52 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

Since these stories generally revolve around organization with the very goal of fighting some "evil", asking to be able to do the opposite really doesn't fit it -- it's ok in the cartoon world of Star Wars where you can run around cackling maniacally and kicking puppies with everyone still following you for reasons unknown, but in more grounded settings you'd just have people go nope.jpg and at best kick you out on the curb, than humour your juvenile power trip fantasy.

[Frozenkex]

I miss the time when games don't follow the same design pattern. Say if you fail to prove yourself at the beginning of DAI you get executed. How awesome would that be?

not awesome at all by todays standards. You can't bring up any game thats not like dragon age into comparison because they are not, and dont abide by same rules. It would've been pointless and frustrating. You can't just throw in something odd and hope it sticks so some dude thinks it's 'awesome'. Everything has to be same quality and has to make sense.

[Lord Raijin]

I would like the opportunity to be a true villian in Dragon age instead of a protagonist who makes bad decisions.

 

I suppose you never played Darkspawn chronicles yet?

[Jaizek]

not awesome at all by todays standards. You can't bring up any game thats not like dragon age into comparison because they are not, dont abide by same rules. It would've been pointless and frustrating. You can't just throw in something odd and hope it sticks so some dude thinks it's 'awesome'. Everything has to be same quality and has to make sense.

 

So just because being an evil player, it would not succeed in dragon age? I mentioned Choice, they want a game where your choices change what happens, Only real game changing choices I had to make in this one so far was templers or mages and Me or morigan. Those where the only real ones that change anything what so ever and they didn't do anything as far as Creating the world a better or worse place like Inquisition stated. Where is this Create the world how you choose? I didn't choose to save it? You put me down this hallway of choices and the selection for dialog is just to get a good reaction or bad reaction, nothing change worthy like DAO. Even then there wasn't much change with good or bad dialog, where as like you brought up Star wars was a whole different reaction to choices. 

[Jaizek]

I suppose you never played Darkspawn chronicles yet?

Played it 2 times and it was Meh, you are pointless trash mobs with set attacks doing nothing special. Was rather lame to be honest, guess that was just what the DLC was for. Where as if they made is so you created a hero and Upgraded him how you wanted with ability's and choices and Armor/weapon selections it would have had a rather different feel.

[warden6788]

Lord raijin I know about darkspawn chronicles I know I'm repeating this alot but I'd like to have a protagonist who we could truly shape as a villain. bioware is more than capable of coming up with a story that enables the player at the end of the game to declare themselves a villain.

[movieguyabw]

I don't think it would double the time as much as yall think if it was done right 

 

Out of curiosity, what would 'doing it right' entail?  The story idea that was brought up, where the player was implanted with the archdemon soul was what I was referring to as sounding like an entirely different campaign.  If you're referring to just an ending where you can choose to be evil, that wouldn't be as much work - however I think that wouldn't really fit with Inquisition.  The only "evil" ending I could imagine working for Inquisition would be if the player decided they wanted to be a god, once they got the orb.

 

I think, though, they have plans for the Inquisitor still for an expansion.  I also kind of feel like that will end up being an option by the end of whatever DLC they have planned.  Something about how the whole temple of Mathal could have played out, combined with the after credit scene, makes me think that the Inquisitor might be able to ascend to godhood at some point.  I'm not going to be terribly broken up if I'm wrong - I just sort of see that as a possibility.

 

not awesome at all by todays standards. You can't bring up any game thats not like dragon age into comparison because they are not, dont abide by same rules. It would've been pointless and frustrating. You can't just throw in something odd and hope it sticks so some dude thinks it's 'awesome'. Everything has to be same quality and has to make sense.

 

I imagine a lot of people would be annoyed and flip out over having paid $60 for a game that ended in 5 minutes. 

[warden6788]

I'm saying that at the end of future Dragon age games at the climax it would be cool to turn out to be a villain and play through it. but it would be really awesome if we could choose to a villain throughout the whole game.

