68 réponses à ce sujet

[Pelle6666]

Don't worry about that. DA is a far more character and story driven series than elder scrolls and unless they are going to rebuild the game from scratch with combat system and all then I don't think this is a threat to the "DA gene".

[Medhia Nox]

I get the feeling the Wulfram is talking about the weird placement of "exploration".

Games are never "about" exploration... often they're about some deeply important quest that the PC "should" be attending to if they weren't metagaming the reality that the game world doesn't move without them. ((I have nothing against metagaming btw - before someone starts shooting fireballs))

But the same could be said for NPC sidequests - sidequests in general - and non-linear travel (after all - how insane did it seem to travel back and forth from Redcliff, Denerim, Orzammar and the Circle during a Blight?)

And in a lot of games - exploration seems silly. Especially fantasy games. Fallout does it well - but people criticize those games for drab landscapes. But seriously - where are the "rest" of these ruins in the swamp? Where's the destroyed roads? And if I found it - why haven't others? Why is it still loaded with gear?

Egyptian tombs were long empty when they were "found" in the 19th/20th centuries.

Again - for me, it's the unrealistic sense that the world is waiting for the PC that I dislike about exploration.

[AlanC9]

Medhia Nox wrote...
Games are never "about" exploration... often they're about some deeply important quest that the PC "should" be attending to if they weren't metagaming the reality that the game world doesn't move without them. ((I have nothing against metagaming btw - before someone starts shooting fireballs))

Well, there have been rare exceptions, though not recently. Starflight and Fallout have main quests that the PC is exploring to find a way to solve. (Hell, in starflight you have to explore to find out what the main quest even is). And those quests do move on without the player, at least before the Fallout timers got nerfed. But yeah, the game world typically waits for the PC; I guess MotB is a recent exception, but I can't think of any others.

And in a lot of games - exploration seems silly. Especially fantasy games. Fallout does it well - but people criticize those games for drab landscapes. But seriously - where are the "rest" of these ruins in the swamp? Where's the destroyed roads? And if I found it - why haven't others? Why is it still loaded with gear?

Even fantasy games without much exploration have this sort of thing. It's..... kind of what the genre is.

Modifié par AlanC9, 05 décembre 2012 - 08:18 .

[DarkSpiral]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I don't want my cat to grow wings and start vomiting fireballs at the people who walk by the upper balcony.

But I'm not going to start a thread about it.

I suddenly want this. Very much.

I'd prefer if it was a chocolate lab, but otherwise I agree completely.

Sorry, what was this thread about again?

[Medhia Nox]

@AlanC9: Doesn't mean a genre can't evolve.

And I wasn't really stating that I "hate" exploration in any way - just that I "think" I get what Wulfram is getting at and I can see his point.

[Wulfram]

Medhia Nox wrote...

I get the feeling the Wulfram is talking about the weird placement of "exploration".

That's indeed part of it.

But more fundamentally, I can't understand how it could be considered fun.  It doesn't present any challenge beyond tolerance for carrying out a repetitive task past the point of tedium, and though I guess you can scatter codexes about I can't see it's a good way to present a story either.

It just seems like a particularly blatant sort of filler, not the sort of thing people should be boasting about putting in their game.

edit:  To me it's as if they were saying that they didn't have enough loading screens in recent games, and needed to make them longer.

Modifié par Wulfram, 05 décembre 2012 - 08:40 .

[LPPrince]

 They're/They were looking at Skyrim to see what made it successful and see if they could find a way to integrate a little of that in their own way towards Dragon Age.

That by no means is defined as "DA3 will be a Skyrim Clone". Hell that is a perfect example of worrying too much and putting WAY too much personal perception into a statement.

Let me give you an example of something they might look at-

Dragon Age 3 had weapon and armor DLC packs. Skyrim on the otherhand released additional armor and weapon sets in their big DLC releases.

How can Bioware integrate that into DA3?

By releasing a load of new weapon and armor types in a bigger than usual DLC for them.

Another-

Skyrim is lauded for its complete and total freedom.

How can Bioware integrate that into DA3?

Without going completely open world, follow DAO's example on a larger scale and have the player and co. visit places far apart on a much larger landmass. Also increasing the size of the "levels" the player visits.

Imagine Orzammar. Now imagine it five times bigger. Get the gist of it?

You have nothing to worry about. Just let Bioware handle it and don't get stressed out over what you read online. If Bioware succeeds, well FINALLY. Took long enough, I've personally been waiting a few years now.

If Bioware fails, well then how you react to that is up to you. But for now, its too early to get nervous.

The ball is in Bioware's court. Let them run with it.

[Wulfram]

simfamSP wrote...

I think the key words here are "to me." Yes, to you it may be something redundant, tedious and monotonous; but others don't. As painfully obvious as it is, not understanding a point of view is fundamentally a subjective construct.

I'll never understand how someone can watch two teams kick a ball for 90 minutes, and others will never understand how I enjoy punching and getting punched

But at least no one feels the need to make playing football a key feature of RPGs.  If they did, I expect you might voice a few words of complaint.

Modifié par Wulfram, 05 décembre 2012 - 08:52 .

[Medhia Nox]

I only like exploration if it marginally randomized - like in Fallout 3.

Some playthru's you'll come upon a group of travelers... and sometimes you'll miss them. I really like that. I'd also love it if items switched locales throughout the game representing the concept that someone maybe got to it before me and then lost it again.

