297 réponses à ce sujet

[bmwcrazy]

It looks amazing. I can't wait.

[In Exile]

Cheylus wrote...
So if I can add a mustache to a character he is not predefined?

The hero of KotoR wasn't predefined?

Hawke looks very predefined to me: human, Lothering, son of a mage, has a warrior brother and a mage sister.

If you're suggest that the PC in KoTOR was predefined, then every Bioware character ever - including the Warden and Bhaalspawn - would be predefined. Not that I disagree (in a sense), mind you, because I don't think there's much of a difference between how fixed the Warden, the Bhaalspawn, "Revan" or Hawke was (on paper). We can debate what VO does to people's experience of freedom, but when we look at the actual features of the character that are defined, Bioware's always had set backgrounds with the only exceptions being DA:O and ME1. 

[slimgrin]

Maverick827 wrote...
grimdark grisly manly dark grim badass grim darkly.

Say that ten times in a row, fast as you can..

[Ravensword]

J. Reezy wrote...

Fire Emblem has "party" based combat. Needs its own genre yo!

Games w/ ATB command battles, as well.

[Seboist]

simfamSP wrote...

Golden-Rose wrote...

It seems to me that most people here either love the witcher series and hate the dragon age series or love DA and hate the witcher. Am I the only one that enjoys both (and is excited for both Dragon Age: Inquisition and The Witcher 3)? :/

Because BioWare let themselves down with DA2 and ME3. So now it's 'popular' to jump on the bandwagon. Of course, there are people who have disliked BioWare since KOTOR, and there's naught anyone can do about it. They have their reasons and let it be.

I love both, I can enjoy a vast array of games really. I dislike this elitism some people display with their gaming. To me, as long as it's designed well and/or is well written I can enjoy it.

As for Dragon Age, there have only been two games, so it's hardly a "series" yet. I think the Witcher surpasses it with design and writing, but let's see how DA:I does. There is no excuse for rushing this time, they've had years and I'm glad of it. Because there was once a time where the name BioWare meant "yeah, this is gonna be awesome." xD

You left out ME2, which was a horrendous continution of the story and stripped almost all of the RPG elements of the previous title.

[Il Divo]

Seboist wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

Golden-Rose wrote...

It seems to me that most people here either love the witcher series and hate the dragon age series or love DA and hate the witcher. Am I the only one that enjoys both (and is excited for both Dragon Age: Inquisition and The Witcher 3)? :/

Because BioWare let themselves down with DA2 and ME3. So now it's 'popular' to jump on the bandwagon. Of course, there are people who have disliked BioWare since KOTOR, and there's naught anyone can do about it. They have their reasons and let it be.

I love both, I can enjoy a vast array of games really. I dislike this elitism some people display with their gaming. To me, as long as it's designed well and/or is well written I can enjoy it.

As for Dragon Age, there have only been two games, so it's hardly a "series" yet. I think the Witcher surpasses it with design and writing, but let's see how DA:I does. There is no excuse for rushing this time, they've had years and I'm glad of it. Because there was once a time where the name BioWare meant "yeah, this is gonna be awesome." xD

You left out ME2, which was a horrendous continution of the story and stripped almost all of the RPG elements of the previous title.

I don't think it really counts if all your RPG elements failed hard.

No inventory system beats a crappy inventory system every day of the week, for example.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 décembre 2013 - 03:05 .

[Volus Warlord]

Il Divo wrote...

Seboist wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

Golden-Rose wrote...

It seems to me that most people here either love the witcher series and hate the dragon age series or love DA and hate the witcher. Am I the only one that enjoys both (and is excited for both Dragon Age: Inquisition and The Witcher 3)? :/

Because BioWare let themselves down with DA2 and ME3. So now it's 'popular' to jump on the bandwagon. Of course, there are people who have disliked BioWare since KOTOR, and there's naught anyone can do about it. They have their reasons and let it be.

I love both, I can enjoy a vast array of games really. I dislike this elitism some people display with their gaming. To me, as long as it's designed well and/or is well written I can enjoy it.

As for Dragon Age, there have only been two games, so it's hardly a "series" yet. I think the Witcher surpasses it with design and writing, but let's see how DA:I does. There is no excuse for rushing this time, they've had years and I'm glad of it. Because there was once a time where the name BioWare meant "yeah, this is gonna be awesome." xD

You left out ME2, which was a horrendous continution of the story and stripped almost all of the RPG elements of the previous title.

I don't think it really counts if all your RPG elements failed hard.

No inventory system beats a crappy inventory system every day of the week, for example.

^

[Seboist]

Il Divo wrote...

