27 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

For me, a story where all your choices don't matter except in how they define your character sends a message of futility that transfers easily to the character I'm playing. Why try hard, why even think about what you're doing, if it all ends up in the same way? Sure, some decisions are like that, sometimes you can't make a difference, but a pattern of such decisions is depressing. Also, yeah, "you can't make a difference" is a possible and legitimate message to send for a story but pardon me if I tend to avoid that kind of story.

Also, the outcome influences how we feel about a decision. If it doesn't work out, that's frustrating, if it does, it's satisfying. I consider a good mix of emotional moments as desirable for a story. If nothing matters, that's as boring as "everything works out" only with more depression added to the mix.

So, yes, I think it is very important that our decisions make a difference here and there, that within some limits, I can influence how things turn out.

I don't feel that the player should never experience success. A mix is best. If what you want always works out, then thought isn't really necessary when making choices. If what you want never works out, the same thing applies.

With respect to sending messages, though, are you of the opinion that we should use the game as a vehicle to send social message? It tends to be a pretty polarizing sentiment, I find

  

Possibly. That I'm not religious may come into it here. Anyway, Grace alludes to my interpretation...

I'm not religious either. I just don't see much optimism in being condemned to the Blood War.

 

Technically, no, but if that comes as a surprise, I feel betrayed. In my tabletop roleplaying games, there is an unspoken contract that the GM will try to keep the player characters alive as long they don't do something stupid or deliberately and knowingly take an extra risk. Not everyone plays that way, and there are campaigns where "death by random die roll" is common. Those can be fun too. Your scenario, however, sounds like "death by fiat of the GM". There is a reason why those are almost universally disliked. There are games which end with everyone dead, where only what you did before matters in the end, but....and haven't I said something like this before...potential players are usually informed in advance so that they know what they're getting into. I see Bioware's writing teams as acting in the role of the GM. There's little worse that can happen to you as a roleplayer than to step unsuspecting into a "PC death by story design" scenario.

I don't consider RPGs to be a perfect analogue to the PnP game (even if that's where some of their foundation comes from) and the ones I enjoy the most are the ones that have stronger focus on narrative than PnP analogue.

I understand, though, that this is my view, not everyone else's. I don't come from a legacy of PnP background at all. My PnP experience has actually all come in the last year, but my RPG experience started with Ultima 6 and then continued on with the Gold Box games even though I had no lick at all what AD&D was. So that difference in background may play a strong role in why our expectations diverge.

[Allan Schumacher]

This is hugely important, particularly for a game. Something which - annoyingly - so many people seem to forget. At its core the whole point of a game is to entertain the player. If the player walks away from a game and they're not happy then that product is a failure as a game. Full Stop.

There is absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever about an optimal ending being a reward for a thorough playthrough. If such a level of success is a reward for all the time spent grinding away at every nook and cranny of the game it is in its own way ENTIRELY deserved. Most people don't even finish the whole game, fewer still put in the effort to do absolutely everything they can. So they are completely justified in my opinion with a reward at the end for it. Mind you, my preference is more on worthy story elements and game challenges determining how optimal your ending becomes. Something which many of Bioware's games excel at. But then everyone will have a different level of what they would be willing to endure or deal with in order to feel they have earned a better ending.

These positions seem to be in conflict with each other though. Particularly because of the implication that "most" people want what you describe out of their video games, while at the same time "most" people don't even experience the end of the game.


Your suggestion for a perfectly okay effort for a happy ending isn't the same as mine. Is it irreconcilable? If so, does that mean I just have to deal with it?

[Allan Schumacher]

I think what Iledra meant was that how the choices matter (or don't matter) is in itself a message.   Dooming a character, or forcing them to do extremely questionable actions in order to "win" sends a message, even if it's one you didn't intend to send.

I framed my question the way it did because I see plenty of very outspoken people suggesting that we, as a game studio, should never seek to send a message with our games. I gather you do not feel that way and that we should strive to tell stories that send positive messages?

 

Falls-From-Grace promises (or can promise, at least) to scour the Lower Planes for The Nameless One and try to rescue him.  In addition, once TNO regains all his memories, he is a truly formidable being with innumerable lifetimes of combined experiences.  One could interpret the ending as being condemned to the Blood War as being but a temporary setback.

Indeed. Ambiguous consequences are best served in a game ending, I agree. It's interesting because it's a talking point.
 
 

Indeed, the PnP experience gives the players a sense of ownership over their own character.  A sense that there is a path through the maze, if you are creative enough and determined enough to figure out the path.  it's what I think of as the gaming experience vs the cinematic experience.

As a note, I have had two sustained PnP game experiences in the past year. Both involved player characters being killed (and people being okay with that). They also involved PC surviving because of luck (rolling a natural 20 during dire circumstances. My desire to save scum in the PnP game, unfortunately, was denied.

As for the bolded, I'm not very interested in you co-opting the term "gaming experience" for "Thinks Iakus likes." My preference holds regardless of how cinematic the game is, and it comes across as disparaging and dismissive that my preference is some how less "gaming" related, particularly since people spend an awful lot of their time trying to claim ownership on what it means to be a "true gamer" and how, particularly on these boards, the idea of a "cinematic experience" is often seen as a pejorative.