189 réponses à ce sujet

[Ridwan]

In Exile wrote...

I think it's pretty comical when people cite the commercial success of Skyrim as a reason for Bioware to make games more like theirs, but complain when Bioware cites the commercial success of CDO as a reason to make games more like that.

And I find it hilarious how you fail to see the difference between imitation and emulation. The old CoD argument when all else fails, huh?

[h0neanias]

If one wonders whether such a design-school combination can work, look no further than Fallout: New Vegas. It requires seeing the game as a simulation of reality rather than a choose-your-own-adventure film, but Obsidian did make Alpha Protocol before that -- one of the best RPG ever in my book. So yes, a company can succeed at both approaches, all you need is will and skill.

Modifié par h0neanias, 11 mai 2013 - 05:13 .

[Ridwan]

h0neanias wrote...

If one wonders whether such a design-school combination can work, look no further than Fallout: New Vegas. It requires seeing the game as a simulation of reality rather than a choose-your-own-adventure film, but Obsidian did make Alpha Protocol before that -- one of the best RPG ever in my book. So yes, a company can succeed at both approaches, all you need is will and skill.

But but... dumbing down, call of duty, money is bad and the evil casuals that ruin gaming!

[hangmans tree]

slimgrin wrote...

Yes, Bioware has proven time and again they are masters at level design and have nothing to learn from anyone else.

loled hard at this

EntropicAngel wrote...

Suprez30 wrote...

If
they could by some miracle create this kind of game. Oh my God ., but I
think Witcher III might be the first to reach this. This level of
awesomeness.

Five whole pages!
I think that's a record.

I wanted to put some remark on it but you did it for me
SKYRIMvsDRAGONAGEvsTHEWITCHER= most probable LOCKDOWN! ;D

[Fallstar]

TES has always been what the player makes it. Bethesda gives the player large, beautiful worlds to roleplay in. It's entirely up to you how much you get out of it. There are plenty of interesting characters and stories/quests - far more in Skyrim alone than in both DA games combined so far. It's just the density of those characters/quests is much lower than in DA. In DA, if you play for an hour, you generally speak to people/advance quests somehow. In Skyrim you can quite easily play for 6 hours without advancing a single quest/talking to other characters.

Some people seem to think that makes the world 'empty'. It doesn't, it makes it big.

Bioware's recent games tend to be relatively short, but intense. In TES, the same peaks of intensity are there, but spread out over a far bigger game. For example, I can completely finish a DAO playthrough, including Awakening, Amgarrak and WH in around a hundred hours now. One of my skyrim characters has over 300 hours and has only finished one of the four 'guild' quest arcs. I can see how that might seem empty to some people, but it doesn't to me.

Modifié par DuskWarden, 11 mai 2013 - 05:53 .

[TMZuk]

If Bioware is going to look at other companies, they should look at Obsidian, not Bethesda.

Bugs aside (and they are well sorted out now) Fallout: New Vegas is IMO the best of two worlds. It combines a strong narrative with an open world, and it does so effortlessly. It has memorable characters and events, something no Bethesda game has ever provided. On top of that Bethesda's games might have an open ~world~, but often (Fallout 3, Oblivion and Skyrim, I am looking at you) a linear and very weak story.

Slight spoilers for DA:O and FO:NV below.



There's freedom in New Vegas, not only regarding exploration, but also in what route to follow through the game. Where Dragon Age: Origins pretty much have a fixed ending, kill the Arch-demon and save Ferelden, New Vegas has a far more open ending. You partake in the Second Battle of Hoover Dam, yes, but fighting for whom? NCR? The Legion? Mr. House? Or your own character?

And if we want to discuss sales, New Vegas sold more than both Dragon Age games combined. So there, Bioware. Have at it!

[Xilizhra]

TES has always been what the player makes it. Bethesda gives the player large, beautiful worlds to roleplay in. It's entirely up to you how much you get out of it. There are plenty of interesting characters and stories/quests - far more in Skyrim alone than in both DA games combined so far. It's just the density of those characters/quests is much lower than in DA. In DA, if you play for an hour, you generally speak to people/advance quests somehow. In Skyrim you can quite easily play for 6 hours without advancing a single quest/talking to other characters.

Also, even the interesting ones have little depth given, in general; only a very few central characters, like Ulfric, match Bioware's efforts of their own accord. Skyrim does indeed rely a great deal on headcanon to make it engaging.

Some people seem to think that makes the world 'empty'. It doesn't, it makes it big.

To me, what's emptier is the lack of companionship. Skyrim is a very lonely game.

[Volus Warlord]

Xilizhra wrote...

