304 réponses à ce sujet

[esper]

Emzamination wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Irrelevant.  Same logic, different data set.

Fallacious logic is fallacious.

We're talking about human beings expressing their likes and dislikes.  Logic doesn't come into play. :lol:

In no way does completing a game express my like or dislike of something.

Completing Mass Effect 3 MADE me dislike it. If I had not completed it, I would have said it was a fairly solid action game. 

DA2 would have had the same resonse (a decent action game) if I had stopped right after Act 2. Act 3 is where most of my distaste for it as an action game came from (although it has features which make it an atrocious RPG). So finishing these games affirmed my DISLIKE of them.

So I hope you can see why people are saying the logic for this argument is completely off-base. 

Not to mention the mountains of text I've already devoted to poking holes in the fact that the way the information was present and revealed at GDC, not to mention the motives of the man presenting them, Fernando Melo, hardly lend any sort of credibility to the argument.

Sorry jimmy, I'm going to have to call this illogical, you can not like 95% of the game, Dislike 5% and File that game under dislike, logic and democracy dictates that the majority percentage rules out the lesser.That game is now an Invalid example and whether you want to or not, you must like that game, this is what logic dictates.

Majority means squat when we talk about like and dislike. I have read plenty of books which I enjoyed untill I came to the very last page which than retro-respectively ruined the whole book for me.
Democracy is not per automatic right, certainly not when it comes to individual taste.
The ending can make or break a story, even in a game.

[tklivory]

Emzamination wrote...

Sorry jimmy, I'm going to have to call this illogical, you can not like 95% of the game, Dislike 5% and File that game under dislike, logic and democracy dictates that the majority percentage rules out the lesser.That game is now an Invalid example and whether you want to or not, you must like that game, this is what logic dictates.

Point A: Logic and democracy have nothing to do with each other

Point 2: Enjoyment of a game en toto is a subjective decision based on empirical evidence gathered on an individual basis

Point iii: It is quite possible for the last moment of an experience to completely ruin the rest.  Would you say that Mary Lincoln should have enjoyed that play because *most* of the time her husband was alive?  Or that Jackie Kennedy should have enjoyed Dallas for the same reason?  

Point Δ:  No point here, just making a point. 


But yeah, applying logic to what is essentially a subjective experience is a bit... hmm, what's that word?  Oh, right:

Modifié par tklivory, 16 août 2012 - 07:26 .

[Emzamination]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

Sorry jimmy, I'm going to have to call this illogical, you can not like 95% of the game, Dislike 5% and File that game under dislike, logic and democracy dictates that the majority percentage rules out the lesser.

That's nonsense.  Why Jimmy might weight the narrative more heavily than the gameplay.  Before he readhed the end, he didn't have the whole narrative to evaluate, so his expectation was based solely on gameplay (which, once the game was complete, became less important in the analysis).

And democracy?  Seriously?  You just appealed to democracy?

Narative, gameplay, graphics, mechanics, in the end it's all one game play and his statement signifies that all these elements have have been taken into effect and judged accordingly.I appeal to democracy because this forum and I reside in a democratic nation, logic dictates I appeal to it.My statement stands, I'd expect you of all people sylvius to understand that the logic of the universe isn't uniform black and white

[Mr Fixit]

Emzamination wrote...

I appeal to democracy because this forum and I reside in a democratic nation, logic dictates I appeal to it.

So, if for some reason Canada became a fascist dictatorship, would that mean logical principles governing the enjoyment of computer games should change?

What nonsense is this?

[Emzamination]

esper wrote...

Majority means squat when we talk about like and dislike. I have read plenty of books which I enjoyed untill I came to the very last page which than retro-respectively ruined the whole book for me.
Democracy is not per automatic right, certainly not when it comes to individual taste.
The ending can make or break a story, even in a game.

Not until you start applying mathematics to your likes and dislikes.For example if you said "I dislike twilight", logic dictates that you dislike that book 100% but when you say "I liked twilight right up until the middle", Logic dictates that you liked and disliked the book at an equal 50%, which classifies you in a state of limbo or for a more modern term undecided, sorry this is what logic dictates, esper.

[Fast Jimmy]

Emzamination wrote...

esper wrote...

Majority means squat when we talk about like and dislike. I have read plenty of books which I enjoyed untill I came to the very last page which than retro-respectively ruined the whole book for me.
Democracy is not per automatic right, certainly not when it comes to individual taste.
The ending can make or break a story, even in a game.

