54 réponses à ce sujet

[ScotGaymer]

ashwind wrote...

Cultist wrote...

And here again we get back to Witcher 2...

 You cant blame us - DA2 tried to be more like ME and umm... it failed. TW2 on the other hand is ME in a medieval fantasy setting done nearly perfect.

If you are talking about TW2 then i can't comment. I can only go by what Yahtzee said and my own impressions of my playthru of TW1.

If you are talking about TW1, then just no.

TW1 is just terrible.

It might have a great storyline, but it has such backward impossible mindbogglingly stupid gameplay, GUI, and combat I have ever seen in an RPG. And the lack of any real tutorial is a real damager.

The using a potion animation... He prays to a bottle. Seriously. It s a long stupid ass praying animation.
Having one sword for humans and one for beasts... Makes no sense.
The GUI is like a giant uninformative spreadsheet.
Geralt doesn't like to dodge.

I could keep going but I would be here all day belabouring TW1's flaws.

As to TW2 as I said I ain't played it; but if the reviews are anything to go by (and by reviews I mean from people I actually respect not IGN) then TW2 kept a number of the really cripplingly stupid gameplay things that really irritated me in the first game, like the nonsensical different swords for different enemies thing.
It's what has kept me from buying the darned thing.

I mean usually if a game has a strong immersive storyline then I can forgive a lot gameplay wise. Example: ME1 is a game I absolutely love - defo my favourite ME game storyline wise. But the combat in it just plain sucks, no getting around it - it's terrible.
But the storyline immerses me enough that I don't care.
TW1's flaws for me were bad enough, and the story wasn't good enough to compensate, that I was jarred completely out of the game and stopped playing cos of how hideously bad I found it.

I suppose I really ought to give TW2 a fair shake though but I don't like playing a sequel without having completed the prequel...

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 05 juillet 2012 - 12:20 .

[AkiKishi]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

Having one sword for humans and one for beasts... Makes no sense.

TW2 was completely overhauled and redesigned. As for having a silver and a steel sword it makes perfect sense. Your just not familiar with why by the look of it.

[Wulfram]

renjility wrote...

^It's the first fight with ser Cauthrien, and it's definitely not optional. You get it near the end of the "Rescue the Queen" quest. And it's not a battle that is impossible to win. It's just very tough. So I guess you did win it.
 

You can surrender without a fight.

Though this doesn't make much sense to me.  You don't know that you'll be put into the worlds least secure prison while your party goes free.

[AkiKishi]

renjility wrote...

^It's the first fight with ser Cauthrien, and it's definitely not optional. You get it near the end of the "Rescue the Queen" quest. And it's not a battle that is impossible to win. It's just very tough. So I guess you did win it.

Allan Schumacher wrote....

I didn't mind that part either, but it needs to somehow be communicated with the player better.

A lot of players reload when the end is imminent, meaning they would reload their game before they were completely defeated. As a result they found the sequence a ridiculous chore and then were ultimately frustrated when they found out that they were effectively "supposed to lose."

Hmm, I'm not sure how you can easily communicate this to the player. After all it will not occur often and it's more or less supposed to be a surprise. The only thing I can think of is a message in the loading screens: "when a battle is not going well, don't reload immediately. You might be surprised..." or something like that.

You could disable reloading in battle. You would either have to win or die.

[Dutchess]

Wulfram wrote...

renjility wrote...

^It's the first fight with ser Cauthrien, and it's definitely not optional. You get it near the end of the "Rescue the Queen" quest. And it's not a battle that is impossible to win. It's just very tough. So I guess you did win it.
 

You can surrender without a fight.

Though this doesn't make much sense to me.  You don't know that you'll be put into the worlds least secure prison while your party goes free.

Yeah, I know you can surrender, but I left it out because the topic is about consequences of losing a battle specifically. I have never chosen to surrender. Can't really imagine one of my Wardens giving up like that.

[TonberryFeye]

The only thing I can think of in that situation is to use the other characters to make the point.

For example, if a generic NPC says "You can't possibly win this!" I'll ignore them (and probably kill the idiot) because players are used to enemies boasting about how we're about to die.

But having a party member stating how "We can't win this; the best we can do is sell our lives dearly," suggests that might actually be true.

The last option is to deny the ability to load a game whilst in combat. This would force players to go to the 'you died' screen... but it doesn't help those who waste a lot of resources in a no-win fight.

[Dutchess]

The resources can probably be reset after you died, if that's such a big issue. Or the post-death scene can offer enough new potions and poultices to replenish your stock.

[TonberryFeye]

renjility wrote...

The resources can probably be reset after you died, if that's such a big issue. Or the post-death scene can offer enough new potions and poultices to replenish your stock.

So what's to stop people suiciding and getting a load of free stuff they shouldn't have had?

