126 réponses à ce sujet

[PsychoBlonde]

Velevita wrote...

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 

True, true, but the meta-plot and the personal plot are not always the same.  BG goes through several permutations--first you're trying to stay alive, then you find out about the whole Iron Conspiracy thing, and at the VERY END you realize that you're trying to prevent Sarevok from becoming the new God of Murder and DESTROY EVERYTHING MWAHAHAHAHA.

So it doesn't quite become "save the world" or at least "save all of the world I'm allowed to visit" until the VERY end, but in BG2 your personal motivation (get my dang soul back from Irenicus!) persists until the end of the game.

[PsychoBlonde]

Oo, and on another note--a big, huge, titanic, massive, "save the world" plot kinda requires some huge changes in world-state which may or may not lend themselves well to future games if they want to keep this import business. That's one area of Hawke's story where I think they did some good ahead thinking . . . most of the big world-state changes that ought to result from DA2 were things Hawke had a HAND in but not a lot of CONTROL over.

I'm not saying that was necessarily a fun thing to play through, particularly the way it was done, but at least it shows they were thinking about the kind of issues that come up with this sort of thing.

A large number of the going-forward issues they're having to deal with arise because there were some significant changes possible in Origins (old god baby, anyone?)  that are going to be HELL to account for in future games.

I'd almost like to see them do an expansion or DLC (or two or three) that resolve(s) those issues where you CAN'T import a world state where the Warden didn't make decision to do X, so that maybe game 4 can be a "clean slate" game where either a.) you can import a world-state where those big decisions are assumed to have not happened OR you can import a world state that went through the expansions and those big decisions are now RESOLVED, so all they have to do is what they evidently want to do and just have occasional side references to all the Big Stuff that Went Down.

Modifié par PsychoBlonde, 15 septembre 2012 - 12:11 .

[Velevita]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

True, true, but the meta-plot and the personal plot are not always the same.  BG goes through several permutations--first you're trying to stay alive, then you find out about the whole Iron Conspiracy thing, and at the VERY END you realize that you're trying to prevent Sarevok from becoming the new God of Murder and DESTROY EVERYTHING MWAHAHAHAHA.

So it doesn't quite become "save the world" or at least "save all of the world I'm allowed to visit" until the VERY end, but in BG2 your personal motivation (get my dang soul back from Irenicus!) persists until the end of the game.

Well, if you put it like this, all PCs in BG1 get tricked by the Evil Dudes into this whole save the world stuff (the irony), even if tPCs just want to hang Sarevok's helmet above their fireplace or get their kicks from drowning mines. It's more like Jaheir and Khalid are doing classical "save the world" story and PC can jump on this bandwagon or choose to use whole situation to get back at his/hers dude. It's also easy to assemble team with pretty solid motivation to go against Iron Throne. 

I certainly wouldn't mind if DA3 tried to give player some alternative motivations to pick, if they are doing whole save the world from the clash of great forces thing, I mean. Maybe this time not with dead family member.  Could be tied to origins - even if they are not reintroducing races, some different detailed backgrounds would do. I guess that would be playing somewhat safe:).

[Blastback]

Right now Bioware needs to play it safe. They've been alienating to many of us.

[brushyourteeth]

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?

I imagine it would involve DA:O's length of gameplay and variety of locations, with DAII's artstyle and improved graphics. Combat would be as fast-paced as DAII's, but your regular attacks would do about as much damage as they did in DA:O.

The game would also veer away from politics for the next installment and instead focus on Grey Warden business. Not necessarily a Blight, but awakened darkspawn/humans with Old God souls/Avernus' research/the return of the griffons, etc. A "love-to-hate" villain and zero surprises about who the final boss will be.

[Blastback]

brushyourteeth wrote...

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?

I imagine it would involve DA:O's length of gameplay and variety of locations, with DAII's artstyle and improved graphics. Combat would be as fast-paced as DAII's, but your regular attacks would do about as much damage as they did in DA:O.