[Z.Z]

not awesome at all by todays standards. You can't bring up any game thats not like dragon age into comparison because they are not, dont abide by same rules. It would've been pointless and frustrating. You can't just throw in something odd and hope it sticks so some dude thinks it's 'awesome'. Everything has to be same quality and has to make sense.

It makes perfect sense. You are the sole survivor of a horrible event and everyone is going out of their way to find someone responsible. Heck, the cleric even brings that up twice. The only reason you aren't killed is because the writer says so.

Since when is choice viewed as frustrating and pointless? Good writing takes many possibilities into account, and the possibilities do not simply mean different dialogue options that usually result in similar responses. What's frustrating is when the player isn't given enough clues or has no control over the events, which is not what I suggested. If you fail to defend yourself you get executed. If you fail to win a fight you die. You have to fail first for something bad to happen. It's not roll a dice and see if you make it. It's not hitting a cow or running around naked. It's not "odd" when it makes storytelling sense. It's thinking and making choices, completely logical choices that result in completely logical consequences. Making choices and avoiding the undesirable consequences result in rewarding, diverse gaming experience. Surely you can agree with that.

And about the comparison...I don't get it. People on this forum are making comparisons all the time. Without comparing one to another, how can we know what works for us and what doesn't? Even the devs make such comparisons to learn from other games, otherwise they wouldn't have said something like "making it more Bethesda-like". Just because two things are different doesn't mean we can't compare them, and expect one to learn from the other.

There are good stories and bad stories. There are more enjoyable games and less enjoyable ones. A large part of the evaluation, if not all is subjective, so we can't ultimately prove if we are more correct. But I always think more choices - real choices, not just illusionary ones - are essential to good storytelling in RPG. So no, I don't like being forced into a certain role or a certain type of ending. If my character makes the wrong choice and dies prematurely, then it's his life, a life I accept and enjoy.

[tmp7704]

Since when is choice viewed as frustrating and pointless? Good writing takes many possibilities into account, and the possibilities do not simply mean different dialogue options that usually result in similar responses. What's frustrating is when the player isn't given enough clues or has no control over the events, which is not what I suggested. If you fail to defend yourself you get executed. If you fail to win a fight you die. Same logic here.

If you fail to win a fight and die 99% of people reload the game from last save and do the fight again pretending it never happened. Applying same logic here like you say, this resolution branch would be just as meaningless. People would just reload their game and try different approach until they cleared the hurdle. It doesn't create any real choice, because the "choice" here is "play some more or don't".

[Z.Z]

If you fail to win a fight and die 99% of people reload the game from last save and do the fight again pretending it never happened. Applying same logic here like you say, this resolution branch would be just as meaningless. People would just reload their game and try different approach until they cleared the hurdle. It doesn't create any real choice, because the "choice" here is "play some more or don't".

That's because you try to be a winner, not a reader. Don't you want to see what happens? If I just want to win a fight and always proceed, I can play other genre. I really love Dark Souls, and you don't even have to reload in that game.

[Z.Z]

I guess it's just because...so many years ago when I got that undead king ending in Planescape : Torment I felt so awesome. I haven't got this feeling all these years with all the games played. Even DAO felt somewhat lacking, though I did enjoy it. I am the only one feeling that way then *sigh*. Fair enough.

[Jaizek]

I guess it's just because...so many years ago when I got that undead king ending in Planescape : Torment I felt so awesome. I haven't got this feeling all these years with all the games played. Even DAO felt somewhat lacking, though I did enjoy it. I am the only one feeling that way then *sigh*. Fair enough.

Nah man there are others like you and I out there, just a lot of people who like Hallway decision making. Go down hallway and talk to jim, john, joe  and charlie then come see me. How you respond to each will Determine your fate. So do mix dialog with everyone and get to be judged and its the same fate no matter what combination you choose. Why even talk to them? 

 

Don't BS with the "What kind of Ruler will you be?" when you can only be one that executes everyone one he can and still is the same guy that freed everyone. Point is on this game it would be Nice to have that freedom to Lose companions that don't like what you are doing of gain them because they do, DA:O was prime for that in previous bioware. Made for really interesting Companion dialog too. Morigan and Alistar.. Hah that was Epic. 

