173 réponses à ce sujet

[Renmiri1]

** dupe **

Modifié par Renmiri1, 08 avril 2013 - 03:32 .

[Renmiri1]

Jayne126 wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...
DA2 is a game that took lots of risks and went for non obvious and non mass market art style and plot devices. And they vastly improved combat.

Oh, the irony.

non obvious plot device:
From
DAO: Hero's Journey and Bioware's - and Tolkien's -  old staple of gather a team of people to defeat big bad.
to
DA2: Rags to riches story taken place during a decade showing the time passing in a place / in a family and in a group of friends. Where "big bad" was different in each act, and not one of the villains were evil incarnate as the Archdemon (or Sauron) was

your turn

Modifié par Renmiri1, 08 avril 2013 - 03:37 .

[Renmiri1]

May the Maker have mercy on it...

Getting back to Gaider's talk, I liked it a lot.

[Noctis Augustus]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...
....
We get it you hated DA2. 


I loved it. Liked it much more than DAO, but I do admit the game was unpolished and Act 3 was rushed. Hopefully DAI will get more time..  But what has this to do with David Gaider's interview ?

Well, he was talking about DAII. It has something to do with it.

[Scelous]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Story ? Gone from Lord of the Rings clone to something very creative and innovative. Was it perfect ? No. Was it good ? Yup. And Bioware gets 1 billion props for trying something different IMHO

Thank you, yes.  It really discourages me how hostile people are towards DA2 when they really tried to do something different.  We get a story that takes place over years, and we get problems that focus on the city level and not the continent level.  We get family making an appearance, which is practically non-existent in games, and I really enjoyed the family aspect.  I cared about Bethany and Hawke's mother.  

Versus DA:O, which some people laud as the pinnacle of RPGness.  Monsters threaten countryside, main character is the chosen one, levels up and stops threat, yaaaay.

I tell you, I am exhausted with that storyline.  Absolutely exhausted.  And here comes DA2, which tries to do something different (and there are definitely problems with DA2, don't get me wrong), and people just crap all over it.  Is that what people want?  More generic storylines?  I guess that explains why we're on Modern Warfare: Black Ops 2.  Just keep on churning out the same thing, the predictable thing, and people will buy it.

As an aside, I just got finished playing DA:O and DA2 back to back.  It did give me a greater appreciation for DA2 than I originally had.  Also, I really do like that the main character is voiced.  The combat is also a lot more fun in DA2.

Modifié par Scelous, 08 avril 2013 - 11:48 .

[Redbelle]

I've only just picked up and played through DA2, and it's good honest fun....... but the thing is:

RPG Fantasy games have a preconceived notion of what you can do within the game. Gone was the sprawling landscapes to navigate through, replaced with samey samey city and dungeon's. I've just hit mid game and when I see a bit of distinctive dungeon, my thought's aren't, 'What is round the next corner'. It's 'Hang on, I remember this from that escourt mission back at the beginning!'

As a development time saving device I'd ok with it. But no one has ever stepped forward to say the developer was running out of time and had to balance asset creation with development time.

As such, I still hold the developer to high standards and wonder what made them miss those standards, while still delivering a final result that isn't half bad, but still has flaws in how gamer's are led to percieve the final result.

After all, I can't think of another BW game that reused environment's as much as DA2.

Thank goodness they changed the craft material's to what they did though. It works much better for keeping the flow of narrative going as oppposed to having to scour a map for that last bit of spindle weed.

[Noctis Augustus]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Might have gotten my centuries wrong.. Wasn't in the mood to research the right period for a troll that would just reply "Nu-huh, they suck"

*sigh* Do you know of a game called "Guild Wars II"? It does the same exact thing but much, much better, and it's a MMO. The textures in DAII are basic and dull and you would think that if everything was limited to a single city scape they would have a lot more time to put on massive amounts of detail but that doesn't happen. This is as basic as it gets.


In DAII you have weaker characters and weaker story but improved combat and UI.


Also it's not the point of doing something new that people dislike it's the fact that they executed it wrong. very wrong.

Modifié par ibbikiookami, 09 avril 2013 - 03:24 .

[Malsumis]

Renmiri1 wrote...

non obvious plot device:
From
DAO: Hero's Journey and Bioware's - and Tolkien's -  old staple of gather a team of people to defeat big bad.
to
DA2: Rags to riches story taken place during a decade showing the time passing in a place / in a family and in a group of friends. Where "big bad" was different in each act, and not one of the villains were evil incarnate as the Archdemon (or Sauron) was

your turn

Antagonists are an integral part of story telling, DA2 antagonists were the weakest of any bioware game I have played. You can't compare DA2 antagonists to IM, Saren, Loghain, master Li or the best of them all Irenicus.

