CaptainBlackGold wrote...
Harle Cerulean wrote...
CaptainBlackGold wrote...
SNIP
Why can't we have a little bit of both? I mean, is there some technical reason why open world must mean, superficial, shallow world?
There's a very simple reason. Money. You would need a game budget the size of Skyim's plus a game budget the size of Dragon Age's. At least. Tell you what, you become a billionaire and front the cash for the game, I'll buy the end product. 
Sorry, my present billions are already ear-marked for my world-dominator weather machine - maybe the next billion?
However, let's step back for a second and analyse this. In DAO, you had to travel from one plot area to the next; and you did so by a map. Once you entered the plot area, "stuff happens." This is the same game style that Bioware used in Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, KOTOR, etc.
Are we so sure that this is a budgetary reason, or simply that this is the way Bioware has been making RPG's since 2D sprites were the latest thing in video technology?
Certainly, a world as expansive as Oblivion, Fallout3/NW or Skyrim is a huge investment, but Dragon Ages games do not need to be that big - just a more open "feel" where you can do, non-quest related "stuff." For example, DA2 had no real crafting, alchemy, enchanting, etc - you just paid someone to do it for you. Yeah, none of these things add directly to the story, but it does engage you in the game (can't remember much about DAO because I modded the daylights out of it to get some really fun stuff to do).
I don't know, since I have been so busy on the weather machine, I haven't looked into the technical aspects - but is it really funding, or that Bioware simply has a certain way of doing things, and is not looking outside the box?
Hunting, crafting, making potions, enchanting armor the way you want it to be, is all stuff that I think can over all add to the DA experience - and it does not take a Skyrim type of budget to include in the game.
I guess if you are satisfied with a compelling story, with fascinating characters, I guess Bioware fits the bill...
But to quote Oliver Twist: "Please, sir, could I have some more...?":innocent:
Money isn't the only factor here, there is the time, people, game engine, software developers skills, etc...
Even if the budget is big:
you have to consider the time that the developer have to make the game (you simply can't make a GTA [and by GTA, I mean an excelent game] in 2 our 3 years [Rockstar said many times that they prefer to spend a long time developing to make a good game]). And I don't see EA giving more than 3 years to Bioware...
People, for an open-world, you would need many modelers to make the scenarios, scripts for the characters and writers, or at least more time (again, time is short)
And the skills of your team is very important, imagine that you need to make a new engine (or edit another [frostbite 2]) for the game you want to make, and once made, the scripts you have to make for every character. I don't know if we can make a Skyrim with the frostbite 2, but assuming we can (or at least, edit the engine to make it work), we would need... damn, to complicated to put in a "small" comment.
In short, it's not only about the money.
Modifié par JCAP, 29 novembre 2012 - 10:47 .
Retour en haut
