148 réponses à ce sujet

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Based on discussion on the BSN, I feel there's a very mixed reception to the pacing of the beginning.

Many have stated they found it jarring to jump straight into an escape as Hawke without much context. They feel it undermined the effect of losing a sibling, as they hadn't yet established any reason to care for said sibling. I find these people tend to appreciate the slower beginnings of the Origins stories, as it helped them feel established in the setting and to make sense of some of the relationships.

Yeah I would've liked a fallout 3 style growing up with carver roleplaying sequence that would've been brill. I might even have shed womanly tears when the ogre tore him up

[Wulfram]

Anything is going to be a slog if you've played it enough times, and the odds are you're going to play the start more than other parts of the game. And it's likely to be linear, and you're probably going to be required to take the same party. Origins avoided this issue with the actual Origins, but then you got to Ostagar.

Including some fairly significant variations based on Origin and class could really help to keep it fresh, even if it's still fundamentally the same level. Maybe offer different paths to complete it based on early choices - like in Skyrim, where you can follow the Imperial or the Stormcloak.

I would like to have is an option for a less tutorially type of experience on subsequent playthroughs, and maybe on imports too. Bump up the starting level to 5 or 10 - fighting with a single talent is really rather boring - and tweak up the combat difficulty.

[El Mito]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Based on discussion on the BSN, I feel there's a very mixed reception to the pacing of the beginning.

Many have stated they found it jarring to jump straight into an escape as Hawke without much context. They feel it undermined the effect of losing a sibling, as they hadn't yet established any reason to care for said sibling. I find these people tend to appreciate the slower beginnings of the Origins stories, as it helped them feel established in the setting and to make sense of some of the relationships.


On the counterpoint, I do agree DAO feels more like a slog (you think you guys think Ostagar is a slog, aye carumba!), and there have been some that feel that DA2's speedier introduction is preferrable (even some who feel that the sibling death was undermined due to the briefness actually don't mind the overall pace of the intro).

I think it's a tricky card to play. I personally value the first playthrough over subsequent playthrough (since it's untainted by extra knowledge), but that's just my perspective.

They're kind of two different things, though. Ostagar was a slog, yes, but it was before that that you got to spend some time with your family/ friends/whatnot and got to know them. Something which DA 2
sorely lacked.

Modifié par El Mito, 01 décembre 2012 - 11:20 .

[esper]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Based on discussion on the BSN, I feel there's a very mixed reception to the pacing of the beginning.

Many have stated they found it jarring to jump straight into an escape as Hawke without much context. They feel it undermined the effect of losing a sibling, as they hadn't yet established any reason to care for said sibling. I find these people tend to appreciate the slower beginnings of the Origins stories, as it helped them feel established in the setting and to make sense of some of the relationships.


On the counterpoint, I do agree DAO feels more like a slog (you think you guys think Ostagar is a slog, aye carumba!), and there have been some that feel that DA2's speedier introduction is preferrable (even some who feel that the sibling death was undermined due to the briefness actually don't mind the overall pace of the intro).

I think it's a tricky card to play. I personally value the first playthrough over subsequent playthrough (since it's untainted by extra knowledge), but that's just my perspective.

Actually, they are different things, at least for me, in da:o. The origins themselves were good and a nice way to be introduced to the characthers. There were also good role play opportunities in them to help define your characther, or at least their starting point. Each origin provided a problem and a different approaches to the problem which helped in roleplaying. Hence why they are so liked it think.

Ostagar and Kokari Wilds on the other hand. Maker it never ended and it was basically only a very long, go fecht plot copuon. I hated it already on my first playthrough,

[fchopin]

I have no problems with DAO it was perfect for me and there is no way i would want to miss anything in the beginning. Same with DA2 it was fine.

The problem i have is that some cinematics can not be missed and that is where the problem is, in DAO and DA2 you can press Esc and skip them so they are perfect as far as i am concerned.

In ME3 you can not skip some of them in the beginning of the game and even after so they become a chore in the game. It's ok if you play the game only one or two times but afterwards they become very boring so i just go and make myself a cup of tea so i don't have to watch them.