The game would also veer away from politics for the next installment and instead focus on Grey Warden business. Not necessarily a Blight, but awakened darkspawn/humans with Old God souls/Avernus' research/the return of the griffons, etc. A "love-to-hate" villain and zero surprises about who the final boss will be.

I think the combat speed would need to be slowed down to a middle ground between Origins and DA2.  To many people felt it was to fast, me included. Also, less over the top combat and animations.  Heck, the artstyle is controversial. 

[Kileyan]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Oo, and on another note--a big, huge, titanic, massive, "save the world" plot kinda requires some huge changes in world-state which may or may not lend themselves well to future games if they want to keep this import business.

First of all, I think this import thing gets in the way and closes off a lot of options for the devs. I don't think the pro's of the imports fidelity we have come to demand, outweigh the cons of what characters they can bring back and what stories they can tell.

Now on the "save the world" plots. I kind of liked DAO, we did save the world but it could be compartmentalized if Bioware so chose to do so, as a localized thing. I liked to idea of each iteration of Dragon Ages showing us more of the world, we could make great impacts upon those areas, but it didn't mean that the next game was totally slaved to everything we did in previous games.

I don't really care too much about carrying over decisions, I'm fine with a canon story even. I'm not going to go batsheet crazy if I killed X character in a game, and I see them in the sequels. I just want some good stories, and I don't care if Bioware has to mess a little bit with my save game expectations to tell me a good story.

[Blastback]

Kileyan wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Oo, and on another note--a big, huge, titanic, massive, "save the world" plot kinda requires some huge changes in world-state which may or may not lend themselves well to future games if they want to keep this import business.

First of all, I think this import thing gets in the way and closes off a lot of options for the devs. I don't think the pro's of the imports fidelity we have come to demand, outweigh the cons of what characters they can bring back and what stories they can tell.

Now on the "save the world" plots. I kind of liked DAO, we did save the world but it could be compartmentalized if Bioware so chose to do so, as a localized thing. I liked to idea of each iteration of Dragon Ages showing us more of the world, we could make great impacts upon those areas, but it didn't mean that the next game was totally slaved to everything we did in previous games.

I don't really care too much about carrying over decisions, I'm fine with a canon story even. I'm not going to go batsheet crazy if I killed X character in a game, and I see them in the sequels. I just want some good stories, and I don't care if Bioware has to mess a little bit with my save game expectations to tell me a good story.

The main thing that I think needs to be carried over is the core identity of who my character was, and the relationships that they had with the characters they interacted with.  

Edit: And whatever fate my character recieves.  Please, no more mytserous dissaperance.  

Modifié par Blastback, 15 septembre 2012 - 01:04 .

[Kileyan]

Blastback wrote...

Kileyan wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Oo, and on another note--a big, huge, titanic, massive, "save the world" plot kinda requires some huge changes in world-state which may or may not lend themselves well to future games if they want to keep this import business.

First of all, I think this import thing gets in the way and closes off a lot of options for the devs. I don't think the pro's of the imports fidelity we have come to demand, outweigh the cons of what characters they can bring back and what stories they can tell.

Now on the "save the world" plots. I kind of liked DAO, we did save the world but it could be compartmentalized if Bioware so chose to do so, as a localized thing. I liked to idea of each iteration of Dragon Ages showing us more of the world, we could make great impacts upon those areas, but it didn't mean that the next game was totally slaved to everything we did in previous games.

I don't really care too much about carrying over decisions, I'm fine with a canon story even. I'm not going to go batsheet crazy if I killed X character in a game, and I see them in the sequels. I just want some good stories, and I don't care if Bioware has to mess a little bit with my save game expectations to tell me a good story.

The main thing that I think needs to be carried over is the core identity of who my character was, and the relationships that they had with the characters they interacted with.

True, I don't want to get into one of those what is an rpg discussions, but.......

To me, my character is his chosen class, his level, items and skills. The rest of it, the important parts of my character are in my head, how I play him, what I think my character is or wants to be, my character is how I pretend/imagine he is. I can reconcile that character fine, even if Bioware has to choose a canon storyline to give me a good game. I prefer Bioware do that, they are more likely to bring back interesting characters I like, rather than being forced to never give certain character any screen time or token screentime because they can be killed.

