184 réponses à ce sujet

[milena87]

Yes, I believe that getting rid of the import feature and setting a canon could improve the game.

We could consider each DA game a "what if" scenario, where we may or may not make different choices from the canon (not knowing at first what would become canon of course). That would allow the writers to give us meaningful choices and consequences in-game, much like The Witcher 1&2 and Alpha Protocol.

I'd personally trade the illusion of a world shaped by the actions of my characters for a better story, true consequences in-game and an evolving world anytime.

[Knight of Dane]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

Anyway; If the writers actually had a problem with it, they would quit.

Not necessarily. I can almost assure you that every single person on staff has a problem with something. One of the programmers really wish the elf redesign looked different, a writer doesn't like a plot they have been handed from above, a producer wishes there were resources to spend on more QA and a cinematics designer doesn't like how a certain tool they use often is placed deep within menus in their toolset without an assigned keyboard shortcut. And maybe, just maybe, somebody wishes their boss was a little more lenient.

There's always something. You don't quit over something, you quit when the somethings grow too large for you to bear.

Sure and now we are talking about specifics. Do they have an problem or problems? How important are those, or are they important etc?

That's not what I'm discussiong, I'm saying that you either cooperate despite what problems you have or you don't (quit)

[Volus Warlord]

milena87 wrote...

Yes, I believe that getting rid of the import feature and setting a canon could improve the game.

[Fast Jimmy]

Knight of Dane wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

Anyway; If the writers actually had a problem with it, they would quit.

Not necessarily. I can almost assure you that every single person on staff has a problem with something. One of the programmers really wish the elf redesign looked different, a writer doesn't like a plot they have been handed from above, a producer wishes there were resources to spend on more QA and a cinematics designer doesn't like how a certain tool they use often is placed deep within menus in their toolset without an assigned keyboard shortcut. And maybe, just maybe, somebody wishes their boss was a little more lenient.

There's always something. You don't quit over something, you quit when the somethings grow too large for you to bear.

Sure and now we are talking about specifics. Do they have an problem or problems? How important are those, or are they important etc?

That's not what I'm discussiong, I'm saying that you either cooperate despite what problems you have or you don't (quit)

But I don't think we are asking if Bioware has trouble finding writers who can conform to their design requests. Sylvius' question was, simply, do they have a preference when writing video game material.

You have said that you would find it engaging and challenging. I am saying not all writers may feel that way.

No actual Bioware writers have weighed in with an opinion. So... we are at an empasse of sorts?

[Knight of Dane]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

Anyway; If the writers actually had a problem with it, they would quit.

Not necessarily. I can almost assure you that every single person on staff has a problem with something. One of the programmers really wish the elf redesign looked different, a writer doesn't like a plot they have been handed from above, a producer wishes there were resources to spend on more QA and a cinematics designer doesn't like how a certain tool they use often is placed deep within menus in their toolset without an assigned keyboard shortcut. And maybe, just maybe, somebody wishes their boss was a little more lenient.

There's always something. You don't quit over something, you quit when the somethings grow too large for you to bear.

Sure and now we are talking about specifics. Do they have an problem or problems? How important are those, or are they important etc?

That's not what I'm discussiong, I'm saying that you either cooperate despite what problems you have or you don't (quit)

But I don't think we are asking if Bioware has trouble finding writers who can conform to their design requests. Sylvius' question was, simply, do they have a preference when writing video game material.

You have said that you would find it engaging and challenging. I am saying not all writers may feel that way.

No actual Bioware writers have weighed in with an opinion. So... we are at an empasse of sorts?

And I agree with you, writers differ just like everyone else.

But writing is a school of art, schools of art often involve free lacne working. Those that are employed are usually at peace with their places, even if they have problems.

Modifié par Knight of Dane, 30 mai 2013 - 03:55 .

[happy_daiz]

Volus Warlord wrote...

milena87 wrote...

Yes, I believe that getting rid of the import feature and setting a canon could improve the game.

^ Agreed.

[garrusfan1]

well totally it would totally make it easier. but it would totally depend on the writer like totally.


sorry OP I couldn't help joke about how you put totally iin the begining

[Fast Jimmy]

Knight of Dane wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

Anyway; If the writers actually had a problem with it, they would quit.

Not necessarily. I can almost assure you that every single person on staff has a problem with something. One of the programmers really wish the elf redesign looked different, a writer doesn't like a plot they have been handed from above, a producer wishes there were resources to spend on more QA and a cinematics designer doesn't like how a certain tool they use often is placed deep within menus in their toolset without an assigned keyboard shortcut. And maybe, just maybe, somebody wishes their boss was a little more lenient.

