.

Loghain thread

[tmp7704]

"In my defense, four other people started it."

[Stanley Woo]

Thanks to RussianSpy27 for the thread and the opportunity for us to clarify, explain and discuss. Since folks don't seem to be interested in discussing the topic anymore, I'm going to shut it down.

End of line.