147 réponses à ce sujet

[Paul E Dangerously]

What I've always found funny is if a developer even hints that they want the mass market, they'll get blasted to hell and back for it. But it's just fine to cater to their specific tastes, even if statistically it's a niche.

[Firky]

I dunno. I really like the idea of innovation in games. But I also don't always like the ways bigger budget games innovate.

I think there was a time - like in the 80s - where innovation was like, "Wow, look what technology can do now! 256 colours is so pretty and the NPCs can talk in sentences longer than a few words."

But, for me, there was a ceiling to that. Realistic facial animations aren't something that excites me, for example. (Although I do admit to thinking that female Hawke had some pretty compelling fidgets. She did, like, a neck stretching and ankle rolling thing and I was like, hey, that looks really realistic. But, it's more, wow, gimmick, than, wow, this is innovative.)

One way DA2 did innovate, IMO, is by bringing some action elements to turn based combat. I really enjoyed that aspect.


(PS. I don't think being proud of backing game x on Kickstarter necessarily *has* to be, "I am better than you." But I certainly think you can find a reasonable pride in backing something niche. I can understand why some might not like old school RPGs being called "niche"; too niche for big publishers. But I really like the term.)

[Allan Schumacher]

I think it's fair for someone to feel proud for backing/supporting anything they are interested in, be it niche or otherwise

[Vaeliorin]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Touche.

But, to be fair, I think the reason Kickstarter fans would be angry at this is because the industry has responded to demands of the niche market with nearly dismissive attitudes.

I refer to them as niche because I feel that they are. I think it sucks when niches aren't considered because it isn't economically viable, which is why I love things like digital distribution and even movements like Kickstarter.

The barrier of entry in appealing to a niche is much lower now. This is a good thing.

People equate niche to irrelevant. I don't believe that a niche is irrelevant, but it's considered a pejorative for sure.

I couldn't agree more. And I think niche will soon become a badge of honor thing again. "I play a game that involves permadeath and five party member creation with full customization. You've probably never heard of it. It's called Grimoire."

I'd think that person was an interdimensional traveler or (maybe) a time traveler.  Grimoire's never coming out (which is sad in some ways, but I'd never play it anyway because Cleve is...well...Cleve and there's no way I'm giving him any money.)

Anyway, I don't actually object to the niche label.  My only objection is to the fact that the kind of games I like aren't getting made (though that's changed somewhat with Kickstarter.)

[Firky]

Actually, thinking a bit further. Are there aspects of tech nowadays that drive innovation, beyond the cosmetic, etc? (I generally think of stuff like cinematics as cosmetic, but there are probably a lot of people who wouldn't agree with that.)

- Slightly different track, though ...

Here's an interesting example that landed on my plate, recently. http://www.instantki....com/driftmoon/ Alan, you should totally play this. (I'm delving into its toolkit as we speak. And it has a "Gardening Tool of Doom.")

At first glance, it doesn't look innovative in the slightest. And certainly not in terms of tech. But, to my mind, it absolutely makes your old school RPG mechanics perfectly accessible to modern 'uns. It's quite amazing.

I could elaborate, but you should totally just play it.

[Allan Schumacher]

Noted. My gaming time is a bit limited (I mostly just sneak on for a bit of Sim City here and there lately), but I trust your recommendation.

[Firky]

OK. I'm going to elaborate. (Well, with just one example of what I mean.)

So, crafting. It's your collect reagents to mix together to make a variety of potions thing. But, ...

a) There is enough room in there so you literally never have to organise or drop anything.
In order to craft a potion, you just click on the plan, which you've found or bought.
c) Reagents are automatically put, and stacked, into the right part of your backpack.

and, most importantly,

d) You don't have to walk close to reagents to pick them up, you just click on them, from far away, as you run down the path. So, you generally always have what you need without mucking about.

So, this allows the game to poison you horribly, in that old school way, with spiders or swamps or whatever, because it provides hassle free crafting of Cure potions. You can still spend ages in your backpack juggling items and stats, if you want, and you still have to engage with aspects of the game like crafting and poison, but it never feels like a hassle.

(And this is from someone who loves old school backpack management. I was just struck by how it retains it's old school feel, despite being so easy to play. I think they got the balance exactly right.)

(Edit: Whoops. I didn't realise you'd responded. Sorry.)

(Edit again: WHOOPS. I called you "Alan." Sorry. Spelling people's names wrong freaks me out.)