There's always something. You don't quit over something, you quit when the somethings grow too large for you to bear.

Sure and now we are talking about specifics. Do they have an problem or problems? How important are those, or are they important etc?

That's not what I'm discussiong, I'm saying that you either cooperate despite what problems you have or you don't (quit)

But I don't think we are asking if Bioware has trouble finding writers who can conform to their design requests. Sylvius' question was, simply, do they have a preference when writing video game material.

You have said that you would find it engaging and challenging. I am saying not all writers may feel that way.

No actual Bioware writers have weighed in with an opinion. So... we are at an empasse of sorts?

And I agree with you, writers differ just like everyone else.

But writing is a school of art, schools of art often involve free lacne working. Those that are employed are usually at peace with their places, even if they have problems.

Well... technically business is a school of art? After all, you can get a bachelors of arts in the subject.

Yet I know many people who are unhappy in their business jobs...?


I feel this conversation is getting off topic, though.

[Fast Jimmy]

garrusfan1 wrote...

well totally it would totally make it easier. but it would totally depend on the writer like totally.


sorry OP I couldn't help joke about how you put totally iin the begining

...? I'm not seeing where the word totally was in the OP?

[garrusfan1]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

garrusfan1 wrote...

well totally it would totally make it easier. but it would totally depend on the writer like totally.


sorry OP I couldn't help joke about how you put totally iin the begining

...? I'm not seeing where the word totally was in the OP?

my mistake I don't know where I got that from

[MerinTB]

happy_daiz wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

milena87 wrote...
Yes, I believe that getting rid of the import feature and setting a canon could improve the game.

^ Agreed.

And I believe a silent protagonist and creating your own party would make for a vastly improved game.

But this is BioWare, and we have to accept how they make games.

And, for most of their games in series, they do save game imports.  They never let you create your party (multiplayer work-around on BG ignored for the moment) and recently dumped the silent protragonist.

Until BioWare says they are done with save imports, you kinda have to accept the game developer's direction.

I mean, by all means, speak what you'd prefer.  But do so with a sense of context.

---

And, objectively, having the save import or not having it doesn't affect the quality of the writing nor the quality of the story.  At all.  Not by it's lonesome.  Having it limits what the writers can do, but so does writing in an established world, so does working with a team of writers, and so does having a publisher floating above you with veto power.  Those limitations MIGHT curb creativity, but they do NOT affect QUALITY.

[Fast Jimmy]

MerinTB wrote...

happy_daiz wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

milena87 wrote...
Yes, I believe that getting rid of the import feature and setting a canon could improve the game.

^ Agreed.

And I believe a silent protagonist and creating your own party would make for a vastly improved game.

But this is BioWare, and we have to accept how they make games.

And, for most of their games in series, they do save game imports.  They never let you create your party (multiplayer work-around on BG ignored for the moment) and recently dumped the silent protragonist.

Until BioWare says they are done with save imports, you kinda have to accept the game developer's direction.

I mean, by all means, speak what you'd prefer.  But do so with a sense of context.

---

And, objectively, having the save import or not having it doesn't affect the quality of the writing nor the quality of the story.  At all.  Not by it's lonesome.  Having it limits what the writers can do, but so does writing in an established world, so does working with a team of writers, and so does having a publisher floating above you with veto power.  Those limitations MIGHT curb creativity, but they do NOT affect QUALITY.

If your job is to make creative works, I'm not sure how curbing creativity wouldn't inherently affect quality?

[AntiChri5]

MerinTB wrote...

happy_daiz wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

milena87 wrote...
Yes, I believe that getting rid of the import feature and setting a canon could improve the game.

^ Agreed.

And I believe a silent protagonist and creating your own party would make for a vastly improved game.

And i believe that crossbows that fire wooly mammoths would vastly improve the game, but.....wait what were we talking about again?

[Knight of Dane]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Knight of Dane wrote...

Anyway; If the writers actually had a problem with it, they would quit.

Not necessarily. I can almost assure you that every single person on staff has a problem with something. One of the programmers really wish the elf redesign looked different, a writer doesn't like a plot they have been handed from above, a producer wishes there were resources to spend on more QA and a cinematics designer doesn't like how a certain tool they use often is placed deep within menus in their toolset without an assigned keyboard shortcut. And maybe, just maybe, somebody wishes their boss was a little more lenient.

There's always something. You don't quit over something, you quit when the somethings grow too large for you to bear.

