177 réponses à ce sujet

[Megakoresh]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Some people like DA2 a lot more than DAO, myself included

Oh? Well that is certainly something different. Aside from combat, why is that?

[Mykel54]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Dragon Age: Origins had a bland premise done well, it could've had improvements in certain areas but what story doesn't?

Dragon Age 2 was the opposite, it was an amazing premise done horribly with irrelevant time-skips and insanity playing too crucial a role in a plot which it wasn't necessary.

Shame the premise is being insulted and ignored when the implementation was the problem.

This is spot on, i don´t really have much to add.

I wish bioware tried again the DA2 story formula, because i feel it is more engaging (for me) in a roleplaying game. The "save the world" story is not bad per se, but i believe the character personal motives and thoughts get less exploration, in favour of the main story.

Modifié par Mykel54, 12 février 2013 - 08:03 .

[bEVEsthda]

Jzadek72 wrote...

I'd say that I prefer the personal story, but I don't believe that is what DA2 really delivered. I never felt involved in any of the events; it was never me driving the plot. Instead, other people did things, and then when they'd played their role, I'd come in and kill them. So I'd have to say that I prefer Origins' storytelling.

EDIT: Also, if you're calling the Warden a shell with no agenda, then you're missing the entire purpose of a role-playing game. The Warden was a blank slate, but it was up to you to paint something on that.

QFT

DA:O does deliver a personal story, as I experience it. In fact many. DA2 does not. And there is one of DA2's big problems. It doesn't get "personal" just because it talks and reacts (or not ) on it's own. It doesn't get "personal" just because we're passively watching a dam movie instead of roleplaying.

[Megakoresh]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Jzadek72 wrote...

I'd say that I prefer the personal story, but I don't believe that is what DA2 really delivered. I never felt involved in any of the events; it was never me driving the plot. Instead, other people did things, and then when they'd played their role, I'd come in and kill them. So I'd have to say that I prefer Origins' storytelling.

EDIT: Also, if you're calling the Warden a shell with no agenda, then you're missing the entire purpose of a role-playing game. The Warden was a blank slate, but it was up to you to paint something on that.

QFT

DA:O does deliver a personal story, as I experience it. In fact many. DA2 does not. And there is one of DA2's big problems. It doesn't get "personal" just because it talks and reacts (or not ) on it's own. It doesn't get "personal" just because we're passively watching a dam movie instead of roleplaying.

So when I get to develop my main character and make him have the persona I myself want, hereby making me care about stuff he cares about, it's not a personal story.

Having a custom model with no voice, whose lines will inevitably ALWAYS be the same, regardless of a behaviour pattern I attempt to instill (disregarding the fact that the game does not allow you to follow any behaviour patters), who is stripped of anything that makes him a character, and who remains such till the end, is apparently a personal story?

To put is simply:
The Warden is an input to interact with the mechanism. Hawk IS the mechanism.

So some people consider the input to be more personal than the mechanism. Tell me then one simple thing: if you have played human noble, what is that, which you want to do first, when you leave the Flemeth's hut? (Please answer straight out of your head, no need to read between the lines and whatever, I am just gonna use the answer to explain, not bash you or antyhing)

I am not judging, this point of view is completely valid, with one detail: a personal story IN THE GAME, does not necessarily mean it will feel personal to YOU. It's the ideal case when it does, which is why I started this thread.

Modifié par Megakoresh, 12 février 2013 - 08:35 .

[Renmiri1]

Megakoresh wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Some people like DA2 a lot more than DAO, myself included

Oh? Well that is certainly something different. Aside from combat, why is that?

The story was very creative, DAO was a good clone of countless games I played before but a tired old story. DA2 broke the mold. I loved the rags to riches story, the 10 years we get to see the story unfold, the friendship and romance system, the DLCs...

[Megakoresh]

Renmiri1 wrote...
The story was very creative, DAO was a good clone of countless games I played before but a tired old story. DA2 broke the mold. I loved the rags to riches story, the 10 years we get to see the story unfold, the friendship and romance system, the DLCs...

I do agree, though in my opinion it was too poorly executed and rushed to be better than origins in my mind. I still liked it, of course, but still there, you go...

[shnig_1]

i like the epic stories better (usually). I thought there would be no way on earth i would like me2 better than me3, but i did. Me3 wasnt bad, it guess the more (kinda?) personal(ish) story of me2 was better. IDK, maybe it just has to be more focused

[Overhuman]

Da2 felt like a very pointless story. The storyline was original yes but it was also pointless and lacking in suspense and a feeling of overall importance. I would rather have a tried formula than a very experimental creation and that is why I believe that Origins is better.

[CyberMurph]

I'm sorry, I still don't see how "personal story" and "save the world" are mutually exclusive.