Modifié par Firky, 20 mars 2013 - 04:42 .

[Allan Schumacher]

At least you didn't call me Allen! Hahaha

[Firky]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

At least you didn't call me Allen! Hahaha

That's my worst nightmare.

[goose2989]

daaaav wrote...

Dragon XIX wrote...

King Cousland wrote...

However, CD Projekt are laying the foundations for the next generation of RPGs, and BioWare should take a few leaves out of their book and adapt them to BioWare's own unique style.

Like set protagonists?

I honestly enjoyed playing a set character both in The Witcher and Mass Effect. I'm not a major fan of Elder Scrolls character development (there isn't any) and much prefer having a foundation on which to project my own persona. I will say that Skyrim has the most impressive game world in terms of music, graphics and style that I have ever seen, but I cannot enjoy the game itself because as impressive as it is, it just feels empty with lackluster story telling and characterisation. 

Brilliant! I have no desire to create a character completely from scratch at the cost of character development. When I play Skyrim, I have very little emotional attachment to the game. My controlled character doesn't even turn his damn head when someone is talking to him! I'd much rather play as a "Shepard" than a "Dragonborn"

[goose2989]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Noted. My gaming time is a bit limited (I mostly just sneak on for a bit of Sim City here and there lately), but I trust your recommendation.

You lost me at "Sim City" 

Ha 

[Allan Schumacher]

Launch issues aside, it's been fun to play with some friends and family (I also got it for free ). Usually when something comical happens:

"Thanks for selling me that power."
/nextday
"WTF my buildings have no power now!?"
"Whoops sorry. I am using it all now and forgot you were buying it off me"
/FFFUUUUU


This is off topic now though, and I am totally PMing myself a warning.

[daaaav]

Korusus wrote...

I wish BioWare operated more in terms of Rockstar or Blizzard or Bethesda. You've found your niche, now perfect it. Take time to polish your game and build that reputation. BioWare used to be on that same level and had that kind of reputation. BioWare for some reason has always been hesitant to embrace their niche and so we get crazy out-of-left-field stuff that sometimes works (Mass Effect) and sometimes really doesn't (Jade, DA2). They fail to realize their greatest success comes from when they embrace the formula that works for them (DA:O).

Evolution, not Innovation.

I think there is a difference between refinement and stagnation. Something Bethesda is certainly flirting with as they routinely deliver gorgeous game worlds but fill them with essentially the same material. Their "refinement" is always a matter of scale which is dangerously close to stagnating.

Biowares strengths are party mechanics and characterisation but games like Deus Ex and LA Noir are the ones pushing forward with conversation mechanics not Bioware. 

[Irx]

Direwolf0294 wrote...

you can't change Geralt's hair

Actually, you can, with the free enchanced edition add-on there is an in-game barber.

That's also one of the reasons why TW is better - free post-release dlcs, unlike the "let's strip Javik out of game and sell him day-1 for additional $$$". =)

Modifié par Irxy, 20 mars 2013 - 10:28 .

[Shevy]

Innovations only for the sake of having innovations is nonsense. I would prefer a game every time which offers a fleshed out story, evolving characters, good crafting/inventory systems, exploration, and so on if it ships in a polished status, even if every part of it has been done in an equal way before.

GTA is a perfect example. Since the transition into 3D the key features stayed the same with some changes here and there to offer new features. Not every change was for my liking and I'm skeptical with the announcement of 3 protagonists for GTA V, but the core game is always the same und thus very enjoying and worth my money.

DA II tried too hard to be different from Origins for reasons I don't know and don't understand, and while it was innovative for a BioWare title in story terms, it missed shipping in a polished way with solid gameplay features and thus wasn't fun and wasn't worth the money.

Knowing what you can do well and improving on these areas with little (key word!) changes to bring in new ideas is the way I think to make successfull products.

[Dominari]

I am sure there is a lot of innovation with every new game that is completely transparent to the player. If you can do a matrix multiplcation with 10% fewer CPU cycles such that those extra cycles can be devoted to combat AI ... now thet is innovation!

[Renmiri1]

Rawgrim wrote...

I don`t think any rpg can be truly innovative these days. If Bioware goes by the BG, Kotor, and DA:O formula, DA:I will be a great game.

When Bioware deviated from DAO's formula the BSN roars of "it's not DAO 2" were deafening. There are some whining until today.

