36 réponses à ce sujet

[Aleya]

So, we have tons and tons of threads about what people do and do not want to see in DA3. We have discussions on player agency, romance options, the dialogue wheel, the identity of the protagonist, our preferred companions, cameos, imported choices, graphics style, combat mechanics, crafting mechanics, character creation, environment, travel, voice actors, camera angles, why we really need horses... You name it and we have analysis, criticism, and recommendations aplenty.

But that's all skin-deep stuff. It's the surface, the polish, the means through which we view a game. I think it's entirely possible for a game to have everything I ever asked for on all the points I listed above, and I still won't love it. It's also possible for me to completely love a game that doesn't fulfill my wishes on all those points. What I'm talking about, for lack of a better word, is the "soul" or "heart" of a game. That thing that leaves you stunned and reeling when the end credits roll in because you've just had one of the best experiences in your life and you want to do it again as soon as possible.

My question to the community is this:
How do you quantify a game's soul? How do you ensure that it will bowl players over and leave them singing its praises decades after its release? What makes a flawed game (they're all flawed, every game has aspects we don't like) perfect? What is the source of the magic? 

I honestly don't have an opinion on this. It's as difficult to pin down as the thing that makes one person attractive to me while someone else with incredibly similar features and personality will never inspire more than friendly interest. I just know that some games have it and most don't. And I'm wondering if someone else has a better understanding of this than I do.

Modifié par Aleya, 20 octobre 2012 - 12:53 .

[ianvillan]

Passion and dedication to make a game for it own sake and not how much money it could make.

When you look at every system of the game in the terms of how can this get us the most money the game you make will be less than if you look at every system as is this best for the game.

[Cultist]

Scalpel, that will cut everything DA2-related.

[Ridwan]

Replayability, that's what separates fake great games from truly great games. A well played game (meaning it works well and it gets played very often) is a well made game.

For example, DA: Origins had a much higher replay value for me, than DA 2 did, and I actually preferred the combat mechanics in DA 2.
How ever the lack of zones, the downer ending (get this through your head (no not you, who is about to write "You don't speak for me"), you all black wearing, no sun getting, only watching films from directors no one cares about guy with no friends other than people on a forum, people like happy endings! So it should be there as an option and it doesn't make the game any less "artistic" because of it. "Then everybody would pick that option and I'm mature cause I like to pretend I'm better than others and so I know how to make a successful game" well boho cry more, if there's an option that appeals to most people, guess what, most people are going to go for that option.) and the clunky inventory system (I had to spend way too much time cleaning it up every now and then) made DA 2 a worse game (I still like it though).

I disagree with all the hate DA 2 gets, other than what I mentioned above I had a good time playing it. If it had the grander scale of DA: Origins, a better inventory system and the option for a better ending it would've been a truly amazing game. So take the good and don't fix it, and cut the crap.

Modifié par M25105, 20 octobre 2012 - 01:33 .

[Zavox]

Perfection, eye for detail.

[The Elder King]

Cultist wrote...

Scalpel, that will cut everything DA2-related.

I'd thing a bazooka would make the job quickier.

[PsychoBlonde]

Perfection? That'd have to be me going insane. Never played a game I thought was "perfect".

[Foolsfolly]

The tone of Dragon Age: Origins was very much a muddy, dirty, near frontier but in a sort of medieval European way. The architecture, armor design, clothing, and everything about it screams this. And I loved it. It was a down and dirty gritty kind of game. A little too brown but brown's a nice color!

I won't lie I never really got a firm grasp on the politics of Ferelden. Kings are higher than Arls, Arls are higher than Banns, and somewhere some how a term known as 'Freeloaders' fits in. But dammit I loved that political system. We didn't get to play with it much but our actions within it often made highlights in my playthroughs. I loved the Landsmeet, Redcliffe, Highever, and any time we met and talked to nobles.

