168 réponses à ce sujet

[David7204]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

David7204 wrote...

No. I'm merely saying the competence of the player character does not flow from the player. It flows from within the character. And thus, heroism, competence, and success do not require the player to overcome challenging gameplay as justification to exist.

You're "does not" as if that is universally true in all games. It is not. You may want revise it to say "should not" and express it as your personal opinion. 

My ability to fly a plane in a flight simulator is directly tied to how well my skill as a player corresponds to my skill as a pilot. That's why they train pilots on video games before putting them in aircraft that costs millions of dollars. Simialrly, my ability to recognize that trading Art for Carpets would net a higher return than trading Salt for Sugar in a trading game is what drives whether or not my character goes broke and fails. 

Player skill has a STRONG effect in whether or not the character is successful in MANY games. 

The player who aces the flight simulator on the super-hardest difficulty and the player who struggles a dozen times to complete the mission on easy get the exact same story. The exact same characters. The exact same story outcome.

The player who makes a mint in games like Skyrim and the player who struggles to make ends meet get the exact same story. The exact same characters. The exact same outcome.

Yes, there are some smaller games that depend more on the player. Some games that build a niche for difficulty. But AAA games? I can't think of a single one with any significant portion of players who were or are genuinely unable to earn any desired outcome on easiest difficulty.

Modifié par David7204, 15 novembre 2013 - 05:10 .

[Xilizhra]

The player who aces the flight simulator on the super-hardest difficulty and the player who struggles a dozen times to complete the mission on easy get the exact same story. The exact same characters. The exact same story outcome.

Aren't there games whose endings change depending on difficulty, sometimes?

[Plaintiff]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

David7204 wrote...

No. I'm merely saying the competence of the player character does not flow from the player. It flows from within the character. And thus, heroism, competence, and success do not require the player to overcome challenging gameplay as justification to exist.

You're saying "does not" as if that is universally true in all games. It is not. You may want revise it to say "should not" and express it as your personal opinion. 

My ability to fly a plane in a flight simulator is directly tied to how well my skill as a player corresponds to my skill as a pilot. That's why they train pilots on video games before putting them in aircraft that costs millions of dollars. Simialrly, my ability to recognize that trading Art for Carpets would net a higher return than trading Salt for Sugar in a trading game is what drives whether or not my character goes broke and fails. 

Player skill has a STRONG effect in whether or not the character is successful in MANY games. 

On the contrary, any game with even the passing semblance of a pre-written narrative assumes the character succeeds. That's why losing a battle leads to a 'GAME OVER', and not a branching narrative about how you retired from mercenary work and took up carpentry.

[David7204]

I can't think of any modern games that do so. Sometimes they add an extra scene, but that's not really the same thing.

[Medhia Nox]

@David7204: Of course you're going to win... it's not for some sort of street cred that you can walk around saying: "Oh yeah, I totally saved both the town AND the keep! Yeah, sign me up for the military."

But, using the information provided and my ability to discern what might be best for this situation, I like to see my playthru get the results I wanted on the first try - OR - face the results based off of my misinterpretation of requirements.

I also fully support someone playing something and trying every possible outcome before choosing which one they want. I don't want to play that way, but the world isn't about what I want, and I support giving other people options.

This isn't about "skill level" for me - it is about looking at the story and "reading" it, comprehending it, and getting the results I want by understanding the context of the events taking place - or - accepting that consequences for the actions I took that didn't achieve my goal.

[Dave of Canada]

Xilizhra wrote...

The player who aces the flight simulator on the super-hardest difficulty and the player who struggles a dozen times to complete the mission on easy get the exact same story. The exact same characters. The exact same story outcome.

Aren't there games whose endings change depending on difficulty, sometimes?

A ton. Star Fox 64--one of my favorites--does it.

[Inprea]

rupok93 wrote...

I was just about to post something like this. You don't need your whole army to kill some weaklings attacking a town. I hope you can save both, this is not a morality choice. In real life you don't have to choose between saving one or the other if you have the power to save both. Now I do like the choice of sending your men and leaving the wounded or defending the keep. In that situation you shouldn't be able to do both.

Ha! Beat you to it.

I agree with what you said about if your character is powerful enough. It frustrates me when my mage that can destroy a small army with two spells, virulent living bomb and lightning, suddenly forgets that they can slaughter large numbers of people almost instantly with their mind.

