272 réponses à ce sujet

[Petedj06]

1. see group of enemies
2. send sword and board warrior person for the enemies to gang bang like starving wolves to a pig
3. order your two archers to attack weakest enemy in mob
4. have my mage keep the sword and board warrior alive with healing and shield and stuff
5. is enemy mob dead?
Y. Congratulations! you are victorious!
N. repeat 2-4

So, there are at least 5 *meaningful* decisions I make in this game, and what does it say about me? I guess I'm just a very simple tactician, and that Biowares encounter design people need to mix it up a bit because I found the game mind-numbingly BORING to play. When I'm BORED, I start caring less about the characters and the plot and end up distracted, thinking about more fun and
useful things to do with my time

You could literally boil ANY game down to something like this. You just described every party based fantasy game ever (including MMOs)

I could also describe every FPS as:
1. See enemy
2. Aim
3. Shoot
4. Don't get shot
5. Repeat until credits roll.

Every turn based strategy game as:
1. Move my stuff around
2. Click end turn
3. Watch opposition move
4. Repeat

Let's go for RTS
1. Harvest supplies
2. Build units
3. Attack
4. Repeat

How about fighting games:
1. Mash buttons
2. Win against someone who plays like "they're supposed to by using proper combos"
3. Repeat

I could go on, but I think I made my point

[JeffZero]

I want to take a moment to say that if people like Ieldra and Medhia grew up around me, I probably would have actually gotten into tabletop as opposed to having played it like thrice in my life and occasionally lamenting that.

Stat-obsessives are the sort who dominated the scene when my friends dragged me along. Put me to sleep. :/ Narrative possibility is fascinating though.

[Maverick827]

Regarding story/character decisions, I feel like that, too, is even worse this time around. There is literally zero characterization and choices to be made outside of the main story, which is 75%+ of the game.

[JeffZero]

Regarding story/character decisions, I feel like that, too, is even worse this time around. There is literally zero characterization and choices to be made outside of the main story, which is 75%+ of the game.

There are choices, just, they feel rare because they're so spread-out between fetchier content. Sitting in judgment of sidequest characters, choosing responses with demons, urging powerful people to join the Inquisition, it's there, it's just infrequent and somewhat shallow, yeah.

[Crackseed]

There are choices, just, they feel rare because they're so spread-out between fetchier content. Sitting in judgment of sidequest characters, choosing responses with demons, urging powerful people to join the Inquisition, it's there, it's just infrequent and somewhat shallow, yeah.

 

I feel like I still make far more choices overall but when those come in spurts because I just spent 5-6 hours gleaning out Storm Coast/Fallow Mire's secondary objectives which may involve very little "talking" and much more exploring, I can see why some people feel like "OMG it feels empty" - it's not empty, but by nature of giving you a much more open experience to explore at your whim, it can create the illusion of being emptier from the RPG aspect when it's really not.

[Lukas Trevelyan]

Regarding story/character decisions, I feel like that, too, is even worse this time around. There is literally zero characterization and choices to be made outside of the main story, which is 75%+ of the game.

I disagree to an extent. Aside from how massive the areas are which can give you some kind of illusion they're 'empty', I'm gonna give two examples to back up my argument:

1- Very first area; the Hinterlands. You run into a group that worship the breech, when questioned by their leader about whether or not you're the herald of andraste, as a religious character (someone who's used religious dialouge options like telling Cass you believe in the maker) you can answer confidently that you are. After you close the breech and prove it to them, you can then direct them to either be agents by being information gatherers or something else (can't remember), or tell them to aid the refugees.

2- Exalted Plains, when you run into the dalish camp and their keeper tells you that they've faced troubles from demons spawning at a graveyard (there's more lore to that, but to put it simply it's a sacred ground to the elves), when you go to that area and defeat the demons you'll notice that you can destroy the graves to obtain keys and enter some kind of sacred vault. When you return to them the keeper will call you out on it immediately and you'll lose favor with the dalish making you unable to acquire the agent unless you gather more materials for them.

Each area could've had a more significant, cinematic side quest, something like SWTOR but the existent ones are not as bad or 'shallow' as people make them out to be. 