There's the problem, really; to be fair to the player you need to tell them they can't win, but if you tell them they can't win any surprise is gone.

[fchopin]

I don’t mind if the endings are standard or not as long as they make sense.
It does not bother me if pc dies or not, or even if pc fails in the end as long as it makes sense.

Bioware are making games with big plot holes in the last few games so it’s something they will need to correct. I think this will be there big challenge in the next game they make.

[Dutchess]

TonberryFeye wrote...

renjility wrote...

The resources can probably be reset after you died, if that's such a big issue. Or the post-death scene can offer enough new potions and poultices to replenish your stock.

So what's to stop people suiciding and getting a load of free stuff they shouldn't have had?

There's the problem, really; to be fair to the player you need to tell them they can't win, but if you tell them they can't win any surprise is gone.

Since the only resources you will use in battle are potions and poultices, I don't really see the big deal in acquiring some more from loot. It's not like three more health poultices break the game.

[PsychoBlonde]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

renjility wrote...

They had one in DAO. If you got killed by ser Cauthrien and her guards, you woke up in prison instead of getting another chance. Something similar was done in ME2 Arrival dlc.

It would be fun if the team found another way to implement this. It's a nice surprise and a change of pace when you don't get the expected "critical mission failure" or "your journey ends here".

I didn't mind that part either, but it needs to somehow be communicated with the player better.

A lot of players reload when the end is imminent, meaning they would reload their game before they were completely defeated.  As a result they found the sequence a ridiculous chore and then were ultimately frustrated when they found out that they were effectively "supposed to lose."

Yes--but you could have done this by, say, having an icon appear that said characters were "captured" when they fell in battle as opposed to showing the "dead" icon.  This would have been unusual enough when the first party member went down that I bet a large number of people would have wanted to see what happened when everybody was "captured".

You may want to think about having status effects of this type ("Captured", "Turned to Stone", "Mind Controlled", Possessed, etc.) for future games, and then the writers can GO NUTS.  

[Leoroc]

Clearly we need more game overs like this

[Vormaerin]

BobSmith101 wrote...


Yeah I hate scripted loss like that. Legai 2 did it, I ended up wasting tons of potions and extras trying to beat something that could not be beaten. All I did was draw the fight out and waste time.
Reading that post was the first I heard about it in DA though, so either I won. Or it was an optional fight I never saw.

Well, the "correct" choice when faced with Ser Cauthrien's guards is to keep quiet, surrender nicely, and let Queen Anora get away.  Fighting with Cauthrien just risks Anora getting killed in the melee.   So if you turn yourself in to keep the Queen's escape secret, you won't face the "no win battle."

[andar91]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

renjility wrote...

They had one in DAO. If you got killed by ser Cauthrien and her guards, you woke up in prison instead of getting another chance. Something similar was done in ME2 Arrival dlc.

It would be fun if the team found another way to implement this. It's a nice surprise and a change of pace when you don't get the expected "critical mission failure" or "your journey ends here".

I didn't mind that part either, but it needs to somehow be communicated with the player better.

A lot of players reload when the end is imminent, meaning they would reload their game before they were completely defeated.  As a result they found the sequence a ridiculous chore and then were ultimately frustrated when they found out that they were effectively "supposed to lose."

This made me laugh so much. Looking back, I kept using the console command to heal myself because I just couldn't defeat her. It's funny now, but I was so annoyed when I realized I had spent so much time trying to fight an unbeatable foe. I wish stuff like that was just done in a cutscene (the cutscene could even cut in halfway through the fight like in DA2's opening).

[AkiKishi]

Vormaerin wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...


Yeah I hate scripted loss like that. Legai 2 did it, I ended up wasting tons of potions and extras trying to beat something that could not be beaten. All I did was draw the fight out and waste time.
Reading that post was the first I heard about it in DA though, so either I won. Or it was an optional fight I never saw.

Well, the "correct" choice when faced with Ser Cauthrien's guards is to keep quiet, surrender nicely, and let Queen Anora get away.  Fighting with Cauthrien just risks Anora getting killed in the melee.   So if you turn yourself in to keep the Queen's escape secret, you won't face the "no win battle."

Legaia is a no win battle though. The one in DA is just difficult. It's not realy the same thing.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 15 juillet 2012 - 08:45 .

[Chiramu]

Wulfram wrote...

Thinking about it, any non standard game overs in DA2 would have had to end with Cassandra saying "bull****"

"I was only trying to make it more exciting..."

Although this was done in Monkey Island 2, if you didn't escape from Lechuck's prison, you got the funny sequence with Elaine.

[Uccio]

Wulfram wrote...

Recent Bioware games seem to have made a point of making sure that as long as you keep playing and don't all die in combat, you'll reach the end of the game and "win".

