428 réponses à ce sujet

[Foolsfolly]

A game isn't defined by one feature only, be it combat or whatever. Especially RPGs.

RPGs have many many many features. And when you removed a bit of inventory management everyone screamed. Imagine having combat optional in a game. Imagine the screams of 'consolation' and all that garbage. Imagine it.

Months and months of arguing about how it isn't an RPG anymore (which they'll have anyway). Combat may be one aspect of any game but it's the largest aspect of most games. The only games without combat are puzzles, racing, and simulations. It's a very important part to games. To many it's the only reason to play games instead of watching a movie or a reading a book.

Such cheats prove that people do skip those things. Why not make things easier for them? Not everyone want to go through the hassles of enabling the console and using it (with invisible font in DA2, at that).

Cheat codes are for children who cannot play game and people too lazy to finish a game correctly. In some games they are for messing around for fun. Like Saints Row or GTA games, although I don't cheat in those either. Some find those funner games with unlimited rockets and indestructible tanks.

I don't begrudge them that. It's having a bit of fun. And fun isn't a waste of time.

This isn't true for every game. Some learning curves are steep, which can cause people to simply give up, and miss on the rest of the game.

And the fault for that lies with the developers. I know it's a hard line to walk between making something too unwieldy and difficult or something so simple you can sleep walk through it. But that's the point of balancing and playtesting. And if a game's learning curve is too steep (Ninja Gaiden for example) then that is a weakness of that game and not the player.

The game will remain to be weak even if they put in a button that allows you to just win because you pressed a single button.

An unbalanced game is unbalanced.

Seriously? Since when gaming has become some sort of life learning experience to be undertaken with the gravity of a religious one? Some play games just for fun (I know, boggles the mind, right?), and don't want to go through parts they find tedious / boring / too hard. There's no shame in that, as there's no obligation to "learn combat and enjoy it or else..."

There's no fun to be had when you find yourself unable to survive encounters because you do not know how to fight. Take someone who's never played Deus Ex and throw them into the last level and see how angry they get.

Learning is a part of every game. You learn how to fight, you learn how to build characters, you learn tactics. Even simple games like Pong have a learning curve (hit the close to the edge to change the direction of the ball).

A newbie starts using that button, the newbie will always use that button. If the point is just to have someone win the game sure why not include such a button. But if it's to give people a fun exciting and enjoyable experience then there's a learning curve. And mastering that curve opens up more of the game to the player.

And I don't understand the intolerance here.

You didn't play Monopoly if your dad wrote a card that said you won.

Thanks for sharing HOWEVER as shocking as this may be... your opinion hasn't affected mine...

No one will change anyone's opinion. This is just a bit of fun on the forums.

[Jenova65]

Foolsfolly wrote...
No one will change anyone's opinion. This is just a bit of fun on the forums.

No sh*t, Sherlock............... 

[Ulathar]

Some games have options to skip cinematic sequences after the player has seen them once. So, the first time they have to watch it, but after that it's fine to skip them.

This could be used for skipping combat as well. Play through the game once. If you liked the story, the characters, the dialogues, the decisions etc. you'll want to play through it again. If you liked the gameplay/combat you can keep fighting your way through, maybe with a higher difficulty if you like a challenge, maybe with a lower difficulty to save time. If you just want to experience the story this time, or didn't like the combat that much, you skip it.

This is all hypothetical, of course, but that would be the way I'd want such an option to be implemented. It's similar with the way I use cheats, the first pt I don't use them, but afterwards I do, if I feel like it.

[Maconbar]

Fiddles_stix wrote...

Nothing is produced by one writer anymore... some people even extend that to novels. Games in particular have a collaborative process and she's only one writer, if the entire staff took that attitude I'd be extremely concerned. As it stands she has her opinion and the producers and directors have theirs and they will go with their judgement over hers as that is what they are paid for.

Agreed. That one writer out of a project staff in the hundreds said five years ago that she didn't like gameplay zero impact on the Dragon Age franchise.

[Jenova65]

I was JOKING btw ^ 

Modifié par Jenova65, 27 septembre 2011 - 12:56 .

[Jenova65]

Systemlord Baal wrote...

Some games have options to skip cinematic sequences after the player has seen them once. So, the first time they have to watch it, but after that it's fine to skip them.

This could be used for skipping combat as well. Play through the game once. If you liked the story, the characters, the dialogues, the decisions etc. you'll want to play through it again. If you liked the gameplay/combat you can keep fighting your way through, maybe with a higher difficulty if you like a challenge, maybe with a lower difficulty to save time. If you just want to experience the story this time, or didn't like the combat that much, you skip it.

This is all hypothetical, of course, but that would be the way I'd want such an option to be implemented. It's similar with the way I use cheats, the first pt I don't use them, but afterwards I do, if I feel like it.

