942 réponses à ce sujet

[Pzykozis]

Maria Caliban wrote...
The things I value most in an RPG don't conflict with cinematics, action driven gameplay, or predefined protagonists. In fact, I don't see them as a genre but as elements that can be placed in any genre.

Stop, just stop being so damned agreeable.

Personally Sylv I'm not entirely sure what you want from openness I can't see how talking about things they're not ready to show or talk about yet would really be a good thing other than to see half complete features.

[Lord Gremlin]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

While I can't say what we're specifically doing with the future of Dragon Age, and wouldn't want to until we can actually show it

This is a mistake, I think.

I asked Mike about this in another thread, and he made reassuring noises, but now you're all back on the same "we won't talk about details until we can show them to you" mantra.

We got to discuss specifics in Dragon Age long before you had anything to show us.  That was openness.

Here's what worries me... Surly there's some stuff that everyone, everyone will consider good. I don't know - no loading times, unique dungeons for each side quest, armor customization... I am biased, sure. But it just sounds like Bioware have nothing universally good to tell you right now.
So, Mr. Gaider, there is really nothing universally good about DA3 so far?

[philippe willaume]

David Gaider wrote...

kinna wrote...
Actually, there are more dialogue choises in DA2 than just three. There is investigate also. Been replaying DA:O and in that there isn't more options in conversations. Just questions you can ask (investigate in DA2) and it ends up with couple of options to move the conversation onward. Just like in DA2. Just because they are not arranged like they were in DA:O does not mean that the choises are not there.

This is very true. It's worth noting, however, that some players feel their choices are more limited-- even if that isn't really so from an interface standpoint. While the source of their frustration may not necessarily be what they've concluded it to be, that doesn't mean the frustration isn't there.

I think more that choices, it is effect that are the driving factor.


I think it boils down are the effect of the unintended consequences in DA:2 and DA:0

Having two choices with visibly different outcome will always give you the feeling that you have more choices that if you 3 option that a variation on the same theme.

If you ask people that liked combat in DA:2 better that DA:0 Their DA:0 experience is like my DA:2 experience (combat wise): I.e. numbingly boring and repetitive.

In DA:0 what makes the game interesting for me was that because I used sub-optimal builds for the main char and the companion I had to use the terrain and skills to get by . Si the combat was longer in DA:0 but it was more interesting . But if you played a mage in DA:0 or an optimnal build or if you had two mages, DA:O is really a matter of GRR Martin with earthquake to make sure they stay in it.
so i ended up having a better Role playing and combat experience.

The companion have much more depth in DA:2 but they end up being much blender that DA:0, probably because or at least partly beause the way the influence system works. In DA:0 there was enough at stake for you to consider what you said and who you took where because you always wondered if one of them was not going to blow a gasket, but I DA:2 the worse that can happen is that they will be slightly mifted when you poke then in eyes or when you apply an abundant layer of manure all over their core principles.

So in a way you do have the impression of a fundamental difference between the two games that are inb fact working on the same principles
phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 26 mars 2012 - 08:09 .

[Lord Gremlin]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

The things I value most in an RPG don't conflict with cinematics, action driven gameplay, or predefined protagonists. In fact, I don't see them as a genre but as elements that can be placed in any genre.

I have to ask, what do you value in an RPG?

From where I'm standing, those features you describe are all extrememly likely to break roleplaying.

Having analyzed Maria Caliban's words I've decided that my favorite RPG's are God of War and Mortal Kombat.

Jokes aside, there are different RPG games. There's Demon's Souls and Dark Souls. There's Bethesda and their bugfests. It's all about having a place in ecosystem. Previously Bioware games were the ones where you have a rich story and actually influence it a lot.
Don't get me wrong but Bioware will never make combat as awesome as From Software does. And you want make it more cinematic than Square Enix does.

[Maria Caliban]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

The things I value most in an RPG don't conflict with cinematics, action driven gameplay, or predefined protagonists. In fact, I don't see them as a genre but as elements that can be placed in any genre.

