428 réponses à ce sujet

[House_Hlaalu]

tmp7704 wrote...

House_Hlaalu wrote...

If you don't like playing through all that combat and action (the stuff that makes a videogame a videogame)

There's plenty videogames which don't have either of these. They don't stop being videogames.

And you know, considering how much of the "combat" tends to be just pointless filler that doesn't add anything to the story... i can definitely see where she's coming from. I'd probably make use of such skip button myself occasionally, just like i do use killallhostiles script sometimes.

Name one game that doesn't have gameplay. Oh, and puzzles and stuff like that are gameplay.

The only one i can think of would be Heavy Rain and Indigo Phrophecy. Those games are interactive movies, even admitted by the devs themselves. And even then they have some puzzle element to it.

[House_Hlaalu]

Shazzie wrote...

With that in mind, I'm not interested in a 'skip combat' button, provided the combat has depth and meaning and is interesting. (I would have gladly taken a 'skip combat' button for much of DA2's combat situations, though all I had was 'turn this on easy and wake up when it's over', but that's simply personal preference- I didn't find DA2's combat to be interesting). But, overall, I would not ask for a 'skip' button, even for combat (such as much of DA2's) that I didn't like. I would instead ask for 'better combat'. Combat has its place in many video games, and I wouldn't want to get rid of it in the games it has its place in... even if I usually do not play games for their combat. I'm far more interested in story. Story can lead to combat, or puzzles (stuff you 'fight' with your brain), or more story... all of which is fine by me.

I agree with this part, i hated DA2's combat, but a skip combat option is not the sulution, better combat is.

[Maconbar]

Huntress wrote...

Ok everyone calm down.. think for a moment.. how long ago was that article wrote? 20 Feb 2009
For how long did dragon age origen was in development? 5 years?
was dragon age origen finished before or after this article?
The article was posted before dragon age origens was released  November 3, 2009.

have a good night all!

This just proves that her mindset ruined DA:O, DA:A, and DA:2.

[Siegdrifa]

Wow, .... when i was working in video game industrie i had my share of BS from non gamer that were working in a video games company, like "if you want your game to be playable by any people, you need to make it playable with only ONE button" and me to think "yeah that's why there is more than 10 boutton on a playstation paddle **** !"

I think she don't grasp the concept of video games completly, she don't seem intrested in video games in first place, not for the "game part", only for the package where the game fit.

Still, reading this is not THAT shocking, lot of people (especialy girls) loved to "play" FF7 / 8 / 9 for the story and cinematic, but not for the game itself, their reward was unlocking a new cinematic, i knew some that made 1 new save before each cinematic, so they could watch them again without playing.

But she is largely exagerating, 100h games ... where ? wich game have a story long enough for 100h ? it's so rare, games are usualy 4 / 15 h, RPG are 15 / 35h it's hard to get longer games, skipping the action would reduce many hour just few minues games, in the best case a couple of houres.

I can't think a "skip" boutton for action could be allowed ... it's like cheating, you are near to die because your screwed up, just skip ! yet you get "average xp and loot" ? for free ? wtf !
And what happend if the outcome of the fight if it decide a path in the game ? it will be random ?

Solution : i prefer if they introduce ultra easy difficulty for extensively bad player, it already make the game shorter, but at least they have to see the whole graphic and level package. (i'm not against unskilled player to enjoy their product, but a "skip" button, to enjoy only 15% of the product? noway).

Last point, nearly all game today have quicksave, no BS about "because i'm in a hurry", just save and keep going later, like everyones else ... A video game is not a damn 20 minutes cartoon !

[Nimrodell]

Sutekh wrote...

 @OP

Did she say she wished games would also come with a bulky mafioso holding a gun against your temple and forcing you to push the button in question under threat of a forced visit to the bottom of Lake Michigan wearing concrete shoes and wrapped in cheap plastic bags? Because I totally missed that. 

If there's a skip button, there's a skip button. If some people want to push it, that's none of your business, and you don't have to judge them or her for wanting it. You, on the other hand, don't have to push it. That's a wonderful and revolutionary concept called "option".

