69 réponses à ce sujet

[MrMrPendragon]

The problem with post-campaign gameplay is that sometimes the world you're playing in doesn't recognize the fact that the storyline is over, meaning the npcs still react as if the ending hasn't happened yet, or maybe some areas post-ending look exacty the same as pre-ending.

 

I don't want this to happen.

 

Also, I don't often play post-campaign because I lack the motivation to keep playing. It just feels like I have no purpose anymore. I already did what I needed to do. I play for both the story and the gameplay, always together.

[TheGlen]

They need Animal House style endings.  That way you can continue the story for a while because the events happen years down the line.  So we can keep playing if that's available as much as we want.  Also when we visit the Bioware Studios we can ask for Dagna.

[Saberchic]

I like playing after the main quest, depending on how the game ends. I would hope the rest of the world acknowledges what happens, but I also would not mind seeing a slide show. That seems to be the most convenient way to show how our decisions played out (if it's not apparent immediately in game of course); some decisions we make may not bear fruit until years down the road. 

 

But it all depends on how the game ends.

[ziloe]

My favourite ending by far, last battle not entirely included, was FF9. There's just something about watching the characters play out what they wanted and where they wanted to go, etc, via cinematics. Though, I understand how expensive that can be. 

Would be cool if they did something like that though, and in order to get them back in your party, you have to go out and find them again.

[In Exile]

I really loathe epilogue slides. They're meaningless. They're just short stories that pay lip service to the idea that choices have consequences, without ever having that choice mentioned or discussed in-game. In DA:O, many of our choices are completely ignored until an elaborate epilogue talking about all sorts of long-term consequences that can't be showed in game and then are retconned by a sequel. 

They're not just unsatisfying, they're not even plausible as ways of tying up the plot if there's a potential future game. 

[Gtdef]

After reading that interview now I just hope that they have an ending. I hope that the "we only really want" is exactly what it sounds like... a load of..?

 

Why would they add quests that are supposed to be done after the main quest? So we can go saving kittens after we save the world and the npcs won't even acknowledge who we are and what we've done?

 

This is no Skyrim, and even that fails. No one really feels good about beating Anduril because whatever "epic" feeling this fight induces, you forget it in 2 minutes after talking with Parthunaxx for the last time. Cause nothing changes. The world is exactly the same, no one acknowledges your accomplishments and those that do just pat you in the back like you didn't pee outside of the litter box.

 

I'm totally looking forward to ending the biggest threat the world has ever seen only to go back killing renegade mercenaries and a crazy golem with a combat system that from the demo looks like it gets old by the middle of the game like both previous DA games do.

 

Just please, end the game. Don't care. Even a pokemon ending will do. The inquisitor kills all the bad guys, his party gets registered in the hall of fame and you get credits and THE END. Best ending.

[ziloe]

After reading that interview now I just hope that they have an ending. I hope that the "we only really want" is exactly what it sounds like... a load of..?

 

Why would they add quests that are supposed to be done after the main quest? So we can go saving kittens after we save the world and the npcs won't even acknowledge who we are and what we've done?

 

This is no Skyrim, and even that fails. No one really feels good about beating Anduril because whatever "epic" feeling this fight induces, you forget it in 2 minutes after talking with Parthunaxx for the last time. Cause nothing changes. The world is exactly the same, no one acknowledges your accomplishments and those that do just pat you in the back like you didn't pee outside of the litter box.

 

I'm totally looking forward to ending the biggest threat the world has ever seen only to go back killing renegade mercenaries and a crazy golem with a combat system that from the demo looks like it gets old by the middle of the game like both previous DA games do.

 

Just please, end the game. Don't care. Even a pokemon ending will do. The inquisitor kills all the bad guys, his party gets registered in the hall of fame and you get credits and THE END. Best ending.

The only thing that ever saved Skyrim for me, was the Interesting NPCs mod. It added so much depth to many different, well written characters. Characters who would even reference the events going on around them, etc. It was great.

However, Skyrim on its own will always be somewhat lackluster. Especially considering the civil war storyline was barely even resolved.

