211 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

LinksOcarina wrote...
Since this is a discussion about results being seen, here is a more important question. Other than the scripted events in Dragon Age or Dragon Age 2, were there any moments where you actually leveled up and were able to kill enemies quicker? Or did your increasing DPS and crowd-controlling get matched as you grinded to level 20?  That whole stat grinding for a higher DPS is often a bane in RPGs, tabletop and otherwise, because it makes the mathematics for the game wholly arbitrary. No matter how badass you become you will always do only 30% of damage in one hit on a regular enemy. The number is just increased from 20 to 200.

Well, there are a couple of moments. Like dropping multiple ogres in the endgame when the first one you saw was a powerful boss. But in general,  no. Part of that is that the gameworld isn't organized around tiers of monsters the way, for instance, an AD&D world can be.

[SamilTane]

On a related note, does anyone else feel that the way ME2 and 3 were designed (particularly the way EMS was implemented in ME3) gave players the idea that there should be a "best possible ending" in RPGs?

I'm always surprised at how often people mention trying to achieve the "best ending", especially on the Dragon Age boards. There was no single "best ending" in DA:O, no single "best ending" in DA2, and, for that matter, no single "best ending" in ME1.

Keep that out of DA:I and let actions have their consequences, without encouraging players to think that some consequences are better than others.

Modifié par SamilTane, 12 août 2013 - 03:08 .

[AlanC9]

ME2 did have an optimal ending, aye. Horrible precedent

[David7204]

Players should absolutely think some consequences are better than others. And a narrative should absolutely not be ambiguous for the sake of being ambiguous. Such ambiguity fundamentally necessitates that options that player finds horrific are portrayed as well as options that player finds outstanding.

Look at the reaction to Synthesis. Look at the outrage that something many players see as utterly repulsive is portrayed warmly. On the converse side, look at the outrage at the 'rubble scene.' And it was necessary, because showing definitively that Shepard survived just wouldn't be ambiguous enough.

Modifié par David7204, 12 août 2013 - 05:06 .

[d4rk fallen]

Really don't want to see the EMS mechanic to be used in DA I. It was poorly done in Mass Effect and in the long run didn't seem to make a damn bit of difference.

[SamilTane]

David7204 wrote...

Players should absolutely think some consequences are better than others. And a narrative should absolutely not be ambiguous for the sake of being ambiguous. Such ambiguity fundamentally necessitates that options that player finds horrific are portrayed as well as options that player finds outstanding.

Look at the reaction to Synthesis. Look at the outrage that something many players see as utterly repulsive is portrayed warmly. On the converse side, look at the outrage at the 'rubble scene.' And it was necessary, because showing definitively that Shepard survived just wouldn't be ambiguous enough.

Your examples actually illustrate my point.

If the player already finds some consequence horrific, there's no need for the game to paint it in a different way. Just let the player have his own reaction to the consequences.

This is something DA:O did extremely well. And as you mentioned, it's something that ME3 did extremely badly.

[David7204]

That necessitates the narrative not 'paint' any of the content at all. Which is not only completely undesirable, but impossible.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

<3

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 12 août 2013 - 06:15 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

David7204 wrote...

That necessitates the narrative not 'paint' any of the content at all. Which is not only completely undesirable, but impossible.

Oh lawd you mean people would actually have to decide for themselves how they feel about their choices?!

BUT THAT'S NOT HEROIC!!!!!!

[David7204]

You always decide for yourself. The issue is whether the narrative is aligned with you or not.

Why don't you go play cheerleader for someone else?

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

David7204 wrote...

You always decide for yourself. The issue is whether the narrative is aligned with you or not.

Why don't you go play cheerleader for someone else?

Because you're the greatest troll that the BSN has left.

You're the hero we deserve and the one we need right now!

An annoying guardian, a loud protector! A white knight!!!

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 12 août 2013 - 06:25 .

[Eralrik]

I can think of some games where in the middle of the game you came to a pivotal plot point like for instance the original Wing Commander you failed at a certain mission soon your on the defensive and the fight leads back to earth and certain technology's are not developed.
Another that had a more harsh consequences for failure  is a game called XF-5700 Mantis Experimental Fighter where you failed certain missions your suddenly stripped in ranks and eventually taken out and shot.
But these games also rewarded you with success with promotions and medals and new tech you also went to companions funerals when one bought the farm.
Granted these were all space flight sims but on the other hand these games had the right idea to consequences or achievements that I really enjoyed in my games and find sorely missing in games of today. A system like what I mentioned would be interesting if implemented in DA:I and future games to come.

Modifié par Eralrik, 12 août 2013 - 06:47 .