Sure and now we are talking about specifics. Do they have an problem or problems? How important are those, or are they important etc?

That's not what I'm discussiong, I'm saying that you either cooperate despite what problems you have or you don't (quit)

But I don't think we are asking if Bioware has trouble finding writers who can conform to their design requests. Sylvius' question was, simply, do they have a preference when writing video game material.

You have said that you would find it engaging and challenging. I am saying not all writers may feel that way.

No actual Bioware writers have weighed in with an opinion. So... we are at an empasse of sorts?

And I agree with you, writers differ just like everyone else.

But writing is a school of art, schools of art often involve free lacne working. Those that are employed are usually at peace with their places, even if they have problems.

Well... technically business is a school of art? After all, you can get a bachelors of arts in the subject.

Yet I know many people who are unhappy in their business jobs...?


I feel this conversation is getting off topic, though.

Yes, I just found out about that a months time ago, my Serbian buddy told me. 

But yo uare right, I think the next step is "Define Art!!!"

[wright1978]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

Could you not say the same thing about any part of player characterisation? Wouldn't it be easier if the writers just got to write their single version of the protaganist, without having to offer players any choice of action in the game or customisation over the protaganist. Personally as far as i'm concerned i hope they stay with the player characterised protaganist & with save imports rather than going down the route of pure interactive movie making.

You could say the same about SOME part of player customization, yes. Such as choice and consequence or personaltiy tracking. But other parts, such as your class, appearance or gender, have nearly no role in the writing of the games aside from a few random little lines (although, in relation to class, this may be changing for DA3).

But the Save Import isn't just allowing player customization of one character... it is creating a game that deals with the customization of THREE. And counting. As big of a headache as giving player's choice in one game is (something most developers don't do at all to begin with), imagine how much more it is compounded when you have to work within the customization of two previous games PLUS a new one? With the ME and Withcer series this is mitigated a little bit, since it is one continuous character throughout. And even then, they have huge mountains to climb. But to integrate the choices, customization and control of three characters, all adhering to the player's decisions? It is an avalanche of variables to track.

The only reason gender/class/appearance are of limited scope currently is because they are hived off to the player largely. If this wasn't the case they could reference all aspects of the protaganist freely. Personally i don't think going down a largely/completely defined character route is of value anymore than i view the stripping away of the sense that choice matters by removing the import mechanic is of value . No doubt it is challenging to take account of variables across games but given there's a new protaganist it surely is easier as you get a free reign to pick which previous story threads you wish to pick up rather than having to address all the issues of the previous protaganist.

[MerinTB]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

MerinTB wrote...
And, objectively, having the save import or not having it doesn't affect the quality of the writing nor the quality of the story.  At all.  Not by it's lonesome.  Having it limits what the writers can do, but so does writing in an established world, so does working with a team of writers, and so does having a publisher floating above you with veto power.  Those limitations MIGHT curb creativity, but they do NOT affect QUALITY.

If your job is to make creative works, I'm not sure how curbing creativity wouldn't inherently affect quality?

Allowing too much creativity can lead to less focused, more esoteric final products that are not coherent nor enjoyable.

Think of all the movie series, TV series, comic books series, novel series, where the property is licensed or owned by someone other than those writing the stories.  Do all of those products have an inherently lesser quality to them simply because there are constraints on what those writers are allowed to do?

Really?

Or, think of it this way.  Someone is writing a realistic, real world crime thriller.  To be a realistic, real world story they cannot include aliens, superheroes, angels and devils, etc.  But that limitation doesn't affect the quality of the story.

Or, think of a science fiction story setting, hard science speculative fiction.  When the writer chooses to go with a technology, science focused world, does the fact that what he's writing in presupposed the disinclusion of wizards and orcs really hurt the story?

Limitations on where you can go with writing is actually usually a beneficial tool.  If you can write whatever you want, without limitation, and you choose to NOT limit yourself... it becomes the worse kind of Mary Sue writing you can imagine.

----

Seriously, while creativity can be important, I think you are giving it too high a value.

If you assign a bunch of writers the task of writing a story about a man who walks down the street, enters a bar, ends up in a bar fight which lands him in a hospital and there a doctor on duty ends up being an old flame and they hit it off... and tell them that they can't include fantastic elements like spies, aliens, monsters, super-powers, etc. -- you'll find how GOOD the writers are by how compelling they make that prescripted plot into a story.

Creativity - coming up with an idea - is really overrated by people who aren't writers.  Thinking up an idea?  That's like 1 % of the work.  The other 99% is putting the words down on the page to make a coherent, engaging and enjoyable story.

