35 réponses à ce sujet

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

Dragon Age fans and Bioware fans in general, like to go on and on, particularly since disappointment with ME 3's endings as they were presented at the time of release, about choices mattering, multiple plot paths, and diverse endings. There are a lot of expectations being placed upon the Dragon Age III: Inquisition devs. As a fan, I think some of my fellow fans are being unrealistic in expressing their desires and placing demands on BioWare here on the BSN.

My thoughts:

1) A game is a product created with a limit of available resources constrained by such things as storage space (the game discs) and the time available to the development team to create it. They can only cram so much into one game. Don't expect the main plot to fork of into a dozen wildly different directions. It's just not going to happen.

2) People want choices which matter and have consequences, sometimes negative ones for seemingly positive choices (and vice versa) and which aren't always apparent immediately and which can manifest themselves much further down the road. I'm fine with this, but I hope that if BW implement something like this, that it is used sparingly or risk being a contrivance.

3) Folks want vastly different endings. Dragon Age is an ongoing series and to expect something like, for instance a magical WMD that kills every single mage as well as every person with magical potential in all of Thedas wouldn't work (I've not heard anyone suggest this, I'm just providing it as an example of a drastic scenario). Such an ending scenario would make it less likely that the mage class would even be playable in the next game.

I suppose we could have different ways of reaching a different ending, with some of the implications of actions taken having different effects, most likely as stated in the post-game epilogue, but then that risks accusations of ME 3's "multicolour endings" (something I was much happier with following the release of the Extended Cut).

I think it's important that the story have significant emotional impact and payoff. That's key to whatever ending BW comes up with working,

4) Story, when all is said and done, is what matters most to me. It's all about the journey the PC will go through, the series of events he/she will be caught up in. I care about what will happen to the companions throughout the game and what I'll discover about them as I get to know them. I want to really, really hate the villains and yet find some of them surprisingly sympathetic.

I want a story that I will remember long after I've finished the game for the first time, and one that will keep me coming back for more!

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 17 novembre 2012 - 06:39 .

[Kail Ashton]

Whaaaaaaaaaat? a rpg? focus on story first? what unheard of madness is this! why clearly it should focus on fixing minor complaints from the first game, developing awesome buttons and figuring out how to use 7 dungeons threwout a 40+ hour game

That "story" stuff? pffft slap it together at the last minute by mashing together a buncha old side quests as a main story, toss in some under developed to the point of never meeting one til the final act characters in there and toss some non player choices in for the sequel, that's how you make an rpg!!

Or could just use the square-enix method: waste alotta money on pretty CG scenes, add a buncha metrosexual characters in, follow every generic japanese writting forumla, mix for five years and serve to a gullible audiance of 7 million +

[Isichar]

I just want to be able to press a key and watch badass **** go down. Screw choices and story, when I press "T" I want to see a nuke come down and blow some city to ashes. What is the obsession games have with making the audience think and stuff? Ramp up the gore, make millions of enemy's constantly spawning to get mowed down in large quantity's and then give me some kind of kill all key and you got yourself a 9/10-10/10 game.

Modifié par Isichar, 17 novembre 2012 - 07:38 .

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

I think back fondly to the first Knights of the Old Republic.


***SPOILER ALERT!!***

It had precisely two endings and in both of them Darth Malak was dead. There were some differences in which companions lived and died based on alignment and the ability to kill both major romance characters on the Starforge (depending on choices, alignment, gender). It's true that we were basically railroaded into going one way or the other after the crucial moment of truth on Rakata Prime, but at the end of the day both endings were powerful and provided their own types of satisfaction.

***END SPOILERS***

I would be satisfied with two or three slightly different, but well-written, well-executed and artfully presented endings than sixteen wildly different ones, many of which probably wouldn't really make much sense under close examination and would make it potentially difficult for the devs to formulate a logical starting point for the sequel.

I am however in favour of choices mattering, insofar as having palpable consequences so long as they don't change the world in some ridiculous way that would make that choice difficult to transfer into a sequel and so long as it's not overused to the point that every little choice we make comes back to bite us or has to have some sort of major plot significance. Sometimes a side-quest just needs to be a side-quest; a small, self-contained event with an immediate conclusion and no blowback or significant aftermath is also acceptable.

