152 réponses à ce sujet

[abaris]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Call it more of a cautious attitude I guess. 

But that's in order with every game being published these days. Unless you have it to burn and move like a locust from one sensation to the next.

[LinksOcarina]

abaris wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Call it more of a cautious attitude I guess. 

But that's in order with every game being published these days. Unless you have it to burn and move like a locust from one sensation to the next.

I review games as a hobby, I have to move from one to the next now a days.

The ones I keep playing, however...

[Cyberstrike nTo]

JasonPogo wrote...

 Cinematic is the new buzz word we always hear about games these days.  Well this whole cinematic approach to game makeing has been slowly killing role playing in games for a while now.  Do you want to role play a character?  To. Ad what you have in mind dose not fit with our totaly awesome voice acting and the awkwardly animated cut scene that is so damn cinematic you'll forget your playing a game.  

I want to play a cinematic gaming experiences.

[Gazardiel]

When I want a fully open-ended role-playing experience, I get together with a tabletop RPG group; that's the only way to actually have responsive story and plot development. Since I've played a lot of JRPGs, I appreciate what Bioware is doing in giving me opportunities to make moral choices in-game and have to see the consequences play out. The addition of the option of choosing a voice and a personality for Hawke that emerges through the playthrough is also intriguing (and fairly new - Fable's the only other game I know of that did this).

Every electronic game has had to be pre-scripted, mapped out, and produced while anticipating a set number of outcomes, and (from what my game designer friends tell me) the process gets exponentially more complicated the more big decisions and outcomes are allowed, and content (quests, locations, cinematics) are what drive the price of a game up rapidly. As it is, I'm highly impressed that Bioware doubles up on many lines for female/male protagonists and triples up for personalities. Additionally, even the small differences in final outcomes in DA:O have brought continuity problems for DA2 - and there is plenty of wanking over small details that don't line up. This means that any differences in one game will have ripple effects in later games, and to have to account for all of those will again make it cost- and time-prohibitive.

The fact that there are RPGs now that actually give you moral decisions is a big improvement over "old-school" computer RPGs (Pool of Radiance, anyone?). Unless they are able to develop a real-time engine that produces relevant animations on the fly (along with organically created dialogue), the prices for more outcomes and possibilities in cinematics would make games more expensive than most would pay for. That plus AIs with genetic algorithms will revolutionize gaming in the future (though I suspect that there will be a whole other set of complaints when exploits don't work as well on AIs that learn).

It's definitely cheaper to put together a tabletop gaming group and to cover pizza for your longsuffering DM/GM.

[abaris]

Gazardiel wrote...

the prices for more outcomes and possibilities in cinematics would make games more expensive than most would pay for.

Simple solution - go easy on the amount of cutscenes then. In my book that's better than autodialoguing the whole shabang with a canon version of the player character.

Modifié par abaris, 15 décembre 2012 - 08:36 .

[grumpyboobyhead]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

I'm not optomistic. Honestly i'm regretting putting money in Project Eternity now...

Well you have my thanks.


Of all the Kickstarters, Obsidian's so far has given me the most confidence in terms of the things that they are delivering (i.e. actual prototyping and works in progress, instead of "marketing quality" concept arts and the like).

Well that´s kind of you to say!

Hmm... Well as a co-funder aswell, you mind if I or anyone uses that as a quote for them?

[PaulSX]

too bad, since that is what you will get for DAIII.

[AlanC9]

abaris wrote...

Gazardiel wrote...
the prices for more outcomes and possibilities in cinematics would make games more expensive than most would pay for.

Simple solution - go easy on the amount of cutscenes then. In my book that's better than autodialoguing the whole shabang with a canon version of the player character.

Is it cutscenes per se that are the problem, or is it any dialogue that expresses the emotional state of the PC?

[argan1985]

Marvin_Arnold wrote...

The moment the PC opens his/her mouth and (audibly) starts to speak, that's the moment the gaming experience ends and becomes a "cinematic" experience.

The PC stops being "my" character, and becomes an actor following (more or less) my direction. I'm an (often poweless) director trying to order an actor around. That's not immersive, and that's not role-playing.

For me, a non-voiced protagonist is essential for a RPG. Otherwise, it's an interactive movie.
I've heard the Japanese are mad about them.

I agree whole heartedly with this post.

[shepskisaac]

I don't really post much since well, I don't play DA franchise so my post is more towards BW as a whole.