Should this be so, or should there be occasions when you can pick the wrong choice and get a "game over" - like letting yourself get possessed by demons, or pissing off the King and getting executed or something. 

Or indeed an occasion when your PC can effectively say "no, I don't want to be the hero of this story" and just leave.

This should be a option. In TW2 if you ****** of Iorveth when you meet him in the forest clearing theill shoot both Geralt and Zoltan. End of game.

[Uccio]

FitScotGaymer wrote...

ashwind wrote...

Cultist wrote...

And here again we get back to Witcher 2...

 You cant blame us - DA2 tried to be more like ME and umm... it failed. TW2 on the other hand is ME in a medieval fantasy setting done nearly perfect.

If you are talking about TW2 then i can't comment. I can only go by what Yahtzee said and my own impressions of my playthru of TW1.

If you are talking about TW1, then just no.

TW1 is just terrible.

It might have a great storyline, but it has such backward impossible mindbogglingly stupid gameplay, GUI, and combat I have ever seen in an RPG. And the lack of any real tutorial is a real damager.

The using a potion animation... He prays to a bottle. Seriously. It s a long stupid ass praying animation.
Having one sword for humans and one for beasts... Makes no sense.
The GUI is like a giant uninformative spreadsheet.
Geralt doesn't like to dodge.

I could keep going but I would be here all day belabouring TW1's flaws.

As to TW2 as I said I ain't played it; but if the reviews are anything to go by (and by reviews I mean from people I actually respect not IGN) then TW2 kept a number of the really cripplingly stupid gameplay things that really irritated me in the first game, like the nonsensical different swords for different enemies thing.
It's what has kept me from buying the darned thing.

I mean usually if a game has a strong immersive storyline then I can forgive a lot gameplay wise. Example: ME1 is a game I absolutely love - defo my favourite ME game storyline wise. But the combat in it just plain sucks, no getting around it - it's terrible.
But the storyline immerses me enough that I don't care.
TW1's flaws for me were bad enough, and the story wasn't good enough to compensate, that I was jarred completely out of the game and stopped playing cos of how hideously bad I found it.

I suppose I really ought to give TW2 a fair shake though but I don't like playing a sequel without having completed the prequel...

Funny, I think TW1 was good and TW2 was awesome. Opinions right?!

[Sweet Dirge]

Have you tried sleeping with Morinth in Mass Effect 2?

[BubbleDncr]

renjility wrote...

They had one in DAO. If you got killed by ser Cauthrien and her guards, you woke up in prison instead of getting another chance. Something similar was done in ME2 Arrival dlc.

It would be fun if the team found another way to implement this. It's a nice surprise and a change of pace when you don't get the expected "critical mission failure" or "your journey ends here".

I loved that. In all my playthroughs, only my mage ever won that fight. And not only, when you lost that fight, did you not get a game over - you got to pick between 2 different way of playing your escape (you escape on your own, or wait for your companions). It was awesome!

Made it feel like I was supposed to lose that fight. Which made me even happier when I managed to beat it on my mage - made me feel epic and awesome. Though, I imagine people who are just skilled enough to win it on the first try would lose out on both that extra content and that pride of feeling awesome, since they didn't know otherwise.

[Elvis_Mazur]

Nah, no. At least, in my point of view, those choices would be completely meaningless since after knowing the results, I would never choose them again in later playthroughs.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Wulfram wrote...

Recent Bioware games seem to have made a point of making sure that as long as you keep playing and don't all die in combat, you'll reach the end of the game and "win".

Grown up with that, to be honest. Most of the games in my collection the party could be revived/resurrected so long as one person survived the battle. DA's method of simply auto-reviving upon the battle ending didn't bother me. It was more a convenience than anything else.

Should this be so, or should there be occasions when you can pick the wrong choice and get a "game over" - like letting yourself get possessed by demons, or pissing off the King and getting executed or something. 

Or indeed an occasion when your PC can effectively say "no, I don't want to be the hero of this story" and just leave.

That's a different kettle of fish, because I'd love to see that. I don't care if ultimately it would lead to a swift reload, because to me it'd be cool that you could die, fail, sacrifice yourself etc in some way other than a random combat encounter. Sometimes, doing X will just get you killed.

But then, I also grew up with King's Quest and Space Quest where there were a plethora of extremely creative ways to fail.

[MKDAWUSS]

Or how about having a GO be a legitimate ending? Might be complicated to implement, but it would be a way of advancing through a failure, something most games these days won't let you do...

[AkiKishi]

MKDAWUSS wrote...

Or how about having a GO be a legitimate ending? Might be complicated to implement, but it would be a way of advancing through a failure, something most games these days won't let you do...

Bad ends are much more common in JRPGs.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 17 juillet 2012 - 08:36 .