Seboist wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

Golden-Rose wrote...

It seems to me that most people here either love the witcher series and hate the dragon age series or love DA and hate the witcher. Am I the only one that enjoys both (and is excited for both Dragon Age: Inquisition and The Witcher 3)? :/

Because BioWare let themselves down with DA2 and ME3. So now it's 'popular' to jump on the bandwagon. Of course, there are people who have disliked BioWare since KOTOR, and there's naught anyone can do about it. They have their reasons and let it be.

I love both, I can enjoy a vast array of games really. I dislike this elitism some people display with their gaming. To me, as long as it's designed well and/or is well written I can enjoy it.

As for Dragon Age, there have only been two games, so it's hardly a "series" yet. I think the Witcher surpasses it with design and writing, but let's see how DA:I does. There is no excuse for rushing this time, they've had years and I'm glad of it. Because there was once a time where the name BioWare meant "yeah, this is gonna be awesome." xD

You left out ME2, which was a horrendous continution of the story and stripped almost all of the RPG elements of the previous title.

I don't think it really counts if all your RPG elements failed hard.

No inventory system beats a crappy inventory system every day of the week, for example.

Yeah, instead of improving mechanics, let's throw them out and end up with a mediocre gears knock off with dialogue options.

Brilliant.

Thankfully, we have comptent RPG developers like Atlus that don't share your mindset and improve upon flawed mechanics in the following game (ala P4 from 3).

Modifié par Seboist, 12 décembre 2013 - 03:09 .

[Il Divo]

Seboist wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Seboist wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

Golden-Rose wrote...

It seems to me that most people here either love the witcher series and hate the dragon age series or love DA and hate the witcher. Am I the only one that enjoys both (and is excited for both Dragon Age: Inquisition and The Witcher 3)? :/

Because BioWare let themselves down with DA2 and ME3. So now it's 'popular' to jump on the bandwagon. Of course, there are people who have disliked BioWare since KOTOR, and there's naught anyone can do about it. They have their reasons and let it be.

I love both, I can enjoy a vast array of games really. I dislike this elitism some people display with their gaming. To me, as long as it's designed well and/or is well written I can enjoy it.

As for Dragon Age, there have only been two games, so it's hardly a "series" yet. I think the Witcher surpasses it with design and writing, but let's see how DA:I does. There is no excuse for rushing this time, they've had years and I'm glad of it. Because there was once a time where the name BioWare meant "yeah, this is gonna be awesome." xD

You left out ME2, which was a horrendous continution of the story and stripped almost all of the RPG elements of the previous title.

I don't think it really counts if all your RPG elements failed hard.

No inventory system beats a crappy inventory system every day of the week, for example.

Yeah, instead of improving mechanics, let's throw them out and end up with a mediocre gears knock off with dialogue options.

Brilliant.

Mass Effect was always a mediocre gears knock off with dialogue options. I'm surprised you ever thought anything different. It just became a knock off without a crappy inventory system. That's a +1 in my book.

[Cainhurst Crow]

I don't think you could fix the inventory system tbh. I don't think James Ohlen could have even saved the system.

[Il Divo]

J. Reezy wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

No inventory system beats a crappy inventory system every day of the week, for example.

Trying to fix something broken is better than scrapping it though.

Freaking ninjas man...

Your post implies that I saw some value in the inventory system. If the inventory system in Mass Effect actively detracts from my enjoyment of the game, it's removal is only ever a positive, not a negative. Sure, in some alternate universe, Bioware made Mass Effect 2 with a good inventory system, which I might have enjoyed. But that's not the one we're in. Mass Effect has a bad inventory system, while Mass Effect 2 just sidestepped the problem resulting in a net increase in enjoyment.

Believe it or not, removal is a viable alternative to repair, in some instances. Some assume that you're always required to do the latter.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 décembre 2013 - 03:14 .

[Il Divo]

J. Reezy wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

I don't think you could fix the inventory system tbh. I don't think James Ohlen could have even saved the system.

Darth pls, it was not irredemably horrible.

Personally, I'd call it the worst inventory system in any RPG I've ever played.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 décembre 2013 - 03:16 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

Il Divo wrote...

J. Reezy wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

I don't think you could fix the inventory system tbh. I don't think James Ohlen could have even saved the system.

Darth pls, it was not irredemably horrible.

Personally, I'd call it the worst inventory system in any RPG I've ever played.

I am tempted to, but I think resident evil's inventory is worse. Just in my opinion.

[Il Divo]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

J. Reezy wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

I don't think you could fix the inventory system tbh. I don't think James Ohlen could have even saved the system.

