15 réponses à ce sujet

[robertm2]

Its something that we have been seeing less and less of with bioware's last 2 releases. More interactive dialogue with companions and better character development. The first dragon age had alot of it. You could spend hours talking to your companions at camp, learning more about them and either having them hate you or love you which had effects on the conversation. Dragon age origins acheieved something that a game never had for me. I was actually playing the game according to what my companions would think of the actions i took. I actually cared what they thought of me and what happened to them.

WIth dragon age 2 you got small introductions to the characters, and then one very short interactive conversation with them per act. This led to very little character development leading to me just flat out not caring who lived or died, what they thought of me and how they reacted to my actions in the game. Instead of me thinking of them as characters they were simply objects and tools i could use for combat and either get a negative or positive reaction out of. One of the best parts of dragon age origins was either overlooked or stripped and it was terrible. 

I will make this next part short because this is a dragon age forums but this is directly related so maybe not. mass effect 3 was plagued by the same thing as dragon age 2. instead of fully fleshed out conversations with the people on you ship you got one or two very shallow dialogue pieces that had zero effect on character development and story. they could get away with this a bit more because the characters are fairly well developed but their was no good reason they couldnt add in some extra backstory or even some missions for them where you learn more about them.

The point im trying to make is it seems like a lack of character development and interactive/interesting dialogue is a trend with recent bioware games and that is what drew me to their games in the first place. With a 2013 release date its unlikely even if this is ever looked at by a bioware employee that anything will be added or taken out but if dragon age 3 does not have what i am asking for i will be buying the game used when it goes down in price. Its not a threat, hell its not even a request its simply just a statement. Unless bioware brings back what made me want to spend my money on them i wont be spending my money on them.

[Kevin Lynch]

I'm certainly a proponent of a solid amount of dialogue, for sure. It lends itself to developing the personalities of your characters more than the exploring and combat can ever do. A trend towards less dialogue, if it can be called a trend, would be primarily attributed to the way people play the games; players don't have the same attention span as they once did. That DA2 went action-oriented was certainly a response to that, just as DA:O was a nod to the alternate, slower-paced, style of play.

We'll have to wait and see how the game comes along. I'm far more interested in a shift back to DA:O than continuing on from DA2 but we're likely to find a middle ground there somewhere instead.

[robertm2]

Thanks for responding. However due to the strong criticism towards dragon age 2 and the very positive response towards origins wouldn't it be fair to say that going back to what origins did best is probably a good idea. Also knowing how people play games aside from personal experience usually goes hand in hand with market research which ruins games sometimes. Market research that shows gamers have a shorter attention span usually leads to lower quality games. Market research showed that people would not care what happened in mass effect 1 and 2 which led to a smaller effect on dynamic gameplay and story changes in mass effect 3 and it also led to dragon age 2 being more combat oriented which didnt work out to well either. Market research is just plain bad. Im not sure how they came to the conclusion that gamers have a shorter attention span then they did when dragon age origins was released which was only a few years ago. Unless of course the demographic they are researching is very young which still doesn't make sense considering most gamers are between the ages of 18-30.

[Rawgrim]

Kevin Lynch hit the nail on the head. its even showing in the new D&D rules. Skillpoints are removed, and pretty much everything else that requires thinking. the players Handbook also explains how to play races and classes now. They have a section of "Play this class if you want to be a character who..."

[Dubozz]

Damn right! Bioware games are about characters and storyline! More dialogues with party members is always a good thing. A few words about "zaeed style" dialogues: I feel no connection with a character when i speak with his back. This type of conversation is good for party banter or short talk with npc but not like something more personal (conversations it the camp). So Please add more 'real' dialogues with our companions.

[jacobdg]

Ivandra Ceruden wrote...

'Players don't have the attention span they used to have'. Of course. If you pander to the broad casual Call-of-Duty fanbase, that is.

[robertm2]

Rawgrim wrote...

Kevin Lynch hit the nail on the head. its even showing in the new D&D rules. Skillpoints are removed, and pretty much everything else that requires thinking. the players Handbook also explains how to play races and classes now. They have a section of "Play this class if you want to be a character who..."

i agree with you on everything but a players handbook that tells you how to play classes isn't all bad. its easier than trying to explain to someone what they should be doing.

[daaaav]

I too place character, setting and story above gameplay when I think of Bioware games. Was very dissapointed with the trend that ME3 and DA2 seem to have started.

Keep the ally and rival system from DA2 though.

Bring back what made KOTOR, ME1 and DAO special please Bioware!

[robertm2]

daaaav wrote...

I too place character, setting and story above gameplay when I think of Bioware games. Was very dissapointed with the trend that ME3 and DA2 seem to have started.

Keep the ally and rival system from DA2 though.

Bring back what made KOTOR, ME1 and DAO special please Bioware!

agreed.

[Foolsfolly]

Kevin Lynch wrote...

I'm certainly a proponent of a solid amount of dialogue, for sure. It lends itself to developing the personalities of your characters more than the exploring and combat can ever do. A trend towards less dialogue, if it can be called a trend, would be primarily attributed to the way people play the games; players don't have the same attention span as they once did. That DA2 went action-oriented was certainly a response to that, just as DA:O was a nod to the alternate, slower-paced, style of play.