[Bfler]

How is the story of DA2 different to the Witcher games in case of a personal story. Geralt is also a guy, who gets roped unintentionally into the conflict of other persons. He isn't an hero, world savior or interested in other people business.
I can see no originality in DA2 here.

[KiwiQuiche]

[Melca36]

Act One was of Dragon Age 2 was bland but fun for the most part

Act 2 was my favorite Act of the game. It was the most organized, cohesive, and BEST written of the arcs. And it was interesting.

ACT 3 was a disjointed, unorganized mess with a ridiculous final battle where it looked like Meredith was holding a light saber instead of a sword.  The 3rd ACT looked as if it was just thrown together without any thought.

Now ACT 3 with the DLC makes it somewhat better and the combat in the DLCs was much BETTER than what it was in the Main Game.

I rated the game 7.0 before the DLC and 7.5 after

It was a good game but NOT great and definitely NOT  worth the original  $60 price


Origins was longer, more immerseive, and had far more replayability than DA2.   I rate the game an 8.5 and the modding/DLC make it a 9 in my book. 

People who didn't like the Warden lacked the imagination to make them their own

----------------------

Each story has their pros and cons

Had the personal story had NOT been rushed I probably would have rated it more because I had fun but the game was NOT as it was advertised and hyped.

That said, I am glad DA3 is not going to have a 3 ACT system

[Megakoresh]

Melca36 wrote...

Act One was of Dragon Age 2 was bland but fun for the most part

Act 2 was my favorite Act of the game. It was the most organized, cohesive, and BEST written of the arcs. And it was interesting.

ACT 3 was a disjointed, unorganized mess with a ridiculous final battle where it looked like Meredith was holding a light saber instead of a sword.  The 3rd ACT looked as if it was just thrown together without any thought.

Now ACT 3 with the DLC makes it somewhat better and the combat in the DLCs was much BETTER than what it was in the Main Game.

I rated the game 7.0 before the DLC and 7.5 after

It was a good game but NOT great and definitely NOT  worth the original  $60 price


Origins was longer, more immerseive, and had far more replayability than DA2.   I rate the game an 8.5 and the modding/DLC make it a 9 in my book. 

People who didn't like the Warden lacked the imagination to make them their own

----------------------

Each story has their pros and cons

Had the personal story had NOT been rushed I probably would have rated it more because I had fun but the game was NOT as it was advertised and hyped.

That said, I am glad DA3 is not going to have a 3 ACT system

Yeah it seems that this genre is going Open World. And by "This genre" I really mean two games. Though those are the two biggest games in the genre, not so full of candidates, so I guess you can judge just by those 2. I hope it's done right. KoR: Reckoning is the only one who came close to making it right. DA3 and Witcher 3 will have to do better.

[Xiltas]

I really think it depends on how well the story and the characters are written.

My best example for a personal story that touched me would be Crisis Core FF7. Zack was a really great character, the way we experience his (personal) story was really well done, and when he died, ascending to heaven, reaching out to Angeal... when he asked him if he finally became a hero, I couldn't help but cry...

[Dutchess]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Megakoresh wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Some people like DA2 a lot more than DAO, myself included

Oh? Well that is certainly something different. Aside from combat, why is that?

The story was very creative, DAO was a good clone of countless games I played before but a tired old story. DA2 broke the mold. I loved the rags to riches story, the 10 years we get to see the story unfold, the friendship and romance system, the DLCs...

I'm sorry, but how is a story in which most people are/go insane creative? The rags to riches is not original, in the seven years (not ten) that the game spans there is no real "unfolding" of the story or anything about the world and the characters in it that indicate time has passed, except in act III the Qunari compound is closed and there is a statue of a guy in plate mail holding a flaming sword, whether Hawke was male or female, mage or warrior. It's just "BAM, three years have passed. Qunari are now gone, mages are more pissed off than before". 

For me the only good idea in DA2 that was also implemented quite well (though it still needs refinement) is the friendship/rivalry system with your companions and the writing of their characters. It made the relationships more dynamic than in Origins 

Modifié par renjility, 13 février 2013 - 11:34 .

[OdanUrr]

What constitutes a personal story again?

[bEVEsthda]

Megakoresh wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

Jzadek72 wrote...

I'd say that I prefer the personal story, but I don't believe that is what DA2 really delivered. I never felt involved in any of the events; it was never me driving the plot. Instead, other people did things, and then when they'd played their role, I'd come in and kill them. So I'd have to say that I prefer Origins' storytelling.

EDIT: Also, if you're calling the Warden a shell with no agenda, then you're missing the entire purpose of a role-playing game. The Warden was a blank slate, but it was up to you to paint something on that.

