126 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

To toss in a hand grenade into this thread...

What type of game would you expect to get if I said we were playing it safe?

[Fallstar]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

To toss in a hand grenade into this thread...

What type of game would you expect to get if I said we were playing it safe?

A refined version of DA2. Stick us in another location, e.g Orlais, gives us a new story and characters, address the near enough unanimous complaints about DA2 such as repeated areas, wave based combat and lack of player agency, and voila. I imagine you could make several more installments to the DA franchise in such a way at relatively low cost.

[ianvillan]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

To toss in a hand grenade into this thread...

What type of game would you expect to get if I said we were playing it safe?

Despite what many people think I dont want a carbon copy of DAO, I just want a Quality Bioware game that is made with Origin fans in mind, no changing of the game so it might appeal to the mass market, because what your marketing department might class as out-dated or boring systems a lot of fans actually prefer.

[Allan Schumacher]

That's fine. I was mostly just having fun because I think one could make an argument that making a game more in the mold of DAO or DA2 could be construed as a safe move

[Fallstar]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

That's fine. I was mostly just having fun because I think one could make an argument that making a game more in the mold of DAO or DA2 could be construed as a safe move

Safe moves aren't necessarily bad moves. I'd have been an extremely happy customer if you'd gone down the safe route post Origins. Equally I'm sure there are those who do want what I described about DA2.

[Fast Jimmy]

To play devil's advocate, I'd say the safest move would be to carbon copy your best selling and reviewed games to date: BG 2, DA:O and ME2.

However, those are all very different games. If you implemented upgrading the Normandy aspects into a Dragon Age game, it would look... weird, possibly.

[bEVEsthda]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

To toss in a hand grenade into this thread...

What type of game would you expect to get if I said we were playing it safe?

It's too late to play it safe. DA2 already burned the market bad, pretty much burned the DA market all the way down to the ground, in my estimate. DA3 is a hard sell, no matter what. If it's like DA2, it's an impossible sale.

Question is how rational is Bioware now? The question is fair, because of what have happened in later years.
But if Bioware is rational, it should have been realized that DA3 needs a good plan, and that should be what work is being done on now.

Safest play? I don't know, I haven't thought about this so much, as going beyond seeing all the difficulties. But I would certainly hope that the fact Bioware is so stubbornly sticking to all the hated problem areas in DA2, is indicating that solutions have been found to make these more acceptable. I would hope that role play and emergent narrative thus is back, just as player agency and player char agency. I would also hope that the art direction will be heavily moderated. I would also hope there is a really clever marketing plan, because if not, you're still not going to sell a lot of DA3.

What are you going to sell it as? If you provide different racial beginnings again, you could call it DA3:Origins. Couldn't hurt.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 14 septembre 2012 - 09:24 .

[ianvillan]

Its a shame because Bioware could of done both, if they would of made a new Jade Empire game putting all the changes they made in DA2 in to that game, they would not of upset a portion of the Origins fan base and had a very good chance of attracting the mass market fans they were so desperate for.

By wanting to capitalise on the success of Origins by quickly bringing out a new game that is different to the old one and aiming for a new market is not the way to make games.

[Wulfram]

Safe would probably take from DA:O

1. Save the world plot
2. Realistic art style
3. A Warden protagonist

and from DA2

1. Voiced protagonist
2. Faster combat
3. Isabela's dress sense

[MerAnne]

Nice to meet you, Allan, and since you asked....
DAO with a few tweaks. Game of the Year says something, doesn't it?

I didn't let poor reviews scare me off of DAII, I read reviews that raved about what wonderful things had been changed in moving to DAII and let that scare me off. Because all those wonderful things that were raved about resulted in the removal of things I had really really liked about DAO. I finally bought DA II because friends were nagging me that I HAD to play DA II before DA III came out.

It doesn't seem like DA III - You HAVE to play it before DA IV comes out - would be the best marketing strategy, but what do I know? I'm just a gamer with money to spend on games.

[wright1978]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Just wonderd which approach you would sooner Bioware go with for DA:3?

A) Daring with lots of new ideas and elements designed to keep things fresh? Risky and could fall falt on it's face, but broader scope for experiment.

Or

Safe, eseentially DA:O but with a few tweaks here and there. Nothing that tries to be revolutionary, just something which gives us what we know and love.

I know it'll probably be a combination of both, but just wondered which you'd sooner see Bioware lean towards.

Are you desperate for a fix of something you know, or are you bored and needing a fix of something fresh?

I'd prefer they refine what worked in DA2 with bringing back some elements of DAO that were missed. Don't thow out baby with the bath water approach.