A game is not defined by its gameplay - and gameplay isn't only fighting. I love fighting, I do; wouldn't skip it unless I absolutely have to, but skipping some fights people might deem tedious doesn't destroy the spirit of the game or whatever holy and sacred thing you think is in jeopardy here.

I'm slightly bothered by her generalizing opinion of what we women like and dislike (OK, more than slightly), but when it comes to gaming, she's a writer who doesn't like fighting. It's her absolute right, and it shouldn't matter unless, one day, she's suddenly in charge of in-game combat.

LordKinoda wrote...

Then DON'T PLAY GAMES ! This is a hobby. It's not a second job. If you don't have the time and energy to put into a video game experience, then DON'T PLAY VIDEO GAMES ! Assigning your ludicrous preferences onto a video game because it does not fit your schedule is just downright insulting to me, sorry. I love the dialog in RPG's as well, it's the reason that it's my favorite genre of game. But that doesn't change the fact that the combat is also just as necessary for more interactivity and to have more of an actual "game" to the gamplay.

Again, how people play their games is none of your business. Why do you care? How does it prevent you from enjoying playing?

I agree with you 100% . And I really don't understand why some people are miffed with what Jennifer Hepler said 4 years ago - as long as such solutions are optional, no one should be complaining (just look at ME3 General Discussion forums and the whole 'arrows are stupid - I'm not rtard' thing). Unbelievable.

[Siegdrifa]

^
At some point some decision must be made by the dev, you can't let te player do anything they want.
You can skip dialogue, you can skip action, just put the games, start, skip skip skip skip skip game over, yeah, because i want to skip both; how to turn a 25h game in 45sec skipping trash.

It's ridiculous, a good writing don't make people wants to skip it! a good action don't make people wants to skip it.

I say NO to dumd solution, make a better game instead, thanks.

[Foolsfolly]

But she is largely exagerating, 100h games ... where ?

I know I went over 100 hours with Morrowind. That's the only game in my experience to do that. Sure I spent maybe too much time arranging things in my house or just dungeon crawling. But I could stay with the same character for a long time in that game. A LOT more time with the two expansion sets (although I'd blast through Tribunal as quickly as I could because I hated the story, setting, and characters. Loved Bloodmoon though).

....I... I kinda wanna start a Morrowind game now.

Anyway, to the topic at hand...

Her answer to "How do you make games more accessible" is: "Make them movies."

Hilarious.

Gameplay is why you play games. Well, perhaps Alan Wake is an exception. I played that because I loved the television show format that game experimented with. And I found the mysteries engaging enough to propel me through the game. I don't think there's a single person who played that game because the gameplay was fun or interesting, it wasn't remotely that.

There might be a future for interactive movies and there might not be. But a game is something I play. I do the actions, I decide the actions, and I have fun by doing those things. Watching a movie is an enjoyment as well but games are meant to be played.

A button that skips gameplay misses the point of the entire medium. It's the only thing that separates it from all other media. And I find more enjoyment from games that integrate their stories more into the gameplay. It's no coincidence that I love the Half-Life games as much as I do. Cutscenes are extremely rare (off memory I can point to maybe 5 off memory between 2 games and 2 expansions, discounting the Gearbox expansions which I doubt are canon).

Of course, she's allowed to have her opinion, but I disagree with it rather harshly. If you don't enjoy playing video games then stripping the playing a video game part out of the game isn't going to win over non-players.

And who doesn't play games these days? There's a whole generation or two who've played them from birth, men and women. In elementary school there were about twenty of us that loaned out Nintendo and Sega games to each other, most were girls.

Just make quality games with engaging plots and characters. Having fun gameplay is a huge plus. That's how you win over non-gamers. You don't see Hollywood exces saying "How about we take away visuals in movies to win over people who don't like watching movies?" You seek to strengthen the elements of the media you're working in.

Modifié par Foolsfolly, 27 septembre 2011 - 08:23 .