The other thing is that we should allow for BioWare to perhaps make choices in one game only matter in the next. I like surprises.

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 17 novembre 2012 - 08:33 .

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

EntropicAngel wrote...

I don't agree.

I think they should focus on the world.

I think one of the strengths of DA:O (which I consider to be far and away the best Bioware game that I've played) was that while the story was paper-thin and oh-so-cliched, the game had such a heavy focus on the world that I could spend hours and hours in the game.

And really, I've never played a Bioware game with a really good story. Good, but nothing special. Very, very cliched. What Bioware excels at, and they really do, is characters and worlds. People spend hundreds of thousands of man-hours on this site not so much talking about the Bioware stories, but talking about the characters and the worlds in the series'.

Bioware write milieu stories. And they do it like absolutely no other developer can.

BioWare is also good at lampshading and taking cliches and turning them on their heads. I don't disagree that world and characters are of vital importance as well; the characters are what I tend to remember best about any given BioWare game. It's all about how it's handled. Mass Effect was a bubbling stew of SF tropes and cliches, but that was the whole point. It was a loving tribute to the whole space opera sub-genre, IMHO.

There is nothing more tired in the whole wide world of RPGs than heroic fantasy settings, be they dark, comical or otherwise. That doesn't mean BW shouldn't try to tell a good story, even a great one in Dragon Age III.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...
1) A game is a product created with a limit of available resources constrained by such things as storage space (the game discs) and the time available to the development team to create it. They can only cram so much into one game. Don't expect the main plot to fork of into a dozen wildly different directions. It's just not going to happen.

A story driven game is a product created with the expectation that the players should be able to interact and alter the course of story especially for an RPG. Otherwise, it's simply a product created for passive audiences like novels and animation. Don't expect a lot of people to invest hours of playing and settle for single plot with zero different direction at the cost of $60. It's not worth the price tag. Watching a movie or reading a novel doesn't cost that much. 

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...

2) People want choices which matter and have consequences, sometimes negative ones for seemingly positive choices (and vice versa) and which aren't always apparent immediately and which can manifest themselves much further down the road. I'm fine with this, but I hope that if BW implement something like this, that it is used sparingly or risk being a contrivance.

It's unlikely we will see that further down the road consequence due to unforseen circumstances, such as  the scrapped of the Exalted March DLC, which render those consequences remain not apparent forever. So what the point of having such useless consequences?

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...


3) Folks want vastly different endings. Dragon Age is an ongoing series and to expect something like, for instance a magical WMD that kills every single mage as well as every person with magical potential in all of Thedas wouldn't work (I've not heard anyone suggest this, I'm just providing it as an example of a drastic scenario). Such an ending scenario would make it less likely that the mage class would even be playable in the next game.

The next game is about the new protagonist,  new story and new setting. It wouldn't focus on the ending of last games. At best, it  only refer those endings in single or two dialogue lines with few codex enteries. So you may as well close each games with proper vastly different endings, since those endings affect little to none with new story and new setting.. 

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...



I suppose we could have different ways of reaching a different ending, with some of the implications of actions taken having different effects, most likely as stated in the post-game epilogue, but then that risks accusations of ME 3's "multicolour endings" (something I was much happier with following the release of the Extended Cut).

It is "multicolor endings" not worth my effort of hours playing each playthroughs. May as well be dumped in dustbin.

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...




I think it's important that the story have significant emotional impact and payoff. That's key to whatever ending BW comes up with working,

With PC created, defined and railroaded by BioWare? The story only have significant impact and payoff if I'm the one who play my own character, alter  my own story as I journey the plot designed to cater my roleplaying experience and not BioWare's. The key is to allow me to roleplay my character for my own journey. Leave my PC alone, stop interfering with my PC personality and stop showcase pathetic generic cinematic acting who continue to bother me with silly emotion, body language, facial reaction and silly tones..  

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...

4) Story, when all is said and done, is what matters most to me. It's all about the journey the PC will go through, the series of events he/she will be caught up in. I care about what will happen to the companions throughout the game and what I'll discover about them as I get to know them. I want to really, really hate the villains and yet find some of them surprisingly sympathetic. 