Blah, again just saying I don't find the strict carrying over of minute save data a a big pro anymore, interesting experiment is all.

[Teddie Sage]

I actually don't want it to be safe. I want the developers to take initiatives, dare to change a few stuff. I want each games to feel different, yet share the lore of its predecessors. Change isn't always synonym of disaster. Then again, this is all about perceptions.

[Plaintiff]

I prefer it when games try new things.

[Iakus]

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 good question.

In  my interpretation "safe" would be as in "tried and true"  What has worked in Bioware games in teh past.  Particularly the more popular ones.  While "taking risks" would involve  trying something unknown, which might or might not work, be it technically or in player appeal.

So when I say it would be a better idea for Bioware to "play it safe"  I don't mean copy/paste from a previous game. I mean they should for the time being stick with what has already proven popular.  In the case of Dragon Age, it would likely invovle beinrg more DAO than DA2, though I freely admit  DA2 has some popular aspects that could (and probably should) be adapted.

Basically don't go "Let's see how this goes over" or "This will be soooooo artistic" when planning DA3 

Modifié par iakus, 15 septembre 2012 - 02:55 .

[TheCharmedOne]

i dont want another DA:O game with a few tweeks. I would much prefer new things and being daring of these are my only two options

[PsychoBlonde]

I gotta say that this is probably the VERY BEST discussion I've seen on this issue so far. Lots of very interesting comments here (and not just from Yours Truly ). For instance, this is the first time I've seen some people bring up that the import of options is Just Not That Important to them--usually it's people SCREAMING about how ZOMG BIOWARE IS FORCING CANON DOWN THEIR THROAT. Seeing someone, ANYONE bring up that, hey, maybe the whole import thing is HOLDING THE SERIES BACK is a really interesting perspective.

I don't really have a perspective on it myself--I just want them to do whatever they decide with the Import well, so I get irritated with ideas like Zombie Anders or the mysterious return of Leliana even though you COULD kill her.  If they're going to preserve your choices, I think they need to DO that, even if it means some stuff that OUGHT to be REALLY INTERESTING gets TOTALLY GLOSSED OVER.  If they decide, dangit, this import bizness is holding us back and do some kind of canon-creating reset, I'm fine with that, but the result dang well better be some FABULOUS thing that they really, truly couldn't do and preserve the import.

My real issue is that the current importing status is Non-Fabulous.  I just want the fabulous, I'm not too picky about how they get there.

Modifié par PsychoBlonde, 15 septembre 2012 - 03:14 .

[Iakus]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

I gotta say that this is probably the VERY BEST discussion I've seen on this issue so far. Lots of very interesting comments here (and not just from Yours Truly ). For instance, this is the first time I've seen some people bring up that the import of options is Just Not That Important to them--usually it's people SCREAMING about how ZOMG BIOWARE IS FORCING CANON DOWN THEIR THROAT. Seeing someone, ANYONE bring up that, hey, maybe the whole import thing is HOLDING THE SERIES BACK is a really interesting perspective.

I don't really have a perspective on it myself--I just want them to do whatever they decide with the Import well, so I get irritated with ideas like Zombie Anders or the mysterious return of Leliana even though you COULD kill her.  If they're going to preserve your choices, I think they need to DO that, even if it means some stuff that OUGHT to be REALLY INTERESTING gets TOTALLY GLOSSED OVER.  If they decide, dangit, this import bizness is holding us back and do some kind of canon-creating reset, I'm fine with that, but the result dang well better be some FABULOUS thing that they really, truly couldn't do and preserve the import.

My real issue is that the current importing status is Non-Fabulous.  I just want the fabulous, I'm not too picky about how they get there.

This is exaactly why I'm disillusioned with importation.  Examples like those and with the Mass Effect trilogy have be believing importation between games just stifles the storytelling.  We should probably go back to self-contained storyarcs in games, rather than connecting them so directly.  I mean, a short checklist at the start of the game to "customize" a game is fine.  But more import flags simply means more things that have to be taken into account by the writers.  More chances to glitches.  More complaints about "That's not my Anders/shouldn't you be dead?".  More complaints that choices don't have impact.

I'm sure a degree of canon would be tolerated if the choices we made in a game had an impact on that particular game.  I don't mind that the Exile in KOTOR2 is canonically female even though I play a male.  As long as my Exile is my Exile.

[Allan Schumacher]

I think that's a good point. The DA franchise has a bit more flexibility in that regard compared to the ME franchise though.

It's easier for us to have an Alistair or something show up as a nod to player import, and not require that the PC actually KNOW Alistair. Whereas with Shepard if he bumps into someone he met before, well, it becomes a bit more personal in that sense.

[PsychoBlonde]

iakus wrote...

I'm sure a degree of canon would be tolerated if the choices we made in a game had an impact on that particular game.  I don't mind that the Exile in KOTOR2 is canonically female even though I play a male.  As long as my Exile is my Exile.

There were some weird glitches with the settings in KotOR2 that I remember.  For instance, I definitely set Revan as being a light-side female, but there were at least 3 times when the game still referred to Revan as "He".

Granted KotOR 2 had SO MANY bugs of this kind that the little stuff became comical if you could bring yourself to play at all.

I played a female Exile so I doubt I even noticed if there were moments when my "he" mysteriously became a "she" within the game.

[PsychoBlonde]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think that's a good point. The DA franchise has a bit more flexibility in that regard compared to the ME franchise though.

It's easier for us to have an Alistair or something show up as a nod to player import, and not require that the PC actually KNOW Alistair. Whereas with Shepard if he bumps into someone he met before, well, it becomes a bit more personal in that sense.

A bit more flexibility regarding Alistair? Sure.  What about Anders?  Or Leliana or even Sten?  Livable.  Does it make ANY sense to just give a NOD to something as potentially major as the Old God Baby, though?  And if it's NOT potentially major then why the HECK did Origins make such a big screaming deal over that decision?  You guys presented it like the fate of the world hung in the balance.  Just nodding at it would be a FAR bigger retcon than Mysteriously Alive Leliana.

THAT'S the real stumbling block.  Not whether you have KingStair or DrunkStair or DeadStair.

I really, truly do think that you might be better off making a DLC or expansion that resolves the OGB issue once and for all and setting some import limitations on that DLC/expansion (e.g. that you could only import a "world" where the Warden did the Dark Ritual--or make a new character, of course, the point wouldn't be to exclude people who wanted to play it but didn't have the Magic Save Game, the point would be to fix this issue somehow).  THEN you could easily get away with glossing over it in whatever games came after.

Or, *sigh* I suppose you could go the route that it was a Big Deal only for Morrigan and fundamentally changed HER eventual fate, and only just nod at Morrigan.  But I think this would be a disservice to the whole build up of Flemeth (and thus Morrigan and Flemeth's various other daughters) being somehow Important, not just to the Warden, but to Thedas.

I demand the expensive option!

Modifié par PsychoBlonde, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:39 .

[Iakus]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think that's a good point. The DA franchise has a bit more flexibility in that regard compared to the ME franchise though.

It's easier for us to have an Alistair or something show up as a nod to player import, and not require that the PC actually KNOW Alistair. Whereas with Shepard if he bumps into someone he met before, well, it becomes a bit more personal in that sense.

Oh I understand that's very true.  But you have to admit, there's still problems.  Not least because while the character may not know Alistair (or Anders, or Cullen, or Leliana, or...you get the picture)  The player does.  And therin lies the real problem. I mean Hawke never knew Leliana (and maybe never did, if the proper dlcs aren't installed.  And how much grumbling is there about her appearance? (not that I understand that.  Who could possibly bear to kill her off?  )

Then there's potential glitches.  My "canon" Warden has some flag messed up in Awakening that says Nate Howe is dead.  As a result.  I can't get his quest to activate in DA2.  Granted it's just one side quest, unimportant in the grand scheme.  But it is an annoyance.

