236 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

What is the Red Wedding, exactly?

[Reznore57]

Xilizhra wrote...

What is the Red Wedding, exactly?

Something bloody?
Read the books , they are quite good .
The last ones are a bit of a drag , but the author can really write great characters.
The guy knows how to give you empathy for bad guys ( well some of them).

[karushna5]

I do feel the books devolved into how can we shock readers the most, and I really have a trouble with it because well...I like female characters and as much as I adore bioware games, I might have to quit dragon age for good if it acts the same, toward female characters. Actually if the game was that vivid with those scenes, I think I would stop playing video games period, it would be too much.

Thankfully, all that is a moot point, since I am confident Bioware would avoid it. Or at least avoid how the books do it

[Milan92]

You mean jumping from character to character, lots of pointless sex scenes that don't add any value to the plot or characters and basically everyone getting killed off?

No thanks.

[Brockololly]

Xilizhra wrote...

What is the Red Wedding, exactly?

If you have any intention of ever reading the A Song of Ice and Fire books or watching Game of Thrones, DO NOT INQUIRE ABOUT THE RED WEDDING.

Seriously, its a super massive spoiler event. It would be awful if somebody spoiled it here for anyone.




As to the OP, I wouldn't mind having more consequences to player driven actions. Consequences that make sense within the world and might b delayed in nature. As far as switching perspectives, I would be ok with that as well. Not every five minutes necessarily, but in a Starcraft 1 style where you have maybe 2 or 3 points of view on a common story.

Modifié par Brockololly, 13 mars 2013 - 06:31 .

[MoeRayShep]

karushna5 wrote...

I do feel the books devolved into how can we shock readers the most, and I really have a trouble with it because well...I like female characters and as much as I adore bioware games, I might have to quit dragon age for good if it acts the same, toward female characters. Actually if the game was that vivid with those scenes, I think I would stop playing video games period, it would be too much.

Thankfully, all that is a moot point, since I am confident Bioware would avoid it. Or at least avoid how the books do it

Milan92 wrote...

You mean jumping from character to
character, lots of pointless sex scenes that don't add any value to the
plot or characters and basically everyone getting killed off?

No thanks.

I get the impression a lot of people here are confusing the books with the HBO show.
HBO veered most significantly from the plot of the books by adding in a LOT of gratuitous nudity and sex, to the point of actually derailing things.
In the books, we only ever find Lord Petyr Balish (aka Littlefinger) in the brothel he owns once, where he brings Ned Stark. In the show, that brothel is his entire base of operations, resplendent with breasts jiggling in every direction.

The books may feature a number of sex scenes, but if you're paying attention you'll realize most of the time these scenes are telling you something about the characters' natures and often their relationship with each other.

So to get back on topic, because the OP beggared a comparison between a video game and a very, very long book series which many people confound with the HBO series...
we end up with a lot of different interpretations of which aspects of the books/TV show DA3 might resemble and whether or not that would be a good thing. It's an incredibly ineffective way to frame what you want from the upcoming game.

[Terraforming2154]

Milan92 wrote...

You mean jumping from character to character, lots of pointless sex scenes that don't add any value to the plot or characters and basically everyone getting killed off?

No thanks.

Yay, I'm not entirely alone in finding ASOIAF largely "meh" and borderline gratuitous at times.

Though, I will say OP, I wouldn't mind more hard choices and more drastic repercussions for those choices. I thought that DA2 sort of toed the line at the end where you can kill Merrill or Aveline stops fighting with you if your relationship with them isn't solidified as a friend, but I wouldn't mind them doing more than that either. 

Could make replays more interesting if some of our choices were really just acknowledged as "bad." The only problem is, I could see a lot of people arguing about what is construed as a "bad" choice in a RPG, you know? I don't think some people would enjoy the game punishing them for a choice they make.

Modifié par Terraforming2154, 13 mars 2013 - 06:37 .

[Ryzaki]

No thank you. Last thing I want is a horde of unavoidable character deaths. Its annoying enough sparingly.

[Xilizhra]

Brockololly wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

What is the Red Wedding, exactly?

If you have any intention of ever reading the A Song of Ice and Fire books or watching Game of Thrones, DO NOT INQUIRE ABOUT THE RED WEDDING.

Seriously, its a super massive spoiler event. It would be awful if somebody spoiled it here for anyone.




As to the OP, I wouldn't mind having more consequences to player driven actions. Consequences that make sense within the world and might b delayed in nature. As far as switching perspectives, I would be ok with that as well. Not every five minutes necessarily, but in a Starcraft 1 style where you have maybe 2 or 3 points of view on a common story.

I have no intention of ever reading or watching either series; my instinct is telling me that I'd hate them with a passion.

[MoeRayShep]

Wulfram wrote...

MoeRayShep wrote...

...
Really?
The story is about people of varying degrees of cunning, power and information doing things consistent with their natures within those constraints. A lot of time that entails stupidity.

