137 réponses à ce sujet

[Red Panda]

MisterJB wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...
I guess that would depend on how we classify a "battle?"  Is it simply an obstacle to overcome?

By "boss fight" I am making assumptions that there must be some sort of direct confrontation with an antagonist, and typically it must involve the fighting system utilized by the game.

Personally, I don't believe the fighting system needs to be necessary. For instance, the final confrontation with TIM in ME3. With Shepard being at the mercy of TIM, he either has to convince him to commit suicide, or he will kill him.
The problem is, of course, that there is really no way to lose that confrontation. The dialogue options that work in our favor are color coded for our covenience and, even if the player didn't acquire enough points, Shepard automatically shoots TIM.
Now, I understand that Bioware can't make a portion of the game unbeatable because of something the player might have done three hours ago. So, the solution is, I believe, to build a series of dialogue trees that the player must navigate through based on the knowledge acquired during the course of the game. The more the players knows about the antagonist; personality, goals; the easier it will be.
But even if the player skipped all conversations and rushed to the ending, it would still be possible, only harder. Or maybe then it would involve a more coventional boss battle.

That would be awesome. Understanding your foe could be another way to win. It'd be a pretty good reward for investigative types anyway, considering that we are supposed to be an inquisitor, are we not?

[Iakus]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Anyway, in a game where you fight a lot, an epic last boss fight where you use all the skills you acquired during the game is mandatory. The question is: should it be against the main antagonist?

This is probably the best reasoning for a boss fight actually! (by having a lot of combat, it sets a level of expectation)

I should point out that the original Deus Ex while had plenty of combat at the end, didn't have a "final boss" as such.

You had three missions, each of which leads to a different endgame, and you went about the complex doing the objectives to fufill your goal. 

[MisterJB]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Deux Ex: Human Revolution had some really fun dialogue boss fights that I'd love to see in a BioWare game as well.

Exactly my toughts. DE:HR had some of the best dialogue and persuasion system that I've ever seen in a videogame. I'd love for Bioware to borrow some ideas from it.

[Allan Schumacher]

I should point out that the original Deus Ex while had plenty of combat at the end, didn't have a "final boss" as such

I wasn't just referring to the ending of the game though. Deus Ex is a game that emphasized various paths to success, so I don't think the comparison applies. Dragon Age games (and BioWare games in general) have always been quite combat heavy IMO.

[dgcatanisiri]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I agree that it's important to have a final challenge (of some sort) as part of a climax to a story.

My question is, must it be a boss fight? Or could it be a challenge presented in a different way?

Personally, I did always enjoy KOTOR II's form of boss battles, which were extended conversations. But it does depend on the game itself - a long drawn out conversation would never have worked against the archdemon, and Meredith was completely bat guano by that point, so it would have been pointless. So I don't think that a boss battle conversation would really fit the Dragon Age series. Though it might work as an earlier boss battle, not as the final one...

[Allan Schumacher]

But why rule diplomacy out completely? Why not have an epic battle of words? I mean this is a Bioware game, it's going to have some awesome writing as well as gameplay. Maybe something that tops Mass Effect 3's final persuasion options in terms of how profound and complex it is.

I'm more referring to the notion of, why must we have a boss fight.

In general I am not a fan of boss fights, but there are a lot of people that are. I'm just trying to facilitate discussion to delve deeper. There's an obvious implicit analogue to ME3's ending, which lacked an overt boss fight, and many complained about it.

Now, were they upset simply because there wasn't a "boss fight" (go and fight using the combat gameplay and win against a very powerful last foe?), or was the climax resolution simply not sufficient. They would have preferred something more meaningful, even if it wasn't necessarily direct combat with the game's combat gameplay.

[Allan Schumacher]

ME3 is actually interesting because none of the boss fights are actually "standard." Without going into spoilers, there's 3 "boss fight" situations, and they all utilize some sort of unique component that goes beyond the typical gameplay to achieve.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

thats1evildude wrote...
I ended another godawful game that I shall not name about a week ago that was building up to a final boss fight … and ended with you delivering some stern words to the main villain. Talk about underwhelming.

(Granted, I think they anticipated a sequel to their awful game, and said villain was likely to be the ongoing Big Bad.)

It is your duty as a gamer to give a title, so that the rest of us can either avoid it or defend it. (Unless there's people lining up to do the latter in droves, I think I'll do the former.)

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 15 décembre 2012 - 02:57 .

[Pallando]

OperatingWookie wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Anyway, in a game where you fight a lot, an epic last boss fight where you use all the skills you acquired during the game is mandatory. The question is: should it be against the main antagonist?

This is probably the best reasoning for a boss fight actually! (by having a lot of combat, it sets a level of expectation)

But why rule diplomacy out completely? Why not have an epic battle of words? I mean this is a Bioware game, it's going to have some awesome writing as well as gameplay. Maybe something that tops Mass Effect 3's final persuasion options in terms of how profound and complex it is.

Just my two cents, that's all.