So for me no, i don't want to skip the intro just the cinematics and video clips by pressing Esc.

[Matchy Pointy]

I honestly find Bioware games to have way better first are then for example skyrim. Awesome games, but Helgen gets boring after the first time, so much you cant skip.

[Wulfram]

Oh yes, in DA2 the exaggerated sequence is always a slog because this is Not My Character so I Don't Care

[Savber100]

What Bioware should do is set the beginning up not as a big introduction to gameplay but to the roleplaying elements.

Introduce the characters, let me get immersed into the world, and start to define my character before entering into combat.

Honestly if Bioware would just focus on roleplaying and producing interesting scenarios rather than dropping us into tedious, boring combat at the beginning of each game, their games will be better for it.

[byzantine horse]

I like comparing the start of Dragon Age 2 with Assassin Creed 2's start. In AC2 you spend half an hour or something helping your family out with different things, "bonding" if you will, before the **** hits the fan. Spoilers below.

When your father and brothers are hung it hurts, at least for me, and that game isn't even an emotion driven RPG. When Carver or Bethany (?) dies my reaction was more in line with "Well that's a bummer. Who was he/she anyway?". Spend an hour or something to building the basis of the world as it was before things went bad, so that the playercharacter has something to strive towards, something he or she wishes to restore. Dragon Age 2 never had that, meanwhile Origins did and I think that's a huge reason why I and many others prefer the first game. Assassin's Creed 2 told a much more interesting story than DA2 with (from Ezio's perspective that is, Desmond is a slug), on all levels, and I expect more from Bioware in that regard.

Modifié par byzantine horse, 01 décembre 2012 - 11:51 .

[Weskerr]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Based on discussion on the BSN, I feel there's a very mixed reception to the pacing of the beginning.

Many have stated they found it jarring to jump straight into an escape as Hawke without much context. They feel it undermined the effect of losing a sibling, as they hadn't yet established any reason to care for said sibling. I find these people tend to appreciate the slower beginnings of the Origins stories, as it helped them feel established in the setting and to make sense of some of the relationships.


On the counterpoint, I do agree DAO feels more like a slog (you think you guys think Ostagar is a slog, aye carumba!), and there have been some that feel that DA2's speedier introduction is preferrable (even some who feel that the sibling death was undermined due to the briefness actually don't mind the overall pace of the intro).

I think it's a tricky card to play. I personally value the first playthrough over subsequent playthrough (since it's untainted by extra knowledge), but that's just my perspective.

I'm definitely one of those people you described in your first paragraph. Slow and steady prologues are great if they are done well - as in they introduce the audience to the world, characters, setting, overarching story, back stories and make the rest of the story intelligible- and build up just enough tension to make one care about what will happen next. In Origins, this was done expertly, from the PC's own backstory to the main story itself through interaction with Duncan. DA2's prologue was too hyperactive and quick for the audience to make any meaningful connection to the world or its characters, in my opinion. ME3's prologue - or introduction if you prefer - is the worst of any BioWare game to date.

Modifié par Weskerr, 01 décembre 2012 - 11:58 .

[svenus97]

I thought I was the only one:P Pretty much the only reason why I will only replay BW games once or twice is because I can't bear to go through Ostagar (Korcari Wilds, specifically), Eden Prime, Taris, and Peragus (I know its Obsidian's, but still the same franchise). ME2 handled this better, DA2 even better than that and ME3 did it great.

[Dominus]

What do you think?

It's hard to say as I've only replayed one of the above listed by the OP. While it doesn't send me into a nerdrage to play it again, I'd think that the simple approach of an option during New Game+ modes(or otherwise indicated to devs that you've played it already) to fully skip the first mission isn't a bad way to go. Considering similar NG+ modes offer other bonus benefits regardless, it wouldn't be fully immersion breaking at said point to just skip it entirely. Giving the skip option for the first mission on playthrough #1 may not be such a great idea, and that's where the mixed reception will probably come into play.