I have to ask, what do you value in an RPG?

From where I'm standing, those features you describe are all extrememly likely to break roleplaying.

The RPG element I value most is choice and consequences, particularly narrative ones. I want to make choices and see the world or story react to those choices.

That's not why I play BioWare games though. In fact, for that element, I find most cRPGs are highly lacking, but I understand why that is and I see it as forgivable.

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Having analyzed Maria Caliban's words....

Anticipation.

...I've decided that my favorite RPG's are God of War and Mortal Kombat.

Disappointment.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 26 mars 2012 - 07:49 .

[philippe willaume]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I am an RPG veteran who is fond of cinematic, action driven games with voice PCs. There are lots of us.

But they are completely different genres that have nothing at all in common.

That's the problem.  It doesn't matter that many people enjoy both.  The problem is that there's a "both" to be described at all.

To use a non spoiler example. lets use the attack of the orgy room in the temple of Doom in Conan (with Scwarzy and JEJ)
Yes and not
I think we need to differentiate the mechanic from they enable the player to do.

Regardless on what systems support it. What I think matters are that the player could use movie approach (half sneak half you killed my faaaaaaaaaaaaather) or a full combat approach or a full sneak approach.

Forgetting that it is a cinematic sequence, I would not mind if the sacred ashes sequence was playable as  it is portrayed  in the actual game.

I.e. morigan take care of the mob
Leliana kill the emissary
Sten go for her when she come from me.
it does not matter if we  pause and use that talent on that target but just having a dialog option/Flight simulator radio order or a ME:2 target designation and movement and order assignment
 
Now the support system is how the combat is dealt with and how the main char and companions progression is dealt with.
That  should be made with that in mind and not if is petabyte Hp vs flashy moves or neadin an excel sperasheet to dertemine what is the most effeicent wat to spend your 3 attributes points.
 
For me RPG is not about how many flashy animation you can poo up in a slug fest or numbrur spreading to get the flashy animation. Tha flshy animation and the point spreading are there to support what you as a player want to do with the main char and the team.
phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 26 mars 2012 - 08:14 .

[David Gaider]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
We got to discuss specifics in Dragon Age long before you had anything to show us.  That was openness.

No, you didn't. The DAO forums were complaining about how, for years, they didn't have anything concrete to discuss-- not until that last six months of development or so. I remember that quite well. It was actually quite frustrating for many people, as anything we said automatically demanded ten detailed questions in response which we couldn't answer... and failing to answer them meant the fan would just assume the answer and demand to be proven false instead.

Very productive.

We've no interest in that, and thus will discuss things in detail when we're able to provide the context that people will demand anyhow. Otherwise there will just be endless speculation and assumptions-- which, considering the environment, is not that healthy.

Doesn't mean it'll be a long wait, necessarily. It does mean that we're not going to throw a bunch of random scraps of meat into the lion's den and hope the lions will play nice as they divvy up the chunks though. Maybe you think the lions will naturally do that, or don't see a problem with it, but we're not as eager.

[Lord Gremlin]

There is one thing I fear. If you include Morrigan and Old God baby I will go back on my word and preorder whatever collectors edition EA puts out... That's an old and deep hook I can't resist.

[John Epler]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

While I can't say what we're specifically doing with the future of Dragon Age, and wouldn't want to until we can actually show it

This is a mistake, I think.

I asked Mike about this in another thread, and he made reassuring noises, but now you're all back on the same "we won't talk about details until we can show them to you" mantra.

We got to discuss specifics in Dragon Age long before you had anything to show us.  That was openness.

Here's what worries me... Surly there's some stuff that everyone, everyone will consider good. I don't know - no loading times, unique dungeons for each side quest, armor customization... I am biased, sure. But it just sounds like Bioware have nothing universally good to tell you right now.
So, Mr. Gaider, there is really nothing universally good about DA3 so far?