Well, I agree, that's why I had an idea and wrote 2 minutes later:

It could be a boss fight where
your attitude towards the ennemy (spells and talents used during battle)
has an impact. If you only defend yourself, they could open up and
resolve things peacefully. If the ennemy is a party similar to yours,
killing some people might lead the others to surrender/give up. Or you
could just kill them.

Maybe the last boss could be solved more or less peacefully, if the player really tries not to kill everyone at the end.
I liked it in ME1 when a particular fight could be completely averted. But maybe, instead of starting with questions and derailing into battle (it always happens this way), it could be interesting to try to reason your ennemy through a fight, if you want to. That way, it would be a big battle anyway, but also a challenge if you wanted to spare your opponent(s). Have you never been frustrated by all those games where you try to use a non-lethal method to save the antagonist but it didn't matter ?

The way I see it, most gamers would expect a big fight at the end. So you give them a good boss fight with standard rules. But some might want a peaceful resolution, because the antagonist might not be evil, just a blinded character you want to save. Or your father. Dialogue in Bioware games is important, but I like the idea of a fight that seems inevitable and that you cannot prevent by your words but can be stopped by your actions during the fight (and maybe the whole game). If you do it right, you can have a conversation with your opponent and try to convice him/her (or use him/her !). 

People who are in just for the fights would get what is expected I guess. And people who value their tongue as much as their sword (or staff) would have a different challenge...

[Maria Caliban]

The reason video games have end boss fights is because they're epic.

Usually epically boring.

[Swagger7]

Maria Caliban wrote...

The reason video games have end boss fights is because they're epic.

Usually epically boring.

This.  I'm tired of boss fights that last really long and either don't have any variety (DAO Arch Demon) or have gimmick attacks and different boss "modes" (Corypheus).  I'd much rather fight through multiple groups of lower level enemies to get to the villain, who fights well but doesn't last too long, and is at no period invulnerable to your attacks.

Then again, I'm generally in favor of faster, more hard hitting fights anyway.  I like enemies to go down after a few hits, while at the same time seriously threatening you.

Will we get this in DA3?  Probably not.  This is fine, since in all honesty I play the DA series much more for story and characters than combat.  If I want enjoyable combat, I play Skyrim.  (This isn't intended as a diss by the way, I'm just not a huge fan of DA style combat in general.)

Modifié par Swagger7, 15 décembre 2012 - 03:25 .

[Pallando]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
In general I am not a fan of boss fights, but there are a lot of people that are. I'm just trying to facilitate discussion to delve deeper. There's an obvious implicit analogue to ME3's ending, which lacked an overt boss fight, and many complained about it.

Now, were they upset simply because there wasn't a "boss fight" (go and fight using the combat gameplay and win against a very powerful last foe?), or was the climax resolution simply not sufficient. They would have preferred something more meaningful, even if it wasn't necessarily direct combat with the game's combat gameplay.

I did enjoy the "boss fights" of ME3, and the lack of a "standard" boss at the end (although, I consider
the part where you have to survive to multiple waves of multiple ennemies some kind of last stand/"epic battle" that qualifies) was not something I missed. I didn't hate the ending, but it was a bit of a let-down for me. 
What I missed was the feeling of defeating my ennemy / fulfilling my quest at the end: it didn't feel like what I had been prepared for during the 3 games. Some already have dissected the ending, and I agree with (spoiler !) this article talking about a "spear-point". 

Modifié par Pallando, 15 décembre 2012 - 03:28 .

[sympathy4sarenreturns]

A final boss, and make it damn hard.

Ornstein and Smough, while not a final boss, was epic and grand and fun. And very hard.

Immensely well done.

[thats1evildude]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

It is your duty as a gamer to give a title, so that the rest of us can either avoid it or defend it. (Unless there's people lining up to do the latter in droves, I think I'll do the former.)

It was an old game, and methinks any damage it did was done long ago.

What got me was how they built up the confrontation. One party member even said something to the effect of "Better get your s**t together!" before you went to meet him. And then … nothing. You tell him off and walk away. That's it.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 15 décembre 2012 - 03:50 .

[Iakus]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I should point out that the original Deus Ex while had plenty of combat at the end, didn't have a "final boss" as such

I wasn't just referring to the ending of the game though. Deus Ex is a game that emphasized various paths to success, so I don't think the comparison applies. Dragon Age games (and BioWare games in general) have always been quite combat heavy IMO.

That's just it, though.  the endgame was still combat-heavy.  It just lacked a boss battle.  You still had to fight your way to each of the objectives

I'm just pointing out that game challenges can have combat without having a "boss battle"  In this particular case, fighting your way to several objectives to complete a task.  It's the challenge that makes it special, not the individual boss

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

thats1evildude wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

It is your duty as a gamer to give a title, so that the rest of us can either avoid it or defend it. (Unless there's people lining up to do the latter in droves, I think I'll do the former.)

It was an old game, and methinks any damage it did was done long ago.

What got me was how they made a big deal about confronting this guy. One party member basically said "Better get your s**t in order!" And then … nothing. You tell him off and walk away. That's it.