Not until you start applying mathematics to your likes and dislikes.For example if you said "I dislike twilight", logic dictates that you dislike that book 100% but when you say "I liked twilight right up until the middle", Logic dictates that you liked and disliked the book at an equal 50%, which classifies you in a state of limbo or for a more modern term undecided, sorry this is what logic dictates, esper.

I'm sure many Jews loved living in Germany most of their lives right up until around the 1940's hit.

But, democratically speaking, they loved Germany... right?

Ah, but I just fell into the Nasee argument fail, didn't I?

[Emzamination]

tklivory wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

Sorry jimmy, I'm going to have to call this illogical, you can not like 95% of the game, Dislike 5% and File that game under dislike, logic and democracy dictates that the majority percentage rules out the lesser.That game is now an Invalid example and whether you want to or not, you must like that game, this is what logic dictates.

Point A: Logic and democracy have nothing to do with each other

Point 2: Enjoyment of a game en toto is a subjective decision based on empirical evidence gathered on an individual basis

Point iii: It is quite possible for the last moment of an experience to completely ruin the rest.  Would you say that Mary Lincoln should have enjoyed that play because *most* of the time her husband was alive?  Or that Jackie Kennedy should have enjoyed Dallas for the same reason?  

Point Δ:  No point here, just making a point. 


But yeah, applying logic to what is essentially a subjective experience is a bit... hmm, what's that word?  Oh, right:

Point A: Check one page back

Point 2: Mathematics is the undisputed law of logic, not empirical evidence, your personal feelings are moot in the wake of Logic

Point 3: Putting aside the fact her husband getting iced and the play are two different subjects, logic dictates you divide the question.You can only have an answer to one or the other.

[Realmzmaster]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I am one of those who have finished a greater % of DA2 games than Origin. Yet, I played a heck of a lot more Origin games than DA2. Therefore, the game you would rather play the most is the better game, no?

I finished and complete all my DAO playthroughs (8) and DA2 playthroughs (12). So in my estimation that would make DA2 the better game by your logic.

Uh... not really.

Unless those playthrough numbers told us which game you would rather play, which they don't.

... all according to Jerrybnsn's assertions.

But it does because I played DA2 to completion 12 times and DAO only 8 times. If I like DAO better I should have more completed playthroughs of DAO than DA2 by the logic that has been presented. 

[Emzamination]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

esper wrote...

Majority means squat when we talk about like and dislike. I have read plenty of books which I enjoyed untill I came to the very last page which than retro-respectively ruined the whole book for me.
Democracy is not per automatic right, certainly not when it comes to individual taste.
The ending can make or break a story, even in a game.

Not until you start applying mathematics to your likes and dislikes.For example if you said "I dislike twilight", logic dictates that you dislike that book 100% but when you say "I liked twilight right up until the middle", Logic dictates that you liked and disliked the book at an equal 50%, which classifies you in a state of limbo or for a more modern term undecided, sorry this is what logic dictates, esper.

I'm sure many Jews loved living in Germany most of their lives right up until around the 1940's hit.

But, democratically speaking, they loved Germany... right?

Ah, but I just fell into the Nasee argument fail, didn't I?

Never mind

Modifié par Emzamination, 16 août 2012 - 07:58 .

[tklivory]

Emzamination wrote...

Point A: Check one page back

Point 2: Mathematics is the undisputed law of logic, not empirical evidence, your personal feelings are moot in the wake of Logic

Point 3: Putting aside the fact her husband getting iced and the play are two different subjects, logic dictates you divide the question.You can only have an answer to one or the other.

A) Logic and democracy are two discrete creatures, since one exists in its pure form and one does not.  In the beautiful mind of certain individuals, true logic in its crystalline brilliance can be seen for fragments of a time.  Democracy, sadly, is a concept not actually implemented in any pure form on a national level (which is the level you were aspiring to invoke.)  The poor creature called the democratic process stands, stripped of fundamental principles, and called democracy to appease the very masses that are not represented by it.  (On a national level, anyway.)  Of course, logic is being invoked in an argument that does not answer to it in this instance, so I suppose the troglodytes of the mind will need to emerge and establish their true supremacy in this case.

β) There is indeed a pure subset of mathematics that exists which follows the flow and wonder of logic in its entirety, but the whole of mathematics does not rely on this.  And I don't know a single mathematician that operates on the level of pure logic that would agree that anything is undisputed, even logic.  The wake of logic is wide and swallows much in its passing, but empirical evidence exists outside of it, enabling logic to be noticed as it provides the medium in which our feeble brains can view and acknowledge the beauty and purity of all that exists within that which is not (yet) fully explained by the exquisite magnificence of pure logic as it is called forth not by logic but by reality and the interworkings of logical and illogical systems - such as the human mind.