[Vumba the Wild Elf]

Lore is what made Skyrim interesting. Lore, and that addictive gameplay that makes you ask yourself why you are playing when the gameplay sucks, and then you stop and quit the game out of boredom. Then you return to play out of addiction, then repeat the cycle. A Kalpic cycle of my own that I must break.

[Gtdef]

Skyrim does have many interesting things to keep you playing and it's very easy to get immersed. I've played a lot of skyrim and still, every time I start a new game, after escaping Helgen it's like playing it again for the first time. I even walk side by side with the npc. 

 

Also it's very easy to think on the game's terms. You play an archer. How can you increase your effectiveness at very long range? By getting the shout that clears the skies, or the one that shows the enemies with a strong reddish color, because target acquisition is a thing. It allows you to be smart. There aren't a lot of games that offer this kind of "simulation".

 

But every time I complete a quest chain, nothing changes. The npc attitude is exactly the same. You don't feel like you are progressing. And there isn't an end. You play till you get bored and the game ends almost exactly as it starts, without point. That's my main problem. 

 

I mean I like tetris and super meat boy too, but these games improve your hand/eye and your awareness. Skyrim is nowhere near that level of hardcore. 

[ziloe]

Skyrim does have many interesting things to keep you playing and it's very easy to get immersed. I've played a lot of skyrim and still, every time I start a new game, after escaping Helgen it's like playing it again for the first time. I even walk side by side with the npc. 

 

Also it's very easy to think on the game's terms. You play an archer. How can you increase your effectiveness at very long range? By getting the shout that clears the skies, or the one that shows the enemies with a strong reddish color, because target acquisition is a thing. It allows you to be smart. There aren't a lot of games that offer this kind of "simulation".

 

But every time I complete a quest chain, nothing changes. The npc attitude is exactly the same. You don't feel like you are progressing. And there isn't an end. You play till you get bored and the game ends almost exactly as it starts, without point. That's my main problem. 

 

I mean I like tetris and super meat boy too, but these games improve your hand/eye and your awareness. Skyrim is nowhere near that level of hardcore. 

But that's why the mod I mentioned is so good, because a lot of the quests (at least 50+ and going) are immersive and can actually connect to other quests. i.e characters reference each other and so on.

[MrMrPendragon]

I really loathe epilogue slides. They're meaningless. They're just short stories that pay lip service to the idea that choices have consequences, without ever having that choice mentioned or discussed in-game. In DA:O, many of our choices are completely ignored until an elaborate epilogue talking about all sorts of long-term consequences that can't be showed in game and then are retconned by a sequel. 

They're not just unsatisfying, they're not even plausible as ways of tying up the plot if there's a potential future game. 

 

Right. Like I said, if we're ever going to know the consequences of our actions, they should be in the game itself - post campaign and we get to play IN it -  or at least a cutscene where everything is tied into a nice knot.

 

Not slides. It just feels like a Codex entry when that happens. I want to see the consequences of my actions, not read about it.

[drake heath]

I don't see why our choices have to affect after the end, I'd rather see their effects before the game is done.

 

Also I don't care much for story based games that allow you to play after the end, it looses the impact on me, I'm not going to play after I beat the game, I'll either stop playing or I'll make a new character, if there's a side quest I didn't do before the end it's because I didn't care about it.

Letting me play after that just makes the story sputter out.

[ziloe]

I don't see why our choices have to affect after the end, I'd rather see their effects before the game is done.

 

Also I don't care much for story based games that allow you to play after the end, it looses the impact on me, I'm not going to play after I beat the game, I'll either stop playing or I'll make a new character, if there's a side quest I didn't do before the end it's because I didn't care about it.

Letting me play after that just makes the story sputter out.

I've always liked the idea of walking around the place and seeing what I've accomplished via the people's commentary. So it disappoints me when a game before, or even after, doesn't acknowledge what I've done. Still, like you, a lot of the time I tend to restart as well, and take the roads I didn't take before to see what could have been different the following times.

[Hiemoth]

I was actually really annoyed by that quote due to my play style and what I find enjoyable in games. I am completionist, almost to an obsessive degree, and will grind through every sidequest to get all the content, which made playing ME1 and AC games just awesome at times. However, at the same time I really enjoy stories and find it extremely rewarding to watch those final credits roll after hopefully a great and emotional ending, being able to just walk away from the game with that high point.