[Lukas Trevelyan]

OP, you've said exactly what I was feeling. I'm somewhat baffled by how some people dismiss the game as a really good rpg because there's no 'pick pocket' or attribute allocation or the combat is too 'action oriented'. I've honestly never played a character so similar to me in a game before I'm finding it difficult playing another play through and playing differently simply because I'm so connected to the character. Kudos to Bioware.

[AshesEleven]

I disagree to an extent. Aside from how massive the areas are which can give you some kind of illusion they're 'empty', I'm gonna give two examples to back up my argument:

1- Very first area; the Hinterlands. You run into a group that worship the breech, when questioned by their leader about whether or not you're the herald of andraste, as a religious character (someone who's used religious dialouge options like telling Cass you believe in the maker) you can answer confidently that you are. After you close the breech and prove it to them, you can then direct them to either be agents by being information gatherers or something else (can't remember), or tell them to aid the refugees.

2- Exalted Plains, when you run into the dalish camp and their keeper tells you that they've faced troubles from demons spawning at a graveyard (there's more lore to that, but to put it simply it's a sacred ground to the elves), when you go to that area and defeat the demons you'll notice that you can destroy the graves to obtain keys and enter some kind of sacred vault. When you return to them the keeper will call you out on it immediately and you'll lose favor with the dalish making you unable to acquire the agent unless you gather more materials for them.

Each area could've had a more significant, cinematic side quest, something like SWTOR but the existent ones are not as bad or 'shallow' as people make them out to be.

That thing in the Exalted Plains was awesome. I didn't even think that the Dalish might not enjoy me defiling their burial chambers

[Corto81]

OP, you've said exactly what I was feeling. I'm somewhat baffled by how some people dismiss the game as a really good rpg because there's no 'pick pocket' or attribute allocation or the combat is too 'action oriented'. I've honestly never played a character so similar to me in a game before I'm finding it difficult playing another play through and playing differently simply because I'm so connected to the character. Kudos to Bioware.

 

Again, read my entire post.

 

It's not about "stat allocation" or "no pickpocketing", but managing and customizing your character, fleshing him out in the way you want, freedom of choice and the direction you wanna take your character, his class and his choices, in an open world, that is big, beautiful... And "dead".

[Maverick827]

There are choices, just, they feel rare because they're so spread-out between fetchier content. Sitting in judgment of sidequest characters, choosing responses with demons, urging powerful people to join the Inquisition, it's there, it's just infrequent and somewhat shallow, yeah.

I just can't get into my character as much in this game because it doesn't feel like who my character is matters anymore.

[Lukas Trevelyan]

Again, read my entire post.

 

It's not about "stat allocation" or "no pickpocketing", but managing and customizing your character, fleshing him out in the way you want, freedom of choice and the direction you wanna take your character, his class and his choices, in an open world, that is big, beautiful... And "dead".

Again. OP reflects exactly how I feel about that. I will not argue. 

[xkg]

@xkg:  It's interesting to me that people want to be able to claim a type of ownership over everything. 

 

You state very clearly that some of your favorite games have nothing to do with roleplaying - and you say you're main interest is really in character building - but you feel like your critiques on something like DA:I are totally valid.

 

 

You mean those games that I listed ? They are all categorised as Tactical-RPG (not The Sims 4 of course), so yeah they have a lot to do with RPGs as far as I am concerned. Much more than story only games, there is separate category for these called Adventure (old Sierra games, Telltale Walking Dead etc.)

 

And what claim are  you talking about? I simply stated there is not much in current state of DAI for me. I didn't say it is objectively bad game did I?

 

Mechanics > Gameplay > ... > ... > Story. Story is only flavor, nothing more. That's how I see it, how I play it and how I like it. If the game's mechanics is painful to play (case in point DA:I - IMO again) I would rather play the same game without it - in form of an adventure game. Story alone can be fun to play also - I play visual novels now and then. But I can't stand to play bad mechanics no matter how good the story is.

On the other hand if the mechanics is very good, the game can has the most boring story in the world and I am still going to enjoy it.