I can see it all now................. Shortest. Game. Ever. 
Cos you know that people will skip the combat and still rush the cutscenes and dialogue 

[Fiery Phoenix]

What's next? A game that plays itself with me idly watching?

[Jenova65]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

What's next? A game that plays itself with me idly watching?

*Squints and points*
You...... movie watcher, you..............

[Siegdrifa]

Ponendus wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

I think Jennifer's wrong. Such a button will not attract new nor female gamers to games. You want a noobie friendly game make something like Portal with a clear and progressive learning curve. Everyone understands everything about that game and they're allowed to master their skills as they go.

You want to keep people playing your game you make the best damn game you can. That includes fun and challenging gameplay. Not an Easy Button that beats everything for you.

Why can't we have both? Why can't Dragon Age be a 'noobie friendly game' without it affecting the fun for those that like a challenge? Why does it have to be one way?

I also am not sure that one can make a claim that such a button will not attract new players; similarly, I don't actually think Jennifer ever suggested it would. She just said it is something she would like to see, perhaps she just meant it as something for convenience? Maybe that actually is her vision of the 'best damn game' she can make?

Here is what is wrong :
insert the game, presse start : skip skip skip skip skip skip skip skip skip skip, end game, final credits.
 W.T.F ?! (i skiped both dialogue and action, because i don't like both).


Make me remember, my little cousine that visited me with her parents was intrested in the F1, i was "wow, a 15yo girl intrested in formula 1?", no, in fact she was just intrested in Sebastian VETTEL,.... F1 comity please, put only young handsome guy to make the girly 15 public bigger, they don't care about the race and care, but it's a potential way to have a wider audiance and selling more t-shirt and stuff.
At some extreme point... sorry but "your opinion won't be taken into consideration".

There is a better way to fix the problem then just using a "skip" button.

[xkg]

Wow just wow.
I never realized how stubborn and close-minded people here on BW forums can be.

They just can't accept that someone can enjoy something different than they do.
They just can't accept something that would be an option they don't have to use.
They know what is better for others.
They feel entitled to tell others how to play and what should others do.

This just being so damn ridiculous I really can't get it.

Modifié par xkg, 27 septembre 2011 - 02:01 .

[SphereofSilence]

Every one has different opinions. Diversity of opinions can sometimes be a good thing. It may give a more balanced perspective. I don't see anything wrong with that, even if I personally like to have combat and believe that combat is necessary in a good story game like in Bioware games.

[Sutekh]

Foolsfolly wrote...
And when you removed a bit of inventory management everyone screamed.

The huge difference is that the streamlining of inventory management can't be avoided. It's imposed. Pushing that button is optional.

I'm not advocating simplifying RPGs (or any genre) but giving simplification options for those who want them while keeping the game intact for those who don't. Provided it has no impact on the main game, I see no problem with it.

Imagine having combat optional in a game. Imagine the screams of 'consolation' and all that garbage. Imagine it.

There always will be people who can't stand optional things they don't want and won't use to be simply there. People who are offended by the mere existence of things they disapprove of, even though they don't have to use or experience them (this thread being a perfect example). The screams would be nothing new, and nothing to care about.

Cheat codes are for children who cannot play game and people too lazy to finish a game correctly

.Agreed. But if some want to use them, who are we to judge? Point is, not everyone takes gaming Very Seriously. Not everyone is a Hard Core Gamer of the True Faith. And being one doesn't make someone the next step in human evolution. Thinking otherwise is elitist at best.

Added to that, there can be many reasons for someone to skip combat apart from laziness. 20th playthrough, hates that particular fight etc... For instance, I make videos. I'd love to have that button to skip some fights and get to the particular spot I need to be to start capturing. Would save me a lot of time. 

And the fault for that lies with the developers.

<snip>

An unbalanced game is unbalanced.

A game can be loved for its storytelling. Nothing to do with balance, right? If some want an interactive movie then let them have it, as long as we can still get the full experience. Other games get better once you're past a certain point, combat-wise. And some have particular fights that are simply too hard or tedious, while the rest is good and balanced. You can get stuck on those and never able to finish the game no matter what (could give you a couple of examples here). Whether the developpers are at fault isn't the point. The point is enjoyment.

There's no fun to be had when you find yourself unable to survive encounters because you do not know how to fight.

And so the skip button would be here to save the day (even in Deus Ex)

A newbie starts using that button, the newbie will always use that button.

So what? They'll stay a newbie forever, but will still have fun in their own newbie way. If you care about them enough, you advise them to try and learn. Otherwise, their problem, not yours.

If the point is just to have someone win the game sure why not include such a button. But if it's to give people a fun exciting and enjoyable experience then there's a learning curve. And mastering that curve opens up more of the game to the player.