Yes the more personal story was a good change from the usual bio play, but the execution of it failed. DA:O was the usual bio play, but it was well done.

As for DA2 'imporved combat'...... SMH.

[Sacred_Fantasy]

RPS: Straddling that line between wider audiences and RPG diehards, where does your focus end up? As a writer, what gets top priority?

Gaider: The main concern over the story is that we have to balance the interests of long-time fans in the story. We’re talking about people who have played Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age II coming into Dragon Age III, but we also have to keep in mind people who are coming to Dragon Age III fresh, who have no previous experience. That’s the biggest thing we have to concern ourselves with.

That's precisely the reason why your story should be self contained with proper ending and not cliffhangers with more questions. You are not capable to answer those questions in the next sequel, without messing the narrative, that is obviously written for the newcomers.

The typical hero’s journey where you start off with humble beginnings, become a hero, save the day, save the world. I think it was good to do something different. We had a story that was about failure as much as it was about epic success.

So is that what DA 2 is about? Saving the world from what? The world is already at the brink of War. You know what? It's funny you mention "epic success" when it's more about epic failure to me. Unless you're speaking from Ander's point of view, instead of Hawke's point of view? Perhaps you should make your message clearer. I hope you do better with DA 3, "Saving the world from itself."

Modifié par Sacred_Fantasy, 09 avril 2013 - 03:35 .

[kingjezza]

Scelous wrote...

Versus DA:O, which some people laud as the pinnacle of RPGness.  Monsters threaten countryside, main character is the chosen one, levels up and stops threat, yaaaay.

Oh yeah because that is all that happens in Origins right, absolutly no other plot strands other than killing a few monstors and defeating the big bad. Origins might be set against the back drop of your typical fantasy defeat a big evil type scenario but there is much more going on than that, shame you missed it.

For the record, most people don't have a problem with DA2's concept, the whole thing is just executed horrificly. 

[Redbelle]

Malsumis wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

non obvious plot device:
From
DAO: Hero's Journey and Bioware's - and Tolkien's -  old staple of gather a team of people to defeat big bad.
to
DA2: Rags to riches story taken place during a decade showing the time passing in a place / in a family and in a group of friends. Where "big bad" was different in each act, and not one of the villains were evil incarnate as the Archdemon (or Sauron) was

your turn

Antagonists are an integral part of story telling, DA2 antagonists were the weakest of any bioware game I have played. You can't compare DA2 antagonists to IM, Saren, Loghain, master Li or the best of them all Irenicus.

Yes the more personal story was a good change from the usual bio play, but the execution of it failed. DA:O was the usual bio play, but it was well done.

As for DA2 'imporved combat'...... SMH.

Still, I maintain that a bad BioWare game is still better a bad non BW game.

I picked DA2 up out of a bargain bin. New and sealed And have been pleasently surprised by the content. Not sure if I would have picked it up at full price had I known what I know now, but while it has problem's, it doesn't make me wish I hadn't bought it. Quite the contrary actually.

[Scelous]

kingjezza wrote...

Scelous wrote...

Versus DA:O, which some people laud as the pinnacle of RPGness.  Monsters threaten countryside, main character is the chosen one, levels up and stops threat, yaaaay.

Oh yeah because that is all that happens in Origins right, absolutly no other plot strands other than killing a few monstors and defeating the big bad. Origins might be set against the back drop of your typical fantasy defeat a big evil type scenario but there is much more going on than that, shame you missed it.

For the record, most people don't have a problem with DA2's concept, the whole thing is just executed horrificly. 

Shame I did.

Oh, I know.  I see that all the time.  People say, "DA2 had a good concept but was executed poorly.  DA:O was generic but was masterfully done."

And I still find that disappointing.  I still find it disappointing that people would have another bland, generic story that was polished rather than something new, something different, that had flaws.  Again, I think that's why we have these long-running generic series.  Another first-person shooter set in the Middle East!  Nicely polished, though.  So good for that.

[lil yonce]

Scelous wrote...

Shame I did.

Oh, I know.  I see that all the time.  People say, "DA2 had a good concept but was executed poorly.  DA:O was generic but was masterfully done."

And I still find that disappointing.  I still find it disappointing that people would have another bland, generic story that was polished rather than something new, something different, that had flaws.  Again, I think that's why we have these long-running generic series.  Another first-person shooter set in the Middle East!  Nicely polished, though.  So good for that.

Well said. I agree completely.

[Noctis Augustus]

Scelous wrote...

kingjezza wrote...

Scelous wrote...