Be careful for what you wish for, as you may get it 

[Allen Spellwaver]

I just want this game has enough variety, decent combat, and plays satisfying. The innovation in RPG genre seldom happens. What I see is adding elements from other genres like action, strategy, and shooter. Other than that, it's simplification on system. I remember I spent like an hour on Baulder's Gate's character customization menu when I first time played that game. RPG is still popular in player community that prefers fast-paced games is because they are less complicated.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I think it sucks when niches aren't considered because it isn't economically viable

As it happens, that line of thinking is why I like the free market.  Because, if I just need to have market power (be super rich) in order to get products made to my specifications, then that avenue is open to me.

[Nashimura]

I am not really looking for innovation from DA, i got into the series on the promise it was more of a throw back to older RPGs....DA2 tried to innovate and i did not enjoy nearly as much. I Hope 3 is more like Origins.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Korusus wrote...

I wish BioWare operated more in terms of Rockstar or Blizzard or Bethesda. You've found your niche, now perfect it. Take time to polish your game and build that reputation. BioWare used to be on that same level and had that kind of reputation. BioWare for some reason has always been hesitant to embrace their niche and so we get crazy out-of-left-field stuff that sometimes works (Mass Effect) and sometimes really doesn't (Jade, DA2). They fail to realize their greatest success comes from when they embrace the formula that works for them (DA:O).

Evolution, not Innovation.

They're like a ship without a captain and it shows in their games. ME2/ME3/DA2 have all sent mixed signals to the fans. Is it a shooter or RPG? It is a RPG or more like God of War? These are questions that I think Bioware faces on a daily basis amongst themselves. They just don't know what to do and so they try to do everything.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 20 mars 2013 - 07:33 .

[Endurium]

Hmm, I'm still waiting for a modern RPG to feature seamless map transitions, with no transitions at all for minor buildings. Haven't seen that since the late 90s, with Ultima IX. It's fun playing a game without ever seeing a loading screen. I must look at/wait for 1000s of loading screens in the time spent playing modern RPGs.

Also, want a modern Bioware fantasy RPG with bow strings, just saying.

[PaulSX]

daaaav wrote...

I almost hate to use The Witcher as an example but love it or hate it, I believe that CD Projekt is a prime example of game evolution and innovation. The differences between The Witcher 1 and 2 are emphatic in terms of how they managed to take a strong narrative in the Witcher 1 and deliver truly branching story lines in Witcher 2 along with a complete combat overhaul. Now, CD Projekt appear to be going big with the Witcher 3 by attempting to integrate an Elder Scrolls size world with strong characterisation and intricate hand crafted story telling (will they succeed? Only time will tell). They are also divorcing character development from combat by awarding no experience for killing which instead becomes an essential activity in terms of characterisation. The player is a monster hunter by trade, not some vampiric entity who needs to consume souls to "get stronger". 

As a fan of both franchises I am looking forward to what the future will hold, but I truly believe that for Dragon Age to be successful, it needs to drive the RPG genre forward and not merely update graphics and combat mechanics with new technology.

Any ideas?

 In my opinion, BioWare is never really strong in plot developments. My hope for BioWare is that they should keep their focus on delivering story-driven games. by story-driven, I mean the plot or narrative that will get players emotionally engaged. But at the same time, they could start to bring the classic RPG elements like explorations, crafting, and so on to their games.

[Fredward]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
They're like a ship without a captain and it shows in their games. ME2/ME3/DA2 have all sent mixed signals to the fans. Is it a shooter or RPG? It is a RPG or more like God of War? These are questions that I think Bioware faces on a daily basis amongst themselves. They just don't know what to do and so they try to do everything.

Why does it have to fit soley into one category? Why can't it be a shooter and an RPG?

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...
They're like a ship without a captain and it shows in their games. ME2/ME3/DA2 have all sent mixed signals to the fans. Is it a shooter or RPG? It is a RPG or more like God of War? These are questions that I think Bioware faces on a daily basis amongst themselves. They just don't know what to do and so they try to do everything.

Why does it have to fit soley into one category? Why can't it be a shooter and an RPG?

Because one has a negative impact on the other and they're trying to satisfy two seperate audiences. The shooter audience will always take priority because it isn't a niche market. That means the RPG side of the game can't be too involved or you lose the people who just want to shoot bad guys. In turn, the people who play the game for the RPG stuff get upset that those features are being dumbed down. In the end, both groups aren't too happy. 

I think it's best to focus on just one thing and do that one thing better than anyone else. Bethesda does open world RPG's better than anyone else and their games are always successful. People know what to expect from them.