575 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Realmzmaster wrote...

No it is an illusion because I have no other choice than what the game presents or the designers have thought of. That is entirely different from a p n p game where the DM can improvise. The best game design can do is simulate a DM. Yes, i may be force to go to the grocery store in the morning, but I wish to go by horse, but if the game does not allow that choice I cannot. I am left with the choices provided by the game and can only define my character within those parameters.

There are two ways in which this is not a relevant comparison.

First, the player doesn't actually get to choose among the available options in DA2.  Because of the cinematics and the paraphrasing, the player never knows what he's chosing, so he cannot be reasonably described to be choosing at all.  Hawke's behaviour arises from the dialogue selections, but not in a predictable way.  There is literally no way you or anyone knew what Hawke was going to say or how he was going to say it, consistently throughout the game, given those paraphrases.

Second, regardless of whether you're forced to choose from a finite set of options, why you choose those options is entirely up to you.  In fact, I would even go so far as to say that you've mischaracterised the games generally.  You do get to improvise your choices.  You do get to do things that aren't pre-determined by the writers.  As long as you define the category "things you can do" to include thoughts.  That's something DAO allowed, but DA2 did not.  That's an important difference in game design, and I, certainly,  have a clear preference as to which design appears in DA3.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 27 mai 2013 - 08:55 .

[bEVEsthda]

Il Divo wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

First: You can't put headcanon aside.

Sure I can. I (and I assume others) want to roleplay. Headcanon has nothing to do with role-playing. Headcanon is the rough equivalent of writing your own story. You can't roleplay when you control both aspects of the action-reaction dynamic which is fundamental to any RPG. If you want to write a story because you think it's fun, by all means. Just don't confuse it with the action of role-playing.

This would be well worth to have more elaborated.
You seem to mean different things, with both "role-play" and "headcanon" than I do?
(I'll look up 'headcanon', so I can see if my assumptions are inline with general usage.)
(P.S. Done it. My assumptions about headcanon were spot on with general usage. My problem is now how you can 'role-play' satisfactorily, without supporting it with headcanon?)

So you're saying that you can "role-play" Hawk?
 
Explain to me how you can do that when Hawke does/says/reacts things which you have not considered (for/as your char)?

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 27 mai 2013 - 11:28 .

[bEVEsthda]

Plaintiff wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...
That WRPG should have to be made in the west, and JRPGs in the east, for example, is clearly meaningless nonsense.

But 'W' stands for 'western' and 'J' stands for 'Japanese'. The naming system is based entirely on where the games were made, with no consideration whatsoever given to aesthetics or mechanics. 

Referring to Dragon Age II as a 'JRPG' because "it exhibits qualities that I subjectively perceive to be in many japanese role-plying games" is actually racist. You're equating mechanics and aesthetics to nationality, and essentially saying that Dragon Age 'doesn't count' as a 'western' game, because it doesn't fit into your shallow assumptions about what 'western' games should look like. Furthermore, you give people who aren't knowledgable about DA2 the false impression that it was made in Japan.

What about Dragon's Dogma? It was developed by Capcom, which is a Japanese company, but it exhibits aesthetics and mechanics similar to a lot of WRPGs. Is it 'less' Japanese because of its appearance? Would you like to take credit for Dragon's Dogma away from Japan and give it to the west? The same way you give credit to Japan when the west produces a game you don't personally enjoy?

But I have already elaborated on this in a number of posts. And that includes an understanding of labels that challenges what you consider a 'fact'. So you actually have no reason to reverse to your 'facts', in order to misrepresent my argument (or call it racist).

Labels come into existance because of a need to make a distinction. And a label is exactly that, just a label. The label-name may be inherited from some historic origins, but what the label signifies, is not its own name, but the actual, relevant distinction which caused it to be.

[Realmzmaster]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

No it is an illusion because I have no other choice than what the game presents or the designers have thought of. That is entirely different from a p n p game where the DM can improvise. The best game design can do is simulate a DM. Yes, i may be force to go to the grocery store in the morning, but I wish to go by horse, but if the game does not allow that choice I cannot. I am left with the choices provided by the game and can only define my character within those parameters.

There are two ways in which this is not a relevant comparison.