3) Logic dictates neither my actions nor that of any human (and any who claim otherwise except Sheldon Cooper doth protest too much, in all likelihood), and therefore I am proud to announce my humanity and eschew the need to divide the two events.  The play was informed by the assassination, and trying to divide the logical conclusion that she perceived them irreparably in her own mind is in and of itself a cruel stab to the nature of logic.  To say that logic demands a concrete answer is to ensure the cat remains poisoned in the box.  Poor Ser Pounce-a-lot.

(I think I need more caffeine)

Modifié par tklivory, 16 août 2012 - 08:06 .

[Pasquale1234]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I am one of those who have finished a greater % of DA2 games than Origin. Yet, I played a heck of a lot more Origin games than DA2. Therefore, the game you would rather play the most is the better game, no?

I finished and complete all my DAO playthroughs (8) and DA2 playthroughs (12). So in my estimation that would make DA2 the better game by your logic.

Uh... not really.

Unless those playthrough numbers told us which game you would rather play, which they don't.

... all according to Jerrybnsn's assertions.

But it does because I played DA2 to completion 12 times and DAO only 8 times. If I like DAO better I should have more completed playthroughs of DAO than DA2 by the logic that has been presented. 

According to what logic presented by whom?

It doesn't follow from the post you quoted.

[upsettingshorts]

My credentials as a critic of DAO and supporter of DA2 - with caveats of course for both - are well established here.

And I'm gonna say this is one of the worst metrics for evaluating the merits of any game I can think of. It's impossible to draw any conclusions based on completed percentage metrics. Furthermore, completion says nothing about enjoy-ability. I like Skyrim but haven't actually finished it. I'm not a big fan of The Witcher 1, but I completed it.   Just to cite personal examples. Likewise, plenty of people finished Mass Effect 3 and had their opinion of the game (or the whole series) altered for the worse by said completion.

Personally, I think DA3 will crystalize a lot of the arguments regarding DAO vs. DA2.  DA2 was rushed out the door and wasn't able to realize as much as it was clearly attempting to do, as such, compromises and jury-rigged solutions are being lumped together with planned design decisions and this clouds the evaluation of DA2 as a game.  

Likewise people seem to think BioWare kept DAO in development for seven years on purpose, and hold the equally silly notion that all seven years were spent making progress in the same direction.  

DA3 might be the first Dragon Age game to actually have a proper development cycle and a clear purpose from the get-go.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 16 août 2012 - 08:26 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

My credentials as a critic of DAO and supporter of DA2 - with caveats of course for both - are well established here.

And I'm gonna say this is one of the worst metrics for evaluating the merits of any game I can think of. It's impossible to draw any conclusions based on completed percentage metrics. Furthermore, completion says nothing about enjoy-ability. I like Skyrim but haven't actually finished it. I'm not a big fan of The Witcher 1, but I completed it.   Just to cite personal examples. Likewise, plenty of people finished Mass Effect 3 and had their opinion of the game (or the whole series) altered for the worse by said completion.

Personally, I think DA3 will crystalize a lot of the arguments regarding DAO vs. DA2.  DA2 was rushed out the door and wasn't able to realize as much as it was clearly attempting to do, as such, compromises and jury-rigged solutions are being lumped together with planned design decisions and this clouds the evaluation of DA2 as a game.  

Likewise people seem to think BioWare kept DAO in development for seven years on purpose, and hold the equally silly notion that all seven years were spent making progress in the same direction.  

DA3 might be the first Dragon Age game to actually have a proper development cycle and a clear purpose from the get-go.

It might be. That is why I am holding out reservations on it. Some of the already announced mechanics I think firmly plant it on the wrong side of the hill (as has been demonstrated by my comments whenever the topics come up) but as a whole, it could possibly be a project that lives up to its ambitions, given that they seem to be taking their time developing it, not promising anything from the get-go and have no other distractions at Bioware (with ME over and TOR looking to lower staff, if not wind down pretty much altogether).

So we shall see, I suppose.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 16 août 2012 - 08:34 .

[upsettingshorts]

Well "wrong side of the hill" is of course subjective. See the entire VO debate, for example. What I'm really trying to get across with that point is it will (hopefully) do away with things like:

Me: "I liked DA2"
Someone: "So you were a fan of enemies dropping from the sky then?"
Me: *faceplant*

I'd rather we talk about stuff with legit pros and cons - as opposed to noise (repeated environments, paratrooper bad guys) that the development cycle/engine forced on the game.