[Wrathion]

I think your "safe" could be considered "daring" as well. Why would take your game from 2009, add a few tweaks to it and call it your 3rd game (and charge $60 for it)?

I would have to go with "Daring" or in my eyes Normal Procedure. I like DA2 the most, and even though I have both games for the same system it's the one I play most often. If they had been given enough time, and the game properly made...I would never play another game.
I hope they can do whatever they want for DA3. I'm sure it'll be great.

[Darth Death]

wright1978 wrote...

I'd prefer they refine what worked in DA2 with bringing back some elements of DAO that were missed. Don't thow out baby with the bath water approach.

Despite me not wanting it to, I feel this is more than likely going to happen. 

[wright1978]

Wulfram wrote...

Safe would probably take from DA:O

1. Save the world plot
2. Realistic art style
3. A Warden protagonist

and from DA2

1. Voiced protagonist
2. Faster combat
3. Isabela's dress sense

1 and 3 from origins would definitely be  in my estimation of safe.

[PsychoBlonde]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

What type of game would you expect to get if I said we were playing it safe?

Lo, an Evil Army/Conspiracy Threatens the World.  You, the Chosen One are the Only One Who Can Stop it.  Gather your Band of Companions to Face the Evil Army/Conspiracy of Destruction and Ugly Spiky Armor. Also, you can totally be a dick to everyone and kick dogs and eat babies if you want to!

Oh, look.  It's Baldur's Gate.  And KotOR.  And Origins.  And Mass Effect.  And Neverwinter Nights.  And Jade Empire.

DA2 might have been sub par in a lot of ways but at least it wasn't You + Friends  vs. The Evil Blob.

Modifié par PsychoBlonde, 14 septembre 2012 - 10:17 .

[Wrathion]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

What type of game would you expect to get if I said we were playing it safe?

Lo, an Evil Army/Conspiracy Threatens the World.  You, the Chosen One are the Only One Who Can Stop it.  Gather your Band of Companions to Face the Evil Army/Conspiracy of Destruction and Ugly Spiky Armor. Also, you can totally be a dick to everyone and kick dogs and eat babies if you want to!

Oh, look.  It's Baldur's Gate.  And KotOR.  And Origins.  And Mass Effect.  And Neverwinter Nights.  And Jade Empire.

DA2 might have been sub par in a lot of ways but at least it wasn't You + Friends  vs. The Evil Blob.

In defense of Origins. You don't need to care about people to want to beat the Archdemon. But you recognize that if you don't, you would be dead. Motivation!

Your whole thing was hilarious though.

Modifié par Alexandrine Delassixe, 14 septembre 2012 - 10:24 .

[Heimdall]

I think option A, implemented in far too short a timeframe, is what got us DA2. I could go with either as long as the proper time is taken to develop it.

[Wulfram]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

DA2 might have been sub par in a lot of ways but at least it wasn't You + Friends  vs. The Evil Blob.

That might have been brave, but I don't think it worked all that well.  Because without the standard save the world stuff, it could be difficult to work out why your character was bothering with all this stuff.

Particularly since Kirkwall wasn't exactly designed to make you feel loyalty towards it.

[Heimdall]

Wulfram wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

DA2 might have been sub par in a lot of ways but at least it wasn't You + Friends  vs. The Evil Blob.

That might have been brave, but I don't think it worked all that well.  Because without the standard save the world stuff, it could be difficult to work out why your character was bothering with all this stuff.

Particularly since Kirkwall wasn't exactly designed to make you feel loyalty towards it.

My general opinion of DA2 = Lot's of potentially good ideas with very poor implementation.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 14 septembre 2012 - 10:59 .

[The dead fish]

I find this story funny, because while DAII wasn't friends vs evil, it didn't work well. Precisely because companions didn't have any reason to follow Hawk everywhere, especially when they do have their lives, or when you follow the rivalry relationship.

Aveline, Capitaine of Kirkwall who helps Hawk to do bad things in the city ? Yeah. Isabela who hates the deep roads, and does not want to have anything with that crap, but wathever, hawk decides to do a side quest over there, she is with him.

The truth is that an evil threat can pretty much justify the loyalty. If you decide to do something else, then, you need something solid and that works very well without that the player has to wonder all the time why theses guys who could have a severe judgment against him follow him everywhere, especially where they do not want to be involved or if they disapprove his actions.

So before critizing the system, I think it would be more interesting to understand why it is often used and why it is relevant.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 14 septembre 2012 - 11:08 .

[Darth Death]

Sylvianus wrote...

I find this story funny, because while DAII wasn't friends vs evil, it didn't work well. Precisely because companions didn't have any reason to follow Hawk everywhere, especially when they do have their lives, or when you follow the rivalry relationship.

