764 réponses à ce sujet

[FaWa]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I don't think cinematic approach is phenomenal and effective as the days of FF7 and FF8 anymore. We have recent titles heavily rely on cinematic storytelling like Jurassic Park: The Movie and Dead Island. Still, both are listed among 10 most disappointed games of the year, heavily critized for linearity.. In the end it's still FPS dominated the largest market segment. And Sykim look good to compete with them. Because Skyrim basically has the same element of FPS. Freedom and the feeling of being in the world as the character..

Dead Island is just a poor game,

And yet its still on my computer, while Dragon Age 2 is not. 
I don't think anyone involved with the creation of DA2 should be in the position to call another game bad. 

[MerinTB]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
Then I have no concern for your point.. 

Long story short-

to paraphrase you, "My opinion matters, and only things that back up my opinion matter.  If what you say, or any evidence you provide, doesn't back up my point or talks about something outside of my own personal experience, then it doesn't matter."

And I'm done trying to talk to you.

[John Epler]

Allan, slagging on Dead Island means that we have to fight. Just letting you know.

[Allan Schumacher]

John Epler wrote...

Allan, slagging on Dead Island means that we have to fight. Just letting you know.

To be fair, I'm basing my entire premise on the opinions my friends have had of the game and the copious amounts of technical issues they had.

I haven't actually played the game lol.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 08 juin 2012 - 08:58 .

[nightcobra]

John Epler wrote...

Allan, slagging on Dead Island means that we have to fight. Just letting you know.

a duel? swords or pistols?


....wait a tick, are duels common in orlais? i like duels, can we have duels?

[John Epler]

FaWa wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I don't think cinematic approach is phenomenal and effective as the days of FF7 and FF8 anymore. We have recent titles heavily rely on cinematic storytelling like Jurassic Park: The Movie and Dead Island. Still, both are listed among 10 most disappointed games of the year, heavily critized for linearity.. In the end it's still FPS dominated the largest market segment. And Sykim look good to compete with them. Because Skyrim basically has the same element of FPS. Freedom and the feeling of being in the world as the character..

Dead Island is just a poor game,

And yet its still on my computer, while Dragon Age 2 is not. 
I don't think anyone involved with the creation of DA2 should be in the position to call another game bad. 

Cherry picking quotes like this and making those sorts of snide remarks afterwards goes a very, very long way to explaining why a lot of the conversation on these forums has either dried up or turned into PR speak. Just putting that out there.

[Fast Jimmy]

John Epler wrote...

FaWa wrote...
And yet its still on my computer, while Dragon Age 2 is not. 
I don't think anyone involved with the creation of DA2 should be in the position to call another game bad. 

Cherry picking quotes like this and making those sorts of snide remarks afterwards goes a very, very long way to explaining why a lot of the conversation on these forums has either dried up or turned into PR speak. Just putting that out there.

Church. 

[John Epler]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

John Epler wrote...

FaWa wrote...
And yet its still on my computer, while Dragon Age 2 is not. 
I don't think anyone involved with the creation of DA2 should be in the position to call another game bad. 

Cherry picking quotes like this and making those sorts of snide remarks afterwards goes a very, very long way to explaining why a lot of the conversation on these forums has either dried up or turned into PR speak. Just putting that out there.

Church. 

Are.. are we speaking in code now?

I'm confused.

[Fast Jimmy]

John Epler wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

John Epler wrote...

Cherry picking quotes like this and making those sorts of snide remarks afterwards goes a very, very long way to explaining why a lot of the conversation on these forums has either dried up or turned into PR speak. Just putting that out there.

Church. 

Are.. are we speaking in code now?

I'm confused.

Mayhaps I should have said 'Preach on, Brother Epler?

Is that what kids are doing these days? I'm not very hip and with it anymore. 

[John Epler]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

John Epler wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

John Epler wrote...

Cherry picking quotes like this and making those sorts of snide remarks afterwards goes a very, very long way to explaining why a lot of the conversation on these forums has either dried up or turned into PR speak. Just putting that out there.

Church. 

Are.. are we speaking in code now?

I'm confused.

Mayhaps I should have said 'Preach on, Brother Epler?

Is that what kids are doing these days? I'm not very hip and with it anymore. 