First, the player doesn't actually get to choose among the available options in DA2.  Because of the cinematics and the paraphrasing, the player never knows what he's chosing, so he cannot be reasonably described to be choosing at all.  Hawke's behaviour arises from the dialogue selections, but not in a predictable way.  There is literally no way you or anyone knew what Hawke was going to say or how he was going to say it, consistently throughout the game, given those paraphrases.

Second, regardless of whether you're forced to choose from a finite set of options, why you choose those options is entirely up to you.  In fact, I would even go so far as to say that you've mischaracterised the games generally.  You do get to improvise your choices.  You do get to do things that aren't pre-determined by the writers.  As long as you define the category "things you can do" to include thoughts.  That's something DAO allowed, but DA2 did not.  That's an important difference in game design, and I, certainly,  have a clear preference as to which design appears in DA3.

That is a matter of opinion. I believe I got to choose the choice I wanted to make. I had no problem understanding the paraphrases and making  the choice. You had trouble with the paraphrasing I did not.

You do not get to improvise your choice except in your headcanon. The game reacts the same to whatever choice you make no matter what you think. You and I are roleplaying differently and there is nothing wrong with that.

[Realmzmaster]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...
That WRPG should have to be made in the west, and JRPGs in the east, for example, is clearly meaningless nonsense.

But 'W' stands for 'western' and 'J' stands for 'Japanese'. The naming system is based entirely on where the games were made, with no consideration whatsoever given to aesthetics or mechanics. 

Referring to Dragon Age II as a 'JRPG' because "it exhibits qualities that I subjectively perceive to be in many japanese role-plying games" is actually racist. You're equating mechanics and aesthetics to nationality, and essentially saying that Dragon Age 'doesn't count' as a 'western' game, because it doesn't fit into your shallow assumptions about what 'western' games should look like. Furthermore, you give people who aren't knowledgable about DA2 the false impression that it was made in Japan.

What about Dragon's Dogma? It was developed by Capcom, which is a Japanese company, but it exhibits aesthetics and mechanics similar to a lot of WRPGs. Is it 'less' Japanese because of its appearance? Would you like to take credit for Dragon's Dogma away from Japan and give it to the west? The same way you give credit to Japan when the west produces a game you don't personally enjoy?

But I have already elaborated on this in a number of posts. And that includes an understanding of labels that challenges what you consider a 'fact'. So you actually have no reason to reverse to your 'facts', in order to misrepresent my argument (or call it racist).

Labels come into existance because of a need to make a distinction. And a label is exactly that, just a label. The label-name may be inherited from some historic origins, but what the label signifies, is not its own name, but the actual, relevant distinction which caused it to be.

But there comes a time when those labels may no longer be relevent. The blurring of the lines between so-called wcrpg and jcrpg is occurring. So I question the continued relevancy of the labels.

[Homebound]

you cant unboil an egg. Bioware needs to accept that this is where they are now instead of trying to restore whats already lost.

[Fiery Knight]

Homebound wrote...

you cant unboil an egg. Bioware needs to accept that this is where they are now instead of trying to restore whats already lost.

Yup.

[Boycott Bioware]

Homebound wrote...
you cant unboil an egg. Bioware needs to accept that this is where they are now instead of trying to restore whats already lost.

yes, but they can eat that boiled egg, then wait for the hen to lay another egg, or simply buy it at the store...

What happen if we remove the pillars of our house? Our house will crumble...that what they do and that what happen.....they can restore the crumbled house if they manage to restore the pillars

What are the pillars of DA:O?

[LinksOcarina]

bEVEsthda wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...
That WRPG should have to be made in the west, and JRPGs in the east, for example, is clearly meaningless nonsense.

But 'W' stands for 'western' and 'J' stands for 'Japanese'. The naming system is based entirely on where the games were made, with no consideration whatsoever given to aesthetics or mechanics. 

Referring to Dragon Age II as a 'JRPG' because "it exhibits qualities that I subjectively perceive to be in many japanese role-plying games" is actually racist. You're equating mechanics and aesthetics to nationality, and essentially saying that Dragon Age 'doesn't count' as a 'western' game, because it doesn't fit into your shallow assumptions about what 'western' games should look like. Furthermore, you give people who aren't knowledgable about DA2 the false impression that it was made in Japan.