I agree, but "fun and enjoyable" is in the eye of the beholder. I know at least one person who would love DAO/2 without the combat, but won't even try it because of it. So, not being able to skip it deprives her from a good load of fun and enjoyment, and, maybe more importantly, she will never buy the games or any RPG.

You didn't play Monopoly if your dad wrote a card that said you won.

My dad would never have done that But if he had, what's more important? That I had a bit of fun or that I could title myself True Monopoly Player through suffering and mastering a set of complicated rules (assuming I was four at the time, because, well, Monopoly...)? Furthermore, my dad was in charge of my education, so it would have been his duty to force me to learn. I do tell my kids out of cheat codes and other "abominations". You, I and games developers aren't in charge of educating gamers. Thinking otherwise is, IMHO, incredibly presomptuous.

Bottom line is: we don't have a say in how people get their fun. Period. It might go against our core principles, we might advise them not to do such and such and tell them why, we might even convince them, but at the end of the day, what people do with  their time and their games (and their food, and their partner, and their music...) is not ours to judge, nor is whether they want to be a better gamer. Giving them the possibility for their particular brand of enjoyment is not a bad thing, and shouldn't have any impact on ours. An RPG will still be an RPG with a little button in the corner that we don't have to even look at.

[tmp7704]

House_Hlaalu wrote...

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.

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

Don't move the goal posts. Your original claim was that is "action and combat" that make the videogame. Thing is, gameplay can revolve around things other than these. Like the "puzzles and stuff". Meaning what i said -- you don't need to have "combat and action" for game to have actual gameplay.

As for examples -- adventure games, plenty of strategy games (political simulators, building simulators, management games, even the grand strategy games which don't have 'combat' in this particular context, just tokens moving around the map) dating games... heck, even some RPGs allow you to avoid random combat encounters by equipping certain items. Or don't have any combat in them to begin with -- the Harvest Moon series, e.g.

Modifié par tmp7704, 27 septembre 2011 - 02:35 .

[tmp7704]

Foolsfolly wrote...

...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.

You are attaching value to the concept of "beating the game" that has long since ceased to exist in (most of) the developers' minds.

You know why the games are so easy these days? Because they aren't anymore thought of as a "challenge" you're supposed to "beat". They are content you're supposed to experience, on your terms and the more of it, the better.

The concept of "beating the game" no longer exists, nor is supposed to be something you might feel like bragging about. Reaching the end of the game means just that, the 'interactive experience' has ended. Like a book, or a movie.

[Pasquale1234]

I really don't understand what the big fracas is about.

I can certainly understand why a writer with very limited time to devote to gaming would want to skip combat so that she can focus more on things like game world, setting, lore, culture, characters, dialogue, story execution, etc. Given the nature of her role at BioWare, those are the game aspects that she directly influences. By skipping combat, she can use her limited gaming time to experience more of these story aspects from a wider variety of publishers and titles, and better invest her time in developing a greater understanding of the industry as a whole.

I think she made it pretty clear that she does not enjoy combat. Why should she struggle through those portions of the game that do not interest her just to get to the parts that do?

[UrkOfGreyhawk]

Once again I have to side with the minority. She makes a valid point. If they added such a feature it would be a minor investment in zots that could significantly increase the size of a games audience. It's certainly worth a try.

[Siegdrifa]

xkg wrote...

Wow just wow.
I never realized how stubborn and close-minded people here on BW forums can be.

They just can accept that someone can enjoy something different than they do.
They just can't accept something that would be an option they don't have to use.
They know what is better for others.
They feel entitled to tell other how to play and what should others do.

This just being so damn ridiculous I really can't get it.

Unable to complete a game in "piece of cake difficulty" spoted
joke, joke  : )

It's not about sayng what to enjoy or sayng what is better for you in video games, every body are free to like / dislike this story, love / hate these character etc.

It's about saying "i want to play a video game without playing the video game", by my standart, it cross the line, and while some improvement could be made to make the player appeal to play it (as much as writers must do to make their work not skipable because it catch the players attention), the "skip" button is not a solution, it's a "fail aknowledgement" from the dev them self.
It would just says "hey !, games designers, 3D modlers, animators and programmers, your game sucks ! only the writting, RTC team and voiced actors are worse the product", and they would answer "yeah, we hear you".

People these days sounds like spoiled child, .... i want only 1% of these, i like books but i hate reading.... i love this movie because there is my favorite actor in it but the movie suck really hard. I like to swin in the sea but i hate to stop breathing , i love writting but i hate to think about what i'll write, i love dramas of other people but i can't stand when i have one.