But in Fallout - exploration itself had a "purpose" - survival. Of course - surviving in the Capital Wasteland was laughable - but it added a good reason to perform the action.

I do enjoy exploration - but I'd like a "reason" to go do it. Oddly enough - I think MMO's are coming up with the solutions to this far faster than single player RPGs.

[Androme]

LinksOcarina wrote...

We know that.

BioWare knows that.

Why is this being discussed still?

[Nonoru]

I would rather have an open world than one city only to roam through.

[Fredward]

You don't say...?

[upsettingshorts]

I'd rather have one open city than a world with waypoints.  Actually I'm not sure.  It's almost as if there are possible tradeoffs...

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:36 .

[Todd23]

Aolbain wrote...

I support more exploration but everyone knows that Skyrim and Dragon Age are very diffrent games.
To begin with, Dragon Age is enjoyable.

And it makes Skyrim's playability on PS3 look good by comparison.

[AppealToReason]

Wulfram wrote...

I hate "exploration".

Actual exploration is great. Visiting exciting new places, learning about their culture and history, that's cool.

What RPGs call "exploration" is just sticking stuff in the middle of nowhere or other stupid places so that you miss half the game if you don't put your supposedly vital quest to one side to go snoop around if every damn crack and barrel. It's a horrible blight on RPGs.

You're a smart man.

[Maria Caliban]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

If exploration is just wandering around in the middle of no where then combat is just hitting things until they burst open and conversation is just talking until... you stop talking.

Except they're not.  There are actual interesting things to do, rather than being about nothing except painstaking tediousness.

"Stop liking what I don't like."

Thank you.

[Avaflame]

Wulfram wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

I think the key words here are "to me." Yes, to you it may be something redundant, tedious and monotonous; but others don't. As painfully obvious as it is, not understanding a point of view is fundamentally a subjective construct.

I'll never understand how someone can watch two teams kick a ball for 90 minutes, and others will never understand how I enjoy punching and getting punched

But at least no one feels the need to make playing football a key feature of RPGs.  If they did, I expect you might voice a few words of complaint.

That's not really a relevant comparison, is it? Playing football has never been a feature of RPGs. Exploration pretty much always has. And it seems to me their point wasn't not to complain, but to recognise that just because you don't like something, doesn't make it inherently bad or that no one else should like it either.

And make that +1 who is baffled by football.

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

Dragon Age =/= Skyrim. In other news the sky is blue. BioWare is looking to Skyrim for inspiration, not to rip it off wholesale. This thread is so pointless...

[Phate Phoenix]

I wouldn't mind some sort of happy medium. Instead of a huge open world, maybe have all paths to and from locations be actual maps that the player has to go through. Quick-travel could be unlocked, but that could risk the player missing out on optional sidequests that pop in randomly.

Something I read in this thread that I also liked: free-roaming the larger cities. Instead of quick-traveling through Denerim or Kirkwall, being able to actually walk wherever I want without quick-travel would be ideal.

As a sidenote, if they keep the day-night system, which I believe is likely, they should keep the one they have. I don't think Elder Scrolls' way of doing it fits with how Dragon Age's timelines have been in the past.

Modifié par Phate Phoenix, 06 décembre 2012 - 12:23 .

[CaptainBlackGold]

I think part of the reason why there are such radically different evaluations of "exploration" may stem back to what people want from an RPG in general, and a Bioware RPG in particular.

Me, I like doing stuff, in game - not just watch a story unfold. I tend to play RPG's I like, over and over again - in fact, until another one I like gets published. I played NWN until Jade Empire (but not as long because it removed many of the aspects I really liked). I played KOTOR (1&2) until ME came out. And to fill in the blank times, I played Oblivion, Fallout, Fallout NV until DA finally arrived - and and now Skyrim.

While Skyrim is a thousand miles long, it is only half an inch deep - I miss the story of Bioware but in fact, it is fun to wander around an open world and do stuff.

But if you only play a game for a story, and seldom replay a game over and over again, I guess all that stuff you get to do could be considered "boring."

I personally would like DA3 to allow me, the player, to do more "stuff" in their world - and therefore keep me playing their game, buying their DLC and eagerly awaiting DA4.

[frostajulie]

Navasha wrote...

Personally I would absolutely LOVE a game that has everything. The vast rich open world where I can travel the roads between cities or go overland at my choosing, AND the deep rich characters of Dragon Age.

That would be a perfect game for me. I realize we aren't at a point where a company could devote the kind of resources necessary for that, though.

Yes.  I enjoyed traveling the world of Skyrim.  I hated everything else about it.  I wish they had more exploration in DA.  Maybe 3 will come closer to that elusive perfect ame we'e been dreaming of.  I am hopeful.

[Solmanian]

Tali-vas-normandy wrote...

It will mostly be like neverwinternights 2 where it was a simi open world sort of thing, it felt like a larger world without being a sandbox like skyrim

I realy don't think NWN2 can be considered open world. It had a lot of big ass maps, and exploration, but is wasn't different than the maps in DA.

[Wulfram]

Avaflame wrote...

That's not really a relevant comparison, is it? Playing football has never been a feature of RPGs. Exploration pretty much always has. And it seems to me their point wasn't not to complain, but to recognise that just because you don't like something, doesn't make it inherently bad or that no one else should like it either.

And make that +1 who is baffled by football.

That something has pretty much always been done seems more like a reason not to do it, than a point in it's favour.