Fast Jimmy wrote...
Dean_the_Young wrote...
Not an accusation, just consider if your order of play had been reversed. Would DAO really strike you as a great illusion of choice determining path if it were the fifth Bioware game you played in which, no matter what order you approached the treaty quests and no matter what your previous choices had been, each arc proceeded exactly the same regardless?
If DA games 3, 4 and 5 played out as linear as 2 did? Yes. I would.
How about as linearly as DAO or ME1 or KOTOR? It's easy to feel their plots are somehow more complex, but those are also static plotlines. Linear beginnings with the creamy middle of interchangeable, isolated linear sidequest arcs that lead back to the linear conclusion.
Unlike, say, Alpha Protocol, which IIRC would alter the levels and content of them depending on which order you took various quests, 'modern' Bioware (KOTOR/Jade Empire since) has never really wandered from linear plotlines and arcs. The greatest variance I can think of in the last decade was a few of the missions/arcs from ME3, which radically recast character interactions and tone/themes for different import states.
That's really the thing - people accuse grognards of viewing things nostalgically, but the thing is more complex game design has actually REGRESSED in the past decade or so, not advanced. Sure, graphics and sound have advanced; things like 3D have become standard; and cutscenes have become undesrcibibly better than they were back in the days of square polygon renderings.
But in terms of volume of content? Or options? Or trying to develop multiple systems of appraoch to handling situations? Games that are 10, 15 or 20 years old still did more inventive and daring achievements in these areas than the vast majority of games today.
Well, exagerations (you'll be hard pressed to find standard games of any comparable complexity and content cost from 15+ years ago) and exceptional cases aside (as in, the exceptional few rather than the standard of their time), there's a really simple formula for why modern game producers are less daring:
The costs have risen drastically for those design improvements that are treated as near necessities by the gamer market, the prices of games have been static and effectively gone down for lower margins, and the Financial Crisis has weakened the market. When a AAA game flop could ruin the company, sticking to what works is sensible.
And, of course, there's also the downside of daring, which is running into your face and massive fan rejection. Like ME3. Hence fan complaints and requests for Bioware to both return to the idealized past that worked well (design conservatism) and take risks with mechanics and storytelling (design innovation).
And sometimes, irony of ironies, it's the same fans making the same requests at the same time. Got to sympathize with Bioware.
Point being - if the industry were to actually make moves forward in terms of divergent content, multiple paths and a commitment to replay value, then yes - DA5 would likely make DA:O look very linear. Yet the opposite is true... DA2 made DA:O's wide variety of options and choices seem even brighter. ME3's on the rails, straight shot plot made ME1's more open and non-linear direction seem like the series had a good idea and then lost it.
Except ME1 had a linear plot. The sidequests and exploration were never the plot, and even they themselves were overwhelmingly linear in both literal and structural terms. ME2 was even more so.
Most games are lucky to have different endings, while DA:O had dozens of permutations that could be reflected in the final scenes and the epilogues. DA2 had the same, exact ending, with three to five seconds of dialogue difference depending on the two choices you made in the game that it recognized - Mage/Templar and who you romanced.
You're combining two distinct, separate issues here: number of endings, and epilogue slides which are post ending. They really aren't the same thing, and treating them like they are conflates the issue of what's going on.
Epilogue slides first. They're the only part the your 'dozens of permutations' can really apply to, but they really aren't a change to the story. Besides the nature of what an epilogue is, all they really are is a reflection of choices made elsewhere. They don't alter or change the plot, and many (most) Bioware games have never had them. ME never had them until ME3's EC. They've never been a part and parcel of Bioware games, or RPGs in general, and most never bother with them. This isn't because the choices in the game never carry forward or have impacts: it's just that the momentum is already assumed.
Final scenes/endings have far fewer variation, and Bioware has never taken an approach of reflecting dozens of permutations in the plots. DAO had one: the OGB choice. At best, if you want to stretch the definition of endings, four: Warden/Alistair/Loghain live (OGB choice), and the Warden OR Alistair OR Loghain undergo the ultimate sacrifice. All four are based on a grand total of three choices.
The illusion of choice was strong in DA:O. Maybe it was only that strong because there haven't been too many other games to even give a full attempt at it, but it was strong regardless.
And if you played your games in reverse order, don't you think the prevalence of hidden linearity would be more obvious to you?
Retour en haut
:devil:
