1774 réponses à ce sujet

[MerinTB]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
A game is not a book. A book relies on having you imagine every scene and so and it can do this because it gives you an enoromous space for you do it: It is after all text on white pages. A game does not work like this.

A comic book then?

What do you mean by "game" then?  Ever play Zork or anything by Infocom?  Those were some great games.  Oh, and they were all text.  Ever play a MUD?

Ever play a table top RPG?

OH, you mean VIDEO game and you are focused on that word VIDEO, perhaps?

Yeah, you know, I just wrote a lengthy-ish post a bit back about this very thing.  I'll say it again in brief -
Gutter.  Off camera.  What you don't see but imagine is often better than what can be shown.
In another way - the scariest monsters are the ones never shown on screen.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Alpha Protocol stands as one of the best gaming experiences because of it's story but it's story wouldn't be as strong without the cinematics, voice acting and graphics. It's not just shinny ****, it's adding immersion to the story through these things.

I love Alpha Protocol hard.  I would love it just as much with no voice acting and probably would love it more with turn-based, stat-based combat.

The cinematics and voice acting and graphics added little to that game for me.  If you took away the voice acting and the cinematics, you could have had a different gender'd character whom you could have designed what they looked like.  If you took away the voice acting and relied on text only, you could NAME your own character and have people respond to your character's name.

That means more to me.  Might mean less to you.

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Brock: Is there any other game with such a sense of reactivity in regards to small decisions, acomplishment and an awesome protagonist like Mike Thorton? 

I'm not Brock, but I'll point to Vampire:The Masquerade - Bloodlines.  I'll direct you  to Westwood's Blade Runner.  I'll gesture at Fallout, and end with a huge neon arrow sign flashing towards Wasteland.

Modifié par MerinTB, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:33 .

[Costin_Razvan]

termokanden: I've made my point clear. Cinematics and voice acting add to a story and removing them you detract from it. Just because you can have more dialogue in terms of quantity doesn't mean you have gotten quality.

Gaming is not what it was 10 or 20 years ago, it has evolved and there are some who dislike it and want to go back to the "good old" days of which I don't give a damn for. I loved Dune 2 when it first came out but I wouldn't want a Dune 2 type game nowadays.

I'm not Brock, but I'll point to Vampire:The Masquerade - Bloodlines.  I'll direct you  to Westwood's Blade Runner.  I'll gesture at Fallout, and end with a huge neon arrow sign flashing towards Wasteland. 

When any of those games has the ability for your protagonist to be as proactive and ambitious as Thorton and to allow you to become the hidden information leader of the world like Alpha Protocol and for that to relly on all your choices that you've made in the game then give me a call.

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

[KnightofPhoenix]

MerinTB wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Brock: Is there any other game with such a sense of reactivity in regards to small decisions, acomplishment and an awesome protagonist like Mike Thorton? 

I'm not Brock, but I'll point to Vampire:The Masquerade - Bloodlines.

I played it, and I respectfully disagree. The game plays out the exact same way regardless of choices and clan. The major difference is how people react to a malkavian and even then, the game plays the exact same way. Not to mention that the PC is painfully reactive, with extremily little pro-activity.

It doesn't come close to Alpha Protocol in terms of micro CnC that accumulate, and Mike's pro-activity.

[Dave of Canada]

Alpha Protocol was one of the best gaming experiences in terms of reactivity, though they were still restricted with what they could've done by cinematics / voice-work and such. Reading about content they had to cut saddened me, it would've been great to have.

Removing those limitations of cinematics, voice-work and more modern expectations and reactivity could be introduced for practically anything, the whole idea of this being an Infinity Engine game with Obsidian's recent experience with AP / MOTB and I feel we could get one one of the most memorable RPGs since PS:T.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Alpha Protocol was one of the best gaming experiences in terms of reactivity, though they were still restricted with what they could've done by cinematics / voice-work and such. Reading about content they had to cut saddened me, it would've been great to have.

Removing those limitations of cinematics, voice-work and more modern expectations and reactivity could be introduced for practically anything, the whole idea of this being an Infinity Engine game with Obsidian's recent experience with AP / MOTB and I feel we could get one one of the most memorable RPGs since PS:T.

My biggest fear however is that the protagonist will be a reactive lapdog throughout the whole thing, incapable of emotional expression, philosophical questioning and / or feats of intelligence, cunning and manipulation (that's what made Mike so awesome to me, his pro-activity and potential intelligence).

I did not play PS:T yet, but every single silent PC that I played was like that, in varying degrees. And I dislike it.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:41 .

[Costin_Razvan]

I strongly disagree Dave. Leland and Thorton would not be as great as the characters they are without the voice acting they have. The deal Leland offers and the way you can end it wouldn't carry as much weight if it was just a portrait on a ****ing screen talking to me.

And as Knight pointed and I agree with him none of the silent protagonsits I have played have been so proactive as Thorton was or as ambitious as he was. in NWN2 you can become more powerful then the gods, but to me that doens't mean as much as it is to blow Leland up and then walk away. Why? Because the character in NWN2 is a brick, whereas Thorton is intelligent, cunning, amibitous and this is shown to us through voice acting.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:45 .

[MerinTB]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...
Brock: Is there any other game with such a sense of reactivity in regards to small decisions, acomplishment and an awesome protagonist like Mike Thorton? 

I'm not Brock, but I'll point to Vampire:The Masquerade - Bloodlines.

I played it, and I respectfully disagree. The game plays out the exact same way regardless of choices and clan. The major difference is how people react to a malkavian and even then, the game plays the exact same way. Not to mention that the PC is painfully reactive, with extremily little pro-activity.

It doesn't come close to Alpha Protocol in terms of micro CnC that accumulate, and Mike's pro-activity.

Wow, uhm, it does NOT end in the exact same way.  You can side with effectively 4 factions (if you count siding with no-one) which gives you distinctly different endings.

How you react to different characters determines if they stay in the game or die, if they are friends or foes... holy crap, even disregarding that you got to make your own character and have different havens depending on your clan....

Seriously, you found the game played exactly the same way?  Do you make the exact same decisions and side with the exact same people and pick the exact same clan?

Play a gangrel, a brujah, a nosferatu, and a malkavian and tell me it's the same game.  Do you talk your way through, fight your way through, stealth your way...

you know what?  No.  I'm going to not fight this fight.  Our metrics must be different, because by how I'm measuring it - Bloodlines is MORE reactive to your choices than AP.

And I LOVE AP, and have played it more than Bloodlines, so... yeah.

EDIT - the one thing that AP has over V:TM-B is that in AP almost every potential "bad guy" is a potential "ally" as well, and you don't have the same depth of a pool of such characters in Bloodlines.  But that's not a limit on reactivity, that a limit on NPCs to react with.

Modifié par MerinTB, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:46 .

[Lord_Valandil]

I kind of ignored "Alpha Protocol" because it got its ass whooped by most reviewers, and I wasn't feeling like dropping 60 dollars on a game with such honors as one-two stars out of five or 6/10.
Its not like I think reviews are the gospel for me (Heck, I love many films that are hated by the critics, and I remember the Escapist review for DA2, comedy gold), but I certainly had my doubts.
So...I take that AP is worth the money, according to most on this thread. Is it a game that was misunderstood by the reviewers? Or is it being overrated by Obsidian fans?

Modifié par Lord_Valandil, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:48 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Lord_Valandil: www.youtube.com/watch

Watch that if you don't mind spoilers.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:47 .

[Jozape]

Alpha Protocol is either a love or hate thing. Apparently if you can look past some imo significant flaws, it has a lot of beauty.

I never made it far. I hated the dialog system with a burning passion. Damn stopwatches.

[termokanden]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

termokanden: I've made my point clear. Cinematics and voice acting add to a story and removing them you detract from it. Just because you can have more dialogue in terms of quantity doesn't mean you have gotten quality.

The quality of dialogue isn't automatically lower just because it isn't spoken.

We'll simply have to disagree to disagree here, because I can enjoy a story just fine without cinematics and voice acting. I won't argue that it isn't a bonus though.

Gaming is not what it was 10 or 20 years ago, it has evolved and there are some who dislike it and want to go back to the "good old" days

I don't want to step back in time. But having been there and enjoyed those old games puts things in perspective and it means I don't need every game to have a blockbuster budget to be able to enjoy it.

[Costin_Razvan]

We'll simply have to disagree to disagree here, because I can enjoy a story just fine without cinematics and voice acting. I won't argue that it isn't a bonus though.

I can do that as well, when I read a book. But there's the thing to me, when I read a book and it's quiet and I am focusing on the words I see before me the characters, the locations, I can feel emotions and the emotions of other characters and so on, but a book isn't interactive a game is.

Obviously there are games which have cinematics, good graphics and dialogue which are ****y compared to a game that doesn't have these things, but if you take the exact same story of PS:T and add in all these elements you would get a better experience, more memorable and more interesting.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:50 .

[MerinTB]

Lord_Valandil wrote...

I kind of ignored "Alpha Protocol" because it got its ass whooped by most reviewers, and I wasn't feeling like dropping 60 dollars on a game with such honors as one/two stars or 6/10.
Its not like I think reviews are the gospel for me (Heck, I love many films that are hated by the critics, and I remember the Escapist review for DA2, comedy gold), but I certainly had my doubts.
So...I take that AP is worth the money, according to most on this thread. Is it a game that was misunderstood by the reviewers? Or is it being overrated by Obsidian fans?

If you come at it from a Splinter  Cell / Rainbow Six / Call of Duty background, you'll be disappointed.  It ain't near that polished for combat and stealth and such.

If you come at it from a "I want to make my own character" or "I need to be able to pick gender" then you'll be disappointed.

If you come at it from wanting an established big bad to take down and a set, solid, deep story, you're likely to be disappointed as the open-ended nature of relationships and how you solve problems in what order keeps the story from being tight.

But if you come at it from the role-playing angle of wanting to make choices and see those choices have big effects on how the game moves forward, and you want excellent usage of game mechanics deceptions by use of modular story-telling to make a game vastly replayable, you'll likely love it.

"Your weapon is choice" was the perfect tagline for this game.

[KnightofPhoenix]

MerinTB wrote...
Wow, uhm, it does NOT end in the exact same way.  You can side with effectively 4 factions (if you count siding with no-one) which gives you distinctly different endings.

An endgame choice does not constitute, to me, reactivity. Otherwise Bioware games would be very reactive when they are not.
Now granted, some endgame choices are blocked depending on one choice before, but it's no where near the accumulation of choices in AP that opens different endings. In AP, it was several choices made along the road. Not the case in Vampires. To side with the Anarchs, you only need to tell them you're Anarch. To side with LaCroix, just be respectful. To side with Max, don't tell his secret....etc. Which doesn't change anything except the ending anyways, as you are still forced to work for LaCroix and everything plays out the exact same way other than the ending.

Also, having a different haven, which is useless anyways in-game, does not constitue a major feat in reactivity.
What I am focused on is story, and Vampires is not as reactive as AP. Doesn't come close to TW2 either.

Play a gangrel, a brujah, a nosferatu, and a malkavian and tell me it's the same game.  Do you talk your way through, fight your way through, stealth your way...

Gameplay changes only, the story doesn't react to you playing stealth or massacring everything.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:54 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

I strongly disagree Dave. Leland and Thorton would not be as great as the characters they are without the voice acting they have. The deal Leland offers and the way you can end it wouldn't carry as much weight if it was just a portrait on a ****ing screen talking to me.

And as Knight pointed and I agree with him none of the silent protagonsits I have played have been so proactive as Thorton was or as ambitious as he was. in NWN2 you can become more powerful then the gods, but to me that doens't mean as much as it is to blow Leland up and then walk away. Why? Because the character in NWN2 is a brick, whereas Thorton is intelligent, cunning, amibitous and this is shown to us through voice acting.

What is said is more important than how it is said. I still don't get why your here though arguing over this in first place since you said no intention of backing it, or buying it. It's a game thats being made for people who like that kind of game, those are the people funding it's development. Going by how much has already been pledged within 24 hours clearly a lot of people like that sort of game.

KOP your concentrating on choice/consequence, branching plots and these things are possible whether it is voiced or non voiced. Reactivity is better in VO but that is different to branching plots and choice and consequence systems. You might prefer reactionary systems using VO but they are not what made Dragon Age Origins so great, not what makes BG, Fallout or PS:T great. These things that those titles have is why people want them and the ones like ME and DA2 with full VO are for those who want that.

Not every game needs VO to be wanted by people, if that one element is only reason you want something then maybe it's not going to be the game for you but I don't see why Costin or anyone else would think every game needs to be made to their specifications or try to convince others to change their minds on what they like and why they are funding it. Don't want it then don't fund it, don't buy it and just buy or fund something else more to your tastes.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 15 septembre 2012 - 06:01 .

[Costin_Razvan]

EDIT - the one thing that AP has over V:TM-B is that in AP almost every potential "bad guy" is a potential "ally" as well, and you don't have the same depth of a pool of such characters in Bloodlines. But that's not a limit on reactivity, that a limit on NPCs to react with.

Can you in Bloodlines turn everyone in your friend or foe depending on your actions, and not just spur of the moment but how you treat them AND what other actions you take ( BOTH are important, not just one.

Can you for instance destroy someone as intelligent and knowledgeable as Parker in a full blown argument and then make him your ally?

Can you decide to take over the world for yourself and do whatever you want with it?

 
Gameplay changes only, the story doesn't react to you playing stealth or massacring everything.  

Which AP does: MIna, Marburg and Leland all react to it.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 15 septembre 2012 - 05:55 .

[Dave of Canada]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

My biggest fear however is that the protagonist will be a reactive lapdog throughout the whole thing, incapable of emotional expression, philosophical questioning and / or feats of intelligence, cunning and manipulation (that's what made Mike so awesome to me, his pro-activity and potential intelligence).

Legitimate fear, I'd fear the same but Obsidian typically has your protagonist being reactive in most cases. I mean, even New Vegas and it's faction system was brilliantly implemented despite the stupid karma system and the NPCs being voiced.

The unvoiced Courier's reasonings for different things could've easily been anything to your imagination, such as me sabotaging Caesar's heart operation to try and weaken the Legion or trying to remove NCR influence from certain places because they were weak and unreliable.

Give Avellone and the others full control of their own writing, capable of implementing anything he desires and I feel the project is in good hands. Obsidian typically doesn't write insanely passive characters with simplistic motivations of good / evil (and even when that happens (MOTB), they expand upon it).

I did not play PS:T yet, but every single silent PC that I played was like that, in varying degrees. And I dislike it.

I'd recommend trying PS:T, it's well worth the time investement at the very least to experience the story.

[Costin_Razvan]

Give Avellone and the others full control of their own writing, capable of implementing anything he desires and I feel the project is in good hands. Obsidian typically doesn't write insanely passive characters with simplistic motivations of good / evil (and even when that happens (MOTB), they expand upon it).

Just keep in mind that both PS;T and Alpha Protocol had corporate control over them: PS:T was a license and with AP they had to answer to Sega. I don't think it's a good idea to give even someone like Avellone full control, they should answer to someone and you might say the fans are the ones they should answer to.

Well I disagree about that. I think developers should not actively try to ****** all their fans off but nothing more then that.

Now don't get me wrong Sega did some BS, but I wouldn't discount some of the positive effects they had.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 15 septembre 2012 - 06:00 .

[termokanden]

Regarding clans in Bloodlines, it is mostly a question of flavor, with NPC reactions to you being different and in the case of clan Malkavian, rewritten dialogue. It isn't really fair to hold it against Bloodlines that your clan doesn't radically change the story, as the games we're comparing it with here (like Alpha Protocol) do not have character customization. So it's really just an extra nifty little thing to spice up the game in Bloodlines.

But no, Bloodlines does not have anything like the choice and consequence of Alpha Protocol. Still a great game, but in other ways.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

 
Gameplay changes only, the story doesn't react to you playing stealth or massacring everything.  

Which AP does: MIna, Marburg and Leland all react to it.

I guess one could make the agument that if you make noise in two quests, Velvet Velour would be pissed at you. But seeing how VV being happy and enamored with you is utterly useless both in the game and story, then it's simply a dialogue change (and a nice poster of her in lingerie).

[FutharkTomahawk]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I still don't get why your here though arguing over this in first place since you said no intention of backing it, or buying it. It's a game thats being made for people who like that kind of game, those are the people funding it's development. Going by how much has already been pledged within 24 hours clearly a lot of people like that sort of game.

Quite possibly he's secretly afraid that EA might notice the strong response that Obsidian is receiving and start making plans to compete with similar offerings of their own.  He wouldn't care for that, needing more visual and auditory stimulation to meet his threshold for good gaming.

Alternately, he might not like that others prefer the sort of game features/design typical of the cPRGs of the late '90s and early '00s and he's here to rain on our parade.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Voice Acting - in RPGs poll

http://social.biowar...07/polls/39461/

[Dragoonlordz]

Andrew PG ‏@2house2fly

Haha, suggested Obsidian stretch goals: '1.5 Million: We'll write in romances.' '2 million: We won't let Chris Avellone write the romances'
Retweeted by Chris Avellone

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 15 septembre 2012 - 06:04 .

[Cribbian]

Suggested Obsidian stretch goals: '1.5 Million: We'll write in romances.' '2 million: We won't let Chris Avellone write the romances'

Ninja'ed:ph34r:

Modifié par Cribbian, 15 septembre 2012 - 06:05 .