58 réponses à ce sujet

[Piecake]

If anyone has ever played Suikoden 3, you know what I am talking about, and I would be perfectly thrilled if DA3 or a future DA game used that format.

Basically, in Suikoden 3 has 3 main characters.  You play each character, in any order you choose, to advance to the next act.  So, 3 chapters in 1 act, and these chapters and acts are synchronous - meaning that your protaganists could cross paths, visit a place one of your characters just been to, or in their chapter at the same place/time etc.  This goes on for 3 acts where you then have to make a choice who your main character is going to be.  The other two characters remain important (and lead a party in the final dungeon), but the dude you choose is the hero now

I think a structure like that, especially the first 3 acts would work amazingly well with a well thought out choice/consequence system.  Yes, it would probably be insanely complicated, but just think how awesome it would be that your game could change simply based on the order of what character you decide to play first?  The decisions you make in your first character would impact the second and so on if those characters visited the same places, overlapped, met, etc

Plus, I just like the idea of multiple perspectives because I think it gives a story a wider scope, makes it feel bigger, and you get to see the conflict or the world in the eyes/perspective of a different character (works well in fiction)

Not only that, but having multiple protaganists gives the writers and creators the option to include a dwarf, elf, human, wahtever, but still tell a personal story that relates back to that characters circumstances and that characters race.  Sure, you sort of got that in the Origin stories (that story really didnt transfer over to the rest of the game), but this is simply another way to do it, and probably a better way, for your character's history, race, circumstance to get more world recognition/reaction

[The Elder King]

It could be an interesting idea, but the cost to implement it might be too much for the resources (especially development time) that Bioware will use to do the next DA game.

[Maria Caliban]

I suggested this not too long ago. Along with having a main protagonist that you follow 90% of the game with occasional forays into the shoes of other NPCs, as in the Witcher 2.

I'd like to see it done though there was resistance to the idea from others on the forum.

hhh89 wrote...

It could be an interesting idea, but the cost to implement it might be too much for the resources (especially development time) that Bioware will use to do the next DA game.

How do you see this as increasing the resources needed?

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 16 avril 2012 - 09:44 .

[Tragick Flaw]

Could be interesting. Especially with how consequences of one player could effect another. Also a great way to bring in the Warden and Hawke again, though have to make sure each character gets equal time, and how post-game play/DLC would work.

[Mmw04014]

Eh, I prefer one protagonist throughout one game. Your idea seems like a neat idea, but it would cut into the time you could get attached to your PC or your PC's companions. I feel it would become more about the narrative at the cost of a less personal feel.

[Piecake]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I suggested this not too long ago. Along with having a main protagonist that you follow 90% of the game with occasional forays into the shoes of other NPCs, as in the Witcher 2.

I'd like to see it done though there was resistance to the idea from others on the forum.

hhh89 wrote...

It could be an interesting idea, but the cost to implement it might be too much for the resources (especially development time) that Bioware will use to do the next DA game.

How do you see this as increasing the resources needed.

Well, my idea definitely would since the game i suggest isnt simply following a  main character and then seeing the world from different people like 10% of the time

Im suggesting 3 main characters and while you play them seperarely, the actions they take are sychronous (3 chapters equal 1 act).  I would imagine that would get insanely complicated with a well thought out choice/consequence system if the characters met, visited the same town, etc a lot 

[Cultist]

I will just copypaste my reply from similar post at Gen. Discussion

...and that is exactly how Call of Duty did things. Especially in later incarnations.
This decision alone will provide an endless source of mockery for years to come.
We already have parts of the game where you can play as companions in Origins and Kotor2.
What you are proposing is the bread and butter of japanese RPGs. Which is the cancer that is killing Dragon Age.

Modifié par Cultist, 16 avril 2012 - 09:48 .

[Dakota Strider]

The OP offers an interesting option. I have thought about something similar myself. But until we can get Bioware to get away from the linear style plot paths that offer next to no choices for the primary character; I am not sure how we would convince them to make multiple paths for several characters. But, this is the type of innovation the modern rpg needs. Better writing, better plots, better story. Less cinematics, less arcade style flash, less high priced voice actors.

[Pzykozis]

I'm not a massive fan of this approach if i'm completely honest, Witcher 2 handles it semi alright but still having this strange tear away from your character to this other one is kind of jarring.

Although, having said that judging by some of the replies in this thread I support this just for the rage it'll induce.

Modifié par Pzykozis, 16 avril 2012 - 09:54 .

[Zkyire]

Cultist wrote...
...and that is exactly how Call of Duty did things. Especially in later incarnations.

And we all know the CoD series is a commercial failure.

...waaaaaitaminute.

Cultist wrote...
This decision alone will provide an endless source of mockery for years to come.

By who?

