Il Divo wrote...
I can certainly understand this sentiment. Perception is what our enjoyment is built off of. In my case, BG was before my time. By the time I returned to Bioware's original work, I had already played every other Bioware game, barring DA2 (which wasn't out yet). In that case, most of BG's achievements, which I concede it introduced, were lost on me, as I'd already experienced what (imo) were better story telling devices in subsequent RPGs, Bioware and otherwise.
Yep, different experiences means different perception of fun. And maybe there is even a rose colored glass element on my part. But are we sure that their following games use better storytelling devices? I mean, in the literary sense they are better tool of course. But in the "game" sense are we sure that they are an advancement?
I mean, Bioware (and the industry in general: that's a common trend) is using more and more storytelling tools taken from other media like literature and cinema wich have the common charactheristic of not being interactive. Up untill a certain point, that's coool. But the more you use those tools, the more games looks like enhanced visual novels and less like games (growing linearity, games that plays by themselves and does not ask any effort, removal of player agency and freedom, etc.).
Gameplay should be the only real storytelling tool of a game. And in that sense, BG1/2 are unsurpassed, imho.
Eh, even there I'd argue that the value of written romances does outweigh fanfiction, especially since the former does not preclude the latter. People are still free to imagine any number of love interests for their PC. 
Eh eh, but the point it's not fanfiction
. It's that Bioware's games are covering any corner of spontaneous interaction between the player and the story with their writing/storytelling devices. There is very little room for emergent RP and even less for the player imagination.
DA:O has more of it (more than most AAA titles on the market) and that's one of the main reason why people loved it.
Fair enough, but I'd argue that the answer is to find that strategical layer which isn't balanced around the reload function. The problem with the Vancian casting system is that it's entirely "preparation-based", but if the player isn't given proper awareness of what he is preparing for, he is essentially gimping himself.
I agree, the system isn't perfect or elegant: I'm simply saying that is better for tactical and strategical games, while mana pool is better for games that focus on storytelling or for pure hack and slash. Variety is good: right now there is no game with any kind of strategic depth because every_single_stat_or_power regenerates over a short amount of time, so you have never to think about what you have to do in advance... if not when you level up.
And (imo) in video games, the vancian system simply leads to frequent reloads, since after players die, they are now aware of what the "threat" is weak against.
That's true but there are possible fix while remaining in the vancian system (like D&D 3rd ed. cleric casting system). Mind, don't take me for a fan of the vancian system: I just miss the times when you have to think about what you were doing in RPGs.
And sorry for the long post, just enjoy good discussion.
It was my pleasure (beside, it's an honour to speak with the divine Giulio
).
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
