133 réponses à ce sujet

[Random citizen]

Ramus Quaritch wrote...

In the lore, for example, biotics are very powerful but they are used infrequently. Someone can unleash a massive onslaught of biotic rage, but will then have to spend a lot of time to recover. That's how it is in the books, anyway. The games, particularly ME2, make biotic use more constant and have faster recharge times. I personally don't mind it since I would not like biotics if I had to wait several minutes before I could use them again. So there's always an acceptable amount of discrepancy between the lore and the gameplay. Finding a balance is, in my humble opinion, the best thing for a game developer to do. On the other hand, If the game is not enjoyable from a gameplay standpoint, then my ability to enjoy the lore is hampered, so it's really a double-edged sword.

ME lore and gameplay is pretty straggling. If they want to have short biotic endurance, it should have been made part of the game.

[AndrewRogue]

An ideal world is definitely excellent integration.

If I have to take one of the other, though, I prefer that gameplay win out. The simple fact ends up being that it is easier to ignore segregation fails then it is to ignore really poor gameplay.

Modifié par AndrewRogue, 19 janvier 2012 - 03:32 .

[andy6915]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...
I think it's the second conversation. It's the one where Kaidan has a migraine attack. I normally pick the top-right answer, and always get this response from Kaidan, and this is coming from someone who plays Soldier and Infiltrator exclusively.

Huh? He has a migrain in a conversation? That was always an off-screen thing that never actually shown. And I'm extremely confident that I haven't missed any. I talked to EVERYONE after every single story event and sometimes after every couple of side assignments. The conversation you're talking about, I've never even heard of.

[Random citizen]

AndrewRogue wrote...

An ideal world is definitely excellent segregation.

If I have to take one of the other, though, I prefer that gameplay win out. The simple fact ends up being that it is easier to ignore segregation fails then it is to ignore really poor gameplay.

you mean "exellent integration" right?

[AndrewRogue]

Yeah. Sorry. Integration. Too used to saying "plot and gameplay segregation" when talking about this stuff.

Thanks. >_>

[JamieCOTC]

It doesn't bother me too much except in cutscenes when Shepard always defaults to a soldier.

[Random citizen]

AndrewRogue wrote...

Yeah. Sorry. Integration. Too used to saying "plot and gameplay segregation" when talking about this stuff.

Thanks. >_>

Yeah, its somewhat of a plauge.

[someguy1231]

Gameplay and lore will never completely match up in a game because, as I've said earlier, it's more important that a game be fun to play than a game's story match the player's gameplay. The ones that come the closest are usually the types of games that figure out what gameplay they want first, and then develop the lore to fit that. Even those, however, usually have to make a few sacrifices to avoid making the lore sound too forced.

[Random citizen]

someguy1231 wrote...

Gameplay and lore will never completely match up in a game because, as I've said earlier, it's more important that a game be fun to play than a game's story match the player's gameplay. The ones that come the closest are usually the types of games that figure out what gameplay they want first, and then develop the lore to fit that. Even those, however, usually have to make a few sacrifices to avoid making the lore sound too forced.

Sounds like you are describing poor design. I can simply not believe that people find it so hard to design interesting and stimulating games where lore and gameplay goes hand in hand. Just don't write useless lore for a game and do not force something into a pre-packed framework. Figure out what you want to do and use a framework that carries your idea fourth.