That isn't to say DA3 won't have compromises, every game does, only it's safe to say they probably won't be as numerous as DA2's.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 16 août 2012 - 08:57 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I'd rather we talk about stuff with legit pros and cons - as opposed to noise (repeated environments, paratrooper bad guys) that the development cycle/engine forced on the game.

But there still are genuine disagreements as to whether some of those features were pros or cons.

[jillabender]

Upsettingshorts…

Personally, I think DA3 will crystalize a lot of the arguments regarding DAO vs. DA2. DA2 was rushed out the door and wasn't able to realize as much as it was clearly attempting to do, as such, compromises and jury-rigged solutions are being lumped together with planned design decisions and this clouds the evaluation of DA2 as a game.

That's a good point – while I think it's fair to say that DA2 didn't live up to its potential, it can be misleading to evaluate the pros and cons of specific features based solely on how they were handled in a single game.

As I've said before, I think that many of the changes DA2 introduced had a lot of potential, but weren't handled as well as they could have been. That's why I'm reluctant to say that I categorically dislike voiced protagonists and paraphrases in RPGs, for example – all I can say for sure is that the way it was handled in DA2 didn't always work for me. I'm looking forward to seeing how those features, and others, will be handled in DA3.

Modifié par jillabender, 16 août 2012 - 09:22 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Well "wrong side of the hill" is of course subjective. See the entire VO debate, for example. What I'm really trying to get across with that point is it will (hopefully) do away with things like:

Of course it is debatable. But then again, that is why I said "I think" after giving the "wrong side of the hill" monicker.

Me: "I liked DA2"
Someone: "So you were a fan of enemies dropping from the sky then?"
Me: *faceplant*

I'd rather we talk about stuff with legit pros and cons - as opposed to noise (repeated environments, paratrooper bad guys) that the development cycle/engine forced on the game.

That isn't to say DA3 won't have compromises, every game does, only it's safe to say they probably won't be as numerous as DA2's.

When you stop pursuing perfection, you will always be imperfect. 


If I can't hop in front of a conversation and push my own vision of a perfect game or a route to reach that, then I'm not pushing anyone to make that game and, hence, I run the risk of never seeing what I envision to be a perfect game.


But... we have wandered far, far into off-topic territory. And since I feel like the original conversation was so statistically unreliable, I'm going to go ahead and take a bow from this thread.

[upsettingshorts]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I'd rather we talk about stuff with legit pros and cons - as opposed to noise (repeated environments, paratrooper bad guys) that the development cycle/engine forced on the game.

But there still are genuine disagreements as to whether some of those features were pros or cons.

That's the point?  

I'm talking about things like repeated environments, with the only Pro being it allowed them to release the game on time.  

I look forward to the difference between "things that were done because there was no time to do anything else" and "things that were done because BioWare really wanted to" being more easily defined.

Fast Jimmy wrote...

When you stop pursuing perfection, you will always be imperfect.

What nonsense is this?  Every game ever made compromises.  There is no such thing as a "complete game" as fans envisage it, pretending that there is leads to a steaming load of entitlement over cut content among gamers who think everything ever conceived for a game is owed to them.

An example of a game that tried to buck this trend and "pursue perfection" was Duke Nukem Forever.  I don't think any elaboration is necessary.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 16 août 2012 - 10:34 .

[Maria Caliban]

Emzamination wrote...


Sorry jimmy, I'm going to have to call this illogical, you can not like 95% of the game, Dislike 5% and File that game under dislike, logic and democracy dictates that the majority percentage rules out the lesser.That game is now an Invalid example and whether you want to or not, you must like that game, this is what logic dictates.

I assume this is a satirical jab at something, but I'm not sure what.

Fast Jimmy wrote...

When you stop pursuing perfection, you will always be imperfect. 

When you start pursuing perfection, you will always be imperfect. The difference being that you'll be imperfect and waste a great deal more time and energy than if you had realistic goals.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 16 août 2012 - 10:46 .

[Realmzmaster]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I am one of those who have finished a greater % of DA2 games than Origin. Yet, I played a heck of a lot more Origin games than DA2. Therefore, the game you would rather play the most is the better game, no?

I finished and complete all my DAO playthroughs (8) and DA2 playthroughs (12). So in my estimation that would make DA2 the better game by your logic.

Uh... not really.

Unless those playthrough numbers told us which game you would rather play, which they don't.

... all according to Jerrybnsn's assertions.

But it does because I played DA2 to completion 12 times and DAO only 8 times. If I like DAO better I should have more completed playthroughs of DAO than DA2 by the logic that has been presented. 

According to what logic presented by whom?

It doesn't follow from the post you quoted.