You can read what you want into our statements - no one's going to stop you. But what it boils down to is that we'll show you when we have something to show. Things can change, for one - what we're doing now may turn out to be something vastly different from what we're doing in three months. And if that happens, we get 'well, why didn't you do Y, like you were doing before?' People develop expectations and beliefs that may or may not be representative of how things will, eventually, look.

So, when we have something to show, we'll show it. I couldn't tell you when that'll be - it's really not my wheelhouse. But 'we don't want to show anything quite yet' is markedly different from 'BioWare has nothing universally good to show'.

[Maria Caliban]

Pzykozis wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...
The things I value most in an RPG don't conflict with cinematics, action driven gameplay, or predefined protagonists. In fact, I don't see them as a genre but as elements that can be placed in any genre.

Stop, just stop being so damned agreeable.

I suspect that the longer you know me, the less agreeable you'll find me. It's a consistent pattern.

[eyesofastorm]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Pzykozis wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...
The things I value most in an RPG don't conflict with cinematics, action driven gameplay, or predefined protagonists. In fact, I don't see them as a genre but as elements that can be placed in any genre.

Stop, just stop being so damned agreeable.

I suspect that the longer you know me, the less agreeable you'll find me. It's a consistent pattern.

I'm sure it's an anomaly, but the longer I've known you, the more agreeable I've found you.  

[upsettingshorts]

If people really got a peek into the development process they'd just be violently angry over everything that ended up on the cutting room floor.

Look at how outraged people can get when they discover "hidden" dialog, for Christ's sake.

Imagine if they were to find out about whole characters, environments, features, or subplots that had to be cut for one reason or another. It'd be a nightmare.

It also really doesn't help that David Silverman is the mouthpiece through which much of the showing and telling is being done.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 26 mars 2012 - 08:37 .

[Wulfram]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Here's what worries me... Surly there's some stuff that everyone, everyone will consider good. I don't know - no loading times, unique dungeons for each side quest, armor customization... I am biased, sure. But it just sounds like Bioware have nothing universally good to tell you right now.
So, Mr. Gaider, there is really nothing universally good about DA3 so far?

no loading times = graphics quality must have been cut so that consoles can manage this!
Unique dungeons for each side quest = they're cutting the number of sidequests!
armour customization = squadmates will have boring generic bodies and no iconic look!

There's a downside to everything if you look hard enough.

(I genuinely think they shouldn't go crazy on the never reusing locations thing.  There are occasions when it's harmless, and there's more important things for them to spend their resources on than ensuring that generic house #2 is different from generic house #15)

[AtreiyaN7]

Really, so now people have to start threads to rant about things they don't even want to play being canceled? This is fascinating to me. Perhaps the OP will next complain about a film project he never intended to watch being canceled too?

[johook213]

Not all of us want the same thing. I loved Dragon Age II and am excited about the direction Bioware is taking the series.

[TheBlackBaron]

Wulfram wrote...

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Here's what worries me... Surly there's some stuff that everyone, everyone will consider good. I don't know - no loading times, unique dungeons for each side quest, armor customization... I am biased, sure. But it just sounds like Bioware have nothing universally good to tell you right now.
So, Mr. Gaider, there is really nothing universally good about DA3 so far?

no loading times = graphics quality must have been cut so that consoles can manage this!
Unique dungeons for each side quest = they're cutting the number of sidequests!
armour customization = squadmates will have boring generic bodies and no iconic look!

There's a downside to everything if you look hard enough.

(I genuinely think they shouldn't go crazy on the never reusing locations thing.  There are occasions when it's harmless, and there's more important things for them to spend their resources on than ensuring that generic house #2 is different from generic house #15)

At this point people would probably suspect that -anything- being cut during development - and as shorts points out, there's quite a bit - is being held back for release as DLC. 

Openness is a good thing in government, but developers might be better off emulating the Illuminati. 

[upsettingshorts]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

At this point people would probably suspect that -anything- being cut during development - and as shorts points out, there's quite a bit - is being held back for release as DLC.

That's not my argument.  I didn't mention DLC at all.  I do not subscribe to the common conspiracy theories regarding DLC because they don't stand up to scrutiny.