I want a story that I will remember long after I've finished the game for the first time, and one that will keep me coming back for more!

If the PC is designed in a manner that is flexible to be my avatar or my created fictional characters, yes it matter to me too. Otherwise, I may as well spend my time reading other people's character in a novel or watching other people's character in an animation movie. SImply railroading me to watch a defined protagonist in cinematic cutscenes, combat and interact with NPC in linear story meant little to my roleplaying experience. I could play any none RPGs in the same manner just fine.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 17 novembre 2012 - 11:54 .

[sunnydxmen]

dragon dogma was a success even though it story was flat.

[Plaintiff]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
A story driven game is a product created with the expectation that the players should be able to interact and alter the course of story especially for an RPG. Otherwise, it's simply a product created for passive audiences like novels and animation. Don't expect a lot of people to invest hours of playing and settle for single plot with zero different direction at the cost of $60.

Final Fantasy, Castlevania, Assassin's Creed, Kingdom Hearts, a billion other games I can't remember right now.

Non-linear paths in story-driven games are the exception, not the rule. 

It's not worth the price tag. Watching a movie or reading a novel doesn't cost that much.

Is this a joke? Books can cost as much as $30, and most new-release movies will cost more than that.

Movies only offer, on average, two-hours worth of entertainment. Even if a videogame is only ten hours long, you're still getting five times as much entertainment for only twice the price. It's absolutely worth the price tag. 

It's unlikely we will see that further down the road consequence due to unforseen circumstances, such as  the scrapped of the Exalted March DLC, which render those consequences remain not apparent forever. So what the point of having such useless consequences?

Because you wanted choices? You just complained about linear story games not being "worth the price tag".

[Sacred_Fantasy]

Plaintiff wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...
A story driven game is a product created with the expectation that the players should be able to interact and alter the course of story especially for an RPG. Otherwise, it's simply a product created for passive audiences like novels and animation. Don't expect a lot of people to invest hours of playing and settle for single plot with zero different direction at the cost of $60.

Final Fantasy, Castlevania, Assassin's Creed, Kingdom Hearts, a billion other games I can't remember right now.

I don't buy and play "RPG-lite" featuring fixed protagonist. To be honest, I don't even consider them as RPG.

Plaintiff wrote...

Non-linear paths in story-driven games are the exception, not the rule.

This arguement is the reason why RPG should have a proper ruleset. 

Plaintiff wrote...

It's not worth the price tag. Watching a movie or reading a novel doesn't cost that much.

Is this a joke? Books can cost as much as $30,

Yeah,  still doesn't cost me $60.

Plaintiff wrote...

and most new-release movies will cost more than that.

What? Cinema ticket doesn't cost more than $10 just to watch most new-release movies. 

Plaintiff wrote...


Movies only offer, on average, two-hours worth of entertainment. Even if a videogame is only ten hours long, you're still getting five times as much entertainment for only twice the price. It's absolutely worth the price tag.

Those 8 hours are wasted on deceiving players into thinking their involvement in the story matters when it's actually not. 

Plaintiff wrote...


Because you wanted choices? You just complained about linear story games not being "worth the price tag".

I wanted to shape the story. And yes I complain linear story not worth the price tag because it doesn't allow me to do so.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 18 novembre 2012 - 01:38 .

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...

snippity snip snip snip

I have to say that in several instances YOU

ARE MISSING THE POINT.

Reread my first post carefully. I never said I was against choice. I just believe that we should have realistic expectations about how much choice there will be. Games are made with finite resources and contained within the parameters of their programming. They are not and will likely never be virtual realities where anything is possible.

It would be very difficult, not to mention incredibly time-consuming to create a game of the graphical quality of a Dragon Age game where the game branches off into wildly different directions. It would basically mean developing, for example, what amounts to three, four, or five different games each with their own separate plot. This becomes even more complicated the minute you start talking about EACH plotline having its own multitude of different endings.

What I am trying to say is that I care more about a good story, characters, well-written dialogue and a deep, well-developed world than I do about having a hundred "choices that matter".