QFT

DA:O does deliver a personal story, as I experience it. In fact many. DA2 does not. And there is one of DA2's big problems. It doesn't get "personal" just because it talks and reacts (or not ) on it's own. It doesn't get "personal" just because we're passively watching a dam movie instead of roleplaying.

So when I get to develop my main character and make him have the persona I myself want, hereby making me care about stuff he cares about, it's not a personal story.

First, I'll argue I can't do that in DA2. Not to my satisfaction. Precisely that is the problem. Hawke is Bioware's character, regardless which 'flavor' I pursue (none of is my Hawke anyway).
It is a personal story, Hawke's personal story. Bioware's Hawke's personal story. So rightly I shouldn't say it isn't a personal story. It's like a movie about someone's personal story. In an ideal world, Square Enix would have called their game "Movie Game", instead of rpg, and we would never have these discussions.

Having a custom model with no voice, whose lines will inevitably ALWAYS be the same, regardless of a behaviour pattern I attempt to instill (disregarding the fact that the game does not allow you to follow any behaviour patters), who is stripped of anything that makes him a character, and who remains such till the end, is apparently a personal story?

Sure. And all my DA:O characters have a personal behavior, a personality, motives, feelings, ethics, etc. That yours don't is your problem, if you consider it a problem. It sounds a bit dismissive, but it really is. It's just you.

To put is simply:
The Warden is an input to interact with the mechanism. Hawk IS the mechanism.

So some people consider the input to be more personal than the mechanism. Tell me then one simple thing: if you have played human noble, what is that, which you want to do first, when you leave the Flemeth's hut? (Please answer straight out of your head, no need to read between the lines and whatever, I am just gonna use the answer to explain, not bash you or antyhing)

The point is what would my character want. The compromise is then to make that fit one of the alternatives the game presents. This has always worked fine enough for me. There's occasional shoe-horning, and sometimes I do have to sort of just slide across. But mostly it's fine. In BG, DA:O,..

Hawke isn't. The first problem is Hawke's voice. But it's not the worst. The really bad news is what Hawke says, and how. It's not the character I intended Hawke to be. (This unsatisfying side of DA2 is compounded by DA2 too often failing to make obvious choices or reactions available. This is due to DA2's cramped economics and linear story, which lacks compelling reasons for the forcing. The effect is to make Hawke even less my character.)
I didn't intend watching a movie and empathize/identify with the protagonist, when I purchased DA2. You apparently take delight in exploring, *experiencing* your player char, Hawke. Hawke is part of the story you get told and you enjoy that.

I don't relate to RPGs in anything like that way. I want that part to be up to me. To me, an RPG is not like a novel or movie. I don't need to learn anything or explore my character. I already know the personality from the moment I create it. That is not to say that it won't change somewhat, due to journey it makes. In that regard I explore my character.

I am not judging, this point of view is completely valid, with one detail: a personal story IN THE GAME, does not necessarily mean it will feel personal to YOU. It's the ideal case when it does, which is why I started this thread.

I've already conceded this point above. Different meanings of the word 'personal' got used indiscriminately and intermixed. Sorry bout that. But I need to clarify one more thing. The important thing is that it's my character. If it's not, I couldn't care less if it's personal, feels personal, or not. Actually that's overstating it. IF I were to play a movie-game, I would dearly like to empathize or identify with the protagonist, to enjoy it. So I would care. Same as when I read a novel or watch a movie. And I do also read novels and watch movies. The problem is that I want to play an RPG.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 13 février 2013 - 06:00 .

[Megakoresh]

You wrote some valuable points that BioWare would do good to read and take into account, like the fact that Hawk really was ONLY smooth and adequate with the funny path, Paragon/Renegade were very forced, annoying and just generic in every way.

I really felt bad and annoyed when I decided to see what a Paragon/Renegade lines would offer. They ALWAYS resulted in a disappointment. Both in forced acting, writing, tone and their generic nature.

I acknowledge my bias in that, to most of the situations, in DA2 I would react in exactly the same way that "humorous Hawk", which made it easy for me to blend in with the character. I also realise how it will a big stopping point for those who prefer to take a different approach.

That is up to BioWare to remedy. We know that DA3 will have a voiced protagonist. It remains up to BioWare to learn their mistakes and take the "best of both worlds". If they can make a personal story that offers players to build main characters correctly. That has more than 3 general paths and, more importantly, that all of the paths are well-executed. If they also allow that character with personal life to struggle in the war he has not personal interest in, to balance between his own life and lives of those depending on him, DA3 can be the best Dragon Age yet.

The problems that immediately comes to mind though is Mass Effect 3. And the attitude that BioWare had over the course of the last couple of years. That of overconfidence.