If that was your take-away from the books, I don't think you really understood much of what was going on.

I didn't say it was the only thing I took away from the books, or that it was necessarily a bad thing.

(snipped) If you railroaded the PC into doing something that stupid, that would suck.

Generally people who fail sow the seeds of their own downfall, and fail because of their own flaws.  But the writers of a videogame don't know the PC's character, or their flaws.
Of course you can have NPCs screw up and die - Ostagar is probably DA:O's red wedding, if the Cousland massacre wasn't - but it doesn't have the same impact.

OK, what you originally said was that stupidity drives most of the plot of ASoIaF.
In the example you cited (which you really should have warned about being a spoiler), I would call what happened an example of a tragic flaw on one party's side and a very high level of treachery and opportunism on another's.

But yes, in a nutshell you have highlighted the problem with trying to implement these sorts of consequences in a video game.

Ultimately the real consequences for poor judgment will manifest in players making poor choices in their character configurations, party selections, inventory and tactics programming-- what you might call the ludic component.
Implementing those sort of consequences in the narrative and dialogue components is tricky; adding in points of divergence with real consequences in the plot is incredibly resource intensive for the developers.

Let's say, for instance, that you were able to kill Teryn Loghain Mac Tir at Ostagar in DA:O and save Cailan and Duncan-- you'd end up with the entire plot forking off into a different direction, with the developers needing to basically make an entirely separate game with a separate premise.

Modifié par MoeRayShep, 13 mars 2013 - 06:50 .

[Xilizhra]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I have no intention of ever reading or watching either series; my instinct is telling me that I'd hate them with a passion.

I have a feeling there's a lot you hate, sis.


I do agree, though, from the sounds of it this wouldn't help Dragon Age very much, if at all.

There's a lot in the world to hate, regrettably.

[Fraq Hound]

MoeRayShep wrote...

Milan92 wrote...

You mean jumping from character to
character, lots of pointless sex scenes that don't add any value to the
plot or characters and basically everyone getting killed off?

No thanks.

I get the impression a lot of people here are confusing the books with the HBO show.
HBO veered most significantly from the plot of the books by adding in a LOT of gratuitous nudity and sex, to the point of actually derailing things.

To be fair, the books are also very gratuitous when it comes to nudity and sex. However Milan is incorrect about these scenes adding no value to the plot or characters.

That is infact, one of the things that makes ASoIaF so great. Those sex scenes actually do add alot to the plot and the characters contained within.

Dany and Drogo -- Showed for the first time that Drogo had a softer side and wasn't a dumb barbarian. (Something they completely ignored in the HBO show.)

Tyrion and basically every **** in Westeros -- It's a running plot throughout the story that Tyrion just wants to be loved. The only happyness he ever finds is in the arms of ****s with whom he tricks himself into believing that they love him and not his money. Something he repeatedly obsesses over during his sex scenes.

Jamie and Cersei -- Their lack of restraint, in all things is reflected in their sex scenes. Not to mention all the messed up things that their love scenes represent.

They are gratuitous but they also DO ADD value to the character's involved.

That being said, I get the feeling that you are correct in your assumption that most commenting here have only seen the HBO show and have zero exposure to the novels.

EDIT:

Also should probably point out that Bioware is not the company that should be referencing ASoIaF as an inspiration for their work.

The fact that the word **** (Rhyms with Boar) gets censored on their forums is as good an example of why then any that would stem from my own mouth. Bioware is still of the mindset of marketing their games to as wide an audience as possible and it shows. There is nothing wrong with that but it's also something that George R.R. Martin wouldn't give a single flying **** about.

Modifié par Fraq Hound, 13 mars 2013 - 07:02 .

[MoeRayShep]

Ryzaki wrote...

No thank you. Last thing I want is a horde of unavoidable character deaths. Its annoying enough sparingly.

Again, we're comparing a series of books to a video game.
Everything that happens in a book is unavoidable, which highlights the problem with this analogy.
Bioware RPG's are already rife with avoidable deaths. The entire conclusion of ME2 was basically a test of how many deaths you could avoid.

[Solmanian]

Plaintiff wrote...

So the game would go something like "Talking talking talking, ******, talking, ******, talking talking, ******, talking talki- holy **** a dragon! ******, ******, talking, ******..."

How is that different than the witcher 2?

[Solmanian]

Xilizhra wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

What is the Red Wedding, exactly?

If you have any intention of ever reading the A Song of Ice and Fire books or watching Game of Thrones, DO NOT INQUIRE ABOUT THE RED WEDDING.

Seriously, its a super massive spoiler event. It would be awful if somebody spoiled it here for anyone.




As to the OP, I wouldn't mind having more consequences to player driven actions. Consequences that make sense within the world and might b delayed in nature. As far as switching perspectives, I would be ok with that as well. Not every five minutes necessarily, but in a Starcraft 1 style where you have maybe 2 or 3 points of view on a common story.