@Ivandra, Which is Why she referred more specifically to replays:

Most of these aren't too bad in the first playthrough, but try them a second time and suddenly they can quickly become dull.

Modifié par DominusVita, 01 décembre 2012 - 12:41 .

[frankf43]

I liked the origins and played all of them except the mage one as I never play MU's in games.

What I do find a slog in the DA series is the fade quests, its a part of the game I feel you just have to grit your teeth and slog through.

[Nerevar-as]

Dabrikishaw wrote...

Being able to skip playing at least Ostagar would have been grand.

Skip dialogues, Ostagar takes around an hour (including battle).

I still prefer much more those slow levels than DA2, with filler combat so frequent I got the idea they were afraid of scaring people who don´t get a fight every other minute. It was far more boring than most starting levels I´ve played in any game. For me it´s just a matter of making what happens interesting, so even replaying is like rerading a chapter I liked in a book. I´ve played Human Noble (cliched to the point it makes fun of itself, but I really got a good idea of the Couslands, and hurt to lose them all) many timss, and never got bored. I think I´ll only go back to DA2 if I need it to carry the import from Origins.

[Navasha]

Well, personally, I loved the origins stories. It made your character start out as a real person. It established that you had a place in the world that was seemingly normal and made you feel like you were thrust into this new world against your will.

DA2s beginning wouldn't have worked if it wasnt a sequel and people already had knowledge about what was going on. I am sure new players that never touched DAO were kind of left stunned at being thrust into such a situation without knowing anything about what was happening.

In some ways, Hawke never felt like my character. I was just simply playing out the role as Varric was telling it. An origin story of humble beginnings might have prevented that, or perhaps that was just a symptom of the framed narrative style.

[LinksOcarina]

Honestly, the pacing of the stories is usually off when they begin. Mainly because it takes so long to get free reign of the world around you in some cases before you actually interact with the main plotline. Ostagar and the Citadel before you search for Saren are examples of that for me. Taris as well reminds me of the long wait before things open up.

So really, its an issue of not it being quicker to get into action, but quicker to achieve player agency I feel. Basically, control over the world in a more non-linear respect, which admit tingly is impossible in BioWare games since they are always a linear storyline.

[Pedrak]

They should give the player access to a reasonably open, vast area with many opportunities from the start (say, a medium-sized city), with the possibility to start following the main plot right away or to deal with a variety of subquests.

[hexaligned]

Pedrak wrote...

They should give the player access to a reasonably open, vast area with many opportunities from the start (say, a medium-sized city), with the possibility to start following the main plot right away or to deal with a variety of subquests.

This.  Crap tank the linear starting areas.  Open up the world from the start, introduce the setting and backstory through party member interactions that are accessable no matter what zone you are in, or that can be skipped entirely on subsequent playthroughs.

Modifié par relhart, 01 décembre 2012 - 03:12 .

[Brockololly]

Maria Caliban wrote...
I wonder if that's a good idea. The first time you play through the tutorial section, and on subsequent playthroughs you can choose to skip it.

That's a good idea.

I never had much of an issue with most of the intro sections to BioWare games on my original time playing the game. Like you mentioned, its only on subsequent replays that sections like Irenicus' dungeon or Ostagar can become a bit of slog.

For Origins, the origin stories fixed that though, at least until you got to Ostagar.  I actually liked Ostagar as a level and an area but its mostly since its the first thing you play and will be forced to replay in the same order in the game that it gets so old.

Maybe if you've already finished the game once, there is an option to somehow fast track completing an Ostagar type area if you want, that cuts out some of the more tutorial like aspects of it. So you're not completely skipping it but you can basically take a shortcut that might only open up if the game realizes you've already been through this area before on another playthrough.

I'll take origin stories and Ostagar any day over DA2's opening though. Just dumping you in with little clue what is going on, while still having the Poo Poo Mountain section largely just as un-skippable as Ostagar was even more annoying on the initial playthrough, since that section didn't even do a good job setting things up from a story perspective.