I used to be with it. Then they changed what 'it' was. Now what I'm with isn't it, and what's it seems weird and scary to me.

[nightcobra]

since you're here mr.epler

could i direct you to this particular topic?

http://social.biowar.../index/12477582

i'd like to see your opinion on the matter

[Dean_the_Young]

That's so it.

[Allan Schumacher]

FaWa wrote...

And yet its still on my computer, while Dragon Age 2 is not. 
I don't think anyone involved with the creation of DA2 should be in the position to call another game bad. 

I'm sure the opposite is true in many cases as well.  I'm sure there are some that have both games installed too.  There's probably also some that have neither game installed (in fact "most" people are probably in this boat).

Although for all of Dragon Age 2's faults, I still can think of many games that are worse.  I can think of many that are much better.


Also, just to be clear for everyone, when I state that a game is poor it shouldn't need to be clarified that it's my opinion on the matter.  I may disagree that someone else thinks that Morrowind or Oblivion are fantastic games.  For me, they are not.  I also recognize that not all games are going to appeal to me, and that there is likely value for others in games that I don't care about.  I know for a fact that there are games that I like that aren't typically well liked.  To each his or her own.

As for your point whether or not I should be in the position to call another game poor because of my work on DA2, I'll disagree.


I try to be candid on the forums.  The forums have actually asked for more open and honest discourse.  Naturally there ARE some restrictions (that even make sense) so I can't talk about everything.  I think people would rather have a clear perspective on what types of games I do and do not like so that they can better qualify statements I make about qualities of games.  Just my perspective anyways.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 08 juin 2012 - 09:16 .

[joshko]

Allan Schumacher wrote...



I try to be candid on the forums.  The forums have actually asked for more open and honest discourse.  Naturally there ARE some restrictions (that even make sense) so I can't talk about everything.  I think people would rather have a clear perspective on what types of games I do and do not like so that they can better qualify statements I make about qualities of games.  Just my perspective anyways.

You may try to be candid, but you end up being Candide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candide

[Fast Jimmy]

John Epler wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote..
Mayhaps I should have said 'Preach on, Brother Epler?

Is that what kids are doing these days? I'm not very hip and with it anymore. 

I used to be with it. Then they changed what 'it' was. Now what I'm with isn't it, and what's it seems weird and scary to me.

...



...church. 

[Allan Schumacher]

joshko wrote...
You may try to be candid, but you end up being Candide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candide

I am pretty sarcastic....

Sometimes I come across terse and adversarial too, which i do try not to but sometimes that is just fail.  I'm human, and sometimes something will come across the wrong way.  But then again, XKCD did make a comic about me...

xkcd.com/386/

[joshko]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

joshko wrote...
You may try to be candid, but you end up being Candide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candide

I am pretty sarcastic....

Sometimes I come across terse and adversarial too, which i do try not to but sometimes that is just fail.  I'm human, and sometimes something will come across the wrong way.  But then again, XKCD did make a comic about me...

xkcd.com/386/

I was thinking more the hopelss optimist that everything bad happens to.

Modifié par joshko, 08 juin 2012 - 09:35 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

joshko wrote...
You may try to be candid, but you end up being Candide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candide

I am pretty sarcastic....

Sometimes I come across terse and adversarial too, which i do try not to but sometimes that is just fail.  I'm human, and sometimes something will come across the wrong way.  But then again, XKCD did make a comic about me...

xkcd.com/386/

Ha! The Internet - battleground of truth sayers since 1994!
I may be dangerously close to being on topic, but what was your opinion on my clarification of linear vs. choice-driven games on the last page, Allen?

Err... en guarde!

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 08 juin 2012 - 09:55 .

[brushyourteeth]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

FaWa wrote...

And yet its still on my computer, while Dragon Age 2 is not. 
I don't think anyone involved with the creation of DA2 should be in the position to call another game bad. 

I'm sure the opposite is true in many cases as well.  I'm sure there are some that have both games installed too.  There's probably also some that have neither game installed (in fact "most" people are probably in this boat).

Although for all of Dragon Age 2's faults, I still can think of many games that are worse.  I can think of many that are much better.