My argument is that things get cut all the damn time for a host of reasons, but gamers feel entitled to anything that was ever in development at any point based on this myth of the "complete" game experience.

Here's a post by a Paradox developer about Crusader Kings 2 that touches on this:

Now, there are a lot of negative opinions about DLC among gamers these days. In some cases, it's justified; some DLC material just isn't worth the money. However, I've never understood the argument that "it should have been in the game from the start". Everything should apparently have been in the game, including an onion peeler and a self-aware AI. There are so many obvious problems with long development cycles that anyone should be able to understand that this argument is simply nonsense. It's far better to make a fun and balanced game with all the core features working properly than to either release a buggy bloated mess or a game with a huge budget (and thus a huge risk) and hefty price tag that's already outdated on release after five years of development.

So what did we cut from Crusader Kings II? Basically, this:

• A medieval style chronicle with annual entries
• Trade post holdings built by the republics (Venice, Genoa, etc)
• Hiring ships from the great republics
• Relics that can be found, looted, and used to build cathedrals
• Loads of very rare narrative events (like "The Gates of Hell") with multi-generational effects
• A viceroy/drots/great seneschal council position for each kingdom held
• Cadet branches of dynasties
• Adventures - younger sons raising an army and going off to conquer something on their own

Will all these things become DLC? Probably not, but some likely will, and others might be patched in for free (or, well, basically paid for by those who do buy our DLC.) Note that playable non-Christians, republics and theocracies were never planned (though always considered good material for expansions.)

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 26 mars 2012 - 08:57 .

[TheBlackBaron]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

TheBlackBaron wrote...

At this point people would probably suspect that -anything- being cut during development - and as shorts points out, there's quite a bit - is being held back for release as DLC.

That's not my argument.  I didn't mention DLC at all.  I do not subscribe to the common conspiracy theories regarding DLC because they don't stand up to scrutiny.

That's not what I was saying, shorts, I was merely referencing how you pointed out there is a lot of stuff that gets cut during development, for one reason or other. That people would - accurately or no - suspect that it's being cut for DLC was my own conjecture. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

No, you didn't. The DAO forums were complaining about how, for years, they didn't have anything concrete to discuss-- not until that last six months of development or so. I remember that quite well. It was actually quite frustrating for many people, as anything we said automatically demanded ten detailed questions in response which we couldn't answer... and failing to answer them meant the fan would just assume the answer and demand to be proven false instead.

Very productive.

We've no interest in that, and thus will discuss things in detail when we're able to provide the context that people will demand anyhow. Otherwise there will just be endless speculation and assumptions-- which, considering the environment, is not that healthy.

Doesn't mean it'll be a long wait, necessarily. It does mean that we're not going to throw a bunch of random scraps of meat into the lion's den and hope the lions will play nice as they divvy up the chunks though. Maybe you think the lions will naturally do that, or don't see a problem with it, but we're not as eager.

That's fair.

I was remembering the discussions of the languages (you hired that linguist - Wolf, I think was his name), and we had long conversations about game design in theory (with occasional scraps of meat, like the four playable races).  And then there was the concept art and the mockups in the NWN engine.

And you do now seem willing to talk about design questions in theory, so we're not too far from where we were then.

I suppose I was hoping for some more insight into the ideas you're considering for how to improve the conversation system, or about he value of "gotcha".moment (which you've said before you want to avoid, but I see DA2's entire dialogue system as one long series of "gotcha" moments).

[Kinkaku]

Honestly let them spend as much time on there next big project as they want, considering that I can see some parts of Exalted March making its way in to it. Not really much of a loss when we knew almost nothing about it.

About the spiritual successor to Baldurs Gate bit, Origins already was that, they never said that the entire series was going to be I'm glad that it won't be.

I for one still have faith in Bioware that they will make the very best game they can. Especially if you consider the legacy that they have. Saying that they have lost their mojo after one decent game and one great game with a ...confusing ending.. isn't enough in my book to discount them. 