IMO Cinematic experience is not bad by default. Bioware widely promoted 'cinematic experience' of ME1's conversations in marketing and there was nothing wrong with it. The cinematic angle was a pretty visual addition to the conversations. However, in ME3, quite a few scenes sacrificed number of dialogue options for the sake of pretty cinematics. Example: Miranda and Shep first meeting on the Citadel, they walk around talking. Sure it's pretty and camera moves and all, but this forced the removal of dialogue options for Shep. Otherwise, they would have to stop walking each time a conversation wheel popped out. Same with the opening cinematic with Anderson and Shep walking to the Alliance Committee meeting. If that's the price for having 'more cinematic experience', than I don't want it. I prefer the characters to stand there in one place through the entire conversation rather than have more autodialogue for the main character. Cinematic experience should never come before dialogue options, this is style over substance IMO. If there has to be a pretty 'walking scene' that involves the player character, then give the non-player character such a long monologue of lines that it will cover the entire walking/moving camera sequence and after they stop moving, have the dialogue wheel pop for the PC to have a chance to comment on what he/she just heard.

Modifié par IsaacShep, 16 décembre 2012 - 12:29 .

[Wulfram]

Couldn't they have the characters walking down what's actually a gently bending circular corridor, so they can keep moving while waiting for the player to select an option?

[shepskisaac]

Wulfram wrote...

Couldn't they have the characters walking down what's actually a gently bending circular corridor, so they can keep moving while waiting for the player to select an option?

That's also a solution, but how many "looped" corridors you can have in one game before it starts becoming really visible to the player that they're just walking in circles lol? Another solution is response timer - like in Alpha Protocol. That would allow bot unlimited number of dialogue wheels and whatever kind of an animation they would want.

[Gazardiel]

AlanC9 wrote...

abaris wrote...

Gazardiel wrote...
the prices for more outcomes and possibilities in cinematics would make games more expensive than most would pay for.

Simple solution - go easy on the amount of cutscenes then. In my book that's better than autodialoguing the whole shabang with a canon version of the player character.

Is it cutscenes per se that are the problem, or is it any dialogue that expresses the emotional state of the PC?

If there is writing and speaking, then that is more cost going to pay writers and actors (not that I mind supporting them, but the costs will add up with each possible variant).  As noted in the wiki entry on Hawke's personality, there was an attempt to maintain one of the three voice tones throughout an act.  That means all of Hawke's lines were recorded six times - 2 genders x 3 personalities - for all plot branches.  (This is just a quick guesstimate; I don't have direct info from the Bioware team on how much repetition is needed for content like this)

My point is that there are quite a few games that didn't blow their budget on a cinematic style, largely older games that had very good plot and character development.  But I doubt that those types of games would sell in a mainstream market today.  Even the venerable Final Fantasy games pre-7 got cinematic remakes with gorgeous cutscenes to add more visual impact to the already compelling stories.  Were they necessary?  No; my friends still swear by FFVI as the best RPG effvar.  But it gave a different sort of immersion for players when they added cinematics.

In order to provide a game that has choices and consequences, there have to be limits to the possibilities in order for a game to be produced and completed to any extent. It would be possible to produce a game with many more options and outcomes tailored to more character approaches, but it would be a Flying Spaghetti Monster of plots that would cost a lot to produce - and would have a much steeper price tag for the end product.

[naughty99]

JasonPogo wrote...

 Cinematic is the new buzz word we always hear about games these days.  Well this whole cinematic approach to game makeing has been slowly killing role playing in games for a while now.  Do you want to role play a character?  To. Ad what you have in mind dose not fit with our totaly awesome voice acting and the awkwardly animated cut scene that is so damn cinematic you'll forget your playing a game.  

When I hear an upcoming game described as being highly cinematic, or focusing on dramatic scenes, a red flag goes up and I begin to wonder if this game is going to have too many long, unskippable cut scenes and lame QTEs.

I love great animated films, but when playing a game, it's no fun to sit through and passively watch lots of long cut scene movies, especially if you have to keep watching the same one over and over before some tough battle. Unskippable cut scenes also completely kill the replay value. 

Modifié par naughty99, 16 décembre 2012 - 01:32 .

[Ianamus]

I would generally argue that making individual cutsscenes more cinematic is a good thing, examples being Aveline punching Hawke in a rivalry and parts of the suicide mission in Mass Effect 2, like the one where Shepar saves a squadmate who is falling off one of the platforms. 

That said, I am not entirely happy in the direction Bioware games seem to be going overall, and I think that cinematics do play a large role in that. They seem to be causing problems in two important areas. 