I liked how you had all these families and histories that even though we barely touched upon it I liked that they existed.

I personally feel that the sense of history, character, and just tone was shallower in DA2.

For DA3 I'd love to have all the detail to focus in on Orlais. I want silks, shoes, fancy masks, big hair, very huge parties, and elaborate fancy architecture all of it screaming of depth and history of a grand nation at the height of its power!

And to counter this I want the worst poverty ever. I want alienages which make the player shudder in disgust. People shouldn't live like this. And yet Orlais is like this. The best city in the world... and the worst city in the world. A Tale of Two Cities kind of thing. The best parties, the best art, the best wine, the best crime, the best poverty.

Large glorious castles and cathedrals tower over shanty towns mashed into corners out of sight. Vibrant colors and hair walk past roughspun and matted and it goes unnoticed by the nobility!

That sets up a tonal dissonance between rich and poor. Humans and elves. It shows injustice and economic struggle based on racial prejudices.

I want a place where the people talk to you and most of them are lying because they're hiding something, the others are lying because they think it's amusing to spread rumors, and the last tiny part are telling the truth but you wouldn't believe it.

People who are lie, cheat, steal, murder, create webs within webs covered in shadows, all the while they show off high fashion and are so so openly devout. These are people who are multifaceted through their conflicts and contradictions.

I want to know all about the families, the bards, the nobility, the clergy, I want these facts to not just exist in the codex but to drip from every pixel on the screen.

And any other location we go to needs to be so definitvely that place (Ferelden, Free Marches, Tevinter, Rivain) that they speak just as loudly as any section in Orlais.

Only when the NPCs, maps, books, cities, and towns all showcase these conflicts, history, contradictions, and other immersive sights and sounds of Orlais will DA3 really click with the audience.

We ask for a lot. I know that. But its these details more so than most things fans will shout and demand that really give you a belief in the setting. And when you believe the setting and characters and understand them you want to spend time there. You want to explore it. You want to be in this world.

And that will transform a decent game into a great game each and every time.

It's why I think Skyrim's better than Oblivion (although Morrowind's better than Skyrim) and Origins is better than DA2.

[coldSnap]

impossible, no game can perfectly intergrate all my expectations, at least not without a loooong developemnt time, a hella strong engine (to allow way more content, cutomization, amazeballs grpahics that almost look too real), and even then, things that i want may not conform to other's ideas.

But i dont need perfection just make sure the story is good, companion interaction is satisifying, good combat, and amazing graphics

[whykikyouwhy]

Aleya wrote...

My question to the community is this:
How do you quantify a game's soul? How do you ensure that it will bowl players over and leave them singing its praises decades after its release? What makes a flawed game (they're all flawed, every game has aspects we don't like) perfect? What is the source of the magic? 

That's four questions. 

My answers, respectively:

A game's soul is, imo, what the developers put into it - what their goal for the player is for the path of beginning to end. But what quantifies that is a medley of several things, from the mechanics and technical details, to the passion put forth in the creation process. How that game is measured could differ based on who is trying to assess it and what expectations they have. I don't believe there is one sure fire method to employ here.

What bowls players over depends on the player. It's doubtful that there is one grand combination that will appeal to ALL people, as people are unique in their preferences, expectations (there's that word again), mindset at the time of game release, etc. So too, you need to look at why a person might want to play a game "decades after its release" - is it because they felt the game was good, because they want to capture some of the feeling of wonder or awe at something that left an impression, are they feeling nostalgic (and may end up seeing the game differently, and being more critical upon long distant replay)?

Perfection is in the eye of the beholder.

Magic comes from passion.

[xAmilli0n]

I'd call myself a casual Dragon Age fan, so this may not be specific to DA3, but I have played many great and terrible games, so here my take.