I have no intention of ever reading or watching either series; my instinct is telling me that I'd hate them with a passion.

The very fact that you're posting on a DA forum tells me your instict are probably wrong. Atleast do yourself a favorwatch one episode or read one of the books.

[Xilizhra]

Solmanian wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

What is the Red Wedding, exactly?

If you have any intention of ever reading the A Song of Ice and Fire books or watching Game of Thrones, DO NOT INQUIRE ABOUT THE RED WEDDING.

Seriously, its a super massive spoiler event. It would be awful if somebody spoiled it here for anyone.




As to the OP, I wouldn't mind having more consequences to player driven actions. Consequences that make sense within the world and might b delayed in nature. As far as switching perspectives, I would be ok with that as well. Not every five minutes necessarily, but in a Starcraft 1 style where you have maybe 2 or 3 points of view on a common story.

I have no intention of ever reading or watching either series; my instinct is telling me that I'd hate them with a passion.

The very fact that you're posting on a DA forum tells me your instict are probably wrong. Atleast do yourself a favorwatch one episode or read one of the books.

I have nothing against ******, but I'd rather not see them in contact with men.

[MoeRayShep]

EntropicAngel wrote...

MoeRayShep wrote...

Again, we're comparing a series of books to a video game.
Everything that happens in a book is unavoidable, which highlights the problem with this analogy.
Bioware RPG's are already rife with avoidable deaths. The entire conclusion of ME2 was basically a test of how many deaths you could avoid.

I don't think that's a good example--it's more a test of if you have the slightest modicum of intelligence (read: Jacob TELLING YOU to upgrade your ship, the squadmate roles at the CB being almost intuitively obvious--you had to try to fail).

First time playing. First Bioware game, to my knowledge at the time. Only person I lost was Mordin (because he is squishy, not because I did something wrong).

First of all, my overall point stands. So there's that.
Second of all, hooray you for most of your characters surviving.
Third of all, ANY squadmate deaths at the end of ME2 are a result of your choices, not squishiness. The game doesn't add up hit points and subtract damage reduction to determine who lives or dies.
Fourth, those choices weren't all obvious. Zaeed seemed like a good choice for squad leader--- he led the Blue Suns. Mordin led several STG missions. For some reason only Thane and Mordin are considered suitable to lead your crew back to the Normandy. Jacob's suitability as a squad leader seemed incredibly tenuous.

And finally, there are plenty of other BioWare games where character deaths, especially companion characters, are possible and to varying degrees preventable.

[Solmanian]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Solmanian wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

So the game would go something like "Talking talking talking, ******, talking, ******, talking talking, ******, talking talki- holy **** a dragon! ******, ******, talking, ******..."

How is that different than the witcher 2?

No dragons? 

You were saying?

[Wulfram]

At least a couple of good choices for squad leader are very obvious if you simply read the text they give you on the choice screen. The problems come when thinking too much - you can easily concoct a pretty solid chain of logic for plenty of people who don't work.

[Fraq Hound]

Xilizhra wrote...

I have nothing against ******, but I'd rather not see them in contact with men.

To each their own.

I have to ask though, that seems like a really... limiting stance to take. Don't you ever get curious as to what things your missing out on because you choose to avoid anything that portraits men and women in coitus?

For example.

The TV show Spartacus on the Starz network, is one of my favorite TV shows of all time. It portraits sexual relationships of all shapes and sizes. To the point of gratuity sometimes.

As a heterosexual male, I honestly have no desire to watch two men engaging in a homosexual relationship. I don't have anything against them, I think everyone should be free to live whatever lifestyle they choose.

I just don't want to watch the graphic bits. I don't, however, let that affect my enjoyment of what is a truly great show.

If I had never given it a chance, I would be missing out on one of my favorite shows ever.

[Ryzaki]

MoeRayShep wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

No thank you. Last thing I want is a horde of unavoidable character deaths. Its annoying enough sparingly.

Again, we're comparing a series of books to a video game.
Everything that happens in a book is unavoidable, which highlights the problem with this analogy.
Bioware RPG's are already rife with avoidable deaths. The entire conclusion of ME2 was basically a test of how many deaths you could avoid.

Wat? ME2 beat you over the head with how to avoid deaths remeber the loading screens with "UPGRADE SHIP!" "MAKE RIGHT CHOICES!!111" 'GET LOYALTY!111" And the characters themselves beat you over the head with it.

Only death that might've been a surprise is Zaeed being a leader but even that too is shown his own mercs turned on him easily showing nope bad leader. Miranda flat out says Jacob couldn't hack the door in time. You're told you need someone with powerful biotics for the field (you might get feinted with using MIranda for this who's all pick me pick me! but you're told she makes fatal misjudgements of her abilities and others), yadda yadda.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 mars 2013 - 07:30 .