Darth pls, it was not irredemably horrible.

Personally, I'd call it the worst inventory system in any RPG I've ever played.

I am tempted to, but I think resident evil's inventory is worse. Just in my opinion.

Ah, I couldn't comment. I missed the Resident Evil bandwagon. Is this the original we're talking about?

[slimgrin]

ME1 suffered from micro upgrades and lots of them, not a bad inventory. Unintuitive, but it worked fine on PC. TW1 had a bizarre character upgrade screen, but inventory in the EE was very good - a grid with auto sort, each slot with its own capacity. TW2, well I wouldn't be surprised if they outsourced that crap UI. They better not make the same mistake in TW3 or I'll rage.

Modifié par slimgrin, 12 décembre 2013 - 03:26 .

[In Exile]

Seboist wrote...
Yeah, instead of improving mechanics, let's throw them out and end up with a mediocre gears knock off with dialogue options.

The mechanism was a pile of crap. Bioware had to throw it out whether htey were going to make it more of an RPG or less of an RPG. Was anyone really asking for a more refined list inventory with identical looking weapons distinguished by a roman numeral in front of their name or a more refined incremental power up system that had nonsensical bonuses like "+1% to accuracy"?

I understand your complaint, but there's a difference between asking Bioware to use good RPG mechanics and want Bioware to just avoid bad mechanics (generally). 

[Blooddrunk1004]

Cheylus wrote...

So if I can add a mustache to a character he is not predefined?

The hero of KotoR wasn't predefined?

Hawke looks very predefined to me: human, Lothering, son of a mage, has a warrior brother and a mage sister.

By your point and logic Dragonborn, The Courier, and every other Bethesda protagonist is predifined, because they have some background and history around his character. Hawke's history and lore wouldn't even go for few pages against Geralt who has friggin saga behind his character.

Calling Hawke and Shepard predifined is just silly.

[billy the squid]

In Exile wrote...

Seboist wrote...
Yeah, instead of improving mechanics, let's throw them out and end up with a mediocre gears knock off with dialogue options.

The mechanism was a pile of crap. Bioware had to throw it out whether htey were going to make it more of an RPG or less of an RPG. Was anyone really asking for a more refined list inventory with identical looking weapons distinguished by a roman numeral in front of their name or a more refined incremental power up system that had nonsensical bonuses like "+1% to accuracy"?

I understand your complaint, but there's a difference between asking Bioware to use good RPG mechanics and want Bioware to just avoid bad mechanics (generally). 

That's a big logical jump. So because there were mrk I-X weapons and upgrades all of it had to go. Weapons, armour types, ammo, gun mods, armour mods, biotic amps, tech amps. Boom, gone. Instead we got planet resource gathering, what a fantastic bloody trade off. 

The ME1 system was clunky slow and generally a hassle not because it had multiple mods, more because it had endless trash that kept coming up. The ridiculous thing is, they reimlemented all the armour, tech, amp, ammo and weapon mods in a 1 use format for ME3 MP.

[Gotholhorakh]

Addai67 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

The posts implying that the Witcher is somehow less of an RPG because Geralt is pre-defined leave me scratching my head.

In the Witcher your decisions have more of an impact than any Bioware game to date. Some decisions result in completely different storylines that take Geralt to completely different locations and surround him with a different cast of characters. Character creation isn't the end-all-and-be-all of RPGs.

To some people the character creation is what defines the RPG or at the very least is a dealbreaker.  The spouse won't play The Witcher for this reason. I know others who won't play if they can't make a female character. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but games are leisure pursuits, people should do what they want.

I should put my hand up here and say I'm one of those people - my thoughts on this go way back into the mists of time and I won't bang on about choice in RPGs at length but yes, without choosing a role to play, to me that makes it an adventure game not an RPG.

Which isn't to say adventure games suck because they're an excellent thing, but that concept of making a character that is uniquely yours, and guiding them through their life has usually been a part of the RPG experience for me.

I hadn't been blown away by the first game anyway (especially the puerile elements, and the clicky combat), and with the DA2 experience (shudder  ) still burning in my mind, I didn't bother to pick up TW2 in 2011, and didn't give it a second thought once Skyrim arrived (which while shallow, is also ridiculously broad, and so allows for choice and control and your own character). Although I was kind of up for Geralt who is Yet Another Elric/Aldric Talvalin/the list goes on, the mistrust of "fixed protagonist RPGs" was strong after dashep.