Also, just to be clear for everyone, when I state that a game is poor it shouldn't need to be clarified that it's my opinion on the matter.  I may disagree that someone else thinks that Morrowind or Oblivion are fantastic games.  For me, they are not.  I also recognize that not all games are going to appeal to me, and that there is likely value for others in games that I don't care about.  I know for a fact that there are games that I like that aren't typically well liked.  To each his or her own.

As for your point whether or not I should be in the position to call another game poor because of my work on DA2, I'll disagree.


I try to be candid on the forums.  The forums have actually asked for more open and honest discourse.  Naturally there ARE some restrictions (that even make sense) so I can't talk about everything.  I think people would rather have a clear perspective on what types of games I do and do not like so that they can better qualify statements I make about qualities of games.  Just my perspective anyways.

We like it, Allan - so don't stop.

Some of us are even mature enough to not be bothered if you disagree with us.

[Allan Schumacher]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Ha! The Internet - battleground of truth sayers since 1994!
I may be dangerously close to being on topic, but what was your opinion on my clarification of linear vs. choice-driven games on the last page, Allen?

Err... en guarde!

You said something....  Oh yes.  I even remember giving it a bit of thought!

I actually am a bit busy right now but if I haven't responded this evening send me a PM

[Realmzmaster]

I understand some gamers do not like DA2 which is their personal opinion and that is fine. Everyone here has a right to their personal opinion. Allan may think Dead Island is a poor game. John thinks it is not. Those are personal opinions that have nothing to do with DA2 and its creation. Why? because they are individual personal opinions. Developers have a life out side of their creations. Developers play and like the competition's games. They are individuals. Allan and John may be proud of some of the things that DA2 did. Are they saying it is a perfect game and does not have faults? No they are not.

People on the forum have asked the developers to be more candid and open. When they are they get snide comments. Gamers on the forum can make snide remarks but it adds nothing to the discussion. and only makes the developers stay away and not want to engage in discussion.

Allan is here engaging in the conversation and even John has dropped in. Let's take advantage of that situation to express our desires no matter how polar they may be and do it in a civil manner.

Remember that Allan and John are individuals who have their own likes and dislikes. Allan has already stated that there are better and worse games than DA2. We can use that as a springboard to engage in dialogue to help improve DA3 and no that does not mean going back to DAO or staying with DA2 format, but making a better format than either of those.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 09 juin 2012 - 04:24 .

[MerAnne]

I started reading this topic and .... well, I gave up after pages of conflicting opinions. So I'm going to throw my 2 cents worth in based on the last few pages of comments. DAO was game of the year. DA2 - wasn't. It think that really sums it up and I don't feel the urge to crucify DA2. Instead I'm going to say what I really really liked about DAO.....

1) Active forum/player community - the unofficial DLC is incredible.
2) Choices 1 - 6 origin stories, 3 races, 2 genders - and for each there is a choice on how to develop that GW
3) Choices 2 - My GWs can spend time talking to NPCs/followers or go on a nice dungeon crawl. There are options for either depending on how I'm feeling that day.
4) Choices 3 - with all of the DLC (official and unofficial), my GWs could be true to the character concept, a holier than thou HN can refuse to take missions for the mage's collective while her HN twin that is a bit of a scamp can. Both will have leveled up enough to defeat the Archdemon by the time the final battle occurs. Being able to pass up quests really improved immersion.
5) Winning battles takes some planning - I always play on Nightmare and try not to overload on 'god items' so that the GW is impossible to kill. I want there to be some element of doubt that the GW is going to be the winner!
Sure, I know all those choices don't lead to huge differences in the end, but the all lead to immersion in the RPG. Isn't that supposed to be the goal of a good RPG?

So back to DA3, I don't care if there is a single mention of a character from DAO or DA2. It is a new game so I don't NEED to have references to past games. If I'm going to spend the money to buy DA3, I don't want to hear the shrieks of moral outrage that I heard when DA2 and ME3 came out. This means DA3 shouldn't disappoint players that pre-ordered it months in advance. DA3 means that there is some expectation that it will exceed the standard set by DAO - name it Chantry vs Mages if the DAO standard isn't going to be met. Make me care what happens to my PC and his/her NPC/followers. I don't need there to be one or more LIs, but I would like to have SOME interest in not letting them get killed in every battle. And last and probably least - I am a straight female gamer. I REALLY don't care about the endowments of the female NPCs. Don't make me wonder how they can possibly fight without all of that excess development getting in their way - kind of kills the immersion when I have to stop and laugh - repeatedly. Trust me, women who don't look like over-endowed Victoria Secrets models can be attractive. And won't cause me to laugh.