[WarBaby2]

Siegdrifa wrote...
Last point, nearly all game today have quicksave, no BS about "because i'm in a hurry", just save and keep going later, like everyones else ... A video game is not a damn 20 minutes cartoon !

But that's where the industry is heading, as I said earlier: The mass market is what counts, companies that don't follow the formula tend to fail pretty quickly... sure, there are exceptions like CRPROJECT RED, but those are rare.

Modifié par WarBaby2, 27 septembre 2011 - 08:23 .

[Quething]

Just make quality games with engaging plots and characters. Having fun gameplay is a huge plus. That's how you win over non-gamers. You don't see Hollywood exces saying "How about we take away visuals in movies to win over people who don't like watching movies?" You seek to strengthen the elements of the media you're working in.

But the single most basic element of a video game is player control. Player interaction. The interface between the player and the game, where the player can determine what's happening on the screen.

How does adding more control by the player over the gaming experience do anything other than strengthen the fundamental gaming element of player control?

Would you advocate the removal of dialog skip and the implementation of more unskippable cutscenes like the opening of ME2?

(I do not want to go play Morrowind. I have things I need to do this month. They will not get done if I go play Morrowind. Dammit.)

Modifié par Quething, 27 septembre 2011 - 08:25 .

[_- Songlian -]

House_Hlaalu wrote...

Im sorry, but shouldn't a person who is in the video game bussiness actually like videogames?

If you don't like playing through all that combat and action (the stuff that makes a videogame a videogame), then why don't you just go and watch a movie or write for a tv show or something? Its all this skipping through the action in videogames nowadays that i hate. L.A. Noire had this where you could just skip all the action sequencences.

The action and playing is what makes videogames. Its the gameplay, you cant get rid of or skip through gameplay in a game!? The option is there to skip acutscene because cutscenes belong to movies and not games. Videogames need to stop pretending that they are movies, and start acting like games.

How can i buy games off a company that employs people who think like this.

Also, thats Jennifer Heppler, one of the writers for Bioware, and just ignore the big-font red comment.

You know, I come so rarely to these forums, and I still see the same threads.

It's been discussed over and over - and shouldn't have been discussed at all in the first place. She's a writer, she thinks combat is optional. If that doesn't let you sleep at night, maybe you're the one with a problem.

Modifié par - Songlian -, 27 septembre 2011 - 08:31 .

[Foolsfolly]

But the single most basic element of a video game is player control. Player interaction. The interface between the player and the game, where the player can determine what's happening on the screen.

How does adding more control by the player over the gaming experience do anything other than strengthen the fundamental gaming element of player control?

Is it still interfacing with the game if you're no longer interfacing with the game? Why not just youtube the cinematics at that point? Or watch someone else play the game? I'm positive anyone who's never played a game but watched their significant other play the game may have liked aspects of watching but would not ever find it as engrossing or enjoyable as playing the game.

It doesn't help that 99% of the games out there have stories fit for film school shorts. Not BioWare games, I love their stories, but most of the games out there are either rip offs of books and movies or just complete nonsense. And in those games we play them for the gameplay and not the story.

I will playing Saints Row: The Third later this year and that's entirely because of the gameplay. I will also be playing Skyrim and Uncharted 3 for the story and gameplay. And NO ONE finds enjoyment in watching someone play an Elder Scrolls game... Uncharted's fun to watch.

[KLUME777]

Quething wrote...

Just make quality games with engaging plots and characters. Having fun gameplay is a huge plus. That's how you win over non-gamers. You don't see Hollywood exces saying "How about we take away visuals in movies to win over people who don't like watching movies?" You seek to strengthen the elements of the media you're working in.

But the single most basic element of a video game is player control. Player interaction. The interface between the player and the game, where the player can determine what's happening on the screen.

How does adding more control by the player over the gaming experience do anything other than strengthen the fundamental gaming element of player control?

Would you advocate the removal of dialog skip and the implementation of more unskippable cutscenes like the opening of ME2?

(I do not want to go play Morrowind. I have things I need to do this month. They will not get done if I go play Morrowind. Dammit.)

Skipping stuff is not player interaction.