Borrowing a bit from guild wars. I'm not sure if you ever played it. There is one moment in which an NPC looks out over a vast field and comments, "Against such numbers we can't win." Except the field was empty because me and a friend had decided to harvest them all for experience. Unfortunately you don't get the choice to ask, what are you talking about? We already killed them all.

[Hippiethecat124]

Why can't those choices be more like the Vigil's Keep/ Amaranthine section of Awakening? Where your upgrades for the keep and its soldiers, as well as your decisions regarding troop placement in the countryside, have an effect on how well it survives if you rescue the town instead? The upgrades weren't too terribly difficult (in my opinion) to acquire, but a person just running through as fast as they can well suffer the consequences.
Having the ability to get the "golden ending" shouldn't be taken away for the sake of more grimdark. I agree with Plaintiff in that it makes players feel punished. If it's a huge part of the game that the plot depends on, then the choices should indeed be more complex and difficult (a-la ME3, which I thought was (mostly) well done), with no clear winning path. But if it's a choice between a dinky little village or your keep, the options need not be so dire.
Besides, I think a goodly chunk of players who care about the story and theme will roleplay and check out the different outcome. People who are most concerned with "winning" as opposed to storytelling won't appreciate a no-win scenario anyway. Unless we're weeding them out, which....... Hey.... You know, that's not a bad plan!

[Fast Jimmy]

The player who aces the flight simulator on the super-hardest difficulty and the player who struggles a dozen times to complete the mission on easy get the exact same story. The exact same characters. The exact same story outcome.

Assuming a game has a story is an insanely large fallacy. So your statements of what a game "must" do is inherently limited by that assertation.

[Dave of Canada]

Thinking back on it, Star Fox 64 had story branching based off the difficulty level and your general competence during missions to do sub-objectives. I remember trying to do every level in that game, it was a pain as a kid without the internet. Damn did it feel good to do Area 6, though.

[Fast Jimmy]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

The player who aces the flight simulator on the super-hardest difficulty and the player who struggles a dozen times to complete the mission on easy get the exact same story. The exact same characters. The exact same story outcome.

Aren't there games whose endings change depending on difficulty, sometimes?

A ton. Star Fox 64--one of my favorites--does it.

Agreed. I was starting to compile a list, but yeah - LOT'S of games change their story and ending based on difficulty, if you completed certain hidden/hard objectvies and if you were able to make it through without dying. People who are claiming otherwise are just showing their own ignorance and bias to only pretending that Bioware games exist in the entire history of a 40+ year industry. 

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 15 novembre 2013 - 05:57 .

[Ianamus]

The real question is if you can save both the Keep and the village WHILE leaving your soldiers to tend to their wounded.

I'm going to try, at least! Though I won't be surprised if I can't, in which case I'll settle for leaving the soldiers to tend to their wounded and saving the village.

Modifié par EJ107, 15 novembre 2013 - 06:00 .

[Fast Jimmy]

On the contrary, any game with even the passing semblance of a pre-written narrative assumes the character succeeds. That's why losing a battle leads to a 'GAME OVER', and not a branching narrative about how you retired from mercenary work and took up carpentry.

This is so wrong that it honestly hurts me to read.

Go to tvtropes.com and look up the "Multiple game Endings" section and spend a few HOURS reading about all of the games that can be completed and have bad endings that are much more than a "Game Over" screen, as well as games that give a perfect happy ending only if you beat the game on Super Hard, don't die and can do it all standing on your head in under an hour.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 15 novembre 2013 - 06:33 .

[Medhia Nox]

@Fast Jimmy: Anything that got a sequel?

[Icy Magebane]

I might try to save both... Based on what I've seen, I can't really decide what's more valuable to the Inquisition in the long run. Does the town have some unique features like Wade the blacksmith? Would having a damaged Keep in this area have a significant drawback once we retake it? How easily can I replace Inquisition soldiers? I'd need more information before I decide what takes priority. "Innocent victims" isn't good enough, because there are more lives at stake if the Inquisition is severely weakened by trying to be local heroes. I hope. If there's no downside to making poor decisions or wasting resources, I'll be disappointed.

Either way, I won't be reloading if I don't like the outcome. That's what subsequent playthroughs are for.

[Medhia Nox]

@Icy Magebane: I think there will be a cobbler there that makes excellent Antivan leather boots... mmm... so soft on the toes.

Now, tell me you won't strive to save the town...

[Icy Magebane]

@Medhia Nox - Curses... my one weakness!  Pragmatism be damned, I need my fashion fix! 