[Iakus]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

iakus wrote...

I'm sure a degree of canon would be tolerated if the choices we made in a game had an impact on that particular game.  I don't mind that the Exile in KOTOR2 is canonically female even though I play a male.  As long as my Exile is my Exile.

There were some weird glitches with the settings in KotOR2 that I remember.  For instance, I definitely set Revan as being a light-side female, but there were at least 3 times when the game still referred to Revan as "He".

Granted KotOR 2 had SO MANY bugs of this kind that the little stuff became comical if you could bring yourself to play at all.

I played a female Exile so I doubt I even noticed if there were moments when my "he" mysteriously became a "she" within the game.

Well, I'm referring to the general Old Republic lore.  Revan is canonically male, and the Exile is canonically female.  Both are Light Sided.  And Star Wars literature and SWTOR acknowledges that.  But if I play KOTOR or KOTOR 2, I can play them as I choose, regardless of canon.  Because these are my characters.  Within these games, canon is mine.  I don't have to worry about how sequels will reflect what they say or do.  Nor do I have to worry if a decision will come back to bite me later.  If it does, it will do so in this game.  Or not at all.

[bEVEsthda]

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

I assume you're talking about the plot? Mainly?

Because my general opinion of DA2 = lots of really bad ideas fully implemented. The only clear execution failure of DA2 is the repeated environments, and this is a detail I can partially defend and have often done so. It's a matter of making the game longer on limited zots.
How bad the ideas were, can be well estimated from the video that is linked previously in this thread. Listen to Matt Goldman. He has no thoughts at all about creating a role play game. He wants to do God of War. He wants to slam his (idiotic) vision of Hawke at the players. All bad ideas. Mike, Mark and Matt, all of them completely off the track. That's what happened. The only thing I can understand (and to some part agree with) is that Mike wanted to make the combat feel faster and more responsive. As for the rest, it's three monkeys in a china store.

As for the plot, a long time ago I wrote a really long defence piece for what is often recklessly called "standard save the world plot". I'll see if I saved a copy I can dig out, if the discussion gets too deep. But basically, "save the world" is called so by it's critics on so flimsy evidence that pretty much any story that is of a kind that offers interesting role play opportunities may be called so. And actually, that story, survival and salvation through cataclysmic events changing the world, is a pretty important story as well. I don't know what kind of upbringing, life and family history those have, who can scoff at that.

[Sir JK]

If we define Safe as "do what you know works" and Daring as "try to improve all the weak spots for a new game" then I much prefer the Daring approach. Origins was a great fun game, but I would have been much less forgiving to it's sequel if it retained the same weaknesses. DA2 was definantely Daring, in the sense that it changed quite a lot to address the weaknesses of Origins.

Similarily, DA2 has flaws, and I expect them to be adressed. Changed for the better.
I also much prefer them not to go on the easy path, especially plotwise. Origins had a "save the world"-plot, and while wonderfully executed (and at it's core it's execution that truly matters) it was very much the safe bet. It is -easy- to make someone care about the end of the world. Going back to that would be very disappointing to me (even if I could enjoy it, a lot, if well executed). DA2's plot felt really fresh in comparison (though it needed a lot more to be truly well executed).

But really, I hope DA3 falls on the Daring end of the spectrum (even if they don't need to be daring in all regards). Like mentioned, it's how you execute the plot that matters. A Daring fame that fails is disappointing. A Safe game that fails is forgetable and boring.

[Shadow Fox]

Arch1eviathan wrote...

I would play it safe. Especially after the fan reactions to both Mass Effect 3 and Dragon age 2.

Are they could stop trying to please the unpleasable and just make a good game.


Anyway I just want playable Elves BW thanks.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

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?

I think 'playing it safe' is a lack of innovation in a sequel. It seems to happen more often than not. You guys at BioWare haven't innovated since the original Mass Effect. You've all been playing it safe for close to five years now.