 

Now the reason that quote annoyed me is not that the world remains open and playable after the ending, a lot of games do that, Tomb Raider, SR and AC games come to mind instantly, but rather that their design philosophy seems to be that some parts of the world should be done only after finishing the game in order to increase longevity. Which I don't quite get, as I don't see how much more time the player would need to do those tasks after the end of the game compared doing them before the ending. To me, it just feels like an additional burden, something that takes away my enjoyment of the ending by making me run around anti-climatically after that ending. The worst offender I can think of at the moment is Arkham City, which made it impossible to collect all the Riddler trophies before the extremely beautiful ending for reasons I cannot comprehend.

 

To sum up my ramblings, I do not see the benefit of designing the game so that the player can not complete everything before the ending of the game.

[NoForgiveness]

I was actually really annoyed by that quote due to my play style and what I find enjoyable in games.

Now the reason that quote annoyed me

What quote?

[Eudaemonium]

I've always been of the opinion that one of DA2s greatest sins regarding the illusion of player agency was its lack of epilogue slides. If it had had epilogue slides, I bet at least 50% of the 'none of my choices meant anything' would have gone away, even if nothing else was changed. Honestly, I could go for or against them in DA:I. I'll be fine either way.

 

It's entirely feasible that the 'post-game' sections will actually be pre-ending, with the game 'rolling back' to a pre-ending state in the manner of several JRPGs.

[Gtdef]

What quote?

 

He means the interview that the op quoted.

[NoForgiveness]

He means the interview that the op quoted.

Oh, gotcha

[New Man]

Lore is what made Skyrim interesting. Lore, and that addictive gameplay that makes you ask yourself why you are playing when the gameplay sucks, and then you stop and quit the game out of boredom. Then you return to play out of addiction, then repeat the cycle. A Kalpic cycle of my own that I must break.

right...

[Rando]

It does make me wonder about how reactive the game world will be. Post-story world states are difficult to implement to the point where I don't think any game has done them right (opting for the easier Epilogue slide route). It's very ambitious but it's liable to backfire as players may feel that their choices throughout the story weren't honored, or possibly BioWare will have to limit the amount of world states that the end-game contains to fit it all in.

 

In any case, I wish BioWare luck in this endeavour.

[ziloe]

It does make me wonder about how reactive the game world will be. Post-story world states are difficult to implement to the point where I don't think any game has done them right (opting for the easier Epilogue slide route). It's very ambitious but it's liable to backfire as players may feel that their choices throughout the story weren't honored, or possibly BioWare will have to limit the amount of world states that the end-game contains to fit it all in.

 

In any case, I wish BioWare luck in this endeavour.

Thinking about it, I wouldn't be surprised if they rolled back the events to just before the final stage. That way, they wouldn't have to deal with the aftermath of people saying there wasn't enough reactivity post game.

But at the same time, if done right, it could be pretty cool to wander around a world where people actually acknowledge it's been saved, etc.

[Burricho]

Thinking about it, I wouldn't be surprised if they rolled back the events to just before the final stage. That way, they wouldn't have to deal with the aftermath of people saying there wasn't enough reactivity post game.
 

I don't imagine so, considering stuff like dragons are meant to be done after the main campaign, (which seems kinda pointless as by that point you will have finished everything, and you won't need any of the loot dragons provide.)

[hexaligned]

I'm actually kind of worried about it. Tes always feels like crap after the main story. Dragons dogma just had way to much stuff after the end... I really like games to have a good solid ending. Like finishing a book. The stories over and the book ends. Dao did that perfectly with the epilogue stuff.

Ultimate dungeons after defeating the big bad are pretty much a staple in JRPGS, I actually enjoyed the story elements added to Dragons Dogma's.  It wasn't necessary to the main story arc, but it brought the story full circle, sort of Tolkien-esque (if I'm being generous).  More importantly (to me) it is where most of the games difficult encounters were, which is what it sounds like Bioware is doing as well, only they aren't gating it behind the final boss.  Which sounds good to me.