Modifié par Kinkaku, 26 mars 2012 - 09:42 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

I do not like the generalizations in the OP. That doesn't mean I don't catch the sentiment.

To me a voiced PC is just fine. I do understand that this will have an impact on the length of the game and/or on the quality of the story. Voice acting can be expensive and thus requires a higher budget. Voice acting needs more disk space and the space on optical disks is limited. Concessions have to be made. Shorter game, less dialogue, to name a few. So if the game has voice acting then it better be damned good. The story of DA2 disappointed me. It makes me wonder if the concessions made were worth it.

I am also a FPS fan. I love action games. That doesn't mean I am unable to appreciate RPGs, but the classic RPGs do nothing for me. However, I feel that the RPG elements of DA2, when compared to DA:O, have been simplified beyond recognition: DA2 could be game from another franchise.

It feels like BW is ashamed of creating RPGs these days. And that not only applies to DA. ME3 is another example. Look at its web page. The term RPG is nowhere to be found. Instead it is described as an "action game with an interactive story".

Whenever I hear a BW employee talk about "moving forward" then I think they mean into the ME direction, because that is what they are showing us. Each title has less of an RPG experience and somehow all these ME "innovations" find their way into DA. It looks like DA2 already got enough ME2 elements (from emails to the Normandy, erm, Hawke Estate to the dialogue wheel). Apparently the DA team also wants to get rid of their RPG audience, probably because they think it doesn't make enough money. Nihilism is the way to get there and DA2 followed suit. And then I giggle a bit when I see Skyrim selling more than DA:O and DA2 combined. And guess what? It doesn't have PC voice acting, more content than ever, and it fits on one disk.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 26 mars 2012 - 09:41 .

[Brockololly]

Maria Caliban wrote...
Sequels often sell poorly when the original wasn't well received. Maybe a bunch of people bought Dragon Age: Origins on the strength of games like Knights of the Old Republic and Mass Effect, but didn't like it and so didn't buy the sequel. :innocent:

And yet, DA2 had strong preorders and sold well initially, well enough for BioWare to proclaim that it sold faster to one million than DAO. And yet, the sales tanked after that. After the word of mouth got out. So it sold as well as it did mostly on the preorders, which it stands to reason that people preordering a sequel probably played or enjoyed the original game.

Filament wrote...

I think it could be a mistake to even  start talking as soon as you have something to show. You have a  significantly more skeptical audience now, and even with DA2, those  alpha screenshots of DA2 did not go over well and are still being used  to bludgeon the game with, alpha state notwithstanding. So basically,  might want to wait until you have something good to show.

True- but at the same time, it would be nice if they could at least speak broadly as to what their goals are for DA3. Like, generally what are the core tenets of what they're going to try to do? Then again, that was part of the problem with DA2 as well, when Laidlaw mentioned a flexible camera was core to strategic gameplay and then the tactical camera was MIA and we have never really gotten any more info as to why that happened.


They just have to show something that gets people actually excited by some means where people can see it easily, not doing their usual drip feed via Game Informer and a million other scattered interviews and scans. And don't bother with deceptive cinematic trailers that are obviously making up for the fact that the actual game won't have anywhere near that graphical fidelity. If you want a great reveal trailer to model after, look to Skyrim with all actual gameplay. Don't do stupid stuff like throwing in obnoxious heavy metal or CG, focus on the actual game.

Show an environment thats actually visually appealing, not **** Mountain with derp ogres and anime Hawke. Visuals are the easiest way to get people talking and get people excited for something- if the visuals are underwhelming out of the gate, then there better be some other great hook or else you're already playing catch up.

Modifié par Brockololly, 26 mars 2012 - 09:51 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I suppose I was hoping for some more insight into the ideas you're considering for how to improve the conversation system, or about he value of "gotcha".moment (which you've said before you want to avoid, but I see DA2's entire dialogue system as one long series of "gotcha" moments).

Perhaps you need to establish a common ground from which to start, from a high-level perspective. Discussing specifics of concept and implementation when you can not or do not agree on the what the big picture goals are will only lead to frustration.