The first is choice in conversations. As Mass Effect 3 showed, having the player character walk about and do a lot of actions in a conversation means that the lines have to be pre-determied. This is really bad in games where you shape your character's personality, and like the Mass Effect 3 opening sequence can result in the character saying things which completely contradict what they might have said previously or an action they did. I'd say that Mass Effect 3's opening would have been far more appealing to me without the cinematics completely if it meant I could make Shepard say things that actually sounded in-character with his actions in the previous games. 

The second issue is with gameplay. Gameplay in Bioware games, to me, seems to come in three parts: combat, cutscenes/dialogue and the third which is gameplay outside of combat like exploration, purchasing armour and weapons and puzzles like the bridge in the Sacred Ash's quest. Recently the exploration/puzzle element has been dramatically decreasing, and I see this as another major problem. While it was only really filler it was a good time sink and allowed you to go and do something else if you were a bit bored of combat and wanted a break.

The removal of this makes the format of the game just combat -> cutscene -> more combat --> more cutscenes etcetera. Not only does this make the combat dull and repetetive very quickly as it is repeated more often but it also makes the game seem a lot more "movie-like" as many people say, particuarly if those cutscenes have few dialogue options. 

It reminds me a bit of a less excessive version of final fantasy XIII- a long corridor of combat and then a cutscene, over and over. Needless to say that was the main criticism of the game, and the reason I couldn't bring myself to complete it. 

Modifié par EJ107, 16 décembre 2012 - 02:14 .

[Nykara]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

I want a cinematic gaming experience!

If only there was a developer that made such games...

100% this TBH.. I want a good mix of both!

I don't even look at RPG's any more unless they also include decent cut scenes, voice acting and interactable character with conversation options etc. Kind of sad really but Bioware changed the bar for which I look for in an RPG, at least in the early games like ME1, KOTOR etc. Anything less now just doesn't have the same impact on me.

[Allan Schumacher]

grumpyboobyhead wrote...

Well that´s kind of you to say!

Hmm... Well as a co-funder aswell, you mind if I or anyone uses that as a quote for them?

Be my guest!

[In Exile]

EJ107 wrote...
The first is choice in conversations. As Mass Effect 3 showed, having the player character walk about and do a lot of actions in a conversation means that the lines have to be pre-determied.

That's not true at all, though. You can imagine that just having characters on a treadmill (or timing the response) could give people choice here without auto-dialogue. Bioware clearly wanted to railroad the player.

The second issue is with gameplay. Gameplay in Bioware games, to me, seems to come in three parts: combat, cutscenes/dialogue and the third which is gameplay outside of combat like exploration, purchasing armour and weapons and puzzles like the bridge in the Sacred Ash's quest. Recently the exploration/puzzle element has been dramatically decreasing, and I see this as another major problem. While it was only really filler it was a good time sink and allowed you to go and do something else if you were a bit bored of combat and wanted a break.

DA:O didn't have exploration. Bioware's never done real exploration. There are always modules, and the levels have always been pretty small. I agree that I really miss puzzles.

[Allan Schumacher]

Bioware's never done real exploration.

The original Baldur's Gate had lots IMO. But in general I agree with you.

[Epic777]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Bioware's never done real exploration.

The original Baldur's Gate had lots IMO. But in general I agree with you.

You must gather your party before venturing forth.

[AlbinaTekla]

Would be nice if the cutscenes didn't feel so stale with over used hand animations and standing still. Maybe it just can't be done but still..would be cool if they came up with something fresh for DA3

[Brahox]

Game like Heavy Rain and The Walking Dead Episodes are the right way to do cinematic experience IMO and make for great game play. I would like to see DA:3 (( or any RPG really )) have DA:O or DA:2 "game play" but during cutscenes the "cinematic gameplay" of Heavy Rain. Having some kind of control over my cutscene beside choices of my character will say would be great.

[abaris]

AlanC9 wrote...

Is it cutscenes per se that are the problem, or is it any dialogue that expresses the emotional state of the PC?

In my book it's the cutscenes without interrupts for player input.

[Marvin_Arnold]

abaris wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Is it cutscenes per se that are the problem, or is it any dialogue that expresses the emotional state of the PC?

In my book it's the cutscenes without interrupts for player input.

A cutscene now and then is OK (IMO) and adds some "candy and spice" to a game.

It's when the game basically becomes cutscene-hack'n'slash-cutscene-hack'n'slash... etc that we have a (one) problem.