I love what can be done with the DAO toolset and the unofficial DLC has drastically increased the replayability of the game, but it isn't mandatory. Few other games have it so I can learn to live without it again. I'll be happy to sulk, maybe beg, and would definitely bribe with cookies if DA3 has a toolset - just so you know

btw - finally purchased DA2 because of a video/cutscene that DahliaLynn created. As you can see, I haven't been motivated to install it yet, but I'm sure I will within the next week - or two.

[Allan Schumacher]

What Bioware has become known for is weaving choices into a fairly
linear story to give it a varied experience. For instance, you couldn't
have the option in DA:O of slaying the Archdemon, then challenging
Loghain at the Landsmeet, then gathering the treaties. That would make
no sense. But we were given options about how to gather the treaties,
how we treat Loghain at the Landsmeet, who we want to crown in his place
and how to approach the problem with slaying the Archdemon. These
choices have in-game consequences, as well as the fact that they offer
endings that can result in a slightly (or even a greatly) different
story on each playthrough.

So do you think Bioware's fanbase
wants plot decisions that are refelected in game? Or would a
sufficiently excellent story on the rails, with the option to romance
who you choose, be more in line with what the fanbase expects?

I think, with us providing a taste of player reactivity with character imports, BioWare's fanbase may be shifting towards wanting improved player reactivity.  It's certainly a vocal component on the boards anyways.  A lot of fans in Mass Effect were disappointed that they didn't receive the level of reactivity that they were expecting.  Maybe that's an issue with messaging, and possibly we could successfully move away from.  But even here there are fans that are stating that they feel that if we aren't going to do Old God Baby or other choices in an appropriate way, it may be best to do focus on something else entirely.

At the same time, there are people that really want to know what happens to the Old God Baby (it is a cliff hanger so this is fair).  But I am wondering if maybe we painted ourselves into a corner a little bit with people insisting that we not ignore the choices that they made in previous games.


I don't know how many people typically replay games though, so I do think that if we were able to create a completely linear story that did such a good job of the illusion of choice and led the players in such a way that they felt that they were truly driving the story, it'd probably still work really well for a lot of people.  (Deus Ex did this really well with it's narrative, IMO).

Before DAO I would have probably said the latter.  Even the Mass Effect games I felt weren't really all that reactive to player choice.  It was mostly the assurance/expectation that (at least by ME2) the choices would eventually be reflected.  But DAO came out and had pretty decent player reactivity.  It had the epilogue slides.  ME2 came out and it was pretty easy to get endings that played out differently and so forth, and I think that really made a lot of fans take notice.

My problem is wondering if I'm overstating what I read on the internet though.  Based on that though, I think player agency has become more important and it'd probably be better to focus on that than a long, mostly linear campaign.

[brushyourteeth]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

*snip*

I don't know how many people typically replay games though, so I do think that if we were able to create a completely linear story that did such a good job of the illusion of choice and led the players in such a way that they felt that they were truly driving the story, it'd probably still work really well for a lot of people.  (Deus Ex did this really well with it's narrative, IMO).

Before DAO I would have probably said the latter.  Even the Mass Effect games I felt weren't really all that reactive to player choice.  It was mostly the assurance/expectation that (at least by ME2) the choices would eventually be reflected.  But DAO came out and had pretty decent player reactivity.  It had the epilogue slides.  ME2 came out and it was pretty easy to get endings that played out differently and so forth, and I think that really made a lot of fans take notice.

My problem is wondering if I'm overstating what I read on the internet though.  Based on that though, I think player agency has become more important and it'd probably be better to focus on that than a long, mostly linear campaign.

I feel like DA:O pretty much hit the sweet spot as far as having a marriage of player choice and a driven "this bus is actually taking us somewhere" plotline. I know you guys want to and have the talent to make something that's an improvement, but if you use DA:O as your "square one" I can't see many of your fans (reasonably) complaining.

Modifié par brushyourteeth, 09 juin 2012 - 04:53 .