To me, what's emptier is the lack of companionship. Skyrim is a very lonely game.

Nonsense! Get a spouse to wander around aimlessly with and/or to buy up your unwanted loot.

[frostajulie]

I'v logged 400+ hours in Skyrim. I enjoy it. The thieves guild questline, Dark Brotherhood, Dawnguard these are better than the civil war and main questline.

But I love DA for the characters all of them, for the way Bioware makes the world come alive and I miss cutscenes at pivotal plot moments. I miss the dialogue wheel. I miss companions I care about who act like they care about my PC if Bioware could bring their A game to a game like Skyrim I would be in nerd gamer heaven, but mods are a MUST and that is non negotiable.

But damn what a game it would be with the best of both worlds.

And I will echo the sentiment

After playing a bioware game

Skyrim is a very lonely game.

Modifié par frostajulie, 11 mai 2013 - 06:26 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Isn't 640 X 480 tied to TV resolutions?

Yes, but I can also run my monitor at that resolution if I wished to.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 11 mai 2013 - 06:30 .

[Bfler]

frostajulie wrote...

Skyrim is a very lonely game.

You can install the Vilja mod. She is very talkative.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Bfler wrote...

frostajulie wrote...

Skyrim is a very lonely game.

You can install the Vilja mod. She is very talkative.

That's one of the reasons I enjoy The Elder Scrolls games. You can just go out on your own and do whatever you want.

[AresKeith]

Xilizhra wrote...

To me, what's emptier is the lack of companionship. Skyrim is a very lonely game.

I enjoyed the company of Lydia, Aela, and Serana

And the dog from time to time

[frostajulie]

I actually take Lydia Atvir Dres and Vilja with me though Atvir likes to steal my gudamn horse and seems to be very prickly when I steal his... he's an **** I think its why I like him.

[KDD-0063]

If there is one thing to learn from Skyrim, it's that design the world to live and breath.

Though I doubt it's learning from Skyrim, it's simply the world of DA2 and TOR feel dead. Bioware has made "living" worlds before. There's a lot of major and minor decisions that I feel contributed to DA2 and TOR's dead world as well as rushing DA2 out.

Another thing is, at least for PC version, modding is awesome. I wouldn't have played Skyrim so much if not for mods; in fact I probably would not have bought it if TES had not always been mod friendly.

Modifié par KDD-0063, 11 mai 2013 - 10:56 .

[KDD-0063]

Xilizhra wrote...

To me, what's emptier is the lack of companionship. Skyrim is a very lonely game.

That is kinda true, but companionship isn't impossible in an open-world.
You can look at, say, Baldur's Gate I for a game that has companions and if you make the world seamless it is sort-of open-world.

[In Exile]

ejoslin wrote...
Well, at least Skyrim is peripherally in the same genre.  If anything, Skyrim shows that there is a market for RPGs.

If Skyrim is the "market" for RPGs, i.e., no-party FPS (or poor 3rd person) style combat, swallow companions and an infinite number of fetch quests, it doesn't really warm my heart.

I recognize that lots of people like Skyrim in the way lots of people like COD, but either game being popular doesn't really fill me with confidence that I'll ever get games I want. 

[In Exile]

M25105 wrote...
And I find it hilarious how you fail to see the difference between imitation and emulation. The old CoD argument when all else fails, huh?

Well, one, there isn't a difference unless you go with a very rare and unsed secondary definition of emulation (see def. #2 below). But supposing you do use that definition, then you can as easily apply it to Bioware talking about COD, i.e., that they want to "equal or surpass" it. So, non, there's no actual substance to what you just said. 

emulation [ˌɛmjʊˈleɪʃən]n1. the act of emulating or imitating2. the effort or desire to equal or surpass another or others3. Archaic jealous rivalry

imitation [ˌɪmɪˈteɪʃən]n1. the act, practice, or art of imitating; mimicry2. an instance or product of imitating, such as a copy of the manner of a person; impression3.a.  a copy or reproduction of a genuine article; counterfeitb.  (as modifier) imitation jewellery4. (Music / classical Music) (in contrapuntal or polyphonic music) the repetition of a phrase or figure in one part after its appearance in another, as in a fugue5. (Literary & Literary Critical Terms) a literary composition that adapts the style of an older work to the writer's own purposesimitational  adj

[In Exile]

DuskWarden wrote...

TES has always been what the player makes it. Bethesda gives the player large, beautiful worlds to roleplay in.

You mean, it gives you dead and empty worlds to write fan-fiction in. It's great if that's what you think roleplay is, but I prefer actual reactivity in my games. As much as I really don't enjoy the actual gameplay in New Vegas, that's a game where you can see the lengths that Obsidian went to make the game reactive. 