[tmp7704]

That's because you try to be a winner, not a reader. Don't you want to see what happens?

But you do get to see what happens -- the "game over, you lost" screen. Then you reload and try again, or put the game away. That's why it's not a "choice" in any practical sense.

If I just want to win a fight and always proceed, I can play other genre. I really love Dark Souls, and you don't even have to reload in that game.

Does Dark Souls give you the "game over, reload or turn me off" screen at any point? Or does it have a certain gimmick that effectively replaces a manual reload in the games which lack it, thus making no real difference?

[Z.Z]

Since these stories generally revolve around organization with the very goal of fighting some "evil", asking to be able to do the opposite really doesn't fit it -- it's ok in the cartoon world of Star Wars where you can run around cackling maniacally and kicking puppies with everyone still following you for reasons unknown, but in more grounded settings you'd just have people go nope.jpg and at best kick you out on the curb, than humour your juvenile power trip fantasy.

Doesn't have to be the case. For example, NWN Hordes of the Underdark handles it well, allowing you to betray your allies. It also manages to give you a good reason to fight the big evil guy because...guess what, just because two people are evil doesn't mean they are friends.

[Z.Z]

But you do get to see what happens -- the "game over, you lost" screen. Then you reload and try again, or put the game away. That's why it's not a "choice" in any practical sense.Does Dark Souls give you the "game over, reload or turn me off" screen at any point? Or does it have a certain gimmick that effectively replaces a manual reload in the games which lack it, thus making no real difference?

No, that's not what happens. Not what happens in Planescape. You have a proper ending, just maybe not the one you what. If you get executed and only a game over shows up, then we are talking about arcade games, maybe the old Mario. But what I suggest is a proper execution ending written by good writers. There ought to be a difference.

By your very logic, we shouldn't be allowed to lose in battles, because everyone just reloads anyway. We all know what happens if we get killed - that big "game over, you lost" screen. So why bother? Simply remove health bars and let us triumph.

I can see the level of freedom I want may not be your thing, but the "reload anyway" is not a good reason to dismiss the suggestion.

[tmp7704]

No, that's not what happens. Not what happens in Planescape. You have a proper ending, just maybe not the one you what. If you get executed and only a game over shows up, then we are talking about arcade games, maybe the old Mario. But what I suggest is a proper execution ending written by good writers. There ought to be a difference.

I was talking specifically about your example where you fail to prove yourself to the Inquisition and get executed. It doesn't matter how much writing and cut scenes is tied with it, it's still a "game over, you lost" screen just with some window dressing. Or a "Bad End" as they call it in visual novels/adventure games, where it's pretty common but it's never really considered a "choice", just a way to tell the player they painted themselves into a corner or otherwise messed up. And in this way no different from what the old Mario gives you when you fail.

edit:

By your very logic, we shouldn't be allowed to lose in battles, because everyone just reloads anyway. We all know what happens if we get killed - that big "game over, you lost" screen. So why bother? Simply remove health bars and let us triumph.

We already have something very close to it -- it's pretty much reasoning behind the "difficulty levels". When the easiest settings effectively let you faceroll through everything with your hands tied behind your back, it's only matter of short time when you see it taken to logical conclusion, the "skip combat" button. And don't kid yourself, quite a few people interested only in the story and not in the combat will make use of it.

[Z.Z]

I was talking specifically about your example where you fail to prove yourself to the Inquisition and get executed. It doesn't matter how much writing and cut scenes is tied with it, it's still a "game over, you lost" screen just with some window dressing. Or a "Bad End" as they call it in visual novels/adventure games, where it's pretty common but it's never really considered a "choice", just a way to tell the player they painted themselves into a corner or otherwise messed up. And in this way no different from what the old Mario gives you when you fail.

If nothing else, it lessons the feeling that you are miraculously the chosen whom everyone just wants to work with, and obstacles remove themselves in unspeakable ways. We have some challenges and consequences in combat, but not enough in storytelling, which result in the lack if realism. We have a set of "different" endings which happen at the exact same point in the story. Even children's books, the ones that let you make decisions and see what happens have more diversity in the events.