Cultist wrote...
We already have parts of the game where you can play as companions in Origins and Kotor2.
What you are proposing is the bread and butter of japanese RPGs. Which is the cancer that is killing Dragon Age.

A Song of Ice and Fire book series.

Very successful.

No main character.

Lots of Point of View characters.

People still get VERY attached to the characters.

[Piecake]

Cultist wrote...

I will just copypaste my reply from similar post at Gen. Discussion

...and that is exactly how Call of Duty did things. Especially in later incarnations.
This decision alone will provide an endless source of mockery for years to come.
We already have parts of the game where you can play as companions in Origins and Kotor2.
What you are proposing is the bread and butter of japanese RPGs. Which is the cancer that is killing Dragon Age.

Really?  The only game that i have seen that has done what I am proposing is Suikoden 3.  Im not suggesting 1 main characters and then you seeing the game periodically from different perspectives.  Im suggesting 3 equal main characters.

Never played CoD, so dont know how they did it, but i doubt it was 3 main characters, each having a chapter an Act that act synchonously.  I think that format would work incredibly well with a well thought out choice/consequence system (insanely complicated too, id imagine)

Filament wrote...

Seems to be problematic for a party-based game in that you'd need a lot more party members, or each protagonist could only have a small cadre of party members. Then if the protagonists meet, that's kind of awkward, unless they're set protagonists. And you're robbed of time to develop the group as a larger cohesive whole.

I wouldn't mind having one protagonist but controlling companions when the party is separated, like a longer Fort Drakon or Hold the Denerim Gates segment, but I'm not too keen on having multiple protagonists.

 

Yea, it worked for Suikoden 3 since their entire game revolves around recruiting 108 characters, so they had A LOT of characters to play with.  Yea, the meeting/talking of main characters would definitely be tricky with dialogue choies, but im sure there are ways around it (by simply not meeting, or other tricks, like party members doing the talking

Definitely a challenge, but I think it would be amazing, and definitely generate some buzz

Modifié par Piecake, 16 avril 2012 - 10:03 .

[Maria Caliban]

Piecake wrote...

Well, my idea definitely would since the game i suggest isnt simply following a  main character and then seeing the world from different people like 10% of the time

Im suggesting 3 main characters and while you play them seperarely, the actions they take are sychronous (3 chapters equal 1 act).  I would imagine that would get insanely complicated with a well thought out choice/consequence system if the characters met, visited the same town, etc a lot 

You're not just thinking of three characters sharing a 30 hour game, but three characters sharing an 80 hour game with lots of choices and consequences that effect one another's storyline?

[Piecake]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Piecake wrote...

Well, my idea definitely would since the game i suggest isnt simply following a  main character and then seeing the world from different people like 10% of the time

Im suggesting 3 main characters and while you play them seperarely, the actions they take are sychronous (3 chapters equal 1 act).  I would imagine that would get insanely complicated with a well thought out choice/consequence system if the characters met, visited the same town, etc a lot 

You're not just thinking of three characters sharing a 30 hour game, but three characters sharing an 80 hour game with lots of choices and consequences that effect one another's storyline?

Yup, and I think it would definitely need to be a long game to do it justice.  At least over 60 - the Suikoden 3 game I keep referring to is about that long

[Pzykozis]

Piecake wrote...

Cultist wrote...

I will just copypaste my reply from similar post at Gen. Discussion

...and that is exactly how Call of Duty did things. Especially in later incarnations.
This decision alone will provide an endless source of mockery for years to come.
We already have parts of the game where you can play as companions in Origins and Kotor2.
What you are proposing is the bread and butter of japanese RPGs. Which is the cancer that is killing Dragon Age.

Really?  The only game that i have seen that has done what I am proposing is Suikoden 3.  Im not suggesting 1 main characters and then you seeing the game periodically from different perspectives.  Im suggesting 3 equal main characters.

Breath of Fire 4 did it aswell, though that was just the two, but it was all the way through I believe. It's not necessarily a bad thing I just prefer the single perspective I want to live the world rather than observe it from a godlike position.

[esper]

Pzykozis wrote...

Piecake wrote...

Cultist wrote...

I will just copypaste my reply from similar post at Gen. Discussion

...and that is exactly how Call of Duty did things. Especially in later incarnations.
This decision alone will provide an endless source of mockery for years to come.
We already have parts of the game where you can play as companions in Origins and Kotor2.
What you are proposing is the bread and butter of japanese RPGs. Which is the cancer that is killing Dragon Age.

Really?  The only game that i have seen that has done what I am proposing is Suikoden 3.  Im not suggesting 1 main characters and then you seeing the game periodically from different perspectives.  Im suggesting 3 equal main characters.

Breath of Fire 4 did it aswell, though that was just the two, but it was all the way through I believe. It's not necessarily a bad thing I just prefer the single perspective I want to live the world rather than observe it from a godlike position.