Modifié par MerinTB, 30 mai 2013 - 04:26 .

[Fast Jimmy]

wright1978 wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

wright1978 wrote...

Could you not say the same thing about any part of player characterisation? Wouldn't it be easier if the writers just got to write their single version of the protaganist, without having to offer players any choice of action in the game or customisation over the protaganist. Personally as far as i'm concerned i hope they stay with the player characterised protaganist & with save imports rather than going down the route of pure interactive movie making.

You could say the same about SOME part of player customization, yes. Such as choice and consequence or personaltiy tracking. But other parts, such as your class, appearance or gender, have nearly no role in the writing of the games aside from a few random little lines (although, in relation to class, this may be changing for DA3).

But the Save Import isn't just allowing player customization of one character... it is creating a game that deals with the customization of THREE. And counting. As big of a headache as giving player's choice in one game is (something most developers don't do at all to begin with), imagine how much more it is compounded when you have to work within the customization of two previous games PLUS a new one? With the ME and Withcer series this is mitigated a little bit, since it is one continuous character throughout. And even then, they have huge mountains to climb. But to integrate the choices, customization and control of three characters, all adhering to the player's decisions? It is an avalanche of variables to track.

The only reason gender/class/appearance are of limited scope currently is because they are hived off to the player largely. If this wasn't the case they could reference all aspects of the protaganist freely. Personally i don't think going down a largely/completely defined character route is of value anymore than i view the stripping away of the sense that choice matters by removing the import mechanic is of value . No doubt it is challenging to take account of variables across games but given there's a new protaganist it surely is easier as you get a free reign to pick which previous story threads you wish to pick up rather than having to address all the issues of the previous protaganist.

True. But my concern as outlined earlier in this thread is the damage it does to the story-telling. Yes, an import can reference a previous choice... but because it must reference (or at least avoid completely retconning) ALL previous choices, how much can that storyline be explored further? 

The Anvil of the Void is an insanely powerful artifact. It can give the dwarves a source of the most powerful armies in Thedas. Or, conversely, they can get rid of it. Could a story be told about the dwarves using golems to regain the lost Deep Roads? Likely not, because that is a pretty big change in the world. Could a story be told about how, without the Anvil, Darkspawn are now clawing at the front doors of Orzammar? No, because that would be a totally different outcome than what would have happened if they had the Anvil.

So, instead, Orzammar will be exactly the same, regardless of the Anvil choice. Does that really make for a better story? I'd say it doesn't - it makes things rather static and linear. If anything, it diminshes the value of your choice. 

If, instead, the writers established a canon between games, they could build a strong story that could let this plot develop more. Instead, they must essentially run away from prior stories every game as hard and fast as they can, while trying to develop new characters, locations and events that will not only be good, but enough to drown out a player's desire to see what happened in places they had previously visited.

Eventually, does it not then just become "flavor of the week" between games, where past events and characters are ignored as much as possible while the new setting tries to perform in the shadow of previous story lines? At that point, would it be better to have a Final Fantasy scenario, where each game occurs totally separate from the rest in terms of world setting and characters?

[Fast Jimmy]

MerinTB wrote...

Seriously, while creativity can be important, I think you are giving it too high a value.

If you assign a bunch of writers the task of writing a story about a man who walks down the street, enters a bar, ends up in a bar fight which lands him in a hospital and there a doctor on duty ends up being an old flame and they hit it off... and tell them that they can't include fantastic elements like spies, aliens, monsters, super-powers, etc. -- you'll find how GOOD the writers are by how compelling they make that prescripted plot into a story.

Creativity - coming up with an idea - is really overrated by people who aren't writers.  Thinking up an idea?  That's like 1 % of the work.  The other 99% is putting the words down on the page to make a coherent, engaging and enjoyable story.

Yes, but I'd argue with the setting in DA, they already have all the constraints you list. What would make it infinitely more difficult would be to say that you need to write that same story, but where the old flame may be dead because of a previous choice, or the hospital refuses him service because he spent his money elsewhere, or he wins the bar fight because he is a warrior, or he doesn't enter the bar because the Qun demands he remain sober.

Writing a story is easy, by comparison. Because it isn't just about puting the words to paper... you have to write not only a good story, but a story that caters to player's choices and reasons. 

Which is great - good roleplaying games allow for lots of choice and consequence. But it is one thing to write about choice and consequence within an existing story... and another entirely to try and connect the stories of multipel characters (the Warden, Hawke and now Quincy) in a way that makes any kind of coherent sense at all. 