Instead of implementing a skip option, developers should try to make the gameplay better so that the players actually want to play it, and stop focusing on cinematics. And they both should be intertwined and complement each other.

Players wanting to skip through the game just to see the story isn't good game design, and should not be encouraged.

[WarBaby2]

KLUME777 wrote...
Players wanting to skip through the game just to see the story isn't good game design, and should not be encouraged.

Not if you ask the new breed of business compliant developers... creating gamesl ike DAO and Skyrim takes too much time... time that you can fill with cooky cutter gamedesign and generic stories... and looots of DLC.^^

Fear not, EA will fall someday, this concept has to fall flat at some point.

[Bitework]

 I have a theory that while it is Ideal to have a career or job that interests you, working in that profession eventually causes 'burnout' in the entire spectrum of that industry/trade.   That is to say, if you sell watermelons, youre less likely to go home and say "man, I really want to eat some watermelon, and then go plant a watermelon garden in the yard".

in other words, if its your job, you're less likely to enjoy it as a hobby as well.   Thats why I avoided the adult film
industry. 

anyway, onto the picture... an option to skip the "combat" is an option to skip the gameplay.  people skip dialog because they've heard it once, they don't want to hear the same damn conversation over and over every time they play that level.  I think the dialog is great, and I try to give different answers across different play throughs, but seriously, if you want to skip the interactive component of the game, they have something for you, it's called a book. or even a TV show.

Modifié par Bitework, 27 septembre 2011 - 09:25 .

[Quething]

Foolsfolly wrote...
Is it still interfacing with the game if you're no longer interfacing with the game? Why not just youtube the cinematics at that point? Or watch someone else play the game?

Is it still interfacing with the game if you're skipping over dialog? If you're pounding on the paragon response just to get through the conversation and get back to the fighting? If you're ignoring every "investigate" and spacebarring through every bnk file? Why not just play COD at that point?

I ask again: would you sincerely advocate unskippable cutscenes? Dialog that can't be spacebarred past? Auto-inquiry by Shepard that forced you to take every Investigate option on the dialog wheel?

Because all of those things are also integral part of a BioWare game. They are gameplay. Responsive to player input. Remove them, remove those story elements and the ability to develop your character through dialog and watch the world react to that, and you have completely gutted the game.

And yet: we demand that games make those things skippable as a matter of course.

And we should. Because if you screw up combat, you may end up playing the same dialog or cutscene many times, and that is not fun. That is not good gameplay. That is not new and engaging. That is just bad and no one wants to do it.

But in a true story-driven game, it is just as possible to screw up dialog as it is combat. Just as possible to want to reload a conversation a dozen times to get it right as it is to want to reload a battle a dozen times in order to survive.

If we don't have to replay the conversation every time in order to repeat the battle, even though the conversation is an integral part of gameplay, then how does it make any sense to have to replay the battle every time in order to repeat the conversation? Why is one bit of gameplay more sacred than the other? Neither is any more or less part of the game than the other.

Modifié par Quething, 27 septembre 2011 - 09:24 .

[WarBaby2]

Quething wrote...
Why is one bit of gameplay more sacred than the other? Neither is any more or less part of the game than the other.

Because one of them always is more important and integral then the other... asually it's the gameplay (combat). Now, if that is boring/repetitive/uninspired, then you have a problem because people will want to skip it...

I don't say it's right, I'm just saying that I experienced the same urge with DA2...

Modifié par WarBaby2, 27 septembre 2011 - 09:42 .

[Herr Uhl]

*pokes head in thread*

I know plenty of people using killallhostiles or cruising (as in, reading a book while doing it) through on casual that would enjoy such a feature. I don't see the big deal.

[WarBaby2]

Herr Uhl wrote...

*pokes head in thread*

I know plenty of people using killallhostiles or cruising (as in, reading a book while doing it) through on casual that would enjoy such a feature. I don't see the big deal.

If DA2 was a budget title, that is only half as long because most of the gameplay is just copy pasted (environments, monsters, etc.), and not a full prize AAA product, there would be no discussion... but it isn't.