What about Dragon's Dogma? It was developed by Capcom, which is a Japanese company, but it exhibits aesthetics and mechanics similar to a lot of WRPGs. Is it 'less' Japanese because of its appearance? Would you like to take credit for Dragon's Dogma away from Japan and give it to the west? The same way you give credit to Japan when the west produces a game you don't personally enjoy?

But I have already elaborated on this in a number of posts. And that includes an understanding of labels that challenges what you consider a 'fact'. So you actually have no reason to reverse to your 'facts', in order to misrepresent my argument (or call it racist).

Labels come into existance because of a need to make a distinction. And a label is exactly that, just a label. The label-name may be inherited from some historic origins, but what the label signifies, is not its own name, but the actual, relevant distinction which caused it to be.

Actually, the label JRPG came into existance as a pejorative against Final Fantasy VII and VIII on the PC, because many PC gamers thought the games should be lumped into a different genre away from games like Elder Scrolls and Wizardry at the time. They also felt those games were terrible for whatever reason. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 27 mai 2013 - 06:15 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Actually, the label JRPG came into existance as a pejorative against Final Fantasy VII and VIII on the PC, because many PC gamers thought the games should be lumped into a different genre away from games like Elder Scrolls and Wizardry at the time. They also felt those games were terrible for whatever reason.

Because games like FF7 were presented as roleplaying games, but didn't exhibit the core characteristics of roleplaying games (namely, roleplaying).  I played FF7 on the PSX.  I couldn't believe the level of control I didn't have over what Cloud did.  The whole game - even the conversations - was on rails.  There was no point at all to playing it aside from just advancing through the story.  The player had almost no input into the story, of the character, or anything.

If FF7 was going to be called an RPG, then the RPG label was going to become meaningless.  Hence the need for some clear segmentation.

Personally, I'd rather call FF7 an adventure game.  It has more in common with Police Quest than it does with Pools of Radiance or Wizardy or Ultima.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Homebound wrote...

you cant unboil an egg. Bioware needs to accept that this is where they are now instead of trying to restore whats already lost.

I'll concede that you can't unboil an egg.  But I don't see how RPGs are like eggs in this context.

[LinksOcarina]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Actually, the label JRPG came into existance as a pejorative against Final Fantasy VII and VIII on the PC, because many PC gamers thought the games should be lumped into a different genre away from games like Elder Scrolls and Wizardry at the time. They also felt those games were terrible for whatever reason.

Because games like FF7 were presented as roleplaying games, but didn't exhibit the core characteristics of roleplaying games (namely, roleplaying).  I played FF7 on the PSX.  I couldn't believe the level of control I didn't have over what Cloud did.  The whole game - even the conversations - was on rails.  There was no point at all to playing it aside from just advancing through the story.  The player had almost no input into the story, of the character, or anything.

If FF7 was going to be called an RPG, then the RPG label was going to become meaningless.  Hence the need for some clear segmentation.

Personally, I'd rather call FF7 an adventure game.  It has more in common with Police Quest than it does with Pools of Radiance or Wizardy or Ultima.

And you would be incorrect in your labeling there as well, cosnidering a game like FF VII has the mechanics for a typical RPG experience that evolved over time both in the U.S and in Japan, but that is not important in this case anyway. 


ETA: Then again, since the term RPG is poorly defined, we should probably stop using it in the video game space as well, unless we encompass all styles of RPG we know, despite the fact that many are sub-categorized through artificial labels. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 27 mai 2013 - 07:54 .

[Malice_Unarmed]

I love mods, huge feature that really makes the game much, much better.

Plaintiff wrote...
Their position has always been that it "extends the life of the game", which isn't something a developer necessarily wants.

What about DLC? If people are playing long after they finish the game and they release DLC wouldn't those still playing be more inclined to buy it over those who have shelved it after a week?

Personally the best way to bring back fans is to make a better game in all aspects (already listed ways to improve in other threads). DA:O was a quality game, DA2 lacked quality and felt overly repetitive. I played DA:O least 8-10 times, I played DA2 once... That says something about my preference.