Or Mass Effect 2's opening with Normandy getting blown up- very cool your first time playing, but then putting the character creator behind that and an cutscene video was incredibly annoying. Same deal with sticking the character creator after the over the top sequence in DA2.

Modifié par Brockololly, 01 décembre 2012 - 03:42 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Based on discussion on the BSN, I feel there's a very mixed reception to the pacing of the beginning.

Many have stated they found it jarring to jump straight into an escape as Hawke without much context. They feel it undermined the effect of losing a sibling, as they hadn't yet established any reason to care for said sibling. I find these people tend to appreciate the slower beginnings of the Origins stories, as it helped them feel established in the setting and to make sense of some of the relationships.


On the counterpoint, I do agree DAO feels more like a slog (you think you guys think Ostagar is a slog, aye carumba!), and there have been some that feel that DA2's speedier introduction is preferrable (even some who feel that the sibling death was undermined due to the briefness actually don't mind the overall pace of the intro).

I think it's a tricky card to play. I personally value the first playthrough over subsequent playthrough (since it's untainted by extra knowledge), but that's just my perspective.

Correct, I for one am one of those people who found Hawkes beginning to be very silly. Everyone introduced and given very little if anytime to set up the backstory. It should of involved much more to me, starting in Lothering pre-invasion to set up and explain the family unit and relationships.

That was part of the beauty of Origins, you had a glimpse at the characters life prior to the main plot kicking in. I did not care about any of the characters in DA2 from the offset due to the dropping them all on you the player all at once with massive assumptions having to be made about their relationships. I certainly did not feel any emotion towards when Carver died as I did not have any time outside or running up a hill to get to know him.

Books tend to all start with introductions for a reason, they establish and set up the tone and character plus events 'about to' unfold. DA2 did not do this for me, they merely threw everyone supposed to know into a pot and stirred it from the start after it had already all kicked off.

As for Ostagar I did not find it a slog as it were, it was no more a slog than any other part of the game or area visited. It was part of the story like any other and was not the tutorial section, if any such section existed it would of been the Origin part not Ostagar.

The game does not start after Ostagar, it started prior to it and continued through it. Saying it was a slog so should have made it shorter has no more or less validity than saying want a [skip button] for any of the following parts of the game Sundermount or Wounded Coast, Lothering or Deep Roads, Fade or Ammarantine, Kirkwall or Ostagar as they were all slogs to someone somewhere and should of been made smaller or given skip button because that person merely was bored of that part of the game and because someone did not like those specific areas.

In fact I would go so far to say cutting down such areas has a massive detrimental effect to my enjoyment. Like another person has said, my ideal is Fallout 3 when born, experience growing up and character develops during that phase before setting off on your adventure. I also feel we should not be telling Bioware to cut down areas, this to me will only lead to yet more really small, short attention deficit areas and content, pit stops in every location as oppoased to any decent exploration. I want bigger areas not smaller, longer periods of time experiencing such areas not less. More to do there not less.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 décembre 2012 - 04:45 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

I actually liked Ostagar and it only takes me 20 minutes to get through it now. The whole introduction to the ruin and the music that plays as you cross adds to the atmosphere and then of course the darkspawn come all adding to the epic story of Origins.

DA2's prologue had you running from the darkspawn and then ends with Carver/Bethany getting smashed into the ground by an ogre before Flemeth shows up in dragon form to aid you. "Dragon" by itself might sound epic to some but it's not as epic as seeing a huge battle with the darkspawn that the humans are losing in. Sure DA2's prologue was even quicker and threw you straight into the action but that resulted in loss of momentum to the story and characters. Why should I care about this Carver/Bethany? I was unmoved by both of their deaths just as I was unmoved by cowardly Wesley's death.

Candlekeep in BG1? You could skip the tutorials. Just head straight to Gorian. Job done. Prologue finished in under one minute. (BG1's prologue was more of a tutorial than an introduction).

The only prologue I found to be a slog through was Mass Effect 1 but many parts of that game was such.