He states that he finished % wise a greater number of DA2 games but played more DAO games which means he did not complete some DAO games. That is comparing apples and oranges. One is a completion rate. To be a valid comparison then the completion rate for DAO should also be noted.

My comparison is apples to apples. I compare complete playthroughs of both games which is 100%, but since I played more playthroughs of DA2 one could  surmised  that I like DA2 better.

If  the poster is going to make a valid comparison then the number of DA2 games played and the number completed should be noted the same with DAO. A vaild comparison can then be made regarding percentages, games completed and games attempted. The original poster was looking at completion rates

[upsettingshorts]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

When you stop pursuing perfection, you will always be imperfect. 

When you start pursuing perfection, you will always be imperfect. The difference being that you'll be imperfect and waste a great deal more time and energy than if you had realistic goals.

 

Well put.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 16 août 2012 - 11:00 .

[Realmzmaster]

Fast Jimmy wrote...


When you stop pursuing perfection, you will always be imperfect. 


If I can't hop in front of a conversation and push my own vision of a perfect game or a route to reach that, then I'm not pushing anyone to make that game and, hence, I run the risk of never seeing what I envision to be a perfect game.

There is nothing wrong with pursuing perfection as long as you realize that perfection is different for different people. What you may consider perfection is not my perfection so therefore your perfection is imperfect to me.

Perfection is a nice goal, but one must be realistic about achieving it. That is why realistic goals are set that are achieveable in hopes of coming close to perfect. In fact if you achieve all of the realistic goals that would be close to perfect for that set of goals. 
Also everyone else is pushing their vision of a perfect game that does not necessarily coincide with your vision. So each vision can only be perfect in the envisioner's eyes.

[Pasquale1234]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I am one of those who have finished a greater % of DA2 games than Origin. Yet, I played a heck of a lot more Origin games than DA2. Therefore, the game you would rather play the most is the better game, no?

I finished and complete all my DAO playthroughs (8) and DA2 playthroughs (12). So in my estimation that would make DA2 the better game by your logic.

He states that he finished % wise a greater number of DA2 games but played more DAO games which means he did not complete some DAO games. That is comparing apples and oranges. One is a completion rate. To be a valid comparison then the completion rate for DAO should also be noted.

My comparison is apples to apples. I compare complete playthroughs of both games which is 100%, but since I played more playthroughs of DA2 one could  surmised  that I like DA2 better.

If  the poster is going to make a valid comparison then the number of DA2 games played and the number completed should be noted the same with DAO. A vaild comparison can then be made regarding percentages, games completed and games attempted. The original poster was looking at completion rates

Yes, the OP was looking at completion rates, but the quoted poster was refuting the idea that playthrough completions are relevant in determining which game the player liked better.  His stated conclusion is bolded and underlined above.

Play and completion numbers don't tell us which game you'd rather play the most.

[Realmzmaster]

Pasquale1234 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I am one of those who have finished a greater % of DA2 games than Origin. Yet, I played a heck of a lot more Origin games than DA2. Therefore, the game you would rather play the most is the better game, no?

I finished and complete all my DAO playthroughs (8) and DA2 playthroughs (12). So in my estimation that would make DA2 the better game by your logic.

He states that he finished % wise a greater number of DA2 games but played more DAO games which means he did not complete some DAO games. That is comparing apples and oranges. One is a completion rate. To be a valid comparison then the completion rate for DAO should also be noted.

My comparison is apples to apples. I compare complete playthroughs of both games which is 100%, but since I played more playthroughs of DA2 one could  surmised  that I like DA2 better.

If  the poster is going to make a valid comparison then the number of DA2 games played and the number completed should be noted the same with DAO. A vaild comparison can then be made regarding percentages, games completed and games attempted. The original poster was looking at completion rates

Yes, the OP was looking at completion rates, but the quoted poster was refuting the idea that playthrough completions are relevant in determining which game the player liked better.  His stated conclusion is bolded and underlined above.

Play and completion numbers don't tell us which game you'd rather play the most.

No number is going to tell you that. The data at best can only give a glimpse at what gamers may be thinking. Surveys rarely work because you simple get data skewed in the favor of those who bother to answer the survey. The forums do not work because they are equally skewed one way or the other or indecisive. So Bioware opts for in-game data collection that one can opt out of if they wish. No measure is going to be completely accurate.

The amount of money and time to get that degree of accuracy is not worth the time or money. So imprecise data is used to arrive at unfortunately imprecise decisions. 

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 17 août 2012 - 01:24 .

[Henioo]

Well, gameplay-wise, DA2 was more entertaining, so I can see where the numbers are coming from.

Still, it is my personal opinion that the original was the better game.