O, what a mistake! I recently picked up the patched-up version of TW2 in the Steam Sale for £3 and some change
and gave it a play - I have to say that if Skyrim hadn't been released in the same year, TW2 would probably be GOTY for me, what a fabulous game.

TW2 is a stunning example of what you get when people labour carefully and thoughtfully at their craft, as opposed to selecting whatever dreadful detritus the developer can gather together onto a disk and get away with calling "done".

So I'm looking forward to TW3 with the usual awareness that everyone should have with games - and if it sucks, well first of all I will know that at least somebody put some effort in, and second of all I will consider the money well spent anyway, given that I accidentally gave the money CDPR deserved to another games company in 2011.

It's awesome that there are games franchises worth celebrating for those of us who like such escapist games. Game looks lovely, and I''m really looking forward to playing a fantasy adventure game (OK, I'm stil not ready to concede TW2 is an RPG yet, give me time) by a company that takes years over their games and appears to give consideration to whether anyone enjoys playing them or not.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 12 décembre 2013 - 10:20 .

[Cheylus]

In Exile wrote...

Cheylus wrote...
So if I can add a mustache to a character he is not predefined?

The hero of KotoR wasn't predefined?

Hawke looks very predefined to me: human, Lothering, son of a mage, has a warrior brother and a mage sister.

If you're suggest that the PC in KoTOR was predefined, then every Bioware character ever - including the Warden and Bhaalspawn - would be predefined. Not that I disagree (in a sense), mind you, because I don't think there's much of a difference between how fixed the Warden, the Bhaalspawn, "Revan" or Hawke was (on paper). We can debate what VO does to people's experience of freedom, but when we look at the actual features of the character that are defined, Bioware's always had set backgrounds with the only exceptions being DA:O and ME1. 

Blooddrunk1004 wrote...

Cheylus wrote...

So if I can add a mustache to a character he is not predefined?

The hero of KotoR wasn't predefined?

Hawke looks very predefined to me: human, Lothering, son of a mage, has a warrior brother and a mage sister.

By your point and logic Dragonborn, The Courier, and every other Bethesda protagonist is predifined, because they have some background and history around his character. Hawke's history and lore wouldn't even go for few
pages against Geralt who has friggin saga behind his character.

Calling Hawke and Shepard predifined is just silly.

Yes, I think every or most characters you ever played in your life was predefined (i.e. established in advance, limited). What changes and matters is the level of predefinition and what the game makes of that predefinition. 
I don't need more than one codex entry to understand the protagonist is predefined. You're talking about the amount of background a character (i.e. the level of predefinition) has: I'm doing exactly the same thing. You're saying the Dragonborn and the Courrier have a background, which basically means they are predefined, but somehow you can't admit it. Characters are as predefined as the world they live in.

"Role-playing" gives the feeling you're playing the role you want when you mostly play a role among others which were set by someone else first and foremost. That shouldn't be a big reveal.

This is not my "point and logic", that's how predefinition works and what predefinition means. If you think your silent protagonist isn't written by an author, designed by a designer, if you think the developer hasn't chosen his/her purpose(s), I think you don't know how characters and games are made.

Yes, I think Geralt is more predefined than Hawke and Shepard; yes, the Warden felt less predefined than all of them. Yet, I have to add DA or ME does little to nothing to question the hero predefinition. Becoming a Warden predefines your characters; his/her purpose runs in his/her blood; you can't un-do the fact you're limited to be a Warden. The Bhaalspawn is somewhat different because you can write part of his/her background in the game. You can choose an "origin" for Shepard but it has almost no impact on him. His/her very nature is to be a space marine, made to save the day and become the ambassador of humanity. The game really starts with Anderson and Udina choosing his/her fate out loud, and Shepard won't derail from it.
Meanwhile, Planescape Torment, KotoR, Deus Ex and The Witcher question the hero "predefiniton", as well as his/her nature, role, purpose or morals. The whole purpose of TW1 and TW2 is to find Geralt's "predefinition", or memory; but you can derail from this predefinition (that's the purpose of the "Identity" questline for instance, which covers the entirety of the game and your major choices).
To me, Mass Effect only and truly did it at the end of the trilogy (that's one reason why it was received with: "that was not supposed to happen", "it shouldn't have been like that", "where is my happy ending"). But that's another (off-)topic.

Saying that {character creator = not predefined} isn't true. You can change Geralt's hair and clothes by the way, that won't make him less predefined. That's the same with genre, noses, lips, and eye colors. Saints Row characters are predefined. Having the choice of a background in the beginning of the game doesn't make your character magically "un-predefined", it makes him less predefined at best.

Modifié par Cheylus, 12 décembre 2013 - 12:02 .