Versus DA:O, which some people laud as the pinnacle of RPGness.  Monsters threaten countryside, main character is the chosen one, levels up and stops threat, yaaaay.

Oh yeah because that is all that happens in Origins right, absolutly no other plot strands other than killing a few monstors and defeating the big bad. Origins might be set against the back drop of your typical fantasy defeat a big evil type scenario but there is much more going on than that, shame you missed it.

For the record, most people don't have a problem with DA2's concept, the whole thing is just executed horrificly. 

Shame I did.

Oh, I know.  I see that all the time.  People say, "DA2 had a good concept but was executed poorly.  DA:O was generic but was masterfully done."

And I still find that disappointing.  I still find it disappointing that people would have another bland, generic story that was polished rather than something new, something different, that had flaws.  Again, I think that's why we have these long-running generic series.  Another first-person shooter set in the Middle East!  Nicely polished, though.  So good for that.

So... You would rather have a very flawed new concept than a masterfully done generic "save the world" story? I don't understand why. You would rather babysit like DAII?

[Dutchess]

DA2's story: fight the crazy persons.

[Sol Downer]

renjility wrote...

DA2's story: fight the crazy persons.

Yup, and that's just as generic as "save the world" stories. So once we saved the world, a second time we fought cultists and extremists, and now we're going to save the world again!

[Dutchess]

Ultimashade wrote...

renjility wrote...

DA2's story: fight the crazy persons.

Yup, and that's just as generic as "save the world" stories. So once we saved the world, a second time we fought cultists and extremists, and now we're going to save the world again!

Maybe destroy the world for a change?

[Sol Downer]

renjility wrote...

Ultimashade wrote...

renjility wrote...

DA2's story: fight the crazy persons.

Yup, and that's just as generic as "save the world" stories. So once we saved the world, a second time we fought cultists and extremists, and now we're going to save the world again!

Maybe destroy the world for a change?

Too standalone.

[Melca36]

Malsumis wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

non obvious plot device:
From
DAO: Hero's Journey and Bioware's - and Tolkien's -  old staple of gather a team of people to defeat big bad.
to
DA2: Rags to riches story taken place during a decade showing the time passing in a place / in a family and in a group of friends. Where "big bad" was different in each act, and not one of the villains were evil incarnate as the Archdemon (or Sauron) was

your turn

Antagonists are an integral part of story telling, DA2 antagonists were the weakest of any bioware game I have played. You can't compare DA2 antagonists to IM, Saren, Loghain, master Li or the best of them all Irenicus.

Yes the more personal story was a good change from the usual bio play, but the execution of it failed. DA:O was the usual bio play, but it was well done.

As for DA2 'imporved combat'...... SMH.

They are changing the combat for DA3.  They said the speed of DA2 would remain but they would be bringing back the tactics of Origins. Anybody expecting the same sort of combat for the next game will be massively disappointed.

I agree about the Antagonists although I do think Meredith had slightly BETTER development.  We were introduced to her in the beginning and at least got sense of who and what she was.

Orsino's development was horrible and his introduction was bad. I had no idea who the heck he was the first time I played.

Even Mr Gaider acknowledged alot of stuff about Orsino was cut from the game and that he was not developed enough.

[Scelous]

ibbikiookami wrote...

So... You would rather have a very flawed new concept than a masterfully done generic "save the world" story? I don't understand why. You would rather babysit like DAII?

The reason for me is because over my life, I have played plenty of generic "save the world" stories that were polished.  I mean, if we are counting the past decades of gaming, back to my Intel486, there is no lack of polished "save the world" stories.  Ultima did it.  Chrono Trigger did it.  Diablo, Xenogears, Deus Ex, Icewind Dale; they all deal with this kind of end boss that is threatening to take over the continent or world.  In the case of Mass Effect, multiple worlds.  It always has to be this huge threat to everyone, and only you, the chosen one, can stop it, sometimes for indiscernable reasons (you're just that badass?).

That isn't bad in and of itself, but the concept has been explored.  Multiple times, in multiple ways.  It has been run into the ground.  I simply cannot get excited about that concept anymore.  My cousin, who is younger than I am and isn't as big of a gamer, could not get through DA:O, despite me encouraging him to do so (I still think it's worth playing).  He said it was too derivative of Lord of the Rings, and while I did enjoy the game, I couldn't blame him for his perspective.  He absolutely fell in love with the Dwarf Commoner origin story -- he thought fighting in the tournament and breaking out of jail was awesome.  He was completely stoked.  And then he got to the whole "chosen one saves the world" again and quit.  He never went back to DA:O, which I think is unfortunate.