1. Great Characters:  Your interaction with the other characters is what makes the story personal, and builds attachment to the world.  Make characters relatable, fallable, and in general human.  Let them lie and be distrutful.  Trust is not something most automatically give, let it be earned.  Make loss and betrayal painful because we have grown so attached to the characters, we can't let them go.  Emotional music alone doesn't make loss painful.

Let us get to know the charcters through the game as if we are experiencing the events with them.  For antagonists, don't make them 100% obviously evil (unless its like the Archdemon which pretty much just kills stuff:P).  Everyone has their reasons for acting, so let us get to know them.  Example of poorly done antagonist, Cerberus in ME3.  Finally, if you are going to make a romance subplot, make it feel like a relationship, not a one sided "I say all the right things and then we sleep together" kinda deal (very hard to execute properly in my experience).  But in the end, characters definitely come first.

2.  Story:  The story in games can vary so widely its hard to say exactly what makes it good.  But in general, it needs to be relatable, well thought out, and developed in a way that not only affects the protagonist, but also the other characters, and the entire game world.  It doesn't need to be epic in proportions (though chances are it will be) but it needs to be impactful and have meaning both on a personal level (how it affects the protagonist) and a universal level (how it affects the game world).  And also, stick to lore.  You spent all this time establishing it, why break it now?  And I'm not talking aesthetic changes, those are fine.  Stick to lore.  Just do it.

3.  The Little Details:  This one is a big deal for me.  Get those little details done right.  For example, when a character crosses their arms, do let it clip through.  While walking, don't let a characters weapon clip through their body.  It totally break immersion for me.  So lets take the time and do it right, okay?

4.  A living, breathing world:  Dragon Age has a wonderful world.  Lets make it feel alive with people who's live don't simply revolve around the protagonist.  And lets see the consequences of our choices reflected on the world.

And thats it.  Not a super detailed list but a few things I 've see to be effective in making a game stand out.

Edit: I noticed people talking about replayability.  In my opinion, when a game truely captures your imagination, regardless of whether it is linear or divergent, you will replay it multiple times.

Modifié par xAmilli0n, 20 octobre 2012 - 02:43 .

[Wulfram]

A clear compelling vision of what this game should be, with all the elements - gameplay, story, art and graphics - working towards that.

DA2 seemed to be notably lacking in such a vision. Rather there were a whole bunch of disparate elements stuck in because someone thought they'd be cool. So, for example, you get a story which is fairly clearly intended to be more down to earth than DA:O, but everything else seems to be done to ramp up the epic. And a framed narrative that only seems to exist for the sake of a few jokes.

I'd also say that for CRPGs it's story, characters and atmosphere that really make a game great. Gameplay only needs to not be a chore.

[Androme]

At the end of the day, you could've been debating about game mechanic that and game mechanic this for a couple of years, in the end, it ALL boils down to the.. guess what? You got it right, the STORY. It's an RPG game, the STORY is what MAKES the game.

[Ridwan]

A good story doesn't save a game with crappy mechanics.

[Foolsfolly]

M25105 wrote...

A good story doesn't save a game with crappy mechanics.

There are plenty of games with crappy mechanics that I continued to play because I dug the story. BioShock, for example, had some medicore first person shooter mechanics with some rather broken RPG mechanics (once you realize you're god if you use stealth and melee it's hard to stop using stealth and melee). Story was great. Replayed that about ten times.

Hell, Knights of the Old Republic 2 is a mechanical mess. The ending is terrible. I replayed that a dozen times.

[legbamel]

In a word, engagement. If the characters are well-drawn and reactive, the setting detailed in lore and interactivity, and the story affected by my choices (not just in large ways but the small ones like choice of race or gender are noted by NPCs and affect interaction) the game will engage me. If I can customize my character and companions along the way, role playing different scenarios based on the options I've chosen along the way, I'll want to do it again with other choices to see what happens, but only if I'm engaged enough that I can care about a whole new PC.

[Ridwan]

Foolsfolly wrote...

M25105 wrote...

A good story doesn't save a game with crappy mechanics.