EDIT: Sorry, getting alittle of trek here..^^

Modifié par WarBaby2, 27 septembre 2011 - 09:51 .

[Foolsfolly]

Is it still interfacing with the game if you're skipping over dialog? If you're pounding on the paragon response just to get through the conversation and get back to the fighting? If you're ignoring every "investigate" and spacebarring through every bnk file? Why not just play COD at that point?

That's a fair question. (Well except COD thing, ME, DA, and the like play very differently from COD and you could be playing the game because you enjoy these styles of gameplay more than FPSs).

I ask again: would you sincerely advocate unskippable cutscenes? Dialog that can't be spacebarred past? Auto-inquiry by Shepard that forced you to take every Investigate option on the dialog wheel?

Here's the difference. Replayability.That's why we demand these things be skipped. I don't think there are many people who skip dialogue in a BioWare game on their first play through. I'm sure there are some games people skip in their first play through (god knows I've had to review games that I wouldn't have finished if I had to watch all the crappy cutscenes and the like).

But when you're replaying a game you don't find it so interesting to hear the same dialogue for the 3rd, 4th, or however many times. Sometimes you do. I've yet to skip through the Landsmeet despite who knows how many play throughs, nor any conversation with the Arishok. But I couldn't tell you the last time I listened to all of Leliana, Alistair, Wynne, or Morrigan's dialogue. I just skip through that and pick the right dialogue choices to make them happy.

If we don't have to replay the conversation every time in order to repeat the battle, even though the conversation is an integral part of gameplay, then how does it make any sense to have to replay the battle every time in order to repeat the conversation?

Again another valid question. I think it comes down to why exactly do we play games? Is it the story, gameplay? A combination of both?

I think gameplay ranks high enough in the experience that that's a huge reason to play. It's not the only reason to play, I was not a fan of DA:O's combat system. I replayed the game many many times despite thinking it was a weak system. And the big combat heavy parts of the game are clearly the worst parts of that game (Deep Roads were it's like two hours of constant fights and the Fade which is a few simple shape-changing puzzles and solo combat for an hour or two). The strongest parts being the more story driven aspects.

And in the end of the day those aspects were why I played it as much as I did. But other than the Deep Roads and Fade there's no place where I feel skipping the combat would benefit the game. I found Redcliffe, Sacred Ashes, and the Denerim segments were a great mix of story, dialogue, and combat. And frankly, I feel the game hit its stride when Eamon arrived in Denerim. With only a small dip in going through Denerim fighting hordes of darkspawn. But that's forgivable thanks to it being the final battle.

I still don't think skipping combat is a good choice. I never will. A game is a game because of gameplay. AI makes battles intense, and that intensity gives the player that sense of achievement when they win. And winning is a huge part of gaming. "YEAH! I killed the High Dragon!" Is more exciting and rewarding than skipping it and having the game say, "Yeah, that thing died between these cutscenes."

I do play games for story, especially BioWare games who historically have had meh gameplay in my personal opinion. But the gameplay is funner than just making a bunch of choices. The choices add depth to the game and roleplaying but in the end of the day it's just checking off multiple choice options. The gameplay is challenging, rewarding, and fun. The story gives it weight, emotion, and drive.

And while replaying a game it's nice to not hear that Mage in the Fade drone on and on and on every time you play the game, I can't think of caring about a storyline in a game without gameplay. Discounting the desire to skip an unbalanced boss fight like Master Vrook in KOTOR2 or that Russian guy obsessed with the 80s in Alpha Protocol. Broken mechanics and uneven bosses kill games anyway. Skipping those doesn't fix the problem it just ignores it.

[Herr Uhl]

WarBaby2 wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

*pokes head in thread*

I know plenty of people using killallhostiles or cruising (as in, reading a book while doing it) through on casual that would enjoy such a feature. I don't see the big deal.

If DA2 was a budget title, that is only half as long because most of the gameplay is just copy pasted (environments, monsters, etc.), and not a full prize AAA product, there would be no discussion... but it isn't.