You can draw so many parallels between ME3 and DA2. Autodialogues? Check. Lack of interaction with the characters? Check. Lack of character development? ME3 has 0, while DA2 had merely less than DA: O. Lack of location variety (especially in comparsion to previous game)? Check. More cliche? Check. Lack of exploration? Check. Simplification? Ceck. It's scary, really. This does not really show BioWare's ability to learn from their mistakes. Separate teams shouldn't mean anything. Those guys work in the same office, yet when one game came out and had widely affirmed problems, the second team did not listen and learn. They made a game and when it had the same issues proceeded to tell fans that it was they who didn't get the game right, using those retarded, Vorcha-******-on-them review numbers and awards as evidence.

The only only way they can redeem themselves enough for at least me to consider pre-ordering their games is if they make DA3 the best one yet, and if I see the major issues and community wishes attended to and and given the importance they are due.

Watching that Witcher 3 coverage videos from CDProject just reminded me of what the correct approach really is. They did only one video on the game itself for now and even in that video they addressed every single community-wide concern that gameplay and combat ever received. Not only "addressed", but said what they plan to do to fix it. And really, Witcher 3 is the only game I will pre-order. Nothing else comes to mind. And that is bearing in mind the fact that when Witcher 2 came out I, with my pre-order, couldn't play for several weeks due to tech issues. I still never regretted buying it. Because I know that CDProject will always try their best to do what's right for US, the customers. During my tech support sessions they actually even made me a custom registry fix that did get the game to run, even though it kept crashing until patch came out.

PS: I did notice you did not actually answer my question  Scared of my evil plot, are we?

Modifié par Megakoresh, 13 février 2013 - 06:55 .

[Arppis]

I always liked the personal story more.

Saving the world is something we do 90% of these games. And it's getting old fast. DA2 may have not done good job at the personal story, but it was refreshing. I hope we get to see more of this in future and Bioware wouldn't just give up on making a story that doesn't involve saving the world.

[bEVEsthda]

Megakoresh wrote...
PS: I did notice you did not actually answer my question  Scared of my evil plot, are we?

I thought I did. What I want is irrelevant, (can't remember wanting anything special anyway). It's about what my character want.

My memory is foggy. I've only played human noble once.
Leaving Flemeth's hut, her need for vengeance for her parents and desire to have family property restored, was still there in the bottom, but in a confused disarray, washed over by the momentous events at Ostagar, the many deaths, the betrayal, the Blight. Mostly she was confused and wanted to find her brother. Anger tempered by fear and insecurity, and despair perhaps, fumbling for a plan, she headed to Redcliff for guidance and help.

I think that's how I remember it.

Straight out of her head: She wanted to find her brother.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 13 février 2013 - 08:14 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Bioware made a game that gave you pretty high levels of freedom of control when playing their game and let us make our own motivations. Then Bioware made a game where they imagined a more fleshed out character for us to play and gave that character three different personality types for us to play with.

If you like one over the other, that's fine, but to argue that either is somehow more "personal" is highly suspect.

[drake heath]

DA2 wasn't a personal story, if it was a personal story I would have felt like the game revolved around Hawke, but it didn't.

Hawke was a lacky, a stooge, a fool and a leaf in the wind. The story was not about Hawke's live, his hardships, he had no true antagonist of his own, no end goal. Instead it was about Mages, and Templars. If the protagonist was anyone it was Anders.

Hawke may have been the POV character, but he was not the protagonist. Hawke was just some schmuck you played as to witness events.

[Megakoresh]

bEVEsthda wrote...
Straight out of her head: She wanted to find her brother.

Ah, you figured it out, didn't you. Yet the game did not allow you to do that, did it? And besides, didn't you argue that the problem with DA2 was that it was BioWare's character, the Hawk?

If the point is in what your Warden wants and not you, than what is wrong with Hawk wanting something other than you yourself do? Because the only difference is in that Hawk is allowed to pursue his own agenda in DA2 and the Warden isn't (for the most part, anyway). I even kept whining about this to Winny: "Yadda, yadda, I never have a choice, sadface.grffn"

I like that in games like Dragon Age 2 or Witcher series you are actually allowed to ultimately pursue something other than this "Oh this Big Bad Black thing that's gonna kill everyone, so it's your sole purpose to kill it!". I want to define my purpose on my own, thank you very much.

But of course it's all a matter of personal preference.

[CyberMurph]

OdanUrr wrote...

What constitutes a personal story again?

Good point. I don't think we're all on the same sheet of music here.

On top of that, being that this is a "choose your own adventure" story, a player's experience with a story is going to vary, particualrly if you are quick on the escape key.

[Dabrikishaw]

OdanUrr wrote...

What constitutes a personal story again?

"Forces that directly affect only the protagonist" is what I'm reading here.