It is like a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure story, coupled with multiple perspectives like in Pulp Fiction and blended in with Lord of the Rings. With all of the headaches each of those genres brings.

While I defer to you on matters of writing, I really don't feel your explanation gives justice to the obstacle. This isn't a scenario that a writer must accomodate to... it is an ever growing web of restrictions, where a writer may often find themselves looking myopically at the landmines they want to avoid stepping on to just complete the task rather than telling the best story they can tell.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 30 mai 2013 - 04:44 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

Honestly I think they feel like any person writing would. Sometimes it's great, and you couldn't think of writing it any other way. Other times, it sucks and you wish you could just scrap it all together. I doubt there is one consistent or previlent mood on the subject, or maybe there is, who knows but the devs themselves.

[dreamgazer]

I know I would. The freedom to create complex, self-contained choices without having to face grand "repercussions" in future games would be much more interesting.

Modifié par dreamgazer, 30 mai 2013 - 05:11 .

[Beerfish]

A difficult thing game makers face is that you don't always know what works and what doesn't for the player until after the game has been released and yet you are beholden to decisions made in previous games. I'm sure they have long term story arcs in their mind as to how a game will go but the popularity or unpopularity of aspects of the game or certain characters can be tough to get away from. This is akin to the tv shows where some ancillary character that was meant to show up once or twice becomes a fan fav and is written into the core of the game.

I'm sure they at times detest restrictions put on them from previous games and at times feel that it helps keep a multi game flow going.

[Sylvius the Mad]

milena87 wrote...

Yes, I believe that getting rid of the import feature and setting a canon could improve the game.

But if that's true, I suggest it would then also improve future games to discard that established canon as soon as each game is done, and then construct an entirely new canon for each subsequent game - a canon that will support the specific sort of narrative they want in that game.

So, if they wanted to tell a story based on the on-going mage-templar conflict arising from the events of DA2, they can.  But then, for the next game, they could decide that the events of DA2 didn't happen and instead have no on-going mage-templar conflict, and instead having them work together to fend off a full-scale Qunari invasion (or something).

The point is, if the restrictions imposed by the save imports are limiting in a negative way, then the restrictions imposed by some other game's canon should also be limiting in a negative way.

[AlanC9]

Knight of Dane wrote...
I think imports can be done in a meaningful way. Mass Effect already did that with the Genophage Arc in the third game. Basically there er a few different outcomes that in characterization and intention vary, but less so in the actual execution.

The same missions happen, but different outcomes are acheiveable wether or not you kept a cure sample from the second game and which Krogan leader was alive.

For me that is a fine execution.

But this only worked because the pre-ME3 choices have very limited consequences; do you have Mealon's data, and are Wrex and Mordin alive?

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

But if that's true, I suggest it would then also improve future games to discard that established canon as soon as each game is done, and then construct an entirely new canon for each subsequent game - a canon that will support the specific sort of narrative they want in that game.

So, if they wanted to tell a story based on the on-going mage-templar conflict arising from the events of DA2, they can.  But then, for the next game, they could decide that the events of DA2 didn't happen and instead have no on-going mage-templar conflict, and instead having them work together to fend off a full-scale Qunari invasion (or something).

The point is, if the restrictions imposed by the save imports are limiting in a negative way, then the restrictions imposed by some other game's canon should also be limiting in a negative way.

Ick. I like my game worlds to have a coherent history, not one that resets every game.

[Fast Jimmy]

Beerfish wrote...

A difficult thing game makers face is that you don't always know what works and what doesn't for the player until after the game has been released and yet you are beholden to decisions made in previous games. I'm sure they have long term story arcs in their mind as to how a game will go but the popularity or unpopularity of aspects of the game or certain characters can be tough to get away from. This is akin to the tv shows where some ancillary character that was meant to show up once or twice becomes a fan fav and is written into the core of the game.

I'm sure they at times detest restrictions put on them from previous games and at times feel that it helps keep a multi game flow going.

I absolutely agree here. And why I think imported choices worked really well for a series like The Walking Dead, which was rather short for each episode (around 5 to 10 hours per installment). This let them realize who made what decisions on a regular basis and build off of them subsequently.

Bioware's obstacle involves creating a 40+ hour game with lots of choices and player agency, but also dealing with choices from OTHER 40+ hour games that offered lots of choices and player agency. That's quite a large feedback loop, where how a writer designs a scene in a game released in 2013 can offend a gamer's decision from 2008.