EDIT: Sorry, getting alittle of trek here..^^

I'm mostly talking about DAO here. Even stellar combat can become a chore the third or fourth time you do it.

[esper]

I know for a fact that the reason I am not playing da:o or da:a anymore is the combat. I want to make more wardens to import into da2 or simply replay da:o to make one little choice different, but I don't do it because I have to replay the whole thing. I still have fun with da2's combat, but once we come to da3 I properly won't be playing da2 anymore because I don't won't to have to fight all the small meaningless fights again.
Combat is fun so long I still haven't mastered it and I feel that I can get better at it, but after I feel that I have mastered it gets a little boring and a core I have to get true in order to enjoy the game. I wouldn't mind a function that let me skip all hostiles in the non-boss battles.

I

[Sabariel]

I wish I could have fast-forwarded through all the "night fights" in Kirkwall

[Foolsfolly]

I know for a fact that the reason I am not playing da:o or da:a anymore is the combat. I want to make more wardens to import into da2 or simply replay da:o to make one little choice different, but I don't do it because I have to replay the whole thing. I still have fun with da2's combat, but once we come to da3 I properly won't be playing da2 anymore because I don't won't to have to fight all the small meaningless fights again.

[snarky comment] With DA2's import function you're likely to not see a difference! [/snarky comment]

I haven't played a DA:O run in a while because of its monstrous length. Not just in combat (which again I'm not a fan of) but also its dialogue. Like the small novel that is talking to your companions (Lily and Wynne being the most droning to me. Zevran, Sten, and Oghren being the most acceptable to listen to over and over again).

It's just a really really long game and I just don't want to invest that time into it right now. I will again one day, I know that for a fact. But not now. Probably one giant DA series run when the third one comes out. All the games, all the DLC. Probably take a whole month.

[snarky comment] And then I'll just be pissed off when the import function messes everything up! [/snarky comment]

[Jenova65]

 It worked in L A Noire.... tbh, I use it once per game.... because I've got to tell you, I get squished by that digger every time... It would have been game breaking for me, not having that feature.

And yes, there is a school of thought that goes ''Well, then you suck and don't deserve to get past that level'', but that is a very old school approach from when it cost 10p per play, not £40..........

And tbh... BioWare have been moving the goalposts a bit, you could argue that a lot of people who signed up for the Mass Effect trilogy are not getting the RPG/Shooter they thought they were getting they are getting a shooter game with RPG elements and it has caused a lot of people to feel marginalized (not me, I enjoy both ME and ME2)

Also with the news that they are ramping up the difficulty for everyone (because insanity, isn't insane enough... I dunno...) there *might* be quite a few people for whom the changes are game breaking, so... what...?  They should never get to complete the game? 

At first it does read a bit ''WTF''? BUT when you read it again.... there is a lot of common sense behind it.. It's also a pretty ironic that a lot of people who think it is shocking to skip combat, are skipping dialogue... So much for the thinking gamer  If you think only combat defines a game, then she should be sacked on the spot.. however if you view it as a sum of all its parts it's not a stupid premise.. I most likely wouldn't use the feature but I have to say, I can certainly see the value of it. Even if, like L A Noire the option only pops up if you fail/die a few times 

[Foolsfolly]

And tbh... BioWare have been moving the goalposts a bit, you could argue that a lot of people who signed up for the Mass Effect trilogy are not getting the RPG/Shooter they thought they were getting they are getting a shooter game with RPG elements and it has caused a lot of people to feel marginalized (not me, I enjoy both ME and ME2)

Also with the news that they are ramping up the difficulty for everyone (because insanity, isn't insane enough... I dunno...) there *might* be quite a few people for whom the changes are game breaking, so... what...? They should never get to complete the game?

...

...yes. Yes they should never beat the game. That probably seems callous, and it likely is, but games are so easy these days. Auto-saves, checkpoints, most games have absolutely no penalty for dying, multiple difficulties to account for all skill levels including the littlest of children who can only grasp so much.

And if you can't beat a game on its simple difficulty setting or even with cheat codes, then yeah. You shouldn't beat that game.