What Bestheda gives you is Fallout 3. What I want is New Vegas (though not with the FPS gameplay - really, really don't find that fun).

In Skyrim you can quite easily play for 6 hours without advancing a single quest/talking to other characters.

Some people seem to think that makes the world 'empty'. It doesn't, it makes it big.

This might be totally shocking for you, but something can be both big and densely populated. Take, for example, New York. Gigantic city. It's "big" in every sense of the word. And yet I can run into a human being every single second. 

In contrast, the Saraha Desert is also "big". But the fact that it's really big isn't good.

Modifié par In Exile, 11 mai 2013 - 11:28 .

[BouncyFrag]

Skyrim can be a bit lonely but if you play your cards right, these little blue fellas will show up and fight for you no matter where you are which is as epic as it is silly:

I'm sure you could also mod in a Riekling Waifu for those dark, cold nights in Solstheim:

[Enigmatick]

In Exile wrote...

 What I want is New Vegas (though not with the FPS gameplay - really, really don't find that fun).

Why doesn't bethesda catch any flak for turning Fallout into a fps it feels it should be a crime

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I distinctly remember a lot of butthurt on my part and long arguments a long time ago with In Exile about the merits of New Vegas' reactivity, which I argued for and he dismissed. Of particular note was the differences of opinion with regards to the faction reputation system and the epilogue slide endings.

Weird to see him speak in favour of it.

Oh well. I am a little tired of Skyrim being held up as the only open world game in existence (thus should be the only game compared to BioWare's offerings), anyway.

I believe I mentioned Red Dead in the last of these threads, and I am a little disappointed at the lack of mention for Baldur's Gate. It's not my favourite game, but if people are clamouring for more of an open world without losing much of the BioWare formula, what about referencing the BioWare game that started their foray into fantasy RPGs in the first place?

[Hazegurl]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

@AtreiyaN7, I agree I would much rather have a game that doesn't have mind blowing graphics but have a great story I can get into and characters I actually care about. I don't truly remember anyone from Skyrim and I was playing it less than a month ago. I don't hate anyone in Skyrim cause I haven't came across any character that makes me feel those emotions toward them. I don't love any of the characters either.

I also agree about the lack of urgency to finish the main quest, the dragons were just an annoyance. If DA could provide us with an open world and the few good things that made Skyrim interesting while still maintaining everything I love about DA games, I would love it, but if not I can live without it.

Hah, yes - I agree about the dragons becoming annoying as the game went on. The first few times I fought dragons in Skyrim, it was actually quite exciting (maybe even a smidge awe-inspiring). After the tenth dragon, the novelty had completely worn off.

I remember that I was trying to do a quest, and every time I quick-traveled I seemed to land right on top of a dragon. If you include the dragon that was inside the tomb that I was supposed to explore, that totaled up to 5-6 dragons in a row that I had to fight. I really just wanted to headdesk at that point - lol.

Oh yeah, I loved fighting them the first few times too but after a while they were like pesky flies that bothered me while I was trying to do other stuff. lol!

In Exile wrote...

You mean, it gives you dead and empty
worlds to write fan-fiction in. It's great if that's what you think
roleplay is, but I prefer actual reactivity in my games. As much as I
really don't enjoy the actual gameplay in New Vegas, that's a game where
you can see the lengths that Obsidian went to make the game reactive.

Right, I'm not paying money to gaming companies just to give me a beautiful 3D world I have to headcanon my way through. There is nothing wrong with headcanon but if the entire game is me having to use it just to get some sort of meaning out of it then it's just a waste of my time.  I need engaging characters and companions with a really good story mixed in there.

[Volus Warlord]

Enigmatick wrote...

In Exile wrote...

 What I want is New Vegas (though not with the FPS gameplay - really, really don't find that fun).

Why doesn't bethesda catch any flak for turning Fallout into a fps it feels it should be a crime

Because it's an open world FPS in which you can't aim without VATS! 

[In Exile]

CrustyBot wrote...

I distinctly remember a lot of butthurt on my part and long arguments a long time ago with In Exile about the merits of New Vegas' reactivity, which I argued for and he dismissed. Of particular note was the differences of opinion with regards to the faction reputation system and the epilogue slide endings.

I don't think New Vegas is, objectively speaking, very reactive. But if I have to settle for an open world game, New Vegas is at minimum what I would consider an actual open world RPG. 

I think games like TW2 handle reactivty much better, and I don't think that things like faction score and epilogue slides are very good ways of being reactive. But at least it's reactive.