People criticize Hollywood for being uncreative, for making the same type of blockbuster movies over and over.  There's the Hollywood ending and everything.  It's the same thing with this.  These generic storylines hold no surprises anymore, they have no novelty.  They are creatively barren, and yet it's what the masses lap up.

I think it's past time that the gaming industry as a whole, through multiple genres, not just RPGs, explore new territory.  And yet when new territory is explored, ala DA2, when new ideas falter and stumble, people bring it down like a group of wolves on a sick buffalo.  And so instead we get another polished, generic game, the same type we have been seeing for decades.

Modifié par Scelous, 09 avril 2013 - 06:06 .

[Renmiri1]

Malsumis wrote...



Antagonists are an integral part of story telling, DA2 antagonists were the weakest of any bioware game I have played. You can't compare DA2 antagonists to IM, Saren

LOL

Saren ? Illusive Man ?

Those are your models of well written antagonists ? 

Oh please, run along child... Come back when you can talk coherently about good writing for a villain

Let me guess... Sauron from Lord of the Rings is a "masterpiece" too right ? Emperor Palpatine ? The Wicked Witch in Snow White ?

G.d even George Lucas, the cheesiest dialog writer in modern fiction was able to add some nuance to some of his villains.. Darth Vader had some tiny ambiguity on him, not pure evil. IM, Sauron, Saren, Palpatine have none.

Disney villains as masterpiece.. What will BSN come up with next ??? 

Modifié par Renmiri1, 09 avril 2013 - 05:55 .

[Dutchess]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Malsumis wrote...



Antagonists are an integral part of story telling, DA2 antagonists were the weakest of any bioware game I have played. You can't compare DA2 antagonists to IM, Saren

LOL

Saren ? Illusive Man ?

Those are your models of well written antagonists ? 

Oh please, run along child... Come back when you can talk coherently about good writing for a villain

Let me guess... Sauron from Lord of the Rings is a "masterpiece" too right ? Emperor Palpatine ? The Wicked Witch in Snow White ?

G.d even George Lucas, the cheesiest dialog writer in modern fiction was able to add some nuance to some of his villains.. Darth Vader had some tiny ambiguity on him, not pure evil. IM, Sauron, Saren, Palpatine have none.

Disney villains as masterpiece.. What will BSN come up with next ??? 

..... and Meredith with her red glowing eyes was any better? Or Orsino the Harvester?

[Noctis Augustus]

Scelous wrote...

ibbikiookami wrote...

So... You would rather have a very flawed new concept than a masterfully done generic "save the world" story? I don't understand why. You would rather babysit like DAII?

The reason for me is because over my life, I have played plenty of generic "save the world" stories that were polished.  I mean, if we are counting the past decades of gaming, back to my Intel486, there is no lack of polished "save the world" stories.  Ultima did it.  Chrono Trigger did it.  Diablo, Xenogears, Deus Ex, Icewind Dale; they all deal with this kind of end boss that is threatening to take over the continent or world.  In the case of Mass Effect, multiple worlds.  It always has to be this huge threat to everyone, and only you, the chosen one, can stop it.

That isn't bad in and of itself, but the concept has been explored.  Multiple times, in multiple ways.  It has been run into the ground.  I simply cannot get excited about that concept anymore.  My cousin, who is younger than I am and isn't as big of a gamer, could not get through DA:O, despite me encouraging him to do so (I still think it's worth playing).  He said it was too derivative of Lord of the Rings, and while I did enjoy the game, I couldn't blame him for his perspective.  He absolutely fell in love with the Dwarf Commoner origin story -- he thought breaking out of jail and fighting in the tournament was awesome.  And then he got to the whole "chosen one saves the world" again and quit.

People criticize Hollywood for being uncreative, for making the same type of blockbuster movies over and over.  There's the Hollywood ending and everything.  It's the same thing with this.  These generic storylines hold no surprises anymore, they have no novelty.  They are creatively barren, and yet it's what the masses lap up.

I think it's past time that the gaming industry as a whole, through multiple genres, not just RPGs, explore new territory.  And yet when new territory is explored, ala DA2, when new ideas falter and stumble, people bring it down like a group of wolves on a sick buffalo.  And so instead we get another polished, generic game, the same type we have been seeing for decades.

I love those stories, when done as a RPG, it makes you feel special and important if you play RPGs as immersively as I do. Don't take me the wrong way, of the concepts that developers are willing to use that's my favourite. I would love to be the one that destroys or conquers the world for once but that's unlikely to happen.

Really? I bet he loves Assassins Creed and CoD though.

But they're different. Sure the mold is "Save the World" but you can do with it many things. Most concepts are already explored, I'm not sure what you would have in mind.

Modifié par ibbikiookami, 09 avril 2013 - 06:10 .