There are plenty of games with crappy mechanics that I continued to play because I dug the story. BioShock, for example, had some medicore first person shooter mechanics with some rather broken RPG mechanics (once you realize you're god if you use stealth and melee it's hard to stop using stealth and melee). Story was great. Replayed that about ten times.

Hell, Knights of the Old Republic 2 is a mechanical mess. The ending is terrible. I replayed that a dozen times.

And I never completed Bioschock cause I hated how the mechanics felt. I don't give a damn about stories when I play a FPS game other than it giving me more motivation to shoot the bad guys. In a RPG it's a different matter, but a even then it's more important to make the players flow with the game. Hell I love Dragon Age: Origins, but I never once bothered to sit down and read outside sources of the lore, I don't care about that. I like when I experience it in the game as the player, preferable, ignorant of it so I learn the basics. But I certainly don't want to bother with it, if the controls handle like crap. Fun gameplay is pillar of all games, once it's there you can build the rest that makes a good game great.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

M25105 wrote...

A good story doesn't save a game with crappy mechanics.

I had trouble with the control system for Assassin's Creed I, and I still played for the story.

[FINE HERE]

I think the magic ingredient is something that makes you play the game despite any of it's flaws and makes you keep playing it until you are finished through your third playthrough. Now what that is exactly... I don't know.

[Realmzmaster]

The magic ingredient is different for each gamer. There is no one ingredient that takes a game from really really good to great. No game reaches perfection as far as I am concerned. It is like baking a cake. If you leave out the eggs, not amount of icing is going to make it taste right unless something is substituted for the eggs. Or the cake could be really good, but it is missing that special icing that takes it to the next level.
The developers task is to take the ingredients and try to make a game that appeals to most of the audience. The problem is that developers may still miss the mark with the fanbase. As I stated that magic ingredients is different for each gamer depending on what part of the game that gamer emphasizes. Some emphasize story and other combat.
IMHO, a great game blends all the ingredients together to make a satisfying whole and then is left in the oven to bake to greatness (which involves lots of testing).
I am not under the illusion that any developer can just ignore the financial ramifications. That is simply a recipe for bankruptcy. A company that does not watch its expenses is one that will doom itself.

I as a gamer can say make the best game possible and damn the costs. That simply is not realistic. I can make the best cake in the world out of the finest ingredients with no regards to cost, but if I go to sell it the reality of the market place is still there. I now have an overpriced cake that I cannot sell.
Gamers can say all they want that they will buy the game if it has to be priced at $100 or more. The reality is many will not pay that price especially if it comes with no extras.
I have to set a budget for my cake. I may not be able to make the finest cake with the best ingredients, but I can make a great cake with good to great ingredients.
The same with a great game. You have to blend the ingredients, keep within budget and make it the best game possible given the constraints.

[BouncyFrag]

These always make anything better...

[Blackrising]

Personally, I think the question of what makes a game 'perfect' is basically...impossible to answer. There are so many factors and they're all unique to the game in question.
I consider DA:O not perfect, but very close to it. Does that mean I want DA 3 to be exactly like Origins? Not at all. Because what made Origins so good might not fit into the the story/feeling of DA 3.

But there is a thing I think would add a great deal to DA 3 and it's particular storyline: Immersion (god, I hate that word) through atmosphere. Showing us/letting us experience what makes Orlais so unique. Which, for me, means POLITICS. Lots and lots of intrigues the PC gets roped into.

[FedericoV]

Wulfram wrote...

A clear compelling vision of what this game should be, with all the elements - gameplay, story, art and graphics - working towards that.

This. 

[RandomSyhn]

FedericoV wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

A clear compelling vision of what this game should be, with all the elements - gameplay, story, art and graphics - working towards that.

This. 

This and emotional investment. Let me care about the characters, laugh when they laugh, cry when they cry, and give a damn about finishing the game for their sakes not mine.