[TanithAeyrs]

I think some of the argument here centers around what roleplaying means to each of us. Do I need the game to acknowledge how my character feels and acts all the time, some of the time or rarely? I think most people (myself included) appreciate when the game lets us express how our character feels in a meaningful way. But that is not all there is to roleplay. I haven't finished the game yet (about 130 hours in now) but my Dalish rogue had a character changing experience on a side quest that was not designed as a major story point. It was even an area that I could have easily missed. That is a part of roleplaying that is often missed- what does this event mean to my character and how they interact with other events afterward. Just my 2 cents.

[Sylvius the Mad]

DAI's dialogue has passed one of my core tests for RPG-ness. It's a test that DAO passed, but DA2 failed (and both ME and ME2 failed).

It has been possible for me to play through the same dialogue with different characters, selecting the same options, and getting the same NPC responses, and have the conversation be about something different.

I first noticed it in DAO during the mage origin, and in DAI it first happened during the tutorial talking ti Cassandra. In one playthrough, Cass was relaying the gravity of our situation, and in the other she was threatening me. Though she was saying the same things.

This is the first time I have seen a voiced protagonist work in this way, and I'll admit I didn't think it was possible.

I'm very impressed with BioWare's writers.

[Elhanan]

I agree that DAI appears to be a great RPG, but not so much because of decisions made in the game, but in the interaction one may take with the remaining world (ie; Companions, NPC's, environs, etc). While there are choices made of importance, this does not define a quality RPG for myself, but is in the ability to lessen the notion that one is playing a game, and is becoming a part of the story. The better GM's I have had in my life were gifted in this; of telling the tales rather than ruling by die rolls.

My regret is that this might have been even better if the Players had as much freedom in designing their characters as they do in dressing them. Being able to look different than another Dwarven Archer is great, but there appears to be little difference between any other.

[Medhia_Nox]

@xkg:  I believe I have seen you in other places simply say that DA:I sucks - perhaps I am wrong, and if so I apologize - it, however, does not change the fact that you see "RPGs" as very different games than I do.

 

For example - in no way would I consider a game like Jagged Alliance or X-com an "RPG" and if I asked for a good RPG suggestion I'd be very displeased to pick them up (forget the fact that I love X-COM and would absolutely research something before taking a suggestion) 

 

Mechanics are the single most boring aspect of any game for me (though when done well it can be enjoyable).  I couldn't care less for them - and their automation is largely the only thing I enjoy more about CRPGs than I do about tabletop.  

 

My list of importance would be the exact opposite of yours - I simply believe it is very important to make the distinction when discussing the quality of a game. 

[AshesEleven]

I think some of the argument here centers around what roleplaying means to each of us. Do I need the game to acknowledge how my character feels and acts all the time, some of the time or rarely? I think most people (myself included) appreciate when the game lets us express how our character feels in a meaningful way. But that is not all there is to roleplay. I haven't finished the game yet (about 130 hours in now) but my Dalish rogue had a character changing experience on a side quest that was not designed as a major story point. It was even an area that I could have easily missed. That is a part of roleplaying that is often missed- what does this event mean to my character and how they interact with other events afterward. Just my 2 cents.

Indeed, the problem is everyone doesn't have the same definition of what an RPG is, or are looking for different things in RPGs.

[theluc76]

DAI its not a RPG, its a offline MMO, the points you gave Leldra, turn out to be elements found in both genre and are mostly the story telling part, the who you represent in a MMO are pre-set as in DAI. Clearly you like story driven games like many and all fine and well. For you clearly its way enough to pick a robe, a stick and a face that pleases you and your character is a mage, to add to your immersion a conversation with some choices of answers to further represent you is satisfying.

 

Im far from the simplicity of dressing up, swing a sword and give short answers to qualify my character as satisfying. Can my Character be a knight in shining armor dual weilding daggers.. nope, Can my Character be a elven ox mage swinging an axe.. nope or a rogue back stabbing with a 2 handed sword.. nope. The combat system dont allow exotic or unconventional choices. The lack of control over companions show this too very well.

 

The fact there is no attribute points make conversations quite generic as all characters will have access to all same answers. Easy exemple high charisma could let me romance Cass and high intelligence could let me romance Scribbles. The present system is more how far you are in the game instead of the actual character ability to make a difference.