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 15 novembre 2013 - 06:17 .

[Plaintiff]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

This is so wrong that it honestly hurts me to read.

Go to tvtropes.com and look up the "Multiple game Endings" section and spend a few HOURS reading about all of the games that can be completed and have bad endings that are much more than a "Game Over" screen,

All relying on concious choices made by the player, having little if anything to do with skill.

as well as games that give a perfect hally ending only if you beat the game on Super Hard, don't die and can do it all standing on your head in under an hour.

Exaggeration doesn't serve your point here.

But in any case, games that have a different ending based on difficulty still assume success on the part of the character, as evidenced by the fact that they don't make provision for failure.

In the instances you describe here, you're not playing a story that changes based on difficulty. You're playing entirely separate stories that just happen to have varying levels of difficulty.

Difficulty is still not the driving force of the narrative.

[Fast Jimmy]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Fast Jimmy: Anything that got a sequel?

Castlevania, Star Fox, Disgaea... are you instead asking about a game that imports prior choices? Because you are barking up the wrong tree asking me that - I think the Save Import is one of the biggest mistakes Bioware has engaged in. 

[Fast Jimmy]

Difficulty is still not the driving force of the narrative.

The difficulty the player chooses directs the differences in narrative for these games. If you want to quibble the difference between "directs" and "drives," then I'm not sure that's a conversation that would be worth having.

EDIT: And if you think I'm exagerrating about games requiring crazy work to get different endings, you've not gotten the hidden ending in Castlevania 2.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 15 novembre 2013 - 06:48 .

[Medhia Nox]

Castlevania has multiple endings?

[Dave of Canada]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Castlevania has multiple endings?

Some Castlevanias. They either rely on player speed, players having an item equipped or players which ignore the obvious route and explore the alternate route.

[Plaintiff]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Difficulty is still not the driving force of the narrative.

The difficulty the player chooses directs the differences in narrative for these games. If you want to quibble the difference between "directs" and "drives," then I'm not sure that's a conversation that would be worth having.

I'm not interested in a semantic debate any more than you, but you should use words that convey your actual intended meaning, not a near equivalent that can be misunderstood.

But in any case, the narrative still makes the basic assumption that the character will reach the end, or else failure would be recgnised as a legitimate narrative path. Gameplay isn't driving the story, you chose your ending at the very start of the game, when you selected your difficulty setting. Your skill as a player is of no particular relevance.

It's like saying a story changes based on whether or not you choose to turn the pages. It doesn't. The characters reach the end without your input.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 15 novembre 2013 - 06:51 .

[Jorji Costava]

Plaintiff wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Difficulty is still not the driving force of the narrative.

The difficulty the player chooses directs the differences in narrative for these games. If you want to quibble the difference between "directs" and "drives," then I'm not sure that's a conversation that would be worth having.

I'm not interested in a semantic debate any more than you, but you should use words that convey your actual intended meaning, not a near equivalent that can be misunderstood.

But in any case, the narrative still makes the basic assumption that the character will reach the end, or else failure would be recgnised as a legitimate narrative path. Gameplay isn't driving the story, you chose your ending at the very start of the game, when you selected your difficulty setting. Your skill as a player is of no particular relevance.

It's like saying a story changes based on whether or not you choose to turn the pages. It doesn't. The characters reach the end without your input.

The one example I can think of where failure is recognized as a legitimate narrative path is Wing Commander III. If you screw up enough missions, you end up in the Proxima system. No matter what you do, this sequence of missions ends with the Kilrathi defeating humanity and taking Earth. There's a fairly elaborate cutscene depicting Prince Thrakhath killing the main character. I'm sure there are some other examples of this sort of thing, but it is quite rare.

[Fast Jimmy]

@Plantiff

I wasn't actually the one who used the phrase "difficulty is the driving force of the story" but that's still splitting hairs.

In regards to your other point, would you consider everyone the game holds dear, including the main character, dying as a failure? And I'm not talking about a "your party is dead... Reload?" but full, sad, depressing endings that are optional depending on if the player beat the game on an easier difficutly or if they didn't beat the game fast enough/without dying/without using a save reload/etc.

It's like saying a story changes based on whether or not you choose to turn the pages. It doesn't. The characters reach the end without your input.

No. It's like saying that depending on what page you turn to, you get a different outcome. Which is the entire premise of a divergent narrative, like some video games and, more literally, the Choose Your Own Adventure books. 

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 15 novembre 2013 - 07:06 .