[unbentbuzzkill]

Just my personal opinion, but when any game developer loses some of it's fanbase it is possible to get them back. But in bioware's case it's going to be alot more difficult the fans they have lost feel like that their feelings or thoughts don't matter and different comments made by various people only prove their point.

[Realmzmaster]

JCRPGS and WCRPGS are meaningless definitions created to try and define certain aspects of the nebulous genre known as the CRPG that has never had a strong definition itself.

A more accurate description may be country of origin (since crpgs are now made in South Korea and China) and even then both genres have plenty of examples of high-profile games that do not meet common stereotypes of their respective sub-genre.

For example Demon Souls is categorized as a Western style action RPG even though its country of origin is Japan. Also the whole King's Field series was considered Western-style.

Now the games do have a set protagonist, but so does Alpha Protocol and the Witcher 1 & 2. A set protagonist alone cannot make a game jrpg. The game is FP with action. Well the Elder Scroll series has that.
Maybe it is turn based combat, but then some of the early western style crpgs had that while the early Japanese style crpgs were action based. Many newer Japanese crpg are not turn based.

So the only real definition that exists are nebulous at best and based on what gamers feel consist the attributes of each sub genre. So the terms are becoming meaningless IMHO.

[Rawgrim]

Realmzmaster wrote...

JCRPGS and WCRPGS are meaningless definitions created to try and define certain aspects of the nebulous genre known as the CRPG that has never had a strong definition itself.

A more accurate description may be country of origin (since crpgs are now made in South Korea and China) and even then both genres have plenty of examples of high-profile games that do not meet common stereotypes of their respective sub-genre.

For example Demon Souls is categorized as a Western style action RPG even though its country of origin is Japan. Also the whole King's Field series was considered Western-style.

Now the games do have a set protagonist, but so does Alpha Protocol and the Witcher 1 & 2. A set protagonist alone cannot make a game jrpg. The game is FP with action. Well the Elder Scroll series has that.
Maybe it is turn based combat, but then some of the early western style crpgs had that while the early Japanese style crpgs were action based. Many newer Japanese crpg are not turn based.

So the only real definition that exists are nebulous at best and based on what gamers feel consist the attributes of each sub genre. So the terms are becoming meaningless IMHO.

The anime\\manga artstyle gives them away.

[Sylvius the Mad]

LinksOcarina wrote...

ETA: Then again, since the term RPG is poorly defined, we should probably stop using it in the video game space as well, unless we encompass all styles of RPG we know, despite the fact that many are sub-categorized through artificial labels.

That raises the question of whether everything that has been popularly described as or labelled an RPG is actually a roleplaying game, or if popular opinion is merely wrong..

Much how "R&B" and "rhythm and blues" somehow now mean different things, despite one being an abbreviation of the other.

[AlanC9]

I'm not sure how popular opinion, or indeed anyone, could be wrong about how to use a term that doesn't have a coherent definition.

Wrong in general, I mean. In particular cases some uses will be obviously right, some wrong, and then there's all the cases we fight about

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 mai 2013 - 11:58 .

[Rawgrim]

The term rpg got blurred when game developers started slapping the rpg label onto things that never was an rpg in the first place, in order for the game to sell more copies.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm not sure how popular opinion, or indeed anyone, could be wrong about how to use a term that doesn't have a coherent definition.

They could use the label inconsistently.  That would guarantee they were wrong.

[Fast Jimmy]

Rawgrim wrote...

The term rpg got blurred when game developers started slapping the rpg label onto things that never was an rpg in the first place, in order for the game to sell more copies.

I think things started becoming hard when anything that was Fantasy-themed (I mean that as the fantasy genre, not Final Fantasy) was angled as being RPG. The two things became intertwined and difficult to separate. 

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm not sure how popular opinion, or indeed anyone, could be wrong about how to use a term that doesn't have a coherent definition.

They could use the label inconsistently.  That would guarantee they were wrong.

True. I was put in mind of bEVEthesda's JRPG definition, but that's supposed to be subjective anyway.

[Plaintiff]

Rawgrim wrote...
The animemanga artstyle gives them away.

You don't actually watch any anime at all, do you.