 

Just wanted to share

[Itkovian]

DAI its not a RPG, its a offline MMO, the points you gave Leldra, turn out to be elements found in both genre and are mostly the story telling part, the who you represent in a MMO are pre-set as in DAI. Clearly you like story driven games like many and all fine and well. For you clearly its way enough to pick a robe, a stick and a face that pleases you and your character is a mage, to add to your immersion a conversation with some choices of answers to further represent you is satisfying.

 

Sorry, but it's definitely an RPG. Maybe it doesn't quite have what you LIKE in an RPG. But it's a bloody RPG.

 

More to the fact, most MMO ARE RPGs as well. Games like SWTOR (obviously), Wildstar, WoW, they're all RPGs. Requiring unconventional options and abilities driving character interaction as your litmus test for RPGness may be fine for you, but that doesn't mean it's not an actual RPG.

 

Besides, conversations ARE affected by many things, all of them RPG elements: prior interaction, inquisition perks, race, class, AND specialization. All these affect dialogue at numerous instances in the game. To somehow ignore that and draw the "this is an RPG" line at requiring character stats driving dialogue choices/options (for example, as Fallout does) smacks of moving the goalpost or the No True Scotsman fallacy.

[Ashen Nedra]

I really agree that the whole definition of an RPG is too wide to allow people to usefully discuss the merits of a game, nowadays.  Bioware games are no longer RPG per se, if there was ever such a thing.

 

What do you guys think of the segregation of gameplay and mechanics/story and background?

http://tvtropes.org/...torySegregation

 

Let me explain where I'm coming from:

 

I was really pissed after the first night playing DAI, mostly because of marketing (I play on PC obviously).  I did something about it, got my Deluxe edition refunded  and then bought immediately after the 35 dollars version via "VPN/Mexico" now well/known method.

 

Having a lot of time on my hands, I decided to give the game another chance and played like 70 hours.  Long story short I just quited playing, without finishing the game, which is rare for me.

And, obvious tech and bugs problems aside, I found that every thing I didn't like about the game could be explained by this game-design decision:

- too much game mechanisms don't really reflect the story, for example the fetch quests are not justified by story reasons enough to make them interesting, the side content is too different than the main time-sink mechanisms

- the mix of different art styles don't work me (e.g.  you have "traditional looking, beautiful and to my taste suit full plate suit of armor on such groups as the Blades of Hessarian (or sthg) and you and your group are a lot more flashy, bordering on tasteless (male elf Skyhold outfit there).  The areas are beautiful and unified in style (Crestwood, Desert especially), expect for the Hinterlands.

...

 

I could go on and on - and maybe will if someone is kind enough too answer me , but let me give you and example of three games that applied the inverse approach and were true masterpieces IMHO :

 

1.  Mass effect series, especially Mass effect 1. Everything was connected and coherent, from the infinite bullets being explained by the ME itself (later retconned in ME 2 and 3) to biotics powers or even the type of side-missions you're being offered. Explore the Galaxy, then find some planet and maybe got something interesting to do, turns out the central quest-hub is a beautiful ship you encounter on the prologue...

In ME 2,  the story is to recruit people to do a diffiult mission.recruiting people so your side -missions and optional content in fact ARE the game).  Very stylish.  Beautiful, immersive, classical.

 

2 The Witcher series.  You role-play as Geralt, which is a character already fully-fleshed in Zapotsky's novels and the way your inventory is managed, style of fighting - hard-paced, unforgiving and an action-RPG- gracefully derives from this character.  And of course the side-quests, monster-hunting (character's vocation), skirt-chasing (he's a freak womanizer), racism-related (he's a freak).

 

3.  BG2.  You start the game in Atkathla, a vibrant commercial town ruled by merchant-princes and a council of mages.  The main antagonist chase after you for personal profit... you can't use magic in town...you first assignments consist of making money to get a powerful ally... and on and on again till the end of the game.

 

I hope you get my meaning. 

 

So, to answer the OP question-affirmation, I don't really think that DAI is a very good game or video-game RPG because it lacks this unity of style and overall coherence between all the tiny contents that make a game, because this extreme segregation of gameplay/story, which is just too much for me, and maybe others, to allow myself to immerse in the world of Thedas.

 

I apologize for the long post and look forward to hear your thoughts, if any.