Take a chocolate cake, take out the cake, it's only chocolate, you can't call it  a chocolate cake any more.
Video games without the core of video game is not the video game anymore. Some people should play video games with a paddle or keyboard instead of the remotre tv controler; a video game is NOT a dvd, a video game is NOT a book, a video games is a mix of many profession to enforce his credibility and quality of the interaction it provide to the player.
And yeah, video game can exist without story, story are just extra quality package to make deeper impact to the player (and i swear when i was working in video game industry i had to fight really hard to convice some co-worker that storys in video games could be out standing and not just generic dumb cliché reason to shoot everything and anything!)

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 27 septembre 2011 - 03:01 .

[LadyJaneGrey]

1)  An optional skip-combat button would be great for replayability.  I enjoy the higher levels of combat, but sometimes I just want to see how different choices play out.
2)  This isn't nearly as big an issue since the advent of youtube.

[tmp7704]

Siegdrifa wrote...

Take a chocolate cake, take out the cake, it's only chocolate, you can't call it  a chocolate cake any more.
Video games without the core of video game is not the video game anymore.

But eat just the vanilla part of the vanilla-chocolate icecream, and you've still had some delicious icecream.

And while the idea of skipping the chocolate may seem insane for these of us who like both flavours, that's really down to individual taste.

[Wulfram]

Does Mass Effect 2 stop being a video game during Samara and Thane's loyalty missions?

[Siegdrifa]

tmp7704 wrote...

Siegdrifa wrote...

Take a chocolate cake, take out the cake, it's only chocolate, you can't call it  a chocolate cake any more.
Video games without the core of video game is not the video game anymore.

But eat just the vanilla part of the vanilla-chocolate icecream, and you've still had some delicious icecream.

And while the idea of skipping the chocolate may seem insane for these of us who like both flavours, that's really down to individual taste.

Thats why i said sometimes, i feel people act like a spoiled child, if you want only chocolate, then there is better choice than chocolate cake or double flavor ice cream.
Keeping the cake idea, it's better if the cake make you think "cake + chocolate = total win" not juste cake OR chocolate.

I prefer the cake over the double flavor ice cream in this exemple because, the difference is not only about taste, it's about texture and where it is put.
Game play in video game is a lot more different then story.
In game play, while you use X capacity over Y, you find a new way to play on the same part, when your gameplay progress, the things you can accomplish also change.
With story, at the same part, same choice, it will be the same writing same voice, it's a lot more predictable than gameplay.

Thanks to game made by Bioware (baldur's gate series for exemple) and lot of japanese company, story and story telling have a larger and important role in our games, and it's always great to hear that story is a big help for some players to keep going on playing until the end, because 15 years ago, many video games studio didn't cared much, it was just a quick excuse to boom boom boom pew pew pew.
Now, fighting to get the other way and missing the core is not realy a step forward, it's opening door to anything and everything, if each player want to be able to get his 5% only of what he likes in the game, it's going to be a mess, producer and games designers have to make choice to define the rule that will make the game as a product as a whole and not an open bar for ABCD....XYZ players.

[tmp7704]

Siegdrifa wrote...

Thats why i said sometimes, i feel people act like a spoiled child, if you want only chocolate, then there is better choice than chocolate cake or double flavor ice cream.

Sometimes, there is. But often, there isn't -- especially when it comes to the video games, you'd be hard pressed to find titles which only include the exact features you love, and nothing else.

So given this limitation, why force people to go through parts they don't enjoy, when games are supposed to be source of entertainment? The 'spoiled child' rhetoric is quite odd in this context, it's not some kind of dinner with vegetables that are awful but you're supposed to eat them anyway because they're healthy for you, or smth. It's just supposed to be fun.

[Oopsieoops]

xkg wrote...

Wow just wow.
I never realized how stubborn and close-minded people here on BW forums can be.

They just can't accept that someone can enjoy something different than they do.
They just can't accept something that would be an option they don't have to use.
They know what is better for others.
They feel entitled to tell others how to play and what should others do.

This just being so damn ridiculous I really can't get it.

It's really naive to think an option to skip the combat would mean just ginving those who want the option skipping the combat, and everything else would remain unchanged. It would mean a major shift of focus, and combat would be receiving far less development attention.

[Sowtaaw]

UrkOfGreyhawk wrote...

Once again I have to side with the minority. She makes a valid point. If they added such a feature it would be a minor investment in zots that could significantly increase the size of a games audience. It's certainly worth a try.

 its a stupid idea that whats is.she just suggested a press x to win button.  

[tmp7704]

Oopsieoops wrote...

It's really naive to think an option to skip the combat would mean just ginving those who want the option skipping the combat, and everything else would remain unchanged. It would mean a major shift of focus, and combat would be receiving far less development attention.

You can currently skip all cinematics and voiceovers in BioWare games with the Esc key, and the developers keep increasing the attention paid to these with each new title.