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 18 novembre 2012 - 03:07 .

[Sacred_Fantasy]

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...

 I just believe that we should have realistic expectations about how much choice there will be. Games are made with finite resources and contained within the parameters of their programming. They are not and will likely never be virtual realities where anything is possible.

I've seen that arguement for decades since I played my 486DX2 machine running under DOS environment. Still that never hinder developers into trying to create virtual realities.

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...
What I am trying to say is that I care more about a good story, characters, well-written dialogue and a deep, well-developed world than I do about having a hundred "choices that matter".

A good story. well-written dialogue and a deep well-developed world can be easily found in novels and movies. I care for a good story, well-written dialogue and a deep well develop world when I can affect the story. Otherwise the story has no value to my gameplay.

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 18 novembre 2012 - 03:39 .

[blueumi]

all I want is for dragon age 3 to be more like origins and less like dragon age 2 with an ending that is not the garbage mass effect 3s enidng is

dragon age origins did a good with it's endings as a person from our heros origin would be at the end of the game also how Alistair may or may not be there it worked

we wanted choice because bioware made it seem like that was what we would get

limitations does not mean they have to dumb down the story and reuse areas over and over

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

blueumi wrote...

all I want is for dragon age 3 to be more like origins and less like dragon age 2 with an ending that is not the garbage mass effect 3s enidng is

dragon age origins did a good with it's endings as a person from our heros origin would be at the end of the game also how Alistair may or may not be there it worked

we wanted choice because bioware made it seem like that was what we would get

limitations does not mean they have to dumb down the story and reuse areas over and over

Mass Effect 3's ending was garbage largely due to incompleteness, pre-Extended Cut, IMHO. I had no problem with the Reapers being guided by insane, inhuman thought processes. I also had no problem with Shepard dying (in most cases other than Deep Breath). At least with the new material and the epilogues we saw that the choices Shepard made did make a difference for the galaxy and that things like curing the genophage could matter.

I didn't hate DA 2 but neither will I defend its most egregious flaws (enviro recycling, BUTTON AWESOME, streamlining which impoverished the role-playing experience, etc.), even if pressure from the publisher were a factor in the game being released in the state it was in.

Dragon Age: Origins was a very tight game and the devs had many years to work on it. Remember when the screenshots looked like KOTOR?

They had years to iron the game out and make sure the story was really solid and was the story BioWare wanted to tell.

I would love for Inquisition to be more like DA:O in the story department than DA 2, which was a noble effort with some good ideas that fell shy of its mark.

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...

 I just believe that we should have realistic expectations about how much choice there will be. Games are made with finite resources and contained within the parameters of their programming. They are not and will likely never be virtual realities where anything is possible.

I've seen that arguement for decades since I played my 486DX2 machine running under DOS environment. Still that never hinder developers into trying to create virtual realities.

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...
What I am trying to say is that I care more about a good story, characters, well-written dialogue and a deep, well-developed world than I do about having a hundred "choices that matter".

A good story. well-written dialogue and a deep well-developed world can be easily found in novels and movies. I care for a good story, well-written dialogue and a deep well develop world when I can affect the story. Otherwise the story has no value to my gameplay.

Look, I said that a good story, etc. were more important to me than lots of choices, not that I don't want choices or that I want to play an interactive movie. I like affecting the story, and when you play an RPG with any depth to it, it's unavoidable.

[draken-heart]

every time I read these kinds of threads is that it comes back to some people that Story=engaging world where choices matter. And in the end this results in them complaining that the import system they have for the game takes away from the story.

Thoughts, or am I just angry and fools.

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

draken-heart wrote...

every time I read these kinds of threads is that it comes back to some people that Story=engaging world where choices matter. And in the end this results in them complaining that the import system they have for the game takes away from the story.

Thoughts, or am I just angry and fools.