 

Edited for typos

Modifié par Ashen nedra, 03 décembre 2014 - 09:11 .

[Lebanese Dude]

Fighting over whether DAI is an RPG or not is a pointless endeavor.

Judge the game on its own merits, not on whether or not it meets arbitrary expectations of a genre.

Modifié par Lebanese Dude, 03 décembre 2014 - 10:12 .

[Itkovian]

I really agree that the whole definition of an RPG is too wide to allow people to usefully discuss the merits of a game, nowadays.  Bioware games are no longer RPG per se, if there was ever such a thing.

 

What do you guys think of the segregation of gameplay and mechanics/story and background?

http://tvtropes.org/...torySegregation

 

And yet Bioware is regarded as the premier RPG dev house in the industry. To say they don't make RPGs anymore is about as valid as saying chivalry means "a guy on a horse" and has nothing to do with honour. Maybe the precise meaning of RPG changed over the years, but that meaning is still valid. Bioware does RPGs, and DAI is definitely an RPG.

 

And quite frankly, I don't agree that somehow the current definition doesn't fit what "old school" RPG meant. The original elements are still there. Some are watered down and streamlined while others have risen to the fore, but it's all good.

 

As for the Gameplay/Story segregation, do you have any specific examples?

 

The side quests do make sense, as your character is trying to increase the reach and influence of the Inquisition. Raising awareness, gaining reputation and people's support, empowering the inquisition and hindering its enemies. This is abstracted into the influence level and power points, which works for me. I guess it might have been more immersive to call it something else?

 

And I'm a bit murky about the design difference between the Hinterlands and Hissing Wastes/Crestwood. One is a lush heartland, the other is a desert, and another a more rocky moorland. I don't see any conflict in any of that. Maybe more examples would be useful?

[Ieldra]

@Ashen nedra:

The relative lack of well fleshed-out side content is indeed rather undesirable. There are too many sidequests that end up as "collect N of Y", especially after you leave the Hinterlands where there are several sidequests with meaningful roleplaying. However, that does not detract from the many meaningful decisions there are, though I guess it contributes to the feeling of some maps being empty.

 

I think Bioware have a lot to learn if they want to attract players used to "opener worlds". The limitations in world interactivity and the design principle "let the player do nothing we can't anticipate" that's still very recognizeable will both have to go. However, I maintain that they're doing the most important things right, i.e. those that make their story function and be a home to a wide range of characters. The ME games, for instance, were really bad in that.   

[AshesEleven]

DAI its not a RPG, its a offline MMO

 

So...you're saying it's an MMORPG...without the MMO part...making it an RPG?

[Ieldra]

I agree that DAI appears to be a great RPG, but not so much because of decisions made in the game, but in the interaction one may take with the remaining world (ie; Companions, NPC's, environs, etc). While there are choices made of importance, this does not define a quality RPG for myself, but is in the ability to lessen the notion that one is playing a game, and is becoming a part of the story. The better GM's I have had in my life were gifted in this; of telling the tales rather than ruling by die rolls.

My regret is that this might have been even better if the Players had as much freedom in designing their characters as they do in dressing them. Being able to look different than another Dwarven Archer is great, but there appears to be little difference between any other.

You are talking of immersion. I agree that's a very important element of any storytelling video game, but it is independent from the roleplaying dimension, regardless of whether you see the mechanisms or the character expression as more important. You can have interaction that feels so natural that you feel you are in the fictional world without ever being able to define any aspect of your character.

 

As for freedom in designing your character, that's of course always desirable, and there is indeed no limit on the amount of freedom you might reasonably wish for. Yet, both the story and the resources needed to implement the mechanics and anchor them in the world present constraints. You need to make your world reactive to the player's design choices, or the design choices will have no meaning. That's why it isn't simply a matter of "giving you options". Those options have to be used. A human GM can do that on the fly, but video games can't, and creating opportunities to express a multitude of skills in meaningful ways in advance is quite a lot of work. The same work, as I see it, is rather better applied to giving the players the opportunity to make meaningful decisions about who their characters are. Fallout: New Vegas did both, and the result is really spectacular. The price it pays for that is also very visible: Bioware's stories are way better presented and have much more emotional impact.