There was an in story reason that you played boths view in that game which made a lot of sense. Also you never doubted who was the hero and who was not.

Modifié par esper, 16 avril 2012 - 10:05 .

[deuce985]

Eh, I'd rather not.

I like getting attached to one PC.

It could work if done right, they'd need that character development. To do that, they'd need to make a rather big game...

But I don't think I'd get attached to multiple characters instead of one. If it was done something like Game of Thrones on TV...that would make sense. They'd need a huge game to do that though and I don't think that's going to happen.

They also run the risk of not liking multiple characters...and wondering why you can't play as the one you like more. I'd rather them focus on one and polish him more. Rather than focusing on polishing 3 different characters at once.

[Maria Caliban]

I've never owned a console.

Can someone explain to me how the Japanese can create these 100+ hour, intricate story-based RPGs when Western developers can't? And don't mention BG 2. Shadows of Amn came out twelve years ago and was an oddity even then.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 16 avril 2012 - 10:09 .

[deuce985]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I've never owned a console.

Can someone explain to me how the Japanese can create these 100+ hour, intricate story-based RPGs when Western developers can't?

Not sure if sarcasm but Japanese game development has been terrible this gen.

The west has pretty much taken over gaming and especially when it comes to RPGs. The only hope for Japan right now is Dragon's Dogma. Which is finally a game that uses tech and actual open world. Problem with their development is they have bad management, small publishers compared to the west, lower budgets, lower tech and stuck in 15 year traditional design molds. I use to like Japanese RPGs...not anymore. Not after what the west has been dishing out the past 10 years.

But yea, I'm sure you were being sarcastic.

Modifié par deuce985, 16 avril 2012 - 10:13 .

[Piecake]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I've never owned a console.

Can someone explain to me how the Japanese can create these 100+ hour, intricate story-based RPGs when Western developers can't? And don't mention BG 2. Shadows of Amn came out twelve years ago and was an oddity even then.

Suikdon 3 was an early PS2 game - so before HD and exploding development costs (apparently)

[Pzykozis]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I've never owned a console.

Can someone explain to me how the Japanese can create these 100+ hour, intricate story-based RPGs when Western developers can't? And don't mention BG 2. Shadows of Amn came out twelve years ago and was an oddity even then.

They can't anymore, though Yakuza is fairly lengthy. I guess on the other hand they don't really offer choice as much, but if that's not a deal breaker they used to and still do to a certain extent provide a very good experience.

@Esper Yeah, blue haired kid was clearly the evil one to me, thats why I merged like a pro and killed my party.

[deuce985]

All the old JRPGs are classics. I'd say JRPG gaming went incredibly downhill as soon as 360 came out.

Companies like Bioware and Bethesda just evolved the formulas. People in the west who actually enjoyed JRPGs started converting to WRPGs. I think that's what happened. Not to mention most of the good developers in Japan broke up and they're not exactly a huge bed of talent on a few small islands. Budget definitely had a lot to play in it too. Notice Japanese games have INCREDIBLY SLOW development times. Then they dish out mediocre games. 3-4  year dev cycle for a average game. Bad management and screws the budget up too.

Best games I've played from Japan this gen...Demon's Souls, Dark Souls and Catherine...all niche games.

Modifié par deuce985, 16 avril 2012 - 10:17 .

[Dakota Strider]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I've never owned a console.

Can someone explain to me how the Japanese can create these 100+ hour, intricate story-based RPGs when Western developers can't? And don't mention BG 2. Shadows of Amn came out twelve years ago and was an oddity even then.

Writers and game developers working in sweat shops 20 hours a day, for 10 cents an hour?

[AtreiyaN7]

Interesting proposal, but it seems like it might be difficult to pull off in a BW game unless they have lots of time to spend on it. I wouldn't mind seeing something like this in smaller doses, though (if feasible).

[The Elder King]

deuce985 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I've never owned a console.

Can someone explain to me how the Japanese can create these 100+ hour, intricate story-based RPGs when Western developers can't?

Not sure if sarcasm but Japanese game development has been terrible this gen.

The west has pretty much taken over gaming and especially when it comes to RPGs. The only hope for Japan right now is Dragon's Dogma. Which is finally a game that uses tech and actual open world. Problem with their development is they have bad management, small publishers compared to the west, lower budgets, lower tech and stuck in 15 year traditional design molds. I use to like Japanese RPGs...not anymore. Not after what the west has been dishing out the past 10 years.

But yea, I'm sure you were being sarcastic.

True this gen wasn't very good for Japanese game development, especially for JRPG. Though the are exceptions, like Xenoblade.
About Dragon's Dogma, my main concern for this game is the quality of the writing, in both main quest and side quests.