We'll have to wait and see how the game comes along. I'm far more interested in a shift back to DA:O than continuing on from DA2 but we're likely to find a middle ground there somewhere instead.

I don't know. This is like whenever someone says their youth was the "good old days". Of course it was you had less responsiblities and age hadn't begun sapping away at your body. But it doesn't make those years of your youth so much better than today.

I really don't think player attention spans are down. For one I don't think my own attention span is less than it used to be, I doubt you think yours has changed overly much, and I doubt anyone on any forum on the net devoted to video games think their attention spans are less. If they did then they shouldn't be talking about video games on their free time. They'd be... chasing shiny things.

Or getting high and watching cartoons.

Whichever.

I know there are stats out there for how many people complete a game but those stats cannot tell the whole story. People can get tired of a game and abandon it, especially if they're not having fun. Looking up at my video game libaray I see a few such abandoned games: LEGO Indiana Jones, Race Pro, Blazing Angels 2, and Assassins Creed Revelations.

These games are either bad (LEGO Indy, Blazing Angels), not my preference of video games (Race Pro which I had to review and put up the moment I wrote my review), or I just lost complete interest (I'm tired with Assassins Creed's go-no-where stories).

But I don't see attention spans waning. The fact there are so many forums, blogs, wikis, and websites devoted solely to video games shows that gamers care enough to write, read, and debate video games. Which shows a lack of apathy and how much gamers care.

I cannot speak for design choices made by BioWare but I can only assume the faster paced combat was designed to be funner than Origins. As is it's hit and miss. It can be tedious, worse than Origins and at other times (Legacy to put a fine point on it) the combat's great.

Origins comes out the victor if you do a side-by-side comparison. But I doubt it was a choice made because modern gamers lack the drive to finish an Ikea bookshelf let alone play a video game.

Finally as a cherry on top of this, WoW is wildly popular after what is it... 8 years? 9? It's got slow combat and billions of skills and powers and an extreme focus on grinding.

[daaaav]

I have nothing against combat improvements, but my expectations are that they are secondary to getting the characters and settings as well developed as possible.

If I wanted a brilliant combat system I would play Ninja Gaiden Black or Dark Souls knowing that the characters will be shallow

If I wanted to play a brilliant hiking simulator I would play Skyrim knowing that the characters would again be shallow.

If I wanted to play a game with brilliant set pieces I would play Halo or COD know that again the characters would be shallow.

It's not nostalgia, I enjoyed running around talking to people and exploring more than the combat in ME1 and DAO because of the brilliant characters and setting!

(and yes.. If I wanted to play friggen multiplayer I would play WOW...)

[Rawgrim]

robertm2 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Kevin Lynch hit the nail on the head. its even showing in the new D&D rules. Skillpoints are removed, and pretty much everything else that requires thinking. the players Handbook also explains how to play races and classes now. They have a section of "Play this class if you want to be a character who..."

i agree with you on everything but a players handbook that tells you how to play classes isn't all bad. its easier than trying to explain to someone what they should be doing.

I explained myself abit poorly. It basically tells the player that if you play a Tiefling, you should play it as some emo and brooding character. Play a drow elf if you want to play a Drizzt clone. And so on. they give you all the character traits, behavior, and what you should do in a fight. If you follow the suggestions you end up with a character from Diablo. Zero depth.

[robertm2]

Rawgrim wrote...

robertm2 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Kevin Lynch hit the nail on the head. its even showing in the new D&D rules. Skillpoints are removed, and pretty much everything else that requires thinking. the players Handbook also explains how to play races and classes now. They have a section of "Play this class if you want to be a character who..."

i agree with you on everything but a players handbook that tells you how to play classes isn't all bad. its easier than trying to explain to someone what they should be doing.

I explained myself abit poorly. It basically tells the player that if you play a Tiefling, you should play it as some emo and brooding character. Play a drow elf if you want to play a Drizzt clone. And so on. they give you all the character traits, behavior, and what you should do in a fight. If you follow the suggestions you end up with a character from Diablo. Zero depth.

yea i hate things like that. when i roleplay i hate it when people tell me how i should act. i dont care if elves in the lord of the rings are supposed to be stuck up and hate humans i want to be who i want to be as long as it doesnt break the lore too much.

[Braellina]

I agree with you, Robertm2. Origins had a deep character build. They were a part of you just as you were a part of them. DA2 lost that. In one post I said that DA2 was like a book that started good but then somewhere along the way some pages got ripped out, making the story incomplete. That how DA2 was very incomplete. There was to many gaps in the character build and in the storyline. Things felt rushed and things felt left out.

[robertm2]

Braellina wrote...

I agree with you, Robertm2. Origins had a deep character build. They were a part of you just as you were a part of them. DA2 lost that. In one post I said that DA2 was like a book that started good but then somewhere along the way some pages got ripped out, making the story incomplete. That how DA2 was very incomplete. There was to many gaps in the character build and in the storyline. Things felt rushed and things felt left out.

For real though. It felt like they were halfway done with the game and they were just like "eh whatever people will buy it anyways."