Can you please at least PM me the title? I still play old games sometimes, and if this is at all typical of the way this game works, I really don't want to run into it by accident..

[Red Panda]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

But why rule diplomacy out completely? Why not have an epic battle of words? I mean this is a Bioware game, it's going to have some awesome writing as well as gameplay. Maybe something that tops Mass Effect 3's final persuasion options in terms of how profound and complex it is.

I'm more referring to the notion of, why must we have a boss fight.

In general I am not a fan of boss fights, but there are a lot of people that are. I'm just trying to facilitate discussion to delve deeper. There's an obvious implicit analogue to ME3's ending, which lacked an overt boss fight, and many complained about it.

Now, were they upset simply because there wasn't a "boss fight" (go and fight using the combat gameplay and win against a very powerful last foe?), or was the climax resolution simply not sufficient. They would have preferred something more meaningful, even if it wasn't necessarily direct combat with the game's combat gameplay.

Oh I see, I misunderstood you.

My apologies, and I must add, it's wonderful that you're interacting with the fans.

It reminds me of why  and how I started playing Knights of the Old Republic  several years ago.


Anyways, back on topic, I feel that boss fights need a major reason behind them.

Take for example, the Archdemon, it's a nasty large dragon with sharp pointy teeth. One can't reason with that.
Looking at Mass Effect 3, I suppose some people felt the Reaper on Rannoch was just a taste of what might happen with Harbinger. I'd suppose it boiled down to the treatment of Harbinger getting marginalized when a simple Reaper destroyer got more screentime. As for the Illusive man, he doesn't look like the apex of combat prowess, so it made sense that he wasn't a boss fight.

Just my more coherent two cents

[PsychoBlonde]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Anyway, in a game where you fight a lot, an epic last boss fight where you use all the skills you acquired during the game is mandatory. The question is: should it be against the main antagonist?

This is probably the best reasoning for a boss fight actually! (by having a lot of combat, it sets a level of expectation)

I'd agree with this.  The final "act" of the game should be some kind of climactic use of the skills you, the player, have honed during the game.  If those skills are primarily or exclusively combat skills, then there needs to be a bigass fight.

If the game revolves more around other gameplay (or uses combat and stealth in combination), then it doesn't need to be a bigass fight.  But since the only major gameplay in the series thus far has been combat, that kind of means a bigass fight is mandatory.  Otherwise it'll be a huge anti-climax.

[Darth Krytie]

Maria Caliban wrote...

The reason video games have end boss fights is because they're epic.

Usually epically boring.

I totally agree. I wouldn't mind if there was a purpose to it. I've liked some of them, but mainly it's about making sure you have enough health products to last through a very big health bar.

At least BW's aren't as annoying as FF's weapons.

[Iakus]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

I'd agree with this.  The final "act" of the game should be some kind of climactic use of the skills you, the player, have honed during the game.  If those skills are primarily or exclusively combat skills, then there needs to be a bigass fight.

If the game revolves more around other gameplay (or uses combat and stealth in combination), then it doesn't need to be a bigass fight.  But since the only major gameplay in the series thus far has been combat, that kind of means a bigass fight is mandatory.  Otherwise it'll be a huge anti-climax.

Agreed.  Appliying what you've learned, abilities developed, allies made,  over the course of the game thus far in major challenges is what makes a good "boss encounter"

[Fast Jimmy]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Anyway, in a game where you fight a lot, an epic last boss fight where you use all the skills you acquired during the game is mandatory. The question is: should it be against the main antagonist?

This is probably the best reasoning for a boss fight actually! (by having a lot of combat, it sets a level of expectation)

I'd agree with this.  The final "act" of the game should be some kind of climactic use of the skills you, the player, have honed during the game.  If those skills are primarily or exclusively combat skills, then there needs to be a bigass fight.

If the game revolves more around other gameplay (or uses combat and stealth in combination), then it doesn't need to be a bigass fight.  But since the only major gameplay in the series thus far has been combat, that kind of means a bigass fight is mandatory.  Otherwise it'll be a huge anti-climax.

For what its worth, the Quest for Glory games were AWESOME at doing this. 

Playing different classes lent you different skills and different solutions to problems. This was especially highlighted at the end games, where you tackled the ending showdown with various skills that you had used and developed in the game in line with your class (a thief would walk a tightrope to sneak into magic chamber, a fighter would bust in head first through a brigand ambush, a mage would use a self-destruct spell on his magical staff to blow up an enemy mage, etc.). 

Games that only have combat as the only difference between classes can really only have combat as the final obstacle. Otherwise, a player might feel a real sense of disconnect.

[Fast Jimmy]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

ME3 is actually interesting because none of the boss fights are actually "standard." Without going into spoilers, there's 3 "boss fight" situations, and they all utilize some sort of unique component that goes beyond the typical gameplay to achieve.

Hmmm. I think I can idenitfy two of those (not to spoiler, but Operation: Earth and Rannoch, I would think). I'm trying to think of a third?