I don't think you're entirely wrong to be angry and hardly a fool. Story to me does not automatically equal an engaging world where choices matter. An engaging world is a key ingredient, but story does not hinge on this alone but on a well-crafted plot, interesting characters, and often a certain relatability or grounding in reality (the way the Star Wars movies mix the fantastic with the familiar, for example). I am not against choices mattering, I just don't think they are integral to the story being good and I certainly believe that too many big choices with vastly different outcomes can hinder the flow of the central plot. Choices with dire or serendipitous outcomes that affect some significant aspect of the world and NPCs should be spread out over side-plots and minor quests.

At the end of the day, as I keep saying, I want a good yarn and an interactive, immersive one to be sure; not Cutscene: The Video Game as Sacred_Fantasy seems to believe I'm hoping for. I think as fans we should maintain realistic expectations. If people want the kind of freedom some people seem to think BioWare owes us, maybe they should consider getting together with some like-minded friends or seeking out some folks who are up for some good, old-fashioned tabletop RPGing. Those silly, archaic old things allow for a lot of freedom of action and full control over the character's personality.

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 18 novembre 2012 - 09:53 .

[philippe willaume]

well
if i play divinity i know i will be rail-roaded toward the ending. that the way those game works. and i am fine. IF i play the daggerfall series, i expect the main story to be somewhat disjointed, and again i am fine with that.


You see I like bio-ware game because of the story and the choices. Bioware itself set the expectation, both in previous game an in each game itself.
A good example of that is ACTII in DA:2.

Is it really that surprising that after the ending of ME;3 or act III in DA:2, I am less than impressed by the effort?

I do not expect every choice to have as many option as in ME:3 when it comes to the fate of the companion. That was brilliantly done by the way. and I would like DA:3 to be the same in that respect, but it is icing one the cake.

but i do expect story arc and companion story to be resolved in a way that acknowledge the choices you make during the game.

Phil

[philippe willaume]

draken-heart wrote...

every time I read these kinds of threads is that it comes back to some people that Story=engaging world where choices matter. And in the end this results in them complaining that the import system they have for the game takes away from the story.

Thoughts, or am I just angry and fools.

nope you are not angrey and follish
thoise are  not really the same issues, import being really matter implementation, so it can really easilly be fixed with a confirmation screen where you can change what is imported if it is wrong.
The more choice you have, the more constraint you put on the next story.  Now it is not a great surprise that if the game works there will be follow up. So a smart design would catter for that.
this more aboy the story mattering accross the next implementation

What i think we are discussing here is the story with the contect of a given implementation.
ie how the story that is being told integrates the descisions/choice the player makes. yes that will end up in the save/import but what is nbing discused is how it is handled in the story being told and what should expected from bioware in that regard
phil

[Rawgrim]

krul2k wrote...

good story and choices that actually matter, getting tired of the deflation of knowing ultimately no matter what path i take or the choices i do they just dont matter

This. The promise of 16 different endings for ME3 springs to mind...

[MichaelStuart]

I just want a ending were I can walk away and leave the world to its fate.
Doesn't have to be great, just has to be a option.

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

MichaelStuart wrote...

I just want a ending were I can walk away and leave the world to its fate.
Doesn't have to be great, just has to be a option.

Perfectly fine with that being an option, but only if the epilogue shows us the consequences of taking that course of action.

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

draken-heart wrote...
...in the end this results in them complaining that the import system they have for the game takes away from the story.

I'd really like someone to provide one concrete example of when a file import choice took away from the story. Are they referring to the belief that  cameos by party member from previous gamer are meaningless and distracting? Or this belief that we need some sort of canon for the story to have real coherence and meaning?

Could they be referring to the save import bugs that led to certain decisions not being recognized? That hopefully they are ironing out. I'd like to see some of those fixed. I'd also like to see the problem where my male Warden who romanced Zevran is referred to as a she in DA II, but that's probably too much to ask for at this point.

I don't think either belief is entirely correct. The cameos are generally harmless. If every single companion from DA:O and Awakening had shown up, then I would have found my willing suspension of disbelief... well, suspended.
lastly, official canon, whether in the story or the proposed canonization of Hawke or the Warden, are not going happen. That's not the way BioWare rolls and the Revan/ Exile example is a bad one, as the decision came from LucasArts and not BW. Sorry, that last sentence was just a tad off-topic. Just an issue I have a beef with.

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 18 novembre 2012 - 06:23 .