Aveline, Capitaine of Kirkwall who helps Hawk to do bad things in the city ? Yeah. Isabela who hates the deep roads, and does not want to have anything with that crap, but wathever, hawk decides to do a side quest over there, she is with him.

The truth is that an evil threat can pretty much justify the loyalty. If you decide to do something else, then, you need something solid and that works very well without that the player has to wonder all the time why theses guys who could have a severe judgment against him follow him everywhere, especially where they do not want to be involved or if they disapprove his actions.

So before critizing the system, I think it would be more interesting to understand why it is often used and why it is relevant.

You're very much correct. Nicely said.

[PsychoBlonde]

I've already said MORE than once that DA2's primary problem was with . . . IMPLEMENTATION. It didn't work well not because it wasn't a "save the world" plot, but because it was poorly implemented.

Baldur's Gate 2 was NOT a "save the world" plot--you were out to save yourself and maybe a few bits of the world you stumbled across as you went. Yet it worked SPECTACULARLY well, better by far than Baldur's Gate: Original Crispy which DID have the "safe" plot.

I won't really mind if DA3 is more save the world hijinks as long as it's done *really well*, especially if the choice is a less-well-implemented "daring" game. But if we can get a REALLY WELL IMPLEMENTED risky game, I'm ALL FOR IT, cause saving the world from the Evil Blob is getting kinda tired.

[PsychoBlonde]

Alexandrine Delassixe wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

What type of game would you expect to get if I said we were playing it safe?

Lo, an Evil Army/Conspiracy Threatens the World.  You, the Chosen One are the Only One Who Can Stop it.  Gather your Band of Companions to Face the Evil Army/Conspiracy of Destruction and Ugly Spiky Armor. Also, you can totally be a dick to everyone and kick dogs and eat babies if you want to!

Oh, look.  It's Baldur's Gate.  And KotOR.  And Origins.  And Mass Effect.  And Neverwinter Nights.  And Jade Empire.

DA2 might have been sub par in a lot of ways but at least it wasn't You + Friends  vs. The Evil Blob.

In defense of Origins. You don't need to care about people to want to beat the Archdemon. But you recognize that if you don't, you would be dead. Motivation!

Your whole thing was hilarious though.

Just to clarify, I don't think BG, KotOR, Origins, ME, JE are BAD GAMES,  (On the contrary, they're all good or even great games) and they all had SOME original takes on the progress of the whole You v. Blob generic plot.  Cliches are cliches because they were good once.

Doesn't mean you gotta keep riding them because doing anything else is difficult, tho.

[Velevita]

IMHO choice to do "personal story of poor refugee who rises to power", which was very interesting idea, did not put people off - it was its rather bad implementation and small percentage of actual personal story in general Awesome Story. While playing, i had impression that most of this personal stuff, with notable exception of Hawke family gradually dying off, was taking place during the timeskips.

Look at the first skip - Hawke getting to know city, and its people (who would pop up later in the story) and letting them know of himself (which would be great opportunity to do some heavy roleplaying, expressing his views, preferences and so on ) is cut - and suddenly Hawke is buddy buddy with some people player never seen. We don't even get to decide what kind of name Hawke made for him/herself (like cutthroat Hawke, diplomatic Hawke, cunning Hawke, hammer-smash-face Hawke, betray-smugglers-to-city-guard-for-citizenship Hawke, you get the idea ) - its always automatically Awesome Hawke. Same goes with reclaiming your mansion -ir could be very personal quest, possibly influenced by the way the quest with killer of elven children was solved, but again - it happened during the time skip.

Such a wasted opportunity, really. Together with numerous plotholes, total shift in art style and abandonment of many DAO features that made franchise stand out in the first place - well, we all know how it ends.


As for DA3, I'd rather Bioware concentrated on its strengths and played it safe (and more DAO-like). Not everything has to include shiny ninjas making 10 meters high leaps in the air and freudian great swords.

Also, BG1 could be soo rp as a personal story - some dude kills your (substitute) papa and sends assassins who try to prevent you from getting drunk in almost every inn you approach - now that's some motivation 

[Edit: PsychoBlonde already clarified whole implemetation thing - I need to type faster next time:)  ]

Modifié par Velevita, 14 septembre 2012 - 11:56 .

[eroeru]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

To toss in a hand grenade into this thread...

What type of game would you expect to get if I said we were playing it safe?

Aah, if you put it that way, I change my opinion. DA3 need not be safe, it should be daring. In that it wouldn't necessarily take anything from DA2.

But it would need to be safe in the sense that the most upset fans would be reconciliated.

Modifié par eroeru, 14 septembre 2012 - 11:57 .