Ideally the story before the ending should be more diverse, but there is the thing called budget. So instead of big branches I want smaller ones. I certainly want a well-written ending with my inquisitor died an elven spy, to satisfy my curiosity and tell me that my choices matter.

[tmp7704]

If nothing else, it lessons the feeling that you are miraculously the chosen whom everyone just wants to work with, and obstacles remove themselves in unspeakable ways. We have some challenges and consequences in combat, but not enough in storytelling, which result in the lack if realism. We have a set of "different" endings which happen at the exact same point in the story. Even children's books, the ones that let you make decisions and see what happens have more diversity in the events.

That's fair enough, but I get a feeling that because the players would end up avoiding these branches/reloading, it's seen as waste of resources which could instead be used on enhancing other parts (reactions to your deeds, length of the plot in general, optional content on the side, etc)

[Z.Z]

I was talking specifically about your example where you fail to prove yourself to the Inquisition and get executed. It doesn't matter how much writing and cut scenes is tied with it, it's still a "game over, you lost" screen just with some window dressing. Or a "Bad End" as they call it in visual novels/adventure games, where it's pretty common but it's never really considered a "choice", just a way to tell the player they painted themselves into a corner or otherwise messed up. And in this way no different from what the old Mario gives you when you fail.edit:We already have something very close to it -- it's pretty much reasoning behind the "difficulty levels". When the easiest settings effectively let you faceroll through everything with your hands tied behind your back, it's only matter of short time when you see it taken to logical conclusion, the "skip combat" button. And don't kid yourself, quite a few people interested only in the story and not in the combat will make use of it.

No matter how hard or easy the game is, it's not the point. The point is that there are still extreme consequences to battles, and only very limited consequences in story. How likely one faces such consequences has never even entered our discussion, because never did I mention how hard it would be for the protagonist to get executed. Maybe it's just one choice, maybe it's a minor quest, maybe it's a series of choices when you try to defend yourself during an unofficial judgment (which would be good, considering you'll be the judge yourself later in story). But none of these matters in our discussion. It's not the specific manner of decision-making that you object, it's that there is a decision, a possibility like that at all you don't like.

[DakotaCoty]

I'm always lawful good in games. I don't know why. I can totally be an ass to people in real life but just can't do the same in games. Weird.

 

Have you played GTA? I would love to see someone play that game whilst being lawful  

[Z.Z]

That's fair enough, but I get a feeling that because the players would end up avoiding these branches/reloading, it's seen as waste of resources which could instead be used on enhancing other parts (reactions to your deeds, length of the plot in general, optional content on the side, etc)

Maybe that's the reason. Then maybe not extreme cases like execution, but other possibilities - joining the other side, for example. If done right, it doesn't have to cost too much resource, just a few extra cutscenes (since the story would end there), and players like me would appreciate the possibility.

[Z.Z]

Have you played GTA? I would love to see someone play that game whilst being lawful

It really just depends on what law we are talking about
The only time I played I followed the questline and tried to do everything "properly", while my cousin just ran around killing random guys on street...

[Tex]

No, that's not what happens. Not what happens in Planescape. You have a proper ending, just maybe not the one you what. If you get executed and only a game over shows up, then we are talking about arcade games, maybe the old Mario. But what I suggest is a proper execution ending written by good writers. There ought to be a difference.
By your very logic, we shouldn't be allowed to lose in battles, because everyone just reloads anyway. We all know what happens if we get killed - that big "game over, you lost" screen. So why bother? Simply remove health bars and let us triumph.
I can see the level of freedom I want may not be your thing, but the "reload anyway" is not a good reason to dismiss the suggestion.

Shadows of mordor handles dying really well imo "sigh" pity you only got to look like the black hand while playing and not be able to play as him in the story.

[Jaizek]

Shadows of mordor handles dying really well imo "sigh" pity you only got to look like the black hand while playing and not be able to play as him in the story.

I agree, this was a well done but extremely short game for me. It would be pretty epic taking game play and some of the general idea's behind that and using it towards a darker Dragon age, one where evil choices could be made.