[batlin]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Fair enough... but it might tie back more to the concept of the OP, in questioning if Bioware is looking to expand and realign its fanbase for The Next Big Thing? 

Well, if you want to carry this on and make it a bit more on topic, I'll give that a whirl.  En garde.

For my first volley, is nonlinearity a trait that most of the BioWare fanbase highlights as their driving factors?  IMO, games like BG, BG2, KOTOR, all the ME games, DAO, and DA2 are still pretty linear game experiences.  KOTOR ME 1/2, and DAO do allow some level of variation in how the player can proceed through the story, and while I don't agree with it I can understand why people feel BG is a nonlinear game due to the open ended exploration allowed in the game.  But if you compare these games to any of the Elder Scrolls games, or other ones like Ultima, Fallout or Wasteland, I don't think BioWare's games offered as much non-linearity as many of these other games.

Though from my experiences, the games that are lauded as BioWare's greatest are typically either BG2 or KOTOR, and occasionally DAO.  All these games offer romances (which IMO are now also a requirement for any game we do going forward), and from KOTOR on they also started to become a lot more cinematic.


I think the defining trait for BioWare games has always been the story.  Some may just love a D&D combat romp (which many BioWare games are), but I think it's the story that makes the biggest impact with those that prefer BioWare over other RPG developers.  Most specifically (especially recently) I'd call out the characters.  A lot of time spent in BioWare games is spent in the conversations.

The interesting thing about the conversations is how, I feel, they can appeal to a variety of players.  Conversations are typically where the romance arcs exist.  Conversations is a way for the player to define their character in a roleplaying fashion.  Conversations are the primary way we drive our narrative.  These conversations exist as part of the story, but they still serve players that may prefer other aspects of the game rather than just story.

Aside from BG1, I don't know if I'd agree that BioWare's games are noted for any sort of non-linearity.  I'm sure some feel that's their best strength (especially within the context of still having a meaningful narrative), but I think the narrative itself is what draws most BioWare gamers in.  JMO.


At the same time, RPG gamers definitely show that they can appreciate a more open ended game world.  So while I wouldn't bet on any sort of Skyrim type seamless open world clone, but I think we'd be silly to not consider potential gains we might gain by looking at what other games have done well.  For example, what I really liked about Fallout 3 was it's ability to tell a story without saying any words.  Stumbling into a blown out house I find a skeleton in a bathtub.  But there's a knife through his ribcage... interesting!  Did he kill himself?  Was he murdered?  When could this have happened.  Stuff like that I find helps drive the setting and the narrative (as much as I dislike TES games, I did enjoy FO3 and FONV), and it's done in a way without needing additional writing and cinematics and so forth.


Anyways this is a wall of text now.  I'll check in for a response tomorrow.

Cheers.

I don't think any one expects a Bioware game to be non-linear to the point of TES where for example you have the freedom to kill almost anyone and everyone you want.

A game being linear is not an "either it is or it's not" situation. There are varying degrees of freedom alotted to players, and DA2 all-around gives players less than we had in DA:O. Most damningly, as I've said before, how we are never given really obvious courses of action to take because doing so would be inconvenient to the plot. I remember going to the Mother in the chantry after having a really foreboding talk with Anders and wonderng why I couldn't warn her about him wanting to sneak in. After checking online, I found out that no, there's no way to do aything about it and you must simply let events play out.

I feel like a broken record about this, but it's VERY annoying how Hawke is always forced into inaction. Bartrand sealed me and my friends in a tomb and left us for dead? Oh well, I won't pursue the matter unless news of his whereabouts falls directly into my lap. There's a murderer on the loose who's killing young women? Eh, I'll just assume it was the very first guy I caught who swore up and down that he himself was looking for the real killer and not look any deeper than that. I had a romantic encounter with Fenris and he stormed away all broodingly? I'll give him three years to cool off before bringing the subject up again.

See where I'm going with this? Do you not see how it can be really frustrating to never even have the the option of being proactive?

In a game like this, the necessity of the story should not trump the player's freedom, especially when the freedom being restricted is a very very obvious course of action that a hero in any other medium wouldn't think twice about before doing it.

Modifié par batlin, 09 juin 2012 - 11:26 .